City Council · 2024-04-30

We had a number of people reach out that were interested in coming and seeing what's going on. And, uh, and so we kind of had to rearrange everything. And so this is very put together quickly, but I think it'll be effective chance for a meeting. Before we start, just to make sure everyone knows everyone and who's involved, if we could just go around the table and just everyone introduce who you are and, and where you're from.

I'm Lenee Millett. I'm from Orem with the Orem City Council. Thanks. Hello, Chris Kilpatrick with the Orem City Council.

David Spencer, Orem City Council.

Jen Gale, Orem City Council.

Tom McDonald, ditto.

Jason Sundberg, business administrator for Alpine School District, and I live here in Orem also.

Shane Farnsworth, Superintendent.

Tryland Lincoln, Alpine School Board member from Saratoga Springs and West Lehigh.

Jeff Lamson, Orem City Council.

Sarah Hacken, Alpine School Board from Orem. Sarah Beeson, Alpine School District, and I grew up in Orem. I was a Tiger. Stacy Bateman, board member, and I represent Lehigh. I'm part of American Fork.

Julie King, um, I wear a School Board of Education. I represent, uh, north end of Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, Cedar Fort, and Fairfield. Ada Wilson, Alpine School Board, representing the west side of Orem and Vineyard. And I just want to say thank you to my fellow board members for being here. We're only missing one.

Bren Bybee, Orem City Manager, also grew up in Orem.

Okay, we appreciate everyone being here. And, uh, interesting, all the connections to Orem. Some people complain that we think that Orem is the epicenter of everything, but all of you have got some connection here. So, um, as far as— and maybe we can ask the council what they think about this. Um, we have had a lot of public reach out. And some people are interested in asking questions or making public comments. Do we want to open that up for 20 minutes, or do we want to just have this be a meeting amongst us? Or I'd just be curious what anyone, if anyone has opinion. As far as the target that we're shooting for is, we'd like to try and keep this meeting from now until 5:30. And so that gives you an idea of our target. We can end sooner if we run out of things to talk about. But any, any thoughts on if we have 20 minutes of public comment or not? Anybody? Anybody?

I think we have an awful lot to cover, Mayor. I'm concerned about going into that, and they'll all be here hearing the public, but I'm concerned about that and whether we'll get through everything we want to do in an hour and a half. That would be my concern.

Okay, any, any other thoughts?

I mean, I think if we have time, they should be able to speak. If we have time, we go to the end instead of the beginning.

Yeah. Okay, any, any other thoughts? I think that'll make sense. Um, so let's go down that path. If we have time towards the end, we'll, we'll invite those public comments. If not, then we'll just try and cover the business at hand. Okay, first thing on the agenda is item 2.1. Uh, we've got safety issues. Would someone like to clarify what concerns anyone has on safety issues. Yeah.

Oh, sorry.

And, and we, we've got these set up so they reach quite a ways, so you should be fairly okay at a distance.

Um, I guess I just wanted— it was on, I think. Are you hearing me? Um, I live close to Orem Elementary, and I just wanted to thank you for your close coordination with Principal Ryan Rock. I contacted him today and he said he met with, um, the city yesterday, and they have been meeting frequently. Um, of course, safety is a big concern because we're building, um, that water tank facility right across the street from Orem Elementary, and they have had to do a lot of adjusting, um, and traffic control. But I think they're doing the best they can. And he said, just, uh, you know, the end is in sight as far as school's going to be out and that will make it much easier. Um, but anyway, he just wanted to say thank you. They had, um, a walk-to-school, uh, day, so to try to alleviate some of the, um, traffic that's, um, daily, uh, their problem. And he said that he wanted to say thank you for the support that they got from the city for that day because our first responders were there and showed up. In conjunction with that, I, I just wanted to make you aware of a request I've had from patrons at the, the 4-way intersection at 400 South and 600 West. And I'm not sure who here in your staff is taking notes, but that is currently okay. I don't know who your safety person is. Raise your hand.

No, that's our entire executive staff over there.

Great. Ah, that's awesome. Anyway, this is the entrance to, um, the park, and that, that heads into the back of the rec center and Mountain View High School. It is a busy intersection, and people have expressed an interest in having that be a permanent 4-way stop or a traffic stop. What, what whatever is deemed to work best. Previously, it was a one-way stop sign. With the construction, that has changed, and, and they think it's a good change to have that be a 4-way intersection, safer for kids who are crossing at that area. So that's just a request I've had from somebody in my public.

Thank you.

Okay, I have, um, also got a couple of, uh, schools that have expressed some concerns, and, um, I'm very grateful that people from Orem City have gone to community councils at both Northridge and Windsor and have— that are working with them. But I'm wondering if you could give me an update on plans for at Northridge to slow down the traffic on 1600 North. They've discussed a number of options, and I don't know What is actively being pursued, if anything? So one is the Northridge area, and there's a little parcel of land that looks like it's going to be developed, and what will be happening coming down that road. And the other is at Windsor. They've got some concerns. And I've heard kind of backdoor that they were going to move a hawk light away from Cascade and put it somewhere else. So can you just kind of like give us a little update on what is happening and what you're— Thinking is, um, at this point with those areas.

Come on up.

So if I can just introduce John a little bit. John is our, uh, our transportation engineer who we've hired this year, and, um, John Dorney, and, uh, we recruited him away from Horrocks Engineers, and he's part of a multidisciplinary team that we've created recently that has representation from police and, and, uh, public works and, and, uh, really kind of all around the city to try and make sure we're looking at these different transportation-related safety issues kind of comprehensively. And so, yes, John, I believe, has attended some of these school community councils and could give us the latest on some of Yes, he's the man right there.

Good to see you again. Thank you.

I think— yes.

Yeah, we've been at the same meetings off and on, and Taylor, also from Public Works, has been at a few regarding Windsor, Northridge, and Cascade. So there's been a lot of activity at Cascade. I actually went there today and talked to the principal and asked— we, we added some safe-hit bollards, those white sticks that keep people from from parking in the red zone. We had a few residents tell us there's been some near misses of students traveling through that hawk signal, and we're going to adjust the timing of the hawk signal because there's a delay when they push the button for the hawk signal to turn on that's not fast enough. You know, 20 or 30 seconds at a signal is a long time, and so we're going to shorten that so the red turns on. We added those, those buttons that keep people from blocking sight distance. We're adding 2 Crossing guards this next fall. Crossing guards are hard to come by. So we're trying to get those August 1st. The hawk signal moving would be phase 2 if we signalize that intersection someday. So if that intersection gets signalized and the principal— I think it's Principal Johnson— really wanted that to be signalized. So we're going to do an analysis. And if, if that happens, the hawk signal will be removed. because they would cross at the, the intersection. Um, we talked with school district members. They're going to black out some of the bus striping that's not being used for buses to maximize parent pickup. We also discussed today, and this could be something district-wide, is a color-coded timed pickup where instead of everybody showing up at the same time, you assign grades or teachers a certain time which coordinates with the of color and the kids kind of migrate if they're not walking home or riding bikes home, if they're going to get picked up. That was something he was interested in for schools that have a really— I think he said he has 900 students, a really high concentration. So that's Cascade, working with them. Um, Northridge, that was a couple months ago I think we met.

Yeah.

Um, we asked For— we gave them kind of a toolbox of things we could do. The tough thing about Northridge is I think right now no one crosses 1600, or at least they're not part of that district unless they're out of boundary. Out of boundary. And so we haven't decided a place if we need to have a crossing yet, because I believe the boundaries don't cross to the south. But if there is an issue, we've asked for them to tell us. If you have— if you have a lot of kids crossing right now that are out of boundary or not being driven, then we need to align them to one place to get across 1600. Right now, I don't believe the speed limit on 1600— Taylor, speed limit on 1600, is it 35? So we can't—

it's kind of an unwritten rule.

