City Council · 2020-03-31

Test, test.

Hello.

Test.

Sound normal in here?

Yeah, we were—

Hello? Hello?

Hello?

Can you hear me good?

Yeah, I heard it over the—

Hello?

Welcome to the meeting.

Thank you. Who's this?

Is that Jeff Lamson?

It is.

That's a voice I recognize.

This is—

got you live. Yeah. Sound's okay for you?

Yeah.

Perfect.

And you were able to download that attachment just fine?

Download the what?

You were able to download that attachment okay, open it up from Jody?

Yeah.

Perfect.

Perfect.

So then you should see for slide 1, it's just Orem City Council meeting Tuesday, March 31st.

Is that what he'll have, Jeff Lamson?

Uh, yep.

Okay, perfect.

Okay, we'll just wait for everybody else.

Okay, well, I'm going to keep on working, uh, until we get everybody.

That's fair.

Those, uh—

How are you doing?

You know, we're doing okay, honestly.

Pretty good.

Good. Yeah, those scripture stickers aren't gonna tack themselves.

So Steve, I'm hearing a little bit of communication through the download on the computer as well.

Is that—

Well, unless you downloaded the PowerPoint for the natural resources committee.

No, it may be something else. I've got a bunch of stuff open. Maybe I've got something else running.

Hi, this is Debbie. I just got on.

Hi, Debbie.

This is Jeff.

Tom's here too.

Hi, Jeff.

Hi, Tom.

Hey, Tom.

Hello.

Where do we go to see the PowerPoint? Is it on YouTube, or where am I logging on to see that?

No, they sent you a big deck.

A what?

They sent you 107-page slides from Jody.

Oh, okay. So I didn't open those. Okay. So I'll need to do that. Okay. I'll do that.

Hey Steve, are we going to do something more technology-based next time?

It kind of depends on how it goes.

It's—

there's kind of a mixed bag out there with public meetings and Zoom. So we'll— I know Provo's testing some things out. We're going to coordinate with some other cities after this and see what worked and what didn't work, but—

Hmm.

Debbie, were you able to get that open?

Oh, it's saying download failed.

Yeah.

It doesn't like it on my computer. Ashley, can I borrow your phone? I can download these slides.

We got Debbie, Jeff, and Tom. Is there anybody else on the call?

Terry, I'm on the call.

Oh, Terry, great. Terry, do you have— were you able to open that attachment from Jody?

Download right there, the little bubble.

The attachment has all the presentations for today? Yep.

Yes.

Perfect, thank you.

Okay, I'm going to try another computer to see if I can download it on my daughter's. It doesn't like my laptop. But not a problem, I can work through it.

We have somebody just join us.

This is Srinath.

Oh, Ernesto.

This is Brent.

Hey, Brent.

Hey, Brent.

Yes. How's it going?

Good.

Who's this?

This is Jeff.

Oh, hi, Jeff.

This is your chance to give snide remarks to each other and nobody will know who it was. Brent, were you able to open that— Brent, were you able to open that attachment okay?

The one on the Sleepy Ridge map?

The one from— yeah, yeah, that would be the first one. The one from Jody. First slide says Orem City Council meeting.

Yeah, I've got it.

Okay, great.

Debbie, any luck?

We're going to try my daughter's computer, see if her browser will bring it up.

Debbie, pay your bills.

I do pay my bills, thank you very much.

Hey Debbie, you're one of the youngest ones on the council. You should be able to figure out this technology.

You know, my husband's not working here today. He's working from at his office today. Otherwise, I do have a technology husband and he would have done this for me.

Hey, Tom?

Yes, sir?

Your request for a different form of technology may require us to put on a tie or something. No, no, I wouldn't.

I still gotta— I'll still wear sweatpants and a ball cap.

I thought, Tom, you were dressed up, had a tie on.

Maybe you all saw this before or something. Mayor, is that you?

That is me. How are you all? Good.

Mayor, were you able to open your attachment okay?

Yes. Uh-huh.

Perfect.

Maybe you all saw the article, but Walmart is reporting higher sales in tops but not necessarily bottoms of outfits.

I don't think I'll go there.

No.

I just meant shirts and pants, not—

Dave?

Hey, Mr. Nesto.

Dave, do we have you on the phone yet?

Yes, I'm here. Perfect.

And Dave, you were able to open it up okay?

And Laura Willis has joined.

What's that, Steve?

Dave, you were able to open the attachment okay?

Yes, no problem.

Perfect.

So Steve, I just had one question for you.

Yep.

What is going to be our meal tonight and who's delivering?

Yeah, we're, uh, yeah, that's, uh, probably a good question for Tammy.

Or did that get forgotten?

I think it's leftovers.

We are, uh, gift card.

We did get some food for staff here to support a local business, Jersey Mike's.

All right, that's good. Save us some, we'll come in and get it after this is all over. Okay.

Is anybody on the council of the city?

Nope, nobody, nobody here.

Uh, no.

So we don't have to have an anchor, uh, with the executive order from the governor? No anchor is required.

Jamie, are you on yet?

Yes, I am.

Perfect.

Greg, are you there?

Yes, I am.

So Steve, once we start the meeting, I'll do a roll call. Oh, perfect.

What's that, Pete? Oh, Pete wanted me to say you've never looked better.

In my pajamas?

Hello?

Yes.

Hello.

Dave Mayer, those fanny packs look great.

I don't By the way, Sam and Mark both think this all happened because they're not on the council, that the world fell apart.

Well, uh, well, okay, well, it's 3:30 on my clock. Why don't we go ahead and start our meeting?

Okay.

Um, I'd like to read the— an item here at the beginning of the work session. Hopefully you've all got your speakers up and running. Uh, so we welcome everyone to our Orem City Council meeting Tuesday, March 31st, 2020 at 3:30 PM. Our work session, I would like to read the following. Minimize the potential spread of COVID-19. If you could all mute your phones unless you're speaking. If we could have everyone mute your phone unless you're speaking. So to minimize the potential spread of COVID-19, and as authorized by Utah Governor Gary Herbert's March 18, 2020 executive order, the Orem City Council and Planning Commission will be an all-electronic meeting. There will be no public access to the Orem City Council chambers. Those desiring to view or participate Participants in the meeting must do so electronically on—

Your line has been muted.

If I could, if I could ask everybody to mute their phone unless they're speaking.

Your line has been unmuted.

I would also like to ask that when we do— if you could announce your name when you go to make a comment. So I would like to go through I'm going to go through a list of those that I have that I believe are on the phone, and if I miss anybody, please let me know. So I'd like to begin with Brent Sumner. Are you on, Brent?

Yes.

Okay. Terry Peterson, are you on?

I am, Mayor.

Okay. Debbie Luray, are you on?

Yes, I am.

Okay. Jeff Lampson, are you on?

I'm here.

Okay. Tom McDonald, are you on?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Dave Spencer, are you here? Dave?

Yes.

Okay.

Jamie, are you on? Jamie Davidson?

Yes, present.

And Steve Downs, are you on?

I'm here.

Okay, Jason Bench, are you there?

He will be joining us when his presentation's ready.

Okay, Jody Bates, is she there?

Yes.

I take that as a no.

She's here.

Greg Stevens, are you there?

Yes.

Okay, Brandon Nelson, are you there?

Yes, I am.

Ernesto, are you there?

Yes, I'm here.

Nicole, are you online?

Yes, sir.

And Pete, are you online?

I'm here.

Do we have anybody else online I have missed outside of those from, uh, Lewis Young?

Bren Bybee is here.

Gary Giles is here.

Okay, Chief Giles. Jason Earl is here. I'm sorry, who?

Jason Earl.

Okay, Chief Earl.

Ryan Clark.

Okay, Ryan Clark.

Carl Hurst is here as well.

Carl Hurst. Okay, anybody else? Okay, well, let's go ahead and start the meeting. Again, as I mentioned, I would ask that as you're speaking that you please mute your phone and that when you do go to speak, you announce who it is that is speaking. So we would like to begin with the discussion on an amended contract with Kisti Ridge. Carl Hurst is our presenter, and we have Lewis Young there. Laura Lewis, I believe, is in the house, and Teresa Pinker— Pinkhall is there. Is that correct?

That's correct.

Okay, well, let's go ahead and start it. Uh, Carl, we'll have you lead off, and then turn the time over to Laura and Theresa.

Mayor, this is Bren Bybee. I've got Carl here as well. Carl sits on our executive board for Sleepy Ridge, and so he's helped kind of facilitate the discussions with the Sleepy Ridge board and, and in gathering information and in meetings with Lewis and Young. But perhaps just kind of to introduce the subject, I wanted to give a little bit of some of the historical information about the agreement with Sleepy Ridge and just some background essentially to— before we kind of go into the deep dive of analysis that Lewis and Young has has sure that would be fine.

It sounds like somebody just joined the meeting. I don't know who that.

Sorry, Mayor.

It's Charlene.

I apologize.

Okay, thank you. Please mute your phone, and when you speak, please announce who you are. And Bren, go ahead.

So if you can turn to the page that. I guess the second page there that says history of Sleepy Ridge Agreement.

One more thing, Bryn. Could we have whoever just came on—

Yeah, this is Chris Shirkey.

Okay.

All right.

Sorry, Bryn, for all the interruptions. Go ahead.

Nope.

Understandable. So back in 1993 when I was in junior high, but when Steven and Pete were in elementary, that's when the city first started these conversations about looking into, first of all, kind of the feasibility of adding a golf course. There was a series of feasibility studies and updates, again, that began in '93, but then were updated in preceding years— subsequent years, rather— in '97, 2001, 2003. All of these studies at the time essentially confirmed that, given the golf course market, that it was a financially feasible endeavor to enter into. Then in 1997, that's when the city actually acquired the 177 acres associated with With Sleepy Ridge. At first, the city had entered into a contract with Thanksgiving Point Management Company to essentially operate and construct the golf course. But we'll see how that changed here as we kind of march through this. There was an initial kind of stalling of the construction of the golf course so that the city could get the appropriate wetland approvals and to also figure out how the whole financing would work. On the— I'll still get to it. On the next page, I'll go through kind of the summary of the different amendments that have happened with the contract. But essentially, the city started to paper this in 2000, and there were a series of negotiations related to the contract. up through 2008 when the golf course actually opened. So then in 2008, by this time, Golden Landscaping had become the constructing and managing company, and that's when they completed the golf course specifically, but needed to essentially figure out the financing for the clubhouse and the office suites. So if you'll move to the next page, this is where it goes into the contract amendments. So starting in the year 2000 is when the contract was assigned from Thanksgiving Point to Golden Landscaping. Then in 2001 and 2003, those amendments centered around essentially lengthening the time period upon which the golf course or Golden Landscaping would pay back and try to achieve essentially a cost recovery where they would get back in the revenues associated are charged at the golf course get back their initial costs and investment that they put into constructing, building the golf course. So like I briefly mentioned previously, in 2008 is when, in addition to Golden Landscaping, the Suites at Sleepy Ridge was an added party to the contract. And that's when then the suites endeavored to construct the larger clubhouse and the office suites associated with the clubhouse. And that's the development that we're talking about. So let's see. So also at that point, that's when the associated revenues with the office suites was also included as part of the cost recovery aspect of this agreement. And then at that time, the, the agreement was also extended to 2046, as that was the anticipated time upon which the full or near cost recovery would occur. And so that's where the current Sleepy Ridge Agreement is at. If you'll follow me with— to the next page, this essentially summarizes— essentially regardless of the different amendments that have taken place, there's essentially these 4 main aspects or principles that have always been kind of maintained in, in any contract iteration with, with, uh, with Golden Landscape related to Sleepy Ridge. So first, it was always been intended that the city would provide the real property for the golf course, all, um, that Golden Landscaping and the suites, uh, would construct, maintain, and operate the course and the clubhouse and office suites with their own funds. Third, that Golden Landscaping, the suites—

Thank you.

Would have a period of time wherein they could recoup their initial costs and investment through the operation of the course and leasing the office suites. And then finally, that at the end of a recoupment period, or, you know, a term of the contract that then Golden Landscaping would revert back the rights and any rights associated with the clubhouse, the office suites, the golf course would all revert back to the city. So with that kind of background and history, I would like to turn the time over to Laura Lewis unless there's any kind of initial questions about that background or history. Hearing none, Laura, if you were to—

Mayor, this is Jamie. If I could just add maybe a little bit of background to this conversation. As you well know, the The intent of this contract was always to be a relationship where both parties would benefit from the golf course and the relationship. And several years ago, we began having a conversation with Golden Landscaping, specifically Golden Holt, in regards to the agreement that we forged initially and the performance of that agreement to this point. And his suggestion and representation was that he has struggled to recoup his investment as part of this relationship that we developed long term. And he asked if the city would be willing to consider amending the agreement to extend the term of the agreement beyond 2046. With this in mind and understanding that there would need to be a basis for that extension, we asked Lewis Young Robertson and Birmingham to take a look at how the golf course, how this relationship, how the suites have done financially since inception of this relationship, and if consideration should be extended to Golden Landscaping in extending the lease beyond and the relationship beyond 2046. And so it was that point that we retained Lewis Young to help us look through the financials of the golf course and the golf suites and to help us come to an understanding as to whether it may be financially advantageous not not just for Golden Landscaping but for the City of Orem to extend the lease relationship.

Laura?

Let me just ask a quick question. In the meeting invite we got, it indicated there might be a delay. So when someone finishes, am I to wait for a bit of time to see if there's any questions or Can we just charge ahead?

Laura, this is Jamie. Everybody on the meeting is connected to a live feed.

Okay.

The public that is seeing the presentation is on a delay.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you. That's why I was pausing before, but it was good because then it allowed you to, you to jump in. So I'm going to add a bit of entertainment to the history. When the golf course was first being discussed with the city, when Ben was in junior high— he's just trying to make me feel old, I think— Jim Reams was the city manager, and he called me and said the city is contemplating financing a golf course, and they would like to do it based on golf course revenues. And to do it as a lease revenue bond where the golf course acted as the security, and what did I think about that. And I said, well, the golf courses are really hard to make money in Utah. Green fees are low. We talked about that a little bit. And I said, but, you know, we'd need a revenue study. And he said, oh, and we don't want to open on Sunday. And I said, deal over. I said, I can finance this for you if you want to pledge to sales tax or franchise fees or something and not stay open on Sunday, that would be fine. But if, you know, the city would like to close it on Sunday, I certainly respect that, but it won't— you know, it's going to hurt your cash flow because they run that tight. So just a little bit of interesting trivia related to, you know, how the city kind of started looking at other arrangements. As you see the detail of the study that Teresa has undertaken. you will probably see very quickly that operating a golf course is not something you want to rush right out and do, unless you believe our weather's going to change significantly year-round or something like that. So with that, we— Theresa has spent a lot of time working on data that she'll walk through here. One of the things that we did look at that she'll talk about very briefly is, you know, we wanted to make sure that they were operating with, you know, in good stead compared to their peers, that there wasn't anything, you know, okay, this golf course itself isn't making a lot of money, if any money, but is that because they're just not operating well? And that's not what this study shows. We will certainly lead you to a point where it's certainly our advice that you consider extending the agreement. And with that, I'll turn it over to Theresa to walk you through the detail.

