City Council · 2025-01-14

I don't think it is anymore. Are we live? We are now live. Perfect. What do you want? No, we want to hear your conversation. All right, welcome to our January 14th board meeting. This is the first one of 2025, right? I guess. Um, Welcome everyone here today. And we'll start out with item 1.1, Healthy Orem update. So Heather, if, uh, I'd like you to lead us in that.

Absolutely. Um, and just really quick, I just noticed, as I— a total side note, I saw these paintings in here and reminded me that you guys come to the City Hall over the next week and it looks like we've been robbed. We have not in fact been robbed. I have the library repossessing the library art this week. Get ready to go over there. So if it looks gloomy in here, just know that we're just getting ready for the move. So I want to recognize the Youth and County Health Department here, Carrie and Kate in the back here. They've come just to contribute and support this Well-Being Action Plan. They've been so helpful with all of this, and they're just such great community partners. So, um, I just want to start off and review on how we got here. We have just— this has been in the process for probably almost a solid year. We started with the Utah Healthy Community designation. We applied for this designation through a local nonprofit called Healthy Utah. And it took a while for us to get everything we needed for this designation. But one thing that we were required to form in order to receive this designation was the Forum Health Coalition. So we formed that coalition, and that health coalition has been awesome, and they gave most of the recommendations that are being presented to you today. We also did a Utah State University City Wellness Survey, and we broke their record for the amount of responses that we gave from our citizens, which was more than statistically significant for our population. So that kind of gave us the— basically an idea of some of the health issues that— and wellness issues that are on the minds of our students here. And we're going to address some of those today. We also hired Debbie Giannico, our Community Connections Supervisor, in September. And Dr. Courtney Flint gave us a presentation about our USU Health and Wellness Survey results. Last October 8th, to just kind of give us some data analysis and some recommendations. And here we are today. We're going— last time, Mayor gave me some marching orders from that Dr. Flynn's presentation to find out some research, you know, fact solutions to some of the survey concerns that our residents have and come up with a plan. And so here we are. But I wanted to introduce you to our Orem Health Coalition. Just awesome group of people. Katie King is with Timber Douglas Regional Hospital. She's the Chief Nursing Officer. Chief Adams, of course, you all know him. Stacy Carlosi, she is at Orem Recreation as a Program Coordinator. Carrie Bennett here in the back, Utah County Health Department Program Manager. Gina Bertelsen, the Orem Senior Friendship Center Program Director. She helps represent senior Citizens, not because she's a senior citizen, but she works with them. She, she corrected me last time. Vicki Sarecki, she's a resident and volunteer. She's a nurse practitioner and she's a PhD in, I believe it's community health. She's also Spanish speaking and she's willing to translate for us. And Lincoln Hubbard from Orange County Hospital, he's their marketing and communications manager. So really great group of people, so much knowledge in one room. We started off, I kind of, I kind of broke this down into 3 phases. There was a lot of data, and we needed to make sure we touched all of the concerns in this wellness survey. So I created a matrix. I'll come back to that. Don't get distracted by it, but I created a matrix that just talked— that has 4 pillars of community health on one side, and across the top to every one of the survey concerns, and I just needed to organize our recommendations by that, those different recommendations. And then I organized those into community tasks, which you have in front of you in the gray, purple, pink, and blue, just in a linear fashion. And this is a living document. Both of these are living documents. We are going to update them and add to them as we get more ideas and more resources. But this 2nd version is This is kind of something that helps us organize it in a more linear organized way. And then we have this that I have turned into— I basically boiled all of these wellness tasks down into a health improvement plan. And this health improvement plan is the next 3 months. Again, that's not the end-all be-all of that plan, but it's just our start. And this wellness plan addresses a lot of the issues, most of the issues that were brought forward by our citizens.

Thank you.

So we'll come back to that wellness matrix and get some input. So, um, we can dwell on this a little or as much as you'd like, but we have these wellness tasks. Um, really what's more, more pertinent is the health improvement plan. But these are just a whole bunch of ideas that were brought forward by Dr. Smith, the Health Coalition, um, some things that were currently in the process. Research-based solutions and some current staff recommendations, but just individual things that we're going to address through our health plan. Any questions so far? The meat and potatoes is in the next spreadsheet. So, and this is our health improvement plan. We're gonna kind of dwell on this a little bit more. In this Gantt chart, We are expected to start this February 1st, although we're a little ahead of schedule. So this first point here, this first priority, create a city health website, health.org.gov. There are a lot of resources kind of floating around on our current website and lots of nonprofits, the health department. We want to make it really centralized, easy to remember website where residents can come to for All things health-related, physical health, mental health. We're gonna feature my hometown on there. But this health.org.gov website has been registered and acquired. So that's already— we're ready to do that. And the design of the website, we are already on that. So it's going to— this is the rough draft of what it will look like. But my idea for this website Is to make it as easy to use as possible when they come to this website. I want them to— they're going to come with an idea of what they need and what they're struggling with, and we just want to address that as easily as possible once they get there. We're going to ensure the website is also available in Spanish, considering our population has such a high amount of Spanish speakers. We're going to make sure that's possible, and we're going to categorize all of the content that's going to be available there. Again, can continually be added to. Bring everything from diabetes prevention to like maternal mental health, everything in between, and feature my hometown on there. And Chief Adams isn't here, so we don't have to worry about him killing me because I am going to show some videos that he was— this was one of the ideas that came from the health coalition. Their domestic abuse has been a significant issue worldwide, actually, since 2020. the COVID pandemic. And here in Orem, again, it's an issue. So we decided on this health website, we're going to feature some videos about domestic violence, and we were able to record them last week. So let's see if this— see if this works. We have it in English.

Domestic violence is a problem in our community, and I wanted to take a minute and explain what domestic violence is and what to do if you're experiencing violence at home. My hope is that you'll know what to do after hearing these answers and reach out to us for help.

We also have it in Spanish.

Hola, soy el jefe de policía de la ciudad de Orem, Josh Adams.

Quería tomar un momento y explicar lo que es la violencia doméstica y qué hacer si usted está sufriendo violencia en el hogar. Les voy a responder algunas preguntas comunes sobre la violencia doméstica. Mi esperanza es que usted sabrá qué hacer después de escuchar estas respuestas y llegar a nosotros en busca de ayuda.

I knew he could speak Spanish so much. His accent's great.

I just think it's good to know that if she puts a camera in your face, she's going to use it against you.

Exactly. So we actually had 6 other officers and victim advocates contribute, and they are also reported— they also speak Spanish. So kind of breaks up the video, and we explain everything about their rights, um, what they can do to get help, what to expect, um, all of the above. So—

So sometimes I would like to do a deep dive into, or a way to identify different types, different—

I don't even know what to call them—

types of domestic violence, different levels, right? Because I feel like resources need to be directed specifically, you know, if it's he yelled at me, he hit me, he I mean, I just read something where he— an article, somebody took away her keys and wallet and wouldn't let her out of the house. I mean, I think if we can better target what's happening, we can better help the victim and understand ways. Um, there's got to be research out there of how we can better focus on our community.

Great.

Yeah.

So I don't know who's in, you know, at what point we do that or who we even reach out to do that, but I would It is a problem. So, you know, let's get it figured out.

There is a domestic violence, um, police officer who specializes.

Yeah, sure. Our Victim Advocate's Office takes care of that.

Because I would really like to get into the schools too and teach the little boys and the little girls, because women do it too, right? So let's—

and let's—

they're building that great relationship with our police officers. Maybe we can help touch on that tough subject.

Just to expand a little bit on Deputy Chief Robles's comment. All of our officers, when they're out on patrol, if they're responding to a domestic violence call, they should be engaging what's called a lethality assessment protocol. The acronym that's always used is LAP. And so they go through a set of questions that had been validated to indicate to the officers and also to our victim advocates where does this victim score as far as the spectrum of safe to stay at home, or do we need to get a safety plan in place to provide them access to a shelter or other resources to get them to a place of safety? So that's already being used by the police department.

Okay. And another note to that, if you don't mind me interrupting here, I met with Chief Adams and the 3 victim advocates last week, along with The Refuge, which is one of the kind of the shelter areas, and we're coming up with some plans on holding like communication events, educational things. We're trying to figure out how we can really appeal to those that are most affected and those that maybe are affected and don't realize it. So that's something that's also in the works for this coming year. Good. More questions? Okay, Debbie, you start. 2 or 3?

Okay, great.

So, was that triple speed?

What was that?

You could never have too much feedback.

I mean, so we're going to go back to, um, one of these presentations. So Heather put this beautiful presentation together. I'm so impressed and so thankful for all of her hard work on it. For my involvement, and I'm going to cover number 2 and number 3 on here. So we're going to have free health classes at various city venues, mainly the library as well as the recreation center. We did talk to Carrie and Katie earlier this afternoon about also holding some classes for seniors at the Senior Friendship Center. So that's another event place, if you will, for these classes, and they will include like diabetes nutrition classes. There will be some birthing type classes, overdose prevention. Those type of things that will be in that. So we'll be coordinating with the Library Rec Center and then the Senior Friendship Center. We're going to be in the process of creating the schedule for that in conjunction with Utah County Health and some other nonprofit organizations. Develop these partnerships for consistent and free classes. We always want to make sure that they're available to everybody on a, on a free basis. There will be the class schedule on our new website, health.org.gov. I will coordinate with the communications team, and already they're starting that to announce those classes once they are scheduled. And you'll kind of see the timeline here, what we're looking at, though it doesn't necessarily need to stay within this timeframe. I mean, if we can get things done sooner, we definitely will. And then we'll be posting those classes on a public basis with the Library of Representation Center and then the Senior Friendship Center. In addition to that, we're going to have the annual health fair in conjunction with our farmers market. We'll be having mobile mammogram screening for women that, that would really benefit most of that. We've talked about some other various things for men as well. We're gonna meet with the events team to brainstorm some of those activities, coordinate that with our local healthcare partners, the Health Coalition and other nonprofits for those booths. And then we'll schedule the City Center Park and finish planning of that for the annual health fair. So if you have any additional ideas or input for that, I would love to hear from you. I'm open to all ideas and suggestions and would be glad to take that to our partners.

Thank you.

The partnerships aspect is important for us, and partnerships with other government agencies. I'm glad that you mentioned the connection with the Utah County Health Department in terms of, you know, providing some of the resources. Will we also have kind of a direct connection via our website to the Utah County Health Department?

We should, yeah, absolutely. Yeah, we'll be linking directly to their schedules and their events. Yeah, great question. Do you guys have any, uh, would you guys like to add anything about the health department and what you have to offer? We have lots of different resources. I like that it's all-encompassing, and I found it really interesting about, um, I didn't know about the domestic violence. Um, we don't have a lot of funding at the health department, um, right now currently for domestic violence, so I'm glad that you're addressing that, but we can look for resources to help in those areas as well. But we're excited to partner with you and get some classes up and running, and also explore opportunities and volunteer opportunities to help assist with, like, I think my hometown as well, to offer some of these classes for free, because of course we are also on limited budgets. So it's not very feasible for us to do too many. Like, there's so many classes we teach a year. So I'm hoping that we'll be able to fill your schedules, but also be able to, you know, maybe build some volunteer opportunities for community members who have special skills in those areas. I love on here, or maybe the other document, partnering with UVU and some of their public health programs or things like that, nutrition programs, where we can get some students involved, be those volunteers to get internship hours and experience in the field. Yeah, so that'd be great. Which I was just in a meeting with the commissioners this week.

And they talked about how they had to— they've had to cut back on your budgets because you had ARPA funds or whatever. And at the same time, you know, we talked about the tax increase and how we're— they're doing it at the county level for expanding the prosecutor's office, is the county attorney. Which is great, right? But sometimes I'm just like, okay, so, so we can prosecute more domestic violence. We're adding to the attorneys. Well, man, I wish we could just get that money and put it upstream. Can we just stop it? Prevention, you know, I don't know. I feel like maybe we have to have some conversations to help that happen.

Yes, in a way.

Absolutely.

And I think there's also going to be like— I'm sorry. No, I think there's also going to be like some anger management type of things that we're going to do in conjunction with Refuge. Like, we're looking at trying— how do we prevent this from an early age? Like you said, How do we get this into the schools in the right manner? Right? And so that's also being discussed as well. So we just met. It was just last week that we met. And so we're kind of in that brainstorming mode right now. But we were talking about having something at Library Hall, you know, and really being able to attract the right people. But prevention is key. Like, that's the thing that, you know, we keep coming back to is how do we prevent this? I agree with you.

Yeah.

We don't want it to get to that prosecutor— prosecution. Are— how do we prevent it? So early education is key. It's just in the appropriate fashion. How, you know, how do we do that? And I can keep you posted on any kind of grant opportunities that come out of the state health department from the Violence Injury Prevention Program. A lot of times these will fall within that category. That's where the health department, they're looking for more community-based organizations that are other than us that are implementing those research designs to reach events. I'll let you know other grant opportunities. That's great. And that's a segue into our last point. Like, we're just going to keep continuing to look for grant opportunities. I'm always scouring the internet for some. Any health-related grants. Yeah, they are even violence, you know, domestic violence, anything related to health prevention and just improving the health. Like, I'm always reporting on grants like EPA community funds for water quality. funding under current grants for parks, recreation, water quality, and just writing health-related grants as they open. Just going to move to our next steps here. Our next steps are to just begin implementing the health improvement plan, um, by building out our, our website first of all, coordinating with organizations for our free health classes. And I may have mentioned this before, the health department is starting their first class next month. diabetes prevention at our library. So we're excited to see how well that goes. We'll also start communicating with the farmers market about the health fair. Our grant writing will always be ongoing, and Debbie, our communication connection supervisor, will be coordinating with the health fair, health department, all of our— getting our health classes and various organizations together and creating a schedule of who can come and give us free classes any resident can come to. She'll also be our main point of contact for this project moving forward. So if you have ideas that wake you up in the night, send them to Debbie, and I'll get them on the schedule. So I just wanted to— this last part is just a little bit interactive. Again, we don't— I know we're running a little bit short on time, so maybe just putting it on your radar, and you can send them on this as we just going forward. But this wellness matrix is what I used as kind of a way to organize all of the thoughts about the survey. So I can just use this on my desktop. So here we have all of the health well-being survey concerns that residents brought up, things like physical health, community connection, improving public transportation, air quality, these types of things. And here I just kind of organized it by pillars of community health. We have, you know, emotion or physical environment, social and economic factors, health behaviors, and access to healthcare services. I wanted to organize it by pillar of community health so we make sure that we're addressing every aspect of community health. And as you can see, there's, you know, a lot on this matrix, and that's what I used to create the health plan and, um, The other list that we have— what did I call that? Our help tasks. But one thing I wanted to point out here is that we have, we have 3 areas where there are gaps. There's traffic, improving road services, and improving city image. Specifically, residents mentioned State Street. And this is where I need your help to fill in these gaps and come up with ideas for how we can address these issues that have been brought forward by residents. So again, we are running short on time, but if you have any ideas that wake you up in the night, send them my way or Debbie's way. But, but, you know, traffic, improving road services, and improving city image, especially State Street, are 3 things that we do not have ideas yet and are looking for ideas from City Council. So.

We talked about this a little bit at our retreat.

Oh, good. Perfect. So that is all we have today. Are there any questions that you would like to share?

Can we buy copies of the video?

Yes, with editing, right? Yeah, it comes with a price. Yeah, so we will turn the panel back to you.

Okay, thank you, Heather and Debbie. We appreciate that. Okay, we'll move on to item 1.2. This is a presentation, um, UTA— are you done? Um, on 1600 North, I'd like to do construction exemption. We'll stand with you. No, no, no. All right, Council, it's a pleasure to be with you tonight. I have with me from Unan, our project manager for the 1600 North project, Yeo Carroll, and then Dan Young with WCG Engineers. We've been working together now since November of '23. What year was that? '23. Okay, so 15 months. We wanted to give you a really quick update on the project, but also they've come tonight making a formal request that we'll get into in just a moment. There are 33 homes on this property that, that are in the process of being purchased or have been purchased. The vast majority have been— How many have been purchased and how many are still left of the 33? So almost all of them have been acquired. We have the 8 parcels that are owned by Orem City that have not yet been transferred. And there are— there's 1 or 2 that are kind of giving us a little bit of a hard time. So some of them have been purchased, but the people are still living there for periods of time? Yeah, there's actually quite a few that still have people living in So we're, we're kind of letting them stay as long as, as long as we can let them stay. So they get rent-free for a period of time, right? Uh, no, actually, they're, they're, uh, if, if they, if they stay after we've acquired it, they're paying rent, or they're paying rent to the city. Gotcha. So yeah, I don't think anybody's in there rent-free unless they're squatters or something. So, so out of the 33 homes, we've purchased 8 through MAG funding. And ours are already demolished? No, there are 2. Well, 2 of them are demolished, but 6 and a half still. Okay, thank you. Um, but as you drive down 16th, you'll notice it looks quite a bit different. Yeah, right. Yeah.

