[0:00] And welcome board members. I'm going to
[0:01] call to order the Monday, May 18th
[0:04] meeting of the Utah League of Cities and
[0:06] Towns Board of Directors.
[0:08] Welcome everyone on this uh spring day
[0:11] that feels a little more like spring
[0:13] than some of
[0:14] the last 3 months.
[0:16] Um
[0:18] first uh item uh is going to be
[0:22] my favorite item
[0:24] which is a Slido version of Would You
[0:29] Rather.
[0:31] Um I've I've missed doing these with you
[0:34] um
[0:35] and so I thought deeply about this.
[0:38] Would You Rather
[0:39] um
[0:40] and it corresponds with both
[0:44] the major happening of this week and
[0:46] next week which are high school
[0:47] graduations across the state.
[0:50] Um and until last night's rainstorm
[0:54] really the start of summer.
[0:56] And so uh hopefully
[1:00] Carson
[1:01] was able to get the Slido
[1:03] >> getting it up. Carson made us a Slido.
[1:06] I'm a poor substitute for Carson, but
[1:08] >> Okay. Hopefully that works. So I
[1:10] uh
[1:11] I'm stalling while the Slido pops up,
[1:12] but in corresponding with both uh both
[1:16] of those things are Would You Rather.
[1:20] Um is
[1:22] uh Would You Rather Oh god, sorry. You
[1:25] got to share
[1:27] I've shared it so really long.
[1:34] Again, tied to both the weather and the
[1:37] end of school.
[1:38] >> [laughter]
[1:46] » How's my Slido? Hold on.
[1:51] All right, I'm going to tell everyone so
[1:52] you can be thinking about it and then
[1:54] we'll put it on the board.
[1:55] So the is Would you rather
[1:58] repeat junior high
[2:01] >> [laughter]
[2:02] >> or
[2:05] uh
[2:06] live through the next three summers
[2:08] without air conditioning?
[2:11] yeah.
[2:12] >> [laughter]
[2:15] » If you had to
[2:16] watch junior high over and you're going
[2:18] to come back right away or you just go
[2:19] all the way back?
[2:27] Hey, would you rather repeat junior high
[2:31] all three all three years
[2:33] or live the next three summers
[2:37] without air conditioning? What if you
[2:38] only had two years of junior high?
[2:41] this is a middle school.
[2:47] All right, we may never get to Slido
[2:50] but I'll give you a little
[2:51] baby you without official Slido results.
[2:54] That's okay. Hey, I think the unofficial
[2:56] poll is 100% junior high. Yeah, that for
[2:58] those of you
[3:02] But if you wake up tomorrow and we know
[3:04] what we know now, would you still go
[3:05] through junior high? You have to
[3:06] >> [laughter]
[3:06] >> go through the whole experience, the
[3:08] acne, the braces, the hair.
[3:15] Uh okay, so for those of you online
[3:18] board members of the
[3:19] uh the seven participants in the room
[3:20] here
[3:21] is they're all going to go with the air
[3:23] conditioning option.
[3:24] Um
[3:26] It looks like there's some potentially
[3:28] some comments in the chat, so if there's
[3:30] any really good comments about um
[3:34] air conditioning versus junior high,
[3:36] we'll look forward to reading those.
[3:38] Um
[3:40] thanks for indulging my love of would
[3:41] you rathers.
[3:44] Next on our agenda is a review and
[3:46] approval of the minutes and a call for
[3:49] any uh conflict of interest disclosures.
[3:52] Uh board, I hope you has had an
[3:53] opportunity to review the minutes that
[3:56] were distributed in our packet.
[3:59] Um, has everyone had an opportunity to
[4:01] review those minutes and is anyone
[4:03] prepared to make a motion?
[4:05] I'll move to approve.
[4:07] We have a motion from Mayor Winchell,
[4:08] seconded Councilmember Dugan.
[4:11] Any discussion?
[4:14] Seeing no hands popping up online. I
[4:17] throw Nick Broyles in, Nick.
[4:20] On seeing everything displayed on
[4:22] screen. All in favor of approving the
[4:24] minutes, please say I. I. I.
[4:30] We'll give it just a minute for any of
[4:32] those online. I know that we have
[4:33] several of our board members that are
[4:34] remote for the um
[4:37] ICSC conference. Sorry that we
[4:40] picked that date, unfortunately.
[4:42] Um
[4:49] I'm back. Yeah, I can see the comments
[4:51] back here. Okay, uh looks like we've got
[4:53] eyes across the board on the motion
[4:55] minute.
[4:57] Councilmember E,
[4:58] uh Councilmember Slay is reporting a yes
[5:00] to the snow.
[5:02] Uh
[5:04] Councilmember Peterson.
[5:06] Okay, yeah.
[5:09] Yes.
[5:11] Councilmember Shumway is a That was a
[5:12] hard no one
[5:15] Thank you, no.
[5:17] Hard pass.
[5:19] Okay, uh next is a call for any conflict
[5:21] of
[5:22] uh interest disclosures. Does anyone
[5:24] have anything they need to uh declare
[5:26] for this meeting or add to the
[5:28] disclosures that are on file?
[5:37] Looks like that is a no. So, we will
[5:39] move on from that agenda item.
[5:42] Next item on our agenda is a report from
[5:45] Alexa related to ULCT boards and
[5:48] commissions and uh potential
[5:50] appointments. All right. Good morning,
[5:52] everyone. Um you might remember in our
[5:54] April board meeting, I updated you on
[5:56] several groups that were created during
[5:58] the 2026 legislative session. So, today
[6:00] we're going to be recommending two
[6:02] appointments for two of those newly
[6:03] created boards. The first one is going
[6:05] to be the Economic Development Council.
[6:07] This um
[6:09] council was created by HB 475 from the
[6:11] session. It's going to be housed out of
[6:13] the governor's office of economic
[6:15] development and is responsible for
[6:17] coordinating economic development
[6:19] projects with statewide or regional
[6:21] significance. Um
[6:23] you can see on the memo that I listed
[6:26] out the 10 different entities that are
[6:28] um that have representation on this
[6:31] board. And you'll notice that most of
[6:33] the entities, the statewide independent
[6:35] entities responsible for approving and
[6:37] leading out on economic development
[6:39] projects are represented on this board.
[6:41] It's no secret that these groups have
[6:42] received increased public and
[6:44] legislative attention in the past couple
[6:46] of months. So, GOED has requested that
[6:49] the executive directors from each of
[6:51] these appointing appointing authorities
[6:53] be represented on this group. So, we are
[6:55] recommending that you appoint Cameron to
[6:56] represent municipal interests on this
[6:58] group. The next, the Political
[6:59] Subdivisions Interim Committee Tax
[7:01] Increment Financing Work Group was also
[7:03] created this legislative session. This
[7:05] group is going to be responsible for
[7:07] recommending like a ceiling for the
[7:09] total amount of revenue that should be
[7:12] um generated and utilized through tax
[7:13] increment financing on a statewide
[7:15] basis. Um again, you can read through
[7:17] the seven different groups that are
[7:18] going to be represented on this board.
[7:20] Um we know that the Utah Association of
[7:22] Counties represented their CEO Brandy or
[7:25] appointed their CEO, excuse me, Brandy
[7:27] Grace to this board. So, because of this
[7:29] and because of the inherent overlap that
[7:31] this board is going to have with the
[7:32] Economic Development Council, we're also
[7:34] recommending that you appoint Cameron to
[7:36] the Tax Increment Financing Work Group
[7:38] as well. Um we'll go ahead and we'll
[7:40] pause on those and just really me if
[7:42] anyone has any
[7:43] questions on those two
[7:47] particular
[7:48] one's a council, one's a work group and
[7:50] any feedback or thoughts from the board
[7:54] having Cameron be our representative.
[7:57] Is this a one year, two year, four year?
[7:59] The work group is the political subs
[8:02] that is time limited and it is this in
[8:06] and we lobbied for a lead position on
[8:09] this on this committee because of all
[8:11] the discussions last session on tax
[8:12] increment. So, that'll be time limited. The economic
[8:16] development council is not time limited.
[8:18] And this
[8:20] in a way feels like
[8:22] we had the UEOC a few years ago and this
[8:25] is a smaller, more refined version of
[8:28] the UEOC. So, that one I would say is
[8:31] likely to continue through the rest of
[8:34] the governor's term, but the legislature
[8:36] could
[8:36] repeal it any year.
[8:38] We, as part of the packet, circulated
[8:41] the policy resolution a couple of years
[8:43] ago and
[8:45] development. That'll be the starting
[8:46] point for the work here and then Justin
[8:48] will talk about this in the advocacy
[8:50] section. That'll be
[8:51] that LPC in two [clears throat] weeks
[8:53] when we're
[8:53] working on the summer. We intend to have
[8:55] advisory group on economic development.
[8:57] We're going to bring in elected
[8:58] officials, our agency staff and
[9:00] everybody in between to help inform
[9:02] these two groups. But, we lobby for lead
[9:05] representation.
[9:07] Please go ahead.
[9:09] I'd just like to ask Cameron if he has
[9:11] any concerns about how the the demands
[9:14] of
[9:15] these assignments would impact your time
[9:18] going forward. I think both of them are
[9:20] going to be pretty time intensive, but
[9:23] again, we lobbied to make sure we got a
[9:25] seat at the table. And because as you
[9:28] know, Alex indicated, there's more
[9:29] public attention around large scale
[9:31] economic development than ever before.
[9:34] What we discussed and what we're trying
[9:36] to talk about this as well, is that if
[9:39] we were to appoint
[9:40] a city's economic development director,
[9:42] or even if you were to appoint a mayor
[9:44] then
[9:45] it could feed into the conversation of
[9:49] an individual project or an individual
[9:51] perspective as opposed to the broader
[9:53] perspective. And I think
[9:55] that's why it makes sense for me to
[9:56] prioritize it and
[9:58] I mean yeah, but everybody within have
[10:00] that
[10:00] advisory group that can help provide
[10:03] direction as we go forward.
[10:05] To add some commentary when I was um
[10:08] viewing the packet and talking with
[10:10] Cameron in advance about some of the
[10:12] items.
[10:13] Um obviously we're all aware of uh the
[10:16] hyperfocus that is
[10:18] um
[10:19] on MIDA and that's in the box elder
[10:22] right now.
[10:23] But with the way things have evolved
[10:24] with
[10:26] um
[10:27] you know, Pointed Mountain with the Utah
[10:30] Inland Port and so many satellite
[10:32] inland ports, I think the pool of
[10:35] elected officials that we would go to
[10:37] that would have kind of the expert teeth
[10:39] to be helpful on this on this particular
[10:41] council,
[10:43] we would run the risk of them then
[10:45] potentially
[10:46] becoming the focus of,
[10:48] you know,
[10:49] are these things which we've had
[10:51] not been in control of
[10:53] because has decided to create them,
[10:55] you know, becoming the focus and whether
[10:58] there would be any um
[11:01] you know, concerns that someone was, for
[11:04] instance, you know,
[11:05] Smith or Spanish Fork have a satellite
[11:07] inland port. So we're coming in West
[11:09] Valley or there's just there's lots of
[11:11] um
[11:12] kind of individual
[11:14] elements and they all have
[11:16] um
[11:17] they're all slightly different.
[11:21] Um yet they fall in this category, so
[11:24] that seemed like a a positive
[11:26] recommendation from my perspective.
[11:28] Nick, is there anyone uh from the board
[11:30] that is online that is has their hand
[11:32] raised or has any comments in the path
[11:35] on this topic that
[11:37] um
[11:43] in Summit County that has the attention
[11:45] of our friends at Mountain Accord.
[11:49] If you have time to back the board for
[11:52] conversation
[11:54] that can imagine being more than
[11:56] quarterly or
[11:58] They haven't been scheduled yet, so I
[12:00] asked Jeff Moss about this a couple
[12:01] weeks ago and they were waiting for
[12:03] everybody to get to the finances. I
[12:05] expect they'll get scheduled this week
[12:07] since the legislature
[12:08] meetings start this week. But yeah, they
[12:10] the intent with the advisory group would
[12:13] be as we've done with other advisory
[12:15] groups, funneling all the feedback to
[12:17] the board and then making sure we're
[12:19] getting feedback from the board, LPC,
[12:21] and the
[12:25] Any other
[12:26] questions, feedback on these two in
[12:28] particular before we move on to
[12:31] the rest of the executive's report?
[12:35] Okay. Thank you. If none, we'll go to
[12:37] the next one. Perfect. I just have one,
[12:38] so those are the only items that we need
[12:40] action on today. I just have one update
[12:42] that we will likely take action on at
[12:44] our next board meeting in June. So, U C
[12:46] T has two seats on the Utah
[12:48] Communications Authority Governing
[12:50] Board. The current representatives on
[12:52] that board are Ogden City Administrator
[12:54] Meira Brown and St. George Government
[12:57] Affairs Director Shawn Guzman. Um
[12:59] Meira's term does not end until August
[13:01] 2028 and Shawn's doesn't end until
[13:03] August 2027. However, Meira is stepping
[13:06] down from her role at Ogden City and
[13:08] Shawn is retiring from St. George. They
[13:10] both plan on staying in the city world
[13:12] doing some contract labor um for several
[13:14] cities, but um we and there are they've
[13:18] expressed interest in remaining on the
[13:20] board as well, but I believe over the
[13:22] next month U C T staff and the executive
[13:24] board will talk about how best to
[13:25] proceed with those positions and if we
[13:27] need to make new appointments at the
[13:28] next board meeting. So,
[13:30] just keep an eye out for that. But,
[13:32] that's all I have. I'm happy to answer
[13:34] any questions about those and do we want
[13:36] to make a motion on the
[13:38] first two committees today or have more
[13:40] time to talk about that? Before we go to
[13:42] motion, I want to just mention on the U
[13:43] Tech Communication Authority, I know
[13:45] that um
[13:46] both Shawn and and Mera have served well
[13:49] and have done a great job. I know there
[13:50] are some changes contemplated um in that
[13:53] space about uh potential construction of
[13:56] a
[13:57] uh
[13:58] an EOC for dispatch and I
[14:01] uh I know that some of our piece apps
[14:03] have some thoughts and concerns there
[14:05] and so I I want us to maybe over the
[14:07] next 30 days just be thoughtful about
[14:10] making sure that the representation we
[14:12] send
[14:13] is going to
[14:14] have
[14:15] uh real relevant expertise in terms of
[14:19] our dispatch and emergency communication
[14:21] needs um
[14:23] statewide. So, um
[14:26] it may be that that our current dynamic
[14:28] duo is still the best duo, but want us
[14:30] to all be
[14:32] uh thinking about it through that lens
[14:33] and maybe checking in with your
[14:36] uh
[14:36] piece apps to, you know, get some uh
[14:38] feedback as well.
[14:40] If there's any feedback you have on
[14:41] that, you can send that to me and I'll
[14:43] compile it and make sure I present that
[14:45] to Shawn and Cameron too.
[14:48] Um okay, with that, any other thoughts,
[14:50] questions, feedback?
[14:55] If not, is there anyone that is prepared
[14:57] to make a motion on the Economic
[14:58] Development Council and the um Global
[15:01] Subs Tax Increment Financing Work Group?
[15:04] I hope you put that on a resume.
[15:11] So, motion from Council Regret would
[15:12] second it from Council Regret. Dugan,
[15:15] uh any discussion?
[15:18] Being none, we'll call for the vote. All
[15:20] in favor uh of um submitting Cameron's
[15:23] name to recommend this on these two
[15:25] different uh organizations, please say
[15:27] I. I. I. I.
[15:31] We'll give a moment just to
[15:33] I.
[15:34] hear from our online cohort.
[15:37] Looks like we're seeing eyes across the
[15:38] board. Uh anyone else?
[15:42] Cameron, looks like you have some fun
[15:44] summer assignments.
[15:50] All right.
[15:51] Uh
[15:51] we'll move on to the next item on our
[15:53] agenda, which is our Juneteenth holiday
[15:56] policy update. Nick, this is your item
[15:59] to discuss with the board. Yes, thank
[16:01] you. Very briefly. Um so, a law was
[16:04] passed in this last legislative session
[16:06] that will go into effect for next year's
[16:08] Juneteenth that will line up the state
[16:10] observed holiday with the federal
[16:12] holiday and have it actually be on uh
[16:14] June 19th. Uh 2026 is still an off year.
[16:18] The The 19th falls on a uh Friday.
[16:21] However, state law currently says it has
[16:23] to be the preceding Monday, so it's
[16:25] going to be like the 15th or something
[16:27] around there. Um we're asking the board
[16:29] just to go a year early
[16:31] um to get it in line with what the state
[16:33] law will be going in 2027. Um as you can
[16:36] see, the four of us uh our Juneteenth is
[16:38] the day Juneteenth is observed by the
[16:39] state of Utah. We're just saying, "Nope,
[16:42] it's the 19th. That's how it will be for
[16:43] the state going forward." And we're
[16:45] saying, "You know what? It makes sense
[16:46] to do it this year at the long Friday."
[16:47] So,
[16:48] that's all.
[16:50] Uh I am so glad that as a state we've
[16:52] been on this journey.
[16:55] We're just saying we will align with
[16:57] Uh any any questions or feedback on
[17:00] this? Um
[17:02] believe that you need Do you need a
[17:03] motion for us to have the full legal
[17:05] opinion? We do, yeah. So, as you can see
[17:06] here in the packet, this is the This is
[17:08] our policy that have our observed
[17:10] holidays, and this would just be a
[17:11] change to our uh personnel policies.
[17:15] Anyone prepared to make a motion to that
[17:18] effect?
[17:19] I so move.
[17:21] It's okay. Thank you, Mayor Weishar.
[17:22] Second from Councilwoman Dugan. Uh,
[17:25] second. I'll try to get from Mayor
[17:27] Dalski. Who's better? Who's better?
[17:30] I'm sorry.
[17:31] Um,
[17:33] it any further discussion to that
[17:35] motion?
[17:37] If not, we'll call for that vote. All in
[17:38] favor of accepting this change to make
[17:40] our June 10th National Freedom Day
[17:44] a holiday, uh, June 19th, please say I.
[17:48] I. I.
[17:52] Any opposed?
[17:56] Looks like that passes unanimously.
[18:03] Okay, moving on. Um,
[18:05] thank you, everyone who took time to be
[18:09] uh, with us in St. George and
[18:10] participate in the um, great strategic
[18:13] board session discussions. Um,
[18:18] you know, I always There's lots to
[18:20] enjoy, of course, about our major
[18:21] conference in St. George, but this uh,
[18:24] board meeting I think is has um,
[18:26] really become a great time for us to
[18:28] check in and
[18:29] uh,
[18:31] see what we're doing well, see where we
[18:32] continue to seek improvement. And so,
[18:35] um, this item's going to be a report on
[18:37] the feedback from those strategic
[18:39] discussions in our breakout groups that
[18:40] we had. Um, Cameron, are you going to be
[18:43] leading this or is this Okay.