Great.

This is Teresa Pinkel. I'm on slide 5, understanding of agreement, and I'll go through these quickly. Brandon and Jamie have given a good overview of the course and the suites. But this analysis did consider both the golf course and the clubhouse and the suites or the commercial space above the golf clubhouse. The initial developer investment in the golf course was $5.6 million. And the developer investment in the suites or the commercial space above that golf clubhouse was $6.4 million for a total investor development of $12 million. And as was mentioned, the agreement is set to expire in 2046. And the overall intention, as Bryn and Jamie had mentioned, is— was to reimburse the developer for some or most of the costs associated with the golf course. So, going to slide 6, as Laura mentioned, one of the things that we wanted to take a look at was how the golf course is currently performing. Just some information of note, there was a new golf pro hired in 2018. Most recent rate adjustments were in 2018. Historically, the golf rounds or equivalent 9-hole rounds were not tracked, but from 2017 to 2019, they have increased, showing good performance. And as you can see on the comparison courses, in comparison to some of the neighboring Courses in the area, they are performing quite well at 58,000 net ball equivalent rounds in 2018. Moving to slide 7, we took a look at the actual revenue and expenses and net income for the golf course. And as you can see, they have operated at a deficit. And cumulative payback line on the far right column suggests that through 2019, The payback— the developer had not received any compensation for that investment, operating at a negative $1.1 million loss.

Theresa, could I jump in for just a second? Could we remind everybody to mute their phones? We're getting some feedback, and I think somebody hasn't muted their phone.

Thank you.

Great.

So moving from slide 7 onto slide 8.

Yes.

We took this historic information and built out a pro forma to project what the revenues would be moving forward. And you can see the revenue assumptions that we utilized, including a 2.5% increase in green fees every 3 years. Cart fees at 2%, rental fees, driving range fees 2%. Wages and benefits were grown at 2% and other expenses at 1.8% based on historic averages. Moving to slide 9, we've summarized the projected growth through 2046 when the contract is set to expire, which shows a cumulative payback, which is a negative $8.6 million, suggesting that the developer is not recouped any of the investment through the end of that contract. And if we were to project it out through '60, um, that would continue to decline, um, to negative $16.7 million. Moving on to slide 10, again, kind of wanting to look at the golf course in comparison to other courses throughout the region and throughout the state. Um, Sleepy Ridge is performing Very well in the top half of the comparisons that we pulled in terms of green fee revenue. Moving on to slide 11. The green fees and the cart fees are quite competitive with those courses in the region, suggesting that they are working diligently to provide the best services that they can at competitive rates. Moving on to slide 12. Golf court revenue, similar situation, potentially a little lower just due to the walkability of the course, but very much on par with their— Moving on to slide 13, we looked at the driving range revenue. And again, they're up in the top half of the comps in terms of revenue that's generated from that source. Moving on to slide 14. The driving range fees for a large or small bucket of golf balls is competitive, if not at the top of the pack. And moving to slide 15. We then wanted to take a look at how the suites, or that commercial space above the clubhouse, was performing. And it has operated in the positive. With a cumulative payback to date of $2.4 million. Moving—

uh-oh.

I'm receiving a notification I've been muted. Am I still— are you able to hear me still?

I can hear you, but I couldn't hear you a minute ago.

We can hear you. We can hear you.

We're on slide 15.

Well, we are, we are.

The slides seem to be a little bit behind.

What slide are you on right now?

We're on slide 15.

Slide 15. Yeah, I'm on 15.

Okay, let's advance to slide 16. So, here on slide 16, we're pulling together the projected revenue for the suites in that commercial space. Through the end of the current contract period of 2046, we're looking at a cumulative payback of $17 million. If the contract were extended through 2060, we're projecting a cumulative payback of $26.9 million. These projections are a result of—

if you advance the slide.

An assumption that revenue will be comprised of event income growing at 2%, lease income growing at 1%. And one of the reasons that this is a little lower than may have been expected is the competition for Class B office space in Utah County currently. And we do have those expenses growing at 2.5%. So this was an opportunity to take a look at how both the individual entities, the suites and the golf course, are performing individually. And as we advance to slide 18, we wanted to review what that picture looked like on a combined basis. So on slide 18, you'll see that despite negative Net operating income for the golf course throughout the life of the venture. Because of the positive revenue coming in from the suites, they are operating on a cumulative payback of $1.26 million together. As we looked at the combined net income for both ventures jointly together, if you'll advance to slide 19. The current 2046 payback is estimated at $8.4 million. And if the contract was extended, it's projected to reach $10.1 million, which still falls short of the $12 million that was initially invested by the developer for both ventures jointly.

Teresa, this is the mayor. I have a question for you on the clubhouse. Part of it Part of it is for golf, part of it is office suites, but you also have the wedding receptions. Can you tell me where that is? Is that included in the suites as far as income?

It is.

Yes, the wedding and event revenue is all captured in the suites pro forma.

Okay, thank you.

So as we advance to slide 20, the combined net Income. This basically breaks down and shows that even though the suites has been operating with positive revenue, because of the net operating income of the LINCS being negative, it's pulled the whole pro forma down to achieve that total payback in 2046 of $8.4 million and the projected $10.2 million in 2060. And if you'll advance to slide 21, Lara will review some considerations relative to the contract extension.

Thank you, Theresa. Are there any other questions of the brief walkthrough of those numbers? Hearing none, then as Jamie indicated, the original agreement was intended to pay back developers for their expense? Uh-oh.

I text my question to Brad to make it easier. Brad, can you answer?

Oh, okay.

So, Laura, the question from Tom is—

yeah, it's— Councilmember McDonald says here that all of these slides show a net income. He said that often these analyses are done with EBITDA. Do we have those numbers, and how does that— how would that kind of impact your analysis?

We have taken into account their payment of interest and taxes, so all of that has been taken into account. I mean, behind the— these are summary slides. Behind the summary slides is a number of Excel spreadsheets with a lot of that detail in it. We could certainly walk him through, but we are really trying to look at this after interest expense and taxes for them. I don't think we took into account depreciation, did we, Theresa?

Depreciation was removed from the projection.

Right. What we did do, though, to, you know, in a way capture the impact of depreciation, again, not what that would do to their income tax ability, but Certainly, the idea behind depreciation is an asset depreciates and you're going to have to, you know, put more money back into it to, you know, better it and, you know, keep it up and such. We have added on the suites in particular an amount every, I want to say, 3 to 5 years. Teresa remembers the detail, I'm sure, better than me, relative to what they're going to have to do as tenants move in and out and tenant improvements and to keep the building up so that it can be leased at the highest practical rates for the class of office that it is.

And Tom, I think—

This is Terry Peterson. I have one question about the property that was developed along the golf course. How does that tie in? Was that something the city did? Was that something that the developer did? A combination?

So my understanding, others may have more detail to add to this. Again, I was back then, I was involved in a few brief discussions relative to the city wanting to at least consider developing and owning the golf course in that area. But there was property development adjacent to the golf course. And as Jamie and Brian and Teresa will tell you, I brought up certainly more than one time that The developer of that property likely was able to sell those lots for a higher margin, whether it was slightly higher or a lot higher, I can't speak to that, than they would have had the golf course not been there. We were not asked to try to address that. I'm not sure the data would even be available, or if we could find data, it would be very defensible to try and make that determination of what kind of additional revenue the developer would have made off of those lots with, with the golf course location being next to those lots.

So, Laura, this is Jamie. My understanding is that the, the opportunity associated with development along the golf course was something that was in the hands of Golden, Mr. Holt, and his partners. I also understand that the process or the development of those properties obviously took place in the middle of a pretty significant recessionary period, and I know Mr. Holt had challenges associated with some of his partners, so on and so forth. And so I can't speak specifically to everything that was related to the development. but I do know that the relationship that was forged was the city had an interest in the golf course and the development community outside the city had interest in the property that surrounded the course. And up until most recently, several areas in and around the course in Orem have remained undeveloped. I think Some of the outstanding parcels that remain to be developed in and around the golf course are actually in the City of Bayonne.

So, Jamie, this is the mayor. I have one question. When that land was set up for development, did Golden Holt buy that land from the city? Was he given that land? Can you tell us about that?

That, that might be a question. Obviously, this, this relationship predates most of us on staff. I do know that Greg was party to drafting these agreements, and he might be able to speak to ownership of that property and how the city came into the property initially.

This is Greg. The city acquired the property from an entity known as SNET and some of the local farmers in the area. That was the golf course property. I don't recall the city conveying any of that property to Golden Holt or Golden Landscaping. But I don't recall how they acquired their piece. For the residential development.

So we as the city were not involved in the transaction of the ground that has been developed?

No.

Okay, any other questions? Any other questions on that?

Mayor, I just want to add, this is Debbie. My home is 12 years old and I live across the street from the 9th hole. So I think my home was one of the first to be developed. So kind of gives you a feel for the last 12 years. We have a few lots that are left to be developed. But my My area is pretty much filled except for 2 lots.

Okay, thank you.

All right, so the— if it's not clear to everyone, we can certainly bounce back to that slide, but I would argue that you do not want to be in the business of owning a golf course. It is very, very difficult to make money on golf in Utah. And notwithstanding what the feasibility studies said at the time, many feasibility studies said at the time that golf would be a positive revenue thing. I can point you to other cities who had studies done by the same entity that said the same thing, and they have again experienced the same kind of thing. It's just a hard business to make money in in Utah. So, it's not likely— I mean, I honestly can't imagine a scenario where, you know, you could take over the golf course and the city could operate it at even a break-even, quite frankly. Payback can only occur to the original developer, or if you think about, well, if the city took it back, you know, when the original agreement ends, then, you know, we could run the golf course and the suites. And I'm sure, you know, that may have crossed some of your minds, but then you have to ask yourself, okay, we pretty much know. I mean, to me it's a given that the golf course is going to operate in the red. Then you have to ask yourself the question of how are we, you know, how is the city suited to be the owner of office suite rental and, you know, hosting of wedding rental? And it's not a business that cities are typically designed for, and, you know, I I would worry that you would be subject to political pressure to keep the rents low and, oh, I've got my little business there, as opposed to treating it like a business, if you will. And without, you know, some reasonable revenue off of those suites and upkeep on those suites, it would be very, very difficult to— for the city to operate this at a, you know, at a break-even or at a profit. Payback for, you know, under the original agreement can only occur if we look at it on a combined basis. And even then, as we look at it, the developer won't fully recoup his original investment, even with an extension to the agreement. As Theresa showed you on the preceding page, so on page 20, the current agreement is scheduled to expire in 2046. If you agree to extend that to 2060 based on our projections, and again, we certainly grapple with these projections go out a long time. We get that. But it's the, you know, they're the best and most reasonable projections we can come up with based on the data we have today. And even with that extension, you know, the developer would get back $10 million of the original $12 million invested. And that is without taking any interest expense or return on investment into account. And I don't know many of you That would— that I could say, loan me $100 today, and I will give you $100 back in 40 years, and we're good, right? Or in this case, I'll give you back $90 in 40 years. But that's effectively, you know, what will be happening under the extension of this agreement. So with that—

I've got a question. David Spencer here.

Yes.

So if we look at slide 20, You know, the, the agreement ends in 2046 at $8.387 million.

Yes.

So we're kicking the can down the road another 14 years and it's $10.1 million. He's still not going to recoup his money. So my question is, are we just going to keep kicking the can down the road? I mean, extending, extending, extending until 2085 or '90 so he can recoup his money? To me, it's a bad business deal from the beginning. And I don't— my thing is I don't know if Jamie or somebody can answer this, but if we own the property, is there any way that you could put single-family homes on that? Okay, and this is Jamie, and that's actually a very good question. I guess from the perspective of the city and the perspective of the surrounding neighborhood, this property was always intended or envisioned to be open space. And so if the city ever went down a path that differed from that expectation, I think it would be incredibly controversial. And based on obviously other communities who have had similar discussions and efforts, it has been very, very difficult. I echo Laura's feelings. I've worked for 3 cities. All 3 of them have had golf courses. All 3 of them cannot make money on golf. So really, the, the reality for, I guess, me as a city manager, as I look at this relationship with Sleepy Ridge, I see it as the most ideal of the 3 relationships That I have heretofore been involved in. The first relationship I was involved in was the city owning a golf course outright. The second relationship I was associated with involved 3 cities having ownership of a golf course, and now we have this relationship where we own property, we own the open space, but we have an operator Who maintains and runs the facility as a golf course with zero out-of-pocket on the part of the city operationally. So the question that I have kind of posed to staff and myself is, come 2046, do we want to be in the golf course business? If we look exclusively at being in the golf course business, we know because we have 20 years of history That suggests, or at least I can represent more than that, 20-plus years of professional history that says you're not going to make money. The only way we can make money is if not only we manage the golf course and its operations, but we also assume responsibility for the suites. And at that point then, do we want to become a landlord? As a, um, as a city. And we have a unique facility as well in that I'm not necessarily sure we could, for example, condominiumize that building and sell that building to other interests without obviously needing to keep a portion of it for golf course operations in perpetuity if we maintain that course Or if we maintain that property as a golf course. So as I looked at this relationship and I looked at where we are as a city, the primary question I asked myself is, does the city want to be in the golf business? You know I love golf, but golf does not pencil and is not a business that will ever return an investment to the city. city, but rather would be an additional responsibility of the city's general fund, a city's already limited general fund. So, from my perspective, in extending the agreement, we extend the opportunity to continue to have open space in a part of the city that I think residents have come to expect. We continue to have a golf course amenity. which many are clearly enjoying based on the number of rounds that are played there annually. And we also have an opportunity to benefit from something that is really zero out of pocket on the part of the city.

This is Brent. I have a question.

Go ahead.

I was just thinking about Debbie's comments. Were you— did you have any knowledge that this was an open space? Is it in your HOA or your— any kind of agreement?

Nothing in my HOA has anything about the golf course. I do know that those who live on the golf course like it, all of their— the fact that their homes were designed to have Patios that overlook it. So those who live there like it, but our HOA does not include anything related to— our only consternation is golfers who park on our street, and that's the only thing that we get frustrated with. But besides that, it's a positive amenity.

So, but there's no expectation that's going to be open space forever?

Never been a topic that would even come up on our HOA meetings. I have no idea. I've only lived here about 14, 15 months, so I could ask.

Well, I just wonder, with you as a new homeowner, you had surely run into that as being some kind of notice that that's going to continue to be open space. I just, I don't know, I was just wondering, you know, forever, that's hard to say that's going to be open space.

