[0:00] Okay, Travis's we're ready to go. Thank

[0:02] you everybody for joining us in the city

[0:04] council chambers tonight here in Spanish

[0:06] Fork City uh on May 5th, 2026 for city

[0:10] council meeting. We appreciate uh your

[0:12] involvement uh in your community. We

[0:14] appreciate the Cub Scouts here for sure.

[0:17] Thanks for being here. That's good

[0:18] stuff. Uh and uh we'll get started with

[0:22] our council meeting like we always do

[0:24] with a prayer motivational message and

[0:26] then uh the pledge. Uh, Councilman Oiler

[0:29] has our prayer motivational message

[0:31] assignment tonight.

[0:32] >> I don't see Brian. Oh, he is there.

[0:36] Okay. Bri, I've invited my good friend

[0:38] Brian Chapman to come and and do that

[0:40] for us tonight.

[0:45] » You want some walk up music?

[0:48] >> I needed no walk up music. Come on,

[0:50] Shane.

[0:50] >> I know.

[0:53] So Kevin or Councilman Oiler asked me to

[0:56] come and just give a little bit of

[0:58] information about an activity that's

[1:00] happening in Spanish Fork this weekend.

[1:04] The

[1:05] Sorry, I just ran up.

[1:10] The Utah Sheriff's Honorary Colonels is

[1:13] an organization that is basically a

[1:16] 501c3 that helps the sheriff's office

[1:19] here in Utah County as we uh do things

[1:23] like training K9 units, as we do the

[1:27] sheriff's teachers academy to help train

[1:29] teachers on how to deal with issues that

[1:33] arise that may need kind of more

[1:36] specialized training with dangerous

[1:38] situations. guns, issues like that. And

[1:42] this Saturday, we're actually hosting a

[1:44] fundraiser at the Spanishport Gun Club

[1:46] titled Shoot with the Sheriff. It's

[1:49] actually even co-enamed with Carol for

[1:54] who was one of our great residents here

[1:56] in Spanish Fork that founded it and that

[1:59] passed away a couple years ago. and she

[2:02] was just such an inspiration and such a

[2:04] big help in the sheriff's office that we

[2:08] named it after her as the Carol Ford

[2:10] memorial shoe with the sheriff. We'd

[2:12] love to have anyone that's listening or

[2:14] any of you to come. It's a great

[2:16] opportunity to support the sheriff's

[2:18] office and to support the men and women

[2:20] who are making a huge difference in our

[2:22] community. And with that, I was asked to

[2:26] give an invocation.

[2:28] Our dear heavenly father, we're so very

[2:31] grateful for the

[2:34] opportunities we have in this country to

[2:37] have officials like the city council

[2:40] members and mayor in front of us that

[2:43] can represent our communities. We're so

[2:45] very grateful for the freedoms we have

[2:48] in this country, for the people who

[2:52] serve us in so many different ways. For

[2:55] those in law enforcement, for those

[2:58] working on the front lines of even

[3:00] public works and other departments

[3:03] throughout our communities that have

[3:05] given so much to make our communities

[3:07] such a great place to live. We're

[3:10] grateful for this community, for Spanish

[3:12] Fork, for the residents, and for those

[3:14] who have been so important in making

[3:18] Spanish Fork a great place. We ask for a

[3:21] special blessing tonight upon our city

[3:23] council and our staff and our mayor and

[3:26] those who are coming to speak and to

[3:28] discuss the issues that are affecting

[3:30] our community that they can be filled

[3:33] with thy spirit that they can make the

[3:36] right decisions and that we can have

[3:38] good honest and strong discussion that

[3:42] meets the needs of our community. And

[3:44] father, we ask for these blessings and

[3:46] continued blessings upon our community

[3:48] and our nation and safety for those who

[3:51] are protecting us here and across the

[3:53] world in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

[3:56] >> Amen.

[3:57] >> Thank you, Brian.

[4:00] >> Can the audience please rise?

[4:03] >> Pledge with me.

[4:05] >> I aliance to the flag of the United

[4:08] States of America and to the republic

[4:11] for which it stands. One nation under

[4:14] God, indivisible, with liberty and

[4:17] justice for all.

[4:19] >> You

[4:25] perfect. Thank you for participating in

[4:28] that with us and thank you for that

[4:30] information. Uh Brian. Uh next uh our recognition uh section of the

[4:38] agenda, we have some very special guests

[4:42] uh that are the new Spanish Fork Royalty

[4:45] uh that will be uh introduced to us and

[4:48] then the just serve uh portion of our

[4:51] meeting. So Spanish Fork Royalty.

[4:53] >> Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. U we a couple

[4:56] god what's it been now? month or two we

[4:58] had ago we had our Miss Spanish Fork

[5:00] pageant here at Spanish Fork High School

[5:02] down the street and it was fantastic and

[5:04] so we have a new royalty and I wanted to

[5:06] uh the council mayor wanted to introduce

[5:09] them to you the city and I thought this

[5:11] is just a perfect opportunity to do that

[5:13] uh led by our amazing director Jen Olson

[5:15] she's here Jen if you don't mind raising

[5:16] your hand just so we know you are you do

[5:18] so much for the city and for the program

[5:20] so thank you um and then uh royalty do

[5:23] you mind coming to the front and then

[5:24] I'll just introduce you by name and then

[5:25] we'd love to

[5:28] Yeah. Here, a little uh opening thought

[5:31] from each of you. So, I'll just go

[5:32] backwards here. We uh we have third

[5:34] attendant, attendant Daisy Finley. Raise

[5:36] your hand so we all know you can

[5:38] introduce. Okay, thank you.

[5:39] >> Got the wave down. Ready for the parade.

[5:41] >> Daisy, you ready? Second attendant Ava

[5:44] Cunningham.

[5:46] >> Okay, perfect. And then we have first

[5:48] attendant Paisley Keller right there in

[5:51] the pink. And then our queen Miss

[5:53] Spanish Fork uh for this next year is

[5:55] Calli Maguire.

[5:58] And uh if you have a thought, we'd love

[6:00] to hear anything. Maybe a little bit

[6:01] about your CSI or what a CSI is or your

[6:04] platform for a second each of you or

[6:05] just the queen, whatever you'd like. And

[6:06] then we'll do a picture and Yeah.

[6:09] >> Perfect. Okay. So like Landon said, I am

[6:11] Calli Magguire and I'm so excited to be

[6:13] your new Miss Spanish Fork. Something

[6:15] that's really special is this is

[6:16] actually our hundth year as in the Miss

[6:19] Spanish Fork program. So all of us, we

[6:20] have our gold crowns, which is super

[6:22] different and super special. And my CSI,

[6:25] so what a CSI is is it's called your

[6:27] community service initiative. So it's

[6:29] what you it's a problem in the community

[6:30] that you want to help to solve and work

[6:33] with. And so mine is called supporting

[6:36] your heroes and it is involved with

[6:37] police officers and law enforcement here

[6:39] in Spanish Fork. And so this was

[6:41] inspired because I actually had an uncle

[6:43] who was in Spanish Fork for a really, long time in the police

[6:46] department. His name was Phil Nilson.

[6:48] And my brother, he recently just joined

[6:49] our department here as well. And his

[6:51] name is Trevor Maguire. And my goal is

[6:53] to really just make sure that our police

[6:55] officers know that there is a community

[6:57] here and that they should feel safe and

[6:59] they should feel comfortable going to

[7:00] talk to anyone that they need to. And

[7:03] also that our community members feel

[7:05] like they can talk to our police

[7:06] officers as well and have a personal

[7:08] connection with them. So

[7:14] » anybody else? Anybody else? That's okay. Well, before we do before

[7:19] we do a picture, I just wanted to just

[7:20] reiterate. Yeah. This is the 100th year

[7:21] of Miss Spanish Fork. So, we now have a

[7:22] hundred Miss Spanish Forks who have

[7:24] gone.

[7:24] >> We can't guarantear

[7:28] tradition.

[7:29] >> Yeah. But there's quite a few.

[7:31] >> There's quite a few. We just There's a

[7:32] few years we can't find. So, we just

[7:35] >> Fair enough. Assume we had them.

[7:37] >> Yeah. Like it. Nobody. Well, we

[7:40] regardless um we look forward to

[7:42] spending time with you all this year at

[7:44] all the different fun events and and

[7:46] look forward to all of your service and

[7:48] seeing your picture, you know, up out

[7:49] here on the wall here soon. That's still

[7:51] happening, right, Jen?

[7:52] >> Yeah.

[7:52] >> Okay, perfect.

[7:55] >> Excellent.

[7:56] >> And um yeah, and so thank you for being

[7:58] with us this evening. Uh could we do a

[8:00] picture, mayor, would that be?

[8:01] >> You bet. Come right up here. And uh yes,

[8:03] give him a round of applause.

[8:06] Here

[8:14] we go.

[8:17] » Thank you.

[8:18] girls.

[8:20] >> Appreciate it.

[8:25] » Very good stuff. Thank you, Councilman

[8:26] Tuk. Thank you, Miss Spanish Fork and her attendance. Some some good work

[8:31] already put in uh since uh since being

[8:33] crowned and uh and lots of work ahead.

[8:35] So, fun summer ahead. Okay. Uh, takes us

[8:38] to our just serve section of the agenda

[8:42] tonight. Uh, are you taking that over,

[8:44] Jack?

[8:54] All right, council. Well, uh, as you

[8:57] know, Spanish Fork is a just served

[8:59] city, and what that means is that we

[9:03] offer opportunities to serve and we

[9:06] recognize those who have served in our

[9:07] community. Uh, a couple times a year we

[9:10] award just serve heroes. This is

[9:12] difficult to do in Spanish Fork because

[9:15] there are so many people who volunteer

[9:18] their time. Uh, there's a real spirit of

[9:20] volunteerism and service here. So to

[9:23] just recognize a few people each time, I

[9:26] mean, we're talking about the best of

[9:27] the best. So with that in mind, we've

[9:30] got the Davises here who are the Just

[9:32] Serve specialists for Spanish Fork area.

[9:36] And uh we'll go ahead and turn the time

[9:38] over to Stacy Beck to uh recognize our

[9:41] first Just Serve hero.

[9:43] >> Okay. Thank you, Jack. It's fun because

[9:46] the council were the ones that kind of

[9:48] nominate different people and the person

[9:50] that I wanted to nominate, I knew she

[9:53] had like this long list. So, I had to

[9:55] text her and say, "Can you send me a

[9:57] bio?" So, Becky Napper, can you come up

[10:00] to

[10:01] the podium right here while I read all

[10:06] the cool things about you? I would dare

[10:09] say that each one of the councilmen

[10:11] would agree with me that the best part

[10:14] of serving on the council is getting to

[10:17] know the people in our community.

[10:18] Correct. Hands down. It's just it's the

[10:21] best. It's what I will miss the most.

[10:23] And Becky, you and I have met just in

[10:25] the last decade of both of us serving.

[10:28] Right. So, I want to read, we kind of

[10:31] condensed it, and I want to read um what

[10:33] you sent me because it's just really, special, and I just want you to

[10:37] know how much we appreciate your

[10:39] service, not only in our community and

[10:42] our state, but in our nation. So, she

[10:45] was in the United States Army from 1974

[10:48] to 2001.

[10:51] She has served as the second vice

[10:53] commander and the historian of the

[10:55] American Legion Post 66 68. In 2020, she

[11:00] was elected the commander of post 68,

[11:03] the first female elected to that office.

[11:06] She served as commander from March 2020

[11:09] through June 2023. She currently serves

[11:13] as the a adjud agitant, is that how you

[11:17] say that? agitant for district 4, member

[11:19] of the for the finance committee and

[11:21] co-chair for both district 4 and

[11:23] department of Utah American Legion. She

[11:26] is a member of the Spanish Fork Post 68

[11:29] Richard Johnson Freedom Walk Committee.

[11:32] I think that's where you and I met years

[11:33] ago. Ambassador for the state of Utah

[11:35] for the Military Women's Memorial,

[11:37] Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington,

[11:40] Virginia. She has served in several

[11:42] chapters of the Association of the

[11:45] United States Army to include Secretary

[11:48] of Non-commissioned office and enlisted

[11:50] affairs, national headquarters. She has

[11:53] served as an election judge in St.

[11:56] Louis, Missouri, Dakota Dunes, South

[11:58] Dakota, and Spanish Fork, Utah. She is a

[12:01] past captain of the Beehive Camp of the

[12:04] Daughters of the Utah Pioneers and

[12:06] currently serves as the Beehive Camp

[12:08] lesson leader. She was an assistant Cub

[12:11] Scout master for three years. She has

[12:13] served in many callings in her church

[12:15] and continues to serve to this day.

[12:18] Jeez, are you so proud of yourself?

[12:21] Can we all give Becky a big round of

[12:24] applause?

[12:44] and stay up here. We want to get a

[12:46] picture as well.

[12:49] >> Do you want to have your husband?

[12:52] >> Did he come with you?

[12:58] » Okay.

[13:00] >> All right.

[13:02] Here

[13:08] we go.

[13:10] >> Thank you, Becky.

[13:13] >> Becky, anything you'd like to say? Feel

[13:15] free.

[13:20] » Well, I I really appreciate this award.

[13:23] Um,

[13:26] part of why I do what I do here is

[13:27] because this community put up with me

[13:30] through my teenage years.

[13:32] They welcomed me with open arms 14 years

[13:35] ago when my husband and I moved back

[13:38] here after we retired from the military.

[13:41] And I just want to give back

[13:44] and

[13:46] I appreciate having such a wonderful

[13:48] community to give back to. Thank you

[13:51] very much for the award.

[13:53] >> Thank you, Becky.

[14:00] » Okay. Okay. And we'll have the second

[14:02] awardee recognized by Jesse Carden.

[14:05] >> Thank you, Jack. Heidi, do you want to

[14:07] come up to the podium, please? All

[14:10] right. I'm going to read a little

[14:11] statement that we have here, too. And it

[14:12] says, "Heidi Robberry um has served as

[14:15] an adviser for the youth city council

[14:16] for the last seven years. And if you

[14:18] guys know, working with teenagers, over

[14:20] 60 of them at a time, for seven years.

[14:22] That's a lot longer than seven years. Um

[14:24] she's been a good example of responding

[14:25] to a simple invitation to help not

[14:27] knowing what it would turn into

[14:28] countless hours of and many um years of

[14:31] dedication to this community. She

[14:32] volunteers her time serving

[14:34] approximately 60 youth city council

[14:35] members at a time. She meets regularly

[14:37] with them and plans and carries out

[14:39] service activities. Heidi is from

[14:41] Spanish Fork and her favorite part of

[14:42] serving with the youth is seeing them

[14:44] get involved, show interest and show

[14:45] interest in the community. She is very

[14:47] impressed with the youth she has served

[14:49] um she has served with and said that

[14:51] their ideas are mind-blowing. her kids,

[14:52] sometimes two at a time, have been part

[14:54] of the youth city council during her

[14:55] tenure as an adviser. And I think not

[14:58] only this, if if you've been to any of

[15:00] our fiesta days activities, the youth

[15:01] city council is always there and Heidi

[15:04] is there as well. So, not only are the

[15:05] youth there doing the service, Heidi

[15:07] makes sure that it's happening. And so,

[15:08] when we were asked about nominees for

[15:10] this just serve award, it was a

[15:11] no-brainer for me to nominate Heidi. So,

[15:13] thank you, Heidi.

[15:28] We need a picture, too.

[15:31] >> Yeah. Do

[15:31] >> you want to come out?

[15:32] >> Your family come up.

[15:40] » It's all right. He's

[15:42] >> Look at that smile. He's happy to be

[15:44] here.

[15:45] >> All right. Here we go.

[15:51] You want to say anything?

[15:54] >> Sure.

[15:57] >> Okay. So, yes, I'm crazy. I work with

[16:00] teens. Um, but I couldn't do it without

[16:03] an amazing city supporting us and asking

[16:07] us to do service and having rooms for us

[16:10] to do things in. And the kids, um,

[16:14] they're so willing, they're so amazing.

[16:16] and the other women that I work with

[16:18] that are there as much as they can be.

[16:22] Um, it's very a re rewarding. Um, when I

[16:26] was in high school, I always wanted to

[16:28] be part of you city council and I could

[16:29] never figure out how to do it. So, I

[16:31] guess I'm getting my time in. So, thank

[16:34] you so much.

[16:36] >> Great job.

[16:41] » Bug with our uh just serve

[16:43] representatives here. Are you guys okay

[16:45] to come up for one more picture with our

[16:46] Just Serve representatives and get you

[16:48] guys in a picture with us? Is that okay?

[16:50] All of you come up. Come on up. Come on.

[17:05] » Should we have the

[17:09] Never mind.

[17:11] >> Hey, here we go.

[17:18] Thank you guys. Thanks again. Thank you

[17:20] very much. Good job.

[17:26] » Great program and and uh and recognizing

[17:29] great people like Becky and Heidi are

[17:31] such a a good good uh good thing to do

[17:34] in communities in our community as well.

[17:35] I um the signs, Uncle Richard, are in my

[17:40] office in the mayor's office. uh that

[17:42] just serve yard signs. So, we'll get

[17:45] those out uh that uh that invites people

[17:48] to that QR code and everything and and I

[17:50] saw them in in there today. So, there's

[17:53] some signs in there and we'll we'll get

[17:54] them out. So,

[17:55] >> are those for the winter the

[17:57] >> I don't think they go in their yard.

[17:58] It's not like yard of the week. No, it's

[18:00] not like that. Um but but it is a place

[18:04] there signs we can put around the

[18:05] community showing that we're a just

[18:07] served city.

[18:08] >> Got it.

[18:08] >> So,

[18:09] >> it's a big banner they put on the front

[18:10] door. Instead of dawn, it says

[18:12] >> chest serve.

[18:13] >> Yeah.

[18:13] >> Thank you, Davises, for your efforts in

[18:15] this.

[18:16] >> Yep.

[18:19] » That's always on the end.

[18:21] >> You can't reach me.

[18:21] >> That's why they put them by me.

[18:24] >> I will.

[18:25] >> I see we have two two councilmen

[18:27] attending our meetings, former

[18:28] councilman today. And it always makes me

[18:31] nervous. We had a mayor a couple weeks

[18:32] ago and now councilman, we're Yeah, we

[18:34] got people looking at us. That's pretty

[18:36] good. Um, okay. great great part of our

[18:40] meeting again for the the recognitions

[18:42] portion. Thank you all for coming and

[18:44] thank to thank you to your families for

[18:46] supporting uh your your good u your good

[18:48] family members as well. What a what a

[18:50] good thing to do. Um takes us to the the

[18:53] public comment section of our meeting.

[18:55] This is where the public can address the

[18:57] mayor and council. Ask us a question if

[18:59] you'd like uh or uh or bring up

[19:01] something to our attention. Uh try to

[19:03] keep it Yeah, Jack's got the threeminut

[19:05] timer up there. try to keep it to that

[19:07] if you can so we can get everybody in.

[19:10] But, uh, feel free. This is the public

[19:11] section, public comment section of

[19:13] council meeting. Uh, feel free to come

[19:15] up and address the mayor and council if

[19:17] you'd like.

[19:24] » Chad Aral Spanish Fork, before you start

[19:26] my time,

[19:30] » I'd like to make a comment about Heidi

[19:32] and the youth council. I was over that

[19:35] for a while and I'm I was always so

[19:37] proud because they'd how many youth do

[19:40] you have and we had 40 or 50 or 60 youth

[19:42] and they were so involved and Heidi's a

[19:45] big part of that for the reason that our

[19:47] students in our community come and be a

[19:51] part of that. And when we'd go up to the

[19:52] legislation session, we'd have to have

[19:54] seven or eight tables. And

[19:56] >> of course, Seth was always good to

[19:57] reserve all those tables and and they

[20:00] were there and active and part of that.

[20:02] such a blessing for our community. It

[20:04] was such it was such a good part to

[20:06] serve that. Go ahead, start.

[20:10] Thank you. Um, mayor, council, I just

[20:13] want to real quick thank you, of course,

[20:15] for your time served in our community.

[20:18] Um, it's important to me as I watch the

[20:21] legislative session and the comments and

[20:25] our representatives up there, I always

[20:27] see a picture of you and it does my

[20:28] heart good to know you're up there

[20:30] watching us. And I know Seth is always

[20:33] there during that session keeping a

[20:35] thumb on that state so they don't get

[20:37] too oppressive about our city and try to

[20:39] take over our cities. And thank you Seth

[20:41] for your time and efforts. I I know you

[20:44] spend a lot of time there, but it does

[20:46] my heart good to see you guys. When I do

[20:48] see a picture of you, there's usually a

[20:50] picture of some all of you. So thank you for that time because I know

[20:53] that's extra time served. I just have

[20:55] two quick things I wanted to bring to

[20:57] the attention of the council. One of our

[21:00] responsibilities is to keep our citizens

[21:02] safe in our community. And I just I have

[21:06] there are five homes in our community in

[21:08] a large building that are abandoned. And

[21:11] there are things going on in these homes

[21:14] and buildings that are bad and evil. And

[21:17] I just want them bring them to your

[21:19] attention.

[21:20] >> They need to be tore down. They need to

[21:22] be taken care of. Um they're not the

[21:25] first city that I've come to when I work

[21:27] for the phone company. I always run

[21:29] across one of these abandoned buildings.

[21:32] I know their colors. I know their signs

[21:35] and there's bad things going on in these

[21:38] buildings and they need to be taken care

[21:39] of. I also just want to uh make sure

[21:44] diligence about our residential. We have

[21:46] residential and commercial areas for a

[21:49] reason. Keeping those commercial trucks

[21:52] out of our residential area, people

[21:54] doing businesses. We have kids on

[21:56] scooters and bikes and they're going so

[21:59] fast and I just think it's a matter of

[22:00] time before we let one of these con

[22:03] commercial and I know none of them would

[22:05] want to do that. Was my biggest fear

[22:07] driving a commercial truck was to hit a

[22:09] child but they're in our they're in our

[22:12] residential areas and they don't they

[22:14] don't need to be parking these

[22:16] commercial trucks or running their

[22:17] businesses. We have home businesses I

[22:19] know but these be vigilant about that.

[22:23] keeping these trucks out of our

[22:24] residential areas. I know they don't and

[22:27] I don't want to ever have that

[22:29] experience,

[22:30] but it's important that we do have

[22:32] residential and commercials for things.

[22:35] Thanks. And thank thank you guys, the

[22:38] director of departments. You're vital to

[22:41] everything that goes on in this

[22:42] community. I just thank you for

[22:44] everything you do and the service you

[22:46] do. It's been a tender week

[22:51] and when you have go through some of

[22:53] those things it the gratitude of this

[22:57] community and

[22:59] those who reached out I want to say

[23:01] thanks to that. Um, my father-in-law

[23:05] served 89 years in this community and uh

[23:10] run a business and did a good thing and

[23:12] uh we've had a lot of people reach out

[23:13] to us and express

[23:16] they're grateful for him and his service

[23:18] um to this community. He was a big part

[23:20] of it and thank you for those that did.

[23:23] Thank you.

[23:24] >> Thank you, Chad.

[23:25] >> Thanks, Chad.

[23:26] >> Chad, can you do us a favor and email

[23:28] the council the the addresses of the

[23:30] homes that you're talking about?

[23:31] >> You betcha.

[23:32] >> Thank you. I'll do that. Um, somebody

[23:35] specific.

[23:36] >> Just the council

[23:36] >> just Okay,

[23:38] >> you should know the email.

[23:39] >> Yeah,

[23:42] >> it's probably still getting them.

[23:45] >> It's an important night. I You guys have

[23:47] got a lot on your agenda, but I have I

[23:50] need to excuse myself, but I will watch.

[23:53] So, just in case he puts a tie on.

[23:57] >> All right. Good. Thanks, Chad.

[23:59] >> Thank you, Chad.

[24:01] This is a little tall for me. Hello.

[24:05] >> It's nice to be back in front of the

[24:06] greatest city in Utah County.

[24:08] >> We do.

[24:09] >> In front of all these people.

[24:10] >> Utah County.

[24:11] >> Utah.

[24:12] >> Greatest city in Utah County.

[24:16] >> And Utah.

[24:17] >> Thank you, Elaine.

[24:18] >> And Florida.

[24:19] >> Yeah.

[24:20] >> You mean the nation?

[24:21] >> Did I make a point now?

[24:22] >> Okay. So, I'm Elaine Hansen. Hello. And

[24:25] I would like to take this opportunity to

[24:29] introduce all of you, whom I love, to my

[24:32] cousin, David Spencer, who is running

[24:36] for county commissioner and cares about

[24:40] great cities, small government,

[24:43] families, safety, less taxes, all the

[24:47] things that we stand for here in Spanish

[24:49] Fork and that I love and miss. So, if

[24:53] it's appropriate,

[24:56] um,

[24:58] can can he come and talk and say hello

[25:01] and you can stop my time?

[25:04] >> He can get his three minutes.

[25:06] >> Anyway, I just want to say hello to all

[25:08] of you. And I was going to just bring

[25:09] you his little um flyer so you remember

[25:12] his face, but he's my cousin. We're

[25:14] Norwegians.

[25:16] Anyway, thank you. I love you all.

[25:18] >> Thank you, Ela. Thanks,

[25:31] So, I'm David Spencer and I'm running

[25:33] for county commissioner seat B. Um, a

[25:36] little history with me, I I've been on

[25:38] the ORM city council for the last 12

[25:40] years.

[25:41] >> And I ran uh for city council to save

[25:43] the baseball fields in Orum. So, in 12

[25:46] years, the baseball fields are still

[25:47] there. So, at least I accomplished

[25:48] something while I was on the council.

[25:50] But while I was on the council, um, in

[25:53] those 12 years, not one time did a

[25:56] county commissioner come to ORM and ask

[25:57] us what our needs were. And I think that

[26:00] needs to change because every city has a

[26:02] need. I was out in Saratoga Springs.

[26:05] Their needs totally different than ORM

[26:06] or in Spanish Fork. So, um, I want to,

[26:09] uh, meet with the mayor and the council

[26:11] of every city and see what your needs

[26:13] are. And I believe that the Utah County,

[26:16] we're fractured. we're fragmented

[26:17] because we're not all on the same page

[26:19] as cities, right? So, if we can get on

[26:21] the same page and we have that power, we

[26:23] can go to the legislature, make sure we

[26:25] can get the money for Utah County that

[26:26] we need. I believe that the the

[26:28] leadership in the legislature right now

[26:30] is in Davis County and they're getting

[26:32] most of the money, right? So, we need to

[26:34] make sure that we fight for the money

[26:35] for Utah County and we can help our our

[26:37] cities in Utah County. Also, the tourism

[26:40] dollars. We need to make sure that the

[26:43] tourism dollars are available for each

[26:45] city and not just Provo, right? So, we

[26:48] need to make sure it's fair. We're not

[26:49] picking winners and losers. But, I'm uh

[26:51] I'm here to serve. I love serving on the

[26:53] city council and I I appreciate what you

[26:55] guys do because I love communicating

[26:57] with the citizens and fixing things and

[26:59] making sure things are right for them.

[27:00] But, um I love to serve and hopefully I

[27:03] can I can gain your trust and vote. And

[27:05] I'm David Spencer and thank you.

[27:06] >> Thank you, David. Thanks for coming

[27:08] down. And thank you for Elaine. I mean,

[27:10] she's she's awesome. She never I don't

[27:12] think she ever sleeps, but

[27:13] >> No, she doesn't.

[27:14] >> Thank you.

[27:16] Yeah. Thank you.

[27:23] » So, uh, why did you want to get elected?

[27:26] >> Oh,

[27:26] >> is you asking that to Shane?

[27:29] >> You.

[27:30] >> Okay. It's a good question for him.

[27:32] >> You, Mr. Mayor.

[27:34] >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor.

[27:35] >> Uh, why did I want to get elected? Um,

[27:38] >> can you tell us your name first?

[27:40] >> Yeah.

[27:40] >> Uh, my name is Arthur.

[27:42] >> Arthur.

[27:43] >> Phillips.

[27:43] >> Yeah, Phillips. I I actually don't live

[27:45] in Spanish Fork.

[27:46] >> Do you live close by?

[27:48] >> Uh, yeah. I I live in Mona.

[27:50] >> Mona's a good place, too. We like Mona.

[27:52] Yep. Thanks for coming up here to

[27:54] Spanish Fork. We appreciate it.

[27:56] >> Welcome.

[27:56] >> I think I think Councilwoman Beck

[27:58] touched on it. Uh that uh the reason why

[28:01] I wanted to get elected was to give back

[28:04] to a city that helped raise me. And uh

[28:07] and you heard those people that that got

[28:09] those awards tonight that how much the

[28:11] city meant to them and so they felt like

[28:13] volunteering was a way to give back and

[28:15] I feel like this is another form of

[28:16] volunteering is getting elected to

[28:18] public office and giving back to the

[28:20] community that you love. So that's the

[28:22] main reason.

[28:23] >> Yeah.

[28:25] >> And to meet kids like you.

[28:26] >> Oh yeah.

[28:27] >> Thanks.

[28:28] >> Do you have a question?

[28:29] >> Thanks. Uh thanks for answering my

[28:31] question, Mr. Mayor.

[28:32] >> You're very welcome. Thanks for coming

[28:33] to our meeting.

[28:35] We're from PAC 72. We meet at ALA and um

[28:39] this is our weeos and arrow of light

[28:41] combined group.

[28:42] >> Very good. Very good.

[28:43] >> And Lisa, right?

[28:45] >> Lisa Ridge and Naomi.

[28:46] >> Naomi. Thank you for coming. And who's

[28:49] the other? What's the names of the

[28:51] others?

[28:51] >> Sandra and Talmage.

[28:53] >> Yes.

[28:54] >> And um yeah, I don't know.

[28:57] >> Troop what?

[28:58] >> We are. We're from PAC 72.

[29:00] >> Pack 72. And um we're really the leaders

[29:04] for fourth and fifth graders. Pack 72

[29:06] serves um from kindergarten through

[29:08] fifth grade, boys and girls. You don't

[29:10] have to be a student at ALA to go. Um

[29:14] you just come and have fun. Um next

[29:16] Saturday we're doing a Pinewood Derby.

[29:19] We can't wait um to get our cars racing.

[29:22] Um some of the things that are coming up

[29:24] are a canoe trip, been a swimming trip,

[29:27] been a um fish fishing activity. Um, so

[29:31] those are some of the fun things that

[29:32] we're doing this summer and come join us

[29:35] if you want.

[29:36] >> Very cool.

[29:36] >> And the one on the Pinewood Derby on

[29:38] Saturday is the open to the public one,

[29:41] right?

[29:42] >> It is.

[29:42] >> Yeah.

[29:43] >> Lisa, anyone can come race a car.

[29:45] >> Let me ask you, Lisa, how long have you

[29:47] been involved in scouting? Because we've

[29:48] seen you here quite a few times.

[29:50] >> Um, 30 years.

[29:51] >> Oh, wow.

[29:52] >> Just a hobby.

[29:53] >> It was a calling from for church. And

[29:56] then, um, I have found that Cub Scouts

[29:58] is my happy place. So that's where I

[30:00] still am.

[30:03] >> Good for you.

[30:03] >> One of her uh perhaps her best child.

[30:07] >> Yeah.

[30:07] >> Works for us.

[30:08] >> Yeah.

[30:09] >> My favorite son works for Spanish Fork

[30:11] City.

[30:13] >> Saw him earlier today. Yes,

[30:15] >> probably.

[30:16] >> Good man. I call him every time my

[30:17] computer does something and he just

[30:19] fixes it. It's great.

[30:20] >> I thought well that's what I do.

[30:22] >> Yeah.

[30:24] >> Anyway, thank you.

[30:25] >> Thank you. Yeah. Appreciate it. Very

[30:28] good stuff.

[30:32] Anybody else for the public comment

[30:33] section of the agenda?

[30:39] » Richard, you're here. Anything you need

[30:40] to say? Nothing you need to get off your

[30:42] chest?

[30:43] >> Wonderful.

[30:44] >> Okay.

[30:45] >> Tam tells me you're Tamara tells me

[30:48] you're yelling at the TV sometimes.

[30:50] >> I need another elliptical.

[30:54] Put another elliptical at the Fit City

[30:58] Center. He's put in his request.

[31:00] >> Put that Put that down on the agenda.

[31:02] >> We got it.

[31:02] >> Got it.

[31:04] >> No more ellipticals.

[31:07] >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. Thank you

[31:09] public uh for for addressing the

[31:11] council. We appreciate that. Uh takes us

[31:14] uh to council comments uh to report on

[31:16] what we've seen the last week, what

[31:18] we've a couple of weeks in in our

[31:20] different places. We'll instead of

[31:23] starting on an end this time, we'll

[31:24] start on the interior with Councilman

[31:26] Carden and then we'll work this way and

[31:28] end on Councilman Oiler. Is that all

[31:30] right? It works for me. Thank you,

[31:31] Mayor. I only have um two things. The

[31:33] first is I'm I might be stealing some

[31:36] thunder from you, Kathleen, so I

[31:38] apologize. Um next Wednesday, so a week

[31:40] from tomorrow, is the Rotary Chamber

[31:42] Scholarship uh golf tournament. I

[31:45] couldn't think of the word there, so

[31:46] maybe I should have left it to you. Um

[31:47] the golf tournament. And one thing

[31:49] that's been really awesome is that they

[31:50] have been giving out scholarships um to

[31:53] the diff the various um schools in our

[31:55] city and in PAC um the last couple of

[31:59] weeks and they have given out I believe

[32:02] it's 30 or 25 so far and they actually

[32:05] are going to give out another five. So

[32:07] they're giving out $3,500

[32:09] scholarships

[32:11] that are all raised from this golf

[32:13] tournament. And so what a cool thing

[32:16] that a group of people, again, we're

[32:18] talking a lot about service tonight, get

[32:19] together with our business community and

[32:22] raise money to give to the high school

[32:23] seniors in our community that some of

[32:26] them um may not be getting other other

[32:28] scholarships. Um MTech is participating.

[32:31] Just a really cool event. So if you're

[32:33] interested, there are still a few spots

[32:35] left for that um that golf um tournament

[32:39] next week and hope to see you there. But

[32:42] other than that, I have one other thing.

[32:44] Last week, um I wasn't able to attend

[32:46] ULCT with everyone else, but I was able

[32:49] to go to Arbor Day and to talk with um

[32:54] the kids at that. What a cool event. Um

[32:57] planting some trees. I don't think that

[32:58] the kids were I don't know if they're as

[33:00] excited about planting the trees as they

[33:01] were of not being in school, but either

[33:03] way, it was fun. And then I'm going to

[33:05] ask this question up here because I

[33:07] we're just going to do a little uh Utah

[33:09] history up here.

[33:10] What is our state tree?

[33:13] >> You want the answer?

[33:15] >> If you know the real answer, maybe it is

[33:16] not spruce.

[33:18] >> Have a note.

[33:18] >> It is no longer the state.

[33:20] >> It is the quaking aspen.

[33:24] But that changed just recently. A lot of

[33:27] us older generation, and I say older,

[33:29] probably don't know that it's not the

[33:31] blue spruce anymore, but it is the

[33:33] quaking aspen. And it was changed

[33:35] because a group of kids similar to what

[33:37] you're seeing on the screen reached out

[33:39] to our governor at the time, Governor

[33:41] Herbert, and petitioned because the

[33:42] quaking Aspen better represented our

[33:44] state. And the Quaking Aspen is found in

[33:47] every county in the state. So, kind of a

[33:50] cool thing. What a cool event. Dell,

[33:52] thank you for letting me be a part of

[33:53] that. And uh Councilman Tuk because he

[33:56] wasn't able to to attend. Um but five

[33:59] new trees um in our city. We do this

[34:01] every year. It's such an awesome awesome

[34:03] event that gives our kids an opportunity

[34:06] to to dig their tree. And one thing I

[34:07] told Dell is um when I was a kid in

[34:09] American Fork, I actually was able to

[34:11] participate in Arbor Day. And I still

[34:13] remember the tree that I helped plant at

[34:15] the cemetery like and I when I drive by,

[34:16] it's my tree. It's not at all my tree,

[34:19] but I claim it as my tree. So, um that's

[34:21] why I got mayor.

[34:22] >> Do you plant quaking aspa?

[34:24] >> We not then. We didn't.

[34:25] >> Those are like the weeds of trees.

[34:26] That's right. Just saying.

[34:28] >> And now it's our state tree.

[34:29] Just like

[34:30] the seed though. Thank you, Councilman

[34:32] Carden. Councilman Tuk.

[34:34] >> Thank you, Mayor. I do have a couple

[34:35] items this evening, but before I jump

[34:37] into those, I would like to give a

[34:38] little time to our president of the

[34:39] Chamber of Commerce, Kathleen Levit.

[34:45] » Thank you very much. Um, no, I'm so

[34:49] excited that you uh talked about the

[34:51] golf tournament. It's next Wednesday and

[34:53] we're so excited. We do have one of the

[34:56] highest participations that we can

[34:58] recall from doing this for 30 years. So,

[35:02] this is a really big year for this

[35:04] event. Um, we've given away 25

[35:07] scholarships and then they just voted

[35:09] this afternoon to do five more because

[35:12] we just keep getting more golfers and

[35:14] more support for this event. So, we're

[35:16] going to give out more scholarships.

[35:18] though between including the MTech

[35:20] scholarship, it'll be uh 35 scholarships

[35:24] overall, which is probably the most we

[35:26] ever have. Usually, it's about 15 or 20.

[35:29] Um so, we're really excited for this

[35:32] day. Um that's next Wednesday. Tea time

[35:35] is at 900 a.m. at the Oaks. Um, but

[35:40] before then, um, I wanted to make sure

[35:42] everybody saw their ma their area guide

[35:45] magazine that should have been in

[35:47] everyone's mailboxes,

[35:49] um, over the weekend early in the week.

[35:52] Um, we do have extra copies, so if you

[35:55] have friends or family members, um, I

[35:58] know the mayor in Salem said her son

[36:00] stole her copy because he wanted the 101

[36:03] things to experience in Spanish Fork and

[36:05] Salem. So, we do have extra copies if

[36:07] people would like and I'll be delivering

[36:09] them to library and the different city

[36:12] offices so that way people can get their

[36:14] hands on it. But, um, super proud of

[36:16] this publication and hopefully it serves

[36:18] our community well for the year.

[36:21] >> So, one of the 101 is attending one of

[36:24] these.

[36:24] >> It I think it is.

[36:25] >> So, everyone in this room can check off.

[36:27] >> Everyone can check that one off. You

[36:29] only have a hundred to go now. So, yes.

[36:32] Check. Check. That's but

[36:34] >> I think it was a a a good thing to

[36:37] combine them. So, it's just all around a

[36:39] community guide. Um and then on

[36:43] Thursday, this s Thursday the 7th, we

[36:46] have our business after hours for this

[36:48] quarter. We're going to the PAC business

[36:50] innovation center. So, I'm really

[36:53] looking forward to introducing that

[36:54] resource to our business community here.

[36:57] It is a available to all of our

[36:59] businesses for use for entrepreneurs,

[37:01] for existing businesses. They've got

[37:04] just about every kind of

[37:05] state-of-the-art

[37:06] branding material that you could need.

[37:08] They can print banners, they can engrave

[37:11] mugs, they can uh they can do just about

[37:14] everything. So, I sent the chamber logo

[37:16] over so that way we can make some stuff

[37:19] and see all of the equipment in use. So,

[37:21] I'm looking forward to it. That's next

[37:23] uh this Thursday the 7th from 5 to 7:00.

[37:27] Um open invite to any business

[37:29] entrepreneur, anybody watching this,

[37:31] come join us. It'll be a fun evening.

[37:33] And new networking for this month is May

[37:38] 21st. We did have a few changes. Um so

[37:41] we're going to be at the Hampton Inn

[37:44] this this month on the 21st. Um, we're

[37:47] going to be hearing from Custom Fit, the

[37:49] MTech program that reimburses up to 40%

[37:52] on uh extended education. Um, they just

[37:56] covered 40% of a conference. For me, it

[37:59] really is an amazing resource. They have

[38:01] a million dollars in funding to be able

[38:03] to give out for um business education

[38:06] for um professional skills. So, they're

[38:09] going to be presenting and then Good

[38:11] Grains and Salem will be catering lunch

[38:13] for us. That'll be on the 21st. And

[38:15] that's all I've got to report. Thanks

[38:17] you guys.

[38:17] >> Thank you.

[38:18] Kathleen, for all you do for

[38:20] our business community and for

[38:21] especially that publication. Uh nice

[38:24] work. Uh just a couple items from me uh

[38:27] this this evening. I was able to attend

[38:29] the conference that was mentioned, the

[38:31] Utah League of Cities and Towns. And uh

[38:33] I went to my f my favorite session was I

[38:36] was with uh city manager parents. Uh we

[38:38] learned about uh all sorts of cool

[38:40] things and insights about the Olympics

[38:41] in 2034. I found that fascinating and

[38:44] just kind of preparing our cities and infrastructure and such and um

[38:48] having volunteered in 2001 too. Yeah.