[18:44] Perfect. Uh, thank you, President
[18:46] Bradshaw. Again, thank you, everybody,
[18:47] for your time in St. George. It was our
[18:49] second largest mid-year ever with
[18:52] over 600
[18:54] uh, registrants, and then we throw on
[18:55] top of that all the vendors, exhibitors.
[18:57] I would say 800 people in the building.
[18:58] So, it was absolutely fantastic to have
[19:00] everybody there.
[19:02] The
[19:03] as we told you when we started that
[19:05] board meeting, we look forward to that
[19:07] April board meeting every year because
[19:08] it's the opportunity to roll up our
[19:10] sleeves and talk about
[19:12] the direction of the organization. And I
[19:15] want to thank Nick, Molly, and Justin
[19:17] for their leadership in the different
[19:19] discussion groups as we walked through
[19:21] operations, advocacy, and engagement. We
[19:24] don't want to rehash those discussions
[19:26] now. What we tried to do in the work
[19:28] before you is we went through every
[19:30] comment and went back through
[19:33] all of the feedback, and we summarized
[19:35] it here both
[19:38] with uh according to the questions that
[19:39] we asked you, but also what we viewed
[19:41] more of the staff takeaways and
[19:43] potential next steps.
[19:46] So, Nick has it scanned down on the uh
[19:48] start just on that operations side.
[19:51] Uh we appreciate the feedback about the
[19:52] board nomination process. And so, you
[19:55] can see that the staff takeaways and
[19:57] next steps here would be to to create
[20:00] more user-friendly materials to explain
[20:02] how the process works. And the good news
[20:04] is over the last few years, we've had
[20:07] anywhere from three to five times the
[20:09] number of applications than we have
[20:11] slots available. So, there's a
[20:13] tremendous interest in people running
[20:15] for the board.
[20:16] Um but there is there's always ways to
[20:18] improve how we announce that process,
[20:21] and and per our bylaws, that will get
[20:23] underway this summer. So, thank you for
[20:25] the feedback there. On the budget
[20:28] bifurcation,
[20:29] you know, I'll talk about this when I
[20:30] get into the tentative budget that we're
[20:32] presenting to you today, but we have
[20:34] kept local administrative advisor
[20:36] funding separate from the core budget.
[20:38] And per your feedback, we'll continue
[20:40] with that budget bifurcation
[20:42] um for LAA and anything else that's in
[20:45] that related space. Then we also got
[20:48] good feedback from you about the future
[20:50] of the annual convention with the Salt
[20:51] Palace going under renovation. And so,
[20:53] based on the feedback that you provided
[20:55] us, uh we will be following up with uh a
[20:58] variety of facilities in Salt Lake City
[21:01] and in other places around the state uh
[21:03] looking at the 2027 API. And just as a
[21:06] reminder, per the league constitution um
[21:09] the board has to fix the date and place
[21:10] of the annual convention unless
[21:12] otherwise fixed and determined at the
[21:14] preceding annual convention. And so
[21:15] because of the self Alice construction
[21:18] >> [snorts]
[21:18] >> we won't be able
[21:20] we won't need actually to set that date
[21:23] this summer for 2027. We won't be able
[21:25] to wait until the 2026 con here
[21:28] convention to announce it for 2027. So
[21:29] that's why we're we're bringing it back
[21:31] to the board later this summer once
[21:33] we've gathered this additional
[21:35] information.
[21:36] Before we go to the engagement recap the
[21:39] really the primary board question is is
[21:41] there anything that we're missing from
[21:44] the recap? Is there anything that has
[21:45] come to your mind in the three weeks
[21:47] since midyear you want to make sure to
[21:49] emphasize? So I'll just walk through
[21:51] each section and then at the end of each
[21:53] division just give you a chance to say I
[21:56] think you should emphasize this or you
[21:57] missed that piece. So on the operations
[21:59] side is there
[22:00] anything else
[22:01] that you want to make sure we emphasize
[22:03] in this recap?
[22:07] Is there anything in the chat or um
[22:11] any hands raised?
[22:14] Okay.
[22:15] All right. That one was pretty
[22:17] straightforward. Let's jump over to the
[22:18] engagement
[22:19] breakout. Perfect. So engagement
[22:21] breakout there were two primary
[22:23] questions. First we asked you for your
[22:26] feedback on how to prioritize the local
[22:28] government advisor funding and then the
[22:31] second was
[22:32] the league's role to facilitate
[22:34] technical assistance beyond local
[22:35] government advisor and then what
[22:37] additional resources should support that
[22:39] effort. So I'll start on the local
[22:41] government advisor piece.
[22:44] You as a you as board members
[22:46] recommended training both the advisors
[22:48] themselves. And so those are the
[22:50] advisors that are housed at the various
[22:52] AOGs around the state as well as the
[22:54] in-house staff so the municipal clerks
[22:56] and treasurers at at all of our LA
[22:58] communities as well as their elected
[23:00] officials. And then
[23:03] you also raised the question of whether
[23:04] hot LA qualified communities should
[23:06] participate in a certain amount of
[23:07] training in advance.
[23:09] So with that as the context
[23:11] [clears throat] of what you provide to
[23:12] us, I'm going to turn it over to McKenna
[23:14] Merchant. McKenna, Meg Ryan and I
[23:17] participated in all day
[23:20] strategic session with the governor's
[23:21] office, the associations of government
[23:23] and others last Tuesday where the
[23:27] feedback that you gave us at the
[23:28] strategic session, we were able to use
[23:31] as part of that discussion just last
[23:33] week. So McKenna can I I'm going to turn
[23:35] it to you to just give a quick recap of
[23:37] that May 12th meeting.
[23:39] Yeah, you bet.
[23:40] So in our May 12th meeting, we had all
[23:44] those groups that Cam mentioned and it
[23:45] was great to have the board's feedback
[23:47] already informing the pieces that we
[23:49] brought forward to the group.
[23:51] So one of the the items that we brought
[23:54] forward to them was what if there was
[23:56] some threshold requirements for those at
[23:58] receiving LA
[24:01] technical assistance.
[24:03] So one of the most popular threshold
[24:06] requirements that they all agreed on,
[24:08] which was a surprise to me, was that
[24:10] they have at least one mayor, council
[24:13] member, staff member, someone from the
[24:16] community attend a ULCT conference or
[24:19] regional training.
[24:21] And so ULCT has been providing
[24:24] scholarships with the office of the the
[24:28] ombudsman's office providing that
[24:30] funding and then we organized funding to
[24:32] provide those scholarships for rural
[24:34] communities. We've been doing it for one
[24:37] So they indicated that they were
[24:40] happy with that and comfortable with
[24:42] that. And then we also asked if we were
[24:45] to expand the resource pool
[24:47] to be able to pull in additional experts
[24:50] from that expert pool, who they would be
[24:53] most interested in. They indicated that
[24:55] they would be most interested in a legal
[24:57] consultant mostly for questions, less
[24:59] for legal counsel, a planning expert,
[25:02] and a public works or engineering
[25:04] consultant both for operations
[25:06] maintenance, and is also for capital
[25:08] improvement planning.
[25:10] Um, with that, we also per so
[25:14] the the reporting for all of those LA's
[25:16] is also undergoing some changes. So, we
[25:18] also proposed some new reporting
[25:21] elements for them, which would
[25:22] essentially have all of the LA
[25:24] communities compliant with various state
[25:26] statutes, whether it is
[25:29] um the the website ada.gov privacy
[25:33] requirements,
[25:34] um land use application checklist, and
[25:37] budget process outlines.
[25:39] So, does anybody have any questions
[25:41] about that meeting?
[25:43] Did you guys did you guys touch on or
[25:45] maybe
[25:46] going to further weeks, but grant
[25:49] uh writing grant
[25:51] uh submissions?
[25:52] We did. So, we brought that up as one of
[25:54] the options of like, "Hey, what if this
[25:56] was like one of the experts?" Or if it
[25:58] was something those communities need.
[26:00] And and of course they're interested in
[26:02] that, but right now they really just
[26:04] need to focus on some of the basics.
[26:07] Yes. And so, like procurement is always
[26:10] very interesting for those communities,
[26:12] but like you can only get to procurement
[26:14] for additional funds once your legal is
[26:17] functioning well.
[26:22] Any uh feedback especially from any of
[26:26] our more rural communities on this
[26:28] portion?
[26:29] Okay, you hear Wincher. I know we have
[26:32] Mayor Bruno online. Mayor Wagner right
[26:34] now. Mayor Wagner, yeah.
[26:41] I'm good with it.
[26:44] Thank you.
[26:45] All right.
[26:46] Let's head to the next section then.
[26:48] Perfect. Thank you, McKenna, and thank
[26:49] you to the McKenna Bank for spending all
[26:51] day there. I think it was really
[26:53] insightful. It was the first time in a
[26:55] while we've been able to be in the same
[26:56] room with all of the LA's.
[26:59] You know, around the state with AOG
[27:01] leadership, Governor's office, and
[27:02] everybody else in the other programs. It
[27:05] is back to being fully funded. I'm super
[27:08] excited about what they're doing. Just
[27:09] as a reminder for everyone, in the first
[27:11] year of that program,
[27:13] the Local Government Services Advisor
[27:14] was able to help 123 communities do all
[27:18] projects around the state.
[27:20] And it has been a a huge success, and
[27:24] it's the first one of its kind in the
[27:25] country. And there are other state
[27:26] leagues that are starting to follow the
[27:28] lead of what we've done here.
[27:31] And so, it's it was really exciting to
[27:33] be in that room and have everybody do
[27:35] basically Mechanic Bank for a show and
[27:37] tell of what's been working and then
[27:38] discuss what comes next.
[27:42] So,
[27:43] starting July 1, that's when the LA's
[27:45] received the
[27:46] um the the additional funding, the
[27:49] $380,000 of ongoing funding, which in
[27:52] years past we have used to fund
[27:55] Mechanic's position and to fund our
[27:58] expert pool. And that's what we intend
[27:59] to do going forward based on your
[28:01] feedback and the feedback from the LA's
[28:03] about how best to utilize those dollars.
[28:06] At the board meeting, we also asked you
[28:07] the question
[28:09] of what should our exact role be in
[28:11] facilitating this technical assistance?
[28:14] And I want to thank Molly and Jennifer
[28:16] for leading this discussion. So, I can
[28:17] thank
[28:18] um but the operations discussion. And
[28:21] the two terms that just kept coming out
[28:22] loud and clear, uh Molly, just make sure
[28:25] we're on the same page here, we're
[28:26] educator and connector, right? And
[28:29] that's consistent with what we've been
[28:30] tasked that we're not the ones who
[28:32] actually execute the technical
[28:34] assistance, but we're the educator and
[28:35] we're the connector. And we are that
[28:38] glue that brings together
[28:40] all of those existing trainings and
[28:41] resources and other things that are that
[28:43] are out there. And then this concept of
[28:45] member member small connect you just to
[28:48] articulate that that feedback? It's
[28:50] something that happens informally, but
[28:52] there may be an opportunity to formalize
[28:53] it. Yeah, I think that's a good example.
[28:55] And sorry, just to add a little bit more
[28:56] as well, this is kind of for the beyond
[28:59] the LA, right? So, the LA municipal
[29:01] system is there, we're continuing to
[29:03] build that out, but we've been getting
[29:04] feedback over time from particularly our
[29:06] ex-officio members of our community for
[29:08] many people helping in the technical
[29:10] systems. And so, a lot of the feedback
[29:12] from the board was again, it's our job
[29:15] to educate them where our resources are,
[29:17] educating them on what to do, how to
[29:19] find those resources, but not
[29:20] necessarily provide those resources
[29:22] directly. Um the members helping
[29:24] members, I thought that was interesting.
[29:25] We had a lot of folks mention, you know,
[29:28] I have a great public works department.
[29:31] I wouldn't be opposed to having my team,
[29:33] you know, contract or not contract, but
[29:35] kind of help or facilitate one of the
[29:36] county one of these cities, you know,
[29:38] for 5 to 10 hours a month. We'd be like
[29:40] that kind of share
[29:42] our in-house experts with other cities.
[29:45] Um a lot of this happens naturally to
[29:48] start with. You know, a lot of folks,
[29:49] especially in our more rural areas,
[29:52] there's kind of like an anchor city
[29:53] manager that fields a lot of questions
[29:55] that come in from smaller communities.
[29:58] Um and so, one possible area to explore
[30:01] was seeing is there a way to maybe
[30:03] formalize things a bit more and say,
[30:06] uh you know, we have our experts in the
[30:08] league or maybe, you know, like we we
[30:10] maintain that list in-house, and then I
[30:12] know, okay,
[30:13] um of the engineering departments, Salt
[30:16] Lake, Ogden, Spanish Fork, and Bountiful
[30:19] all said, "We're happy to give 5 hours a
[30:21] month of engineering support." And so,
[30:23] then as a city calls us with those
[30:26] questions, I can look and say, "Okay,
[30:28] I've already sent three questions to
[30:30] Salt Lake and two to Ogden, but I
[30:32] haven't sent any to Bountiful yet." So,
[30:34] just kind of helping connect members
[30:35] with other members
[30:37] um and using the strength of the League
[30:39] army [clears throat] to better support
[30:40] ourselves.
[30:41] Um so, that was one concept that came up
[30:43] in two of the groups that we thought was
[30:45] interesting and worth exploring.
[30:49] I have a question.
[30:51] >> Do we have any process for our LAA
[30:53] program that addresses technology
[30:57] opportunities? I've had lots of GovTech
[30:59] reach out to me
[31:01] who addresses policy, compliance,
[31:03] procurement, community engagement, all
[31:06] kinds of these great tools. And we're
[31:08] all looking at things, especially what
[31:10] how many Yeah, I help
[31:12] I I imagine a lot of these LAA
[31:14] communities don't have the time or maybe
[31:17] the tech technical prowess to audit the
[31:20] type of competitors or whatever. Do we
[31:22] have a process that we're even
[31:23] considering where
[31:25] a company can submit to be on a review
[31:28] or LAA approved? Or are we going there?
[31:31] Or this could be a member-to-member
[31:33] thing cuz technology is one of the best
[31:35] things that we can
[31:36] connect people on to simplify and make
[31:39] efficient.
[31:40] Can I Can I Can I ask questions to make
[31:42] sure I'm understanding? Are you thinking
[31:43] like a preferred vendor list? Like
[31:47] they've already been vetted that they
[31:48] >> Yeah, well, I don't I don't know if I
[31:49] want us to get into the business of
[31:51] vetting but it could be a
[31:52] member-to-member. Just in general, one
[31:53] of If we're talking about helping our smaller communities, one of the best
[31:57] things we can do is help them with
[31:59] efficient technology.
[32:01] So it's something to talk about. I don't
[32:03] know the right answer but I know that a
[32:05] lot of communities, even bigger ones,
[32:07] are on the hunt for technology that will
[32:09] automate and streamline and increase
[32:11] connections. So
[32:13] All right, can I Can I jump in here? So
[32:15] actually, one of the questions we're
[32:17] going to ask you in the advocacy section
[32:19] of today's meeting
[32:20] is about technology in the
[32:23] land use space because we've had
[32:25] conversations with several different
[32:28] technology firms that have been doing
[32:31] some pilot programs around the country
[32:33] and probably here in Utah as well.
[32:34] Mayor Burton, your city, I know, it was
[32:37] involved of these pilot programs. And
[32:39] so, we're trying to figure out what
[32:41] should our role be in connecting
[32:44] these opportunities with our cities.
[32:48] So, we've had that conversation in the
[32:50] housing land use space, and it did come
[32:52] up as part of the broader conversation
[32:55] with LAA. And so, I think it's a I think
[32:57] it's a fair thing to talk about, and
[32:59] it's part of what we're working through
[33:00] now. Like, okay, if our our our role in
[33:03] this overall space is education and
[33:06] connection, so what is the depth of
[33:08] that?
[33:10] Um in thinking about the education and
[33:13] connector piece, too, and the
[33:14] opportunity to join the League staff
[33:16] that the um fabulous bar six
[33:19] uh summit two weeks ago, week ago.
[33:23] Two and a half minutes. Okay. Um and out
[33:26] of that I um
[33:28] Cameron and I spent
[33:29] good time talking about the
[33:30] transportation utility piece, and two
[33:33] days later I had a an outreach from a
[33:35] mayor down there that wanted to talk
[33:37] about just the political side of considering one
[33:43] and all of those elements. My city
[33:45] hasn't done that, but I was able to say,
[33:46] well, let me
[33:48] connect you actually connect him to the
[33:49] Tim to Mayor Tran as a community that
[33:51] So, I think there's lots in our
[33:55] um
[33:57] uh creating kind of a robust
[34:00] uh
[34:01] list of people who can educate and
[34:03] connect, so that we can we can provide
[34:06] those resources, so
[34:08] um sometimes you need to
[34:11] sometimes another engineer needs to talk
[34:12] to other engineers. Sometimes another clerk needs to hear another
[34:15] clerk is doing it. And sometimes on the
[34:17] political side, you need to
[34:19] uh talk to someone about how much
[34:21] yelling
[34:22] it's going to require
[34:23] from the public in order to do
[34:25] something.
[34:26] I think that's I think that's what we do
[34:28] best as cities.
[34:30] We've got
[34:31] just going and sitting next to our peers
[34:33] and talking to things and sharing ideas
[34:35] and thoughts. I think we
[34:37] from elected officials to the staffs
[34:40] to staff positions, I think that's
[34:41] something that our people really enjoy
[34:43] doing. They do it really well.
[34:46] I love that focus.
[34:48] Educating.
[34:49] Yeah, I was just going to say it it was
[34:51] a great session and thanks to you
[34:54] President Bradshaw and for the League
[34:56] staff for coming down to Richfield.
[34:58] Uh it's it's a wonderful annual event
[35:01] and some of the really small communities
[35:04] get a chance to have the training and I
[35:07] don't see any of a lot of those people
[35:08] at our
[35:10] meetings uh with the League.
[35:12] Unfortunately, it's probably because of
[35:13] the financial issue. But but they all
[35:17] come to the R6
[35:19] training and it's so valuable for them
[35:21] to hear other things that small
[35:23] communities are dealing with and to get
[35:25] the excellent training that's provided.
[35:28] And uh
[35:30] I think maybe as an example of helping each other, I know that we
[35:35] Gunnison just lost uh a treasurer and so
[35:38] they've been asking for our treasurer to
[35:40] come down and help them a little bit and
[35:42] just those connections that are made in
[35:44] those kinds of
[35:46] uh
[35:46] settings are so valuable, especially for
[35:50] the small communities. So, thank you for
[35:52] facilitating them.