And that—

so they have a demolition contractor that's been on site that's demoed, um, more than— a little more than half of the homes right now. You'll notice that they've come back and backfilled that with the material, packed it in nice and smooth and so forth. It's very clean, very well organized. I'm very pleased with the work that they've done there. And also, I'd like to give a shout out to UDOT and to WCG and their subcontractor of engineers who have been excellent to work with over the past 15 months. But, but now we're at the time where, where the rubber is going to literally and figuratively hit the road. So we're at a point right now, starting April 1st, I'd like to have all the funds in place to be able to bid this project. About 3 or 4 years ago, the project was estimated to cost around $35 to $40 million. While there is no estimated amount of what it may cost today, we are anticipating that the bids will probably come in likely higher than $70 million. So, it's a significant change. So, Diego and UDOT team will be going to the State Transportation Commission, I believe, in February to request some additional funding for this project to get this completed. And just to clarify, that cost includes the right-of-way acquisition and construction. So interestingly, so almost half of the— well, just under half, maybe 40% of the project cost is right-of-way acquisition and relocation of individuals and families to homes that are very comparable. Not just comparable, but also comparable in this area as well. And so there's a substantial cost for that deed. The construction costs, I think, are estimated to be roughly $25-ish. $25 million.

So it gives you an idea of the total cost of the project.

Less than half of it is for construction, actually. So there's a lot of effort that goes into the front end and the purchasing, right-of-way acquisition, and so forth. Uh, details of, of can be found, and I can share those with you, uh, of this map and so forth. But, uh, really what we're here to talk to you tonight about is, um, a resolution that is on a consent agenda for the city council. We wanted to present that to you here. Answer any questions you might have and explain what the request is. So first and foremost, in the Horham City Code, in Section 929, there's a restriction for construction work within 200 feet of residentially zoned properties. Uh, from 10:30 PM to 7 AM, it's prohibited. Um, you might recall, uh, Lene perhaps on 1600 North.

I remember.

4 AM.

Oh, okay.

We have some construction tomorrow.

Waking up at 4 AM every day.

But, but it accelerated the project. It made it so it went faster. It was safer. And it was a very collaborative effort that helped us to get that done in a safe and quick manner. And I would suggest that we did the same thing also on 800 North when we did our widening. And what year was that, Ryan? 2007-ish? 2006-ish? If you all recall when that happened.

2005.

2005?

Okay.

Anyway, we blew it up, right, with UDOT, and all the homes on the north side were purchased and demoed. And it was, it was a massive war zone and construction effort that took place at that time. This is going to be similar in fashion to that, although I would say that we're ahead of the curve a little bit with the construction or the demolition efforts that have already taken place. And so, um, with the assistance of Jake Summers, he's prepared this resolution for you tonight. Utah code does allow or provide that state highway construction projects can provide reasonable written notice in advance of nighttime construction. There is a net community benefit to conduct nighttime construction, and the state highway construction project institutes best management noise reduction practices in the construction with local government. The local government shall issue a nighttime construction noise ordinance exceptional permit. In essence, it allows— it suggests that we can do this. And we have done this historically, and what is requested specifically by UDOT at this time is the following. UDOT requests an exemption for nighttime construction with the following conditions. The UDOT contractor will provide written notice to the city 15 days prior to beginning construction of the intended schedule for night work for this request. So it's on, it's on a per-request basis. It's not for the whole project, is it? It's for just certain aspects of the project during the— for the whole— okay, okay, thank you. Under contract, will not perform or use any saw cutting, jackhammering during nighttime hours, which would wake people up and become more disruptive that way between 10:30 and 7:00. So just, just to back up a little bit here, when we, when we worked on, uh, 8th North and also 16th North for Phase 1 of this project, I don't think we had these types of restrictions in place specifically. They've come forward with these to make this more palatable and more manageable, and also to recognize the disturbance that this would create on the surrounding public. The 3rd item is the contract will not use compression release engine brakes, dynamic braking devices, Jake brakes, Except to avoid imminent danger. So there will be no loud jake brakes occurring during construction at nighttime. The contractor will also provide adequate lighting to perform satisfactory inspections and construction operations. And the contractor or representative will notify in writing the neighbors' businesses located within 200 feet of the construction prior to beginning the night work. So, as I anticipated, they'll probably focus a lot of their work on the south side of 1600 North. where it's already been demoed. There'll probably be widenings out there on the south side, start constructing that part of it, and then they'll flip all of the construction zone, and then they'll flip it to the north and then move the traffic to the south. That's how I envision it. I don't know exactly if that's going to happen that way, but it makes logical sense to us as designers and engineers. So, um, this is the heart of the resolution here. Um, are there any comments, questions, concerns? Please, Brian. Could we get an estimate from UDOT on, um, so, you know, we're asking the public to, to put up with a little bit more, uh, inconvenience and/or travel, right? And so if at the same time we can share a commitment that that's, that's the cost increase here, so to speak, but the savings or the benefit would be X amount of quicker timetable to finish the project. Do you have an estimate of how much time this— That's not a quantified— we don't have a quantified or monetized benefit, but there are definitely a lot of safety benefits. Instead of closing down the road during the daytime, we can close it at nighttime. That avoids congestion and other safety hazards. This also provides enhanced safety for, for the contractor. In reality, actually costs the project more to do work at night. But I mean, in time, how much time?

In time?

Yes, it saves us. I'm not sure if we have an estimate. I'm guessing probably, probably it doesn't cut it in half. I don't know. Yeah, congestion is probably the biggest thing, because if we're going to run it during the day and we have a certain level of service, right, that we want to provide the public. during construction hours, we— those restrictions are just so much more limited during the day. And so we can do it at nighttime, and we can open that up to let the contractor use more of that, of that real estate, so to speak, right, to do their work. It really quickly decreases the amount of time that they're going to do that job. We have not put together any estimates on that just because we're kind of going off the premise that this should work, but it, it would severely increase the amount of time. It's probably not half, but it is because they, they're not as efficient. We put limitations This is basically what we would tell the contractor. We get the benefits of you continuing to do work, but we want you to limit how, how much of a nuisance you are to the community. And so we put this in the contract so they have to abide by, by these requirements. I mean, again, I'm just coming up with like general quick time. So what, what is the expected construction timeline? So right now we're looking to be completed with construction, uh, in 2026. But actually, Dan and I both just pushed back a meeting by 15 minutes. We're actually in the midst of working with construction experts to help us figure out what the sequencing might be like. So when we send this out to bid to the contractor, we give them a lot of limitations and we kind of punish them, if you will, if they go long. But we leave it for them to decide how to sequence the project. So we try to constrain it. but also give them enough flexibility because they really know how to construct the project best. So, so if construction is a year to year and a half, yeah, then, then doing this ordinance to allow construction at night could conceivably save upwards of a year on construction. At least a year. Saves a year's worth of inconvenience. In terms of traffic flow along there and just general— well, saves a year of all the nuisance that comes from a big project. And it allows the traffic impacts to be minimized during the day. So if we're doing it during the day, those traffic impacts are going to be a lot more severe because they just have to be, and it's going to take more time. And I would say at least a year, it would increase that amount of time just because we can't limit it as much. It's— so I think you'll save at least a year's time, and it'll minimize those daily traffic impacts. They're not going to go away. There's just no way that it can, right? But we can limit it to maintain a certain level of service that's at least acceptable, that we can bear with. And we're just trying to minimize the amount of time that we're impacting everybody's lives. Thank you. That's a big deal, that, that kind of savings in time. That's what's worth, I think, considering. Thanks for getting us there. And like Diego said, we're, we're, we are working through, like, with Rocky Mountain Power and some other things, placement of noise walls, how we can coordinate, because there's going to be some noise walls that go underneath the transmission lines on the north side of the road. And so we're trying to coordinate that when they have it, when they replace some of those lines, that we can be putting those noise walls at the same time. And so We can coordinate those efforts and minimize that construction time even more. Our hope is to be done by the end of 2026. There is a small possibility that it could go into 2027, but that's what we're shooting for. It's a 2-year construction period. I don't know all the other noisy things you might do. I mean, you gave us a list of the things you won't do. I think the, the nature of what we're trying to say is it won't be noisy things. Real noisy things. Okay, jackhammers, saw cuts, et cetera. If something else super noisy comes in, do we have the opportunity to come back and say, hey, that should have been on your list of don't do these noisy things?

Go ahead.

Well, it's that. So we tried to list the things that, you know, these are the typical things. There's still maybe some things that are noisy, but these are the most of the biggest nuances. The challenge is that we're putting this on the contract for the contractor. If we come in and put a new requirement on the contractor, it'll just cost us. So that's, I guess that's the caveat. I guess I'm relying on your expertise to say we got a pretty good list of the noisy, super noisy things. Super noisy things. That is correct. And some of the things that allows them to, they can still make good progress with night work without using the noisy things. So there's still, there's still noise, right? That's why we're coming to you, because they're going to be noisy. But we can restrict these things while still allowing the project to move forward effectively. Thank you. Council Member McDonald, to maybe answer from the city side of this, the way the resolution is written, the way the exemption is currently written, is there really isn't another avenue for us to come back and say, hey, we received these type of complaints, we need you to do this. Now hopefully we could work with the contractor to maybe make those adjustments, but as the resolution's written, as the exemption's currently written, no, there's not a way necessarily to enforce it. I think this is a good faith negotiation is what we're having here. I trust that we'll continue that. And we do have an individual who's a public relations person who will coordinate with the contractor, put out notices to the public, give notices to the city council And Chris and others to try and make sure that as we do traffic switches, or as there's certain construction activities, that everybody's made aware of that in advance. And we should put Chris's cell phone number on that. Thank you for that, because we will receive, you know, some citizen feedback, and we want to direct them to, to you. And we may, even though maybe there's not much more we can require, Uh, you'll, you'll still get requests, and we would ask that you direct those to, to him so that he can take those, log them, you know, and we can control them the best we can and coordinate the best we can. So we have it on public record that we can blame you? Absolutely. So they'll also have a designated PIO on this who will be communicating directly and become Pete's new best friend and getting information out there to the public throughout the whole construction process. Yeah. Yeah. That's all we have to present.

There's nothing else.

When do we approve this? Is this on the same thing?

Thank you.

All right.

Any other questions, concerns?

If we could just get rid of the beep beep beep backup.

Yeah.

And they do flashing lights or something.

That's an ocean.

Somebody invent something like a safety shield or something.

Bubble wrap, maybe.

Bubble wrap.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay, next up we've got item 1.3, uh, EPA Brownfields grant report. Matt Taylor is going to present that. Mayor, if I could just do a quick introduction. Uh, some time ago, in fact, going back a number of years, we received our first grant from the EPA. We followed that up with another grant where we can help businesses and other entities do, uh, different phases of environmental studies on their properties. Matt has run that program for us and done a really good job on it, and it has reached its completion. And so We thought it would be good to have Matt come and let the council know what those efforts were and what was accomplished.

Sorry.

Okay.

Thank you.

So, uh, thanks, Brian, for that introduction. Um, a little bit additional information: the first grant Ryan referred to was a grant that helped us do some planning for the Geneva Road corridor. It was issued by the Environmental Protection Agency because that corridor has traditionally been an industrial-type corridor, especially in the days of Geneva Steel, and that looking at ways to redevelop brownfield sites. And we're going to talk a little bit about what that means. The follow-up was an additional grant for— we'll call it for simplicity's sakes, the brownfield grant, or the 2019 brownfield grant. technically called the Community-Wide Assessment Grant. And we'll do a crash course in a few terms. The EPA loves acronyms and all sorts of special language, and took me— it was quite of an education as I tried to manage this grant to get my head around it all. The Environmental Protection Agency protects human health and the environment by enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress. Actually learned they are not a— they're a federal agency, but they're not executive branch agencies. So a little bit of isolation from the executive branch. A brownfield. What is a brownfield? It's a property that may be difficult to expand, redevelop, or reuse because of actual or suspected environmental pollution. Sometimes just even the public consciousness thinking, oh, there might be a problem there, that might lead people just to say, you know, I don't even know if I want to deal with that, right? There's a legend here that something was dumped. So even that perception of contamination can give it sort of brownfield status. And what did this grant primarily do was help provide environmental site assessments. These are studies that evaluate a property pollution or environmental hazards, often before it's sold or developed. And usually, if financing is required, banks will require this as well. Sometimes, as a cash seller, you can bypass— or cash buyer— you can bypass having these studies done. Financing is involved, these are often required. There's different phases of thinking about ratcheting up the level of investigation depending on what the first phase results in. If the first phase results examining the property's past and present uses, so they just sort of do this general history of reviewing documentation, property records, historical uses, businesses. Um, Doing a window survey of the site to start looking at it. Is there things that would stand out as obvious contaminating type elements associated with property? And these are the base level assessments that are typically done before any type of real estate purchase contract, or sorry, any type of finances issued for a real estate transaction. If that Phase 1 comes back with, yeah, you know, these are my These are also written by what they call— I'll have an acronym later. Another acronym, a qualified environmental professional. So these are not just Matt Taylor, Joe Schmo, or anybody else doing these. These are people with real-world background and training in these issues. They come back and they say, well, there may be potential for contamination. It meets certain criteria that We think we would recommend a Phase 2 assessment. So, again, ratcheting up the level of evaluation. At this point, generally, they are doing some soil sampling of suspected areas, never more than 6 inches down. It's just taking that back to a lab, running various tests on that soil, possible groundwater, and other sources of Um, samples and, and seeing what comes back. If those samples— I'm just not a full-scale investigation— come back with actual confirmed levels of contamination different, different ways, then phase 3 level assessment can be conducted where they do extensive sampling and testing, going deep, seeing how far and wide contamination may be, not just the soil, but groundwater, which is really an important issue for us in the Valleys. You know, we're digging more and more wells. We want to keep that groundwater protected. Remediation. What is remediation? It's the process of cleaning up pollution, typically in accordance with the Phase 3 environmental assessment remediation plan. So a Phase 3 plan will not only test everything, they will come up with a plan on how to remediate the contamination. Now, remediation may be leaving it in place. Actually, it doesn't always mean taking it out. Um, in some instances, remediation may be putting a parking lot over it, right? Maybe there's not actual potential for groundwater contamination. We just want to make sure that children don't eat the soil.

Yeah.

So parking lot might—

and can be—

might be an acceptable remediation plan. Another, more extenuating circumstances, it may call for an actual removal of soils and other contamination, which gets more and more expensive as the need to remediate problems rises. So what did the Brownfield grant do? It provided preliminary assessments for targeted areas. talk about that in a second. It provided Phase 1 and Phase 2 studies for willing property owners. We didn't go out and say, oh, that one needs a study. No, we, we tried to work with property owners and get them to voluntarily participate in this program.

Um, we did not—

that grant did not cover Phase 3 studies. At that point, it would be on the property owner to, or potential property owner, to conduct those type of studies on remediation plans. It allowed for asbestos and lead contamination studies in existing buildings. Also provided for market analysis of contaminated properties, examining economic conditions to determine best new uses for previously— oh, I got some redundancy there, but potential It may have contamination. What is the best redevelopment scenario considering local laws, the situation on the ground, highest and best use study assumptions, and also area-wide studies? And I'll give you an example of that momentarily. So, I don't think I finished this list, but there are property owner benefits for participation. These studies can cost— I think, you know, phase 1 could cost anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000. Uh, one of our Phase 2 studies costs upwards of $45,000 under this grant. So, uh, that is a value to our residents receiving this grant—

residents and property owners.

They may not necessarily live here. Um, it helps market those properties because now we have a known issue instead of, oh, the boogeyman, let's put our head in the ground and ignore this issue. Now they have a better idea how the property can be evaluated. assessed and marketed. Um, it helps oftentimes clear financing because now, well, now there's no issue at all. We can move forward with life. And, uh, this really helps, um, new property owners establish a bright line of liability. Like, you know, and old property owners, like, hey, we know it was here before the transaction occurred and, uh, we're not responsible for that. Or nope, these things did happen after the transaction occurred, and new property owner is responsible for that. So that's just a few benefits. There's more that we could get into. We already talked about the history a little bit. We closed out this grant in September, and we spent 98% of the funding, or $290,000, almost $294,000. What did the funding provide? Well, one, it provided us qualified environmental professional. We went through our RFP process to secure this professional.

