[0:00] Welcome to Bountiful for those of you
[0:02] that are online, you're you're missing
[0:04] out. Um
[0:06] on a on a really great visit to the city
[0:08] of Bountiful.
[0:09] Uh
[0:10] just to give you I I don't want to take
[0:11] too much time cuz we're starting just a
[0:13] little bit late while we were figuring
[0:14] out some technical issues. Uh
[0:17] Bountiful uh was founded by Peregrine
[0:20] Sessions. So, the mountains that you see
[0:22] behind our city hall are known as the
[0:24] Sessions Mountains. And one of our
[0:27] really cool new mountain bike trails is
[0:29] the Peregrine Trail. Um Forest Service
[0:31] thought we should spell it like the
[0:32] bird, we thought we should spell it like
[0:34] Peregrine cuz parents for some reason
[0:35] spelled it creatively in a very Utah
[0:37] fashion. We had a good time.
[0:38] >> Definitely South of Utah County.
[0:39] >> Um
[0:40] Yeah. Very very ahead of his time. Uh
[0:43] but he's our founder. He uh moved his
[0:46] cattle just a little bit further north
[0:48] for uh better watering after arriving in
[0:50] the Salt Lake Valley. So, we claim to be
[0:53] the second oldest city
[0:54] uh in the state. Um Mayor Tran is not
[0:57] with us today. I know that her city
[0:59] likes to make that claim, but she's
[1:00] wrong and she's not here.
[1:02] >> [laughter]
[1:03] >> Just let the record reflect that um
[1:05] Bountiful
[1:06] is the second oldest city after our
[1:08] friends in in Salt Lake. Um
[1:11] population of about 45,000. [snorts]
[1:14] Um some of the uh things that we are um
[1:18] working on and are proud of is of course
[1:20] as I mentioned our our trail system and
[1:22] our trail master plan. We have three new
[1:24] trails that will start construction this
[1:25] summer.
[1:26] Um
[1:28] I have taken uh Councilor Turpin and of
[1:31] course uh Mayor Troy Walker, great for
[1:34] serving as a great learning opportunity for us that
[1:36] they bring our trails. Anyone who would
[1:38] like to, I'm always happy to show off
[1:40] what we're doing here.
[1:41] Um on our trail system.
[1:43] >> [snorts]
[1:43] >> Uh
[1:44] we uh are a a municipal power system
[1:47] city. Some of you share that in common
[1:48] with us. So, that's one of our unique
[1:51] features as well. And
[1:53] um
[1:55] other things that we are working on is a
[1:57] whole [snorts] host of summer festivals.
[1:58] I know like many of you, there's a lot
[1:59] of 250 events. Hopefully you noticed our
[2:02] 250 banners because I think cities do a
[2:05] great job of borrowing from each other.
[2:07] We noticed Santa Clara had cool banners
[2:09] from their city hall, so um we thought
[2:12] it would be a great idea to do something similar
[2:14] >> [snorts]
[2:15] >> uh here in Downtown as well. So,
[2:17] welcome. I hope you enjoy part of your
[2:19] afternoon here with us. And of course,
[2:21] it would not be a board meeting that I
[2:23] chaired if we did not start with a would
[2:25] you rather. Um I hope you are all
[2:28] prepared to open Slido. It's also not a
[2:31] board meeting if we do not begin with
[2:33] opening Slido so that we can do a poll.
[2:37] And um
[2:39] because America 250 has been so on my
[2:42] mind uh this this summer with planning
[2:45] and with events,
[2:46] um
[2:47] what I really want to know from you is
[2:50] for the perfect America 250 summertime
[2:52] dessert, would you rather a classic
[2:55] rocket popsicle
[2:57] or
[2:58] a slice of apple pie?
[3:05] I'm I you know, I'm making no
[3:06] determinations about whether they're
[3:07] paired with ice cream or with whipped
[3:09] cream or
[3:16] » [snorts]
[3:20] » Where's hot fudge sundae?
[3:23] » Mayor Burton, when what
[3:25] >> Short post, she can put that on the
[3:26] Slido.
[3:26] >> [laughter]
[3:29] >> Is it all in here?
[3:30] >> That may be a while. I'm not
[3:33] in the line.
[3:43] » I don't vote yet. Speaking of like
[3:45] starting to read all of them.
[3:48] >> Yeah.
[3:48] >> You know, in the middle
[3:52] Okay, some of some of
[3:54] did not enjoy Rocket Popsicles the same
[3:56] way I did as a child.
[3:59] Now I know where the 20% of my people
[4:02] are.
[4:03] Oh, 24.
[4:08] All right, we'll give that just a minute
[4:09] to finish. Hopefully this will help
[4:11] guide whatever decisions you are making
[4:13] about what you're serving at your July
[4:16] 5th potluck in your neighborhood.
[4:19] Um this will now return to our regular
[4:21] agenda. Oh, wait. Sorry, we have one
[4:24] really important thing we have to do.
[4:27] It is the birthday of our first vice
[4:30] president, Councilmember Krystal.
[4:32] So she is spending her birthday not in
[4:34] Santa Clara, but up in Santa Barbara.
[4:36] So um
[4:38] Does anyone want to make a motion
[4:41] to sing her happy birthday?
[4:43] >> I already have a motion. I already have
[4:44] a second.
[4:45] >> No, I heard a motion and I heard a
[4:46] second. All in favor, aye.
[4:48] >> Aye.
[4:48] >> Okay, we're doing it.
[4:50] Okay, ready?
[4:52] >> Happy birthday to you.
[4:56] Happy birthday to [singing] you. Happy
[5:00] birthday, Krystal.
[5:03] >> [laughter]
[5:04] >> Happy birthday to you.
[5:11] » [applause]
[5:12] >> It's great that you're not legally
[5:13] allowed to hold public office.
[5:18] Okay, now we'll return to our agenda.
[5:21] Have
[5:22] Has the board had an opportunity to
[5:23] review the minutes
[5:25] uh from our May 18th meeting?
[5:29] And has Does anyone care to make a
[5:31] motion about uh who's going to approve
[5:34] >> [cough and clears throat]
[5:34] >> I move I move to approve the May 18th,
[5:36] 2026 board meeting minutes.
[5:38] >> Second.
[5:39] >> We have a motion from Councilmember
[5:40] Diggs and a second from Mayor Walker.
[5:43] All in favor of approving the minutes,
[5:44] please say aye.
[5:45] >> Aye.
[5:46] Second.
[5:47] >> Any opposed?
[5:48] >> Passes unanimously. Thank you. Minutes
[5:50] approved.
[5:51] Uh do we have any conflicts of interest
[5:54] disclosures that anyone needs to uh
[5:58] declare before we begin the rest of our
[5:59] agenda?
[6:03] Seeing none. And Nick,
[6:05] do you know if anyone has their hand up
[6:07] online?
[6:09] Okay.
[6:10] Uh we will then move on to the next item
[6:13] on our agenda, which is um
[6:16] to
[6:18] discuss our fiscal year '27
[6:21] uh tentative [cough and clears throat]
[6:22] budget and to receive public comment for
[6:25] our tentative budget. Nick, are you
[6:27] planning to do uh an opening
[6:29] presentation before we open up to public
[6:31] comment?
[6:33] >> Uh we were not. The presentation of the
[6:35] tentative budget uh was at the the May
[6:38] 18th meeting. There are uh no changes
[6:40] for the hearing that we're having having
[6:42] on. We will do a short presentation on
[6:44] any changes we have for the final budget
[6:47] adoption.
[6:48] >> Okay.
[6:49] All right. Then with that, can I get a
[6:51] motion for us to open up uh a public
[6:54] hearing on our fiscal year '27
[6:57] uh tentative uh
[6:59] >> Madam Chair.
[7:00] >> Second. We have a motion from Walker, a
[7:02] second from Commissioner
[7:04] Uh any discussion? Seeing none, we'll
[7:06] call for the vote. All in favor, please
[7:07] say aye.
[7:08] >> Aye.
[7:09] >> Any [clears throat] opposed?
[7:11] All right, we will open up a public
[7:13] hearing uh for anyone who'd like to
[7:15] offer public comment uh on the League's
[7:18] fiscal year '27 budget. Just by way of a
[7:20] reminder, we've adopted rules for our
[7:23] public hearing, and anyone who gives
[7:25] comment will be limited to 3 minutes.
[7:27] We'd ask that those comments be germane
[7:29] to the budget before us, and that they
[7:31] will state their name and where in the
[7:34] state of Utah they live. So with that,
[7:37] we invite any of the public to have an
[7:39] offer comment.
[8:03] » Is the noise up there?
[8:04] >> What's
[8:05] >> Is the noise up there?
[8:06] >> Yeah.
[8:25] » [clears throat]
[8:32] [snorts]
[8:37] » Here your name again.
[8:39] >> Pardon?
[8:41] The voting I'm the reason why you asked
[8:43] last question last meeting why you're
[8:45] going to have
[8:47] uh
[8:47] parameters around public speaking
[8:50] which is evident with the plethora of
[8:53] people who want to speak.
[8:55] Um my name is Ken Bullock.
[8:59] Uh our minutes are being recorded. Is
[9:01] that correct?
[9:05] Um I was the executive director of the
[9:07] league for over 30 minute or for over 30
[9:09] years. I built this organization from
[9:12] the ashes and I care about its
[9:13] reputation
[9:15] and how it's run. I'm here to talk about
[9:17] four things related to the budget.
[9:19] Since I'm limited in time
[9:21] I provided three of them in writing.
[9:23] Uh number one, unless the league board
[9:26] changed the policy, Salt Lake City's
[9:28] dues were capped at around $180,000,
[9:31] not the 254 in your budget. This came at
[9:34] the request of Salt Salt City Council
[9:36] and the league Board approved this
[9:37] policy. For confirmation, you should
[9:39] contact Cindy Gust Johnson, the former
[9:42] director of the Salt Lake City Council
[9:44] and Neil Abercrombie from the governor's
[9:46] office. Number two,
[9:48] and I I think it should be relevant that
[9:52] the League Board establish a regularly
[9:54] scheduled opportunities for the public
[9:56] to speak in League [clears throat]
[9:57] meetings.
[9:58] To date, you have 10 minutes in the
[10:00] course of the year
[10:01] approved on your budget for the public
[10:04] to speak. That seems highly irregular.
[10:08] Um I also would like the board to
[10:11] establish a policy prohibiting the
[10:12] League from lobbying on behalf of donors
[10:15] over $2,500.
[10:17] You have $400,000 you raise in your
[10:20] budget and there are obvious conflicts.
[10:23] When I left the League, the the staff
[10:25] included Meg Ryan, whom I hired to
[10:27] consult with small towns on land use
[10:29] questions.
[10:30] Among other things, Roger Tew was hired
[10:32] to consult with small towns on tax
[10:35] policies and uh
[10:38] and tax issues.
[10:40] We had Dave Church, an exceptional
[10:41] attorney, to answer procedural and legal
[10:43] qu-
[10:44] questions.
[10:45] Your executive director hired John Park
[10:48] to provide training for cities.
[10:51] When I left the League, I had
[10:52] established a baseline of $400,000 in
[10:55] donations, which you have maintained.
[10:57] I provided you with a four over $400,000
[11:00] in the form of a trust to be spent on
[11:02] training.
[11:03] You spent approximately $500,000 or more
[11:06] on renovating a perfectly suitable
[11:09] office.
[11:10] You have raised dues over 900
[11:12] approximately $900,000 over the past few
[11:14] years.
[11:16] In addition, the League has hired a
[11:17] staff member to market and solicit
[11:19] donations.
[11:21] So, why do you
[11:22] uh have the LAA L A A program?
[11:25] Raising tax cities have small cities
[11:28] have the option, just like other cities.
[11:30] They can raise their taxes. They can
[11:31] contact contract with the county to like
[11:34] they do with roads and public safety.
[11:37] They can contract with entities like the
[11:39] league does for legal services with your
[11:43] private entities.
[11:44] If they can't afford it, they should
[11:46] consider
[11:47] disincorporation.
[11:49] Your policy prism has three lines about
[11:55] uh
[11:58] So, when I'm introducing myself, that
[12:00] counted.
[12:02] Okay. The Let me just be very clear
[12:04] then.
[12:05] Um your policy prism says leave us
[12:07] alone, etc. It should say leave us alone
[12:10] and except when we want money.
[12:12] Your president mentioned last time that
[12:15] uh she has assurances from the
[12:18] legislative leadership that you'll get
[12:21] full funding for the LAA program.
[12:24] I will do I have and will do everything
[12:26] that I can to prevent you from doing
[12:29] that. Um I think it is it is morally
[12:33] bankrupt to ask the state legislature
[12:36] for money that the league has been
[12:37] providing a service for the better part
[12:39] of a hundred years
[12:42] to when there are more extremely
[12:45] legitimate needs for the state to be
[12:47] funding. And Councilman Dugan, as my
[12:51] council member, you wrote a text last
[12:53] session in regarding uh requesting the funding to
[12:58] be approved. And you stated that this
[13:01] was bad blood
[13:03] for because someone didn't want it. No,
[13:05] I just wholeheartedly disagree. The
[13:07] league That's what it's funded for.
[13:11] >> [clears throat]
[13:12] >> Is there anyone else who would like to
[13:13] offer public comment?
[13:20] If you just state your name for the
[13:22] record.
[13:22] >> Yes, my name is Liam Trillium and I live
[13:25] in Highland, Utah.
[13:27] I'm a former League employee as well. I
[13:29] actually ran the local administrative
[13:31] advisor program,
[13:33] which I think uh pound for pound, dollar
[13:35] for dollar, is probably the best
[13:36] investment the state has ever made. We
[13:39] have
[13:40] >> Sorry, we're resetting.
[13:41] >> Yep, no, we're good. It'll be shorter
[13:42] than 3 minutes.
[13:44] In my first year, there were over about 600 projects that were completed
[13:48] in over 100 different communities, and
[13:50] it's to an extent and to a point that
[13:52] the League had never been able to
[13:53] provide to rural Utah previously. We
[13:56] have members, I think, that are even on
[13:58] this board now that can speak to how
[13:59] that's gone above and beyond what's been
[14:01] provided in the past from the League.
[14:03] And then the other point I'd love to
[14:04] just uh quickly hit on is in my years
[14:07] working there, we have never done any
[14:10] lobbying on behalf of any donors uh to
[14:13] the League, so
[14:14] um at least nothing that I've ever seen
[14:16] um in the years that I was there, so
[14:18] thank you.
[14:18] >> [snorts]
[14:19] >> Thank you, Mr. Crabtree. Is there anyone
[14:21] else that would like to offer a public
[14:22] comment?
[14:29] Seeing none,
[14:30] we will go ahead and close the public
[14:32] comment on the fiscal year tentative
[14:34] budget,
[14:36] and move to the next item on the meeting
[14:37] agenda, which is
[14:38] >> I make a motion to close the public
[14:40] hearing.
[14:40] >> Okay, thank you, Seth.
[14:42] Uh Seth has heard a motion to close the
[14:43] public hearing. Do we have a second?
[14:46] >> [clears throat]
[14:46] >> Second from Councilman Tui'one.
[14:48] All in favor of closing the public
[14:49] hearing, please say aye.
[14:51] >> Aye.
[14:52] >> Any opposed?
[14:55] Seeing none, the motion is unanimously
[14:57] approved.
[14:59] Uh
[15:00] I'm going to just move us to item number
[15:02] four, which is is fully review,
[15:05] consideration,
[15:06] and potential adoption of our fiscal
[15:08] year 2027 budget. Um and I'm sure that
[15:11] there are some questions and or some
[15:13] comments that the board may have related
[15:15] to the budget, but let's allow our uh
[15:18] League staff the opportunity to would
[15:20] walk us through
[15:22] the budget
[15:24] and of course the memo that was provided
[15:25] in the packet.
[15:28] » Great. Uh
[15:29] thank you, Mayor. Um you have in your
[15:33] packets uh a memo and uh and slightly
[15:36] altered um budget uh for our we're
[15:39] proposing as a final budget adoption and
[15:40] the memo um it details what uh elements
[15:44] have changed between that and the
[15:45] tentative budget uh that you adopted in
[15:47] May. Um we have uh unrestricted revenue
[15:51] reserve increased by uh two uh 170,000
[15:56] from 114,000. That's a $56,000
[15:59] increase. We have publications updates
[16:02] expense increased to 56,000 from zero.
[16:05] Uh
[16:06] we have staff salaries expense increased
[16:09] uh to uh 1,385,000
[16:13] from 1,380,000.
[16:15] A five uh $5,000 increase.
[16:18] Also, a $5,000 increase to employee
[16:21] benefits
[16:22] >> [clears throat]
[16:22] >> expense from uh to 638,000 from 633,000.
[16:29] And then a uh contract labor decrease.
[16:32] Uh and I do have a typo here to 165,000
[16:37] from 175,000.
[16:39] Uh and that is a $10,000 decrease. So,
[16:41] that was a decrease in uh contract labor
[16:44] to fund uh uh slight increases in staff
[16:47] salaries and employee benefits as well
[16:50] as unrestricted revenue increase. The
[16:52] reasoning behind that is we are going to
[16:54] have publication expenses that we had
[16:56] budgeted for the end of this fiscal year
[16:58] in our update that we uh publication
[17:00] update that we used reserves for in this
[17:03] calendar year uh or excuse me, fiscal
[17:05] year. That uh will not happen until
[17:07] July. So, that is basically that money
[17:09] will be put to reserves and we'll be
[17:10] taking more out of reserves to fund what
[17:12] we planned on uh this year and next
[17:14] year.
[17:15] Um
[17:16] the proposed uh FY27 personnel budget uh
[17:20] includes an organization-wide 2 and 1/2%
[17:23] cost of living adjustment, various
[17:25] market and merit increases and job duty
[17:28] adjustments, and a benefits increase
[17:30] through our cafeteria plan for full-time
[17:32] staff.
[17:33] The board president conducted the
[17:35] executive director's annual review, and
[17:37] the board officers are recommending a
[17:39] 2.5 merit increase for the executive
[17:41] director, which according to contract
[17:44] must be approved by the board as part of
[17:46] this budgeting process. This is also
[17:48] accounted for in the proposed final
[17:50] budget.
[17:51] Um we have a published notice of this
[17:53] hearing uh of the FY27 tentative budget
[17:57] on the public notice website,
[17:59] um and uh it has been available on the
[18:01] public notice website as well as our
[18:03] website, and public information handouts
[18:05] are available in the back with the
[18:06] tentative budget. Uh we would now ask
[18:09] the board uh to take action to approve
[18:11] the proposed final 2027 budget and
[18:14] executive director merit increase uh
[18:16] following the public hearing we just
[18:18] had.
[18:20] >> Okay, board members. Um you've had an
[18:23] opportunity to hear and review the
[18:25] budget in our meeting last month, and
[18:27] then you've received it in your packet.
[18:29] Does anyone have any questions for our
[18:32] staff about the
[18:34] budget that is before [clears throat]
[18:35] us?
[18:38] Okay, I don't see any questions. Is
[18:40] there anyone who has any
[18:42] um
[18:43] comments or feedback they'd like to add?
[18:47] Or any of our public comment?
[18:50] » I think I'll just add
[18:52] I'll make a comment I've as I've
[18:53] reviewed the budget and worked through
[18:55] the the issues associated with it, I
[18:57] think it's in line with
[18:59] uh
[19:00] how [clears throat]
[19:01] I see the operations of my individual
[19:03] city in terms of uh employee pay and and
[19:08] uh
[19:09] and also So, terms of growth and
[19:10] operations of the league is not without
[19:12] its growth
[19:14] pressures as well.