[35:54] It was our pleasure to come down. You
[35:56] know, I know that um
[35:58] uh you were very often here in person
[36:01] for many meetings and it's the same
[36:02] distance for us to come down as you to
[36:04] come up. Um and so I appreciate that you
[36:07] did that. Plus, you know, we're ready to
[36:08] RP for a really great road trip um that
[36:11] I did kind of make uh the down and back. Uh we also saw a potentially a
[36:16] comet.
[36:17] >> We saw the biggest comet of my life.
[36:19] >> Yeah. Yeah. On the way back home. Yeah.
[36:22] Like it was it was impressive.
[36:24] >> Like I'm surprised there weren't news
[36:26] reports about it.
[36:27] Just just for you. Yeah.
[36:29] There were we both saw it so it really
[36:32] happened.
[36:34] Um we had not reached the full
[36:36] caffeinated part of the the night drive
[36:38] which turned out
[36:39] um but anyway I I agree with you I think
[36:42] um
[36:43] you know the strength of the league is
[36:44] the members and so I think Molly the
[36:47] takeaway I would share is
[36:49] um
[36:50] members helping members is something we
[36:52] should continue to place a lot of
[36:53] emphasis on and
[36:55] you got a lot of people willing to do
[36:56] it.
[36:58] Molly asked the question is there
[37:00] anything that we're missing from these
[37:02] takeaways?
[37:03] One question on the budget side of the
[37:05] house we talked about the scholarships
[37:06] to go to the either conventions St.
[37:08] George or here.
[37:10] I mean
[37:11] you have a fixed budget and then
[37:12] people are more people ask than you have
[37:14] budget for. Yeah. Yeah and so and the
[37:17] scholarship money does not come from the
[37:19] league general fund. That it comes from
[37:21] the office of property rights ombudsman.
[37:23] Okay. And their report was thrilled with
[37:25] the idea of using some of the training
[37:28] dollars to improve the training of
[37:31] elected officials around the state.
[37:33] Okay. And in fact I'll to share a quick anecdote
[37:36] and Mayor Van Wagner will remember this.
[37:38] So Mayor Van Wagner hosted me in Castle
[37:40] Dale a few weeks ago.
[37:42] Um so Mayor thanks for the pizza for the
[37:44] lunch and we had all the mayors in Emery
[37:46] County but one together and Mayor Van
[37:49] Wagner do you remember what your
[37:51] colleague from Ferron said to me as soon
[37:53] as I sat down?
[37:56] Uh
[37:57] not right off the bat. I know that the
[37:59] LIA was talked a a huge amount but uh
[38:04] refresh me.
[38:05] Yeah so yeah we talked LIA for a good
[38:07] chunk of the time talked about water
[38:08] rights and water availability. First
[38:10] thing he asked me when I sat down is why
[38:12] didn't I get a scholarship?
[38:13] And it was because we had far more
[38:16] interest than there were dollars
[38:17] available from the property rights
[38:19] ombudsman's office but I think what that
[38:20] demonstrates is there's there's a lot of
[38:22] interest. People want to get trained.
[38:23] And so, this is why as President Brunson
[38:26] indicated, like we go to the our six
[38:27] meeting every year. We've been doing
[38:29] these regional events with the AOGs.
[38:32] Like I personally have done trainings in
[38:33] the last few months. And some of Wasatch
[38:36] counties, Washington and Iron counties
[38:38] have one. Carbon, Emery County. Um
[38:41] Mayor Peterson and I are talking about
[38:42] putting one together in in Cache County
[38:44] this summer.
[38:45] And so, we're trying to meet people
[38:46] where they are in addition to having
[38:49] them at the larger events. Great. Great.
[38:51] That's awesome. Thanks.
[38:53] Can I add one more thing though? With
[38:54] those uh
[38:56] regional meetings that with the AOGs um
[38:59] and do doing doing them in the evenings
[39:02] cuz most everybody has a a day job.
[39:05] And those are incredibly valuable
[39:08] especially for uh new
[39:11] councils and mayors. So, I hope we
[39:13] continue those uh because they do
[39:15] they're s-
[39:16] very successful.
[39:18] Uh thank you Mayor Van Wagoner. And we
[39:20] did one jointly with SERDA that Mayor
[39:22] Van Wagoner attended. SERDA Southeastern
[39:24] um
[39:25] Southeastern is based in Price. And so,
[39:27] we did one with them. And we're having
[39:28] another one tentatively scheduled for
[39:30] September. I believe. September 9th.
[39:35] Okay. Anything else on the engagement
[39:37] section?
[39:39] Or presentation or feedback perspective?
[39:44] Nick, are there any other comments in
[39:46] the chat that you're aware of?
[39:48] Nope. Okay. Okay. All right. Let's move
[39:50] on to the advocacy breakout room.
[39:52] Advocacy. So, again, thank you to Justin
[39:54] for facilitating that that conversation.
[39:58] And what was interesting about this one
[39:59] is we just had a really broad question
[40:02] about how to better involve you as board
[40:04] members. And then there were lots of
[40:05] ideas that came from it. So, Justin,
[40:07] I'll turn to you briefly to just hit the
[40:09] highlights for the staff to take away.
[40:10] All right. Um yeah, there was a lot of
[40:12] great ideas on this one. A lot of good
[40:14] discussion. Um
[40:15] and so, yeah, I'll just go through the
[40:16] takeaways uh fairly quickly. Some things
[40:19] that became really apparent
[40:20] is we do need a matrix or spreadsheet or
[40:22] list of everybody's expertise and
[40:24] relationships.
[40:26] We sort of know them, but we don't know
[40:27] all of them. And particularly as new
[40:29] board members come on,
[40:31] we don't always know who you know.
[40:33] we know that you have good
[40:34] relationships with your legislators, but
[40:36] we don't always know that you were
[40:37] college roommates with somebody maybe,
[40:38] and that would be a great person to give
[40:40] a call. So, that's one thing we can
[40:42] definitely take away is we can identify
[40:44] some of those a little bit better.
[40:47] A lot of you are already involved in
[40:48] advisory groups. Many of you are
[40:49] involved in multiple advisory groups,
[40:52] but we do want to be cognizant that as
[40:53] we're building advisory groups now, LBC
[40:55] advisory groups, that we either make
[40:57] sure board members are involved, which
[40:59] will help us later in the session as we
[41:01] have expertise on things where we're
[41:04] giving testimony on bills, or that we
[41:06] make sure there's kind of that board
[41:08] stamp of approval as we're going through
[41:09] some of those. So, that's one of the
[41:11] things we want to make sure that it's happening for the most part, but
[41:14] it's happening more by happenstance than
[41:17] on purpose. That's what we want to make
[41:18] sure that we're doing that purposely.
[41:20] Um,
[41:21] action alerts, we heard loud and clear
[41:23] that
[41:24] we send out our action alerts and we get
[41:25] a really good response. We also heard
[41:27] that not everybody checks their email or
[41:29] maybe the email that we have for the
[41:31] action alerts as soon as we send out
[41:32] those action alerts. As Mayor Val Wagner
[41:35] said, people have day jobs, you're not
[41:36] always looking at your city email at
[41:37] 3:00 on a Wednesday, even if it is
[41:40] session like all, you know, those of us
[41:42] at the capital are. So, we can use the
[41:43] board to leverage relationships that we
[41:46] have locally. So, if we send out a text
[41:48] to the board and say, "We just sent out
[41:49] an action alert." That triggers you to
[41:51] send out your email and like Mayor Bruno
[41:53] brought this up, she's on a text stream
[41:55] with all the mayors in Washington County
[41:57] and can immediately ping all the mayors
[41:58] in Washington County and say, "An action
[42:00] alert went out. We need to We need to go
[42:02] on this one." So, that's a way we can
[42:04] leverage that one.
[42:06] We also heard from a lot of you that you
[42:07] would like to learn more about what the
[42:09] legislative process works.
[42:11] This is not an open invite I think that
[42:13] we make to everybody we don't have the
[42:14] time.
[42:15] Um, but
[42:17] I there is an open invite that I'm
[42:18] making right now if anyone would like to
[42:20] shadow us as we're going around up at
[42:22] the capital during interim or during the
[42:25] session if you want to see how
[42:26] committees work, if you want to see what
[42:28] happens when we're out in the hall
[42:29] talking to legislators, um, if you
[42:31] wanted to pick our brains, open invite
[42:33] anyone on the board that would like to
[42:35] just shadow us, walk around with us, see
[42:37] what's going on, more than happy to have
[42:39] that. So that when we do need you to
[42:41] testify committee it's not the first
[42:43] time you've ever been in a committee
[42:44] room perhaps or if we say we really need
[42:46] you to go talk to the legislator it's
[42:48] maybe not the first time you've ever
[42:49] seen that happen as well. So
[42:51] just there was a, you know, desire
[42:53] raised that we could do some shadowing,
[42:55] we could do some learning and and as a
[42:57] lead staff that's something we could
[42:58] feel like we can we can definitely work
[43:00] through.
[43:01] The the last one,
[43:03] well there's two more, one of them was
[43:05] having board members testify more
[43:07] on certain things and there's a couple
[43:09] different things we can do here. One, as
[43:11] we give you to have more expertise
[43:13] then you maybe will come and make you've
[43:14] been the point person on a bill or on a
[43:16] subject for us during the interim and
[43:18] then you can get up and testify.
[43:20] We know that it is really effective many
[43:23] times to have a mayor or council member
[43:24] get up instead of a lead staffer and
[43:26] that holds some really specific weight
[43:29] on on certain bills that works really well.
[43:32] And then as somebody also pointed out
[43:34] sometimes we only ask you to get up and
[43:36] testify when it's the big scary bills
[43:39] and that feels like a lot of pressure.
[43:41] Um, and sometimes it would be really
[43:43] worthwhile and this kind of goes to the
[43:44] shadowing thing.
[43:45] We have we have a joke where we have
[43:47] kind of play calls like in football
[43:49] where we say what are we going to go
[43:50] testify today and we're like well it's a
[43:51] number six which means we like to think
[43:53] the legislator we're working with us and
[43:55] while the bill's not quite there yet we
[43:57] look forward to continue discussions on
[43:58] this bill. And we say that like every
[44:00] day up there.
[44:02] But that's also something that we could
[44:04] do a play call it a number six could go
[44:05] to almost any board member cuz it's
[44:08] pretty bland. And that could again give
[44:10] you some experience getting up to
[44:11] testify on something in a lower pressure
[44:13] situation. So, when it is the big bill
[44:16] that we need someone to come in on,
[44:17] you've got some experience and you've
[44:18] got some background on that. And then
[44:20] finally, um the last one and this is a
[44:22] trickier nut to crack um and it's worth
[44:24] having some discussions. Um once we get
[44:26] to pass that first board meeting, as
[44:28] board members, unless you're on the
[44:30] exact team uh or exact officer, you
[44:33] really just sort of go back to the
[44:34] regular your LPC. There's not really a
[44:36] special board meeting we have, we don't
[44:38] have a special board group, and there's
[44:40] good reasons for that cuz if we had a
[44:41] whole board meeting together, we'd have
[44:43] to have a board meeting. Um
[44:45] and so, trying to figure out how to
[44:46] crack the nut of perhaps giving some
[44:48] additional updates
[44:50] um without having to have a board
[44:51] meeting every week. Um it's worth having
[44:53] those discussions. I put worth having
[44:55] discussions cuz I don't know how to do
[44:56] it yet. Um there's some some
[44:58] off-the-cuff things there that we've got
[44:59] to figure out, but if we can figure that
[45:01] out, it's worthwhile discussing. Are
[45:03] there ways we can have you as a board
[45:05] more up-to-date and maybe getting some
[45:07] of those backroom discussions that the
[45:08] other officers get without, you know,
[45:11] breaking down things that we do
[45:12] otherwise.
[45:13] If we're going to do like an email
[45:14] string, for example, there's nothing we
[45:16] would put in an email that we wouldn't
[45:18] already put in our nightly emails
[45:19] anyway. Um
[45:20] there's nothing we would say in an open
[45:22] board meeting that we would say in an
[45:24] LPC. Um so, trying to figure out the
[45:26] value of some of those kind of um
[45:29] less on the record discussions without
[45:31] breaking any of those those laws or
[45:33] requirements to something we're not
[45:34] quite sure how to crack, but it's worth
[45:36] discussing. So, that's that's kind of
[45:38] the things that we're taking away from
[45:40] that. Um
[45:41] we'd love any input if there's anything
[45:42] we missed uh since all of you were in
[45:44] those discussions or or thoughts about
[45:46] any of those items. So, Justin, on that
[45:48] last one, I think you could have had
[45:49] that information come from the league
[45:51] staff to the board members. The board
[45:54] members, when they get those emails,
[45:55] will come back and say, "I might respond
[45:57] back and say, 'Hey, I've got the picture
[45:58] of the chief administrator. I can
[45:59] help.'" And here's some information I
[46:00] can provide. You can have it lead the
[46:02] other direction. I think that's really
[46:04] what would be helpful. Yeah, absolutely.
[46:06] That's a great point. Yeah, make sure
[46:07] you know. I think that's a really good
[46:09] point number one that from a former
[46:11] member perspective
[46:12] um
[46:13] I think we are asking y'all to be more
[46:17] connected to your emails during the
[46:18] legislative session
[46:20] in and around whether you're, you know,
[46:22] full-time or um
[46:25] full-time with zero pay.
[46:29] You're in your home.
[46:31] Um but to be really connected cuz I
[46:33] think it is really key that when you're getting those um
[46:37] Friday facts or other communications
[46:39] that you're
[46:41] then quickly saying Lisa app, I can help
[46:43] you here, here, and here or I know
[46:45] something about this or we've had we've
[46:46] had a the challenging experience with
[46:48] this in our city so that the league
[46:50] staff quickly gets a pool of a good pool
[46:52] of information that they can deal with.
[46:54] It's a um
[46:56] from having uh been on the board side and the executive
[47:01] committee side, it's kind of a two-way
[47:04] street of having the staff figure out
[47:06] how to use the board more during the
[47:08] session
[47:10] but the board also proactively
[47:12] um thinking of ways that
[47:15] you can contribute and
[47:17] be available, you know, for instance,
[47:19] Council member Dugan with his fabulous
[47:21] proximity to the capital thanks for
[47:23] representing Salt Lake.
[47:25] Um
[47:26] you know, often with with say I'm
[47:27] available, I can come up quickly and I'm
[47:29] here, I'm around. Here's areas I'm
[47:31] passionate about on, you know, UTA or
[47:34] renewables or things like that. So, I
[47:36] think those are really appreciative and
[47:38] then also for those of you who are are
[47:39] wondering along with um
[47:41] the Salt Lake City team, there actually
[47:43] were little football play call things
[47:45] that were made to count.
[47:46] That was uh this testifies to this is
[47:49] the session we actually numbered
[47:50] something.
[47:52] Is is there an opportunity in those
[47:54] emails to put like a a graphic call out
[47:56] that's like help wanted? If you're like,
[47:58] we need someone expertise on bullet bullet that it prompts us to
[48:01] think about those specific I mean, there
[48:03] always there's always something
[48:05] but maybe there could be something we're
[48:06] all used to as a habit for health help
[48:08] wanted. Put a code in there. Yeah, the
[48:11] bat signal was specificity.
[48:13] Cassie, that's in your area, I think.
[48:14] Bat signal. Well, and before Cassie gets
[48:17] in line, one of the things I think that
[48:18] is important, this is brought up in a
[48:20] couple of groups, is
[48:22] it's it does happen. We get bills that
[48:24] we don't know are coming. That happens
[48:26] during session. Plenty of bills being
[48:27] drafted that we don't know are coming.
[48:29] But usually we have expertise nailed
[48:32] down before we get to session.
[48:34] >> [clears throat]
[48:34] >> Um so if we're in week six of session,
[48:36] something's come up that we don't
[48:37] already know the expertise, we're
[48:38] probably going to have to Yeah.
[48:40] Like the it's a really big bat signal at
[48:42] that point. So we hopefully that's if we
[48:44] get the expertise nailed down, I will
[48:46] have to say
[48:48] you know, we really need help on this.
[48:49] I'll say, I know I'm going to ask for on
[48:51] this.
[48:53] Any other thoughts, Cassie, on the
[48:55] callout of one that something that as
[48:57] you're
[48:58] going through the myriad of bills that
[49:00] helps
[49:02] a particular board member to recognize
[49:03] like this is one
[49:05] Did you not abuse the bat signal? The
[49:07] signal is just if we have a crisis,
[49:08] it'll be good to
[49:10] Yeah, and I I could be on the phone
[49:11] right
[49:12] I think that's the main point, right? Is
[49:13] like when do we use a tool like that and
[49:15] informing our members to watch out when
[49:17] it's coming. Like something if you've
[49:19] been reading the last few Friday facts,
[49:20] we've started to kind of transitioning
[49:22] into like, all right, here's things that
[49:23] we want you to do and here's things that
[49:25] we think you should know. Just to kind
[49:26] of help give people a direction with our
[49:28] emails because sometimes we do provide a
[49:30] lot of really great resources and
[49:31] they're not applicable to everyone on
[49:33] our list cuz we have like 5,000 people
[49:35] on our email list. And we have a
[49:38] great variety of like who's really
[49:39] involved with the league, who needs the
[49:41] league sometimes. So it's just kind of
[49:42] trying to manage that. But I think we
[49:44] have some great moves strategically
[49:47] coming down the pipeline that will kind
[49:48] of help mitigate and manage with
[49:50] different audiences.
[49:52] Well, I just want to piggyback on what
[49:54] Cassie said. And I thank Cassie, you so
[49:56] two board meetings ago at the board
[49:57] meeting after the session, Cassie went
[49:59] through the numbers
[50:01] of our email open rates and action
[50:03] alerts and and everything else. And then
[50:05] we talked to our other state league
[50:07] counterparts on a regular basis.
[50:09] To our knowledge, we are the only state
[50:11] league that sends a nightly email during
[50:13] the session.
[50:14] So the other state leagues will usually
[50:16] do a weekly email during the session,
[50:17] but we send a nightly email. It's a lot
[50:19] of work, but the open rate is
[50:21] extraordinarily high during the session,
[50:23] and we've never lost on an on an action
[50:25] alert. We've never done a full action
[50:27] alert. And so really the feedback you
[50:29] gave us at least will help us as we're
[50:32] working through the technologies to say,
[50:33] "Okay, we're doing things really well
[50:35] here, but here's how we can improve."
[50:36] And thank you, Cassie, for all that work
[50:38] during the session on the communication
[50:40] side.
[50:43] Okay. Is there anything else? Anything
[50:45] else to say? Cassie has her hand raised.
[50:48] Yeah.
[50:49] Uh sorry, I'm not there. I'm actually
[50:51] pretty sick. So didn't want to come down
[50:53] there and get everyone sick. Um in my
[50:56] group my group, we talked a little bit
[50:58] about what UAC was doing. Did we get any
[51:01] more information? I know that my
[51:02] counterparts for Summit County serve on
[51:04] some smaller committees where it might
[51:06] not be um an OTMA issue. So I just
[51:10] wondered if we knew what UAC is doing at
[51:12] the legislature with these smaller
[51:13] groups.