They—

we ultimately secured Brownfield Redevelopment Solutions, BRS, and they were fantastic, tremendous resource and assistant to help guide us through every step of this process, making sure we were not only doing high quality or getting high quality reports and evaluations, but also making sure that we administer the grant to the letter for the EPA. So, um, I did a lot of work, but I could pick up the phone anytime and call them and help guide me through the bureaucratic maze. Um, they also assist with public outreach and education efforts, technical grant assistance, the environmental reviews. And the preparation of the grant products. One of the things we did was community workshops and stakeholder group meetings. So part of the grant paid for the consultants to assist in that process. One of the things we did early was help identify priority focus areas. And in that process, we already mentioned Geneva Road, but State Street also came up as a potential priority area. And so we expanded the study area, provided additional information about specific properties, and generated leads. So as we have these meetings, you know, public citizens, residents, property owners would come in and help inform the strategy of what properties should we focus on and try and help evaluate. Um, we had a series of initial meetings and then mid-grant meetings to try and, uh, generate additional interest. Unfortunately, we launched this right, right about the time that COVID was underway, and we, we initially had a little bit of a hard time getting people to participate. Um, and overall participation was a little difficult. I think as much as we tried to, um, convey the benefit of participation. Um, anecdotally, I feel that many property owners just didn't want to know that, or they weren't ready to know, or they were too busy with other things in their lives right now. And so even though there was money available on the table, for various reasons, uh, we, we've missed out hundreds of mailers. And, you know, A score of people called us back. So, you know, short of door knocking, I think we did a really good effort getting out to the public, trying to notify, trying to let people know. But it was difficult to get people to respond to this program. One of the first things we did, and this is just one map of about 20 maps, is doing just a preliminary evaluation of properties in these target areas on Geneva Road and State Street and sort of ranking them in a level of high, medium, and low priority.

Yes.

So even going forward, working with, uh, the city, um, whether we're acquiring property or working with our economic development team, we have a much better sense now of where potential problems are. Um, one of the first projects we did end up doing was a city-based project. The city made use of this project for the Farley Orchard, and we conducted Phase 1 and 2 surveys prior to construction of the water tank. The great thing is there was no substantial findings. We had some pest— low-level pesticide use found, not to be too unexpected, but it was well below EPA regulatory limits for residential use. And but this helped assist us in coming up with this finding of no significant impact and helped assure us that we didn't have issues that we need to mitigate or remediate or future liability issues. So this became one of the second projects. We helped Utah County Housing Authority— this was outside our study priority areas— but for them to clear their financing hurdles by conducting Phase 1 asbestos lead surveys for them acquiring the Camp 3 senior living apartments. So there was a great public benefit here. There was no significant issues found by— Uh, we had a private property owner come forward on, uh, 525 South State. Um, it's a veterinary clinic. At least he was struggling with how to proceed in marketing and evaluating, um, the value of his property, and he needed He approached us to participate so he could have additional information how he moved forward with his long-term plans with this site. There were— he did— we did identify in the Phase 1, there was potential vapor intrusion concerns and some other issues. And so, although we didn't have additional grant funding at this point, he was recommending to do a Phase 2 study. to, to pin that down and get a little more detail on. But this, this helped him move forward in his decision-making. The storage facility at 1020 North Geneva Road, we did quite a bit of work with. They had Phase 1 and Phase 2 surveys conducted. Uh, we did— it was determined that there was several 55 gallons of unknown contents that needed further evaluation, and so He is recommended to move forward with some gas-specific remediation plans if he redevelops. However, we also work with them to do a market assessment, what type of highest and best use. And the contamination levels are actually under— likely under the industrial and retail type levels. So obviously, Uh, it'd be more affordable for him to market this in for industrial or flex space rather than trying to come to the city. Not only is there a zoning issue, but come to us also with a residential product. Um, 1412 West 4th and 4th, again, similar situation. All, all these examples were property owners that Needed additional information to move forward in decision-making. And this property owner was also looking at retirement, as well as the previous property owner, and what do they do as next steps. And, um, because of the salvage operations, there was some contamination found. And so, um, but he was provided a whole list of ways to remediate. or contain the current problems so it didn't pose a problem to anyone in the future, how they use the site going forward.

Can they upgrade from industrial? Will it help, um, from a market value industrial to, um, warehousing? I keep hearing we need more warehouses and whatnot.

Yeah, you know, I think that is probably permitted in the zone. And this is— that's, that's like one of those type of uses where, hey, maybe you don't have to do as much remediation because that could be capped. with the warehousing, right? And there's no residential or component for— or less component for people to interact with that contamination. And so each of these reports recommend those type of next steps, or so they have better ability to make decisions of how they market or remediate.

I'm sorry.

This particular property owner was highly afraid that the feds were going to swoop in and make them do all sorts of things and force them to do, you know, spend $100,000. And that wasn't the case in these studies. Again, these, um, these are— information is power. These are ways to help them move forward so, so when they finally do sell, it can be done in a way that's helpful for them and the future owner. Uh, one thing we as a city took on was use the money to help assess the Union Pacific rail spur. It's, um, I don't know exactly where Union Pacific is, but they've had discussions about completely abandoning the spur line. Uh, it goes— is completely within Orem City boundaries, although it hugs very closely Vineyard City. And even though it's on the, uh, west side of Geneva Road there, it is within city— Orem City limits. Uh, south of Center Street, um, it fully diverts into Orem City and abuts industrial properties on both sides.

Yeah.

If Union Pacific were to actually put that up on the market, or if a willing buyer was to come forward, uh, we would want to know the level of contamination of that rail spur line because of its use as an industrial spur line. Uh, this study was not able to specifically sample soils, but they looked at each area and looked at the most likely causes of contamination that would exist and ranked them by segment. So we have a lot more information, especially if we ever enter into discussion with Union Pacific about possibly acquiring that city side, whether we were interested in Right-of-way acquisition, trail development, or even going as far as making land available for adjacent property owners. And it's not necessarily maybe in that scenario keeping it, but facilitating a transaction to expand operations for existing property owners. So this study looked preliminarily like what would be the next steps, but it gives us enough information to have meaningful dialogue with decision makers and with Union Pacific on what we would need to do forward to continue any type of discussion on the spur line if we have to. And that is the results of this grant. And any questions? Okay, I'm going to be putting together a final website, uh, where each of the grant products, Phase 1 and 2 reports, the studies are available, uh, for our city leaders, the economic development team, and for the public. So we'll send out a link to everyone that's following us.

Thanks, Matt.

Okay, thank you, Matt. Okay, moving on to item 1.4, another presentation, City Council Conflict of Interest Disclosures. Office of John Diddle.

All right.

Okay, so this presentation really is going to be for the elected officials, mayor, city council, uh, as well as city recorder. And, um, this last legislative session, the House passed Bill HBP, which dealt with conflict of interest disclosure requirements. What we're going to be discussing today is the annual disclosures that are required for all elected officials. And these specific annual requirements need to be done in January each year. And so this is January 1st through the 31st. And these disclosures that you've been given here, this disclosure statement that is taken directly from the Utah Code. And so these are the requirements that need to be disclosed. And we'll talk about kind of each item and go through it and see if you have any questions. But once these are filled out, then they'll be given to the city recorder, and we'll discuss kind of next steps from there. All right, so let's go through this disclosure document. I will just say, just in general, that everything in this document is, is from the Utah Code. So we haven't added anything. We haven't added any requirements. Everything you see here, including every item, name of the elected official, if elected official spouse, other adults residing in the official's household that aren't related by blood or marriage. It may sound odd, but these are all requirements that the state has enacted. So we'll go through the first one. Obviously, the first one is going to be yourself, elected officials, current employer. What's the information here? Name of the employer, address, description of your employment, job title, occupation. If there's more than one, then we've made space for several, but if you need additional— Excuse me, I think some are starting to fill this out. You're going to give us an electronic copy We are. Yeah. So if you don't want to handwrite it, you're going to get an electronic copy. Yeah. So we will talk a little bit about— We're just so excited to disclose those things. That's great. So the next is anything that is not a current employer, but which is within the last 1 year. So 365 days. Next is going to be any ownership interests that we have in any entities or businesses also within the last year. Investment interests of any entity, or this was located in all of that, or only entity, or— These are any entities in which you had an interest in. So any interest you have, either you are an owner or an officer. In the entity that you didn't list above, but it's also within last year. Is there— this is— yeah, if you're involved in a private equity fund or own stock and you're a small owner, you got to list all this. Well, and stock is listed a little bit later. It does list ownership in the other statute. That— so there's, there's 2 types of disclosures. One is the annual disclosure, and then the other is the disclosure that you need to make when you're elected, and that threshold is 5%. Okay, and what is this threshold? Do we know? I would assume that that's the same because there's no— there's nothing that's different, but we can drill down and make sure that that's the same. So if you're saying if you own 5% or more of a company or Yeah, or, or an officer. You're going to need electronic copy. Next is going to be the investment interests. So specifically, these are— if it's fair market value, it's $5,000 or more in stocks or bonds, excluding, of course, things like mutual funds. Blind trust, things that are managed outside of your control. We just give you a copy of the balance sheet. Well, yeah, it's essentially what— no, why not? Essentially, in some aspects, I think you give your balance sheet. Obviously, you're going to want to retain some privacy there on that balance sheet. But if it's easier for you to provide a balance sheet that way, then— and this is a public forum. This is a public forum. Oh, that's fine.

Yeah.

Oh, it's—

I, I—

HB 80 changed a lot of the disclosures here. And, and so again, some things to be aware of. This is going to be posted on the city's website where it will remain while you're in office. There will also be a link provided to the Lieutenant Governor's office. And they have a website where they link to our site. So, like I said, if you feel better about providing a balance sheet, just make sure that you're only providing the information that you're required to. You're going to want to retain some privacy here, but there is a substantial amount of disclosure that is now required. And of course, the amounts of, you know, the value or things like that. You're not putting— you're just putting that you have exactly the entity, the nature of the business activity, those kinds of things. Seems like a really bad idea. Write your local legislature. Excludes funds managed by a third party.

Yes.

So if you have I don't know if any of you have a blind trust, but if you have anything in a mutual fund or anything that's run by a 3rd party and you don't really control, the 3rd party's controlling it. So I would, I would assume, and I'm not going to say anything, if I was in your situation and I have my retirement account and it's being managed by— Fidelity, X, Y, Z. Mission Square, right? And they're managing that for me. Even though I do have some control, but they're really managing the day-to-day. I would not be reporting that on this form.

You wouldn't, even though you're picking the positions that you're owning in there?

Yes, because again, it's being managed by a 3rd party. Now, I would draw the line. It's also— I also have my own other account on Robinhood and the accounts, the stocks that I'm buying there, I, I would be the one That's managing the day-to-day. And I think anything over $5,000 in a particular stock, you'd be required to, to disclose. There's a line that I don't think makes a lot of sense in some of this, but that's the line they've drawn. See, I mean, since I own an investment firm, I freaking do everything. Yes, right.

Now, your entity's separate.

You made—

that's your business.

You're—

I just, I don't, I can't—

I get it.

But I actually don't, because it's all in trust.

There you go.

You're set.

So maybe I don't own anything.

Maybe I just have a credit card. And we'll also make ourselves available if you have particular questions. We'll make ourselves available to help answer. Simple little thing is just turning into a nightmare. Yes.

I think it's—

instead, including this It's due by the end of the month to Teresa.

Donations and kickbacks are the problem in our government.

I'm sorry, this is not the problem.

That's what the legislature should have written.

Yeah, every investor is all welcome. Yes. The legislature should also hold themselves to this standard, but they don't. Oh, is that right? Do they not have to fill this out? So there are— there is a conflict of interest disclosure they also have to make. They've made this applicable to state boards, state agencies, local government, county government officials. So another point is, if you're involved in the Utah Lake Authority Commission, if you have a seat on that board, make sure they have access to the— your, your site. Make sure you're communicating through that administrator and clerk, because you also have that obligation to make the same conflict of disclosure form for that board. But rather than making you do it twice, there's a way that we can just have that clerk link to Teresa's website. Okay, are any of us officers at Utah League of Cities and Towns or just members? Not, not Utah League, the Utah League Authority. Oh, thank you. Sorry, sorry, I missed something. Did I misspeak? You probably said it right. I defaulted to Utah League. Thank you.

So I got nothing, so I got no problems.

I'm poor. Nice guns though. The, uh, what's that?

Nice guns. Nice guns.

There you go.

The next section of this, um, so this is going to be any individual or entity that you've received $5,000 or more from. Um, now if you own a business or you have some kind of a professional licensure entity, then you wouldn't be listing a list of your clients that gave you $5,000 or more. You would just be listing that entity for that business. Within the last 365 days, right? Correct. Again, the example that I would use is if I were in your shoes and I managed my own law firm, rather than listing every one of my clients individually, I would list the law firm. As providing your income? Correct. Because it— we're not trying to drill down to who everybody's clients are. I think that's invasive of your privacy, and the statute does not require you to do that.

Just who you're affiliated with, and then if there's a question, they audit that.

If that person gets audited, whatever. So one of the conflict things I saw, it's with dual interest in an entity that does business with the group you're doing business with. Which makes sense, right? If I owned XYZ Construction and they're tearing up 1600 North, I think I should disclose that.

Yes.

But if I own XYZ Construction, they're not doing any business in— this seems pretty strange to me. Council Member McDonald, I don't disagree. You say amen and hallelujah, but tough one. Yeah, my father is just, but you can do nothing for me. I've heard that before. That is correct, because we already had a prior disclosure that if you conducted business or had a business interest in— disclose that with a business that was going to do business with the city, you would make that disclosure. But this is asking for something above and beyond that.

This wants your whole life story, correct?

Correct. For the last year? Yes, for the previous 365 days. 365 days, this is your ownership.

And we would put the city of Warren as one of our employers.

Only if we paid you over $5,000. I don't know, you'd think they'd figure that out. It's really an encouraged business move to run for council. Very much so.

Yeah.

But the last one for yourselves is going to be entity leadership positions. So if you have any either paid leadership position or paid or non-paid board of directors positions in any entity, then you disclose that again within the last year. Paid or non-paid? Paid or non-paid for board of directors. So if we sit on a board of directors with some of our commission assignments— No, that's, that's different, isn't it, if it's a city assignment? Well, if it's like you told me— I'm gonna parse here a little bit. It says if you sit on a board of directors position Whether you are paid or not paid, you are to list it. Board of Directors versus trustees? It says specifically Board of Directors. None of us are on Board of Directors in our city assignments.

Is your Utopia thing a Board of Directors?

I feel like it is.

I think it is.

Are you a voting member?

Yes.

Yes.

I was. I don't have to. You're not on it. He has to. I will next year. This is for previous— previous— what do we call the sleepy ranch board next time? That's not really— put that up. Do we have to do— maybe there's difference between board directors and advisory board, so we'll assume it come to Jake.

Jake didn't help fill it out.

I'll, I'll take the board. So beyond your own disclosures, you're also going to be disclosing, uh, so your spouse's employment, your current spouse's employment, as well as your spouse's employment within the last year as well. And then the other one, the last one I should say, affiliated adult employment. This is someone, kind of an odd carve out, but it's someone that lives in your household not related by blood or marriage. So if that does apply, then you would fill out that section. And then there are optional disclosures if you haven't got your fill of disclosures and you just want to do more. There's some optional disclosures as well. I think those relate to real property or other matters. potential. I think they're going to— so that, that is the form. So once you've filled out the form, sponsors of this bill, they were Paul Cutler and Jerry Stevenson. Exactly. So you can have a word with them. And it passed last year. It did.

How is that not on our radar?

Is From ULCT?

I can't speak to that.

Wow.

So once this is filled out, we will be sending an electronic copy. Pete Wolfley and his crew are going to edify it, as they say.

When is this due?

It's due the 31st of January.

Of January.

2 weeks.

When are you sending us the electronic copy? Ideally tomorrow.

We are—

we're going to send our digital copy to Pete. His team will beautify it, make it electronic, billable form. We're trying to make this as easy as we can for you. Part of the reason we're also delayed in making this presentation is we've been waiting for— the representation was, was the Lieutenant Governor's Office was going to be preparing the form and be carrying the oar here. As far as getting everything prepared. We made calls in December to the Lieutenant Governor's office, to the elections office, saying, hey, we're anticipating a form. Where's the form? We need to get our council educated on it. And then after the holidays, we just started creating our own form and getting, getting ready so we could make this available to you as quick as possible. I'm guessing other cities won't be as proactive as you've been. Yeah. So just last week, I think Teresa amongst Okay. They've been sending me emails for the last 2 weeks telling me to get my website up.

So they already have our link.

They're just waiting for me to drop the files onto the link.

So it's—

so you could probably go onto the state website right now, find Orem.

There would be the page that we put it on.

There wouldn't be anything there yet.

But yeah, it's We talked about it, um, pretty in-depth in our last meeting with the other reporters. So it's— they're pushing it pretty hard.

They did finally get a form out. I gave one to Jason.

