City Council · 2024-05-07

Hello. Hello and welcome to the City of Warren Library Hall. We're grateful to all of you for joining us for this historic 4th City Council Council on Women in Warren Southern Girls and Men. We appreciate the willingness, cooperation, and support of the community to gather today. Our common goal is to provide the best The Utah Economic Cooperative works to strengthen the quality of Utah's cities and towns. In addition, each of our core cities are members of the Utah League of Cities and Towns, and therefore Molly is a perfect neutral facilitator. A big thank you to Molly for serving in this, this capacity. Let's give her a round of applause if we can have it. Thank you. So now, time over to Molly to take over the meeting and lay out how this works. Thank you all for having me. I want to cover a bit of how this is going to unfold and just cover some housekeeping. The purpose of this meeting is simply to create almost a post-checklist about how your team should be This is just a space for a different future, a possible future. It is not to make a decision about where this is going to go. It is simply to explore how this could work. I want to also clarify the legal issue that normally we are up at the Capitol advocating for an audit on college teachers, and I want to make it really clear that today we are not here doing that. We are here because people are there who are not. That identification policy is new, and we are in conflict with one of our outcomes, and we're here to make sure that we achieve that. There's a lot of passion about this, and there's a lot to cover today. There's a lot of elected officials here, and I want to take a moment to recognize that you have all been really affected by your constituents. You've all had to recover, and I commend you for the service you've done to assess your peers' structures and your options. So I'm really excited to follow through with BCC to get to the bottom line for your state of affairs. Thank you. So we want to make sure that we have time to explore the opinions of other cities and also recognize that there isn't necessarily consensus within each city, right? There might be disparate opinions within cities, and we want to have time to explore those. We're going to start by hearing from the Alpine School District and then hear from a few members of the forum school board. And so with that, we're going to do mayor introductions. Or are we not?

Nope, we're going to do introductory statements from the mayors now. Thank you, Mayor. We're going to do introductory statements from the mayors. We're going to start on the far side with Lyndon to begin.

Mayor Lumbergh here with my council.

Council members with me here this evening and this afternoon and my city manager. to my right.

Excellent. Vineyard? Hey, Julie Fulmer, Mayor of Vineyard, and I'm here with our council as well— Martisa Fuentes, Amber Rasmussen, our city manager Eric Ellis, Sarah Cameron, and Jake Holdaway. We're really excited to be here and probably going to hear a lot from Marty, as she's done very excellent work in being a representative for each of us. Thank you.

And last but not least, Orem.

Yes, I'm Mayor Dave Young, and our entire council is here minus Tom. So over here we've got Chris Kilpack, Lainey Millett, Jeff Lamson, Dave Spencer, Jen Gale, and, uh, Brent. No, he's not on our city council, he's our city manager. And then Tom is— But yeah, we're excited to have this conversation. We appreciate all of you coming and we just are looking forward to this.

Excellent. Before I turn the time over to Shane Barnes with Alpine School District, I also want to make a note that we do have a hard stop at 5 PM today so that these fine folks have an opportunity to make it to their council meetings at 6. So Thank you for that. With that, I'll turn the time over.

Thank you. I believe I am addressing you, so I'll tilt this way, and I apologize for those that I'm tilting away from. Shane Farnsworth, Superintendent of Alpine School District. I'm here to make you aware of the process that Alpine School District is currently engaged in to consider possible district reconfiguration. This is a multifaceted and a dynamic endeavor. We are discovering more facets and the complexity of this as we go along. So what this looks like today may look different tomorrow and next week. I think as more parties become involved in this, there's more interest in what the law says and how to navigate that. So we're all learning as we go through this process. So Alpine School District began a study of possible reconfiguration last summer, contracted with MGT, an outside entity, to review that. They have been over the past 8 months reviewing some data, data that they gathered from us, other data they looked at. They came back with 6 recommendations of possible viable options for reconfiguration. They presented to the Board of Education. Made a recommendation that the district is strong, should consider staying together, but if they were to engage in reconfiguration, they looked at what we consider Option 3 as a viable option. The Board of Education met in a work session the next day, so that would be the 25th of April, to review that and come to a determination of the feelings of the board. The following Tuesday, they met in a board meeting and decided to move 2 options forward to the county for possible certification: a 2-way reconfiguration, which would be Saratoga Springs West and Lehigh East, and a 3-way configuration that would be Saratoga Springs West, Lehigh through those northern, the central areas up to Pleasant Grove, and then Pleasant Grove South as another possible configuration. Those have been sent to the county for certification by them. We're waiting to hear back from them. At that board meeting, they also— the board moved for 2 additional board meetings to allow for public hearings. So our timeline is to hear back from the county, and then on May 14th, The board would present— we would present information to the board regarding those options that have been certified by the county, option or options, and the data, the feasibility data that's required by state statute to our public. We believe that that would begin the 45-day public hearing process. We have scheduled June 11th as a regular board meeting, have scheduled June 25th as an additional board meeting Where we would take public comments and have a public hearing. We have also scheduled July 9th— no, July 12th, excuse me, as a board meeting where the board— it is intended the board will make the final determination of what, if any, initiative to put on the ballot for November. In the meantime, we have taken the MGT data, we have reviewed that, we have made that public. It is on our website for anyone to gather. Thank you. We've looked at that data. We found where we are congruent with that data and where possibly there are some incongruencies. Jason Sundberg and his team have worked with MGT to figure out why those discrepancies exist. We have— many of you are aware we've invited any city leader that wants to participate to come on Wednesday. We're trying to be open and transparent with our data. Some of that data will look a little bit different than what MGT presented. Some of it will look very similar. That is the same data set that we intend to share with our public next Tuesday. We did not want our city leaders to be surprised if the data they were looking at from MGT differed from Alpine School District data and why that might be the case. I won't go into specifics right now of that data. We reviewed that with our board members this morning in separate meetings. We are continuing to adjust that, make changes to that so that it's clear. with the anticipation that we will share that tomorrow at 2 o'clock and at 4 o'clock, and then that information will become public next Tuesday at our board meeting. So that is kind of the process and the timeline that the board is following. You're also aware you're meeting today to consider a possible interlocal. We are aware, as you are, that there are interlocal agreements being formed by other municipalities that are following a similar timeline as Alpine School District. Thank you. And the legislation affecting possible interlocals and competing or congruent interlocal agreements would still need to be clarified a little through legislation. That's our report. That's kind of where we're at in the process. My assessment right now is the board continues to— has a desire to continue to go through this process. At the same time, observing what the interlocals are doing and how to move forward. As a staff, we're here to provide the board the best possible information to guide them in their decision-making, and then to collaborate with our city partners to provide them the information that they need to be wise in their stewardship as well.

Thank you. Before we invite Ada Wilson and Julie King up, are there any questions?

What is the feeling of ASD currently in regards to the city interlocals versus your assessment of potentially what you are deciding among your board on the interlocals?

ASD is a very large entity. So what is the feeling of ASD? I would say it is multifaceted and dynamic. That it depends— there are different board members who have different feelings about reconfiguration. That was evident in the vote that we had. The staff made a recommendation that we believe that Alpine is strong in its current status. We have, from the MGT report, from our own findings, that we believe that we are able to meet student needs. it could be necessary, might be necessary to consider a reconfiguration because of some other dynamics going on outside of the district. But there are various feelings. I don't know that I could speak and say this is the Alpine School District feeling with respect to interlocal agreements, because that's going to change from board member to board member and staff member to staff member. But we understand— I personally understand why entities might consider that because of the voting of that and who gets to determine that. And if there is going to be a reconfiguration, they probably want to be involved in that to see how that turns out. So I think that's the general sentiment that I get.

But can I lean into that a little bit? Um, maybe you don't know where the whole organization stands at present, but what would be the pros and cons of of cities forming interlocals versus allowing you to move through that split?