[51:15] The one key distinction between UAC and
[51:17] the league The league is a public
[51:19] entity. You are a public board. UAC is
[51:22] not a public entity. So part of the
[51:24] reason they don't have to worry about
[51:25] open meetings because they are not a
[51:26] public entity.
[51:28] So that's one key distinction. Uh the
[51:31] second thing
[51:32] is UAC's board is almost twice as big as
[51:35] our board. So you know, they break their
[51:38] board up into smaller groups. They've
[51:39] got the bigger number, but our policy
[51:41] our legislative policy committee is much
[51:43] bigger than their policy committee. So
[51:44] that's why we've taken the approach of
[51:46] doing advisory committees under the L B
[51:48] C banner because it pulls in more people
[51:52] than if we just did advisory groups with
[51:53] the board, but as Justin said, we want
[51:55] to maximize the potential with those
[51:56] advisory groups, which have served us
[51:58] well, and making sure we've got board
[52:00] involvement in those advisory groups.
[52:02] And Justin,
[52:03] later in the meeting, will
[52:04] identify which advisory groups we plan
[52:06] to recommend to the L B C in 2 weeks
[52:08] that we do need to get started in June.
[52:11] Thank you. That really helps.
[52:14] Anyone else online with feedback or
[52:17] questions?
[52:21] Okay. Go ahead, Mayor.
[52:23] I'll pick up on Mayor Berke's comment.
[52:26] Where I struggle is not half
[52:28] anything to do with the staff's efforts
[52:30] to outreach. It's on me, and I would
[52:32] encourage the board members to
[52:34] be introspective as well. The
[52:36] where I struggle is I have good
[52:37] intentions going in, and then I get just
[52:39] wrapped up.
[52:41] I've got to figure out a way to to
[52:43] commit the amount of time I'm trying to
[52:44] commit to the to the session itself, and
[52:47] that's a that's that's on me. But so I
[52:50] really appreciate how the staff's asking
[52:51] for
[52:52] what you guys should do.
[52:54] But I'd encourage all of us to say what
[52:55] can we do
[52:57] and give back.
[52:59] It can be a challenge. The session is is
[53:01] it all special beast and kind of suck
[53:04] It's hard to just in and out, in
[53:06] and out. You're either in or you're out.
[53:09] Well, and and if I can admit it, well, I
[53:11] think that's one of the reasons we want
[53:12] to get some of the expertise and some of
[53:15] those advisory groups with the board
[53:16] members in there. So you don't feel like
[53:18] you have to be in on everything.
[53:20] Um
[53:21] you could be in on the thing where
[53:22] you'll do the most damage or the most
[53:24] good, I guess. Either one.
[53:26] Depending depending on which thing it
[53:28] is, but where you can have the biggest
[53:29] impact, neutral terms. Um
[53:32] but yeah, and then and that's part of
[53:33] what we want to figure out in advance is
[53:35] so you don't have to feel like you have
[53:36] to jump in on everything, but I can say,
[53:37] "Hey, Mayor Del Se I need you on this
[53:39] thing."
[53:40] Um and then you've got that advantage.
[53:42] That's why we have a lead is so we can
[53:43] spread that stuff out.
[53:45] So, I appreciate that. Yeah, you have to
[53:47] do everything. Well, one of the
[53:48] realities is that each session takes on
[53:50] some characteristics and we often don't
[53:52] know that until we get into it.
[53:56] Our task is pretty good.
[53:59] The session was almost devoid of his
[54:03] weakness alive and magic school.
[54:05] Mhm.
[54:07] It was a heavy task session.
[54:10] And uh and some of those we just don't
[54:12] know until we get
[54:14] into the game, but we got to know who we
[54:16] can go to when when we don't.
[54:19] And that's just a really hard thing to
[54:20] sort of say
[54:22] we got a lot we need a lot of people who
[54:24] are really good at the last minute.
[54:26] >> [clears throat]
[54:28] >> Mhm.
[54:29] It is, you're right. Of course, every
[54:30] session
[54:32] different things become the
[54:34] big issue.
[54:37] Sometimes you know those things don't
[54:38] Okay, anything else on the uh takeaways
[54:41] from our uh strategic session from the
[54:43] budget report meeting?
[54:47] Okay, thank you all and our staff will
[54:49] continue to
[54:51] uh
[54:51] work on these items and bring them back
[54:54] uh they're ready for more action and if
[54:55] you have additional thoughts uh
[54:58] please feel free to weigh in with those.
[55:00] Um, with that we'll move on to our next
[55:03] item which is our board level uh
[55:05] personnel discussion and this will be
[55:07] with Cameron and Molly to talk about the
[55:10] engagement for air position. Okay, thank
[55:12] you. Thank you, President. And when we
[55:14] after this we'll get to the tentative
[55:15] budget and the
[55:18] strategic takeaways and this the
[55:20] strategic session takeaways to the area
[55:23] have informed our budget process as I
[55:25] always do of course every year. Part of
[55:27] the budget process is actually personnel
[55:29] and we have an important personnel
[55:31] announcement. Um, so Meg, can I turn it
[55:34] to you to
[55:37] explain what's was next for her.
[55:40] Yeah, I just want to thank the board and
[55:42] thank particularly Cameron for the
[55:44] opportunity to have been part of this
[55:46] organization for the last 24 plus years
[55:50] and I greatly appreciate the
[55:51] opportunity. Well, it's time for me to
[55:52] write a new chapter and Cameron's built
[55:55] an incredible open, professional, kind,
[55:58] and transparent
[56:00] organization with a team of dedicated
[56:02] staff people that are also kind and
[56:04] professional and incredibly smart and I
[56:07] hope that continues with your support
[56:10] and I'm proud to be part of this
[56:11] organization and thank you for the
[56:13] opportunity and hopefully this will open
[56:14] the way for new opportunities for the
[56:16] staff.
[56:17] Okay, I think you have like a round of
[56:19] thanks and applause for this.
[56:30] So, Meg has been awesome
[56:32] and Meg predates
[56:35] my arrival at the League. In fact,
[56:38] some you may not realize that Meg and I
[56:39] shared an office once upon a time and
[56:42] shared a computer even.
[56:44] >> [laughter]
[56:45] >> And she's
[56:47] going to be with us through the end of
[56:49] June and so
[56:51] thankfully we still have her for a few
[56:52] more weeks.
[56:53] But
[56:55] you as a board, there are a couple of
[56:55] things I want to make sure you as a
[56:56] board do.
[56:59] Initiatives [clears throat] that she had
[57:00] led out on that have really paid
[57:02] dividends
[57:04] statewide. So, first the Land Use
[57:06] Academy in Utah.
[57:08] That's now housed at the Office of the
[57:10] Property Rights Ombudsman. We have a
[57:12] strategic partnership with them on the
[57:14] development.
[57:15] Meg has had ownership in that from day
[57:18] one and and still works every day
[57:21] in conjunction with the Office of
[57:22] Property Rights Ombudsman to try to
[57:24] elevate the understanding of land use
[57:27] statewide. She's been heavily involved
[57:30] with the Utah Land Use Institute and has
[57:33] really has really professionalized the
[57:36] training of land use from small towns
[57:38] East West State. And Meg and I've done
[57:40] many many a road trip together and and
[57:43] it was and this is actually
[57:46] I think a perfect encapsulation of of
[57:48] who Meg is. So anyway, just reference to
[57:50] the R6 Regional Council which several of
[57:52] us attended a couple weeks ago where
[57:53] there were 300 people in Richfield
[57:55] city and county folks alike and
[58:00] the morning of that event
[58:02] we got a phone call asking if if Meg
[58:05] could do not one not two but three
[58:07] training sessions of that night.
[58:09] >> [laughter]
[58:10] >> Uh the
[58:12] Meg's answer was of course. And so Kate
[58:14] and I were doing our sessions and and
[58:16] other league staffers like Karen
[58:18] Nakamura was doing her budget session
[58:20] and
[58:21] uh McKenna was and Wally were there
[58:23] their sessions and and then Meg just
[58:26] picked up the baton and did three land
[58:27] use trainings uh that night to over 100
[58:30] all all told of probably 150 between the three sessions. That's just what what Meg does.
[58:37] The other thing is
[58:39] prior to COVID we had we had strived to
[58:43] have more technological
[58:47] connectivity with the parishes. So all
[58:48] of our meetings have been hybrid since
[58:50] before COVID. But what Meg did is Meg
[58:52] actually partnered with Utah State
[58:54] University so that we could do
[58:58] elected officials essentials trainings
[59:00] at their sites around the state so that
[59:02] we could be in communities and then
[59:04] broadcast from USU's main campus and
[59:08] then she did many land use trainings
[59:10] through that partnership with Utah
[59:11] State. And this all predates Zoom. So
[59:13] now we do those trainings all the time
[59:15] via Zoom and everybody is just
[59:16] accustomed to doing that via Zoom. But
[59:18] pre-Zoom you had Meg and and Utah State.
[59:21] So
[59:22] Um
[59:23] anyway, she's not done until 30th so
[59:25] we'll have more opportunities to to say
[59:27] goodbye to her but want to say thank you
[59:28] Meg for a all of your contributions and
[59:31] your friendship. And before I went to
[59:33] law school,
[59:35] Jared and I shared it and all the modern
[59:37] law school I went to is where she did
[59:39] some for undergrad. I still have my
[59:41] interesting college shirt that you gave
[59:42] me
[59:44] all those years ago.
[59:45] So, thank you Meg for your friendship
[59:47] and for your tremendous work on behalf
[59:49] of mayors, council members, planning
[59:51] commissioners, and city staff around the
[59:53] state.
[59:55] Because of Meg's departure, it does
[59:57] allow us to take a look organizationally where we
[1:00:02] want to go as a small staff. We always
[1:00:04] are re-evaluating whenever a vacancy
[1:00:07] opens up.
[1:00:09] And so
[1:00:10] as we've had conversations as an
[1:00:12] executive team between Justin, Molly,
[1:00:14] Nick, and me and some of the officers.
[1:00:17] And then based on the feedback you gave
[1:00:18] us last month, what we
[1:00:22] identified is that it would make sense
[1:00:25] to bring in a coordinator type position.
[1:00:27] So, this is the type position that Alexa
[1:00:29] fills for the advocacy team.
[1:00:31] Which did free us up other members of
[1:00:34] the advocacy team for other
[1:00:36] responsibilities. And Alexa did it is
[1:00:39] doing it now. Liam Hill did it for us
[1:00:41] before Alexa did and really made a huge
[1:00:43] difference. Carson Eilers did it prior
[1:00:46] to that. And so the idea here is rather
[1:00:49] than trying to replace Meg cuz Meg you
[1:00:51] know herself is irreplaceable.
[1:00:53] Do we
[1:00:55] bring on this coordinator position and
[1:00:57] then reallocate and pivot some of the
[1:00:59] responsibilities that Meg had through
[1:01:01] Molly,
[1:01:02] through Cassie, through Jared, and
[1:01:05] through other Lisa Powers and and
[1:01:07] partners. Molly, anything I missed that
[1:01:09] you that you want to
[1:01:10] add there? I think one thing we've
[1:01:12] really noticed over the last
[1:01:14] I would say um
[1:01:16] and granted things are cyclical, but the
[1:01:18] engagement team has been running pretty
[1:01:20] full out for the last seven plus months
[1:01:23] between newly elected NLC sessions,
[1:01:27] spring training, local officials day,
[1:01:30] mid-year meeting, you name it, and I
[1:01:32] think a lot of uh projects video series.
[1:01:34] We have done
[1:01:36] We've done a lot, and and we can do a
[1:01:38] lot, but I think that this position will
[1:01:41] free up Cassidy and I in particular to
[1:01:43] do more high-level things. I'm
[1:01:46] particularly excited um
[1:01:48] you know, we've started this project
[1:01:50] video series,
[1:01:51] and Cassidy's been incredibly leading
[1:01:53] out on that, and I for one I'm very
[1:01:55] excited by the prospect of giving
[1:01:58] Cassidy more bandwidth to do what she
[1:02:01] does best, rather than have her do
[1:02:05] things like updating the website and
[1:02:07] kind of one of those more entry-level
[1:02:09] communications pieces that she can do
[1:02:11] and does very well, um but I think that
[1:02:14] she has some pretty remarkable talent
[1:02:16] that we can be better utilizing as an
[1:02:18] organization. And so, bringing someone
[1:02:21] else on staff,
[1:02:22] um again, kind of pivoting that role
[1:02:24] Nick had, freeing up more capacity so
[1:02:26] that we can be doing
[1:02:27] more communications.
[1:02:32] Nick, will you scan down to the the next
[1:02:34] page? So,
[1:02:35] 4 years ago, we shifted to this
[1:02:38] organizational chart where you have the
[1:02:41] advocacy engagement operations. And in a
[1:02:43] small staff, there is a lot of overlap.
[1:02:45] We don't have arrows going across the
[1:02:47] page, but just know that anybody in
[1:02:48] engagement
[1:02:50] helps on the advocacy side during the
[1:02:52] session. And then anybody in advocacy
[1:02:54] helps on engagement and operations
[1:02:55] during conferences and then throughout
[1:02:57] the year. And then and you know, Molly
[1:03:00] referenced spring training, and we had
[1:03:02] that down below, but Molly, if it's all
[1:03:03] right, I'm just going to reference the
[1:03:04] spring training stats here, cuz I think
[1:03:07] they they illustrate what you were just
[1:03:08] describing. So, since the end of the
[1:03:11] legislative session, which
[1:03:13] a little over 2 months now,
[1:03:14] um 11 League staff has
[1:03:17] uh presented at 11 different conferences
[1:03:20] with city leaders. We've done eight
[1:03:22] webinars with total viewership of 2042.
[1:03:26] We've had of those 2042, 1309
[1:03:30] that have watched those live plus
[1:03:32] another 733 views on YouTube. We have
[1:03:35] the property tax video series
[1:03:38] several are out and several are still to
[1:03:40] come which multiple cities are basically
[1:03:42] just using
[1:03:44] hot off the virtual presses and they're
[1:03:45] actually using them as templates for their own cities.
[1:03:49] We have the the legislative recap
[1:03:53] documents and all the different white
[1:03:54] papers that we've done
[1:03:57] and then we have more webinars scheduled
[1:03:59] in the in the weeks to come as well as
[1:04:01] the different regional meetings that are
[1:04:03] scheduled for the summer fall. So,
[1:04:05] there's there's a lot that's happening
[1:04:07] there and that's why we feel like
[1:04:10] rather than replacing Meg with a another
[1:04:13] senior land use manager, we would pivot
[1:04:16] and have this person fill this spot. We
[1:04:19] would still maintain the same number of
[1:04:21] full-time employees. So, we're not
[1:04:22] increasing the number of full-time
[1:04:23] employees. We're pivoting to this
[1:04:25] position and you as a board per bylaws
[1:04:28] have to approve all positions. So, you
[1:04:30] have to make that decision
[1:04:32] and then we would not fill a senior land
[1:04:34] use manager in house. We would instead
[1:04:37] and reallocate those responsibilities
[1:04:40] within our in-house staff and then back
[1:04:44] to that educator connector role that we
[1:04:46] talked about a moment ago, look at
[1:04:48] partners at other cities that can help
[1:04:49] fill some of those responsibilities. So,
[1:04:52] that's our recommendation to you but at
[1:04:54] the end of the day, it's up to you if up
[1:04:56] to approve the deputy director position
[1:04:59] as part of the org chart as described.
[1:05:01] I think it's great idea, Beth. I don't
[1:05:02] know if I like the end of the day
[1:05:03] though.
[1:05:05] Good. Did we run out of time?
[1:05:08] Any other feedback or questions? Just do
[1:05:10] it. A question.
[1:05:11] I will tell you that when I first became
[1:05:13] council member Meg was one of the first
[1:05:15] people I contacted with lots of land use
[1:05:19] questions that we were having. Again,
[1:05:21] such an invaluable resource for small
[1:05:24] communities. So, I guess my question
[1:05:26] would be would all those types of
[1:05:29] questions then be referred to the land
[1:05:32] use ombudsman? No.
[1:05:34] we're still we're still working that
[1:05:36] out internally between
[1:05:38] me, Jared, [clears throat]
[1:05:40] Molly, Cassie, Justin who would take
[1:05:42] what pieces.
[1:05:44] Todd Gotfry was online right now. Todd
[1:05:47] is our legal advisor in the land use
[1:05:48] space. So, there's a lot of pieces we're working through
[1:05:53] what that pivot's going to look like.
[1:05:55] Molly.
[1:05:55] Well, you know, this
[1:05:58] ideally would be a full budget as well
[1:06:00] that anything that we can't handle from
[1:06:02] the general education in-house we could
[1:06:06] similar to our contract with Todd
[1:06:08] look at bringing in a few other contract
[1:06:10] topic experts and freelance them to
[1:06:12] supplement any areas that we're lacking.
[1:06:16] And if I can just add on that and Meg
[1:06:17] has done a phenomenal job making sure
[1:06:19] that
[1:06:20] there are more land use experts than we
[1:06:21] used to have in this space. As she
[1:06:23] reminds us frequently everything else is
[1:06:24] actually land use. And so Carson, Cat, Jared, others
[1:06:30] gained more expertise than we used to
[1:06:32] have as well.
[1:06:33] Um
[1:06:34] so Meg has done a good job making sure
[1:06:36] that she's not leaving that huge hole
[1:06:37] there.
[1:06:38] She's trained the trainers. Thank you
[1:06:39] for growing from your perfect place.
[1:06:43] Any other questions, feedback?
[1:06:46] Burton, I think we're
[1:06:48] getting back to what you suggested which
[1:06:50] is um
[1:06:52] I'm happy to make a motion.
[1:06:55] We have a motion from Mayor Burton to
[1:06:57] accept this new
[1:06:59] staff position. Do we have a second?
[1:07:01] Councilor Diggen,
[1:07:03] we've had a great discussion so I'll
[1:07:04] just go ahead and call for the vote. All
[1:07:06] in favor, please say I. I. I.
[1:07:11] Give me just a moment.
[1:07:13] Are there any online?
[1:07:15] Okay.
[1:07:16] Uh any opposed, please say nay.
[1:07:20] Looks like that passes unanimously.
[1:07:22] Uh we are now to the presentation of the
[1:07:24] tentative budget. Uh I'm going to turn
[1:07:26] this over to Cameron and Nick to tag
[1:07:29] team on this presentation. Good job,
[1:07:31] Nick. Well, I've
[1:07:33] set this up to the discussion around the
[1:07:36] strategic session. Uh Nick, I'll turn it
[1:07:39] to you to start walking through the
[1:07:40] detail of the tentative budget uh with
[1:07:43] the
[1:07:44] um
[1:07:45] with the reminder that it is indeed the
[1:07:47] tentative budget and then So, Nick, you
[1:07:49] want to talk through process
[1:07:51] uh the budget process?