We reviewed their form and it's pretty duplicative. And so we've again tried to make it in a form that's not going to require you to fill out the same information in multiple places.

And have you compared this form to the law?

Yes.

And you're pretty confident that you've interpreted that correctly?

We've done it with a fine-tooth comb and comparing it to their forms to make sure that we're not making you over-report. And we're also making sure that you report what is necessary. So you're in compliance.

And what's the enforcement?

That's—

oh, 2 slides.

Okay.

Great question. So what— why do we have to do this? What if we don't want to do it? Um, so it is a Class B misdemeanor to violate this section. So, um, there's that, there's that fun piece. And thankfully our office does not need to prosecute. That's a civil fine. The misdemeanor would be a criminal fine. So that's a period. Civil and criminal. So, okay, wait, so we do—

our city recorder.

So the city recorder is required to make any, any violation reports to the Attorney General's Office.

Okay, for that enforcement, we are self-reporting.

Oh yeah, Jake's gonna make sure you guys get your paperwork done. That is our goal, is to try to get it— make it as painless as possible for you so everybody's in compliance. Yeah, so next steps, like I said, we'll be sending out an electronic copy. Please let Jake or I know if you do have any questions. We can help you with any specific questions that you have. We just need to make sure that this is in Treece's hands by the 31st.

Okay.

Okay, any other general questions on, on this disclosure form?

Anybody open to bill file to correct this in any way or adjust this?

Not that I'm aware of yet. I'm sure after this first reporting cycle, there probably, probably will be.

Everybody's just finding out about this. Yeah, I have no problem with this, but I think you should grammar request it. I don't think it should be put out there publicly for scammers to know stuff about me. Yeah, it just opens me up to more identity theft.

And scammers.

There were some concerns I had, and I had nothing. Yes, on the digital side as well as the physical security side. I mean, you're giving out a lot of information about where you are, where your family will be, et cetera, et cetera. And in today's day and age, I have just physical security issues, security issues, as well as the digital security issues here. Susan, can I challenge?

I think those are very valid concerns.

I think there's anything we could do right now on the reporting cycle. I think we're too far behind the 8-ball. But I think definitely speaking again with the bill sponsors from last year is to see if you can get an amendment or some changes to this, or seek a legal injunction to hold off until it's litigated. Yeah, that's what happened on the federal side. Right now it's happening.

There's all the boards and commissions, they got some gigantic federal database.

They're forcing everyone to put the information in. Got an injunction in some—

can you represent that?

I can talk with the team and see what we can do.

I don't mind.

It should be publicly available, right? Yes, it just doesn't make sense.

It needs to be public.

This could also be a good thing then.

Yeah.

you know, talk to individual, um, legislators about. So I'll take that. Contact some of the—

I mean, why am I so careful on social media, right? And then to have this out there, right? Yeah, stalkers, whatever, they'll know.

Yeah, yeah, it's not—

yeah, it's a mess.

What?

Yeah, correct. Makes no sense.

Thanks, guys.

Wow, thank you. The bear. I know, the most popular. The only good news I heard out of that is that apparently to pedify something is now a legal term. Yeah. These are our proposed changes. This is what they want to hear. Okay, we're gonna move on to item 1.5, care tax policy change recommendations. And Brandon's going to direct some of that. Thank you, man. So, as Nate was alluding to, I believe as a CARE Commission at the end of last year, we had a discussion and kind of prompted some of these changes to discuss, obviously, with the group and to get your general approval of. And then I believe they would— because they're procedure and policy-based. Um, they're not necessarily ordinance-based, so, so there's— I don't think we, we're going to be bringing anything else forward. It'll be your general approval here. I don't want to do that. So, um, yeah, so to start with, we talked about, um, changing our schedule, just to make you aware. So in the past, we've been meeting with the CARE applicants and having meetings where they present their information. And those have been occurring in April. Well, as you can imagine, April is not a good month for Trevor and I in the budget realm. So, and not only that, but you have spring break, and you have a lot of people traveling in April. It's just a good month in many instances, right? You have ULCT and ICMA. So of Councilman Lamson and Councilman Spencer, that's problematic as well. That limits a lot of the timeframe we have in April between all of those things. So we thought, why not? And on top of that, the approval stuff that we do is too late, generally speaking, to get into the actual budget. So it makes that piece difficult as well.

So we thought, well, if we can push the schedule up so that the—

by February, the applicants have submitted, we have our meetings in March, we have the conclusion that, you know, we come to you here in a work session and then obviously approve those. That's all done in March so that we can then put that exact information that's been approved into the actual tentative budget. So that was the plan going forward with moving all of that up basically by one month. Any particular issues that you might think of? You've notified all the potential former and public notaries if they have a desire to apply? Yeah, we're working with Pete's team. We're actively notifying them.

We've been in contact with all of our Just making sure they're all aware of it.

I assume that would be the case, but just a good question. Second, um, the current thresholds for our 3 categories of grants on the left, those categories have been there since the beginning, 18 years ago. So we felt like it actually became time that we should update those thresholds for each of those particular grants, not only from an inflationary standpoint, but we had several entities who I know that have been very popular with us, and to push them into a major grant category provides some difficulties based on our current policies in relation to major grants.

So we thought, well, between those 2 things together, why don't we—

should probably push that threshold up so that we have the opportunity to award those higher grant amounts to, you know, whoever those grantees are that we might feel that are— we feel good about giving them that extra amount of money. Now without having to, to go through jumping the hoops for major grant. So this was a direct request from our advisory commission, from our volunteers, because they wanted to give more to 2 specific groups. But just more flexibility. Any questions or concerns about that particular element? So since it started like 18 years ago, I mean, on that mini, and do those still apply as far as— We'll have a discussion about that as well. So this is how it currently reads, right?

Yeah.

So this is how it currently reads. You can see the mini and mid, they provide us with information. They provide us with satisfactory official auditor review, then for the most recent calendar fiscal calendar year, then we can go ahead and pay them out the money when they are awarded the grant. Otherwise, they fall into the 2nd category, which is a reimbursement type situation where they have to actually spend the money first and then submit their documentation of the event. and those costs to us, and we will pay them. As you can imagine, with a lot of these organizations, they don't have a lot of money necessarily. So to do a reimbursement grant is hard in many cases because they're relying on that money to hold their event. So, so that's kind of an important element in relation to that. And so we, we would like to change That so that it reads, which we started actually last year. We're just making now procedure follow it, which is, if you've been a grantee in the past year and you've shown satisfactory completion of the requirements, then the next year, if you're awarded a grant, you're automatically qualified to receive that grant award upfront. So, because we have some confidence in you that you're gonna do those things right in order to qualify. The reimbursement part, just so you're aware, if you may not, may not be aware, the reimbursement part came in because we had 1 or 2 grant holders who did not do what they were supposed to with the grant money. They never held the event, and obviously we'd already paid them. It became very difficult to get the money back from them. In fact, we didn't get the money back. One of them we didn't get back. That's correct. So, so we want to at least have a balance between not having that kind of a situation occur and having some efficiencies, right? And if, if you've proven to us, so to speak, we'll reward you for that, in essence, right? Uh, and of course, they still, um, potentially, you know, if they were to go have an actual— if they have an actual audit or review, we would still accept those as well as part of this. This just gives them another avenue to be able to get those— they advance the grant. Any questions with any of that? Okay. There was a time when we— it seemed like we would have a lot of money that wasn't used, that we hadn't disbursed, correct, because of the reimbursement. process as just a good, good policy. Yes. Okay, so now, somewhat to the mayor's question. First off, things have changed such that mid and mini, there are no differences between those 2 from a requirements standpoint. Just for the amount they're asking? Just for the amount they're asking. So, number one, do we still feel like there should be a differentiation between those 2 groups? So that's the first question. Second question, which a couple of our organizations have asked us about, is how do I get considered to become a major grant holder?

How do I go about that effort?

Is it purely come to the meetings that we have and express my love to be a major grantee? Or is there some other avenue by which they can do that? And the only reason I bring this up is, number one, because they're talking about that with us, and we don't have a really good answer other than that, other than to come present and convince everybody there that you should be a major grant holder?

And then how does that consideration go forward?

Because right now, if you are a major grant awardee, you don't have to come to a meeting. You are just considered part of that group. And then you as a whole, when we have the work session, determine what amount you feel Each of those major grant holders should be seen.

Because they're vetted by the city council, not by our citizen committee.

Not by the subcommittee, correct.

Which makes sense based on the dollar amounts.

Right. So, and the thought— I realize CIRA is, you know, our major individual, right?

But how does—

what if we are a city who wants a broad perspective of different arts? How do you bring other art organizations into that mix and help them grow to broaden more than just the circle? So that's where that thought comes from, is how do— what process do we go through to do that? And we are, we're struggling with exactly what method we should be using to do that without stepping on anybody's toes or offending anybody.

Are you, are you asking that question?

I am, I am.

So my personal opinion— I served on the Care Tax Commission, so I saw a lot of these presentations, and the biggest touch point for me was the impact in our community. How much do you contribute? How much, how much, how many touches do you have to people either who are, you know, the choral singers or the people attending the concert? How many events do you hold?

How many How many—

what's your count?

What are your—

I mean, real data, right?

I mean, yeah, it's almost certainly— So when they come, is their only avenue then to come to those subcommittee meetings and Councilman Spencer and Councilman Lamson determine whether that is qualifying if they provide all of that information?

Do they then—

are they the only avenue by which a recommendation is brought forward to you as a whole?

It seemed like we also looked at income statements or financial statements.

So, correct.

I mean, if they're going to be a major grant holder, they now have to meet the requirements of what a major grant holder— but obviously, if they're already doing that, already have an audit, already have a review, then that's not something that they need to worry about, right? Because they're already doing it, right?

I guess the other thing was located in Orem.

Sure.

I mean, I'm trying to think of the things we used to do, Jeff, right?

I mean, what were some of the— Yeah, there's, uh, the care policy has the detailed list of what, what qualifies a group to be major. And it's, uh, we have a few groups that are qualified and would like to be considered for the major, but we just don't know how to get that in front of them. It's— there's a Part of the articles of incorporation, they're 501, you have to be dedicated to like 8 different categories, and you have to have a corporate forum, and it spells it out. And so we have groups that have come and said, look, I meet all these requirements. So we're just kind of— that's where we're at. But it spells it out in that policy.

And I think our main— I mean, honestly, this is me speaking, but our main major affiliate that is the Sera, right? You know, I, I'm not interested in diminishing their, um, award. Yeah, well, yeah, um, I'm open to other— it's just like the ballet, right? They were a major, but we gave them $30,000. So I guess I'm—

I—

we have a partnership with the Sera.

We have partner—

I mean, to have a Someone moved to Orem just to get our CARES tax monies. You know, I feel like there has to be a history. There has to be data that shows their contribution to our community, or they're including future. I mean, I feel like when, you know, I just don't want someone moving here, buying a building, and then saying, hey, I'm in Orem. I want to be a major and compete with them.

So, throw something out there. So, Mad Hat Theater comes to town, builds a building, they run their operations for 2 years, and then they come to you and say, how do, how do we bring them in front of you to determine whether they now qualify as a major grant? I think in the past, the Sarah, the ballet, whatever, they came and they did present to the city council. in a study session.

So maybe we need to bring that back, um, if there's new people. Well, but I still think our number one priority is the CERA, period. And the piece of the pie is this big, right?

For sure.

So you're cutting down the mini or the majors or what, or the small or the minis or the medium ones.

You're going to cut that down, so people aren't going to get as much as they want.

But I mean, because the pie only goes so It's only so big.

So, you know, I think that's the statement.

I mean, if you want to be a major, you can come present, but you might get your $5,000 like you had before.

I don't know. Right. And you've maybe hit on a point, is if you're willing, if we have a major, somebody who wants to be a major grant holder, can we have them come Before you, during the work session, to appeal to you to become that. You still obviously have the full right to be able to say, yeah, we still don't think you're there, or no, we, we liked the recommendation. Because what we hate to have them do necessarily is come to a subcommittee and then also then have to come to that. But maybe that's the pain of having to do that.

Right.

So, so I would, I would agree with you in that sense.

It might be too that maybe Jeff and I and, and the, the citizens committee would say, hey, no, it doesn't really—

Yeah, we can, we can do the vetting.

Yeah, we can vet it.

And then they—

if it—

if we say, hey, it looks good, we'll bring it forward to council, then they can present. If not, try next week.

So, so you think—

because what I hear Brandon saying is You know, this is—

the system is 18 years old, right?

And it hasn't been adjusted for inflation.

If you just simply—

The dollars.

Yeah, the dollars out of it. And so if you just simply adjust for inflation, it's going to be a piece of trouble, whatever your numbers are right now. I don't know that we want to go there because this seems to be working okay.

But then at the same time, a big part of the— this care is to promote arts through our community. And Sarah does a great job of doing that.

We fully support them. But are there other groups that, you know, should be in the mix and should be considered and should have an opportunity to have access to this CARES money?

And, and so I think you're asking a lot of really good questions.

You know, I don't know, Carrie, is this something that Strategies and Innovation team could be a piece of? You know, to really gather some data, talk to all the different stakeholders and try and figure out what might be a look for the future.

And if we want to, and I'm just, because I'm, you know, I bleed CIRA. So if we want to protect the CIRA because of partnerships, you're saying you need to define that more specifically. You want us to define that more specifically as far as their piece of the pie.

Well, you could even create a different category. You could.

Okay.

I mean, you could even—

you could say you're going to get no less than some percentage of the remaining amount, right? Because obviously we're at the point when we're doing these, we're guessing as to what our CARE grant tax money is going to be by year end.

Okay.

So to Jeff's point, a lot of the times, not only do we have Some mini grant, mid-major grant builders not take advantage of their grant award. But we also, in many years past, we've also received more sales tax dollars than we thought we were going to. So there's an opportunity then for— if we're setting that SARA number, there's an opportunity not only potentially for others to take part in anything Of that, you know, any excess amount, but potentially also CIRA to take advantage of that excess amount. But they can only get 35% of their property. And they may be limited, right? So, so to that point exactly, why not then allow the opportunity potentially of some other grantee to come into the major category? As long as, from what I'm hearing, right, as long as it does not impact Sarah. And as long as we meet the mission of expanding the arts throughout our community and optimizing that. I mean, I think it would have to be something pretty special that we, I mean, that we would all say, oh, wow, let's do this. Yeah, because what's different than what Sarah offers, right?

We're just obviously—

that's the thing. We don't know what's going to be presented.

We don't know what we don't know.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And so, so yeah, you're, you're looking down the road and our sales tax are what they are.

So we just talked about the retreat. So it's not going up like it used to during COVID It's not going up. It's most likely flat or going down. So that's another thing.

So we have to definitely protect Sarah. And moving forward. So, maybe suffice it to say, let's try to further define what it means to be in nature. We're not going to be able to figure it all out now, and we probably need like— You know, maybe in another meeting, but it wouldn't take effect probably till the next year. The other thing I might add is, you know, our legal department has become more familiar in recent months with the 1984 agreement with the Sierra that still exists. And we've been reviewing that as we've been trying to develop a new written documented partnership for the exclusive use of Family Saving USA and getting that trademark and everything. And so there, there are aspects to that 1984 agreement that we're going to probably want to go and double-check and make sure we're not in contradiction to that agreement as well. And make sure that this definition doesn't contradict that.

Well, I think too, on the, on the, uh, the 35% operating, so that is for everybody in the major category.

It's not just the 7, so it's everybody unless we want to raise the percentage higher, you know, if— That's kind of one of my points is the major category. What was it, $15,000? The major category is anything over $15,000. I mean, so that doesn't even make any sense with anything that's going on. I mean, the survey is way more than the thing, right? So this whole thing, I think, needs to be looked at, you know, as far as just how it works.

I just want to make sure we protect the survey because that's mega major.

That's our— we can absolutely do that. Well, what I might suppose is, so you talked about mid-majors At the minor, mini, there's not really a distinction between those anymore as far as what they have to do, the requirements for each one. So potentially— We could just redefine mid-major. So, so we consider anything below $15,000 a mini here today, and then we look at what could we do with that mid-major category and redefining what that means. as part of a discussion about— like you just said, major, but major, right? So does that sound like maybe that would be okay, at least to move forward with now? As far as the change, we can remove this category and just call anything below $15,000 a mini.

That's fine.

And then we'll sit with our strategy and innovations team and legal And try to work out something else in relation to— yeah, I would bring them in. I would also bring in people, you know, Dave, Jeff, and any people who've had experience on that, you know, that would give their input to that group too. Of course. Good.

Yes, because here's the thing.

When I first was on, I was on the commission as a resident, right? And we didn't have the mid, so we added the mid, I don't know, 10 years ago. When did we do that? So now it's interesting that we're saying, well, let's just—

So the mid-category, we invented it so that we could raise the threshold. They did have different requirements. They had to have a review at a minimum, if not an audit.

