[0:12] Kindle, are you ready?

[0:14] Okay. Welcome to the Springdale Town

[0:17] Council regular meeting. Today is

[0:19] Wednesday, June 10th, 2026.

[0:22] It's 5:01 p.m. and we're at the

[0:24] Springdale Canyon Community Center. With

[0:27] us from the town, we have Chief Brek. We

[0:29] have Joe Barker, who's new to these

[0:31] meetings and he's going to love them. We

[0:34] have Nile Connolly, Tom Dansey, Kindle

[0:37] Sagers, and we have Ryan Gubler. On the

[0:40] dais from Council, we have Pat Campbell,

[0:43] Randy Aiton, me, Barbara Bruno, Jack

[0:46] Burns, and Kyla Topham.

[0:48] And I will start with the Pledge of

[0:51] Allegiance, if you'll join me.

[0:58] » I pledge

[0:59] allegiance to the flag

[1:01] of the United States of America,

[1:03] and to the republic for which it stands,

[1:06] one nation under God, indivisible, with

[1:09] liberty and justice for all.

[1:17] » Could I get a motion to approve the

[1:19] regular meeting agenda?

[1:23] » I move we approve the regular meeting

[1:24] agenda.

[1:25] >> I'll second it.

[1:26] >> Got a motion by Randy and a second by

[1:27] Jack um I'm sorry, Pat.

[1:30] >> Randy, yeah.

[1:31] >> Barbara, I.

[1:31] >> Jack, I.

[1:32] >> Kyla, I.

[1:34] >> Hey.

[1:35] First item on the agenda is general

[1:37] announcements. Do we have any from the

[1:39] town?

[1:51] » Thank you. So, first most important

[1:53] announcement, I didn't get permission to

[1:55] share this one, but uh I'd like to recognize Tom Dancy. He

[1:59] became a grandfather today.

[2:01] >> Aw.

[2:03] >> He did.

[2:03] >> [applause and cheering]

[2:06] » Congrats to him. I'm probably

[2:08] >> Gray. I thought grandpas had gray.

[2:12] Okay.

[2:13] >> It's coming.

[2:14] >> So, I'm going to get in trouble later

[2:15] for announcing that, but that's okay.

[2:16] >> or a girl?

[2:17] >> It's a boy.

[2:18] >> And where does he live? Is he down here?

[2:20] >> He lives in Colorado.

[2:21] >> Oh, for now.

[2:22] >> Okay. Okay.

[2:25] Yeah.

[2:26] for a lot of reasons.

[2:28] >> Okay. Um so, we have a trails open house

[2:31] that's actually going on right now in

[2:33] the gallery. Um this isn't uh it's been

[2:35] put on by Bike Utah. We've entered into

[2:37] an agreement with them to do some trails

[2:39] community outreach. So, this is their

[2:41] first big push for some public

[2:43] engagement. Um there will be more in the

[2:46] coming weeks via surveys and site visits

[2:49] and uh community um

[2:52] stakeholder interviews. So,

[2:54] we just encourage people to participate

[2:55] with that so we can get as much feedback

[2:57] as possible.

[2:58] Uh as part of the America 250 program

[3:02] uh celebration, the community center

[3:03] will be holding a lecture titled Painted

[3:06] Canyons, the story of the Utah Parks

[3:08] Company. It will be It will be put on by

[3:09] Professor Ryan D. Paul from the SUU

[3:12] Department of History, Sociology, and

[3:14] Anthropology.

[3:15] That will be on Thursday, July 2nd at

[3:17] 6:00 p.m.

[3:19] And that is free for anyone to attend.

[3:20] It focuses on uh the Utah Parks Company

[3:22] and the impact it had right here in in

[3:24] Zion Canyon. So, it should be really

[3:26] good.

[3:27] Um and then last, this isn't necessarily

[3:29] a town

[3:30] uh event, but there is it's worth noting

[3:33] the uh

[3:34] July 4th parade will be on Saturday,

[3:36] July 4th at 9:00 a.m. Prior to that will

[3:38] be the pancake breakfast, I believe, at

[3:40] 7:30.

[3:41] >> 7:30?

[3:42] and then Mayor, you you

[3:44] there's a flag raising as well at 7:00.

[3:46] >> Yeah, in honor of the America's 250, we

[3:49] are have We, we Lions Club, are having a

[3:51] flag raising ceremony around 7:00 a.m.

[3:54] And it'll be the local fire department

[3:56] as well as I think at least one or two

[3:59] of our police officers. And we're hoping

[4:01] to have a local musical performance as

[4:04] well.

[4:05] I I have heard it's it's firm. Okay.

[4:08] Good.

[4:10] At the school? The elementary Just the

[4:11] usual pancake breakfast. We'll just do

[4:13] it all right there.

[4:14] So.

[4:15] >> Okay, that's all.

[4:18] >> Any other announcements? Council town?

[4:21] Okay.

[4:22] Then we'll go into the second agenda

[4:24] item, which is the voluntary

[4:25] acknowledgement. So, also in conjunction

[4:28] with the America 250, the Lieutenant

[4:31] Governor of the state of Utah

[4:33] has

[4:34] um

[4:35] offered to let us recognize some of our

[4:37] residents who do a lot for the

[4:39] community. And we want to honor four of

[4:41] them tonight. We expect to do a few more

[4:44] of these through the end of the year

[4:45] since it's a whole year of America 250.

[4:48] But um these are people who have

[4:52] helped with everything. I mean, these

[4:53] are people that every time we have a

[4:55] call for volunteers, they step up, they

[4:57] do what's required, they work hard, and

[4:59] they always go above and beyond. So, if

[5:01] I could get Sherry Icard, Regina Pegels,

[5:05] Jim Passic, and Lisa Saab to come up to

[5:07] the front of the room, I'll give you

[5:08] your certificates.

[5:12] » [applause]

[5:41] » Oh, sure.

[5:55] » Michelle, you got a ticket?

[5:56] >> Yes.

[5:56] >> Okay.

[6:25] » [applause]

[6:34] » That might be the funnest thing on our

[6:36] agenda tonight. Okay. Oh, oh, sorry,

[6:39] Jeff.

[6:40] Um

[6:41] >> [laughter]

[6:42] >> Well, forget Superintendent Brady about

[6:45] to give us a really fun update on Zion

[6:47] National Park.

[6:57] » Good afternoon.

[6:58] Um

[6:58] As you know, we'll start out with the visitation report for May this year.

[7:06] >> I can't hear him.

[7:08] It's on mute.

[7:14] » Sorry today.

[7:15] >> Yeah, that's great. Uh visitation report

[7:18] for May. Um

[7:21] Total visitation um

[7:24] was about 582,000.

[7:28] Uh that is down 1.

[7:31] 2% compared to last year's May.

[7:35] Um

[7:36] but for the year, uh we're at 1.9

[7:40] million visitors, which is up 3 and 1/3%

[7:44] Um um

[7:45] year-to-date, so

[7:47] uh still running a little bit ahead of

[7:49] last year altogether.

[7:52] Um couple other things to bring up uh

[7:55] South Campground is finally open again,

[7:57] you may have noticed, and uh

[8:00] didn't take long, it's filling up uh

[8:03] with uh rec.gov

[8:05] uh reservations, so folks are enjoying

[8:07] the new facilities over there.

[8:10] And things are looking good.

[8:12] Uh UDot fiber project has started um

[8:16] into the park on the east side. Um seems

[8:20] to be going okay, although they had a

[8:22] traffic light uh glitch um yesterday,

[8:26] which backed up traffic for a while, but

[8:28] they've gotten that straightened out. Um

[8:31] still don't have a real definitive

[8:33] schedule, and I think that's uh

[8:36] something that we and uh communities

[8:39] continue to ask UDot uh to try to pin

[8:43] that down a little better.

[8:46] But, going along good.

[8:48] Um the um

[8:50] uh large ve- vehicle uh traffic changes

[8:54] on the Zion-Mount Carmel Highway uh seem

[8:57] to be working well.

[8:59] Uh if pe- folks have uh reports uh

[9:03] of problems and such, please let me

[9:05] know, but we've had very few um even

[9:09] traffic stops. I mean, we're catching

[9:11] most people at the entrance stations,

[9:13] but um people seem to be aware of it.

[9:17] And uh working out well so far.

[9:20] Um be happy to answer any questions uh

[9:23] folks might have.

[9:26] » Questions?

[9:31] » Be safe with fire. We're under fire

[9:33] watches and red flag warnings, so

[9:36] >> I just now, while you were talking got a

[9:38] notice that Angel's Landing is closed

[9:40] indefinitely. There's damage to the

[9:42] chains. Do you know more?

[9:43] >> Not indefinitely.

[9:45] Um we Yeah, we just got a report in that

[9:49] one of the uh posts is broken.

[9:53] And uh it's it's in kind of a key

[9:55] location, so uh

[9:58] the trail crew will be up there in the

[9:59] morning to fix it.

[10:01] depends on the fix how long it'll be

[10:04] closed. So, if we're able to do um

[10:07] quick repair

[10:09] um it'll be just the time for the uh

[10:12] rock epoxy to to cure.

[10:15] Uh which is usually a day.

[10:17] Um if it's more complicated, it might be

[10:19] a couple days, so yeah.

[10:21] >> Okay.

[10:22] >> Yep. Thanks for bringing that up. I just

[10:24] saw that as I walked in, so yeah.

[10:28] >> I think that's it. Thank you.

[10:30] >> Thanks.

[10:34] » Next item on the agenda is um council

[10:36] reports. Does anyone have any questions

[10:38] or clarifications on that?

[10:42] Looks like not. So, next presentation is

[10:45] Bridget Butinski from Washington County.

[10:48] She's going to do a presentation on a

[10:51] new mapping software that the county has

[10:53] made available.

[10:55] >> I don't like these.

[11:09] Awesome. So, I'll tell you a little bit

[11:11] of history of why we are doing this. Uh

[11:13] last year obviously we all know we had

[11:15] the fire in Forsyth um Canyon. And what

[11:18] we learned from that is we needed a

[11:20] better way to reach out to our public um

[11:23] within the community and figure out how

[11:26] we give them the best information for

[11:28] evacuations. So, Jason and I, uh the

[11:31] emergency management director and I,

[11:32] went out and started looking for

[11:35] programs and um tools to figure out how

[11:38] we could move forward in being able to

[11:41] alert our community better if we have an

[11:43] evacuation necessity

[11:45] um come up, whether it's from fire,

[11:47] flood, or a uh road closure or something

[11:50] like that.

[11:52] I guess I don't get

[11:55] Like, I guess I don't get my slides

[11:56] today. It's fine. We'll start anyway. Um

[11:59] so, the Genesis Protect program is

[12:01] actually a mapping tool uh that the

[12:04] county has purchased. We purchased it

[12:07] under the five-county program that we

[12:09] run with Iron, Kane, Garfield, and

[12:12] Beaver. Um and they are all going to go

[12:14] to this same program. We just happen to

[12:16] be the largest county and roll it out

[12:17] first. This rolled out in April, and

[12:20] we've had a slow roll with it cuz we

[12:21] wanted to make sure we worked through

[12:23] any um hiccups or issues. We did work

[12:27] with uh every entity within the county

[12:30] um come up with the best ability to how

[12:33] we're going to divide up each section of

[12:36] each town or each section of the um

[12:39] communities. So,

[12:41] well, this is great.

[12:46] No, you're fine. I can talk about it. I

[12:47] just wanted people to see it. So, you're

[12:49] good. Uh what it does is it allows us to

[12:52] It works with what we already have with

[12:55] uh 911 register, and um it allows us to

[12:58] send information out to um

[13:02] to people through their phones and

[13:04] emails on evacuation routes.

[13:07] Um okay, yay.

[13:13] All right, so we'll move forward.

[13:15] Maybe.

[13:17] >> [laughter]

[13:19] » Okay. So, we'll go ahead. Um it allows

[13:22] peo- allows us to give information on

[13:23] evacuation routes based on what the um

[13:27] necessity is based on the environment

[13:29] that's going on. If we had a fire in

[13:32] Zion and we need to evacuate Springdale,

[13:35] we can also get the information to the

[13:37] people, not just local residents, but

[13:39] also visitors, and tell them, "Okay, so

[13:41] there's a fire here. Don't go through

[13:43] the park. Go this way." We give them how

[13:46] directions and where to go. We also

[13:48] allow them or we also can tell them

[13:50] where a shelter has been set up. So,

[13:52] this isn't just for our community, it's

[13:54] also for the visitors to the area, which

[13:56] we all know we have a lot of those. And

[13:58] we need to be able to communicate to

[13:59] them as fast as possible as well. Um

[14:02] some areas will have multiple evacuation

[14:05] routes and some areas won't. Um but what

[14:07] this allows us to do

[14:10] is work with the communities, the local

[14:12] first responders, and communicate these

[14:15] routes easy. So, it's like if you get an

[14:18] alert and you don't know where you're

[14:20] standing. If you were in um

[14:22] Coconino County uh in Flagstaff is one

[14:25] that also program. If you're in Coconino

[14:27] County and you don't know where you're

[14:28] going, if you get an evacuation, they'll

[14:30] give you the directions, turn-by-turn

[14:32] directions on how to get out of the

[14:33] area. You can go to the next one.

[14:37] Um and it's traffic flow and being able

[14:39] to um

[14:40] evacuate the most at-risk areas first.

[14:43] What we don't want to have is a um is a

[14:47] bottleneck when we're evacuating. And we

[14:49] use Dammeron as an example as well

[14:50] because you have a north or a south

[14:52] route. You're either going north or

[14:53] south. What we don't want is people to

[14:55] go the wrong way. They're thinking,

[14:57] "This is how I always go. When I leave

[14:59] Dammeron, I always go south." What if

[15:01] they can't go south because the fire is

[15:03] in or near Diamond Valley. So, we want

[15:06] them to go north. So, we just give them

[15:08] the ability to evacuate and it gives

[15:10] them it's making it easier in our

[15:12] communication. You can go to the next

[15:14] one.

[15:15] So, what you'll be seeing um rolling out

[15:18] is know your zone. You can go to the

[15:19] next one.

[15:21] And how do you know your zone? You'll

[15:22] find your zone in five steps. You'll log

[15:24] onto the website or you can download the

[15:26] app. Um we do suggest that everybody

[15:28] download the app on their phone, but you

[15:30] can download the app.

[15:32] It'll give you your zone and every zone

[15:34] is based on a number

[15:36] asset. So, it's based on It's not saying

[15:39] like oh it's not based on your zip code,

[15:41] it's based on a number that's assigned

[15:42] per the map that we've created. Um

[15:45] you'll click subscribe to alerts. It'll

[15:47] be able to send you alerts and you can

[15:49] clock in or click into that program. You

[15:51] can go to the next one.

[15:53] So, I did this in St. George and this is

[15:58] sort of my address of where I was at

[16:00] when I did it. But at that point when I

[16:02] did it there were no alerts and if you

[16:03] look up there you can see all the

[16:05] different areas

[16:06] um that we would run evacuations out of.

[16:09] Each of those parcels is a separate

[16:11] evacuation area. The more condensed, the

[16:15] smaller the parcel because we have more

[16:16] people in that area. And as you look it

[16:18] kind of goes out as towards Ivins,

[16:20] there's larger parcels and then in St.

[16:22] George and Washington and in Hurricane

[16:24] the parcels are a little smaller in

[16:27] those proper areas.

[16:29] Um but that's what page you're going to

[16:30] look up. You search your address, it'll

[16:32] tell you your current location, if there

[16:35] are any alerts, if there are fires in

[16:37] the area. A lot of this is AI driven.

[16:40] So, when UDOT puts out a message that

[16:41] says I-15 is closed going from the Iron

[16:45] County line north, that will populate

[16:48] into this system. So, we're pulling

[16:49] these populations from UDOT and other

[16:52] entities like that that are already

[16:53] putting this information out. It's not

[16:55] something that we have to go in and like

[16:56] oh we have to keep up with this on the

[16:58] daily. Um so, anything that populates

[17:00] out like that will be automatically be

[17:02] added to this. You can go to the next

[17:04] one.

[17:05] This is where you'll go to find your

[17:07] zone. It's protect.genesis.com

[17:09] and genesis is spelled g e n a s y s. Um

[17:13] and go to the next one. This is the last

[17:15] one.

[17:16] This is where you'll download the app.

[17:18] You can do in the App Store, Google

[17:19] Play, whatever your whatever you

[17:21] download apps on your phone app. Um

[17:23] download the app, search your area, and

[17:26] then um it will just consistently send

[17:28] you messages. Now, if you are someone

[17:30] who doesn't have the app, it will still

[17:31] send you a message because we will work

[17:33] through the Everbridge and Reverse 911

[17:36] and IPAWS to send that information out,

[17:38] but it'll still give them the same links

[17:40] on how to evacuate.

[17:43] So,

[17:44] any questions?

[17:48] » Great. That's a great system.

[17:49] >> Yeah, you know, we had a fire here a

[17:51] couple years ago that started in

[17:52] Rockville, and all of these concerns

[17:55] came up. So, which way would we My

[17:58] neighborhood, three of us were evacuated

[18:00] from our neighborhood, but we were

[18:02] afterward talking about it. We didn't

[18:03] know how to notify visitors. We didn't

[18:06] know how to tell people whether they

[18:08] were at risk, what route to take, and

[18:10] then we didn't have any power here at

[18:12] the Town Hall campus. So, now we've

[18:14] installed emergency power. So, we're

[18:16] much better prepared if that should

[18:18] happen again. Let's hope it doesn't, but

[18:20] um this is great, and thank you to the

[18:22] county for setting this up.

[18:24] >> need to uh do an evacuation, obviously

[18:26] it would go through um

[18:28] uh since the sheriff is the evacuating

[18:32] um entity in the county, it would go

[18:33] through myself or Jason, through either

[18:35] Chief Decker or um the police chief, or

[18:38] any of those. They would communicate

[18:40] with us. We would push it out that way

[18:41] because we're the alerting facility for

[18:43] that.

[18:43] >> And if somebody doesn't download the

[18:45] app, it's still they would get the alert

[18:47] on their phone

[18:48] >> if they're geographically in the area,

[18:50] right?

[18:50] >> Yeah, we'll run it off of IPAWS if it's

[18:52] one of these alerts that we need to get

[18:53] out to a larger area. The addition The

[18:56] sub-

[18:57] The thing with IPAWS is it's great, but

[18:58] it also bleeds over into some other

[19:00] areas, so it kind of alerts people

[19:02] um

[19:03] unintentionally, but we would rather

[19:05] unintentionally alert people and not

[19:06] alert a group of people because we

[19:08] didn't use an IPAWS alert going out.

[19:11] >> So, is this like strictly

[19:13] uh

[19:14] to be used like in the case of an

[19:16] evacuation or let's just say if we have

[19:18] a like a major road closure up here?

[19:21] >> So, this will be used if there is an

[19:23] evacuation needed for a flat a fire,

[19:25] flood, um any sort of, you know, shelter

[19:27] in place, a hazmat, any way that we need

[19:29] to communicate more information to the

[19:32] community. This is just an additional

[19:34] step in our process of and our

[19:36] Everbridge program links into this, so

[19:38] we can do it one we're not

[19:40] moving through multiple programs. We're

[19:42] using one program and we're linking it

[19:43] all the way out to everything. So, it's

[19:45] not just for evacuations. We can shelter

[19:47] in place with this program. We can also

[19:49] give information about, "Hey, don't go

[19:51] this way." Or if there's a power safety

[19:53] shut off because of a fire or high

[19:56] winds, this will also pick up that alert

[19:58] as well.

[20:01] » Um

[20:02] I know with the reverse 911, I can

[20:05] register multiple addresses. So, like

[20:07] maybe I've got my place of work plus my

[20:10] home and maybe my kids' school.

[20:13] Would this work similarly? Can I put

[20:15] more than one location or does it track

[20:16] where I am to give me relevant

[20:18] >> Yes, to both.

[20:20] >> where I am?

[20:21] >> It'll It'll do both. So, when we send

[20:23] So, with a reverse 911, you sign up and

[20:25] you get this. This will put in where you

[20:27] are locally and then it kind of tracks

[20:29] where you are. If you move and you're

[20:32] worried that you don't know that alert,

[20:34] you can log in or click the app on the

[20:35] phone.

[20:37] >> [snorts]

[20:38] >> Did that answer your question? Okay.

[20:42] » I'd like to say first, Bridget, thank

[20:43] you very much for coming out. I think

[20:45] you you

[20:46] sold yourself short at the beginning. I

[20:48] think folks should know

[20:49] uh the actual critical role that you

[20:52] play in the Washington County Emergency

[20:54] Operations Center. I've been to several

[20:56] exercises that Bridget conducts.

[20:58] Jason runs the show,

[21:00] but Bridget makes sure of

[21:03] >> Thank you.

[21:04] >> very good at what she he I've just got

[21:05] two quick questions.

[21:06] >> Yes, sir.

[21:07] >> I have played with this Genesis. It

[21:08] works pretty well.

[21:10] The evacuation tells you which way to

[21:11] go, but there's no, that I could find,

[21:14] um,

[21:15] no metric where it tells me, like,

[21:17] assemble here or go here. It just

[21:19] >> We have to implement that. It's like, so

[21:21] because we don't always have that

[21:23] immediately, we don't know ahead of time

[21:25] where we're going to assemble people.

[21:27] >> Does it have that ability?

[21:28] >> It does have that capability, yes. So,

[21:29] all we have to do is flip on, um,

[21:31] shelter here or assemble here or go here

[21:33] or here's a shelter.

[21:34] >> You know we have talked about this

[21:35] before, but who flips the switch on the

[21:37] evacuation? Does the chief

[21:40] call you and say, "We have this event.

[21:42] There's There's fire. We'll let you

[21:43] know." How How do you know

[21:46] that there's an event that this needs to

[21:47] be activated?

[21:48] >> Kind of works all the above. Um, we all

[21:51] are kind of constantly in communication.

[21:53] Either Jason or I will be out if it's a

[21:55] large fire. Jason and I are out on the

[21:56] fire.