In my opinion. Brent, this is Jamie. I guess the, I guess the question you could ask is, if the city were ever to take any of its parks and to make a decision to develop those parks in a way different than what is the current use, would you face opposition? And we, we have even faced opposition When we have tried to site certain amenities in a park, that doesn't speak to us trying to change the use of a particular property.

If it matters at all, I can tell you— I'm sorry, this is Laura Lewis. Anecdotally, again, because we work with so many cities, Every time a city has much discussion about closing down golf courses, it's like everyone in the city you would think is a golfer. I mean, it's— I think it's called— I can't think of the name of the golf course. Jamie might know, but it's on the west side of South Jordan.

Glenmore.

Glenmore. They were going to— that was owned by a private party, and the private party was going to sell it, which they had every right to to do, and the citizens pretty much came unglued and told the city they needed to figure out how to buy it, and the city didn't really want to buy it. In the end, the city worked out something with the developer, and they developed part of the property along it. Salt Lake City several years ago was going to close down some of their parks. Again, people came unglued. So it really is kind of a political lightning rod, notwithstanding the fact that, you know, the majority Of us. I mean, I golf. I'm not, I'm not a golfer like Jamie. I'm not a diehard or good golfer, but it really— that the loss of that kind of open green space really does tend to light people up.

This is Tom. I have a question or comment, if I may.

Go ahead.

So there was another golf course we closed not too long ago that should be fairly recent in our memory. And many of the people who had a backyard they thought was going to be a golf course no longer have that backyard as a golf course, and they don't like it. But we didn't alter the plans based on that thought of those neighbors. So, why I'm not in favor of saying, hey, we could develop this into a development. I'm okay with the extension. What I don't want is that extension to come back and bite the city. If sometime in the future they try to get out of— we try to break that lease like we did with the Strattons. I'd have to pay— I'd hate to pay for another 15 or 20 years because we've extended it at this point. Is there some caveat that allows that correction at the end? And then, Jamie, I've also texted a couple questions. Don't know if you can address those too.

Go ahead, Jamie. Are you there?

I'm not sure if we lost Jamie.

Yeah, I'm, I'm here. I'm sorry, Mayor. So the question is, at the end of the lease term, who would assume the ownership of the clubhouse. The clubhouse would become property of the city. Virtually— and then the other comments are virtually all golf courses make money off the land developer for the surrounding area. And I can't speak to obviously the business dealings that Mr. Holt has had with his partners. I know it has been a rocky road. I did make him aware of this meeting today. Obviously, the, the interesting nature of the meeting in terms of it being electronic didn't allow him to participate, but I do know that he has an interest in properties. I don't believe he has any interest any longer in those properties, but I know there was a time he did have interest in those properties and actively was developing those properties.

So, Jamie, this is the mayor. One thing I wanted to mention, I am aware of what's occurred with Cedar Hills and their golf course up there. I know that they were losing money every year and they did not turn it around. They were going to sell it and the neighbors against it. But the only way they turned it around was by putting in a decent clubhouse with a wedding reception center and then taking some of the holes and changing them into developable land and developing that land. And those 2 things together gave them a positive return on investment and has allowed them to hang on to the golf course. But I know it was very tentative and they had to do both of those to make it work financially.

And Mayor, this is Jamie. I am not sure if this is still the case, but for many years, the Cedar Hills Golf Course, they actually assessed a $10 to $12 monthly utility charge Um, uh, to the golf course, to their citizens for the golf course. So they actually had a bond that they needed to pay and meet, and they couldn't meet it with the, uh, revenues that were coming from course operations. So they actually then started charging their residents. A monthly $10 to $12 surcharge for that course. So, you know, and I actually— Mr. Holt is listening in on the line. I actually got a text from him, and he has represented that he has no property interest in the, uh, in any of the property surrounding the golf course anymore, with the exception of the pond.

Okay. Okay. Are there any other questions?

Mayor, this is Bren Bybee.

Okay, Bren, go ahead.

There was one question that Councilmember McDonald had in terms of how are we addressing what happens if we were to go to cancel the lease in the future by mutual consent? Greg, I don't know if you could speak to that and/or, I guess, assert whether that's something we might include.

That's definitely an issue that we could address if we decide to amend the contract. Just a matter of deciding what the terms would be.

This is Terry.

Just let me just ask a question, see if I understand this right. It costs the city nothing and it provides a great service for our citizens. Um, am I— does it cost us anything?

No.

And this is Jamie. That's, that's the argument that I would make, is we have a wonderful resource and asset in the community that many other communities struggle to pay for. and we don't have to pay for anything.

So the guy that's at risk seems to be Golden. We're fine, it costs us nothing, and we have this great facility, unless I don't understand something, but.

So Jamie, another question. Are there penalties if Golden were to walk away from the current state?

No, under the current agreement.

Okay, other than the fact that we are in first place and take ownership of everything.

Well, I mean, and Greg can speak to this as well, but Mr. Holt could approach the city at any point in the future and say, I've met with my, my business team and we've decided we want to get out of the golf business and we're going to walk away from the investment that we've made. Obviously, we're going to maintain responsibility for any of the debt service that still remains on the property, but we're going to get out of the golf business and we're going to give you back this course. From a city, I'm looking at that and saying that automatically is going to require an ongoing operational investment from the general fund. And frankly, I'm not excited about that opportunity. My desire is to maintain this healthy relationship with Mr. Holtz and his team prospectively, because as was noted, we are the recipients of an asset.

Thank you.

that benefits our community that we don't have to pay for.

One thing I'd like to mention is that if, if in fact, uh, Golden were to walk away from it, we are the owner of the building and of the golf course. Um, has the building been paid off? Do we know that?

No, my understanding is that, that both, both the golf course and the, um, and the clubhouse are subject to, to financing.

That, that is correct. That is our understanding. And I can't remember, Teresa, you probably will, even though I have looked at it. When does their current— they've rolled, they had like a line of credit that they then put to And they rolled it to fixed. Um, Theresa, can you remind me of the roughly the dollar amount and when it expires? I'll try to look for it on the K drive if you don't have it handy.

While you're looking, can I ask a question, Mayor? This is Tom McDonald.

Go ahead.

First of all, I thought Terry summarized my feelings 100%. We have a great asset that benefits the community. I'm in favor of extending the lease. I just don't want a potential 20 years down the road for that extension to be costing the city of, of Orem like it did when the Stratton broke their 99-year lease and still had 50 years left. So I'm in favor of extending it. Think it's a wonderful asset. Grateful for Mr. Holt and his family who operate a golf course. And while I don't golf there, I have had wedding receptions there and had other social events there. So grateful for it. Its influence in our community and want to do all we can to help secure a long-term relationship.

Um, Laura, could you— it sounds like you don't have the info, but this is the mayor. Could you get us the info of how much—

Yes, Mayor.

Yeah, we, we have that information. Teresa, did you find it?

Mayor, again, this is Jamie. I did receive a text from Mr. Holt. He represented that the golf course is not encumbered, but the suites are encumbered.

Okay. And no, how much?

I don't—

he— is that Teresa? This is Teresa.

I am struggling with my computer, but I do have that information if you give me just 1 second.

Mayor, this is Debbie.

Can I—

I'm also in favor of sending those. Since I live in this neighborhood, the quality of life this golf course offers, the positive it is in this neighborhood, is a quality of life issue. And I think it's not costing us anything. I played the course last week and it's a wonderful course. So I really think that it makes sense to extend it and it's well maintained. And it's— this neighborhood really loves this course. We love the—

we love the geese, we love the pond, we love walking trails.

It's a beautiful amenity for our city, as well as a lot of residents in the surrounding city who love it.

Mayor, Mayor, this is Amy. Mr. Holtz— Mr. Holtz has represented $2.4 million.

This is Theresa.

That is the information that was provided by Caroline. It's $2.4 million, and the payoff is anticipated in 2038.

And do we know how much square footage is in that building?

I do not have the square footage amount.

Okay, well, that's just information I would like to learn. Unless anybody else has a question, we can, we can go on. Mayor, I have a question. Yes, go ahead.

Yes, this is Brent. I just, yeah, I, I see no problems extending that, but my question is, in 20 years, does it just pass down? The LLC's passed down or bought from by someone else? How's that work, the new ownership? You know what, if—

I mean, so Greg could be assigned. So according to the—

this is Greg. According to the agreement, uh, he can't assign it without written consent from us.

Oh, so he can't sell his LLC and ownership in?

Could you repeat that, please?

I just wonder, he, he has to get the city's approval on, uh, 20 years, 30 years when Mr. Holt's not here, wherever that ownership goes.

If he wants to assign the rights of either Golden Landscaping or the suites under the contract It would require approval from the city in writing.

Okay.

Okay.

That's answered my question. Thank you.

And remember, Jamie, go ahead, Jamie. This is in response to the question as to the square footage, 40,000 square feet.

And this is Greg again, just to clarify a couple of points that have been brought up. The building that we refer to as the clubhouse is actually several condominium units. The bottom floor, which is mainly the clubhouse, is actually owned by the city and leased to Golden Landscaping pursuant to the same lease that the golf course is leased to them. The upper units are owned by the suites, and those are the units that revert back to the city. Under the current agreement in 2046. The other point I wanted to make is that there is a small cost to the city for the golf course. In the agreement, we, we agree to provide discounted irrigation water for the golf course. So that is just to be totally upfront. That is a cost to the city.

Yes, and this is Jamie. And in addition to that, we have been for many years making plans to provide treated water from our wastewater reclamation facility to both the golf course and Lakeside Park. And this summer we will begin work on doing just that. So we will actually transition the golf course off of the city's culinary source. and hopefully exclusively onto reclaimed water from the city's water reclamation plant.

So, Jamie, this is the mayor speaking. So it appears that we have ownership of the land and ownership of the building. Full ownership would occur in 2038. Uh, we own the bottom floor right now. Uh, truly, this is a great asset. The land is very valuable. The building is of good quality and valuable. And I think this is a nice service for our residents. So I'm interested in extending to allow Roland the chance to recoup his investment. There are other people that operate golf courses. Uh, that land can be operated by other operators. Um, and the fact that it is bringing in income, uh, maybe not as much as you would like, it is bringing in income through the building itself to help offset part of the golf losses, I think is valuable. So I would suggest that, uh, depending on how everybody feels, that we move ahead and look at setting up a lease agreement extension. Any comments or questions?

This is Debbie. I'm supportive of that.

So, Mayor, this is Jeff. I think one of the things with this also is The opportunity that it allows multiple generations to use this space. I mean, I'm down there not as often as I would like to be, but fairly regularly, and it's interesting to see the cross-section of people that you see down there enjoying that space. You know, you have older citizens, or I don't know where they, you know, if they are come from Orem or from surrounding communities, but everything down to, you know, teenagers and younger children. And so I think it's a wonderful thing if we can continue to maintain that. Mayor, this is Jamie. Based on your representation What I would like to suggest is that we bring forward an amendment, an amended agreement with Sleepy Ridge to the city council for consideration. Obviously, we would like the opportunity to again sit down with Mr. Holt and review obviously this conversation, review the agreement, but return it back to you for consideration and potential action.

Thank you.

Either on the 14th of April or the 28th of April.

I'm fine with that. Any comments from the council?

I concur. This is Tom.

This is Debbie. I'm good with that.

I'm good with it. This is Jeff. I agree with that. Taking into consideration Tom's comments, Tom's comments, just kind of looking down the road.

This is Terry, and I absolutely agree.

Sorry, I lost you for a minute. If there's— are there any other comments? Then, Laura, we thank you for the presentation. Let's go ahead and move on.

Thank you.

So we'd like to go to our budget discussion for fiscal year 2019-2020 with Brandon Nelson and Nicole LaRue, and turn the time over to—

Okay, thank you, Mayor.

This is Brandon Nelson.

Mayor, this is Jamie.

This is Jamie.

May I give a brief introduction? Appreciate Brandon and Nicole and all of their efforts in recent weeks. We felt very good about the path that we were forging for the '21 fiscal year '21 budget, and we're kind of buttoning things up about 3 or 4 weeks ago in relation to the budget. And then, of course, this recent pandemic has thrown the world really into a certain degree of chaos. And as a result of that, it has required us not only to revisit next year's budget, but also to have conversations with our departments about This current fiscal year.

Sounds like you're getting some reverberation.

Yeah, Brandon, can I have you put it on mute? So as what we would like to share with you is some information associated with fiscal year '20, our current budget year, and some some of what we are doing in relation to trying to mitigate COVID-19, and then also share with you the path that we are working on moving forward. With the qualification that to some degree we are pulling out a crystal ball and trying to anticipate what this pandemic is going to do to our economy in the short and the relative midterm. We believe it's going to impact our current operations, our current budget. We believe it's going to impact next year's budget. We do not know how it is going to impact our budgets. For reference purposes, when we went through the Great Recessionary period of 2008 to 2013, We saw a drop of approximately 20% in our sales tax. That equated to about $4 million annually. Our hope is that we are nowhere close to that as a result of this pandemic. However, we will not know what our sales tax is going to do and how it responds to this pandemic until June. Because our March 2020 sales tax returns will be provided to us in June of this year. There's about a 2 to a 2 and a half month lag between point of sale and the city actually realizing that revenue.

We are—

Jamie, this is the mayor. I just have a question as you're starting into I think we all— What's going to happen to our sales tax? And I think it will be down 20-25% for sales tax within the city. My question is also seeing a real uptick in sales, in online sales, and the Marketplace Facilitator Act, first quarter came in the last quarter of last year. I'm wondering if you have data on that, and when you look at what happened here our first quarter of this year, if we can also get data to see how much of an uptick on that side there is to offset the loss of tips.

And what I think Brandon— I'll turn the time over to Brandon and Nicole, but I think what they are doing now is trying to anticipate how some revenues may grow, and how other revenues may decline as a result of this pandemic. So the first part of our— of their presentation centers on this current fiscal year, and then we will transition into the next fiscal year with the understanding that much of what we're talking about today in this current fiscal year will carry forward into the next.

Brandon.

All right, thank you, Jamie. So if you can turn to the, the nice orchard picture, that's where we begin, and the page after that in the presentation heading Citywide Budget Cut. And down in the bottom right corner, you'll see the page numbers that I will be referring to, which begins with page 2. As Jamie mentioned, this first section of our discussion is primarily focused on the current fiscal year, and we'll later discuss the fiscal '21 budget. But the first thing that, as Jamie mentioned, that we did is we went through and had all department directors look through their accounts and come up with at least a 3% cut to their operational expenses, at least identifying those cuts and where they might be able to come from. That does not include any personnel nor any capital. It's purely their operational accounts. As you can see from the top line related to the general fund, The appropriate associated amounts that were identified in relation to those proposed cuts and the total dollar amounts, not only for fiscal the current fiscal year, but what we anticipate potentially cutting out of the fiscal 21 budget. And then the bottom line includes all other funds that could be water fund, the transportation fund. B&C Roads potentially. So some of the other funds that we have that have costs that we potentially have the ability to control and to cut. Are there any specific questions related to that slide? If not, we'll move to slide number 3.