I wouldn't call it law, but It's hard to add traffic calming measures on a road that's greater than 25 miles an hour. And so it becomes unsafe. And so we have to do other things on 1600. We actually gave the option to stripe the lanes narrower to 10 feet and possibly remove parking at some key locations. And I think Northridge— I don't know if they're part of the uh, retooling of elementary schools that might get shut down, and they were kind of waiting on what happens in the future with their district boundaries or their school boundaries. So there's also an empty lot you mentioned that has a potential for access.

Yeah.

But right now it's a field, and it's south of the canal. And so they're kind of landlocked. So the only way to get in without having to go down to 1600 would be come across this farmer's field that would be bisected. So we're trying to figure out what happens to that land. And then the last one, Windsor. Um, Taylor and I went to Windsor. They were mainly interested in their safe routes. And so I think, uh, we talked a little bit about that, knowing that there might be district changes. I think the district said in a year, year and a half So we're going to put the safe routes on hold depending on the district changes, but they have a lot of parking lot access issues where they have a kindergarten pickup and another pickup that all seems to conflict. And so Taylor and I are going to actually go watch and see what happens to see if there's a way to help modify that. And so, I don't know how staggering times or doing something different, but They, they want us to come out and watch real time and see what's going on so we can kind of get a feel for that.

Thank you so much.

Sure. Thank you.

Did you have anything to say about the intersection by Orem Elementary? Or— I— this is the first I've noticed anyone, so—

I have not been meeting with Orem Elementary Personally, I don't know if anyone else at the city has, or if there's plans for the intersection near Orem Elementary. This is the signal intersection person at the city, Taylor Forbush.

We talked about 600 West.

So we got a request for a 4-way stop there prior to the construction and closure, and we went in and did a study, and then they closed the road.

So we're, we're gonna wait for that road to open and do a further analysis and see if that warrants it.

Thank you. Just know that there is continued interest.

Yeah. So, John, will you talk about 12th West, what the work that you did for Bonneville there?

Sure. So we at 1200 West About 1360 North, just west of Bonneville Elementary. We met with them also. That's where the sidewalk ends southbound on 12th West.

Yeah.

And we're hearing that people are crossing, whether it's school or not school, but it keeps the kids from being able to cross reasonably because there's a lot of apartments. I think there's 40-something students just in the elementary school that lives in those townhomes, apartments. And the safe routes takes them all the way up to— what is that?

16, and then back down and wind over to Bonneville.

So we're designing a hawk signal. Uh, well, I guess we're calling it a high visible— high visibility. It's not a hawk where it doesn't stop the cars. It has a pedestrian— it has different signage. And, um. We were adding bike lanes behind the curbing, so we're including the bike lanes. That was part of the TAC committee that we have here, and also Bike Orem said, hey, if you do bike lanes, we'd like it to look like this. And so that's under design. We're almost ready to go to bid on that, and that would allow people to cross. Um. About 13-something north at 12th. And like I said, a lot of, a lot of feedback we got from the school was people are just jetting across that road, and I think that's also higher than 25. And so it would be not just during school time safety, but regular hours. So that's called the high visibility crosswalk, similar to a hawk.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Just as a point of interest. So we have obviously our transportation master plan. We have all kinds of projects going on all the time, different priorities. But we found that occasionally we have situations that need immediate attention because they're really dangerous. And so for that, we form what Bryn was talking about, our Tiger Team. That's where several different groups come together to Decide, is this an emergency? How pressing is it? And does it need to be moved up the list? And so that's basically where that, uh, that semaphore stop at Orchard Elementary came from. That wasn't scheduled for probably 4 years out, but that was moved up in anticipation, you know, because of what happened. So if you have things with the schools that you're hearing are an issue, then feel free to reach out to it and we'll be real reactive.

You said that's called the what team?

Tiger Team.

Tiger Team.

Okay. Anything else on safety?

Thank you.

Okay, thank you. All right, let's move to item 2.2. And like I say, this is, is really interesting, uh, that we're meeting today because there's been a lot of news. When we scheduled this meeting, uh, none of this was happening, and, uh, So maybe it's karma, I don't know, but it's interesting. Um, anyway, recommendations on split options. Maybe, uh, Shane— sorry, Farnsworth— if you'd like to— Superintendent Farnsworth, if you'd like to maybe give us an update on where you're at.

Yeah, so we, uh, we met this morning. Board of Education met this morning. Um, they determined to look at Option 3, which is a 2-way split, and an Option 3, uh, Option 3 and Option 4. Option 3 is a 2-way split. Option 4 is a 3-way split. Recommendation is to further study those, to certify those with the county, and then open that up at the May 14th board meeting for further study of those options. That would officially begin the 45-day requirement by state statute for public input. They also determined an additional board meeting for June 25th. So June 11th and June 25th will be the public hearing meetings where we take input on that. And then the board scheduled a July 12th meeting, which would be within 2 weeks after that 45-day period, to make a determination of what, if any, initiative proposal, proposition to put on the ballot. It was discussed during that time that there have been some other cities that have entered into interlocal agreements and began that process as So that's kind of the state of where we're at right now. So we— I think we're in what we call Phase 2. Phase 1 was having MGT review that information, make recommendation. Phase 2 now is the board reviewing that, and then they'll make a determination of whether or not to put that forward as proposition for the November ballot.

Okay, so, so right now, just to clarify, you're, you're looking at those 2 options? Option 3 and 4?

Yes, 3 would be, uh, Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, Fairfield, Cedar Fort, and then Lehigh East. Option 4 is the same west configuration— Lehigh East to Pleasant Grove as a central, and then Pleasant Grove South as an east. We haven't labeled those east, but those were the 3 configurations.

And then as, as you— so that's right now what you've decided? And then May 14th, you'll decide if you want to go further with that, or—

May 14th will begin— that will be when we officially declare to the public that is what we're seeking input on. That begins the statutory requirement for that 45-day public input.

Okay, so, so just to clarify, are you planning on going forward with both those options, or are you just looking at both those options now and then you'll decide something before—

The intention of the board is to put both of those options out for public input.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Could you— you said some cities have already entered into an interlocal agreement. I think most of us are aware of what that is, but could you clarify which cities have entered into an interlocal?

Yes, and I will have board members correct me if I err on this, but I believe that Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, Fairfield, and Cedar Fort have entered into a local agreement— interlocal agreement to create a district in the west. And then Lehigh, Draper, Alpine, Highland, Cedar Hills, American Fork have entered into an interlocal agreement. Again, they're following the same statutory process. What they entered into an agreement is to begin the study of that for public input and feedback. When they officially begin that 45-day period, they will have to determine that. But what took place over the last couple days is the initial stages of that, similar to what the board did. this morning in their meeting. Did that answer your question?

All cities except for the 4 that would be in the southeast have entered into an interlocal, to your knowledge?

That is my understanding.

And, and those cities would include Orem, Lyndon, Vineyard, and Pleasant Grove, right? Those would be the remaining cities.

Those are the 4 that I understand have not to this point officially entered into an interlocal.

Any, any other— I mean, questions? Jen?

I just want to say thank you for your efforts on this. I know this is a very, very difficult topic, and you have all been under fire, whatever your opinions on any given split. And we as residents and as a city appreciate your efforts on that. So thank you.

Yeah, I just have to say, this is kind of the scenario that we had hoped to avoid, because Our— according to our public, um, they want this to be handled very carefully and apolitically. So we were in the process of doing that, and we, we can't tell city councils what to do, but, uh, these interlocal agreements essentially, um, make it so that our cities cannot vote on what happens Uh, overall. Um, but I think the Alpine School District will continue to put forward, uh, what we consider to be the best option, and we'll let the process play out. And I think it behooves you as city council members to work closely with your compatriots, uh, in other cities.