[38:51] Two. It was it's extra special. So I

[38:53] think for many of us it's it's fun to

[38:55] look ahead and see so much already going

[38:56] on in preparation for that. So that was

[38:58] one of my great takeaways from our what

[39:00] our conference down at that. Um, I also

[39:03] Councilman Cardon Cardin and I, we uh

[39:05] participated in something called the

[39:07] rodeo reading roundup family night which

[39:10] was at Sierra Bonita and had a great

[39:12] time supporting that program and the

[39:14] children reading and the program that's

[39:16] going on now. And so um kudos to to

[39:19] their principal and to uh just programs

[39:22] like that really. So uh I won't say much

[39:24] about it because I know others will but

[39:26] I I love being a part of the fire

[39:27] station 61 uh groundbreaking. So that

[39:30] was excellent. excellent experience.

[39:32] Looking forward to that. And then

[39:34] lastly, we uh just thought yesterday

[39:37] evening we had a a great parks and

[39:39] recreation committee board meeting. Uh

[39:41] thanks to Dell Robinson and and our team

[39:43] and it was excellent. Things are moving

[39:45] forward so well with all that. And on

[39:47] that note, that's all I've got. Mayor,

[39:49] >> thank you. Councilman Tuk, Councilman

[39:51] Marshall,

[39:52] >> just a quick story that it's an

[39:55] interesting thing. I'm I was at the

[39:56] state Republican convention and I'm

[39:58] waiting for the thing to start and these

[40:00] two Spanish residents sit next to me and one guy goes I have can I ask you

[40:04] two questions said sure before you do

[40:07] yes we support roundabouts and he's like

[40:09] okay I have one question left um

[40:13] and he was dead serious he said so which

[40:16] of the city council members are on the

[40:18] take

[40:20] and I'm like what are you talking about

[40:22] are you seriously asking me that

[40:23] question he's like yeah I really want to

[40:26] Mike, do people really believe that this

[40:28] body that these people that sit up here

[40:31] every day are taking money from

[40:33] somebody? He's like, that's the rumor.

[40:34] >> Oh my

[40:35] >> that I can assure you 100% does not

[40:38] happen up here. These folks, like Mike

[40:40] said, are here to volunteer to give back

[40:42] to the community. They want to serve the

[40:44] community every single time. They're

[40:46] only in it for for that and the the love

[40:48] of their community. And he's like, I

[40:50] kind of thought that, but I needed to

[40:52] ask anyway. like just the just it was

[40:54] shocking that seriously wasn't joking,

[40:56] wasn't anything. It was a dead serious

[40:57] question. Um so for those that are

[40:59] listening, all six of you, we're not on the take. Um we're doing

[41:04] this because we've been here a long time

[41:05] and we love this community. We love it

[41:06] dearly. Um and we're trying to continue

[41:09] the good work that our former council

[41:11] members have put us in a position to be

[41:14] one of the best cities in in the in the

[41:16] nation.

[41:16] >> Yes. So, um, just a strange conversation

[41:20] to be had on the gym floor over EVU that

[41:22] day. So, other than that, I don't have

[41:24] anything else.

[41:26] >> Perfect. Thank you, Councilman Marshall.

[41:28] Councilwoman Beck,

[41:29] >> a couple things. I sit on the library

[41:31] board and so I wanted to be sure I

[41:33] supported Chrissy Henry in her

[41:35] retirement. She's been at the library, I

[41:36] think, for 25 years, and she's just a

[41:39] staple. Um, she started part-time across

[41:41] the street, has moved over here. She's

[41:44] retiring. So is her husband. And so I

[41:46] just wanted to give a shout out to any

[41:48] of those people that attend the library

[41:50] are no longer going to see her. And I

[41:51] wanted to thank her for her years of

[41:53] commitment to such a great organization.

[41:56] And then also the library is considering

[41:59] about doing a homebound library and it

[42:03] would be a library service for those who

[42:06] cannot leave their home. So, if you have

[42:09] someone in your family that that can't

[42:11] leave and get to the library, they will

[42:14] have the the employees here actually

[42:17] gather the books, deliver them, come and

[42:19] pick them up. You just need to call the

[42:21] library. They're going to put the word

[42:22] out. I think it was in this month's

[42:24] newsletter as well. So, you can look at

[42:27] um at that for more information. I think

[42:29] that's really cool. And I think Mayor

[42:32] brought up yard of the week just a

[42:33] couple moments ago. The yard of the week

[42:36] program will start up here in a couple

[42:39] weeks. It runs from Memorial Day through

[42:40] Labor Day. And so around May 15th,

[42:43] you'll start seeing um the website

[42:46] promoting that. I think it'll be on

[42:47] social media. And we want new new yards.

[42:51] We our committee, we have nine

[42:52] volunteers working on the committee. We

[42:54] will will look over the weekly

[42:56] submissions, the photos, um why you're

[42:58] being nominated and and make a decision

[43:01] then. and just really we want to

[43:04] encourage good curb appeal in our

[43:06] community. That's important and it takes

[43:09] a lot of time and energy and money and

[43:11] we want to recognize that. So if you

[43:13] want to nominate yourself, feel free to.

[43:15] If you want to nominate your neighbor,

[43:17] your mom, someone that you just drive by

[43:19] and you jump out of the car and take

[43:21] some picture, I've I've been known to do

[43:23] that a couple times and and it's really

[43:25] fun to go recognize those people for

[43:26] their efforts. So be looking for that

[43:28] starting May 15th. and mayor asked me to

[43:31] go to a ribbon cutting for Waffle Love

[43:34] and I had seen it on social media, but

[43:37] Waffle Love just opened up in the Little

[43:40] Acorn. So, they have kept a couple um

[43:44] menu items from the old Little Acorn.

[43:46] And so, on the building, it does say

[43:48] Waffle Love and Little Acorn. And so, I

[43:50] just encourage you to go stop by and

[43:52] support them. They've put a lot of money

[43:54] into freshening up the building,

[43:57] replacing um the kitchen, the bathroom,

[44:00] fresh coat of paint, filling the

[44:01] potholes, and so just go support your

[44:04] local waffle love. And that's all I

[44:06] have.

[44:06] >> Very good. Thank you, Councilwoman Beck

[44:08] and Councilman Oiler.

[44:10] >> Thank you, Mayor. I just want to talk a

[44:12] little bit about the event that we had

[44:13] last Friday. So, we had a groundbreaking

[44:16] for our new fire station, station 61,

[44:19] which is currently located on Spanish

[44:21] Fork Main Street, and is going to be

[44:23] relocated to just two blocks west of

[44:26] where we're at right now. One really

[44:28] cool thing, and Chief Hails talked a

[44:30] little bit about this as he spoke, is

[44:32] that piece of ground has been used by

[44:36] Spanish Fork City for decades. Um, for

[44:39] those that weren't aware, it's the

[44:40] location of our old senior center

[44:43] building. And so, it's really neat to

[44:45] consider and think that that property is

[44:48] going from a place where our seniors

[44:50] have benefited and come and socialized

[44:52] for many years to now a new use within

[44:56] our city that will benefit all of our

[44:58] citizens and keeping us safe, keeping us

[45:02] uh protected. It'll be a fantastic new

[45:05] facility for our first responders, our

[45:07] fire and EMS. It will it will be built

[45:10] in a way that will keep them safe as

[45:13] well. Um, so super excited about that.

[45:15] Seth, correct me if I'm wrong. I think

[45:18] estimated time of completion is fall of

[45:21] 2027.

[45:22] >> Yep.

[45:23] >> So, keep your eye out

[45:24] >> early fall.

[45:25] >> Keep your eye out for that. Early next

[45:27] fall, um, we'll have a ribbon cutting

[45:30] for that new building. So, it'll be

[45:31] great. The other thing I wanted to talk

[45:33] about briefly was um ULCT. So this

[45:38] League of Cities and Towns conference

[45:39] that a few of us had the opportunity to

[45:41] go to down in St. George. Our keynote

[45:44] speaker is an individual by the name of

[45:48] Dr. Greg Jackson. He's an associate

[45:51] professor of history at Utah Valley

[45:54] University. He has a popular podcast

[45:57] called History That Doesn't Suck. And so

[46:01] he he gave kind of a a riveting story

[46:05] and he said as a historian a lot of

[46:08] times he gets asked the question have

[46:11] you ever imagined or seen a time in our

[46:14] country that's been more awful or more

[46:17] divided than it is right now? And as a

[46:21] historian, he can look at people and

[46:22] say, "Actually, yes, there have been

[46:25] many, many times that have been much

[46:27] more divided and much more worse than

[46:30] what we're going through right now." And

[46:31] he shared an example of that that was

[46:34] just just incredible of individuals that

[46:37] were killed um over their politics. And

[46:41] so, just a a reminder for all of us that

[46:43] yes, things are difficult. uh things can

[46:46] be difficult but we live in an

[46:49] incredible country. We are blessed to

[46:51] live in the best country uh in the

[46:55] world. Uh we have so many blessings here

[46:57] and so just a reminder that things

[46:59] aren't necessarily meant to be easy. Um

[47:02] things are meant to be a little more

[47:03] difficult to push us to help us figure

[47:05] out how we can come together and solve

[47:08] difficult problems. And I I believe that

[47:10] as a country we can do that can do that.

[47:13] So, thought that was a cool experience

[47:15] and a cool story that he shared. So, if

[47:17] you're interested in a fun podcast,

[47:19] history that doesn't suck. That's all

[47:22] I've got. Mayor,

[47:23] >> thank you, Councilman. I think it is on

[47:25] his podcast where he mentioned that uh

[47:27] Thomas Jefferson ran against John Adams

[47:29] for the presidency and they didn't speak

[47:31] for 11 years after running against each

[47:33] other. So, there's uh there's been some

[47:36] rocky times for sure. Uh thank you

[47:39] everyone for attending your meetings and reporting on them and and the good

[47:43] work you're doing uh besides your day

[47:45] jobs in the community. Appreciate it and

[47:47] it uh it's showing results. The only

[47:49] thing I wanted to bring up was the Utah

[47:51] State Junior Livestock Show was held at

[47:54] the u the fairgrounds this last week. Um

[47:57] these were projects from all over the

[47:59] state uh that came into our community

[48:02] and and some people stayed here um

[48:05] overwhelmed the the Hampton Inn again.

[48:07] So they had to stay somewhere else

[48:09] trying to trying to recruit some more

[48:11] hotel space down here in in our city for

[48:15] these big events that come in. But um a

[48:17] lot of people from all over the state

[48:18] for three days and then and then a sale

[48:21] day um that were really good. I had the

[48:24] opportunity to speak to some of the

[48:26] judges in this livestock show which I

[48:29] don't know anything about except

[48:31] watching the animals uh but I know

[48:33] people that know thing about it. they

[48:35] always bring in judges from outside of

[48:37] your area. Um, so they don't know

[48:40] people, they don't know names, they

[48:41] don't know families, they don't know,

[48:43] you know, kids or or whatever. And so

[48:46] it's trying to be that unbiased look at

[48:48] that animal and the way that it's it's

[48:50] being shown in the in the ring. So

[48:52] usually from Oklahoma and Ohio and the

[48:54] Midwest, uh, because they got a lot of a

[48:57] uh, you know, representation out there.

[49:00] And so these spoke to two of them while

[49:02] they were out here and they just

[49:03] couldn't believe um the city couldn't

[49:05] believe the facility. Um I said, "Well,

[49:08] come back next year. It's about to get

[49:09] better, right?" Uh and so they were all

[49:12] excited about that, but uh they they couldn't believe the quality of of

[49:17] livestock that were here, the the the

[49:19] good feelings that they had around that

[49:20] place. And so thank you uh for everybody

[49:23] that participated in that, all the

[49:24] families that uh keep an eye on each

[49:27] other. It's it's fun to watch a lot of

[49:28] people

[49:29] help each other out. Kids

[49:33] leave their white shirt, you know, home

[49:35] or whatever, and what do they do? They

[49:37] put on another kid's shirt and they go

[49:39] show, you know, and just the camaraderie

[49:41] down there to help each other out and

[49:42] help animals that don't don't want to

[49:44] always listen either. So, cool stuff.

[49:46] The the state junior livestock show went

[49:49] off another year at our our fairgrounds

[49:51] and we'll continue for the next hundred.

[49:53] So, thanks uh thanks for Nick and his

[49:56] team down there taking care of everybody

[49:57] else, too, Dale. They did a great job.

[49:58] Mayor, did we see that you came home

[50:01] with a pig?

[50:03] >> Don't start. Jesse, we've we've now like

[50:07] we needed another project in my home,

[50:09] but uh yeah, now we've got

[50:11] >> You're showing pig.

[50:12] >> I'm not showing a pig. Jagger will show

[50:14] a pig in the county fair and I have no

[50:17] idea what we've got oursel into. So,

[50:19] >> where are you keeping it in the

[50:21] backyard?

[50:21] >> Is this legal?

[50:22] >> Yeah, it's We got a fence.

[50:26] Is it Is it some pig?

[50:30] >> Some pig.

[50:31] >> Yeah,

[50:32] >> it's down at his uncle Tyler's who I

[50:34] completely blame for talking him into

[50:36] it. Um the cousins are going to go do

[50:40] this experiment together. And we'll see

[50:42] if they, you know, play on play in the

[50:44] field down there more than help the pig.

[50:46] But it's uh Yeah, he's having a good

[50:48] time already. So, we'll see. Awesome.

[50:50] Yep.

[50:50] >> Had to go get a pair of muck boots

[50:52] already. You know what muck boots are?

[50:54] Well, you don't, but there's things you

[50:57] don't Yep. Yep. Got got those going. So,

[51:00] pretty fun stuff.

[51:02] >> Okay. Um, council comments takes us to

[51:05] staff reports. Anything from the staff

[51:08] uh to catch up on from last meeting?

[51:11] >> I don't think so, mayor. I think we'll

[51:12] have enough new tonight.

[51:14] >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Takes us to the

[51:17] Spanish Fork 101 section. Thank you,

[51:19] scouts, for joining us. We appreciate

[51:21] you coming and seeing us. come in. Come

[51:23] back anytime.

[51:26] >> The wastewater 101 and WRF update. Mr.

[51:30] Mayor will maybe introduce Zack Staley.

[51:33] He's our wastewater division manager.

[51:35] And

[51:36] >> um I just invited him to come talk about

[51:38] the treatment plant. You guys understand

[51:40] the investment of that and talk a little

[51:42] bit about how well it's doing now that

[51:44] it's been operating since last fall and

[51:47] really also what we can do as users of

[51:50] the system to help protect it. So,

[51:53] >> and we know what muck boots are. So, we understand that.

[51:57] >> Right in.

[51:59] >> So, like Cory said, I I'm excited to be

[52:01] here. Thanks for taking some time to

[52:02] listen and and uh get an update on the

[52:05] wastewater treatment facility. It's been

[52:07] a great project. We wrapped it up in

[52:09] October. This uh this last October. Um

[52:14] we're treating about 5 a.5 million

[52:16] gallons of water a day. That that's

[52:18] quite a large amount. And you know, as I've grown in this industry, you

[52:22] didn't quite put it into scale until you

[52:24] actually see it. And and a lot of you

[52:25] guys have seen the treatment plan and

[52:27] understand that. But it it's a large

[52:29] amount. Um, one thing I'd like to point

[52:31] out and on these next couple slides is

[52:33] we are exceeding our treatment

[52:34] expectations that we talked about as we

[52:37] designed this treatment facility.

[52:41] Um, as you all know, the reason we built

[52:43] the facility was we were a running out

[52:45] of capacity as far as hydraulics go. Um,

[52:48] B, we could not meet the nutrient limits

[52:50] that we needed to hit that were mand

[52:52] mandated by the state. Um, one of them

[52:54] being ammonia. Um, and I'd like to point

[52:57] out um, our current ammonia limits that

[53:00] are outlined in our permit that was

[53:02] issued by the state for us to discharge

[53:03] into bodies of water um, is 6 milligrams

[53:08] per liter. um we could not hit that

[53:11] dependent you know consistently with the

[53:14] old facility and right now we are

[53:16] achieving an average of 0.16

[53:19] um amazing right um astronomically great

[53:24] um same thing with the phosphorus this

[53:26] was a big driver for us to jump into the

[53:28] facility that we're in now um the me

[53:31] membrane filtration facility um the

[53:34] state gave us an average for the year of

[53:36] 1 milligram per liter which is again

[53:38] quite a bit less than ammonia limit but

[53:40] we are consistently below 0.1 milligs

[53:44] per liter. Um so it speaks volumes to

[53:48] the engineering and the design and the

[53:51] thought process and again you know we we understand and we we acknowledge the

[53:56] large capital investment it was for the

[53:58] city. It's the largest project the city

[53:59] has ever done um capital wise. Um and it

[54:04] is paying off. Uh we have a great group

[54:06] of guys. Uh there's 11 of us total that

[54:10] uh run the facility and outside the

[54:12] treatment plant, the collection system,

[54:13] and and they're doing a great job. I I I

[54:17] sit at my desk, so I'll give all credit

[54:19] to those guys. Um but we're we're loving

[54:23] the new facility. It's doing well, and

[54:25] we appreciate your guys' vote and

[54:26] support in in upgrading to that

[54:28] facility.

[54:30] Now, with great a good investment like

[54:33] that, we got to protect it. And um what

[54:36] that's the next thing I'd like to talk

[54:38] about and maybe give you know council

[54:40] and and those listening you know some

[54:42] thoughts as you go daytoday in your own

[54:45] home right there's things you can do to

[54:47] protect your own sewer lateral you know

[54:49] your line going out to the main but also

[54:52] protect our facility right so I'd like

[54:53] to talk about some things that are meant

[54:55] to be sent to us and me not meant to

[54:58] right

[55:00] um I apologize for the picture this is

[55:02] an actual picture we took um in our town

[55:07] uh off of Third South and Third East. Uh

[55:11] we had a a uh an employee who was

[55:16] jetting the line. He was going up the

[55:17] line and he hit something not quite to

[55:19] the end of the line. And so he punched

[55:21] through it, pulled it back, and there's

[55:23] a lot of things in that picture that

[55:25] should not be in the sewer. Um,

[55:28] so a lot of this, all this information

[55:31] I'll plug, we can find on our website if

[55:33] you go to Spanishwork.gov,

[55:36] um, public works, the sewer tab, and

[55:38] then there's a tab that says my sewer

[55:40] responsibilities. And this outlines some

[55:42] of the things that should not go down

[55:44] the toilet or even down your drains,

[55:46] right? Fats, oils, and greases. Um,

[55:49] flushable wipes, even they're even if

[55:51] they're marked as flushable. uh fe

[55:54] feminine hygiene products, dental floss,

[55:56] kitty litter. Some of it's advertised as

[55:58] flushable. I never knew that until we

[56:00] got into this. Um hazardous household

[56:04] chemicals such as motor oil, pesticides,

[56:06] paint, solvents, you know, those can be

[56:09] disposed of at the transfer station.

[56:10] They charge you, but it's a better,

[56:12] safer way to do so. Um prescription

[56:15] drugs, and correct me if I'm wrong,

[56:17] Chief, but you guys still take them down

[56:18] at the uh at the police station. Uh lots

[56:22] of people and including myself, you

[56:24] thought just flush the ones you don't

[56:25] use right after you've had surgery cuz

[56:27] you don't want them anymore. But that's

[56:28] not the case. Those things are very hard

[56:31] to remove from the waste water and and

[56:33] never do. You know, our facility can't

[56:35] even remove the facial things.

[56:39] >> Um and maybe just something to think

[56:41] about be be sparing in your usage of

[56:44] your garbage disposal. Um scrape all the

[56:47] pieces of food that you have off your

[56:49] plate into the garbage. rinse it off,

[56:51] use it sparingly. Those kind of things

[56:53] are the I would say 90% of the phone

[56:56] calls we get from residents say, you

[56:57] know, they've got a plugged lateral,

[56:59] they've got something going on. It's

[57:00] because something went down the drain

[57:02] that shouldn't, whether it's food or

[57:04] some of these other items that I've

[57:06] talked about.

[57:09] Um, one other thing to think about, we

[57:11] deal with roots a lot, especially in the

[57:13] old part of town where we have clay

[57:14] lines. um the city doesn't plant trees

[57:19] um in those areas and and so that's one

[57:22] thing that we don't help our residents

[57:23] cover. But one thing I'd like to offer

[57:25] is a thought as you as you go about that

[57:28] process and you decide to plant a tree

[57:29] in your own home area at at your home.

[57:32] Um you know you know the plug call blue

[57:35] stakes find out what's underneath the

[57:36] ground so you don't damage a gas line or

[57:38] something like that. They'll mark your

[57:40] sewer line as well. Um think about where

[57:43] you're planting it. Those roots are

[57:45] attracted to moisture and they will

[57:46] follow down and follow that pipe. That

[57:48] is an actual again another picture we

[57:50] found

[57:52] uh a resident claim or called with an

[57:54] issue and we we thought it was an offset

[57:57] joint. We didn't see anything but that

[57:59] route is the size of a 4-in clay pipe

[58:01] that has wrapped its way around that

[58:03] lateral and made it so they had backup

[58:06] issues.

[58:07] >> So So again, that's going to take a long

[58:10] time for that tree to get that big, but

[58:12] it it can happen. So, just a plug for

[58:15] use caution. Think about what is at your

[58:17] house and what could potentially happen.

[58:21] Uh, and then and then the last thing I'd

[58:23] like to touch on is just uh knowing your

[58:27] responsibility as a citizen here in in

[58:29] Spanish work. Spanish work is a very

[58:30] generous city as far as helping our

[58:32] residents out. We understand digging in

[58:34] the road and all these other things are expensive and it can be a burden on

[58:38] the citizens and so Spanish work will

[58:41] help out with uh certain portions of

[58:44] replacement if it fits a certain

[58:46] category. Um if there's a structural

[58:49] defect, offset joint, broken pipe,

[58:52] something from the back edge of the

[58:53] sidewalk, you can see on there it shows

[58:55] the property line from there towards the

[58:57] main line, we will help take care of if

[58:59] there's an issue. Um, the homeowner's

[59:01] responsibility is from the back edge of

[59:04] the sidewalk to the home. Now, the

[59:06] exceptions are maintenance and roots,

[59:08] right? Maintenance, you know, clean your

[59:10] line. If you need a plumber, call them.

[59:13] Um, but if it's a root caused issue, the

[59:17] city doesn't plant trees, right? We

[59:18] don't plant the trees in your yard.

[59:20] That's something that we would look to

[59:22] the resident to take care of. Um,

[59:25] again, knowing this, it's, you know, an

[59:29] eye openener for me as, as far as I live

[59:30] in Salem. They don't take care of any of

[59:33] that stuff. Um, and so it's it's an eye

[59:35] opener opener for me to think about

[59:37] those things before I do those things at

[59:39] my own home. And I would, you know,

[59:41] implore that you guys do the same as

[59:43] well as you're thinking about trees and things that you you send down your

[59:47] toilet or drain.

[59:50] Um, again, here's a plug for Oh, who put

[59:53] that picture there?

[59:55] Jack.

[59:57] So, for more information, you can visit

[59:58] our website. Um, my contact information

[1:00:00] is on there as well. If you have a

[1:00:02] question, uh, we have our email

[1:00:04] addresses, uh, office phone numbers. Um,

[1:00:07] if there is an issue, please don't

[1:00:09] hesitate to call. We're more than happy

[1:00:11] to come help. But, um, anyways, any any

[1:00:14] questions?

[1:00:18] Zach,

[1:00:21] >> ask two questions. Zach would how often

[1:00:25] do we have a sewer backup once uh it

[1:00:28] depends on the year. Uh we we budget a

[1:00:31] certain amount to help take care of

[1:00:32] those things with with residents and and

[1:00:35] this year is an abnormal one. We are

[1:00:37] we're spending a lot of money in that.

[1:00:38] Um but there's some years that we spend

[1:00:40] hardly any money in that. So in the last

[1:00:43] 10 years, our average has been something

[1:00:44] like one or less than one a year.

[1:00:47] >> I would say probably five a year

[1:00:49] >> sewer backups

[1:00:50] >> and not all are caused by on on the city

[1:00:53] side.

[1:00:54] >> We respond to probably five to five to

[1:00:57] seven a year and usually it's something

[1:00:59] that is caused on the resident side of

[1:01:01] the of the lateral.

[1:01:03] >> And so these things

[1:01:06] they seem so easy to just disappear down

[1:01:08] the drain,

[1:01:09] >> flush and forget it, right? but they

[1:01:11] don't forget

[1:01:12] >> and they come back in the nastiest of

[1:01:15] ways.

[1:01:15] >> And I will advocate if you guys would if

[1:01:17] anyone would like a tour of the

[1:01:18] facility, we we are open. Again, my

[1:01:21] contact information is on the website.

[1:01:23] We're more than happy to show you and

[1:01:24] we're more than happy to show you what

[1:01:25] comes on our way. So, I

[1:01:27] >> It's the greatest, nastiest room in the

[1:01:30] city.

[1:01:30] >> It is. Yep. Smells something.

[1:01:33] >> We should have brought you up before the

[1:01:34] scouts left. I could have been there

[1:01:35] next.

[1:01:36] >> Scout. I actually took a preschool group

[1:01:38] through on Friday. So,

[1:01:41] >> very good.

[1:01:43] >> But I have a question to add to Zach.

[1:01:45] You know, often things we flush get down

[1:01:48] to the treatment plant and there's some

[1:01:50] pretty good screenings to get it out.

[1:01:53] Um, so even things we can put in the

[1:01:56] garbage, someone's putting them in the

[1:01:58] garbage just in a harder way. How many

[1:02:01] dumpsters do you haul off or how often

[1:02:03] do you haul off the dumpsters of debris

[1:02:06] that's screened out of our sewer?

[1:02:07] >> We have two dumpsters in our headworks

[1:02:10] facility. So that where the water comes

[1:02:12] in, we dump one of them once every other

[1:02:14] week and once the other one gets dumped

[1:02:17] once a week. So we are three dumpsters

[1:02:21] in two weeks. So six dumpsters a month

[1:02:23] >> of garbage that should not be put in

[1:02:25] there. It's a lot of banana peel

[1:02:27] stickers.

[1:02:29] >> And those don't get uh you can't take

[1:02:31] those to the dump and pay $12 a ton.

[1:02:34] >> No, we we get charged an astronomical

[1:02:37] amount to

[1:02:38] >> those are to hold those off. Yep.

[1:02:40] >> Yeah. And who pays for those?

[1:02:44] >> Citizens of Spanish,

[1:02:45] >> right? Yeah. I mean, it's not like some

[1:02:48] faceless, nameless, somebody's paying

[1:02:49] for it. You and I are through our rates,

[1:02:52] right? That's a part of sadly a part of

[1:02:53] the expense.

[1:02:54] >> Yep.

[1:02:55] and and and all that, you know, as I

[1:02:57] said, it's to protect our our investment

[1:03:00] that we just made, right? We spent so

[1:03:02] many millions of dollars and and that's

[1:03:05] to protect the filtration that's down

[1:03:06] there that's giving us those great

[1:03:08] results. So,

[1:03:12] » thank you, Zach.

[1:03:13] >> Thank you.

[1:03:14] >> Appreciate the update.

[1:03:17] >> Okay,

[1:03:19] that uh

[1:03:20] >> I've never seen Corey more proud. It's

[1:03:22] an interesting part of uh

[1:03:24] >> actually I have every time we talk about

[1:03:26] the treatment plan.

[1:03:27] >> Yeah,

[1:03:28] >> it's probably best.

[1:03:30] >> Okay, it takes us to consent items uh

[1:03:33] section of the agenda. There's A, B, and

[1:03:34] C. The minutes of the last meeting inlue

[1:03:36] donation and exchange of services

[1:03:38] agreement and the Brent money annexation

[1:03:40] agreement are all in consent items.

[1:03:42] Anybody have any questions about those

[1:03:44] consent items?

[1:03:46] If not, I would entertain a motion to

[1:03:48] approve the consent items.

[1:03:51] I move to approve the consent items.

[1:03:54] >> Second.

[1:03:55] >> Motion made by Councilman Tuk, second by

[1:03:57] Councilwoman Beck. All in favor say yes.

[1:03:59] >> Yes.

[1:04:00] >> Can I consent items approved? Takes us

[1:04:02] to the new business section. This has A

[1:04:05] through F. First one is the res

[1:04:08] resolution for personnel policy updates.

[1:04:10] I'll bet that's what Kim's here for.

[1:04:16] Maybe she was waiting for walk up music.

[1:04:20] >> I was hoping Kim would do it.

[1:04:23] >> So, I don't know what's more exciting,

[1:04:24] me being here because May's kind of a

[1:04:27] big month or if it's Stacy and I sharing

[1:04:30] in my grandson's birthday in a couple

[1:04:32] weeks.

[1:04:33] >> I don't know. This is pretty exciting.

[1:04:36] >> But Harrison's much more exciting than

[1:04:38] this.

[1:04:39] >> Possibly. Possibly. That might be

[1:04:40] >> pretty lucky.

[1:04:41] >> That little boy smiles so big. His smile

[1:04:44] is so cute.

[1:04:45] >> He's awesome. Isn't he perfect?

[1:04:47] >> He's perfect. Shall we go on?

[1:04:51] >> Two grandmothers reminiscing about their

[1:04:53] grandson.

[1:04:54] >> Start showing pictures. No,

[1:04:55] >> his birthday party's on the 16th. If you

[1:04:58] want an address or the registry, we can

[1:05:00] share.

[1:05:02] >> Everybody's invited.

[1:05:04] >> I'll give I'll give a candy bar to

[1:05:05] whoever can decide. Tell me what the

[1:05:07] theme is.

[1:05:09] >> Disneyland.

[1:05:10] >> Disney.

[1:05:10] >> Yep. Seth got it.

[1:05:11] >> Candy bar. Oh, I thought the theme of

[1:05:14] the policy changes. No.

[1:05:15] >> Oh, no. No. His birthday party.

[1:05:19] So, hey, Jack, do you Yeah. So, I've

[1:05:21] we've got about 10 policies here um that

[1:05:24] we're we're going to submit to to get

[1:05:27] your approval. Uh just so you know,

[1:05:30] these policies have gone through the

[1:05:32] personnel committee. Uh just as a

[1:05:34] refresher, that personnel committee

[1:05:36] consists of the mayor, two council

[1:05:38] members, you've got admin, and then

[1:05:40] there's two employee representatives

[1:05:42] that go on that meeting. And we had a

[1:05:44] meeting, went over all of these in in a

[1:05:46] little bit greater detail, and then um

[1:05:49] made the final resolution, which is what

[1:05:51] we're presenting today. Uh I've got

[1:05:54] these broken up into three sections. You

[1:05:56] can see we've got one that's

[1:05:58] clarification and compliance to state

[1:06:01] and federal law. Then we had some that

[1:06:03] are more changes to the policy and then

[1:06:06] we have a couple new ones. I'm not going

[1:06:08] to go into detail on all of them. If you

[1:06:11] guys have questions, please ask. I'm

[1:06:13] just going to give you more of an an

[1:06:15] overview and then give you an idea of

[1:06:17] what these changes um represent. And but

[1:06:20] feel free if you have questions, I can I

[1:06:22] can answer those. So the first section,

[1:06:24] the clarification and compliance. Um,

[1:06:27] for example, the bilingual, the the

[1:06:29] policies are still administered the

[1:06:31] same. We're just adding clarification.

[1:06:34] For example, that bilingual when we

[1:06:36] created this policy in 2003 or 23 2023,

[1:06:41] it was the full-time employees that we

[1:06:43] had in mind. And once we started

[1:06:46] implementing the policy, we realized

[1:06:48] that there's a lot of part-time

[1:06:49] employees out there that are using their

[1:06:51] second languages to benefit us as a

[1:06:54] city. And so we wrote policy to kind of

[1:06:56] help clarify how this policy um should

[1:07:01] be handled with our part-time employees.

[1:07:04] Uh couple other policies, the the

[1:07:07] political activity and the nepotism.

[1:07:09] These are examples of where we just used

[1:07:12] wording from the actual laws and put

[1:07:15] them in our policy to make to give some

[1:07:17] clarification. The nepotism we added um

[1:07:21] some definitions. Uh it's it's

[1:07:24] surprising how many qu times I get

[1:07:26] questions on my nepatism policy and

[1:07:29] we're hoping that with this change we

[1:07:31] can go through the policy and we can say

[1:07:33] does this comply? Does it does it reach

[1:07:36] the nepotism point and and that's what

[1:07:38] these this section is is just

[1:07:40] clarification and helping our

[1:07:42] supervisors make the better decisions uh

[1:07:45] when it comes to to policies and their

[1:07:47] employees.

[1:07:48] The second section, the change of

[1:07:50] policies. These are policies that are

[1:07:52] actually been changed in some way. Um,

[1:07:56] some are minor like the procedure for

[1:07:58] general grievance. This is simply

[1:08:00] stating that if somebody wants to file a

[1:08:02] grievance, they're going to come to the

[1:08:04] HR director rather than the assistant

[1:08:06] city manager. This is just a

[1:08:08] clarification of where employees go to

[1:08:10] the fire and EMS policy. you know that

[1:08:13] our fire and EMS department is a really

[1:08:15] young department right now and we tried

[1:08:18] to create policies that um represented

[1:08:22] and we're going to be for long time but

[1:08:25] as we started to utilize those policies

[1:08:28] we're re realizing that we need to make

[1:08:31] changes and it's as we use them and

[1:08:33] that's this one here um all this is

[1:08:36] doing is if a firefighter or EMS has

[1:08:40] earned some holiday time. Right now, the

[1:08:44] policy is if that employee leaves the

[1:08:46] city, they don't get bought out or paid

[1:08:49] for those holidays that they've earned.

[1:08:51] This policy is changing that. Now, if a

[1:08:54] firefighter earns those upon separation,

[1:08:56] we do give them a buyout for those since

[1:08:58] they've been earned. I'm going to go

[1:09:01] over these last two policies in a little

[1:09:03] bit more detail just because they are

[1:09:05] new. The obligation to report private

[1:09:08] conduct. This is requiring our employees

[1:09:12] that if they are convicted or arrested

[1:09:15] of a a misdemeanor or a felony, we don't

[1:09:18] care about the parking tickets, the

[1:09:20] speeding tickets, but if it's a

[1:09:22] misdemeanor or a felony, they need to

[1:09:23] contact HR. We need to know these in

[1:09:26] case this um affects their position in

[1:09:29] any way. And it protects our residents,

[1:09:31] it protects our employees. Um and so

[1:09:34] this is just policy stating that they

[1:09:35] need to come to HR and let us know.

[1:09:38] The last one is the uniform and apparel

[1:09:41] policy. The uniform policy is stating

[1:09:44] just remaining the same but the same but

[1:09:48] the apparel policy we're adding. And

[1:09:50] just so you know this policy has

[1:09:53] actually been in the works for about two

[1:09:54] years. It you know been talking about it

[1:09:56] saying hey we need to make a change

[1:09:58] here. And now um after a lot of effort

[1:10:02] um Carson put a lot of effort in putting

[1:10:04] this policy together. He had a committee

[1:10:06] together of other departments um to make

[1:10:10] sure that we're representing everybody

[1:10:13] the best that we can. And this policy is

[1:10:16] just giving really good guidance on um

[1:10:20] what each division, what each

[1:10:21] department, what each individual um

[1:10:23] should receive as far as apparel.

[1:10:25] something for our linemen and what their

[1:10:28] needs are, their protective gear is

[1:10:30] going to be different than what I need.

[1:10:32] And so this just kind of outlines that.

[1:10:35] One thing in this policy that uh does

[1:10:38] affect our employees is we are making

[1:10:41] policy

[1:10:42] that our employees as long as they're

[1:10:44] working for the city on city time they

[1:10:48] cannot wear the logo or branding of

[1:10:51] companies or individuals that we have

[1:10:53] done work with or are currently doing

[1:10:55] work with. The reason for this is we

[1:10:57] don't want to give that perceived um

[1:11:00] favoritism or conflict of interest. they

[1:11:02] can wear those apparels on, you know,

[1:11:04] after hours at home, but just on on the

[1:11:07] job, they're no longer to wear those

[1:11:09] logoed or branded apparel.

[1:11:12] Those are the policies. I'll open it up

[1:11:14] to you if you have any questions.

[1:11:16] If not,

[1:11:20] » Councilman Marshall and I sit on this

[1:11:22] committee and went through everything

[1:11:23] and approve it.

[1:11:26] >> There you go.

[1:11:27] >> I second.

[1:11:28] >> If that's helpful. Oh,

[1:11:29] >> I thought you made a motion.

[1:11:31] No.

[1:11:32] >> Oh,

[1:11:32] >> I'm just letting them know that

[1:11:34] >> she's letting us know that Okay. that we

[1:11:36] did our job and we

[1:11:37] >> You did your job on that committee. So,

[1:11:39] >> appreciate that.

[1:11:40] >> Thank you, Kim.

[1:11:41] >> I'll see you next Saturday at the

[1:11:42] birthday party.

[1:11:44] >> Wow.

[1:11:46] >> Okay. Uh there's a motion. Uh I think

[1:11:48] Stacey kind of made a motion there, but

[1:11:50] didn't formally make the motion, but

[1:11:52] there is a motion to be made to adopt

[1:11:54] the personnel policy updates.

[1:11:58] If so inclined,

[1:12:00] >> I will move to approve the ordinance to

[1:12:01] approve the resolution for the personnel

[1:12:03] policy updates.

[1:12:05] >> Second.

[1:12:05] >> Motion made by Councilwoman Beck,

[1:12:07] seconded by Councilman Marshall. Uh, a

[1:12:09] roll call vote. Councilman Tuk, yes.

[1:12:11] Councilman Carden, Councilman Oiler,

[1:12:13] Councilwoman Beck, yes.

[1:12:14] >> And Councilman Marshall,

[1:12:15] >> yes.

[1:12:16] >> Personnel policy updates are updated.

[1:12:19] Thank you, Kim.

[1:12:20] >> Takes us to ordinance adopting title

[1:12:23] five amendment.

[1:12:29] All right, we're talking signs.

[1:12:32] So, uh, specifically, we're talking

[1:12:34] project signage, uh, plans. That's what

[1:12:37] that's, uh, the the amendment today. So,

[1:12:39] as a quick refresher, project signage

[1:12:42] plans allow a property owner to apply

[1:12:44] for signage that exceeds our standard

[1:12:47] limitations on signage. Uh this could

[1:12:50] mean a greater number of signs on the

[1:12:51] property, maybe a taller sign, um maybe

[1:12:54] some more copy area on the sign. Um but

[1:12:57] just in general something that might

[1:12:58] exceed the normal limitations in some

[1:13:00] way. Um so as a part of this project

[1:13:04] sign application, um they have to

[1:13:06] provide information showing where the

[1:13:08] signs are going to be on the site, uh

[1:13:09] the dimensions of the signage proposed,

[1:13:12] um etc, etc., uh for staff to review. Um

[1:13:16] and then the rest of the process is

[1:13:19] going to work the same. The project

[1:13:20] signage plans have to come to the

[1:13:21] planning commission and then to the city

[1:13:23] council for um ultimate approval. Um but

[1:13:26] the amendments we're making, if you go

[1:13:28] to the next slide,

[1:13:30] if you want

[1:13:30] >> Oh, thank you. I do.

[1:13:38] » Oh.

[1:13:47] there we go. It's hitting the wrong

[1:13:49] button. That's on me. Okay. So, the

[1:13:51] first amendment we're making here um

[1:13:55] lowers the minimum site area requirement

[1:13:57] for a property owner to make application

[1:13:59] from 5 acres down to 4 acres. And I just

[1:14:02] want to note that this was kind of a

[1:14:03] last minute change. Um, this was, if you

[1:14:06] saw the draft last week, it it remained

[1:14:08] at five acres, but at the property

[1:14:10] owner's request, we've um moved that

[1:14:12] down to four acres. Um, and then the

[1:14:16] second amendment is uh addresses

[1:14:19] building size. Currently, the site needs

[1:14:20] to have at least 50,000 square feet of

[1:14:22] building space. So, that can be more

[1:14:24] than one building to qualify uh for a

[1:14:27] project signage plan. Um, this would

[1:14:29] remove that requirement only if you are

[1:14:32] within 400 ft of an Interstate 15

[1:14:34] interchange. Um, for any site further

[1:14:37] than 400 ft from an interchange, that

[1:14:39] 50,000 ft building requirement remains

[1:14:41] the exact same as it is today. Um, we're

[1:14:44] proposing this because sites that are

[1:14:46] have close proximity to um, I-15

[1:14:49] interchanges

[1:14:51] um, kind of have a unique opportunity to

[1:14:53] generate some revenue that other

[1:14:54] properties in the city just simply don't

[1:14:57] because of their their proximity to um,

[1:15:00] transitors down the highway, people

[1:15:01] getting on and off, etc., etc. Um but

[1:15:05] finally, most importantly with this, um

[1:15:08] this really should only open up a small

[1:15:11] number of property owners to make

[1:15:12] application. Um it does not obligate the

[1:15:15] council to approve anything. The rest of

[1:15:17] the process is entirely the same. We're

[1:15:19] essentially just changing some of the

[1:15:21] requirements that someone would have to

[1:15:24] meet in order to qualify to apply for a

[1:15:27] project signage plan. Um, so it will

[1:15:30] still come to the planning commission,

[1:15:32] it will still come to the council. Um,

[1:15:33] you'll get to see those signage plans uh

[1:15:36] with the specific

[1:15:38] um signs proposed at that time.