So we—

that was becoming too difficult, very difficult for most of these organizations, even at that mid-level. to be able to do that. Okay. And so we kind of removed that in discussions in previous meetings, not with you guys in particular, but in other meetings.

It kept going to the same people because they didn't have a problem with the admin. Some of the others, you know, could have had the additional money, but they were having problems with those other requirements.

So it's not so much the ones that are up there as the ones at the bottom that would like to get more that we as a— I say we, the commission— really wanted to give more money to, they would have a really hard time meeting those. That requirement. Yeah, I like this. So, you know, I'm fine with it. Everybody good with that? That was good. Okay, fantastic. Thank you so much. And that's all I've got.

Thank you, Brandon.

Okay. Next up, we got item 1.6, Gold Star Monument, and Pete's going to present that. You didn't have any slides, I think, did you?

No.

We just wanted to give you a quick update where we stand going into the new year with the Gold Star Monument. So Heather's going to talk a little bit about where we're at as far as fundraising, and then as well as construction, and I have some to share as well.

We are sitting at about $52,000 raised so far. We had— we work with the Woody Williams Foundation, who owns the art rights to the actual monument itself. And we're going through them to order the monument and get it placed and everything. They sent us a quote.

They had—

they reached out to several companies to get bids. They chose the lowest bid and received that quote shredded. So the monument itself comes in about $49,700, and the etching is around $1,500. So we have enough money to pay for the monument itself. Of course, we don't have enough for the plaza and the surrounding area. But we signed that quote today. Brent signed that quote today. So they're going to send us an invoice, and we can then put in the order this week. It will take about 6 months to get here because it is black granite. sent from India. But that process will be started this week and get the Indian program.

On the fundraising side, we've done a couple of things reaching out to businesses, grassroots campaigns, and we've had some success recently. The next thing we want to try is we've drafted a letter that maybe we could have the city council send out on the official letterhead to, you know, associates, friends, family, people who you think might be interested. So just let us know. This is the letter you know, you can, you know, see if there's anything you want to change about it. But I would feel like you could have some success with that. We're just trying basically every different angle to get what we can out of this important monument here in our community.

What were you trying to get up to?

We wanted, I mean, ideally 250. All right, you said 52 or 62?

250.

250. You said we're up 52 or 62?

52.

We purchased the granite and the etching, which is huge.

That's a huge milestone. But with these letters, uh, if you want to send us a list of people to send it out to on your behalf, we're happy to print it on this nice stationery, mail it from the city accounts, and get it in, in the hands of the people that you think might be able to help us out. And after we do these disclosures, we'll know who has all the money. I don't know how much, right? That's correct.

I get that.

And again, we want to make sure, you know, you like the messaging here, um, because one thing we want to do too is, as we've sent them out to different entities that work with the city, it would be nice to have it, you know, with all of your signatures all together. essentially making, making the request all together.

We should be able to get some of our major retail to get involved.

Yeah, pretty sure. Do you by chance have a mockup of the donor wall that could go with the letter to show? And in the letter it references, uh, some architectural renderings, and we'll include that in— we'll make a little brochure and package.

And it's not, it's not on the monument.

The donor wall is facing south, away from— and it is outside of the— so you can't— you can see the backside of it. We don't want to take away from the monument. So the names on the donor wall will not be facing the monument. And I'm glad you brought that up because the donor wall, that granite we have not purchased yet. Trying to get it donated, but we'll see.

So there's not a wall that says, this monument brought to you by—

Yeah, not as you walk in. Yeah.

It'll be very tasteful though. So maybe you can do one more, like follow up with the council in a few days and just make extra sure there aren't any suggestions for changes or adjustments. And then barring that, we can move forward. Yeah, why don't you assign us— why don't you tell each council member to do 10 of the runs? me. Or a dollar bill. Though the last, uh, little round that we did with businesses was really successful. It was like a 10-minute email that we sent, put together, and brought in $600, $700. Yeah, so it was pretty good. So we're hoping to maybe hit something along those same lines with this letter campaign. Heather, Councilman Kris happening, so good point too. We would love to hear from unit suggestions of who we should reach out to as well. It's like on both sides of me then. And what we were trying to talk about, as I was mentioning, is do we have any— for example, do we have some friends who are leaders in the Utah National Guard? Do we have people that actually have funds and this is their passion, it's their livelihood? Would they be willing to?

Yeah, and the idea I think to this is that, you know, it would have more impact hearing from council members rather than me, you know, someone just— they don't know. Um, so yeah, anyone like that would be ideal.

Like the liaison for the LDS Church that we just spoke at our memorial service. I mean, there's people— that's a great idea. There's people that are, are in the know because they're in there, that's their careers. And if we just tap into some, that would give us a list and would go from 50,000 to $500,000.

That would be ideal.

Yeah, right.

And they have those connections. They really do.

Yeah. But, you know, not to reiterate this, but I think if you assigned us each at least 10 names, um, and then that kind of gives you a proactive place to go with getting the names, gathering the names from us.

Yeah.

And I think if we just took a step back and said, okay, who do I know that You know, might want to make a donation, who might have an interest in this.

I think we can all come up with people that would fit that category.

I don't know if they give, you know, $1,000, $5,000, or $10,000 or whatever.

Yeah, but I think a targeted thing like that could be pretty effective. Yeah, and we have little, you know, rewards or thank-yous at each level. So even if someone gives $5, they get a sticker that says, you know, I support the Gold Star Family Monument. And it's $1,000 to get your name on the wall. So hopefully, you know, there's business. So you're saying there would be a letter down?

Yeah, all of our names on it.

United. But we would use that same letter, but we would maybe tap our own personal connection list as well. Yes, it was being sent out. That's what I'm saying. Yeah, I like that.

And then Pete would keep track and make sure we all—

we'll have a spreadsheet and a leaderboard. Is he gonna win? Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. Thanks. Okay, we've only got a couple more things, uh, so I think maybe we'll just kind of blitz through these things and then we'll grab dinner. That's okay with that? Okay, so, are you reporting on your commission?

Gosh, I forgot all about that.

Sure.

I mean, we can defer you if you want.

If you would defer me, that would be great.

I mean, because we expect videos and all that.

And I aim to please.

Okay, so we'll defer you. Okay, so Teresa, can you arrange that?

Yeah, I'll just put her on the Zoom link. Okay, thanks. Okay, thanks.

All right, um, we'll just go over the agenda real quick.

Can I just say, I was waiting to see what the conditions would be.

No, I wasn't.

We'll see at our retreat for them.

Um, okay, 6 PM, regular session, call to order. Uh, item 5, location. We got Dave Blazer. You want to do a second person? Actually, no, Dave Blazer. Yeah, I can tell some pretty funny stories about Dave Blazer. I don't think you appreciate it. Thank you, um. Okay, and then we've got, uh, mayor's report items preferred by the council. Um, item 7.1, emergency preparedness and city drill report. Item 7.2, presentation ULCT legislative priorities. Item 7.3, health office community development director. Again, uh, 7.4, award lifetime achievement Kevin or Jim Yelman. Mayor, on that one, if you don't mind noting to invite Paul Ashton up. He's our chief building official. He will introduce, um, kind of tell you about that award that Jim received. Okay, Paul Ashton. Yeah, Paul Ashton, chief building officials. And Mayor, just thinking in terms of kind of managing these, Carson Eilers with ULCT, that'll be— he'll be presenting via Zoom. And if there's a desire to have a little bit of Q&A there, then maybe we put that one to 7.4 rather than 7.2. Okay, we're changing all of them then, right? Yeah, so then 7.3 would be 7.2, 7.4 would be 7.3. Okay, all right. And this, this Lifetime Achievement Award, Brian, this is something the city's giving or something you achieved? Something he's already received. We're just here to—

Yeah.

Okay, then we've got number 8, personal appearances. Number 9, consent items. Got approval of meeting minutes, uh, appointments, form events advisory commission. That's, uh, And I can't see— Krista.

Krista Tay, Kimmy Burgess, Ashley Shumway, and Rodney Gardner. Then we got item 9.3, uh, reappointment Planning Commission, Madeline Coleman.

And then item 9.4, Resolution 1600 North Nighttime Construction Exemption. We got item 10, scheduled items. A public hearing ordinance amending current fiscal year 2024-2025 budget with Brandon. And item 11, financial information, which we skip. I don't know why we have to say that. Um, and then anything from Brandon, city manager, and then we're going to a closed session. So I'll make some motion on that. Mayor, are we going to move to Table 9.3 in here or in there? I think we're going to do it in there. So how do we do that? Take it out of the consent items? So yeah, so we just move it out of the consent item and put it on the scheduled items. I think I would read through it and then someone would make a motion to table that item. Um, and then like I said, we're, we're going to adjourn to the closed session to discuss pending litigation. And again, we have to say that exact thing, correct? Because we're not discussing people or whatever the, the language we use when we use that. It's just to discuss this, correct? Just, just for the pending litigation that we need to present for a strategy session. We have like 3 things we can do closed session for, right? So there's 3 basic ones that we always use, uh, the character competence of, of, of an individual, litigation, and then usually purchasing or acquisition of property. Okay. All right, any questions? Okay, we'll adjourn this meeting. We have a volunteer to collect the food. Father in heaven, we're grateful for this evening and the time together, for the things we want to discuss and learn about, and grateful for this wonderful executive staff and all of the staff that make great work that you do. We're grateful for this food, Father. We pray that thou would bless it, that it will be nourishing and strengthening to our bodies. We pray that we might use that strength to do good. We pray that thou would bless us with thy Spirit in all that we do. We thank thee for, again, for this meeting. Say these things in the name of Jesus Christ.

Amen. 1, 2, 1, 2. This is mine.

Test, test.

It's working. By that 3rd chair. The recorder's sitting by the first chair.

Thumbs up.

Test, test, test. I think it was right there. Welcome. Oh yeah, absolutely.

Good evening. We'd like to welcome everyone out to our City Council meeting tonight. We're going to start out with an invocation, uh, by Dave Glazer and then a Pledge of Allegiance by Shelby Kilpack. And Chris, if you'd like to introduce these guys.

Thank you. Uh, Dave Glazer is a dear friend and, uh, wonderful Orem City resident and, uh, is a great individual in our community, has contributed significantly, and just grateful to have him here tonight and help us all start off the meeting. And then the better half of our family is here going to help us with the pledge.

So thank you. Our beloved Father in Heaven, humbly we bow our heads before thee tonight. We thank thee for the wonderful community we live in. We're grateful for the blessings and freedoms we enjoy here. We're thankful for these elected officials and for the many staff members who are here to support them, grateful for the contributions they all make to help our community be the best it can be. We invite thy spirit To be here this evening, to bless all the proceedings, the discussions that take place, that they might be held in a spirit of understanding and consideration one for another. We pray that Thou wilt help there to be unity in all the decisions that need to be made.

We thank Thee for Thy Son, Jesus Christ, and His many blessings to each of us in our lives. And we ask these blessings humbly now, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Amen.

Thank you. Please rise for the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

We'll start with item number 7. And, uh, before we get going, I'd just like to excuse Jen Gill. Uh, she's just not feeling well tonight.

She's on Zoom.

Um, but we'll start with item 7.1, and that'll be with Heath Stevenson and Assistant Chief Myers will be coming up.

There we go. Thank you for this opportunity.

Nope, there we go. Okay, I just want to say thank you for the opportunity. Uh, thank you for the time. I was asked to do just kind of a quick 2024 emergency preparedness and Orem City drill report. Um, so I'm going to start with— we do monthly neighborhood courses for our residents. Uh, they're all different kinds of preparedness topics. Just a couple that we did, we had Be Ready Utah come down from the state and do 3 or 4 this past year. We've done family preparedness and winter weather communications. Um, we've had a decent turnout. We've had anywhere between 10 to 30 people depending on the month. Um, so moving into 2025, we've actually working with Provo's emergency manager, and we're going to Combine our efforts. He's getting about the same type of turnout. So half of the year we will be doing our preparedness down in Provo, and the other half Provo residents will be coming with our Orem residents here to Orem City. We'll be covering kind of the same topics. And those— we'll do those the second Thursday of every month is what our plan is for those. So I just want to thank Dave Spencer. He comes to just about all of them, him and his wife. So thanks for the support on coming to those courses. We also teach 4 ham radio courses each year. We do 2 technician courses, a general and an extra course. Those are the different levels of licenses that we have.

We love—

I love having our guys teach those. They help us a ton with all of our events— Aurum Fest, the parade, and the fireworks. Uh, they're huge, huge kind of eyes all throughout the, the city on those. Um, again, this kind of talks about some of our classes that we, we did in 2024. Um, also did multiple preparedness booths and fairs. Uh, we did groups with, uh, our youth, with the residents, with city employees. And then we're continuing with— I'll cover our Orem City drill and our Block Captain program here in just a minute, but we are continuing to push that and getting good turnouts with, with our Block Captain program. Um, as far as exercises, we've done citywide, countywide, and state emergency management exercises. Uh, we did our great Utah Shakeout communication exercise. I've done a couple Alpine School District reunification exercises, and, uh, our SROs are great to work with on those at the individual schools. Um, and then every September we do our big Orem City Drill. So, and then on a, on the county and state level, it's, it's a lot of communication, uh, shelter, hazmat. And then every year we do a big 3-day EOC exercise where We try to get most of the emergency managers from the county to go participate in that exercise. I won't read through all of these. This is just a list of all the partners that I network with that help us out, help Orem City out on a day-to-day basis. But also, if we were to have an emergency, these are the group of people outside of Orem City that we would be calling, that we would be reaching out to. This is on a state level, county level, federal level, and then all of our volunteer groups throughout, throughout the county. I just want to say quick thank you to everybody on this list for all the help that they've given us over the last few years. As you guys know, so Orem Fest last year, every year we have to do a mass gathering permit for all of our events that are over 1,000 people. With Orem Fest, the Utah County Health Department came and did an inspection. We were able to pass their inspection the first time, which is always nice, not having to make a phone call to Brendan to say, hey, we might have to shut down in a half hour. So that's never a phone call I hope to make. Only once, and that was based on weather. So, uh, and then our last thing here is our Orem City, our Everbridge, which is our mass notification system. These are our signups. These are residents who have gone onto the website and put in their information to sign up to be part of this notification system. This is one thing that any meeting or any booth or anything that I go to, I ask the help if our Orem employees will help push that, just if they have a minute to say the word Everbridge. Bridge and throw that out there to our residents. Um, then so our Orem City Drill, for those— we'd break the city down, uh, into 21 different areas, and this last year we had 17 of those 21 areas that reported that had representation, and then we had 44— it's just over 44,000 people, uh, who checked into that drill and, and said they were accounted for on the night of our Orem City drill. So it's pretty good. It's almost 50%. We get all of those numbers within a 2.5-hour period. So from 6 to about 8:30 is what we aim for. So as you can see on this chart right here, these are the years that I've been here and done the drill. So We continue to grow. We went from 45, it was maybe 500 people less this year than last year. But as long as we keep moving that number up, I think with our new EOC building or EOC being in the city center, people are going to want to really participate next year to see that new setup and see what's going on over there.

So is this saying there are 3 areas that no one responded?

4, yeah, 4 areas. That we didn't have anybody that responded.

Would you let me know after this meeting? Would you email me what those are?

I'd like—

I can address that with our neighborhood commission and see if we can get some help.

That'd be great. So I'll send that over for sure.

Also, just out of curiosity, how do you get the word out for people to participate in this drill?

So we use Everbridge. We have a group that have signed up over the years saying that they wanted to be part of the drill. So Everbridge, Pete helps me a ton through Orem social media, sending it out in the newsletter the month before the drill. We use some of our volunteer groups like LDS Church help send information out. So there's about 6 or 7 different ways we try to push it out.

But it just seems really successful as far as that's, to me, is an incredible amount of people participating.

Yeah, it is very successful. It's something I mean, if our residents, I feel like they're really good and wanna be part of the preparedness within Orem City. So on that level, they come to a lot of the prep courses and the booths and fairs. And so that's another word of mouth and we get a lot of people that just wanna be more prepared. So I, I agree, the turnout in emergency management, they say if you're getting 20%, then you're doing a good job. So it's nice to see that our residents wanna be more than that 20%.

Mm-hmm.

want to boost that average. Uh, and then the final thing, just want to say thanks as we put in this new city center that we were able to add in that EOC. Um, I think it's going to be awesome as we move into there and have a bigger area for our city as far as trainings and exercises, um, and getting our city more involved and more ready for if, if and when a disaster is just happen here in Orem. Um, that's kind of all I've got for my quick little presentation.

If there—

I'm going to turn some time over to Chief Myers if there aren't any more questions directed for me.

