[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.

Board of Directors Meeting June 22, 2026

Transcript