[1:15:42] Any questions? Is a property owner with

[1:15:45] this change or with their current change

[1:15:47] are property owners

[1:15:50] as a council are we able to what are the

[1:15:53] criteria to deny a sign? for example,

[1:15:56] are they entitled to be able to put a

[1:15:58] sign on their property

[1:16:00] >> under the standard Title 5 requirements?

[1:16:04] Um, yes. The the project signage plan is

[1:16:07] just for signage that may exceed some of

[1:16:10] the standard uh limitations in Title 5.

[1:16:13] So, if you wanted, for example, a

[1:16:15] freestanding sign, pull sign, and a

[1:16:18] monument sign, you'd have to have a

[1:16:19] project signage plan. um you uh normally

[1:16:23] as long as I don't remember the

[1:16:24] requirement. I think there's a

[1:16:25] requirement for both of those uh to

[1:16:29] qualify for at least one, but this if

[1:16:31] you had a project signage plan, you

[1:16:32] could propose to have multiple of them.

[1:16:34] >> And if it gets approved by the council,

[1:16:36] then then they're allowed to do that.

[1:16:38] >> Yeah. And you guys can also at the time

[1:16:40] that it comes to you with that specific

[1:16:42] project signage plan, make request

[1:16:44] modifications to it. So if you were

[1:16:45] like, we think this is too many pole

[1:16:47] signs, could you get rid of one of

[1:16:49] these? Um, so there is still some some

[1:16:52] play with it when it each one finally

[1:16:54] gets to you in the end essentially. But

[1:16:56] for the most part, nothing is changing

[1:16:58] with project signage plans. Just that um

[1:17:02] minimum building space if you're within

[1:17:05] 400 ft of an interchange.

[1:17:08] >> So the threshold is changing.

[1:17:09] >> Yeah, the threshold's changing,

[1:17:10] >> but not how it's approved.

[1:17:12] >> Yeah, exactly.

[1:17:13] >> Okay. Um,

[1:17:15] how do you measure 400 feet and from an

[1:17:18] interchange or interchanges

[1:17:20] >> from an the way it was explained was

[1:17:24] essentially if you can measure from

[1:17:25] somewhere on the interchange to

[1:17:27] somewhere on the property. It doesn't

[1:17:28] have to go across the entire property or meet the center point of it. If it

[1:17:32] can get to the property from an

[1:17:33] interchange, um, then we would call that

[1:17:37] 400 ft. So I guess from and on or off

[1:17:40] ramp um of I-15.

[1:17:46] » Do we want to get in a point of gore?

[1:17:48] >> Yeah,

[1:17:48] >> I would pick some point.

[1:17:49] >> Where in that interchange does it have

[1:17:51] to be on the road? Is it on the right?

[1:17:54] >> It's probably fairly long.

[1:17:59] » When does an interchange start and stop?

[1:18:01] Let's let's take

[1:18:02] >> Yeah. the SR 147, the Arrowhead trail,

[1:18:06] Arrowhead Road that's getting on I-15.

[1:18:07] Where where is that point referenced

[1:18:09] from? Someone could argue that that

[1:18:12] on-ramp going westbound is on 147

[1:18:16] itself.

[1:18:18] So, does it come all the way back? I

[1:18:20] mean, it just I think for just clarity

[1:18:22] sake, some reference to there would be

[1:18:24] helpful.

[1:18:25] >> Yeah. Um,

[1:18:26] >> so would it be maybe sufficient to say

[1:18:29] from the asphalt of the off-ramp, from

[1:18:34] the uh ride ofway of the of the offramp?

[1:18:37] I I mean, I think either of those are

[1:18:38] good

[1:18:40] uh probably

[1:18:42] good

[1:18:45] things to reference, but

[1:18:48] um I like I like where you're headed. I

[1:18:50] think it's it provides clarity. Um,

[1:18:54] so I'm just looking at a map and I think

[1:18:56] I would um I would probably

[1:19:02] It's not the off That's not the offramp.

[1:19:05] Um, I would say from

[1:19:09] I think my natural thought would be from

[1:19:10] the asphalt.

[1:19:11] >> Which as what point on the asphalt?

[1:19:14] >> The closest point. I mean to be most

[1:19:16] generous I'd probably

[1:19:18] >> It's probably semantics. It's probably

[1:19:19] not that big a deal, but just

[1:19:22] I guess we'll interpret it as we need

[1:19:24] to.

[1:19:24] >> Is it where the asphalt intersects other

[1:19:26] asphalt or are you talking asphalt?

[1:19:29] >> I mean,

[1:19:31] >> yeah. Dave suggests uh right of way.

[1:19:37] » From watching

[1:19:38] >> from Nashville.

[1:19:39] >> Okay.

[1:19:40] >> He's watching. Really?

[1:19:41] >> That's what some people do when they

[1:19:42] >> when they're on trips.

[1:19:46] >> Nashville. I think we add a thing that

[1:19:47] Shane is the one who gets to go measure

[1:19:49] them all too.

[1:19:49] >> Well, I mean I sure um that does not

[1:19:54] help a point of reference. It's now

[1:19:56] right away for a length of time for a

[1:20:00] Where does that right away?

[1:20:03] >> Start and stop.

[1:20:06] >> Come on, staff. Pick a point.

[1:20:09] Well, I'm looking I'm looking at a map

[1:20:10] where I can see where right ofway ends

[1:20:12] and I would say, you know, if if this is

[1:20:15] the closest point, I'd go 400 feet and

[1:20:16] say it's 400 feet or it's not. That's

[1:20:18] >> right. That's what I would say.

[1:20:20] >> Not okay.

[1:20:23] >> Yeah.

[1:20:23] >> So, you're saying the interstate

[1:20:24] rightway?

[1:20:26] >> Interstate rightway. Okay. The

[1:20:27] interchanges

[1:20:29] >> the rightway associated with the

[1:20:30] interchange. Yeah.

[1:20:31] >> Okay.

[1:20:31] >> Is that helpful?

[1:20:32] >> Is helpful.

[1:20:33] >> For the record, I have a map of the

[1:20:35] interchange at Benjamin that we were

[1:20:37] looking at, but submit it to

[1:20:40] >> I'll take a snapshot of it.

[1:20:42] >> So if we put So if we put in the

[1:20:44] language

[1:20:46] >> what the minimum building space

[1:20:48] requirement is waved for sites located

[1:20:51] within 400 ft of the

[1:20:53] >> rightway of the I-15

[1:20:57] interchange.

[1:20:58] >> Yeah, there you go. That's helpful.

[1:21:00] >> Rightway of the I-15 interchange and

[1:21:02] take the plural off the interchanges.

[1:21:04] >> Yep.

[1:21:06] >> Right. Okay. That's it.

[1:21:09] >> Go ahead with that motion then.

[1:21:10] >> Thank you, Ian. Any any other questions

[1:21:11] for Ian about this?

[1:21:14] >> Can Ian do all of these?

[1:21:17] >> Well, David can too.

[1:21:18] >> No, not Dave.

[1:21:19] >> No,

[1:21:20] >> Dave can. Yes,

[1:21:22] >> I

[1:21:24] David G. Anderson. No, I'm just kidding.

[1:21:26] Is he really watching? Hey, if there's

[1:21:27] no other I heard you

[1:21:29] >> questions for Ian or uh or his team, I'd

[1:21:32] entertain a motion for item B with I

[1:21:34] think that adjusted language in there.

[1:21:37] Added language.

[1:21:40] >> Was there amended language? You

[1:21:42] >> you want me to add it?

[1:21:43] >> Yeah.

[1:21:44] >> Add lib.

[1:21:45] >> All right. I move to approve the

[1:21:46] ordinance to modify the city's

[1:21:48] application recurrence for project

[1:21:49] signing plans with the addition of

[1:21:53] adding to that sentence 400 ft from

[1:21:58] interstate rightway.

[1:22:02] » Okay. Motion made by Councilman

[1:22:04] Marshall.

[1:22:06] >> Uh well, we're we're targeting around

[1:22:08] >> the interchange itself.

[1:22:09] >> Yeah. We're not necessarily going the

[1:22:11] whole

[1:22:11] >> 400 ft of interstate

[1:22:14] >> interchange right away.

[1:22:15] >> Okay, we can.

[1:22:17] >> Von says yes.

[1:22:18] >> We can handle that.

[1:22:19] >> I'd like a yes from Von.

[1:22:21] >> I I Okay, second. Motion made by

[1:22:24] Councilman Marshall, seconded by

[1:22:26] Councilman uh Carden. A roll call vote

[1:22:28] here. Councilwoman Beck. Councilman

[1:22:30] Marshall. Yes. Councilman

[1:22:32] >> Tuk. Yes. Councilman Carden.

[1:22:33] >> Yes.

[1:22:34] >> And Councilman Oiler.

[1:22:35] >> Yes.

[1:22:36] >> Item B is approved. Thank you. Good

[1:22:38] discussion. Appreciate it. Uh item C is

[1:22:42] Creekide Town Homes amended development

[1:22:45] agreement.

[1:22:47] >> This is David H.

[1:22:48] >> David H.

[1:22:49] >> All right. So

[1:22:52] the Creekide Village development uh is

[1:22:55] on the west side or sorry the east side

[1:22:57] of Main Street um close to the Fit City

[1:23:00] Center.

[1:23:02] Uh there's a new uh buyer for the

[1:23:05] development that's looking to build town

[1:23:08] homes. Um and the the proposal that they

[1:23:12] have is similar to what was uh shown

[1:23:15] during the approval process um and the

[1:23:19] reason uh with some minor uh changes. So

[1:23:23] they they felt that due to how close it

[1:23:27] is to the Fit City Center and there

[1:23:28] there's wonderful amenities there um in

[1:23:32] order to support that, they didn't feel

[1:23:34] the need to have a clubhouse and pool in

[1:23:38] their community when they've got one

[1:23:40] that's uh Kitty Corner from from where

[1:23:43] this would be. So they're proposing to

[1:23:45] swap that out with an additional pickle

[1:23:47] ball court as well as a tot lot. And

[1:23:50] then there's some minor changes to the

[1:23:53] elevations

[1:23:54] that were shown uh originally. So this

[1:23:58] is the site plan for the layout of the

[1:24:01] development that was approved. Um and

[1:24:04] then the new one has the three pickle

[1:24:07] ball courts and the tot lot in the

[1:24:10] northern portion of that. Um there's

[1:24:13] minor changes to where guest parking

[1:24:16] would be located throughout the

[1:24:17] community. Um the street configuration

[1:24:19] is is uh changed slightly, but overall

[1:24:23] it's it's it's roughly the same kind of

[1:24:25] layout and format uh for what was

[1:24:28] approved.

[1:24:29] >> No more units.

[1:24:31] >> Same amount of units.

[1:24:33] >> Okay.

[1:24:33] >> Can you describe what a tot?

[1:24:35] >> Uh like a playground.

[1:24:37] >> It's just a playground.

[1:24:38] >> Yeah.

[1:24:40] Um, so this is the elevations for what

[1:24:43] is the

[1:24:44] >> he has three tots

[1:24:46] >> for the for the units that are on the

[1:24:49] south end that are front loaded. Um,

[1:24:53] these these were the elevations that

[1:24:55] were approved. And then these are the

[1:24:58] new elevations uh done by Visionary

[1:25:01] Homes showing similar roof pitches um a

[1:25:06] little bit different uh materials but

[1:25:08] overall the same kind of look with the

[1:25:10] same kind of layout of the of the site.

[1:25:15] Um these are the other units that are on

[1:25:17] the northern end and that would face

[1:25:19] along uh Main Street. Uh these were ones

[1:25:23] that were approved and these are the new

[1:25:25] ones that have more of a pitched roof

[1:25:26] look

[1:25:27] >> rather than the flat roof look that was

[1:25:29] uh previously approved.

[1:25:32] So um we do have representatives here

[1:25:34] that could answer uh any specific

[1:25:36] questions about uh changes between the

[1:25:38] two looks um or the layout, but I'd be

[1:25:42] happy to answer any questions that you

[1:25:43] have at this time.

[1:25:44] >> I personally like the new layouts a lot

[1:25:47] better. I I like this look. I just when

[1:25:50] I look at that I worry still about

[1:25:52] parking and so

[1:25:56] what about a thought of not adding a

[1:25:58] pickle ball court or a tot lot and

[1:26:00] adding more parking stalls either one or

[1:26:02] the other or do we feel really

[1:26:04] comfortable that we have enough parking

[1:26:06] in there?

[1:26:06] >> Are we required to have a certain amount

[1:26:08] of amenities within a

[1:26:11] >> development? Yeah, this is in the R4

[1:26:13] zone. So, the code does say that there's

[1:26:15] a certain amount of uh amenities based

[1:26:17] on the number of units that are being

[1:26:19] proposed.

[1:26:20] >> But in that same vein, I

[1:26:22] >> you could call it parking amenity if you

[1:26:23] wanted to.

[1:26:24] >> I'm I struggle with the even I don't

[1:26:27] struggle with getting rid of the pool. I

[1:26:29] do struggle with getting rid of the the

[1:26:32] clubhouse. There's 169 units in this

[1:26:35] with nowhere really to go.

[1:26:38] >> Fit city.

[1:26:39] >> What do you mean nowhere to go?

[1:26:40] >> Across the street,

[1:26:43] right? Okay. So, but a but a clubhouse

[1:26:46] isn't used for fitness.

[1:26:48] >> What's the purpose of a clubhouse? I

[1:26:49] guess

[1:26:49] >> usually it's a meeting area for people

[1:26:51] in a town home facility if they have

[1:26:53] family gatherings and those type of

[1:26:54] things.

[1:26:55] >> And I'm not worried about that. So I

[1:26:58] when I lived in a town home on the east

[1:27:00] end of town by the golf course and we

[1:27:02] had to have a HOA mu meeting or whatever

[1:27:07] to elect our new officials each year we

[1:27:09] would go up to the reservoir and use one

[1:27:12] of the pavilions that they've got up

[1:27:13] there. These guys are just across the street from the

[1:27:18] pavilions at the sports park. So I I

[1:27:21] don't feel like that's really needed as

[1:27:24] much as maybe

[1:27:26] I Yeah. I don't know.

[1:27:28] >> I would disagree.

[1:27:31] >> Just because I think that I've been in

[1:27:32] enough of these projects where they need

[1:27:35] places to

[1:27:36] >> be, right?

[1:27:37] >> That's just my opinion, I guess.

[1:27:39] >> Going to be a day.

[1:27:40] >> I'm only one of five, though.

[1:27:43] >> So, this does remove clubhouse.

[1:27:46] >> Yeah. So, they would be removing the

[1:27:48] clubhouse in the pool.

[1:27:49] >> I I guess my question is then what was the intended purpose of the

[1:27:54] clubhouse before? and maybe we can get

[1:27:56] whoever was

[1:27:57] >> I I don't know if we had a very detailed

[1:27:59] floor plan of what was being proposed

[1:28:01] when it went through the reszone

[1:28:02] process. I think it was uh probably had

[1:28:05] some bathrooms uh changing rooms maybe

[1:28:07] associated with the pool being there

[1:28:09] >> and then a small meeting area is would

[1:28:12] be my assumption with part of that being

[1:28:14] dedicated to maybe some exercise

[1:28:16] equipment.

[1:28:20] » You said there were some representatives

[1:28:21] here, right?

[1:28:22] >> Yeah.

[1:28:22] So, they could tell us some more.

[1:28:23] Any questions for David before you

[1:28:26] >> Sorry, mayor.

[1:28:27] >> No, you're all right.

[1:28:28] >> Can you remind me what with the layout

[1:28:30] that they've got right now, what's the

[1:28:31] parking per unit? Where are they at?

[1:28:34] >> Um, so it's required to have uh I

[1:28:37] believe 2.5

[1:28:39] uh stalls per unit. Um,

[1:28:43] and then with this, there was the the

[1:28:45] text amendment that changed the uh the standard street uh that is parallel

[1:28:52] to Main Street. uh where uh the

[1:28:55] applicant was initially showing a 20-

[1:28:57] foot driveway and what was approved was

[1:29:00] a 25- foot driveway requirement. So that

[1:29:02] gave some uh

[1:29:04] >> some more space for parking different

[1:29:06] types of vehicles there to to help with

[1:29:08] any parking issues that

[1:29:10] >> those are the ones just along Main

[1:29:11] Street.

[1:29:12] >> Yes.

[1:29:16] I like when uh renderings include

[1:29:19] fitting an F-150

[1:29:22] and a sedan in their stuff because

[1:29:26] we have F-150s

[1:29:28] and there's an F350 there.

[1:29:34] » Okay. Thank you, Mr. Man. Any other

[1:29:36] questions for Mr. Man? Do you want to

[1:29:37] hear from the applicant to ask him any

[1:29:39] additional questions for these

[1:29:41] adjustments

[1:29:42] >> you want to ask? Yeah, I would love to

[1:29:44] just hear more about the clubouses and

[1:29:46] thoughts.

[1:29:48] >> The applicants here feel free to 761

[1:29:51] stalls.

[1:29:52] >> 761

[1:29:53] 169 units

[1:29:54] >> version picture. It gives you a town

[1:29:56] there.

[1:29:58] >> Thank you sir.

[1:29:59] >> Mark Hampton.

[1:29:59] >> Hello Mark. Mark Hampton.

[1:30:02] >> Um yeah the original intent of the

[1:30:04] clubhouse as you remember was fit mostly

[1:30:06] fitness. We have uh we do a lot of uh

[1:30:09] apartments and most of our club houses

[1:30:10] are for fitness for our residents. When

[1:30:13] we noticed the beautiful facility across

[1:30:15] the street, we thought why not create

[1:30:17] some activities outside then have the

[1:30:19] fitness in the city uh rec center and

[1:30:22] that's why that's why the thought for

[1:30:24] the change and as parking goes you

[1:30:25] remember we did have uh a 20 foot drive.

[1:30:29] We you right before our vote we

[1:30:32] amendment

[1:30:33] was made to 25 which then allowed all

[1:30:36] that parking. So I think we exceed the

[1:30:38] parking by almost 35 40% more than we

[1:30:42] need because we can count the stalls uh

[1:30:44] the driveways as as parking and the

[1:30:46] garages. So I think we have plenty of

[1:30:48] parking. Um, but yeah, the intent on the clubhouse originally was for

[1:30:53] fitness and and uh HOA meetings or

[1:30:57] whatever you you would have in in a

[1:30:58] clubhouse, but but in a in a town home

[1:31:02] facility, it's not as used as much as an

[1:31:04] apartment facility for rent. Now,

[1:31:06] remember, these aren't for rent, so it's

[1:31:09] not going to be used for that kind of

[1:31:10] thing.

[1:31:11] >> That answer the question. And I do like

[1:31:12] the elevations better, too.

[1:31:14] >> What was that?

[1:31:15] >> I do like I I agree. The elevations are

[1:31:17] better this time. Yeah, they look good.

[1:31:18] Yeah. Any other questions about the

[1:31:20] original intent? And then the applicants

[1:31:22] here that are or the buyers, the people

[1:31:24] that are buying and going to build these

[1:31:26] are here too to answer any questions.

[1:31:29] >> I don't think so. Thank you, Mark.

[1:31:31] >> Appreciate it.

[1:31:32] >> Go ahead.

[1:31:33] >> Uh John Moric, um Visionary Homes. One,

[1:31:36] the comment I would just make is we've

[1:31:38] found with all of our town home

[1:31:39] communities right now that um people

[1:31:42] actually request more of the outdoor

[1:31:43] like pickle ball courts, trails, walking

[1:31:46] paths uh than they do actual the pool.

[1:31:48] we find is um it's only used

[1:31:51] less than half the year. Um and

[1:31:53] especially with I just again across the

[1:31:55] street you guys have that wonderful

[1:31:56] facility. And one of the goals too is to

[1:31:59] try to keep the HOA dues as low as we

[1:32:01] can just to help with affordability. um

[1:32:04] the attainability of of these are going

[1:32:06] to are going to be on the market, but we

[1:32:08] just trying to keep the HOA fees down as

[1:32:09] low as we can and the clubhouse will be

[1:32:11] a number one hit to that budget. So,

[1:32:13] >> makes sense.

[1:32:14] >> Okay, thank you.

[1:32:15] >> Yeah,

[1:32:16] >> thank you.

[1:32:18] >> You bet.

[1:32:20] >> Yeah, probably for you.

[1:32:21] >> Yeah.

[1:32:22] >> And I think these are all city streets

[1:32:25] that we're looking at, not private

[1:32:26] streets, right? And so they they've got

[1:32:29] a width where if there isn't a driveway

[1:32:31] that I can park along that street,

[1:32:33] right?

[1:32:34] >> Yeah.

[1:32:34] >> You're not I mean it's not going to be a

[1:32:35] private road. So

[1:32:36] >> not private. That's correct. Yeah.

[1:32:37] >> H can't shut it down. It's wide enough

[1:32:39] that you could park

[1:32:41] >> on one side. So as I'm looking at this I

[1:32:42] think I'm looking at your concern,

[1:32:44] Stacy. I I I shared I'm I'm thinking

[1:32:47] >> I actually have a daughter that lives in

[1:32:48] one of your projects and um in another

[1:32:51] community and so where would I park when

[1:32:53] I go and visit her? and and there's a

[1:32:55] lot of parking in this side, but not so

[1:32:58] much on that side. So, I think you're

[1:33:00] going to see a decent amount of on

[1:33:02] street parking

[1:33:04] where there isn't a driveway. I think

[1:33:05] that's where people are going to go

[1:33:07] because as I'm going to park at, you

[1:33:09] know, as I'm looking at unit 152 or

[1:33:11] whatever, I can't park in front of 152

[1:33:13] because that would block a driveway, but

[1:33:15] I can park across the street where there

[1:33:17] isn't a driveway.

[1:33:20] And then I think you got a few small

[1:33:23] parking stalls over there. I'm not

[1:33:26] trying to say that it's parked enough.

[1:33:28] I'm just trying to reason where would I

[1:33:29] park because that's exactly what I think

[1:33:31] I'm seeing what you're asking.

[1:33:33] >> It just brings to my mind all the

[1:33:35] questions I had last time about the

[1:33:36] parking.

[1:33:37] >> And I Yeah. And I can't speak to the

[1:33:39] former, but I know for that part of it

[1:33:41] is that there's, you know, we always

[1:33:43] said if you're going to have a driveway,

[1:33:44] people want to park on it, make sure

[1:33:45] it's over 18 feet. um you know because

[1:33:48] that way just you have plenty of room

[1:33:49] there to double stack. Um but yeah that

[1:33:52] and you know personally pickle ball

[1:33:53] courts I my son um lives down in Utah

[1:33:56] County and asked him what he would want

[1:33:58] to see too because he's going to be

[1:34:00] looking for purchasing and his first

[1:34:02] thing he said pickle ball courts. So

[1:34:05] >> So your parking layout looks like it's

[1:34:06] heavy on the north end near the pickle

[1:34:09] balls and not so heavy on the south end.

[1:34:12] Is there a reason for that? It's just

[1:34:13] the way that the the engineer when

[1:34:15] they're laying this out with the with configuration. Um, and part of it

[1:34:20] too is there's some detention down as

[1:34:22] you go down. Um, so there's not enough

[1:34:24] width to put units. And so that's where

[1:34:27] it makes sense to then dive in and put

[1:34:30] parking stalls. So I think it's from my

[1:34:32] looking at it looks like it's parked,

[1:34:34] you know, we're putting a parking stall

[1:34:35] everywhere we possibly can.

[1:34:40] » Yeah, that line that dips down is a

[1:34:43] ulation drop. Oh yeah, you can see that.

[1:34:45] >> How about How about a And I don't know

[1:34:47] what the numbers are. Probably unit 144

[1:34:52] to 118, which is May I see the mouse?

[1:34:56] Thanks.

[1:34:58] >> And my eyes aren't that good.

[1:34:59] >> Yeah. Sorry. Am I up or down? There we

[1:35:02] are.

[1:35:03] >> So, you know, do you have the ability to

[1:35:06] bring some more parking here and here?

[1:35:09] Is that is that kind of the area, Stacy,

[1:35:11] where you're thinking it's light?

[1:35:13] >> Yeah, wherever we could get them on that

[1:35:15] south side would be helpful. I think

[1:35:17] >> it looks like the previous version

[1:35:19] >> did have it.

[1:35:19] >> Sorry. Did have that.

[1:35:21] >> Yeah, we could we could ask the

[1:35:22] engineer. Again, if we if we can, you

[1:35:25] know, there's we're not anti. Um we're

[1:35:28] just,

[1:35:30] >> you know, I'm not sure exactly. There's

[1:35:31] probably some reason why he didn't put

[1:35:32] it there, but we can ask him that

[1:35:34] question. There's also some parking in

[1:35:35] that little triangle piece on the

[1:35:37] original, too.

[1:35:39] >> And looks like there's a little bit on

[1:35:40] the new one, too.

[1:35:43] >> If we're looking at the same place,

[1:35:45] >> looks like there's

[1:35:46] >> Yeah, six units not in the in the new

[1:35:49] version for the pickle ball court. Did

[1:35:51] you remove units? Um the we actually so

[1:35:55] for you might be kind of noticed that

[1:35:57] we're trying to not go heavy on like

[1:36:00] eight plexes and so we did for our front

[1:36:02] loads this new version does have pure

[1:36:05] front loads to it because we are not

[1:36:07] going to build anything more than a six

[1:36:08] plex.

[1:36:09] >> Okay.

[1:36:09] >> So um so yeah the unit count's still the

[1:36:12] same but we we're holding ourselves to

[1:36:14] not going above that

[1:36:16] >> redistributed.

[1:36:17] >> Yeah.

[1:36:19] So, Visionary will be building the front load units and and Oakwood,

[1:36:22] our partner on the deal, will be

[1:36:24] building the the rear load units.

[1:36:32] » I do like the elevation from Main Street

[1:36:35] way better than the last one. So,

[1:36:37] >> that was a no last time primarily

[1:36:39] because of that. But, you all approved

[1:36:41] the parking last time. So, hopefully

[1:36:42] you're okay with the parking this time.

[1:36:43] >> Yeah, the parking is different though.

[1:36:45] >> This parking is different.

[1:36:46] >> It's a number perspective. From a number

[1:36:49] perspective, no distribution center,

[1:36:52] it's not.

[1:36:52] >> I think it's the numbers are like I

[1:36:54] think there still what Mark was saying.

[1:36:55] I think we're we're exceeding what the

[1:36:57] code is saying.

[1:36:59] >> No. Yeah. Their parking stall number

[1:37:01] hasn't changed.

[1:37:03] >> If we can, you know, if we can, we would

[1:37:05] like there's a couple of those areas

[1:37:06] like you mentioned. If we can, we'll add

[1:37:07] some in there for sure.

[1:37:08] >> I would love to see that. If that can go

[1:37:09] on record, I would be fine to approve

[1:37:12] this tonight for me, but I would love to

[1:37:14] see if we can shift some of the parking.

[1:37:15] >> Yeah, we can we can look at it.

[1:37:18] I I don't have to try to come back to do

[1:37:19] that, but we can definitely have to look at that and see what we can do it

[1:37:22] because if it's just on the

[1:37:22] >> if there's something we can do, we can.

[1:37:24] >> Yeah. And if you want to give him some

[1:37:25] direction, you'd like to see an

[1:37:26] additional 10 parking lots. I'm making

[1:37:28] up a number here, but if you want if you

[1:37:30] want to say, you know, with the approval

[1:37:31] with some condition that he

[1:37:33] >> I think it would be helpful for him if

[1:37:34] you gave him some.

[1:37:35] >> Okay. But I don't even know like you

[1:37:37] said, you have the number of parking

[1:37:39] needed. So, I don't know that it's the

[1:37:41] just shifting it. Yeah, I'd have to

[1:37:43] check just with utilities and stuff like

[1:37:45] that to see if those areas that they

[1:37:46] were before if they're right if there's

[1:37:48] a reason why they don't have it now

[1:37:49] >> if there's a possibility. Yeah.

[1:37:52] >> Is that a road on the bottom right of

[1:37:55] the image on the south would be the

[1:37:57] southwest buildings?

[1:37:58] >> It's um access um down into the the

[1:38:01] parcel to the east.

[1:38:04] >> Okay. So, you don't own the you don't

[1:38:05] own the so you've got to give access to

[1:38:07] that.

[1:38:07] >> That's correct.

[1:38:08] >> Okay.

[1:38:08] >> Yeah.

[1:38:09] >> Are you talking by Main Street or by the

[1:38:11] river? the main street sign.

[1:38:13] >> Yeah, he's talking by the he's talking

[1:38:15] down in the southwest bottom right.

[1:38:17] >> Yeah, bottom right

[1:38:18] >> to the access to the south property.

[1:38:21] This does maintain access to the McCuel

[1:38:23] property I believe on the north well the

[1:38:27] very north on paper the eastern part of

[1:38:30] in actual orientation you can see that

[1:38:32] hammerhead um maintains access to the

[1:38:35] Mel property on the east there

[1:38:38] gated if I read that right gated access.

[1:38:43] >> Thank you John. Any other questions for

[1:38:44] you John?

[1:38:46] >> Yeah we look forward to being in here so

[1:38:48] >> yeah thank you. Thank you.

[1:38:51] >> Any other questions up here for staff uh

[1:38:54] that you'd like to to ask before making

[1:38:57] a motion?

[1:39:02] » If not, I'd entertain a motion uh for

[1:39:04] item C, Creekide Town Homes amended

[1:39:07] development agreement. I'll go ahead and

[1:39:09] move to approve the ordinance to approve

[1:39:11] the master plan, the master development

[1:39:13] agreement for the Creekide Village

[1:39:15] master plan community and look into

[1:39:19] transferring some of the parking.

[1:39:22] >> Motion made it.

[1:39:25] >> Motion made by Councilwoman Beck.

[1:39:27] >> Second.

[1:39:28] by Councilman Oiler. A roll call

[1:39:30] vote here. Councilman Oiler.

[1:39:32] >> Yes.

[1:39:32] >> Councilwoman Beck. Yes.

[1:39:33] >> Councilman Marshall? Nope.

[1:39:35] >> Councilman Tuk? Yes.

[1:39:36] >> Councilman Carden?

[1:39:37] >> No.

[1:39:38] Item C passes 3 to two.

[1:39:41] >> And I for the record, my no is just

[1:39:43] because of the clubhouse. I know that it

[1:39:45] was answered, the questions answered,

[1:39:46] but I really do want that in that

[1:39:48] facility.

[1:39:50] >> You want to explain?

[1:39:52] >> Same reason last time. Too dense. Um,

[1:39:58] I want I don't want people coming from

[1:40:01] Salem to go, "Oh, we're in the the urban

[1:40:04] gut of Spanish Fork now because we have

[1:40:07] row houses on either side of Main

[1:40:09] Street." Same same problem I had last

[1:40:11] time. Perfect. Okay. takes us to item D

[1:40:15] of the uh agenda or of the new business

[1:40:18] agenda, the fiscal year 2027 tentative

[1:40:21] budget. Uh

[1:40:24] tag team, Mr. Hails and Mr. Parents, you

[1:40:27] going to go up front?

[1:40:31] » Yes.

[1:40:37] » He was not going to come up.

[1:40:39] >> He wasn't. He was going to be doing the

[1:40:40] present.

[1:40:40] >> I was taking a drink.

[1:40:43] Mayor and Council, thank you. It's an

[1:40:45] opport uh pleasure to present the

[1:40:47] tenative budget for 2027.

[1:40:50] Um my first budget that I presented

[1:40:53] worked on here was the fiscal year 2006

[1:40:58] budget. The 2005 budget was already on

[1:41:01] its way when I got here, but the first

[1:41:03] one I worked on was fiscal year 2007.

[1:41:07] So, this is pretty fun. It's a 20 year

[1:41:10] mark. I've seen a 07, a 17, and a 27.

[1:41:16] This budget's been a great uh great team

[1:41:18] effort. Uh it's been worked on in large

[1:41:20] part by the directors and division

[1:41:22] managers for the better part of several

[1:41:25] months. Uh they started working on this

[1:41:28] about uh November or December in concept

[1:41:32] and we open up the budget to them in

[1:41:34] January. You'll recall a number of

[1:41:37] budget conversations that we've had in

[1:41:38] at Midway and then we've had some budget

[1:41:41] discussions about different topics that

[1:41:43] have helped to inform questions and

[1:41:44] answer questions that we have. This

[1:41:47] process uh is not done today, but it

[1:41:51] legislatively starts today. So, we

[1:41:54] present to you a a balanced budget and

[1:41:58] uh we'll ask for you to approve it, but

[1:42:00] then really it's a handoff to you and

[1:42:03] you have the next roughly 45 days that

[1:42:06] you get to review it. It's your budget

[1:42:09] and then you can um adjust it if you

[1:42:11] want to change anything that you want.

[1:42:14] Um and then by the second meeting in

[1:42:16] June, approve a balanced budget that

[1:42:19] will include uh Jordan, you're going to

[1:42:21] talk about all these logistics, right?

[1:42:23] All right, I won't go into that. I want

[1:42:25] to express my gratitude uh to the many

[1:42:27] staff members that have participated in

[1:42:29] making the budget. It's not an easy

[1:42:31] thing to put together a budget that

[1:42:33] covers over $200 million worth of

[1:42:35] things. And uh it takes a lot of

[1:42:38] looking, reviewing, checking, and

[1:42:40] double-checking. And um each of these

[1:42:43] directors are very aware of the

[1:42:45] different elements of their budget. They

[1:42:47] can answer any question that you have.

[1:42:49] If you ask a question that they cannot

[1:42:50] answer, then uh they can find it and we

[1:42:54] can report back on them. So, as we go

[1:42:56] through that today, please ask any

[1:42:58] questions that you have and know that

[1:43:00] over the next couple of weeks, uh you'll

[1:43:03] get an email from Shellyley

[1:43:06] tomorrow morning, we'll invite you to

[1:43:08] select a time, find a time that can work

[1:43:11] for you in the next three weeks or so

[1:43:12] that you can sit down with me. You can

[1:43:14] do it one on one or you can do it in

[1:43:16] groups of two. And I want to make myself

[1:43:19] as available as you want me to be. So in

[1:43:21] three hours or four hours or one hour or

[1:43:24] no hour. Um you choose what kind of time

[1:43:26] you want and how deep you want to go.

[1:43:28] But I'd love to spend any time that you

[1:43:30] want in reviewing the budget. So you'll

[1:43:32] look for that email tomorrow and and

[1:43:33] she'll have two or three blocks of time

[1:43:37] for the next couple of weeks that you

[1:43:39] can select. With that, I give you uh

[1:43:42] Jordan V. Hails uh V for victory 2% of

[1:43:47] the budget.

[1:43:54] » All right. Um Seth covered some of this

[1:43:57] uh timeline. Uh in January, staff

[1:44:00] presented needs and priorities and

[1:44:03] requests to you all and got your

[1:44:05] feedback. Um over the last few months,

[1:44:08] uh Seth and I have sat down with

[1:44:09] division managers and directors. Um

[1:44:12] tonight that uh tentative budget is

[1:44:14] being presented um services as the

[1:44:16] beginning budget for council and public

[1:44:18] to review.

[1:44:19] We will have a public hearing on the

[1:44:22] budget uh the first council meeting in

[1:44:24] June. Um and hopefully an approval of a

[1:44:28] budget uh the third council meet or I

[1:44:31] guess the second second council meeting

[1:44:32] in June, third Tuesday in June. Uh the

[1:44:36] budget will be available tomorrow at

[1:44:38] smashwork.gov gov and we've we're going

[1:44:40] to have some printed copies uh in here

[1:44:42] in the library finance department and

[1:44:44] the city office as well. Um any

[1:44:47] questions on this timeline and the

[1:44:49] process? Okay.

[1:44:52] All right. Um expenses or budget by

[1:44:56] fund? Um the city budget and most city

[1:45:00] budgets have multiple funds. Um, and you

[1:45:02] can think of those funds as uh their own

[1:45:05] individual businesses or self-balancing

[1:45:08] accounts. Um, so here's the totals um

[1:45:12] for the entire city budget. Um,

[1:45:16] and budget uh that we're working in

[1:45:19] right now is 250 million. The proposed

[1:45:21] budget for next year 230 million. Um

[1:45:24] most of that decrease being due to uh

[1:45:28] capital projects being completed such as

[1:45:30] the sewer plant and the fit city center.

[1:45:33] Um yeah the capital inflates your budget

[1:45:37] during those capital periods or those

[1:45:40] periods where you have intensive

[1:45:42] capital. Um any questions on this table

[1:45:45] or

[1:45:48] uh noteworthy general fund items? No

[1:45:50] property tax increases being proposed.

[1:45:53] um rec center known as the fit city

[1:45:56] center opened in December. Fiscal year

[1:45:58] 2027 will be the first full fiscal year

[1:46:01] of operations. So it'll be a while

[1:46:03] before we have good good data on how

[1:46:06] we're performing there. Uh sales tax

[1:46:08] revenue growth is around 4 to 6% right

[1:46:11] now and that's where we're budgeting for

[1:46:13] next year which is okay but not great.

[1:46:17] Um couple years ago we were flat. Uh

[1:46:20] historically we've seen around 8%

[1:46:22] growth. Um we'd like to get up there

[1:46:25] again. Uh the golf course continues to

[1:46:28] increase its profit margin. Um I still

[1:46:31] get quite a few people asking me does

[1:46:32] golf course make money and yeah it's

[1:46:34] been very profitable um ever since co um

[1:46:38] not only covering expenses but helping

[1:46:41] uh contribute to the general fund. Uh

[1:46:44] fiscal 2027. So, this budget we're

[1:46:46] talking about includes the final debt

[1:46:48] payment on the the Justice Center. Um,

[1:46:51] so that's exciting to have that come

[1:46:53] off. And we continue to set aside 20% of

[1:46:55] sales tax for capital projects and just

[1:46:58] as a buffer if sales tax were to go

[1:47:00] down, then we could remove that transfer

[1:47:02] out to capital projects and still cover

[1:47:05] operations.

[1:47:07] Any comments or questions on these

[1:47:08] items?

[1:47:10] All right.

[1:47:12] general fund expenses by

[1:47:13] category. Um,

[1:47:15] >> can you back up one real quick?

[1:47:16] >> Yeah.

[1:47:17] >> Um, that 20% line at the very bottom.

[1:47:19] >> Yeah,

[1:47:19] >> I think it's pretty sound policy. That's

[1:47:22] the sort of the savings account, right?

[1:47:24] It's

[1:47:25] >> I think it serves a couple of purposes.

[1:47:27] >> Um,

[1:47:28] >> okay.

[1:47:28] >> One two

[1:47:30] >> one to uh s have reserves for capital

[1:47:33] projects. Um, and then one to create

[1:47:35] that buffer so that you're not living so

[1:47:37] close to the line uh with with

[1:47:40] operations.

[1:47:41] Yeah,

[1:47:42] >> I think yes. Spot on. So 80% of our

[1:47:45] money goes to ongoing operations.

[1:47:48] >> 20% is the the

[1:47:51] >> yeah for

[1:47:52] >> savings the change or you could dip into

[1:47:54] for

[1:47:54] >> whatever whatever it could be that that

[1:47:56] year an emergency whatever it might be.

[1:47:58] I think it's really important. I think

[1:48:00] >> so it's a balanced budget overall which

[1:48:02] I think is if everyone could do that

[1:48:05] we'd be all better off right. Um

[1:48:07] especially the marshalss. Um, but I

[1:48:11] think what the public needs to

[1:48:12] understand is we're budgeting up to 80%.

[1:48:15] >> That in theory

[1:48:17] >> in sales tax with the opportunity to to

[1:48:20] take some if it's if it's more, we can

[1:48:22] go do some more capital improvements.

[1:48:24] It's if it's less, we still have the

[1:48:26] money to operate the city. I think

[1:48:27] that's that's a fact that I mean, every

[1:48:29] time you go through this is I learn

[1:48:32] something every single time. It's like,

[1:48:33] oh, okay. What is the one thing I

[1:48:35] learned today? That's a that's a very

[1:48:36] sound conservative fiscal policy that

[1:48:39] we're taking. So, I appreciate that.

[1:48:41] It's the last bullet on the thing, but

[1:48:43] still it's that's a good policy.

[1:48:45] >> Yeah. Um, if you look at the sales tax

[1:48:49] uh during the Great Recession that we

[1:48:50] went down about 80% from the peak. So,

[1:48:52] we had I think 2008 was down from 2007,

[1:48:55] then I think it was 2009 was even down

[1:48:57] from 2008. So, you had two consecutive

[1:49:00] years.

[1:49:02] >> Yeah. 20%. Yeah. So we were 80% of where

[1:49:06] we were. Yeah.

[1:49:08] >> Right.

[1:49:10] >> All right. Um

[1:49:12] >> yeah, general fund expenses by category.

