[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.

Board of Directors Meeting May 18, 2026

Transcript