So can you, can you clarify that? Um, As far as when you say that this doesn't allow the citizens to vote, right? I mean, because that, that's what it is, right?

Yeah, an interlocal agreement only has to be approved by the people within that agreement. And so essentially what's happening is the same thing that happened in the Jordan Canyon split, where half a part got to vote and the other part had to take what was left. I don't think that's a fair process, um, and I'm a little disappointed, um, that city leaders would take that decision out of the hands of their people. Um, I trust the public. They are connected to their kids, they're connected to their schools, and they know what I think is best for, uh, their community. And I, I had hoped that they would have the chance to vote.

I'd like to make a comment.

I still don't understand. I'm sorry, because my understanding is that the citizens do have the opportunity to vote. In other words, if the citizens—

not in an interlocal agreement.

Well, yeah, okay, let's just— for example, so just to clarify, because I think this is confusing. So Saratoga Eagle Mountain did an interlocal agreement. Their citizens vote, do they want to be their own school district or not, right? So they're, they're voting. So how, how are they not voting or being represented?

Well, anybody who is not included in the interlocal does not get to vote and, uh, on, on what the future is. And to me, um, well, I'm just going to leave it at that.

Okay, I'm just trying to clarify because, like I said, it's confusing. So to clarify, From what I'm understanding, so Saratoga Eagle Mountain, if they do an interlocal, they can vote. All the citizens there can vote. We want to be in, we want to be out. But what you're saying, I think, is the rest of the district doesn't get a vote whether they're in or out, right? So they get a vote if they're in or out, but just everybody doesn't, right? That's correct. Okay. And then to say what happened with Canyons and Jordan, that was, um, So one of those 2 did an interlocal agreement? Oh, is it an initiative? Okay, so it was different. But so they did their initiative and they were able to withdraw, and that's where you're saying the other was left, left over or whatever, right? Okay, I just want to clarify so we're all on the same page.

I don't know. And there's laws about what happens when there's conflicting things on the ballot. And I'm not completely clear on what would happen in the event that there are multiple things on the ballot. Maybe the superintendent can comment on that.

These— there is some statutory guidelines, law, with respect to competing initiatives. There is different interpretation whether district reconfiguration propositions are subject to that same statute. There's different interpretation of that, and I would assume there would be further clarification of whether or not the county allows competing initiatives on the ballot. And if so, what initiative would determine if both passed, what would be the prevailing initiative if they were conflicting? So there is some statutory guidelines on that that talk about the majority of affirmative votes. would be the one who writes. But there's— I would say it's unclear at this point, and there is not significant case law on that statute to clarify how that would be interpreted. And I can just tell you what I've heard in asking that same question is that where that essentially there's new legislation that creates a lot of this, this path. Um, and what I've been told is that if there were— was a conflict at the end of this process, that the legislature would likely, uh, create a priority at that point in time. I mean, odds are that they're going to amend that legislation and clean it up, but that's, that's kind of what I've been told would happen. Sure. So we've heard similar. Yeah.

I wonder if we can have our city attorney. He gave a great explanation when we met with Lyndon City Council. Steve, would you mind commenting on the, you know, like the interlocal agreements, how those affect the vote, how those are, um, kind of like Jamerrill kind of touched on that a little bit? And then the other option, which is if the district puts something on the ballot, how that is tabulated, calculated, determined.

See if I can figure out how to work this mic here.

It's already on.

Okay, I didn't see any light like I'm used to on these things. Uh, yeah, so, and I think that the mayor has kind of clarified this with his question, but there is a little bit different— a bit of a difference in the voting process if it is a district-initiated, uh, proposed split versus if it's a process that's initiated by cities. via interlocal agreements. And that is, as you've already indicated, if it's, if it's 2 or 3 cities that get together via interlocal agreement, then only the, the residents or the voters in, in those, uh, jurisdictions, uh, vote on whether they split or not, and the rest of the district doesn't have a say in that. Um, how— in contrast, if it is the, um, a district-initiated, uh, split, then you have to have a vote of both a majority of the residents in the proposed new district, as well as a majority of the voters in the existing district. So frankly, it's a little bit tougher to get approval, I would say, of a proposed split that's initiated by the district because it's a 2-step process versus one that's just initiated through interlocal agreement by individual cities.

And I think, I think there's some fear that if, um, Option 3, which is a 2-way split, was on the ballot, the city's fear that it would not pass— I think that that's not an assumption they should make. Um, and I think they should allow all people in Alpine School District to vote.

I think it's, you know, who do I want Eagle Mountain voting for something that happens to Orem? Does Saratoga want or I'm voting for something that happens in their area. To me, that's a little different interpretation than, you know, a different viewpoint than what you're saying. I understand everyone should vote, and really, the— I really feel like the best way for that to happen is to have every community join in an interlocal agreement, and then you have those opportunities for everyone to control their destiny. You know, right now we're the only ones that aren't in an interlocal agreement at this point. So if something does happen, I fear that there will then be, you know, well, we never— there will then be these continuing conversations. That's one of the cons, right? Continuing conversations of, we didn't get a choice, we didn't get to vote, we didn't get to, you know, control our destiny. So I think that that's just another perspective I've heard. Um, you know, from our public that I think, you know, probably needs to be out there and discussed.

I'd like to give just a point of information for those who are listening either in person or online. When we began this process last fall, we hired a company from Florida, MGT, to do a feasibility study for us. And part of that process was to hold meetings and to get public input, and then also to have public input online. And so they ended up with over 11,000 responses, and they used the same questions for each meeting. So PTA meetings, employee meetings, um, you know, a variety, um, public people, public meetings. Um, but obviously some people have responded twice to this, to the survey. They were both there in person and they also responded online. So I don't think we can say that their 11,000 number is the number of people who actually responded. It's probably less than that. But in every cluster, because I have looked at this, the majority of the people who responded wanted option 1. They did not want a split. And in some clusters, it was a higher percentage than others. Some of it was like 51%, some of it was like 67% or 70%. So cluster to cluster, there was a great deal of variance. However, those same people also said they wanted it on the ballot. So even people who are in favor of staying together felt like they wanted to put it on the ballot, they wanted to have a choice, they wanted to have that discussion. And that is one reason why we have moved forward with further examination of 2 options that we will be looking at and getting public input on until the end of June. I want people to understand that there is a lot of support for staying together, but there's also a lot of support for taking a good deep look at it across the district, and that's the process I think we want to follow, or we are following, and we would like to work very closely with all of our cities to get correct information back and forth.

Thank you. Tom, please.

So it sounds like for the next 45 days, or 45 days from whenever the start happens, Superintendent, we're in a study mode.

Uh, there is a possibility at least 2 interlocal agreements may be signed, and you may recommend a 2 or 3-way split. What if those 2 interlocals go? Would you Could you put a 2-way split on, or would you have to go to a 3-way split vote?

That is up to the board to vote and decide, and we'll do that.

So this could become confusing for our citizens, right?

Because there could be an interlocal for the west, an interlocal for the northeast, and an Alpine School District proposal to do 2-way. And who knows what if we ended up with an interlocal? It could become very confusing, it sounds like. So the study process seems to be pretty Pretty critical to our method going forward.

Yes, and when we say we're studying options, Alpine District has already studied all of these options. They have collected data, they've looked at all kinds of factors involved. So an important part of this is for the public to study the options. When we say we're studying, it's not just us, it's mainly giving the public a chance to study, to look at the data, to ask questions, to come to meetings, to give input. So it's a 2-way study process.

And really important to note that the MGT study looked at maintenance and operations, so it was just one snapshot from fiscal year '23. So part of this further study also brings in the capital planning piece, um, the properties that we have, the new builds that need to happen, seismic concerns, and renovations. So that study was just one piece, and we need to now complete the rest of the, the Total picture.