[1:49:15] Um so you see we're increasing about 3.2

[1:49:18] million. Basically all of that being in

[1:49:20] personnel costs and this 3 million uh

[1:49:24] increase in personnel is cost of raises

[1:49:27] and new positions added. And I'll I'll

[1:49:30] detail those new positions that have

[1:49:31] been added. Um but yeah 0.1% increase on

[1:49:36] this operations line. Um yeah

[1:49:42] uh general fund expenses by division. So

[1:49:44] these are the same expenses but

[1:49:46] categorized by division instead of uh by

[1:49:48] category. I think the main thing to

[1:49:50] point out here is communications crew

[1:49:52] has moved from SFCN to admin and those

[1:49:55] that follow social media have probably

[1:49:56] seen a a push with and some differences

[1:49:59] with uh our outreach via social media.

[1:50:03] Um so yeah, this growth is almost

[1:50:06] entirely from personnel. Um so most of

[1:50:08] this growth in all these divisions is

[1:50:10] going to be personnel related.

[1:50:14] So just when I say we are very

[1:50:16] conservative,

[1:50:17] >> we grew government by

[1:50:20] >> we moved government

[1:50:21] >> with 3.25 $3.5 million.

[1:50:24] >> Correct.

[1:50:24] >> But for very specific and are you going

[1:50:27] to walk through the positions that are

[1:50:29] added?

[1:50:29] >> Yes. Okay.

[1:50:30] >> Yeah, perfect.

[1:50:31] >> Uh this is the the slide on revenues. Um

[1:50:35] so yeah, $3.2 million increase in

[1:50:37] expenses, but a $3.5 million increase to

[1:50:40] revenues as well.

[1:50:42] Um,

[1:50:43] uh, golf, you see a $600,000 increase

[1:50:46] there. Budget in golf revenues. Um, I

[1:50:50] saw March's numbers. Man, March was

[1:50:52] great for the golf course. Holy smokes.

[1:50:54] I guess it helps when it's

[1:50:56] >> dry and warm.

[1:50:58] >> Uh, interest earnings are coming down.

[1:51:00] This is a function of how much cash is

[1:51:02] in the bank, but also what is the

[1:51:04] interest rate we're getting on that and

[1:51:05] rates have come down over the last

[1:51:06] couple years from the peak a couple

[1:51:08] years ago.

[1:51:10] Yeah.

[1:51:12] All right. General fund transfers and

[1:51:14] change in fund balance. Um so that 30 or

[1:51:18] 20% sales tax is that number there. Um

[1:51:23] yeah

[1:51:25] um

[1:51:28] $187,000

[1:51:29] increase in fund balance. Um that's a

[1:51:32] very small number compared to the 54

[1:51:34] million of but it is positive and there

[1:51:37] is a healthy reserve um in the general

[1:51:39] fund.

[1:51:42] All right. And here are those reserves.

[1:51:45] So state law requires that our

[1:51:47] unrestricted general fund reserves be uh

[1:51:51] between 5% and 35% of revenue in the

[1:51:54] general fund. Um so the blue line

[1:51:58] uh here is the revenue for each of these

[1:52:00] fiscal years and we're trying to project

[1:52:02] not only our current fiscal year end but

[1:52:05] next fiscal year and same with the the

[1:52:08] reserves. Um so right now we have about

[1:52:11] $13 million um in the general fund and

[1:52:14] we're projected to remain right around

[1:52:16] there. Um which puts us at around 22 and

[1:52:18] a.5% um uh as a percentage of total

[1:52:22] revenue.

[1:52:24] So very healthy spot.

[1:52:28] All right. Capital projects. Will we

[1:52:30] barn rebuild at the fairgrounds? Um this

[1:52:33] is a a project that was discussed in the

[1:52:36] past couple months. Um but the new

[1:52:38] facility will attract additional events.

[1:52:40] Um the current facility uh can't host

[1:52:44] certain events. So this new facility

[1:52:46] will be able to uh construction will

[1:52:48] begin in August and completion is

[1:52:50] planned for spring of 27. Cost of

[1:52:53] construction is budgeted around 11

[1:52:54] million and the county is paying for

[1:52:57] half of the cost of they as they have

[1:52:59] traditionally done with the the

[1:53:00] fairgrounds.

[1:53:04] Uh capital projects river trail bridge

[1:53:06] connection. That's a mouthful. So the

[1:53:08] city received a grant from the state for

[1:53:09] $13 million. This will build a vehicle

[1:53:13] bridge and a trail bridge uh and connect

[1:53:17] the Smash Fork trail system with the

[1:53:18] Mapleton trail system. ties the city

[1:53:21] trail into the regional Bonavville

[1:53:22] shoreline trail system. The trail will

[1:53:25] cross under under Highway 6. So be a

[1:53:28] very safe way to cross and this will be

[1:53:30] a multi-year project. Um yeah.

[1:53:36] All right. Here are those positions that

[1:53:37] we're adding to the general fund and uh

[1:53:39] the enterprise funds. Uh so three

[1:53:42] captains to for fire and EMS. Right now

[1:53:44] there's a captain uh for each fire and

[1:53:47] EMS shift. Um, and I think they're

[1:53:51] located at station 61. Um, so this will

[1:53:54] put a captain also at station 62. Um, so

[1:53:58] we have better leadership and better

[1:53:59] coverage. Uh, police are adding two

[1:54:02] patrol officers and adding one

[1:54:04] detective. Uh, library converting one

[1:54:06] part-time position to a full-time

[1:54:08] position. Engineering adding a project

[1:54:10] manager to begin in January. And then

[1:54:12] parks. We've added a lot of parks over

[1:54:14] the last 10 five or 10 years. And

[1:54:16] there's it's time for another lead

[1:54:18] worker in parks. Uh and power um has

[1:54:21] requested a new lineman and inspector

[1:54:24] and those this budget funds those

[1:54:26] positions as well. Any questions on

[1:54:28] these

[1:54:33] is that the $ three.5 million is that

[1:54:35] >> that's the three and a half. Yep. Close

[1:54:36] to it. I mean there's raises in there as

[1:54:39] well,

[1:54:40] >> but that's a big chunk of it is three

[1:54:41] and a half million. So I think I think

[1:54:43] what's important to point out is yes we

[1:54:45] did grow government. We're asking to

[1:54:47] grow government. We're proposing to grow

[1:54:49] government but it's because of the

[1:54:50] growth of the city that experiencing a

[1:54:53] proportional growth. Right. Yeah.

[1:54:55] >> You don't add firemen as po police if

[1:54:58] your city isn't growing. Our city's

[1:54:59] growing. You just service the all the

[1:55:01] our our residents appropriately. And

[1:55:04] that's how you do it is by adding fire

[1:55:06] and EMS and police. So I think it's I

[1:55:09] think these are really good asks. I

[1:55:11] think it's it's very appropriate to be

[1:55:14] very deliberate about when we add

[1:55:17] positions to our to our city. Um, in

[1:55:21] every in every case you could break that

[1:55:23] down and say this is because we grew

[1:55:25] here, we needed more to do this,

[1:55:27] whatever it might be. And I think that's

[1:55:29] exactly when you should add resources is

[1:55:31] when the growth of your city is

[1:55:33] proportionate to that. So, great job.

[1:55:35] And I know you spent a ton of time

[1:55:38] really getting to the heart of these

[1:55:40] requests. Um, and I appreciate that time

[1:55:42] and effort to get to this point because

[1:55:44] this is it's a pretty small list, you

[1:55:46] know, in retrospect, but it's it's not

[1:55:48] easy to get to. So, I appreciate it.

[1:55:51] >> I think it might be interesting at some

[1:55:53] point to see a a graph of of FTEES

[1:55:57] versus population. And I'll bet that

[1:56:00] they're I bet the slope is pretty dang

[1:56:02] similar.

[1:56:03] >> Yeah,

[1:56:03] >> there'll be peaks, right? because it's

[1:56:05] not always consistent, but I but it's

[1:56:07] overall

[1:56:09] >> pretty dang

[1:56:10] >> it correlates pretty well.

[1:56:11] >> I mean, a lot of it depends on what

[1:56:12] services you provide as well.

[1:56:14] >> For sure.

[1:56:15] >> It would be difficult, I think, to

[1:56:16] compare to other cities because we

[1:56:17] provide a different subset of or

[1:56:20] different set of of services. But, um, I

[1:56:23] think if we get if we get questions

[1:56:26] about growing government, I think it'd

[1:56:27] be a good a good exercise to go through

[1:56:30] to say this is how and this is why

[1:56:32] proportionately we've grown.

[1:56:35] Thanks, Jordan.

[1:56:36] >> Yep.

[1:56:37] >> I want to also say that I really

[1:56:39] appreciate the budget in a snapshot.

[1:56:40] There's what 142 pages,

[1:56:44] >> right?

[1:56:44] >> And some of you may know I don't look at

[1:56:47] screens all day about budget. So, it

[1:56:49] just this is so helpful. And I know

[1:56:52] years ago after attending the league, I

[1:56:53] think it was with Councilman Carter and

[1:56:55] I, and we said, just make it more

[1:56:57] visually appealing, easier to digest.

[1:56:59] And this is awesome.

[1:57:01] >> Like looking through it, I'm like, "Oh,

[1:57:02] that makes sense." Like I really enjoy

[1:57:05] looking at the budget this year.

[1:57:06] >> Seth and I would like to take credit for

[1:57:08] that, but that credit goes to Carson and

[1:57:09] in our administration. You did some

[1:57:11] great work simplifying the budget,

[1:57:13] making it digestible.

[1:57:14] >> Yes, I think residents will appreciate

[1:57:16] it. You can look at it. You don't need

[1:57:17] to look at 142 pages, maybe 20.

[1:57:20] >> Yeah, I'd say I think it's just the

[1:57:22] first 10 or so pages. Um, you can get a

[1:57:24] lot from.

[1:57:25] >> Clearly, you hired somebody.

[1:57:27] >> It's changed. It's really, really good.

[1:57:30] Carson's been that's two shout outs to

[1:57:32] Carson tonight.

[1:57:33] >> I'd second that. I mean, it's it does

[1:57:35] look good. It's much easier to digest.

[1:57:37] So, great job.

[1:57:40] >> All right, let's dig into enterprise

[1:57:41] funds. So, enterprise funds function

[1:57:44] like businesses where they rates pay for

[1:57:47] the the expenses.

[1:57:49] >> Um so, most of these are utilities. You

[1:57:52] also have the airport and gun club um

[1:57:54] that function as enterprise funds. Um

[1:57:57] again the budget going down and again

[1:57:59] this is the result of uh capital needs

[1:58:02] not being as great and finishing the

[1:58:04] particularly the the sewer plant uh

[1:58:07] construction.

[1:58:11] Uh and we have some utility rate

[1:58:13] increases proposed here. Um, so what

[1:58:15] we've done is taken the average bill and

[1:58:20] we've determined what does the rate need

[1:58:22] to be um to make sure that we have solid

[1:58:26] cash in each of these funds. So water 59

[1:58:30] increase, PI 69, power $247,

[1:58:34] and transportation utility fee which is

[1:58:37] a new fee we're proposing uh Corey

[1:58:39] talked about last council meeting. Uh

[1:58:41] that'd be $2.50 50 cents on the uh per

[1:58:44] household. So, all in $6.25

[1:58:48] on the average household, uh which is a

[1:58:51] 3% increase to the utility bill. Um any

[1:58:56] questions on these rate increases.

[1:59:01] Okay.

[1:59:03] All right. Uh speaking of the

[1:59:05] transportation utility fee, so this was

[1:59:07] a topic of discussion in the legislature

[1:59:10] this year and a bill that passed uh made

[1:59:14] it so that uh if we do institute a

[1:59:18] transportation utility fee, it has to be

[1:59:19] in its own fund. Uh we estimate that the

[1:59:23] fee would generate $600,000 in revenue

[1:59:26] uh in this upcoming fiscal year. Um,

[1:59:29] right now we're spending about $1.9

[1:59:31] million on road repair and maintenance

[1:59:32] out of the streets and storm drain fund.

[1:59:35] So, we could uh take $600,000 of that

[1:59:38] and uh lower that in the streets fund

[1:59:41] and have it paid for out of this fund.

[1:59:45] So, that's a new fund that people will

[1:59:47] see.

[1:59:49] Uh proposed SFCN residential internet

[1:59:51] rates. Um we have on the lefth hand side

[1:59:54] there uh our current rates. Um the big

[1:59:57] change is that what we've found um is

[1:59:59] that there's a benefit um to our

[2:00:02] customers that have our athome Wi-Fi

[2:00:05] service. Um this is a service where you

[2:00:08] rent a router um from the city and the

[2:00:12] city can actually see if how your

[2:00:14] internet's performing um from their

[2:00:17] office and they can troubleshoot many of

[2:00:19] the problems that you're going to that

[2:00:21] you're encountering. Um

[2:00:23] >> just to be clear, they can't see what

[2:00:24] we're You are correct there.

[2:00:27] >> Or we're surfing. We collectively

[2:00:29] >> they will see the performance of the the

[2:00:31] speeds and

[2:00:33] >> asking for a friend.

[2:00:34] >> Yeah, I think that's a I think it's

[2:00:36] always good to clarify those things. Um

[2:00:40] yeah, so we're proposing some new rates.

[2:00:42] One is a senior rate uh for those 65 and

[2:00:45] older. Uh $35 for 300 megs.

[2:00:50] >> A new rate for $50 for 500 mags. um a

[2:00:54] two gig rate at $90.

[2:00:56] Um yeah, and all of these rates except

[2:00:58] for the $45 300meg would include one

[2:01:01] free router with the internet service.

[2:01:04] Each additional router would uh be $5 a

[2:01:08] month.

[2:01:10] Yeah. Any questions or comments on these

[2:01:14] internet rates?

[2:01:17] Okay. And these are proposed. um we need

[2:01:20] to wait on uh council approval in June

[2:01:22] before uh those excited residents can

[2:01:25] call and get on these rates.

[2:01:29] Uh other noteworthy fee schedule changes

[2:01:31] uh contracted private security use of

[2:01:33] police officers. So our local

[2:01:36] universities frequently ask for officers

[2:01:38] to come help them with large events. Um

[2:01:41] I think sporting events, stadium fire,

[2:01:43] those type of things. Um we build those

[2:01:47] uh users $100 an hour currently and

[2:01:50] we're proposing that goes$120.

[2:01:52] Um yeah

[2:01:56] uh generally a lot of times those people

[2:01:58] those officers that are going are being

[2:02:00] paid overtime rate by us to go there. Um

[2:02:03] which is why that rate is uh so high.

[2:02:07] Uh increases to non-resident library

[2:02:09] cards are proposed. Wreck program

[2:02:11] inflationary increases. Airport building

[2:02:14] ground lease moving from 45 cents to 67

[2:02:17] cents per square foot. This is a pretty

[2:02:19] good jump. Um we're really trying to

[2:02:22] make it so that airport users are paying

[2:02:25] for the airport. Um and that property

[2:02:27] tax and sales tax can go to other uh

[2:02:31] sources other needs. and also proposing

[2:02:33] a wings and wheels $10 parking fee. Um,

[2:02:37] all of these are proposed um and would

[2:02:40] be predicated upon your approval in

[2:02:42] June. Um, any questions here?

[2:02:48] >> I have a question on the Wings and Wells

[2:02:50] parking fee.

[2:02:51] >> Yeah.

[2:02:51] >> How will they monitor that? That the

[2:02:53] parking's all over the place.

[2:02:55] >> Um,

[2:02:55] >> be just the the parking that's at on the

[2:02:58] property of the city at the airport. And

[2:03:01] it look to Corey.

[2:03:03] >> Yes. In the organized parking lots,

[2:03:05] there's also local property owners that

[2:03:08] have allowed us to um have people park

[2:03:12] there so we could have attendance um

[2:03:15] help manage that parking. This came

[2:03:17] about a little bit from recommendations

[2:03:20] I think from the wrap tax committee as

[2:03:23] they talked about wings and wheels and

[2:03:25] some potential funding there. a request

[2:03:28] of looking at that parking fee. Um, as

[2:03:31] Seth and I have discussed, we're gonna

[2:03:33] we need to do a little work on a map

[2:03:36] showing where those fee areas are and

[2:03:40] um directing people there to allow it.

[2:03:43] So,

[2:03:43] >> you mentioned that there's business

[2:03:45] owners around that have opened their

[2:03:46] parking lots. So, are you thinking that

[2:03:48] those businesses could possibly be one

[2:03:50] of the fee areas?

[2:03:51] >> It it could be. The impression I get is

[2:03:54] some of those business owners are still

[2:03:55] okay donating it, but why don't you

[2:03:58] charge for parking that can help offset

[2:04:01] the costs of the event. Um, so I I don't

[2:04:05] know that it's look to be a revenue

[2:04:07] generator for those properties at all.

[2:04:09] >> Right.

[2:04:10] >> They they certainly could do that with

[2:04:11] their own private property, but I I

[2:04:14] think the request was, hey, I'm okay

[2:04:16] with using the parking for this, but why

[2:04:18] don't we create some more organization

[2:04:20] to it, okay? and why don't you charge

[2:04:22] and that can help with uh funding the

[2:04:26] event.

[2:04:27] >> In the RAP committee meeting that we had

[2:04:30] when they were discussing this, they had mentioned that the Wings and

[2:04:35] Wheels is looking at hiring an outside

[2:04:36] crew to come in and manage parking for

[2:04:39] that event because it's a little

[2:04:41] difficult with some of the volunteers

[2:04:43] that we've had and and other things. And

[2:04:45] so as part of that discussion, they

[2:04:48] brought up the idea of, well, if you

[2:04:51] need to hire a crew to come and do that,

[2:04:54] why don't you look for ways to offset

[2:04:56] that cost, which

[2:04:58] >> brought up the idea of a parking fee? I

[2:05:01] think we initially, one of the ideas we

[2:05:02] talked about was just the parking within

[2:05:06] the airport grounds, the city- owned

[2:05:08] property, because it's kind of a

[2:05:11] gets you a lot closer to the event,

[2:05:13] right? So people more likely to pay for

[2:05:16] that than maybe some other places. But

[2:05:17] if they've got a way to be able to use

[2:05:20] other properties by other business

[2:05:22] owners to do this as well, then then

[2:05:25] yeah, we'll see what they can figure

[2:05:27] out.

[2:05:27] >> I think it makes sense $10 closer. But I

[2:05:30] think if there's still a possibility

[2:05:32] where families that are aren't able to

[2:05:35] pay the additional $10 on top of the

[2:05:37] tickets, maybe there's some free parking

[2:05:39] at different areas. So

[2:05:41] >> Seth just said that, you know, we will

[2:05:43] have a more detailed uh plan as we get

[2:05:46] closer. The wings and wheels will happen

[2:05:48] in September. So we have a few months to

[2:05:50] definitely

[2:05:52] >> iron some of those details out.

[2:05:55] Um any other questions on these fees?

[2:06:01] Um there airport recent successes? Um

[2:06:04] there's been some grants awarded and

[2:06:05] some grants that we're uh still seeking,

[2:06:08] but we received a million dollars from

[2:06:10] the federal government with assistance

[2:06:11] from uh Representative Owens and uh $3

[2:06:15] million from the state. Um and the

[2:06:18] grants we're seeking 1.8 million from

[2:06:20] Utah County and 5 million from the

[2:06:21] federal government and uh John Curtis's

[2:06:24] office is assisting with that. Um and

[2:06:27] all of this would fund uh the

[2:06:28] construction of Taxi Way Bravo. Um, so

[2:06:31] there's a lot happening um at the

[2:06:33] airport and their expensive uh needs

[2:06:36] there. So these grants go a long ways to

[2:06:39] helping what we need there.

[2:06:44] All right. Um, and this will be another

[2:06:47] item

[2:06:48] later on in the agenda,

[2:06:52] but any comments, questions on these? I

[2:06:55] guess just a question for you Jordan is

[2:06:59] as you mentioned our sales tax revenues

[2:07:01] are kind of they're okay four to 6%

[2:07:04] typically around 8% they've been flat in

[2:07:09] prior years. Uh we discussed a little

[2:07:12] bit about needs for new hires uh which

[2:07:14] are ongoing expenses. So what are your

[2:07:18] thoughts or what are the projections for

[2:07:21] projected or future revenues

[2:07:24] over the next four or five years as

[2:07:27] compared to projected future expenses,

[2:07:30] ongoing expenses with salary increases

[2:07:32] and things like that?

[2:07:33] >> I think that's so hard. Um I you know I

[2:07:38] think in a lot of ways you've got to

[2:07:40] take it year by year and make sure that

[2:07:43] for each year you're looking at

[2:07:45] operations are paying for operations but

[2:07:48] to try and prognosticate what's going to

[2:07:50] happen in four years out. So

[2:07:53] >> suppose the sales tax revenues that

[2:07:55] we've got are the same next year with

[2:07:58] the salaries that we've got now.

[2:08:00] Obviously if we can do it this year we

[2:08:01] could do it next year. Right. Right. If

[2:08:03] sales tax were to go back to zero again

[2:08:06] and we've now brought on additional

[2:08:08] hires,

[2:08:08] >> right?

[2:08:09] >> I guess at that point you just have to

[2:08:10] analyze the positions.

[2:08:12] >> Yeah.

[2:08:13] >> Find areas maybe maybe not quite as

[2:08:15] large of a salary increase or pay raise

[2:08:18] this year.

[2:08:18] >> I mean,

[2:08:20] we look at what the city did during the

[2:08:22] great recession. Um there were high um

[2:08:25] freezes on hiring and freezes on

[2:08:28] payraises and those things. Um and you

[2:08:30] also have that that sales tax buffer. um

[2:08:33] that we could dip into as well. So,

[2:08:34] there's a few different levers,

[2:08:36] >> tools that we have that you can pull. Um

[2:08:39] but yeah, the first thing you're

[2:08:40] probably looking at is what can we

[2:08:42] afford to increase and then you start

[2:08:44] looking at other things. Um

[2:08:47] >> yeah, I don't know. Does that answer

[2:08:49] your question?

[2:08:50] >> Yeah, it does. And so, because of the fact that sales tax is

[2:08:54] increasing, it's not decreasing or

[2:08:56] staying flat, it got it does give the

[2:08:58] city the ability to to spend more money.

[2:09:02] Right.

[2:09:02] >> Um,

[2:09:04] >> basically want to be clear that the

[2:09:05] money that we're spending for new hires

[2:09:07] is not one-time expenses, right? It's money that we're planning for that

[2:09:12] >> hoping or expecting to get

[2:09:13] year-over-year.

[2:09:14] >> Yeah. I mean, I think if you look at the

[2:09:16] general fund in total, if you look at

[2:09:19] these expenses um by category, it shows

[2:09:22] you that the capital in the general fund

[2:09:25] um

[2:09:27] is very minimal. Um, so we're not

[2:09:30] spending onetime money here. Um,

[2:09:36] and all of the revenues are pretty much

[2:09:38] ongoing revenues. Like if you look at

[2:09:40] this, uh, grants are very minimal here.

[2:09:44] Um, when you're talking about $57

[2:09:46] million and only $200,000 of this is

[2:09:48] grant. So 99% of the budget um is

[2:09:52] ongoing revenue.

[2:09:54] >> Yeah. Yeah. So, for the most part, the

[2:09:55] general fund is an operating fund only,

[2:09:59] but we are taking a portion of the

[2:10:01] operating revenue and setting it aside

[2:10:03] for capital.

[2:10:04] >> Perfect.

[2:10:05] >> Yeah,

[2:10:06] >> I think it's those are great questions,

[2:10:08] Kevin. I think it's important to talk

[2:10:09] about we are with this budget. We're

[2:10:12] provo proposing a level of service for

[2:10:14] the citizens in Spanish Fork. two three

[2:10:18] more three more police officers, three

[2:10:20] more fire chiefs, um someone else in

[2:10:23] engineering and a variety of other

[2:10:24] things. We're providing this level of

[2:10:25] service.

[2:10:27] Next year, if sales tax is flat, we

[2:10:31] still have it in our budget to provide

[2:10:33] that same level of service. Assuming

[2:10:35] inflation isn't continuing to go up

[2:10:38] under this administration,

[2:10:40] um I couldn't help it.

[2:10:42] >> I know I heard

[2:10:43] >> I couldn't help it. Um but

[2:10:47] so if it if it's flat next year, we're

[2:10:48] still okay. If it goes negative, we

[2:10:51] still have that 20% buffer, right? So we

[2:10:53] can still provide the same level of

[2:10:55] service, but there becomes a point where

[2:10:56] if sales tax is not outpacing inflation

[2:10:59] and the growth of the city, we have to

[2:11:01] turn to another revenue source to

[2:11:04] maintain that level of service. And

[2:11:05] we'll be faced with continuing that

[2:11:07] level of service or reducing it

[2:11:09] >> or reducing it to pay the costs

[2:11:11] >> or raising a revenue a different way.

[2:11:14] And so I think it is important to have

[2:11:15] these conversations every single year.

[2:11:17] We know what we're do. We know what

[2:11:19] we're doing by adding 78 um additional

[2:11:22] resources. We have the money to pay for

[2:11:23] it. It is ongoing and that is extremely

[2:11:25] important for everyone to understand.

[2:11:28] As far as we can look out in the future,

[2:11:30] property or sales tax continues to to

[2:11:33] bring in more revenue to offset this. We

[2:11:35] have some buffer. We have some caution

[2:11:37] in there. Um I think there was a big

[2:11:39] bullet that there is no property tax

[2:11:41] increase proposed this year. So, I think

[2:11:43] we're head we're these things we should

[2:11:45] talk about every single time we talk

[2:11:47] about the budget and um and make those

[2:11:50] tradeoffs when we need to. In this

[2:11:52] particular year, we're in a good spot.

[2:11:54] We don't have to have those hard

[2:11:55] conversations about what we won't

[2:11:57] provide or what we need to raise. And

[2:11:59] so, I think we're in a good spot this

[2:12:01] year. And I don't think there's a lot of

[2:12:03] cities out there that can say that we're

[2:12:05] they're pretty comfortable with

[2:12:06] providing the level of service that

[2:12:08] citizens of Spanish Fork expect

[2:12:11] for the price that they they pay. I

[2:12:13] mean, we just went through the survey

[2:12:15] results today. Um while not a lot of

[2:12:18] folks like us, um they do love work

[2:12:22] living in the city and you know we all

[2:12:25] live we love living in this city as

[2:12:27] well. when you have that kind of

[2:12:28] approval rating for the city you um that

[2:12:32] you live in, we're doing something

[2:12:33] right. And I think this is this is where

[2:12:35] the rubber meets the road in providing

[2:12:38] those services. So

[2:12:39] >> yeah,

[2:12:39] >> great questions, Kevin. Every single

[2:12:41] year we should be asking them.

[2:12:43] >> Yeah, and I think one slide that I

[2:12:45] looking back I should have included is

[2:12:47] our property tax rate compared to those

[2:12:49] of surrounding communities. our property

[2:12:51] tax rate is really low and you look at

[2:12:54] what you get for that um including a new

[2:12:57] rec center and you know a full-time fire

[2:12:59] and mist staff. Um yeah, I I feel like

[2:13:04] the the bang for your buck is is really

[2:13:06] high here in town. Um one note on

[2:13:08] revenues, Kevin, when you look at the

[2:13:10] total revenue here, 57 million um you

[2:13:14] know sales tax is about 17 million of

[2:13:17] that. you have 40 million other dollars

[2:13:19] of revenue coming in and how they

[2:13:22] perform definitely factors into how well

[2:13:25] the general fund is doing. You know, um

[2:13:28] if you look at golf course for instance,

[2:13:29] not just this $600,000 increase, but the

[2:13:33] increase we've seen back since 23, you

[2:13:36] know, it's almost doubled in just a

[2:13:38] four-year period. And that is really and

[2:13:41] that's keeping property taxes low. Like

[2:13:43] that's a real thing that's happening is

[2:13:45] the success of the golf course is making

[2:13:47] it so property taxes

[2:13:49] >> Yeah. because

[2:13:49] >> are able to stay low.

[2:13:51] >> That success of the golf course doesn't

[2:13:53] just stay at the golf course. It's used

[2:13:55] in

[2:13:55] >> Yeah. It's helping pay for firefighters

[2:13:57] which Thank you, D. Keep golfing.

[2:14:00] >> Yeah. Um some of those things, you know,

[2:14:03] you look at the energy tax, I mean, it's

[2:14:04] basically flat over the that four-year

[2:14:06] period. So it does depend on some of

[2:14:08] these other factors as well, but there

[2:14:10] is we have some cushion there and

[2:14:12] there's some things that we can pull if

[2:14:14] needed.

[2:14:15] >> Health and I'd be remiss if it during

[2:14:18] that golf course discussion not

[2:14:19] mentioned that it's not just favorable

[2:14:22] weather for the last little bit for a

[2:14:23] golf course, but there's been

[2:14:25] substantial investments in the golf

[2:14:27] course as well. And that points to

[2:14:30] prices you can charge and the people

[2:14:31] that want to go there and and hang out.

[2:14:33] There's marked improvements in

[2:14:36] the clubhouse, the expansion, and

[2:14:38] they're not cheap to do, but the the

[2:14:41] water and power that is used up there in

[2:14:44] a better way, uh especially in years

[2:14:46] where we're talking about being short on

[2:14:49] water, uh smart investments made in the

[2:14:51] golf course that are already paying off.

[2:14:54] >> Yeah.

[2:14:56] >> All right. Anything else?

[2:14:58] I think it's fair like we have one month

[2:15:00] before the public hearing but all of us

[2:15:02] up here if if there's questions from the

[2:15:05] public right that they have about the

[2:15:06] budget please reach out whether it's to

[2:15:08] city staff or to us because I think this

[2:15:09] is the time for us to ask questions even

[2:15:11] before the public hearing because now is

[2:15:13] the time to make those changes or to ask

[2:15:15] the questions that need to be answered

[2:15:17] and I know that there's been years where

[2:15:18] we don't hear anything um and sometimes

[2:15:20] we do hear a few things and we love to

[2:15:22] answer those questions and have those

[2:15:23] conversations because it helps us to

[2:15:25] draw eyes to things that you care about

[2:15:26] as

[2:15:27] Yeah. Um and and if you're interested in

[2:15:31] learning about finances, Smashwork

[2:15:32] University is great. I mean, there's one

[2:15:34] night where we talk some finances, but

[2:15:36] the other nine nights or however many,

[2:15:38] you're seeing where those finances are

[2:15:40] going and the services that are being

[2:15:42] provided to this community and that

[2:15:44] helps you understand the need of the

[2:15:46] budget.

[2:15:47] >> Does finance win is the most popular

[2:15:48] night?

[2:15:49] >> Uh yeah, sure.

[2:15:52] >> Yeah. I think last time it got one vote.

[2:15:56] This is an important vote ever got.

[2:15:59] >> That's pretty impressive. Yeah, I would

[2:16:01] just echo that. Um Jesse, if if anyone

[2:16:03] wants to reach out, y'all have our

[2:16:05] emails. Please do. Mine is um

[2:16:07] jcardonfork.org.

[2:16:10] Please reach out and ask the questions.

[2:16:13] >> Yeah. How much he uses his email? It's

[2:16:15] gov now.

[2:16:15] >> Gov now.

[2:16:16] >> I mean gov. J Cardone.

[2:16:19] >> Cardone.

[2:16:20] at

[2:16:21] >> So just a couple just one follow-up

[2:16:23] thought. Uh, as you're sitting there

[2:16:25] talking about how do we deal with this

[2:16:26] circumstance and that and that

[2:16:27] circumstance, I'm over here just jumping

[2:16:30] for joy in my seat because over the last

[2:16:33] 10 years or so, we've made some

[2:16:35] significant changes to the budget and

[2:16:37] these tools that you're talking about,

[2:16:39] these levers that Jordan references with

[2:16:41] his hands in motion. These are very real

[2:16:44] and important parts of what we've done.

[2:16:46] The budget is very deliberate and we are

[2:16:50] uh capable of dealing with change as it

[2:16:53] may come. We're not resilient to

[2:16:55] anything and everything. You know, we

[2:16:56] can't predict everything, but we've got

[2:16:58] some wonderful tools in place and it

[2:17:01] always starts with we just can't do

[2:17:03] that. That's tool number one. And then

[2:17:05] when things are flat or things are

[2:17:07] negative, um during 2008, we go back to

[2:17:11] that because that's a very real time

[2:17:12] that we can remember. ORM's sales tax

[2:17:15] was about where we are right now, $15

[2:17:17] million. And they went backward from 15

[2:17:20] to 13.

[2:17:23] That's a hard pill to swallow. Right.

[2:17:26] Our sales tax at that time was 4 million

[2:17:28] and it went down to three and a half.

[2:17:32] Relatively speaking, almost the exact

[2:17:34] same percent. A really hard pill to

[2:17:36] swallow. We've got those we've got

[2:17:38] levers in place that we can pull. First

[2:17:40] starting with we're just not going to do

[2:17:42] it. We're not going to grow that way.

[2:17:43] we're we're not going to do that. Then

[2:17:45] how do we how do we we recess for a year

[2:17:48] or two or three and and keep things

[2:17:50] going? And I'm so proud of what we've

[2:17:52] done. It's different and and sometimes

[2:17:55] the staff has had um

[2:17:59] you know uh convulsions to some of the

[2:18:02] ways that we've adjusted things. But but

[2:18:05] those convulsions are not because it's

[2:18:06] bad or it's just it's just different.

[2:18:08] But as you understand where we're trying

[2:18:09] to be and how we're trying to u make

[2:18:13] things function

[2:18:15] sustainably and I love the way that

[2:18:16] Jordan analyzes things. He's brought

[2:18:18] such a great great eye to this and his

[2:18:21] eye to the future and in sustainability.

[2:18:22] I think he's done a great job. Um if you

[2:18:25] don't have any other questions we do

[2:18:26] need you to um approve the tenative

[2:18:28] budget and we we need you to set a time

[2:18:29] and place for the public hearing.

[2:18:33] as typical in Spanish Fork. Um we do not

[2:18:37] you can approve the budget as early as

[2:18:40] um June 2nd, but we would always

[2:18:42] recommend that you not um but you can

[2:18:46] but take that public hearing, receive

[2:18:47] that comment, those comments, assume

[2:18:49] somebody's going to have a comment that

[2:18:50] we want to follow up on, we want to look

[2:18:52] into, we want to understand, and then we

[2:18:54] would prepare to approve the budget in

[2:18:56] some form uh on that June 16th council

[2:18:59] meeting.

[2:19:03] question for Seth or Jordan.

[2:19:06] >> I have one last. Um, so if you look

[2:19:08] through the budget book, where' Jordan

[2:19:10] go? Um,

[2:19:13] wonderful graphics. We have a really

[2:19:15] good graphic that shows where the money

[2:19:16] goes from an expenditure standpoint. We

[2:19:18] don't have one collective. Where does it

[2:19:21] come from?

[2:19:22] >> Oh, really? I'll have to take a look at

[2:19:24] that. So you have further in the

[2:19:27] document the pieces of how you make up

[2:19:30] the revenue side of it, but you don't

[2:19:32] have you have the expenditure on page

[2:19:36] I don't know what that is. It's the big

[2:19:37] circle pie chart. You need to miss one

[2:19:42] graph.

[2:19:45] It's got revenue on

[2:19:48] >> you get there.

[2:19:50] >> How city finances work and then

[2:19:54] >> so if you

[2:19:55] >> you can add it up.

[2:19:56] >> What you're saying is you want So jump

[2:19:57] to page 19 of the text. You want

[2:20:00] something like that.

[2:20:02] >> 19.

[2:20:03] >> Um nope. You want revenue. Sorry. Page

[2:20:05] 21.

[2:20:06] >> Yep.

[2:20:07] >> You want something like that that shows

[2:20:09] taxes this portion of the pie. Sorry.

[2:20:11] Sales tax this portion property etc. You

[2:20:14] want something like that?

[2:20:15] >> Yeah. So, if you if you're looking at

[2:20:17] the it's the second pie chart.

[2:20:20] >> Yeah.

[2:20:21] >> Total city budget expenditures FY27.

[2:20:24] Really good job of where the money is

[2:20:26] going. The next slide should be where

[2:20:28] the money came from.

[2:20:30] >> Holistically.

[2:20:31] the whole 231.1

[2:20:35] million. You have it. I can find it. I

[2:20:39] just like it graphic. Graphically,

[2:20:41] >> you like the colored.

[2:20:44] I do. I like the red. I like the maroon.

[2:20:47] Now I figured out there's two high

[2:20:49] schools in the city.

[2:20:50] >> Good job. We can do that.

[2:20:51] >> See, Mr. Boyak was here. Coach Boyak was

[2:20:54] here.

[2:20:55] >> Pay some respect.

[2:20:58] >> Yep. Absolutely.

[2:20:58] >> That's it. Thank you.

[2:21:02] >> Anything else?

[2:21:06] Okay. uh as was mentioned uh by manager

[2:21:09] parents there the um this is to adopt

[2:21:12] the tenative budget which does uh

[2:21:15] schedule a public hearing for June 2nd.

[2:21:18] Uh and again I think well said by

[2:21:21] council up here that residents don't

[2:21:23] need to wait till June 2nd to talk to

[2:21:25] us, ask questions about it or meet with

[2:21:28] uh staff about it as well. I know that's

[2:21:30] a periodic thing that happens with

[2:21:32] residents coming and talking to our

[2:21:34] finance department as well. So, um, not

[2:21:37] set in stone, but preliminary today and

[2:21:40] then would love to hear from you before

[2:21:41] the public hearing on June 2nd. If

[2:21:44] anybody's ready to make that motion, I'd

[2:21:46] say let's do it. I move to approve the

[2:21:49] tenative fiscal year 2027 budget and set

[2:21:52] the public hearing for June 2nd, 2026 at

[2:21:55] 6 p.m. during city council meeting to

[2:21:57] consider adoption of the final budget.

[2:22:00] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden.

[2:22:02] >> Second.

[2:22:03] by Councilman Tuk. A roll call

[2:22:05] vote here. Councilman Tuk,

[2:22:06] >> yes.

[2:22:07] >> Councilman Carden,

[2:22:08] >> yes.

[2:22:08] >> Councilman Oiler,

[2:22:09] >> yes.

[2:22:09] >> Councilwoman Beck,

[2:22:10] >> yes.

[2:22:10] >> And Councilman Marshall,

[2:22:12] >> yes.

[2:22:12] >> Item D is approved. We'll uh we'll see

[2:22:16] everybody on a public hearing of June

[2:22:18] 2nd.

[2:22:19] >> Okay. Item E, ordinance adopting the

[2:22:21] land use element of the general plan.

[2:22:25] Mr. David W. Man,

[2:22:30] » turn that W upside down. You got it,

[2:22:34] >> David. And

[2:22:35] >> I guess DMM.

[2:22:37] >> That's how I'm reading it.

[2:22:38] >> So, first of all, I just want to express

[2:22:41] gratitude for being able to work on this

[2:22:44] project for the amazing I'm I'm being

[2:22:48] completely and totally honest. This has

[2:22:50] been the highlight of my career. I don't

[2:22:52] know if it's going to be topped for the

[2:22:54] rest of my career because it's been a

[2:22:56] pleasure.

[2:22:57] >> We're going to do this again next year.

[2:22:58] It's and I get to keep working on it,

[2:23:02] but it's been a pleasure to work on it,

[2:23:03] to to be able to communicate with the

[2:23:07] residents, with staff, with the mayor

[2:23:10] and council, to get lots of feedback, to

[2:23:13] learn throughout this whole process. So,

[2:23:15] I just wanted to say that upfront.

[2:23:18] Um, I'm going to keep my my comments

[2:23:21] brief tonight. I think we've talked a

[2:23:23] lot about the land use element. I think

[2:23:25] we're all pretty familiar with what it

[2:23:27] is, what it contains, but I did want to

[2:23:29] read this paragraph that's on the first

[2:23:31] page. Uh says, "The land use element is

[2:23:35] both visionary and practical. It

[2:23:37] outlines community aspirations while

[2:23:39] guiding daily decision-making.

[2:23:42] It identifies where uses currently exist

[2:23:44] so that future uses can be distributed

[2:23:46] effectively. As Spanish Fort grows and

[2:23:49] conditions evolve, the document will be

[2:23:52] updated to ensure policies remain

[2:23:54] aligned with the city's needs and

[2:23:55] values.

[2:23:57] That one paragraph, I think, very well

[2:24:01] lays out the purpose, the intent, the

[2:24:03] role that the land use element plays.

[2:24:06] Um, last week I had an opportunity to go

[2:24:09] to a kind of an additional meeting with

[2:24:12] other staff and the consultant that's

[2:24:15] working on the transportation master

[2:24:16] plan. and we had an opportunity to talk

[2:24:18] about land use. And um it was

[2:24:23] I was grateful for the opportunity, but

[2:24:25] it was challenging because we're still

[2:24:28] kind of in this process of evaluating

[2:24:31] the language, the the colors on the map,

[2:24:34] um all the elements that are part of

[2:24:36] this document. And um the the the land

[2:24:42] use element that's in place right now

[2:24:44] was adopted over 15 years ago. We still

[2:24:48] when people come into the office, we've

[2:24:51] got a land use map that was once again

[2:24:54] primarily created about 15 years ago.