[21:57] Um, if, you know, chief lets us know

[22:00] that, hey, they need to We need to go

[22:01] ahead and and put them in red, yellow,

[22:04] or green, ready, set, or go,

[22:05] um, we can do that on this program. And

[22:07] you can log in and say, "Oh, wait, I'm

[22:09] in red I'm in green, so I'm ready. I

[22:10] just need to get ready." Or this part of

[22:13] town is in red. They've got to go, but

[22:15] this part of town is in yellow. They're

[22:17] not being evacuated yet. Um, and because

[22:20] the sheriff is actually the controlling

[22:23] person for evacuations in the county,

[22:27] he has passed that along to Jason, um,

[22:29] and saying, "You can, you know, just

[22:30] call me and let me know what's

[22:31] happening, but we really rely on fire,

[22:35] um, to let us know, hey, this is This is

[22:37] a situation where we are. This is kind

[22:39] of what we need to do." So, it's kind of

[22:40] like a conglomerate conversation where we

[22:43] would also involve, um, the mayor as

[22:45] well.

[22:46] We're not going to evacuate your town

[22:47] without you knowing.

[22:49] Or that's not the plan ever.

[22:51] >> Right.

[22:51] >> Thank you.

[22:52] >> move that fast into evacuation, it's something beyond what we can

[22:57] control.

[22:58] So.

[22:59] >> Thank you.

[23:00] Oh, yeah.

[23:00] >> Okay.

[23:02] >> Thank you, Bridger.

[23:03] >> Yes, ma'am.

[23:03] >> Appreciate it.

[23:06] We won't be offended if you leave to

[23:07] drive back down to St. George.

[23:09] >> I've got to go to Virgin for another

[23:10] meeting.

[23:10] >> Oh, okay.

[23:12] Sorry about it.

[23:13] Next item on the agenda is a Arts Design

[23:17] and Art Design presentation and I think

[23:19] that Mike and Larson is not able to be

[23:21] here after all. So, Kendall, we are

[23:24] going to show something on the screen?

[23:27] No?

[23:28] Okay, so I'll read what she sent us. She

[23:30] said it's from Bobby Wankier and Mike

[23:34] and Larson. Thank you for your kind

[23:35] consideration when we requested leave to

[23:37] appear at your regular meeting to be

[23:39] held today to offer a report both

[23:41] thanking the town of Springdale for your

[23:43] generosity and accounting for the $2,500

[23:46] RAP funds. Unfortunately, a family

[23:48] emergency has arisen. We would request

[23:50] that in lieu of our personal appearance,

[23:52] this memorandum be read.

[23:54] The funds were used for the Arts Design

[23:56] Springdale cultural tour which occurred

[23:58] in November 2025 and in addition to the

[24:01] 2500 from Springdale, the Arts Design

[24:03] organization spent an additional

[24:05] approximately 2500 to make this tour in

[24:08] Springdale a success. In spite of the

[24:10] persistent rain, there were sales at the

[24:13] galleries as a result of the tour and

[24:15] there were two marvelous artist home

[24:16] studios open as well. One of them was

[24:18] Jack. It is always our intention to

[24:21] fulfill the paperwork and administrative

[24:23] requirements of our various obligations

[24:25] and we will follow up with this

[24:26] memorandum with both a written report

[24:28] and visuals images. Please know that we

[24:30] appreciate the town of Springdale very

[24:32] much.

[24:35] Okay.

[24:37] Next item on the agenda is community

[24:39] comments. Um if you wish to make a

[24:41] comment and it will be comments only,

[24:43] not questions. If you have questions,

[24:45] we'd like to address those outside the

[24:46] meeting, but make sure you've signed in

[24:49] so we can get your name right and you'll

[24:51] state your name and please limit your

[24:53] comments to 3 minutes or less.

[24:58] No comments. Okay.

[25:01] Next item on the agenda is a consent

[25:03] agenda, which includes the review of the

[25:05] monthly purchasing report, minutes from

[25:08] April 22nd, 2026,

[25:11] appointment of Jack Burns and Randy Aton

[25:13] to serve as a town council

[25:14] representatives on the irrigation

[25:16] advisory board,

[25:18] personnel policy manual revision

[25:21] clarifying the observation of Juneteenth

[25:23] holiday,

[25:24] the annual fraud risk assessment and

[25:26] resolution 2026-06,

[25:29] a resolution designating surplus town

[25:32] property

[25:33] and providing for the sale or disposal

[25:35] of surplus property. And all of the back

[25:37] detail on these items is in the packet

[25:39] that's on our website.

[25:41] Is there a motion to approve the consent

[25:43] agenda?

[25:44] >> I move to approve the consent agenda.

[25:46] >> I'll second.

[25:47] >> Got a motion by Jack and a second by

[25:49] Kyla.

[25:50] >> And I.

[25:51] >> Randy I.

[25:51] >> Barbara I.

[25:52] >> Jack I.

[25:53] >> Kyla I.

[25:54] >> I.

[25:55] Next item on the agenda is a public

[25:57] hearing.

[25:58] Uh the process for a public hearing is

[26:00] on the back of your agenda and we'll be

[26:02] following that format.

[26:03] And we we ask that um you if you're

[26:08] going to speak again that you've signed

[26:09] into the meeting. We will allow a

[26:11] comment period, so if you have comments,

[26:14] you please wait for that period. Um

[26:18] public comment should be limited to 3

[26:19] minutes or less. And if others have

[26:22] expressed the same view as your own and

[26:24] you want to just raise your hand to say

[26:25] you agree, that's fine. You can also

[26:27] come up and speak, too.

[26:29] And if you choose to leave during the

[26:31] meeting, please do so as quietly as

[26:32] possible.

[26:34] So with that, the item on the agenda is

[26:37] application for a zone change from the

[26:39] central commercial zone to the central

[26:42] commercial zone with the transient

[26:43] lodging overlay zone at 975 Zion Park

[26:47] Boulevard. The applicant is Trista

[26:49] Raynor and the staff contact is Niall

[26:51] Connolly. and we'll start with a staff

[26:54] report.

[26:55] >> Thank you.

[26:57] So, yes, as you indicated, this is a

[26:59] zone change application for the

[27:01] transient lodging overlay zone to be

[27:04] applied. The applicant is Trista Rayner,

[27:07] um and she's applied for the zone change

[27:10] for her property at 975

[27:13] Sign Park Boulevard.

[27:15] Uh her property is in the central

[27:17] commercial zone, and so it's eligible

[27:19] for um

[27:21] for this application for the zone

[27:23] change.

[27:24] Um just a little bit of background on

[27:26] the transient lodging overlay zone.

[27:29] Um

[27:30] the application window for uh

[27:34] applications for this zone change

[27:37] is open every even year during the month

[27:40] of March.

[27:41] Uh so, the most recent window

[27:43] application was March 2026,

[27:46] and the town received one application,

[27:48] and this is it.

[27:49] Um

[27:50] so, the property is currently developed

[27:53] with Mimi's Cafe.

[27:55] Uh there is also a second restaurant

[27:58] building, which is vacant, which is

[27:59] behind Mimi's.

[28:01] And there's also six town homes, which

[28:03] are used as vacation rentals.

[28:06] And the proposal

[28:08] uh involves demolishing the vacant

[28:11] restaurant building and replacing it

[28:13] with a new building that would house

[28:15] four transient lodging units and two

[28:18] long-term rental units.

[28:20] And um the application includes uh some

[28:23] plans of the proposed building. There's

[28:26] a an elevation there on the screen.

[28:30] Uh so, the council should review the

[28:32] application to determine whether or not

[28:35] it promotes the aims of the general plan

[28:38] and the purposes of the transient

[28:40] lodging overlay zone.

[28:42] Um the application has been reviewed by

[28:45] the planning commission in their May

[28:47] meeting.

[28:48] Uh they recommended that the zone change

[28:51] be approved. Uh

[28:53] they also recommended three conditions

[28:55] of approval, which are in the staff

[28:57] report.

[29:00] Um

[29:01] So, just a few points to consider. Um

[29:04] the overlay zone at chapter includes

[29:08] application standards and review

[29:10] criteria.

[29:12] Um

[29:14] So, the application standards are

[29:16] generally kind of more quantifiable

[29:18] requirements for a complete application.

[29:21] The review criteria are

[29:24] more qualitative

[29:26] uh about how you know, this application

[29:29] meets the vision of the general plan and

[29:33] on the uh the purpose of the overlay

[29:35] zone.

[29:36] Um so, the applicant has provided

[29:38] responses to all of these questions, and

[29:41] those are provided in the staff report

[29:43] as well.

[29:45] Um

[29:47] The transient lodging zone requires one

[29:50] long-term rental unit for every four

[29:54] lodging units that are provided.

[29:56] Um so, this application includes four

[30:00] lodging units and two long-term units.

[30:03] Um so, there's one additional long-term unit

[30:08] kind of over and above what what the

[30:10] minimum requires.

[30:11] Um

[30:13] the zone or the ordinance requires that

[30:19] uh the long-term unit be deed restricted

[30:23] so that it's available on the open

[30:25] market and can't be used um as part of a

[30:29] transient lodging business, say for a

[30:31] property manager or that kind of thing.

[30:33] It It just needs to be open. Um

[30:37] Uh because there's one additional um

[30:40] unit being provided, the applicants

[30:43] requested that one of those units not be

[30:46] subject to the deed restriction.

[30:48] Um

[30:50] so that there will be flexibility to

[30:52] rent it potentially to a property

[30:54] manager if if that was necessary.

[30:56] But either way there are two long-term

[30:59] units there.

[31:00] Um

[31:02] we've received two public comments on

[31:04] this. Uh one was included in the

[31:06] application pack. Uh the other was

[31:09] submitted to the planning commission.

[31:11] Um

[31:12] and so that was posted on the town

[31:14] website at at the time that the planning

[31:16] commission met.

[31:17] >> And both of those were in favor of

[31:19] renting the overlay zone.

[31:21] >> They were. They were from neighbors and

[31:23] they were in favor. That's correct.

[31:26] So I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[31:28] I know the applicant is here as well. Um

[31:31] and I know she'll be making a

[31:33] presentation in a moment, too.

[31:35] >> Niall, I was hoping that since it is a

[31:37] zone change that you could read us the

[31:39] three conditions for

[31:42] making a zone change, just to remind us.

[31:45] >> Yes, absolutely.

[31:48] I'll just find that now.

[31:53] Thank you, Tom.

[31:55] Okay.

[31:59] So I'll just read it out. Uh it's

[32:01] in 10 3 2 A of the code.

[32:07] So legislative amendments policy. For

[32:09] the purpose of establishing and

[32:11] maintaining sound, stable, and desirable

[32:13] developments within the town, has adopted a general public

[32:18] policy that amendments should not be

[32:20] made to this title or to the zoning map

[32:23] except to

[32:24] So these are the conditions. More fully

[32:27] um

[32:29] Sorry.

[32:31] Except to promote more fully the

[32:33] objectives and purposes of this title

[32:36] and the general plan to correct manifest

[32:39] errors or to accommodate substantial

[32:42] changes in conditions that are not

[32:44] contemplated in the general plan.

[32:47] >> Thank you.

[32:48] And one of those needs to be met.

[32:51] >> Correct.

[32:51] >> Okay, thank you.

[32:53] Any other clarifying questions from

[32:55] council?

[32:58] » Yeah, I'm curious. There's a couple

[33:00] mentions of like um

[33:03] public infrastructure.

[33:05] The like charging station and the maybe

[33:08] a bike repair station. And I'm curious

[33:13] if it's in this plan, are those things

[33:16] kind of cemented to for sure happen or

[33:19] are they they're kind of written as

[33:21] maybe they're like suggestions and so I

[33:23] wondered

[33:25] what what

[33:29] if I if it's not in a motion, is it

[33:31] guaranteed to follow through?

[33:34] >> Sure. Yeah, I I think um yeah, those things that you mentioned they're

[33:39] not requirements as such within the the ordinance, but they have been

[33:45] proposed.

[33:47] Um I think if you would like to secure

[33:49] those to ensure that they are delivered,

[33:52] you might want to add those as a

[33:53] condition of approval.

[33:58] » Other clarifying questions of staff?

[34:02] Does anyone in the audience want to ask

[34:04] a clarifying question of the staff?

[34:06] We'll give you another opportunity to

[34:08] ask of the applicant.

[34:11] Looks like not. So um Trista, do you

[34:14] want to

[34:15] make a presentation?

[34:19] » Thank you for

[34:21] hearing my proposal tonight.

[34:23] Um we put a lot of work into this

[34:26] submission. We took all of the feedback

[34:29] we got from our prior meetings with the

[34:31] town and the planning commission and we

[34:33] incorporated them into this new design.

[34:35] So, these are not engineered drawings,

[34:37] but um they are to scale on the property

[34:40] for where we're wanting to build. So, I

[34:42] would say what we presented is

[34:45] what what I would foresee going through

[34:47] um

[34:48] when the engineering plans and the

[34:49] design development review was presented.

[34:52] And as far as the charging station and

[34:54] the bike um rest area, we were proposing

[34:57] that um

[34:59] we have a lot of guests and a lot of

[35:00] people coming to Mimi's that cannot

[35:02] charge their cars locally unless they're

[35:05] staying at a hotel and even so sometimes

[35:08] it's very limited where they can do

[35:10] that. So, um

[35:11] that's just something I would like to do

[35:13] and it doesn't have to be a Mimi's um

[35:15] customer and it doesn't have to be

[35:16] somebody staying on the property. It

[35:18] could be somebody shopping. It'll be

[35:20] open use.

[35:21] And I don't know exactly what that will

[35:23] look like, like maybe a 4-hour maximum

[35:26] or you know, just something, but I think

[35:27] it'll create a little of foot traffic

[35:29] downtown, which is highly desirable. And

[35:32] there's so many people on bikes or even

[35:34] if they're not on a bike, I'd like to

[35:35] have a little rest area in that um area

[35:38] in the front of our property. That's

[35:41] obviously for bikes to be locked up or,

[35:44] you know, for somebody to refill their

[35:45] water, that kind of thing. So, I'm

[35:47] committed doing both of those. I wanted

[35:49] to do those on our property regardless

[35:51] of the of the submission.

[35:54] Okay. Um I'm just going to go over a

[35:56] couple things and I'm sorry I've got to

[35:57] do it by my notes because I don't want

[35:59] to forget anything. It's really This is

[36:01] really important to me.

[36:02] Um the current uh building is vacant

[36:06] and it has been since 2022.

[36:10] It's made of aerated concrete blocks.

[36:13] And so, for those of you maybe in the

[36:14] audience, I know the the town council

[36:16] knows that it cannot be remodeled in the

[36:18] way that a a traditional building can.

[36:21] Um it literally is like foam blocks.

[36:25] Um

[36:26] so, our hope is to rebuild with more per

[36:29] architecture style with rock, stucco,

[36:32] and metal.

[36:33] And, um,

[36:35] change some of the design elements like

[36:37] removing the very large commercial

[36:39] windows with smaller residential

[36:41] windows. The internal breezeway and

[36:43] internal walkway, um, will benefit the

[36:45] night sky. So, instead of having

[36:47] exterior entrances to all of the to the

[36:51] any of the units, residential or

[36:53] transient, their their walkways will be

[36:55] internal and their lighting will be

[36:57] internal.

[36:58] Um, it's hard to tell from the drawings,

[37:00] but the front where the stairway is, um,

[37:05] that's set back. It has a breezeway and

[37:07] that's where you would go into that

[37:09] inter- interior corridor to get to the

[37:12] each unit. Um, the building is stepped

[37:16] back several times and there's open

[37:19] patio areas and, um,

[37:22] balconies. You can see where it says

[37:24] open on the right. So, we we've tried as

[37:27] much as possible on the the same

[37:29] building footprint to

[37:32] have a lot of open space with the

[37:34] building.

[37:35] Um,

[37:37] >> So, Trista, just a verification, those doors we're

[37:41] looking at there are the doors to the

[37:44] breezeway

[37:45] in the center.

[37:48] Two different breezeways, is it is it a

[37:49] matter

[37:50] >> Yeah, so you would Sorry, that's the

[37:51] front elevation. You would not access

[37:54] any

[37:55] I'm not sure what that That is not a

[37:57] doorway. You would enter

[37:59] the buildings from down below in the

[38:01] breezeway and then upstairs by going up

[38:03] the stairs.

[38:04] >> And where are those Oh, those stairs are

[38:05] inside?

[38:06] >> Yeah, that's inside. So, it's it's it's

[38:08] like two small buildings with a

[38:10] breezeway in the center, but the

[38:12] residential will be in the back.

[38:16] So, kind of a courtyard feel, a U.

[38:19] Um, [snorts] I wanted to repeat and this

[38:21] was in the planning commission meeting,

[38:23] but the property slopes significantly

[38:25] from SR 9.

[38:26] The new building pad sits 8 ft lower

[38:28] than Sign Park Boulevard.

[38:31] Um it's 5 ft lower than the Mimi's Cafe

[38:33] building and 3 ft lower than Cannon

[38:36] Offering's property.

[38:37] The rebuild um

[38:40] will keep the natural skyline and vistas

[38:42] unaffected, and will blend in more

[38:44] harmoniously with the surrounding

[38:45] properties and buildings in Springdale.

[38:48] Um this redesign from our 2024

[38:52] submission to this one gave us

[38:54] a larger residential unit for the TLO

[38:57] requirement, but an opportunity to add a

[38:59] much needed second residential unit that

[39:02] we will use for employee housing,

[39:04] long-term rental, or maybe a future

[39:06] on-site manager.

[39:08] There's some conditions with the TLO

[39:12] um units that you can't use it

[39:15] for a future property manager, or you

[39:18] can't use it if it's tied to employment.

[39:20] There's also restrictions you can't do

[39:22] it less than 90 days. There's a lot of

[39:24] things in that TLO um requirement, which

[39:27] what we're happy to make, but the second

[39:30] residential unit, if somebody was

[39:32] building

[39:33] a property or remolding remodeling a

[39:35] property, this would give us an

[39:37] opportunity to rent for a month or 2

[39:39] months,

[39:40] which the TLO would not allow us to do.

[39:43] So, the second unit, we foresee being a

[39:45] 20 a 12-month lease, but um

[39:50] it it could be a a Mimi's employee, it

[39:51] could be a open market.

[39:54] Um and I for I'm the manager on the

[39:57] property, but

[39:58] in the future, if we ever wanted to have

[40:00] an on-site manager, then we could

[40:02] potentially turn the second unit into

[40:03] that.

[40:05] Um the two residential units make up 43%

[40:08] of the living space in this building. Um

[40:11] each residential unit is 916 sq ft,

[40:16] and we're designing them to feel more

[40:18] like a home, not a rental. They'll have

[40:20] um upgraded amenities, private laundry,

[40:22] patio, and balcony spaces.

[40:25] Additionally, we made extra effort to

[40:27] design this um building in a way that protects our adjacent neighbor,

[40:32] Laura Dody.

[40:34] Um the residential units will be on the

[40:36] backside of the building. Their patios

[40:38] will face Mimi's and face the parking

[40:40] lot. So, we're we're we're turn

[40:43] the property away away from Laura's

[40:45] adjacent wall, if that makes sense.

[40:48] Um closest to her residence, we designed

[40:51] the

[40:52] building to have our storage and our

[40:54] maintenance. So, there will be no direct

[40:57] windows, stairways, or doors um adjacent

[41:00] to Laura's residential property.

[41:04] Um

[41:05] they mentioned that uh our full-time

[41:07] resident in the townhomes in the back

[41:09] gave us a letter of recommendation, but

[41:11] the second one was from Laura Dody, and

[41:14] I don't know if you guys have had a

[41:15] chance to look at her letter.

[41:20] If not, I'd like to just say a couple

[41:21] things. Um she was in support of it. She

[41:24] said she's strongly in favor and would

[41:26] prefer to have residential and vacation

[41:28] rentals

[41:30] as neighbors.

[41:31] Her first point references the vacant

[41:33] building

[41:35] and

[41:36] beautifying the central commercial area

[41:38] is obviously important to everybody down

[41:40] there. Um this also secondarily meets a

[41:44] town goal to eliminate empty and unused

[41:46] buildings.

[41:48] And then her second point, which is

[41:49] really

[41:51] significant, is that the location does

[41:53] not lend itself to retail or residential

[41:56] or I mean, sorry, restaurant commercial

[41:58] because it doesn't sit on Highway 9.

[42:00] We've had three different restaurants

[42:02] there, and it's just a very difficult

[42:04] sale. Nobody in the walking area

[42:07] downtown

[42:09] turns down Juniper Lane

[42:11] to do anything beyond Soul Foods Market.

[42:14] They don't understand that there's a

[42:15] second business there. So, it's it's

[42:16] very difficult because it lacks

[42:19] visibility for cars and pedestrian

[42:21] traffic.

[42:23] Um

[42:24] >> [sighs and gasps]

[42:24] >> with our current lodging, the six that

[42:26] we do own now, we choose not to maximize

[42:29] occupancy. Um

[42:31] and we want to lower the impact on town

[42:33] resources.

[42:34] We do have um

[42:37] solar panels on those units and we hope

[42:40] in the future we're going to wire these

[42:41] new units, if it's approved, to also

[42:43] have solar.

[42:45] Um but that's down the line there. It's

[42:47] very very expensive right now to put

[42:49] solar in.

[42:50] Um our guests love staying in the center

[42:52] of town and supporting local businesses,

[42:54] which is huge. The biggest compliment we

[42:56] receive is when guests say they feel

[42:58] like locals during their stay. And our

[43:00] guests actually prefer the village scale

[43:03] of our property versus a larger complex.

[43:07] Um this property in the in central

[43:09] commercial zone is very unique in town.

[43:12] Um we've added a variety of housing and

[43:14] lodging.

[43:16] We have the 18 two-bedroom residential

[43:18] units in the back of the property

[43:21] and nobody in central commercial has has

[43:23] built that much residential in downtown.

[43:27] Um this makes it a very unique property

[43:30] and a unique a unique stay for the

[43:32] residents as well as our guests.

[43:35] Um

[43:37] we wanted to

[43:39] avoid constructive tourism by building

[43:41] smaller than the town ordinance allows.

[43:43] This building is 38% smaller than our

[43:47] current zoning allows. And with the

[43:50] addition of the four units, we're 20%

[43:52] lower than the the um transient zoning

[43:55] allows.