[19:16] Uh I think back over the last 10 years
[19:18] or so since I've been the city manager
[19:20] of Spanish Fork, the number of bills
[19:22] that that we face.
[19:24] So, I'm [clears throat] I'm really
[19:25] comfortable with with the process that
[19:26] we followed and and uh
[19:29] the different
[19:30] elements of the budget, especially those
[19:31] as it relates to the employees.
[19:33] >> [snorts]
[19:34] [clears throat]
[19:35] >> Thank you, sir.
[19:36] >> Yes.
[19:37] >> I'll speak to the LAA LAA discussion
[19:40] here.
[19:42] I'm pretty new to this, right? But, I'm from a big town now.
[19:45] Bigger city now, but grew up in a rural
[19:47] Utah. And I had the privilege of
[19:49] traveling to Camp this year
[19:51] to a couple of small areas where they
[19:53] rely on the LAA.
[19:57] It might be in my opinion it's a little
[19:58] misguided that we're like this is a
[20:01] the state has There's been so many bills
[20:02] passed in the cities. The LAA LAA is
[20:05] supporting those cities. In my opinion,
[20:07] we administer it, but it is supporting
[20:10] law bills that have been passed by the
[20:11] state legislature. We are administering
[20:13] it. Yes, it's been an added task
[20:15] from the state. That's why the state is
[20:17] funding this. It's We're trying to
[20:18] support the rural towns in their
[20:19] planning efforts in their
[20:22] growth, you know, all the efforts to
[20:23] support the growth happening in our
[20:24] state. It is a new program that didn't
[20:27] exist, for sure. Absolutely. But, that
[20:29] program those cities, those towns in
[20:31] rural Utah rely on this. They're more
[20:34] efficient than ever before. They're able
[20:36] to keep up on all the laws, the things
[20:37] that they could not get done before.
[20:40] The money that the I guarantee the money
[20:42] that's being sent spent by the state is
[20:44] being more than
[20:47] recuperated from other grants, from
[20:49] other funding sources they would have
[20:50] lost if they not had the
[20:52] support the resources to support them.
[20:54] So, 100% support the LAA, support what
[20:59] we do at this, support our staff. Um I
[21:01] think every one of us sitting here we
[21:02] all sit on our own city budgets. We're
[21:04] We just finished our budgets. We of
[21:05] course analyze
[21:07] the fee that pay to the league, and it's
[21:08] absolutely
[21:10] We 100% support every year the fee that
[21:12] you
[21:13] We feel that we get more than our
[21:14] money's worth from the people we pay.
[21:16] So, I just want to thank everybody here
[21:18] that on our staff [snorts] that
[21:20] every year there's more asked of you,
[21:21] and so thank you for what you do. So.
[21:25] » Thank you.
[21:26] Any other comments?
[21:27] >> We have Mayor Wright online as well.
[21:29] >> Okay, we'll go to Mayor Winch, and then
[21:30] we'll go to
[21:31] >> Um I I would just like to echo what
[21:34] Mayor Palmer said. Being one of the
[21:36] representatives from a very small
[21:38] community, and there are other
[21:40] communities that surround mine who are
[21:43] the having fewer staff,
[21:45] part-time people a couple of times a
[21:47] week, [snorts] and it has been such an
[21:49] incredible
[21:51] benefit for the small communities to
[21:53] have that program, and I'm grateful for
[21:54] the 20 years of support.
[21:57] >> Thank you.
[21:58] Mayor.
[22:00] And then we have comments online.
[22:06] » Yes, this is Mayor Wright from Torrey. I
[22:08] just
[22:09] want to uh
[22:11] re-emphasize what I said to the state
[22:12] legislature last summer. I cannot do
[22:15] right by the people of Torrey and Wayne
[22:17] County without the LLA program.
[22:20] Thank you.
[22:24] » Thank you.
[22:25] I'm sure.
[22:26] >> Uh yes, Counselor
[22:28] >> Um I would just like to echo Mayor
[22:29] Palmer's sentiments as well. I think the
[22:31] LLA is invaluable.
[22:33] The ROI on that investment by the state
[22:35] is large and demonstrable. We've seen
[22:37] that and talked about it a lot, so I
[22:39] appreciate that we have that opportunity
[22:41] to help the cities with smaller staff be
[22:44] successful.
[22:46] Sorry, I'm so quiet.
[22:47] >> [laughter]
[22:48] >> Yay LLA is what I said.
[22:52] » I just wanted to say my appreciation to
[22:54] the staff for the deliberation of the budget and the thoughtfulness that went into it and
[23:00] the programs and everything I have going
[23:02] on with the the like across the board
[23:04] budget.
[23:06] We got to St. George for the convention
[23:07] down there, convention here, all the
[23:10] work that staff does
[23:11] and staff does. I appreciate so much.
[23:13] They also appreciate the way they're
[23:15] very thoughtful about
[23:17] our money and our our city's money and
[23:19] also [clears throat] our our city's
[23:20] work. So, my hats off to the staff for
[23:23] their great work.
[23:25] >> Can I say one more thing?
[23:26] >> Yes, just one more. Sorry. On the on the
[23:28] LA program, I you know what
[23:30] I think it's really it speaks to the
[23:34] growth and evolution and perhaps the the
[23:36] foundation of course of of the league,
[23:38] the services that we've provided
[23:40] historically speaking.
[23:42] But I I think a natural
[23:44] growth was this LA program because as
[23:48] the city gets more as the state rather
[23:50] gets more and more complex
[23:52] the different number of bills that
[23:54] happened
[23:55] 20 years ago, 30 years ago, the number
[23:57] of bills, the types of bills and the
[23:58] issues were not as complex as they are
[24:00] today that
[24:02] the development [clears throat]
[24:03] community uh
[24:05] and those that are there, the residents and the challenges that
[24:08] they face, water issues and so on. And
[24:11] so I think I think what we have done as
[24:13] a league historically [snorts] speaking
[24:16] and what we're offering it you know in
[24:18] one element with the LA program is a
[24:20] natural growth and I think it's a great
[24:22] program that speaks to what we have done
[24:25] and what we're continuing to do paying
[24:27] attention to the needs of our members,
[24:29] paying attention to the needs of cities
[24:31] as they get created and as they as they
[24:33] proliferate etc.
[24:34] So, I love that
[24:35] >> [clears throat]
[24:36] >> that we've been able to look at the
[24:37] needs and evolve responding to those
[24:40] needs like the LA program, working with
[24:42] the state and I think the state's seen
[24:45] you know, you big cities or you know,
[24:47] whatever you however you define an an
[24:49] established city that that has staff,
[24:51] you might be doing it okay, but these
[24:53] smaller cities can have this help. I
[24:55] think it's a great program that
[24:57] I love that it's built on our history
[25:00] and and
[25:01] allows us to have evolved and I think
[25:03] they did a great job in all of that.
[25:08] » Anyone else?
[25:10] All right, I'll take this moment then to
[25:12] just offer some thoughts that I have as
[25:14] well.
[25:18] We've talked before that the strength of
[25:20] the league is its members.
[25:22] And our members come in all different
[25:23] shapes and sizes from big cities to
[25:25] medium cities to small cities. Some of
[25:27] us are resort cities, some of us are
[25:29] rural cities, some of us are capital
[25:31] cities, some of us are
[25:33] lovely suburbs just south of the capital
[25:35] city.
[25:37] >> [laughter]
[25:38] >> And but the strength comes from the fact
[25:40] that we have
[25:42] a great diversity of experiences
[25:44] but also tremendous willingness to pull
[25:46] together
[25:48] to make sure that we're doing this
[25:49] important frontline work that local
[25:51] government does.
[25:53] And um
[25:56] in serving on this board and in serving
[25:59] on the executive committee after years
[26:00] of serving in this role
[26:02] for the past several months, I get to
[26:05] have quite an insight into what our
[26:08] operations are
[26:10] and how our staff engages and thanks to
[26:12] my day job I get to spend many many
[26:15] years with many of our league staff. So
[26:18] I get to see them
[26:19] >> [snorts]
[26:19] >> as a peer in terms of their actions.
[26:23] I'm proud of the work we do
[26:25] and I'm proud of the way we engage.
[26:27] And I'm proud of the way we stand up for
[26:30] our fellow cities even sometimes when
[26:32] it's not in our direct interest.
[26:34] There have been numerous times that the
[26:36] legislature has for
[26:39] whatever [snorts] reason decided they
[26:40] aren't happy with things our capital
[26:42] cities do.
[26:43] And the league has stood to push back
[26:46] and to point to our principles and point
[26:49] to good good governance and be part of
[26:51] that effort.
[26:52] Um, there have been times where um, we have
[26:56] needed to help our smaller rural
[26:59] communities and the LAA program is that
[27:01] response.
[27:03] Um
[27:04] during the 25
[27:06] legislative session um
[27:08] Mayor Walker and I were at the capital
[27:10] with lead staff responding when the
[27:12] legislature, in my opinion in a
[27:14] misguided way, decided to pull some of
[27:16] that fund because of, in my opinion
[27:18] again, bad information that they
[27:20] um,
[27:21] had received for that program.
[27:23] Uh, and I was grateful that with all of
[27:26] you, with great advocacy for many of you
[27:28] that represent rural communities, and
[27:30] many of you like me and will never ever get to take advantage of the LAA
[27:34] program because my city is too big.
[27:36] I've put tremendous time and resources
[27:38] to helping educate and restore that
[27:40] funding.
[27:41] Um
[27:42] I have confidence that if it appears in
[27:45] a legislative bill that it is going to
[27:46] happen. Um
[27:48] and the funding will
[27:51] fully come our way.
[27:52] So, um, I think it's unfortunate um
[27:57] that those who were once engaged with us
[27:59] in this work don't see the value of this
[28:01] program.
[28:02] Um
[28:03] my hope is that perhaps they'll spend
[28:05] some time talking with some of those
[28:07] rural communities
[28:09] that I and others of you have had the
[28:10] opportunity to see the value of this
[28:12] program.
[28:13] Um, I'm happy to recommend this budget.
[28:15] Uh, happy to recommend all of elements
[28:17] of it. Um, happy to spend some good time
[28:19] with our staff to do so.
[28:21] that is
[28:23] what I would have to say about the
[28:25] budget and any particular issue.
[28:28] So, with that, if there's no one else
[28:30] that would like to offer any um
[28:33] comments from the board
[28:35] um, we will move to uh,
[28:38] consideration and adoption of the fiscal
[28:40] year
[28:41] uh, 27 budget and the accompanying uh,
[28:44] budget resolution.
[28:46] >> And the executive director merit
[28:48] increase.
[28:48] >> And, of course, included there in the
[28:51] executive director merit increase, which
[28:53] again I strongly
[28:55] recommend. [snorts]
[28:56] We had an excellent session. Our
[28:57] executive director was a key part of
[29:00] our success this legislative session.
[29:02] So,
[29:02] >> Madam Chair, so moved that we approve
[29:04] the budget
[29:05] >> Second.
[29:06] >> and the merit increase
[29:07] >> and the resolution finance.
[29:09] >> resolution.
[29:10] >> And the resolution. So, we have a motion
[29:11] from Mayor Walker, and I think I heard
[29:13] Councilor Eggbert with the second.
[29:14] >> Actually, I heard several seconds, but
[29:16] I'll
[29:16] >> I'll
[29:16] >> [laughter]
[29:16] >> second.
[29:18] >> It's a second.
[29:18] >> Thirds, fourths, and fifths.
[29:20] >> Is there any further discussion to the
[29:22] motion?
[29:24] Seeing none, I'll call for the vote. All
[29:26] in favor, please say aye.
[29:27] >> Aye.
[29:30] » Any opposed?
[29:31] >> Where are we at on the agenda?
[29:33] >> It looks like that passes unanimously.
[29:36] Thank you,
[29:37] for your hard work
[29:39] on that item.
[29:42] We'll move on then in our agenda to item
[29:45] number five, which is to consider ULCT
[29:47] Boards and Commissions reports and
[29:49] appointments. And, Alexa is going to
[29:52] talk to us about that.
[29:54] >> All right, good afternoon, everyone. I
[29:56] have three items for you today, an
[29:58] update discussion item, and then an
[30:00] action item. So, you might remember from
[30:02] our last board meeting, I updated you on
[30:04] our current ULCT's current
[30:06] representation on the Utah
[30:08] Communications Authority Board. As a
[30:10] reminder, our current representatives on
[30:12] the board are Ogden City Administrator
[30:15] Myra Brown, and St. George Government
[30:16] Affairs Director Shawn Guzman. Both Myra
[30:19] and Shawn are moving on from their roles
[30:21] at their respective cities at the end of
[30:23] the month. Both Myra and Shawn have
[30:25] indicated an interest to continue
[30:26] serving on the board until their terms
[30:28] end in 2027 and 2028. Nothing in state
[30:32] law precludes them from serving even
[30:34] after they've retired, and in fact, many
[30:36] of the representatives on the Utah
[30:38] Communications Authority Board now are
[30:40] retired officials from whatever sector
[30:42] they represent. Um this is likely in
[30:44] part because state law does preclude
[30:47] current users of the 911 system from
[30:49] serving on the board. So, we've
[30:51] interpreted this to mean individuals
[30:53] whose day jobs are in direct contact
[30:55] with the 911 system. So, all of that is
[30:58] to say in conversations that we've had
[31:00] with cities in the past month since the
[31:02] last board meeting, we've received a few
[31:04] requests for our representa-
[31:06] representatives on the UCA board to be
[31:09] actively involved in the day-to-day
[31:11] operations of the city. So, that leads
[31:13] us to the question that we have for you
[31:14] today. I would love to get your feedback
[31:16] on is whether it's important to you as
[31:18] the board that our UCA representatives
[31:20] are currently employed by a city and
[31:22] we'll take our next steps based on that
[31:24] feedback. So, love to hear from you.
[31:27] >> Board members, any feedback for Alexa on
[31:30] this matter?
[31:33] » I have some normal review kick off some
[31:35] thoughts. Um I think that uh Shawn and
[31:38] Mira have done a a tremendous job
[31:39] serving. Um
[31:40] >> [clears throat]
[31:41] >> they have served uh us in many
[31:43] capacities over the years um
[31:45] representing the cities on the boards
[31:47] and they have a depth of expertise in
[31:49] this and that.
[31:51] Um I do think that this is a really
[31:52] critical
[31:54] uh
[31:54] board especially where we have moved to
[31:57] consolidate uh
[31:59] PSAPs uh up and down the state. And so,
[32:02] I think uh
[32:03] having representatives that are
[32:06] directly employed W-2 type employment
[32:08] with cities is is really the key
[32:10] um
[32:12] and in that representation on the board.
[32:15] Uh
[32:16] so, that would be my recommendation and
[32:18] suggestion. Um I also
[32:21] in guiding this a little bit, I have
[32:22] found it odd that the legislature
[32:24] has precluded anyone actively receiving
[32:27] services from serving on this board.
[32:29] This
[32:30] um
[32:31] you know, I know enough about dispatch
[32:33] to just be incredibly dangerous to me in
[32:34] this is a important
[32:36] technical area where a director of the
[32:38] dispatch center um
[32:40] makes a lot of sense to have
[32:42] representing us. And so, it it'd be
[32:43] something where we want to entertain
[32:45] in the future asking the legislature to
[32:47] think about
[32:48] that policy so that we can have people
[32:50] who are
[32:51] very hands-on, especially with that
[32:54] uh knowledge-based platform consolidated
[32:56] with the consolidation of these apps.
[32:57] So,
[32:58] um
[33:00] that would be
[33:01] my suggestion for the
[33:04] uh
[33:05] in the office just just enough to be
[33:07] slightly dangerous though.
[33:08] >> So, is that who you're recommending be
[33:09] put in here?
[33:10] >> I'm not recommending they can be because
[33:12] they're both retiring and will no longer
[33:13] be W-2 employees of of either St. George
[33:16] or Ogden.
[33:19] » Who would qualify then? I'm just cuz I
[33:20] thought about that, too. Who else?
[33:22] >> Mr. Can't be a just
[33:25] Yeah, please.
[33:26] >> Yeah, let's [clears throat] not jump in
[33:26] too much.
[33:27] >> Yeah, please.
[33:28] >> Yeah, so yeah, so the question yeah, I
[33:30] mean who qualifies? It's basically
[33:31] there's a disqualification cuz you can't
[33:33] be a direct user of the of the system of
[33:35] 911 system. Um
[33:38] a step removed from that though, you're
[33:40] fine. The the the line is not a bright
[33:42] line, but if you're a direct user of the
[33:44] system, you would not qualify. But, city
[33:46] attorney is fine.
[33:48] City manager, an elected official,
[33:50] there's nothing that says it can't be
[33:51] any of those.
[33:52] >> In your opinion, or
[33:53] >> Is what too close? A chief of police is
[33:55] too close, yeah.
[33:56] >> But, a city manager, a city attorney
[33:59] >> City manager, city attorney, an elected
[34:01] official, there's nothing that says they
[34:02] can't be be a city council member or
[34:03] mayor.
[34:04] >> How long do I have to go without dialing
[34:06] 911 before I'm not considered a direct
[34:08] user?
[34:09] >> If you're if you're calling in every
[34:11] day, I don't know if that disqualifies
[34:12] or not.
[34:12] >> [laughter]
[34:13] >> We we might have to have some
[34:14] discussions.
[34:15] >> It'd be helpful that the board has at
[34:17] the very least maybe an ex officio like
[34:20] somehow let's get some
[34:22] of our city members there that are
[34:23] users, not on the board, but that we
[34:25] operate like to your point of do we how
[34:27] do we change it? Cuz I agree with you. I
[34:30] think having some users in the room would be really
[34:33] helpful in those discussions.
[34:35] >> I I guess if I can jump in again,
[34:37] whoever I'm asking, Mayor. Um
[34:39] >> Please, Justin. Please.
[34:40] >> I was going to ask Alexa, but I'm like,
[34:41] that's who I usually ask if I can do
[34:43] things.
[34:44] Um there is there is also, and it's
[34:46] important to know, there is an advisory
[34:47] committee to the UCA, and that is made
[34:49] up of some users. So, there is a group
[34:51] there trying to give some input. The
[34:53] advisory committee um doesn't bind
[34:55] anything. There's there's not a binding
[34:56] vote from that. The executive director
[34:58] can listen to their feedback and then do
[35:00] with it what they will. Um so, there is
[35:03] something built in where they're trying
[35:04] to get feedback from those users, but
[35:06] it's not the exact same as the board who
[35:08] actually votes on on what they're going
[35:10] to do.