[2:24:58] We are growing city. We're a changing

[2:25:01] city. And so we have an opportunity to

[2:25:05] adopt a a new land use element but as

[2:25:08] well as that we can continue to update

[2:25:10] it to ensure that it remains valuable.

[2:25:14] Um this is a document that we want to

[2:25:16] use regularly. We want to use it so that

[2:25:18] we can both apply uh the principles, the

[2:25:21] goals, the policies, the strategies that

[2:25:24] are contained in it as well as

[2:25:26] continually evaluate it as we apply

[2:25:29] those. Um, I think it's a great

[2:25:31] opportunity to continue to build on that

[2:25:33] idea that this is a living document. Um,

[2:25:36] we do have some minor changes that have

[2:25:39] been made. There were some

[2:25:40] inconsistencies because there was a lot

[2:25:42] of uh changes that were made kind of in

[2:25:44] the first section of the plan, not so

[2:25:46] much on the second half. And so in order

[2:25:49] to get some more consistency in some of

[2:25:51] the language um so for example the

[2:25:54] station area uh designation talking

[2:25:56] about a potential future frontr runner

[2:25:58] station rather than having it seem more

[2:26:01] certain because there is some

[2:26:03] uncertainty at this time. Um

[2:26:07] there's also some language in the

[2:26:08] gateway designation uh that wasn't uh

[2:26:12] updated when we changed the the gateway

[2:26:15] idea with uh the confusion that came

[2:26:19] with the gateway principle and then the

[2:26:22] gateway land use designation. So this

[2:26:25] highlights the focus growth center uh

[2:26:27] idea as well as um highlighting the

[2:26:30] northern portion which is where that uh

[2:26:33] land use designation is shown on the

[2:26:35] proposed land use map.

[2:26:38] Um there was also some changes made to

[2:26:41] uh the summary of the southwest quadrant

[2:26:43] of the city. Um talking about the Front

[2:26:46] Runner station that it's still uh

[2:26:49] there's still some uncertainty there. Um

[2:26:51] but that uh if finalized and funded, a

[2:26:55] required stationary plan would establish

[2:26:57] transit oriented land uses, development

[2:26:59] intensity, and design standards. Um, and

[2:27:03] so we wanted to say that, you know, it's not for certain at this time, but

[2:27:09] if that does become a reality, that's

[2:27:12] what we have to look forward to.

[2:27:15] We also added a strategy uh to the first

[2:27:18] goal um to consider future

[2:27:20] infrastructure needs when evaluating

[2:27:21] proposed annexations to avoid

[2:27:23] inefficient uh spending of public funds.

[2:27:26] I think that was something that uh

[2:27:28] needed to be highlighted uh in this

[2:27:30] section. There's still a lot of things

[2:27:32] that can be done, but uh I think there's

[2:27:36] time to be able to evaluate it as

[2:27:38] projects come forward, as developers

[2:27:40] come in with proposals in different

[2:27:42] parts of the city. Um, and so I look

[2:27:44] forward to seeing this uh to the point

[2:27:47] where it gets adopted and that we can

[2:27:49] continue to uh make it work for us as

[2:27:53] the city grows. I've had to answer any

[2:27:56] questions that you have.

[2:28:00] Thank you, David. Appreciate that. Any

[2:28:02] questions for Dave on this item?

[2:28:08] » Nope.

[2:28:10] >> No.

[2:28:12] >> Have a lot of questions for you all.

[2:28:14] >> Right. We might call you back up, Dave.

[2:28:17] >> Yeah. Be ready. Don't go to dinner yet.

[2:28:18] >> Be ready.

[2:28:22] » Okay. Uh let's see.

[2:28:25] land use elements of the general plan

[2:28:28] here. Um we

[2:28:32] was it the remind me it was the uh water

[2:28:35] portion of the general plan last time we

[2:28:38] discussed

[2:28:39] >> yeah that was I believe recently

[2:28:41] adopted. We adopted that a meeting ago,

[2:28:44] maybe a couple meetings ago, but we uh

[2:28:47] we had this public hearing last council

[2:28:50] meeting uh for for the the general plan

[2:28:54] here. So, not a public hearing tonight,

[2:28:56] but a hearing up here to be able to

[2:28:58] discuss it. And we have one attendant

[2:29:00] here still. Maybe if he wants to say

[2:29:03] something, we could ask him. But, uh

[2:29:06] yeah, discussion up here. uh what uh

[2:29:10] what concerns, what comments, what

[2:29:14] discussion would you like to have up

[2:29:15] here that's not been had in the last one

[2:29:19] year and eight months of discussion of

[2:29:21] this?

[2:29:22] >> Yeah.

[2:29:26] » Where do we start? Who's starting?

[2:29:29] >> I sent mine.

[2:29:30] >> Go ahead.

[2:29:31] >> Go for it. Go, Jess.

[2:29:32] >> Kevin, go.

[2:29:36] Um

[2:29:38] yeah, how do I guess the question is how

[2:29:41] do we approach this because it feels

[2:29:42] like there's different areas

[2:29:45] um lots of different concepts. Do we

[2:29:47] just pick something and just start

[2:29:50] talking about it and then jump to the

[2:29:51] next thing? I don't know.

[2:29:53] >> I think that's the only way to get

[2:29:54] through it,

[2:29:54] >> right?

[2:29:56] >> You want to pick a section of it and

[2:29:58] discuss it further and ask questions? I

[2:30:01] >> I would be a great idea.

[2:30:05] I think we've all got it in front of us.

[2:30:07] >> I approve the east bench. That's all.

[2:30:11] >> That's all you got?

[2:30:12] >> I've got all you got.

[2:30:14] >> The buildout area.

[2:30:17] >> I'm comfortable with everything that's

[2:30:18] currently built out.

[2:30:19] >> It's built. Yeah. I think uh I think uh

[2:30:24] my uh

[2:30:27] my first comment uh to to this again is I I think that was important what

[2:30:34] David said about working off some maps

[2:30:38] um you know in their in their office

[2:30:39] that are some older maps and the city's

[2:30:41] changed and adjusted since then. Um you

[2:30:44] just heard it. We just had a a budget

[2:30:46] discussion where we touted how healthy

[2:30:48] of sales tax revenue is. $17 million in

[2:30:52] a year. That's that's that's a $1.4

[2:30:55] million average a month in sales tax

[2:30:57] revenue. That previous general plan map

[2:31:01] or general plan discussion did not have

[2:31:05] things that produced that sales tax

[2:31:07] revenue. So the things that we're proud

[2:31:10] of, which is why I like tomorrow's

[2:31:12] today's progress, tomorrow's pride, the

[2:31:15] things we're proud of today, where our

[2:31:17] community has has evolved to is because

[2:31:20] of some some good planning and because

[2:31:21] of that map being amended, the the

[2:31:25] general plan being amended, and this one

[2:31:26] will be amended, too. So, I I I

[2:31:29] certainly I think I've said this before,

[2:31:30] I don't want it to come off that we've

[2:31:33] done a poor job of planning our our our

[2:31:37] plan has been updated when it needs to

[2:31:39] and and it's been a a place that that I

[2:31:42] think we could point to that's got us to

[2:31:44] some success that we like to talk about

[2:31:46] here in in Spanish Fork.

[2:31:50] I guess my hockey analogy since I'm a

[2:31:52] hockey fan now that we were in the

[2:31:53] playoffs, big hockey fan, you know,

[2:31:55] >> this is we

[2:31:57] >> uh

[2:31:58] is is um the general plan feels more

[2:32:02] like instead of skating to the puck,

[2:32:06] skate where the puck will be. And that's

[2:32:10] an important u concept in in that game

[2:32:14] is uh if you skate to the to the puck,

[2:32:17] you're probably late to it and somebody

[2:32:18] else is there. And a general plan feels

[2:32:21] like let's have a vision, a 10,000 foot

[2:32:24] vision of skating where the puck will

[2:32:26] be. Um and obviously there's a lot of

[2:32:29] factors that go into that puck actually

[2:32:32] ending up there. Um but I think we have

[2:32:34] a great history. We have a great working

[2:32:36] history

[2:32:37] with uh with our county partners with a

[2:32:40] lot of people uh that that that used to

[2:32:43] be areas of the county and are now

[2:32:46] inside of our city and we'll continue

[2:32:47] that tradition going forward as well.

[2:32:50] I'm confident of that. Um, so again,

[2:32:56] doesn't need to be perfect and perfect

[2:32:59] could certainly be the enemy of good

[2:33:00] here. But, uh, let's, uh, let's talk

[2:33:05] about the issues you you you still want

[2:33:07] to discuss and and and and maybe have

[2:33:10] debate on. Um, but let's not debate it

[2:33:14] for another year and a half.

[2:33:16] >> Who's who's running the computer? Jack,

[2:33:19] do you have access to that? Can you turn

[2:33:21] to the land use land element draft if

[2:33:25] you've got it open

[2:33:28] and maybe go to page 17 which just shows

[2:33:31] the overall map of all of the changes.

[2:33:35] Start there.

[2:33:45] » It's a pretty small document,

[2:33:47] >> right?

[2:33:48] >> 62 pages. Smaller than the budget ones.

[2:33:51] It

[2:33:51] >> is smaller than the budget.

[2:33:54] >> Is it really smaller than the budget?

[2:33:56] >> Yeah, this is smaller than the budget

[2:33:57] document.

[2:33:59] >> Give you a page again.

[2:34:00] >> 17.

[2:34:12] » Perfect. Thank you.

[2:34:15] Maybe zoom in just a little bit more.

[2:34:17] Would you like to see them?

[2:34:19] >> Um, just mostly the map. We don't need

[2:34:21] the text above. Yeah, that's good.

[2:34:23] That's perfect. Thank you,

[2:34:28] » Jane. I know you shared some things with

[2:34:30] staff, with the council. I don't know if

[2:34:32] you want to start with some of the

[2:34:34] things.

[2:34:34] >> Sure.

[2:34:35] >> I knew you were going to do that to me,

[2:34:37] Kev.

[2:34:37] >> Yep.

[2:34:38] >> Um, you saw my five points. Um, there

[2:34:43] the first part the first point is, are

[2:34:46] our goals right? Are there things that

[2:34:47] we can add, refine? Um, you don't need

[2:34:51] to go to the goals. This is this is a

[2:34:53] good spot here. I'll get to this point.

[2:34:55] Um,

[2:34:56] you could walk through all 15 of those

[2:35:00] and say yes no to each one of them.

[2:35:03] That might be a way to do it. Um, I

[2:35:06] don't know if we want to sit here and

[2:35:07] read them all night long,

[2:35:10] but the one I do want to talk about here

[2:35:12] today for sure is how to treat in the

[2:35:17] current plan in the current decision of

[2:35:19] a landowner APA and what the designation

[2:35:22] land use designation should be. Um, I've

[2:35:26] proposed something which is different

[2:35:28] from the comment I made two plans ago.

[2:35:32] Um, Jesse has proposed something on how

[2:35:36] to how to sort of resolve

[2:35:40] this. We know what

[2:35:43] I think I have a good understanding of

[2:35:45] what the people the property owners of

[2:35:48] APA specifically. I'm not talking all of

[2:35:50] Leland. I'm not talking all of Center

[2:35:52] Street. I'm not talking I'm talking

[2:35:53] specifically active APAs.

[2:35:57] Um my my thought is they have come

[2:36:01] before the board before us and said we

[2:36:03] want to designate our property as APA

[2:36:06] because we want to farm it for as long

[2:36:07] as we possibly can.

[2:36:10] Very very many times we sit here and we

[2:36:14] want to support a land use a land

[2:36:16] owner's decision on what they want to do

[2:36:17] with their property. And Richard's

[2:36:20] sitting here tonight saying yes. I like

[2:36:22] where he's going with this because he

[2:36:23] has a change that he wants to make to

[2:36:25] his property as well. Um, not every

[2:36:28] single time do we say yes, we agree with

[2:36:30] that property owner. Um, but in this

[2:36:33] case, they have taken an action that

[2:36:35] says clearly to me that what they want

[2:36:37] to do with their their property is farm

[2:36:39] it. So, my proposal is to designate the

[2:36:44] land use in APAs as agriculture.

[2:36:48] One, because that's the signal they sent

[2:36:50] to us. Secondly, I think that is the

[2:36:53] only land use designation that complies

[2:36:55] with the law for an APA. I disagree with

[2:36:59] um Dave Anderson that any land use is

[2:37:03] compatible with an APA. I don't believe

[2:37:04] that is correct. Um I think this is the

[2:37:07] only way that we can be compatible. I

[2:37:10] know we had some debate about it. There

[2:37:11] was some discussion about it last time.

[2:37:13] Von gave us a pretty good answer. Um

[2:37:16] this is that's the that's the one thing

[2:37:19] that I want to resolve tonight. And if I

[2:37:21] have to make a motion to do it and we

[2:37:22] vote and we turn it down, whatever, I

[2:37:24] want to get some resolution on. But I

[2:37:26] think Jesse has an idea that we need to

[2:37:27] talk about.

[2:37:28] >> So, yeah. So, the the the opposite or

[2:37:32] this because we've been talking about

[2:37:33] the boundary

[2:37:35] um

[2:37:36] >> boundary growth boundary being used as

[2:37:40] that carve out. Um, from a good steward

[2:37:43] standpoint, I do think it makes sense

[2:37:44] that we need to plan for those areas at

[2:37:46] some point when they do or if at some

[2:37:49] point they they change hands or somebody

[2:37:52] decides to change the way that they're

[2:37:53] using that land. So my thought is is if

[2:37:56] we were to make a new type of

[2:37:58] designation in the general planned that

[2:38:01] simply so for lack of having them all

[2:38:04] spelled out on this paper. Let's say

[2:38:07] it's commercial in the future. That's

[2:38:09] what we have it general planned here on

[2:38:10] this picture as. But then we put some

[2:38:13] type of cross-hatching over that APA

[2:38:16] property that has a key to it that says

[2:38:20] this cross-hatching means that they're

[2:38:21] in an APA. We still are general planning

[2:38:24] it. We are still looking to the future

[2:38:26] saying this is what we see this as in

[2:38:28] the future, but we also recognize that

[2:38:30] they are in APA and they can they will

[2:38:32] continue to be in that APA until they

[2:38:34] decide to be out of it. It then

[2:38:37] delineates the need to actually use the

[2:38:40] growth boundary part of this. So, you

[2:38:43] know, some of it is we're trying to be

[2:38:45] strategic in what what we were using

[2:38:47] with the uh growth boundary, but there

[2:38:49] was still some hesitancy on both sides

[2:38:51] of the growth boundary. Both from city

[2:38:52] staff, they they had come up with a way

[2:38:54] to make this work, but I still think

[2:38:55] there was some hesitancy of that being

[2:38:58] the right way to do it. And I don't know

[2:39:00] that there's a right or a wrong way to

[2:39:01] do it, but I think that this

[2:39:03] cross-hatching, for lack of better

[2:39:05] words, kind of solves both issues in

[2:39:08] we're sending a clear signal. This is

[2:39:10] APA. We recognize it. We see it. we see

[2:39:12] you, we hear you, but we also are saying

[2:39:15] to ourselves and to the future of the

[2:39:17] city staff that hey, this is what we see

[2:39:19] it as in the future.

[2:39:21] >> So the two the two arguments that you're

[2:39:23] the two problems you're trying to solve

[2:39:24] is one landowner wants to farm it. We're

[2:39:27] going to acknowledge it. We say that

[2:39:29] sort of like in the interim between now

[2:39:31] and some future state, we're going to

[2:39:33] treat it as agriculture.

[2:39:34] >> Correct.

[2:39:36] plan for the future so that

[2:39:38] infrastructure that's built it can

[2:39:40] accommodate the future land use of that.

[2:39:42] That's what So that's the idea.

[2:39:44] >> Yes. 100% is the idea.

[2:39:46] >> All right.

[2:39:47] >> I really like that idea. Can I ask

[2:39:49] though like if they're in an APA?

[2:39:54] Doesn't everybody already know that?

[2:39:56] >> So

[2:39:57] >> I feel like we're doing like double duty

[2:39:59] of

[2:39:59] >> So if you look at that map, can you see

[2:40:01] an APA on there?

[2:40:04] >> No. But is that our responsibility to

[2:40:06] tell

[2:40:06] >> the state code that Shane pulled up last

[2:40:08] time said that it has to be identified

[2:40:11] in the general plan. And when I know the

[2:40:13] general plan is the entire document.

[2:40:15] >> Okay.

[2:40:15] >> But when I think of a general plan and I

[2:40:17] think and I would contend most people

[2:40:19] think of the general plan, they think of

[2:40:20] this,

[2:40:21] >> right? I would too.

[2:40:22] >> And that's why I say that. Okay.

[2:40:23] >> So I guess my question to that is that

[2:40:25] the individuals who have approached us

[2:40:30] with this idea of APAs

[2:40:35] in the discussions I've had want nothing

[2:40:37] more than to have it designated as a I

[2:40:41] don't know that this is going to make

[2:40:43] them happy or appease them in any way.

[2:40:45] So, I guess my purpose and I state this

[2:40:51] all the time in as member of the city

[2:40:53] council is to make sure that we're

[2:40:54] making doing right by the entire city of

[2:40:56] Spanish Fork. And I think that you're

[2:40:58] 100% right. They've said they want to be

[2:41:00] general planned agg. I don't know that I

[2:41:02] can with a clear conscience for the good

[2:41:05] of the future of Spanish Forks say that

[2:41:07] if I general plan that as a that I'm

[2:41:09] making the best decision because I don't

[2:41:12] know that that's making setting us up

[2:41:14] for success for what that future looks

[2:41:15] like. This is the best way I can see us

[2:41:18] doing this in a way that tries to do

[2:41:21] both ways. But again, I don't think

[2:41:23] everyone is going to be happy about it.

[2:41:25] But it also gives us it shows clear

[2:41:28] indication that we are trying to

[2:41:31] work with what they've they've done.

[2:41:33] They've went through a step to make it

[2:41:34] act protection and so we're just

[2:41:36] identifying it. But we're also not

[2:41:38] setting ourselves up for a big problem

[2:41:40] in the future when somebody does change

[2:41:42] land owners and they decide that they

[2:41:44] need to or they need to develop and now

[2:41:45] all of a sudden we're digging up

[2:41:47] hundreds of miles of hundreds of miles.

[2:41:49] That's not right. But hundreds of feet

[2:41:51] of road to put in a bigger sewer line, a

[2:41:53] bigger whatever because we didn't plan

[2:41:55] correctly.

[2:41:56] >> Agreed.

[2:41:57] >> I are you sure that's what that property

[2:41:59] owner's asking?

[2:42:00] >> Say that again.

[2:42:01] >> You sure that's what that property owner

[2:42:02] is asking for? I guess you better ask

[2:42:04] the property owner if they're okay with

[2:42:06] hash marks on the map and if they're

[2:42:08] okay with bigger pipes going down the

[2:42:11] road. Well, that that's not what I'm

[2:42:13] saying at all. I'm I'm saying that I'm

[2:42:15] trying to hear what they have said as

[2:42:18] their reasoning, but also to say that

[2:42:21] hey, this is what state code has said is

[2:42:23] that we need to identify on a general

[2:42:24] plan and to show it. I don't think that

[2:42:26] I'm saying necessarily that we have to

[2:42:28] do what every

[2:42:28] >> we think we think these planners

[2:42:31] >> are breaking state code our our our

[2:42:34] general

[2:42:35] >> that's not what I'm saying either though

[2:42:36] I'm saying that I'm trying to do what I am taking all the information that is

[2:42:40] coming towards me and saying this is my

[2:42:41] idea

[2:42:44] » okay so we're talking about are we

[2:42:47] talking about uh APA's inside Spanish

[2:42:50] fork or outside Spanish fork

[2:42:52] >> inside Spanish fork

[2:42:53] >> so there's one we're talking about one

[2:42:56] property.

[2:42:56] >> I'm talking about anything that we have

[2:42:58] designated

[2:42:59] >> or general plan for

[2:43:00] >> in general plan for that is an APA.

[2:43:02] >> That's what I meant to say.

[2:43:03] >> So you're talking about our there's one

[2:43:04] property

[2:43:05] >> growth policy

[2:43:06] >> much more than one property.

[2:43:07] >> So you see our growth policies

[2:43:08] >> but not inside our city

[2:43:10] >> inside our future city

[2:43:12] >> inside our growth boundary growth

[2:43:13] policy.

[2:43:14] >> Yeah.

[2:43:14] >> So you're talking not not not annexed

[2:43:17] inside

[2:43:17] >> we have we have designated the the river

[2:43:19] bottoms as agriculture. That's not in

[2:43:21] our city. So why are we what what what

[2:43:24] what's the designation? What's the

[2:43:26] reasoning behind that?

[2:43:28] >> Why why would we why is it okay to put a

[2:43:30] designation outside of our city

[2:43:32] boundary?

[2:43:33] >> Well, because you're doing

[2:43:33] >> in one area, but not another.

[2:43:35] >> Yeah, you do it with a general plan.

[2:43:36] >> And that's what we're talking about.

[2:43:37] >> Okay. Talking about general planning all

[2:43:40] the area that we think that could be

[2:43:42] >> that's what I'm trying to get specific

[2:43:44] more specific on. You're not talking

[2:43:46] about the one

[2:43:48] >> spot

[2:43:48] >> APA,

[2:43:50] >> but APAs outside

[2:43:52] are you're not talking about one

[2:43:54] specific APA inside our city.

[2:43:56] >> I'm talking about APA.

[2:43:57] >> Okay. So APAs, they're inside our growth

[2:43:59] boundary,

[2:44:00] >> not outside our city.

[2:44:01] >> Well,

[2:44:03] the future growth boundary, they would

[2:44:04] be outside of it because that's the

[2:44:05] proposal on the table is to put them

[2:44:07] outside the growth boundary. But

[2:44:09] >> generally, yes.

[2:44:11] >> Not Okay, real quick. Terms growth

[2:44:13] policy, not growth boundary.

[2:44:16] That might be helpful for me.

[2:44:17] >> Yes. Our It's our policy, not our

[2:44:19] boundary because our boundary is a

[2:44:21] totally different map than our policy

[2:44:23] map.

[2:44:23] >> Thank you. Our policy that clarifies it

[2:44:25] for me. Thank you.

[2:44:27] So Jesse, you're saying I I get what

[2:44:29] you're saying and I and I think where I got to with that I mean

[2:44:37] if I'm sure none of you all read the

[2:44:41] email the previous time but it had a

[2:44:44] very similar concept of that. It was

[2:44:47] basically in the interim call it a but

[2:44:51] long-term plan it or we think that it's

[2:44:54] going to convert to. I think that has

[2:44:55] some benefit. I think that if I am a

[2:44:57] property owner next door to that APA,

[2:45:00] I'd want to know what that future

[2:45:01] potential is in that APA because I think

[2:45:03] that's that's important.

[2:45:06] We though there are many properties and

[2:45:09] Richard has one of them that will change

[2:45:11] over time

[2:45:14] for a variety of reasons potentially,

[2:45:16] right? How do we I mean we're not

[2:45:18] hashing all of those, right? There's a

[2:45:21] commercial spot. There is a there's a area around the Benjamin interchange

[2:45:28] that we're going to make some general

[2:45:30] plan assumptions around and six months

[2:45:33] from now change those potentially,

[2:45:36] >> right? So, we're not hashing those out.

[2:45:38] So, that's my only challenge with my

[2:45:40] only problem with with the proposal. I

[2:45:42] like it.

[2:45:43] >> Where does it end? I think that the

[2:45:45] exact same thing should apply if that's

[2:45:48] the methodology you go to to the river

[2:45:50] bottoms.

[2:45:51] You can't tell me that they're preserved

[2:45:53] forever. And if they do develop, they

[2:45:56] will have an impact on our

[2:45:57] infrastructure.

[2:45:59] So should we do that? Should we say that

[2:46:02] if it ever happens, which we never want

[2:46:04] it to happen. I'm not, please don't

[2:46:06] please community, don't suggest that I

[2:46:09] want the river bottoms to develop, but

[2:46:12] if they did, they will have a impact to

[2:46:17] a sewer line that's going somewhere.

[2:46:19] Should we plan the same way or should we

[2:46:22] call it what it is today and evaluate

[2:46:24] the general plan as needed as we move

[2:46:26] forward? It I like the idea. It's just

[2:46:29] it's hard. It's tricky why we apply at

[2:46:31] one place and not another place.

[2:46:32] >> So the only difference I would say is

[2:46:34] that we have made a at least from my

[2:46:37] understanding of the past and what we've

[2:46:38] talked about with riverb we we have made

[2:46:41] a decision that we're saying this is

[2:46:43] what we see for future use in the river

[2:46:45] bottoms. We're not saying that in the

[2:46:46] future we see it turning to this.

[2:46:48] >> Right. Correct. So that would be the

[2:46:50] difference I would say.

[2:46:50] >> Okay. So then if that's that's fair. If

[2:46:54] you asked a property owner that wants to

[2:46:58] continue to do agriculture, they would

[2:46:59] say that that's their intent as well.

[2:47:02] Knowing that there's always a potential

[2:47:04] for change, right? But that's that would

[2:47:06] be their intent to to farm forever,

[2:47:08] >> right? But if we were to ask the same

[2:47:10] property owners in the river bottoms,

[2:47:11] their intent is not necessarily to farm

[2:47:13] forever.

[2:47:14] for half half her farm and half her I

[2:47:16] want my

[2:47:17] >> but when we general plan we're not

[2:47:19] always saying hey this is what the

[2:47:20] property owner is planning to do in the

[2:47:22] future that's why I'm saying I'm trying

[2:47:23] to appease both sides right

[2:47:25] >> trying to say hey we're identifying this

[2:47:27] but we're also planning for the future

[2:47:28] because at some point that is going to

[2:47:30] change

[2:47:30] >> I'm not trying to argue against your

[2:47:32] idea because I think that it has some

[2:47:33] merit and it solves some

[2:47:37] immediate issues today but prepares us

[2:47:40] for the the long term

[2:47:43] I think that it has some benefits.

[2:47:46] I'm just trying to reconcile it with the

[2:47:48] rest of the plan because there are

[2:47:50] places that

[2:47:53] will and could and will change. We don't

[2:47:56] hash those.

[2:47:58] Is that not the point of an updated

[2:48:00] general plan is to evaluate it at some

[2:48:03] future date and say what do information

[2:48:05] do we have today?

[2:48:08] Are landowners making a different

[2:48:10] decision wherever that might be? and do

[2:48:12] we need to update it accordingly? The

[2:48:14] map that's up there today is that's our

[2:48:16] current plan and I think Mike said it

[2:48:18] very well before. I don't always

[2:48:20] disagree with him, but just sometimes.

[2:48:22] But he he made a great point that we

[2:48:25] have learned a lot from this. We have

[2:48:29] developed in a very productive way and

[2:48:31] we've made changes from when this was

[2:48:33] approved.

[2:48:34] >> Sure.

[2:48:34] >> Right. So it's it's an evolution. I

[2:48:37] think Dave started this in the

[2:48:39] paragraph. This is a this is a plan that

[2:48:41] evolves over time. To me, that is that's

[2:48:44] where I got to with this recommendation

[2:48:46] was it's going to be rehashed and

[2:48:48] discussed

[2:48:50] in the future. And if we want to put a

[2:48:52] date on it, that might even let's let's

[2:48:54] not wait 10 years and have some poor

[2:48:58] schmucks up here having this debate

[2:49:00] again.

[2:49:02] Let's let's pick an area and say, you

[2:49:04] know what, that's evolving quicker.

[2:49:07] Let's let's talk about it in five years.

[2:49:09] Okay. So, Shane, you're you're

[2:49:12] item number two, APAs.

[2:49:15] >> Only APA

[2:49:16] >> based on your discussion, your

[2:49:19] suggestion, and what's up on the map. I

[2:49:22] know the colors behind it are different

[2:49:24] than what we're proposing, but and Seth,

[2:49:27] maybe I can ask you or whoever's, is

[2:49:30] this an accurate updated APA map? It's

[2:49:33] as

[2:49:35] so what I've tried to show here and I

[2:49:37] wonder if this is perhaps what you're

[2:49:39] saying Jesse

[2:49:42] if you could what if we

[2:49:44] >> pardon

[2:49:45] >> sorry sorry go

[2:49:47] >> what if we take this view and add it

[2:49:52] into the document as map next or map

[2:49:54] before

[2:49:55] >> correct

[2:49:56] >> and so now it's not it's not a

[2:49:58] crosshatch of a kind of a thing but this

[2:50:00] shows all of those APAs are in here

[2:50:02] >> yes And on the document in the document,

[2:50:05] I think it's page 12ish. That's if you

[2:50:08] uh click general plan. Get that off for

[2:50:10] a second. That's the view. That's

[2:50:12] pageish 12,

[2:50:13] >> correct?

[2:50:14] >> With some other lines and things. And

[2:50:16] then turn that back on and go turn off

[2:50:18] the APA. It's up. Yeah, we try to make

[2:50:21] them alphabetical actually. It's kind of funny. It's kind of funny. Um

[2:50:26] that's it without. That's page 17. We

[2:50:29] don't have Now. Turn that egg protection

[2:50:31] back on. Would that would that

[2:50:33] accomplish what you're trying to say by

[2:50:35] having that show through and say this is

[2:50:37] where this is we want you to see it but

[2:50:39] underneath it underneath it is what is

[2:50:42] intended but now it's not a whole other

[2:50:44] thing we're not separating things we're

[2:50:46] just blending

[2:50:47] >> correct what we want you just pushed a

[2:50:49] button

[2:50:51] >> right

[2:50:51] >> okay

[2:50:52] >> it's layered

[2:50:52] >> so that's so that's Jesse

[2:50:54] >> the maps are already in there

[2:50:55] >> that's Jesse's recommendation which

[2:50:57] >> document

[2:50:58] >> makes sense going back to Seth or to

[2:51:02] Shane then your recommendation is that if they've

[2:51:07] told us they're they're in an APA

[2:51:09] they've told us they're going to farm

[2:51:11] forever let's just make it and designate

[2:51:14] it in the general plan as a that's your

[2:51:17] recommendation

[2:51:18] >> correct

[2:51:18] >> okay can let me speak to that now the

[2:51:21] reason why I don't

[2:51:23] my thoughts on that and why

[2:51:24] >> you could say you don't like it it's

[2:51:25] totally fine

[2:51:26] >> why I don't love it

[2:51:29] >> you like it but you don't love why I

[2:51:31] don't love it.

[2:51:32] >> Okay, that's fair.

[2:51:32] >> So, here are my here are my thoughts.

[2:51:35] Slowly over time, you're going to get

[2:51:37] one property owner here and there that

[2:51:38] are going to say, "You know what? Pull

[2:51:40] me out of the APA." Uh, and then do

[2:51:45] whatever you got to do at that point. As

[2:51:47] they do that, those pieces will slowly,

[2:51:51] you know, start to change. One of the

[2:51:53] things over the four years that we've

[2:51:55] served together that you have been very

[2:51:58] adamant about, you know where I'm going

[2:52:00] with this. I do. You know exactly where

[2:52:02] I'm going with this.

[2:52:03] >> You have been very oneoffs

[2:52:06] >> is that you hate when the city

[2:52:09] >> Have you gone back and reviewed all of

[2:52:10] this?

[2:52:11] >> Well done. Very well done. Is that not

[2:52:14] true?

[2:52:14] >> That is very true.

[2:52:15] >> Yes.

[2:52:16] >> You are setting future councils up for a

[2:52:19] million. Maybe not a million, but so

[2:52:23] many oneoffs

[2:52:25] >> by doing exactly what you're suggesting.

[2:52:28] >> Dang it. That's You're correct.

[2:52:32] >> Dang it.

[2:52:33] >> You drop his middle name. His middle

[2:52:35] name is a oneoff.

[2:52:37] >> It has been negative oneoff. That is for

[2:52:40] sure.

[2:52:40] >> So that's why I don't love it.

[2:52:47] » That's fair. That's that's it's that's

[2:52:48] it's a valid I I think wherever you got

[2:52:50] that information from is solid argument

[2:52:54] >> where everyone

[2:52:56] >> whoever said that to you is a is a

[2:52:59] genius. No, that is that is very

[2:53:02] consistent with how I've been in the

[2:53:03] past for sure. Um

[2:53:07] I I the reason that I am hyperfocused on

[2:53:10] APAs um is because it limits

[2:53:15] the conversation, limits the area very specifically. Um I think there is a

[2:53:21] general sentiment and we heard it from I

[2:53:23] think more than one person. I think Lisa

[2:53:25] said this to change the whole area to

[2:53:29] some other land use designation.

[2:53:33] And I don't know if that's right or

[2:53:35] wrong. That's what we heard, right? And

[2:53:37] so if we

[2:53:40] the the reason I can probably wrestle

[2:53:43] myself

[2:53:44] away from the one-off is because it's

[2:53:46] very deliberate and specific to

[2:53:49] a process that a landowner went through

[2:53:51] to say, I want to continue farm and this

[2:53:53] is the way I want to do it. But

[2:53:56] >> so,

[2:53:56] >> but I don't think those I don't think

[2:53:58] those land owners that are in the APA um

[2:54:02] expressly uh if the feeling I'm getting

[2:54:05] from them is not our not as much

[2:54:08] acknowledgement that they need from us

[2:54:09] to do what they do. They think they went

[2:54:11] to APA. A lot of them well for some some

[2:54:15] they knew that something would happen

[2:54:17] around them and they said I want an

[2:54:18] additional protection for what happens

[2:54:20] around me. They know

[2:54:22] >> uh these guys are going to sell and I'm

[2:54:25] not going to buy it. Somebody else is

[2:54:26] going to buy it. And I'm okay with that

[2:54:28] happening because

[2:54:28] >> absolutely that's why I want to

[2:54:30] >> that does more for me when I decide to

[2:54:32] do more for me. I mean that's physic

[2:54:34] that's the literal words that have been

[2:54:36] said to me and those people are in an

[2:54:38] APA. So to to give much more of

[2:54:42] acknowledgement on top of the APA

[2:54:45] besides showing it on our maps like they

[2:54:48] are

[2:54:49] um feels like

[2:54:52] okay let's let's tell you what you got

[2:54:54] and I know what I got. I'm a farmer and

[2:54:57] you really can't stop me from farming or

[2:55:00] getting my water or doing anything

[2:55:03] >> that that that I want to do um because I

[2:55:07] have these rights. And so it it it feels

[2:55:10] just like

[2:55:13] acknowledging what's already facts and

[2:55:15] already law and already, you know,

[2:55:17] already what the late work they've done.

[2:55:20] >> So I I really like what Jesse's thought

[2:55:23] of here with

[2:55:24] >> You love his.

[2:55:25] >> I love his. Sorry, Shane. But I do I

[2:55:27] love I love his

[2:55:29] >> yours.

[2:55:31] >> But so I think we're just missing one

[2:55:34] more in my opinion. We're just missing

[2:55:37] one more thing with this and that's what

[2:55:38] the city's all already suggested with

[2:55:40] the growth boundary and anything. So, we

[2:55:44] overlay it like we've got it here, but

[2:55:46] then we also add in the additional

[2:55:49] growth boundary where if you're an APA

[2:55:51] and you're not in the city, you are

[2:55:54] removed from our growth boundary, which

[2:55:56] it sounds like I think that's what we've

[2:55:58] already already discussed and come up

[2:56:00] with. outside of that. I mean, that's basically telling the world this

[2:56:07] is an APA. You can see it on the map.

[2:56:09] It's not in our growth boundary, so

[2:56:11] we're not going to service it. And so,

[2:56:14] until that changes, leave the property

[2:56:17] owners alone because they've in they

[2:56:19] have their intention to do what they're

[2:56:20] doing today. And the city has zero

[2:56:23] intention of bringing it into Spanish

[2:56:26] Fort. I don't know if we add anything to

[2:56:29] our annexation policy that includes this

[2:56:32] and says if it's within

[2:56:35] if it's not in the and maybe we already

[2:56:37] do. Maybe it already says if it's not in

[2:56:39] the growth boundary that we don't annex

[2:56:42] it. Bon, do you know off hand?

[2:56:46] » The policy says today as it's written in

[2:56:49] the general plan document that you're reviewing it, it would tell

[2:56:53] us if it's in APA. I don't know if I'm

[2:56:56] answering your question. So keep me on

[2:56:57] track. If it's an APA, you shouldn't

[2:56:59] generally consider to annex it.

[2:57:01] >> But the grow not necessarily the APA,

[2:57:03] but the grow growth boundary policy.

[2:57:05] When we annex, are we also adjusting at

[2:57:08] that same time the growth boundary?

[2:57:10] >> You shouldn't annex

[2:57:12] >> if we're not if outside of the growth

[2:57:14] boundary

[2:57:15] >> boundary, right? And so,

[2:57:16] >> and if you're going to annex outside of

[2:57:18] the policy boundary, then that's the

[2:57:19] process that you went through with.

[2:57:21] >> But as far as the growth boundary, if

[2:57:24] we're saying if you're in an APA, you're

[2:57:27] not in that growth boundary, then we

[2:57:29] wouldn't even be considering annexing

[2:57:32] them.

[2:57:32] >> Correct.

[2:57:32] >> Because of those

[2:57:34] >> I mean, you can nothing nothing in this

[2:57:35] document binds your hands. It gives you

[2:57:38] guides, but the guide the guidance that

[2:57:40] you that this document says is if it's

[2:57:42] in APA, generally you shouldn't consider

[2:57:44] it because they aren't looking for

[2:57:46] municipal services.

[2:57:57] boundary. Your growth boundary is a

[2:57:59] guiding principle. Same with your

[2:58:01] general plan, but you were required to

[2:58:04] have it within your annexation policy

[2:58:07] plan to annex it.

[2:58:13] » Then obviously

[2:58:15] we just approved

[2:58:20] one tonight that took a process that

[2:58:22] wasn't inside of it, right? We started

[2:58:24] with amending the growth policy and

[2:58:28] >> correct

[2:58:29] >> they kept asking you know annexation and

[2:58:31] now we finalized an annexation

[2:58:33] agreement. So seeing Kevin to you to my

[2:58:36] one of the reasons why I was saying

[2:58:38] putting the maps together because I

[2:58:40] don't I personally don't know that we

[2:58:42] need that growth boundary protection at

[2:58:46] that point because I feel like this

[2:58:47] fulfills what we've been trying to in my

[2:58:50] what I've been seeing as us trying to do

[2:58:52] is sending a clear message that this is

[2:58:54] an APA. We recognize it. It's there.

[2:58:57] It does. The the only other option would

[2:59:00] be is that it gives city staff more of a

[2:59:02] tool to say don't go talk to those

[2:59:04] property owners when somebody comes in.

[2:59:06] >> That would be the only thing that it

[2:59:07] adds.

[2:59:07] >> Yeah.

[2:59:07] >> That I don't think that this

[2:59:10] >> we Yeah. And I I agree that does the

[2:59:12] purpose. I think just the growth

[2:59:13] boundary part of that is a

[2:59:16] >> it reinforces this.

[2:59:18] >> Sure. Yeah. I just don't I just don't

[2:59:19] know that it's necessary anymore. But I

[2:59:22] think that it could I could see the

[2:59:23] reason why we'd want to do it still. But

[2:59:26] I don't know that it's necessary at that

[2:59:27] point.

[2:59:32] » Okay,

[2:59:35] maybe staff can answer me this. So

[2:59:38] are there decisions that we make

[2:59:42] based on the land use designation and

[2:59:45] the general plan as we as we move

[2:59:49] forward over time? So, I'm I I don't

[2:59:53] love Jesse's recommendation,

[2:59:56] but I don't

[2:59:58] hate it. No, just kidding.

[3:00:01] I This is This is what we should be

[3:00:04] doing, everybody. I think this is good

[3:00:05] for us. I I like this. I'm going to

[3:00:08] lose. I get it. Um that's typical. It's

[3:00:12] fine. Um what I'm wondering is if would

[3:00:16] we make a different decision? So I I

[3:00:18] let's let's say Jesse's

[3:00:21] he makes a motion and it moves forward.

[3:00:23] In the interim it shows on a map as an

[3:00:26] APA. We're going to treat it like it's

[3:00:28] agg. Can we say that? Can we say that in

[3:00:31] the interim

[3:00:33] between now and some future state that

[3:00:34] the landowner wants to to do something

[3:00:36] different? We're going to treat it as a

[3:00:39] >> I like that because I think there's a

[3:00:41] concern where when you're putting

[3:00:42] together a plan, you're saying at

[3:00:44] buildout, this is what we're going to

[3:00:46] have. Well, what if this piece that

[3:00:49] we've designated as highdensity

[3:00:51] residential,

[3:00:53] >> which is in an APA today, never actually

[3:00:56] becomes highdensity residential. How do

[3:00:59] we then plan, you know, the future

[3:01:01] accordingly with

[3:01:04] where we've designated it something that

[3:01:06] will never come to pass?