Do we have any questions?

All right, thank you.

So I'm grateful to be here tonight, and, uh, and my purpose here tonight is really just to to just recognize Heath publicly, um, and, and express to, to you, Mayor, and council members, and Brandon, what a good job he is doing. He talks about the, the interest that our, our, our city has in a lot of these events, and we're, we're doing great. I attribute much of that to this gentleman right here. He's moving and he's shaking, and the people feel it, and it's, it's kind of fun to watch. And he is the resource guy, by the way. You saw that list of all those things up there. There's been times where, you know, I've walked by his office and said, where are we going to get—

we got—

we need this, where are we going to get this?

And he's—

he says he's got his people and his—

and he's—

he's got this vast network that he's established. And, um, it's— it's just a good feeling to know that we're taken care of. We're very fortunate, I think, as a city to have Heath in this position. And the last thing I'll just comment is on the relationship that he is really working to enforce within our sister cities, other cities within the county. It's not uncommon for him to be just rubbing shoulders with these guys every week and these gals that are in similar positions with other cities. And I think if something ever were to occur along the lines of a disaster, that we would— we'd be in good hands, that our ducks are in a row, we've got the resources accounted for, and we'd know where to go, which is right there.

Thank you.

Free us up so we can do our job, right? And so anyways, I just wanted to take those moments and really just recognize those contributions and And Heath for that. Okay, thank you.

Can I add one thing? I just— and this is kind of in your realm, I think, but I, I guess I just want to make mention of the devastation of the fires that are happening in California right now and how, you know, praying for them, of course, but also saying how proud I am that we sent firefighters there. So we're, we're, we're doing it right. You guys are doing it right. And thank you, thank you for all you do. This is so important, and we never want to hear from you, but we're so grateful if we ever have to.

It's awesome.

Thank you.

Can I add something, Mayor? I found it really interesting this last, uh, this, the storm of '24. Um, the training that you're doing is paying off because, uh, I heard so many different neighborhoods talking about the block captain and people going around checking on their neighbors and making sure that they were okay and who, who needed help with moving furniture out of a basement that was getting flooded or putting sandbags or whatever it was. And so I think that was really a true test of, you know, what can happen unexpectedly in a second. And, uh, and so thank you for having a plan in place and continue to train so that When it happens, we're ready and we know what to do and how to look after our neighbors.

Yes, thanks for that comment. It's fun to hear about it working in real life, right? Do all these trainings and exercises, and then it's fun to have comments like that from varying neighborhoods that it's working in real life. So thank you.

Okay, thank you. Thank you for all you do. Okay, next we're going to rearrange these items a little bit. Next we'll do the oath of office, uh, for the Community Development Director, Gary McGinn.

Okay, Gary, have you raise your right hand and then you'll repeat after me.

I, Gary McGinn, I, Gary McGinn, do solemnly swear, do solemnly swear, that I will support, obey, and defend, that I will support, obey, and defend, the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Utah, the Constitution of the State of Utah, and the laws and ordinances of the City of Orem, and the laws and ordinances of the City of Orem.

And I will discharge the duties—

And I will discharge the duties—

Of my office with fidelity.

Of my office with fidelity.

Thank you. We'll move on to A Lifetime Achievement Award for Jim Yeoman, and we'll invite Paul Ashton, the Chief Building Officer, to give that.

So if I would have thought a little bit quicker, I would have had Jim bring the award, but he does not have it here.

So, but that's okay, we're, we're here to, to look at Jim.

So I'm Paul Ashton, the The Chief Building Official. We have an outstanding employee working for the City of Orem in the Building Safety Division. Jim Yeoman is our Deputy Building Official. In his personal life, he enjoys motorcycles and owns 2 Harleys at this time and has had up to 4 in his garage at any other times. He also likes riding a side-by-side and looking at fall, fall colors. He has served in many charitable positions over the years as well.

His coworkers appreciate his choice in music, Dickson shirts, hats, boots, and shoes, as he owns a stack of each, and some of them even reside here in the city.

The only other thing I can think that he enjoys is work and family.

Early in his career, he worked as a logger and a hot tar roofer where he injured his back.

This caused him to rethink his occupation, um, and ended up in college studying building codes. He has worked for the city for 32 and a half years and has a total of 40 years under his belt as a code official. He serves on the International Code Council Energy Code Committee That reviews energy efficiency requirements for buildings. This committee is working on developing the 2027 energy code at this time. As a building official, he, he has helped many developers, contractors, engineers, homeowners, coworkers, and architects understand building code and help them figure out how to make their project meet those requirements. Because of Jim's dedication, he has been able to help many Orem residents have safe places places to live, work, and play. Jim has also been instrumental in helping many throughout the state with code issues.

Many other cities request his opinion on code issues they come across.

The reason we are here tonight is to recognize Jim, Jim's excellent service.

The Utah American Institute of Architects has presented Jim with the Distinguished Service Lifetime Achievement This award is not generally given to city plan reviewers because they are always critiquing their work and having them make changes to meet code. In some ways, this could be an adversarial relationship. Jim has been able to create friendships on how—

in how he does his job.

There, there have been many times when the code is updated with major changes.

He has sent out months in advance the new requirements to architects so they are aware of them. Jim's attitude is, let's see how we can make this work. The City of Orem is fortunate to have Jim Yeoman as an employee.

Thanks, Jeff.

Excuse me, Paul, his family's here. Would they like a picture with the city council and mayor? At least the young man would have— bring him up. Is that okay, Mayor? I'm sorry, I jumped out.

Here we go. 1, 2, 3. Thanks.

Fantastic.

Congratulations.

Mayor and Council, if I can just add a shout out as well with, with the oath of office of Gary McGinn, and then this Lifetime Achievement Award for Jim Yeoman. I just want to say that they are very fine examples of the quality employees that we have in our Community Development Department. And not only are they solutions-oriented and creative and just technically sound in, you know, the performance of their jobs, but they're also kind and find positive, constructive, good ways in working with so many people. So just want to add my appreciation for them.

Thank you, Brent. We appreciate that. Last up, we've got item 7.4. And this is, this is, this is the ULCT legislative priorities. And we're supposed to be doing this on Zoom.

Right.

Yes, Carson Eilers with ULCT is on Zoom to present and to receive any questions that you might have.

Okay, just with the legislative session coming up, can you give us an update?

That's right.

Can you hear us, Carson?

Yep.

Can you hear me all right?

Yes.

All right. Well, again, Carson Eilers. I'm the policy director for the Utah League of Cities and Towns. Thrilled to be joining you online. Sorry I wasn't able to make it in person. I had some late afternoon meetings, and with my luck hitting I-15 southbound traffic, probably wouldn't make it down there till 7. So thank you for accommodating me. I really appreciate it, and I'll try to keep this brief. I'm sure you all have other things to do tonight, so I'll just kind of hit on some high-level talking points that we have been sharing with our policy committee and other member organizations. I'll try to be fairly succinct. Much of it will be repeating information that you might have heard at our policy committee on Monday, and some of it you'll be hearing again if you're participating in the Local Officials Day at the Capitol next week. So I'll try to move through stuff relatively quickly. I want to hit on some points that are important for Orem. And then if you have any questions, please feel free to just jump in at any time. I'm happy to answer them. If I can't answer them, I'll bring it back to our team and I'll follow up with Bren and make sure we get you a good answer. So are there any questions before I get started? Alrighty. So first off, This year we are seeing a record number of bills already, 239 as of close of business today. So, you know, those are normally second week of session numbers. Session starts next week. And so we already have a lot of work to do. And our first policy committee meeting will be pretty hectic, I'm sure, with everything we have to discuss. This year, last year at this time when I presented to this council. We mentioned that the budget was tight. We made the joke about— or I made the joke about it being a socks and underwear Christmas this year. This might be a repeat from LPC, but this year the joke that's been going around the Capitol is that it's a last year socks and underwear kind of Christmas. So really tight budget constraints, and that's critical for municipalities because our budgets are just as tight as the state budget is. So we need to make sure that there's no unfunded mandates coming down, that any costs are not just being pushed onto municipalities because it's maybe politically easier in some cases. So ULCT puts in fiscal impact statements on almost every bill that affects municipalities. So we'll be looking out for that. But just please be aware that in tight budget years, oftentimes we see more costs get shifted onto local governments. So in everything we do, we're trying to keep that in mind, and we ask you to talk to your legislators about that too and share that message. State doesn't have a surplus, neither do local governments. Among the big issues this year, homelessness will be probably one of the biggest. Lots of bills in the homelessness space already. I think there's 7 or 8 already numbered or proposed. I think it's too soon to say what exactly is going to happen, how these will all shake out, because some of these are in conflict. You have some proposals to require cities to do more enforcement. You have other proposals that would require cities to do less enforcement. make enforcement a lot more difficult. So stay tuned, but just be aware homelessness will be a hot-button issue. Among hot-button issues, probably the next biggest one will be public safety, specifically relating to immigration. There's been a number of legislators who are already looking at a bill package to try to crack down on crimes related to immigration and related to the border. They held a press conference a little while ago. Most of these have little to no impact on municipal governments, but there will be some interaction between your police chief and some of these new— some of this new legislation, be that enhanced criminal penalties for certain things, requirements for officers to detain vehicles and detain people who are unlicensed. So yeah, there'll be some impact. We'll be working with the police chiefs. We ask you to stay in touch with your police chief just as we move through these things, trying to again just navigate what our lane is in this space and with these new policies. Again, most of— mostly that's a fiscal impact. So we just want to make sure that we're navigating that, we're taking legislative concerns into account, but also making sure that we don't have a lot of new responsibilities falling on local governments without some kind of additional revenue streams. Let's see, next, probably worth mentioning is sales tax. Some of you have heard that there's been some, some talk at the state level, mostly in the governor's office, about potential changes to 50/50. As of now, the good news is this mostly seems like it's just saber rattling. We've heard, you know, 50/50 has come up in a couple different high-profile venues. We haven't actually heard any proposals yet, and we haven't heard any legislators who are really totally bought into that. So obviously 50/50 is a core league issue. I know that Orem tends to be more point-of-sale heavy, so I wanted to flag this specifically for you. We don't see anything on the radar yet, but we will obviously keep you attuned because any kind of changes to 50/50 would disproportionately affect cities like Orem. Let's see, housing, I think, is probably the one that everybody's been waiting for. And I specifically want to mention Councilmember McDonald and Councilmember Millett, who have both— Councilmember McDonald served on the Commission on Housing Affordability for us, which is probably one of the most thankless jobs, maybe second only to being a local council member or mayor. But he's taken a lot of arrows defending local government, and I really— we really appreciate his service to the league there. And Councilmember Millett and Councilmember McDonald have both served on our policy committee. We have a subgroup that advises on any number of housing issues. We have a lot of long meetings. Most of those meetings are about 2 hours, but both of them have been heavily involved, and Bren and a number of other ORM staffers have helped facilitate those too. So we really appreciate that, and that's been critical to us being able to navigate most of these issues. So what does this all mean for housing? There's been, you know, any number of policy proposals this year, many of which are concerning to local governments. I'd say the good news as of January 14th at 6 o'clock is the big, the big overriding issue right now is the state housing plan. The state housing plan phase 1 will not be released until Friday at the earliest. The state housing plan is probably going to— this first phase will be trying to align key high-level metrics, trying to make sure that we're focusing on the right goals. As you all know, the state's housing goals seem to shift every year. Some years it's rental housing, some years it's ownership housing, some years it's deeply affordable, some years it's market rate. It's been tricky for cities at large to navigate this kind of constantly shifting target. So the good news is the state housing plan is going to try to bring all the stakeholders together, And try to state before we get too far down the policy route where we're actually trying to get to. So this first phase, I don't expect a lot of controversy from it. It's been a very collaborative process. A number of league staff have been involved throughout the interim working on it. It won't be probably like a great relief to cities, but it'll at least give us something to talk about in some kind of direction. So that's phase 1. Phase 2 of the state housing plan will be talking more about granular policy tactics, more about specific metrics, really the meat of the discussion. Phase 2 will be a 2025 interim issue. It'll start up in April and probably go to the 2026 session. So expect a lot more deep conversation there. But this Phase 1, most of the governor's office effort will probably be more focused on just trying to get legislative buy-in on that first phase. phase this session. So that's helpful, I think, in avoiding some of the more concerning proposals we've heard. So that's state housing plan. That's one big piece. What does that mean for current local requirements? I'd say that's still TBD. I think it's likely that that Phase 2, those metrics and policy tactic conversations will supplant what is currently moderate-income housing plans. That's good and bad. I know that moderate-income housing plans have worked in some regards and have also caused local governments no shortage of frustration over the years. So again, I don't know exactly what that— how that shakes up, but I would expect significant changes to MIHP next interim. To try to get ahead of that and try to steer conversations in a way that's more helpful for local government, our policy committee subgroup on housing has been working to craft kind of a general framework to incentivize, not require, but incentivize local governments to do a density bonus or housing overlay, something in that space. It's kind of amorphous because we've really— the feedback we've consistently gotten in that subgroup is making sure that local governments control when it happens, where it happens, making sure that the targets are what they want. It'll be for affordable ownership. We know that much, but we want to make sure that you as a legislative body have all the control over this policy so that there's no adverse impacts on your community. We want to make sure that we— anything we do gives cities more tools to support housing, but doesn't infringe on current quality of life. So that's still kind of vague. We went into a little more detail at our policy committee, but I won't belabor that point too much now unless you, unless you really want me to, and then I can spend all night talking about it. Um, one other thing I wanted to flag for you all on the housing front is external accessory dwelling units. I know that this has been sort of a concern for OREM, so I wanted to talk about this specifically. These external accessory dwelling units have— I'd say there's been some conversation over the interim, but it's been fairly quiet. There hasn't been a lot of activity on it. Um, that is until maybe last week when we started hearing from quite a few legislators who are really interested in possibly advancing something. Now, there's only one bill on that so far. Uh, it's from Representative Ray Ward up in Bountiful, and that bill would be pretty much the carte blanche accessory dwelling unit legalization. Every city or every urban city, so every city in a 1st or 2nd class county in the state, would have to allow accessory dwelling units by right. on any lot that wanted them. We'll push back on that. We've pushed back on it. I don't know how much momentum that has because it's such a blunt approach, but I wanted to make sure you were all aware that that conversation is already starting. So, um, yeah, I don't know exactly where ADUs go either right now. Part of the good news about the state housing plan is, you know, we're, we're trying to define the metrics over on one side. So That could also help us play defense on the other side, being able to say, look, we're trying to figure out where we're going first. Let's hold off on some of these seismic changes until we even know where that is. So again, I just wanted to bring that up to make you aware of it because I've heard specific concerns. So we'll keep you apprised through the Policy Committee process and through, through all the normal processes. Of course, we'll bring Brent into any of those conversations so he can make sure that you are all Um, that's most of what I have to cover today. There's a couple of other audits and ends issues. We're still coming through the 280-some-odd bills. Um, sorry, 239 bills. There's a couple of new ones, like, uh, there's a bill that would prohibit municipalities from fluoridating water. I don't know if Orem is one of those cities, but I know there's quite a few who do that. Um, I know that's like an issue from yesteryear. That's the first time I've— it's the first time in my career I've encountered it. There's issues relating to bicycle lane safety. There's, yeah, really just a whole laundry list of new things that we'll be working through. Again, everything we try to vet through our policy committee process to make sure that you all have an opportunity to give us policy feedback and try to make sure we can get everything to the best point we can. But, you know, there's a lot coming out, and so I would expect a lot of conversation in the next couple weeks trying to, to navigate this legislative session.

Thank you. Do we have any questions?

I, I have more of a comment. Carson, thank you for keeping your eye on this. Um, you didn't give us a full report of all 257 bills, or however many it is, but thank you for you and the Utah League of City and Town Commission that works on this. It sounds like you've got your hands full, But thank you, and I trust that you work probably most closely with Bren. But we appreciate you keeping us aware of issues that might cause us concern, and we do not have fluorinated water in Orem.

Yeah, and Councilmember Kilpatrick is also on the LPC committee, and then Steve Earl as well. If I can just say to Carson, One, we appreciate that you guys listen and that you've been listening and, and, and incorporating our feedback as, you know, you develop messaging. And so we've really appreciated that, to see that we're— that we are being listened to and that it's taken into account. And, and, and the perspective of, of legacy cities like us. Maybe just a little heads up on, on in terms of some of the priorities that I've heard from our council, um, is— I mean, you hit on a big one, essentially growth management and maintaining the, the control over that. Uh, we'll be looking at some transportation and trail, um, uh, type efforts, um, but we're also interested in seeing if, if anything, if any new legislation comes out related to, uh, short-term rentals. One, and then 2, um, the utility transportation fee, uh, subject. So just want to make you aware that, that, that those are things of kind of heightened concern for us.