[43:57] I think this is a really unique

[43:58] opportunity to bring

[44:01] residential

[44:03] and a couple more transient lodging

[44:06] um and a restaurant. Having that in the

[44:08] downtown commercial core is important

[44:10] and it's important for workers to be

[44:12] able to live in town.

[44:15] Um,

[44:16] adding both of these, I think, on this

[44:18] small scale helps bring additional

[44:20] support to our local businesses, which

[44:22] is needed on a year-round basis, not

[44:24] just tourism months.

[44:27] Um,

[44:28] I think the property being 1.18 acres is

[44:31] modest in scale when compared to other

[44:33] properties in Central and Village

[44:35] Commercial.

[44:36] Um, our buildings, I don't know, Nile,

[44:39] if you can put the overhead photo on.

[44:49] One here?

[44:50] >> Let me rotate that.

[44:51] >> Yeah.

[44:52] >> If we can make that bigger, um,

[44:58] we have multiple buildings at village

[45:00] scale, um, on the property. The three

[45:02] existing townhome rentals, which are

[45:05] down at the bottom there in the blue,

[45:08] those have a footprint of 1,000 square

[45:11] feet each.

[45:12] And then the Mimi's Cafe building at the

[45:15] front of the property is 2,000 square

[45:17] feet

[45:19] for the footprint. It's only one story.

[45:22] Um, and that's the gazebo to the left

[45:24] for dining outside. And then the second

[45:26] building, um, the new building will

[45:29] actually be smaller than that footprint

[45:31] because it won't have those large patios

[45:34] on both sides, those dining patios.

[45:36] Um, the new proposed building footprint

[45:39] will be 2,600 square feet.

[45:42] The new building, if approved, is, um,

[45:45] very similar in size to Laura Dody's

[45:47] new, um,

[45:49] building.

[45:51] If If she added added a second

[45:53] residential unit as we have done,

[45:56] her building and our building would

[45:57] virtually be the same size.

[46:00] Um,

[46:02] there's a lot of great buildings and

[46:03] businesses in Central Commercial, but

[46:05] ours is significantly smaller

[46:08] than a lot. Zion Guru, for example, has

[46:11] a 5,500 square foot footprint.

[46:14] Soul Market is 11,000,

[46:17] Pioneer Lodge 16,000,

[46:19] Pete's Noodle 7,300 just on the

[46:22] footprint. Um and Bumbleberry 12,000

[46:25] square feet. So, I really do feel like

[46:27] for Central Commercial that this is

[46:29] village scale.

[46:31] And hopefully you do, too.

[46:33] Um

[46:35] we want to beautify the property and

[46:37] work on a landscaping plan. As part of

[46:39] that, I'd like to do

[46:40] the charging stations if that is

[46:42] something the town is interested in

[46:44] having. Um

[46:48] we also um

[46:49] think that having I already mentioned

[46:51] that, but having those that rest area

[46:53] and those charging stations might create

[46:55] a little bit more walkability for the

[46:58] local businesses, which would be nice.

[47:00] Um I wanted to bring up something that

[47:03] came up during the Planning Commission

[47:05] if you don't mind me spending a minute

[47:06] of time might actually save a question

[47:09] later on. But our parking plan came up.

[47:13] We actually have enough parking on our

[47:15] property to support this change or a

[47:18] restaurant or anything else that we

[47:20] can do on that in that building. Um but

[47:24] in 20

[47:26] let's see. I think it was 2022, the town

[47:28] removed on-street parking

[47:32] on SR 9 directly in front of us and

[47:36] in some distance down SR 9 in the

[47:38] Central Commercial area. And that

[47:40] removed a lot of handicap accessibility

[47:43] to our property. Right now, our handicap

[47:46] parking

[47:48] um is down slope and

[47:51] yes, right there where

[47:52] his arrow is is our handicap parking. Um

[47:56] we just don't have any parking next to

[47:58] Mimi's and it's really important for the

[48:00] success of our business.

[48:03] So, that parking plan was just a rough

[48:05] draft. I am I have talked to Nile and I

[48:08] want to work with the town.

[48:10] Anything we can do to minimize that

[48:11] impact or make it smaller,

[48:14] like make it one-way traffic, it would

[48:16] save a lot of driveway space and

[48:17] asphalt, but um,

[48:20] that said, that parking submission is

[48:22] totally separate from the TLO. It's not

[48:24] a requirement of the TLO.

[48:27] I don't need that additional parking for

[48:29] that. I I actually need it for Mimi's.

[48:31] So, I would be coming back before the

[48:33] town

[48:34] um, on that issue. I just haven't

[48:36] proceeded with getting that approved

[48:38] because I think

[48:40] if I was going to do that, I would do it

[48:41] at the same time as building the second

[48:43] building.

[48:45] >> Quick question about the parking. You

[48:46] say the parking plan that I'm looking at

[48:49] here is not part of this application?

[48:51] >> No. No, it just was required to be

[48:54] submitted, but the whole um,

[48:57] the whole property plan. Can you pull

[48:58] that up, Nile?

[49:03] It's next to the drawings.

[49:07] So, we had proposed this several years

[49:09] ago and then when we submitted our

[49:10] application for a TLO overlay in 2024,

[49:15] we we paused this,

[49:17] um,

[49:19] this parking lot idea cuz we wanted to

[49:21] be able to incorporate it together, um,

[49:26] yeah, so that black area there,

[49:29] um,

[49:30] along the front of the property along SR

[49:33] 9, just to give you some perspective,

[49:35] that's 155 ft of frontage

[49:39] between Juniper Lane and Canyon

[49:41] Offerings. That's 155 ft.

[49:44] And I'm hoping to reduce the asphalt

[49:47] impact on this parking plan, but I do

[49:49] want to and forward with it. I just want

[49:51] to bring it up because it it's important

[49:53] that you guys know that's in the future,

[49:55] but that front area between Mimi's SR9

[49:59] and the parking lot, that's over 5,000

[50:02] already, that's over 5,000 square feet

[50:04] of open grass and landscaping. So, it's

[50:07] significant. I know the parking lot

[50:09] looks intimidating, but there is still a

[50:12] lot of open space. It's also set back 45

[50:15] feet from SR9.

[50:18] So, it's also on the same kind of slope

[50:20] going down our property.

[50:22] >> So, that's not part of this plan.

[50:25] Is that right?

[50:26] >> So,

[50:28] just a bit of background on the on the

[50:29] parking lot. So, um

[50:32] some time ago,

[50:33] uh Trista made an application for the

[50:35] parking loss kind of independence from this proposal. Uh that application

[50:42] has been on hold for some time.

[50:44] Um

[50:45] so, that was kind of independent of this. Um

[50:51] the parking plan was submitted with with

[50:55] this plan. Um

[50:57] my understanding was that it's it's part of the the intention to

[51:04] happen, you know, like it it's it's

[51:06] there

[51:08] they intend to build this, but the transient lodging

[51:13] overlay zone

[51:15] development isn't dependent on this parking loss. But, the the parking

[51:21] can be mass based on the existing

[51:24] parking. So,

[51:26] I I think if there's any doubt, I think

[51:29] in your approval, you may want to

[51:32] clarify that by permission by condition

[51:35] to kind of stipulate whether the parking

[51:38] is

[51:40] >> Well, I mean, the the application either

[51:42] includes it or it doesn't, right? I

[51:43] mean, I don't I guess I don't

[51:44] understand.

[51:45] Am I missing something?

[51:47] >> So, they required us to show any future

[51:50] developments on the property, what we

[51:51] were intending with this TLO submission

[51:54] and if there was anything pending. And

[51:56] so this parking lot was pending. I just

[51:59] haven't proceeded with this because when

[52:01] we were denied in 2024,

[52:04] I thought if I come back in 2026, I

[52:06] would incorporate the construction all

[52:08] into one project, you know, and the

[52:11] landscaping and everything instead of

[52:13] putting the parking lot in and then

[52:15] potentially building a second building,

[52:18] you know, a year or two later. I would

[52:20] just prefer to do all of the

[52:21] construction at the same time.

[52:24] >> So we if if we approve this, we'd be

[52:27] approving the building and the parking

[52:29] lot.

[52:30] >> No, just the just the building.

[52:32] >> We don't need to approve the parking

[52:33] lot, that's a staff matter, right?

[52:36] >> Well, the if if the parking lot came

[52:38] forward, that would go to the planning

[52:39] commission actually, but

[52:41] um

[52:43] I suppose irrespective of whether the transient lodging is approved or

[52:48] not, um this parking lot could be approved anyway it it subject

[52:56] to meeting the landscaping standards.

[52:58] >> So there's there's no need to install a condition because it's not

[53:02] part of the plan.

[53:04] we would approve if we approve

[53:05] it tonight, is that right?

[53:09] » Yeah, I I I I would say so that

[53:11] I either way the the design development

[53:14] review will need to come forward

[53:15] afterwards for the for the transient

[53:18] lodging and the parking, yeah.

[53:23] » Oh, that's okay. Um

[53:25] I wanted to bring it up because of that

[53:26] question, that exact question came up

[53:28] during the um

[53:30] the planning meeting.

[53:32] Um I think that's that's about it. I

[53:34] just I wanted

[53:35] also say that

[53:38] we we own the property, we're family

[53:40] owned. There's three generations of us

[53:42] working at Mimi's Cafe. Um Um

[53:45] We do care very much about the town and

[53:47] beautifying the property. That's our

[53:49] goal here.

[53:50] Um

[53:52] I'm willing to answer any questions or

[53:53] take any feedback and I appreciate your

[53:55] time. Thank you very much.

[53:57] >> I just have a clarifying question for

[54:01] Nile. So, you mentioned that the second

[54:04] long-term residential unit, if you don't

[54:06] have the restriction on it, you could

[54:07] rent it for 30 days. I don't think you

[54:10] could.

[54:12] Nile, is that because that would make it

[54:14] a short-term rental?

[54:15] And that would mean you had

[54:17] five short-term rentals with only one

[54:19] long-term. It would I think the minimum

[54:21] is 90 days, right?

[54:22] >> I think in this in the central

[54:24] commercial zone, it's 31

[54:26] >> Oh, okay. So, because it's central

[54:27] commercial. Okay.

[54:29] >> And that gives us a lot of flexibility

[54:30] if somebody's moving to town and working

[54:33] at Mimi's for example. If they need if

[54:35] it happened to be open, I can't imagine

[54:37] it wouldn't be leased for the year, but

[54:39] if it happened to be open, we could give

[54:40] somebody an opportunity to say

[54:43] yes, you can live there

[54:44] for 60 days while you find something for

[54:46] your family.

[54:47] >> And I don't have any issue with I just

[54:48] thought that the minimum was 90 days. I

[54:50] didn't realize it was different in

[54:51] central commercial, so.

[54:53] >> I do anticipate it being rented 12

[54:55] months out of the year. That's my goal,

[54:56] but if it was open

[54:58] for a couple of months or something then that would give me some flexibility

[55:02] or a seasonal ranger or something like

[55:04] you know, along that nature, artist in

[55:05] residence.

[55:07] You know, that kind of a thing.

[55:09] >> [snorts]

[55:10] >> Questions for Trista?

[55:11] >> Um just Nile, if you clarify. So,

[55:14] if uh let's just say the parking lot

[55:16] never happens

[55:18] >> Can't hear you.

[55:20] Is your mic on?

[55:22] >> Let's just say there was a um

[55:25] uh the parking lot doesn't happen. There

[55:27] was a desire to actually expand the

[55:29] transient lodging.

[55:31] Um

[55:32] would that be a a completely different

[55:35] application for a zone change?

[55:37] >> Yes, so I adding additional transient

[55:40] lodging units would require a new

[55:43] transient lodging overlay zone

[55:44] application that would have to come in a

[55:46] future year.

[55:48] >> And are you guys thinking about that at

[55:50] all?

[55:50] >> No, not at all. Um we want parking up

[55:53] next to Mimi's Cafe. And then putting a building there would actually block

[55:57] Mimi's Cafe. So we have no desire to put

[56:00] another building there. Um

[56:03] we'd like to build exactly in the

[56:05] footprint of the old restaurant

[56:07] building.

[56:08] >> And would the parking be paid parking?

[56:11] >> No. No, that would be all of those would

[56:14] be Mimi's Cafe. It'd be handicap and

[56:15] Mimi's Cafe only. And then we would have

[56:19] overflow Mimi's Cafe parking in the back

[56:21] and then additional town home parking

[56:24] back there.

[56:28] » Other questions for Trista?

[56:32] Does anyone in the audience have

[56:34] clarifying questions for Trista, not

[56:35] comments but clarifying questions?

[56:40] It looks like not. So um I'd entertain a

[56:43] motion to open public hearing.

[56:46] >> I move that we open the public hearing.

[56:48] >> I'll second.

[56:50] >> A motion by Kyla and a second by Randy.

[56:52] >> And I.

[56:52] >> And you.

[56:53] >> Barbara, I.

[56:54] >> Jack, I.

[56:54] >> Kyla, I.

[56:57] » So same process. If you have a comment,

[56:59] please state your name and make your

[57:01] comment.

[57:04] Looks like we have none. So I entertain

[57:06] Oh, I'm sorry.

[57:08] >> I want to say something.

[57:13] » I'm embarrassing

[57:14] to my mommy. Sorry.

[57:18] Town Council, my name is Michelle Callan

[57:21] and I am a manager at Mimi's Cafe here

[57:23] in Springdale.

[57:25] I am here to express my strong support

[57:27] for this um mixed-use lodging and

[57:30] residential project. As a downtown

[57:33] business owner, I see firsthand what

[57:35] works for our town. This project is

[57:37] exactly the kind of thoughtful

[57:39] development that Springdale needs, and

[57:41] here's why.

[57:42] It drives walkable business. Having

[57:44] lodging right in the town center means

[57:47] guests walk to our shops and

[57:49] restaurants. They spend money locally

[57:51] without adding cars to SR 9 or taking up

[57:53] valuable parking spaces.

[57:56] >> [snorts]

[57:56] >> This directly benefits Mimi's Cafe and

[57:58] every other business in the commercial

[58:00] core. And I can attest to the current

[58:05] six units, the people that the guests

[58:07] that stay there, they're using shuttle

[58:10] stop five to get to the park, and

[58:12] they're leaving their cars there in the

[58:14] parking lot.

[58:16] Two, the scale is perfect for

[58:18] Springdale. Instead of maxing out zoning

[58:21] limits, this is a modest 2,600

[58:24] square-foot building.

[58:25] >> [clears throat]

[58:25] >> Significantly smaller than other recent

[58:27] commercial builds, preserving our

[58:29] village feel while replacing a vacant,

[58:31] outdated building that can't be

[58:32] remodeled.

[58:34] Three,

[58:35] it provides much-needed housing. Over

[58:37] 40% of the living space goes to

[58:40] residential units. We desperately need

[58:42] more employees employee housing and

[58:44] long-term rentals in town, and this

[58:46] project delivers that. And I can attest

[58:48] to having so much difficulty with our

[58:51] employees finding relevant housing

[58:55] that's affordable.

[58:57] >> [snorts]

[58:58] >> Four, [clears throat] it's thoughtfully

[58:59] designed, protects the night sky

[59:00] ordinance, it's lower than surrounding

[59:02] properties to preserve our natural

[59:04] vistas, and it includes more landscaping

[59:06] than the town requires.

[59:08] And five, it's a better neighbor, and I

[59:10] speak specifically to the six units

[59:13] behind us as well as the new property

[59:16] that Laura did get approved for. The

[59:19] property sits adjacent to residential

[59:21] homes and vacation rentals. Unlike a

[59:23] restaurant or retail use, which would

[59:25] bring noise, kitchen exhaust, late night

[59:28] activity, sound, light, all of these

[59:31] things. This is the least disruptive

[59:34] commercial use possible in that location

[59:37] that still also benefits commercial use.

[59:41] This project is a win for our downtown

[59:43] economy, a win for local workers, and a

[59:45] win for Springdale's future, and I

[59:47] strongly urge you to vote in favor for

[59:49] it. Thank you so much for hearing me

[59:50] out.

[59:51] >> Quick question before you go.

[59:53] And not off the hook.

[59:54] >> Yeah.

[59:54] >> Say that this could be one of the

[59:56] residents

[59:56] >> This is a comment period.

[59:59] >> Something that a Mimi's employee could

[1:00:01] use.

[1:00:02] Has somebody Mimi's told you if that

[1:00:03] happens, I'm going to look into this?

[1:00:06] >> I personally have an employee right now

[1:00:09] that rents one of the 18 units that they

[1:00:12] developed right behind Mimi's. She

[1:00:14] doesn't have a license, she walks to

[1:00:16] work, and she uses the town shuttle, and

[1:00:18] uses the town economy. Um otherwise, all

[1:00:22] of my other employees drive from either

[1:00:25] Hurricane or further St. George. I'd

[1:00:27] love to see that change, and I think

[1:00:29] most other restaurants here would, and

[1:00:31] some have gotten the opportunity to

[1:00:33] include employment housing for their

[1:00:36] development. That would be huge for us.

[1:00:39] Thanks. Thanks.

[1:00:42] >> Any other comments?

[1:00:45] Entertain a motion to close public

[1:00:46] hearing?

[1:00:48] >> Move we close public hearing. Second it.

[1:00:51] >> Motion by Randy, second by Pat.

[1:00:53] >> Pat, I. And you?

[1:00:54] >> Barbara, I.

[1:00:55] >> Chuck, I.

[1:00:55] >> Kyle, I.

[1:00:57] >> Well, Tricia, this would be an

[1:00:59] opportunity for you to respond to any

[1:01:01] comments, but you probably don't have

[1:01:02] anything to add to Michelle, so

[1:01:05] um we are now in deliberation.

[1:01:10] » Now, do you have the ability to put the

[1:01:11] criteria up on the screen?

[1:01:14] >> Yeah.

[1:01:15] >> Yes, sir, do you?

[1:01:18] » Yeah.

[1:01:46] » Okay.

[1:01:47] >> I was I guess I was referring to the

[1:01:49] criteria for a zone change.

[1:01:52] >> Oh, pardon me. Okay, I can put that up.

[1:01:55] >> I can if I just get it on the

[1:01:58] town website.

[1:02:01] I can't type.

[1:02:03] >> [laughter]

[1:02:14] » Okay, great.

[1:02:27] Where are we?

[1:02:32] » Al, you said it was 10-3-2A.

[1:02:49] » Here it is.

[1:02:56] I'm looking for the three bullets in

[1:02:58] >> They're in

[1:02:59] paragraph A at the end. So

[1:03:01] >> Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[1:03:01] >> Yeah.

[1:03:10] » I guess maybe if if I'll get this

[1:03:13] started.

[1:03:14] Um I listened to the minutes of the

[1:03:16] Planning Commission.

[1:03:18] and Trish I I thought you know that you

[1:03:19] did a good job in your presentation and

[1:03:22] I think your proposal is

[1:03:27] well thought out.

[1:03:29] Um

[1:03:32] but for me the crux of this whole issue

[1:03:35] is not

[1:03:38] you know how more transient lodging

[1:03:41] or even having additional employee

[1:03:45] housing contributes to Springdale.

[1:03:48] It's do you

[1:03:50] by your application meet this criteria

[1:03:53] that's highlighted or not?

[1:03:55] And so that's what I've been focusing on

[1:03:58] and I I'm hoping as part of our

[1:04:00] deliberation

[1:04:02] you know we can focus a little bit

[1:04:04] mostly on that.

[1:04:06] Because I'm I'm kind of struggling on

[1:04:08] how to how this proposal meets this

[1:04:11] criteria.

[1:04:13] And so

[1:04:15] I'm just kind of curious what others are

[1:04:16] thinking.

[1:04:22] » You know I think Jack that that I I like

[1:04:24] this proposal.

[1:04:26] What I like best about it is it

[1:04:28] eliminates a vacant building that's been

[1:04:30] vacant for quite a few years.

[1:04:32] And it's right in the center of town. I

[1:04:34] think

[1:04:35] I'd like to see that property used and

[1:04:39] I think that this is a reasonable

[1:04:40] proposal. Then the numbers of units that

[1:04:43] two full-time unit long-term units that

[1:04:45] kind of thing. I think I could make a

[1:04:47] case for it meeting the purposes of the

[1:04:50] general plan because we talk about

[1:04:51] housing.

[1:04:53] And I think that

[1:04:55] a substantial change in condition is

[1:04:58] that that building is sitting empty.

[1:05:01] And so I I can support this application. I

[1:05:07] couldn't support it two years ago. I

[1:05:08] thought it was too much but I think that

[1:05:10] this is a a good application that

[1:05:13] would actually enhance that property.

[1:05:18] » I think it would have helped me if there

[1:05:20] had been an actual statement from an

[1:05:22] architect that says this building can't

[1:05:24] be modified.

[1:05:25] Um I own a foam block house in Rockville

[1:05:28] that was basically rebuilt. So, it was a

[1:05:31] major modification, kind of similar type

[1:05:33] construction. I'm a little concerned

[1:05:35] that, you know, our our pathway to

[1:05:38] employee housing is more transient

[1:05:41] lodging,

[1:05:42] something that this town does not need.

[1:05:46] And nor is there any kind of demand from

[1:05:49] our residents asking for more transient

[1:05:51] lodging. So,

[1:05:53] you know, that's kind of where I'm at is

[1:05:55] um

[1:05:57] I hope that we don't continue to use

[1:06:01] uh transient lodging as a pathway to a

[1:06:05] need for employee housing.

[1:06:07] >> Yeah, and I don't think it's kind of a

[1:06:08] dangerous path to

[1:06:10] And I don't think that the criteria in

[1:06:12] this zone requires that that be employee

[1:06:14] housing or workforce housing. I think

[1:06:16] it's just got to be long-term housing.

[1:06:19] >> Or well, regardless of what we call it,

[1:06:21] housing,

[1:06:23] which I have felt from day one that that

[1:06:27] was our loophole,

[1:06:29] you know, that people would jump on.

[1:06:32] And

[1:06:33] um

[1:06:35] again, we continue down the path of

[1:06:38] putting in something that this town does

[1:06:41] not need.

[1:06:42] And that's transient lodging. We just

[1:06:44] don't need it. We have more than twice

[1:06:47] the number of lodging rooms in this town

[1:06:50] over residents. So,

[1:06:53] um

[1:06:54] Anyway, that's my position on it.

