[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