And when are you— I mean, I, I just heard rumors. I didn't get to watch all your meeting today. So you're going to be doing that over these next 45 days, or you've had— I heard something. I watched the first part of your meeting and you got something at midnight last night or something along those lines. Is that what you're talking about, that information?

Yeah, so part of what we received, um, last night or early this morning were the capital needs for Options 1 2 and 3, um, and not for option 4. So, because now we have voted to move forward with exploring options 3 and 4, then we'll take a look at what that looks like for option 3, what that looks like for option 4.

Okay. And I guess you're working on that, Jason, right? Is that what you're—

Is that something you're doing internally, or is that something MGT is doing? Is MGT complete now, or are they still involved in this?

No, that— it'll be an internal thing that we're working on on that.

So you're just gonna go through all the different options as far as what the potential capital costs are?

Yeah, and we're looking— we're not— we're looking at new school locations, not new things that would be needed, because that could be in, oh, somebody rents a district office or builds. So there's not decisions on that part of it.

How about would you include Like the big thing we have here in Orem, seismic overhaul, seismic repairs, would that be included in that study?

The revelry report?

It can be. Yeah.

I mean, I think that would be important to us to— I mean, to me, that's a big missing part of the puzzle is what are the capital costs going forward, you know, outside the budget? Yeah.

I think, and the board will come to consensus hopefully on what that data package looks like. It'll satisfy the statutory requirements for that. But it will likely be just the, the capital plan that we have updated on an annual basis divided into those areas.

And so just because a new district could decide whether or not they want to rebuild that school or adjust boundaries, so we would just share this is what we've considered as possible capital needs going forward when we are a consolidated district. These would be considerations we would recommend a new district look at as possible capital needs going forward.

That would be very valuable. Um, I also, in this study, um, I, I would love to have seen some— you know, they showed an impact, they showed an impact on like bonds, a $200 million bond, right? Um, and I really appreciate how Alpine has done the revenue-neutral, you know, bonding with bond layering. And I feel like I would like to kind of see how that would be instead of the snapshot. You know, here's really what it's going to cost now, a year out from now. You know, what anticipated bonding do you have? Kind of going away from just the snapshot that was given in the MDT study and showing like you have when you've presented bonds in towards the public. Um, moving forward, if that makes sense.

And I just— to clarify, um, and you just— you spoke to this, but as far as this capital cost analysis, I think one of the most important things for them is the seismic piece. And so, um, we need a really clear picture on exactly what that looks like. I mean, for example, in the— in the last bond, they talked about they were going to put— and, you know, $40 million. I can't remember what the number is, some number towards seismic, but it wasn't determined if it's in Pleasant Grove or Lehigh or Orem or where. We'd really like to know what our school's condition is and what that looks like going forward as far as it does need to be fixed.

And of course, that would include— to me, that's your option 4. So in these, um, not just Orem but Pleasant Grove, Linden, Orem, Vineyard, I guess Is what we're trying to say, right, as a whole. I would be very interested to see that.

The document that Jason sent us last night or early this morning, um, for the east, which would be Pleasant Grove, Orem, and so on, on capital needs, it has an elementary rebuild for Orem listed. Um, and we would— the future school board would be— would determine what that is. And it also has, uh, to complete the rebuild for Pleasant Grove High School. So there are some of those things that are on this, and if we did move ahead with that, then you would look at what that— what the total is, what the bond would be, how much it would cost per household, and so on. So just those 2 together would be about $115 million. It would cost $110 per household according to this chart.

Okay, and I guess I'm just looking for a little bit deeper than that. As far as random schools that we have that have seismic issues. So, Jeff, that's a quick question.

Um, thank you for this opportunity to be together and to discuss these important issues. Um, can you explain what the public engagement process will be going forward, um, as you come to your conclusions and then as you, uh, make these proposals. Um, I would be really curious to hear how that rolls out, uh, so that our citizens can make sure that they're engaged on reality, um, what, what the actual numbers are, what's actually happening, so that they can make the best decisions, uh, moving forward as well, and for the rest of us as well.

Thank you, Jeff. The— I think we still need to finalize that process. Obviously, we'll fulfill the statutory requirements of a 45-day period when we open that. We will have the disclosure of the boundaries, the capital, the M&O, all of those variables that are required, and additional information. so the public can look at what those options would mean for them. And then we'll have our feedback button, we'll have opportunities for feedback, we'll have at least 2 of those public hearings where they could come and give input on that. We've discussed possible open houses before those meetings so that they could ask questions, they could review maps. That process will be finalized over the next little bit. And then when we announce on April or on May 14th, we'll articulate what that feedback— what the complete feedback process is.

That clarify? Yeah, it's a lot to happen in 2 weeks. Yes, it—

and it does— I mean, what Tom mentioned, uh, I hadn't really thought of, but I think it's a great point in terms of how this progresses on the ballot. I mean, you all know from passing different issues and that over the years, the confusion is the enemy of everything, right? And so if we have— I mean, we know we've already got 2 interlocal agreements between the groups of cities. We don't have an interlocal agreement. And if Alpine puts 1 or 2 interlocal agreements— is yours called an interlocal agreement? Okay. Put your this district proposal, if you put your district proposal on, um, I don't know, it just seems kind of like potential chaos just because from a voter's mind, you know, the, the district proposal is different than an interlocal agreement, and you get your ballot and try and figure that all out. So anyway, that's a concern.

Hopefully we'll get some clarity before we get to the ballot, and I'm sure others who have stewardship over that will weigh in on that and give some direction and guidance if there are competing initiatives, proposals, whether they're interlocal or district, how they would sort through those so that we get clarity to the voters.

I think what you say is really important considering that this particular ballot is going to be a long ballot. There's going to be constitutional amendments on it, there's going to be federal races, state races, local races. It's going to be a very long ballot, and the possibility for voters to be confused, I think, is very real. So anything we can do to work with our municipalities and our citizens to clarify what we have on that ballot, I think, would be really important.

Uh, you know, we were elected, um, we were elected to oversee the affairs of our schools in this area, and it is concerning to see that Uh, the reality is this may fall to you. You may have to be the people that make the relationships, that convey the information, and, um, and it's not what you signed up for, and it's— but it's the reality. I, I think you need to be prepared to take very seriously the role that you play in the future of this community, the future of our school system. And, um, I— we have to work closely together so that we have the right information.

So I've got a question for the board members that represent those cities that did interlocal agreements. Do you know why they did the interlocal agreement? I mean, There's gotta be a reason why, and I'm just trying to get an answer of what the direction was with those cities and why.

You know, I won't speak specifically for my mayors and city council members. There's a significant concern about representation in our area. You know, just the dynamics between the census and when our school district seats were actually redistricted in 2022. In that 2-year period, tens of thousands of people were added into the 2 cities, the 2 large cities that I represent. There's significant concern that we are constantly underrepresented since the school board seats are only redrawn every 10 years at the census, and you can only go negative or positive 5% over kind of like, you know, getting the even dynamic of everyone. And so one of the problems is in that 2-year gap, we're already— even though we started the negative 5%, we're already the— we're already more than the positive 5 over by the time the new people have been elected. So representation is significant. Um, another, you know, considerable issue for my area, we just can't build schools fast enough. Um, we have a lot of kids. We've got 3,200 kids at one high school, 2,900 at the other. We just need to build schools faster. We just went through a special education, um, redistricting kind of with our— with our staff where they came with some changes that they made to better serve our special education students. And one of the concerns was that because of the limited capital space in many of our buildings, we were not able to have the same dynamics available in other municipalities because of lack of space. And so I, I think we're just in a dynamic where, um, you know, with the bond failing a couple of years ago, um, but having positive support in those areas of high growth where parents have kids in schools experiencing that every day. I think it was a, you know, a lot of factors. You've taken the representation piece, the need for schools to be built faster, supports of bonds. There's just a concern that there's a, there's a level of disconnect that maybe ASD has gotten to the size that there is a little bit of a disconnect between municipalities and not understanding needs from one area to the other. And by potentially condensing those areas, are we able to tackle those problems, um, and work towards solutions in, in a, in a way that every student is supported? Oh, sorry, I, I, um, I'm Eagle Mountain, uh, in the north end of Saratoga Springs. So basically the west side that, you know, we have— we're spouting out the kids everywhere. I tried, I tried to not make a face when some— when The safety director said 900 students was a, was a very large school, and I try, I tried to relax my face.