Uh, great question. I think that would depend upon the person that you asked. I think Board Member Wilson, Board Member King are prepared to come and share some pros and cons. I think the— one of the options now that I shared with the Orem when we met last week is you ought to start engaging in the conversation, because just waiting to see what Alpine does It may get to a point where there are interlocals that preempt the school district from taking action or become competing initiatives. So we don't know what the Board of Education will do in July. This is their intention. Their intention is what I articulated to you, but this is dynamic and changing. And my counsel at that time to the Orem City Council was to start engaging in the conversation, consider that process because it may get out of the control of Alpine School District and be determined by cities, and you would want to be involved in that conversation if it were going to be determined by interlocal agreements rather than a district initiative. So the pros and cons of reconfiguring the district in general, is that what you want me to comment on? Yeah, I think the— one of the pros would be we have kind of diverse needs across the district. It's clear that our last general obligation bond was not successful. There's several factors that we believe that affected that. But we do have diverse needs from the east to the west in terms of declining enrollment and increasing enrollment. And so perhaps getting those districts configured in such a way that the problems were closer to the people who had those problems or those challenges, you would get more of a response to address those problems. There are some challenges associated with that in terms of economy of scale. And I think, as I've always said, you need to look at 2, I think, determining factors. Where is your student population? What is it and what direction is it heading? And what is the taxable value? And we know the taxable values in this area, because of the great economy we have, are all going up. But they're going up at different speeds, different trajectories. And those 2 factors significantly drive the resources that we're able to provide as a district. The WPU generates the funding for the M&O, and then the adjusted taxable value allows for increments to supplement that weighted pupil unit and to provide capital needs as well. So the districts can't generate necessarily their own resources. They have to come from those 2 sources. And so going forward, to have strong, viable districts Interlocals or the district would need to look at those configurations to make sure if we're serving the needs of all students and communities that they have the resources going forward to continue to provide the best possible education for the students in Alpine School District. Our response from MGT and others was that Alpine does a great job providing that educational opportunity and very efficient with our resources, so There are a lot of good things going on within the district. What would that look like if you split it up? That is a little bit of an unknown.

Thank you for that. So just to clarify, to make sure I understand, are you recommending— I mean, would your recommendation be, based on your experience, all the moving parts, everything you see, would your recommendation be that we Our 4 cities form an interlocal agreement?

My recommendation would be to do what you're doing today and engage in the process. You would have to say, well, how does that— what does that look like for us? What are the benefits of us engaging in that? What are the benefits of us holding back and waiting to see what the process— my comment last week remains the same. My recommendation is you need to start engaging in the process because you— it's multifaceted, more dynamic than just Alpine School District. And to not engage in that process may be to the detriment of your citizens. And so what that engagement looks like, what you ultimately decide, that's your decision. My recommendation was you need to have these conversations so that you can be proactive in the process.

And I guess just to clarify, if we have those conversations and we don't do an interlocal agreement, those conversations and Whereas if we do an interlocal agreement, then we are able to have those conversations over the next—

Yeah, the time— I wouldn't with confidence say they end next week. I've shared with you our timeline when we're going to publicly announce that, the 45 days, the 14 days within which we'll act. My understanding is any interlocal or district initiative that would need to be on the ballot would need to go through that same process. And by August would need to be to the county for ballot consideration. So next week doesn't necessarily— isn't a drop deadline, but you would need to engage in that process before too long.

So I guess what we're trying to find out here is there is a 45-day time period if you count backwards. Next week, the 4th is the 5th. is, from my understanding, kind of a drop-dead deadline as to whether our residents will actually be able to continue to engage with the purpose. Otherwise, they will not have that option.

Yeah, I would have you counsel with your own legal counsel on his or her interpretation of the statute. Our understanding of the statute is you need to make a public declaration, a vote by your city council or by the school board in our case, They need to determine what initiative they are putting out or initiatives they are putting out to the public for consideration. Once you do that and share your feasibility data, that begins a 45-day period. As a school district, our intention is to begin that on May 14th so that we can allow for that 45 days, have 2 public hearings, with our intention is the Board of Education wants to make their decision in July. July 12th is the scheduled day to make that decision. They could push that back and say we're going to do it at the end of July, the 1st of August. We're trying to— when we counseled with the city or with the county commissioners, they said we need about 3 months before it, the election date, to put it on the ballot. So we began working backwards from that timeline. So that is our timeline. So I don't— I wouldn't be comfortable saying you have to act next week or you cannot act. You have to act in such a way that you can satisfy those statutory requirements in time to get that to the county if you were to put an initiative on the ballot.

Good question. Dr. Farnsworth, thank you for being here. Just to get back to— you put Option 3 and Option 4 to put that through the 45-day process. Do you feel comfortable as a school board and moving forward with those— that process and then recommending on July 12th, if that happens to be your option, let's say option 3, do you feel comfortable or do you feel that your, your options are being taken away with the interlocals that are happening, or do you feel comfortable with moving forward with whatever option you put forward for the residents to vote on?

Yeah, um, a great question. I, I'm not going to speak for the board I believe that the board feels comfortable in moving forward with their process and making a recommendation. That's given the current landscape. That landscape changes between now and July 12th. They will need to take that into consideration and determine what they feel is in the best interest of the students and patrons of Alpine School District given the current landscape or the landscape at that time.

So if, uh, if there's 3 interlocal agreements amongst Alpine School District, will you continue to put forth a proposal from ASD?

The Board of Education would need to make that determination.

And just to clarify, um, So that the timeline that you laid out that backs into next week, you know, May 14th, 15th, right? That's, that's our understanding, and that's from our legal counsel, that, that basically we as a group need to do something by then in order to meet the requirements.

Otherwise, yeah, too late. If you wanted to make a decision in July, by July 12th, then that is a timeline that you would need to follow if you want to make a decision. By July 26th, then you could back that up a week. If you want to make a decision by August 9th, you could back that up 2 other weeks. So you've got to have 45 days of public input. You need to have 2 hearings during that time, and then within 14 days of that 45-day window, you need to make a decision. And our understanding is by the beginning of August, that determination needs to get to the county so they can prepare the Right.

Now, that's our understanding also. And the main difference is that we would have to have— between the 4 cities, we would have to have 8 meetings within that time period.

That's our understanding as well.

Can you tell us what happens if we don't form an interlocal agreement either? Well, just what happens if we don't form one?

I don't know.

Do you see any options, like what— like potentially this, this, or this could happen?

I think you're aware that if others vote and, let's say, there's a district initiative, there are interlocal initiatives, someone will determine— some entity will determine whether or not those are conflicting initiatives and whether or not they should be on the ballot. If there were 2 that passed and a group did not enter into an interlocal agreement, they would probably be considered the remaining district. That's my understanding, but that statute is interpreted a little bit differently by different individuals.

So just as a follow-up to that question, there's 2 interlocal agreements that have already been proposed. We're the remainder. If we— the way I'm seeing this, and maybe this is a question for you—

if we do or whether we don't I think that would be assuming some things that I'm not ready to assume.

I think, uh, I think I need more clarity on that. When you say you're not ready to just assume that, does that mean that, um, you're looking at potential opportunities for if we don't sign an interlocal? Then July 12th changes the way that you vote, or—

No, I just think to say whether we do or we don't, the outcome's the same. I don't know what's going to transpire legislatively between now and then. I don't know what would happen if there were competing initiatives on the ballot. I don't know what would happen if one passes and one does not. There's so many variables out there that I don't have clarity on that it would be premature for me to say If you do or do not, you're going to have the same outcome because those would need to be voted on. The Board of Education would need to determine if they're going to put an initiative on the ballot. All of that would need to be determined before I could say, yes, this is likely one of the outcomes that would occur because of that.

But then wouldn't it be premature for us to enter into an agreement if we're not aware of what the outcomes will be?

That is something I think you would have to consider.

I have a question that I'm not sure if you'll be able to answer, but let's say per se we have the 2 already talked about interlocals for the west and the central. What if only out of these 4 cities, let's say only 3 of these cities decide to go into an interlocal? Where would that leave the remaining city if everything passed?

That's a great question. That's been discussed as an island, and can you leave an An island as you form, can that remaining district be left as an island? And there is some varying legal interpretation of whether or not that can be the case.

Yeah, maybe the question that we would need to explore is that that remaining island could petition to be in another school district rather than taking it on themselves. That might be an option.

So question, I'm hearing some, some other options also that there can't— like this group could enter into 2 different interlocal agreements to preserve the timeline, one with 4 cities, one with 3 cities, that that would preserve the timeline. leave the options open for discussion, you know, create this environment where the residents and citizens of our communities will actually have an opportunity to take part in the vote from that perspective, from an interlocutor's perspective. And then when you get to the point that you are talking about, the July 12th is what the district is going to do, whether to put it on the ballot. That is what I'm just curious. You know, there would be, of course, it would depend. Everyone picks their own date, I'm understanding from you. Only, you know, 1 or 2 of those interlocals could be put on the ballot. So I guess that's my question.

Yeah, and I would say I would seek your legal counsel's advice on that because I am not here to clarify the legislation on interlocals and what that could look like and whether you could have 2 on and with different combinations, that would be something that you would need to look into the statute and clarify.

So what I'm understanding is there's a lot of options, but if we don't do an interlocal, we lose the option of putting it on there today. We're going to be studying a ton of varying options, but we have to put an interlocal in to reserve that option.

Yes, I think you would have to proactively form an interlocal to— To keep that option available. To be voted on as an independent proposition.

But then there's all these other options that will continue to go on, but this one would die if we don't.

There would not— you couldn't put forth a proposal for the ballot to be considered without entering into an interlocal and following those statutory requirements.

But then if we sign an interlocal agreement that's really not binding, it's just leaving the door open and we're gonna study it for 45 days and then we could just not ratify it or not vote it. It's just keeping the door open.