[1:06:57] >> With that said, though, this this plan

[1:07:02] is more modest. They do have more

[1:07:06] long-term

[1:07:08] housing than we required.

[1:07:11] It's um

[1:07:15] you know,

[1:07:16] under-scaled

[1:07:19] and over

[1:07:22] uh how do I want to say that?

[1:07:23] Over-residented.

[1:07:25] >> [laughter]

[1:07:26] >> Long-term the long-term residence

[1:07:27] portion is more than we require, which is I think a step in the right

[1:07:32] direction. And that the um

[1:07:36] scale of the building is is lower than

[1:07:39] they could have gone, right? Which was

[1:07:41] some of our feedback for for last time

[1:07:43] is that we just felt like it was

[1:07:46] too much.

[1:07:48] It didn't fit

[1:07:50] um as well as it could have. And I think

[1:07:52] this plan has taken some of those things

[1:07:54] into consideration.

[1:07:57] I will also say that I echo the same

[1:08:00] concerns. It's really hard for me to say

[1:08:05] this It's hard for me to see a vacant

[1:08:07] building in the first place. And a

[1:08:09] vacant building in the commercial zone

[1:08:11] and how we have so many of them, I do

[1:08:13] not understand, but we do. And this is

[1:08:16] this has been one of those.

[1:08:18] Am I excited to see it go to transient

[1:08:21] lodging?

[1:08:22] Not particularly.

[1:08:24] But I'm also really not excited to see

[1:08:26] it stay vacant.

[1:08:28] Um

[1:08:30] I don't

[1:08:33] you know, we've heard the both of the

[1:08:36] owners say that they've tried and

[1:08:38] they're not interested in trying it to

[1:08:40] have any other kind of business there.

[1:08:42] Um and it's been vacant for quite a

[1:08:44] while now. So, I feel like we're kind of

[1:08:47] you know,

[1:08:49] this is our chance to either decide that

[1:08:50] we

[1:08:51] What do we value more?

[1:08:56] Vacant buildings, populated buildings, that are are used

[1:09:02] or

[1:09:03] uh saying no to transient lodging. And

[1:09:06] it's a hard place to be in. I don't

[1:09:08] quite know where I fall.

[1:09:11] So, I'm interested to hear what

[1:09:13] uh other council members have to say.

[1:09:15] And I will say that whether or not the

[1:09:17] building can be remodeled, if the

[1:09:20] current owner is not willing to remodel,

[1:09:22] it's going to stay vacant. And we've

[1:09:24] seen how that how that goes

[1:09:27] with a few of the other vacant buildings

[1:09:28] in town.

[1:09:29] >> Yes, and then it's like how much do we

[1:09:31] sacrifice Springdale

[1:09:33] for what a will an owner isn't willing

[1:09:35] to do?

[1:09:38] >> And that's exactly where we are tonight.

[1:09:42] >> Yeah.

[1:09:43] >> It's a really hard place to be. Not that

[1:09:45] this seat is ever the easy place to be,

[1:09:49] but

[1:09:50] I

[1:09:53] Yeah.

[1:09:53] >> I mean, I I guess when I hear, you know,

[1:09:55] like what

[1:09:56] some of the the benefits are,

[1:10:00] um I don't know how transient lodging

[1:10:03] equates to a

[1:10:04] benefiting town residents

[1:10:08] other than adding more congestion.

[1:10:10] Uh the downtown area currently certainly

[1:10:13] has no shortage

[1:10:15] of

[1:10:16] customers walking around town.

[1:10:19] And you can go downtown any pretty much

[1:10:21] any night of the week and experience

[1:10:23] that.

[1:10:25] So, what we're really saying is that

[1:10:27] we're, you know,

[1:10:29] we want to take on just a little bit

[1:10:31] more congestion. We want to put

[1:10:33] Um and I, you know, don't take this the

[1:10:35] wrong way. I think the only people who

[1:10:38] are proposing

[1:10:40] more transient lodging are those who

[1:10:42] want to build it.

[1:10:44] We do not hear this from our residents.

[1:10:46] We haven't heard it for a long time.

[1:10:50] And

[1:10:51] again, please don't take this the wrong

[1:10:53] way.

[1:10:54] It's not our job to make sure that

[1:10:57] somebody profits from their property.

[1:10:59] That's not our job.

[1:11:02] is having a holistic look at

[1:11:06] what is best for Springdale.

[1:11:08] >> Agree, and I think

[1:11:11] we have an ordinance that allows

[1:11:14] people to add transient lodging. If we

[1:11:17] don't want any, we should change that

[1:11:19] ordinance.

[1:11:21] I mean, we've really restricted it by

[1:11:23] only taking

[1:11:24] applications as we do. Um

[1:11:27] Randy, Pat?

[1:11:29] >> If I could just quickly add though, it

[1:11:31] is solely our discretion as a council,

[1:11:34] recognizing that we we still have that

[1:11:37] allowance.

[1:11:37] >> Yeah.

[1:11:38] Absolutely.

[1:11:43] » Well, I I agree with Jack on on several

[1:11:46] points, but there is a counterbalance

[1:11:48] that that I'm looking at. Um

[1:11:50] I do see this as more tourist serving

[1:11:54] and less community serving.

[1:11:57] I think as as a fact, that's what it is.

[1:12:00] It'll project should will add traffic,

[1:12:02] parking pressure, lighting, all the rest

[1:12:03] of that. There there are some

[1:12:06] um statements in the application about

[1:12:09] uh infrastructure that uh it won't

[1:12:11] impact the infrastructure. Really no

[1:12:13] data to say that that won't happen.

[1:12:16] But but it will happen.

[1:12:18] The counterbalance I see here is that

[1:12:20] there is a building sitting there now

[1:12:23] that's not being used.

[1:12:25] Um to Jack's point,

[1:12:28] is it our job to figure out how that

[1:12:30] building gets used? I don't think so.

[1:12:33] But this puts a building there that at least

[1:12:37] is not is not deteriorating or is not

[1:12:40] just sitting vacant not being used.

[1:12:42] So, I'm I'm I'm kind of on the fence

[1:12:45] about this. I could just as easily vote

[1:12:46] this down as vote it in.

[1:12:48] Um if we use the only metric, does this

[1:12:52] serve the community at large? The answer

[1:12:54] is no, it doesn't.

[1:12:57] If that's the metric we use.

[1:13:05] » Okay.

[1:13:06] Um

[1:13:10] I have been no big fan of transient

[1:13:13] lodging

[1:13:14] for

[1:13:15] many years and I agree with those comments, Jack.

[1:13:20] Um

[1:13:22] >> [clears throat]

[1:13:22] >> One of the things when I look at this

[1:13:30] one of the big things that I like and

[1:13:33] which other people have mentioned is the

[1:13:35] fact that there's a large vacant

[1:13:37] building there in the central commercial

[1:13:39] that's not being used.

[1:13:41] Uh it would be

[1:13:43] um

[1:13:46] I think it would be beneficial to town

[1:13:48] if that

[1:13:49] found

[1:13:50] a way to be used. And this is a proposal

[1:13:55] uh

[1:13:55] for one way to be able to use that

[1:13:58] space.

[1:13:59] And uh I do appreciate that.

[1:14:05] In terms of

[1:14:07] um

[1:14:10] whether it benefits the town

[1:14:13] we have

[1:14:16] a very limited

[1:14:19] amount of private property and we've

[1:14:21] talked about this a number of times in

[1:14:22] this town.

[1:14:24] And it's extremely challenging for us to

[1:14:27] find ways to have

[1:14:31] rental or

[1:14:32] housing for people who work here.

[1:14:36] And we've tried a lot of different

[1:14:38] proposals

[1:14:40] uh done a lot of different things and

[1:14:42] uh it just

[1:14:46] and there's no big

[1:14:49] proposal that's going to come out of the

[1:14:50] blue that's going to cause or going to

[1:14:53] solve that problem for us. So, what

[1:14:55] we've got to do is do it incrementally.

[1:14:58] One of the things one of the reasons I'm

[1:15:00] one of the things that I'm still not

[1:15:05] happy with this council about is we had

[1:15:08] uh we have talked about

[1:15:12] one way to legislate that in

[1:15:15] uh having ADUs have a workforce housing

[1:15:19] component

[1:15:21] in uh the residential zones. And this

[1:15:24] council

[1:15:25] I voted for that each time this council

[1:15:27] voted down. That is a very

[1:15:31] important thing, I think, for the health

[1:15:35] of this community is to create more

[1:15:38] housing for people who

[1:15:40] work here.

[1:15:42] And it's there's not any magic bullet,

[1:15:45] like I said, for a big housing

[1:15:48] development. We don't have the money as

[1:15:50] a town to build one.

[1:15:52] And and nobody's going to come forward

[1:15:54] with the cost of property

[1:15:57] and solve that problem.

[1:15:59] So, we've got to do it incrementally.

[1:16:01] This is an incremental

[1:16:05] opportunity to create some more housing.

[1:16:08] So,

[1:16:09] I support this proposal for two reasons.

[1:16:12] One,

[1:16:13] because of that. And two, because it

[1:16:16] takes a large building in the center of

[1:16:18] commercial that's not being used and

[1:16:20] puts it to an effective use.

[1:16:23] And three, uh

[1:16:25] I think they've done a really good job

[1:16:27] of

[1:16:28] uh proposing something that's not a

[1:16:32] huge eyesore

[1:16:35] or residence for

[1:16:37] uh people traveling through this

[1:16:39] community. They've got They've got a

[1:16:41] good proposal here. This low-key

[1:16:43] uh and

[1:16:45] I'm I'm

[1:16:47] very supportive of this proposal.

[1:16:48] >> Let me ask this just a hypothetical.

[1:16:51] It certainly isn't isn't up to

[1:16:55] council to suggest what a a private

[1:16:57] property owner should do with their

[1:16:58] property, right?

[1:17:00] Um

[1:17:02] but if this was Christmas day, what

[1:17:04] would we put in that that location other

[1:17:07] than this? What would we do?

[1:17:09] I mean, I'd be favoring a a bakery

[1:17:11] myself, but that's just me.

[1:17:12] >> Of a what?

[1:17:13] >> We have a bakery.

[1:17:14] >> Put in a bakery. That's just me. But

[1:17:15] what else would we do with it?

[1:17:17] >> [clears throat]

[1:17:18] >> And I'm not saying that because we can't

[1:17:19] think of something else to do with it

[1:17:20] that we have to approve this, but

[1:17:23] I mean, I rack my brains trying to

[1:17:24] figure out if and I'm not a business

[1:17:26] person, but what would I put there? I

[1:17:28] don't know.

[1:17:30] And Jack, I mean, I'm

[1:17:31] >> Well, I mean, I guess I guess I don't

[1:17:34] agree

[1:17:35] that if it doesn't face

[1:17:37] um SR 9, it's not viable.

[1:17:41] You know, um

[1:17:42] I mean, we've got some pretty successful

[1:17:44] outfitters here who aren't on SR 9.

[1:17:47] I think we have more people walking

[1:17:50] around town today than we've ever had.

[1:17:53] So, I think depending on how the

[1:17:55] pedestrian flow was designed,

[1:17:58] um I think

[1:18:00] for me, it's retail.

[1:18:02] You know, or it's a restaurant.

[1:18:04] Um so, I I don't agree with, you know,

[1:18:06] the assessment that it's not viable if

[1:18:09] it's not on SR 9.

[1:18:11] I um

[1:18:12] so, that's just me.

[1:18:13] >> But they did have a restaurant there. I

[1:18:16] think they were a couple

[1:18:17] >> really struggle with that is that, you

[1:18:18] know, again,

[1:18:20] um because of somebody else's failure on

[1:18:23] a their business plan, that shouldn't be

[1:18:27] the justification

[1:18:29] for adding in this case transient

[1:18:31] lodging. We we can't be responsible for

[1:18:34] someone else's business plan.

[1:18:36] >> No, but what I'm saying is they have a

[1:18:37] successful restaurant on the property.

[1:18:41] They had a second restaurant. They know

[1:18:43] how to run a restaurant.

[1:18:45] Clearly, and so if that one didn't work

[1:18:48] out, certainly they wanted it to work

[1:18:49] out. So, I don't want to second-guess why it

[1:18:52] didn't. Maybe it was because it wasn't

[1:18:54] facing our SR-9, maybe it was something

[1:18:55] else, but I don't think that they own

[1:18:58] the property. I don't think they're

[1:18:59] inclined to open another restaurant. I

[1:19:02] don't think we have the right to tell

[1:19:03] them they have to.

[1:19:05] >> I'm not saying that. I mean, he asked a

[1:19:07] question and I responded to it.

[1:19:09] >> Yeah.

[1:19:12] » Well, if we're going to talk about like

[1:19:14] whether it does or doesn't meet um

[1:19:17] the criteria for a zone change, I think

[1:19:19] there are several parts of the general

[1:19:21] plan that do talk about um increasing

[1:19:26] housing specifically for

[1:19:29] you know, residential and workforce

[1:19:32] housing.

[1:19:33] Um so, having

[1:19:35] the deed-restricted unit and the

[1:19:38] additional unit, I think

[1:19:41] do speak to those parts of the general

[1:19:43] plan.

[1:19:45] And um then there are also the general

[1:19:47] plan

[1:19:49] statements about unique lodging

[1:19:52] um you know, in the park field. I don't

[1:19:55] know if this is really considered an in

[1:19:57] the park field, but

[1:19:59] the experience and what we've heard from

[1:20:02] the applicant is that people do enjoy

[1:20:04] staying in the downtown area, and maybe

[1:20:07] it does encourage them to leave their

[1:20:10] car,

[1:20:12] uh walk, take the shuttle, um

[1:20:15] so, I do see that it could potentially

[1:20:17] meet a few of the general plan goals. I

[1:20:21] feel like

[1:20:22] at some point

[1:20:24] maybe we just talked about it and it

[1:20:25] didn't make it in that there was

[1:20:26] something about reducing vacant

[1:20:28] buildings, but I'm not finding that

[1:20:29] anymore. So, if somebody else remembers

[1:20:33] um that passage in the general plan,

[1:20:37] that might be a third uh

[1:20:41] a third asset that we could use, but

[1:20:43] if it's not there, if I dreamed it up,

[1:20:44] then obviously it doesn't apply.

[1:20:47] >> I I'll just say one more thing and then

[1:20:50] I'm done. I think we have to be really

[1:20:51] careful our application of if there's a

[1:20:54] mere mention of it in the general plan,

[1:20:57] then

[1:20:59] um

[1:21:00] it should be approved.

[1:21:02] I think that's a really dangerous road

[1:21:04] to go down.

[1:21:06] And um

[1:21:12] So, yeah.

[1:21:13] >> Yeah, and I'm I'm not in favor of this

[1:21:16] because there's a mere mention of it. Um

[1:21:20] It sounds like we could go either way.

[1:21:22] Does somebody want to float a motion and

[1:21:24] we'll see where it goes?

[1:21:31] » Pat cleared his throat like he had

[1:21:33] something, so

[1:21:35] >> Pat, do you have something?

[1:21:38] There's a There's actually a in the

[1:21:40] staff report, there's some language,

[1:21:42] isn't there?

[1:21:47] » There is.

[1:21:48] Um

[1:21:51] I Okay, before we have a motion, I will

[1:21:53] just say it. I mean, Jack, I hear you

[1:21:54] and and I am on the fence about this,

[1:21:57] too. But, to Barbara's point,

[1:22:01] we have an application

[1:22:03] and it is a legislative application.

[1:22:06] But, but really, if we're going to have

[1:22:09] an application so that we always have

[1:22:11] to, no matter what an applicant does,

[1:22:15] it's a no because we don't want more

[1:22:16] transient lodging, then maybe that's,

[1:22:19] you know, a decision we finally need to

[1:22:21] make.

[1:22:22] Which is obviously not going to be the

[1:22:24] discussion we have tonight, but I do

[1:22:28] feel like of applications that we could

[1:22:31] get besides the fact that this has the

[1:22:35] you know

[1:22:36] that on this piece of property there

[1:22:38] used to be a restaurant.

[1:22:40] That's the one thing that not the one

[1:22:42] thing that is the probably the biggest

[1:22:43] thing that's kind of

[1:22:45] giving me pause.

[1:22:47] Um

[1:22:48] if this were

[1:22:52] I mean they're here they're running a

[1:22:53] business

[1:22:55] a restaurant

[1:22:57] that's valued

[1:22:58] they're going to create more housing. I

[1:23:01] just feel

[1:23:06] I'd rather this kind of thing happen in

[1:23:09] central commercial than

[1:23:12] uh village commercial.

[1:23:14] I guess.

[1:23:17] Anyway, just my two cents that

[1:23:19] if that's really a conversation that the

[1:23:21] council wants to have is that maybe we

[1:23:23] need to relook at

[1:23:25] transient lodging all together.

[1:23:28] >> Yeah, because to just every two years

[1:23:31] accept applications knowing we're going

[1:23:33] to turn them down because we don't want

[1:23:35] any more transient lodging is

[1:23:40] not really fair to the applicants but um

[1:23:44] let's vote on this this application we

[1:23:47] have

[1:23:48] in front of us and uh

[1:23:51] see where it goes.

[1:23:59] » Okay, hold on.

[1:24:01] I'm getting there.

[1:24:05] » I'll float [clears throat] this and

[1:24:08] >> Sure.

[1:24:09] >> Hello, are you okay with Pat? Yeah, go

[1:24:11] ahead Pat.

[1:24:12] >> No, please he doesn't she was going to

[1:24:14] wing it.

[1:24:20] » You can still make a proposal and vote

[1:24:22] against it, right?

[1:24:25] >> Yeah, you'll you'll make a motion and

[1:24:26] we'll either vote

[1:24:28] >> Yeah, you can

[1:24:29] >> You can vote no on your own.

[1:24:31] But the motion has to pass.

[1:24:33] >> It's kind of intuitive, but all right.

[1:24:35] Uh the Town Council has reviewed and

[1:24:37] approves the request for transient

[1:24:39] lodging overlay zone at 975 Zion Park

[1:24:41] Boulevard, Springdale, based on the

[1:24:42] following findings.

[1:24:45] And I'm drawing

[1:24:46] um much of this from planning and then

[1:24:48] I'm going to add one thing here.

[1:24:50] Under Town Code 10-3-2A,

[1:24:53] this promotes more fully the objectives

[1:24:55] and purposes of the general plan.

[1:24:57] Firstly, the land use and town

[1:24:59] appearance goals sub-goal A,

[1:25:02] which reads, "Maintain Springdale's

[1:25:03] identity as a unique village

[1:25:06] within a spectacular scenic setting and

[1:25:08] preserves the town's distinctive small

[1:25:10] community feel and atmosphere."

[1:25:14] Sub-goal C,

[1:25:17] uh zone changes will only be considered

[1:25:19] for approval if the town finds the

[1:25:20] proposed zone change will clearly

[1:25:22] benefit the town

[1:25:24] by providing more attainable housing

[1:25:26] options for members of the community.

[1:25:29] And sub-goal G, the Town Council will

[1:25:31] revise the land use regulations to

[1:25:33] ensure transient lodging establishments

[1:25:35] help promote the village atmosphere and

[1:25:37] small town scale.

[1:25:40] And I add these two and the general

[1:25:42] housing sub-goals A and B.

[1:25:45] I won't read them into the record, but

[1:25:48] the general plan has them.

[1:25:50] And additionally, the zone change meets

[1:25:52] the requirements set forth in Town Code

[1:25:55] 10-13F for transient lodging overlay

[1:25:57] zone

[1:25:58] and authorizes the mayor to sign.

[1:26:01] >> You want to put any conditions in there

[1:26:02] like that?

[1:26:03] >> Yes, that there needs to be a bakery in

[1:26:05] one of those rooms.

[1:26:06] >> [laughter]

[1:26:08] >> No, I think we really

[1:26:09] talk about conditions. If if yeah, we

[1:26:12] should talk about conditions because I

[1:26:14] think it was the Planning Commission was

[1:26:16] wise to bring in the 2600 square foot

[1:26:21] uh

[1:26:22] footprint give or take

[1:26:24] 5%

[1:26:25] >> Mhm.

[1:26:27] >> I'll accept that.

[1:26:28] >> Okay. There was also a condition about

[1:26:31] the exterior materials being like an varying

[1:26:38] styles or varying materials I think is

[1:26:41] how it was worded.

[1:26:43] >> I have it on the screen here. It says

[1:26:44] the final design submitted for design

[1:26:46] development review must include varying

[1:26:49] external wall panels and exterior design

[1:26:52] elements as shown in the drawings.

[1:26:54] >> Yeah, so we kind of want something we

[1:26:56] didn't even really get into that. Like I

[1:26:58] think we would want something similar to

[1:27:01] what they've given us conceptually.

[1:27:03] >> I think we can just add the same

[1:27:04] conditions as planning commission, can't

[1:27:06] we?

[1:27:07] Subject to the same conditions.

[1:27:09] >> Yeah, I don't do you guys agree that we

[1:27:10] would want to see something we want

[1:27:12] planning commission to to

[1:27:15] their DDR that they receive to be

[1:27:16] something similar to what we've kind of

[1:27:18] seen.

[1:27:19] >> Yeah, I think

[1:27:20] >> the the point that they made about one

[1:27:22] of the long-term rentals

[1:27:24] uh much have

[1:27:25] the required deed restriction

[1:27:27] and the other does not require it.

[1:27:31] >> I agree with the the other third

[1:27:32] condition. And then are we we did not

[1:27:35] get into talking about like do we want

[1:27:37] to see the the charging station and bike

[1:27:43] rack station? Do we want to see those in

[1:27:46] the final DDR?

[1:27:47] >> Isn't that part of the parking thing

[1:27:49] though?

[1:27:51] >> Well, like Niles said, they're kind of

[1:27:52] proposed, but if we really want to see

[1:27:55] them come through.

[1:27:56] >> They're not requirements for the zone,

[1:27:58] so would it be appropriate to require

[1:28:00] that they built those? Are we able to do

[1:28:02] that anyway?