[3:01:08] >> Is that now taking up that allocation

[3:01:10] for, you know, removing it from some

[3:01:13] other place in the city? because we've

[3:01:14] said right here it's going to be this

[3:01:17] when it may never be. Is Is that kind of

[3:01:19] your

[3:01:19] >> That's kind of my Yeah, that's my

[3:01:21] concern. And and I think additionally to

[3:01:22] that, um the property next to this APA

[3:01:28] that we're going to, you know, treat

[3:01:30] like a is it

[3:01:33] would we make a different land use

[3:01:34] decision on that property knowing that a is going to be there forever? Is

[3:01:39] it to Lisa Olsson's point lower density

[3:01:42] and then it increases density as you

[3:01:44] move away from the farm?

[3:01:46] >> There there's where it comes in my

[3:01:47] question. I think we need to be

[3:01:48] cleareyed and and clear voiced.

[3:01:52] If that's our intention, you are making

[3:01:56] some substantial

[3:01:59] uh decisions to people that aren't in

[3:02:03] farming.

[3:02:04] >> For sure. Absolutely. And and you're

[3:02:06] making it you're making that case

[3:02:08] because you're saying, "Well, there's a

[3:02:10] farm next to you that wants to be a farm

[3:02:11] forever."

[3:02:13] Well, we can drive up and down the state

[3:02:15] and see commercial buildings and

[3:02:19] restaurants and grocery stores right

[3:02:21] next to active farming.

[3:02:23] >> Absolutely.

[3:02:23] >> All over.

[3:02:25] And I think if we made that decision, if

[3:02:28] we made decisions like that in our

[3:02:29] current general plan on a consistent

[3:02:32] basis,

[3:02:34] that number we just touted of what we

[3:02:37] get to use to build rec centers and fund

[3:02:40] cops and everything else is a third of

[3:02:43] it.

[3:02:44] >> For sure. Yep. I agree with you, Mike.

[3:02:46] Um, we do that in the river bottoms.

[3:02:50] We say because of your general plan,

[3:02:52] landowner, you're not going to develop.

[3:02:56] >> Sure.

[3:02:56] >> So the property taxes in the river

[3:02:58] bottoms are gone.

[3:02:59] >> Sure.

[3:02:59] >> We do that all the time. I'm not arguing

[3:03:01] that it's the right thing and and I

[3:03:03] think that it's very tricky down here

[3:03:05] because there is at least like if you

[3:03:08] looked out there

[3:03:11] 100 years, you could see potentially

[3:03:14] Leland developing and not the river

[3:03:16] bottoms. I totally understand that part.

[3:03:18] And so I think it's easier to say in

[3:03:20] that area that we're making decisions

[3:03:24] that affect

[3:03:27] property owners bottom line because it's

[3:03:29] lower density growing to higher density

[3:03:31] or whatever. I totally understand that.

[3:03:33] is the challenge of

[3:03:35] >> and those two the general plan

[3:03:36] >> those two maybe apples and

[3:03:40] oranges or or apples and what's close to

[3:03:43] an apple. I don't know.

[3:03:44] >> It's it's not a direct correlation.

[3:03:46] There's farm ground and there's farm

[3:03:48] ground and then there's a freeway and

[3:03:51] there's not a freeway and and then

[3:03:54] there's

[3:03:55] >> Yeah. Then then there's services and a

[3:03:57] flood plane, you know, and then there's

[3:04:00] utilities and no utilities.

[3:04:01] >> Sure.

[3:04:02] >> And so so

[3:04:04] >> the chances of

[3:04:05] >> Yes, I'm with you. Geographically, I

[3:04:08] would hate to say I mean south of

[3:04:10] Arrowhead Lane in Leland

[3:04:14] is Salem and the property owners there.

[3:04:17] are some of the same property

[3:04:18] owners on the north side and on the west

[3:04:20] side. A lot of the same names.

[3:04:22] >> And that ground is

[3:04:25] graded and ready and saying come one,

[3:04:29] >> come all for sure.

[3:04:30] >> That is not next to the river bottoms.

[3:04:32] >> Nope.

[3:04:32] >> Anywhere. And it's not going to be there

[3:04:34] for a long long time. You have so many

[3:04:36] people that have to get together and

[3:04:38] say, "Here's how much we're going to put

[3:04:40] up to get these roads, sewer, water,

[3:04:42] power, and everything through here." And

[3:04:44] it's such a huge lift where

[3:04:47] some of that stuff's already out there

[3:04:48] for everybody out there.

[3:04:49] >> If we if we general plan the river

[3:04:51] bottoms lots, all of that would happen

[3:04:54] >> 100%

[3:04:55] >> tomorrow.

[3:04:55] >> 100%. And no one's that no one is asking

[3:04:59] for it.

[3:05:01] >> Yes and no. I disagree that no one's

[3:05:03] asking it.

[3:05:04] >> Yes. One property owner.

[3:05:05] >> I think there I think there are other

[3:05:07] additional factors besides general

[3:05:09] planning with the river bottoms that

[3:05:11] leaves.

[3:05:12] The fact that it's located where it is

[3:05:14] and historically the flood plane and

[3:05:16] everything else.

[3:05:18] >> There's there's more than just

[3:05:21] >> general planning and coordinated.

[3:05:22] >> I get you. And I'm not again public not

[3:05:25] arguing to fill up the river bottom

[3:05:27] homes. I'm not I'm saying that we make

[3:05:30] those type of decisions in a general

[3:05:33] plan all the time.

[3:05:34] >> We do.

[3:05:35] >> We say we generally want this type of

[3:05:38] views here, here, here, and here.

[3:05:40] >> Yeah.

[3:05:40] >> And it it changes the way the city

[3:05:43] develops. It changes the property values

[3:05:45] at times. It changes a bunch of things.

[3:05:47] >> Yeah. You you based on one,

[3:05:50] >> you do it all the time.

[3:05:51] >> One general plan or one zone change. You

[3:05:53] could make one pro because we had this

[3:05:54] issue on South Lane in town where you

[3:05:58] had a property owner on the north side

[3:05:59] of the road that was able to develop

[3:06:01] made lots of money. Property owner on

[3:06:04] the south side which is in the county

[3:06:05] not in Spanish Fork wanted to develop

[3:06:08] but for whatever reason you know the

[3:06:11] city didn't move in that direction. They

[3:06:13] sold their house. They did not make a

[3:06:15] lot of money. I'm sure they made money

[3:06:17] but probably not as much as the property

[3:06:19] on the north.

[3:06:20] >> That happens all the time. I remember on

[3:06:22] planning commission with John Mendenhal

[3:06:25] him often saying to property owners that

[3:06:29] >> now he's quoting you

[3:06:30] >> man if my house hadn't if my house or

[3:06:33] property hadn't been in Palmyra but had

[3:06:35] been closer to this or that I would have

[3:06:37] gotten a lot more for it

[3:06:40] >> but

[3:06:40] >> location matter

[3:06:41] >> um location absolutely matters for sure.

[3:06:44] >> Yeah.

[3:06:45] And we don't and and I think I mean I think our all of our

[3:06:48] documents and and this updated document

[3:06:51] should still reflect no farm is long as

[3:06:54] you own a farm we don't think you need a

[3:06:55] lot of permission from us to do that.

[3:06:58] Let's let's make marks on on a map if if

[3:07:01] that's if that's what you want in some

[3:07:03] way. But it would be a u uh a disservice

[3:07:09] to our general plan, I think, to say on

[3:07:13] an exit, we're not planning for

[3:07:15] something else going there.

[3:07:18] >> Um

[3:07:19] is not on the exit. By the way,

[3:07:20] >> I'll be honest with you, Shane. I think APAs

[3:07:26] to be honest have been overused in our

[3:07:28] county in the sense that

[3:07:31] in my mind a is 40,000 acres up in box

[3:07:35] elder

[3:07:37] or

[3:07:38] >> data center on top of that

[3:07:39] >> an actual an actual

[3:07:43] >> fullon a production where you're you're

[3:07:47] >> you know if you're growing hay to sell

[3:07:49] to your neighbors you're farming But I

[3:07:52] don't know that I would consider that a

[3:07:53] and why that gets protected.

[3:07:57] People smarter than me know and

[3:07:58] understand that. But in my opinion, I

[3:08:00] just feel like APA like a protection and

[3:08:04] what people consider a is maybe not what

[3:08:08] those were intended for.

[3:08:12] Gotcha.

[3:08:14] We can

[3:08:16] It sounds like Jesse has a solid plan.

[3:08:20] Jess, you want to make a motion and move

[3:08:21] this thing forward?

[3:08:23] >> Well, are we

[3:08:24] >> You would be a motion direct staff

[3:08:26] because I don't You'd probably want to

[3:08:28] see some text.

[3:08:29] >> Yeah, I'd like to see it changed and

[3:08:30] then I think I I would be ready to vote

[3:08:32] after that. We see

[3:08:34] >> I think this is my perspective. We

[3:08:37] I've made a bunch of comments to Dave

[3:08:39] and Dave and and Seth. Some of them get

[3:08:42] implemented, some of them don't for good

[3:08:44] reasons. I'm not complaining to you

[3:08:46] guys. Problem the challenges. Some of

[3:08:49] them have been implemented though,

[3:08:50] right? Through this process.

[3:08:52] >> Oh, absolutely. Yeah,

[3:08:53] >> I checked one off just today because

[3:08:54] Dave went over some language that I we

[3:08:58] were very clear on a stationary plan was

[3:09:00] proposed and page 18 does a really good

[3:09:03] job of putting the clarifies around

[3:09:05] clarifiers around it, but then we made

[3:09:07] it more permanent as we move the

[3:09:08] document. And he pulled up the thing and

[3:09:10] said, "Hey, we're going to change it."

[3:09:11] Absolutely, they've made changes. Don't

[3:09:13] get me wrong. Part of their challenge

[3:09:15] though is I'm one vote and what do they

[3:09:18] change based on my one vote? So what I

[3:09:20] would love to hear is Jesse, you say

[3:09:23] this is the direction I want to go.

[3:09:24] Whether we vote or not, you get buy in

[3:09:26] from three of five

[3:09:30] and they go make some changes.

[3:09:32] Otherwise, it's your idea and then it's

[3:09:34] Kevin's idea and then it's my idea. Like

[3:09:36] we got to give them some good solid

[3:09:38] direction from the majority of the

[3:09:40] people sitting up here.

[3:09:41] >> How hard is it? I I mean again I think

[3:09:43] you're talking about hash marks on

[3:09:47] >> are you are you talking about hash marks

[3:09:48] on a lot of property down there

[3:09:50] >> well it's whatever the APA button was

[3:09:52] right

[3:09:54] >> you turn that back on

[3:09:56] >> it seems like it's

[3:09:57] >> you know I mean

[3:09:58] >> and I don't know how you

[3:10:00] to be honest like I think it's going to

[3:10:02] be a little bit more work than us

[3:10:03] pushing the button oh to make it

[3:10:06] whatever the color works because we've

[3:10:08] got to be able to see both still right

[3:10:10] >> so I think that there is a little bit

[3:10:11] more work there than just hey it's going

[3:10:14] to happen. I think there's going to be a

[3:10:15] little

[3:10:15] >> some text of why it's there. Why is

[3:10:17] there this hash

[3:10:18] >> which I think if you're going to do the

[3:10:19] text you're going to explain it you're

[3:10:21] going to explain it to that many

[3:10:23] property owners in those in those APA

[3:10:26] areas that hey it's not green now it's

[3:10:29] kind of green with some crosses in it.

[3:10:31] >> It wasn't green before.

[3:10:33] >> It's in on page 12. It's green.

[3:10:35] >> We could we if you want to keep it

[3:10:36] supplemental pages you can keep it

[3:10:37] supplemental pages. I'm saying I like

[3:10:39] the overlay

[3:10:40] >> put the overlays together though

[3:10:41] regardless of how we're doing this.

[3:10:44] >> So are you proposing that you you take

[3:10:46] page 12 basically and overlay it even

[3:10:49] though it's already here to understand

[3:10:52] >> or you keep APA. So, you've got page 12,

[3:10:54] you keep 17, but then you've got an

[3:10:56] additional one that shows

[3:10:58] >> I don't think it hurts the document to

[3:11:00] create another map that shows the APA's

[3:11:03] overlaid underneath

[3:11:05] >> the layers of

[3:11:08] Yeah, I think I think I don't think that

[3:11:09] hurts.

[3:11:10] >> That that doesn't take a that doesn't

[3:11:12] take time to study it.

[3:11:13] >> And so, I guess the question Yeah. So,

[3:11:15] what Shane is saying is is just put some

[3:11:17] text with all of you guys right now seem

[3:11:19] like you're saying, I like that.

[3:11:21] >> We're hearing you. question I've got,

[3:11:22] Seth, then is if we're looking at the

[3:11:24] interactive map and you click just

[3:11:26] general plan, are you going to see the

[3:11:28] overlay?

[3:11:29] >> No, you'll have to click the other

[3:11:30] layer, but it's right there. It's a

[3:11:32] layer that's in the map system.

[3:11:34] >> Yep. It's It's not hard to do. It's just

[3:11:37] a layer,

[3:11:38] >> right?

[3:11:38] >> Click it.

[3:11:40] >> Okay.

[3:11:41] >> So, you're saying we cannot approve

[3:11:43] anything today. We have to give you

[3:11:44] direction and then this will come back

[3:11:47] to us again.

[3:11:47] >> Yeah. Because

[3:11:49] >> I'm not saying I'm not saying that

[3:11:51] either. You guys, you guys decide that.

[3:11:52] >> My question with the approval is if

[3:11:55] there's one approval, there's one motion

[3:11:57] we're making tonight, right? How do we

[3:11:59] because I don't feel like we're done

[3:12:01] discussing the general plan. I think

[3:12:02] there's some other things that we need

[3:12:04] to bring up. So, this is one item of the

[3:12:08] motion that we need to make eventually

[3:12:11] or do we

[3:12:13] suggest staff take this back and do

[3:12:16] something with it and then we come back

[3:12:18] with an actual motion once this has been

[3:12:20] applied to it? I don't Yeah,

[3:12:23] >> I would suspect that there are a couple

[3:12:25] of things that we're going to debate and

[3:12:29] give staff direction on so that it comes

[3:12:31] back in a format that we can take a vote

[3:12:34] on.

[3:12:34] >> Right.

[3:12:36] It's my opinion that staff needs clear

[3:12:39] direction from at least three of the

[3:12:41] five voting members on what to change in

[3:12:44] the map. So, while it might not be a he

[3:12:48] makes a motion and we vote on it, it

[3:12:50] maybe it maybe it is maybe it is Jesse's

[3:12:53] motion is to do the hashing and we vote

[3:12:56] on it. They have good clear direction,

[3:12:58] but that's just a piece of the map. We

[3:13:00] haven't piece of the overall document.

[3:13:02] We haven't approved it. But the

[3:13:05] challenge has been from day one there

[3:13:07] are five opinions, six opinions about

[3:13:10] what to do wherever

[3:13:12] and how do we res get resolution if we don't give them direction and vote on

[3:13:17] I don't understand how that would be. I

[3:13:18] think that's the problem of maybe why

[3:13:20] we're maybe to this point, right?

[3:13:22] There's I think there's some frustration

[3:13:24] um probably from city staff's side more

[3:13:26] than any not they're not going to say

[3:13:28] that but because we haven't given those

[3:13:30] clear direction because we haven't had

[3:13:32] this conversation in in a way that we

[3:13:34] can actually debate some of those things

[3:13:36] whether that's our that could be our

[3:13:38] fault that could be I I don't

[3:13:39] >> this could be the time when we needed to

[3:13:41] >> but this might be what we need right and

[3:13:42] so I do think there's a few more things

[3:13:43] that need to happen I don't know that

[3:13:45] there's a ton

[3:13:46] >> but I do think there's I think there's

[3:13:47] still some that are going to take

[3:13:48] probably the same amount of time right

[3:13:51] >> um So I and to Seth's point I think and

[3:13:55] maybe we need to be clear is if are we

[3:13:57] all or how many of us are on board with

[3:13:59] that direction because then that's the

[3:14:02] direction that city staff is going to

[3:14:03] go. I don't know. I don't know where

[3:14:05] everyone else is at. I've obviously been

[3:14:06] clear where I'm at.

[3:14:07] >> So and where you're at is you want an

[3:14:10] actual general plan that shows shows

[3:14:12] that shows the overall.

[3:14:13] >> Yeah. And then you can have separate

[3:14:14] maps that show the other stuff, right?

[3:14:16] Like in and I think keeping it. So

[3:14:17] you're adding additional map that shows

[3:14:19] it and then give it give it some text to

[3:14:22] Shane's point so that people understand

[3:14:23] why it's there.

[3:14:24] >> So not just a clicking of the two maps

[3:14:27] that are available, but you want the

[3:14:28] general plan map to actually show

[3:14:31] >> correct the overlay. Correct. Is what

[3:14:32] you're asking.

[3:14:33] >> Yeah.

[3:14:33] >> If I could offer what I was hearing,

[3:14:36] >> you could make a motion to continue the

[3:14:39] item but with direction to staff on make

[3:14:42] that map that you described the text.

[3:14:44] what other other issues you still think

[3:14:46] need work and then see if that motion

[3:14:50] passes. If that motion passes then we

[3:14:51] have clear direction from majority of

[3:14:53] the council

[3:14:55] >> because how do how do you do that Seth?

[3:14:57] Because without an actual designation in

[3:15:00] the general plan,

[3:15:02] if you click the general plan map just

[3:15:04] like you did, it's going to show just

[3:15:06] the general plan. So

[3:15:07] >> So I guess for me it's

[3:15:10] I'm going to use my teenage friends

[3:15:13] language. It's not that deep. Um, we can

[3:15:17] have the land use map and we have the

[3:15:20] APA map and it's just layered. And if

[3:15:23] you're going to be on the internet, you

[3:15:26] just click the layers and turn them on

[3:15:27] and you can see them all in the document

[3:15:29] where you don't have the ability to

[3:15:31] it's, you know, it's not living and

[3:15:32] breathing. We can create a layered map

[3:15:34] that shows it. It just has them in an

[3:15:37] image like this. This is the old general

[3:15:39] plan, but in an image that's like this

[3:15:42] where it has the the APAs underneath it.

[3:15:47] So, and so you can see them and we just

[3:15:50] print that and we just put that in here

[3:15:51] and identify. This is how it looks

[3:15:53] overlaid the APAs with the land use

[3:15:56] designations.

[3:15:58] >> But the people you're talking about

[3:15:59] coming and approaching these people are are not just looking for a hard

[3:16:03] printed map. They they do get online and

[3:16:06] can click around and find

[3:16:07] >> and they can they can turn on they can

[3:16:08] turn on any of all the layers that they

[3:16:10] want. Very functional.

[3:16:12] >> Five years from now are we going to be

[3:16:13] using a printed document? We're going to

[3:16:15] be

[3:16:16] >> We currently are.

[3:16:18] >> We are.

[3:16:19] >> All right. I hope so because David I

[3:16:22] know has put a lot of work into it.

[3:16:24] >> Yeah.

[3:16:26] >> So are we good to move on and do you

[3:16:28] want me to make a motion?

[3:16:30] >> Um I'm a no.

[3:16:33] >> Okay. You're fine. I'm I'll just make

[3:16:34] the motion. So, I move that we table the

[3:16:37] general plan discussion

[3:16:40] >> with the direct or we going to go with

[3:16:43] more tonight.

[3:16:44] >> Yeah. Are we done?

[3:16:45] >> I you guys

[3:16:46] >> move on to the next one. Come back to

[3:16:47] it.

[3:16:48] >> Okay.

[3:16:49] >> Never mind.

[3:16:49] >> D.

[3:16:50] >> Yeah. Sorry. I

[3:16:51] >> I thought we were moving.

[3:16:52] >> I think there's Yeah, I guess I don't

[3:16:54] know. Are we done with general plan

[3:16:56] topics tonight and we're ready to keep

[3:16:58] going with the agenda or we got more we

[3:16:59] want to talk about with the general plan

[3:17:02] cuz I'd like to talk about stationary

[3:17:04] and west of I5

[3:17:05] >> do it.

[3:17:05] >> I think we need to talk more but I think

[3:17:07] we need to agree on this area. Are we do

[3:17:10] we have have we given enough guidance?

[3:17:14] >> I think what Van was saying is get all

[3:17:16] of the issues that we talk about

[3:17:19] on the table and make a motion to

[3:17:21] continue and then staff go do this this

[3:17:23] and this and this. And one of those this

[3:17:25] is

[3:17:27] >> is this

[3:17:27] >> is that?

[3:17:28] >> Yes.

[3:17:28] >> That's what I mean. So, should we at

[3:17:30] least make sure we have four or three of

[3:17:33] us?

[3:17:34] >> I think you have three.

[3:17:35] >> Okay.

[3:17:37] >> You have your direction, correct?

[3:17:39] >> On this one item. Yeah.

[3:17:40] >> Yes. Okay.

[3:17:41] >> I I will probably summarize in the end

[3:17:43] to make sure that I'm there. Yeah.

[3:17:47] >> But there still needs to be a motion.

[3:17:48] >> Correct. Right.

[3:17:49] >> And and so what I'm going to do

[3:17:51] >> why we can't just say

[3:17:51] >> why not make it clear.

[3:17:53] >> Yeah. Well, I'm not ready for a motion.

[3:17:55] They're not ready for a motion. What

[3:17:56] they're saying,

[3:17:56] >> why can't we get take a

[3:17:59] why can't we have a motion directing

[3:18:01] staff to do something?

[3:18:03] >> You can

[3:18:04] >> seven times.

[3:18:04] >> You can do that. Absolutely.

[3:18:06] >> Then then we would be clear each and

[3:18:07] every time.

[3:18:08] >> Yeah, you can totally do that.

[3:18:11] >> I move to direct.

[3:18:13] >> It's not on the agenda.

[3:18:14] >> This is general plans.

[3:18:15] >> This is general plan.

[3:18:16] >> Absolutely. It's within the

[3:18:18] >> It's not a resolution. It's not. It's

[3:18:20] just a unified moment where you say I So

[3:18:23] I'm going to speak as if I was Jesse

[3:18:26] because apparently it's Jesse's motion.

[3:18:28] I move to direct staff to add a map to

[3:18:31] the general plan document that is a

[3:18:33] layered map showing the APA's and the

[3:18:36] land use designations in one image.

[3:18:38] >> Correct.

[3:18:38] >> Well done, Jesse.

[3:18:40] >> Thank you.

[3:18:40] >> And then you guys

[3:18:41] >> with some text to back it up.

[3:18:42] >> Yeah. With some with some explanatory

[3:18:45] text that tells the story. And then you

[3:18:48] guys say yes. Yes. Yes. No, because you

[3:18:50] said no. Yeah, you said no. I I can read

[3:18:52] and I listen

[3:18:53] >> or listen maybe.

[3:18:55] >> And then I'm I move on and then when

[3:18:57] we're done, you either say now that

[3:18:59] we've had that direction, I say we table

[3:19:01] this until a future meeting and then we

[3:19:03] table the item. Yes. Are you good with

[3:19:05] that?

[3:19:06] >> And then we're going on.

[3:19:08] >> Yeah, I think that's what I was saying.

[3:19:09] I think you can write these down.

[3:19:11] >> Shane has is that do it all in one

[3:19:14] motion. Landon's going to say no because

[3:19:16] of number four. Jesse's gonna say no

[3:19:18] because of number three. Kevin's gonna

[3:19:20] say no because of

[3:19:21] >> finally agree on something.

[3:19:22] >> I do.

[3:19:22] >> Yeah.

[3:19:23] >> So, this

[3:19:25] I would entertain a motion a motion for

[3:19:29] clear direction to staff on the specific

[3:19:33] piece that you want to discuss. I move

[3:19:36] to direct staff, which sounds really

[3:19:38] funny, to create a map with the general

[3:19:41] plan and the APA overlay in one map with

[3:19:45] text to back it up.

[3:19:50] >> Okay, I think they know what we're

[3:19:51] talking about. We need to vote.

[3:19:53] >> Everybody got that?

[3:19:54] >> Okay. Motion made by Councilman Carden.

[3:19:57] Is there a second?

[3:19:58] >> I'll second.

[3:19:59] >> Second by Councilman Oiler. It's a roll

[3:20:01] call vote. Councilman Oiler,

[3:20:03] >> yes.

[3:20:03] >> Councilman Carden,

[3:20:04] >> yes. Councilman Tuk,

[3:20:06] >> yes.

[3:20:06] >> Councilman Marshall,

[3:20:07] >> no.

[3:20:08] >> Councilwoman Beck,

[3:20:09] >> yes.

[3:20:11] >> That's not an item, but that's that

[3:20:13] direction has been given.

[3:20:14] >> We didn't vote on it.

[3:20:15] >> Clear as mine.

[3:20:16] >> Okay. We didn't vote on it, but we voted

[3:20:18] on it.

[3:20:18] >> I lost. And I think that is that's makes

[3:20:21] me way more comfortable

[3:20:24] move being able to resolve these things

[3:20:26] as we move forward.

[3:20:27] >> Something you're used to. Keep

[3:20:29] >> I operate uncomfortable.

[3:20:31] >> Can we address any other things you're

[3:20:33] used to? you're used to losing. Just

[3:20:34] talk to Gary

[3:20:35] >> if there are things we can we can jump

[3:20:37] to we

[3:20:38] >> I just figured if we're in that area

[3:20:40] down by Leland

[3:20:41] >> keep talking about it.

[3:20:42] >> Yes, I have if that's okay.

[3:20:45] Um, I know they talked about this in

[3:20:48] commission

[3:20:50] meeting and on 9inth South there's a lot

[3:20:53] of requests and the commissioner

[3:20:54] Woodhouse brought it up to instead of

[3:20:56] having medium density on 9inth South to

[3:20:59] have it low density

[3:21:02] >> north of 9inth South. Correct. both

[3:21:05] sides. From what I understand,

[3:21:10] » the it sounds like the concerns are that

[3:21:14] residents at this moment in time could

[3:21:16] build town homes. Is that right? South.

[3:21:21] >> So, it's general. It's not zoned. So,

[3:21:23] it's

[3:21:24] >> Yeah, it's not zoned, but I mean, they

[3:21:25] could they could ask for it and it would

[3:21:27] comply with the general plan.

[3:21:28] >> Eight acre, eight units per acre, right?

[3:21:30] >> Up to. So it sounds like they're they're

[3:21:33] concerned in that area. So to just keep

[3:21:35] them as is so someone doesn't come in

[3:21:36] and start making town homes or adding

[3:21:39] homes, they would love just a little

[3:21:40] area right there on 9inth South to be

[3:21:42] low density.

[3:21:43] >> So AS is would because AS is is what's

[3:21:46] on the map right now, which is medium

[3:21:48] density,

[3:21:49] >> right?

[3:21:50] >> Yeah. Nothing changed there.

[3:21:52] >> So I guess the only thought I would have

[3:21:54] is to take the property north, which

[3:21:58] surrounds the river. I would I would

[3:22:03] my thoughts are any property around the

[3:22:05] river I'd rather have a low density

[3:22:06] property than a bunch of houses close to

[3:22:08] the river. But I say that we just

[3:22:10] approved a whole bunch of houses.

[3:22:14] >> Yes, you did.

[3:22:15] >> We very

[3:22:16] >> He did a He did a one-off.

[3:22:21] » Dang it. I hate when my words come back

[3:22:23] to me.

[3:22:24] I just wanted to bring it up because it

[3:22:26] was a comment that Commissioner

[3:22:27] Woodhouse made and I just wanted to make

[3:22:29] sure we address it.

[3:22:30] >> Do you support that comment?

[3:22:32] >> I think I do, but I would love to hear

[3:22:34] what you guys say. If you're all a No.

[3:22:36] >> So then

[3:22:37] >> then you will change.

[3:22:39] >> Maybe I'll be ashamed and I'll suggest

[3:22:41] it and you can all vote it down.

[3:22:43] >> I think if you suggested it,

[3:22:45] >> but I'd love a discussion. Does it make

[3:22:46] sense to do low density?

[3:22:49] >> Yeah.

[3:22:51] Can we pull it up on the big map? Is

[3:22:52] that okay to look at that Jack or

[3:22:54] >> do we have the proposed general plan?

[3:22:57] >> It's

[3:22:57] >> in lie of

[3:22:58] >> do we have it in the GIS the proposed

[3:23:01] somewhere that we can access? I don't

[3:23:03] feel like I feel like that's behind kind

[3:23:04] of the beta door.

[3:23:07] >> Okay.

[3:23:08] >> Beta door.

[3:23:09] >> Yeah. So just go to the document.

[3:23:10] >> This is on page 39.

[3:23:12] >> Yeah. Just go to the document and we can

[3:23:14] zoom into where Councilwoman Beck is

[3:23:16] talking RR just for

[3:23:20] >> it's good to know.

[3:23:22] Thanks for that.

[3:23:23] >> 30 something.

[3:23:25] >> I'll tell you when to stop.

[3:23:26] >> But it's not yet.

[3:23:27] >> 17.

[3:23:30] >> General go down to the targeted area.

[3:23:33] >> It's not changing.

[3:23:34] >> No amies.

[3:23:36] >> It's why those people why the land

[3:23:38] owners have come in here saying, "Hey,

[3:23:40] the general plan is almost

[3:23:42] >> medium density residential."

[3:23:44] >> Correct. We're we own this ground. It's

[3:23:51] >> uh

[3:23:52] are our our rural residential now would

[3:23:55] like to put plans in front of you to go

[3:23:58] medium density residential like like

[3:24:00] they have I mean they've brought those

[3:24:01] plans in front of us

[3:24:07] » what do you guys think

[3:24:09] >> I

[3:24:09] >> worth it or

[3:24:10] >> so I like the you've got LDR to the left

[3:24:14] you've got LDR to the right above 900

[3:24:18] South you've got MDR and MDR. The MDR

[3:24:21] west of I-15

[3:24:25] has been underwater recently and so that

[3:24:28] one I would be concerned about putting a

[3:24:30] lot of homes on. So that one I would be

[3:24:32] more comfortable with an LDR. And then

[3:24:36] if you were to just tie in the north of

[3:24:38] 900 South is LDR as well. Then you've

[3:24:40] got that whole strip which is LDR

[3:24:44] >> low density. I don't

[3:24:46] land owners and developers will talk to

[3:24:48] you different about why if it's

[3:24:51] underwater, why it shouldn't be LDR,

[3:24:55] >> why it should be more medium or high

[3:24:57] density instead because of the cost to

[3:24:59] fix the problem. Is that why or what?

[3:25:02] >> Low density residential. Where do you

[3:25:04] see low density residential inside the

[3:25:06] city?

[3:25:08] >> All along the river,

[3:25:10] >> but not in the flood plane of the, you

[3:25:11] know, not where they can dig basement,

[3:25:13] right?

[3:25:14] >> Yeah. Right. all like by the sports

[3:25:16] park,

[3:25:17] >> right? So they can dig basement there.

[3:25:20] They would they would tell you what

[3:25:21] Kevin's saying that's underwater over

[3:25:23] there. The water table

[3:25:25] >> is different there. It would

[3:25:26] >> single families without basement is not

[3:25:29] realistic is what you're saying.

[3:25:32] >> Um which makes sense.

[3:25:33] >> Yeah. Which I mean you can ask somebody

[3:25:36] that builds for a living but they're

[3:25:38] going to tell you it's that's a tough product. That's why they're that's

[3:25:42] part of the reason why they come to you

[3:25:44] to say in these places that are a little

[3:25:46] wetter that the water table doesn't

[3:25:48] allow

[3:25:50] basement that it's more medium density

[3:25:53] residential. It's commercial stuff. It's

[3:25:55] industrial stuff. It's slab on grade

[3:25:57] type things you can do.

[3:25:57] >> Makes more sense to see now you're not

[3:26:00] doing a basement.

[3:26:00] >> Yeah.

[3:26:03] I I I listen to Commissioner

[3:26:05] Woodhouse comments of where he lives and talking to a couple of people. Um,

[3:26:11] again, I think it's I think it's some

[3:26:12] colors on a map that if he if it makes

[3:26:16] more comfortable, it's it's his property

[3:26:18] and his direct neighbors property. And I

[3:26:20] don't I've never none of them have ever

[3:26:21] reached out to me and said, "Hey, here's

[3:26:23] the high density, you know, or the

[3:26:25] medium density, you know, plan that I

[3:26:28] want to talk to you about." Um, I think

[3:26:32] going south of there,

[3:26:34] >> we've seen plans recently.

[3:26:35] >> We've seen plans. we're going towards an

[3:26:37] exit. That's just starts to smack

[3:26:40] different to me of of of

[3:26:42] the land owners down there. Uh I think

[3:26:46] we'd need to have some decent reasoning

[3:26:48] of

[3:26:49] >> Yeah. And I don't think he he doesn't

[3:26:51] want to move or he's not suggesting all

[3:26:53] of it. MDR.

[3:26:56] >> Yeah.

[3:26:57] >> LDR. Sorry.

[3:26:58] >> We've got the ESA just north of there.

[3:27:01] How did we determine what is

[3:27:04] environmentally sensitive area and how

[3:27:06] did how do we come to that conclusion?

[3:27:09] >> So David, you might be the best one to

[3:27:11] speak to this that's here. I'll say

[3:27:13] something and then if why don't you fill

[3:27:14] in some of the coloring here. Um the

[3:27:17] blue is

[3:27:20] less developable I think than ESA.

[3:27:24] Um

[3:27:25] >> the light blue is the the floodway.

[3:27:28] >> Yeah. Uh and so you can't do anything

[3:27:30] inside the blue. The river itself is not

[3:27:32] that wide in that point in that point

[3:27:34] where you're seeing

[3:27:37] >> uh on the west of the freeway, right?

[3:27:39] The river channel itself isn't that

[3:27:41] wide, but it is when the river is high.

[3:27:46] Um and then the ESA, go ahead and speak

[3:27:49] to that what what you know, David.

[3:27:50] >> Yeah. And the intent was always to um

[3:27:54] identify places where development would

[3:27:57] be very difficult or very expensive

[3:28:01] um due to natural the natural landscape

[3:28:05] whether it's whether it's the flood

[3:28:06] plane, whether it's a steep slope,

[3:28:08] whether it's whatever the case may be.

[3:28:11] >> Okay.

[3:28:12] >> So there's more than just flood plane

[3:28:14] issues with ESA. Otherwise, you would

[3:28:16] just designate a flood plane,

[3:28:19] >> right? Well, the floodway is is that's

[3:28:21] basically there's nothing that can go

[3:28:23] there.

[3:28:25] The the ESA is is more identifying other

[3:28:29] areas that are kind of beyond that

[3:28:32] floodway that also would be very

[3:28:35] difficult or expensive to develop.

[3:28:38] >> Yeah. And I need to point out floodway

[3:28:39] and flood plane are very different

[3:28:41] words.

[3:28:42] >> Yeah. And so an ESA can be inside of the

[3:28:46] flood plane.

[3:28:48] Um, but it is not the flood way. The

[3:28:52] flood way is the flood way, which is the

[3:28:54] blue river.

[3:28:55] >> Okay.

[3:28:55] >> Kind of thing. The ESA, I think, in in

[3:28:58] this case, is

[3:29:00] I don't know if it's delineated or not,

[3:29:01] or if we just know that it's I don't

[3:29:03] know why this particular parcel is

[3:29:05] designated ESA, but

[3:29:06] >> it's always underwater.

[3:29:07] >> While this is up, can where's Center

[3:29:09] Street just is it?

[3:29:11] >> Zoom out.

[3:29:12] >> No, don't zoom out because I think it's

[3:29:14] the very very top, right?

[3:29:15] >> Yeah. Top right. Why is there a Why is

[3:29:17] there a next to an interchange?

[3:29:22] » Not an interchange yet, is it?

[3:29:25] >> I I think I can speak to that.

[3:29:27] >> It's the most approved future thing we

[3:29:30] have.

[3:29:31] >> Why are we Why would we want a there?

[3:29:36] >> I can speak to that. David, do you want

[3:29:37] to speak to that? That's the the Larsson

[3:29:40] family farm area, the Rex Larson family

[3:29:42] farm area, right?

[3:29:43] >> Yeah. I don't know if Corey can address

[3:29:45] it more, but I I my understanding is

[3:29:47] that the flood plane there is much more

[3:29:50] uh extensive and more difficult to

[3:29:52] develop than it would be in other areas

[3:29:54] along the floodway

[3:29:56] >> all the way to Center Street.

[3:29:58] >> It's not

[3:30:00] Yeah, it's not Center Street. That's

[3:30:02] what is that first South?

[3:30:04] >> Yeah,

[3:30:04] >> that's First South. The one that borders

[3:30:06] South

[3:30:08] Yeah, it's a block off of Center. one of

[3:30:10] the most major interchanges we have

[3:30:12] >> or will have

[3:30:12] >> that we're going to put going to land

[3:30:14] we're going to general plan a

[3:30:18] >> they've asked for that correct Seth

[3:30:20] >> the family

[3:30:21] >> yeah like they're planning on

[3:30:23] >> so have others so

[3:30:25] >> please define for me when we're going to

[3:30:28] say yes to an ask and no to an ask

[3:30:32] >> I mean others have asked Richard's gonna

[3:30:35] ask

[3:30:38] when do we today. We want this because

[3:30:41] it's the best future use of Spanish

[3:30:44] fork.

[3:30:45] >> If it needs to be ESA, then that makes

[3:30:47] sense to make it ESA. But if you

[3:30:50] >> Yeah. Y a in a place that is very very

[3:30:53] close to a future interchange and not

[3:30:55] even I mean I'm going to have a

[3:30:58] >> I'm not going to speak in oneoffs.

[3:31:01] I hope not. Um, when I talk about a

[3:31:04] station that is proposed, there is a not

[3:31:07] a proposed interchange, a

[3:31:09] environmentally approved interchange at

[3:31:11] Center Street, right? That's that's a

[3:31:12] given. Now, we're just waiting for

[3:31:13] funding. So, in a given like that, it

[3:31:16] seems odd that that's a place that we

[3:31:19] would want a

[3:31:22] >> right next door to the station

[3:31:24] >> to a station to an interchange. like

[3:31:27] >> that just doesn't just it just

[3:31:29] >> I'm confused as how we're playing how we

[3:31:32] are

[3:31:33] making decision they seem inconsistent I

[3:31:36] guess is my point

[3:31:37] >> I think the flood plane is and and maybe

[3:31:40] we'll switch over to a map in a second

[3:31:41] they can help that this is not meant to

[3:31:44] answer the question that you're asking

[3:31:46] but it is this should go like this and T

[3:31:51] here so center street won't be over here

[3:31:53] >> okay

[3:31:54] >> it will be something like that so the

[3:31:56] trajectory of the road will be

[3:31:57] different. Um Jack, I'm going to give

[3:31:59] you this so you can maybe go to the

[3:32:01] city's map and turn on flood plane. I

[3:32:03] think

[3:32:04] >> so. Oh, okay.

[3:32:07] >> I don't I don't

[3:32:10] No, but I think I think a good portion

[3:32:11] of that a uh area is in the flood plane.

[3:32:19] Yeah. Is that going to be in hazards?

[3:32:23] » Keep talking. We'll find it. It's under

[3:32:25] sensitive land.

[3:32:26] >> Thank you.

[3:32:28] >> Near the bottom of the list.

[3:32:30] >> Sensitive.

[3:32:33] >> Where does that fit?

[3:32:34] >> W the FEMA 2020 that one.

[3:32:40] >> Yeah.

[3:32:41] >> And it's not just one property owner

[3:32:44] that has been designated act. There are

[3:32:47] multiple.

[3:32:47] >> Sure. Absolutely. I totally understand

[3:32:49] that part. Whether the property owners

[3:32:51] ask or not ask to me is almost

[3:32:55] irrelevant right now. Like what is

[3:32:57] >> what's the reason for it?

[3:32:59] >> Yeah. I mean if

[3:33:00] >> Yeah,

[3:33:02] >> it it seems to be in decent proximity to

[3:33:05] an interchange.

[3:33:06] Why isn't it commercial?

[3:33:12] » So I don't know if that at least informs

[3:33:14] a little bit of that.

[3:33:15] >> I don't know.

[3:33:16] >> Yeah.

[3:33:16] >> Is that the property that's green? A

[3:33:17] huge It's a huge blue area.

[3:33:19] >> It's that blue area to

[3:33:20] >> west of

[3:33:22] ESA then

[3:33:23] >> it's

[3:33:23] >> not a

[3:33:24] >> well you can a it

[3:33:26] >> you can a it

[3:33:28] >> ESA you generally not always but like

[3:33:31] David was saying a hillside's going to

[3:33:33] be ESA wetlands are going to be ESA

[3:33:35] where you can't do much with

[3:33:37] >> and the two areas on the other side of

[3:33:39] I-15 are they're kind of landlocked.

[3:33:43] There's not an easy way to access it.

[3:33:45] Um, and it's, as far as I know, it's not

[3:33:48] currently being

[3:33:48] >> I mean, I prefer not going to Western 15

[3:33:51] at all. So, this is my oneoff

[3:33:53] conversation

[3:33:54] for you all.

[3:33:56] >> How many one-off conversations you gonna

[3:33:57] have tonight?

[3:33:58] >> I'm going to have a bunch of them.

[3:34:01] I appre I mean, I'm poking at Kevin, but

[3:34:04] I really appreciate him calling me out

[3:34:05] on my crap.