Brandon? Yes, Brandon, this is Brandon. This is Jamie. If I could just share with the council, when we went through this cutting process several weeks ago, the request of departments was to cut at least 3% out of their ongoing operational budgets, with the exception of cuts that were tied to personnel. So what you see there is representative of operational expenses minus personnel and benefits.

Correct. Thanks, Jamie. So slide number 3, the main reason for showing this slide is just to give a general idea of the major revenues associated with the general fund. This represents 75% of the revenues that the general fund receives on an annual basis. And as you see down in the right corner, the sales tax component of that represents 52% of that 75%. So it's half, you know, approximately 36% of our total revenues. But it's really just to give an idea of where do our revenues come from and what these revenues may be— how they may potentially be impacted by the current crisis. The next page on slide 4 is then comparing where we are at currently year to date In relation to our total budgeted amounts for fiscal year 20, as you can see, up and and then on the far right side, it indicates what month are those revenues up through. As you as Jamie mentioned, with sales taxes, there's a lag. So we just barely last Friday received the sales tax information related to. January, and this chart is reflective of those numbers. And, you know, as we look ahead, we're going to have a further discussion on sales taxes, of course, but that just gives you an idea of where we're at. Now, property taxes obviously have done well in relation to the increase that was passed this— for this budget year. So, you know, that's helped bolster the revenues for the year and are obviously benefiting us.

There are— Mayor, this is Tom. Sorry, I thought you'd hit a period. This is Tom. I have a question, if I may.

Sure.

If you go back to your slide 3, at this point we, of course, have no idea how much sales tax might go down, but the mayor made an estimate of 20%, which would be, you know, $4 million plus. Property taxes, while most people will ultimately pay them, we may have significantly more delinquencies as renters aren't paying landlords. Landlords may or may not have the wherewithal to pay their property taxes. Homeowners may not have enough. So while it's instrumental and useful to go through this, my guess is we're going to have a lot more information in 6 months and may have a mid-year budget adjustment either up or down. Because if we're talking about cutting a few hundred thousand here or there and we lose $4 million or more, we're going to have to take a much deeper cut. And I just think we need to acknowledge that while this information is useful, it isn't definitive until more time passes. Jamie, would you comment on that, please?

Yes.

I mean, I— we absolutely understand part of the motivation We had 2 weeks ago, we started having this conversation with our department directors and, and in fact, even our employees, is to essentially make them aware of the fact that we anticipate we're going to have to make some changes. Now, our hope is that consumer confidence coming out of this pandemic will remain relatively strong, that we will need to essentially provide a short-term bridge through monies that we have already available in, for example, our general fund balance. Prospectively, there are a number of things that we can do in the next budget year to temper and to accommodate what the future may bring And to do it in a way that is a little less reactive and more proactive. For example, we are going to look at— take a hard look at what we anticipated spending this next year and ask ourselves the question, are we really willing and wanting to make those expenditures today? So for example, we look to program additional hires into our budget in the next fiscal year. Do we proceed with hiring those individuals in July, or do we put them on the back burner until the middle of the fiscal year, allowing us to make a better determination as to whether the economy is going to recover or not? If the economy does, then we will make those hires. If it doesn't, then we haven't pulled the trigger on anything as of yet. We can institute hiring freezes, we can make adjustments To our operations in a way that can garner us some revenue savings— or excuse me, some operational savings. All of these, you know, 70% of our organization is people. So these adjustments we're talking about do not relate to people. If circumstances become dire, then we are going to have to have conversations about people. But initially, the suggestion and the way we adjust will be in not hiring those that we plan to hire prospectively and not potentially filling positions in the event they become vacant in the future. I will also represent that we are not alone, obviously, in this circumstance. Every community, every city that I've had a conversation with the last couple of weeks, we're all scratching our head wondering what it's all going to mean. Obviously, best case— Every business as well, Jamie. Yes, yes, every business. You're right, I, I, I, uh, I should have expanded. Everybody is having this question. Our hope is this is going to be a 6 to 12 month hurdle that we're going to have to jump over. It's not going to be the same as the Great Recession, which ran 5+ years, but we don't know that yet.

Thank you, Jamie.

A couple of thoughts. We do know that the stimulus checks will come out to all the residents who filed tax returns, $1,200 to $500, and that could bring in Yes. $20 million of revenue to our citizens, and then we have the CARES Act that's going to bring in unemployment, it's going to bring in money to businesses. My real question is, it's my understanding that the state is going to receive $1.5 billion from the federal government for issues within the state. Have you heard anything at all as to how that would play out? Because they did mention that some of that would come down to cities. And this may be too early of a question.

So, you know, I would— this is Jamie— I would venture that much of the distribution of that money will come by way of programmatic allocations that will be made, for example, through The federal CDBG program or through the Department of Transportation or others. So we could see that money, but I don't anticipate receiving a check directly from the state or the federal government to help us offset what we will experience, but rather those dollars will be made available to us through existing programs and existing organizations.

Okay, thank you. Brandon, you want to keep going?

All right, this is Brandon back. I just wanted to point out that, you know, while we focus on sales taxes, because obviously that's the biggest component, and even property taxes where we think that that is a super stable source, you have to realize that, you A decent amount of that portion also relates to personal property taxes, which are primarily paid by businesses. So if they're not continuing to invest in purchasing things that are taxed under personal property tax, that tax does actually fall. As well as motor vehicle registrations. If you're not buying newer vehicles, then the amount that we receive under motor vehicle registrations actually begins to decline as vehicles get older since we rely on an age-based registration fee. Along with that, obviously a significant portion of the surplus excess that, as you know, we have been— had the last few years, a significant portion of that is relation to building permits. So if this crisis in some way, shape, or form impacts those building permits. Not only do we have a reduction in sales taxes, but then we start seeing a slowdown in building permits, which again goes back to a reduction of any potential surplus that we might have available. We don't know what kind of impact this may have on business licensing. How, you know, is— are businesses going to shutter? And, and so business licenses fees go down. Currently the court is basically in a shutdown, almost no activity. That probably can't go on for too terribly long, but what kind of potential impact does that have? Especially, it will have an impact here in the current fiscal year, but does that have a potential long-term impact, at least into next year? So just some other things to kind of think about in relation to as you think about what potential items may impact the city and the revenues that we have. If we can move to slide number 5. This kind of hits to the— what we were talking about as far as an impact in relation to sales taxes. Down in the far bottom right corner in the 2 columns, the one marked 5% reduction and 10% reduction, You can see a $1,136,000 and a $2,273,000. That would— and that's based on fiscal '19. But trying to then say in the 2 columns, where, where do we think is going to be impacted by this crisis? We certainly know restaurants are heavily impacted by this. So if we look at the eating and drinking establishments line item, well, is 20% or is 30% or even a bigger percent an appropriate number? Really all we're trying to do here is give you some ability to look at, well, what do I think? How do I think this is going to impact us? Obviously we've shown in the 5% column General merchandise and groceries, we've shown no impact. What the you know grocery stores may be benefiting from, as we've seen on the news, you know a 253% increase. Well, is that offset by other elements in that category that are not? Say they're shuttered or their their sales have come to a minimum. The mayor mentioned online sales. A huge portion of online sales are also in that category. So do we see a big increase? A lot of that, as Jamie mentioned, we just don't have enough information and we just don't know. So we're just giving you an idea of how might that play out as we look forward and try to analyze what the impacts of this crisis are. And this table is not only useful for just the remaining portion of the year, because obviously we only have Basically, you know, 3 months left. But how does that translate into our fiscal '21 budget? Are there any questions related to that particular slide? Okay, if we can move to slide number 6. Really quickly, this again, same concept as the general fund, just gives you an idea of some of our other major funds and the associated revenues related to those. I really just want to kind of point out, you know, our recreation revenues and our transportation sales tax revenues. Those are probably the 2 that are going to be most impacted by the crisis. The others, yes, they potentially could be, but nowhere— probably nowhere near the same level that those 2 particular funds, since they rely very heavily on Either a tax— in the case of the transportation, it's a sales tax, so the same impact falls there. And recreation, obviously, we already were experiencing that just with the shutdown of the fitness center and the construction going on. But this didn't help in any regard either. Moving on to slide number 7. Just gives you kind of a breakdown of where we're at. in relation to those, those particular funds and kind of helping us understand the flow and where they are currently at. That's, that's all we have really for fiscal year 2020. Are there any questions, concerns, thoughts in relation to that before we move on to discussing in detail more about the fiscal '21 budget? Okay, I did want to mention one thing because I want to make sure that everybody understands. I have heard some rumblings in regard to sales tax. Obviously, we all hopefully know by now that the IRS extended the deadline from April 15th to July July 15th, the state tax— Utah State Tax Commission did the same in relation to income taxes. That then followed with, well, what about extending sales tax submission deadlines? And those would end up being due by April 30th, and even monthly filers have, you know, one month afterward. Are those deadlines going to be extended? So while they eventually will be collected, potentially there's a cash flow problem there. Not that we can't deal with that, but just to make you aware, that is another potential issue that could arise coming out of this.

Mayor, council, just one— Steve Downs here. One thing that I know Brandon and his team will do is continue to keep you updated on FY20. Each month as we get new reports of different revenue sources and we do future budget presentations, we'll let you know where we're at, what we're seeing. But as Jamie and Brandon have both mentioned, what we're most concerned about, and I think what we're most interested about, we know we won't see for a little while. But we'll let you know as we get February numbers and then obviously as we get March numbers. Our hope in presenting that is just for you to know that we're, we're trying to think of all the right questions, look at all the data that we have access to, and then proactively make decisions as it relates to expenses even before knowing what the revenue might come in at.

All right, this is Brandon again. Okay, Steve, thanks for, for that reminder. As we kind of plan—

How much is coming from the—

Say again, Mayor?

Brandon, I was going to say it'd be nice to know how much is coming from the Marketplace Facilitator Act when you get those figures on sales tax. If you could ask the state to break that out.

Okay, yeah, I'm going to have to dig into that and see if we can get some information in relation to that.

Okay, Mayor, this is— Mayor, this is Jamie. I mean, obviously, anecdotally, the, the one thing we are looking to as we work through this COVID situation is obviously what took place by way of the Great Recession. We know that during that time period, people started buying fewer cars, people disengaged from building projects, And the housing industry kind of took a took a significant hit. If the housing industry takes a hit, then furniture retailers are not selling as many couches or TVs or so. So there is kind of a cascading that happens, and and we are looking at that, looking at those dominoes, trying to predict. You mentioned the stimulus dollars that will be shortly available to a number of people in the community. What's interesting about those stimulus dollars, the last time the stimulus— a stimulus package went through like this with President Obama, is given the economic uncertainty that was in the economy at the time, many people actually held on to that money and they didn't roll it back into the economy. Because they were worried that they would need it into the future, and so they actually put it in their savings account rather than putting it down at the local, you know, retailer or wherever. So, you know, obviously, as Stephen mentioned, this is something we are watching very, very closely. This is a very fluid situation, and it gets infinitely more complicated as we hear from the experts and they start talking about increasing the time that we need to social distance, increasing the time that we need to modify business operations, so on and so forth. I think many of us were hoping that we could reach today, March 31st, and that we would be well past the, the period of concern as related to COVID-19. Unfortunately, we're finding ourselves in a much different world today than we were 2 weeks ago, and the governor of the state has now issued a directive that runs through April 13th. The president has stated that he believes social distancing and self-isolation is going to be necessary until April 30th. I read something today that the governor of Virginia was suggesting that many of these measures will still be in place through the middle of June. So if this thing resolves itself in a matter of 4 to 6 weeks, it's going to be a different conversation than if we continue, for example, all the way to the end of the fiscal year and are still in the same kind of predicament that we are today.

And Jay, Understand that they are stating that the peak for Utah in those people who are infected probably will happen later this month, and the peak in hospitalization will happen sometime mid to late May. So yes, I think we're still gonna be in the midst of it in June, so. A lot to go on. Anyway, Brandon, go ahead.

All right, this is Brandon again. Yes, I will continue. So as we, we start looking here to slide 9, if you'll go with me there, as we look into the fiscal '21 budget. So the first thing I want to say is on this page, the only item that has been adjusted from where we began, as Jamie mentioned, 3 weeks ago So these are all from that time period. Sales tax is the only item on here that I have adjusted, and all I've done is moved it back to what we budgeted here in fiscal '20, which, as we've talked about, lots of things can be— could happen, but likely that number will need to go down. We don't know, so for the time being I've left it at basically no change. But keep that in mind. This does include, as you'll notice, this asterisk on the property taxes. It does still continue to move forward with keeping the mill rate the same on the property tax item, which adds approximately $400,000 to that revenue line. So those are just a couple of items. All the other discussion items that we had when we were talking about The current fiscal budget. Those items all still applicable here as we talk about fiscal '21. So I'm not going to reiterate those, but just keep those in mind as well. As we move to slide number 10, again, these are the other funds, the other major funds. Some main items of note there. Again, the transportation sales tax, we just— we don't— we assume again that may fall from that number as we make those adjustments for what we think may happen with sales taxes. We are— the water revenues and water reclamation revenues, as you'll— as you note, 0%. We're not moving forward with a fee increase there as we We're going to try to evaluate not only the use of potentially bonding, but also the effect that it may have on impact fees as we continue down that road. So for the current fiscal year, we are planning on holding those rates the same. That's not the case with stormwater and solid waste, as those fees we are continuing to move up, either because That's part of the master plan.

There we go.

That's the word I was looking for. Or just because in the solid waste because of the vendor that we work with. Recreation revenues, obviously still very not solid as we continue to potentially run into issues with delay in opening or, you know, related to the construction of the fitness center or delay in opening of the outdoor Sierra pool purely because of the crisis. How does that eventually impact going into the next fiscal year? So some things that are up in the air still. Obviously, if everything is hunky-dory by June 30th, then maybe there's not as big an impact. But honestly, we're having a hard time foreseeing that. And then how long is that? Is that just 1 or 2 months into the next fiscal year, or is it, you know, way into the next fiscal year? So a lot of items to consider when thinking about these funds and the associated revenues with those funds. At this point then, that's really all we're kind of touching on from a revenue perspective. We now want to turn our focus to the discussion in relation to compensation and benefits that we've been working on and discussing. And on this particular slide, slide 11, you can see the elements that we have discussed in relation to a 1% market competitiveness increase for all employees, and then in relation, you see on item merit-based 3%, up to a 3%, you know, related to merit pay and the associated dollar impacts of those. And then the second item in item number 1 related to the year 2 funding of the Public Safety Career Ladder Program. And I just wanted to point those out.

May I ask a question, Mr. Mayor?

Sure, go ahead, Tom.

Jamie, I don't— I know that we have to pass a budget by a certain date. But there are so many moving pieces. I don't know how we think about whether there are any pay raises. Are there any reductions in staff? How do we answer these questions in such a changing world? And of course, you lived through 2008, '09, and '10, either with us or other cities. You know, having these discussions seems like we're talking just theoretical. We can't really make decisions on these at this point. Can you give some counsel there, please?