[1:07:53] Or you can talk through the budget
[1:07:55] itself. Nick, we can tag team you. Yes,
[1:07:57] indeed. So, um you'll see this this will
[1:07:59] be in your conclusion portion of your
[1:08:00] memo, uh but uh at this meeting we are
[1:08:04] filing the tentative budget with you as
[1:08:06] the board. We will need you to review
[1:08:09] and approve this tentative budget, set a
[1:08:12] time and location for the hearing on the
[1:08:15] tentative budget, uh as well as the
[1:08:17] meeting for the uh
[1:08:19] adopting the official budget for June.
[1:08:22] That uh and the rules in which that
[1:08:25] meeting will take place. Uh that's the
[1:08:26] process that we'll we'll be going
[1:08:28] through.
[1:08:29] Um with that, I'll walk through what we
[1:08:31] have proposed for you. So, as you can
[1:08:32] see, we have a memo for you as well as
[1:08:34] the
[1:08:35] uh hard numbers included in your packet.
[1:08:38] We're proposing uh a budget for FY '27
[1:08:41] of $4,611,600,
[1:08:46] of which $3,905,000
[1:08:49] is ongoing general revenue,
[1:08:52] uh $592,600
[1:08:55] is state-funded technical assistance,
[1:08:57] and uh $114,000
[1:09:00] is pulled from unrestricted reserves. In
[1:09:03] total, this is a decrease of 10.4% from
[1:09:06] the FY26 adopted budget. Now, you'll see
[1:09:10] as we get into that that decrease number
[1:09:12] is slightly misleading. Um because we
[1:09:14] budgeted at the beginning um for 700,000
[1:09:18] in the DWS
[1:09:21] uh uh
[1:09:22] subdivisions and mapping grant. That is
[1:09:24] the full amount of the grant. When we
[1:09:26] adopted the budget, the actual details
[1:09:28] of the grant were not in place. We
[1:09:29] didn't have a signed agreement uh with
[1:09:31] DWS on how that would work. That those
[1:09:33] 700,000 are spread out over 3 years. So,
[1:09:36] you'll see in our estimates for year
[1:09:39] end, we're actually looking at about
[1:09:40] 227,000
[1:09:42] in the FY26, the year we're in, whereas
[1:09:45] what we budgeted at 700,000. So, that's
[1:09:47] where you see that giant decreases. Oh,
[1:09:49] no, the budget was 700,000, but in
[1:09:51] reality it's about 200 and and change
[1:09:54] over these 3 years. Um FY27 will be the
[1:09:57] second year of that grant. We'll have a
[1:09:59] final year of the FY21. So, that's why
[1:10:02] you see that large decrease, even though
[1:10:03] we've seen restored funding uh in the
[1:10:06] state grant areas with uh the LAA
[1:10:08] funding.
[1:10:10] Um also, throughout the budget, you'll
[1:10:11] see we uh
[1:10:13] if you've memorized the line items from
[1:10:14] years past, uh we've rearranged those a
[1:10:17] little bit. Um the year-over-year
[1:10:18] comparisons are the same, uh but we
[1:10:21] thought this the way we've laid it out
[1:10:22] here better encapsulates our divisional
[1:10:25] structure. Um so, we see stuff under
[1:10:27] operations, under advocacy and
[1:10:29] engagement, etc. So, it's just a little
[1:10:31] uh we've done that every couple of years
[1:10:32] where we just kind of see how it
[1:10:34] operates and um better refined so it uh
[1:10:36] is a better explanation of the lines.
[1:10:39] Um the general revenue increase, and as
[1:10:41] we talked about it in the strategic
[1:10:43] session, we we kind of bifurcate the
[1:10:44] budget where we have our general revenue
[1:10:46] and then we have any state funding, uh
[1:10:48] grants, that sort of thing as a as a
[1:10:50] separate entity. So, general revenue is
[1:10:51] really what uh we want to pay attention
[1:10:54] to. Uh the general revenue increased by
[1:10:56] $60,000 or 1.6%
[1:10:59] over the FY26 budget. Um, that includes
[1:11:03] the major component of that is the
[1:11:04] $50,000 total increase in membership
[1:11:07] dues revenue compared to the budgeted
[1:11:09] amounts of last year or a 1.9% increase
[1:11:12] there.
[1:11:14] Uh, conference registration remains
[1:11:17] stable. It is budgeted slightly lower
[1:11:20] because we do not have the elected
[1:11:22] officials essentials run off here for
[1:11:24] that in yeah, FY2027.
[1:11:27] Uh, as mentioned, the grant special
[1:11:29] project and state funding revenue,
[1:11:30] there's a decrease of $157,400
[1:11:34] or a 21% decrease and that is explained
[1:11:37] by the
[1:11:39] better budgeting of the 3-year $700,000
[1:11:42] EWAF grant. We've also as I mentioned
[1:11:44] received full funding of $380,000 for
[1:11:47] the EWAF program.
[1:11:50] Uh, we do have $114,000
[1:11:53] worth of unrestricted reserve budget for
[1:11:55] this year. Uh, this is not because we
[1:11:58] need to tap into our reserves because we
[1:12:00] don't have enough money in this year. As
[1:12:02] you recall, this is because of our
[1:12:04] policy to have our reserves between 25%
[1:12:08] and 50% of our previous year budget.
[1:12:11] Uh, we would need to tap into about
[1:12:12] 114,000 of those unrestricted reserves
[1:12:15] to get us at about 48%
[1:12:17] estimate at the end of next fiscal year.
[1:12:20] So, that's why we're pulling those in.
[1:12:21] Uh, what we're planning to use this for some one-time capital improvements
[1:12:26] around the office. The office was
[1:12:28] remodeled in 2018, so we'll do some
[1:12:30] updates since then. And then we're
[1:12:32] hopefully going to expand our capacity.
[1:12:35] Meg works almost entirely remotely and
[1:12:39] we don't know with this new position if
[1:12:41] we'll have kind of hybrid in office,
[1:12:42] that sort of thing. So, we want to
[1:12:43] expand some space for that position.
[1:12:47] Uh, moving on to personnel, I have our
[1:12:49] computers to share with the chairman.
[1:12:51] Yes, indeed. Yep. Yep. We we will have
[1:12:54] that. Uh, in the personnel expenses,
[1:12:56] we're seeing an overall increase of
[1:12:58] $50,000, which is a 2.3%
[1:13:01] increase over the FY26 budget. Uh if you
[1:13:04] look within the subcategories there, um
[1:13:08] we are budgeting our staff salaries to
[1:13:10] remain uh same over last year in total,
[1:13:13] and that's because of the switching
[1:13:14] positions. However, we are budgeting
[1:13:16] more uh benefits will cost more, and we
[1:13:19] are budgeting more in contract labor
[1:13:21] there uh to fill in some of those gaps
[1:13:23] with next extra seats.
[1:13:25] And Nick, I'll I'll just note that that
[1:13:27] section, because of the pivot, is
[1:13:30] subject to change over the next couple
[1:13:31] weeks as we, you know, we'll start doing
[1:13:33] the job posting and we'll figure out
[1:13:34] those pieces and hopefully have that all
[1:13:36] resolved in the next few weeks prior to
[1:13:38] the gym board meeting. Absolutely.
[1:13:40] Uh moving on to operations and
[1:13:42] administration expenses, we're looking
[1:13:43] at a decrease of $41,700
[1:13:46] or 11%, um and a lot of that is because
[1:13:49] we are in our off year as far as when
[1:13:51] publications go out. I don't have
[1:13:52] elected officials uh essentials.
[1:13:55] Um advocacy and engagement expenses,
[1:13:57] there's no increase. It's at the same
[1:13:59] levels of 2026. However, we've shifted
[1:14:01] around a little bit. We've increased the
[1:14:03] travel budget um so that we can get out
[1:14:06] and about throughout the state, and we
[1:14:09] uh have lowered slightly the policy uh
[1:14:12] research budget, which we had backfilled
[1:14:13] last year with reserves, just back to
[1:14:15] FY2025 levels.
[1:14:18] Uh event expenses, there is a decrease
[1:14:20] of $69,000 or 6.7%
[1:14:24] uh over the FY26 budget. Uh and that is
[1:14:27] because we are again holding uh fewer
[1:14:29] events. So, those numbers have reverted
[1:14:31] back to FY25 levels as well.
[1:14:34] Hey, just to be clear, we're still
[1:14:36] holding a lot of events, we're just not
[1:14:38] holding the newly elected focus events.
[1:14:40] Yeah. And and the uh we also budgeted
[1:14:43] more last year for the uh NLC uh uh,
[1:14:46] this the events we held in conjunction
[1:14:48] with NLC here in Salt Lake.
[1:14:50] I'm making a question. On the
[1:14:52] annual convention that we have in Salt
[1:14:54] Lake City, did you just
[1:14:55] uh, kept the same budget we had last
[1:14:57] year?
[1:14:57] Assuming that we have a different place
[1:14:59] in 2023. Yeah, this is This 2023 fiscal
[1:15:01] year will still be in Salt So, this will
[1:15:02] be in Salt Lake. All right. I'm going to
[1:15:03] let you know. It's still up in the air.
[1:15:05] You can leave it behind. Okay, got you.
[1:15:06] So, we still have some some really good
[1:15:08] comparatives. And then we'll be the
[1:15:10] replacement. The next year is when
[1:15:11] things will Right, yeah. So, that's one
[1:15:13] year off. Okay, thanks.
[1:15:15] Uh,
[1:15:16] I'm scrolling down the list. So,
[1:15:26] Uh,
[1:15:26] and as explained in the revenue section,
[1:15:28] the grant, special project, and state
[1:15:29] funding decreased uh, 572,645,
[1:15:33] 45.3% less than FY26.
[1:15:37] Um, we backfilled because the LAA
[1:15:40] funding was uh, cut for the league in
[1:15:43] the current fiscal year that we're in.
[1:15:44] We backfilled that with the unrestricted
[1:15:46] reserves uh, that were Sorry, with the
[1:15:48] restricted reserves that were um, held
[1:15:51] over for LAA specifically. Um, so,
[1:15:53] that's the major decrease there. And
[1:15:55] then the adjustments uh, as I mentioned
[1:15:57] with the DWS land use technical
[1:15:59] assistance grant as well.
[1:16:01] Um, ultimately, we uh, believe that the
[1:16:03] budget we're proposing fulfills the ULCT
[1:16:05] mission in a financially responsible way
[1:16:07] and will give us the resources we need
[1:16:09] to increase staff bandwidth and
[1:16:10] performance.
[1:16:12] Uh, we ask the board to adopt this
[1:16:14] proposed FY27 tentative budget and uh,
[1:16:17] request that the board provides feedback
[1:16:19] to be incorporated in the final budget
[1:16:21] uh, that we will be presenting in June.
[1:16:24] Uh, the board also must schedule a time
[1:16:26] and place for the public hearing that
[1:16:27] will be held on the adopted tentative
[1:16:29] budget before the official adoption of
[1:16:31] the final budget uh, as well as
[1:16:33] procedural rules for that hearing.
[1:16:36] Um, given that the board only meets once
[1:16:38] in May and once in June, staff
[1:16:40] recommends scheduling the public hearing
[1:16:42] on the same day that the board will
[1:16:43] consider uh, the adoption of the FY2027
[1:16:47] budget. And that day will be June 22nd
[1:16:51] 2026 at Bountiful City Hall at noon.
[1:16:55] Staff is also making recommendation to
[1:16:57] limit public comment to items directly
[1:16:59] related to the budget with a 3-minute
[1:17:02] time limit and the ability to submit
[1:17:04] written comments.
[1:17:05] We're happy to
[1:17:08] make any adjustments as foreseen fit
[1:17:10] there.
[1:17:11] But those are the the pieces that we
[1:17:14] need the board to do
[1:17:15] comply with our state law budget wise
[1:17:17] and our own budgeting procedures.
[1:17:19] Happy to answer any questions.
[1:17:22] We do a late board meeting at the
[1:17:24] presidential city during the summer. So
[1:17:26] sometimes that's in June, sometimes
[1:17:28] that's in August. This year they
[1:17:29] couldn't work out to do it in June. So
[1:17:31] that's why it's at the Bountiful City
[1:17:32] Hall. Looking forward to introducing you
[1:17:34] all to Bountiful City Hall. It's a place
[1:17:36] I spend a lot of time.
[1:17:38] I bet it's a gorgeous city hall.
[1:17:40] >> [clears throat]
[1:17:41] >> Maybe afterwards there'll be a bike
[1:17:43] ride.
[1:17:44] I have a question.
[1:17:46] Sure. Let's Let's focus first on budget
[1:17:48] questions. Do you have a budget
[1:17:49] question? Okay. Let's go budget
[1:17:51] questions and then we'll go to any other
[1:17:52] questions. Question is on the public
[1:17:54] comment portion.
[1:17:56] I don't remember having a public comment
[1:17:58] at this
[1:18:00] before. Do we get public They public
[1:18:04] It's happened once before.
[1:18:06] I was just wondering because of the the
[1:18:08] tightness of our limit on that. I
[1:18:10] thought there was some issue
[1:18:12] we limited them to.
[1:18:13] So as Cameron mentioned
[1:18:16] in recent memory we could only come up
[1:18:18] with with one time. It is a required
[1:18:21] public hearing opportunity. Since we
[1:18:24] haven't necessarily had
[1:18:26] um much public attend and want to make
[1:18:30] comment. You know, we are all aware that
[1:18:32] often in our board meetings we have
[1:18:34] you know, legislative staff or our
[1:18:36] friends from the counties or others
[1:18:39] sometimes from
[1:18:41] property rights coalition sometimes
[1:18:42] attend to just
[1:18:44] observe but requests for public comment
[1:18:47] to this group have been really rare. So,
[1:18:50] in anticipation
[1:18:52] we decided we should probably suggest
[1:18:55] some guidelines. We looked at what other
[1:18:56] cities
[1:18:58] do and trying to think of some
[1:19:00] recommendations to make. This one seemed
[1:19:02] to kind of fit within
[1:19:03] where a lot of cities are at. So, that's
[1:19:06] where the recommendation came from. I
[1:19:07] don't have any problems with that. I
[1:19:08] just wondered if there were any
[1:19:10] incidences that said that already? I think
[1:19:13] probably.
[1:19:14] Does anyone have any questions to on any
[1:19:16] of the budget numbers too that you want
[1:19:19] to have Nick walk through?
[1:19:23] And you got the LAA budget. So,
[1:19:27] but it passed in the house.
[1:19:31] But the state state and that funds us
[1:19:33] through
[1:19:35] This all I still want. So, this this
[1:19:37] upcoming fiscal year here. Okay.
[1:19:39] >> is restored. So, up to this point
[1:19:41] restricted
[1:19:43] Okay. So, we have funding for that and
[1:19:44] then will we be asking for more than the
[1:19:47] 438 back up to the 500 or more in the
[1:19:50] [clears throat] coming year? No, they restored the funding back to where it was for the original ask. So,
[1:19:55] we're back to that level. Okay, right.
[1:19:57] And then what what will be working
[1:20:00] through with the AOGs and the governor's
[1:20:01] offices is to get the exact expectations
[1:20:04] of how those dollars will be spent.
[1:20:05] That'll be part of the the June
[1:20:07] recommendations. June recommendations,
[1:20:09] okay. I appreciate that. But the the
[1:20:11] three general buckets have been the
[1:20:13] staff member which you know right now
[1:20:15] it's McKenna, the administrative costs
[1:20:18] and then the expert pool. Those are the
[1:20:19] three general buckets. Okay. But we'll
[1:20:22] be working through that a little more
[1:20:22] specifically over the next few weeks.
[1:20:24] Okay, great. Thanks. Any additional
[1:20:26] budget questions for Nick or Cameron?
[1:20:30] on the proposed tentative budget.
[1:20:34] Is there anyone online with a question?
[1:20:38] I just want to get our friends that are
[1:20:40] participating in hybrid mode.
[1:20:43] I need that we're not taking up any of
[1:20:45] that.
[1:20:50] was equal. Who's second that? Oh,
[1:20:52] and time.
[1:20:53] Okay.
[1:20:56] Yeah, that's what we're looking for,
[1:20:57] three
[1:20:58] Okay. three-fold motion Yes, you're
[1:21:00] looking for a three-fold motion and then
[1:21:01] it is the time and place and the cost.
[1:21:04] Yes.
[1:21:05] Any questions on the
[1:21:09] time and place or the policy before we
[1:21:13] entertain a hand motion.
[1:21:14] We have Mayor Waddoups now.
[1:21:16] Question / comment, anyone else?
[1:21:20] Okay.
[1:21:21] Seeing none, then yes, we are we are to
[1:21:23] the point where we would be willing to
[1:21:24] entertain a
[1:21:26] three-fold motion.
[1:21:27] >> [laughter]
[1:21:28] >> I make a motion that we move that we
[1:21:30] approve the tentative budget for fiscal
[1:21:32] year '27
[1:21:35] and that we set a public hearing
[1:21:39] uh to review this budget as a board
[1:21:42] in our June board meeting
[1:21:45] which is June 22nd, 2026 at the
[1:21:49] Bountiful City Hall to be held at noon
[1:21:52] and that we have a policy to allow for public
[1:21:59] comment and we'll limit that public
[1:22:01] comment to 3 minutes.
[1:22:03] Uh
[1:22:04] that those comments can be related to
[1:22:05] the budget
[1:22:07] and it need be allowed or anybody can
[1:22:10] also submit written comment.
[1:22:13] Okay, we have a motion, do we have a
[1:22:15] second? Second it.
[1:22:17] Uh I'm going to give that to to Mayor
[1:22:19] Waddoups now.
[1:22:22] Just just so you know, Mayor, we're just laughing cuz the volume is
[1:22:25] way up for that. So, we've got it.
[1:22:28] Oh.
[1:22:28] We got that second. Not your fault. I
[1:22:30] think it's on our end in the room.
[1:22:33] So, I'll speak quieter.
[1:22:36] Robust second.
[1:22:37] >> [laughter]
[1:22:38] >> Uh any discussion?
[1:22:41] Okay. Seeing none, I'll call for the
[1:22:43] vote to adopt the uh fiscal year 2027
[1:22:46] tentative budget, just set the time and
[1:22:48] place for our uh public hearing on June
[1:22:51] 22nd, 2026.
[1:22:53] It'll be fabulous about 3:00, so we call
[1:22:55] it noon. And then that that we adopt uh
[1:22:59] guidelines for our public comment. Um
[1:23:04] 3 minutes.
[1:23:06] Persons related directly to the budget
[1:23:08] and they will be restricted to written
[1:23:09] comments.
[1:23:10] I'll call for the vote. I think you put
[1:23:12] words in my mouth.
[1:23:13] I'll allow
[1:23:14] >> That That restatement of your motion
[1:23:15] makes sense. I'll allow the friendly
[1:23:16] amendment.