[1:28:10] » Yes, so so that as you mentioned mayor,

[1:28:11] they're not requirements of the of the

[1:28:13] code

[1:28:15] and so this is is is something kind of

[1:28:17] in addition to the code. So if you want

[1:28:19] to require them, you need to make a

[1:28:20] finding on how including them is

[1:28:23] integral to your legislative approval,

[1:28:25] right? Why?

[1:28:27] What

[1:28:29] you can't just say hey

[1:28:31] you you need to give me a bakery because

[1:28:33] there's there's no

[1:28:33] >> But I just did.

[1:28:35] >> Because there's no connection between

[1:28:37] requiring a bakery and what you're

[1:28:38] trying to promote the code. So with with

[1:28:41] the with the bike rest station and the

[1:28:43] EV charging, you would need to make a

[1:28:45] finding that that somehow those are

[1:28:46] linked to the

[1:28:48] standards for

[1:28:50] the the transient lodging overlay zone.

[1:28:52] So for example, you could you could say

[1:28:55] well we we find that um

[1:28:58] section 1013F6

[1:29:02] paragraph A

[1:29:05] uh

[1:29:07] three talks about the the fact that

[1:29:11] transient lodging overlay or excuse me

[1:29:13] transient lodging facilities need to

[1:29:16] um

[1:29:17] give back to the community with more

[1:29:18] than just tax revenue and you could say

[1:29:20] well by providing

[1:29:22] charging stations and a bike rest

[1:29:24] station, that's an example of doing

[1:29:25] that, right? So my my point is you have

[1:29:26] to make that connection. You can't just

[1:29:28] require random things out of the blue.

[1:29:30] But if you wanted those things, you

[1:29:31] would need to make a connection to the

[1:29:32] requirements of the of the ordinance.

[1:29:34] >> I like that connection. I like that

[1:29:36] addition.

[1:29:37] >> Okay.

[1:29:38] >> I agree in the fact that he just knew

[1:29:41] exactly which paragraph to go to like I

[1:29:44] the Tom's understanding of the code is

[1:29:46] always like I admire you. So thank you.

[1:29:51] » So can you say that or does Pat have to

[1:29:53] say that?

[1:29:55] Can we say what he said?

[1:29:58] >> Well, if the council wants to include

[1:29:59] that as as part of the motion, yes.

[1:30:01] >> Well, it's Pat's motion so it's up to

[1:30:03] him.

[1:30:04] What you said.

[1:30:06] Can we do that?

[1:30:06] >> Does that work? I like that, Pat.

[1:30:10] >> I like it. I think it I think it does

[1:30:13] add to the application. You know, it's

[1:30:16] it is thoughtful. It's a thoughtful

[1:30:18] design and it will um

[1:30:21] you know, just exactly like the code

[1:30:23] says, it will give back to the community

[1:30:26] in more than tax dollars, so.

[1:30:31] >> So, I think we have a motion. Do we have

[1:30:32] a second?

[1:30:33] >> I'll second.

[1:30:34] >> We've got a motion by Pat and a second

[1:30:35] by Randy.

[1:30:38] >> Pat, I.

[1:30:39] >> Barbara, I.

[1:30:40] >> Jack, no.

[1:30:41] >> Kyle, I.

[1:30:44] » Motion passes.

[1:30:46] Next item on the agenda

[1:30:48] is another public hearing. We'll follow

[1:30:51] the same process.

[1:30:53] Uh review of an opportunity for public

[1:30:55] comment regarding proposed compensation

[1:30:57] increases for Springdale executive

[1:31:00] municipal officers.

[1:31:02] Um I guess Tom, you'll be the staff con-

[1:31:06] contacts since Don's not here, so we'll

[1:31:08] start with an introduction and

[1:31:10] explanation.

[1:31:12] >> Thank you, Mayor. Um yeah, Don is at a

[1:31:15] conference today, so she's asked me to

[1:31:16] present this on her behalf.

[1:31:18] Um

[1:31:19] recently the state law changed such that

[1:31:22] prior to granting any increase in

[1:31:25] compensation for executive municipal

[1:31:27] officers, the council must first hold a

[1:31:29] public hearing and allow public comment.

[1:31:32] Um there's no action that's required as part of this agenda item. All you're

[1:31:36] doing is is holding a public hearing to

[1:31:37] allow the community to express comments

[1:31:40] about the proposed salary increases.

[1:31:43] Any action that you want to take on this

[1:31:45] will be um included in the next item,

[1:31:48] which is the final budget. These um

[1:31:51] proposed increases are included in the

[1:31:53] final budget. Um and so if you are are

[1:31:56] in favor, then

[1:31:57] acting on the final budget will will

[1:31:59] enact those increases. Um should you

[1:32:02] choose to modify or change those, we

[1:32:04] would need to to make a modification or

[1:32:05] change in the in the next item, which is

[1:32:07] the budget.

[1:32:09] Um, just as background, and this is

[1:32:11] explained a little bit in the staff

[1:32:12] report as well. Um, the town every year

[1:32:16] gives two increases to all employees.

[1:32:19] One is the cost of living adjustment,

[1:32:22] um, and that's given to all employees.

[1:32:23] The other is a merit increase, and

[1:32:25] that's given to those employees who who

[1:32:28] qualify based on their performance

[1:32:29] reviews. The total of those two combined

[1:32:32] is 4.55%

[1:32:34] this year.

[1:32:35] Again, that increase is available to all

[1:32:37] Springdale town employees.

[1:32:40] The only employees that are showing up

[1:32:42] in this hearing are those that are

[1:32:44] defined by state code as executive

[1:32:45] municipal officers, but the increase

[1:32:47] proposed for these for those executive

[1:32:49] municipal officers is the same as the

[1:32:51] increase that is general to all

[1:32:53] Springdale employees. Um, but these are

[1:32:55] the only ones that require a special

[1:32:56] hearing.

[1:32:58] >> Where does the COLA amount come from?

[1:33:00] >> Um, we usually try to base that on the,

[1:33:03] um,

[1:33:04] the the CPI.

[1:33:07] Um, and and

[1:33:09] sometimes we're

[1:33:11] a little bit lower, sometimes we're a

[1:33:12] little bit above. This year it's a a

[1:33:14] 2.5% COLA and a 2% merit, but when you

[1:33:18] stack them together, it's turns out to

[1:33:20] be 4.55%.

[1:33:21] >> 2.5 cost of living allowance seems a

[1:33:24] little low with where inflation is, but

[1:33:26] the numbers are the numbers. So.

[1:33:28] >> Yeah, so I mean, so the CPI is based on

[1:33:30] last year, and that doesn't affect that

[1:33:32] doesn't account for the the recent

[1:33:34] dramatic increases in inflation. So,

[1:33:36] next year's COLA will likely be higher

[1:33:39] to reflect the the current, um,

[1:33:42] increases in in inflation.

[1:33:44] >> You said it's CPI. Which which reference

[1:33:46] CPI? CPIW, CPIE, which is it?

[1:33:51] >> That would be a Dawn question, and I'm

[1:33:53] not positive.

[1:33:55] Um,

[1:33:57] >> I just I I was just curious cuz CPI

[1:33:58] doesn't mean anything to to the

[1:34:00] attachment on it.

[1:34:01] >> [clears throat]

[1:34:02] >> I I'm wrestled with this merit increase.

[1:34:04] I guess everybody gets a merit increase.

[1:34:10] » So [clears throat] the the merit

[1:34:13] Yes, there there it's up to a 2% merit

[1:34:16] increase

[1:34:17] based on on the

[1:34:19] performance evaluations. An employee can

[1:34:21] qualify for zero,

[1:34:23] 1% or 2% based on on some metrics that

[1:34:26] we have on on how they do their jobs.

[1:34:29] >> And and

[1:34:31] the math works out the same so it

[1:34:32] doesn't matter.

[1:34:34] But the merit increase is

[1:34:36] should be initiated first based on past

[1:34:38] performance.

[1:34:40] Then there's a new base and then the 2.5

[1:34:43] is

[1:34:44] on the new base, correct? Even though it

[1:34:46] reads the opposite.

[1:34:48] It reads it to get the 2.5 first and

[1:34:51] then the merit afterwards.

[1:34:53] Mathematically it works out the same but

[1:34:55] the actual in practice, the merit goes

[1:34:58] first and then the cola. Correct?

[1:35:02] >> I think they're just using the 4.55

[1:35:04] number on the current base.

[1:35:06] >> matter which goes It doesn't matter cuz

[1:35:08] the number works out the same but I'm

[1:35:09] just curious about the system.

[1:35:11] >> Yeah, and I apologize that was probably

[1:35:13] also a dumb question. Um

[1:35:16] but as you point out in it it all comes

[1:35:19] out in the wash.

[1:35:20] >> matter, right?

[1:35:20] >> Regardless.

[1:35:21] So so in practice, I'm not sure exactly

[1:35:23] how she does it.

[1:35:25] >> Tom, will you remind us when the fiscal

[1:35:27] year starts?

[1:35:29] >> Uh July 1st.

[1:35:31] >> So these increases would go into effect

[1:35:33] July 1st.

[1:35:35] >> The the first pay period after July 1st,

[1:35:38] which I forget what it is this year.

[1:35:40] It's July

[1:35:41] I forget the date.

[1:35:44] Um and and

[1:35:47] the

[1:35:48] To to your question again, Pat, in

[1:35:50] addition to the CPI, we also use the

[1:35:51] social security cola as a guideline as

[1:35:53] well. And so it's it's

[1:35:57] >> Oddly enough, the social security cola

[1:35:58] is always higher than CPIW.

[1:36:02] Even though it's like a tenth of a

[1:36:03] percent.

[1:36:04] Because it's

[1:36:05] the social security cola is CPIE, I

[1:36:08] think, for like old person.

[1:36:10] I think that's what it Anyway.

[1:36:13] >> Okay.

[1:36:14] >> So, just one other quick question. Um

[1:36:16] so, even new employees, yourself being

[1:36:19] one,

[1:36:21] who have been on the job less than a

[1:36:22] year, would get this increase starting

[1:36:25] July 1.

[1:36:27] >> Uh

[1:36:29] Correct.

[1:36:31] Now,

[1:36:32] just a a

[1:36:34] kind of

[1:36:35] clarification to that. We've we've

[1:36:37] recently had

[1:36:38] um some some

[1:36:40] like within the last few weeks, some

[1:36:41] changes in employee staffing.

[1:36:45] Um and and there's some there's some

[1:36:48] employees, particularly in the public

[1:36:49] works department, that have have just

[1:36:51] recently changed positions.

[1:36:54] Those

[1:36:55] um

[1:36:56] the the salaries for those individuals

[1:36:59] included proactively these these salary

[1:37:02] adjustments, just so we didn't have to

[1:37:04] adjust salary once and then do it turn

[1:37:08] around and do it do it again. But

[1:37:10] in in in in general, yes, you the answer

[1:37:12] to your question is this is um

[1:37:14] applicable to all employees.

[1:37:17] >> But you're kind of getting your merit

[1:37:19] pay based on your previous

[1:37:22] uh activity in your previous role that

[1:37:25] kind of is carrying over into your new

[1:37:27] role.

[1:37:28] Because I think Jack's point is like how

[1:37:30] can you have merit when you've not been

[1:37:32] doing the job yet? Is that kind of what

[1:37:34] you're saying? Yeah.

[1:37:36] >> Okay.

[1:37:36] >> Yeah, it's following you from your

[1:37:38] previous position.

[1:37:40] >> Yeah.

[1:37:41] >> The performance evaluation is on the

[1:37:43] past performance and that's what

[1:37:45] triggers the the merit increase, so it

[1:37:48] is based on

[1:37:49] the old job, the amount is based on

[1:37:51] performance.

[1:37:52] >> But it's in the

[1:37:53] >> But it's on the new salary.

[1:37:55] Yeah.

[1:38:00] » Yeah. So, again, this these are

[1:38:02] the the council is is welcome to make

[1:38:05] changes or amendments to this. This is the purpose of of this hearing.

[1:38:11] » So, um any other clarifying questions

[1:38:13] for staff?

[1:38:15] From council?

[1:38:17] How about people in the audience? Any

[1:38:18] clarifying questions?

[1:38:21] Okay.

[1:38:22] Uh why don't we get a motion to open

[1:38:25] public hearing?

[1:38:25] >> I move that we open the public hearing.

[1:38:27] >> I'll second it.

[1:38:28] >> Motion by Kyla, second by Pat.

[1:38:30] >> Pat, I. Randy, I.

[1:38:31] >> Barbara, I.

[1:38:32] Kyla, I.

[1:38:39] » Lisa Zumft, thanks for the conversation

[1:38:42] you guys had, the questions you asked.

[1:38:44] Um I think that if you are

[1:38:47] confused or concerned about the way the

[1:38:52] policy is written, that perhaps you

[1:38:55] should um consider accepting the policy

[1:38:58] as it is, accept the budget

[1:39:00] recommendations this year, work with

[1:39:01] staff to clarify the policy so that

[1:39:04] you're not having to ask the same

[1:39:05] questions again for the future. Um

[1:39:07] because I think that

[1:39:10] the way this policy is written, I think

[1:39:11] staff are reading it the way it's been

[1:39:13] proposed, and um it would be very

[1:39:17] difficult to try to clean that up right

[1:39:20] now tonight for the next year.

[1:39:23] >> Thank you.

[1:39:26] Other comments?

[1:39:31] » Uh oh, I figured me out.

[1:39:33] >> Okay.

[1:39:33] >> The bike ambassador's not on here.

[1:39:34] [laughter]

[1:39:35] >> Motion to close public hearing.

[1:39:37] >> I move that we close the close the

[1:39:39] public hearing.

[1:39:40] >> I'll second it.

[1:39:41] >> Motion by Kyla, second by

[1:39:42] >> And I, Randy Young.

[1:39:43] >> Barbara.

[1:39:44] >> Jack, I.

[1:39:45] >> Kyla, I.

[1:39:47] ran deliberation.

[1:39:50] >> So, you actually don't need to take any

[1:39:52] action or

[1:39:52] >> Oh, we're not taking action so, okay.

[1:39:54] So, that's that's the end of that public

[1:39:56] hearing. The next public hearing then is

[1:39:59] resolution 2026-07,

[1:40:02] review and possible adoption of the

[1:40:04] fiscal year 2026 to 2027 municipal

[1:40:08] budget for the town of Springdale and

[1:40:09] this will be Tom, also.

[1:40:12] >> Thank you, Mayor. As the council is

[1:40:14] aware,

[1:40:15] and as just clarified, our fiscal budget

[1:40:18] year starts on July 1st and state law

[1:40:20] requires the council to adopt a final

[1:40:23] budget by

[1:40:25] June 30th in anticipation of this new

[1:40:27] fiscal year.

[1:40:29] So, the the

[1:40:31] what's the action that's before you

[1:40:33] tonight is the final proposed final

[1:40:35] budget for fiscal year 26-27.

[1:40:38] The council has already reviewed this

[1:40:41] budget on on three different occasions.

[1:40:44] One is at the January capital priorities

[1:40:47] meeting.

[1:40:48] The next is at the April budget work

[1:40:50] session where details on proposed

[1:40:51] expenditures and spending were presented

[1:40:53] to the council and finally last month at

[1:40:56] the in May at the when the council

[1:40:59] adopted the tentative budget

[1:41:01] that

[1:41:02] finalized the

[1:41:05] proposed expenditures and spending for

[1:41:07] each department.

[1:41:09] The final budget is identical to the

[1:41:11] tentative budget with some slight

[1:41:13] adjustments and those are outlined in

[1:41:16] the staff report. If there are questions

[1:41:18] about those, I can answer those, but

[1:41:19] essentially what what you're acting on

[1:41:21] tonight is is the same in terms of

[1:41:24] priorities and expenditures

[1:41:26] as what was presented in the tentative

[1:41:28] budget.

[1:41:30] I'm just

[1:41:31] to

[1:41:32] read it into the record, although it's

[1:41:34] all in the in the details. Just so so

[1:41:37] it's on the record. I'd like to just

[1:41:39] read from each of the different funds

[1:41:41] the total budgeted amounts, and so

[1:41:43] that's that's all in the record. So,

[1:41:45] this is going to be a lot of facts and

[1:41:46] figures for a second. I apologize, um

[1:41:49] but I think it's important to read this.

[1:41:51] Um the town has the the town's budget is

[1:41:54] comprised comprised of eight major

[1:41:55] funds. The first is the general fund.

[1:41:57] This is our operating fund that funds

[1:42:00] town operations. By law, this fund is

[1:42:02] required to balance every year. Um this

[1:42:05] year our projected revenues and

[1:42:07] expenditures are balanced at $6,307,838.

[1:42:15] Um the town has two capital projects

[1:42:17] funds. These funds are like savings

[1:42:19] accounts. We put money into these funds

[1:42:21] for specific projects, and then those as

[1:42:23] those projects are are um executed, we

[1:42:27] pull money out across different budget

[1:42:29] years. Um and so, these funds don't need

[1:42:31] to budget because we oftentimes put more

[1:42:33] we front-load them with money and then

[1:42:35] gradually pull them out. Um we have two

[1:42:37] of these capital projects funds. The

[1:42:39] first is the parks capital projects

[1:42:40] fund. This year we are proposing um

[1:42:43] revenue of $118,087.

[1:42:47] Um

[1:42:48] expenditures this year are considerably

[1:42:51] more than that. That's 1. 1,3 uh

[1:42:54] 1,368,000.

[1:42:57] Um the reason for the large disparity is

[1:42:59] because we already put a bunch of money

[1:43:01] into that fund last year in anticipation

[1:43:03] of the River Park expansion project.

[1:43:05] Um and so, that's why there's such a a

[1:43:07] big expense there.

[1:43:09] Our streets capital projects fund, uh

[1:43:11] we're projecting $110,000 in revenue,

[1:43:14] and again expenses in excess of that at

[1:43:16] $465,000.

[1:43:19] Those expenses are for uh the Quail

[1:43:22] Ridge to uh Church segment of the

[1:43:26] uh road shoulder paving and sidewalk.

[1:43:29] And also the um design of the Big

[1:43:31] Springs Road reconstruction.

[1:43:34] In addition to those funds we have

[1:43:37] five enterprise funds. These are

[1:43:39] business funds

[1:43:40] and and so they they they don't need to

[1:43:42] balance every year. They act more like a business.

[1:43:45] These are our our utility funds. So

[1:43:48] first the irrigation fund we're showing

[1:43:50] or projecting revenue of $162,405

[1:43:53] and expenditures of $160,664.

[1:43:57] Our water fund with projected revenue of

[1:44:00] $2 million

[1:44:01] $47,508

[1:44:03] and expenditures of $1,977,892.

[1:44:09] Our sewer fund with projected revenue of

[1:44:12] $834,842

[1:44:16] and expenditures of $1,057,693.

[1:44:21] And then our final two funds are the

[1:44:24] Municipal Building Authority Fund.

[1:44:25] That's the fund that is paying the debt

[1:44:27] service on this building and also the

[1:44:29] lion's share of all of our property.

[1:44:31] Revenue on that fund is projected to be

[1:44:32] $249,980

[1:44:35] and expenditures of $245,480.

[1:44:39] And then finally our transportation

[1:44:40] fund. This is the fund where parking

[1:44:43] revenue and goes and and other

[1:44:46] transportation related funds

[1:44:48] money goes into that like our

[1:44:50] road funds.

[1:44:52] Expected revenue of $1,258,500

[1:44:56] and expenditures of $1,030,045.

[1:45:00] So thank you for bearing with me on on

[1:45:02] that uh

[1:45:03] reading of of the fund balances.

[1:45:06] Not fund balances but but fund revenues

[1:45:08] and expenditures.

[1:45:09] So again what the the council's action

[1:45:11] on this tonight is to review the final

[1:45:13] budget, um make any adjustments as

[1:45:15] necessary. If the council

[1:45:18] finds that these expenditures are in

[1:45:20] line with your priorities, you should

[1:45:22] approve resolution 2026-07

[1:45:25] which would adopt the final budget.

[1:45:27] If you want changes or revisions to

[1:45:29] that, we can make those tonight or it

[1:45:32] probably be um wiser to suggest areas

[1:45:34] that need revision and direct staff to

[1:45:36] make those. That would require

[1:45:38] scheduling a separate meeting for you to

[1:45:39] adopt the final budget because again,

[1:45:41] this has to be done by June 30th.

[1:45:44] Any questions?

[1:45:47] >> Let me just say I'm anxious for tonight

[1:45:49] to be over.

[1:45:50] >> [laughter]

[1:45:51] >> Any questions of staff?

[1:45:53] >> Oh.

[1:45:56] Uh I guess not.

[1:45:59] » Okay.

[1:46:00] Any questions from the audience?

[1:46:02] Clarifying questions for staff?

[1:46:05] Motion to open public hearing.

[1:46:08] >> I move that we open the public hearing.

[1:46:11] >> I'll second.

[1:46:12] >> A motion by Kyla, second by Pat.

[1:46:15] >> Pat, I.

[1:46:16] >> Randy, I.

[1:46:17] >> Barbara, I.

[1:46:17] >> Jack, I.

[1:46:18] >> Kyla, I.

[1:46:20] >> You all know the drill.

[1:46:27] » At the uh go keeper, uh at the meeting

[1:46:30] that uh was a couple weeks ago,

[1:46:33] we [clears throat] talked about um

[1:46:35] the lot next door uh and uh what the

[1:46:39] plan was. At but the thing that

[1:46:41] concerned me that I heard was that the

[1:46:44] parking revenue

[1:46:46] uh

[1:46:47] coming off of Lions Boulevard

[1:46:50] is also being sent to the state

[1:46:53] as

[1:46:54] cuz the parking on Highway 9 was being

[1:46:57] sent to the state. Is there a way that

[1:47:00] we can not send the parking for Lions

[1:47:03] Boulevard to the state?

[1:47:06] >> You want to clarify that, Tom?

[1:47:08] >> Sure. Yeah, I apologize for the

[1:47:09] confusion. We don't send any parking

[1:47:11] revenue to the state.

[1:47:12] Um the state requires us to use parking

[1:47:15] revenue generated on SR 9 for

[1:47:17] transportation-related projects here in

[1:47:19] Springdale. We retain all of those

[1:47:20] funds, but our agreement with the state

[1:47:22] is that those funds from SR9 parking

[1:47:25] must be used on transport related

[1:47:27] transportation related projects.