[35:11] Um
[35:12] I will say that I've had conversations
[35:13] with uh several of your cities um with
[35:16] some of your chiefs and some of your
[35:17] other people um some of your 911
[35:19] operators um and there are concerns that
[35:23] there there are concerns that there are
[35:25] concerns they're not being heard. Um and
[35:29] sometimes when you don't have those
[35:30] people in the room who can raise the
[35:32] concerns, and even if you just know
[35:33] enough to be dangerous, one of the
[35:34] things we've asked many of those people
[35:36] is what should we be looking for? And
[35:38] often times this is just someone who
[35:40] will ask the questions. You know, why
[35:42] are we doing this? Why does this make
[35:43] sense? Um is this something that works
[35:45] for us? Have we heard from the users? Um
[35:49] so, I would I would back up what you
[35:50] said uh
[35:52] Mayor, that there are there are many
[35:54] people who would like to see a little
[35:56] bit more input on those boards. The
[35:58] other board members currently are often
[36:01] times retired retired folks uh whether
[36:04] they're retired county commissioners,
[36:05] retired legislators, or people who may
[36:07] have been a user, but it's been been a
[36:09] minute, and the technology has been
[36:10] updated. So, I would say from the the
[36:13] users that I have talked to, I would say
[36:15] it matches that that they would like to
[36:16] see some change.
[36:18] >> How often does this board meet?
[36:20] >> Uh they meet uh so, that's they're
[36:22] meeting in August again, so they'll meet
[36:24] on August 12th. They We about every
[36:25] couple of months. Um sometimes a little
[36:27] more often, but
[36:28] >> It's a quarterly.
[36:29] >> I'd say more like bi-monthly.
[36:31] I think about six times a year is pretty
[36:33] normal.
[36:34] >> And I think
[36:35] the discussion is great. I want to have
[36:36] it. I think what Alexa is looking for
[36:38] first and foremost in direction is
[36:41] do we want
[36:42] the people we are sending to represent
[36:45] cities to be directly employed by the
[36:47] city at W-2
[36:49] employee or
[36:50] >> We're not picking somebody
[36:51] >> Yeah, we're not picking
[36:52] >> Correct.
[36:53] >> We're giving direction on just kind of
[36:55] this first step of how connected to
[36:57] cities
[36:58] uh, should these people be sent and then
[37:00] >> Mhm.
[37:01] >> And then And then we will go look for
[37:02] people that
[37:03] >> Correct.
[37:03] >> that meet whatever we're setting. So,
[37:05] just just to set your expectations. And
[37:07] because I could see Alexa's head going,
[37:09] "What?"
[37:10] >> I think he made a rash job.
[37:12] >> [snorts]
[37:12] >> one piece of that as well. Please and
[37:14] then we'll go over here.
[37:14] >> Yeah, Shawn and Mera have been terrific.
[37:16] They both have a lot of quick stints and
[37:18] background in this space. It's just a
[37:20] unique opportunity that they are both
[37:23] leaving their current positions at the
[37:25] same time. And that's where we thought
[37:27] it warranted having this this bigger
[37:29] conversation. Uh, so it's not about
[37:32] those two particularly. I spoke with
[37:33] both of them to chat about the fact that
[37:36] their terms are up in 1 year and 2
[37:37] years. Does it make sense to continue
[37:39] them or does it make sense to take a
[37:40] step back? The second thing to note is
[37:42] these are gubernatorial appointments in
[37:44] statute. We as a league send names. So,
[37:46] this board sent those two names
[37:48] previously
[37:50] along with other names cuz the governor
[37:51] always asks for two names for every one
[37:53] spot that the governor or that the the
[37:56] governor actually nominates. So, if this
[38:00] board feels like at this point it's a
[38:01] good time to maybe reset how we're
[38:04] engaging with UCA, we would then need to
[38:06] ask Shawn and Mera as they're stepping
[38:08] down from their current positions to
[38:10] then also step down from UCA to create a
[38:12] gubernatorial vacancy and then we would
[38:14] recommend
[38:16] uh, names for the governor
[38:18] >> So, you're saying not to continue
[38:19] through 2027.
[38:20] >> Correct.
[38:22] So, yeah, ultimately the yeah, the quick
[38:23] is should Shanna and Mayor step down
[38:25] this summer and we recommend two other
[38:28] names to the governor to appoint is kind
[38:30] of the question we're asking.
[38:31] >> I want to just ask the policy question
[38:33] first and then we can come back later to
[38:35] business.
[38:36] >> And then Council member Eggbert had a
[38:38] comment slash question.
[38:39] >> My I have a statement to second your
[38:41] statement that I support the principle
[38:44] that the board represent the board
[38:46] representatives are either in employed
[38:49] or elected positions with incentives.
[38:51] >> Yeah.
[38:55] » Any other thoughts or comments that I
[38:56] don't want to leave out of the board
[38:58] members that are online if any of them
[39:00] have thoughts or feedback for us.
[39:06] » No hands or chat.
[39:07] >> Shepherd shaking his head.
[39:09] Um
[39:10] Do you feel like you would you have what
[39:11] you need to or would you do you need us
[39:13] to make that formal motion for you?
[39:15] >> Cool. I was just thinking that same I
[39:17] don't
[39:19] Well, I guess most would make it really
[39:20] clean. Um
[39:22] yeah, and should we look for um
[39:28] new representatives to the UCA board.
[39:30] Um
[39:31] however we want to make that motion.
[39:33] >> There are no hands.
[39:34] >> I make a motion that yes we do.
[39:37] >> [laughter]
[39:37] >> Perfect.
[39:38] >> I second.
[39:39] >> cleaning up my my statement.
[39:41] >> So, you have a motion by yes.
[39:41] >> We have a motion by Mayor Palmer. We
[39:42] [snorts] have a second from Council
[39:43] member Eggbert.
[39:45] Uh
[39:45] any further discussion or clarification
[39:47] needed?
[39:50] Seeing none, I'll call for the vote. All
[39:52] in favor of the motion, please say I.
[39:54] >> I.
[39:57] >> Any opposed?
[39:59] Seeing none.
[40:00] So, I think you've got the direction you
[40:01] need.
[40:01] >> We do. Yes. Everyone for the feedback.
[40:03] And in the meantime, if you have anyone
[40:05] that you think would be a great
[40:06] representative for the Utah
[40:07] Communications Authority Board, let me
[40:09] know and we'll come back with
[40:10] recommendations at the August meeting.
[40:12] >> Yeah, I just did the
[40:14] same with Alexa just said, but and if
[40:16] any of you are perhaps interested, um it
[40:18] doesn't again if you have someone in
[40:19] your city, that's great. If you want to
[40:21] volunteer them that this is a good thing
[40:22] for them to do. Um but also if if
[40:24] someone on our own board is interested,
[40:26] that's something that we could certainly
[40:27] discuss um as that would give us some
[40:29] direct feedback to this board from the
[40:31] other board. So, um like Lexi said,
[40:34] we'll come back in August but if you
[40:36] yourself have interest or someone in
[40:37] your city, please send them our way.
[40:40] >> Okay.
[40:40] >> Uh
[40:41] Lexi, do you want to talk about the
[40:42] other items in your uh staff report?
[40:45] >> I'd love to. Yes, I'm going to jump down
[40:47] to the third item cuz the second item is
[40:49] an action item and I want that to be
[40:51] fresh in your minds when you take
[40:52] action. So, just an update on the Joint
[40:55] Highway Committee. So, you as the Board
[40:56] of Directors are responsible for
[40:58] appointing 15 regional and at-large
[41:00] representatives to the JHC. Um thank
[41:03] you. Huge shout-out to Council Member
[41:05] Shumway not only for her participation
[41:07] on the JHC but also making sure that
[41:09] we're staying on top of things and
[41:11] ensuring that we're maximizing our
[41:12] representation on this board. So, we
[41:14] have staff has have identified six
[41:16] vacancies on the Joint Highway Committee
[41:18] that need to be filled. And we've
[41:20] already lined up individuals for um
[41:22] several of these. So, we have people in
[41:24] mind um but we will come back at our
[41:26] August board meeting and make
[41:28] recommendations to make those six
[41:29] appointments. Um two of the appointments
[41:32] that we have not discussed with anyone
[41:34] yet or haven't identified any potential
[41:36] volunteers for. One is an at-large
[41:39] appointment. So, if there's anyone from
[41:40] your city or if any of you are
[41:41] interested in serving on the Joint
[41:43] Highway Committee, please let me know.
[41:45] And then the other vacancy is a seat
[41:48] dedicated specifically to someone from
[41:50] Carbon, Emery, Grand, or San Juan
[41:52] County. So, especially those counties
[41:55] but all of you if there's anyone that
[41:56] you could think of that would be a good
[41:57] fit, please let me know and we'll talk
[41:59] in August.
[42:03] Please.
[42:04] >> Do you want uh
[42:06] do you want people who perhaps are like
[42:07] directors of streets departments?
[42:09] >> It could be either. Typically, it's
[42:11] going to be staff that is on the Joint
[42:13] Highway Committee. It's more staff
[42:14] members than elected officials, but it
[42:16] could be anyone that's interested and
[42:18] has some knowledge about the area.
[42:21] Exactly. Yeah, lots of public works
[42:22] directors on there, but of course
[42:23] elected officials as well. So, thanks
[42:26] for the question.
[42:29] » But it is during our conference.
[42:34] » [laughter]
[42:35] >> Yes, and they meet again in September as
[42:38] well, I should have mentioned. So, we'll
[42:39] be making these appointments at the
[42:41] August Board meeting so that we have a
[42:42] full roster for September.
[42:44] Great.
[42:46] Perfect. And then my last item, so at
[42:48] our June LPC meeting we announced a
[42:51] staff an opportunity for elected
[42:53] officials from 10 counties to serve on
[42:56] their counties outdoor recreation
[42:57] initiative regional recreation ranking
[43:00] council. I got that right. So, those
[43:02] councils, yeah, long name. Those
[43:04] councils are very important step in the
[43:06] outdoor recreation funding process as
[43:08] they'll review project applications
[43:10] within their region, rank those
[43:11] projects, and then submit those rankings
[43:13] to the Outdoor Adventure Commission
[43:16] who's ultimately responsible for making
[43:17] funding decisions for those outdoor
[43:19] councils. And so, since June 1st we've
[43:21] been soliciting volunteers to serve on
[43:23] these outdoor recreation councils. So,
[43:25] we're recommending a staff that you
[43:27] appoint the following individuals to
[43:29] their respective regional recreation
[43:31] council. So, first Brigham City Mayor
[43:33] D.J. Foote as a Box Elder County
[43:35] representative to the Northern Regional
[43:38] Recreation Council. And then Salt Lake
[43:40] City Council member Dan Dugan as a Salt
[43:42] Lake County representative to Wasatch
[43:45] Front Regional Council. And then Ogden
[43:47] Mayor Ben Nadolski as a Weber County
[43:49] representative also to the Wasatch Front
[43:51] Regional Recreation Council.
[43:54] Green River Council member Guy Webster
[43:56] as an Emery County representative to the
[43:58] Eastern Regional Council. And then a to
[44:00] be determined Salina Council member as a
[44:02] Sevier County representative on the
[44:04] Central Regional Recreation Council.
[44:06] Just so you're aware, Salina gave us two council members that are interested,
[44:10] and so we're waiting to hear back on
[44:11] their preferred candidate. So, I'm happy
[44:14] to answer any questions about those. I
[44:15] know it was a mouthful, but just asking
[44:17] for you to appoint those five
[44:18] individuals to those four councils.
[44:21] >> Okay. I happen to serve on the Wasatch
[44:24] Front ranking council, and
[44:27] help represent the legal on the Wasatch
[44:28] Front on the Upper Metro Commission. It
[44:30] is a fun time.
[44:32] And I look forward to There was a couple
[44:34] names from the board that will be
[44:35] joining me on the Wasatch Front
[44:37] committee. We had a meeting last week.
[44:39] Lots of great planning taking place, so
[44:41] um
[44:42] I will just add a thumbs up that this is
[44:44] a fun and interesting
[44:46] um way to engage in upper recreation
[44:48] planning.
[44:51] Any other
[44:53] comments or questions about the names
[44:54] that have been proposed?
[44:58] I'm sure other ranking councils besides
[44:59] the Wasatch Front one are also
[45:02] equally awesome.
[45:03] >> Sure.
[45:05] >> All right.
[45:06] Um in that case, I think we need a
[45:07] motion to uh recommend those names. Is
[45:11] anyone prepared to make a motion?
[45:14] » So moved.
[45:16] >> Okay, we've a motion from
[45:17] >> Second.
[45:18] >> from Mayor Palmer, and a second I saw
[45:19] from Mayor Weight. Actually, I saw
[45:20] Weight raise your hand.
[45:22] >> [laughter]
[45:22] >> I can lift, so
[45:26] » I think I think they're both
[45:27] recommending you, so
[45:28] >> So that's good. Thank you.
[45:30] >> Uh any discussions about motion?
[45:33] Seeing none, all in favor, please say
[45:35] >> Aye.
[45:37] >> [snorts]
[45:37] >> Any opposed?
[45:40] Looks like that passes unanimously.
[45:43] And uh look forward to
[45:45] some new friends on that uh ranking
[45:47] >> Thanks, everyone.
[45:50] >> Okay, that takes care of item number
[45:52] five, so we will be moving on to item
[45:54] number six on our agenda, which is our
[45:55] executive director report. Hey, it's
[45:58] nice that we moved this up so that you
[45:59] don't have to do this in Promise us that
[46:01] you can do this in 30 seconds.
[46:03] >> [laughter]
[46:04] >> In this case
[46:06] uh per our constitution and bylaws, we
[46:08] have to do this in the June meeting. So,
[46:10] that's why we moved it up to make sure
[46:11] it got done at the at the June meeting.
[46:13] Uh thank you everybody for joining us in
[46:15] the presidential city of Bountiful
[46:17] today. And this is the formal
[46:20] announcement in the board and we will
[46:22] also announce it through upcoming Friday
[46:23] facts
[46:25] um the upcoming board of vacancies after
[46:28] the annual convention.
[46:30] So, when the membership a few years ago
[46:32] changed the constitution, expanded the
[46:34] board from 16 to 21, we created uh those
[46:37] additional board spots. Also, elevated
[46:39] the UCMA representative um who is Seth
[46:43] to be an elite officer, which is a
[46:45] four-year term. So, the four-year terms,
[46:47] you can see has will have a vacancy
[46:49] because we'll elect the second vice
[46:50] president uh this fall. First vice
[46:53] president, Mary Palmer, will chair the
[46:55] nominations committee.
[46:56] And we will be putting together that
[46:58] nominations committee uh later this
[47:00] summer in accordance with the
[47:01] constitution and bylaws. We appreciate
[47:03] all the feedback you gave us in St.
[47:05] George during our strategic session of ways that we can improve that process
[47:09] and improve the the communication. The
[47:10] good news is
[47:12] um every year that I've been director,
[47:13] we've had at least three and sometimes
[47:15] up to five times the number of
[47:16] applicants as we've had available spots.
[47:18] So, every year the first vice president
[47:20] has her or his work cut out for them.
[47:23] So, Mary Palmer, thank you in advance
[47:25] for chairing that.
[47:27] Um also, for the feedback uh you gave
[47:29] us, so we'll continue with the hybrid
[47:31] approach that we've been doing the last
[47:32] few years, a combination of the multiple
[47:35] Zoom meetings and then the final
[47:37] deliberation as part of the annual
[47:38] convention. Because the annual
[47:40] convention is happening at the end of
[47:41] October, we have a little more of a
[47:43] runway
[47:44] in the summer time than we normally do.
[47:45] And so, when the materials come out, the
[47:47] deadlines will reflect that additional
[47:50] runway. If you see your name highlighted
[47:52] in blue or in gold, that means your term
[47:55] is up at the end uh at the end of this
[47:59] year, which ends at the end of
[48:01] convention. If your name is not in the
[48:03] blue or gold, then you have an
[48:05] additional year or in case the officers
[48:08] uh through the rest of your term. So, we
[48:09] want to all just make sure you are
[48:11] aware.
[48:12] Um you are welcome to uh reapply for the
[48:15] board, and then we'll be building up the
[48:16] nominations committee
[48:18] again per your feedback of a combination
[48:20] of
[48:21] former board members, current board
[48:22] members, and people who've never been on
[48:24] the board. And then have the geographic
[48:26] uh diversity, um size city diversity
[48:29] from across the state. So, this is our
[48:30] official notice. We'll have more
[48:32] information in upcoming Friday Facts. Um
[48:35] any questions about nominations process
[48:37] or next steps here?
[48:42] Nick, uh just the staff person
[48:44] responsible for nominations committee,
[48:46] anything else you want to add?
[48:47] >> Just very quickly, uh this is also we'll
[48:49] also be announcing along with the
[48:50] vacancies for the board being in Friday
[48:52] Facts. We will also officially announce
[48:54] to general membership and uh here that
[48:57] the nominations committee is now open.
[48:59] So, anyone who wants to solicit their uh
[49:01] wants to participate on the nominations
[49:02] committee, now is the time they can uh
[49:04] start to let us know. And then color
[49:06] coding on there, uh blue means it's a
[49:08] vacancy, yellow means it's a vacancy we
[49:10] have to fill um specifically in this
[49:13] case uh with someone from area eight,
[49:15] and the uh seven in blue would be uh
[49:19] {quote} {unquote} at large positions.
[49:20] So, we have everything else filled um
[49:23] through someone who is not undergoing a
[49:25] vacancy this year that uh that we need
[49:27] to have on our board such as area
[49:29] representation, two from uh first or
[49:31] second class city, and a town. Um so,
[49:34] that's that's kind of the lay of the
[49:35] land currently.
[49:38] One last note on nominations committee,
[49:40] again based on the feedback you gave us
[49:41] in April,
[49:43] we intend to have a nominations
[49:46] committee that does not have anyone on
[49:48] the nominations committee who has
[49:50] someone from their city running for the
[49:51] board.
[49:53] We did not codify that in the bylaws for
[49:54] your feedback. People like that as a
[49:56] best practice, but recognize there may
[49:58] be times where just due to just
[50:00] logistics, we need to be able to to have
[50:02] that flexibility, but that's worked
[50:03] really well for us for the last few
[50:05] years is to keep the nominations
[50:06] membership separate from anybody who's
[50:08] applying. It also means that we have to
[50:10] close the application process before we
[50:12] can open the nominations process so we
[50:14] can make sure those lists align. So just
[50:16] watch for information via Friday Facts
[50:18] and then we'll follow up
[50:19] with each of the board members to
[50:21] confirm with you if you're interested in
[50:22] running. Again, we ran into that issue a
[50:24] couple of years ago where a board member
[50:26] intended to run again and just missed
[50:28] the deadline
[50:29] and there was hard feelings. We want to
[50:30] make sure everybody's clear on what the
[50:33] next steps are.
[50:36] Okay.
[50:36] >> Any questions? I will say if you are not
[50:39] up and you have never served on a
[50:41] nominating
[50:42] committee before, it's it's a really
[50:44] interesting and helpful experience.
[50:45] [laughter]
[50:48] » I wish you would.
[50:49] >> I have done it twice. Um so
[50:51] >> Amazing.
[50:53] >> Yeah, well
[50:54] I I technically done it three times
[50:56] since I got to chair it one year. Uh so
[50:59] that's also a fun experience.
[51:01] >> It's dirty.
[51:02] >> Um
[51:04] >> [laughter]
[51:05] >> I don't know. Everyone needs to nominate
[51:06] someone.
[51:07] Uh
[51:07] but serving on the nominating committee
[51:09] I think is a really interesting way to
[51:10] just learn and meet new people and
[51:13] people who have lots of great
[51:14] backgrounds. So um
[51:16] if your name's not in blue or in gold,
[51:19] think about whether that's something you
[51:20] can fit into your schedule.
[51:22] Uh any other discussion, questions about
[51:26] um
[51:27] that item?
[51:30] Okay. You're all set.