[3:34:07] >> That may be the best day of my life.

[3:34:09] >> I know it was. I could feel it. I could

[3:34:12] feel it. You just staring at my back of

[3:34:13] my head.

[3:34:14] >> Yeah. I'm not looking at him.

[3:34:17] >> Okay. I mean, I guess that that's

[3:34:18] helpful. I still I disagree that that

[3:34:20] should be a I mean,

[3:34:21] >> and you can also see on the south side

[3:34:23] of the floodway on in that area

[3:34:27] >> is where the future uh loafer mountain

[3:34:31] parkway is going to be expanding going

[3:34:35] across I-15.

[3:34:37] Um,

[3:34:38] so that that's kind of the thought

[3:34:40] process behind the different

[3:34:42] designations on the different sides

[3:34:44] where you've got one side that has uh

[3:34:46] extensive flood plane, the other side

[3:34:48] that isn't as extensive that would have

[3:34:51] better transportation network.

[3:34:55] >> Sorry.

[3:34:56] So in our current land use plan, it's

[3:34:59] not egg.

[3:35:00] >> No. Yep.

[3:35:02] >> And in future we've found something out

[3:35:04] that makes it a Okay.

[3:35:06] seems inconsistent.

[3:35:10] But back to to Council Member Beck's

[3:35:12] point, like what

[3:35:16] is this the proper transition from EDR

[3:35:19] to commercial? That's really what we're

[3:35:21] talking about, right? It's it's state

[3:35:23] development

[3:35:25] through Leland into business into

[3:35:28] commercial. Is that Do we go from estate

[3:35:31] to medium? Should we go from estate to

[3:35:34] low to medium? That's kind of Dave's

[3:35:37] point, I'm assuming.

[3:35:39] >> They just want to protect their property

[3:35:41] so someone doesn't come in and offer or

[3:35:44] a neighbor just doesn't

[3:35:47] keep the density that they all want,

[3:35:49] >> but then that takes away their property

[3:35:51] rights. So,

[3:35:54] >> that's why I thought I'd bring it up. I

[3:35:57] thought he had text a lot of you guys

[3:35:58] about it, so that's why I thought I

[3:35:59] better bring it up again.

[3:36:06] Okay, next general plan item.

[3:36:09] >> Let's talk a little bit about west of

[3:36:10] I-15.

[3:36:12] >> So Shane,

[3:36:13] >> no.

[3:36:14] not at all. My thoughts are that we

[3:36:18] need some kind of a some kind of a lever

[3:36:22] in here to designate that we may general plan for this, but

[3:36:29] there's no way that any of this will

[3:36:31] actually ever happen until

[3:36:33] roads are in place because I personally

[3:36:37] I don't want to see I I don't think it's

[3:36:40] a good idea to put subdivisions west of

[3:36:43] I-15 until we've got good accesses. My

[3:36:45] big concern is Fourth North right now

[3:36:48] because we've got a developer that wants

[3:36:50] to build.

[3:36:50] >> Yeah.

[3:36:52] >> West and that's just not a good road for

[3:36:54] kids or pedestrians to get to where all

[3:36:58] their commercial base is right now. Um

[3:37:00] and are you going to have, you know,

[3:37:03] kids have to ask their parents to drive

[3:37:05] them into town anytime they want to go

[3:37:07] somewhere? I as kids, we never did that.

[3:37:09] we jumped on our bikes and we went into

[3:37:12] town or we walked to school or whatever.

[3:37:15] And so until we get some real

[3:37:19] until UD do or somebody says, "Okay,

[3:37:22] we've done the environmental, but now at

[3:37:24] this point, okay, we're ready to pull

[3:37:26] the trigger on some spending,

[3:37:28] then I would feel more comfortable with

[3:37:30] pulling the trigger on any kind of

[3:37:32] development west of I-15." But how do

[3:37:34] you combine those in a general plan and

[3:37:37] say this is what we're general planning,

[3:37:39] but realistically we don't want the

[3:37:42] housing to come before the access.

[3:37:45] >> I think that's in the goals.

[3:37:46] >> That's it.

[3:37:47] >> Okay.

[3:37:48] >> So that's laid out in our goals as far

[3:37:50] as

[3:37:51] >> it's there a bit, but I think that it

[3:37:52] needs to be more deliberate in

[3:37:54] >> those a little bit more. So that's my only con well a concern I have

[3:37:59] with west of I-15 is making sure that

[3:38:01] we're not

[3:38:04] moving one before the other. How do you

[3:38:06] balance that to where it happens at the

[3:38:08] same time? And I think there's some

[3:38:10] trigger there's some goal statements

[3:38:14] refer you back to

[3:38:16] let's see um

[3:38:26] where is it chain come on where did chat

[3:38:29] put this goal Jesse

[3:38:36] I'll find it I think that's that's a

[3:38:38] place I think that we can be articulate

[3:38:40] about. We don't want

[3:38:43] um development happening until

[3:38:44] infrastructure is imminent

[3:38:48] like whatever the words you want to use.

[3:38:50] I think those property owners, those

[3:38:52] property owners that have showed us a

[3:38:54] little something now and are in

[3:38:56] discussions with it,

[3:38:58] >> the the general plan's not giving them

[3:39:00] any false uh hope that I can see from

[3:39:04] the direction you as council gave them

[3:39:07] when they were here and I think

[3:39:08] everything they've heard from staff is

[3:39:11] that's a real concern of how that

[3:39:14] connects to our community and how it's

[3:39:16] safe before anything happens. So, show

[3:39:18] us how it is. Show us how you improve

[3:39:20] that. Show us how that happens. And then

[3:39:23] that's when

[3:39:23] >> then then we can move forward on

[3:39:26] >> take it off a map and say, "Well, okay.

[3:39:28] Don't

[3:39:28] >> Yeah. Don't don't at all." No, I don't.

[3:39:31] >> Yeah, I agree with the map. I think the

[3:39:33] map needs to be there. But

[3:39:34] >> so maybe it's some language.

[3:39:36] >> Yeah. How do you make the language?

[3:39:39] >> Well, that's

[3:39:40] >> where for those developers that do come

[3:39:41] to the city

[3:39:42] >> and that's where the the growth

[3:39:43] management boundary comes into play.

[3:39:45] It's kind of the balance between the

[3:39:48] annexation policy boundary which is the

[3:39:50] extent of the colors and the current

[3:39:54] boundary of the city and then the growth

[3:39:57] boundary determines where that kind of

[3:40:00] the next step is as far as growth.

[3:40:03] If that area on the north side of 400

[3:40:08] >> uh 400 north is is not ready

[3:40:11] infrastructurally with roads with uses

[3:40:15] all that then

[3:40:17] >> the growth it should not be included in

[3:40:19] the growth boundary until a future date

[3:40:22] where you can revisit that topic and see

[3:40:25] if changes have been made so that the

[3:40:28] growth boundary could be included.

[3:40:31] Yeah, I like that.

[3:40:32] >> I think the goal language is on page 47.

[3:40:36] >> So there's there's some of that I I

[3:40:38] recommended before the goals putting in

[3:40:41] a sort of a contextual paragraph that

[3:40:44] says because we do use these goals and

[3:40:46] strategies staff uses them in in what

[3:40:50] they give us to say here's what your

[3:40:52] goal said. Using those goals, here's

[3:40:55] what the what we recommend, right? And

[3:40:57] so I recommend we put in goals and

[3:41:00] strategy provide policy direction but do

[3:41:02] not create zoning entitlements, rights,

[3:41:04] development approvals or obligations to

[3:41:06] extend services on particular timeline.

[3:41:08] Implementation should consider

[3:41:09] infrastructure capacity, physical sustainability, existing laws,

[3:41:14] private property rights and other things

[3:41:17] before they move forward. So, I it's kind of I I'm I'm sharing the same

[3:41:22] concern is that I think we need to be

[3:41:24] clear that this is generally how we want

[3:41:26] it to look, but that doesn't mean you

[3:41:28] can go there tomorrow. And Dave's spot

[3:41:31] on. That's part of the growth management

[3:41:33] boundary, the whole philosophy around

[3:41:35] it. This place would be carved out of

[3:41:37] it. It would be outside the growth

[3:41:39] management boundary until we're ready

[3:41:41] because infrastructure is ready to to

[3:41:42] move into place. So, yeah. So, if I may

[3:41:46] ask a clarifying question in, and Corey

[3:41:49] mentioned this, page 47 of the document

[3:41:51] goal 112,

[3:41:54] um, it says, I think what you're I think

[3:41:57] what you're worrying about in in the

[3:42:00] point you're trying to make. So, goal

[3:42:03] 112, adop approve annexations only

[3:42:06] within the adopted growth management

[3:42:08] boundary.

[3:42:10] Um, and so you're going to say you you

[3:42:13] need to set where the boundary is.

[3:42:16] And if for the moment the boundary is

[3:42:18] not on the west side of the freeway

[3:42:20] because what is it? Number 113,

[3:42:24] no 114, expand the growth boundary west

[3:42:27] of the freeway when infrastructure

[3:42:30] projects are complete or underway.

[3:42:32] >> Those two things say it's not 2026.

[3:42:35] Yeah.

[3:42:36] >> And in two years when nothing has

[3:42:38] changed in 2028, it's not 2028. In six

[3:42:41] years when Center Street's funded and

[3:42:44] it's under construction, that's when the

[3:42:46] council then in this hypothetical says,

[3:42:49] "Okay, yeah, we can start looking at

[3:42:51] that because projects are underway."

[3:42:53] Right. It's not I don't think it's an

[3:42:56] exact science, but it is certainly a

[3:42:58] good it's easy to feel, but I don't know

[3:43:01] if that goes far enough.

[3:43:02] >> I I feel like this does. Yeah. As I read

[3:43:04] through this, I feel like because yeah,

[3:43:07] you can't have one without the other

[3:43:10] >> and you're not going to expand the

[3:43:11] growth boundary until these major

[3:43:14] transportation parkway infrastructure

[3:43:15] projects are they're not going to be

[3:43:18] underway unless if they've been funded.

[3:43:19] >> Yeah.

[3:43:20] >> So, chewing on a real for instance, I

[3:43:22] don't know if you remember last council

[3:43:24] meeting or two council meetings ago,

[3:43:26] Dave Anderson said, "We have an

[3:43:28] annexation that we've accepted to study

[3:43:30] the what are we calling it the 1040

[3:43:32] West?" that is west of the freeway.

[3:43:37] It's heavy and intense. There is no new

[3:43:39] infrastructure that's in there. It

[3:43:41] clearly goes against these two goals,

[3:43:44] right?

[3:43:44] >> And so if we adopt this, do we stop

[3:43:47] that?

[3:43:49] And I think it's a hard question. Maybe

[3:43:52] the answer is hard to say to somebody.

[3:43:54] But if if these are the goals you have,

[3:43:58] then I think a part of the passage of

[3:44:00] this is to is to tell staff tell the

[3:44:04] applicant that we don't want it or you

[3:44:06] formally say we're going to stop the

[3:44:08] study of that and because it doesn't

[3:44:10] meet goals 112 and 114,

[3:44:12] >> right?

[3:44:13] >> And and as staff, that's easy for us to

[3:44:15] say to some applicant when they say,

[3:44:16] "Hey, we want to come into the city, but

[3:44:18] it's not ready. Here you go." But for

[3:44:20] one that's already come in and that's

[3:44:22] already started the study. So they're

[3:44:24] their their their argument would be

[3:44:26] we're trying to answer those questions.

[3:44:27] We're trying to get to those answers and

[3:44:30] we want to spend the money to do a study

[3:44:31] to show you how to get to those answers

[3:44:34] and we gave them direction. Go do the

[3:44:36] study and come back and talk.

[3:44:37] >> Come back, let us know what you've

[3:44:38] learned. And then

[3:44:38] >> and you'll recall they did say the one

[3:44:40] time that they've reported back, we're

[3:44:42] not talking about transportation. We're

[3:44:43] only talking about these other things.

[3:44:44] Like don't let's not talk about that big

[3:44:47] ugly gorilla that's over there.

[3:44:49] >> Don't talk about the thing we need.

[3:44:51] >> Yeah. Let's talk about these other

[3:44:52] things and and then maybe we can talk

[3:44:53] about that later. Right. And so they I

[3:44:55] think they recognize that they've got an

[3:44:57] uphill battle as it relates to

[3:44:59] >> transportation issues west of I-15.

[3:45:01] >> Right.

[3:45:02] >> They are absolutely aware of these

[3:45:06] conflicts. They've been clearly made

[3:45:08] aware. And if you were to say we're done

[3:45:12] studying that, would they be

[3:45:14] disappointed? I'm sure they would be.

[3:45:16] Would it be unexpected? I don't think so

[3:45:18] at all.

[3:45:20] >> Yeah, I feel like this resolves my

[3:45:21] concern.

[3:45:22] >> Okay.

[3:45:23] >> Yeah. Thanks for calling that out.

[3:45:27] » Okay, that's three.

[3:45:30] Keeping the tally marks here. What's

[3:45:33] next?

[3:45:34] >> Let's go to our other gateway area.

[3:45:36] >> Which one?

[3:45:37] >> Could you be specific? Uh, north of the

[3:45:40] hospital,

[3:45:40] >> Dry Creek.

[3:45:42] >> Okay. So, up back to page 17.

[3:45:45] >> We only have

[3:45:47] >> there's only one gateway area, right,

[3:45:49] David?

[3:45:49] >> Well, there's two.

[3:45:50] >> Are there two?

[3:45:51] >> There's the south and then there's the

[3:45:53] >> No, we have focus focused growth areas,

[3:45:55] but are they gateway?

[3:45:56] >> Keep going.

[3:45:56] >> I thought they were.

[3:45:57] >> I thought we only general planned one

[3:46:00] gateway.

[3:46:00] >> That's what I thought, too.

[3:46:02] looking at the map. Part of my concern

[3:46:04] is the

[3:46:05] >> one more.

[3:46:06] >> The nomenclature of focus growth. Yeah,

[3:46:09] I saw your

[3:46:10] >> That's it.

[3:46:10] >> I read it. I'm

[3:46:11] >> so lost on some of these.

[3:46:13] >> Yeah. And and I think David

[3:46:15] >> Yeah.

[3:46:15] >> I think David Man agrees like he's he's

[3:46:18] working on

[3:46:20] >> Okay.

[3:46:20] >> Clarifying the use of the word focus

[3:46:22] growth area as well as gateways. That's

[3:46:25] something that's on his his duty.

[3:46:27] >> Yeah. And that's something that you know

[3:46:29] the gateway idea was kind of started by

[3:46:32] the consultants uh when they were

[3:46:34] looking at places where intense

[3:46:36] development could go in the city. Um the

[3:46:39] confusion came with the same name being

[3:46:42] used different ways in the doc in the

[3:46:45] original document that was being

[3:46:47] proposed. So changing it to focus growth

[3:46:50] center. I think the principle behind

[3:46:52] that is to kind of designate a a

[3:46:56] geographic location where further study

[3:47:00] maybe on like a small area plan type of

[3:47:03] level can be done rather than trying to

[3:47:07] address it on the whole city like we're

[3:47:11] doing right now. So, in the future, if

[3:47:14] we're going to say, you know, let's look at this a little bit closer

[3:47:17] now that the the the Dry Key Dry Creek

[3:47:21] interchange is is going to be opening up

[3:47:23] in a few months. Um, things are

[3:47:26] progressing in that area. That might be

[3:47:28] a time where we want to look closer at

[3:47:30] that whole area so that it could be

[3:47:32] planned uh cohesively uh rather than

[3:47:36] just kind of peacemail or oneoff.

[3:47:43] Did you look at me when you said one

[3:47:45] off?

[3:47:45] >> Makes sense. You

[3:47:46] >> did.

[3:47:48] >> Shut up.

[3:47:50] >> I was laughing at your not at you.

[3:47:53] >> So, where can you point out? Is there a

[3:47:56] map that shows this is the focus growth

[3:47:58] center that we're talking about? The one

[3:48:00] or two.

[3:48:01] >> There there isn't there isn't a

[3:48:02] definitive order. It's kind of just a

[3:48:06] general area like we've got the station

[3:48:08] area which is kind of a a general

[3:48:12] location around that. We've got the

[3:48:14] Benjamin interchange where that's going

[3:48:16] to be there's funding. There's going to

[3:48:18] be changes there. So, it's kind of that

[3:48:20] general, you know, maybe a half mile

[3:48:23] radius

[3:48:24] uh on those three areas within the city.

[3:48:27] >> So, the station and both interchanges.

[3:48:30] Okay.

[3:48:32] basically all three interchanges, right?

[3:48:35] >> Yeah, true.

[3:48:36] >> Try Creek, Center Street, and Benjamin.

[3:48:41] » It does sound like we're going to focus

[3:48:43] our growth there. That's not necessarily

[3:48:46] the

[3:48:49] we're going to study the area to figure

[3:48:51] out what the growth pattern looks like.

[3:48:53] We're not going to focus all our growth

[3:48:54] into these three.

[3:48:55] >> Focus some resources there.

[3:48:57] >> Yeah. To

[3:48:59] >> is that part of the intent?

[3:49:00] >> Yeah. and the and the area around the

[3:49:02] Benjamin exit would be treated

[3:49:04] differently than it would be around the

[3:49:06] station because

[3:49:07] >> sure I get the concept I and I agree

[3:49:09] with it. I

[3:49:10] >> So change the language because you don't

[3:49:12] want to communicate we're going to focus

[3:49:14] growth here like a magnifying glass.

[3:49:15] Correct.

[3:49:16] >> We're going to we're going to study

[3:49:17] studied growth area or something like

[3:49:19] that.

[3:49:19] >> Something like that. Okay.

[3:49:20] >> I get what you're saying and I and I and

[3:49:22] I I I agree with the concept. I think

[3:49:24] part of um

[3:49:27] what is the road that is going to

[3:49:29] connect is it Dry Creek all the way to

[3:49:31] into Spanish Fork?

[3:49:32] >> Yep.

[3:49:32] >> That that corridor that could be a good

[3:49:35] place to study further in a corridor

[3:49:38] level in a more granular way than from a

[3:49:41] land use general plan area. That's what

[3:49:44] you're talking about.

[3:49:45] >> Exactly. And I agree with that. I think

[3:49:47] that solves there are some there are

[3:49:49] some comments that we've gotten that

[3:49:51] will require further study because it's

[3:49:53] way more granular than is appropriate at

[3:49:56] this higher level and those are the

[3:49:58] areas. I'm with you. I'm with you. David

[3:50:00] don't like the term focused. It's just

[3:50:03] >> study maybe.

[3:50:04] >> I'm not married to it. We can change it.

[3:50:07] >> Whatever sounds better.

[3:50:08] >> His middle name is M.

[3:50:15] » Michael. I hope it's Michael.

[3:50:17] >> I hope so.

[3:50:20] >> David,

[3:50:21] >> my middle name, too.

[3:50:24] >> Is it?

[3:50:24] >> Yep.

[3:50:25] >> Shane. Michael Marshall.

[3:50:26] >> My first name.

[3:50:27] >> It's really It's Michael Shane, but

[3:50:29] >> Okay.

[3:50:31] >> Start calling you Michael then.

[3:50:33] >> I won't answer.

[3:50:34] >> Shane. I think you should call him M.

[3:50:35] Shane.

[3:50:38] >> I prefer

[3:50:39] >> Okay. I think that's some good

[3:50:40] direction. And have you got that note to

[3:50:42] that? Maybe that's maybe there's a a

[3:50:44] better word than focus that doesn't

[3:50:47] >> just for the record that's two things

[3:50:49] that I got right today.

[3:50:51] >> I know they're getting

[3:50:53] >> barely

[3:50:54] >> two for eight.

[3:50:55] >> Take a win still.

[3:50:56] >> Take a win.

[3:50:57] Dang it.

[3:50:59] >> You could be a major leager.

[3:51:02] >> Okay.

[3:51:03] >> 250 right now.

[3:51:04] >> Um good good recommendation there.

[3:51:08] What? Uh,

[3:51:09] >> really good at defense.

[3:51:11] >> What's next? That's number three.

[3:51:13] >> My 250 is all home runs.

[3:51:15] >> What's number four?

[3:51:16] >> Also,

[3:51:21] » we probably need to address Richard and

[3:51:25] Joe's comments that we've received in

[3:51:27] the Canyon Creek area.

[3:51:30] >> Yeah, let's talk about that for a little

[3:51:32] bit. knowing that Canyon Creek Parkway

[3:51:34] is going to be

[3:51:36] rerouted and we're going to have that

[3:51:39] new interchange, Dry Creek interchange

[3:51:41] is going to be complete

[3:51:43] soon.

[3:51:45] Does that I mean we've got

[3:51:50] right now we've got commercial, we've

[3:51:51] got gateway. Does that make sense to

[3:51:55] gateway I know is a mix of high density

[3:51:57] and commercial.

[3:52:00] Does it make more sense to just separate

[3:52:01] them and call them out?

[3:52:04] Or are we okay if along Canyon Creek you

[3:52:07] get fourstory

[3:52:10] apartments that run right along? Because

[3:52:13] a designation doesn't mean you have to

[3:52:14] have both, right? If it's it could be

[3:52:17] either or. Meaning if you take a gateway

[3:52:19] section and they decide to put in that

[3:52:21] gateway all high density, then that's

[3:52:24] what you get is all high density.

[3:52:27] Um, we had a discussion that Canyon

[3:52:28] Creek Parkway is is going to be a major route outside of I-15 to get

[3:52:36] north and south once it connects up

[3:52:38] through uh through Springville. Does it

[3:52:40] make more sense to add additional

[3:52:42] commercial instead of gateway along

[3:52:45] Canyon Creek Parkway? I guess that's the

[3:52:47] question I've got.

[3:52:50] >> Add more gateway instead of commercial.

[3:52:53] >> No, change opposite.

[3:52:54] >> Change gateway. add more commercial

[3:52:56] directly in line or

[3:52:58] uh adjacent to Canyon Creek Parkway.

[3:53:02] Right now, Canyon Creek's not I mean

[3:53:04] it's I'd be curious to know from Corey

[3:53:07] or any staff

[3:53:10] what traffic patterns I know back in the

[3:53:12] day when they first created the general

[3:53:14] plan that was not a busy road. But I'd

[3:53:17] be curious to know even now before the

[3:53:19] reroute. Once they get the reroute, it

[3:53:21] will become even more.

[3:53:22] >> I'm gonna send you something right now.

[3:53:23] >> If uh if we're seeing more traffic using

[3:53:25] that road currently,

[3:53:27] >> let me I'm going to send Jack an image.

[3:53:28] I think that can address that question.

[3:53:32] >> Hey, mayor,

[3:53:34] can I take a like another stab at a

[3:53:37] staff directed motion?

[3:53:38] >> Let me let me mark that down.

[3:53:41] >> Maybe this one.

[3:53:42] >> I'm keeping stab marks, too.

[3:53:44] >> Just just one shot. And if you all you

[3:53:46] just shoot me down. I would move that we

[3:53:49] direct staff to start a small area plan for the Canyon Creek

[3:53:56] Dry Creek area so that we can talk about

[3:54:00] that in detail in that context.

[3:54:02] >> Yeah, I I would support that.

[3:54:04] >> Is that a second to my motion?

[3:54:06] >> I would support that. Tell me the the

[3:54:08] location again.

[3:54:10] >> Um Canyon Creek and Dry Creek. I'm not

[3:54:12] sure exactly what the

[3:54:13] >> I just call it all Canyon Creek.

[3:54:14] >> Okay. Colorado Canyon Creek

[3:54:15] >> Canyon Creek area.

[3:54:17] >> I think

[3:54:17] >> that's what it is.

[3:54:18] >> This I think needs a bigger discussion.

[3:54:20] >> I think it need we need to drill down

[3:54:22] right there and really study that. I

[3:54:23] think Richard came with some really good

[3:54:26] information about what that could or

[3:54:28] that may be over there.

[3:54:30] >> We don't want to miss

[3:54:31] >> we can't miss the boat. We can't this is an interchange that's developing

[3:54:35] right now.

[3:54:36] >> And so I my motion would be to direct

[3:54:38] staff to start a small area study for

[3:54:40] that particular area.

[3:54:41] >> I think that's great.

[3:54:42] >> Even if we approve the general it is

[3:54:45] then we can Okay. So

[3:54:46] >> it would be Yes.

[3:54:47] >> Once that's approved, we would do that.

[3:54:49] >> Okay.

[3:54:51] >> Defining it from say Highway 6 to Dry

[3:54:53] Creek Parkway, I-15 to

[3:54:57] >> Highway. Yeah. I would even say to

[3:54:59] Springville, the old Springville

[3:55:00] Highway.

[3:55:01] >> Yep.

[3:55:01] >> I'll Highway 51.

[3:55:03] >> Whatever. Yeah. Whatever's in

[3:55:05] >> Boundary.

[3:55:07] >> Yeah. Okay.

[3:55:09] >> That's a yes for me.

[3:55:10] >> That's a yes.

[3:55:12] >> Well done. I love that one. I love it.

[3:55:14] >> A motion direction from Shane. Seconded

[3:55:17] by

[3:55:18] >> Dell Murphy.

[3:55:19] >> Councilman Oiler.

[3:55:20] >> Where you going?

[3:55:23] >> Um,

[3:55:25] all in favor say yes.

[3:55:26] >> Yes.

[3:55:27] >> It's not a resolution or anything. It's

[3:55:29] just direction.

[3:55:30] >> Okay.

[3:55:32] >> Those were the things I want.

[3:55:33] >> Richard, if I were you, I would go home

[3:55:35] now. I'd get out, run, go to bed fast.

[3:55:44] No, but they have really clear direction

[3:55:46] from us that we want to hone in on that

[3:55:48] >> soon

[3:55:48] >> like pronto.

[3:55:50] >> I think you got worry about the general

[3:55:52] plan being adopted tonight.

[3:55:55] >> He's talking about he wants to talk

[3:55:56] about this area before we have to

[3:55:59] >> Yeah. And I I'm fine with that. Try and

[3:56:01] get it all done at once because there

[3:56:03] that's a big area. So to try and then

[3:56:06] change after the fact might be a little

[3:56:10] more difficult. So it depends on timing.

[3:56:12] If we can if we can get that soon, but I

[3:56:15] don't know how much time staff would

[3:56:16] need and we would need to meet with

[3:56:18] them. Yeah, it might be difficult.

[3:56:20] >> I think that just goes to support the

[3:56:23] whole principle behind the general plan

[3:56:25] is that it can change. So we can do that

[3:56:28] small area study and then we can change

[3:56:30] the land use designations in that area

[3:56:33] based on that study

[3:56:34] >> pretty quickly. And I think if if that's

[3:56:36] not quick enough for Richard, make a

[3:56:41] proposal specific to your site and let's

[3:56:44] have that conversation as a oneoff.

[3:56:48] >> Yeah. You always have that absolutely

[3:56:50] application possibility.

[3:56:56] » Both.

[3:56:56] >> Yes.

[3:56:57] >> Uhhuh.

[3:56:58] >> Yes.

[3:56:58] >> No.

[3:57:00] How do we make that

[3:57:03] >> through the community development

[3:57:04] process?

[3:57:05] >> Development.

[3:57:06] >> So I think what you're describing is a

[3:57:08] general plan amendment.

[3:57:09] >> Yep.

[3:57:10] >> application.

[3:57:10] >> Yep. If if you want us to move quicker,

[3:57:13] that's your prerogative.

[3:57:14] >> But you're talking about the general

[3:57:16] plan amendment on his property, not the

[3:57:18] whole gateway.

[3:57:18] >> Correct.

[3:57:19] >> Yeah. So don't don't worry about

[3:57:23] the shame. It's so weird.

[3:57:24] >> The miles

[3:57:26] two different things. his property.

[3:57:29] >> But in general, my I'm more concerned

[3:57:32] about

[3:57:32] >> I'm with you, too. Generally, I think we

[3:57:34] need to get the general area correct.

[3:57:37] >> Yeah.

[3:57:37] >> And if if that's not fast enough, then I

[3:57:40] think he needs to come back with a

[3:57:41] general plan amendment.

[3:57:45] >> It does.

[3:57:47] >> What we do there would influence what

[3:57:49] you asked for down there.

[3:57:51] >> Yeah.

[3:57:53] >> Yep. Yep.

[3:58:00] Bill, thanks.

[3:58:01] >> Yeah, that's

[3:58:04] >> Sorry, Richard. They they want your they

[3:58:06] want your words on the record that

[3:58:08] you're going to make an application as

[3:58:09] soon as you can to the to the to the

[3:58:12] development or Hartman.

[3:58:15] >> Richard Mendenhal.

[3:58:17] >> Yeah, the other men.

[3:58:19] >> I got you.

[3:58:20] >> Yeah, we'll we'll get something in the

[3:58:21] morning.

[3:58:22] >> Thank you, Richard.

[3:58:25] We

[3:58:28] just real quick discussion. So, we got

[3:58:30] we all got an email recently. The

[3:58:31] council got an email recently about

[3:58:35] the station, Front Runner Station. Um,

[3:58:39] so we've got a station area that's also

[3:58:42] west of I-15. So, I guess the question

[3:58:44] I've got,

[3:58:46] and I don't have an, you know, I'm not

[3:58:48] trying to say one way or another, but

[3:58:50] the question was brought up. Does

[3:58:51] Spanish Fork even want or need a

[3:58:54] station? So, that was the question that

[3:58:56] was brought up. Um, I feel like we ought

[3:58:59] to at least discuss it.

[3:59:02] I know we've had discussions about

[3:59:04] possibly trying to get it in a different

[3:59:06] location and move it up in in this area

[3:59:08] that we're looking at here. Shane, I

[3:59:11] don't know if you've had any opportunity

[3:59:13] at this point to talk to Springville.

[3:59:15] >> Nope.

[3:59:16] >> One very brief conversation

[3:59:19] 18 months ago, maybe. Mike.

[3:59:21] >> Mhm.

[3:59:22] >> And it was not wellreceived at the time.

[3:59:25] >> Yeah.

[3:59:30] In my in my opinion, from what I've and

[3:59:33] you guys can chime in to where what

[3:59:35] you've felt around your discussions

[3:59:37] there, but um I think it would be

[3:59:40] shortsighted for us to to just say,

[3:59:43] "Okay, so

[3:59:46] Springville's not going to move theirs

[3:59:48] south closer to maybe some stuff that we

[3:59:50] think would be good and because it might

[3:59:52] not be good for them. they've been

[3:59:53] planning for it in a different place and have made some plans around it. So,

[3:59:57] you can't fault them

[3:59:59] >> for that. But I don't think I think it

[4:00:01] would it would be um shortsighted for us

[4:00:05] for our residents to say then it then it

[4:00:09] doesn't belong here, you know, have one

[4:00:10] in PAC. I I think

[4:00:12] >> so. Let me be the devil's advocate. If

[4:00:15] I'm a resident that doesn't want a

[4:00:18] station, help me or explain to me why

[4:00:21] that's good for Spanish Fork to have a

[4:00:23] station.

[4:00:24] Why why do we need one in Spanish for?

[4:00:26] How do how do we as residents benefit

[4:00:28] from that?

[4:00:30] >> Well, a couple different ways. The way

[4:00:32] I've explained it to some people is who

[4:00:35] do you know that goes over to Provo and

[4:00:37] rides up to Salt Lake or Lehi now on the

[4:00:41] train? Do you know anybody? I know some

[4:00:44] of your neighbors that do. Some of my

[4:00:46] neighbors that do.

[4:00:48] >> So, they currently get on the freeway

[4:00:49] early in the morning, drive over Provo

[4:00:51] to do that.

[4:00:52] >> I work at New Skin and I know employees

[4:00:55] and co-workers that ride the train to

[4:00:57] get to work in Provo

[4:00:59] >> because there's a stop there.

[4:01:01] >> No,

[4:01:02] >> you can't do that from here.

[4:01:03] >> From the north.

[4:01:04] >> Yes. So, they they're coming down

[4:01:05] >> from the north coming down to go to

[4:01:07] work. Yes. I think I think the simplest answer I could give I think

[4:01:12] is the number one survey problem we had

[4:01:16] was traffic

[4:01:17] >> always

[4:01:19] >> and I think a big chunk of that

[4:01:23] discontent is US6

[4:01:26] a station a access to transit whether

[4:01:29] it's a station or light rail whatever it

[4:01:32] is access to transit will alleviate some

[4:01:34] of that congestion.

[4:01:36] So, you're going to get people on on a

[4:01:39] mass transit system out of their cars,

[4:01:42] whether they walk or bike to it, and

[4:01:45] alleviate some congestion. We can't

[4:01:49] We're not going to build enough highways

[4:01:52] to satisfy the demand that is going to

[4:01:54] be in South Utah County. We need an

[4:01:57] alternative to that, and that's transit.

[4:02:00] >> So, let me ask another question

[4:02:03] >> and this is a good one.

[4:02:04] >> It's from a highway guy.

[4:02:05] >> This is a good one for you.

[4:02:07] I would I would expect he was going to

[4:02:08] do something a little more green than

[4:02:10] that.

[4:02:10] >> Who pays for UT? Who pays for UTA? How

[4:02:13] do they get funding to build a station?

[4:02:16] >> Um,

[4:02:16] >> where does that funding come from? The

[4:02:18] taxpayers. Only the taxpayers that live

[4:02:21] adjacent to the UTA front runner

[4:02:22] station, right?

[4:02:24] >> No.

[4:02:25] >> All of you.

[4:02:26] >> So, as a resident right now, I'm paying

[4:02:30] quarter.

[4:02:30] >> No. So, as a resident, I don't know how

[4:02:32] long Front Runner's been around, but I

[4:02:34] I've paid for Front Runner,

[4:02:37] >> but

[4:02:38] >> I don't have access to Front Runner. So,

[4:02:40] how is that fair to me?

[4:02:41] >> You got four or five buses,

[4:02:42] >> right?

[4:02:42] >> I think there are 4%.

[4:02:43] >> And so, by having a station in your

[4:02:46] city, you're actually benefiting from

[4:02:48] taxes that you've paid for years.

[4:02:49] >> For sure.

[4:02:50] >> For UTA, right?

[4:02:51] >> For sure. So, one look at it.

[4:02:53] >> I' I'd have to look, but I think in

[4:02:55] Spanish Fork there's a decent maybe a

[4:02:57] full percent and maybe a percent and a

[4:02:59] quarter to a percent and a half of our

[4:03:02] sales tax goes there. I can find it, but

[4:03:04] not this quickly. It's a decent amount

[4:03:06] and it's across

[4:03:08] all of

[4:03:10] >> So, we could have a nice bus route and

[4:03:12] Springville could have their station and

[4:03:14] PAC could have their station and we and

[4:03:16] Spanish 4 can subsidize those stations

[4:03:18] and keep our bus route.

[4:03:20] >> Yeah. But in reality, we're paying for

[4:03:23] it. Why not have it?

[4:03:24] >> Yeah. And in in in maybe terms of

[4:03:26] numbers in Spanish for we get a little

[4:03:28] bit less than 1% in sales tax. Uh

[4:03:32] there's 1% that's allocated, but we

[4:03:33] don't because of the way the formula

[4:03:35] works. We don't get the full percent. Um

[4:03:37] and actually getting less than a full

[4:03:39] percent is a good thing. Um I can

[4:03:42] explain that later, but you just have to

[4:03:44] trust me. A full percent equals in

[4:03:46] Spanish work about $15 million a year.

[4:03:50] So we're sending to UTA that amount

[4:03:54] probably a little bit more for the

[4:03:57] services that we are or are not getting.

[4:03:59] So to your point maybe to put a dollar

[4:04:00] amount to what that maybe looks like.

[4:04:02] It's a decent chunk of money.

[4:04:04] >> Yeah, it's a good amount.

[4:04:05] >> I think also to remind our residents

[4:04:07] that in the next what 35 years 30 years

[4:04:11] our county is expected to double and a

[4:04:15] lot of that's going to have to be South

[4:04:16] County. I don't think people are just

[4:04:18] going to be thinking, oh, let's go north

[4:04:20] also going south,

[4:04:22] >> but we're gonna we're going to need

[4:04:25] >> transit

[4:04:26] >> primarily down here, won't it? I mean,

[4:04:27] you think about here from south, right?

[4:04:29] The cities that are growing and that's

[4:04:30] primarily, I think, the focus that's

[4:04:32] going to go.

[4:04:32] >> Yeah. I think it's also important to

[4:04:35] note that that front runner stop,

[4:04:37] wherever it is, whether it's north or

[4:04:39] center or south, wherever it might be,

[4:04:42] the the impetus of putting a stop there,

[4:04:45] isn't because of our station area plan.

[4:04:48] That's not what's driving the need for a

[4:04:51] station in Spanish for

[4:04:52] >> Good point.

[4:04:53] >> The

[4:04:55] transportation in South Utah County

[4:04:59] >> is driving the need for transit.

[4:05:02] So it's yeah it's not because we did a

[4:05:05] plan or didn't do a plan. It's because

[4:05:07] there is because there's a need for it.

[4:05:09] >> Yep. Also

[4:05:11] there probably is a higher need today

[4:05:14] for one in PAC because they have access

[4:05:17] to it. They they have developed way too

[4:05:21] far in advance, right? And they need it.

[4:05:23] So there is a decent chance that we

[4:05:25] don't have one for a little bit of time

[4:05:27] because we'll grow into it and when when

[4:05:29] in fact it makes sense then we will have

[4:05:31] a station. But

[4:05:33] >> I start to think of the the the work

[4:05:36] that has been put in for employment

[4:05:40] places of employment in South Utah

[4:05:43] County has centered in our city. Yes,

[4:05:46] there's there's there's, you know,

[4:05:48] probably ahead of our game around the

[4:05:51] freeway, more living in other

[4:05:54] communities,

[4:05:56] but the employment,

[4:05:58] we've been the place where that is. And

[4:06:00] to your point, people taking

[4:06:03] >> the train south to get to employment,

[4:06:06] there's going to be a time where if you

[4:06:09] know, we're always worried about what am

[4:06:11] I going to hit going north on I-15, but

[4:06:13] you're hitting traffic south on I-15.

[4:06:16] All those people getting home

[4:06:17] >> and those people Yeah. getting home.

[4:06:19] But, you know, the next phase of this is

[4:06:22] the employment that we've that we've

[4:06:25] nurtured and grown and and and I would

[4:06:28] say uh you know, made the investments to

[4:06:31] grow are not just going to be people

[4:06:33] right in our community working either.

[4:06:35] We hope that's most of it, but you're

[4:06:37] going to have people I think

[4:06:38] >> community indoor city

[4:06:39] >> commuting into our city that didn't

[4:06:41] before.

[4:06:42] >> Yep.

[4:06:42] >> So, I guess on Go ahead, you can. Um, so

[4:06:45] I ran into our friend Eric, the school

[4:06:48] teacher up at the junior high, and he's

[4:06:51] like, "I watched city council, and what

[4:06:54] you said about moving the station north

[4:06:56] makes no sense at all to me, Shane. What

[4:06:59] are you thinking?" That was a good

[4:07:00] question because it it sounds sort of

[4:07:03] odd for me to be saying I'd like to see

[4:07:06] it moved because from a transportation

[4:07:08] specific only, it makes probably a ton

[4:07:10] of sense, etc. My point to him is from a

[4:07:13] pragmatic approach,

[4:07:16] the lift to get a station at Center

[4:07:18] Street is so great financially that it's

[4:07:21] going to be a very long time before we

[4:07:23] can take advantage of what you just

[4:07:24] talked about, Kevin, our contribution to

[4:07:26] the system. And the lift to put it on

[4:07:29] the north end is much much smaller, much

[4:07:32] smaller. And we have active development

[4:07:36] talk talks on the north end that can

[4:07:38] accommodate and could use

[4:07:41] that station to help that development

[4:07:44] thrive. So, yes, it may not be the

[4:07:48] perfect location, but it happens

[4:07:50] quicker. It's in a good location with

[4:07:52] great access. And it's like, okay, I get

[4:07:54] it. As long as you can get me there on a

[4:07:56] bike, I'm fine,

[4:07:57] >> which I love about

[4:07:58] >> that's legit.

[4:07:59] >> Yeah. Yeah. That's that's what I love

[4:08:01] about the current location is you could

[4:08:03] easily tie into our trail system very

[4:08:05] easily.

[4:08:05] >> And that was his point is that it's way

[4:08:07] easier to get to it on Center Street

[4:08:08] than it is on the north end of town.

[4:08:10] Okay, let's solve the bike problem,

[4:08:13] which is a much smaller lift than a $150

[4:08:16] million interchange.

[4:08:17] >> Right. So, I guess my next thought would

[4:08:21] be then if UTA is designating a need, if

[4:08:24] they're saying there is or will be a

[4:08:27] need

[4:08:28] uh at some point in the future. It could

[4:08:30] be 20 years from now, right? We don't

[4:08:32] know. But if they're designating a need

[4:08:34] and it they're saying it it will happen

[4:08:37] eventually, what do we as a city then do

[4:08:40] to make for make sure that wherever that

[4:08:42] location ends up being is the most

[4:08:45] successful for a station, right? And I

[4:08:48] think that's the reason behind

[4:08:51] >> stationary

[4:08:51] >> the stationary plan. I

[4:08:52] >> I agree with that completely. My my only

[4:08:56] push back is until they make a decision

[4:09:00] where it goes, it's still speculative.