[1:47:29] We've adopted the same policy for Lion

[1:47:32] Boulevard parking. We're not required to

[1:47:34] by the state, but that's our policy. But

[1:47:36] all of those funds are retained locally

[1:47:37] for local transportation improvement

[1:47:39] projects. None of it goes to the state.

[1:47:41] >> Can we use those funds for something

[1:47:43] else?

[1:47:45] >> The funds collected on Lion Boulevard,

[1:47:46] yes. The funds collected on SR9, no.

[1:47:50] >> Okay.

[1:47:51] That's all I ask is that we look at what

[1:47:54] other expenditures do we do we have that

[1:47:56] might be able to better use those funds.

[1:47:59] >> Thank you.

[1:48:01] Other comments?

[1:48:04] Okay. Motion to close public hearing.

[1:48:10] I will second. Got a motion by Randy and

[1:48:13] a second by Kyla.

[1:48:14] >> Can I?

[1:48:14] >> Randy, I.

[1:48:15] >> Barbara, I.

[1:48:16] >> Chuck, I.

[1:48:16] >> Kyla, I.

[1:48:17] >> I.

[1:48:18] >> Do we need to talk any more about this

[1:48:20] budget or we good to go?

[1:48:22] We've discussed it a lot.

[1:48:26] If good to go, I'd entertain a motion.

[1:48:33] » I'll make

[1:48:33] >> Well, let me just say

[1:48:36] I think that what we just discussed as

[1:48:39] far as

[1:48:41] the employee side of this is a pretty

[1:48:43] big flaw that needs to be corrected.

[1:48:47] And I don't know if that has to be

[1:48:49] rolled into this approval or not, but um

[1:48:54] I I think that's kind of a a pretty

[1:48:56] glaring flaw.

[1:48:58] >> That is probably a separate issue

[1:49:01] because that'll be a policy for um we

[1:49:04] can direct staff to look at that policy

[1:49:06] and make changes.

[1:49:08] But I think that it's separate from this

[1:49:11] year's budget since we already discussed

[1:49:13] >> So, I guess we're saying we're going to

[1:49:14] since it's rolled into this budget,

[1:49:16] we'll just go with it.

[1:49:17] >> It's I mean

[1:49:18] >> Well, more more than it's rolled into

[1:49:19] the budget.

[1:49:20] >> That's the policy, right? The policy is

[1:49:23] that if you've worked here, your merit

[1:49:25] follows you.

[1:49:27] And that's the way that it's been and for us to just on a whim

[1:49:32] make that change.

[1:49:34] >> No, I I'm referring to compensation for

[1:49:37] new employees

[1:49:39] that are eligible

[1:49:41] for a pretty significant increase really

[1:49:43] in a matter of months.

[1:49:45] >> You're talking about people in new

[1:49:46] roles.

[1:49:48] >> Yes.

[1:49:48] >> Yeah. Okay.

[1:49:49] >> Getting getting their merit.

[1:49:51] >> Yes.

[1:49:51] >> Okay.

[1:49:52] >> So, I'm I'm I'm sorry. Let me I may have

[1:49:54] misspoke. You Are you talking There's two scenarios. One is an

[1:49:57] employee an existing employee changes

[1:49:59] roles and there's another scenario where

[1:50:00] a new employee comes and um

[1:50:04] is from outside the town to to fill a

[1:50:07] vacancy.

[1:50:09] Um

[1:50:11] my unders- I I'll have to clarify this

[1:50:13] with with with Don or maybe one of the

[1:50:15] other department managers can can

[1:50:17] clarify this for me.

[1:50:19] When when an employee is on probation,

[1:50:20] which is their first 6 months, they're

[1:50:21] not eligible for a an increase.

[1:50:24] And and and so that's

[1:50:27] uh employees that have have been with

[1:50:28] the town for less than 6 months would

[1:50:29] not be eligible for those increases.

[1:50:32] Um

[1:50:34] Does that Does that clarify

[1:50:35] >> Well, no. I I appreciate We're just

[1:50:36] trying to understand it. That's why I

[1:50:38] asked you [laughter] before the fiscal

[1:50:39] year started.

[1:50:39] >> I think your concern is someone's in a

[1:50:42] new role and hasn't hasn't really

[1:50:44] demonstrated performance yet in that

[1:50:46] role and so

[1:50:48] this could be corrected for next year,

[1:50:50] but right now they're being evaluated

[1:50:52] for their performance in their previous

[1:50:53] role, but still with the town.

[1:50:55] So.

[1:50:58] Anything else?

[1:51:01] Is there a motion to approve the budget?

[1:51:06] Do it.

[1:51:08] >> Town Council has reviewed and approves

[1:51:09] resolution 2026-07,

[1:51:12] a resolution adopting

[1:51:14] an annual budget of revenues and

[1:51:15] expenditures for the various funds of

[1:51:18] the town of Springdale for the fiscal

[1:51:20] year ending June 30th, 2027, and

[1:51:22] authorizes the mayor to sign.

[1:51:25] >> I'll second.

[1:51:26] >> Motion by Pat, second by Kyla.

[1:51:28] >> Pat, I.

[1:51:28] >> Andrea,

[1:51:29] >> Barbara, I.

[1:51:30] >> Kyla, I.

[1:51:32] >> Next item is our favorite subject,

[1:51:35] wildland urban interface code ordinance, 2026-13,

[1:51:41] adopting state wildland urban interface

[1:51:43] code and a wildland urban interface zone

[1:51:46] for the town of Springdale. And staff

[1:51:48] contact is Tom. This is not a public

[1:51:51] hearing.

[1:51:54] » Um thank you, Mary. Um

[1:51:56] as you mentioned, this is this item is

[1:51:57] the wildland interface code,

[1:52:00] and as you mentioned, that the town has

[1:52:01] spent quite a bit of time

[1:52:03] um discussing this already. The planning

[1:52:05] commission has has discussed this

[1:52:06] several times. The town council has

[1:52:08] discussed this in previous meetings.

[1:52:10] Town has hosted a couple of community

[1:52:12] engagement and and education efforts

[1:52:15] regarding this topic, um and we're now

[1:52:17] at a point um

[1:52:19] for the town to take action on this.

[1:52:21] There are two elements um that I think are

[1:52:25] important to to to differentiate in this

[1:52:27] action. One is the

[1:52:30] wildland urban interface code,

[1:52:33] and the second is associated with that,

[1:52:34] we have to

[1:52:35] adopt a wildland interface zone boundary

[1:52:39] map.

[1:52:40] Um

[1:52:41] now, we are required we are mandated by

[1:52:43] the state to adopt the wildland urban

[1:52:46] interface code and a specific version of

[1:52:49] the code.

[1:52:50] There's there's no discretion in the

[1:52:53] from the council to change the wording

[1:52:54] of the code or to to modify certain

[1:52:56] provisions of the code. We we have to

[1:52:58] adopt that code as is.

[1:53:01] Um

[1:53:03] on the other hand, with the wildland

[1:53:05] urban interface zone boundary map, the

[1:53:07] town does have discretion to determine

[1:53:10] where that

[1:53:12] boundary is drawn, how that map is

[1:53:14] configured.

[1:53:15] So, just again, the the code wildland

[1:53:20] urban interface code says, here are the

[1:53:21] requirements for properties that are in

[1:53:24] the wildland urban interface.

[1:53:27] Here's how you need to build your

[1:53:28] building, here are the defensible space

[1:53:29] requirements. That is non-negotiable.

[1:53:33] Um [snorts]

[1:53:33] the the what those code requirements

[1:53:35] are.

[1:53:38] A few questions that have come up with

[1:53:40] regard to that is, well, what what does

[1:53:42] that mean for properties that are now in

[1:53:44] the wildland urban interface area?

[1:53:48] Do are do are these properties now going

[1:53:51] to have to go back and if they have a

[1:53:52] non-compliant roof material, for

[1:53:54] example, re-roof their their property?

[1:53:56] Um

[1:53:57] the code is forward-looking. So, if you

[1:53:59] are non-compliant

[1:54:04] with building materials or

[1:54:05] ignition-resistant materials or or

[1:54:07] construction, you don't need to make any

[1:54:09] changes to your property. Once you

[1:54:12] propose development or additions to your

[1:54:13] property, yes, then you would need to

[1:54:15] come into compliance with that code.

[1:54:17] The exception to that is the defensible

[1:54:19] space requirement of the code.

[1:54:23] If a property is non-compliant with the

[1:54:25] defensible space requirement,

[1:54:28] um that property will need or would need

[1:54:31] to come to become to brought into

[1:54:32] compliance with with the defensible

[1:54:34] space requirements.

[1:54:36] As we've learned in previous

[1:54:37] presentations, that does not mean cut

[1:54:39] down every tree on your property. Um

[1:54:41] that may mean trimming uh limbing up

[1:54:44] your your your trees to 6 ft off the

[1:54:45] ground, separating the crowns of trees

[1:54:48] to have separation from your 10 ft of

[1:54:49] separation from your home to the crown

[1:54:51] of the trees, things like that.

[1:54:53] Um so, that that portion of the code you

[1:54:55] would need to comply with.

[1:54:57] What is the consequence for a property

[1:54:59] owner who who says, well, gosh, I'm I'm

[1:55:01] not going to to come into compliance or or what are you going to do about it?

[1:55:05] Well, that would be a code enforcement

[1:55:07] issue subject to the town's typical code

[1:55:09] enforcement process.

[1:55:12] Um so that's that's a little bit about

[1:55:14] the the code.

[1:55:16] Um

[1:55:17] also that that

[1:55:18] some background on on the map. Now the

[1:55:20] map is where again where you have some

[1:55:22] discretion on choosing where that the

[1:55:24] boundaries of that of the map should be

[1:55:26] and and the the purpose of the map again

[1:55:28] is to say here are the properties that

[1:55:30] are subject to the requirements of the

[1:55:31] wildland urban interface code.

[1:55:33] Um

[1:55:35] For Utah Forestry Fire and State Lands,

[1:55:38] which is the the state agency that's

[1:55:39] kind of managing wildfire mitigation and

[1:55:42] manages the the the wildland urban

[1:55:44] interface as applied to to properties,

[1:55:46] they've developed some online mapping

[1:55:47] tools to assist the town on where that

[1:55:51] the wildland urban interface zone should

[1:55:53] be drawn. And according to those tools

[1:55:55] and the direction from Forestry Fire and

[1:55:57] State Lands, the entire town should be

[1:55:59] in the wildland urban interface zone.

[1:56:02] We've pushed back on that with with help

[1:56:04] from the Hurricane Valley Fire

[1:56:06] Protection District, we said that

[1:56:07] doesn't make a lot of sense. There are

[1:56:08] areas in town that that legitimately

[1:56:11] should be in the wildland urban

[1:56:12] interface zone. There are areas that

[1:56:14] probably don't. Um and so we worked with

[1:56:16] um with Dave Harmon from from Hurricane

[1:56:20] Valley Fire to identify

[1:56:23] where these areas of of high risk uh for wildfire are

[1:56:28] and used used metrics like uh the type

[1:56:32] of vegetation on properties, um

[1:56:35] flat combustible vegetation versus

[1:56:37] non-combustible vegetation, the density

[1:56:39] of vegetation on properties, the density

[1:56:41] of structures on properties, um the

[1:56:44] proximity of structures to combustible

[1:56:46] vegetation, slopes and terrain. All of

[1:56:49] these factors were were analyzed um in

[1:56:52] determining what the local Springdale's

[1:56:55] local wildland urban interface boundary

[1:56:58] should be.

[1:56:59] Um

[1:57:01] Now,

[1:57:02] keep in mind that that wildland urban

[1:57:04] interface zone boundary is not an

[1:57:06] indication where a wildfire is going to

[1:57:09] magically stop once it starts.

[1:57:12] W- obviously once a wildfire starts in

[1:57:14] the community, it's going to go wherever

[1:57:15] it's going to go.

[1:57:17] The purpose of the zone boundary is to

[1:57:18] say these are the properties that would

[1:57:21] benefit from the additional wildfire

[1:57:24] mitigation strategies contained in the

[1:57:26] wildland urban interface code. These are

[1:57:29] where we think it's appropriate, these

[1:57:31] are the properties where we think it's

[1:57:32] appropriate to apply these strategies

[1:57:34] because of their elevated risk. This is

[1:57:36] not these properties are safe from

[1:57:38] wildfire, these properties are in danger

[1:57:39] of wildfire.

[1:57:41] Because of that and because of of how the map is drawn and using these um

[1:57:47] these factors to determine where the map

[1:57:48] goes,

[1:57:49] the boundary is a continuous line that

[1:57:53] often time cuts across properties,

[1:57:55] sometimes even cuts through buildings on

[1:57:58] a property.

[1:57:59] Um and the the the reason for that is

[1:58:01] because that's that's where the data is

[1:58:03] directing us. That's where the data says

[1:58:05] that line should go.

[1:58:07] That um has caused some confusion,

[1:58:09] that's caused some questions, that's

[1:58:11] caused some some concern about well,

[1:58:13] gosh, the the the line this this map

[1:58:16] goes halfway through my property, it

[1:58:17] goes halfway through my building. Why is

[1:58:18] that? That's ridiculous.

[1:58:20] Um we can change that. You you you as as

[1:58:23] a council have discretion on how to that

[1:58:25] line is drawn. You could make the the

[1:58:28] wildland urban interface zone boundary

[1:58:30] follow property lines.

[1:58:32] Um

[1:58:33] that is is is a choice you can make.

[1:58:38] We recommended against that for a couple

[1:58:39] of reasons. One is the wildfire risk

[1:58:42] doesn't follow property boundaries.

[1:58:43] These these metrics that we we um use to

[1:58:46] develop the the map don't follow

[1:58:48] property boundaries.

[1:58:49] Um further, that doesn't really resolve

[1:58:52] uh an issue of why is the map drawn

[1:58:54] here? Why is it going to halfway through

[1:58:55] my property? Then you have the issue of

[1:58:57] hey, my my neighbor's property is in in

[1:58:59] the wildland urban interface, but mine's

[1:59:01] not. We're right next to we door to each

[1:59:03] other. What what what's the difference?

[1:59:04] You're always going to have those

[1:59:05] questions about why is the why is the

[1:59:07] line drawn where it's drawn?

[1:59:09] Um but again, that's for for ease of

[1:59:12] administration and for clarity, that is

[1:59:13] an option that you could consider to say

[1:59:15] no, we're going to make this wildland

[1:59:16] urban interface

[1:59:17] uh zone follow property boundary lines.

[1:59:21] Um

[1:59:22] So, and and another thing is we we we

[1:59:24] made this this mapping effort uh over

[1:59:27] the entire town in one effort.

[1:59:30] And and we did it um

[1:59:32] in a in a kind of compressed time

[1:59:34] timeline. Because of that, there are

[1:59:35] undoubtedly areas or specific properties

[1:59:38] where um

[1:59:40] that that that that could use some

[1:59:42] refinement. And so, if there there may

[1:59:44] be specific properties that you look at

[1:59:46] the map and say, well, gosh, that that

[1:59:47] kind of missed the mark based on your

[1:59:50] stated goals or stated metrics for why

[1:59:52] you're drawing the the map here, those don't really seem to apply to my

[1:59:55] property. There are probably those

[1:59:56] situations that could be refined.

[1:59:58] Um so, I I think there are three options

[2:00:01] for the council tonight in terms of

[2:00:03] action on this. You can adopt the woo

[2:00:06] code

[2:00:07] and include the entire town of

[2:00:09] Springdale in the in the wildland urban

[2:00:10] interface zone boundary.

[2:00:12] That's what Forest Tree Fire and State

[2:00:14] Lands would like you to do. Um that is

[2:00:17] removes all doubt of why is my property

[2:00:20] in and my neighbor's property is out.

[2:00:23] That's not I I I I don't think that's a good idea because there are

[2:00:28] areas in town that clearly should not be

[2:00:29] subject to the wildland urban interface

[2:00:31] code. But that's one option for you.

[2:00:33] Um the second option is you can adopt

[2:00:35] the wildland urban interface code with

[2:00:36] the current map as it's drawn

[2:00:39] and recognize that there might be some

[2:00:40] tweaks required to that map.

[2:00:43] >> The map that's in our packet.

[2:00:45] >> that's in your packet, correct. You

[2:00:46] could adopt it as as drawn in your

[2:00:48] packet and then give specific direction

[2:00:51] to staff to say, "Look, we're going to

[2:00:52] adopt this this this map and this map

[2:00:53] will go effective right now, but we

[2:00:55] realize that it needs to be tweaked and

[2:00:57] changed and here are the specific things

[2:00:58] that we'd like to see changed on that

[2:01:00] map." Give staff direction and we can

[2:01:02] come back and have you

[2:01:04] adopt an updated revised map.

[2:01:07] The process to adopt an updated revised

[2:01:09] map is pretty pretty clear or or excuse

[2:01:11] me, pretty pretty pretty clear-cut,

[2:01:13] pretty straightforward. This isn't like

[2:01:14] a land use zone change that has to go

[2:01:17] through the planning commission with

[2:01:18] public hearings and through the town

[2:01:20] council and needs to meet the land use

[2:01:21] zone change requirements. This is

[2:01:23] something that you can do

[2:01:23] administratively as a town council just

[2:01:25] to say, "Yes, here's our updated map."

[2:01:28] So, that's option two. Adopt the code,

[2:01:30] adopt the map that's in your packets and

[2:01:32] give staff direction on things that

[2:01:33] might need to be changed.

[2:01:35] Adopt

[2:01:36] option number three is to not adopt the

[2:01:39] wildland urban interface code tonight

[2:01:41] and say, "We're concerned about this

[2:01:43] map, but we want you to make some big

[2:01:44] wholesale changes

[2:01:46] um before we adopt it."

[2:01:48] I don't recommend doing that either

[2:01:50] because we are under state mandate to

[2:01:52] adopt the wildland urban interface code.

[2:01:53] In fact, we're we're 6 months past our

[2:01:55] deadline. We were supposed to adopt this

[2:01:56] on by January 1st, 2026.

[2:01:59] Um and so, doing that just puts us

[2:02:00] further out of compliance in um

[2:02:03] uh complying with the state mandate. So,

[2:02:06] I I think those are three options for

[2:02:07] you tonight.

[2:02:09] >> Ask Chief Decker to weigh in on this.

[2:02:13] I I

[2:02:14] what I'm as

[2:02:16] personally

[2:02:17] especially interested in hearing from

[2:02:19] you is what do you think of this map? I agree. I don't think the whole town

[2:02:23] should be in this zone. Clearly, the

[2:02:25] commercial area isn't going to be

[2:02:26] subject to wildfires like like the outer

[2:02:29] areas, but

[2:02:30] >> Yeah, I've I've spent some time. My

[2:02:32] battalion chief, Dave Harmon, spent a

[2:02:34] lot of time working with this and I

[2:02:35] spent some time speaking with him about

[2:02:37] this particular map last night, today.

[2:02:41] And I think the key thing to remember is

[2:02:44] almost saying is is this is your guys'

[2:02:46] map. It's this doesn't dictate how the

[2:02:49] state is going to look at you with what

[2:02:52] I call the House Bill 48 issues where

[2:02:54] they're they're coming in designated

[2:02:55] high-risk areas. They're charging a fee

[2:02:57] based off of that.

[2:02:59] They will not look at your map as part

[2:03:01] of that. They look at their own map. The key thing about your map is once you

[2:03:05] adopt the Wooey code, those are the

[2:03:07] areas that you have to enforce that

[2:03:09] Wooey code on new construction, things

[2:03:11] like that.

[2:03:13] Um

[2:03:13] my thought is it's a great map. I agree

[2:03:16] with a lot of the areas there are in it.

[2:03:18] I could pick this thing apart just like

[2:03:20] anybody can, right? But where do you

[2:03:22] draw the line on where your Wooey is at

[2:03:25] in your community?

[2:03:27] The one nice thing about this is this

[2:03:29] gives a tool to the citizens up here to

[2:03:31] be able to mitigate some of their

[2:03:33] issues,

[2:03:34] come back and and maybe once a year as a

[2:03:37] community we and we would obviously help

[2:03:40] with this cuz we do a lot of the fuels

[2:03:41] work, look at moving that boundary based

[2:03:45] off people that are being proactive and and moving their their property out

[2:03:48] of the Wooey.

[2:03:49] Um

[2:03:50] that is one option the state has not

[2:03:52] given us on their maps at all.

[2:03:54] But I think it's a good opportunity for

[2:03:56] Springdale in that.

[2:03:58] Um

[2:03:59] the I think the biggest thing like I

[2:04:02] said with this particular map is just

[2:04:05] enforcing the Wooey code once it's

[2:04:07] passed.

[2:04:08] There's no reason to pass a code if

[2:04:10] you're not going to enforce it.

[2:04:12] >> Okay.

[2:04:12] >> So

[2:04:13] >> The question I have is we could just say

[2:04:16] that our zone boundaries that what you

[2:04:18] call the town the

[2:04:20] town zone boundary

[2:04:21] >> Yeah.

[2:04:22] >> is precisely what the state code

[2:04:24] requires. We could just say that one

[2:04:26] little red spot up on Anasazi

[2:04:28] that's that's going to be our zone zone

[2:04:31] boundary.

[2:04:32] >> There there is a fourth option you could

[2:04:34] do.

[2:04:35] Um I'm am to bring this up, Tom.

[2:04:37] You could

[2:04:39] a pass your map following the state's U

[2:04:43] wrap map.

[2:04:45] Which is exactly kind of what you're

[2:04:46] saying where you look at their high risk

[2:04:48] Louie areas. There's one over by Trees

[2:04:51] Ranch, one up by Anasazi. Sorry, Randy.

[2:04:55] Um, I believe one up Oak Creek, Oak

[2:04:57] Canyon. There's There's not a bunch of

[2:05:00] them in in Springdale. Now, that is

[2:05:01] their high risk.

[2:05:05] Their definition between high risk and

[2:05:06] Louie are two different things. They're

[2:05:07] saying the whole town is in the Louie,

[2:05:09] but that's their high risk Louie area.

[2:05:11] >> But the GIS mapping link that we were

[2:05:14] given, and

[2:05:15] I'm glad we're here.