[51:32] >> Can I just add one thing? Can we
[51:34] I know you've got a few ex officio here.
[51:37] Can we add Mayor Walker at this time?
[51:40] >> Come October. Come October.
[51:42] >> Yes.
[51:42] I'm just saying it doesn't show it,
[51:44] but I'd love to have him I'm
[51:45] >> Yes, so he's still an officer until October and
[51:48] then he will slide over to executive
[51:51] And he gets to pick and choose
[51:53] if he wants to come to meetings or not.
[51:56] I had this very conversation with Mayor
[51:57] Ramsey actually last week. He said,
[51:58] "Yeah, I looked at the agenda. I have to
[51:59] go to the Sundance Film Festival."
[52:01] >> [clears throat and laughter]
[52:06] [snorts]
[52:06] >> Yeah, so we will look forward
[52:08] to We're never going to lose Troy. We'll
[52:10] make him pay.
[52:13] Any other questions?
[52:15] Okay, everyone's appropriately noticed
[52:17] that.
[52:18] Okay.
[52:20] >> Okay.
[52:21] >> Now we'll jump over to Do you have
[52:24] anything else in the executive
[52:25] director's report you want to cover?
[52:27] >> Did you want to cover the other stuff in
[52:28] advocacy?
[52:29] >> I just get so excited
[52:32] Okay.
[52:33] And it was only like two minutes after
[52:35] we started.
[52:36] Molly, you were up then to talk to us
[52:39] about engagement and annual convention
[52:41] and LAA
[52:42] and property tax and engagement.
[52:45] >> What a party. Thank you. Um and not
[52:48] homelessness actually. I know.
[52:52] » [laughter]
[52:53] >> Um and I'm going to have a few of our
[52:55] teammates join me for this one. Um so
[52:58] first with the Salt Palace, um as I'm
[53:00] sure you know, you are aware we've been
[53:02] discussing it. The Salt Palace is going
[53:03] to be closing temporarily as they make
[53:06] renovations in preparation of the 2034
[53:09] Olympics.
[53:10] >> Um Are they making an exception for the
[53:11] league to still meet?
[53:13] >> Oddly, no. They are not making an
[53:16] exception that they will halt
[53:17] construction and have a space ready for
[53:19] us to hold annual each year.
[53:21] Um and because of that you all gave us during our April
[53:26] board meeting about the strategic
[53:28] discussion around annual, the feedback
[53:30] was to really find a venue um that could
[53:33] accommodate annual in its current
[53:35] footprint. And Katie has been working
[53:38] really hard and touring a lot of sites
[53:39] to accomplish that.
[53:41] Um I want to flag for the board that we
[53:42] are really just looking at temporary
[53:44] solutions. We're not making a permanent
[53:46] call on anything and in fact, we're not
[53:48] really even making a call today. We
[53:50] can't sign any contracts yet. Um, we
[53:52] just wanted to give you an update on how
[53:54] this process has unfolded and give you
[53:56] uh, our staff recommendation. Um, and so
[53:59] with that, I will hand it over to Penny
[54:01] Harley. Yeah.
[54:02] >> Um, so I went north, south, east, west
[54:05] and toured venues um,
[54:08] from Ogden down to Provo.
[54:11] Um,
[54:12] there were some venues that did not fit
[54:15] our requirements. Um, there are some
[54:16] that just don't have availability and
[54:18] others that are just no longer available
[54:19] for us. In April, the board directed to
[54:23] keep the annual convention footprint the
[54:25] same that we've been doing the last few
[54:27] years and with that direction, the ideal
[54:31] host would be Provo's Utah Valley
[54:32] Convention Center or Sandy's Mountain
[54:35] America Expo Center. Um, both are great
[54:38] venues that can fit and exhibit hall, a
[54:40] general session, and has space for
[54:42] workshops and our miscellaneous um,
[54:45] meetings [snorts] that we host during
[54:47] the conference.
[54:48] Um, after touring these venues and the
[54:51] dates that they have available, uh, the
[54:53] staff recommendation would be hosting
[54:55] the annual convention at the Mountain
[54:57] America Expo Center. The current date
[55:00] they have is September 28th to the 30th.
[55:02] So, that would be our option one. Um,
[55:05] unfortunately, we are not able to do any
[55:08] booking until August. They have a
[55:09] requirement that's a 13-month window.
[55:12] Um, so we would have to wait and that
[55:13] could potentially become unavailable and
[55:15] if it does, our second and third option
[55:18] would be the Utah [snorts] Valley
[55:19] Convention Center for October 4th to the
[55:21] 6th or Mountain America Expo Center
[55:25] October 12th to the 14th, if that makes
[55:27] sense.
[55:29] >> [clears throat]
[55:30] >> Thank you so much for your work going up
[55:33] and down looking for locations that make
[55:35] sense.
[55:36] Any clarifying questions anyone wants to
[55:39] ask about
[55:41] which is better?
[55:42] >> Have you considered just renting a
[55:44] gigantic tent?
[55:54] That's it.
[56:02] » Look at that.
[56:03] And of course our our sympathies and
[56:05] apologies to our friends at Salt Lake
[56:07] that we will
[56:10] not be able to be in the capital city
[56:13] for our annual until until the Salt
[56:15] Palace.
[56:18] » This is just [clears throat] an
[56:19] important thing to note. For as long as
[56:21] Roger, me, and others have been around
[56:23] annual commission has always been in
[56:24] Salt Lake.
[56:25] You as a board, per the constitution
[56:27] bylaws, set that location. So, that's
[56:29] why we're bringing it
[56:30] back to you. Well, and we looked at
[56:32] every possible option that would
[56:34] staff in the city asking for additional
[56:37] ideas, uh looking at the other options
[56:40] in Salt Lake. Historically used the
[56:41] Sheraton Hotel, but that will no longer
[56:43] exist. It's being converted into
[56:44] housing. Obviously, we've used the Salt
[56:46] Palace. It'll be under the knife for
[56:48] several years. The Grand America would
[56:50] have sufficient space, but it's both
[56:53] cost prohibitive and I think there's a
[56:54] perception issue with having
[56:56] publicly funded event
[56:58] at a facility like Grand America. Great
[57:00] facility, but for us it didn't make a
[57:02] lot of sense. We
[57:03] and discussed potentially using campuses
[57:06] of higher ed. We looked at the Hyatt
[57:08] Hotel. It was unavailable throughout the
[57:10] fall of 2027. So, we looked at other
[57:13] options to keep that historic precedent
[57:15] going, but in light of
[57:17] the construction and other things, it
[57:19] opened up the doors to say, "Let's look
[57:20] at other facilities." And so, we, as
[57:22] Katie said, we shared them all with you.
[57:24] We looked at St. George again. We looked
[57:26] at the Little America. We looked at the
[57:27] Wasatch Front. We looked at
[57:29] Ogden. We looked at basically every
[57:31] facility in the state and whether they
[57:33] can work and that's where we our staff
[57:35] narrowed it down to these two. We felt
[57:37] checked all the boxes appropriately. We
[57:39] can't make a decision today, but we
[57:41] wanted to report back before we do have
[57:43] to make a decision later this
[57:46] >> Okay, any
[57:47] other questions, feedback?
[57:50] >> My question is why are we picking on the
[57:52] whole place as a whole again?
[57:55] >> I I am certain there are a number of
[57:57] different conferences and conventions
[57:59] that are also
[58:00] looking at other places. I I know this
[58:03] is
[58:04] um this is a impactful to Salt Lake. I
[58:06] mean this will have a great benefit to
[58:08] have a remodeled facility and have space
[58:11] reconfigured, but it certainly I'm sure
[58:13] will be painful for Salt Lake for a
[58:15] couple years to see some of these events
[58:17] leave downtown
[58:19] just for a little while
[58:20] until we fix it.
[58:22] Um
[58:23] so
[58:24] >> You need You need thumbs up for us or
[58:26] just purely
[58:27] >> Just information.
[58:29] >> Yep.
[58:30] >> Everyone feel like they are informed?
[58:33] Okay.
[58:33] >> Marvelous. I'd love to inform you some
[58:35] more.
[58:36] Um
[58:36] local administrative advisor, we have an
[58:38] update on that. That's obviously been a
[58:40] topic of conversation for today's
[58:41] meeting.
[58:42] Um
[58:43] as we discussed, the funding was
[58:44] restored that was previously cut, that
[58:47] $500,000.
[58:48] $380,000
[58:50] goes to the league. We spend that money
[58:53] and are negotiating the contract with
[58:54] GOPB now uh to spend on four things. We
[58:57] spend that on an FTE, on our expert
[59:00] pool, as well as with our reimbursements
[59:03] to the AOGs. We partner really heavily
[59:05] with the AOGs on this. That's where the
[59:06] bulk of the money goes in this program.
[59:09] Um and then for travel, conferences,
[59:11] professional development, and that those
[59:13] sorts of expenses.
[59:15] Um
[59:15] I [clears throat] wanted to just flag
[59:16] for everyone a few highlights of the
[59:18] program over this last year.
[59:20] Um
[59:21] my favorite came from when we were
[59:22] actually testifying on the hill during
[59:24] the the to get the funding restored. Uh
[59:27] Travis Keel, who's the executive
[59:28] [clears throat] director of our six, um
[59:31] spoke about how he has been uh the
[59:33] Central Utah AOG uh director for almost
[59:37] 20 years and that no program has ever
[59:40] existed in the state that has been so as
[59:42] impactful for rural Utah as this
[59:45] program. And it is because it provides
[59:48] hands-on technical assistance. Um
[59:50] we as the league do a lot of training.
[59:53] We do a lot of consultation. We do
[59:55] provide a lot of resources to rural Utah
[59:57] as we do all of Utah. Um but this really
[1:00:00] just allows us to get a little bit
[1:00:02] deeper and really help get projects
[1:00:03] across the finish line in partnership
[1:00:05] with the AOGs. Um and so we've been
[1:00:07] really grateful for that and hearing uh
[1:00:09] that someone who is working in with
[1:00:12] these communities every day say that
[1:00:14] this is hands-down the best program
[1:00:16] that's existed in 18 years is
[1:00:19] uh
[1:00:19] pretty remarkable accolades.
[1:00:21] Um second, we are continuing to explore
[1:00:24] how we can continue to partner with
[1:00:25] ACEC. That is the American Council of
[1:00:28] Engineering Companies. Um pretty much
[1:00:31] none of these communities have an
[1:00:32] engineer on staff. They all consult with
[1:00:35] these engineering companies. And they
[1:00:37] reached out to us last year essentially
[1:00:38] saying, "We're noticing a really big
[1:00:40] knowledge gap um with some of these
[1:00:42] communities and at times we almost don't
[1:00:44] know how to help them um because there's
[1:00:46] just so much that we want to
[1:00:48] do and you know, we don't even some of
[1:00:51] them don't even have experience like
[1:00:52] writing an RFP so that we could respond
[1:00:55] to it and help them with a road project.
[1:00:57] And so nothing is finalized yet, but
[1:00:59] we're continuing to explore how we can
[1:01:01] partner with them uh to provide some
[1:01:03] better engineering resources to rural
[1:01:06] Utah. And then finally, um you know,
[1:01:09] we've been saying this as far as our
[1:01:10] knowledge is kind of the first of its
[1:01:12] kind in the nation and we have had a lot
[1:01:14] of other state leagues from around the
[1:01:16] country um either implement somewhat
[1:01:18] similar technical assistance models or
[1:01:20] look at doing a similar expansion, which
[1:01:23] I think again is very high praise of
[1:01:25] this program. So, again, nothing for you
[1:01:28] to vote on, no decisions to make, but
[1:01:29] just some updates for you there. We are
[1:01:32] anticipating that that contract will go
[1:01:33] into effect at the beginning of the new
[1:01:35] fiscal year,
[1:01:36] and we're really looking forward to it.
[1:01:40] » Yes.
[1:01:41] >> I just want to thank Molly and McKenna
[1:01:43] Marchant, who's our LA
[1:01:46] coordinator, and the associations of
[1:01:48] government government around the state,
[1:01:50] and the governor's office of planning
[1:01:51] and budget, and the legislature. The
[1:01:52] partnership has been
[1:01:54] phenomenal, and I just want to publicly
[1:01:56] thank the OHCS for the the great
[1:01:59] partnership. They're the ones whose
[1:02:00] employees funded through this program
[1:02:02] are doing the technical assistance.
[1:02:04] We provide the administrative support,
[1:02:06] they provide the technical assistance.
[1:02:08] >> Yep.
[1:02:09] Excellent.
[1:02:11] Um jumping on down property tax. So, a
[1:02:14] few things on property tax, and one will
[1:02:16] also delve a little bit into advocacy as
[1:02:19] well. So, if I could get Alexa on deck
[1:02:22] um to talk about the property tax
[1:02:24] updates.
[1:02:25] Um so,
[1:02:27] based on the conversations we had, we
[1:02:30] launched
[1:02:31] our property tax education series,
[1:02:34] and I'd love to have Cassidy chat a
[1:02:35] little bit about that, and then Alexa
[1:02:37] provide a quick update on just what we
[1:02:39] know about communities going through
[1:02:41] property tax this next year.
[1:02:43] >> Right. So, when we're talking about
[1:02:45] property tax resources, we're really
[1:02:46] talking about kind of two different
[1:02:48] buckets. So, the first bucket is our
[1:02:50] compliance resources. So, this is for
[1:02:52] our cities to go through and see, "Okay,
[1:02:53] what are the new changes we have to
[1:02:54] comply by?" And we have a whole page,
[1:02:57] and a really big shout out to Alexa,
[1:02:59] Carrie Nakamura, and then the rest of
[1:03:00] the ULCS team ULCS team.
[1:03:04] Yeah, okay on that.
[1:03:07] So far on our compliance page, we have
[1:03:09] over 1,100 views, so we know that people
[1:03:12] are coming back and using that resources
[1:03:14] those resources as we go through the
[1:03:16] process.
[1:03:17] Um and we also have over 121 views on
[1:03:20] our webinar that Carrie did. And this is
[1:03:22] on top of our mid-year workshop that we
[1:03:25] had that also had a lot of people in the
[1:03:27] room. As far as our communication
[1:03:29] resources go, we have finished out eight
[1:03:31] total videos that our um members can use
[1:03:34] to communicate with the public.
[1:03:36] Collectively, I know we have over 2,000
[1:03:38] views on all of these videos.
[1:03:40] I'm going to tell you it's probably
[1:03:42] higher because a lot of our cities are
[1:03:43] choosing to host these videos. So, we
[1:03:46] have a Dropbox for them that they can
[1:03:47] download the videos themselves and then
[1:03:49] post it kind of on their own timeline
[1:03:51] versus just using our YouTube video. So,
[1:03:53] something I want to do after the
[1:03:54] property tax season is over is get a
[1:03:56] report back from those communities. I
[1:03:58] know of at least 10 communities that
[1:04:00] have been using our videos regularly.
[1:04:02] And then as we look forward to the
[1:04:03] future, the nice thing about this
[1:04:04] resource is that we'll continue to use
[1:04:06] it in future years. We're hoping to
[1:04:09] build out kind of a toolkit to help
[1:04:10] create suggestions of like, here's how
[1:04:12] you can use this video, when in the
[1:04:14] timeline that you should be posting it
[1:04:15] as you're going through property tax,
[1:04:17] and a few things like that.
[1:04:19] >> Yeah, just a quick update, too. We've
[1:04:21] also been doing tracking behind the
[1:04:23] scenes to um monitor communities that
[1:04:25] are going through truth and taxation.
[1:04:27] We've had a few drop out recently, so
[1:04:29] our number now is 60 communities that
[1:04:31] are or 60 municipalities, I should say,
[1:04:33] that are going through truth and
[1:04:35] taxation this year. Now, we have the
[1:04:37] universe mapped out as today, June 22nd,
[1:04:40] was well, it has to be before June 22nd,
[1:04:42] but the deadline to adopt your tax levy
[1:04:44] that exceeds the certified tax rate to
[1:04:46] increase to generate that additional
[1:04:48] revenue, but we've collected property
[1:04:50] tax impact schedules from all 60
[1:04:52] communities that are going through truth
[1:04:54] and taxation. And if you'll remember
[1:04:56] that those impact schedules were
[1:04:57] required new as of this year um to tell
[1:05:00] your story of what the property tax
[1:05:02] increase is used for and how much it
[1:05:04] will how much additional revenue it will
[1:05:06] generate. So, we'll continue collecting
[1:05:08] those as they're updated. If your
[1:05:09] community updates their property tax
[1:05:11] impact schedule, please send it to me.
[1:05:13] You'll save me from going through your
[1:05:14] city council meeting minutes, which
[1:05:16] that's okay. I'll do it anyways, but um
[1:05:18] >> [laughter]
[1:05:19] >> Um yeah, so we'll we'll stay on top of
[1:05:21] those and the idea is to be able to use
[1:05:23] that information that we gather from
[1:05:24] that those impact schedules to tell like
[1:05:27] the collective city story of why cities
[1:05:29] are going through property tax up at the
[1:05:31] legislature. One thing that I've been
[1:05:32] going through and doing is identifying
[1:05:34] what like what common themes are coming
[1:05:36] from the uses of the additional property
[1:05:38] tax revenue. And almost every community
[1:05:41] is in some way raising property taxes
[1:05:43] because of public safety costs or um
[1:05:45] because of inflationary costs. So, we'll
[1:05:47] continue tracking those and be able to
[1:05:49] tell our story once the process is
[1:05:50] wrapped up.
[1:05:52] >> Thank you. These resources have really
[1:05:53] been great. Um I'm not one of the cities
[1:05:56] doing a two-tier taxation rate, but
[1:05:59] um the fire district that my city is a
[1:06:01] part of is, and I have uh been
[1:06:03] forwarding all of your resources, in
[1:06:04] particular the checklist, to them
[1:06:06] because I think these are the only
[1:06:08] resources that are out [snorts] there,
[1:06:09] frankly. Um and so whether you're
[1:06:12] a city or a county or a special
[1:06:13] [clears throat] district of some kind,
[1:06:15] um
[1:06:16] these have been really timely resources
[1:06:18] to get out there with the with the new
[1:06:19] state law. So,
[1:06:21] thank you for putting those together,
[1:06:23] not just for cities to use, but for the
[1:06:24] other entities that we're all a part of.
[1:06:28] >> Excellent. And then last but not least,
[1:06:29] um we are with Meg's retirement, uh
[1:06:32] we're very sad to lose Meg, um but
[1:06:35] pivoting and trying to explore what this
[1:06:36] can mean for our staff moving forward.
[1:06:38] Um in our last board meeting, we
[1:06:41] discussed the creation of a new
[1:06:42] engagement coordinator position. We have
[1:06:44] been interviewing some stellar
[1:06:46] candidates for that role. We have um
[1:06:48] more interviews this and we are hoping
[1:06:51] to extend an offer and have someone
[1:06:53] begin uh mid-July. So, if there's any
[1:06:56] questions about that, happy to talk
[1:06:57] about it, but wanted to just give you a
[1:06:59] quick update on how that process was
[1:07:00] going.
[1:07:06] » Okay.
[1:07:08] Questions on that?
[1:07:09] Okay. you both and really the resources
[1:07:12] have been excellent.
[1:07:16] We will move on to advocacy report. But
[1:07:19] I want to know what you are thinking
[1:07:20] about this advocacy report.
[1:07:21] >> Oh, I'm flabbergasted.
[1:07:23] >> I have never done this.