That's my understanding that you can't put something on the ballot if you have not gone through this process, but you can go through the process and not put something on the ballot. Right, okay.

understanding also is that all you're doing with an interlocal agreement is you're giving yourself options going forward. If you don't have an interlocal agreement, then there are no options other than what— just whatever happens to you.

That's my understanding as well, Mayor.

So just another point of clarification. So if we have 4 wonderful cities here— thank you everyone for being here, what a great day— we have 4 wonderful cities here that want to work together. If there is one city or 2 cities that decide they don't want to enter into an interlocal agreement, what happens then?

I think an interlocal could be formed between 2 or more cities, is my understanding. But again, I would, I would get counsel from your legal counsel on that.

Just one other question going back to what you were talking about before. So what if the Lehigh District passes and the Eagle Mountain District doesn't pass?

Great question. We were discussing that this morning. Does that create a separation of the remaining district because you have taken that, or does the lake allow that to be contiguous? And I imagine if that comes to that, someone will clarify that through legislation.

So we don't know at this point in time?

Some may know. I don't know.

So we were told last week at our council meeting that ASD would be putting an option on the ballot, and that would help us make our decision regarding an So are they not putting anything on the ballot, an option?

That is still their intention, is to study this and consider whether or not to put an option on the ballot. So they'd be— they're in the process of getting those certified by the county to begin that process in order to determine on May— or on July 12th whether or not they're going to put it on the ballot. So their intention right now is to pursue that process.

Great. To follow up with that, let's say hypothetically everyone in this room, we say, here we go with the interlocal. So now you have basically us telling you, taking your— I don't know, your authority away and saying, hey, Alpine School District, you're mute now, right? You don't count. We basically agree with Lehigh and what's happening. What happens? I mean, are you just going to walk away from it and say we're not going to put something on the ballot now? we're just going to now move forward with what the cities want? I mean, the elected board members are just going to stand back and let that happen and not put something out there?

Great question. That's something the board would need to process through. We need to clarify the legislation on that, how those competing initiatives would be addressed, and hopefully there would be some clarity by July 12th when they need to make that decision. But that would be something, whether there's 1, 2, or 3, the board is going to need to process through, do we continue forward and put an initiative on the ballot or not.

I think what we're hearing you say is that there's still some legal analysis that needs to be made if the city interlocals may preempt anything that the board could try to put forward.

Yeah, our understanding of that statute is that it's not clear right now as to— there is some statutory language about competing laws and what the process is for determining which law prevails. Some believe that would apply to propositions such as interlocal agreements or the district proposition. Others feel that it does not. And so there is some discussion about possible additional legislation that would clarify that.

When and how would we get the clarification? Because I didn't run for school board. I'm on city council. So I've never been on a school board. I don't have the expertise.

I'm trying to get information from the school board to help me make an informed decision on behalf of my community. So how and when can we get clarification on some of these questions? Because I don't feel like I can make an informed decision without the expertise of the school board.

Yeah, great. So that's where I'm at.

I'm having a hard time. Yes.

We have our city attorney. I don't know if the attorneys need to meet, but how do we we get the clarification and when, because at some point we need that from, I believe, the school board so we're all on the same page.

Yeah, it would be wonderful if we did have that clarification. The school board does not determine state law. This is determined by state law. The school board determines district policy. So the board is waiting for clarification as well. We're happy to enter into conversations about what we know at this point, but it's not something that will be determined by the board. It will be determined by the state legislature, the county, or those who handle the election results and outcomes. So I— we're trying to share everything we can that we have in terms of data, in terms of process. We've been completely transparent. What we can't share is this is definitively what the law states, because there's ambiguity about that. So we've got our legal counsel his perspective of it, but others have a different perspective. So it's— I wish we did have clarification on that, but we don't. And I don't know that it's something that's going to be provided. As soon as we do, as soon as someone provides that, we're happy to share our perspective of that. But we don't currently. I'm not aware of that clarification at this point.

But the board could tell us whether they're putting something on the ballot or not. Period. I, I understand you're wavering, it's not your job, but the board could tell us, hey, we are planning on putting a proposal on the ballot, so don't worry, you'll have a choice. Are they going to do that anytime soon before the time runs out?

The board, in following their statutory requirements, would need to do that in an open public meeting by vote, and that's scheduled for July 12th.

So they wouldn't do that?

They couldn't help us out and let us know I don't think that would be appropriate for them to say we've got a public meeting, we've got 6 votes for this or 5 votes for that or 4 votes for that. I think you can— there'll be 2 public hearings. You'll hear board member comments, uh, on those public feelings. You'll hear, um, maybe board members in their tone and feeling will give you a sense of where they're— but it's— nothing's official until the board votes, and the board acts as a united board, and And the determination of that is July 12th. So I, I understand your frustration, but—

Well, part of the frustration comes is that we were told as a city council that regardless of what that proposal looks like on July 12th, that the intention of ASD is to put something on the ballot.

Yes, I can tell you the intention of ASD is to put something on the ballot. Okay, that's what I wanted to clarify. That intention may change given the way that the dynamics of the situation evolve. Um, at least that's— let me clarify, that is my understanding of the intention of the Board of Education.

So I also want to understand, um, so the West and Central have decided to do interlocals, which are basically allow the citizens to vote, and If we— what, it doesn't matter if we put an interlocal and we allow citizens to vote, or if we don't want our citizens to vote, regardless if the Lehigh and then— and those decide and dictate to us. What I'm getting out of this is regardless, this group is working together on a very high probability that there could be something going on. So what I'm getting out of this is you said we should be working together. What would be your recommendations on what— since we have never led a school board, like, we, you know, biweekly, monthly, starting to get our act together?

Yeah, as Mayor Young pointed out, you're going to need to act sooner than later if you want to follow that timeline process. I think you need to explore those variables. What are the benefits of doing this? What are the drawbacks of doing this? What are the benefits and drawbacks, consequences of not doing this? And you would need to process, given that, your stewardship and your responsibility. So I'm happy to be done whenever.

So we just need to be mindful of time. We're going to take one more question. I think it was from Vineyard. I apologize, council member. It's like the same question being asked 5, 4 times. Are we already in that situation? All right, so here we're going to take 2 more questions. We're going to hear from Vineyard, we're going to hear from Orem, and then we are going to pivot and hear from the school board members. So we're going to go to Vineyard first with your question, and then we will go to Orem, and then we will invite our school board members to join us.

Molly, I mean, if she has a new question, maybe—

Okay, then we will go straight to Orem. I feel like maybe we're already in that situation.

There are, you know, we keep talking about if the district is going to put something forward, if an interlocal— it seems to me like the question that needs to be answered that we don't know is, are we already in that situation where an interlocal is competing with something the district would put on the ballot? How do you feel about that?

I would say that is a fair question that you need to wrestle with.

Yeah. So, Lynne, I think I was just going to echo the same thing, which is today whatever discussion we have sets the tone for how you make a decision on July 12th, it would seem. And so I was just pushing us towards—

Just as the other 2 interlocals has affected the conversation that the board is having, a 3rd interlocal would affect the conversation the board is having.

Excellent. Thank you so much, Superintendent. I want to take a moment to invite our 2 school board members up to speak and also take some questions. So, uh, Would you like to present separately or together? Separately? Perfect. All right, excellent. So we'll have Ada Wilson come up first, please. And if you could try to keep your remarks to about 5 minutes so we have some time for questions. Not 5, I was told 7. All right, keep it to 7. Yeah, it's— all right. It's going to be close. I'm just going to take this off.

Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity to address each of you. You are about to see some of the multifaceted nature of a school board. I am one of 3 board members charged with the governance of schools in Pleasant Grove, Linden, Orem, and Vineyard. My colleagues are Board President Sarah Hacken, Do you want to wave? And also Dr. Mark Clement. Mark and I probably have over 40 years of volunteer experience in your public schools. And Sarah Hacken, our board chair, is a 30-year veteran teacher and the founder of the gifted and talented program in Alpine School District. Our experience runs deep. In July of 2009, Jordan School District was split in half, a decision in which only half the stakeholders were able to participate. Unfortunately, with the introduction of city interlocal agreements, we seem to be in the same place. Last night I spoke with current Jordan School District member board member, Darryl Robinson. He recalled that in the months leading up to the election, the Jordan board made a crucial mistake, and that is that they stayed silent. Finally, 2 weeks before the election, they realized what was at stake, and they began to raise their concerns, but it was too late. What resulted, despite months of planning, was a classic case of how not to split a school district. At the time, the state of Florida studied their split and decided to reverse course in their efforts to break up large school districts. I do not want to make the mistake of being a silent board member. I know that a united Alpine is the best option for our students, families, and employees. But no matter what the outcome of this question, I want our citizens to make an informed choice with their eyes wide open, fully understanding the impact on our communities. Tonight I would recommend that you do not form an interlocal agreement for the following 4 reasons. Number 1, we must say no to a 3-way split. I am happy to lead the charge of the 81% of the district survey respondents who told us they think this is a bad idea. The 2 existing interlocal agreements by default constitute a 3-way split. Every 3-way plan to split Alpine is taking resources away from our kids, increasing the tax burden on our citizens, and severely compromising the deep services our teachers and families are accustomed to receiving. Larger districts have strong negotiating power And the ability to pay competitive wages for excellent teachers. I have to say that Alpine School District currently is running a very tight budget, and I can't imagine what would be the fallout of 3 districts on the same resources. Number 2, keep politics out of the process. According to countless comments on our survey, our people want the split question to be handled by the district itself. They trust us to be the most knowledgeable and capable to put forward the best option. Some of you have expressed some frustration wondering what politics is behind the formation of the interlocal agreements. While some reasons I feel are legitimate, I believe that most arguments are based on false narratives that need to be challenged and corrected. The most egregious one I feel is the claim that the Alpine Board has not adequately met the needs of our students in the West. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even with the tragic loss of our bond in 2022, the board has acted unanimously to build an elementary and a junior high. We have addressed classroom size hotspots. We have aggressively adjusted programs and resources to increase access, and we have bought land for a high school. That does not say sound like not supporting our students in the west. We do. Number 3, let Alpine vote. Your leadership, your determination to allow the Alpine board to put a recommendation on the ballot is crucial in allowing the entire district to have a voice. Interlocals can only vote Yes or no for their own areas. And in doing so, they don't allow all stakeholders to vote on the bigger question, which is, should Alpine School District continue as one district, or should it be divided in a recommended way? This is important because we are getting mixed messages from leadership in the West. On one hand, they claim to be mistreated, the victims of board neglect, being voted off the island, etc. But on the other hand, we hear a split is inevitable, being— and the split is promoted, made easier, and reasons are supplied for why it must— it will work. I truly do not know How the people of Eagle Mountain, Saratoga Springs, Fairfield, and Cedar Fork feel about being an independent school district. I would say that to you city leaders, surveys would be very helpful to inform your decisions, but ultimately let your people vote. Number 4, we need a simple, easily understood ballot. If 3 interlocal proposals are on the ballot, to my reckoning, there are 8 possible outcomes. The decision of one set of communities would end up determining the fate of others. The complexity introduced by city agreements is mind-boggling, perhaps requiring a court ruling to determine the result of the election. I believe we owe it to our public and to our kids to keep it simple. I am not disputing that something needs to be on the ballot. Our communities want resolution on this issue. On April 30th, the board majority voted to put forward 2 options. I believe that our communities have the information they need, and now they want clear direction. My position is to advocate for a unified Alpine while placing Option 3, a 2-way split on the ballot. Some have said that because our needs are so different, we should separate so that we can guarantee that those needs are met. I disagree. Let us unite in our commitment to our future generations, pool our resources so that we can provide deep services to our kids, and then watch them fly. I appreciate the great conversations that I have had with many of you, and I am grateful for your willingness to allow the board to do its work. We enjoy working with you on matters where our responsibilities intersect, and we respect your role in this decision. I know I speak for President Hacken and for Dr. Clement when I say we are happy to meet with your community members to answer questions. Your input and observations are most welcome. Please do not hesitate to be in touch with us, your school board members. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any questions for School Board Member Wilson?

Is this on? Perfect. Thank you so much for your experience, for your representation of our city, for your transparency. I appreciate that. It's difficult. This is a difficult forum, and it's sometimes difficult, as Dr. Farnsworth pointed out, to answer some of those questions. questions directly. And so maybe it boils down to an opinion on your part. This group today were to enter into an interlocal, as a board member, would you interpret that as a discouragement to the 2-district split? Because I think there are many of us here who are— who support it and second and you just said, and but also want to provide our citizens with options and choices without discouraging maybe our preferred option of a 2-way split. Right. Would you be discouraged by an interlocal today? Yeah. Discouraged to put it on the ballot, or discouraged— and you can speak for yourself as a board member, and maybe because of your knowledge of the board, where you think Yeah. How that would be interpreted.

I think as personally as a board member, I would not be insulted or discouraged if you put something— if you formed an interlocal. The thing that I would worry about is the message that that would send to your community. And again, it's my number one reason. We do not want a 3-way split. It just does not make economic sense. And even if Alpine puts forward an option that has a 2-way split, our business administrator, Jason, you want to raise your hand back there? He has done a tremendous amount of work and he has prepared analysis of both the 2-way and the 3-way. It will definitely be a part of our open houses and our public will be fully informed on both of those options. And as I said before, I am happy to entertain groups of your citizens and answer questions. I just want to be of service to you in getting information out. You have the resources to get information out that to a public that we don't. So I would think about that.

Are there other questions?

I worry that there's a scenario where we end up as cities with egg on our face by not doing an interlocal if you as a board do not put a 2-way option on the ballot.

Yeah, I fully believe that there will be a board something put on the ballot. That depends on a 4-person majority on the board. And as you can tell, our superintendent is dancing a fine line because he is an employee of the board. And he is— of having to dance in 2 camps right now. So, um, I do think that if this body were to decide not to do an interlocal, that it would send a message to the rest of the district, and you might be actually leading out in a new direction.

So just to follow up, thank, thank you for everything you do on the board and appreciate it and the information that you've put out there for us to research and do. And I know, I think tomorrow there's a follow-up meeting with some more information, is that correct?

Yes, Jason Sunberg will be presenting very clear data about each option.

And I'm glad you— your last comment is, you know, I think sometimes patience wins out sometimes. Because what I hear you saying is we could lead out in a different direction, right? I— that we keep hearing, and I keep hearing a lot of people press me for interlocal, that if you don't do interlocal, you're not doing anything. Well, sometimes, right, I think your kind words kind of speak to that, that we were able to maybe lead out in a different direction and show Alpine School District, the residents the parents and the kids that we're willing to make some hard decisions for them.

And I don't, I don't believe you would be putting yourself on a cliff because most people in Alpine School District would be absolutely flabbergasted if a 3-way split happened. They know that it is not good. It is not in the best interest. And I believe it was Steve— where's Steve? Steve, who said, you know, what we are interested in is getting the most resources to our students. There you are. You said it so well the other night.

There was a vote that the school board did relative to a 3-way and to a 2-way that I read about. There was a split, as I understand, on the 3-way and unanimous on the 2-way. Can you speak to that?

Yes. I think the fact that the 2-way was unanimous speaks volumes. The 2-way is the better option, in my opinion. And I was one of those that dissented and did not vote for the 3-way because I am not willing to promote something that I can't back. And I can't— I just can't defend it to teachers. I can't defend it to students. I can't defend it to families. And I can't defend it to you. One thing I do want to emphasize is I think your— in your work with your cities, surveys would be helpful. And it would help us to know Kind of what the direction of your communities are.

And if that's something that you can help provide us so we're all on the same page and do the same surveys, if that's something the board could provide, I would like to see that. And hopefully the other cities would as well, that we're sending out the same information to our communities so when we get that information back, we're disseminating the same responses. Because I think if we all send out different questions as different cities, we're not going to be on the same page with what that result— with what those results are. So as a board, that would be helpful, at least for me as a council member, for some suggested questions that would be in a survey that we could send out to our community members.

Sid, that's a very good point, and I will point that to our board president, Sarah Hacken. That, that's a very good suggestion. Thank you.

All right, for the sake of time, we're going to move on. Thank you so much, School Board Member Wilson. Perfect. And then We would love to invite school board member Julie King to join us now.