Yeah, and I think, I think you're right. Obviously, this conversation began pre-COVID, and what I am really most interested in showing you today is what it potentially costs, everything else remaining equal. and we can, in a relatively short term, work through this COVID situation. This is what it would cost prospectively to fund what has been represented, promises that have been made, so on and so forth into the future. I share your concern as related to Having a conversation about spending money that we don't necessarily have. And so I think we have to qualify this conversation by saying, look, this is, this is kind of the path that we want to head down potentially with obviously your approval. But it may require us To hit the pause button and to look at things on a month-to-month basis to see how we're trending, how we're tracking, if what we're talking about is even achievable in the short term. So, you know, what, what you see in front of you is if we're going to just adjust a 1% adjustment for all of our employees. That accounts and equates to $348,000. And we have said, and we have made a commitment to our public safety personnel that we will fund a career ladder program. And year 2 of that program is $205,000. And then prospectively, if we were to continue to fund a market program, a merit program, excuse me, for our employees, that would equal in excess of $1 million. So yes, what we're sharing with you from a revenue perspective and what we're sharing with you from a compensation perspective are incongruent at this point. Because we are talking about moving forward with a compensation program that we have yet to identify how to pay for. And it's not just compensation, it's other things as well. As you move through the slides, I'll specifically reference slide 12. You may be asking yourself, well, what is driving this need for market competitiveness what is driving this ongoing merit-based pay-for-performance program, a lot of it is obviously driven by what's happening in the marketplace. Now granted, much of what I'm going to share with you are happenings that are pre-pandemic. So I know that other communities are having this very— other organizations, other businesses are having this very conversation. But if you turn to page 12 of the analysis, what you will see is the turnover work that we have been doing in the organization, trying to understand where the needs are, trying to understand where we need to make adjustments in compensation across the entire organization. And again, these These slides are developed with information that is pre-March 12th, 2020. Slide 13 identifies how obviously our level of turnover in the organization is directly in correlation to level of unemployment. Now, if we were to extend that graph into FY20, what you are probably going to see is you're going to see the red line dramatically increase, almost like the, the trajectory of a hockey stick. And you are going to see the turnover rate probably fall like a stone because many in this environment today are probably thankful that they have a job. But we don't know that yet. If you go to slide 14, there's some additional information that suggests that obviously in recent years we have been losing employees primarily to retirement and to other employment. More specifically, More focused on other employment. Slide 15 identifies where we have lost individuals, and we broke out both police and fire by way of sworn and other personnel. Number 16, slide 16 represents to you on a percentage basis those numbers, and you will notice by the bottom row of the graph. That we are actually faring better than other state and local governments according to the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. Now, I'm not suggesting to you that that's incredibly good news, but thankfully we actually did fare better than some of our peers in other organizations and other states. And then we took some time on both slides 17 And slide 18 to do a comparison of both police and fire in relation to other departments. But all of that turnover conversation may be a conversation that was relevant 3 weeks ago, may not be relevant today. So if I can have you just continue down the path to slide 19, There are additional pieces of our compensation program that will also require our attention. One that will require our attention regardless of where we are heading in terms of market and merit compensation is health insurance. We anticipate that we— obviously we operate on a January to December Plan year for our health insurance. We already know that our health insurance is costing us more beginning January 1st of this year than it did last year, and we anticipate that it's going to cost more next year as well. And so we've loaded $271,000 into our budget. In addition to that, we have no additional Benefit increase costs. We do have obviously our obligations to employees by way of the Utah State Retirement System, and you can see those specific retirement rates that are noted below, with the exception of Public Safety Tier 2, and we'll explain that a little bit on slide number 20. Based on action that was taken in both the 2019 and the 2020 state legislative sessions, public safety retirement for Tier 2 employees was modified. Beginning in 2011, public safety employees in the Tier 2 system were, uh, Eligible to receive 1.5% per year of service and qualify for retirement after 25 years of service. So 25 years at 1.5% equal to 37.5%.

Okay.

Now we're in a situation where they changed the law And they said beginning July 1st, 2020, Tier 2 firefighters and police officers are eligible for 2% a year for 25 years. So that benefit was adjusted from 37.5% of salary at retirement to 50% of salary at retirement. And as a result of that, there was an added cost. And that added cost has been passed on to employers. And specifically, the city historically has been required to pay 12% of that contribution. Beginning July 1st of this year, we will be required to pay 14% of that contribution. But the actual cost of the contribution, the actual cost of the benefit right now is 16.27%. And so the state provided additional flexibility in saying you as an organization can pick up that added 2.27%, or you can pass that responsibility on to your employees. The state of Utah took advantage of additional money that they available in insurance premium taxes, and they covered what it is going to cost them for 16 of that 16.27%. But they didn't provide that same opportunity to local governments, and we are required to pick up that additional amount. We're mandated to pick up the amount between 12 and 14%, which equals $68,000. Given our current situation with Tier 2 employees, and we are given the option of picking up the additional 2.27% as well at an additional cost. And the full amount to fund all 16.27% of that benefit is $144,000 for our Tier 2 police officers and Tier to firefighters.

That are—

those are costs above and beyond what we're currently paying. So what does it all mean? If you turn to page slide 21, if we were to represent and present to you a budget that is pre-COVID-19, it would include $1.9 million in new monies that would be necessary to fund a 1% market increase for employees, a 3% merit increase for employees, $271,000 in health insurance costs, additional health insurance costs, additional costs to pay for year 2 of the police fire career ladder, additional costs to cover tier 2 public safety retirement. What that $1.9 million does not include is the additional pickup that the city could opt to pay for, for Tier 2 employees, public safety employees, which is an additional $76,000. It doesn't include flexible seasonal pay adjustments above and beyond existing budgets. That departments have to hire flexible seasonal employees. It does not include additional public safety compensation adjustments that may be needed to address consequences of the current career ladder. It also does not include adjustments that may be associated with the current compensation and benefits study that we have underway at the city. And of course, it doesn't include any new personnel or full-time equivalents that we would be sharing and presenting to you for consideration of hire as part of future budget discussions where we talk about what we term workload expansion requests. So really what we're sharing with you is information that we hope you will digest and essentially take into consideration as we move forward. We have historically made compensation and have historically prioritized the needs of our current workforce ahead of other needs in each operating budget in each fiscal year. Given where we are today, I've given you a price tag as to what it might cost. But I also will qualify, as you've already stated, that at this point in time, we're not sure where we're going to be July 1st. All of these numbers, all of these budgets are reflective of a July 1 implementation date. So I'm happy to entertain any questions.

Well, I think we have lots of unknowns and we're still in that category.

So, Jamie, this is Debbie.

I have a question. If we eliminate a merit-based 3%, let's say by July 1st, what if in January things look better? I'm assuming we could, we could maybe 6 months down the road when we have more information, we could say, okay, we will give some sort of percentage, or is that something that has to be Well, I, I will represent to you that you have the flexibility as a city council to, to, to do what you feel is appropriate.

We have looked to July 1st as the date our employees historically been eligible for increases. these last 6 or 7 years. But there is nothing sacred with that July 1st number or that July 1st date. However, what I will represent to you is sometimes practice evolves into expectation. So there may be an expectation that something happened July 1st, and that will be obviously something that we will need to manage. In the event we're not comfortable with where we are in relation to a revenue picture.

So I have a second question.

Is it better to set the expectation that there may be zero, and then if there are appropriate revenues, then they— we would look at it later? I mean, better to set the expectation now, manage those expectations, and then if it's like this, it's only a few months and we Do you have it? I'm just trying to think, how are you going to do the PR on this is what I'm asking, I guess, is the question.

You know what, that's a good question, and it's especially challenging given the period where we have been, where we have been in a situation where we've been able to do a lot, to go on the turn of a dime to A situation where we may not be able to do much. So, you know, I think our employees are mindful. I mean, I've been sending out in the last couple of weeks, I've been sending out daily information to employees and hopefully trying to be transparent in suggesting to them that there are a lot of unknowns that we're going to face in the future. But with that said, I've also been at the forefront of criticism based on the perception and the understanding that employees have had in the past about promises being made and promises not being kept. So I, I don't think it's an easy conversation whether you have it today. Or whether you have it 3 months from now. Whenever we have it, there's going to be consternation, there's going to be frustration. There are going to be some who ultimately, I think, will understand. I think there are others who are going to be disappointed and who are probably going to think that the city is not holding up its end of the bargain.

Okay, well, I appreciate the perspective. I'd rather set low expectations and underdeliver, you know, and then manage, you know, low expectations. And then if you can, we will. That's, that's just my— I like to underpromise and overdeliver later on.

Okay, if there's no other comments, let's go ahead and move on. Fast running out of time. Um, thank you, Brandon. Uh, and let's go ahead and move on to the Southwest Ormond area discussion with Jason Bench.

Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. This is a new experience, so I appreciate you taking some time.

You have 15 minutes max.

I will—

you tell me when to stop and I'll be glad to stop. As part of our discussion that we had last time that we presented, Mayor, you asked us to go to the different communities around the Wasatch Front and look at what other temple sites have done. And so we've basically done that. We were not able to meet as a group with the Southwest Area, of course, with the COVID and other restrictions. We did not be— or were not able to have a public meeting, and so we don't have any comments from the neighbors. But at this time, we just kind of went through these different sites and looked at what other communities have done in and around the temple sites. We did not look at Salt Lake City. Obviously, everybody is, I think, familiar enough with Salt Lake to know what is around that. And we did not look at Provo, the 2 temples in Provo. I think everybody's pretty much familiar with those as well. This map does not show— we're on page 2, by the way, sorry— does not show that we also went up into Ogden to look at the new Ogden Temple and see that as well. So we'll just kind of go through each temple site and just kind of show highlights of what we've found. I think what you'll discover is each city is a little different depending on the location of the temple, when it was built, and at the time that communities have had to build around the temple sites. In Draper, for example, there are a different type, but for the most part they are single-family Yes. ...detached units. As you can look to the left of the screen, in the lower left, you'll see some closer kind of zero lot line developments. That's a little higher density than you see to the east or to the north. So there are some different mixes of single-family, but for the most part, it seems like, in Draper at least, they are more of a single-family. It is an RM residential zone, but it does allow for Multifamily or a density up to 8 and even up to 12 depending on the type and style of the development. But what's been developed seems to be probably less than the 8 units per acre. Oh, sorry. I'm now at slide 5. I'm sorry. I'm assuming everybody has that. I apologize for that. This is their zoning map that kind of shows— you can see the green around on slide 5 is the open area hillsides. The darker browns and lighter browns TANs or the residential zones that they have. I'll now go to slide 6, which kind of gives you a 3D look, looking out to the east to the paper temple on the top, which does still show predominantly single-family around the area. And then slide 7 gives you another perspective. This is a little different situated temple, which is of course against the Wasatch Mountains, which ought Obviously, it is limited to the type of development, I think, because of the traffic patterns and what was already developed in Draper at the time the temple was constructed. And slide 8 just kind of shows a ground level of a street of the homes that are currently next to the Draper Temple. If you go to slide 9, we'll go to Mount Timpanogos Temple, which is obviously in American Fork.

That also Okay.

Shows more. And if I can just show you what the yellow circles indicate, quarter-mile spacings. The initial one is a quarter mile, the next one is a half, and then the outer ring is a mile spacing, just to kind of give you an idea of the distance. If you go to slide 10, you can see that there are still a lot of undeveloped properties around the Temple site, but the majority of residential or development is residential. If you go to slide Yes. Slide 11 gives you the zoning map of American Fork, which pretty much are limited to residential zone— zones. If you go to slide 12, it kind of gives you— there are some lot— zero lot line smaller lots, but basically larger single-family homes on those small lots. And there are a few townhomes in the area, but the majority of land use around American Fork area are around the temple is single-family. Slide 13 goes to the Jordan River Temple up in West Jordan. If you can picture that. So another perspective of the Jordan River. There is a lot of difference in the type. Obviously the temple was built back in the '80s. So there's a lot of different land uses that have been built over time. You can see the X in the lower left of the screen, that's high-density apartments to the west of the temple between the road on the north— or excuse me, on the west side or left side. Excuse me?

Redwood Road.

The left side of the screen is Redwood Road. 13th East is on the right side. So you can see to the north of the temple and to the directly west are about 9 to 8-unit-per-acre developments. They are predominantly single-family or attached units that are single-family in nature. And then on the south and west are single-family also. Slide 15 gives you another perspective of that overview of the temple. And then looking more—

Jason?

Yeah.

This is the mayor. It's just interesting as you go through this, I see a lot more High density or smaller homes and smaller units than I was expecting.

Yeah, especially, well, not necessarily the older temples, but a lot of, depending on the location of the temple and the proximity to major streets and different things, we found that it does have a lot more density when they happen to be closer to more infrastructure than like the Draper, for example, which is more on the outskirts of the town. town or city, you'll see a lot more single-family predominance. So, let's see, slide 16 just kind of shows you a different perspective of the X that's in the upper right corner, and then, of course, the other higher densities that surround the Jordan River Temple. This is their land use map that shows the general plan around the temple. There's a lot of mix of different types of land uses that they have proposed. The zoning map on slide 18 shows that there is a lot of different zones that are in and around the temple. So they have planned for different mixes of high-density, single-family, and mixed-use developments around the Jordan River Temple. Let's go to slide 19, which takes us up to Ogden. As you know, Ogden was just redone a few years ago. It is close to the downtown. If you go to slide 20. Slide 20. That shows that it is in the north end of the central business district. So we would expect to have a little higher density. If you go to Slide 21, you'll see that there are some high-density projects to the west of the Ogden Temple, to the north of the temple. And then, of course, there's a mixed-use development to the south. And then as you go east across Washington Boulevard, then it gets into the more of the single-family neighborhoods. Slide 22 gives you a different perspective and kind of outlines where those high-density mixed-use developments and that commercial are in proximity to the temple. So there is a lot more mixed-use and apartments in that vicinity of the temple. If we go to slide 23, it takes us to Ocher Mountain, which is a little different and unique. The temple was actually built prior to a lot of the development even being in the vicinity. There is a picture— I don't know if I have it with me, but there is a picture that basically has the temple built with hardly anything around it. If you go to slide 24, it gives the master plan of Daybreak that was built. And you can see the different colors represent different densities. The Daybreak development does allow up to 25 units an acre. Each of those obviously are different densities, but the maximum that Daybreak would allow is 25. And some of those are relatively close, whether they're attached or detached. It does provide a different mix of development. If you go to slide 25, it kind of gives you an overview and you can kind of see rooftops—

I got it.