So similar, similar to our municipalities to these, I would say the first concern for my city was representation prior to our redistricting about a year ago. Julie and I covered 48% of the entire district, just the two of us. Yeah. And then our 5 colleagues covered 52% of the district. So I think there's just been— which, by the way, broke down to 18 schools for me and 21 for Julie. And that is quite a lot of schools for one person to represent. We tried to be in all the places. Unfortunately, we've not yet figured out how to clone ourselves to get multiple places. So that was a concern. And I think in that piece of what drove the interlocal was that if the board chose to put Option 3 forward, which I think was the general feeling of people who listened to the work session, was that there was board majority support for Option 3, then a decision would be made for people. If a couple of cities had, you know, did a really strong push for Option 3, um, then our areas would not essentially have a say in this. It would be made for us. Um, there's also kind of some concern, I think, around with the bond failing, and this is just anecdotally, I do not have quantitative data support this, but just a lot of comments from patrons about, you know, if we were in smaller districts, then people would be more willing to support a smaller bond knowing that it was going to the area, you know, directly around them. And I think whether or not any of us like that or agree with that is not— it's not the point, right? If voters are saying we don't support— we also heard a lot about the bond amount that we put forward, how large it was, which was not actually the full amount we could go for in order to cover all of our capital projects, but just seen by patrons across the district is this is an astronomical amount. So just maybe some hope that, you know, if we were in smaller geographic areas, then people would be more willing to support that. Oh, and then the other piece, and this is why I advocated so strongly for Option 4 to be considered, because we do seem to have different priorities in different geographic areas, right? Like, we've heard from a lot of Orem constituents who said we really like our neighborhood schools and we would like the option to keep our neighborhood schools. Which I fully support. If Orem decides, you know what, we want to keep these schools open, we're willing to pay for that, I think Orem should have the opportunity to do that. Then we have areas that are declining, right? So let that area decide, are we going to, you know, consolidate? Are we going to renovate? And then in the West, bless you as you go forth and you try to build. I don't know that you can build fast enough to keep up, but just, just in Maybe a faster way than it's currently going. So, um, and I think the other, uh, piece is that, um, it's just the understanding that we have of each other's area and the inability to come to consensus that supports all students. And so I think City's just kind of said, let us help out here.

We need to be able to make sure that we get everybody the resources that they need regardless of where They reside.

Oh, sorry, Lehigh and the corner of American Fork.

Sarah, do you mind if I interject really quick with one more thing? Sure. I forgot to say this one too. The other benefit of an interlocal is that right now the code states that we have to hold 2 public hearings as a district. So if you can, you know, 2 public hearings for the 14 municipalities, but interlocals are required to hold 2 public hearings. per city that is involved. So, for example, in my area, they'll be required to hold 8. In the other configuration that is together, because it's 6 cities, they'll be required to hold 12. So there is a— as a— there is a higher capability, I guess, of the public to be involved and make comments.

She didn't want to comment. She's also—

She was going next. You've got the mic right there.

You asked that question. Yeah. Joy Lynn is also one of those, right?

I mean, I'm just going down that.

Um, I'm Sarah Beeson, and I'm over the American Fork, Cedar Hills, Highland, and Alpine area. And I guess if you're asking for, you know, a reason of why, I think, um, ours, it was a little bit triggered by Lehi. And Lehi and our communities out there are just—

my communities are a little smaller in terms of they bleed over into each other, and we have boundaries there where kids are close-knit, and I think it just became a domino effect. I have to be honest, 2 weeks ago, even a week ago, I didn't think we would be where we are today. It's kind of been a surprise, and it's been definitely a paradigm change.

But as I have talked with the mayors and council members in my areas, I'm feeling a sense of comfort knowing that we have council members and mayors that are very concerned and want to take part in the process and helping, I guess, with this heavy lift, because it is. And there—

this is probably— I told someone today, probably the most important decision that elected officials will ever make in Utah County. And this is generational.

And so having other people being willing to help with a lift is important. And the members of my community and cities are committed to working with us as a school district to make sure that we are looking under every stone and leaf and trying to really get into the weeds of things to make sure that the data that we have is sufficient.

They're also willing to be wrong, which is wonderful.

And they said, you know, with their interlocal. They were wanting an exit clause in there so that if they came and their findings were probably the same as the district, that they would be able to pull out and continue through. I think they're— they are just wanting to make sure that their data is just right. And so, I'm excited at the prospect of being able to work closely with these communities and to be able to see what we can find out and to look at the data together and study. And so it's a definite link arm in arm with our communities, and that should assure our public. That is one thing I want to assure the public. I think there may be a perception out there that, oh boy, we've got cities that are taking over Alpine School District.

And I was reassured, and I would assure the public that this is not a referendum on anything with Alpine School District.

It has been a wonderful district that has given many opportunities to our children, our grandchildren. Some of us have grown up in this district. I think it's just we are going into different times where people are wanting a little bit, um, more of an opportunity to have a say of what goes on, and I think there is a little fear that they'd be left behind. Um, Highland did wherever Lehi went, Highland wanted to kind of go, and same with American Fork. It just kind of was a domino effect in my area. So that's where we are.

I'd love to clarify a piece of this. So Lehi did not initiate this. So there at the meeting a couple weeks ago that I know some of you attended, that was, um, put together by a city council member in another city in an effort to just get councils together and talk about what kind of the issues were and what your role was If any, and I do believe that Councilmember Newell told you recently before a meeting that Lehigh was not interested in going west.

And so that's kind of how that started.

I'm talking about the process of when they started the study. They were the first ones to start the study, and it was just the dump.

And then you want to make a comment, ma'am? What was your name?

I'm Joy Lynn Lincoln, and I represent South Saratoga Springs and West Lehigh. So that high-growth, underrepresented area, um, and it's just really challenging to live in an area where your growth is so fast that the needs can't be met. Um, with the failure of a bond, it was felt very differently in my area than it was here. Um, here it didn't affect the number of students in a classroom like it does in my area. Um, like I said this morning in our meeting, I spoke with a chemistry I spoke to a chemistry teacher on Saturday at the Utah County Republic— or the Utah State Republican Party Convention, and she said all of her classes next year have 45 students in it. 45 students in a chemistry class is really difficult to do a lab science and to actually make sure the building doesn't burn down. But it's just really challenging. And so I think in my area, they were just looking at the challenges, that are placed in the area and trying to meet students' needs.

Sorry, I really am going to keep coming back to this, the interlocal thing. Um, the other thing that I guess I wanted to mention, I was able to attend 3 of the meetings where the interlocals were voted on. Um, Cedar Hills, Lehigh, and then the Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, and Fairfield actually held a joint meeting. And I'll say one of the things that was really interesting specifically in the Lehigh and Eagle Mountain Saratoga one is they specifically put it in their motions That they supported the other cities and our locals. This was not a competition. It was not an us versus them. They also made statements about this is not about the district as far as being anti-district. All of the people in those seats who are making votes are very supportive of Alpine School District. So just to kind of, I think, lead on to that thing that it's, you know, it's not an us versus them thing, that everyone was very collaborative. I've had conversations with city council members and mayors from across the district, and the core has always been in every discussion: how do we serve our kids? How do we serve our employees? How do we serve our communities? And so, um, I just want to make sure that I articulate that this is not a city versus city thing, and that if anything, it has been one of the most collaborative processes I've ever seen between that many elected officials.