Thanks. My name is Julie King. I serve on the Alpine School District Board of Education. I represent the west side. We are the ones who keep growing nonstop. Just wanted to clarify before we start. That I am not speaking on behalf of the board, that the opinions and thoughts I'm going to share are my own. I'm sure you guys understand that as elected officials don't want to represent something that may not be accurate. You guys covered a lot of the things in questions previously with the superintendent about pros and cons. As far as interlocal, some of the things you addressed are, you know, with an interlocal you only have to have your residents of an interlocal voting versus all 14 municipalities. Mayor Young also touched on the fact that in a— if a district puts something forward, there's 2 public hearings, but in an interlocal, it's 2 per municipality. So the interlocal on the west side would require 8, just as similar it would be for you guys if you formed an interlocal. It's 12 for the central area. So there is a— I would argue a higher level of transparency with that when you're, when you're doing so many of those meetings. Other dynamics. I think one of the things that I wanted to articulate kind of early on, I think there's sometimes a perception that this has been within our locals that there's a sense of like, is it the district versus municipalities? I just want to speak to my own experience in interacting with mayors and city council members from my own area as well as outside of my area in areas I do not represent. The focus has 100% been on what is the best for students, what is the best thing for employees, what is the best thing for communities. So I just want to make sure I articulate that, that the interlocals are not a sense of, well, that was a no-confidence vote in ASD. Some of those city council members, individuals who have previously been teachers, avid supporters of Alpine School District. So I just want to articulate that there is not a sense in those interlocals that it is some somehow a negative thing against ASD. There has been a high level of collaboration. And one of the things that the superintendent has communicated is that we just want to be aware and keep the conversations open. So I just want to kind of communicate that to you guys just so you make sure. As far as the dynamics, as far as splits, we have previously talked about splits. We, you know, it has come on the— it has come up a couple of times previously. And then we reviewed it as a board, I believe in 20— I want to say it was 2021, 2020. We had conversations about it. The district has always kind of taken a stance that there's 3 reasons to consider a split. One is if finances are tanking, and that's not been the case in ASD. We have AAA bond rating, really strong dynamics in our financials. The second thing is academics. There's always room for improvement, but we've been watching like amazing. I've been getting some of the feedback from my schools and just seeing the amount of student growth is just phenomenal. Our teachers are really just rock stars. And then, so those are kind of like, and then the third issue is representation and that kind of means different things to different people. I've always argued that there are 2 additional reasons to have a conversation about it. One is if a bond doesn't pass, which we saw happen in 2022. And the last piece is if there are inequities in different areas that aren't being addressed. So I am— I know that the superintendent covered quite a few things. I know that Board Member Wilson also covered quite a few things. I'm happy to take questions and any, any ideas that you guys may have.

Juliette, I appreciate your time and being here. You've had a hard job representing the west side, and I, uh, I, I acknowledge that and appreciate that. If, as a board member, uh, if you could kind of have your desire, would it be option 3 or would it be option 4?

Um, so you probably— so Ada and I probably represent like the 2 furthest opinions in the board. So I don't know, I don't know if Mayor Young did that intentionally. Um, I would say my preference is a 3-way. Um, Whether it's Option 3, Option 4, or just, you know, the interlocals that are currently in place, it's the same result for my area. I will say that one of my concerns specifically is making sure that representation is solid and fair. And I think one of the challenges if there is a 2-way split is the dynamics with Lehigh. And Lehigh, I think, presents a challenge as far as will their representation be fair will they get the dynamics that they need and the supports that they need. And in speaking with their city council members, their mayor, I will say that I was very, very vocal and supportive of Option 2 in the beginning because Lehigh swinging west made sense to me. But as more information came out and we got the feedback that Lehigh did not want to go west, technically we have enough people between Saratoga and Eagle Mountain we could have outvoted Lehigh. I was not interested in that. I was not interested in creating a dynamic where Lehigh was kind of forced into something they weren't supportive of. And so I was not supportive of, even though it probably would have benefited my area, I was not supportive of outvoting Lehigh when it was something that their residents were not supportive of.

Thank you. Yeah, for sure.

I just wanted to follow up on that because I think you talk about Lehigh as whether they support one way or another. And is that by a vote or is that by survey? Is that by city council members? When you say Lehigh doesn't support X, Y, and Z, what do you mean by that?

So some of the data that we got back from MGT showed that 72% of people in the Sky Ridge cluster, so they're predominantly on the east side or, yeah, the east side of I-15, were more interested in swinging east while 51% of those who are in the Lehigh cluster, which is predominantly the west side. 51% is probably not significant. And I think it's a little bit of a challenge because of the way Lehigh is laid out. It's just very, very long. I basically— my neighborhood, when I cross the street, I'm now in Lehigh. So I'm very connected to Lehigh. I drive every day in Lehigh past Lehigh schools. I am sure the people in Highland feel the exact same way I do, just on the reverse side. So I feel super connected to Highland, but Highland also doesn't feel super connected to Saratoga. And when we got that level of information back, um, that the Sky Ridge cluster was significantly more interested in swinging east, um, that made sense to me, and I didn't want to kind of overrule that.

Okay, so when you're talking about swinging east, was that limited to east with only the northern Utah County, what we would call this, this the proposed central district, or was that just east in general?

Um, I can't remember the exact question, so I don't know that I can speak to it. Like, with that 72% and 51%, I can't remember the exact question, so I don't want to give you incorrect information and say which one it was, but I can circle back with you.

My, my personal opinion I, I believe from what I read on the survey that it seemed like a general east question. It was regard— it didn't specify splitting up the east.

That's what I believe. That's what I remembered. I was just wondering if I was misremembering that.

No, I may be correct. Yeah.

Um, so first of all, I want to say I looked at the 2021 survey that Rob Smith put the numbers together for a 2-way and a 3-way. I've studied that, and I— the overall message I got from that was, you know, you could be viable in either of these scenarios. Having gone through this previously, these discussions, I've really come to believe that data and information is power, and I've had a number of residents email me about, can we please have more time? We're rushing by not making a decision. We're making a decision and stopping our opportunity to have this, these 8 meetings or 6 meetings. And really, I see the data changing from Alpine. I'm grateful that you're doing that meeting tomorrow because I had heard of some of the discrepancies already and So I guess my question is, where are you with studying the MGT data? Right now, we've— I've seen 2 or 3 different things pointed out that needed to be reworked. I'd maybe like to have you comment on that. And then also concerns that I've heard from citizens is, you know, people were We seem to be talking about the survey a lot. People were able to take the survey multiple times. If they had 10 devices in their home, they could take the survey on a different device. I would almost rather see a poll than a survey, something that can be statistically corralled, you know, and help— that would be more helpful to me as a council member. But if you could speak to maybe those issues that I have seen in the last few weeks and maybe help us.

So I think what you have brought up, right, is, you know, there is some validity there. It is not like it was Qualtrics or Dan Jones that came out and did a very specific survey trying to make sure that they were matching exactly. It was predominantly who was taking the survey were people who attended the meetings as well as those who were sent the email, which was predominantly the parents and then employees in our district. Not the same thing, right? Like surveys, yes, there were people who could take the survey multiple times. We got 11,000 responses. That does not mean we had 11,000 individuals take the survey. So that's correct. MGT data, I don't want to get a jump on what I know are going to be meetings attended tomorrow. I will say there was a discrepancy that was found by our business team specifically about some information that I know will be explained in detail tomorrow. And then once that— and that those corrections have been made on new information, I also can say that there are other cities who are doing also individual data analysis. I know that Lehigh has done their own data analysis as to different options and what would be the best for their situation. I know that Eagle Mountain, Saratoga Springs, Cedar Fort, and Fairfield are also pursuing getting additional information. I will say that education funding is incredibly complicated. It's federal dollars, it's state dollars, it's property taxes, it's WPU, and then, you know, it's things like cell phone towers and building rentals. It's incredibly complicated. There are about 41 different funding streams of public education money. And so it's really complicated to figure out exactly what— which piece of this bucket would go to this area. So I would say that we're doing the best that we can to make sure that the information we give you is accurate. But I think that there are other cities who are pursuing different avenues to make sure that there may be kind of a range and making sure that the range that we're in is relatively close.

So MGT's done? They're not going to adjust any of this? This is now—

From my understanding, and I don't have the contract in hand and didn't write the contract or sign it, from my understanding, once MGT delivered that data at our Tuesday board meeting, that then they had completed their terms with, with us and had completed their terms of the contract.

So just from your perspective, would it be accurate to say— I mean, we talked about all the things we don't know, and there was— There's a list. Everything, I mean, basically. But what we do know is that we have the option to do an interlocal agreement, and that option gives us options going forward, and if we don't do an interlocal agreement, then we lose those options going forward. Is that an accurate characterization?

You're really going to put me on the spot, Mayor. You're going to ask all the hard questions. I will say that, you know, one of the things that I've heard stated is that— and other individuals who have talked about interlocals is we can either make a decision or have a decision made for us. And I would say there is some validity to that statement.

You know, I feel like that has already somewhat happened in a lot of ways. And I love that we're here talking about this because I think that there is so much we can do as a group of cities to try to unify with what we been provided. And so I think— and I'm sorry, this is just my opinion— and I think that where we're at, I just feel like it's a moot point at this state in the game because Lehigh's central group's decision and the West's decision has put us in this position where no matter what, I feel like we're putting 2 initiatives in front of our constituents that basically diminishes their voice. And so I think that we're really excited to be here discussing it as a group, but I am concerned that we are creating a lot of discontent, confusion, politics, and it's unfortunate that it's been taken out of the school board's hands.

I can't say— oh, go ahead.

Oh no, no, I can't say I speak for my entire council, but I do feel that that is a general consensus on our council, and we are still willing to discuss things, of course, but I do see a lot of concern with proceeding with an interlocal.

We have time for one more question before we move on.

If anybody else has one, they're welcome to. The question I had related to your statement about the split, and you said that there's 3 reasons to split. One was finances, the second is student performance, and the third was representation. Do you think that a split enhances the finances? Do you think that a split would enhance student performance on those first 2? Because it sounded like you were fine that the first 2 indicators currently in ASD are positive. Is that an accurate assessment?