[1:23:17] >> [laughter]
[1:23:23] » I thought it was a fine
[1:23:27] I think it was. The land council. Uh
[1:23:30] Now, before I call for the vote, we have
[1:23:32] maybe one in the chat. So, I just want
[1:23:33] to make sure if there was any discussion
[1:23:35] that we
[1:23:36] Oh, someone's already on it. Okay. All
[1:23:38] in favor, say I. I. I.
[1:23:42] Any opposed?
[1:23:44] Okay. Our tentative budget has been
[1:23:45] adopted. I encourage
[1:23:47] um
[1:23:48] all of the the board, any other
[1:23:50] interested parties to uh
[1:23:52] feel free to review while it's
[1:23:54] [clears throat] open to the public
[1:23:55] inspection.
[1:23:56] And uh
[1:23:58] feel free to submit written comments or
[1:24:00] be prepared for our June 22nd meeting.
[1:24:03] With that, we will move on to our
[1:24:05] engagement report. Uh
[1:24:07] Molly. Hi, everyone.
[1:24:10] Um
[1:24:11] everyone's favorite, homelessness.
[1:24:13] Thanks for having me.
[1:24:16] So, as Ken mentioned, we have a few uh
[1:24:19] staff in places where we do cross over.
[1:24:21] And uh this communication task force is
[1:24:23] a very good example of our engagement
[1:24:25] and advocacy crossover work. So,
[1:24:27] in 2018, the Shelter Cities Mitigation
[1:24:30] Fund was created. It is a fund that
[1:24:34] either pay into if you don't have
[1:24:36] qualifying shelter, or you receive funds
[1:24:38] from because you host qualifying
[1:24:40] shelter. Based around the premise that
[1:24:43] uh local government, cities and towns, have two main roles
[1:24:46] when it comes to addressing homelessness
[1:24:48] as a state, that of land use and
[1:24:50] non-public safety. So, you either have
[1:24:52] the land use of a shelter in your
[1:24:54] community, or you help um those with
[1:24:57] that land use pay for the increased
[1:24:59] public safety cost. Um I think the fund
[1:25:02] has worked fairly well since its
[1:25:03] inception, but it's becoming abundantly
[1:25:06] clear that we need to re-envision it a
[1:25:08] bit. Um the way that it's structured
[1:25:11] right now, each time a new shelter city
[1:25:13] comes on, we need to kind of or new
[1:25:15] shelter comes on even, we kind of need
[1:25:16] to crack open the code, uh revamp
[1:25:19] everything, and what we would really
[1:25:21] like to do is create a collaborative
[1:25:24] process of between shelter cities,
[1:25:27] non-shelter cities, and the state since
[1:25:28] there's some state dollars in there.
[1:25:30] Really thinking of how we can build a
[1:25:32] mitigation fund that shelter cities feel
[1:25:36] supported um by the non-shelter cities,
[1:25:39] and that there is um consistency in
[1:25:41] funding, that the funding is anticipated
[1:25:44] immediately whenever a shelter opens,
[1:25:46] that there are some clear uh guardrails
[1:25:49] and parameters
[1:25:50] um that are clearly communicated for the
[1:25:52] non-shelter cities so they know exactly
[1:25:54] what their dollars are going to in the
[1:25:56] shelter cities.
[1:25:57] Um and really just trying to make sure
[1:25:59] that we have a good process for
[1:26:00] everyone. Um
[1:26:03] This is kind of one of our our bigger
[1:26:05] issues where it's, you know,
[1:26:07] 10 sheltering cities and everyone's
[1:26:08] involved in a pretty difficult issue.
[1:26:10] So, um we have worked with OHS to put
[1:26:13] together this task force.
[1:26:16] Um the board approved of the creation of
[1:26:17] the taskforce in April,
[1:26:19] um, and the structure of it.
[1:26:21] Uh, right now what we're looking at,
[1:26:23] just for some context, uh, so it would
[1:26:25] be three appointees from the state. One
[1:26:29] would be, uh, Tyler Clancey, State
[1:26:31] Business Coordinator or his designee.
[1:26:33] Um, they have gotten word that one of
[1:26:35] the, uh, the confirmation that one of
[1:26:37] the designees from the state will also
[1:26:40] be Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall
[1:26:41] since she serves on the State Homeless
[1:26:44] Board. Um, which is great cuz that's
[1:26:46] another local voice for us to have in
[1:26:48] this conversation. It also makes it
[1:26:50] easier for us because we only had three
[1:26:53] spaces for shelter city mayors and five
[1:26:55] shelter city mayors who were interested.
[1:26:57] Um,
[1:26:58] so with that we have, uh, Ogden Mayor
[1:27:00] and board member Ben Nadolski. Um, as I
[1:27:02] mentioned, uh, Mayor Erin Mendenhall
[1:27:04] will be filling a role from the state.
[1:27:06] We have South Salt Lake City Mayor
[1:27:08] Cherie Wood, St. George Mayor Jimmy
[1:27:11] Hughes, and Tooele Mayor Ernie Steadman
[1:27:13] and Mayor Gill. Um, we had a lot of good
[1:27:16] discussions about this, uh,
[1:27:18] in our April meeting about really
[1:27:19] wanting to make sure that we had
[1:27:20] geographic and population diversity,
[1:27:23] um, across the state. We also had a lot
[1:27:26] of great applicants come in to represent
[1:27:28] the non-shelter cities, um, that you'll
[1:27:30] find listed on the back of that page.
[1:27:32] And pardon me, after this memo went out,
[1:27:36] we also got an application from
[1:27:38] Springville Mayor and board member
[1:27:40] Barbara Brudnicki.
[1:27:41] So, there are a couple things that we
[1:27:44] were considering as staff, um, as we
[1:27:47] wanted to bring forward our
[1:27:48] recommendations to this group. Uh, one I
[1:27:51] think great problem to have is we have a
[1:27:53] lot of stellar people who want to be
[1:27:55] involved in this conversation. And I do
[1:27:58] want to say that I think that while this
[1:28:00] group will be just holding up the
[1:28:01] conversation, it will still be
[1:28:03] conversations that we have with the
[1:28:04] board, it will be conversations that we
[1:28:06] have with the Salt Lake City Policy
[1:28:07] Committee, uh, depending on the timing
[1:28:10] of how everything works out. It might be
[1:28:11] something that we even, you know, bring
[1:28:13] forward to the general membership at
[1:28:14] annual.
[1:28:15] Um,
[1:28:16] you know, we'll see during the session.
[1:28:18] So, while this will be a conversation
[1:28:21] group for this, uh, this isn't the only
[1:28:23] place the conversation will be
[1:28:24] happening.
[1:28:25] Um,
[1:28:26] so with that said, and looking at the
[1:28:28] balance of those that represented that
[1:28:31] applied, we do have a few
[1:28:33] recommendations for the board to
[1:28:36] consider.
[1:28:37] Um, we felt it was important for the
[1:28:41] non-shelter cities, um,
[1:28:43] to consider having Davis and Utah County
[1:28:46] represented since those are the two
[1:28:47] largest counties,
[1:28:49] um,
[1:28:50] that aid into the fund and do not have
[1:28:52] qualifying shelters as it currently
[1:28:54] stands, and and have some conversations
[1:28:56] in those communities about that. Um, so
[1:28:58] with that, we recommend, uh, Mayor Don
[1:29:01] Fullmer and President Keith Bradshaw as
[1:29:04] from Davis County, and then, uh, Mayor
[1:29:06] Karen
[1:29:07] Caldwell um,
[1:29:09] from Utah County.
[1:29:11] And then we also might suggest from
[1:29:14] Southern Utah having a more rural Utah
[1:29:16] voice put in forward, um,
[1:29:18] Springdale Mayor Harold Brunson as well.
[1:29:21] Um, and then when it came to the
[1:29:23] remaining shelter city mayors, we have
[1:29:25] Mayor Melinda McCollum, um, and we
[1:29:28] recommend considering including Mayor
[1:29:30] Ben McAdams,
[1:29:31] Mayor Cherie Wood, and Mayor Marissa
[1:29:34] Neff in Tooele. Um, I think one plug
[1:29:38] I'll put in just for the two tier two
[1:29:40] shelter cities, they
[1:29:42] um, until Tooele came online as a major
[1:29:45] shelter, they were largely domestic
[1:29:48] violence shelters or shelters that had
[1:29:49] pretty little community impact, and
[1:29:51] Tooele's kind of broken that model. And
[1:29:53] so I think as we reconsider what this
[1:29:55] fund looks like, it's, uh, an important
[1:29:58] to have, um, a tier two from the two
[1:30:00] smaller shelter cities voice on that.
[1:30:03] Um, if the board would consider it, but
[1:30:04] those those kind of
[1:30:05] what we would recommend to staff, but
[1:30:07] you also have some really stellar
[1:30:10] advocates.
[1:30:12] I think screen bill.
[1:30:14] Yeah. So, sorry. She Her application
[1:30:16] came in after right after we sent out
[1:30:18] the memo. So,
[1:30:21] We unfortunately did not Fortunately,
[1:30:23] unfortunately, it was kind of open-ended
[1:30:25] application process. So, there wasn't
[1:30:27] necessarily deadline. So, we appreciate
[1:30:31] that some of them came in after.
[1:30:34] So,
[1:30:35] board members, this is um
[1:30:39] This was such an interesting bill during
[1:30:40] session. It was so great to pass this
[1:30:42] bill.
[1:30:43] Um
[1:30:44] with some high negotiation from the last
[1:30:46] session because of
[1:30:48] this critical component plus the fact
[1:30:51] that um our new homelessness coordinator
[1:30:53] uh Tyler Clancy was going to be moving
[1:30:55] from the legislature into his this new
[1:30:57] role. Um
[1:30:59] the bill The bill actually sort of died
[1:31:01] and we had to
[1:31:03] um actually spend quite a bit of work uh
[1:31:05] narrowing its focus to that which would
[1:31:07] be acceptable and bringing it back. This
[1:31:10] component was one of those that was in
[1:31:12] the original bill.
[1:31:14] Um didn't end up coming back in bill
[1:31:16] form, but came back through um
[1:31:19] commitment and agreement with
[1:31:21] coordinator. Do we call him coordinator
[1:31:22] Clancy? That's like a weird title.
[1:31:25] Tyler uh coordinator Clancy.
[1:31:28] Um but this was this was a really
[1:31:30] important discussion we felt needed to
[1:31:32] be had around mitigation funds. I mean,
[1:31:34] this is This is cities helping cities.
[1:31:37] We've convinced the state to put a
[1:31:38] little bit of skin in the game, but this
[1:31:39] is still largely cities helping cities
[1:31:42] um with this important responsibility.
[1:31:45] Um
[1:31:46] and um
[1:31:48] feel like
[1:31:49] cities are therefore ought to take
[1:31:51] leadership role in these discussions
[1:31:53] about how we how we use these funds, how
[1:31:55] we understand these funds to be used,
[1:31:57] how we measure them, how we measure
[1:31:58] success. So, um
[1:32:03] Uh it was one of those that Molly and
[1:32:06] Cameron and I own with
[1:32:08] just Tyler.
[1:32:10] Um
[1:32:11] Well, he was Representative Clason. He
[1:32:12] was Representative Clason. Spent a lot
[1:32:14] of the last week um
[1:32:17] having discussions about. So, I just
[1:32:18] offer that context as as we're
[1:32:20] considering who we want to
[1:32:23] um assign to uh
[1:32:26] summer fund. And if I may, there is one
[1:32:29] remaining appointee from the state board
[1:32:31] that we're still waiting on. So, there's
[1:32:33] going to be one
[1:32:34] open spot and uh that is up to the chair
[1:32:37] of Human Services Board to appoint. And
[1:32:40] we will let this group know who that is
[1:32:42] once it's there. And uh once this
[1:32:46] once the board approves of who we're
[1:32:47] going to have on the task force, we'll
[1:32:48] get going on getting the task force
[1:32:50] meeting up and
[1:32:51] pretty quickly. So, we have until
[1:32:52] November to
[1:32:55] I don't know what's going to happen.
[1:32:56] Recommendations to the legislature act
[1:32:58] on.
[1:32:59] President or the board votes on it. I
[1:33:01] want to vocally thank St. George City,
[1:33:02] Mayor Hughes personally because if you
[1:33:06] go forward with what Molly outlined,
[1:33:08] which is that shelter city tier one and
[1:33:10] two option, then St. George would not
[1:33:14] have somebody
[1:33:15] as one of the six league appointments.
[1:33:18] Uh St. George wants to still be involved
[1:33:20] in the conversations, needs to be
[1:33:22] involved in the conversations. One
[1:33:23] interesting tidbit about St. George,
[1:33:25] just so everyone's aware, situational
[1:33:27] awareness, St. George actually owns
[1:33:30] their facility, which is unique with all
[1:33:33] of the other shelter cities. So, yes,
[1:33:36] they have the mitigation fund issue that
[1:33:38] everybody else has, but they also are
[1:33:40] very much in the operations space
[1:33:43] like a Switchpoint or other provider.
[1:33:46] And there is
[1:33:47] there there is significant inequity
[1:33:50] between how St. George receives funding
[1:33:52] on the operations side compared to those
[1:33:54] other operators. That is separate from
[1:33:57] what this task force will be doing and
[1:33:59] St. George will be heavily involved in
[1:34:00] that conversation and has asked for the
[1:34:02] support of
[1:34:03] League members in the and that
[1:34:05] conversation too, which will be again
[1:34:06] separate but related to this entire
[1:34:08] process as well. And Cameron, one other
[1:34:10] thing on this that I forgot to talk
[1:34:13] about. One of the other groups that will
[1:34:14] convene frequently will do what we can
[1:34:16] to convene the League for LPC and our
[1:34:18] internal as you mentioned, but Shelter
[1:34:19] Cities Advisory Board is a statutory
[1:34:22] group that exists and I imagine that we
[1:34:24] will continue to convene that group
[1:34:25] pretty frequently
[1:34:27] so that even though all of those mayors
[1:34:29] will not be on this work group, there
[1:34:31] will still be frequent conversations of
[1:34:33] specifically the Shelter Cities
[1:34:35] throughout this process as well.
[1:34:37] Will they be open meetings that
[1:34:38] we can still attend even though we're
[1:34:40] not on the work group?
[1:34:41] Um we haven't formalized that yet. It's
[1:34:43] not a formal public group.
[1:34:46] So I don't I don't think we'd be
[1:34:48] following you know, their
[1:34:50] open and public noticing thing, but
[1:34:52] I don't know what our It doesn't mean
[1:34:55] It's a statutory so it wouldn't be required. It wouldn't be
[1:34:57] required.
[1:34:59] But again, the intent here is that when
[1:35:01] we get to the end of the year, that
[1:35:03] every city and town in the state feels
[1:35:06] buy-in to that process. So that's why
[1:35:09] Molly gets Shelter City Advisory Group
[1:35:10] which is a statutory group that will
[1:35:12] continue operating LPC and board and
[1:35:15] then
[1:35:16] our first step was just
[1:35:18] get the people and then you approved the
[1:35:20] process last time and
[1:35:22] now we want to make sure it's as as open
[1:35:24] as as possible while also making sure
[1:35:27] that you can have the candid
[1:35:28] conversations as possible.
[1:35:30] Cuz this yeah, again, this is not a
[1:35:31] statutory group. This is something we're
[1:35:33] doing in partnership with OHS to resolve
[1:35:36] these issues going forward.
[1:35:38] I'm good with the names that the staff
[1:35:40] is recommending, but if
[1:35:43] there's something that St. George can do
[1:35:44] to help and
[1:35:46] attend some of those meetings, she's
[1:35:48] real busy during the daytime.
[1:35:51] Thank you.
[1:35:53] Thanks.
[1:35:55] And again, I truly appreciate the way
[1:35:57] it's just
[1:35:58] thought process, thought process behind
[1:36:00] the selection, thought process today.
[1:36:02] Different, you know, I know we have
[1:36:04] shelter, non-shelter, or
[1:36:05] tier one, tier two. I just
[1:36:08] I appreciate the thought process there,
[1:36:10] and I think you have some great
[1:36:11] recommendations. Um
[1:36:14] I'm supportive of all this. Amen. Yes.
[1:36:17] Yeah, I think it's a good team that you
[1:36:18] got you brought together.
[1:36:21] Any other comments, questions? Oh, it
[1:36:23] looks like Council Burton has her hand
[1:36:25] raised.
[1:36:27] I just want wanted to mention also, and
[1:36:29] I'm sorry if this is super loud, the
[1:36:31] work that's gone into these
[1:36:32] recommendations, too. I I looked this
[1:36:34] over quite a bit and talked about it,
[1:36:37] and
[1:36:38] it seemed like a bit of a Rubik's Cube
[1:36:40] in trying to make sure we have coverage
[1:36:42] from all the the tiers and the areas and
[1:36:45] the shelter cities and the non-shelter
[1:36:46] cities. So, I appreciate all the work
[1:36:48] and the thought that's gone into this.
[1:36:49] And appreciate very much the
[1:36:51] recommendation to have some
[1:36:52] representation from Southern Utah, as
[1:36:54] well.
[1:36:56] Thank you, Council Burton, and that was
[1:36:58] the appropriate volume, which is, by the
[1:36:59] way, all on our end in the room. Thank
[1:37:01] you. Uh appropriate volume of the TV,
[1:37:03] but that was a good volume. Thank you.
[1:37:05] And then I saw that we had another hand
[1:37:06] up, I think it was Council Burton Foley.
[1:37:11] Maybe. I can't hear you. No. No.
[1:37:14] Okay. I think it's the hand from the
[1:37:16] last comment. Any other
[1:37:19] comments, questions, feedback from the
[1:37:20] board?
[1:37:24] All right, seeing none, uh is anyone
[1:37:26] prepared to make
[1:37:28] a motion related to uh the staff
[1:37:31] recommendations?
[1:37:33] I kind of did, so I'll finish it right
[1:37:35] now.
[1:37:36] Thank you, Mayor Burton. Mayor Burton
[1:37:38] moves the uh staff recommendations for
[1:37:41] both the shelter city and the
[1:37:42] non-shelter
[1:37:43] city participant nominations. Second. We
[1:37:46] have a second from Council Region.
[1:37:49] We've had a bit of discussion, so we'll
[1:37:50] just go ahead and move to the vote on
[1:37:52] this one. All in favor, please say I. I.
[1:37:57] think we have a vote in the chat, so
[1:37:58] we'll just wait for those eyes.
[1:38:01] Okay.
[1:38:02] Any opposed?
[1:38:06] If none, looking forward to spend some
[1:38:08] quality
[1:38:10] spending time on this topic.
[1:38:13] And that will move us over to our
[1:38:16] advocacy
[1:38:17] report.
[1:38:19] Justin.
[1:38:20] Um Amicus timing, Justin. You're up
[1:38:22] first on this.