[1:07:24] >> Presidential City for the win.
[1:07:30] » Okay, well we will turn our time over to
[1:07:32] a combination of
[1:07:33] Justin and Jared
[1:07:35] and
[1:07:36] to talk about our advocacy report and
[1:07:38] I'm sure that we'll have chiming in from
[1:07:40] others as well.
[1:07:41] >> Yeah, uh Jared, let's have you start
[1:07:42] out.
[1:07:44] >> [snorts]
[1:07:49] » Alexa, Molly, and Cassidy are a lot more
[1:07:52] pleasant than I am, so
[1:07:54] this is what you get. Um so
[1:07:57] last board meeting we had discussed the
[1:08:01] amicus um
[1:08:03] the amicus brief and
[1:08:05] the request from Salt Lake City
[1:08:08] to have the league join on. There have
[1:08:10] been
[1:08:11] uh quite a few different requests
[1:08:13] throughout the years. Um
[1:08:16] some we have signed on to, some we have
[1:08:18] not signed on to, whether that be
[1:08:20] through because of process, uh the
[1:08:23] timelines of the filing dates, um and so
[1:08:28] as as you may remember we we signed on
[1:08:31] to the main case that talked about
[1:08:34] governmental immunity
[1:08:36] um in the past and and so we've got this
[1:08:40] request like like I brought up last
[1:08:42] time.
[1:08:43] Um the the question that the
[1:08:47] appellate court is considering is
[1:08:49] whether cities can use
[1:08:52] spend impact fees collected under one
[1:08:54] impact fee facility plan
[1:08:57] uh
[1:08:57] >> [clears throat]
[1:08:58] >> for projects that were were included
[1:09:00] under a later amended plan.
[1:09:04] Um
[1:09:05] and so uh last board meeting uh the
[1:09:08] request was bring back uh UAC uh was
[1:09:13] going to be filing an amicus brief. Uh
[1:09:15] bring back UAC's brief and we'll review
[1:09:17] it decide uh in this board meeting
[1:09:21] whether we want to sign on that brief or
[1:09:24] not.
[1:09:25] Um
[1:09:26] we recently found out that UAC is no
[1:09:30] longer going to be
[1:09:32] filing a brief independently. Um after
[1:09:36] surveying their members, they found that
[1:09:40] uh
[1:09:41] it was it was uh
[1:09:45] only had a few members that were
[1:09:46] concerned about the the policy issues.
[1:09:49] Uh
[1:09:50] I'm not sure whether they will be
[1:09:52] signing on to the other amicus briefs.
[1:09:56] But that's that's kind of where that was
[1:09:58] a recent development that happened. Uh
[1:10:02] we found out about and so we immediately
[1:10:05] uh reached out to
[1:10:07] both IMLA, which is the International
[1:10:10] Municipal Lawyers Association,
[1:10:12] who will be filing an amicus brief
[1:10:15] uh that we found out about and also
[1:10:17] Provo City. So those are the outstanding
[1:10:20] amicus briefs that uh if the board
[1:10:23] decides to sign on, they would need to
[1:10:26] it would be one of those two.
[1:10:28] Uh the IMLA brief
[1:10:31] uh discusses uh a few items, primarily
[1:10:36] responding to another amicus brief on
[1:10:38] the other side.
[1:10:39] Provo City uh
[1:10:41] their brief is
[1:10:44] really in two different areas. One is a
[1:10:46] technical analysis of the impact
[1:10:49] act.
[1:10:50] And uh
[1:10:52] and then the other is a uh discussion of
[1:10:57] reimbursements on impact fees if a
[1:11:00] negative
[1:11:01] uh decision came down from the court.
[1:11:05] Um
[1:11:06] so we those are the outstanding uh
[1:11:09] briefs.
[1:11:10] Both of them are still in draft form uh
[1:11:13] given various circumstances that uh
[1:11:18] that are being uh dealt with through in
[1:11:21] Provo City uh some illnesses, medical
[1:11:24] issues uh that have delayed the amicus
[1:11:27] brief from uh getting to a final form.
[1:11:31] And so right now we don't have those
[1:11:34] final form uh amicus briefs for you.
[1:11:38] Um
[1:11:39] and so right now the the deadline to
[1:11:44] file for Salt Lake City's uh principal
[1:11:47] brief is on July 7th.
[1:11:49] Um
[1:11:51] the amicus briefs have to be filed 7
[1:11:53] days after the principal brief is filed
[1:11:56] with the court.
[1:11:58] Uh
[1:11:58] if that's before, then we'd have even
[1:12:00] less time.
[1:12:02] Uh I don't So if Salt Lake City files it
[1:12:05] on July 7th, we'd have till July 14th to
[1:12:08] decide whether or not to file the amicus
[1:12:11] brief.
[1:12:12] Um so that is the current status of
[1:12:15] where we're at.
[1:12:17] Um
[1:12:18] and
[1:12:20] the issues that uh and and I believe the
[1:12:24] board members have been given
[1:12:26] uh
[1:12:28] the uh Salt Lake City's brief of what
[1:12:31] they intend to file.
[1:12:33] Um if you've had a chance to read it,
[1:12:34] it's it's a uh a technical argument
[1:12:38] based upon the interpretation of the
[1:12:40] impact fee act.
[1:12:42] Um
[1:12:44] and so that's that's kind of where we're
[1:12:45] at. Um
[1:12:46] it's
[1:12:48] we're
[1:12:50] the process is is frankly
[1:12:53] in the game. Um
[1:12:54] it's it's
[1:12:56] uh
[1:12:57] we don't have those amicus briefs to
[1:13:00] give to you right now.
[1:13:03] In their in their form that uh for the
[1:13:05] board.
[1:13:07] >> So, in terms of
[1:13:09] any uh
[1:13:12] indication from the board on
[1:13:14] direction or
[1:13:17] support for a different approach with
[1:13:18] the different
[1:13:20] uh
[1:13:20] amicus briefs that are out there. Do you mean to do that or more just
[1:13:24] informational report?
[1:13:26] >> Um well, this would be the last board
[1:13:29] meeting uh because there's no board
[1:13:32] meeting in July. So,
[1:13:34] I I think a decision at least for us
[1:13:37] needs to be made. The The other um
[1:13:42] possibility is if the board decides
[1:13:46] um
[1:13:47] to give the uh executive board the the
[1:13:51] uh
[1:13:51] ability to file on um without having
[1:13:55] another board meeting.
[1:13:58] I think that they under the policy have
[1:14:00] that ability, but again, we're running
[1:14:03] up against a July
[1:14:05] 14th deadline to file
[1:14:08] to join an amicus.
[1:14:10] >> Didn't we already make a decision on
[1:14:11] that?
[1:14:13] >> No, we we uh the the board wanted us to
[1:14:16] come back uh with the UAC brief.
[1:14:19] Um but they are no longer
[1:14:22] going to be filing that brief.
[1:14:25] >> If I might, jurors,
[1:14:27] pretty job of looking at the job
[1:14:29] description, but the sort of play field
[1:14:30] has really shifted on this on this issue
[1:14:32] in the sense that
[1:14:35] it started off as a broad policy
[1:14:37] debate, it's really turned into a really
[1:14:39] high technical discussion that I'm sort
[1:14:40] of like having right now.
[1:14:42] And uh it doesn't mean it's not an
[1:14:44] important issue.
[1:14:45] Yeah, but to me it's a sweeping issue I
[1:14:47] would say for our policies
[1:14:50] That's a
[1:14:52] At least for me, that sort of changed.
[1:14:54] >> So, one of the Yeah, so Roger brings up
[1:14:57] a good point. The um
[1:14:59] the court, the reason it's a technical
[1:15:01] argument in Salt Lake City is because
[1:15:04] that was the decision that was made by
[1:15:07] the lower court. So, they're responding
[1:15:10] to lower court's decision because that's
[1:15:13] all they can respond to.
[1:15:15] Um and so, it
[1:15:18] I I uh I would be making the exact same
[1:15:21] arguments based upon the
[1:15:23] go.
[1:15:24] Um
[1:15:25] Yeah.
[1:15:26] >> But, but in terms of
[1:15:28] cooperation with the big Salt Lake City
[1:15:30] in terms of broader policy this case
[1:15:32] isn't that now.
[1:15:33] >> So, Jared, so
[1:15:35] where we're at right now with the
[1:15:36] different
[1:15:38] briefs or lack of briefs, um amicus says
[1:15:40] or MSI, whatever it is. Um
[1:15:43] what do we need from the board right now
[1:15:44] then?
[1:15:45] >> I I read what you said, just I have no
[1:15:47] idea what it said.
[1:15:49] >> Decision of whether the board wants to
[1:15:52] join one of the other amicus briefs.
[1:15:57] >> That we don't have yet.
[1:15:59] >> So, so remind us we have to include this
[1:16:01] Provo.
[1:16:03] >> Provo City and IMLA, which is the
[1:16:05] International Municipal Lawyers
[1:16:08] Association.
[1:16:10] >> So,
[1:16:12] may I ask if it's that because they're
[1:16:14] looking at the broader
[1:16:16] effect of of
[1:16:19] how impact fees are described and this Salt Lake City case, if it's
[1:16:25] decided one way versus another, would
[1:16:27] that have an adverse effect on future
[1:16:29] judgments or how would that affect
[1:16:32] a larger, broader
[1:16:34] group of cities?
[1:16:35] >> The answer to your first question with
[1:16:38] IMLA is
[1:16:41] merely responding to another amicus
[1:16:43] that's already been filed on the other
[1:16:45] side. So someone on the other side filed
[1:16:48] an amicus and they aren't necessarily
[1:16:52] um
[1:16:54] The issues that were brought up in the
[1:16:56] other amicus is what they are responding
[1:16:58] to. It's not the underlying brief of
[1:17:01] Salt Lake City
[1:17:02] for uh
[1:17:04] um
[1:17:05] the opposing party.
[1:17:07] So
[1:17:08] that's Emulous' brief.
[1:17:11] The other question that you had is what
[1:17:13] are the ramifications if there is a uh
[1:17:18] a negative uh ruling against Salt Lake
[1:17:22] City.
[1:17:24] We're not quite sure where or how many
[1:17:27] other cities
[1:17:29] use impact fees
[1:17:31] for
[1:17:33] projects that were only included in a
[1:17:35] subsequent impact fee facilities plan.
[1:17:38] We don't have that information.
[1:17:41] um
[1:17:44] » So Jared, it sounds like Emulous may be
[1:17:46] not the right fit for us.
[1:17:49] >> No.
[1:17:49] >> So we should probably maybe take that
[1:17:50] off the list of considerations. So it's
[1:17:52] Provo
[1:17:53] >> And you actually have a brief, so it's
[1:17:55] really the Provo brief brief is what's
[1:17:56] left.
[1:17:57] >> [laughter]
[1:17:58] >> So
[1:17:59] yeah, go ahead.
[1:17:59] >> Is this Is this Is this a possibility? I
[1:18:01] mean I it's it's very difficult to sign
[1:18:03] on to something we don't have.
[1:18:05] Especially given the legal and technical
[1:18:08] nature and and even though we I'm sure I
[1:18:10] have great faith in Provo's legal team.
[1:18:13] Um
[1:18:14] would it be possible for us to make this
[1:18:16] something that we delegate to advice
[1:18:18] from Jared back to the executive
[1:18:20] committee make a determination
[1:18:22] around
[1:18:24] I I'm sure this is going to fall like
[1:18:26] >> Right.
[1:18:26] in the thick of everyone's 250
[1:18:28] minutes.
[1:18:29] >> That cuz timing-wise that is the thing.
[1:18:30] It's like they're falling
[1:18:32] [clears throat] in the middle of July is
[1:18:33] what we're saying, right?
[1:18:34] >> Yes. [snorts]
[1:18:34] >> Before we meet again.
[1:18:35] >> So yeah, I think that is basically what
[1:18:39] we're asking is should we should we
[1:18:40] delegate some authority to the executive
[1:18:42] officers
[1:18:43] to make a determination once we have
[1:18:45] something to make a determination on.
[1:18:49] » It does seem like
[1:18:50] to me it would just seem like a little
[1:18:54] to vote to join Provo when we don't know
[1:18:55] what it says yet.
[1:18:57] I mean like what if it said something
[1:18:58] about like cougars?
[1:19:01] >> [laughter]
[1:19:02] >> I am moved I am moved to join.
[1:19:06] » I'm I'm supportive of that the principle
[1:19:10] the cougars also but supportive of the
[1:19:12] principle
[1:19:13] to delegate authority to participate in
[1:19:16] litigation
[1:19:18] pending we have information and delegate
[1:19:20] that to the executive council and we can
[1:19:22] format that as a
[1:19:25] motion.
[1:19:27] >> I'm supportive
[1:19:27] >> [laughter]
[1:19:28] >> and add I think I think that we
[1:19:31] sign on is probably
[1:19:34] a fairly important detail. Uh
[1:19:37] and I'll call it an amicus brief just to
[1:19:39] add another premise to it.
[1:19:41] >> Love it.
[1:19:42] >> I think it's important that we sign on
[1:19:44] if we can in some way so if we can do
[1:19:46] that as Councilmember Eggbert suggested
[1:19:48] I would support that as well.
[1:19:51] >> Okay. So, it sounds like we have a
[1:19:53] motion to do that delegation and review
[1:19:56] consideration from Councilmember Eggbert
[1:19:57] and I have a second from Councilmember
[1:19:59] Eggbert.
[1:19:59] >> Eggbert.
[1:20:01] >> So, we have a motion from Councilmember
[1:20:02] Eggbert and a second from our city
[1:20:04] manager uh Councilmember
[1:20:08] >> I'm seeing we're going to change his
[1:20:09] name actually so it's not
[1:20:11] >> Yeah.
[1:20:12] >> Uh
[1:20:14] >> [laughter]
[1:20:15] >> Is there any
[1:20:16] >> Yeah, can I move on to
[1:20:17] >> any additional discussion to that
[1:20:18] motion?
[1:20:20] Seeing none I'll call for the vote. All
[1:20:22] in favor of the motion please say aye.
[1:20:25] >> Aye.
[1:20:26] >> Any opposed?
[1:20:28] All right, Jerry, sounds like you've got
[1:20:30] >> Thank you.
[1:20:30] >> your marching orders there.
[1:20:32] you, right?
[1:20:33] >> Perfect. All right, let's talk about a
[1:20:34] couple things here. One really quick on
[1:20:36] the advisory groups. We talked about
[1:20:38] this at the last board meeting in a
[1:20:39] mid-year. Um
[1:20:41] One just want to make you aware that we
[1:20:42] do have a housing meeting coming up. Um
[1:20:45] a week from today. Uh we have an
[1:20:46] economic development one coming up this
[1:20:48] Thursday. Um on the housing one, one of
[1:20:51] the things we had talked about is that
[1:20:53] we'd like to have board members a part
[1:20:54] of all the advisory groups. So then when
[1:20:55] we get to session um you'll have the
[1:20:57] background on things. Uh can step up if
[1:21:00] we need you on different things. Um good
[1:21:02] news is on the ones that are coming up,
[1:21:03] we do have board members involved in all
[1:21:05] of them. On housing and land use, we
[1:21:07] have most of you involved in that one.
[1:21:08] So um along with 124 of your friends. Um
[1:21:12] who are part of that email list. So no
[1:21:14] shortage of people on that one. Um
[1:21:16] economic development, we have board
[1:21:17] members involved in that one. Bill board
[1:21:18] boards, we have Amy Shumway, so we have
[1:21:21] board a board member involved in that
[1:21:22] one. Um
[1:21:24] and we will have more coming. So these
[1:21:26] groups later on, kids, impact fees,
[1:21:28] property tax, water. Um we're waiting
[1:21:31] for a few more things to clarify on
[1:21:32] them. Um we're going to talk a little
[1:21:34] bit about impact fees during uh economic
[1:21:37] development anyway. But is there
[1:21:38] anything that we're we're missing
[1:21:41] basically giving the opportunity now to
[1:21:42] say, man, there's a group we really need
[1:21:44] around whatever it is that we're not
[1:21:45] thinking of. Um and we want to ask you
[1:21:48] now so we don't get to November and say,
[1:21:49] man, you know what we really wish we
[1:21:51] would have spent the summer on is you
[1:21:53] know, X problem. So one planning the
[1:21:55] question, if there's nothing, that's
[1:21:57] fine. But if you think of another group,
[1:21:59] another issue that we should be jumping
[1:22:00] on top of um sooner or later, please let
[1:22:02] us know. Um there are always the things
[1:22:04] we have to respond to when we get to
[1:22:06] session. There are issues we don't
[1:22:08] always see coming or bills that are
[1:22:10] they're protected for the whole time,
[1:22:11] but we want to get ahead of whatever we
[1:22:13] can. So if there's something that's
[1:22:14] missing or if there is a group that you
[1:22:17] have not volunteered to be a part of,
[1:22:18] but really want to be a part of
[1:22:20] let me know. Um that's a quick ask on
[1:22:22] that one.
[1:22:23] >> Nobody's talking about it, but maybe
[1:22:24] data centers.
[1:22:26] >> Yeah, data centers has not come up at
[1:22:27] all. Data centers will come up if you
[1:22:28] look at the draft agenda, I think which
[1:22:30] is you can scroll down, Nick. Uh draft
[1:22:32] agenda we have on economic development,
[1:22:34] that is one of the things we have on
[1:22:35] there. Um there are um
[1:22:37] every
[1:22:38] not every group, but a lot of different
[1:22:40] groups and entities are building out
[1:22:42] different discussion points around data
[1:22:44] centers. Um so we'll certainly try to
[1:22:47] wrangle some of that and be a part of
[1:22:48] those discussions.
[1:22:49] >> I I think the real problem is they've
[1:22:51] got a billion acres of it in one county,
[1:22:53] but everybody's got it in their own fair
[1:22:55] counties across the state, so
[1:22:57] >> There are There are many more data
[1:22:58] centers than just the one up in Box
[1:23:00] Elder that are coming online.
[1:23:02] >> I'm I'm afraid the information from that
[1:23:04] one may affect all of us.
[1:23:06] >> We know So, one of the things I'll I'll
[1:23:08] mention there is the Central Valley
[1:23:10] Water Conservancy District, for example,
[1:23:12] is putting together some FAQs and some
[1:23:14] information around questions you should
[1:23:16] ask if a data center is proposed in your
[1:23:19] area, just from the water perspective.
[1:23:21] Just one of the things that comes up a
[1:23:22] lot. So, as we get these resources and
[1:23:24] as we uh see these coming from other entities, other people with
[1:23:28] expertise, we'll try to promulgate those
[1:23:30] out and then I I would imagine at some
[1:23:32] time point we will either have a webinar
[1:23:35] or trainings at at annual or whatever it
[1:23:36] is that deal with some of that as well.
[1:23:38] >> Well, I find it interesting that some
[1:23:39] people think that the communities that
[1:23:41] have those have not asked those
[1:23:43] questions and taken that into account.
[1:23:45] >> Yes, as if no one's thinking about that.
[1:23:47] >> Exactly.
[1:23:48] >> Um
[1:23:49] So, yeah, Camp, go ahead.
[1:23:50] >> Just jumping on the economic economic
[1:23:52] development piece first and the housing
[1:23:54] piece second. These advisory subgroups
[1:23:57] uh we've got a decent number of
[1:23:58] volunteers or people who want to
[1:23:59] participate in, which is great. The
[1:24:01] reason we put the draft agendas in here
[1:24:03] is they're still draft. Like
[1:24:04] even from the time we finished the
[1:24:06] packet on Thursday, we actually made
[1:24:08] some adjustments to them.