That would be my assessment. As far as the dynamics, as far as academics, I have actually tried to do some research just District splits are not very common. There has been a push more and more to consolidate resources, so I've tried to do some digging to see if size of district consolidation splitting if that has an impact on student academic performance, and I've not really been able to find data, so I don't feel comfortable saying yes. Studies show XYZ. I will say I do have a little bit of pause when I think people talk about whether or not academic. Academics would differentiate. There's the two greatest factors that impact a student's academic performance are first off a high level of involvement from their parent. The second off is having a phenomenal teacher in the classroom. I can testify that we have phenomenal teachers in our classroom, and I think regardless of who signs their check, they're going to continue to show up every day for our students. So that's kind of my personal opinion on that one. As As far as finances, ASD runs very lean. There is no question about it. Will there be challenges moving ahead? Absolutely. Do I think that when we look at our direct expenses versus our support expenses, will those be heading in the wrong direction for a little while while we try to, if a split does occur, build those things up that need to be built up? Yeah, I do think they will be going in the wrong direction for a little while. I will also say that I think that a lot of times people use Jordan and Canyons as kind of a horror story. And we've absolutely had conversations with those individuals about what went right, what went wrong, and what can we do better. I will also say in the end, those are 2 phenomenal districts. Jordan and Canyons are both very, very solid districts with phenomenal communities, strong employees, and good results.

Thank you, school board member. All right. So we have about 35, 40 minutes remaining. We need to do a brief facilitated discussion because we also need to maintain time for mayor's closing statements as well as a timeline overview with Orem City Attorney Steve Earle. So with that in mind, I'm— we had 3 questions laid out. We're only going to focus on one. The question is, In your opinion, would it be in your city's best interest to enter into an interlocal agreement with the other cities here to create a new school district, or would it be better to wait and see what happens with the school board? I also want to be mindful we have 21 people here who can speak with limited time, so I am going to set my phone's timer for 60 seconds. If you hear it, know that that's your cue. I apologize that we don't have more time. If we need to set up another meeting, I'd be happy to do that. So with that in mind, I'm going to pivot and go to a timer. Mayor Feuilleau, you look like you're ready to speak, or would you like— you just look like you're ready for it. And for this, if it's all right, just to make sure we get time from everyone, we're going to popcorn through the cities as well. So I was going to start with Pleasant Grove. If Pleasant Grove doesn't want to start, we can start with Vineyard.

OK, I'll start. What was the— clarify the question again.

I didn't know where you were at. Absolutely.

So you want to know where Pleasant Grove is?

Pleasant Grove, if you're all on the same page or even I mean just you as mayor right now.

Pleasant Grove's opinion— our thing, we met a week ago in a work session, unlike this. Anyway, this is very interesting, by the way. But anyway, it's great. It's working out. And we had some school board members there that answered a lot of questions. But our council, who Including the mayor, we are for not having— going with any interlocal. We're not interested. We support Alpine School District. So that's our Plan A. We have a Plan B. If everything fails, we're gonna end up in Plan B, and we'll be part of a 4-city school district if that's the way the voters, which will be the wrong way to go, for our community. So that's where Pleasant Grove sits. And, uh, you know, so anyway, I'd like to hear from some of the other cities.

Perfect, right on time. Well, Lyndon—

well, so the mayor's not here, but who's going to speak for the mayor?

Well, so we're going to— we started with Lyndon for some— well, I guess it wasn't really opening statements. All the mayors just introduced themselves. But we were going to continue this cycle, if that's all right. So we're going to pop over to Vineyard next to hear from someone from Okay.

It looks like— I mean, our council might disagree, but Marty—

And so to clarify, the reason why everyone has 60 seconds is I'm expecting that there might be multiple opinions from a city. So no one has to speak. If a city is all on the same page, that's excellent. If there are diverse opinions within a city, I built this out so that we have time to hear those opinions within a city.

I'm going to try it over to Marty because she has really gone all in on representing us.

All right. Excellent.

Our city council is somewhat split from what I can tell, but I believe that we have the majority in that we actually believe that a 2-way split where the west side of the district is able to go off on their own and then the remaining to be Lehigh down to Orem is our preferred district configuration. And so we prefer— it's basically what I just said before. I think that if we go into an interlocal, I understand that researching it and looking for more information is always, you know, it's always an option for sure. That's great. But in the same breath, I worry that we're creating a narrative that's pushing in a certain direction that Excellent.

Thank you. Orem, would anyone like to speak from Orem? And we'll circle back, so if there's more opinions— well, so I want to, I want to make sure that we're hearing voices from every city, so we're going to pop through every city and then we'll come back through and hear from other voices within the city. So we're going to go to Orem next. Hi. Good job.

Yeah, yeah, we haven't met about this, so I'm not sure where our entire council's at, but— and I'll say more just in my closing statements. I think I'll some up where I am coming from. But, uh, yeah, it's kind of act or be acted upon. Um, I think there's real compelling reasons for a 3-way split, and, uh, I think it would be good to have those conversations. I kind of— where we've had 10 city councils unanimously vote to go a different direction than the direction we're talking about right now is concerning. And I mean, I think they've been researching, they've been talking, they've been doing all kinds of things. And I'll go later into some of the reasons why I've heard that from them that they're doing that. But I see this as just we're deciding if we want to have the option to go forward and explore this further as we gather more information, or if we want to just— I think that's a good point. give it up and let everyone else figure it out for us.

All right, thank you. Linden.

Lincoln Jacobs from Linden, and, and, uh, I definitely don't represent the rest of the city council, um, but I do— I like what Eric said. I do believe there's something, uh, to be said in a statement that, um, we're not going to form an interlocal agreement because we do believe We do believe that Alpine School District has good research, and we do believe that what they put forth on the ballot is something that we can stand behind. I think by not forming an interlocal agreement, we can make the statement that we want to work together as a large group.

Thank you. All right, we're going to jump back to Pleasant Grove.

Yeah, I'm Todd Williams on Pleasant Grove City Council. You know, we, we took a little bit of heat last week, which is okay. We're okay with that. We, we like the idea of not splitting at all, but we definitely understand the need for the west side's needs are different than ours. All of us, right? We're much more stable. We're the not going to be 10 more high schools being, being built in our, in our neighborhoods. So we, we have discussed kind of in detail and, and talked to a lot of people, and we're, we're for Option 3, which is a 2-way split, um, because we were handed something that we had to make a choice on, right? Otherwise, we probably wouldn't have gotten involved and we would be golfing at this point right now today. Um, but, um— Careful, it's cold out there. I'm not going to say that. But, uh, yeah, but, um, but, you know, we appreciate the discussion. We want to be in the discussion. Um, we, we know that we're going to be in a, in a school district with these cities. We would prefer it would be others as well, uh, Lehigh and Highland and American Fork, etc. But given, given the choice that was— that we feel is the best for Pleasant Grove, it is that 2-way split or Option 3.

Thank you. Back to Vineyard, is there someone else who'd like to share?

Um, I would never speak for Vineyard citizens. As a city, we haven't gotten and held any meetings as a council or mayor. So, um, but what I would say in speaking with the west side leadership— I've made a lot of phone calls— is a lot of their fear was the uncertainty of if Alpine would commit to putting it on the ballot and allowing that decision from the board. And they didn't like it and said, you know, we're going to just put it on the ballot just to ensure and make sure. Now, I don't want to paraphrase anyone, and, you know, but I, I did get that feeling in making multiple phone calls. Um, from a Vineyard standpoint, I, I, from representing me and only me, um, I love the idea of citizens making this decision. I liked the comment about I'm not a school board, I'm not qualified for it, and I understand the west side and Lehigh's of like, let's just have citizens make the decision. And that's where I would come from, is just what's the, what's the problem with just allowing them that decision? But I, I understand the back and forth of the district doesn't want to put down on paper if and which one they're going to choose, so that makes it really awkward.

Thank you. All right, Orem. Yeah, and I don't speak for my entire council as well, so I just want to be clear that I'm speaking for myself. But I think, first of all, I'm really grateful that everyone's here having this conversation. And I think I would align more with the idea that a 2-way split is in the best interest of our students and our teachers and our taxpayers, and that putting a 3-way split on the ballot signals that we are okay with that option and that And it shapes public opinion, and it shapes the dialogue, and it shapes the legislation, and it could shape the Alpine District's decision. So that concerns me greatly, and I think we're shutting the door more to Option 3 if we don't— if we put it on the ballot now. So that said, I want to make one thing perfectly clear to all of us. The fact that we're here together today just tells me that whatever happens to us, whether we're an interlocal ourselves or whether with a broader district, that we're going to be just fine and that we're going to lock arms with city council and we're going to help make decisions that are in the best interest of our people. And I want our public to know that. Thank you. Back over to Lyndon.