[1:38:23] Yes.
[1:38:24] So, uh
[1:38:28] I'm here, so I don't know if you can see
[1:38:30] me.
[1:38:31] Um last uh
[1:38:33] last board meeting, we talked a little
[1:38:34] bit about uh
[1:38:36] I
[1:38:37] I've Amicus brief Amicus. Yeah.
[1:38:41] for this one.
[1:38:42] Amicus. Okay. Okay. another year, but I
[1:38:46] don't have to pay
[1:38:47] a big sum, so.
[1:38:48] Uh the Amicus request uh from Salt Lake
[1:38:51] City
[1:38:52] uh
[1:38:53] regarding impact fees. And uh
[1:38:56] as far as the timing goes, we're ready
[1:38:58] to meet with
[1:38:59] um
[1:39:00] the uh the litigators as well as the
[1:39:03] individual from UAC who will be uh
[1:39:07] drafting the Amicus brief.
[1:39:10] Um the there was an extension for filing
[1:39:14] of the initial brief
[1:39:16] uh
[1:39:17] filed by Salt Lake City to July 9th.
[1:39:20] We will receive
[1:39:22] uh
[1:39:23] that we've been told that we will
[1:39:24] receive a draft of Amicus uh
[1:39:28] brief by May 29th.
[1:39:31] Um and so that gives uh all of you time
[1:39:35] to at least look it over. Once we
[1:39:37] receive it, we'll send it on.
[1:39:39] Uh and then at the following board
[1:39:42] meeting,
[1:39:43] uh we will the board will need to
[1:39:45] consider that and either
[1:39:47] vote yes or no to
[1:39:49] uh
[1:39:50] to sign on to that amicus brief.
[1:39:54] So, we this two amicus briefs, we
[1:39:58] there there is one other city, I
[1:40:01] believe, that will be filing
[1:40:03] uh
[1:40:04] an amicus brief.
[1:40:06] And then also
[1:40:08] the International Municipal Attorneys
[1:40:11] Association has also
[1:40:14] agreed to file a amicus brief. So, there
[1:40:19] are other amicus briefs that are also
[1:40:21] going to be filed,
[1:40:23] um and we don't have access to those,
[1:40:26] but we would be
[1:40:28] waiting on the International Municipal
[1:40:30] Attorneys Group.
[1:40:33] Thank you for your brief comments.
[1:40:35] Any any questions on the impact
[1:40:40] brief?
[1:40:45] Okay, thank you for that update and
[1:40:48] appreciate
[1:40:50] all of the rapid work and also figuring
[1:40:52] out the proper pronunciation.
[1:40:56] I would just like to note, according to
[1:40:57] the American Bar Association,
[1:40:59] depending what part of the country
[1:41:01] you're in, it does get pronounced
[1:41:02] different ways.
[1:41:03] >> Oh.
[1:41:04] So,
[1:41:05] and different Supreme Court justices
[1:41:07] themselves pronounce it different ways.
[1:41:09] And the Brits have their own version,
[1:41:10] too, so.
[1:41:12] I'm just saying.
[1:41:13] Salt Lake City would agree with you.
[1:41:15] But that's why we need their help.
[1:41:17] But I'm just saying it could be
[1:41:20] different ways. Yes.
[1:41:22] Okay. How would you say it on stage?
[1:41:25] » [clears throat]
[1:41:25] >> I would
[1:41:26] where I was at in the country.
[1:41:28] Moving on to the next item, which is the
[1:41:31] potential partnerships on housing
[1:41:33] policy. Can I make a suggestion? I'm
[1:41:35] covering this one for Carson because
[1:41:37] he's out of town today
[1:41:39] for his first real opportunity to catch
[1:41:40] his breath since the session. So, I'm
[1:41:42] going to talk about everybody still
[1:41:44] running hard since the session and and
[1:41:46] so
[1:41:47] today's Carson's first
[1:41:49] real day off since then.
[1:41:51] And so, the
[1:41:53] partnership not preemption mantra that
[1:41:56] the board adopted several years ago and
[1:41:58] it's been the centerpiece of our
[1:41:59] legislative advocacy for the last years
[1:42:01] has paid dividends at the capital.
[1:42:03] And we have other state we turn the
[1:42:04] capital
[1:42:05] using that that term in TML. When we had
[1:42:08] National League of Cities here in Salt
[1:42:10] Lake in November, we had little
[1:42:11] partnership not preemption pins that we
[1:42:13] distributed to our fellow Carson across
[1:42:15] the country.
[1:42:17] What has been interesting over the last
[1:42:18] few months is that groups that maybe
[1:42:21] historically have been our adversaries
[1:42:23] or frenemies have said, "We hear you on
[1:42:26] the partnership. Can we partner with you
[1:42:28] on training?" Now, we've partnered with
[1:42:30] a lot of these groups for years through
[1:42:31] the task force. So,
[1:42:33] Megan and I have been
[1:42:36] many years and we will continue to do so
[1:42:38] and in fact, this past legislative
[1:42:41] session, President Adams and Speaker
[1:42:43] Straus
[1:42:44] actually did a commendation for the
[1:42:46] language task force on the house and
[1:42:47] senate floor that that we attended. And
[1:42:50] so, this is separate from those
[1:42:52] conversations because we've always
[1:42:54] had those discussions with other
[1:42:55] stakeholders and brought them back to
[1:42:57] LPC or or the board when it comes to
[1:42:59] policy changes at the at the capital.
[1:43:03] This has been a little different these
[1:43:04] last few months. It's been some saying,
[1:43:06] "Can we partner with you on training?"
[1:43:08] And so, Nick, if you scan down
[1:43:11] into the same page of the memo where
[1:43:13] Carson bullet pointed several of the
[1:43:15] requests of Catherine Egard, you'll see
[1:43:16] one of them ties into the technology
[1:43:18] piece here
[1:43:19] that we've had questions of like, "Can
[1:43:22] we partner with you on policy templates?
[1:43:24] Can we create a cohort of elected
[1:43:26] officials
[1:43:28] to work together on on X topic?"
[1:43:31] "Can we work on Can we do some joint
[1:43:34] webinars with them or partner with
[1:43:35] different companies?
[1:43:36] And there are pros and cons to
[1:43:39] partnering on the training side. Um, I
[1:43:41] think when we talk about collaboration
[1:43:43] and working together to solve problems
[1:43:45] through our advocacy arm, that's
[1:43:47] something we're all accustomed to doing
[1:43:48] and have done so regularly. On the
[1:43:50] training side, I think it's an
[1:43:51] interesting it's an interesting
[1:43:52] potential pivot for us, um, especially
[1:43:55] with with Mike's departure.
[1:43:57] So, we have these different asks that
[1:43:58] have come to us.
[1:44:00] And I think if you go down the last
[1:44:01] page, really the the question we just
[1:44:03] wanted to ask this group is mainly a
[1:44:05] smell test. If you If you see
[1:44:09] um, any landmines to partners of these
[1:44:12] groups. I'm not using any names because
[1:44:14] I think all these groups have approached
[1:44:15] us in good faith saying, "We want to
[1:44:17] partner with you on some training." But
[1:44:19] you've seen the different topics of that
[1:44:21] they're doing. So, on one hand, I think
[1:44:24] there's a reputational benefit to say
[1:44:26] we're working together with these groups
[1:44:28] on this type of training. On the other,
[1:44:30] there's also the reputational risk that
[1:44:31] it feels like we're maybe endorsing a
[1:44:34] group that has historically been at odds
[1:44:36] with cities. But it's an interesting
[1:44:38] partnership opportunity. So, really the
[1:44:40] question, and this is again just come up
[1:44:42] in the last few weeks as we're building
[1:44:44] out our our advocacy and engagement
[1:44:47] priorities this summer, we just wanted a
[1:44:48] quick smell test from the board. Is this
[1:44:50] something worth pursuing? Is it worth
[1:44:53] pursuing to keep your guard up or
[1:44:56] keep your distance?
[1:44:58] I think it's a great idea. But
[1:45:00] if we might be collaborate better out,
[1:45:02] we'll come out together, we'll be
[1:45:04] solid before we get there.
[1:45:07] I think it's dangerous.
[1:45:08] I agree with that part, but I also have
[1:45:10] my I'm hesitant sometimes with the
[1:45:12] partnership cuz there's got to be a lead
[1:45:14] dog, and I think because I can often see
[1:45:17] the language of the training and the
[1:45:19] language of some of the
[1:45:21] um, word we use, might be there might be
[1:45:24] a difference, and
[1:45:26] uh,
[1:45:27] there should be like okay
[1:45:29] We're the lead trainer.
[1:45:31] You can make some recommendations or
[1:45:32] some ideas, but I think We need to be
[1:45:35] careful of uh
[1:45:38] Who ends up with the power on on some
[1:45:39] things.
[1:45:40] But I can see the partnership Maybe
[1:45:43] taking a turn for for
[1:45:45] Whatever the league wants. Yeah. And
[1:45:47] that would be uh
[1:45:49] you end up with that.
[1:45:51] Hustle on how you
[1:45:55] Finish or how you train it. So that's my
[1:45:57] only thing.
[1:45:58] Take it with a
[1:45:59] uh
[1:46:00] Open eyes and and uh
[1:46:03] Concern, I guess. So more of that middle
[1:46:06] Yeah, yeah, go ahead.
[1:46:09] Yeah, yeah. I love the idea. I love the
[1:46:12] idea of partnering where we
[1:46:14] have obvious overlaps. I think that's a
[1:46:16] great step, but same Specificity of how
[1:46:20] we're Serving and what the roles are,
[1:46:23] documented,
[1:46:25] guardrails, but General I support
[1:46:28] principle of an
[1:46:30] MOU to move forward, but we need to
[1:46:31] define internally. I think that's key
[1:46:33] question number one is
[1:46:36] Circumstances. It is intriguing the
[1:46:38] question about You know, different kinds
[1:46:40] of entities. You're going to have
[1:46:42] Uh housing solutions, you have academic,
[1:46:46] you're going to have
[1:46:47] Uh proprietary products, you're going to
[1:46:49] have all kinds of things.
[1:46:51] I don't know the answer right now, but I
[1:46:52] think as long as we're
[1:46:54] Documenting and follow our rules, we'll
[1:46:56] be okay.
[1:46:57] I like that idea
[1:46:59] Can I ask you without naming any, could
[1:47:02] you give us what category the request is
[1:47:04] about? Sure, yeah, absolutely. So if you
[1:47:07] Nick, can you go back up to the five
[1:47:08] bullet points?
[1:47:09] So bullet points
[1:47:12] >> [clears throat]
[1:47:14] >> Bullet points one, two, three, and four
[1:47:17] have all come from organizations with
[1:47:19] whom we have collaborated at the capital
[1:47:21] in the past on policy, often starting on
[1:47:25] opposite sides and then working to get
[1:47:27] to consensus that makes sense. Again,
[1:47:30] born in the advocacy space and the
[1:47:31] setting policy space.
[1:47:33] Um so, these are primarily Utah-based groups,
[1:47:39] some that are in the nonprofit space,
[1:47:41] some that are in the business space,
[1:47:43] but they
[1:47:46] I I do want to give them credit cuz over
[1:47:48] the last few years, as we've
[1:47:50] as we negotiated with them,
[1:47:53] they they've heard us constantly preach
[1:47:55] partnership, one size fits all. And they
[1:47:57] said, "Okay, well, then maybe instead of
[1:47:59] pursuing state legislation this way,
[1:48:01] what if we partner with you to figure
[1:48:03] out some some good best practices from
[1:48:06] the private sector perspective here?"
[1:48:08] Now, the anxiousness we've always had
[1:48:09] there is
[1:48:10] we don't want to put our seal of
[1:48:12] approval on
[1:48:14] Can we use Cameron City here? So, I'll
[1:48:16] use you know, X entity's approach
[1:48:19] because that may work for Ogden, but it
[1:48:21] may not work for Salt Lake.
[1:48:23] But, it may still be a best practice. It
[1:48:25] just may not work for one or the other.
[1:48:26] So, that's what has been an interesting
[1:48:29] request and our initial instinct was
[1:48:32] spirit of partnership. But then, our
[1:48:34] second piece is this verbal So, what I'm
[1:48:36] hearing from the folks in the room and
[1:48:38] welcome thoughts online again. We're
[1:48:39] just looking for a first blush here cuz
[1:48:41] we've told all these groups, like,
[1:48:42] "We'll get back to you." But as we're
[1:48:43] laying out this summer plan, sounds like
[1:48:46] maybe the best first step for us in the
[1:48:48] alliance engagement side is to build out
[1:48:50] our guardrails and say, "Yes, we'll
[1:48:52] partner with you,
[1:48:53] but under these conditions." Could I
[1:48:56] Sorry.
[1:48:58] The
[1:48:59] I was looking like went back to the
[1:49:00] What's our vision? What's our goal here?
[1:49:02] And back to the statement that, you
[1:49:04] know, partnership, not preemption, you
[1:49:06] know, does it fit that mold when we're
[1:49:09] when they're willing to support a
[1:49:11] partnership? Good if if they have maybe
[1:49:14] some different uh
[1:49:16] desires that don't fit that meet that,
[1:49:18] We got to make sure that you know, it
[1:49:19] comes back to that portion of it and we got to refer to that instead of
[1:49:24] getting diverted off the supply. I would
[1:49:27] dare to that I I read through the memo
[1:49:30] and I guess I've
[1:49:32] done enough sessions
[1:49:34] spent enough time from a board
[1:49:36] perspective that after this session
[1:49:38] um
[1:49:39] that I've developed enough scar tissue
[1:49:41] that I I had an initial
[1:49:43] reaction [clears throat] when I read
[1:49:44] this stuff like
[1:49:46] there are some of these entities um
[1:49:50] that have spent years and years
[1:49:55] to learning the league in particular
[1:49:57] cities, you know, the bad cities.
[1:50:00] And and I my initial gut reaction was
[1:50:04] I don't know. You need to show me how it
[1:50:05] works.
[1:50:06] Yeah. That what he means to explain.
[1:50:08] Um
[1:50:09] but then I but then, you know, better
[1:50:12] angels
[1:50:14] um on the one shoulder said um
[1:50:18] when when it when an entity seeks to
[1:50:22] engage and whether they're seeking to
[1:50:23] engage because you know, we frankly had
[1:50:25] a great session today.
[1:50:27] Uh
[1:50:28] lost in our message
[1:50:30] uh working together has carried the day
[1:50:32] more often than not of late.
[1:50:34] Um or whether they're doing it because
[1:50:36] they decided that's really where work
[1:50:39] and policy is made. Um
[1:50:42] I don't know. So, I I guess I've I've
[1:50:45] been
[1:50:45] studying that and thinking more about
[1:50:47] it.
[1:50:47] I think there's there's some groups that
[1:50:49] that's easier than others and I think
[1:50:51] there are some topics that are easier
[1:50:53] than others. Um I think we should
[1:50:56] um
[1:50:57] I think we should try, but I do think we
[1:50:59] also need to just be cautious and I
[1:51:00] think we really really depend on the
[1:51:02] league staff
[1:51:04] to deploy your spidey sense. Um
[1:51:07] and if it's if it's a group where we've
[1:51:10] had a lot of historic animosity with our
[1:51:12] membership,
[1:51:14] then that's when where your spidey sense
[1:51:15] maybe says, "Okay, let's let's run this
[1:51:18] by a few folks or a few cities to make
[1:51:19] sure that it's not going to get us
[1:51:21] crosswise with our membership."
[1:51:23] Um if it's,
[1:51:25] you know, one of the universities where
[1:51:27] you know, maybe they sometimes we've
[1:51:28] disagreed, but but we're hitting it from
[1:51:30] an academic standpoint, you know, your
[1:51:31] spidey sense doesn't go off in the ding, but I I just would urge that as we
[1:51:36] consider this that like
[1:51:38] high degree of spidey sense um
[1:51:40] where it seems like we might end up with
[1:51:42] some friction points.
[1:51:44] >> like my question is do you run them
[1:51:46] through Is it this? Is it this? Is it this? If not
[1:51:50] then, but you have so much more context
[1:51:52] than probably your average board member
[1:51:54] in terms of Is this a manipulative
[1:51:56] strategy or is this an authentic
[1:51:59] partnership app? And I suspect you'll
[1:52:01] have both. Yeah, or are you setting us
[1:52:03] up to fail
[1:52:05] somehow for the next session to tee up
[1:52:07] what you want when when when Well, but
[1:52:09] they wouldn't let us do the training or
[1:52:10] they didn't get the training that we
[1:52:11] wanted, and so therefore we must We we
[1:52:14] shall make them in a future legislation.
[1:52:16] And that's that's where I started to
[1:52:17] worry. And I see
[1:52:19] I'm going to go to Mayor Shepherd and
[1:52:19] then I'll come back to you, Zach. Sorry.
[1:52:23] Well, thanks. Yeah, I mean, I agree with
[1:52:24] you, Kate. There I it worries me a lot.
[1:52:27] Um
[1:52:28] my my initial sense was just absolutely
[1:52:31] not. This just it isn't good. I think
[1:52:32] there's some great opportunities where
[1:52:34] it does make sense, but we got to vet
[1:52:36] them real well. We've got one of our
[1:52:38] Well, [clears throat] we have a builder
[1:52:40] that sits on the
[1:52:42] America's Housing Comeback
[1:52:44] that
[1:52:45] we thought, you know, I mean, it's just
[1:52:46] a great fit. They represent the
[1:52:48] builders. This is this is good, but they
[1:52:49] very very much have a different agenda.
[1:52:52] And it is even sitting there in not a
[1:52:54] very collaborative
[1:52:57] um mentality from their end. And so it
[1:53:00] on face value it looks great, but as
[1:53:02] soon as
[1:53:03] things are said, it's it's very apparent
[1:53:05] that they're not. And so I just have
[1:53:06] some some serious guardrails up and some caution as we move forward with
[1:53:11] that.
[1:53:14] So, President Brechtel, I'm going to
[1:53:15] summarize what I'm hearing both online
[1:53:17] and in the room. Yeah, but it's not a
[1:53:19] first step. Yeah. Yeah. And then Mayor
[1:53:22] Elsey
[1:53:23] We'll go here and then we'll go to Mayor
[1:53:24] Elsey.
[1:53:26] I'm in line with everything you just
[1:53:27] said and and with what Mayor Shepherd
[1:53:30] just said as well. I'm thinking of a
[1:53:31] couple of interactions that we've had
[1:53:33] probably over the last decade where
[1:53:35] we've had some groups with whom we met
[1:53:38] regularly. We've discussed policy and we have what are maybe some informal
[1:53:43] ground rules. And then as the
[1:53:45] legislative session happens, there's
[1:53:46] some bills run that go outside of the
[1:53:48] context.