Thank you.

Can I just say something that—

oh, sorry.

Sorry, I just wanted to, to interject that, um, the, the needs in the West are real. Um, we just have not been able to keep up with, with years of, of needed growth with the failure of the bond. And I just want to point out that the district has done what it could, and that is to use the LRB process for emergency build of a junior high and also an elementary school. Um, this is what we could do. Um, and recently we've, uh, a legislature legislator, uh, severely limited that process. Um, so we're kind of at the place where we, we have to do something.

So thank you, Lynette.

Yeah, I just wanted to— so I had someone send this to me, and this is Um, I attended one of those meetings and it was very collaborative with the elected officials and very— I was so impressed by the, um, I want to say compassion for the other municipalities. Very impressed with that. It was like asking questions. Well, how can we help you? How can we make sure that you are not left out in the cold, that you are taken care of? And when I say you, it's your kids, right? We're talking about kids here. This is— that's the important thing. And I'm just— I would just want to read this one because I kind of had to write it down because I wanted to say it correctly. But it's like, this is not city against city, area against area. This is not a vote of no confidence in ASD. And I really love that theme. That theme was present everywhere. I want you guys to all know that you're appreciated and everything that you do— the staff, the board— very appreciated throughout these conversations. Please know that. Um, rather it's a let's divide and unify. I love that, right? How does that— how, you know, you divide and unify. There's so many different needs across the district. We can divide into smaller districts, work to solve our problems, and support each other. And that I just wanted to kind of share. That's the messaging that I heard in conversations that I've had. in, um, or that I've been, you know, told about, uh, I just want to hats off to y'all and for what you're doing. Um, Sarah Hacken and I had, what, a 2-hour meeting yesterday, and it was really great because we talked about how we had— And Dave Spencer. And Dave Spencer. How we had, um, kind of evolved and changed our minds on some things, and that, um, you know, it really was about the kids and the and the teachers in the community. So I've appreciated these conversations, and I really appreciate hearing your experiences too. Thank you.

So I have a question, and we can, we can opt not to do this, but so as I look at our city council, you know, we've got decisions to make. We've got to decide, do we do an interlocal agreement? Do we not do an interlocal agreement? Uh, what are the pros, cons? And we've heard a lot of that as you guys have explained your why. Um, I'd be curious from someone, since you guys have been doing this for several weeks and you've been through the mill, right? I'd be curious to hear maybe from one of the school board members why you would advise us not to do an interlocal agreement and why you would advise us— No. Why you would advise us— why you advise Forum to not do an interlocal agreement. And then also the other side, why you would advise us to do an interlocal agreement. Would you be willing to do that? Yeah. So, I don't know if we might—

I think this is a conversation we're going to be having, and, and I don't know that this is the proper setting to have the back and forth of that. I mean, I could— I have a why, and I will be communicating my why. Um, I'm looking at this agenda and I would like to get on with the agenda, but I could tell you my reasons. I have communicated my reasons to, to other people. Um, I, I just fundamentally believe that a 3-way split is the most disruptive, the most expensive, and the most disadvantageous to our, our students. I'll just say that, and I, I really don't want to go into you know, a prolonged discussion because it is prolonged. And I think, I think it serves us well to go on with the agenda.

Well, so the reason I asked the— the reason I asked the question is because, I mean, as a council, we've got to decide if we're going to do an interlocal agreement. And even though whether you're for a 3 or 4 or whatever, that's great. But the question at hand, do we do an interlocal agreement in the next week or so? Uh, or not. And, and so I'd really like to—

essentially a 3-way split. If everyone does an interlocal agreement, that is a 3-way split, right?

And so you're saying— well, I'm not going to say what you're saying, but yeah, I don't want to restate yourself. But I, I just want to know, from our standpoint, should we do— unless, unless we don't want to have the answer to that question. I'm just curious, as long as we got the school board here, would you guys advise us to do an interlocal agreement or not? Kind of thing.

Um, I want to real quick give you a piece of information that I think is important to know. Um, so when we first started having conversations about MGT coming and what was going on, and we had, you know, a lot of patrons or council members coming to those sessions, it became clear early on that Saratoga and Eagle Mountain, um, wanted to form an interlocal, right? And it became who was going to come next. And so at that point, my city came in trying to figure out which way do we go. Um, and I, and I really think the biggest reason for the interlocals is so each area, um, would have a say, right? So just real quick, according to our 2027 projections, um, we would be, uh, at 26,000, 34,000, and 23,000 in a 3-way split, which are very, very close numbers, right? Obviously the West— We start off with the smallest. I know. So they're at 23,000, but they have the, you know, the projection, the possibility they're going to eclipse us all, dwarf us. But I think the important part to know in these— in this scenario is that Lehigh is the— we have the largest tax base and you have the second largest. And so when we talk about moving into Three Ways, and we actually in 2027, that central area would have 10,000 more students. than you would, right? But we have a similar-ish enough, um, basis. And so for me, the reason to enter into an interlocal is so that there are— each area, West, Central, and South, would be able to weigh in and to say either yes— I just— please let me finish. You say yes, we want to be in this, or no, we do not. Also, part of it from Lehigh is we would be the largest contributor with the smallest voice, right? Now, the argument to put on something— to not enter an interlocal might be that you want to do a really big campaign to say to your citizens, you know, we want you all to vote for the option that the school board puts forth, knowing then that everybody from Lehi down to Orem would—

it would have to pass in that whole area for it to pass.

So to me, that is the reason to or not to.

I would say the biggest reason to not do it is if you're going to remain city-centric, if it's just going to be like You know, it's Orem versus Lindon versus Vineyard versus PG. Don't do it because that's not a healthy dynamic ever. I would say that the cities that I represent are kind of an interesting dichotomy because I have Eagle Mountain and Saratoga Springs, which are slated to be the 2 largest cities in all of Utah County and are expected to have at least 50 years of growth. There's 52 square miles in Eagle Mountain, and it's only 25%. built out. Like, it's, it's not just coming, it's coming a lot and for a very long time. Um, and then I have the cities of Cedar Fort and Fairfield, which have about 400 and 100 people apiece. Um, and it's a def— it's a different community. It's, um, sometimes the kids ride ATVs to school. We have to remind them that that's not legal, please don't do that. Um, and every year I have dynamics where I see kids on horses who are riding horses to and from school. So it's a little bit of a different feel, and it's an awesome feel, but those cities have a different culture in each, each one of them. If it's something where, um, it's not going to be a collaborative effort, don't do it, because then it'll just be a lot of adults fighting in a room and then kids pay the consequences. If you are willing to have a conversation, put some ego aside, have a level of humility, and compromise, then I would say it's something you should definitely have a conversation about. especially if you feel that your areas are facing similar issues, whether that's kind of having a stability, a decline, or in my area, significant growth, to work together to solve kind of one problem together. I think there's some benefits, um, to that as well.

Thank you.