[4:09:02] They're going to make one, right?

[4:09:04] >> And then once they do, we have an

[4:09:06] obligation to plan around it, for sure.

[4:09:07] >> Right. So, similar to our whole west of

[4:09:09] I-15 discussion, how do you

[4:09:12] >> tie those two together? Yep. But they've

[4:09:14] spent I mean, haven't hasn't our

[4:09:16] taxpayer dollars been spent quite a bit

[4:09:18] studying a center street interchange?

[4:09:20] >> They have.

[4:09:21] >> Buying some property, buying some

[4:09:23] rideway

[4:09:24] >> for the center street interchange. Yes.

[4:09:26] >> Good.

[4:09:26] >> So,

[4:09:28] >> for the station location? No.

[4:09:29] >> But then they're they're really three

[4:09:32] separate things. You could get the

[4:09:33] center street interchange but still not

[4:09:36] have a station.

[4:09:37] >> The center street interchange is not

[4:09:38] dependent on the station.

[4:09:39] >> It's not. And so, so if you've

[4:09:41] designated a certain piece of ground in

[4:09:43] our general plan as a station

[4:09:46] and we get the Center Street

[4:09:48] Interchange, which now says, "Okay, now

[4:09:50] we've got the access west of I-15. Let's

[4:09:52] move forward with development, but we've

[4:09:55] designated a station area, which is

[4:09:57] super high density, but then what if

[4:09:59] that station doesn't end up being where

[4:10:01] we've designated?"

[4:10:03] >> That's another council, another day.

[4:10:06] >> Yeah.

[4:10:07] I think we can only do our That's

[4:10:09] way closer to

[4:10:10] >> Wow, that works in there now. Yeah,

[4:10:12] >> we can only do our best, right? And and

[4:10:15] I think that it's

[4:10:17] >> I think the work that has been done on

[4:10:19] the station area plan itself is portable

[4:10:22] depending on the location. It's not that

[4:10:24] hard to take what they've done from a

[4:10:27] conceptual standpoint and move it to the

[4:10:29] place that UTA finally designates. So, I

[4:10:32] don't think any of that's lost.

[4:10:34] >> And and I think that the Center Street

[4:10:35] interchange is absolutely needed to help

[4:10:39] with our Main Street problem, right? Um

[4:10:44] my my point of all this is,

[4:10:47] you know, I did I did a ton of work up

[4:10:49] in Davis County and there were there

[4:10:51] were cities up along the up along the

[4:10:53] entire section of I-15 that said, "We

[4:10:56] want this or we want that or do this or

[4:10:58] do that." and their city council said,

[4:11:01] "We know. We we understand that it's not

[4:11:03] our decision to make. We get that. It's

[4:11:05] the state of Utah. You're going to make

[4:11:06] the decision. Here is a document that we

[4:11:10] said this is the direction we want you

[4:11:12] to go. If you can accommodate it,

[4:11:15] perfect. If you can't, we understand,

[4:11:16] but we're going to direct you to do

[4:11:18] something. You study it. You tell us you

[4:11:20] can't or you can't." We have not done

[4:11:23] that.

[4:11:24] I would like for us to to do that to UTA

[4:11:27] to say we've looked at it. We've studied

[4:11:30] this enough. We want you to go here, here,

[4:11:34] focus on it, and move forward. They

[4:11:36] haven't even started the environmental

[4:11:38] work, right? It's all been planning to

[4:11:39] this point. There's tons of work to do.

[4:11:42] But if we're comfortable, if if we're

[4:11:44] all good at center, I understand that

[4:11:46] completely. But let's articulate that to

[4:11:50] the people the to the decision makers so

[4:11:52] that they know what to focus on

[4:11:55] or tell us why they can't somewhere

[4:11:58] else.

[4:11:58] >> Yeah.

[4:11:59] >> And force them like this. I get there,

[4:12:02] you know, it's too close. I understand

[4:12:04] that. And there'll be people that I'll

[4:12:05] get an email tomorrow saying it's too

[4:12:06] close. Doesn't make sense. And I get

[4:12:09] that the train's not going to be going

[4:12:12] 70 miles an hour from Springville to

[4:12:13] Spanish Fork regardless of it's at the

[4:12:15] North End or Center Street. It's not

[4:12:17] going to. So, it's going to slow down.

[4:12:19] It's got to stop somewhere. Why not stop

[4:12:22] in five years instead of 25 years or 20

[4:12:25] years? Why not access that opportunity

[4:12:28] sooner and let us develop around it in a

[4:12:31] way that makes a ton of sense today?

[4:12:33] >> Because they'll tell you they'll tell

[4:12:34] you they don't when are they going to

[4:12:36] buy that land?

[4:12:38] >> Have to develop around it or are they

[4:12:39] going to buy it as a farm field?

[4:12:41] >> And do they have the money? Are they

[4:12:42] going to do Springvilles and ours and be

[4:12:44] like, "Yeah, we just have enough money

[4:12:45] to do both."

[4:12:46] >> More than likely, they'll go to FTA and

[4:12:48] say, "We want a line from Bacon to Span

[4:12:50] or from Provo to BAS and there's three

[4:12:52] stops along the way."

[4:12:54] >> That's that would be the goal.

[4:12:58] >> If they if they move forward today,

[4:13:00] there would not be a stop at Center

[4:13:02] Street. It would not get constructed.

[4:13:03] There's no way to get to it.

[4:13:06] >> Period.

[4:13:06] >> Yeah.

[4:13:06] >> Right.

[4:13:07] >> Yeah. Yeah.

[4:13:08] >> So we would be out

[4:13:09] >> access

[4:13:11] >> until such time that the interchange is

[4:13:12] built and then they put the station.

[4:13:14] >> Yeah.

[4:13:16] >> Which is I think why some of our

[4:13:18] planning documents are saying hey boy

[4:13:21] would you know this would this this is

[4:13:23] where it would go if that was to to to

[4:13:25] happen. Um but it it is the it's the

[4:13:28] chicken and the egg argument%.

[4:13:31] >> Yeah. Yeah. I don't know.

[4:13:35] » This one's done.

[4:13:36] >> Nothing concrete change.

[4:13:40] >> Again, that's a I think that's a future discussion in in the general plan

[4:13:45] when the general plan changes

[4:13:48] and um you know and and and we get more

[4:13:52] clarity on on a on a few different

[4:13:54] things there.

[4:13:58] Okay,

[4:13:59] we've made a couple of directions. Any

[4:14:01] more directions that people have burning

[4:14:04] in their bosom?

[4:14:05] >> I think I'm done. I think I

[4:14:07] >> I think we've got

[4:14:08] >> shared everything I

[4:14:09] >> Okay.

[4:14:10] >> had on my list.

[4:14:17] » Questions. Do you have any questions for

[4:14:18] us, David, of what we've discussed?

[4:14:23] >> Uh I think going back to your fir the

[4:14:26] first motion that was made about the the

[4:14:29] map. Um, is there specific

[4:14:33] uh text or

[4:14:36] narrative that you would want to include

[4:14:40] that isn't already in the document or

[4:14:44] that would further explain kind of the

[4:14:46] purpose behind that map?

[4:14:48] >> I think the the text would be simply

[4:14:51] just identifying what the map is and

[4:14:53] that it's taking the maps from whatever

[4:14:55] exhibit and this one and putting them

[4:14:56] together so that you can see the

[4:14:58] overlay. It would seem that the person

[4:15:00] that made the motion could come up with

[4:15:02] some generic text for you.

[4:15:05] >> But I also he also gets paid to do that.

[4:15:06] So

[4:15:08] >> yeah,

[4:15:08] >> Chad GPT does it for you. So

[4:15:10] >> just do the same thing, dude.

[4:15:12] >> But an idea.

[4:15:13] >> It's not anything too elaborate.

[4:15:15] >> Yeah.

[4:15:16] >> Just words that describe the picture of what you're looking at.

[4:15:20] >> Correct.

[4:15:21] >> Yes.

[4:15:23] >> Thank you, David.

[4:15:24] >> I like that one. Can I Can I ask one

[4:15:27] more question on page nine? Can you pull

[4:15:29] page nine? Just check.

[4:15:33] >> I did just check.

[4:15:35] >> Yeah.

[4:15:35] >> Put the hands up.

[4:15:36] >> Did you not?

[4:15:37] >> I forgot.

[4:15:38] >> Um

[4:15:39] >> nervous.

[4:15:40] >> Is that map in the key takeaways? Um

[4:15:44] David Mm.

[4:15:46] Can we go up a little bit in the little

[4:15:48] gray box in that key takeaway? Can we

[4:15:51] acknowledge the growth boundary in that

[4:15:53] takeaway? So if we keep continue forward

[4:15:57] with the growth boundary concept, there

[4:15:59] will be places on the map below that are

[4:16:01] outside of the growth boundary, right?

[4:16:03] And so yes, while they are

[4:16:07] vacant,

[4:16:09] we have no intentions of right now

[4:16:12] growing within those areas. That's the

[4:16:15] only that's to just just to put the full

[4:16:18] context on what's actually available.

[4:16:22] >> What page

[4:16:23] >> nine? It's right there.

[4:16:26] >> Yeah. The the the takeaway from this

[4:16:28] whole section is this these are the

[4:16:31] areas within the city that are big and

[4:16:34] could be filled up with homes or

[4:16:35] whatever. That's that's fair.

[4:16:40] It it leaves out the fact that we have

[4:16:43] some policy decisions that we've made

[4:16:45] prior with the growth boundary that

[4:16:48] we're not ready to go there. And all I'm

[4:16:50] saying is can we acknowledge that?

[4:16:53] >> Yeah. Yeah. And I I think that's

[4:16:54] >> just one more bullet in the key

[4:16:55] takeaway.

[4:16:55] >> Yeah. And I think that's the intent

[4:16:57] because the shortly after this is where

[4:16:59] it goes into the growth boundary and

[4:17:02] protection.

[4:17:03] >> Yep. We get there.

[4:17:06] >> This is merely Yeah. I think the intent

[4:17:08] behind this was merely just to point out

[4:17:11] that in order to have a well-designed

[4:17:14] development, something that isn't just

[4:17:16] trying to make it fit within a smaller

[4:17:20] or

[4:17:21] an oddshaped property or something that

[4:17:24] has okay

[4:17:25] >> other things that this these are the

[4:17:28] large scale good opportunities that in

[4:17:31] the next 10 20 30 years when we're

[4:17:34] talking development, this is where we

[4:17:36] can really focus and have a quality

[4:17:39] design rather than more of an infill

[4:17:42] make it work kind of situation.

[4:17:43] >> Sure.

[4:17:45] I get what you're trying to accomplish.

[4:17:47] You're saying here's what's left big

[4:17:48] picture which then focuses a future

[4:17:51] developer into those areas.

[4:17:54] Next page is future developer don't come

[4:17:57] to these areas which some of them are

[4:18:00] great in this map. So it's is a little

[4:18:02] contradictory. I think maybe it might be

[4:18:04] just in that paragraph that with so few

[4:18:06] large sites available,

[4:18:08] just take that out. These aren't

[4:18:10] necessarily available. Like these are

[4:18:11] the opportunities. Maybe just frame it

[4:18:14] in a way of here are the opportunities.

[4:18:15] They're not available for anybody,

[4:18:18] but here are the opportunities that are

[4:18:19] left.

[4:18:20] >> I I really understand the concern you're

[4:18:22] expressing. I feel like

[4:18:24] >> there's a butt coming.

[4:18:25] >> There is a big one. I think we take it

[4:18:28] out. I think we just delete page nine.

[4:18:30] I think David, you wrote it.

[4:18:32] So tell me if I'm interpreting right.

[4:18:34] Page nine I think is meant to direct

[4:18:35] you, not the developer.

[4:18:38] >> And if it's causing confusion, it's

[4:18:40] that's an unnecessary cloud. It's meant

[4:18:43] to tell you, hey guys, when you see one

[4:18:45] of these parcels come to you, take

[4:18:47] special care because it's 20 acres and

[4:18:49] you can do something special there. You

[4:18:51] can do mixed use. You can do complete

[4:18:53] neighborhood. You can do that. You can

[4:18:54] do lots of things there because it's 20.

[4:18:56] But when farmer stops farming and it's

[4:19:00] five acres or I've got a twoacre lot

[4:19:02] that I want to subdivide, right? These

[4:19:04] little one one and two acre types, five

[4:19:06] acre types,

[4:19:07] >> those aren't those just happen because

[4:19:10] they're all I can do is one road, three

[4:19:13] culus acts off of it and and I get kind

[4:19:15] of a lame development. That's terrible.

[4:19:17] I don't mean it like that. It's 10:30,

[4:19:18] the filter's dying.

[4:19:21] >> But this is more to direct you like,

[4:19:22] hey, when you see something, these are

[4:19:24] so special because they're 20 acres.

[4:19:26] when you see one of these really do

[4:19:28] something good here it's meant to direct

[4:19:30] you not focus people go here got

[4:19:33] >> so if that if it's doing that I think we

[4:19:35] take it out because it's not wanting to

[4:19:38] do that is that how' I do

[4:19:40] >> yeah and I I think this this page could

[4:19:42] even be distilled into one strategy it

[4:19:46] could just be if if the growth boundary

[4:19:49] expands to include properties that are

[4:19:52] large scale

[4:19:54] to take you to kind of point the the

[4:19:57] council into making a decision that is

[4:20:01] quality.

[4:20:01] >> I'm totally fine with that. Something

[4:20:03] that more in the future like that

[4:20:06] strategy rather than

[4:20:07] >> if a 20 if a 10 20 acre parcel becomes

[4:20:09] available, take advantage of it. Right.

[4:20:11] >> That's what you're saying. Yep.

[4:20:12] >> Okay. Yeah. I like that.

[4:20:14] >> That's all we're trying to say. So, if

[4:20:15] it's confusing, you know, we can word it

[4:20:17] differently. If it

[4:20:18] >> just take it out and put it as a

[4:20:19] strategy, a oneline strategy.

[4:20:20] >> Okay.

[4:20:22] >> Great. I'm totally fine with that

[4:20:24] because it that takes away a page. Good

[4:20:26] thing and

[4:20:27] >> makes confusion for me.

[4:20:28] >> It's not confusing. I don't want that

[4:20:31] confusion. I you've expressed that a

[4:20:32] couple times and we're not hitting the

[4:20:33] mark. So, I don't like that.

[4:20:35] >> Okay. That's three, Shane.

[4:20:37] >> No, it's four.

[4:20:38] >> Oh, it's four.

[4:20:38] >> Let me ask, do any of you agree with

[4:20:40] that? Or is it just one?

[4:20:42] >> That's fine.

[4:20:43] >> At two.

[4:20:43] >> Shake your heads.

[4:20:44] >> We don't want him confused. Help him

[4:20:46] out.

[4:20:46] >> Thank you. You're the best, all of you.

[4:20:49] All right, I'll call it a night. We'll

[4:20:51] make that a strategy.

[4:20:54] >> Page nine is strategy. You got that

[4:20:56] motion. Okay.

[4:20:57] >> So, I have three takeaways. Can I just

[4:21:00] re review these?

[4:21:04] » I have three takeaways. Add a map

[4:21:07] general plan and APA.

[4:21:09] >> That first one. Second one is you want

[4:21:12] to have a focused study on the Dry Creek

[4:21:14] area. The third one is remove

[4:21:18] page nine. add it as a strategy goal

[4:21:25] instead.

[4:21:26] >> Sounds like you're trying to make sure

[4:21:27] you have enough syllables there.

[4:21:29] >> Did

[4:21:29] >> I just I just wrote it as I was

[4:21:31] >> um

[4:21:32] >> did I I got the three that you

[4:21:33] specifically acted on and with this last

[4:21:35] suggestion. There were others you

[4:21:37] discussed, but I heard the discussions

[4:21:39] kind of die on the vine and so I didn't

[4:21:41] note them. How did I do?

[4:21:44] >> That's right.

[4:21:44] >> Good. Are we going to

[4:21:45] >> I would add the focus growth center. I

[4:21:48] missed that.

[4:21:49] >> Yeah.

[4:21:50] >> Is that what you just said?

[4:21:51] >> I wrote that one down.

[4:21:52] >> Isn't that the station area plan?

[4:21:53] >> No, no, no. It was just defining focus

[4:21:55] growth centers. FGC. Yeah. Yeah. Not at

[4:21:58] Center Street.

[4:21:59] >> Yeah.

[4:22:00] >> Focus growth centers. Clarify. Focus

[4:22:02] growth.

[4:22:02] >> Changing the wording. Whatever you have

[4:22:03] to do there.

[4:22:04] >> Clarify.

[4:22:04] >> It's confusing.

[4:22:05] >> Are you guys all good with that?

[4:22:06] >> Yeah.

[4:22:07] >> No.

[4:22:08] >> Okay. Clarify focused growth.

[4:22:10] >> That study area.

[4:22:11] >> Okay.

[4:22:13] >> Yeah. Something like that. You got that

[4:22:14] one, David? Okay.

[4:22:17] Von, how you doing over there?

[4:22:20] >> A little nervous.

[4:22:21] >> My tailbone. Not that. I'm talking

[4:22:23] legal.

[4:22:27] » I mean, we all want a bio break, but

[4:22:29] >> okay with it. He's okay with it.

[4:22:31] >> We also want to just go home, right?

[4:22:34] >> Okay. Um,

[4:22:36] >> we need to make a motion.

[4:22:37] >> You don't need to table it, but you can

[4:22:39] table it.

[4:22:40] >> Can you table it or just We've had a

[4:22:41] public hearing on it.

[4:22:43] >> Yeah,

[4:22:43] >> we we can just say we gave that

[4:22:45] direction. leave it then

[4:22:46] >> and not have to table it and have you

[4:22:48] guys come back to us at our next meeting

[4:22:51] >> with some of those some of those

[4:22:52] adjustments. And I would say, you know,

[4:22:55] I mean, feel free to communicate those

[4:22:58] to us before then. We can

[4:23:00] >> Yeah, we'll work on these and try to get

[4:23:01] them out as soon as we can.

[4:23:02] >> Culminate culminate it in a two week.

[4:23:06] Maybe the first time we see this stuff

[4:23:07] either, right?

[4:23:08] >> David M man is smiling. Tomorrow is a

[4:23:12] good day. I'm already thinking about how

[4:23:15] this can be changed.

[4:23:16] >> Yeah. Look at it.

[4:23:17] >> Somebody said his love language a few

[4:23:20] hours ago when you said something about,

[4:23:21] you know, look hyper study this area. I

[4:23:23] mean, he's lit up.

[4:23:25] >> You're going to Disneyland for Harrison.

[4:23:27] He's going to Disneyland tomorrow.

[4:23:29] >> Yeah,

[4:23:30] >> he likes it. Hopefully David's still not

[4:23:33] watching from Tennessee.

[4:23:33] >> Yeah, David. David M and David G.

[4:23:35] >> Really?

[4:23:36] >> He to go to bed.

[4:23:38] >> He fell asleep at some point.

[4:23:39] >> It's like getting excited about

[4:23:40] wastewater treatment, right?

[4:23:42] >> Yeah. He's just liking it because he so

[4:23:43] much easier

[4:23:44] >> that side of the dis side of the DAS is

[4:23:47] just passionate about where you're

[4:23:48] >> mathematical equation to change poop

[4:23:50] into water. That's a much better

[4:23:52] conversation.

[4:23:53] >> Are we okay that the uh the gra growth

[4:23:56] management boundary amendment is is that

[4:23:59] dealing with the same thing that we've

[4:24:01] been discussing or are we talking about

[4:24:02] a different thing there? Yeah, I think

[4:24:04] we talked briefly about the 1050

[4:24:06] annexation specifically uh as kind of

[4:24:10] something that there was some

[4:24:11] uncertainty about of whether or not it

[4:24:13] should be included in the growth

[4:24:14] boundary, but that's something that we

[4:24:16] can probably bring up again once these

[4:24:20] other changes are addressed.

[4:24:22] >> Oh, but this is a separate ordinance

[4:24:23] that I've got right on item D item F.

[4:24:26] Okay. I'm I'm seeing this. So, mayor, it

[4:24:28] is a separate ordinance. If you guys

[4:24:29] want to discuss and act on that today or

[4:24:31] if you want to take it step one, step

[4:24:33] two again in a future conversation, I

[4:24:35] think as staff were fine either way.

[4:24:38] >> I Yeah, I personally think we wait just

[4:24:41] because it's got the addition of the

[4:24:43] 1040 West annexation or whatever.

[4:24:46] >> Yeah. And in the meantime, I think it

[4:24:48] would be great for us if you guys give

[4:24:50] serious con consideration to I think it

[4:24:53] brings it into the growth management

[4:24:55] boundary, right? And do you want that?

[4:24:57] And if you specifically want it out,

[4:24:59] >> we just need that direction.

[4:25:01] >> There's two there's two pending

[4:25:02] annexations that are included in the

[4:25:04] growth boundary. So if

[4:25:06] >> that we've had

[4:25:07] >> I don't want to include them.

[4:25:08] >> No, I don't think we've had

[4:25:10] >> I think they both gone for study.

[4:25:12] >> Yeah, we've just had

[4:25:13] >> Oh, is that where Oh,

[4:25:15] >> okay.

[4:25:16] >> Yep.

[4:25:16] >> Okay.

[4:25:18] >> I'm mixing the two up.

[4:25:20] >> LBA

[4:25:21] >> and we're letting the

[4:25:22] >> 9inth South just kind of fizzle out. No, strong feelings one way or another on

[4:25:27] that.

[4:25:27] >> Readers Digest.

[4:25:28] >> I think to the same point that we talked

[4:25:30] about with that caught me off guard

[4:25:33] because it's quiet in here. Travis is

[4:25:35] turning things up on us. I think that we

[4:25:37] if they really feel passionately about

[4:25:39] it, do the oneoff and ask for a change

[4:25:42] in the

[4:25:44] >> in their general plan there because the

[4:25:46] problem is we have seen

[4:25:48] stuff in that area recently and we would

[4:25:51] be changing a general plan potentially

[4:25:52] on what they've shown us. Whether or not

[4:25:55] that's a dealbreaker or not, I think

[4:25:57] that it'd be worth having that

[4:25:59] conversation if they really do care that

[4:26:01] much

[4:26:01] >> as a group or individual.

[4:26:02] >> Yeah. Either way.

[4:26:05] >> Okay.

[4:26:05] >> Yeah. and and that's my opinion

[4:26:07] >> and I want to acknowledge like some of

[4:26:08] their concerns I drive

[4:26:10] >> the street in front of their home I know

[4:26:13] what talking about so I mean

[4:26:16] >> without without some improvement on that

[4:26:18] road and adding homes there

[4:26:21] >> is is tough so so I I sympathize with

[4:26:26] what they're what they're looking at I I

[4:26:28] just think we could get some of that

[4:26:30] with I don't think it's a binary choice

[4:26:33] I think we can get some of that

[4:26:35] improvement

[4:26:36] with some development down there too

[4:26:38] that that I think we'd want to see.

[4:26:41] Yeah. Some sidewalks, a little bit

[4:26:43] bigger street stuff than Yeah.

[4:26:46] >> For me, we're we're dang close and I

[4:26:48] don't want to There's not another motion

[4:26:50] to make. There's not anything else. But

[4:26:51] I think um what House's point I think is

[4:26:54] legit. I'm I would be very fine if it

[4:26:57] was low density there. I'm totally fine

[4:26:59] with that. Um there are some map tweaks

[4:27:02] that I would want to talk about at some

[4:27:04] future date. and one of them is the A on

[4:27:07] the west side of I-15. I think that's

[4:27:08] not in my head not fully resolved why

[4:27:10] there's a big patch of what could be

[4:27:13] very prime real estate in a um however

[4:27:17] it's it's a living document too and and

[4:27:20] I think that we'll we can when any one

[4:27:23] of us says you know what I want to talk

[4:27:25] about in two weeks is this and let's

[4:27:27] bring it forward and talk about it

[4:27:28] >> and it'll be probably a more productive

[4:27:30] conversation as the oneoff

[4:27:33] >> is done

[4:27:34] >> I think the rules say that two of us

[4:27:35] have to want to talk about not just one

[4:27:36] of us Well, if Stacy calls I want to

[4:27:39] talk about it, I'm saying yes, no matter

[4:27:40] what it is.

[4:27:41] >> But if you call and say it,

[4:27:43] >> that's fine with me. You guys don't have

[4:27:44] to agree with me. I don't care. But I'm

[4:27:45] going to agree with Stacy on the

[4:27:47] conversation, disagree with her on the

[4:27:49] resolution,

[4:27:50] >> the concept, please. But it's I think we

[4:27:53] need to be and I think for those that

[4:27:55] you know aren't comfortable with the

[4:27:58] this plan going forward need to know

[4:28:01] that at any point if they want to come

[4:28:03] and say here is the reason I think you

[4:28:05] messed up. We will listen to them.

[4:28:07] >> Yeah. 100%.

[4:28:08] >> Right. And have a conversation around

[4:28:09] that.

[4:28:09] >> I I think I've said it but 13 years it's

[4:28:12] we I think it's 13 times it's been

[4:28:14] amended. So it's not it's not Yep.

[4:28:17] >> It's not changed all the time.

[4:28:18] >> It's not Yeah. And at some point I'm

[4:28:21] gonna have an argument against the

[4:28:22] argument that Kevin had for me today on

[4:28:25] the oneoff because I don't know how to

[4:28:27] avoid it now,

[4:28:28] >> right?

[4:28:30] >> I hate doing it oneoff. Absolutely.

[4:28:31] That's why I like the the stop smiling

[4:28:34] over there, David. Stop it.

[4:28:36] >> Um I like the smaller area plan over

[4:28:39] there because it's it could feel

[4:28:40] oneoffish if we don't do something.

[4:28:42] >> I agree. Yeah, but there's a there's a

[4:28:46] decent conversation to had at at a small

[4:28:48] area around Benjamin like how far do we

[4:28:51] go with commercial to the north,

[4:28:53] >> right?

[4:28:53] >> And how what does that blend into? So,

[4:28:55] there's still some

[4:28:56] >> some things to talk about that are just

[4:28:58] too granular at this level.

[4:29:00] >> And there's some plans that are coming

[4:29:01] forward about that area. We're having

[4:29:03] these conversations early.

[4:29:04] >> Yeah. When a plan comes forward, be

[4:29:05] like, "All right, this is this is what

[4:29:06] we get. We need to talk about this from

[4:29:08] a general perspective." So, yeah. Amen.

[4:29:11] >> It's not dead.

[4:29:13] Okay. So, F. Did we want to uh move on?

[4:29:18] >> Just move on.

[4:29:18] Leave it. Leave it there,

[4:29:20] too. No. No reason to table. Do we need

[4:29:22] to take a Anybody need to take a break

[4:29:23] before we go RDA?

[4:29:24] >> Let's get these last ones done.

[4:29:26] >> Oh, I thought we were done. I thought

[4:29:28] going home.

[4:29:28] >> RDA consent item.

[4:29:30] >> We adjourn to RDA. Right.

[4:29:32] >> Yep. I would entertain a motion to

[4:29:33] adjourn to RDA.

[4:29:34] >> So moved.

[4:29:36] >> Motion made by Director Carden, second

[4:29:38] by Director Oiler. All in favor say yes.

[4:29:41] Uran redevelopment agency.

[4:29:43] >> I move that we approve the minutes from

[4:29:45] last RDA.

[4:29:46] >> Motion made by Director Carden.

[4:29:47] >> Second.

[4:29:48] by Director Beck. All in favor

[4:29:50] say yes.

[4:29:51] >> Yes.

[4:29:52] >> Minutes are approved. Jordan.

[4:29:54] >> Jack. Can you pull up the slide?

[4:29:57] >> Jordan's been waiting all night for the

[4:29:59] second be on the

[4:30:01] >> ready to go.

[4:30:02] >> He fell asleep over there.

[4:30:05] >> He was lulled to sleep by all that. Uh,

[4:30:08] we're at the RDA.

[4:30:11] >> Yeah, you sound so official.

[4:30:12] >> Around slide 23.

[4:30:14] >> Did you just make that up?

[4:30:17] >> That's the wrong slides.

[4:30:19] >> You are directors.

[4:30:21] >> Yeah, there you made for me.

[4:30:24] >> I think it was slide 23 somewhere in

[4:30:26] that

[4:30:34] » um

[4:30:36] >> RDA. So, we got to go back, I think.

[4:30:39] There we go. One.

[4:30:42] Yeah, that in town.

[4:30:44] >> I don't know where that is. It looks

[4:30:46] dilapidated, though, which is the

[4:30:48] purpose of redevelopment agencies is to

[4:30:52] >> provide funding sources to redevelop

[4:30:54] distressed or underutilized properties.

[4:30:57] >> Um, so we have multiple different

[4:30:58] project areas in our RDA. Um, the north

[4:31:02] industrial project area is located near

[4:31:03] the airport. There are some funds

[4:31:05] remaining in that fund or in that

[4:31:08] project area. Uh final expenses in FY27

[4:31:11] for contracted work by developer will

[4:31:13] clean out the remaining $200,000 of

[4:31:16] funds in that. Um Sar Bonita is the name

[4:31:20] of the RDA area for the Young Living

[4:31:22] expansion. This RDA expires in this

[4:31:25] upcoming fiscal year 2027.

[4:31:29] Um the budget for that is uh 275,000.

[4:31:32] And then Crona is the name of the Canyon

[4:31:34] Creek RDA area. This year we made

[4:31:37] payment two of 10 in incentives to

[4:31:40] target. Um so FY27 will be the third of

[4:31:45] 10. Um any questions on any of these

[4:31:48] project areas? Um and what's happening

[4:31:51] with them?

[4:31:54] >> What's the negative on Sarah Bonita?

[4:31:56] >> Uh on Sierra Bonita.

[4:31:58] >> Yeah. Why is 45? the the agreement there

[4:32:02] is they get a portion of the property

[4:32:03] taxes back

[4:32:04] >> down 45.

[4:32:05] >> Yeah. Property taxes are a function of

[4:32:08] uh real property meaning building and

[4:32:10] land but also personal property um such

[4:32:13] as equipment and sometimes that

[4:32:15] equipment can depreciate and you

[4:32:18] actually get

[4:32:19] >> the difference from one year to the

[4:32:20] next.

[4:32:21] >> Different my bad.

[4:32:22] >> Yeah.

[4:32:23] >> Read the

[4:32:24] >> but most of the time you see it uh

[4:32:26] generally increases. Um, one thing with

[4:32:29] Young Living is they part of the

[4:32:31] agreement for them to get some of those

[4:32:32] uh tax dollars back is that they need to

[4:32:35] meet the uh certain job requirements and

[4:32:38] they've not been they didn't meet those

[4:32:40] last year and I don't believe they

[4:32:42] submitted anything this year. So, right

[4:32:45] now they're not in meeting those

[4:32:47] requirements.

[4:32:53] » Right. I remember discussing that.

[4:32:55] >> Yeah. So that's why the the expense in

[4:32:58] last in fiscal 25 was lower.

[4:33:00] >> Yeah.

[4:33:01] Um any other questions on

[4:33:04] >> questions for Jordan about our

[4:33:06] >> We'll have a this fall this will follow

[4:33:08] the same timeline as the the city's

[4:33:10] budget. So we'll have a public hearing

[4:33:11] on this uh June 2nd.

[4:33:15] >> So is there a need for a motion here?

[4:33:17] >> I believe we still need to approve a

[4:33:19] tentative budget. Is that

[4:33:20] >> and set the hearing?

[4:33:24] Okay,

[4:33:26] there's no other questions. I'd

[4:33:27] entertain a motion uh for uh uh to adopt

[4:33:32] a tenative budget for the RDAs and u set

[4:33:36] a public hearing.

[4:33:40] » I move to adopt the RDA consent item and

[4:33:43] uh move to uh public hearing. Was it

[4:33:47] >> on June 6th?

[4:33:49] >> Second.

[4:33:49] My bad.

[4:33:50] >> June.

[4:33:51] 2nd.

[4:33:52] >> On June. wasn't seconding the motion.

[4:33:54] >> Not June second.

[4:33:55] >> June second.

[4:33:56] >> It wasn't a consent item.

[4:33:59] >> Tentative second. Okay. Motion made by

[4:34:02] Councilman Tuk.

[4:34:03] >> Yeah. It's not a consent item, though.

[4:34:05] Right.

[4:34:08] >> Manager.

[4:34:10] >> I would just make make the motion that

[4:34:12] I'm not seeing the language there.

[4:34:13] >> I said that incorrectly.

[4:34:14] >> I'd make the motion that uh we approve

[4:34:18] the tenative budget for the RDA. Oh,

[4:34:22] excuse me. She found it.

[4:34:24] >> Maybe it lo get locked out. I did get

[4:34:27] >> logged me out, too. I just had

[4:34:29] good.

[4:34:31] >> Okay. I could try I could try again.

[4:34:33] >> Do you want me to read it now?

[4:34:34] >> You got it.

[4:34:35] >> It's a lot. Yeah. Under new business.

[4:34:37] >> Perfect.

[4:34:38] >> Okay. So, let's see here. Jesse, it's

[4:34:41] this one here, right?

[4:34:42] >> Yep. It's RDA.

[4:34:43] >> Okay. I move to adopt the redevelopment

[4:34:46] agency fiscal year 2027 tenative budget

[4:34:48] and to set a public hearing for June 2nd

[4:34:51] 2026 at 6 o'clock PM during the city

[4:34:53] council meeting to consider adoption of

[4:34:55] the final budget.

[4:34:57] >> Perfect. Councilman motion made by

[4:34:59] Councilman Tuk.

[4:35:02] >> Director Tuk. Sorry.

[4:35:03] >> Second.

[4:35:05] by director Carden. A roll call

[4:35:08] vote here. Director Tuk. Yes. Director

[4:35:11] Carden. Yes. Director Order. Yes.

[4:35:12] Director Beck and Director Marshall.

[4:35:15] >> Yes,

[4:35:15] >> you can vote on this one too, I think,

[4:35:16] can't you?

[4:35:18] >> Director,

[4:35:19] >> chairperson.

[4:35:20] >> Probably not.

[4:35:22] >> Yes. Is the chair and you can uh keep it

[4:35:24] legal. Yeah. Matters.

[4:35:27] >> Okay. Uh I entertain a motion to uh go

[4:35:31] out of RDA.

[4:35:34] >> I move that we adjourn to LBA.

[4:35:37] >> Motion made by Director Carden.

[4:35:40] >> Second. Seconded by Director Beck to go

[4:35:43] into LBA.

[4:35:45] >> All in favor say yes.

[4:35:47] >> Yes.

[4:35:48] >> Thank you. Trustee Carden.

[4:35:53] » I move that we approve the local uh the

[4:35:55] LBA consent items.

[4:35:57] >> Motion made by Trustee Carden.

[4:36:00] >> Second.

[4:36:00] >> Seconded by Trustee Tuk. All in favor

[4:36:03] say yes.

[4:36:04] >> Yes.

[4:36:06] >> All right. Let's talk tentative budget

[4:36:08] for the LBA. Um so this fund accounts

[4:36:11] for city buildings that are built with

[4:36:13] the building serving as the collateral

[4:36:15] on the debt. Um the building we are in

[4:36:18] library hall was built this way and the

[4:36:21] new SFCN building uh was also built this

[4:36:24] way and funded this way. In FY2027, we

[4:36:28] have budgeted to make uh debt payments

[4:36:31] on those two existing buildings. And

[4:36:33] also, it is uh the current budget

[4:36:36] proposes to issue debt in FY2027 for the

[4:36:39] construction of fire station 61 rebuild,

[4:36:42] which we had a groundbreaking for last

[4:36:45] week, and uh a public works building uh

[4:36:50] is proposed as well. Um that

[4:36:54] All right. Um,

[4:36:56] fire station 61 rebuild estimated

[4:36:58] opening in late fall 2027

[4:37:01] constructed out of this LBA fund. Debt

[4:37:03] will be repaid with a combination of

[4:37:05] public safety impact fees and capital

[4:37:06] project funding sources.

[4:37:10] And then the proposed public works

[4:37:11] building. Um, this project has not yet

[4:37:14] been approved by yourselves. uh the

[4:37:16] architect and CMGC are working on

[4:37:19] preliminary drawings and cost estimates

[4:37:21] and that if uh if we move forward will

[4:37:25] be repaid by impact fees and utility

[4:37:27] revenues.

[4:37:29] Any questions on the LBA tentative

[4:37:33] budget?

[4:37:34] I think it'd be helpful to add emphasis

[4:37:36] to the point that

[4:37:40] the budget would have the

[4:37:44] numbers but no dollars behind it. And so

[4:37:47] the the actions would come on the fire

[4:37:50] station. That's that decision has been

[4:37:52] made a couple of weeks ago uh for the

[4:37:55] public works building. That decision is

[4:37:57] forthcoming. So this in if you approve

[4:38:01] the budget and eventually we enact the

[4:38:03] budget as we've outlined here then you

[4:38:05] don't have to make a budget amendment if

[4:38:07] or when you approve it. If you never

[4:38:09] approve the project and you never

[4:38:10] approve the bonding for it then it will

[4:38:12] never happen. Uh maybe in line with

[4:38:15] this, we would I think I think uh we're

[4:38:18] proposing either next council meeting or

[4:38:21] one more in June, we would bring a

[4:38:22] parameters resolution that would outline

[4:38:24] the the structure of how a bond could

[4:38:27] look and that would give us the clarity

[4:38:30] that if you decide that we could bond

[4:38:32] for both the public works and fire

[4:38:35] station or just the fire station

[4:38:38] um if you don't decide to do the public

[4:38:40] works building, one of the mechanisms

[4:38:43] that we're working on with Jonathan is

[4:38:44] actually um not just that you approve

[4:38:48] with the GMP but also that there is

[4:38:50] maybe some signatures or something like

[4:38:52] that of typically it's the mayor and the

[4:38:55] city manager and the finance director

[4:38:57] and that we have maybe the mayor those

[4:38:59] three plus maybe one of the council

[4:39:01] members. So there's just an extra step

[4:39:03] in check that we don't execute the bond

[4:39:06] until we're done. just a couple of belts

[4:39:08] and suspenders types of things, but it allows us to have that clarity that

[4:39:13] if we decide to go, we can go quickly.

[4:39:18] Um there may be a reason that we say,

[4:39:20] "Oh, we want to go now because rates

[4:39:22] have really dipped and we think they're

[4:39:24] going to come up, right?" It just gives

[4:39:25] us a lot of flexibility. So, we we will

[4:39:27] propose to do that next uh either next

[4:39:31] council meeting or the one after that.

[4:39:33] But just like we've talked in midway and

[4:39:36] we reviewed in March, no decision is

[4:39:39] made on the no decision has been made

[4:39:41] until you say that decision has been

[4:39:43] made and either you you do it whenever

[4:39:46] you do it or you do it at least when you

[4:39:47] approve the GMP.

[4:39:51] How did I do with that? Is that clear?

[4:39:53] >> Yeah, sounds good.

[4:39:54] >> Okay, sure.

[4:39:55] >> It's 10:30.

[4:39:59] » Okay. If uh there's no other

[4:40:01] >> You said you were there.

[4:40:03] questions there. I'd entertain a motion

[4:40:06] to approve the local building authority

[4:40:07] fiscal year 2027 tenative budget.

[4:40:10] >> Remember that

[4:40:12] >> disappoint.

[4:40:13] >> I move to approve the local building

[4:40:15] authority fiscal year 2027 tenative

[4:40:18] budget and to set a public hearing for

[4:40:20] June 2nd 6 p.m. during the city council

[4:40:24] meeting to consider adoption of the

[4:40:25] final budget.

[4:40:28] >> Motion made by trustee Oiler.

[4:40:30] >> Second. Seconded by Trustee Marshall

[4:40:34] in a encouraging way.

[4:40:37] Uh, roll call vote here. Trustee

[4:40:39] Marshall,

[4:40:39] >> yes.

[4:40:40] >> Vice Chair Beck,

[4:40:41] >> yes.

[4:40:42] >> Trustee Oiler,

[4:40:44] >> yes.

[4:40:45] >> Trustee Carden,

[4:40:46] >> yes.

[4:40:46] >> And trustee Tuk,

[4:40:47] >> yes.

[4:40:48] >> That passes. I would entertain a motion

[4:40:50] to reconvene to city council.

[4:40:52] >> So moved.

[4:40:53] >> Motion made by Trustee Carden.

[4:40:55] >> Seconded by Trustee Oiler. All in favor

[4:40:58] say yes.

[4:40:59] >> We're back to normal. Council people in council meeting any other items that

[4:41:05] need to be brought up here?

[4:41:08] >> Sure. Why not go another hour?

[4:41:10] >> I move that we adjourn.

[4:41:11] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden.

[4:41:14] >> Second.

[4:41:14] by Councilwoman Beck to adjourn

[4:41:16] council meeting. All in favor say yes.

[4:41:18] We're adjourned. Thank you

[4:41:19] everybody for

Spanish Fork City Council | May 5, 2026

Transcript