[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