Can I just make a quick comment? Mark Clement from Pleasant Grove-Linden. And I think the main difference is If an interlocal votes for it, then they— the other parts of the district are not involved in that election. So if you wanted to be able to resolve this just with, for example, Orem, Linden, and Pleasant Grove, irrespective of the rest of the district, then that would be a reason for an interlocal agreement.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, just as an observation, if every city is part of an interlocal That means we have one choice. There's only one choice, and I don't think that's what we signed up for. We didn't sign up to have one choice. And, uh, and if we think that this is the way to keep our small neighborhood schools, I think we're in for a rude awakening because A smaller school district will only magnify the current problems we have with balancing student enrollment, the quality of the building, and accountability to the taxpayer. Those 3 things— on those 3 things, many of our Orem schools are outliers. We're too small, our building is too old, and they're costing more per student than anywhere else in the district. And what we want is to have state-of-the-art schools. We want to have fully enrolled schools that offer choices to our, our kids so they can have more than just one teacher. And we want to say to our taxpayer, we're using your money wisely. And this is in the, the area of the school district that has the greatest socioeconomic needs. In other words, we are— we have families that are living paycheck to paycheck. So I think if we think that being in a smaller school district is going to solve that problem, I think we are going to be giving up a lot of the current services that we enjoy and a lot of the current options that we are giving our children and curricular and extracurricular activities. We will be paying a price, and that will not get better. It will become more concentrated.

I mean, I mean, the question is that the mayor was asking is there are cities have already done 2 interlocal agreements.

Yeah.

So PG, Linden, Orem, and Vineyard.

Yeah.

Have no vote, they have no say. So that's why we do an interlocal agreement.

But then you still have no choice. I don't believe this scare tactic.

I mean, everybody can scare everybody, but everybody should have right to vote. And that's, that's my, my DNA.

So, yeah, it— but it gives you one choice, yes or no.

But we don't have a choice at the moment with 200 local agreements.

Yeah, it's, it's very problematic. And I— that's why I am saying your leadership, your leadership is, is crucial at this time.

So, just to clarify, whatever option ends up in the ballot will be voted up or down, right? So I think we've had a lot of conversations where people think that maybe they're going to have choices. So whether it's like, as a resident of Lehigh, whether I'm voting for a Lehigh interlocal or for a board option, I'm voting either yes or no. So whatever it is is one choice, right?

Right. Tom, if I may, Mayor, clarification.

If Lehigh votes for theirs— Lehigh and Company, forgive me— and Saratoga Springs and Eagle Mountain vote for theirs, we de facto become a district, if with or without an interlocal. If we have an interlocal and Pleasant Grove, Linden, Vineyard and Orm vote for theirs and Lehigh votes against theirs and Saratoga Springs and Eagle Mountain vote for theirs, Lehigh just got put in an interlocal whether they wanted it or not. The one that seems most likely to pass to me, and you could clarify this, is a Lehigh-Saratoga Springs exit.

It seems like they're most inclined to do the exit. Eagle Mountain-Saratoga Springs.

Eagle Mountain-Saratoga Springs, sorry. Eagle Mountain-Saratoga Springs. If they vote for theirs and we don't have an interlocal and Lehigh fails— Lehigh and company, sorry for those other cities that are every bit a part of this— then we become one larger school district. Is that correct?

So that would be a reason, if we wanted to have a larger school district, not to have an interlocal, so that if Lehigh fails, we're still married to them.

It kind of makes the choice for us.

Yeah, well, our people would vote. For it, because you—

because we're not voting. Yeah, we are. We're voting for— We're not voting on a 3-way split. Yeah, they put a 2-way on the ballot, then we vote for or against that. No opportunity to vote for a 3-way split, but it's a future thing. Yeah, we don't want to go through this again.

I mean, there's, there's kind of— there's There's not many dominoes.

There's not many, you know, cups to move. You talk about choice. That's very important to determine right there.

Absolutely. And it's not all tax dollars. I get it because there's also representation. I think a lot of people would speak to that. But if Saratoga Springs and Eagle Mountain and company voted no and Lehigh and company voted yes and we didn't vote, we'd still be a district. Are we connected somehow?

The lake? The lake.

Okay. And, and that's before the bridge gets built in 2075 or something. Okay. Thank you. Those were the pieces I'm seeing float around.

I mean, the way I understand it is we either have a choice as far as we have— we, we do something proactive or something just happens to us. Yeah.

And but we don't have the vote. We don't have the choice of the bigger district from Lehigh South if we put an interlocal on. I guess we can vote no. And see what happens.

Yeah, yeah, you vote no on both. Yeah, yeah, then it's back.

But then you get to vote in Warren. You get to— I think—

Well, I think we'll get to vote because Alpine School Board will have something on the ballot. Maybe we'll know that in 45 days, right? Well, 45 days from April 14th or May 14th.

Yeah, okay, so 45 and then 14. Yeah, so there's, there's a lot of options and this has been great because this helps our council have a lot of information to digest, think about, incorporate.

And Mayor, it necessitates a visit with the other 3 players that aren't here.

Absolutely, absolutely. And my guess is they're probably watching.

So can I make one more comment really quick?

Yes.

Um, so I think this is the first time since I've been on the board that we have been to Orem. And so I guess my hope is that whatever the outcome is, whether it's Interlocals or a district ballot, that whether we are staying together as one or we are in 2 or 3 different configurations, I love this opportunity and I hope that we'll continue to do this because I think the vote is just the first part, right? Like, so depending on how that goes, we're either going to move forward working together trying to do the best thing for kids, or we're going to move forward in different directions but still having to figure out what goes where. And so I'm just appreciative of being with you all today and Thank you.

Following up on what Stacy said, I don't know if the public realizes that a reconfiguration is about a 3-year process. It, it doesn't happen just because you vote on it. It takes time to elect a new school board, hire the people, divide the assets and liabilities, etc., etc., etc. And so we as an Alpine board are committed to keep moving together as an Alpine board until those, uh, solutions are final and the schools are opening— opened under other district names. But until then, we are still Alpine and we are still working together, right?

And, and to be specific, right, if there's an election in November, it's 32 months after that before things are finalized. So decisions that are made today are basically, hey, we're deciding what's going to happen in 3 or 4 years.

So going back just a little bit in, in some of our conversation, um, Adi, you mentioned something, and I think you mentioned something about helping with heavy lifting, getting information to our citizens. Out of respect for your role as elected officials and your responsibilities, and our roles as elected officials and responsibilities, I just want to make sure that I'm understanding what saying correctly, and in a spirit of respect and collaboration and working together. Um, so yeah, I, I, I think what I'm hearing you saying is you would like us to engage with the public and help make sure that they're educated, that we're sharing information correctly, so that we come to the best possible conclusion, whatever that is. Am I hearing you correctly that you're, you're okay if we're, if we're out there, uh, educating our public as to what's happening along with you?

I, I think, um, our— as our superintendent has said, we have, uh, contact with our patrons, and we have, uh— that is our avenue of getting information out, and we're very good at that. And, and informing them of opportunities to, uh, get more information. We also have a website. You know, we do everything we can to get information out. You have access to a broader public that we do not necessarily have, and so your messaging is very important, um, as was demonstrated with, uh, the bond. Um, so we do want to work together with you to make sure that the information that is, is given, that is is accurate and is information that they can use to, to reach a decision, um, that would support their, their children. So yeah, we do, we do need to cooperate.

So thank you, Ada. Okay, well, I do have a goal to hit this by 5:30, so we're gonna have to make this tight. But I think the next 2 items are really important, um, and they're more an ask than anything. We've got Windsor Elementary, uh, item number 2.3. And we've also— we've had, as you well know, uh, there have been, what, 3 elementary schools shut down, uh, in, in recent times, uh, with Sharon being one of the most recent. And that actually created a lot of controversy. And it takes you back to, you know, representation and are our neighborhoods represented type thing, but there's a big feel on that. But we've got Windsor on here because we still want to keep Windsor open, and we feel pretty strongly about that. And so our ask would be, with all this commotion and who knows what— where this is all going to go as far as split, no split, whatever, uh, we'd really like to have that school stay open until there's some clarity on where this is going. And it— yeah, our concern would be If we want that neighborhood school to stay open, then we go through a split, and now the district is in, you know, if there winds up being an Orem, uh, Vineyard, Linden, Pleasant Grove district, we don't want that school to be shut down because then we've got to try and figure out what to do with that. So it— so that, that's an issue. And then also, um, as far as the DLI, Magnet school at Orchard. That's creating quite a bit of chaos in terms of the way that neighborhood school works. And Lenee can speak to that better than I can.