—rooftops and to see the different types of developments. They're all intermixed. There's a lot of different housing types within that area. Slide 26 does give you a different perspective as well. You can see Bangor Highway. On the top right as it goes through. And so you can see that there is a lot of density in the area. This kind of gives you— Slide 27, it gives you some different housing type or types along the residential street. It still has a residential feel, but it is definitely a different density. Slide 28 also gives you a kind of a central landscaped courtyard area within the Daybreak as it has different sidewalks and Paths and different things, but does definitely have a higher density, but has more of a residential feel to that. If you go to slide 29, takes us to Payson. Payson is unique that there was existing residential on the east side of Payson. If you go to slide 20— or slide 30, excuse me— gives you the base scenario plan of their South Meadows area, which is kind of west between I-15 and and even west of I-15 as well from the Temple West. And the majority of their uses are going to be between 4 and 5 units per acre. So they're looking at different types of residential, but typically you'll see that they're probably going to do more of a single-family detached, even though there'll be— so slide 31, sorry, gives you the zoning map, and you can see that the majority of that is going to be residential.

Slide 32.

Gives you kind of a perspective. On the right shows when the temple was under construction. And then on the left gives you some of the developments that have happened, or at least started to construct, after the temple was built. The majority of those are going to be zero lot line. If you look on the very upper left top of that picture, you'll see some homes that are kind of close together, zero lot line developments. But they are single-family detached homes.

homes.

So the density is a little bit higher, but you'll notice that they are detached. And then the next slide, 33, gives you that same perspective, or a different perspective. It shows you those zero-lot-line homes. And then the single-family lots that are outlined on there were existing prior to the temple being constructed. Talking to one of the planners in Payson, they, for the most part, will be single-family or a variant of the single-family. single-family development going forward to the west of the temple. If you go to slide 34, it gives you the home housing stock that's directly east of the temple. So, and this, of course, slide 35 is the last slide, but just shows the Orem Temple concept plan that you'll be looking at in a couple weeks. The bottom line, I think, that the staff perspective Yes. The mayor pointed out at the beginning is that each of the temples have a unique land use around them. And I think each city has taken a different way of developing. And I think Orem has a unique opportunity to do that as well. It just depends on the direction that you would like to go. But it seems like each temple, each city has developed in a different way, but predominantly some type of single-family and even some mixed-use developments around there. It just depends depends on the city and the location of the temple, is what we found. I'd be glad to address any questions.

Jason, this is Terry. Just a comment. It seems like some of the temples had no choice, like Ogden just took a spot in the middle of an already developed-out area. Some of the other temples were like that. But you look at something like Draper, where it wasn't developed, and they chose to Put nice single-family homes. Timpanogos, it seems like, did the same.

Doesn't—

it looks like those where they have a choice go with single-family homes. Is that a fair thing to say?

I think it's fair. Some of the— like Ogden, obviously, it was built in the 1970s. That's an older temple. Jordan River was another older temple that kind of had 30 or 40 years of development around it. So it's kind of hard to compare the Ocher Mountain or the Jordan River, which was built in the '80s or '90s, I guess. So, yeah, I think it's a fair statement. But I think some of those older temples, I think, were kind of developed— had a longer development history, I guess. And the Draper obviously is off the beaten path and wouldn't— you would guess would be most likely single-family around that one as well, yeah. Good comment.

Thanks. All right, if there's no further comments, Jason, appreciate the presentation and I think it gives us some good ideas as to what other people are doing.

This is Jamie. I think the, uh, I think the next step for you as a council is to have a conversation in regards to whether or not you wish to amend the general plan. I'm not wanting to obviously push, but at the same time, we are receiving obviously feedback from the development community that is anxious to proceed. And so I think this is a timely and necessary conversation in the, in the very, very near future.

Sure.

One thing I was going to say is I've got the impression from the last time we met with regards to this that, uh, some on the council would like to see an amended plan and some may not. Um, but as to what that amended plan would have in it, uh, there's a lot of, uh, discussion. Um, so I would be interested, just a real quick sense, to hear what the council has to say as to How many would like to see an amended plan? So if I, if I would, if I could, if I could maybe just check, uh, Brent, what are your thoughts?

Well, I, I know what, uh, Jason said about the neighborhood meeting. Is there any way we can get feedback in that area, Jason? I, you know, and I don't know how you do that with the, uh, The virus situation now, but I'd like, I'd like some feedback in that area. And I, and same, that I, I still like going with the, uh, single-family homes the best we can, even if they're on a smaller lot.

Yeah.

I'd like some more information from the neighbors down there. I don't know how you could do that, Jason, but Is there a survey or something?

So, uh, I was just going to mention that, um, I agree with you. We have talked about getting information from the neighbors. I would like to see that happen. It's interesting that just down the road from the temple is a piece of property with a for sale sign on it that talks about light industrial. Anyway, uh, Terry, what are your thoughts?

I am in favor of keeping it residential. I would, I would, I'd need to, I'd need to know more about what that means to amend a plan if there's certain, you know, something we want to talk about for maybe a grocery store or something, but I would be in favor of that, making that a nice residential area for our city.

So what we do have in there is a fair amount of industrial. So if you're interested in residential, then an amended plan would probably be beneficial.

So, Mayor, I would like to have that discussion. I just don't want anyone to think I'm in favor of any kind of high density or multiple units. I prefer residential, but I would like to have that discussion.

Debbie, how about you?

I'd like to have the discussion. I said before in our meeting, I don't mind a nice twin home. The last time that, um, Chatwin Homes built over by Orchard Elementary, the Penny Lane, I think those are attractive. I'm not sure how many of those fit on an acre. I could probably be talked into maybe a PRD, um, but I don't want to see anything high density. I don't want to— and I want to keep it as low density as at all possible, but I'm willing to look at twin homes and if that fits into the overall plan.

Okay, Jeff, how about you?

Yeah, I would concur. I, you know, for sure no high density. And, you know, I think it would be a worthy discussion to look at the industrial and, you know, I would be in favor of residential over the industrial.

Tom, how about you?

I think mine echo earlier comments. I don't want anyone to think that I'm interested in taking a look, that that opens the door for greater population out there than our original plans call for. But I could see some switch from industrial to nice residential.

Okay, Dave, how about you?

Yeah, I'm in favor of amending the plan to residential, medium residential, maybe like 6 to 7 houses an acre or something like that, but no high density at all.

Okay. So, Jamie, I think that pretty much gives you the info you need. So, Mayor, if I can comment, I think the council is interested in an amended plan more towards Mayor, can I make a comment?

Mayor, this is Jason. Can I make a comment?

Sure.

So with the— with obviously the issues that we have right now, the city does have a subscription to Zoom, which is an online forum that we're going to see if we can't do that as part of our outreach meeting. I'm not sure if we can do that, you know, legally with Greg, if that counts. I guess that's something we're going to look into. If we can, Do a virtual meeting, uh, if, you know, base of the city center, invite everybody to call in like we've done here and see if we can do it that way. And then maybe bring back some information based on what we get from the neighborhood and then come, you know, and then work on doing an amendment that way.

That sounds good to me. Um, I was going to say most businesses right now are doing Zoom. I've done a bunch of calls on Zoom and I really like So hopefully we can get that in place. Let's go ahead and move on, if we could, to our agenda.

Yes?

Mayor, this is Ryan Clark. Could I make one comment really quick? Sure.

Go ahead, Ryan.

We currently have a site plan in process for 3 industrial flex warehouse buildings directly north of Jeff Mansell's project. So I want to represent to you that there is an industrial project moving forward and likely will occur So if we do make a change, that project will still be there. I think our suggestion would be to possibly rezone the property north of that project to commercial where Lakeview Parkway ties into Geneva Road, therefore kind of creating a buffer moving forward if we were to do residential in other areas on the west side of Geneva. So just wanted to offer that.

Sure. Ryan, could you send out the information to the council on where that is and how many acres?

Yeah, be happy to do that.

Okay, thank you. All right, let's move on to the agenda for our evening at 6 PM. Um, we're going to start out with a prayer by Brent Sumner, pledge by Stephen Downs. Uh, we'll then have a Natural Resource Stewardship Committee, um, report. And, uh, from our committee, we then go to our personal appearances. Uh, Steve Downs, do we have any comments from the public for that period of time?

No, Mayor. I think the only thing that have been— this is Stephen— just from Jody is we're We're still 12 minutes away from 6, and so it might be worthwhile to give everybody a little break and then reconvene at 6 o'clock.

No, no, that's fine, but I'm just curious if you've had anything come in yet.

Nothing, nothing yet, but we don't know what might— but yes, as of now, nothing. Correct? Correct.

Okay, so on our consent items, we have approval of meeting minutes We have a resolution on an interlocal agreement with the Utah County Election Office for the purchase of our 2 election boxes. Is everybody okay with those moving forward?

Yes, I am.

Sure.

Anyone who's against it? Okay, I'll take that as a yay. We then go on to our scheduled item, which is the public hearing Jason Bench is our presenter. Jason, you want to talk about that? That being—

so we are there, Jason. Yeah, so we're amending the sign ordinance to update the PO zone to allow monument signs along— the majority of them are along 800 North—

amending the sign zone along And they're on the south side, is that correct?

South, and then there's 2 projects. The one on the corner—

The map you showed us was the south side.

Right.

There is some on the south, and there's 2 properties on the north of 8th as well along the map.

Okay.

So it— and then the clarification of a text or an ordinance that basically clarifies when a property that's not in a commercial zone can have a monument sign. So those are the 3 items.

Okay, um, then, uh, if nothing else is there, uh, Jamie, do you have any items? And I was thinking that it might be helpful to take a 10-minute break before we start at 6, but go ahead.

Yes, Mayor, I think at some point tonight, if we can, after the, uh, the scheduled item is complete, I, I think we need to have a conversation about Summerfest, and can we please give Steven some time to, uh, talk about that event and then maybe just give you a little debrief as to how things are going with COVID

That would be great. All right, well, why don't we go ahead and adjourn our, uh, work session and, uh, take 9 minutes and then come back for city council meeting right at 6. So let's adjourn. Thank you.

I hear everyone hanging up. Are we going to hang on or call back?

That's what I was thinking.

I'm just going to hang on.

There's no reason to, uh—

okay.

You and I, Tom, you can hang on.

It won't hurt anything. I'm with you guys. Yeah, this is Terry.

Okay, well, we can, we can solve all the problems of the world with just 3 of us. We just don't have enough weight to vote. For anything.

So I gotta get my diet Pepsi anyway.

I had dinner brought in and, uh, very nice, but I didn't get Uber Eats delivered, but my wife was kind enough to bring me a meal.

I'm going to talk to Becky right now.

I'm sorry, I missed that, Brett.

I'm going to talk to Becky right now.

Okay.

Anybody there?

Brent, this is Bren. Is there something that you need or that I can help you out with?

Oh, hi. No, I was just wondering if I was all alone.

I think you kind of were, but there's a few of us.

I'm still on brand, Mr. Cherry.

Oh, okay.

Well, just someone will say something when we're ready to go, I guess.

There's 7 people on the queue, so there's still some more that need to join.

Okay.

We'll be sure to make it obvious when we kind of restart the meeting.

Okay.

Yeah, starting our city council now.

Well, yeah, pretty good outside.

Hello?

Jeff, who's this?

Hi, this is Jeff.

Oh, it's Brent.

Hey, Brent.

And this is Joyce.

I'm back.

Hi, Debbie.

Hi, Jeff.

You guys getting through this COVID stuff okay?

We're doing great. We're cooking a lot.

I'm eating a lot, I know that. Holy smokes.

Jim's making jambalaya tonight with shrimp and andouille sausage, so it's going to be good.

Oh man, go Jimmy, go!

He treats me right.

He's great. We're trying not to gain weight, so we're trying to walk a lot and get out and fly our drone.

Do you guys have a drone?

Yeah, we do. It's not super big, but it's one that's fun.

Yeah.

Fun to fly and give us something to occupy our time. And the grandson loves it.

Oh, I bet.

He calls it the helicopter.

Does Jim work from home?

Jim works from home 3 out of 5 days. He goes in on Tuesdays and sometimes Fridays, but the rest of the time he's pretty much in our bedroom programming and on Zoom meetings. He does have flexibility, but they always need one person on his team in the office in case they have to reset the whole hardware if they're working on something. So they rotate that around.

That's good. Are you working from home, Jeff?

I am, yeah. I just started, just started this week.

So how about you, Brent?

I'm just drinking lots of Diet Pepsi.

Attaboy!

Hey, Jeff, I wanted you to know that I went to Sprouts and bought your nasal spray. Just wanted you to know.

Oh, you know what?

I've got a bag full of it in my car that I brought to that thing that we were gonna— I was gonna get some of that for you. So I've got—

okay, well, we'll still take some more. We'll run out sooner than later.

Okay, close. Brent, I was going to say the worst part of this meeting this way is we don't have access to that Pepsi machine. Well, and Becky keeps Jeff, you need to drink water, man.

Oh, I know.

Water.

We would like to start this session of our city council meeting. It is 6 PM. I would like to begin by reading a statement, and I call this meeting to order to minimize the potential spread of COVID-19. As authorized by Utah Governor Gary Herbert's March 18th, 2020 executive order, the Orem City Council and Planning Commission meeting will be an all-electronic meeting. There will be no public access to the Orem City Council chambers. Those desiring to view or participate in the meeting must do so electronically. If you want to make a comment, please use—

Hello.

orem.org/comments or go to citycouncilpubliccomments@orem.org. Comments will be accepted before and during the meeting, and all comments received will be read into the record during the live meeting. Once an item has been voted on, that item will be closed to additional comments. You're able to view the live meeting on orem.org/meetings. We would like to start now with a prayer to be given by Councilmember Brent Sumner, after which the Pledge of Allegiance to be given by Stephen Downs. Brent, why don't you go ahead?

Our kind and eternal Heavenly Father, during this time of uncertain— some uncertainty, we Amen. Father, we wish to bless members of the City Council and Orem City staff, that they may be able to make decisions and have thy spirit with us that will benefit the citizens of Orem. And Father, we ask thee to bless our state and nation and world, that we may get past this virus and resume our normal activity and Father, we're thankful for our citizens and the great employees of our city. And at this time also, we wish to bless the Wallace family with the passing last week of Tom, that they may know that we love them very much and that we support them and we're here to help them in any way possible. Father, bless this meeting that it goes forward, that we may be able to be productive and help our fine citizens of Orem. And we say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Amen.

Amen.

Okay, okay, Steve, why don't you move—

Please repeat the Pledge of Allegiance after me.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. As this is an electronic meeting, I would like to read a roll call. For the record, that everyone knows who is on the phone, I'd like to begin with City Council. Uh, Bruce Sumner, you are here, obviously. Uh, Terry Peterson, are you here?

I'm here.

Debbie Lorette, are you here?

I'm here.

Jeff Lampson, are you here?

I'm here.

Tom McDonald, are you here?

Here.

David Spencer, are you here?

Here.

Okay, uh, city management. Jamie Davidson? Here.

Wrenn Dybee?

Wrenn, are you here?