And if I can—

I'm sorry.

Oh, may I just add one other clarification too? And I've been in, you know, I was on the Zoom call with Representative Ward, um, and from our, my perspective, and I believe our residents perspective, a huge concern with the external ADU is that we maintain the setbacks for the surrounding neighbors. I know Representative Ward said, well, if we'll get the neighbors to agree and sign off that it's okay, the next-door neighbor, but that's, that's not— you have to get the whole neighborhood to agree. This is a neighborhood-changing event. You're essentially putting a home behind a home. So I would like to really, if you don't mind, Carson, just emphasize to you again that this is, this is not, um, something that we are excited about and that these property rights need to be honored and remembered and recognized for the entire city and neighborhood. So I appreciate if you wouldn't mind just emphasizing that to Representative Ward.

Yeah, absolutely. And thank you for that additional context. Yeah, we will, we will keep pushing back on that. That is maybe the broadest ADU preemption we've seen. It restricts just about everything but impact fees. So very, very concerning for, for the League, as well as many, especially like built-out cities where your infrastructure is relatively fixed and there's not a lot of A lot of room to grow and plan for the ADUs. So your feedback is well, well heard there. And, Bren, regarding some of the other priorities, I'll just give you a 30-second update on 2 of those. On short-term rentals, there will be at least one bill on short-term rentals this year. I don't think it'll be a sea change in policy for local governments, but I think it will give us a little bit more It'll clarify some of the current restrictions and maybe give us a couple more small tools. So I don't— I wouldn't expect it to be anything huge, but I'm cautiously optimistic as of now that it would be a step in the right direction. So we will— I'll let you know as soon as that bill is actually numbered. On transportation utility fee, I expect 2 bills that will probably be in. One will probably be a restriction, one will probably be an empowerment. So we'll see how that all shakes up. But Well, yeah, of course, keep you posted. And yeah, and thanks again. I just wanted to echo my appreciation, and I know Cameron was hoping to be here as well, and he wasn't able to make it either. But we really appreciate Orem's involvement in the league, whether that's going to long meetings and talking with staff, whether that's just your support in general, whether that's driving up to the Capitol LPC. The strength of the league is cities like Orem. It is you. And your ability to contact your legislators. It's your ability to work with staff. So really, we appreciate all of your involvement, especially in the last couple of years as we've leaned more heavily on you.

So, Carson, just one last thing I want to put out as long as we got you on the line here. We came across a bill tonight in our work session. It wasn't a bill. It was the result of a bill from last year. And essentially, In the name of avoiding conflicts of interest, they've created— they have a bill that basically requires a raft of unnecessary information. And from my perspective, it was a pretty shocking bill if they're going to inflict that on every elected official in the municipal space in Utah. And so anyway, it was HB 80 from last year. But we would, we would be welcome to, uh, talk to you some other time and give you more information on it. But it's something that needs to be addressed because I think you're going to see, as cities learn about this, um, it's just going to be a problem because it goes way beyond it. It gives you 10 times more information than you need to avoid conflicts of interest.

If I may, Mayor Carson, it, it requires all financial disclosures, not just disclosures that In your interaction with the city, which is fairly normal for a conflict of interest. It, it allows for phishing expeditions from whoever can see this because it's a public forum. So it's, it's pretty onerous.

Yeah, if I, if I can maybe add to that, Carson, I think a big concern is that it asks for so much information that there's identity theft and scamming type concerns that, that could arise from it.

So, so anyway, I just want to put that on your radar as something to pick up. And like I said, we can give you more information on that at another time, but that is something that somebody should run a new bill to fix that bill.

Yeah, I appreciate that feedback. We actually— that, that bill has come up in a couple different places. I think now that elected officials are having to start actually working through what that means, and I know that there's been some concern from Some elected officials who are like investors and they're concerned about losing a strategy. There's a little bit of irony in the state requiring a lot more privacy protections for citizens and then really hollowing out any privacy for electeds.

Right.

So anyway, that's a, that's a concern that we came across last— today. Yeah, fix it. So. Anyway, any, any other questions, comments? Okay, I, I, I think we're, we're good, and we appreciate that report, and, uh, we appreciate hearing from you and expect to keep hearing from you as this goes on. We appreciate all your help.

Awesome.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you all for the time this evening. We really appreciate it.

Okay, thank you, Carson. Okay, uh, that takes us up to item number 8. And, uh, item number 8 is personal appearances, and nobody signed up tonight, so we'll pass on that. Uh, item number 9 is consent items. We've got item number 9.1 on the consent agenda. We've got 9.1, which is approval of the meeting minutes from December 10th and December 17th, 2024. Uh, we've got 9.2, appointments to the Forum Events Advisory Commission. That's Krista Tate, Cami Burgess, Ashley Shumway, and Rodney Gardner. Item 9.3, a reappointment to the Planning Commission of Madeline Coleman, And item 9.4, a resolution regarding 1600 North nighttime construction exemption.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the consent items.

Second.

Nay.

Nay. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Jen?

Nay.

Unbelievable.

So now you can make your motion.

You guys are doing—

Jeff?

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we, uh, move item 9.3 off of the consent items and, uh, for further discussion at another time, and then reapprove the other items.

Second.

So let's have a discussion.

Yeah, why don't we have a discussion about this?

If we could maybe clarify what the motion is. Is the motion to move it from the consent— move it off the consent agenda to the scheduled items?

That's correct.

Or is it a motion to table the item? Oh, might as well table it.

To table.

Table.

And should we have—

after there's a second, the council can discuss the motion to table.

It was a second.

Okay.

Okay, so we, so we have a second on that. So I'll just open it up for discussion for anyone who would like to discuss it.

I'd like the 4 members who voted against the approval of the reappointment of our Planning Commission chair to explain why they wish to postpone this appointment?

My reasoning is, uh, there's a process that we have begun to discuss, the Planning Commission process for appointments, and want to, uh, discuss that before we have anything, uh, additional can, uh, occur with the Planning Commission. So I'd like to— we'd like to either have the 332 meetings or some other form of discussion where we can look at the process, and that's my desire.

So, Chris, what do you see the process is right now? Can you please explain it to me? Uh, explain it to me.

Yeah, I'm aware of the current process. I'm looking for a different process for the Planning Commission.

So just for your information, Chris, when Jamie Davidson appointed Planning Commission members, they— he just put it on the, on the item and we voted on it. We didn't get any resumes or anything. So what I've done is I've, I've gone and vetted the last 2 years. I've done my homework. I've called the citizens and I asked them for resumes and I presented the resumes to you guys, but none of you even called any of those people.

I called some of them.

Oh, really?

Yeah.

And I know Jeff did.

So, so on the last round when we were going to replace Jerry, you didn't call anybody? None of them. And there were 2 new candidates. So to say that I'm not playing fair is garbage.

There's nothing to do with you personally, Dave.

You guys didn't even want me to be on the appointment of the Planning Commission. No, that's talking about spirit of collaboration. It's garbage, man. Garbage.

Thank you for your opinion.

That's—

yeah, that's not the process. A reason why we want to look at the process. It has nothing to do with you personally. It has to do with the process of how we We talk about the— probably one of the most important commissions in the city.

And that's why I gave you resumes, and you have the right to go on to the website.

And we also have the right to change the process. So that's what we're doing this evening, is to talk about that process.

But the point is, are you against this individual? We are looking to reappoint the chair of the Planning Commission.

And what I'm looking to do is look at the process before we have any other Planning Commission individuals change. So, so that's the—

that's— Do you even know Madeline? Any of you, have you contacted Madeline?

Have you been to Planning Commission meetings?

Have you talked to her? Contacted Madeline? Have you contacted Gary McGinn?

It's not the person that we're having a concern with, it's the process.

Then just to reappoint her. There's no problem with the process.

The process is the concern. So before we move—

What process? I don't get it.

Okay, we'll talk more about it in 332.

But I want to know—

No, we're not.

We're going to talk in a public meeting. We're not going to have 332 meetings.

So there's a process.

I want to know, did you— have you talked to Madeline? And one and two, have you talked to Gary McGinn? Who runs the Planning Commission meeting? Have you talked to him?

So the, so the question that, uh, is being brought up is the process. And so that's what I'd like to discuss.

Okay, you've said that 10 times, and I'm trying to say, do you have a problem with this appointment? Do you have a problem with the way that she has served? This person has served for 3 years as chair of our Planning Commission. I've been to many meetings. She does an excellent job. She's an attorney. She's a mother. She's a resident who cares about what happens in Orem. She's been not controversial in any way. She is a great servant of our community, and I'm trying to figure out what's the reason to postpone her reappointment. Do you have a problem with her? Because it sounds to me that that's like what you're saying, to, to push it off onto the process. Is Doesn't have anything to do with this.

I do not have a problem with her.

This is a reappointment.

Right. I don't have a problem with her. I have a problem with the process.

Of the reappointments?

Of all Planning Commission appointments.

She's a reappointment. There is no process.

Any appointments.

What do I— I guess I'm thinking maybe I don't understand. You're, you're thinking of a different process than I am. When we reappoint someone, we don't ask for resumes. We don't re— I mean, look, we, we just appointed these people to the advanced Advisory Commission. We've reappointed people to other commissions. We don't, um, reevaluate their resume in the past. We have just, you know, we have a stipulation of a 6-year term limit. So 2 times, they get 2 3-year terms.

I'm aware of the current procedure. I'm looking for a different procedure.

So, right. And, and, and so for— but the point is there's no different procedure here. You seem to have been fine with it for a year, so what is it with Planning Commission that you don't like?

The Planning Commission currently, as we've sat and had discussions—

who's we?

The entire council. As we've had council discussions about rezoning and other issues, when the Planning Commission comes with a 7-0 recommendation and then the City Council has a different— it's much different than the 7-0 zero. That process of those that are on the current commission, we want to make sure that their views are in more in line with the entire city.

So you think they don't represent your views?

No, I don't think they represent the city's views. I'm here to represent the citizens of Orem, and currently the citizens of Orem are not represented by this current council.

Can you tell me when I thought we had a unanimous agreement as a council on Zoning changes.

What one are you referring to? So I'm here to talk about the procedure.

Which one are you referring to? Which vote are you referring to from the Planning Commission?

All of those over the last year. You said I had no—

Well, I think you're talking about the Wilkerson Farm and then the Canyon Park. Those are— they were both 7-0. Those are both identical products, uh, projects, and you voted to table the one down at Wilkerson Farm and you voted against the other one.

So I also voted to table the other one as well until we had more discussion. And so we're doing the work of the Planning Commission when they should be bringing recommendations, when they all just say nothing.

You need to go to the meetings, Chris.

And I've talked to the— I've talked to the individual.

You need to go to the meetings. You can't just watch it on YouTube. You need to be in the room where it happens, right? So, so you can see what the residents are saying, which is who we represent.

So those are my concerns.

And then to see what the plan— please don't interrupt me. And then see what the Planning Commission is saying.

So, so I have a question. Okay, so, so Gary, can, can you please comment on, on Madeline and your opinion?

Because I just want to know if Jeff— I mean, we're hearing from Chris. Let's hear what Tom has to say and what Jeff and Jen have to say. This is a public decision and it should be in a public meeting.

I have no other comments.

You have no comment?

And for what Chris said, I have no other comment.

So can I ask you, what is your thought about the process?

No other comment.

Thank you.

So you're not going to, um, you know, let our— your public know why you're voting against this Planning Commission member?

We're not suggesting we're voting against this council member. We're saying we're delaying this. We're tabling it for Why?

It's a reappointment, right?

It's a process.

It's someone who's been serving our community for 3 years.

Okay, I, I have no problem with Madeline. Um, I, I don't know her well. I've seen some meetings that she's conducted.

I, I—

it's not about that. I just, I feel like, um, I would like to, with City staff, uh, Brand, Gary, uh, and the council, um, as we can meet together.

I'm not doing 3-2-2 meetings, Jeff. That's just hiding things.

To review the process. Um, and not saying that there would be dramatic changes, drastic changes, but I would, I would like the opportunity to review that process.

So, so if you have no problem with Madeline, then why don't we go ahead and just Pass her on the consent items.

Yeah, why don't we vote for her? Yeah, and then we can review.

And if you want to do the— I mean, the process to me, I've given you 100% more information than Jamie ever gave the council, ever. And you want to say you want to change the process, which is fine, but don't hold Madeline hostage. She's the chair of the Planning Commission, and we need to move forward on the consent item and pass her. I mean, Gary, can you, can you shed some light? Because these individuals that, that want to change the process, would you please give us some information on Madeline in your opinion? Because you'd think they are the main staff that deals with Madeline on the Planning Commission. Maybe you get their, their, their, his perspective, because, you know, maybe you should talk to Madeline too. I mean, to me, I think this is a disservice to Madeline just because you want your people on the Planning Commission.

That isn't the point. It's the Process.

I guarantee it is. When you called me and said you wanted rate shipment, or you're going to do the nuclear option, what does that mean?

That isn't what I ever said.

You did.

You said nuclear option, dude.

I did not. I've never said that to you.

Yeah, then you're a blatant liar. Blatant liar. Because you said nuclear option. And I told you, if you want to do the nuclear option, go ahead. Chris, you can't say things and then deny it, dude.

I never said that to you.

Okay, that— you're lying. Gary, can you please— this is irritating me.

As the Director of Community Development, we work with the Planning Commission and we work with all members of it, and our chair is Madeline, uh, Komen at this time, and I enjoy working with her. She's a good person. She's dedicated. And has been a great help in working on the commission. As far as my view of commission members, the important thing to me is— well, the unimportant thing to me is their perspective. What's the most important thing to me is how they work with other people, and can they have an open mind in discussions, in listening to residents, listening to applicants, listening to all the, the concerns that people may have. And, uh, and so for me, that's, uh, what I value as a Planning Commission member the most. Um, happy to answer any questions or to talk with anybody about anything.

And again, my concern, Gary, is not with the individuals, it's with the process in which we're currently having those join the Planning Commission. So I'd like us to discuss it, not, not to eliminate this individual, but to allow us to have a brief discussion about the process and then go forward in, in the near future and then have whatever we need to have happen to continue on in, in filling the needs of the Planning Commission. So it's not a long-term wait, it's not a delay, it has nothing to do with this individual. Uh, who, who's in every way been a wonderful asset and a blessing as our chair. But it's the process is all I'm talking about, nothing to do with individuals, no character issues. This is just the process we'd like to discuss.

And I would like to understand. So I mean, I really do want to understand you guys here, okay? First of all, I just have to say I'm a little irritated at this because just this weekend at our retreat, I 4 no more on our council who were elected last year and have behind the scenes been pushing their power and control. We've tried to get along with them and tried to be collaborative in public, but there have been numerous power plays behind the scenes that have been happening. So just this— just Friday, I, at our retreat, I said, you know, everyone talked about the 4 no more. About they wanted to improve communication and collaboration as a council, and I expressed that that has not been happening this year, which has caused severe stress in my life, which I don't need. Um, I learned 2 hours before our work meeting of this desire to set aside this routine reappointment appointment of our Planning Commission member. And it's not just this. Let's just backtrack a year. We've appointed 2 Planning Commission members over this past year since the, the last election, and each time there has been pushback. Dave Spencer, as the Planning Commission— the council member over the Planning Commission, has the responsibility, or, or actually does the work for us as commission members. He looks at the applications, he vets the candidates based on the ideologies that we have in this city that our residents have told us that they want. So he will vet the candidates and then he will give us, um, you know, resumes of some of them. Now that doesn't mean that we as council members can't go and look at some of the other resumes that are on there and that those people can't be considered also. This is just something that Dave does. He does kind of a pre-vetting of if he thinks that— because quite frankly, we had someone on the Planning Commission right when on my first year that her ideology was we should not have parking at apartment complexes, and because that will get people out of their cars so they can ride their bikes like she does around town. And it might be hard for 10 years, but eventually people will be on mass transit and we'll have the mass transit we need if we make people ride it. She told me that. She told me that. That was a former member of our Planning Commission. Now, how many members of our community are represented by that opinion? So that kind of needs to be vetted, right? And Dave is trying to do that. Now, like I say, if there's someone that one of the council members knows applied for Planning Commission, they can pull out that resume and say, hey, let's have this person considered too. And that actually happened with an individual. And some of the council had said, well, that individual expressed this, um, to me and that to me. They were in favor of the State Street Master Plan, which our public resoundingly has, um, you know, said they don't want rejected. So we had those conversations. And then we— so the process was that. And then because the mayor makes the appointment with the advice and consent of the council, we asked— the mayor asked for 3 suggestions from this group of resumes that Dave put together. 3 suggestions. Well, the 4 no more on our council gave 1 suggestion. They got together and decided who they wanted, and they gave the mayor one suggestion. So the rest of us were like, okay, fine, you can have your person if you want. He was actually one of my choices. But how disruptive and how non-collaborative and how non-communicative was that? That's happened twice to me this last year. In, in a, in, in a spirit of collaboration, which is what these people put forth when in public, right? But there are conversations that are happening behind the scenes. And you know what, you can grammar request those emails, they're there. That's what I'm bothered by. So when you won't tell me what part of the process you don't like— I mean, there were even points of they want to change the policy and not have the mayor appoint the Planning Commission. So is that where we're going here? Is that what you're doing here? You want to bump the mayor off the— from the appointment of Planning Commission members? Tom?