[1:24:10] The Economic Development Council, which
[1:24:13] the board appointed me to represent uh
[1:24:15] the League on, will have its first
[1:24:17] official meeting on July 1st.
[1:24:20] The Political Subdivisions Interim
[1:24:22] Committee on Extending Tax Increment
[1:24:23] Financing, Adam our first organizing
[1:24:26] meeting at the end of May.
[1:24:28] The meeting is not scheduled to meet
[1:24:30] again until August because we're waiting
[1:24:32] for some data to come in.
[1:24:34] So, part of our objective in this first
[1:24:36] economic development advisory group
[1:24:37] meeting is just to make sure that people
[1:24:39] in in the room know the universe. You
[1:24:41] know, we've
[1:24:42] listed our existing policy and economic
[1:24:44] development and policy resolutions that
[1:24:46] we've adopted in the past.
[1:24:48] I'll have a lot more after that. Our
[1:24:50] first meeting requested to consider and
[1:24:52] Justin I were in the room last week and
[1:24:55] I think it's fair to say every committee
[1:24:56] at the capital talked about data centers
[1:24:58] and so forth.
[1:24:59] >> Every committee is a data center
[1:25:01] committee now.
[1:25:01] >> Every Every committee these days is a
[1:25:02] data center committee. On the On the
[1:25:04] housing side, can you slide up to the housing one?
[1:25:07] thing we noticed as we were going
[1:25:09] through our existing policy resolutions
[1:25:11] and League board principles is that we
[1:25:14] actually don't have anything specific on
[1:25:17] impact fees. Now, we've taken positions
[1:25:19] on impact fees legislation for years
[1:25:22] and we have our general board principles
[1:25:24] on housing around affordable home
[1:25:26] ownership, sustainable infrastructure,
[1:25:28] quality of life. In terms of our key
[1:25:31] principles on impact fees, the
[1:25:32] resolutions that our members have
[1:25:34] endorsed in years past have been silent
[1:25:36] on impact fees. So, that's one thing we
[1:25:37] plan to talk about with the advisory
[1:25:39] group is putting together the core
[1:25:41] principles on impact fees that we can
[1:25:42] bring back to the board to endorse while
[1:25:44] we're awaiting the legislative audit on
[1:25:46] impact fees. And our sources have told
[1:25:48] us that that audit is unlikely to go
[1:25:52] public earlier than October.
[1:25:55] So, it'll be October, maybe even
[1:25:57] November, which means you have this big
[1:25:59] audit with lots of considerations coming
[1:26:01] out of it. Senator Muslim has already
[1:26:03] said he wants to pull together a work
[1:26:05] group and he's already volunteered
[1:26:06] League staff to help with the work
[1:26:08] group.
[1:26:09] And there'll be a bunch of meetings
[1:26:10] after that audit. So, October, November,
[1:26:13] December. So, right now is a good time
[1:26:16] >> [snorts]
[1:26:16] >> to make sure we're all aligned on those
[1:26:18] core principles around impact fees.
[1:26:21] There's also going to be a lot of
[1:26:22] discussion about everything centers and
[1:26:25] the alignment between state funding and
[1:26:27] land use. So, those aren't spelled out
[1:26:30] in this subgroup, but those are part of
[1:26:31] the discussions I had with you just last
[1:26:33] week.
[1:26:34] >> On impact fees, the state already
[1:26:35] requires we have an independent
[1:26:38] firm
[1:26:39] give us
[1:26:41] a
[1:26:42] What's the word? Consultant on it. And
[1:26:44] we take those
[1:26:45] and
[1:26:47] West Jordan or like other cities or like
[1:26:49] West Jordan,
[1:26:50] the rates that we get from them that we
[1:26:52] are able to charge for impact fees, we
[1:26:54] don't charge much less than that. If
[1:26:57] they push this, is that going to end up
[1:27:00] changing it and making it so that
[1:27:02] we charge what the consultant says we
[1:27:04] can charge for impact fees? And are they
[1:27:07] going to
[1:27:08] kind of
[1:27:10] blow up and make it go backwards what
[1:27:11] they're trying to accomplish instead of
[1:27:13] just researching and going and look at
[1:27:15] what we they've already asked us to do
[1:27:17] when they see that we are actually
[1:27:18] playing the game the right way?
[1:27:20] >> I'm going to answer that question in
[1:27:21] light of what happened in the political
[1:27:23] subdivisions in Utah last week.
[1:27:26] Justin, Jared, and others who talked
[1:27:27] with the auditors, you're welcome to
[1:27:28] chime in as well from based on the
[1:27:30] conversations you've had with the
[1:27:31] legislative auditors.
[1:27:33] In the House and the political
[1:27:35] subdivisions interim committee last
[1:27:37] week, which is joint committee of House
[1:27:38] and Senate members,
[1:27:40] Representative Ray Ward presented an
[1:27:43] idea on impact fees. It was purely that,
[1:27:45] just an idea. No legislation yet, so we
[1:27:47] don't take positions on ideas or our
[1:27:50] formal positions.
[1:27:51] But I got up to testify afterwards to
[1:27:53] explain the legal framework of impact
[1:27:55] fees because I thought it was important
[1:27:56] for the committee to understand
[1:27:58] the ins and outs of impact fees under
[1:28:00] current state law.
[1:28:01] Then Chris Camp got up from Ivory Homes
[1:28:03] got up afterwards. And Chris and I were
[1:28:05] pretty united in explaining what the
[1:28:07] legal framework was.
[1:28:09] >> Which you enjoyed for just a moment
[1:28:10] because that is not happening.
[1:28:11] >> I was going to say,
[1:28:12] is it the same, Chris?
[1:28:14] >> Yeah, no, it was great. It's early in
[1:28:15] terms of the audit. We have lots of
[1:28:16] time.
[1:28:18] But Chris and I were both trying to make
[1:28:20] the same point. Like this is the legal
[1:28:21] framework that we all accept and
[1:28:24] understand.
[1:28:25] And
[1:28:27] the legislators on the committee were
[1:28:29] asking really good questions about the
[1:28:32] balance of current residents paying for
[1:28:33] growth versus new residents paying for
[1:28:36] growth. And should it How much are
[1:28:37] impact fees based on a reasonable
[1:28:39] analysis and a reasonableness standard?
[1:28:42] Are they meeting the Nolan Dolan
[1:28:43] exaction? Senator Moskowitz is on that
[1:28:45] committee. He's I've got this workgroup
[1:28:47] and I spent a lot of time over the last
[1:28:48] year. He pulled his bill back last
[1:28:50] session that was focused on impact fees
[1:28:53] in part to allow this space to occur
[1:28:55] with the impact fee audit. So he said as
[1:28:57] soon as that audit is done, I'm going to
[1:28:58] pull my group back together and we'll
[1:28:59] get we'll get back to work on it. So it
[1:29:01] was it was actually a very sophisticated
[1:29:04] discussion in that committee.
[1:29:06] And I think right now everybody's in a
[1:29:08] bit of a holding pattern and so we see
[1:29:10] what comes out of the audit.
[1:29:12] And I think there's an acknowledgement
[1:29:15] from someone like Chris on private side
[1:29:17] that most cities are doing it right,
[1:29:20] checking the boxes, and following the
[1:29:21] process as spelled out.
[1:29:23] And I think one of the questions that
[1:29:24] the audit's going to look at is do we
[1:29:26] have the right process?
[1:29:28] That gets to the role of consultants and
[1:29:30] everything else. Those are some of the
[1:29:31] themes that have come up in our
[1:29:32] conversations as well. Just anything
[1:29:34] else you want to add from
[1:29:35] >> And the only thing I'll add to that is
[1:29:38] yeah, the role of consultants
[1:29:40] is something the auditors are looking
[1:29:41] at. Both the recommendations they make
[1:29:44] and then some of what
[1:29:46] and I don't know what the audit will say
[1:29:47] to this effect or not, but some of the
[1:29:49] idea that the consultants um
[1:29:54] some people feel like they have an
[1:29:55] incentive to suggest impact fees because
[1:29:57] that is their business. And so if if you
[1:30:00] make a procedure for them to do it and
[1:30:01] that creates businesses for them to come
[1:30:03] in and do it and there's not that many
[1:30:04] of them around.
[1:30:05] Um so the number of consultants that are
[1:30:07] out there is it is a function of the
[1:30:10] market, but I don't know what it's going
[1:30:12] to look like, but they've certainly been
[1:30:13] having discussions around those and
[1:30:14] talking to those consultants. So, I I
[1:30:17] guess in answer to your ultimate
[1:30:17] question, I'll be shocked if the
[1:30:19] recommendation comes back and says, "You
[1:30:21] have to go with what the consultant says
[1:30:22] and nothing lower."
[1:30:24] >> I wanted to um
[1:30:26] make sure everyone understands too what
[1:30:27] type of an audit we're talking about,
[1:30:28] just because
[1:30:29] >> Mhm.
[1:30:30] >> often when you say the word audit,
[1:30:31] people think you're doing a like a
[1:30:34] financial review
[1:30:35] >> Like a forensic audit or something, I
[1:30:36] guess.
[1:30:36] >> scatters [snorts] and and and things
[1:30:38] like that. Uh, just to be clear, this is
[1:30:40] a an audit by the office of
[1:30:44] um
[1:30:44] >> The state auditor general.
[1:30:46] >> auditor general's office. And while they
[1:30:48] still sometimes look at uh you know, how
[1:30:51] money is being spent and did it comport
[1:30:53] with the requirements for how money is
[1:30:55] being spent, they're actually looking
[1:30:56] more at policy and process.
[1:30:59] Um, and um often
[1:31:02] when they do uh an audit, a legislative
[1:31:04] audit, versus the state auditor's office
[1:31:06] type audit, they are looking at it in
[1:31:08] terms of them driving bills that will
[1:31:10] result
[1:31:12] from their audit. So, [clears throat]
[1:31:14] it's it's a it's a
[1:31:16] just a different type of audit that that
[1:31:18] you might be used to seeing when you
[1:31:19] have an entity that comes to present
[1:31:21] your annual
[1:31:22] uh audit of the city. This is very much
[1:31:24] an audit about policy,
[1:31:26] uh not about necessarily
[1:31:30] whether the money was spent and whether
[1:31:31] there was a corresponding
[1:31:33] ledger entry that reported with that.
[1:31:36] >> Exactly.
[1:31:37] >> I think the last thing maybe on this one
[1:31:38] cuz we do have other things we may talk
[1:31:39] about is
[1:31:41] coming out of those OAG, Office of the
[1:31:43] Legislative Auditor General, audits,
[1:31:45] they will always put recommendations in
[1:31:46] their audits. It's not just, "Here's
[1:31:48] some here's some stuff you should know."
[1:31:49] They will say, "We have recommendation
[1:31:51] 1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4." And 80% of the time
[1:31:55] those turn into bills.
[1:31:57] Um, if they put a audit recommendation,
[1:31:59] some legislator it grab that and they
[1:32:01] will put something in there. So, that's
[1:32:03] when we say we have to wait for the
[1:32:04] audit to come out because that will very
[1:32:06] much inform the discussion that comes
[1:32:07] out of it.
[1:32:09] >> I would say it this way.
[1:32:10] I think it is.
[1:32:12] My gut feeling is
[1:32:14] less of an issue of compliance but it's
[1:32:16] more an issue of
[1:32:18] for example
[1:32:19] we use impact fees for residential
[1:32:21] property differently than we use them
[1:32:23] for
[1:32:24] other types of construction. Should we stratify the residential
[1:32:28] property? I see that they are much more in that arena than
[1:32:34] quite a little off. I think the laws
[1:32:36] been litigated to death. It's there.
[1:32:38] It's it's being followed. The question
[1:32:41] is
[1:32:42] what are the tangential issues?
[1:32:45] Is that a lot of work?
[1:32:47] >> I think So, again, impact fees will be
[1:32:48] part of our next Monday discussion in
[1:32:50] the advisory group. We'll roll up our
[1:32:51] sleeves to talk through those
[1:32:52] principles.
[1:32:54] Last week I had several meetings around
[1:32:56] the governor's starter home initiative
[1:32:58] and then progress reports there. So,
[1:33:00] that will be part of this advisory
[1:33:01] group. We're still
[1:33:03] you know, at LPC earlier this month we
[1:33:05] listed all the different ideas that were
[1:33:06] out there. We're not responding to every
[1:33:08] bad idea. We're waiting to see which
[1:33:10] ones are rumor and which ones are real.
[1:33:13] Uh there's a lot of discussion about how
[1:33:14] to uh
[1:33:18] propel
[1:33:19] uh
[1:33:20] centers going forward. That was
[1:33:22] something we've pushed hard for the last
[1:33:23] couple of years is is how do we
[1:33:25] turbocharge the development of centers
[1:33:27] and the housing component therein. And
[1:33:29] then we also have uh generational
[1:33:31] legislation that Congress is considering
[1:33:33] on housing uh that we'll be worth doing
[1:33:35] a deeper dive on. Mayor Shepherd, can
[1:33:37] you take a quick moment since you know a
[1:33:38] lot about the 2045 plan to just give an
[1:33:40] update on on where things are at there
[1:33:42] and then my last question for the board
[1:33:43] when Mayor Shepherd finishes is if
[1:33:44] there's anything else missing
[1:33:47] in either the economic development space
[1:33:48] or the housing space you want to make
[1:33:50] sure is on the radar for those two
[1:33:51] advisory groups. Please, please, please
[1:33:53] let us know as we finalize those agendas
[1:33:54] in the next couple you for all
[1:33:56] Mayor Shepherd. [snorts]
[1:33:57] >> Your housing's going well. We'll get the 21st Century Road to Housing Act
[1:34:02] that is the Senate moved forward last
[1:34:05] week. They'll take their vote up early
[1:34:08] this week, today or tomorrow.
[1:34:09] Uh it'll head over to the house.
[1:34:11] It moved out of the Senate on a
[1:34:14] 85-7
[1:34:16] vote, I believe. Um so it it will move
[1:34:19] forward. It'll move forward in the
[1:34:20] house. It's got consensus on both sides.
[1:34:22] Um that's the first major housing
[1:34:25] legislation that's come through in in
[1:34:27] decades. So
[1:34:29] um some some some great things in the
[1:34:31] bill.
[1:34:32] Um
[1:34:34] looks like our
[1:34:36] senators are split on it.
[1:34:38] Huh.
[1:34:38] One will vote yes, one will vote no.
[1:34:41] Um
[1:34:42] but it looks like all of our our the
[1:34:43] members of the house will vote for it.
[1:34:45] So that will be good. We continue to
[1:34:47] meet with America's Housing Comeback and
[1:34:49] head back to Louisville week after next.
[1:34:52] So
[1:34:53] >> Thank you, Mayor Shepherd, for your
[1:34:55] service with the National League of
[1:34:56] Cities board. I know that means a lot of
[1:34:58] travel for you back and forth. So we
[1:34:59] appreciate your
[1:35:01] engage and make sure that we have some
[1:35:03] solid representation from the Utah
[1:35:05] League.
[1:35:07] >> All right, Nick. I think let's jump to
[1:35:08] the discussion on LPC. If you want to
[1:35:10] pull up my slides.
[1:35:11] >> question before we leave this subject.
[1:35:13] >> Yeah.
[1:35:14] >> Um so everyone that's served on the
[1:35:15] property tax group, are they
[1:35:17] automatically
[1:35:17] >> Everyone's volunteered, yeah.
[1:35:18] >> Yeah, automatically volunteered.
[1:35:20] >> Okay.
[1:35:20] >> You're all volunteered.
[1:35:21] >> I enjoyed that. I know my city manager,
[1:35:23] Gary Hill, enjoyed that uh tremendously
[1:35:26] and so did many others.
[1:35:28] >> Is [clears throat] that the word he
[1:35:29] would use?
[1:35:30] >> I don't know. Gary is nodding his head.
[1:35:32] Gary is sort of the author of the impact
[1:35:35] statements. So
[1:35:36] >> Oh, does Gary want that public?
[1:35:40] » So I think it also demonstrates how
[1:35:41] valuable these advisory groups have been
[1:35:44] creating them. So I I appreciate
[1:35:45] everybody's service on it. You'll notice
[1:35:46] homelessness is not listed here because
[1:35:48] it's a separate own work group.
[1:35:51] >> Yes.
[1:35:51] >> Homeless remediation task force with the
[1:35:52] November 1st deadline. That also has its
[1:35:55] first meeting this week. So, all these
[1:35:56] groups are are often working now.
[1:35:59] >> All right. So, I'll spend a few minutes
[1:36:00] talking about LPC.
[1:36:02] Um
[1:36:03] but about the how LPC is working. So,
[1:36:07] these are the upcoming LPC meetings we
[1:36:08] have uh until January. These are having
[1:36:11] them a lot more frequently.
[1:36:13] Um
[1:36:14] We've got four of them the rest of the
[1:36:15] year. At this point, roughly 2/3
[1:36:19] >> I'm taking your picture.
[1:36:21] >> Roughly 2/3 of LP Like you had these
[1:36:23] slides. Roughly 2/3 of LPC attendees are
[1:36:26] attending online. I know some of you
[1:36:28] attend our LPC meetings online. So, the
[1:36:30] first question I have um before we get
[1:36:33] to some proposals is is there anything
[1:36:35] that we can do for those of you who
[1:36:37] participate online um or those of you
[1:36:39] who participate in the room and are
[1:36:40] really missing out on what the chat is
[1:36:42] saying online. Is there anything that we
[1:36:44] could do that would change the
[1:36:45] experience
[1:36:47] to make sure everybody, whether they're
[1:36:48] in person or online, is having a good
[1:36:51] LPC experience. Anything that
[1:36:53] you know, for those who have joined
[1:36:54] online or those who are in the room that you feel like could be done
[1:36:57] differently.
[1:36:58] >> I think that's a real good question
[1:37:00] because sometimes the chats will show up
[1:37:01] and I'll start reading them and then you
[1:37:03] take them off. Do you have a separate
[1:37:04] monitor just for the chats? I think
[1:37:06] they'd love the separate chats.
[1:37:08] >> That's like all of my That's like all of
[1:37:10] my internal thoughts being written out.
[1:37:12] I don't want
[1:37:13] >> [laughter]
[1:37:14] >> those.
[1:37:15] >> Well, and it it is it Frankly, it's a
[1:37:16] fascinating thing because um in the room
[1:37:19] you can, you know, turn to someone right
[1:37:20] next to you and say something snarky.
[1:37:22] But, in a chat room people just type
[1:37:23] them out and there are people who sort
[1:37:25] of take over the chat.
[1:37:28] >> I have wanted to see the chat. Like,
[1:37:30] we'll listen to them but we'll look at
[1:37:31] it.
[1:37:31] >> Mhm. You get to see what's going on.
[1:37:33] It's almost like you have to have the
[1:37:34] computer going on when you're
[1:37:36] >> Right.
[1:37:36] >> But, I do want to know what they're
[1:37:37] talking about usually and sometimes
[1:37:39] we've almost had votes and I know
[1:37:41] Carson and Cassie were able to see those
[1:37:43] but the rest of us won't, right?