[2:05:18] If you use

[2:05:20] that little circle that's going to come

[2:05:21] up.

[2:05:22] >> Those circles are their high risk Louie.

[2:05:26] >> High risk, right. But you use that map,

[2:05:29] you take that little circle, zoom in

[2:05:30] more if you can,

[2:05:32] and come down to the center up come down

[2:05:34] to the river like they

[2:05:37] where Oscar's is at. Go there.

[2:05:42] » I don't know how to get rid of this says

[2:05:43] high center thing.

[2:05:46] So, this is a confusing map because it

[2:05:49] this this center I don't know how to get

[2:05:51] rid of this center area.

[2:05:52] >> 2,500 ft diameter that circle.

[2:05:59] » So,

[2:06:00] there there there's different as there

[2:06:02] there's different

[2:06:03] uh evaluation metrics on this on this U

[2:06:08] wrap viewer.

[2:06:09] The what's shown in this circle is is

[2:06:12] one metric. What's shown in these red

[2:06:16] blobs here are what uh uh Chief Decker

[2:06:19] is referring is is is stated the state

[2:06:21] has said these are the high risk Louie

[2:06:24] zone areas.

[2:06:25] >> They're extreme [snorts] risk Louie

[2:06:27] areas, is what they're saying.

[2:06:28] >> But

[2:06:29] >> So, everything in the yellow is still

[2:06:30] considered high risk Louie.

[2:06:33] and if you pass the map based off of

[2:06:37] being

[2:06:38] other than just the extreme then it puts

[2:06:41] the whole town of Springdale in

[2:06:42] >> in except for one little spot

[2:06:44] >> right

[2:06:46] correct

[2:06:47] >> so if we passed it

[2:06:49] >> and this circle is

[2:06:51] different than police radio stuff which

[2:06:53] uses kind of averages that circle is

[2:06:56] aggregate right so it doesn't matter if

[2:06:58] I'm on the my house has zero likelihood

[2:07:01] of getting fried

[2:07:02] but if it's in that circle it's additive

[2:07:06] right so I'm still going to be high risk

[2:07:08] regardless

[2:07:09] correct

[2:07:11] >> correct

[2:07:14] » I have a question about um

[2:07:17] if the someone was looking at the map

[2:07:21] and

[2:07:22] they were going to build and

[2:07:25] a portion of their property is in the

[2:07:27] Louie so we're I'm talking about the

[2:07:28] version of the map that does not like

[2:07:30] entire parcels but could cut a parcel in

[2:07:33] half

[2:07:34] is there something in the code that says

[2:07:36] you have to be 1% in the Louie or 50% in

[2:07:40] the Louie before you have to become

[2:07:42] compliant

[2:07:43] >> if any part of the structure is in the

[2:07:45] Louie it has to follow the the Louie

[2:07:47] code

[2:07:47] if you if so if you have a a property

[2:07:50] that's split in half and you build the

[2:07:51] whole structure then not a piece of that

[2:07:53] structure is within an inch of that

[2:07:55] Louie what they designate as Louie you

[2:07:57] don't have to follow the code

[2:07:59] >> even if I'm not mistaken if my house

[2:08:02] isn't

[2:08:03] but there are two homes that are and I'm

[2:08:05] within I think it's 250 m

[2:08:09] of those structures my house is

[2:08:11] automatically in

[2:08:14] » essentially yes and no

[2:08:16] >> [laughter]

[2:08:17] >> if your house is within

[2:08:21] 200 if if you if you're in a open area

[2:08:24] that that that has two homes within a

[2:08:26] certain amount of time,

[2:08:27] and but you've cleared your vegetation,

[2:08:29] then no, you will have a wide area

[2:08:31] around your your house, and you will not

[2:08:33] be in the Louie.

[2:08:35] But it's so pinpoint, it's really hard to I mean, this I'm

[2:08:40] sorry, guys. This is a mess. It really

[2:08:42] is. And this

[2:08:43] >> Your apology, Glenn.

[2:08:44] >> Yeah.

[2:08:44] >> I get it.

[2:08:45] >> Trying to work our best to work around

[2:08:47] it.

[2:08:48] >> So, question. What if What if we So, we

[2:08:51] need to adopt the Louie code.

[2:08:54] We can have our own map.

[2:08:57] What if we said, "Well, none of the town

[2:08:58] is in the Louie code." What would the

[2:08:59] state do?

[2:09:01] >> They It's your It's your map. That's how

[2:09:03] you adopt it. So, what we did with one

[2:09:05] of the other communities, we had the

[2:09:06] same discussion.

[2:09:08] Um

[2:09:09] they adopted their Louie map

[2:09:13] and changed it a little bit to where it

[2:09:14] followed the state's URAP map, which is

[2:09:16] behind you, but only the extreme areas

[2:09:19] were in their Louie map.

[2:09:22] So, the red blobs.

[2:09:23] >> So, So, the red blob, which is there's

[2:09:25] only one in town, cuz the other one's in

[2:09:27] the park.

[2:09:29] So, we could A fourth option is then we

[2:09:31] could adopt the Louie code, but just

[2:09:33] include that.

[2:09:34] >> But you I would be very

[2:09:35] >> Three of our neighborhood, four of us

[2:09:37] maybe in that. Yeah.

[2:09:38] >> very specific that says you know, you're

[2:09:40] following the URAP map, but only

[2:09:44] the extreme areas that are

[2:09:47] designated by the state.

[2:09:49] >> My understanding, Tom, is that we're

[2:09:51] kind of handcuffed here because a later

[2:09:52] issue

[2:09:54] uh to the was dropped yesterday.

[2:09:57] If we don't do anything,

[2:10:00] we can't sign that that agreement, and

[2:10:03] if there's a wildfire

[2:10:04] on the weekend, we're footing the bill.

[2:10:07] >> That's correct.

[2:10:08] >> So, we have to do something.

[2:10:09] >> Well, we can't not do anything. The The

[2:10:11] state requires that we adopt the Louie

[2:10:13] code.

[2:10:15] >> Correct. The consequence is as as as Pat

[2:10:17] mentioned, that if we choose not to,

[2:10:20] we um we we we can't enter into a

[2:10:23] cooperative agreement under the CWF.

[2:10:25] >> on our own.

[2:10:26] >> And we're on our own for the entire cost

[2:10:28] of fire suppression for wildfires in

[2:10:29] Springdale.

[2:10:30] >> Okay.

[2:10:31] So, that's not an option.

[2:10:33] Um so,

[2:10:36] what's your recommendation?

[2:10:37] >> My recommendation would be just exactly

[2:10:39] what I said. Pass the U-RAP map only the

[2:10:41] extreme areas as your personal map and

[2:10:43] then you're done.

[2:10:44] >> You're calling it U-RAP. So, that would

[2:10:46] make the the enforcement the building

[2:10:48] enforcement

[2:10:49] less onerous, too.

[2:10:52] >> It it it would. So, so just

[2:10:55] Chief, to to clarify, the what you're

[2:10:57] calling the extreme areas, that's this kind of red blob.

[2:11:01] >> The red blob.

[2:11:02] >> That would be your your designated WUI

[2:11:04] areas.

[2:11:06] Sorry, once again, for who lives in

[2:11:07] >> And is it possible I mean, I assume

[2:11:10] that's the whole Anasazi Plateau. I

[2:11:12] guess there's a way to find out exactly

[2:11:14] where that is.

[2:11:16] >> Yeah, you you can zoom in more on the

[2:11:18] >> Okay.

[2:11:20] » Yeah, it's not the whole Anasazi. It's

[2:11:22] actually

[2:11:24] uh it's it's a big chunk of maybe 2/3,

[2:11:27] but there's some homes that are not in

[2:11:29] the

[2:11:30] extreme.

[2:11:31] >> Which is weird because we're all on top

[2:11:33] of each other.

[2:11:33] >> Yeah, and like Valley View,

[2:11:35] I think the first two homes on Valley

[2:11:36] View are not in it and the rest of them

[2:11:38] are.

[2:11:39] So, it's

[2:11:40] >> The very unfortunate part about this

[2:11:42] whole map is it was done with um

[2:11:46] satellite images and AI.

[2:11:49] So,

[2:11:51] I

[2:11:51] >> Well,

[2:11:52] >> I mean, an example, we're getting ready

[2:11:54] to go out to build a new administrative

[2:11:57] station at Sand the Mouth Sand Hollow.

[2:12:01] We're in a giant red blob.

[2:12:03] And it's all sand and water. There's

[2:12:05] nothing else there.

[2:12:06] So,

[2:12:07] >> I think the one thing that's kind of

[2:12:09] interesting and this may apply if we had

[2:12:11] go this route, is like if you type my

[2:12:14] address into that, it says I'm not in

[2:12:16] the high risk zone.

[2:12:18] However, my insurance company, when they

[2:12:21] sent me my letter threatening to cancel

[2:12:24] my insurance, they said you're in the

[2:12:25] high risk zone.

[2:12:26] >> And the good part about this, with the U

[2:12:28] wrap now being in

[2:12:30] code, you can show them, "No, I'm not."

[2:12:35] So.

[2:12:38] » [laughter]

[2:12:38] >> Whoops.

[2:12:39] >> Cut down all the trees.

[2:12:40] >> Understandable.

[2:12:43] >> Jackson living in a van down by the

[2:12:44] river.

[2:12:45] >> [laughter]

[2:12:46] >> Yeah, sometimes that's not a bad idea.

[2:12:49] >> They look good anyway.

[2:12:51] >> Um, did I answer Can I get anything else I can help you

[2:12:54] >> I think we have everything we need. Are

[2:12:56] you Are you staying for that next fire

[2:12:58] thing, too?

[2:12:59] >> Yeah, I'll

[2:12:59] >> Okay.

[2:13:01] To be continued. Okay. So, are we ready

[2:13:03] to make a decision on this wooey map? We will adopt the wooey code. We have

[2:13:08] to. And

[2:13:10] I'm inclined to follow Chief Decker's

[2:13:12] recommendation.

[2:13:14] >> Which would be the U wrap with the

[2:13:17] extension

[2:13:17] >> Tom, how does that

[2:13:24] » It's not a zone change.

[2:13:29] » No, that that was the point I made

[2:13:30] earlier. This is This is a uh

[2:13:32] kind of an administrative

[2:13:34] It's It's like adopting the building

[2:13:36] code. Um,

[2:13:37] it's It's a It's not a land use zone,

[2:13:40] like the foothill residential zone or

[2:13:42] the valley village commercial zone. This

[2:13:44] is is a It's unfortunate that they call

[2:13:47] it the wooey zone.

[2:13:50] Because it sounds like a zone, but it's just kind of like adopting the

[2:13:53] building code with different seismic

[2:13:56] areas or different wind loading areas.

[2:13:58] It's It's an administrative

[2:14:00] um adoption of an administrative of uh

[2:14:03] code that that says where the wooey's

[2:14:06] going to be enforced.

[2:14:10] » Are you okay with questions?

[2:14:13] >> I'm okay as long as you're okay.

[2:14:19] » I feel okay, but

[2:14:21] I before I came to the meeting

[2:14:23] uh printed out the uh

[2:14:25] the map from

[2:14:28] >> [clears throat]

[2:14:28] >> the home page Utah Wildland or Wildfire

[2:14:32] risk

[2:14:33] assessment portal. And it's under the

[2:14:36] high risk Wildland interface

[2:14:40] viewer and we typed in our address

[2:14:45] and it says you are not in the high risk

[2:14:47] WUI boundary.

[2:14:49] Now, if we look at the map that uh the

[2:14:52] previous map of Springdale you have my

[2:14:56] address in the

[2:14:59] with in the high risk zone.

[2:15:01] So, why

[2:15:03] I guess what if there's discrepancies,

[2:15:05] why

[2:15:07] not just a adopt a code tonight?

[2:15:10] Let us take another better look at the

[2:15:13] map and get the discrepancies

[2:15:17] uh figured out and

[2:15:20] uh just

[2:15:21] can you go with that tonight?

[2:15:23] >> I think we need to adopt a map tonight

[2:15:25] and make and people can make cases for

[2:15:27] not, but where we're going you won't be

[2:15:29] in the zone anyway, it sounds like. I

[2:15:32] I'm inclined to go with the chief's

[2:15:34] recommendation. So, you won't be in you

[2:15:37] won't be in that zone.

[2:15:40] >> I feel like it does add consistency, you

[2:15:42] know.

[2:15:42] >> Yeah.

[2:15:42] >> We go with what the what the state has

[2:15:45] determined as extreme risk and

[2:15:49] um

[2:15:51] you know, despite

[2:15:53] that there are some mistakes, you know,

[2:15:56] generally with the uh use of AI and

[2:15:58] satellite imagery. For for Springdale,

[2:16:00] it seems to be

[2:16:02] okay that it's, you know, up there on

[2:16:04] the plateau, which I would consider

[2:16:06] >> juniper forest, so you can see why it

[2:16:08] is.

[2:16:08] >> So, it makes sense.

[2:16:10] >> So, Gil, we we people will have the

[2:16:12] option if they're in that zone to try to prove they're not in it

[2:16:18] even after we adopt this, but we we need

[2:16:20] to adopt this.

[2:16:22] >> What happens to my insurance in the

[2:16:23] meantime?

[2:16:26] >> We're all going to We're all going to

[2:16:28] Yeah, we're all going to experience

[2:16:29] that, but you you should be good where

[2:16:31] you are.

[2:16:33] Don't move to that Anasazi Pato.

[2:16:38] So, are we ready for a motion? Are we I

[2:16:40] saw a lot of head shakes about Pat, you

[2:16:43] have something?

[2:16:44] >> No, I I

[2:16:45] I'd like to piece plan a little bit, but

[2:16:46] I just have a

[2:16:47] >> I have a question as to how the motion

[2:16:49] reads, Tom.

[2:16:51] Um

[2:16:53] we have a map that that the staff has

[2:16:54] drawn. How do we excise that from this

[2:16:56] motion?

[2:16:58] >> So, in in the motion, um the the

[2:17:01] proposed ordinance language just says

[2:17:03] that you're adopting the map as it's

[2:17:05] maintained in the community development

[2:17:07] department.

[2:17:08] >> That's okay.

[2:17:09] >> And and to assist you in that, we've

[2:17:11] proposed a map tonight. So, what you

[2:17:14] would want to do in your motion is just

[2:17:15] adopt the the proposed ordinance

[2:17:17] language and clarify that hey, we're not

[2:17:20] accepting the map that was proposed in

[2:17:22] the packet material. Instead, we want to

[2:17:24] use the state's high risk WUI properties

[2:17:28] map as shown on the the U-RAP viewer.

[2:17:31] Extreme. Yeah.

[2:17:34] >> Make sure you say extreme.

[2:17:36] >> Yeah, extreme only.

[2:17:49] Okay, I have something, but we'll have

[2:17:51] to work on the map part.

[2:17:53] >> Okay.

[2:17:56] To comply with mandates from the state

[2:17:59] the Utah State Legislature and to

[2:18:01] mitigate wildfire risk in the community.

[2:18:05] I move to approve ordinance 2026-13

[2:18:10] as discussed in the town the June 10th

[2:18:12] town council meeting.

[2:18:14] This ordinance adopts the state wildland urban interface code by

[2:18:23] reference. Um, it's the 2006

[2:18:27] Utah WUI

[2:18:29] code.

[2:18:30] Um, and do

[2:18:34] Okay, and also the 2024 international

[2:18:38] WUI code.

[2:18:41] Um,

[2:18:43] the ordinance also adopts a

[2:18:47] U wrap

[2:18:49] map

[2:18:51] um, highlighting the extreme fire risk

[2:18:54] areas.

[2:18:56] Uh, as the WUI boundary.

[2:18:59] Does that

[2:19:01] make sense?

[2:19:02] >> Yep.

[2:19:02] >> Yeah, maybe as opposed to the map that

[2:19:04] was proposed with the

[2:19:06] by the

[2:19:07] community development department.

[2:19:09] >> Chief Decker was shaking his head, yes.

[2:19:11] You think that's good enough in the

[2:19:13] ordinance?

[2:19:13] >> Okay.

[2:19:17] » Tom, you comfortable with that?

[2:19:19] >> Yes, thank you.

[2:19:20] >> Yeah. Cuz we don't specifically have to

[2:19:22] say it's not the one in the packet.

[2:19:23] We're saying what it is, not what it

[2:19:24] isn't, right?

[2:19:25] >> That's fine.

[2:19:26] >> Okay, so do we have a second?

[2:19:28] >> I'll second that.

[2:19:29] >> So, motion by Kyle, second by Pat.

[2:19:31] >> Pat, I.

[2:19:32] >> Randy, I.

[2:19:34] >> Barbara, I.

[2:19:34] >> Jack, I.

[2:19:35] >> Kyle, I.

[2:19:37] >> Very glad to get this behind us.

[2:19:41] >> Wow, is it behind us though?

[2:19:43] Um, okay, review and possible approval

[2:19:46] of a RAP tax funding agreement between

[2:19:48] the town of Springdale and Z Arts. Tom?

[2:19:51] >> Um, in the last council meeting the

[2:19:55] council approved the Z-Arts application

[2:19:58] for RAP tax funding for $15,000.

[2:20:02] This item follows on that. This is just

[2:20:04] the funding agreement between the town

[2:20:06] and Z-Arts. So, it's the same proposal

[2:20:09] that you've already approved. This is

[2:20:10] just the actual agreement that you're

[2:20:12] approving tonight. Um and so, if you'd

[2:20:14] like to approve that and authorize the

[2:20:16] mayor to sign, that will formalize the

[2:20:18] action you took in the last meeting.

[2:20:21] >> I have a motion.

[2:20:22] There's no discussion.

[2:20:25] I think sounds like no discussion.

[2:20:28] Okay, I move to approve the RAP tax

[2:20:30] funding agreement between the town of

[2:20:32] Springdale and Z-Arts in the amount of

[2:20:35] $15,000

[2:20:37] and direct the mayor to sign.

[2:20:39] >> I'll second.

[2:20:40] >> Motion by Kyla, second by Jack.

[2:20:42] >> I.

[2:20:43] >> Barbara, I.

[2:20:44] >> Jack, I.

[2:20:45] >> Kyla, I.

[2:20:46] >> I.

[2:20:47] >> Next item is a request for an exception

[2:20:49] from the noise standards of section

[2:20:51] 4-38-2

[2:20:53] for the Zion Canyon Music Music

[2:20:56] Festival. The applicant is Alex Pelton,

[2:20:58] who's here if we have questions, and

[2:20:59] staff contact is Tom Dempsey.

[2:21:02] >> Thank you, Mayor. The uh town's noise

[2:21:04] ordinance prohibits loud noises after

[2:21:07] 8:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m. The Zion

[2:21:10] Canyon Music Festival has operated at

[2:21:13] the um Bittersweet property for the past

[2:21:15] several years. That um

[2:21:18] that event goes past 8:00 p.m. and the

[2:21:20] music associated with it it is louder

[2:21:23] than what our noise standards allow.

[2:21:25] The noise ordinance um does allow an an

[2:21:30] organization to apply for a noise

[2:21:31] exemption permit for

[2:21:34] um

[2:21:35] events or or or projects that have a

[2:21:37] community-wide benefit.

[2:21:40] Um as you mentioned, Alex Pelton has

[2:21:42] applied for an exemption to the noise

[2:21:44] standards for the

[2:21:46] music festival.

[2:21:48] The council approved a similar request

[2:21:50] last year.

[2:21:52] After the after last year's event, that

[2:21:54] the town did not receive any complaints

[2:21:55] or objections to the festival, and it's my

[2:21:59] understanding that the festival will be

[2:22:01] operated very similar to the way it was

[2:22:03] last year.

[2:22:04] Part of the requirement for a noise

[2:22:06] exemption permit is for the applicant to

[2:22:08] notify all neighbors within 600 ft of

[2:22:11] the requests and let them know that this

[2:22:14] is this this request will be on the

[2:22:16] council's agenda tonight. We did not

[2:22:18] receive any objections

[2:22:19] based on that notification.

[2:22:22] So, your your decision tonight is

[2:22:25] whether or not to approve the noise

[2:22:26] exemption request for the Zion Canyon

[2:22:29] Music Festival this coming September.

[2:22:33] » Discussion?

[2:22:35] >> Yeah, I will say that

[2:22:37] I'm glad to hear that there weren't

[2:22:38] complaints last year since the previous

[2:22:41] year we

[2:22:42] did have some issues.

[2:22:44] Um

[2:22:46] and that I do feel like the the

[2:22:51] music festival is a community-wide

[2:22:53] benefit. I think it does meet that

[2:22:54] criteria. I have neighbors actually who

[2:22:58] come to town specifically for that and I

[2:22:59] think um

[2:23:02] last year I missed getting free tickets

[2:23:04] because everybody got them before me.

[2:23:05] So, I think that in itself shows that

[2:23:08] people are interested in attending. It's

[2:23:11] something they look forward to.

[2:23:14] Um people come together for that. I

[2:23:16] think it's a good benefit.

[2:23:18] >> I think it's a I think it's a great

[2:23:19] event. I mean, people look forward to

[2:23:21] it. I know I do.

[2:23:22] Um and I'd miss it if it didn't happen,

[2:23:25] so.

[2:23:26] >> I just want to say all the earlier my

[2:23:28] bedtimes

[2:23:32] » [laughter]

[2:23:34] >> Maybe you can take a nap.

[2:23:37] Jack, any

[2:23:37] >> The The issue with taking a nap is I'm

[2:23:39] good.

[2:23:39] >> Okay, sounds like we're ready for a

[2:23:41] motion.

[2:23:42] >> I move to approve the noise standard

[2:23:45] exemption permit for the Zion Canyon

[2:23:47] Music Festival on September 25th and

[2:23:50] 26th of 2026.

[2:23:54] >> Um I think there's one condition we

[2:23:57] should add that just says

[2:23:59] on the

[2:24:00] >> Yeah.

[2:24:01] >> 25th and 26th that all

[2:24:04] What does it say? Something like

[2:24:06] any noise that would exceed the

[2:24:08] permitted allowance needs to be ended by

[2:24:10] 10:00 p.m.

[2:24:12] Something like that.