Or, well, Dave Spencer lives in that area. Yeah, Dave, you want to talk about that?

Well, yeah, yeah. I mean, I just know that, uh, our kids live across the street from the school, and if they're not in a DLI, you can't go. You're— the parents have to drive them somewhere else. And I don't think that's fair because that is not a sense of community. And I'm hearing that over and over from the parents. It's not right. We need to keep it the normal school and take the magnet. Maybe you can do it in magnet in somebody else's neighborhood, but not in Orem for now.

Wow. And I'm going to speak to the Windsor part of the magnet, the DLI magnet, because Windsor has a very successful DLI program, and creating the magnet school at Orchard will essentially force the closure of Windsor because the kids that are in that DLI program will go to the Orchard, and then there will be diminished enrollment in Windsor, and there won't be enough time for that to, um, you know, recover. And so then there will be this justification for closing Windsor. We already lost a number of teachers. I, I heard a percentage, and maybe someone can yes or no, but you know, 25% when the edict was made that Windsor was going to be closed. The that teachers were like, I'm out of here before this is even decided, right? So instability again for our kids. These are underprivileged. This is my neighborhood, um, Title I school. I kept my kids there when a lot of people went to Orchard or Foothill or Northridge because we— that community needs, um, uh, some strength. So, and, and they're wonderful, wonderful experience there. I feel my kids had loved Windsor Elementary, but the, the, those underprivileged kids, it's so hard to see this instability happening to them. They're already— many of them come from unstable homes. And we just plead that the, the comments, the people that are reaching out to me in this area are just pleading with you to please, let's, um, let's take a pause on this. Let's Give a— take a breath and, and see how the reconfiguration turns out. You know, like I say, they're recovering from COVID they're recovering from the threatened— the threat of a closed school, they're trying— they're dealing with the magnet school issue. Um, I think that's the plea that I want to communicate to you that I'm hearing. So yeah.

Yeah, well, when I saw that this was an agenda item I did a little bit of research and background, and first of all, we have to acknowledge that this— we have paused, and there will be no movement on this until the '25-'26 school year, which is not next year but the, the following year after that, at which we should have some more certainty about what configure— reconfiguration looks like.

But I did— Wait just a minute, is it set to happen in '25? Is it set to happen next fall?

Yeah, we've paused on it.

So you're not going to do it next fall?

Correct. We're not—

okay, there's no action being taken this fall. With change in legislation, it is now dual language immersion and gifted and talented programs. The change in those are a board vote, and so the recommendations that were made previously to be commenced in the '25-'26 school year will now need to go back before the Board of Education for a determination.

Okay, so you're gonna vote on that. You're— you may split. You have to vote. You may go— you may continue with it, you may not. Is that what you're telling me? Okay.

And I'm just going to address the recommendation.

And just to clarify, we got 2 things going on. We got Windsor and then we got the DLI. You're talking about the DLI is '25-'26, correct?

I'm talking about the recommendations that were finalized by the staff, legislative And the legislature enacted changes to that bill to include dual language emerging gifted and talented now go through a similar process as boundary and school closure.

So it's a board decision.

I'm not hearing many concerns about the ALL, but the DLI magnet I am.

Yeah, we previously looked at schools and whether or not we were going to close them, so we don't have any open studies like that right now. We said, well, so this is the program side, but then in terms of our smaller enrolled school, if we were going to close any school in the district, we would have to start a new boundary study to say we are looking at this area. So that's not a—

So, so to clarify again, Windsor is not on the chopping block currently, is that right?

No, that's— it's— there's no— yeah. Um, so anyway, I, I talked— I, I called up, uh, the current principal example of Orchard Elementary, which by the way is at such a crisis, um, that without district support they would have split classes. In other words, combined grades for 1st and 2nd, 3rd and 4th, 5th and 6th. This is, this is a problem. And we also have the problem that, that because we're trying to provide equal access across the district to programs We had 2 Spanish dual language immersion programs right next door to each other. That's a problem.

And, and those are the 2 you're talking about?

Well, I'm talking about Orchard and Windsor, those 2 programs being right next door. It's 2 Spanish being right next door to each other. So the idea to—

Well, they're successful programs, both of them.

Yes. Yeah.

Okay.

I'm not, I'm not arguing that, but I talked to Principal Cynthia Cardenas Is that how she pronounces that? Uh, of Orchard, and she could not be more excited for this magnet school program. She said currently there's very much a division between the students that are in DLI and those that are the general education, that this has been a problem that they've been working on because they do not play together. And they've changed the schedule so that they're kind of forced to intermingle. But she said with a magnet school, they can become one culture, one united school, and they can celebrate the cultures, uh, in the— that both— not just in their homes but in the community. She says she's looking forward to having 4 classes that they can choose from. They can recruit more people to participate in program, and she said they, they're hoping to get like a 40/50— sorry, a 60/40 ratio between those who are native speakers and those who are English-speaking learning the language. Um, she says this is going to be phenomenal experience for those that are coming to our community knowing no English, that this will be an opportunity for them to participate in a half school day that they can actually participate in. I've been in a class where there was no participation because they— everyone else was engaged except the poor students that did not know any English. They were clueless. And we have got to find a way to serve that population. They get to know each other in the way that they are not, and they're looking forward to having those uh, native speakers from Windsor mixing in that program, it will enrich that program. She could not be more excited for a magnet school at Orchard.

Right, but I gotta—

oh, go ahead. I just have a question because I think Sarah Hacken is over that school, and what, what are your thoughts on that?

I have a lot of thoughts. I've had a lot of conversations about both Orchard and Windsor, and Part of the dilemma we have is the nature of the DLI program is decreasing class sizes as they age up. So you start with fairly large classes in 1st grade, but by 6th grade you may only have 17 or 20 kids. The others have moved out and moved on. Whereas in your gen ed classes in that same school, you might have 32 kids or 33, and they have fewer options. So all of our DLI programs are working through that challenge. And we would love to have more support from the state on that. And, you know, more FTEs given to us to support those programs. Because we're committed to those programs and they're very, very good programs. So the question is, what do we do when we have declining enrollments, when we have inequities between the gen ed program and the DLI program and so on? So in a perfect world, which it's not, what we would love to do, for example, is in a perfect world rebuild Windsor. That has been something we've discussed many times, and it's partly a funding issue. And what do we do about Northridge, which Northridge in 1985 had 1,100 students. This year it has 395. That's 59 down from last year. And so when you have Windsor and Northridge, they're basically half a mile apart or a mile apart, and one has only 395 students, then we've got to look at that because that is so small that there are not adequate programs and opportunities for those kids. They don't have enough teachers. They don't have enough specialists because of the FTEs. And so we backfill as a district. We give them extra teachers. in order to have the basic programs they need. And we have similar programs or similar problems with any school that gets too small. So one of the issues in the district is when is the school too large, when does it get too small, and how do you support those extremes? So in, in terms of Windsor, as I have talked to Windsor people, what they would like is for us to rebuild Windsor. And if we had a bond We could do that. Many of them have told me we don't mind going and joining with Northridge, for example, for a few years while they rebuild our school and then bring Northridge back. But if you talk to Northridge people, they're not sure they want to do that. There's a lot of discussions.

Unfortunately.

Yes. There are a lot of discussions that need to happen and a lot of discussions we cannot have now. We've got to get this reconfiguration solved. And then we've got to let those new boards tackle these really sticky, difficult issues.

And I just want to say it's not an issue of causation. Growth in the West isn't causing decline in the East.