[1:53:50] So, I think I think those guardrails um
[1:53:54] identifying how the collaboration can
[1:53:56] exist. And so long as it looks like
[1:53:58] this,
[1:53:59] you know, and and we're comfortable with
[1:54:01] it,
[1:54:02] then I think I'm okay with it. But, if
[1:54:04] we start to see the the inner and maybe
[1:54:07] as as Kate was describing it, the
[1:54:10] looks like the the Mayor Palmer said, the fellowship
[1:54:14] seems to be falling apart, you know,
[1:54:16] then I think we can end it. But, I'm
[1:54:18] always for a collaboration. I'm
[1:54:21] certainly Pollyanna when I look at that
[1:54:22] kind of stuff, but I'm leery, too. So,
[1:54:25] if if we can identify the guardrails and
[1:54:27] we can vet the issues and and create the
[1:54:29] relationship and stay within it, great.
[1:54:31] But, if it goes around it, I think
[1:54:33] having an exit strategy
[1:54:35] could be helpful.
[1:54:36] It's not a great way to enter
[1:54:37] relationships.
[1:54:40] Mayor Elsey came up.
[1:54:44] Right, I thought it was anyway. I'm on
[1:54:45] the
[1:54:47] Mayor Brechtel, you have the garden?
[1:54:48] Yeah. I mean, I think
[1:54:50] we kind of have to accept it or else I
[1:54:51] think we're setting ourselves up for
[1:54:53] more conversation later.
[1:54:55] I think they'll probably I suspect
[1:54:56] there'll be a mix of success and
[1:54:58] failure. And hence the bring up. Yeah, I
[1:55:01] mean But, yeah.
[1:55:03] I mean, I actually think it could go
[1:55:04] both and I
[1:55:05] I'm imagining
[1:55:07] some of the
[1:55:08] groups here mentioning
[1:55:10] I would ask that the staff be have that
[1:55:12] space and not just about the group but
[1:55:13] also about the the interest in the issue
[1:55:16] that group represents. Yeah.
[1:55:17] We're just starting to see more and more
[1:55:19] pressure around
[1:55:20] um from the public
[1:55:22] uh like these workarounds and these side
[1:55:24] deals things.
[1:55:25] Well, you know
[1:55:26] we'll be on the lookout for if we're not
[1:55:28] make ourselves look like we're
[1:55:30] opening up these new avenues that are
[1:55:32] non-transparent.
[1:55:35] Okay, I think this is a perfect summary.
[1:55:38] I mean we wanted to thank you. That's
[1:55:39] helpful. There is a chat.
[1:55:41] Oh.
[1:55:43] That's also a good summary for me.
[1:55:46] Okay.
[1:55:47] Um
[1:55:48] 2 minutes. [clears throat] We are to
[1:55:50] Which of Which of the things do you want
[1:55:51] to hit in
[1:55:53] Uh yeah, can you read this because we
[1:55:54] can go through these pretty quickly. Um
[1:55:57] Uh LPC plan. Um we've got some LPCs
[1:55:59] coming up this year. Uh first one on
[1:56:01] June 1st Uh we will not see you again
[1:56:03] until August 24th is the plan. Um
[1:56:07] For LPC
[1:56:09] Uh September 21st uh we'll have an LPC
[1:56:12] and a board meeting that day. October
[1:56:14] 19th uh will be a week before the annual
[1:56:16] conference where we will also have board
[1:56:18] meeting. That's the week of interim.
[1:56:20] November 16th and then we've done this
[1:56:21] the last couple of years. We haven't had
[1:56:23] one in December but we have had an LPC
[1:56:25] early in January. And so we'll have one
[1:56:29] uh plan is January 11th which is one
[1:56:31] week before the session begins. Um if
[1:56:33] anyone's keeping track that will be
[1:56:36] uh 8 months from tomorrow is the start
[1:56:38] of session.
[1:56:43] You're welcome.
[1:56:44] Which means we have a lot of time to do
[1:56:46] a lot of things. Um so that is the LPC
[1:56:48] plan. Um any questions, comments,
[1:56:51] concerns with that?
[1:56:53] Is anyone hoping for more LPCs?
[1:56:57] All right. Uh let's get to next one. Uh
[1:56:59] next thing we've got um
[1:57:01] we have some interim advisory groups.
[1:57:03] They're groups that we know we need now
[1:57:05] and groups we'll likely need later. Uh
[1:57:07] we've already talked about the
[1:57:08] homelessness one. Uh we will have a
[1:57:10] housing advisory group and we'll present
[1:57:12] these at LPC in a couple of weeks.
[1:57:15] Housing advisory group is kind of
[1:57:16] continued from last year. Uh we need to
[1:57:19] Sorry, that was That's all right.
[1:57:21] Everybody thinks we're now lying to us
[1:57:22] for this. Uh we know we need to do work
[1:57:25] on annexation this year. Uh Jared's
[1:57:27] super excited about that one. He said,
[1:57:29] "Please put annexations on here whatever
[1:57:31] else you do."
[1:57:32] Um we have continued discussions around
[1:57:34] property tax. And then as we already
[1:57:36] discussed, there's going to be a lot of
[1:57:37] work around economic development this year. Last year we had an economic
[1:57:41] development group that helped us with
[1:57:43] top and several other things. This is a
[1:57:45] continuation of that. Uh groups we'll
[1:57:47] likely need later. Um there's a lot of
[1:57:50] discussion around PIDs. We're having a
[1:57:51] lot of discussions with legislators and
[1:57:53] auditors.
[1:57:54] And some of these really fall in this
[1:57:56] group cuz we know we're going to need to
[1:57:57] talk about it. We also don't want to get
[1:57:59] a group together just for the sake of
[1:58:01] talking. Um
[1:58:02] we don't know what we're going to have
[1:58:04] to do with PIDs yet, but we anticipate
[1:58:06] that we will need to have some
[1:58:08] discussions around PIDs. So,
[1:58:10] hold on this one. At some point we'll
[1:58:12] likely have a big working group. So, if
[1:58:14] somebody uh looks at this list and says
[1:58:16] like, "Ooh, pick me, pick me." And then
[1:58:19] they
[1:58:20] Annexations for $200, Alex.
[1:58:22] I might contact them.
[1:58:24] We will ask for Well, we will check in
[1:58:26] with board members, but we'll ask at LPC
[1:58:28] in a couple of weeks uh for for who is
[1:58:31] interested in these. And then we will
[1:58:33] make sure that if we don't have board
[1:58:34] members on all of them as we discussed
[1:58:35] earlier, then we will make sure some of
[1:58:37] you get involved in all of them. Let me
[1:58:39] translate that for you all, board
[1:58:40] members.
[1:58:42] We want board members to serve on these
[1:58:44] groups. So,
[1:58:46] pick your favorite or you'll get
[1:58:48] volunteered.
[1:58:50] You volunteer.
[1:58:52] Or be volunteering for one.
[1:58:54] So I guess for the the answer um
[1:58:57] Mayor President Bradshaw, uh just reach
[1:58:59] out to me. Shoot me a text, shoot me an
[1:59:00] email if you want to hit one of these
[1:59:02] topics. I'll make sure you're on there.
[1:59:04] Would it be helpful if we give you one
[1:59:05] or two because you don't want all of us
[1:59:07] to pick the glitzy glamorous
[1:59:09] >> Look, I know everyone wants to ask
[1:59:10] questions, but we do need people on the
[1:59:12] other ones. Yeah, so let me know which
[1:59:14] ones you're interested in. Um we'll talk
[1:59:16] about those.
[1:59:17] The [laughter] Amicus one or the Amicus
[1:59:19] one? Anyway, impact fees, we know
[1:59:21] there's the audit going on. I had a
[1:59:23] discussion with uh Senator Muslima last
[1:59:25] week. Um he's the one who ran the bill
[1:59:27] last year.
[1:59:29] To his credit, he's waiting to see what
[1:59:31] the OLA going to say. So we're not doing
[1:59:32] multiple tracks on this one. The audit
[1:59:34] will likely be late in the interim. I'm
[1:59:37] guessing we'll see it in November. Um
[1:59:39] that's the way the audits have gone the
[1:59:40] last couple of years. Um so we will
[1:59:43] definitely need a work group on that
[1:59:45] one, an advisory group. But that one's
[1:59:46] going to spin up quickly and it's going
[1:59:48] to spin up near the end of interim. Um
[1:59:50] we just won't have anything to respond
[1:59:51] to until then. And anything we say
[1:59:53] before that audit comes out is just um
[1:59:56] is just half-baked. So we need to see
[1:59:58] what they're going to come up with that.
[1:59:59] Water, there are a lot of things out in
[2:00:01] the water space, but we don't have
[2:00:02] anything that is specific enough yet to
[2:00:04] say, "Let's get a group to talk about
[2:00:05] this." And billboards, uh we're going to
[2:00:08] make a specific ask on this one at the
[2:00:09] June LPC. Uh we need to know who's got
[2:00:12] big work going on on some thoroughfares
[2:00:14] and who's likely to have billboards
[2:00:15] reallocated or reallocated relocated. I
[2:00:18] like flip somewhere in that one. But
[2:00:21] that will help us know what that group
[2:00:22] should look like. So at the June LPC, if
[2:00:25] you don't let me know today, that's
[2:00:26] fine. Um we'll say these groups on the
[2:00:28] left we definitely are going to need
[2:00:29] work on. Who would like to be involved?
[2:00:32] These groups on the right are coming, so
[2:00:34] stay tuned if you're really excited
[2:00:36] about them, but uh these are the groups
[2:00:38] that we are anticipating this year. And
[2:00:40] as we talked about earlier, along with
[2:00:42] whatever else shows up. Um Nick, bring
[2:00:44] up the next slide. We could put a poll
[2:00:46] out to see if anyone's interested in
[2:00:48] that. Um this we can really skip. This
[2:00:51] is pretty much Did you get that one? I
[2:00:52] did. That was quick. Um on the horizon
[2:00:54] for this year, everything we're
[2:00:55] expecting um and more. So we can kind of
[2:00:59] jump this slide in interest of time. Um
[2:01:01] here's our interim prioritization plan
[2:01:03] to figure out what we want to prioritize
[2:01:05] uh this time. Um I have zero here. We've
[2:01:08] already heard some impact input with
[2:01:10] that list since the end of session.
[2:01:12] We've asked different meetings about
[2:01:13] people that have input. Um so that's
[2:01:15] zero. When you say we have some ideas,
[2:01:19] we have one city gave us 56 um
[2:01:22] potential ideas. And let's just say
[2:01:25] Jerry and I came up with dozens from the
[2:01:27] city attorneys. The
[2:01:30] advisory group has just laid out like
[2:01:31] we've already started vetting them which
[2:01:34] ones need work groups and which ones are
[2:01:35] just technical fixes that we can insert
[2:01:37] into other bills. So it's really they're
[2:01:39] sort of just been kind of ad hoc asks at
[2:01:41] this point. We want to get a little bit
[2:01:43] more systematized on this one. So plan
[2:01:45] is we're going to send out an open-ended
[2:01:46] survey on Friday back just soliciting
[2:01:48] ideas. We have done this several times
[2:01:50] at several conferences, but we know not
[2:01:52] everyone is in that work room when we go
[2:01:53] to a conference. So this is our effort
[2:01:55] to ask it a little more broadly, you
[2:01:57] know, what is your city prioritizing?
[2:01:58] What are your big ideas this year? What
[2:02:00] are the things we need to look at? We'll
[2:02:02] then come to the June LPC and ask for a
[2:02:04] little prioritization around that. We'll
[2:02:06] probably post a slide. Of course we're
[2:02:07] going to post a slide. Why did I say
[2:02:09] probably? Um and ask for some additional
[2:02:11] discussion around those ideas that'll
[2:02:12] help us prioritize where some things are
[2:02:14] at. After that June LPC, we're then
[2:02:17] going to send out a more specific survey
[2:02:19] um to the LPC members looking for
[2:02:22] additional prioritization or if there's
[2:02:24] anything to work.
[2:02:26] Cuz again, we we can't do everything all
[2:02:27] the time even though we try really, hard. So this is helping us
[2:02:30] prioritize where those things are at.
[2:02:32] And then we will come back in a month to
[2:02:33] this board uh which will be 3 weeks
[2:02:35] after that LPC and say, here's what
[2:02:37] we've learned. Here's what we've heard.
[2:02:39] Here's where we think the priorities
[2:02:40] are.
[2:02:41] Tell us if this looks good or if we're
[2:02:43] off somewhere.
[2:02:44] And then we'll be rocking and rolling on
[2:02:46] advice and groups and
[2:02:48] tip groups and everything else that
[2:02:49] we've got going on throughout the intro.
[2:02:51] So this is our plan with that big
[2:02:53] asterisk that know that's in a vacuum.
[2:02:55] Let's say your obviously gets a little
[2:02:57] bit of say what gets prioritized.
[2:03:01] So any questions, concerns, comments on
[2:03:03] this one, anything that we're missing?
[2:03:08] That's perfect.
[2:03:10] And [clears throat] we really shouldn't
[2:03:11] change you.
[2:03:16] Okay. So we're not asking for a vote on this prioritization but it sounds
[2:03:20] like everybody's going to vote yes.
[2:03:22] So thank you for that. You'll note at
[2:03:24] the end of advocacy and thank you Justin
[2:03:26] for the presentation. One of your
[2:03:28] strategic objectives is maximize
[2:03:30] political capital. The capital and over
[2:03:32] the last two months these are the issues
[2:03:34] we've still been heavily involved in.
[2:03:36] Ogden Valley City and Spring Lake City
[2:03:37] for example had issues trying to become
[2:03:40] taxing entities. We were able to at
[2:03:41] least address the issue
[2:03:43] on that one. We plan to gather all the
[2:03:46] information from the impact schedules
[2:03:48] and cities that are considering property
[2:03:49] tax to bring that
[2:03:52] the board in in June and then also
[2:03:54] potentially the legislative leadership
[2:03:56] so they can understand the
[2:03:58] one that cities are following the new
[2:03:59] process that we agreed to follow.
[2:04:02] And that
[2:04:04] here are the reasons why cities are
[2:04:05] considering property tax increases. To
[2:04:08] date per the survey that we are
[2:04:10] gathering from our members, we know of
[2:04:12] at least 50 cities that have initiated
[2:04:15] the taxation process. We expect that
[2:04:17] number to be bigger
[2:04:18] when it's all said and done.
[2:04:21] We also are getting a lot of pushback
[2:04:23] from
[2:04:24] different stakeholders around city fees.
[2:04:27] That's we spent a lot of time the last
[2:04:28] few weeks not just impact fees but fees
[2:04:30] in general.
[2:04:31] And then you'll notice in the executive
[2:04:33] director reporting references national
[2:04:34] trends on property tax. Jared and Alexa
[2:04:37] attended a national webinar last week
[2:04:40] and it's really scary to look at what's
[2:04:42] happening in Ohio and Georgia. Alexa and
[2:04:44] Jared are nodding their heads to this at
[2:04:46] a high.
[2:04:47] If you're going to have a ballot
[2:04:48] proposition in Ohio, right Alexa? That
[2:04:50] would repeal all property taxes with no
[2:04:53] plan on how to replace that revenue.
[2:04:55] All right?
[2:04:56] Um Georgia and Florida are both having
[2:04:59] big battle on the silver property tax.
[2:05:01] So
[2:05:02] we're trying to learn from what the
[2:05:04] different states and leagues are doing
[2:05:05] there and then use it here and I think
[2:05:07] we're ahead of the game because the
[2:05:08] video series we've put together
[2:05:11] to legislators.
[2:05:13] Um it mentions the upcoming membership
[2:05:15] outreach. Um Mayor Peterson, you and I
[2:05:18] still you and I will connect this week
[2:05:20] to get something on the calendar in
[2:05:21] Cache Valley. Um I also now that you
[2:05:24] pointed me to the economic development
[2:05:25] group, plan to reach out to our members
[2:05:27] in Box Elder County um to try to
[2:05:29] facilitate some conversations up there
[2:05:31] so they can be part of the economic
[2:05:33] development conversation. Yeah, the
[2:05:35] capital and then just the family leave
[2:05:37] update on RM. My wife wanted to say
[2:05:39] thank you to the board for the family
[2:05:41] leave policy. Um we have as a reminder 6
[2:05:45] weeks of paid and 6 weeks of unpaid
[2:05:47] family leave. At this point I've used
[2:05:49] half of the paid family leave. I used
[2:05:52] that after the session and then
[2:05:54] as we got into conference season, I was
[2:05:56] back at it but plan to use the remaining
[2:05:59] paid family leave time in the summer and
[2:06:02] so my wife wanted to say thanks.
[2:06:04] We are grateful to Rachel for
[2:06:08] the fact that she's willing to be
[2:06:09] flexible with that.
[2:06:12] Um
[2:06:13] I think I should speak for all the board
[2:06:14] when we say that we expect you to take
[2:06:16] the others.
[2:06:17] Um and also expressing a serious
[2:06:19] disappointment that there are no
[2:06:20] pictures of baby Brynnin that you have
[2:06:23] brought for this meeting. I hope you
[2:06:25] will remedy that.
[2:06:28] Duly noted.
[2:06:32] Uh any anything else you want to Oh,
[2:06:36] Carson, sorry. Carson asked me to bring
[2:06:37] up one more thing as part of the budget
[2:06:39] uh
[2:06:40] research plan. This is related to
[2:06:41] property tax. One of the key themes that
[2:06:44] that's not surprising anybody is that
[2:06:46] cities are considering property tax
[2:06:47] increases because of the increased cost
[2:06:49] of
[2:06:50] police, increased cost of roads,
[2:06:51] increased cost of everything city
[2:06:53] related. So, that spurred a discussion
[2:06:56] internally
[2:06:57] doing a research project of just the
[2:07:00] cost of the city and showing how the
[2:07:01] cost of the city has gone up over time.
[2:07:03] So, that's part of the
[2:07:05] budget for next year is once we get past
[2:07:08] this property tax phase, expanding into
[2:07:10] that broader cost of the city
[2:07:11] conversation. So, Carson wanted me to
[2:07:13] bring that up as part of the tentative
[2:07:15] budget piece.
[2:07:17] Um other than that, thank you everybody
[2:07:18] for making time today to join us in
[2:07:20] person and online and thank you for
[2:07:22] hosting us next month. I'm with 808 LPC,
[2:07:24] which I have in.
[2:07:25] Thank you, everyone. Thanks for being
[2:07:26] indulgent to
[2:07:27] spending an additional
[2:07:29] few minutes. Um with that, uh
[2:07:32] any other business we need to consider?
[2:07:37] If not, I will entertain a motion to
[2:07:39] adjourn.
[2:07:40] Second.
[2:07:42] That was like a whole lot.
[2:07:44] >> [laughter]
[2:07:45] >> Did
[2:07:46] you get any other comments from Johnny?
[2:07:49] Uh All in favor All in favor of of
[2:07:53] adjourning the CPI. All right.
[2:07:55] I said all.