Yes, I'm here.

Okay, Steve Downs, obviously here. Chief Giles, are you here? And, uh, Chief Earl, are you here?

I'm here, Mayor.

Okay, Chris Shirkey, are you here?

I'm here.

Charlene Crozier?

Yes, I'm here.

Brian Clark?

Present.

Uh, Kathy Lewis? Jason Bench?

Jason says he's here.

Yes.

Okay. Jackie Lambert? Carl Hurst?

Carl's here.

Okay, Steve Earls? Greg Stevens?

Here.

Pete?

Here.

Brandon Nelson?

Present.

Ernesto?

I'm here.

Nicole? Anybody we missed? Okay, let's go ahead and move forward with the meeting. I would ask again that everyone mute their phones, and when you go to make a comment, that you please announce who you are when you're making the comment. We'll now move forward with the Natural Resource Stewardship Committee annual update, and we'll turn the time over.

Mayor and Council, this is Jody Bates. We have received this from the Natural Resource Commission. They submitted this electronically and have added their own words to their presentation, so we will set that up for you and you can follow along with your slides. We will let you know when the slides change.

Mayor, City Council, and city staff, and thank you for facilitating this report during these unusual times. I'd rather be there in person, but this is a great opportunity that we have this technology that can help. Thank you for continuing to serve the citizens of Orem, and I wish you and your families the best. My name is Sarah Bateman, and I have been a member of this committee since its inception. The Natural Resources Stewardship Committee has just completed its 3rd year serving the city of Orem.

Committee's mission—

Excuse me, Mr. Mayor?

Yes?

Could you ask Sarah to speak up?

Sure. Jody, could you turn the volume up on that?

Yep, we'll try and get that louder for you. Okay, moving on to the next slide.

Okay.

The committee consists of 5 citizen volunteers, each committed to the mission and each possessing a certain level of expertise that benefits the committee and the city.

Next slide. This has no voiceover.

This just shows the relevant In looking back at the year, we identified 3 ways in which the committee serves: connecting with the city government, with Orem residents, and as ambassadors in community partnerships. We'll start off with the city government. We've appreciated the opportunity to learn from various city departments and try to identify ways that our committee can serve as a support to the programs the departments are working on, whether that be water, waste, transportation, or other areas of overlapping goals. Our committee serves to support and extend existing programs through volunteer committee members. It also serves to facilitate extended learning of elected officials of relevant current issues.

Slide 6.

For example, last fall, our committee presented to the City Council about the benefits of supporting the Community Renewable Energy Act passed by the 2019 Utah State Legislature. I've included this and the following slide to serve as reminders of our presentation and the survey we conducted among Orem residents.

Slide 7.

Here's a quick review of the highlights. I would be happy to review that presentation and the survey results with new Councilmembers Lamson and Pedersen at another time.

Slide 8.

Secondly, we aim to get Orem residents and business owners to engage in a variety of conversations about how we use our natural resources and how we can celebrate the natural beauties that surround us.

Slide 9.

This past year, we shifted from the Youth Earth Day meme contest to a general art contest. This was the winning piece, Only Together, by Gavin Bateman, a student at Timpanogos High School. It was selected by a group of youth judges. It was displayed on the digital billboards at University Place on Earth Day, which is April 22nd, and the winner was awarded Prizes by— donated by local business owners.

Slide 10.

Don't bother yet with the text below. I'll describe the photos at the top first. During the Orem Centennial celebration, the Natural Resources Stewardship Committee hosted a table where we highlighted some of the things that the City of Orem is doing, like building electric vehicle infrastructure, participating in subscriber solar, improving bicycle infrastructure, installing a large network of purple air monitors, uh, and installing smart water meters to help residents save water and save money. We had a Lowe's employee on site demonstrating the kinds of electric mowers and string trimmers that the state sponsored, um, for the mower exchange. It has done that over the past few years in its efforts to improve the air quality. We encouraged the guests to write down or draw a picture of what they enjoy doing in the outdoors. I've included the responses here below.

Slide 11.

We also create a variety of content for the city's social media platforms. Here are samples of our posts, most of which highlight our ultimate connection to nature and our desire to preserve its beauty. Maybe you've seen some of these around on Facebook or Instagram.

Slide 12.

Most popular post featured an Orem resident talking about the therapeutic benefits of nature.

Slide 13.

Here's a quick chart showing the stats of the posts we've contributed thus far.

Slide 14.

As for the 3rd area of focus, we serve as ambassadors. and community partnerships.

Slide 15.

We continued our partnership with Geneva Elementary in our idling research project. Students collected the data winter of 2018, then used that data to complete a custom math lesson that fit the 6th grade curriculum. January 2019, the project, the students, and I in my position on this committee were featured on KSL-TV with Jed Bull. In March of last year, I was invited to present this project at the David R. Keller Environmental Ethics Symposium at Utah Valley University.

Slide 16.

Last March, the Natural Resources Stewardship Committee of the City of Orem served as the founding organization of the Utah County Sustainability Coalition. This is a coalition dedicated to government entities, to meet monthly to discuss the challenges and opportunities that we all face with the projected population growth. We discuss water and energy conservation, waste reduction, transportation and congestion, preserving agricultural lands, and more.

Slide 17.

And of course, how to celebrate the wholesome outdoor recreation opportunities we enjoy in Utah County.

Slide 18.

As for 2020, our committee priorities include, starting in the center there, using the recently released Utah roadmap that the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute published about Utah-focused opportunities to tackle clean air issues and a changing climate. This includes promoting electric vehicle infrastructure, no idling signage, Tier 3 fuel, active transportation and transit. We plan to continue the conversation about renewable energy and highlight recently published research by a BYU professor and his team that, among other things, has determined that for every $1 invested into clean air, $32 gets returned to the economy. We plan to also promote water conservation featuring resident and business owners who are successfully saving water and money. And of course, we hope to plan community events that get people connected to nature to enjoy the benefits, mental and physical health, as well as economic health.

Slide 19.

Thank you again for letting us serve the city in this capacity. We are glad to be rooted in Orem and look forward to our future together.

Thank you.

Mayor, that's the conclusion of their presentation.

Mayor, I have a comment if I may.

Go ahead, Tom, that's fine. Hey, I just—

I think this was an excellent report, but what I was kind of most focused on was slide 13 where I saw how much significant how significant the increase was on Facebook posts and likes, et cetera. Again, great compliment out to the whole team who put this together, and thank you for a wonderful report. Thank you, Tom.

Any other comments on the report?

Mayor, this is Jeff, and I just— I would also like to thank Darren, Quinn, Sarah, Paul, and Heidi for their Excellent work on this committee. I have the opportunity of serving on this committee with them, and I've learned a lot from them, and I'm really impressed with their dedication and their good work and their concern for our community.

So thanks, guys.

You bet. Any other person want to make a comment? Well, I would just like to thank Sarah and her committee, the Natural Resources Stewardship Committee.

Thank you.

For everything they're doing. Our earth and our place of living is important, and we need to take care of it, and we appreciate the efforts that they're putting forth. So thank you to them. We would now like to go on to personal appearances. I'd like to make a comment. Those desiring to view or participate in the meeting must do so electronically. If you want to make a comment, please go to orem.org/comments or citycouncilpubliccomments@orem.org during the live part of our meeting. And I just want to make a comment that, that any comments should be related to issues that are not on the agenda. for a vote later and should be related to issues and not people or personalities. With that, Steve Downs, do we have anyone who has sent in a comment?

We don't have anybody right now. We would just ask that we pause for 1 minute to allow anybody who will be seeing this on delay.

Be happy to do that.

Mayor, it appears that there are no comments.

All right. Yeah, I was just jumping in. All right. So it appears that we have no comments and we'll close the personal appearance and appearances portion of our meeting and we will go on to our consent items. The consent agenda is a meeting management tool to allow the city council to handle several routine items with one action. Once I have read each consent agenda item into the record, either the council or the staff may request an item be pulled off of the consent agenda and be considered separately under the next agenda item in the order they are listed. The first consent item is 8.1, approval of the City Council meeting minutes of March 10th, 2020. 8.2 is the second one, which is a resolution. For approving of an interlocal agreement with the Utah County Election Office for the purchase of the election ballot boxes from the City of Orem. Is there a desire by either council or staff to pull off any item from the consent agenda for further discussion? Seeing none and hearing none, I'll proceed with one motion and a second, followed by a roll call vote.

So moved.

approving all consent items. Is there a motion?

So moved, this is Tom.

Okay, is there a second?

Second, this is Debbie.

Okay, seconded by Dave Spencer. I think he was first, not sure, but anyway, let's go ahead and vote on it. On the consent agenda, we'll start with Brent.

Aye.

Barry Peterson?

Aye.

Debbie Larey?

Aye.

Jeff Lampson?

Aye.

Tom McDonald?

Aye.

Dave Spencer?

Aye.

And I vote aye as well as mayor. So the consent agenda items pass. Thank you. We'll now go into our scheduled items. The first is a public hearing amending Section 14-3-3, freestanding signs. Again, I would like to read at the beginning of this discussion, those desiring to view or participate in the meeting must do so electronically. If you want to make a comment, please use forum.org/comments. Or citycouncilpubliccomments@orum.org. Comments will be accepted before and during the meeting. All comments received will be read into the record during the live meeting. Once an item has been voted on, that item will be closed to additional comments. Uh, so I believe that Jason Bench is our presenter, and we'll turn the time up To Jason.

Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. So slide 1 just indicates, uh, the— what we are amending. If we go to slide number 2, outlines the redline versions of the 14.33, which is a clarification that deals with properties that are either not in a commercial use in a commercial zone that's not within a signed zone. We do have several business Businesses that are located outside of a sign zone. And then also a residential—

Hello.

A residential use within a residential zone— or non-residential use. So a school, a church, or those type of things. So it clarifies when they can have a monument sign, and we would categorize them as Sign Zone D. So that clarifies that language. And then we're also expanding the PO zone to allow that to have wall signs as well. Excuse me. Slide 4 indicates the areas of Sign Zone D where we want to expand. Those that are outlined in red would be new areas that would be amended to the sign zone. Sign Zone D allows for monument signs only, so 6 feet tall, 36 square feet, and most of these projects already have them. because we— they were in a— they were commercial use in a zone that wasn't in the sign zone. So we have allowed them. We just wanted to clarify and add them to the sign zone, why we were doing it. So those are the 3 amendments. Slide 5 just indicates that the Planning Commission did make a positive recommendation to the council to approve the proposed amendments. I'd be glad to address any questions.

So Jason, a question I have is the easternmost part of this amendment on the north side. What does that little square cover? What business is there?

That is simply the professional office. Looks like more of a home that was, I think, now used as a massage office. I think it was a— it's been office Office uses on and off for the last many years.

Sure.

Okay.

Are there any other comments or questions from the council? Okay. Seeing none, this— we will open this up for our public hearing. And we would ask that if someone has a comment, to, as we expressed before, that they, uh, go ahead and, and send that in electronically. Um, and we will go ahead and leave this open for 1 minute to see if we have any comments.

Mayor, while we're waiting, perhaps someone could let me know if the Planning Commission recommended approval of this They did.

It was a unanimous recommendation.

We could wait on that.

We could wait on any comments until the public hearing's over. Okay, we have gone 1 minute. Stephen Downs, to begin. Thank you, Do we have any comments from the public?

No comments received.

Okay, uh, so with that being the case, we'll close the public comment portion of our public hearing. And then, Tom, did you have a question?

Go ahead and address it, Jason.

You've already heard it.

Okay, any other comments or questions from the council?

So this is Terry. Jason, go ahead and address it. You've already heard my question.

I haven't heard his answer.

Oh, so 2 things. One, we did notice the entire— the property owners to let them know what we were doing on their own, on their properties. So they, they were noticed. Nobody came to the Planning Commission to make any comments in the public hearing, and the Planning Commission did unanimously recommend approval for the amendment.

So Jason, this is Terry. Just one question then.

Does this—

does any of the current property owners have to amend what they already have on their buildings?

They do not. This is simply putting it in the category where it's already permitted. They already have the sign. It's just a formality at this point.

Okay.

Thanks.

Any other comments? So Jason, I know on the south side there are some new industrial buildings that this includes. Is that correct?

The 2 office buildings that are being built by the Davies development, those would be included. And then the 3 existing buildings that look more like a home, those are included as well. There's no industrial buildings Other than the 2 office buildings, right?

Okay. All right. Is there any other questions or comments from the council? So I would accept a motion at this point if someone would like to make one.

David, I'll make a motion.

Okay, go ahead. And who are you?

What's that?

Who are you?

Dave Spencer.

Yeah.

Okay.

Only Dave.

I'd like to make a motion that the city council amend Section 14-3-3, freestanding signs, pole, and monument, number 7, by clarifying language and wall signs of the City of Orem code by adding and applying Assign Zone D to properties located generally at 825 East, 950 East, 1020 East, 1040 East, 1068 East, and 1145 East, 800 North.

And did you include by adding the PO zone as a permitted zone?

And by adding a PO zone permitted and amending the signed zone map of the City of Orem by applying the signed Zone D.

Okay. Is there a second?

I'll second it.

Okay, somebody give their name. Debbie sounded like she seconded it.

Terry.

Terry.

Okay, Terry Peterson seconded it. Let's go ahead for a roll call vote. We'll start with Brent Sumner.

Aye.

Okay, Terry Peterson.

Aye.

Debbie Laree.

Aye.

Um, Jeff Lampson?

Aye.

Tom McDonald?

Aye.

Dave Spencer?

Aye.

And Mayor Brunt, and I vote aye as well. Uh, the amendment and ordinance change passes, and we'll move on to our next item. At this point, uh, our next item is actually, uh, communication items. And we'd like to give some time to Steve Downs with regards to communication about Summerfest.

Thanks, Mayor. As you probably can appreciate, we've been talking a lot about Summerfest and what that might look like. And as it is with many things, we're, we're having those conversations without all the information we wish we had, but trying to project what the future might look like. And so As we've gone through this process of evaluating our current Summerfest plan for 2020, as you, as you know, our grand marshal was—

is—

that's been invited and accepted is Governor Herbert. And we felt it would be unwise to have an event where he's the grand marshal that is against his judgment of being an event. And so we've looked at what, what Summerfest would look like come June. And as you know, the Utah Leads Together plan that Governor Herbert laid out, where we would find Summerfest is in best-case scenario is in kind of phase 2. And phase 2 still discourages large community gatherings and events. It starts to allow some to come back but discourages large ones. And Summerfest is essentially a large event that goes on for a week. So with your kind of permission and guidance, what we've discussed with Councilwoman Larray, who's our liaison, our chair, Jay Teresa, and our vice chair, Ashley Mann— this is the recommended go-forward plan that we want to present to you. One, step one would be to cancel some of the Summerfest 2020 events that create the large gatherings, specifically the parade and the carnival. Point 2 would be to look at all the other parts of Summerfest that could, that could be a standalone event. Those, the ones that come to mind are potentially our pool party, our storytelling event, our car show, Orem's Got Talent, and others. And what we would look is to identify a time in late summer and into the fall and even the winter if necessary to have some of those events that we feel like we could still facilitate this year. The other thing, and this is all obviously based on a lot of different factors, would be to try to at a later date have a fireworks show. Specifically, the kind of time we're looking at is maybe a Labor Day weekend celebration. That obviously is subject to many things, but that's the direction we'd like to start going down, which would include us reaching out to any— anybody that we have agreements with, either canceling those agreements.