[2:24:13] >> Yeah, I guess with the following

[2:24:15] condition the noise exemption permit

[2:24:18] um

[2:24:19] shall take place between 10:00 Oh, no.

[2:24:23] Let me read that again.

[2:24:26] Uh will will

[2:24:29] um

[2:24:31] I guess is valid until 10:00 p.m.

[2:24:34] >> Yeah.

[2:24:35] Um on both Friday, September 25th and

[2:24:38] Saturday, September 26th.

[2:24:41] All noises made after must be kept

[2:24:44] within the noise maximum levels

[2:24:46] established in section 4-3b-2

[2:24:50] of the town code.

[2:24:53] >> Second.

[2:24:54] >> Motion by Jack, second by Kyla.

[2:24:56] >> Pat, I.

[2:24:56] >> Andy, I.

[2:24:57] >> April, I.

[2:24:58] >> Jack, I.

[2:24:58] >> Kyla, I.

[2:25:01] >> Okay.

[2:25:02] Next item on the agenda is donation of

[2:25:04] parking revenue collected from Lion

[2:25:06] Boulevard on the 4th of July to Zion

[2:25:08] Forever. And I'm the contact. Um this

[2:25:11] stemmed from a conversation I had with

[2:25:14] Natalie Brett Well, actually it was

[2:25:15] Stephanie

[2:25:17] Lion and Tiffany Stouffer from Zion

[2:25:19] Forever when they told me that they were

[2:25:20] having this event at the amphitheater.

[2:25:23] Um I wondered if we could because it is

[2:25:26] a fundraiser and they have had such a

[2:25:29] rough year with the government shutdown

[2:25:31] and all. I wondered if there was

[2:25:32] something the town could do

[2:25:34] as a as a token to support the event and um help them raise some funds. And

[2:25:40] so I talked with Garen about the idea of

[2:25:43] donating the proceeds

[2:25:45] from parking

[2:25:47] in the town that day to Zion Forever and

[2:25:51] found out that we could not do that with

[2:25:52] the SR-9 properties, that that money

[2:25:55] needs to go into the transportation

[2:25:56] fund. We talked about Lion Boulevard

[2:25:59] being an exception and that is not

[2:26:02] mandated, although that is our policy

[2:26:05] and um we have a letter from a resident

[2:26:09] pointing out that that would be a

[2:26:10] precedent that we'd be setting and maybe

[2:26:12] that wouldn't be a good idea. So I guess

[2:26:14] we want to I guess we should talk about

[2:26:16] whether we'd like to donate the proceeds

[2:26:18] from Lion Boulevard, which would

[2:26:19] typically be around $1,000,

[2:26:22] or whether we want to do nothing or

[2:26:25] whether we want to just make a

[2:26:26] contribution and not do it out of our

[2:26:29] parking revenue on the 4th of July.

[2:26:34] » I don't know.

[2:26:35] For me, I I don't I don't think

[2:26:38] that that we should even though we don't

[2:26:40] have to, even though we don't

[2:26:42] have to use parking fees

[2:26:45] and put in the transportation fund along

[2:26:47] Lion Boulevard, I just think deviating

[2:26:49] from

[2:26:50] past practice is just a bad idea.

[2:26:53] Um it's a parking fee

[2:26:55] and if we wanted to donate out of the

[2:26:58] general fund to Zion Forever, that would

[2:27:00] be a different action. That would be tax

[2:27:03] money

[2:27:04] and not fee money. So I I I I couldn't

[2:27:07] agree with it as it's written.

[2:27:11] » Yeah, it does open the door for other

[2:27:14] entities to ask us for parking money and

[2:27:18] so I agree with that. I hadn't thought that

[2:27:22] through.

[2:27:23] >> So what are other options for us? What

[2:27:26] other funds?

[2:27:26] >> Well, since that would the general fund,

[2:27:29] Tom, would be an option for a donation,

[2:27:31] right?

[2:27:32] >> Correct. Yeah, we would would I mean we make donations to other organizations

[2:27:35] from the general fund and so you could

[2:27:37] certainly do that with Zion Forever as

[2:27:39] well.

[2:27:39] >> Would a thousand dollars be doable

[2:27:42] out of the general fund?

[2:27:44] >> Sure. I mean, we haven't budgeted for

[2:27:45] it, and and so that would we'd need to

[2:27:47] make a

[2:27:48] um

[2:27:50] you you just passed your your budget, so

[2:27:52] >> [laughter]

[2:27:53] >> maybe we should have put this before the final budget. So, we need to do a

[2:27:57] budget amendment, but it's that's not

[2:27:58] that big of a deal, and certainly we the

[2:28:01] um the general fund could accommodate a

[2:28:03] thousand dollar contribution to Zion

[2:28:04] Forever.

[2:28:05] >> So, when when we do that, is there some

[2:28:07] metric we use to decide who gets it and

[2:28:09] who doesn't?

[2:28:11] >> You mean what organizations we donate to

[2:28:12] and which which we don't?

[2:28:14] >> Yeah, I mean, Zion Forever we've decided

[2:28:15] if we decide Zion Forever gets a

[2:28:16] thousand bucks, what if

[2:28:19] you know, Joey Bananas wants a thousand

[2:28:21] dollars? Does he know how that he could

[2:28:23] do that? Does he know how how to ask for

[2:28:25] that? I mean

[2:28:27] >> Cat, this is me, Barbara Bruno, asking

[2:28:31] the council to approve a donation to

[2:28:32] Zion Forever. Any of us could do that

[2:28:35] with any organization, and I think we

[2:28:37] just need to vote for or against

[2:28:40] make a decision about that.

[2:28:42] >> Could it come out of the 27-28 budget,

[2:28:45] since it's a July 4th donation? Wouldn't

[2:28:47] that be after

[2:28:48] >> the 26-27 budget?

[2:28:50] >> Yeah, like next year.

[2:28:51] I guess it would be 26-27, so I was

[2:28:53] already thinking a year.

[2:28:55] >> [laughter]

[2:28:55] >> Yeah, I and I I I um

[2:28:58] I think that's probably the best place

[2:28:59] to do it. I'll I'll get with Dawn to see

[2:29:02] if it's easier to do it out of this

[2:29:03] fiscal year and take care of that with

[2:29:05] our year-end amendment, or if it would

[2:29:06] be easier to do in the next budget year.

[2:29:09] I I defer to her expertise on that, but

[2:29:12] either way, you'll need to make a budget

[2:29:13] amendment.

[2:29:15] >> So, we need to just decide let's take a

[2:29:17] vote on whether we want to do it at all.

[2:29:19] The one thing I have considered though

[2:29:21] is that um

[2:29:24] when they made their presentation to us,

[2:29:26] something that specifically was called

[2:29:28] out was shuttle service.

[2:29:30] In my opinion, shuttle service is

[2:29:32] transportation. So, I'm not saying like

[2:29:35] totally against that you guys

[2:29:38] don't agree with the president because I

[2:29:40] do. I I see that if we open up that door

[2:29:42] to donating funds from a certain area,

[2:29:45] it becomes very like we're

[2:29:47] you know, changing the policy a little

[2:29:48] bit. But, I'm wondering

[2:29:51] if somehow we could say, "We are making

[2:29:54] a donation, but we would like it to go

[2:29:56] to this Springdale

[2:30:00] convenience, which is the shuttle."

[2:30:04] >> But, it's not our shuttle. So,

[2:30:06] >> It's not our shuttle, but it

[2:30:07] >> And I think our funds go to Springdale

[2:30:09] projects rather than park projects. I

[2:30:11] mean, that's that's debatable. We can

[2:30:13] talk about that.

[2:30:14] >> Yeah.

[2:30:16] I know that

[2:30:18] nonprofits often earmark things for

[2:30:20] certain like

[2:30:22] this donor has said they want this money

[2:30:24] to go towards this specific project.

[2:30:27] >> Yeah, we can certainly do designate

[2:30:29] where we want them to use it.

[2:30:31] >> I would like us to support to support

[2:30:33] this and I think if we can do a donation

[2:30:36] out of the general fund, it seems the

[2:30:37] cleanest way to do it.

[2:30:40] >> Usually, it it seems like though with

[2:30:42] organizations

[2:30:44] other than say RAP tax funds,

[2:30:47] uh

[2:30:48] we're donating for a certain project,

[2:30:51] not for something that would benefit the

[2:30:53] town, not just in general here.

[2:30:56] You've you've lost some funding and and

[2:30:58] a lot of organizations have lost

[2:31:01] funding.

[2:31:02] So, it's

[2:31:04] um

[2:31:07] it's challenging.

[2:31:08] Um I I support what they're doing. I

[2:31:11] like what they're doing.

[2:31:13] $1,000 doesn't seem like a lot, but are

[2:31:15] we

[2:31:17] kind of stepping up

[2:31:18] of the way we usually do things

[2:31:22] with doing this.

[2:31:24] >> Well, I mean, if if this request didn't

[2:31:27] come from the mayor tonight, I mean,

[2:31:30] we're not even aware as a council of

[2:31:32] what the town donates to, correct?

[2:31:35] I I don't recall ever this item coming

[2:31:38] before us before.

[2:31:39] Are we willing to, you know,

[2:31:43] to this organization, but yet sounds I I thought I just heard from Tom that the

[2:31:48] town donates to organizations.

[2:31:51] >> Yeah, so so in your budget, there there

[2:31:53] are

[2:31:55] um

[2:31:55] uh entities that we we we we we uh

[2:32:02] budget to every year, and now I'm just

[2:32:04] bringing them up.

[2:32:05] >> them is the Paiute Pow Wow.

[2:32:07] >> We we we budget for the uh Paiute the

[2:32:11] Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah. We

[2:32:12] contribute $500 each year to the

[2:32:14] Restoration Pow Wow. We contribute $500

[2:32:17] each year to a um Zion Canyon student

[2:32:20] scholarship at Hurricane High School. Um

[2:32:24] it's uh we we

[2:32:26] don't sponsor, but we contribute $2,000

[2:32:29] each year to the Zion Canyon Music

[2:32:32] Festival in exchange for

[2:32:34] um

[2:32:35] uh

[2:32:36] local tickets that we can distribute to

[2:32:38] the to the the community. So, those are the kinds of of contributions

[2:32:43] that we make. And those are in the in

[2:32:45] the budget each year.

[2:32:46] >> And and I will acknowledge um Lisa's

[2:32:49] letter. She made a good point. She did

[2:32:51] say, "If we think this is just too

[2:32:53] fraught, we we are contributing police

[2:32:57] and parking services to the event, uh

[2:32:59] taking that budget item off of their off

[2:33:02] of their table. So, we are already

[2:33:04] contributing to the event in that way.

[2:33:06] So, if if this is too fraught, then you

[2:33:10] know, that's so be it, but let's let's

[2:33:12] just

[2:33:13] decide as a council.

[2:33:16] >> Well, like I said, I'm not

[2:33:18] I think they do great work. I'm not

[2:33:19] opposed to helping them, especially with uh with the current political situation

[2:33:30] and loss of funding for a lot of

[2:33:32] different nonprofits.

[2:33:34] >> And you know, a thousand is is not a lot

[2:33:37] of money. It probably won't change

[2:33:39] anything for them if we don't give it to

[2:33:41] them, but um I guess another option is

[2:33:43] to just consider a donation next year.

[2:33:50] They can't apply for RAP tax, can they?

[2:33:54] » Well, [clears throat]

[2:33:55] >> They could for an event, I guess.

[2:33:56] >> They they could, but it would need to

[2:33:57] meet our criteria for for RAP tax

[2:34:01] funding. Um and I don't know that their mission aligns well with our

[2:34:07] criteria for RAP tax funding.

[2:34:08] >> Okay.

[2:34:09] >> Well, I think you bring up a good point,

[2:34:11] Don, you know, what we are contributing

[2:34:14] already uh for the event

[2:34:16] uh

[2:34:17] as far as our police force, so.

[2:34:20] >> So, should we just leave it alone?

[2:34:22] Should we just not worry about setting a

[2:34:24] precedent?

[2:34:26] >> I think that's a good idea.

[2:34:27] >> Yeah, I'm I'm just a little

[2:34:29] uncomfortable with that.

[2:34:30] >> Okay.

[2:34:33] And

[2:34:34] we probably don't need a motion at all,

[2:34:35] right?

[2:34:37] >> Uh no, if you if you're going to take no

[2:34:39] action on this, then then you don't need

[2:34:41] to to make a motion at all.

[2:34:42] >> Okay.

[2:34:45] So, the next item on the agenda is

[2:34:49] discussion and possible approval of a

[2:34:51] cooperative agreement with Utah

[2:34:52] Forestry, Fire and State Lands under the

[2:34:55] Cooperative Wildfire System. And this is

[2:34:57] also Tom Dansey.

[2:34:59] >> It is. So, um as as Pat mentioned, this came up kind of last minute. Um and

[2:35:05] so, I apologize for the late addition to

[2:35:07] the agenda. However, I do think this is

[2:35:09] a a um urgent issue um because we've recently learned that we are not

[2:35:16] protected under the

[2:35:18] uh

[2:35:18] cooperative wildfire system with the

[2:35:21] state.

[2:35:22] Um and I'd like to get us into that as

[2:35:24] soon as possible to to reduce our

[2:35:26] exposure to wildfire suppression costs.

[2:35:28] So, essentially what this says

[2:35:30] is um

[2:35:32] that

[2:35:33] by entering into this cooperative

[2:35:34] agreement, the town commits to do

[2:35:36] certain things. We We agree to take

[2:35:39] action to reduce or or or mitigate

[2:35:42] wildfire risk in the community each

[2:35:44] year. That's called our participation

[2:35:46] commitment or PC.

[2:35:47] Um we agree to um implement a community

[2:35:51] wildfire preparedness plan and and we

[2:35:53] agree to adopt the wildland urban

[2:35:55] interface code. Those are our

[2:35:56] requirements.

[2:35:58] In exchange, the state um agrees to

[2:36:00] cover the costs for any state or federal

[2:36:04] firefighting resources that respond to a

[2:36:07] catastrophic wildfire within the town

[2:36:10] boundaries.

[2:36:11] Without this agreement, we as a town are

[2:36:15] on the hook for those suppression costs.

[2:36:17] Um

[2:36:18] as uh Chief Decker has has indicated,

[2:36:21] they they are fantastic partner with this with the town and the other

[2:36:25] entities in the district. They help us

[2:36:27] fulfill those requirements of the

[2:36:29] community wildfire system through the

[2:36:31] cooperative agreement. Um

[2:36:33] but that agreement still needs to be in

[2:36:35] the town's name.

[2:36:37] Um

[2:36:39] Chief, can I talk about the agreement

[2:36:41] that you're proposing? So, so um the

[2:36:44] district has an agreement with the city

[2:36:46] of Hurricane that kind of formalizes

[2:36:48] their their position that says, "Yes, as

[2:36:50] a district, we will

[2:36:52] partner with you in helping you fulfill

[2:36:54] your CWS requirements. Here's what the

[2:36:56] district is going to do. Here's

[2:36:58] what the what the municipality is going

[2:37:00] to do." And Chief Decker has indicated a

[2:37:02] willingness to enter into a similar

[2:37:03] agreement with the town.

[2:37:05] Um so, if the council decides to adopt

[2:37:08] or enter into this CWS cooperative

[2:37:11] agreement with the state, I would

[2:37:13] recommend that we follow that up with an

[2:37:14] agreement with Hurricane Valley Fire

[2:37:17] that that just kind of memorializes our

[2:37:20] mutual commitments to each other in

[2:37:21] fulfilling the CWS requirements.

[2:37:24] >> Sorry, I just came in. What are we

[2:37:25] >> Oh.

[2:37:26] Do you have anything to add to that?

[2:37:27] >> Historically, we as a district have

[2:37:29] always just taken care of the CWS for

[2:37:31] you guys. Um

[2:37:33] due to some

[2:37:35] changes in code and maybe some

[2:37:37] differences in interpretation with the

[2:37:39] state that we are still arguing. Um they

[2:37:43] have a stance that we don't have the

[2:37:45] authority to do that anymore. Um

[2:37:48] I'll argue that all day long, but in

[2:37:50] essence of trying to get everybody

[2:37:52] covered, this is the only way we can get

[2:37:53] it done right now. So, um and I am a

[2:37:56] little nervous. Um you know, all the

[2:37:58] communities it's we will always be your

[2:38:01] firefighting force. We'll always be your

[2:38:02] initial attack. We'll do our best that

[2:38:03] we always can, but there are times we

[2:38:06] saw it last year with Rockville that

[2:38:07] we've had to bring aircraft in.

[2:38:09] That is expensive.

[2:38:11] Um and if we weren't part of this last

[2:38:13] year,

[2:38:14] which we signed for last year, um

[2:38:18] Rockville would have been paying for

[2:38:19] that. I think Springdale would have paid

[2:38:20] for a portion of it, too. So, but um we

[2:38:22] don't want to see that at all. So.

[2:38:25] But and once again, um we take care of

[2:38:27] every aspect that Tom brought up. We

[2:38:29] take care of your participation

[2:38:30] commitment. We take care of the initial

[2:38:32] attack. We take care of the fuel

[2:38:34] mitigations. We do your CWPP, which is

[2:38:36] your community wildfire protection um

[2:38:39] stuff. We will continue to do that no

[2:38:41] matter what.

[2:38:42] >> So, this is a little bit of a formality

[2:38:44] just that the state's requiring now.

[2:38:46] >> Yes.

[2:38:47] >> Okay. Thank you.

[2:38:49] >> And just a

[2:38:51] I take responsibility for getting this a

[2:38:53] little bit late to Tom. I should have

[2:38:54] got it to him sooner. So, my bad.

[2:38:58] Uh

[2:38:58] the other thing is the the agreement

[2:39:01] that Tom's talking about is

[2:39:04] we have uh the chief sent me a copy of

[2:39:07] the agreement that they did with

[2:39:09] Hurricane City and I sent that to Tom.

[2:39:12] He has sent it to Greg and Greg will get

[2:39:16] to it to look at it so that we will have

[2:39:19] our attorney in once Greg looks at it.

[2:39:22] Um then we'll need to accept that agreement, right?

[2:39:28] So, that's that's why we don't have that

[2:39:30] agreement right now.

[2:39:31] >> But this is urgent.

[2:39:33] >> But this is

[2:39:34] >> we

[2:39:35] >> This is we can adopt this, but then we

[2:39:38] will uh, on top of that, so to be able

[2:39:41] to cover the town's re- requirements

[2:39:44] under this agreement uh, Hurricane

[2:39:46] Valley City will cover it.

[2:39:48] >> Okay.

[2:39:49] >> And we will end up signing an agreement

[2:39:51] with them, but this this covers us right

[2:39:53] now if we pass this tonight, tomorrow

[2:39:56] there's a

[2:39:57] uh, there's a fire that the state has to

[2:39:59] respond to

[2:40:01] we're covered, right?

[2:40:03] >> Correct.

[2:40:04] >> So

[2:40:05] >> Mhm.

[2:40:05] >> This is something that

[2:40:08] you know, before there's any lightning

[2:40:10] around here

[2:40:12] or anything else, we should

[2:40:14] >> The downside is that we're just kind of

[2:40:16] financially on the hook now for maybe

[2:40:19] about $10,000.

[2:40:20] >> At this point, yes, until we pass this.

[2:40:22] >> pass this.

[2:40:24] >> Mhm. But that [clears throat] that

[2:40:25] financial commitment is can be in kind.

[2:40:27] That that's not a that's not a cash

[2:40:28] requirement and that also applies to

[2:40:30] anything that anybody does on their

[2:40:32] property. So, it's not just what the

[2:40:34] town does, it's um, Randy recently did a

[2:40:36] bunch of fuels reduction on his

[2:40:37] property. The value of that can count

[2:40:40] towards the participation commitment.

[2:40:41] >> And and we have already done

[2:40:43] participating commitment for Springdale

[2:40:45] for the year 2026.

[2:40:47] >> Okay. Yeah, cuz Dave came and helped a

[2:40:49] bunch of us. Yeah.

[2:40:54] » You know

[2:40:55] we are not going to walk away from that.

[2:40:57] We're going to even

[2:40:58] pivot as we're working through this

[2:41:00] other agreement which just kind of

[2:41:01] solidifies everything in the in the

[2:41:03] documents.

[2:41:04] We will continue to do your your PC in

[2:41:06] every aspect that we do as the district.

[2:41:09] >> Okay.

[2:41:11] Will I recommend that we approve this

[2:41:13] cooperative agreement tonight, and then

[2:41:15] we'll look at the new agreement that Greg approves at

[2:41:21] a later date.

[2:41:23] >> I totally recommend that.

[2:41:25] >> Okay. Let's get a motion.

[2:41:26] >> I have a motion. I move to approve the

[2:41:29] cooperative agreement with Utah Forestry

[2:41:32] and Fire

[2:41:33] and State Lands under the Cooperative

[2:41:36] Wildfire Systems and direct the mayor to

[2:41:39] sign. Additionally, I would like that to

[2:41:42] direct the staff to coordinate

[2:41:46] an agreement with HVSSD

[2:41:49] to help us fulfill the the requirements

[2:41:53] of the CWS.

[2:41:56] >> I'll second that.

[2:41:57] >> Motion by Kayla, second by Randy.

[2:41:59] >> That I

[2:42:00] >> Barb Wright?

[2:42:01] >> Jack,

[2:42:02] >> I.

[2:42:02] >> Okay.

[2:42:03] Are there any council discussion before

[2:42:06] we go into closed session?

[2:42:10] Okay. So, do we We don't adjourn this

[2:42:13] meeting. We just make a Somebody make a

[2:42:14] motion to go into closed session?

[2:42:19] » I move to go into closed session.

[2:42:21] >> I'll second.

[2:42:22] >> Motion by Jack, second by Kayla.

[2:42:24] >> Jack,

[2:42:25] >> Randy, I.

[2:42:25] >> Barb Wright?

[2:42:26] >> Jack, I.

[2:42:27] >> Kayla, I.

[2:42:28] >> Okay.

[2:42:36] » Captain Mulholland, thank you.

[2:42:37] >> [laughter]

[2:42:37] >> And and now we're making them leave.

[2:42:43] » Yeah.

[2:42:44] Three

06/10/2026 Town Council Meeting

Transcript