Thank you. It's great to be here. It's great to be with people that are passionate about outstanding student outcomes. I'm a product of the Alpine School District. It was formed in 1950. With Lehigh, American Fork, Pleasant Grove, and Orem. And I think that's the best option going forward. If the west side, they have their different needs now and they decide to go, I wish them well, but I would like to see us stay together and we can lead out by not making an interlocal agreement. And I speak for myself.

Thank you. All right, back to Pleasant Grove. Any, any more comments?

I'll just give just a few more comments. Eric Jensen, Pleasant Grove City Council. Great, great interaction today. Appreciate everyone being here. I've appreciated meeting new council members from different cities, and I'm grateful for the people who have showed up today out in the audience today. My perspective is I've had kids all— they're products of Alpine School District, and we want to support Alpine School District. We want to move forward and show that we support them. And that's why I was trying to get Dr. Barnsworth to be political here, and he just wasn't having any of it. So, um, that, uh, we support Option 3, and I think if we can be united today, we can be proactive and show these other cities that a little patience goes a long ways, that we're able to work with everyone in this room and be united and move forward and show our residents that we do care about our kids. We do care about the resources that are associated with those kids and the teachers. I mean, I've heard from a lot of teachers and they're scared, right? And rightfully so. And again, I think it was brought up when the state did what they did, they brought politics into it, and that scares me that we're part of this process. But we're going to look out for Thank you.

Any more comments from Vineyard?

Yeah, I just want to, um, I really appreciate what Eric said and what Jen said. A lot of the comments here have been really helpful. I do want to reiterate that I, I do hope that Alpine School District puts something on the ballot. I, I believe that they will, and so, um, and I do hope that it is Option 3. that our community can all agree on. And as Rob Smith did say, there are benefits to being larger school districts and smaller and medium. We're all going to be okay no matter what happens, and I am really grateful to be among these cities. I've loved just having the conversations leading up to this meeting, being here with all of you, and I just really appreciate the open collaboration.

Anything else from Orem?

First of all, I just want to say we are passionate about education in Warham. I'm sure you've seen that, right? All of our residents, both sides, very passionate about education. We love our kids, we love our teachers, we appreciate Alpine School District. I have 4 kids that graduated from there. My biggest issue is information. I really feel like discussion and conversation is productive. I don't think it sends a message. As you can tell, I'm in favor of an interlocal. I really am hesitant about the ballot issue that the district is going to put on, not because I don't trust them or I don't appreciate it or even don't agree, but the way that that is run is that Eagle— someone in Eagle Mountain can cancel my vote because the whole district votes on the district proposal. So Eagle Mountain shouldn't be voting on what happens in Orem. Orem should not be voting on what happens in Eagle Mountain. That's kind of my, my core value is that we just give information, we get feedback, and the people get to make the decisions. It's not my decision to make. Thank you.

Thank you. Right back to Linden. Anything else to add?

So my sort of values guiding my thinking on this are maximizing resources, minimizing tax increase on residents, and doing a thorough vetting of our public so they can have an opportunity. And so, so far that's led me to think that maximizing the opportunity for a 2-district split, if there's a split, would be ideal. And so in the pro/con analysis It seems like an interlocal might inadvertently negatively impact that possibility. And as far as representation goes within the district, Linden, in all 3 scenarios, we won't even have one rep, like a full rep on the board. And so we're at 0.9, 0.5, 0.3 reps in all scenarios. So representation doesn't shift tremendously for us. And Julie, I can share the 3 studies I found that showed district size and impact on student outcomes with null findings mostly. So the data and stakeholders— 83% of the Linden stakeholders I've reached out to have wanted, if a split, a 2-district split instead, with 3— 7% wanting an interlocal. So that's what's going on.

All right, we're going to do one more round of comments and then we're going to move to the legal feedback with Steve Earle and then the mayor's closing statement. So this is the final minute for each city prior to the mayor's closing remarks. So back to Pleasant Grove.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe the voters could vote on their own interlocal if that's what's on the ballot for them, as well as an ASD option. So it wouldn't cancel out the vote. They would actually be able to vote for both, which if they were interested in that, that would give them a voice. I— what I need as a council member, as a taxpayer, as a parent of an ASD student is I need the ASD board to lead out on this. I need you to give us as much information as possible so I can make an informed decision as a council member, as a taxpayer, as a parent of an ASD student. I need you to take a stand. I need you to let us know what you're going to do so we can help our constituents and myself As a parent to be able to know what's best for my student and our community. So I need ASD to get those answers to the questions. I need ASD to— because you're the experts, you were elected to do this. I'm not an expert as on the school board. I will try my best to get all the information that I need to make that decision, but I need your help. If it's a survey or a poll that goes out to parents, please give me the questions that would be most beneficial that we can move forward and make those decisions as those 3 categories of individuals in our community.

All right. Vineyard.

We honestly don't have anything to add at this point.

Okay.

Oh, actually Jake does.

I wanted to ask a question of PG. So if I understand this correctly, we're going to wait and see what the voters of the north dictate on— or, well, of the interlocal, because theirs is going to be on the ballot, or the Alpine School District, and then we'll be ready as a group. Is that what I'm understanding?

No, the way I, the way I see it and the way I'm, I'm going is we want to lead out. We want to lead out on a combined effort from this from this group and potentially even Central that we would like to keep Option 3 on the table as a 2— as a 2-district split, and that we are going to convince our residents or hear from our residents, right, either one, that, that a stronger district rely— is, is dependent upon all of our cities joining together. So it's not that we're taking a let's sit back and do nothing, it's a hey, let's get involved. Thank you. All right.

Oram.

So I'm definitely in favor of an interlocal, and the reason why is because we can study it. We're not making a decision to put it on the ballot. It's just to study it and to do a deep dive, and then we can get citizen feedback. You know, we met with Alpine School District last week and I asked, why do you think these cities are doing this? Why? The number one reason was representation. So we're not— maybe they're not being represented out in Eagle Mountain or Lehi and they felt they're getting gypped, I guess. But I just think that doing it in a local agreement is no harm, no foul, because we're not making any decision. You can shake your head, that's fine. You don't agree with me. When I'm speaking, that's pretty rude. I think the key thing is you're doing it again. Unbelievable. But we need to make sure that we can gather the information and be able to disseminate it and give it to our citizens and that they can vote on it.

Thank you. All right. We're going to go to Linden for the final minute comment, and then we're going to transition over to Steve Earle with Orem.

Excellent, thank you. Personal opinion here, I, I've lived in Linden my whole life, went to elementary school in Orem at Aspen Elementary, went to Oak Canyon Junior High in Linden, and was a PG Viking. So just by living in one spot, got to go to all 3 cities, and I love Alpine School District. Have family members and friends, the grand majority that I have spoken to Are for a strong district, for the two-way split. I appreciated Board Member Wilson inspiring so many of the thoughts that I've had over the last 2 weeks as I've tried to become an expert on school district type of decisions. A lot of those were vocalized by you, so I really appreciate that. That was inspiring. I stand with my council members in support of a 2-way split and by not sending the incorrect message to the Alpine School District Board by signing in on an interlocal agreement. Thanks.

Thank you. All right, so we have 2 more components. We're going to hear of a potential timeline overview with Steve Earle, Orem City Attorney, and then we're going to go to closing statements with each mayor.