[1:37:45] >> It does seem like we sometimes have two
[1:37:48] we have two LPC meetings
[1:37:50] and I joined our June LPC meeting
[1:37:55] from vacation.
[1:37:57] >> She was so snarky.
[1:37:59] >> I had so much fun in the chat because I
[1:38:01] don't I'm often in the room
[1:38:03] so I I got to visit the chat.
[1:38:06] >> Okay, so
[1:38:07] >> I would say yes, we're having two
[1:38:08] different meetings.
[1:38:09] >> We're having so chat visibility is
[1:38:11] something that I hear people would
[1:38:12] actually like to see whether they're in
[1:38:13] the room or not.
[1:38:14] >> We have a good time.
[1:38:16] >> Seth is un- unsure.
[1:38:18] >> I love with Seth.
[1:38:19] >> So actually maybe chat visibility would
[1:38:22] make the chat even more productive. Like
[1:38:24] it
[1:38:25] >> Snarky's good and snarky Seth comes out
[1:38:27] playing.
[1:38:31] » Like I don't know how much we want that
[1:38:33] chat to be a part of the cover record.
[1:38:35] >> But there are it it's their choice as
[1:38:37] far as the
[1:38:38] >> Right, but I mean so if there's more
[1:38:39] visibility on that then maybe I'm going
[1:38:41] to be a little bit more reserved.
[1:38:43] You may be more circumspect to what you
[1:38:45] but if it's going to be up on the
[1:38:46] screen.
[1:38:48] >> There's great
[1:38:49] might be more productive conversation if
[1:38:51] they know it's part of the record and
[1:38:52] not just off.
[1:38:54] >> There's often good questions in the chat
[1:38:56] too.
[1:38:57] >> Fantastic questions.
[1:38:58] There are.
[1:39:02] Snarky Seth is something.
[1:39:08] are kind of the dominant
[1:39:10] >> Right.
[1:39:11] >> Now I mean
[1:39:12] I think it
[1:39:15] Attending LPC in person has been I think
[1:39:17] incredibly valuable for me in getting to
[1:39:19] know people across the state and learning more about people's cities
[1:39:25] and experiences and the unstructured
[1:39:28] connection that you would have making in
[1:39:30] an in-person meeting.
[1:39:31] But the reality is it's really far. We
[1:39:34] have board members that travel quite far
[1:39:36] to be here
[1:39:38] today and I really appreciate that but I also want to respect that
[1:39:42] it's good a distance to be here.
[1:39:45] But, that's just not always possible
[1:39:47] when you also have duties and
[1:39:48] responsibilities to your city and your
[1:39:49] job. So,
[1:39:51] >> Well, and again, I know like it is
[1:39:53] really 2/3 that are attending online. We
[1:39:54] have more people online than in person
[1:39:57] at this point.
[1:39:58] Um and I agree there are there are
[1:40:00] somewhat two different meetings. I do
[1:40:01] think like Carson and Cassidy do a great
[1:40:03] job responding to questions in the text
[1:40:05] or in the in the in the thread in the
[1:40:07] chat. Um but yeah, if you're in the
[1:40:08] room, you're not necessarily getting
[1:40:09] those sponsoring knowing it was even
[1:40:11] asked. Now, I can also think they do a
[1:40:13] really good job aggregating questions
[1:40:14] and letting us know, "Hey, this is this
[1:40:16] is the beginning of this question a
[1:40:17] bunch. We need to respond in the room."
[1:40:20] But, that that's helpful with that one.
[1:40:21] Any other thoughts? We know voting we
[1:40:23] have not had to take a close LPC vote in
[1:40:26] a couple of years. Um but with that
[1:40:28] number of people online,
[1:40:30] we know um and we are a little bit
[1:40:32] scared of when we do have to take a
[1:40:33] vote.
[1:40:34] That is going to be a little bit funky.
[1:40:36] And so yeah, we we have talked about
[1:40:37] what we needed to do to figure out
[1:40:39] whether you're in the room or in person,
[1:40:40] some kind of system that everyone logs
[1:40:42] on to and votes the same. Um
[1:40:45] we know that's a thing that we need to
[1:40:46] deal with. We've just been awful lucky
[1:40:48] and we were really close to this last
[1:40:49] one. That last LPC where we thought we
[1:40:51] were going to have to take a vote, we
[1:40:52] didn't quite get there.
[1:40:53] >> I think that ability to take
[1:40:55] a vote the same way would be helpful.
[1:40:57] And
[1:40:58] like you said, I think it's just a
[1:40:59] matter of time if it's you know, was it
[1:41:02] this session or it's not the next one.
[1:41:03] It's
[1:41:04] not one too far away. So,
[1:41:06] exploring that option or some kind of
[1:41:09] similar vote,
[1:41:10] that seems a great idea.
[1:41:11] >> Is there a way using Slido? I mean, we
[1:41:13] cuz we we
[1:41:15] I hope that we thought so.
[1:41:16] >> Carson jump Carson jumped in up there.
[1:41:19] >> I just we we we've really used that as a
[1:41:21] really great tool to help us.
[1:41:23] I think that's been an amazing way to
[1:41:25] take the two rooms and make it one is
[1:41:27] actually Slido. I think that's been
[1:41:29] >> Yes, that has been a lot.
[1:41:31] >> that you can see
[1:41:32] how
[1:41:33] all cities are viewing the issue using
[1:41:35] Slido. But, is there a way to make sure
[1:41:36] that we take the LPC representatives of each city,
[1:41:40] verify them with Slido cuz some Slidos
[1:41:43] we want the whole room and some Slidos
[1:41:46] we need just voting members. So, is
[1:41:47] there a way to make that our official
[1:41:48] voting method?
[1:41:49] >> Um yeah, so uh we've looked at a couple
[1:41:52] different options here and we would love
[1:41:54] to have a voting software. We actually
[1:41:56] piloted one during COVID
[1:41:58] um with some degrees of success, but it
[1:42:02] was clunky for a lot of people, so we
[1:42:04] kind of phased out away from that. Um
[1:42:06] and likewise it required everybody to
[1:42:08] keep their phones or devices on that
[1:42:11] webpage constantly and if they were
[1:42:13] disconnected from a
[1:42:15] free public Wi-Fi source like we often
[1:42:17] use at the capital,
[1:42:18] um which was common, then they would
[1:42:20] lose access to the vote and sometimes be
[1:42:23] locked out. So, um we've tried we've
[1:42:25] looked at a lot of different platforms
[1:42:26] and there's some different challenges we
[1:42:28] have cuz we need a platform that would
[1:42:29] let us
[1:42:30] um modify questions in real time. With
[1:42:33] those contentious votes we frequently
[1:42:35] have um amended motions and we might be
[1:42:38] voting on layers of motions and so we need a tool
[1:42:41] that can
[1:42:42] >> [clears throat]
[1:42:43] >> adapt.
[1:42:45] Excuse me, be adaptable. We need a tool
[1:42:47] that um allows us to verify who's
[1:42:50] voting. Um so, one thing we've done in
[1:42:52] the last couple years is uh we've moved
[1:42:55] the online voting registration from
[1:42:57] people filling out the sheets of paper
[1:42:59] to people signing in on Qualtrics so
[1:43:02] that we can more readily if somebody
[1:43:03] casts a vote online or in the room we
[1:43:05] can more readily identify who they are
[1:43:07] and make sure they are an eligible
[1:43:08] voting member. Um so, that's been We
[1:43:10] haven't had to test it yet, but that's
[1:43:12] been really helpful in getting ready for
[1:43:13] a that that scenario.
[1:43:15] >> Test it.
[1:43:16] >> Yep. Um we've we've looked at a couple
[1:43:18] different things there. The challenge
[1:43:20] with using We've tried to delineate
[1:43:22] Slido as sort of opinion polling, so
[1:43:25] we've never said um only LPC members can
[1:43:28] fill this out. We've wanted to sometimes
[1:43:30] get a broader like you may have um 10
[1:43:32] planners in the room who have expertise
[1:43:34] on a land use issue but are not
[1:43:36] necessarily their city's LPC voting
[1:43:38] members and we sometimes want to be able
[1:43:40] to identify their opinion, take that
[1:43:41] into account.
[1:43:42] So we've used Slido as sort of the
[1:43:44] catch-all. One thing we do Mayor is
[1:43:47] after the meetings, we can't really do
[1:43:48] this in real time because the way the
[1:43:50] data stream works, they don't have a
[1:43:51] API.
[1:43:53] So after the meetings, we'll export all
[1:43:55] the responses. One of the reasons we ask
[1:43:56] for people's names is just so that we
[1:43:58] can we can kind of do this tally and we
[1:44:01] have a script that will just run through
[1:44:02] and identify everybody who's an LPC
[1:44:04] member, who's a board member.
[1:44:07] That's really the only we'll have like
[1:44:08] city classifications, some of those high
[1:44:10] levels of detail. I won't break out
[1:44:11] results that way. We just can't do that
[1:44:14] in real time during the meeting but that
[1:44:16] does inform how we report back to you as
[1:44:19] the board
[1:44:21] and our our own team internally.
[1:44:23] So we're still we're still trying to
[1:44:25] crack that
[1:44:26] crack the nut of finding a tool that has
[1:44:28] all those three sort of characteristics
[1:44:30] and if anybody knows them, then I'd be
[1:44:32] all ears.
[1:44:33] There's a lot that do some combination
[1:44:35] of those things but I've yet to find one
[1:44:37] that does all of them.
[1:44:39] We've even looked at had some
[1:44:40] conversations internally, Cassidy and I
[1:44:42] have just trying to like home brew a
[1:44:45] system that we could just use and I
[1:44:48] don't know that we've
[1:44:49] we don't really probably have the
[1:44:50] bandwidth right now to develop that
[1:44:53] ourselves but it's something we could
[1:44:55] explore.
[1:44:58] » Any other feedback on how to take
[1:45:00] two rooms
[1:45:02] two different meetings and make them
[1:45:03] more effective as one?
[1:45:05] >> And
[1:45:06] I would say I think oh yeah, Nick's
[1:45:08] there. I like Nick's discretion. Yeah,
[1:45:09] let's go to the next slide. I want to
[1:45:10] talk about a proposal.
[1:45:13] If we go all right, so some of you will
[1:45:15] remember this slide.
[1:45:16] I just want to bring it back cuz it's
[1:45:18] epic.
[1:45:19] Um
[1:45:20] Street Fighter, if you know it was an
[1:45:21] arcade video game where you travel
[1:45:23] around the world and you battle
[1:45:24] different opponents in different parts
[1:45:26] of the world.
[1:45:27] Um
[1:45:28] They don't just battle in one venue.
[1:45:31] So like I said, 2/3 of our attendees are
[1:45:33] online now, 1/3 are in person, and I'm
[1:45:36] not talking about during session. During
[1:45:37] session
[1:45:39] we're going to be where we're going to
[1:45:40] be no matter what. For anyone who's
[1:45:41] watching where this is about to go. But
[1:45:44] outside of session during the interim,
[1:45:46] let's get the next slide, Nick.
[1:45:48] What if we started traveling legislative
[1:45:51] policy committee around the state?
[1:45:53] Acknowledging that we already have a lot
[1:45:55] of people online.
[1:45:57] We just have maybe different people in
[1:45:59] the room and different people on the
[1:46:00] line if we traveled around during the
[1:46:04] interim. So if you want to get the next
[1:46:06] slide, Nick. So
[1:46:08] you saw the earlier slide where
[1:46:09] everything was at the trust and Zoom,
[1:46:11] and this is for illustrative purposes only. I'm not
[1:46:14] saying this is where we're going to go.
[1:46:15] But what if
[1:46:16] um
[1:46:18] in August we went to somewhere in Cache
[1:46:19] Valley and had it on Zoom. And so the
[1:46:22] people in northern Utah get to come in
[1:46:24] person and be a part of LPC in person
[1:46:26] and have a different discussion than
[1:46:27] what we normally get. And maybe we go to
[1:46:29] Vernal in September and Provo in October
[1:46:31] and Santa Clara in November. It's on my
[1:46:34] side.
[1:46:35] Um
[1:46:35] >> I love it.
[1:46:36] >> So thoughts about pros and cons about
[1:46:38] traveling LPC around the state. I'll say
[1:46:41] that the impetus for this is last LPC
[1:46:43] meeting at the trust that we just had a
[1:46:45] few weeks ago. I looked around the room
[1:46:47] and I said, you know,
[1:46:49] there's 75 people in this room, and
[1:46:51] again, we had more than that by a long
[1:46:53] shot online. And the people in the room
[1:46:56] were pretty representative of Davis
[1:46:57] County, a little bit in northern Salt
[1:47:00] Lake County, and then the numbers
[1:47:02] started peeling off a little bit. Some
[1:47:03] of you drove, and I appreciate the
[1:47:05] people who make the drive.
[1:47:07] But geography-wise, we are getting the
[1:47:09] people in the room
[1:47:11] a pretty consistent crowd, but also
[1:47:12] geographically a pretty small crowd. And
[1:47:15] so we're having two different meetings,
[1:47:16] and my concern as someone who's getting
[1:47:18] your feedback is I'm getting feedback
[1:47:20] from kind of the same people all the
[1:47:22] time and missing feedback we might get
[1:47:24] otherwise. Um
[1:47:26] so you can see I'm obviously pushing in
[1:47:27] favor of this, but I want to hear from
[1:47:29] your perspective pros and cons if we
[1:47:31] were to travel LPC around and not just
[1:47:33] hold it the trust only during interim.
[1:47:35] We're not traveling around during
[1:47:36] session, that's not an option, but
[1:47:38] during interim.
[1:47:39] >> Mr. President.
[1:47:40] >> I love it. I love it.
[1:47:41] >> [clears throat]
[1:47:41] >> Cost just have to be considered. There's
[1:47:44] going to be a hotel and town fair.
[1:47:46] I think if we just think cost something
[1:47:47] like that, but I love it. I also I think
[1:47:49] the right thing is that it makes up the
[1:47:50] voice of the people in the room.
[1:47:52] The city would provide hotels.
[1:47:56] >> See what I mean? Yeah, Mayor.
[1:47:58] >> What would happen what would be the
[1:48:00] consequence if you did it entirely on
[1:48:02] Zoom except for the people that were
[1:48:06] That was something Roger
[1:48:08] >> Mhm.
[1:48:08] >> I missed the lunch.
[1:48:09] >> It was a long one.
[1:48:11] >> You would miss the lunch.
[1:48:12] >> With multiple salads and I know why.
[1:48:13] >> [laughter]
[1:48:14] >> Um no, we have talked about doing all
[1:48:16] online on meetings, but we do think
[1:48:18] there is for those who are in the room
[1:48:20] there is like um Mayor Bratshaw said
[1:48:21] some benefit and not just some, quite a
[1:48:23] bit of benefit to you know meeting your
[1:48:25] colleagues, getting to know them, um
[1:48:26] having those discussions. There's also
[1:48:29] some very real benefits when we get
[1:48:30] legislators in a room um to come and
[1:48:33] have that discussion with people in
[1:48:34] person um I think makes an impact.
[1:48:37] >> Okay, couple of that with some training
[1:48:38] where you'd be going out to these
[1:48:39] meetings anyway and like
[1:48:40] >> Bingo.
[1:48:41] >> you can get a bigger bang for your buck.
[1:48:42] I love I love this.
[1:48:44] >> And yes, that is one of the things
[1:48:45] exactly we were talking about. If we go
[1:48:46] somewhere, you know, we've come down and
[1:48:48] we've done a lot of traveling, you know,
[1:48:50] Mayor Palmer mentioned this earlier
[1:48:51] where where we'll go out and do a
[1:48:52] meeting with whomever in an area, do a
[1:48:54] lunch, do a dinner. Yeah, if we did a
[1:48:57] you know, an LPC and then we cut off
[1:48:59] everybody online and if you're in the
[1:49:00] room
[1:49:01] Yeah, we rolled it over to a different
[1:49:03] meeting there um which we could get with
[1:49:05] people there. I think there's an
[1:49:06] opportunity going back to legislators um
[1:49:08] if we show up in Richfield, I think I
[1:49:09] can get Carl Albrecht to show up. Um he
[1:49:12] may not show up to any other LPC, but I
[1:49:13] bet I could get him if we're down in
[1:49:15] that neck of the woods and there's some
[1:49:16] benefit to that potentially.
[1:49:18] >> Go ahead, do it.
[1:49:19] >> I love it for engagement all over the
[1:49:20] state with the legislators, with the
[1:49:22] members.
[1:49:23] >> Is there a week
[1:49:24] you can do it based on maybe what the
[1:49:26] topic is? Like is it more relevant to
[1:49:28] the place that you're going?
[1:49:30] >> I think that's actually I I really like
[1:49:32] that idea. The trick I think is I think
[1:49:35] we need to do some advanced planning and
[1:49:36] it'll be tricky to say this new thing
[1:49:38] dropped this month. Hey, do you happen
[1:49:40] to have somewhere available in Park City
[1:49:41] we can bring everyone to?
[1:49:42] Um so I think we'd have to do a little
[1:49:44] bit of planning now.
[1:49:47] There's a great pizza place in
[1:49:49] >> What's up, Andrew? Come on in.
[1:49:51] >> But to tell us point, I mean you could
[1:49:53] ahead of time
[1:49:54] we're going to be in Cache Valley
[1:49:56] >> Mhm.
[1:49:57] >> up the issues going on here. One is
[1:49:59] actually we are we are going to take 15
[1:50:01] minutes to talk about this topic there.
[1:50:03] >> Sure.
[1:50:03] >> And I think that's like a really helpful
[1:50:05] and that might encourage
[1:50:07] people to join
[1:50:09] from Cache Valley that maybe don't even
[1:50:11] join the online stuff.
[1:50:14] I think what this potentially can do for
[1:50:16] us is
[1:50:17] make even more people participate in our
[1:50:19] LCC process.
[1:50:22] >> The other idea I would have to you is so
[1:50:24] Park City does these tours around all of
[1:50:27] the ski towns in the in the
[1:50:29] Intermountain West so they can learn
[1:50:30] more about like what's going on in in
[1:50:32] towns [clears throat] that are relevant
[1:50:33] to us.
[1:50:34] So we just got back from American Fork
[1:50:35] and Vail and so maybe if you're in these
[1:50:37] specific cities and they have something
[1:50:39] new that they've just like maybe they
[1:50:40] have a new rec center, they have a new
[1:50:42] something they want to showcase it.
[1:50:43] Maybe there's like a field trip or
[1:50:44] there's something that goes along with
[1:50:46] their city so you can learn a little bit
[1:50:48] while you're there
[1:50:49] or
[1:50:51] just they have have the opportunity like
[1:50:52] that. I felt it today. I was like maybe
[1:50:54] I should have come down the mountain
[1:50:55] like before you
[1:50:55] >> I thought about inviting you all to
[1:50:57] [laughter]
[1:50:58] >> But I was thinking about
[1:50:59] >> I was putting out fires this
[1:50:59] >> You know, I've actually
[1:51:01] I I I hate to say this but I've like
[1:51:02] never been
[1:51:04] down to the Main Street or anything like
[1:51:05] that.
[1:51:07] >> I wish we could go right now.
[1:51:08] >> So I was like where can I get coffee
[1:51:09] after this? But I was just thinking like
[1:51:11] how do I get to know your city's better
[1:51:13] than the trouble is that
[1:51:15] >> One thing I think we could change is
[1:51:17] communication.
[1:51:18] >> Mhm.