Your line has been muted. Your line has been unmuted.

Okay, so anyways, that, that's, that's the discussion we wanted to have with the City Council, and essentially the proposal we wanted to be able to have The next step based on your recommendation would be to do a conference call with our Summerfest committee, have everybody look at the events that they're responsible for, and identify if and which events we could hold at a date later to be determined into kind of the third quarter of this year.

So my question would be— this is the mayor— if we could look at an alternative date that we could do a regular-sized Summerfest, if that's even possible. And if that were, also talking with the governor as to what his schedule is. I can tell you he was very disappointed in not being able to be the grand marshal last year, which we had tried to do. And this is his last year as governor, and he's really looking forward to the parade and the festivities, but of course in accordance with safety standards with COVID-19.

So there—

Mayor, this is Debbie. Can I—

Please, Debbie.

Sure, Debbie.

One thing we need to understand is we also, we have to get a mass gathering permit through the county health department, and we don't know if and when that will be available. And Steven, you know, is that a month ahead? What is the timeline on the mass gathering?

So what we know now is they've asked us to not even talk to them until April 14th. But yeah, it takes— and Heath Stevenson has been heading that up for us. But I think you're at least 4 weeks, but likely they prefer longer than that in order to do that.

Sure. Well, we're a ways off from Labor Day. I would love to see it if that would be a possibility. I don't know if it is, but would love to explore it.

Yeah, and I will suggest one of the challenges is the amount of time it takes to obviously plan for, prepare, not just by us but also the organizations, in order to even do it. And so we were The reason for the conversation now was the end of the month is our kind of our drop-dead in order to send to print a— our magazine.

Wow.

And that's a— that's a $20,000 expense that we didn't want to— obviously don't want to have if we're not going to be doing it. So part of the challenge is obviously is trying to— to time this where we're not spending a significant amount of money to something that we may not— we may not do. And as it relates to Governor Herbert, which I understand exactly what the mayor is saying, Governor Herbert's schedule in his last year of being the governor only would only allow him to be likely at the Saturday parade.

He's—

he actually will be on a trade mission the week of Summerfest, coming in Friday night and then being there Saturday. If we were to delay having him be our grand marshal until next year, Obviously, his responsibilities as governor will be completed, and he'd likely be able to participate in more of the festivities.

So I'd still like to look at the Labor Day. I'm not sure why the printing has to be done now, why it can't be done later. I understand contracts and whatnot, but we're talking essentially 4 months. I'm thinking within you know, 6 weeks or whatever, we'll have a better realization where things are at. So could we not hold off on the printing and try to look at something around Labor Day? And that, I understand, it'd be nice to have the program, but—

No, that is—

Mayor, this is Jamie. I think another consideration too is obviously there are There are hundreds of communities in the state that plan and prepare similar events. They're also having similar conversations, and a number of those cities have already scheduled their events. So we're frankly not even sure if some of the amenities, some of the people we would look to help us in executing this event are even available.

Sure.

So as we have conversations about, for example, carnival companies, firework companies, vendors, a lot of these vendors actually schedule out their entire summer by going from event to event to event. So we don't even know if we put on an event if anybody would come because it may conflict with other communities and other priorities in the state. And so that's why we came up with this, or staff and the committee came up with this idea of let's not dispense with all that's tied to Summerfest, but let's try and do it in a way where we can minimize, you know, the financial constraints that may result, or that we may mitigate some of the financial problems that may result if we try and put together an event and ultimately don't hold it. And clearly this is not a year where we have a lot of money available to essentially lose in the event we can't hold an event.

So I appreciate those comments. Certainly that may be the way we end up going. I still would like to explore and see what is a possibility and what is open with the different parts of the Summerfest.

And we—

Well, this is Debbie. I have another comment. Go ahead.

I was going to just mention the only other consideration— Go ahead, Debbie.

Okay, one of you go. Go ahead, Debbie.

Okay. For me, the fireworks was a very important thing, I think, for bringing community spirit, kind of almost a morale sort of idea. We could stage a fireworks show with, you know, limiting people around it. Maybe you have to stay at your own home. I just think there's a— there's something beautiful about fireworks and the patriotism.

I—

that's why I thought a fireworks show would be important. When exactly that is, I just think that's a great morale booster. And I think for 15,000 to 20,000, that would bring a lot of peace and joy. So I just want to say the fireworks Steve, go ahead.

No, I would say the, the other consideration is we have now had— we have word from our, our 2 largest sponsors that make up 50% of our sponsorship that both of them are on hold with any sponsorship money until further notice. And so that's, that's obviously the other consideration is 50% of our sponsorship money is up for grabs.

Okay.

And so we're going to have to figure out how to make up for that.

potentially—

That's a big one that I hadn't heard.

No, of course. Yeah, just now sharing.

So—

Mayor, this is Terry.

Just one other comment about Labor Day weekend. Labor Day weekend is the Swiss Days Festival in Midway, and also isn't that the storytelling festival? So I wonder if we went a week off of that, if we might have a better shot at people. being able to attend. Just, just a thought. I know Labor Day weekend's a big one already.

The storytelling festival is the week after the Labor Day weekend.

It's the week after, okay.

Yeah.

So, Terry, you're thinking before—

what's that?

I said you're thinking the week before, is that what you're saying?

Well, maybe, yeah, just, just a week off of Labor Day because I think a lot of times families might I don't know, but some families, that's their last hurrah to go on a trip that weekend. So I'm just trying to think to get the best support from our city if maybe the week before, Mayor.

Okay, just a thought.

Any other thoughts or comments?

Okay, well, Steve, sorry, Mayor, I was having trouble unmuting. Councilmember McDonald is here. Happy to push this down the road and make a decision down the road. Debbie, I think fireworks are wonderful, but I don't think there's a prayer people would stay at home to watch it. And so I think if we can do the fireworks when the ban has been lifted on gatherings, that would be wonderful.

But I don't think it's—

other than not doing it when we had it planned for May, I don't think it's a decision as to when we have to do it other than to start shooting for a date until we have more information. So I don't think we ought to do the fireworks until we have lifted the bans on gathering.

This is Jeff. I can't think of a better reason to get together and celebrate than having the ban lifted under fireworks.

Well, I'm thinking of the movie Independence Day, and I'm thinking July 4th Might be our Independence Day from this, but who knows. But anyway, I'm wondering if we could just keep looking at it, and Steve, if you could come, you know, look at various parts and let's keep talking.

Okay, that's— so I think then what we do know is we won't be— we can at least agree to not do anything during the week that we would traditionally have done Summerfest.

Correct.

Yes, we won't be ready for that.

Are we, Mayor, if I may, are we ready to— is it time to call the Memorial Day program itself?

Tom, that's a good question. I don't know the answer to that, but Bren can speak here in the next 2.

Mayor and Council, if I may, this is Bren Bybee.

Go ahead, Brand.

Sorry for the interruption there, Mayor, but right now, just kind of internally, we've been talking about the idea of maybe doing a streaming video where we would perhaps just have some of the main participants doing the Memorial Day program and then essentially streaming it to the public at large and otherwise discouraging residents or participants, or I guess the public, from attending the celebration or the program. Our thought is that it would be nice to still provide a patriotic program that, of course gives a nod and salute and honors our veterans.

So, Brent, I like that idea. I don't see us being ready with COVID-19 by that time for large gatherings, so I think that's a great idea.

I feel like it's an event that would be not just memorable but also unforgettable.

And if the rest of the council is okay with it, I think we ought to move that direction on that day. Is that acceptable to everybody?

I'm okay.

That's great for me, Debbie.

Yes, Terry. Yes, Jeff.

Yes, Tom.

Dave?

Great, well, we'll continue to work on those details and logistics.

Okay, and then Dave, if you could just keep working on Summerfest and come back to us, but we might want to put out the word that it will not be happening on that date.

Will do.

Okay, anything else from you, Steve?

Nothing from me.

I'll take that as a no. Um, Jamie, let's go to you for any information items in regards to COVID-19.

Sure, thank you, Mayor. Uh, this discussion that has just been had relative to Summerfest is just a small peek into the window of what we have been doing for the last 2 and a half weeks. Incredibly proud of our staff, incredibly proud of the way they've responded to not just COVID-19 but also an earthquake. And I don't know if you heard just a few, a few minutes ago in Idaho they had a 6.4 magnitude earthquake outside of Boise. So we're not just dealing with COVID-19, we're dealing with other seismic activity and events here in the Rocky Mountain area. But as, as you can appreciate, COVID-19 has required us to modify the way we're doing business, the way we deliver services, the opportunities for people to benefit from the activities that we provide as a city and the amenities that we provide as a city. And as you might also expect, we are encountering those who appreciate some of the decisions we're making, while at the same time others who are frustrated and believe that we have exceeded our authority or gone beyond necessary in a number of areas. We meet as an Emergency Operations Committee at least twice. Generally, these last few weeks we've met, I think, 3 times a week to talk about where we are on all fronts in all departments. We have relied heavily on our employees to execute and to deal with a normal that they've never experienced before. And frankly, I think we're making progress on a number of fronts that obviously aren't directly tied to COVID-19, but It would be easy at this point to hit the pause button on everything, but we are trying to move forward, trying to address ongoing needs and concerns as we can. You may continue to, to receive feedback from individuals about the governor's directive and why we're not doing this or why we have to do that. I would ask for your continued patience. in kind of helping and working with us as we navigate these waters. But like I said, I'm incredibly proud and appreciative of our staff, the work that they're doing, the attitude that they have, and obviously dealing with what is definitely the first time for all of us in this, obviously this challenge. Challenging period. We do have probably our biggest source of contention right now are our parks and what activities should and should not be taking place in those parks. Based on the direction I received from you last week, we made a decision to keep our parks open but to limit and close access to playgrounds, tennis courts, our skate park, our pickleball courts, and our futsal courts. We unfortunately have had people who have decided to go against that directive despite the city either placing caution tape in and around those facilities or actually posting signs In those key areas. Today we went one step farther and we actually took down and are in the process of taking down all of the nets that are in our pickleball parks as well as our tennis courts. We will lock our futsal court, we will lock our skate park, and we will obviously sign that all of those facilities are closed. We also have our buildings that are subject to a hard closure now. That doesn't mean that services are not available from the city. It just means that we are encouraging people to use telephone, email, or our chat application to communicate with us and to conduct business with the city electronically rather than in person. On occasion, if necessary, we also will work with individuals who need to meet with us in person on an appointment basis. But we anticipate that these closures, we anticipate that these, I guess you could say, changes will be part of our operations here in the next 15 to 30 days at least. And at that point, we will reassess and take our direction from the governor, the state health department, and the county health department. So I've been doing what I can in terms of communicating regularly with employees, keeping you and them up to date. Our department directors, like I said, are meeting regularly trying to address problems as we become aware with Of them. And of course, the fluidity of this epidemic, this pandemic, is unlike anything I think many of us, if not all of us, have ever seen. So we're going to continue to just do our best and to adjust as necessary and to weather this and to come out hopefully stronger and better as a result. If you have any questions, I'm happy to entertain them or to have members of our staff speak to specific questions or concerns that you may have.

Jamie, this is Brent.

Uh, yes, what—

I noticed the playgrounds at the schools, at least over by me, are heavily used. Is that not our responsibility, or Is that the school district?

Well, if, if there are, um, if the playgrounds are specifically on school property, then they are the responsibility of the school district. If, if they're within a, obviously, a city park, then they're our responsibility. And we have been using caution tape to essentially discourage people from— we've been wrapping these structures in caution tape, and we've been signing our parks advising them that certain things are closed within our parks. We did that, for example, with our pickleball courts, and we had people just tear down the caution tape and jump onto the courts. And so it became necessary for us to kind of go to the next level. But for playgrounds, actually, people have been pretty respectful.

Okay.

I did see that.

I just happened to be by Mountain View when they were tearing them down.

I don't know.

It just kind of shocked me.

Yeah.

And again, I think there are some who— in fact, we get— we have gotten a variety of comments. Half the comments are, you need to do more. The other half of the comments are, you need to do less, why are you infringing on my constitutional rights?

Yeah.

You're doing a great job.

Thank you.

Any other questions? I would like to just— thank you, Jamie. I'd like to just make a couple of quick comments. I wanted to thank Jamie and Bryn and Steve and our entire staff, department heads, and our police and fire for all the efforts they're making. This COVID-19 has kind of upset everybody's plans and made everybody kind of tense, and a lot of things have to occur. And I can see that everybody in our city is putting in twice as much work to deal with this. And so I just would hope Jamie pass on to our staff how much that we as a city council appreciate what they're doing, their efforts, and for what they're doing for our residents. I did want to mention that it's interesting that in Utah we had recently 87 new cases of COVID-19 occur for a percentage increase of 12%. But that's actually an improvement over the previous week, which was a 19% increase. So we're actually starting to go down a little bit. So our soft closure and closure of parks and other facilities is helping. We have 806 cases of people that have COVID-19 in the state of Utah with 4 deaths. If you look at our neighbor to the east, Colorado, they have 2,627 confirmed cases of COVID-19 with 51 deaths. We are one of the lowest of the top of the 10 states, lowest 10 states in the nation as far as the amount of cases being confirmed and deaths. Also, I wanted to make mention that Timpanogos Hospital starting tomorrow has a location in Provo and Timpanogos Hospital in Orem, where they will be doing drive-by testing for COVID-19 with getting results back in hours, not days. So if you remember, 3, 4 weeks ago, they only had enough tests to test 2,000 or 3,000 people in the US. Now we're testing 4,000 a day in Utah. And they're moving ahead to get to 8,000. And to that point, my wife had to go in for testing because someone in the school appeared to have had close contact with someone that had COVID-19. So there's a lot going on, but I think that what we're doing in closing certain areas of the city and asking people to Stay safe, stay home, and save lives is actually occurring. Our businesses are suffering. If they go— if our residents go to orem.org, you'll see all the references for different bridge loans and SBA loans to help the businesses. We appreciate everything that everybody is doing. This is a very tough time. And I know that we are a great community. We can get through this together. So I think now is the time to stay up with keeping our movements down so that we can stop the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus. With that, I would accept a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Okay, who is that?

Yep, Brent.

Okay, Brent. Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, um, all in favor say aye.

Aye. Yes.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, I was on another call, so I was just hanging up right now. Okay, thank you for the electronic meeting. I appreciate staff setting it up, and I'm