Hello, I'm Steve Earle. I'm the Orem City Attorney, and as part of looking into this process, if the 4 cities were to decide they want If we wanted to enter into an interlocal agreement, I have kind of prepared a preliminary timeline of the deadlines that we would need to meet in order to move that process forward. You have already heard from Dr. Farnsworth about that a little bit. So you probably already have a pretty good idea of that. However, I think that our potential timeline would differ a little bit from the school district's timeline, primarily because they have already done their feasibility study. They've received that report and recommendation already. And so they don't have to build that into their timeline right now. They can move forward with that already being completed. So obviously, if the 4 cities here were to move forward, we would have to do a feasibility study and we would have to build a certain amount of time into our timeline to provide for that. And the timeline that I prepared basically assumes that we would need something like 30 days to do that feasibility study. It could be a little bit more, it could be a little bit less. The MGT study that has been commissioned by the district, as I understand it, has essentially analyzed the 4 cities here, a potential pod of these 4 cities as an independent school district. And so maybe with some of that data and some of that work already having been done, we might able to get by with less than 30 days, but maybe not. We just don't know for sure. So again, assuming that we have a 30-day window to do a feasibility study, my calculations are that we would basically— we'd want to finalize a draft of an interlocal agreement, and that's probably on me as well as your attorneys collaborating on that, by around May 14th. And then Probably we would want each of the participating cities to vote on whether to approve that interlocal agreement by May 17th, which I believe is next Friday, if I'm not mistaken. So not this Friday, but a week from Friday. So about a week and a half or so. Again, there could be a little bit more flexibility on that if we needed less than 30 days to do the feasibility study, but You know, to be safe, we probably need to have each city vote on it by that time. So following that process, you know, again, you've heard from Dr. Farnsworth a little bit on this. We have to— if all the cities approve that we execute the interlocal agreement, our next step is we file a request with the county to initiate the process of creating a new school district. They then have 5 days in which to either Yes. To either certify that the application is correct and complete or to notify us that it was incorrectly filed. And if that happens, then we have to try again and fix whatever mistakes they identify. Hopefully that wouldn't happen, but that's always a possibility. That deadline that I have on the timeline would be May 27th for the county clerk to certify that our request meets the the requirements of state law. Then immediately we would potentially commission someone to do that feasibility study. And again, building in 30 days, that would put us out at June 26th. Hopefully they could get us a final report recommendation. And that— once you have that, that's what starts the 45-day public comment window. That's correct. That's correct. The 45-day period doesn't start until we get the feasibility study report and recommendation. So again, you see how critical that element of this timeline is. So if that— assuming again that that 45-day public comment could begin on June 26th, that would put us out to August 10th for that time period to be completed. And during that 45 days, as you have already of heard, each city council would need to hold 2 public hearings regarding the feasibility study and recommendation. And then following that, then each city council would need to vote on whether to go ahead and put the proposed new school district question on the ballot. And one of the constraints that we are looking on, and I want everybody to understand, is that if we start with with— let's assume we started with a group of 4, and I understand based on the discussion maybe there's not a willingness to do that. But hypothetically, if that were to happen, then part of the proposal that we submit to the county has to show the actual school— new school district boundaries that we're proposing. And obviously, if that were the 4 cities, that boundary would include the boundaries of all 4 cities. And then each council ultimately would have to vote whether to place that specific proposal on the ballot. And if one city elected not to put it on the ballot and the other 3 did, it would fail and it would not go on the ballot. So once you start with a proposal with a certain number of cities, everybody has to in the end agree to that and vote on it to go on the ballot. Otherwise, if somebody backs out at the end, it fails, it doesn't go on the ballot. So, um, so on my timeline, I'm anticipating that we would want every city council to make that vote by August 16th, and then we would submit that. We have to submit a notice essentially to the county commission that we voted to put this on the ballot, and then the county commission gives it to the county clerk, and then they put it on the ballot. So the This timeline that I've given you doesn't have hardly any wiggle room or buffer at all. And so these deadlines that I've given you, they're like absolute drop-dead dates for the most part. And we would ultimately like to get things done before the dates I've listed here so that we don't— you know, if there's a glitch somewhere, a mistake, or somebody's sick, or, you know, who knows what could happen, that that doesn't torpedo the whole process if we elect to go down that road. So that's essentially the timeline that I've come up with. And then we can talk a little bit about what happens after that if you're interested in that. I mean, you probably all know that if it goes on the ballot and the voters vote to approve the new school district, then the following year at either a special election or a general election, the voters of the new school district would vote to elect new school board members. That would occur either on August 5th or November 4th of next year to elect the school board members. And then you start the process after that of, you know, you can start to use funding from the existing district to use to pay for startup costs, and you go through the process of starting to allocate school property and resources. Thank you. and that sort of thing, but that's probably a level of detail that you don't need at this point. So I'm happy to take any questions if anybody has any.

So you've described what happens if things move forward and it goes to a ballot, that all 4 cities would have to agree. Based on what we're hearing today, to do an interlocal agreement, um, if there's one city that doesn't want to participate in that interlocal agreement, or if there are 3 or 2, yeah, then it's a moot point.

Yeah, 2 or more cities can, can do it. I mean, and one city can do it too. I mean, we, we did that back in 2022. One individual city can do that, or 2 or more cities can get together and do that.

But that was for a one-city split? Yes, correct. Correct. Not for a 4-city split.

Correct. So if you wanted to do a 4-city split, then yes, all 4 would need to enter into that interlocal agreement to start the process. Thank you.

Or, you know, if there were only 3 cities or 2 cities that wanted to, then those 3 or those 2 could also do it.

Okay, you're letting me off easy. There's an advantage in going last because, you know, I think Dr. Farnsworth took a lot of the questions that you might otherwise have asked me. So I guess there is one question.

I haven't heard the ambiguity of what possible other alternative there would be if the remaining 4 cities did not enter an interlocal than to have them become a district, with Dr. Farnsworth saying that's unknown. What other possibility is there that we would be absorbed into? I, I just—

So, so the way the law reads is that if you have interlocal cities that apply to vote to create a new school district, whether that's one group or two groups, and one or both of them pass, then the other cities in the district that weren't part of that process They become the, the what's called the reorganized district.

So we— yes, if the other 2 passed, we would be— Yes. So that there was some ambiguity entertained in that, like there was, and I was the first time I'd heard that that, that had been clear to me. But so I'm hearing from your analysis—

Yes.

That if the other 2 passed, we would become a reorganized district.

That's correct.

Okay, just want to make sure.

Okay. Thank you.

Great, thank you so much. So we're going to move on to closing statements from each mayor. We, given the time, we only have time for about 60 seconds for each of you, so I'm going to do the timer again. We're going to start with Vineyard, then go to Orem, Lyndon, and end with Pleasant Grove.

All right, um, I think I'll just echo the sentiments that we are all starting from the hope to give our students the best, that we are all wanting to give our residents the largest voice, and that we, we just want the best entirely for our communities. And that's a strong place to start from. I think today our council heard you. We, we know where a lot of you stand, and we're going to take that back into our discussion. We're going to ask hard questions and we're going to go and have those discussions with our council and do our research and our homework. And then we're going to come back together and look forward to working with you in whatever capacity that looks like in the future. But we're grateful for this conversation. And I would emphasize the point that was made for Alpine to do something. I think I encourage you to move forward and do that work. As you meet with the people, you hear the people, you know what they've been saying to you in the meetings that we've all sat in. And I think having those discussions and being part of that is important.

All right. Orem.

Okay. I've been holding back. But so I've got a little bit to say here. Uh, 10 independent city councils— Eagle Mountain, Saratoga Springs, Cedar Valley, Fairfield, Lehigh, American Fork, Highland, Alpine, Cedar Hills, and Draper— voted unanimously. They voted unanimously to enter into interlocal agreements to explore the possibility of forming their own school districts. By default, they're effectively voting for a 3-way split. Today, one of the reasons that Lehigh, American Fork, Highland and Alpine, Cedar Hills, and Draper formed an interlocal agreement was because they wanted more representation for their cities. That's what they've told me. The elected officials felt like they had no voice Within the only— with, with the 7 school board members for 85,000 kids. They did not invite more cities because they did not want to dilute their representation. If they invited our 4 cities here today, it would dilute their representation, which is the main reason they chose to go with the cities they did. They wanted their residents to have a voice. Do we want to be part of their school district? By forcing them to stay with us? Do we want to just stand on the sidelines and hope they fail so that we can force them to stay together with us? These 10 cities proactively determine their future. Each of their cities will now hold 2 public meetings for a total of 20 public meetings. Each city will have the opportunity to review and digest the distinct financial data and decide what makes sense. And I've got more, but we've used up the time. So I, I think what we're talking about by avoiding an interlocal agreement is ignoring what's just happened throughout the rest of the district, and I don't think that's wise.

Thank you, Mayor.

Mayor Lumbergh had to step out. Grateful to be here. Thank you. It was wonderful to talk to you. Kids will pan out regardless. I like how Jen said that. We are still committed to study and learning and not looking at the interlocal as the only mechanism to continue rigorous study. So we will continue doing our work and meeting. This was a key meeting for us to understand the political viability of an interlocal. Tomorrow will be a fiscal viability for us and then taking it back on Friday to have a consensus in our council, which hopefully will inform what you all need to do as well. So thank you.

Thank you. Pleasant Grove.

Yeah, thank— I'd like to thank the Alpine School District for all you've— you do for us each and every day. And how I know I sat in your chairs for a few years And we didn't have anything like this when we were there. We just suffered through the, the Jordan Canyon split and said, boy, we hope this never happens to us because we were all about growth. We got to have more students. We need to have more so we can have more programs and we can do better for our students. But anyway, Pleasant Grove position, we don't need an interloper. We won't be part of one. And so we have faith in Option 3 of Alpine School District who come forward, and all of our voters will get to decide what the outcome is. And that's all I have.

Thank you. Uh, thank you all electeds, staff on the cities for looking at this. Thank you to the school district and school board for your time today. And thank you to the audience and all of you who came to listen to this important discussion. We really appreciate it. I appreciate you having me, and I wish you the best of luck as you continue through this endeavor. There was a request that if the, the folks on stage would stay on stage, they want to take a quick photo, but then we know we need to get you all to your council meeting. So thank you again.