[1:51:18] >> There is a group that has gotten used to
[1:51:20] just being like "It's LPC. I'm going to
[1:51:22] trust autopilot." So, you know, we
[1:51:23] really have to ramp up
[1:51:25] some advanced planning especially for
[1:51:28] um
[1:51:30] for those down the Wasatch Front that
[1:51:31] have been
[1:51:33] you know, able to easily drive to be
[1:51:36] like "All right, I'm going to need to
[1:51:37] really be thinking about how I'm, you
[1:51:39] know, going to get down for the day to
[1:51:41] get down to
[1:51:42] Vernal or it may might be an overnight
[1:51:44] if I'm heading down to Santa Clara. So,
[1:51:48] I really need to think about it ahead of
[1:51:49] the day.
[1:51:50] >> Yes, the communication wouldn't just be
[1:51:52] autopilot for sure. Yeah. LPC, you know
[1:51:54] what you're doing at this day. Yeah, I
[1:51:56] agree.
[1:51:56] >> around in November we do the November
[1:51:58] one like later so
[1:52:01] >> [laughter]
[1:52:03] >> You have some biking trails there.
[1:52:04] >> That's right.
[1:52:05] >> It's a good time to be there.
[1:52:06] >> Yeah, so yeah, these dates are all
[1:52:08] actually set for LPCs. Um but yeah, the
[1:52:11] locations are all not.
[1:52:13] >> Not, I like the idea.
[1:52:16] Back to your point that
[1:52:18] we've always been keeping it at trust
[1:52:20] and it is probably it is the same group
[1:52:22] >> Mhm.
[1:52:22] >> and probably has been through the number
[1:52:24] of years
[1:52:26] to allow other people to join in and
[1:52:27] just like we have a when you go down to
[1:52:29] St. George,
[1:52:31] we would get a lot of conversation going
[1:52:33] on with people who don't come up north
[1:52:35] for the annual.
[1:52:36] And it's kind of nice to,
[1:52:37] you know, have that conversation with
[1:52:39] you.
[1:52:40] >> Every, I don't know how often but every
[1:52:42] so often UDot takes their board meetings on the road and
[1:52:47] they do their transportation board
[1:52:48] meeting. I we've hosted them twice in
[1:52:50] the last 10 years or so. So, it's not
[1:52:52] that common.
[1:52:54] But,
[1:52:55] you know, [clears throat] if you had six
[1:52:56] or eight locations a year
[1:52:58] next year to not use those same six or
[1:53:00] eight. Generally, yes but specifically,
[1:53:02] no.
[1:53:03] I there's a little bit of civic pride
[1:53:05] that comes that when I can showcase
[1:53:07] Bountiful or North Myton or whatever, I
[1:53:09] think that also there's there's
[1:53:11] something to that that
[1:53:12] >> Mhm.
[1:53:12] >> that the respective cities make it that
[1:53:15] allows them to to be prideful of their
[1:53:17] community.
[1:53:18] >> Yeah.
[1:53:19] >> I love that.
[1:53:21] >> I mean Davis County will be a little bit
[1:53:22] sad. I'm looking over
[1:53:24] where
[1:53:25] Forest is showing.
[1:53:26] Uh
[1:53:27] >> You just have to carpool and have a good
[1:53:29] time.
[1:53:29] >> Yeah.
[1:53:32] » That's great, yeah.
[1:53:33] >> We'll put together some carpools.
[1:53:34] >> Yeah.
[1:53:35] >> As Mayor Shepherd.
[1:53:36] >> And and as a Davis County resident, I
[1:53:37] will say it is great at the trust cuz it
[1:53:40] cuts my commute time way down after
[1:53:42] >> [laughter]
[1:53:44] >> as I drive through the land of
[1:53:45] Bountiful.
[1:53:45] >> thumbs up to to see what you can come up
[1:53:47] with.
[1:53:49] >> Okay, yeah. We will we'll put some
[1:53:50] thought into this, but yeah, I
[1:53:51] appreciate the feedback. If there's
[1:53:52] anything else, um obviously as we try
[1:53:54] this out and as always give us feedback
[1:53:56] as as we try this out, see what things
[1:53:58] look like. Um but if, you know,
[1:54:00] something hits you next time we're in
[1:54:01] LPC that says, yeah, this would just
[1:54:03] help with the online versus in person
[1:54:05] thing. Um or you as staff it would help
[1:54:07] if you would ask, whatever it is, you
[1:54:09] know, just let us know. It's it's it's a
[1:54:11] good problem to have that we have so
[1:54:12] much participation, but we have changed
[1:54:14] this in the 5 years that I've been here
[1:54:15] from some online with, you know, a lot
[1:54:18] in the room and it has just slowly
[1:54:20] shifted um
[1:54:22] year by year it's changed over, so we
[1:54:23] want to make sure we're we're getting
[1:54:24] the best experience for everybody out of
[1:54:26] it.
[1:54:26] >> I think you're
[1:54:28] I think maybe why some people are
[1:54:29] feeling more comfortable attending
[1:54:30] online is because of the Slido
[1:54:31] engagement.
[1:54:32] >> Mhm.
[1:54:33] >> Because you're capturing a lot of
[1:54:34] feedback through Slido.
[1:54:36] It used to be that you had to be in the
[1:54:37] room to make sure that if you felt
[1:54:39] strongly about the issue that that kind
[1:54:41] of made it into the record.
[1:54:43] Um so I I think continued use whether we get to
[1:54:48] Carson developing his own
[1:54:50] real-time voting
[1:54:51] amending motion
[1:54:54] broad software or anything, I don't
[1:54:55] know, but they're like Slido has been I
[1:54:57] think a really good app for our
[1:54:59] community group.
[1:55:01] >> And then the last thing I think to to
[1:55:02] Mayor Palmer's point about uh staff
[1:55:04] costs, I look down at Nick on this one.
[1:55:05] But budget-wise uh we have we have funds
[1:55:08] in the travel budget that we wouldn't be
[1:55:10] in a bad place without.
[1:55:12] >> Yeah.
[1:55:15] » All right. Um
[1:55:17] we we've made it I think to the end of
[1:55:20] the
[1:55:21] >> Mhm.
[1:55:22] >> advocacy report, if I'm not wrong.
[1:55:23] >> Right.
[1:55:24] >> Okay.
[1:55:25] >> So, here's just the last ask then for
[1:55:26] everybody.
[1:55:27] One,
[1:55:28] you see what the advisory groups are
[1:55:30] that we put together. Some are starting
[1:55:32] to meet, some will meet later this year.
[1:55:34] So, if there's any other issue out there
[1:55:36] that you've heard from your colleagues
[1:55:37] your city colleagues, please make sure
[1:55:39] it's on our radar. We still have a list
[1:55:40] of a bunch of individual topics that
[1:55:42] have come in that we're working through.
[1:55:44] These are the the big ticket ones.
[1:55:46] Second, with the housing, economic
[1:55:47] development, homelessness, they're
[1:55:48] getting underway in the next [snorts]
[1:55:49] few days. So, if there are topics you
[1:55:51] want to make sure are on the radar for
[1:55:53] those specific ones, um let us know. And
[1:55:56] then third, we'll start building out a
[1:55:57] proposal here to just take LPC on the
[1:56:00] road and try to address the two big issues. I will say I realize
[1:56:05] we're overtime. I think it's important
[1:56:06] for folks to know that I talked to my
[1:56:08] fellow state league directors around the
[1:56:09] country and tell them how many of our
[1:56:11] cities are engaged in LPC and in the
[1:56:14] advocacy process, their response is
[1:56:15] usually, "What? You have a meeting every
[1:56:18] week with hundreds of your people?"
[1:56:21] Cuz a lot of them try to go the other
[1:56:22] way. They're like, "You know, we're
[1:56:24] handling our business at the capital and
[1:56:25] we'll let you know what's happening."
[1:56:26] And we've taken the strength of the
[1:56:28] league as the membership approach. So,
[1:56:30] it's awesome to go in the five years
[1:56:32] that Justin's been here to where we've
[1:56:33] basically doubled our regular LPC
[1:56:35] attendance. So, it's a good problem to
[1:56:37] have and thank you for the feedback
[1:56:38] today.
[1:56:39] >> I remember telling you we begged
[1:56:40] [clears throat] you to get involved.
[1:56:44] That's
[1:56:45] >> Well, Roger was only 15 in the state
[1:56:46] then though, so.
[1:56:48] NLC
[1:56:49] and NLC thinks about our business.
[1:56:54] That was only
[1:56:56] Great.
[1:56:56] >> great.
[1:56:57] >> Could you just mention something about
[1:56:59] fire restrictions?
[1:57:00] >> Yeah.
[1:57:00] >> For your information.
[1:57:02] >> Yes, feels like every time you turn
[1:57:04] around there's another fire and and
[1:57:06] that's acute in
[1:57:08] Juab County right now with town of
[1:57:10] Eureka under evacuation yesterday. Looks
[1:57:12] like every other canyon in Salt Lake
[1:57:14] City has faced a fire so far.
[1:57:16] So in Friday facts
[1:57:18] What?
[1:57:19] >> Farmington had one yesterday.
[1:57:20] >> No.
[1:57:20] >> We did have one yesterday.
[1:57:21] >> One on the freeway right
[1:57:22] >> Yeah, right by the freeway, yeah.
[1:57:25] >> Indeed and now
[1:57:26] >> I know because my brother lives in that
[1:57:28] subdivision.
[1:57:29] But it's hard to keep track of which
[1:57:31] is happening and which is
[1:57:32] >> Is from
[1:57:33] >> West Jordan had one this morning by the
[1:57:35] Right. So it's it's a tinderbox out
[1:57:37] there. So we put a reminder Friday facts
[1:57:40] this past Friday
[1:57:42] coming into fireworks season of the
[1:57:43] steps that you need to follow as a
[1:57:45] community if you're going to ban the
[1:57:46] discharge of fireworks or anything else
[1:57:49] that can
[1:57:50] make you cause fires. So one
[1:57:52] ask we have for you going forward is
[1:57:54] just as you're working through that law
[1:57:56] over the next few weeks if there are
[1:57:57] issues that arise let us know because
[1:57:59] that easily can work its way into our
[1:58:01] advocacy efforts at the capital.
[1:58:03] Um
[1:58:04] in the short term though
[1:58:06] are there any specific questions for you
[1:58:08] or from others about what the process is
[1:58:11] that you have to go through?
[1:58:13] They're a couple weeks out.
[1:58:17] The conditions are getting worse by the
[1:58:18] day. Any specific questions on the
[1:58:20] step-by-step process?
[1:58:21] >> It [snorts]
[1:58:22] It would be recommended that
[1:58:23] municipalities across the board do that
[1:58:26] I think, right?
[1:58:28] >> I think the key is the hazardous
[1:58:31] environmental conditions
[1:58:32] you as a community whether it's Manti,
[1:58:34] Valley Ford or anywhere in between
[1:58:36] make that finding in consultation with
[1:58:39] your fire marshal, make that finding
[1:58:41] that the environmental hazardous
[1:58:42] conditions exist. And we spelled out a
[1:58:44] code for several years ago. We worked on
[1:58:45] legislation to provide more detail of
[1:58:47] what that meant.
[1:58:48] So it's it now includes for example dry
[1:58:50] grass. It did not include dry grass
[1:58:53] prior to that change.
[1:58:54] >> Okay. So, there are multiple things you
[1:58:57] can look at and then you look at your
[1:58:58] wildland urban interface, which in the
[1:59:00] case of Park City is basically C1,
[1:59:02] right? I mean, the entire city is the
[1:59:03] wildland urban interface. Well, that's
[1:59:05] not necessarily the case in West Jordan.
[1:59:07] you know, there's a portion
[1:59:08] of the city that's wildland urban
[1:59:09] interface, but the majority of the city
[1:59:11] isn't. So, your findings need to be
[1:59:13] individualized in that situation if
[1:59:15] you're a fire marshal [snorts]
[1:59:17] and then you can make the determination
[1:59:20] of whether or not to to ban discharge
[1:59:21] and then where you ban discharge. And
[1:59:24] that could change between the 4th and
[1:59:25] the 24th.
[1:59:27] >> Can I say something really cool that
[1:59:28] we're talking about now?
[1:59:29] A couple of our firehouses have the
[1:59:30] drones that are going up to spot fires
[1:59:34] out in out in the the like slide around
[1:59:36] and spot it before anything comes and
[1:59:38] then
[1:59:39] sends it immediately sends it to the
[1:59:40] fire department. They've been doing this
[1:59:42] in Colorado and it's caught We've
[1:59:44] already caught three fires that were not reported
[1:59:48] burns like they could have burned, but
[1:59:49] they have put them out.
[1:59:51] They could have spotted them really
[1:59:51] quickly. So, we're we're trying to get
[1:59:53] really ahead of it with AI. Our fire
[1:59:55] department can go into the forest around
[1:59:57] the city.
[1:59:58] >> Do you have any of those?
[1:59:59] >> That's really cool.
[2:00:00] >> Yeah.
[2:00:00] What's that? Does that allow us
[2:00:01] for potential workshop or webinar?
[2:00:03] >> It's cool.
[2:00:04] >> It's really cool. They've done it
[2:00:06] Yeah, started in October.
[2:00:08] >> One thing I I know I brought this site
[2:00:10] up a lot of times to parent fight, but
[2:00:11] drought.utah.gov
[2:00:13] the state is doing a really good job
[2:00:15] aggregating everything around drought
[2:00:16] from wildfires to snowpack to reservoir
[2:00:18] levels. So,
[2:00:20] drought.utah.gov It's If you want to
[2:00:22] share it with your citizens or with
[2:00:22] others like that, you can find a lot of
[2:00:24] good info and information on all of it
[2:00:26] drought-related stuff there.
[2:00:28] >> Um fire info, their social media account
[2:00:31] is great if you happen to have fire in
[2:00:33] your community and residents want to
[2:00:35] know where to go for
[2:00:36] and updates and
[2:00:38] uh information if it's especially if
[2:00:40] it's not necessarily something you're
[2:00:42] actively thinking about activation, let
[2:00:44] me say that, but fire info is a state account
[2:00:48] Our social media has great real time,
[2:00:50] reliable updates.
[2:00:52] Um
[2:00:52] >> Cameron needed to mention our dates for
[2:00:54] our next meeting.
[2:00:56] >> Yes.
[2:00:56] >> you want to tell us?
[2:00:57] >> So, right now you have calendar invites
[2:00:59] for the following three dates. This is
[2:01:00] the last three meetings of this current
[2:01:02] board.
[2:01:04] They were scheduled initially at 9:30
[2:01:06] a.m. because of the possibility that we
[2:01:08] were doing the double
[2:01:09] board meeting with LPC at lunch. We
[2:01:12] ultimately only have one of those
[2:01:13] doubles and that currently is Monday,
[2:01:15] September 21st where we have board in
[2:01:17] the morning, LPC at lunch. The 17th and
[2:01:20] the 26th
[2:01:22] because Monday the 26th overlaps with
[2:01:24] the convention, there is no LPC that
[2:01:25] week and then in August we decided to
[2:01:27] split up board and LPC since we weren't
[2:01:29] doing either meeting in July.
[2:01:31] So, my quick question for this group is
[2:01:33] do you want to keep these times at the
[2:01:36] same time? Would you prefer the on the
[2:01:38] case the August and October meetings to
[2:01:40] move to the lunch hour so we can provide
[2:01:42] lunch? If you're already locked in with
[2:01:44] these times, that's fine, too, but just
[2:01:46] in light of the changes we're going to
[2:01:47] propose to LPC, we needed to
[2:01:49] confirm these details, too.
[2:01:51] >> Okay, so you're going to
[2:01:52] >> So, right now we have the double on
[2:01:53] September, so we'll work through that.
[2:01:55] But, for purposes at least of Monday,
[2:01:56] August 17th, do we stay at 9:30 or shift
[2:01:59] to the lunch hour because we will not be
[2:02:00] doing the double back-to-back?
[2:02:03] >> Everyone check your calendars right now.
[2:02:05] >> I have it.
[2:02:05] >> So, where did you say the August 24th
[2:02:07] LPC was going to be?
[2:02:08] >> We do not know yet.
[2:02:09] >> We're going to work through something at
[2:02:10] that board meeting which changes to that
[2:02:12] new location.
[2:02:13] >> No, this is no, we would still
[2:02:15] These board meetings have already been
[2:02:16] approved. It's just a matter of changing
[2:02:17] the times for the meeting.
[2:02:19] >> Oh, just the
[2:02:19] >> Just the times.
[2:02:21] >> We both do September, we have both of
[2:02:22] them.
[2:02:23] Not the other one. Yeah, August 7th. So,
[2:02:25] August, do you want to stay at 9:30 or
[2:02:27] move to the lunch hour since it will not
[2:02:28] be LPC at lunch that day cuz LPC will be
[2:02:30] in the fall.
[2:02:31] >> I will say the I I have got them locked
[2:02:33] in my calendar already, so
[2:02:35] >> Yeah, which is fine.
[2:02:36] If we want to just keep it since they're
[2:02:37] already in the calendars, that's fine.
[2:02:39] >> But, I want to mention this board
[2:02:41] meeting we've held in this location.
[2:02:43] Thank you. This is great, very
[2:02:44] comfortable, it's roomy, it's nice. No
[2:02:47] offense to the League conference room,
[2:02:49] but that room is too small.
[2:02:52] I would be happy to move all our board
[2:02:54] meetings outside of that
[2:02:57] room and find a different location of
[2:02:58] our apartment.
[2:03:02] » Well, Mayor, I think as part of what
[2:03:03] we're rethinking with LPC and others, I
[2:03:05] think we can take all that under
[2:03:07] consideration.
[2:03:08] Cuz right now we do four board meetings
[2:03:10] offsite. We do the Presidential City,
[2:03:13] Local Officials Day mid-year,
[2:03:15] historically we've done annual
[2:03:17] at least right now we're not scheduling
[2:03:19] any offsite there.
[2:03:21] Okay.
[2:03:22] >> I will say this, I thought the League
[2:03:24] staff did a great job on figuring out
[2:03:26] what they would need and how to make
[2:03:28] everything work.
[2:03:30] Um and
[2:03:32] now the staff is happy to help, but it
[2:03:34] does it does involve them packing up
[2:03:37] shop and everything they might
[2:03:39] need and
[2:03:40] kind of hefting it somewhere. So, if we
[2:03:43] were to take all our
[2:03:45] >> Yeah, if we were to take all our
[2:03:46] meetings on the road, that might get to
[2:03:48] be kind of a burden.
[2:03:52] » But I'll be taking it under advisement
[2:03:53] as part of this overall conversation.
[2:03:58] » Unless you propose in there always about
[2:04:00] food and then that's a awesome idea.
[2:04:02] >> [laughter]
[2:04:04] >> My commute is great.
[2:04:06] >> That's true.
[2:04:08] >> Okay, we've reached the end of our
[2:04:10] agenda. If there are no other business,
[2:04:12] I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
[2:04:14] >> So moved.
[2:04:15] >> The motion has been made by
[2:04:16] Councilmember Ervin and seconded by
[2:04:18] Mayor Palmer. All in favor of
[2:04:19] adjourning, please say "Aye."
[2:04:20] >> Aye.
[2:04:22] >> Any opposed? Looks like we are
[2:04:24] adjourned. Thank you all for
[2:04:26] coming up to Land O' Lakes.
[2:04:28] Thanks, everyone.