I'm ready to talk if I won't be interrupted.

3 years ago, almost the whole Planning Commission was fired by the 4 No More. No, no questions were asked of the others of us. The whole— we, we not only terminated people when they were up for renewal. We just terminated people. And so we haven't had a fresh look of who's on the Planning Commission for those 3 years. Now they're coming up for renewal. I want to revisit this. I want to be able to look at all the resumes, not just the resumes that David Fetts put forward. And I understand I, I was able to go back into them and look, but I think that's the process I'm concerned about. We had a total wipeout of the Planning Commission 3 years ago. I think it's time to think about it before we move forward.

And so now in your control, now that you're in control, you want to do it.

So let me, let me just clarify something, Tom. You know why those 4 Planning Commission members were released, right?

Well, I know why one was. He was a bit of a pain in the neck, and I was okay with him stepping down from being the chair to being a member, right?

Because you were, you were going to talk to him to have him resign. Yeah, so that leaves us with 3.

Yeah, and the other 3, you were concerned that they might not show up to meetings and may not vote.

Well, no, it was bigger than that. It wasn't just meetings. We had, if you remember right, my memory's a little fuzzy on this, but we had the election and then we had something like February 5th—

February 9th.

February 9th that we had—

The moratorium ended February 9th. They had to meet.

But it was a big deal. It was the State Street Master Plan. So we had February 9th, And we had to do something before that. So we're a newly elected council. We've got literally 5 weeks to change the world, and we've got a planning commission who says—

All the city council was happy to move it, but you needed the planning commission to say something to present, right?

If the planning commission didn't just show up and say yes or no, it didn't matter what they said, they just had to show up. But we were told that they were not going to show up to block us stopping the State Street Master Plan. And so that was a huge issue. And so we—

so, so, well, the, the information came from the city. It was Jason Bench.

But you know it now, and you just put that other narrative out there that wasn't true.

So wait a second. But so that was a major, major issue, and it, it boxed us in to where if we left them in, that, that State Street Master Plan would not have changed in time. And so we were forced to let that go. And then the narrative was put out there that we were like blowing up the Planning Commission, whatever. They blew themselves up by refusing to come to meetings.

I agree. I agree with that, Mayor. But now we're 3 years later. I'd like to see if they should all be on there that were put on kind of in a rush. That's all. Yeah.

Well, my question too is, we appointed 2 people. We appointed Rod Erickson and Britton Rinaldsen unanimously. So what was wrong with that process?

Pick anything you want. Okay, so, so all I'm saying is I'm asking for a pause and not an argument. That's all.

That's not true at all, because we've been arguing the past year. But we've been doing it via email and via conversations. You're interrupting me.

Oh, I'm sorry.

No one ever does that here. No, no, I guess not. But you just called me out on it. So I guess I'm going to call you out.

Okay, so I mean, I, I really think that Madeline, you know, with, with the, um, with— as Gary McGinn said, she's done a wonderful job. She's doing the chair, and I, I see no reason why we don't reappoint her. There's 7 people on the Planning Commission, so it makes no sense that we will not. I mean, we're kicking the can down the road when we need her. We have a meeting tomorrow.

So, right, I have a meeting tomorrow. So, so the way I see this is there's 2 arguments going on here. One argument is whether or not we should re-up Madeline, you know, just to keep the continuity going and keep things happening with the Planning Commission. The other argument is whether or not we need to look at the process and change it. So I think where we're getting into a problem is we're trying to join those 2 issues Whereas if we agree that we're going to look at the process and talk through it, there's really no reason to not re-up Madeline. And I think that's where the conflict is.

It is exactly the conflict.

So if we could come together on just re-upping Madeline and agree to evaluate the process, then I think we could get where we want to go.

We haven't, we haven't heard from Jen. I don't know if she has anything she'd like to Yeah, Jen, are you there?

Yeah, sorry. Yes, I am here. Thank you.

Um, yes, would you like to weigh in?

Well, I just, um, appreciate the discussion that's happened. I think, um, I, I think this process of appointing members to the Planning Commission has evolved since Jamie Davidson, or the city manager, used to appoint them, and then it shifted to the city council kind of appoints them with advice and consent from the mayor. But I don't think that the process has been totally baked. Since this is probably the most important commission in the city, I would just like to see a place where more contributions from all members of the council can be included. You know, I think it would be great— you know, we know when the terms are up, so a month ahead of time we can start talking about it, and any council member that wants to can submit a resume or a name for discussion. The other thing is, you know, every other commission now has 2 council liaisons responsible for it. This one only has 1. So none of these are big deals. I just think it's something that we need to work through together as a council to come up with a more robust process that will stand the test of time, not just for us or a future council, but for the city for a long time. And I do— I want to reiterate what has been said. This is nothing at all against Madeline or even Dave Spitzer. I think it's just let's, let's work together longer term. Um, and I think what brought this to a head was Madeline's reappointment wasn't even on the draft agenda last week, and then it showed up Monday, and, and it's like, wait a minute, let's slow down and just see if we can have some discussions about this. I know I've spoken with Lynnae about this in the past. I've spoken with Dave Young about this in the past, and, and I just would like to see some action now on how we make the commission, um, more representative of all members of the council. So that's, that's all my perspective is. Thank you.

No, you haven't spoken with me since we had the initial problem last spring. So, yeah.

Actually, you and I talked about it, and I mentioned some specific changes I would like to see on the council, and you said, no, I don't think we need to do that.

No, that was last spring.

It was not last spring. It was this fall.

It was absolutely—

No, it was not.

Okay, well, we remember that differently then.

So, so, Jen, I've got a question. So, um, when we talked Um, you mentioned Britton Renolfson, and, and I went ahead and said, hey, you know, we will take you off the Beautification Commission, and you were all fine with that. So you gave me that, uh, that name, and I went for it, right? So it's not like the process— I mean, if we look at it, you have to have 4 council members to, to vote and say yes for— to, to do an appointment. So, you know, the process, I just don't— I mean, I don't know, and maybe I'm doing a bad job in that I didn't go back five years. I went back two years and vetted everybody. So there's certain people that I could have sent your resumes, but I know that it wouldn't have passed Tom McDonald for a fact. They'd be safe. You know, I I just know for a fact. So I didn't even waste your guys' time. But I mean, the last two I gave you Bruce Cameron. And I gave you Dwight Green. Wonderful people.

They both passed, didn't they, David?

Huh?

Did they both pass? Did they both pass, those 2 names? Excuse me.

No, I mean, I gave you— they were 2 of the 8 that I just sent you the last time. And I got nothing. You guys wanted to kick the can down the road, I'm thinking. So I just, you know, I went and talked to Jerry, and Jerry goes, I'll stay on for another term because I'm not getting anywhere. So I mean, they're, they're really, really good candidates with Dwight and Bruce, but, you know, I didn't even get any feedback at all, you know. So I, I'm just confused on—

Well, Dave, I think some of the issues is the timeline on some of these things. You know, we know that that case was unique, but for the most part, we know it, you know, we know now when all of these appointments are up. So just, you know, a month ahead of time saying, okay, these appointments are up, these are the resumes I'm submitting, or whoever the chair Persons, plural, are the resumes we're submitting. Would anyone else like to add resumes to that stack? And then we can take all of those, and all of us can take some time to vet them. We can interview them.

And I agree with that, but I mean, with Jerry's, uh, resignation, that came really quick. So it wasn't like I had a month's time to say, hey, you know, he's going to be resigning. So I mean, but I thought that they were definitely candidates, uh, citizens that, that could be viable on the— and valuable on the, the Planning Commission. And I didn't get any one of you guys. I mean, Dave and, and Lynette gave me their responses, but you, you 4 didn't. And you say you need more time. So, so I don't know. I, I'm, I'm at a loss on, you know, what you guys really want. If you want people that want high density and the BRT, then bring them on. But I'm not that kind of guy that's going to pass them forward.

Well, it's sounding to me like, from what you've said, Jen, You're—

you—

and maybe we can just solve this now. It sounds like the problem you have with the process is you want a month of lead time on appointments or reappointments.

I don't—

I don't have a problem with that, you know.

Yeah, and what I'd like to see— what I'd like to see actually is to have Bren and Ryan and Gary maybe come up with some ideas on how we can just all have really good communication about this and how we can maybe schedule interviews, or just— I don't know what best practices are out there. I would love to hear their ideas. But I think if we can establish some of those and maybe move that direction, that would make me feel happy.

Well, I, I really think that with the resumes given, you guys need to do your due diligence and call those individuals and talk with them, because my perspective is different than yours. And I don't think we need to put anything else on the city, on the employees. I mean, I did the homework, I gave you the resumes, but you have to go through. And if you call them all, hey, I didn't like them, Okay, we'll restart and we'll go.

We'll start over.

But I, I mean, I took the time three four hours calling people going back two years, and I'm thinking I was trying to help the situation. But I guess that's not the right process, Chris. I don't know. But to me, I thought we have viable candidates. I mean, Dwight Green is amazing. Bruce Cameron, you know, totally developer, you know. So, but did anybody even look at him? That's my point. I'm like. You know, I'm going through the motions, spending my time. I mean, Planning Commission is a big, um, commitment. It's a lot of time, and I did not volunteer for the Planning Commission.

So when I talked to you about one of them, you said you weren't going to put his name forward.

That, that was Ray Chipman, because I talked to him twice and he told me he didn't say those things.

He said them to me too, Tom.

So, so I was at the CERA and he said, I'm, I'm for the height, I'm for the master, the Straitsview master plan, and I'm for the BRT. And I'm thinking, you're not my guy. So, so you can bring him forward. You know, we could do the nuclear option that Chris told me. That's what you were talking about, Ray Chipman. So, you know, you know, my thing is, I'm the type of person, I don't forget anything. I know what people say to me. And I know that you said that, Chris. I'm sorry. But if you're saying you didn't, I, I feel sorry for you because you did.

I mean, to me, this just comes to the, you know, you guys were new on the council. We said we give 3 names. This is the process we've followed. Tom doesn't like it. That's— I'm sorry, Tom, but, you know, the process is the planning person over the Planning Commission submits, you know, helps us out by sending us resumes of the We all interview, read it over, whatever effort you want to put into it, give 3 names to the mayor, and the mayor can then select someone, which he still has to do with the advice consent of the council. So it's not just his thing, right? But we— then, and that was in a way to see if we all come up with the same person, basically. You guys submitted one name to the mayor. You did not cooperate. I did cooperate. You did not do what Dave asked you to do. You submitted one name and it was all the same name from the 4 of you. So I'm— that's what's irritating me here is you're trying— it seems to me you're trying to force the process that you want, and yet you won't in an open meeting talk about what changes do you want to make to the process. I mean, I agree. To me, this one-month lead time, legitimate. I, I totally agree to that. I don't want to do 3-2-2 meetings behind the scenes to figure out what to do here with the Planning Commission appointments. No, let's do it in front of the public.

That—

I mean, if it's the 1-month thing, I have no problem with that. And I can understand your dissatisfaction with that. That's hard sometimes when you're busy, you know. In fact, we did postpone it once, right?

And I don't, I don't, I don't really think we're that far away. Yeah, because I think the process is fairly solid, and maybe the process just Be tweaked. So it's not like there's this huge gap.

So I was just going to say, yeah, the short— the shortness of time when they— I, I apologize to you and Dave. I did reach out to the mayor and had a conversation with him. Uh, had intended to get with you and Dave, uh, not in the cards today. But we had such a short amount of turn time. This, this didn't show up on the agenda, and this, this is no one's fault. It just is part of the way things were going. Um, so I'm not trying to, to cast blame on anyone for that. Um, but it would have been nice to have a little more time to be able to look at, uh, possibilities in the way that we go about doing things. So I, I, I, uh, and I thank you for bringing that up. Um, and I, you know, hadn't— like I said, I had intended on getting with you and Dave. We had a great conversation with the mayor. And, um, so, uh, yeah.

I guess, can I just say one thing?

I don't—

I would not have thought that a reappointment would have caused this controversy. That's what I'm having a hard time with too. I'm not understanding why you would want to shove someone out the door, who has diligently served for 3 years, has been the chair. I've been to her meetings. She's amazing. She has done a great job when the public has been a little irritated. I mean, other, other commission members. And I just feel like, you know, can we work on the process? I, and I'm grateful that you've told me some of these things tonight with the process. Um, but as the mayor says, I feel like it's an injustice. I feel like we're making her a political pawn. I feel like we should reappoint her tonight. There's— she should not be involved in this, and the reappointment is not the same as appointing, trying to fill a vacancy and vetting in that way. We've seen her track record typically on our commissions. we do 2-year terms. So I guess that's why what I would like to see, and I, in a spirit of collaboration, I would like to see that tonight. I would like to see us do her reappointment. I don't feel like she should be used as a political pawn here. And let's take the time and do the process right. That's my thoughts.

I, I think I have one more comment on, um, on the current Planning Commission. We've given them direction that we are not for high density and we're not for the BRT, and that's the lead they're following, Chris. So they're just following our lead. And, you know, the 7-0, I thought that was amazing that they voted 7-0 against Canyon Park because that is high density, higher density than what's around it. And then also Wilkinson Farm, that is higher density than what's around it. So they were consistent, and that makes sense because that's the direction that we gave them. So, you know, no fault to them, they're just following our lead. Now if you say, hey, they want high density, they'll probably all just say, hey, I want to get off the Planning Commission.

That's not the point of what the process that we're talking about is about. It has nothing to do with high density, BRT, anything else. It's about discussion of the current process. Just as Jen had mentioned, every count— every major commission in the city now has 2 council members representing it. That's one of the discussions that would be nice to discuss. And the other is the, the opportunity to have time to, to go forward and, and look at and review those that are on, knowing if someone's timeframe's coming up, just being aware of that timeframe.

Chris, you said—

that's my only— that's my only concern.

But you said that they off base on their voting because they're not—

I didn't say they were off base. They were not representing the city as a whole because of their view is, is all— in fact, they're not even representing—

We gave them that direction, we as a council.

So when, when you say we as the council, is that this you as the individual that's over the Planning Commission, or—

No, when we got elected from the last time, the, the whole thing was anti-high density and Right. On State Street, and that's why we got rid of the Station Master Plan and 10,000 apartments.

Right.

So that's the narrative. So I mean, that's, that's the basis of what they're functioning on. So to say that they're off or they're not connected to the city or the citizens, I think that's wrong.

Can I just add one other thing? Just kind of kudos to our current Planning Commission. Last year, before you were on the council, Chris, the Transportation Master Plan Do you want to have a little sidebar here? Our transportation master plan came up for review. Our planning commission members spent hours and hours reviewing that plan with a fine-tooth comb. Because of them, they noticed that 12th North was scheduled to be widened to a 5-lane road. east of I-15, that 1600 North was on the schedule, was on the plan to be widened to a 5-lane road all the way from State Street all the way over to University Parkway by the mall, 8th East. So 1600 North and 8th East. I mean, there were several things that because of the diligence of this— these Planning Commission members And their care and concern for Family City USA and creating an environment where families can thrive. They brought those things to our attention as a city council, and we were able to review some of these things and, and correct some of these things that were hidden in this plan. It was— I, I was just like, I didn't give them direction on that. They brought this to the attention, and then we as a council voted on it and reviewed it, I probably should say. And I just was very grateful for their representation there, and the public was very grateful. That was an issue in our last election. The public was very grateful. We don't want to be a, a through city. We want to preserve our neighborhoods. So I guess, you know, I'm just— I feel like this process is being put in place to, to boot the members of the Planning Commission that were put on there 3 years ago because some people weren't in the majority. One person wasn't in the majority back then. And so now, as was mentioned in our retreat, you know, the 4 no more are back on it on the other side. So I don't want that. I feel bad about some some of the things that happened in the past, and even the narrative that we booted them off. We didn't. There was a reason, as the mayor explained. They weren't going to show up to vote. They were holding us hostage. Um, but every other commission member, um, as unless there is some issue, as one of the planning commissions assaulted some of the residents verbally. Um, we appreciate their service. We, um, reappoint them to another 3 years, uh, to help, uh, continue serving our city. So I don't have a problem going through the process, but I am just really having a problem with the insinuation being made that these Planning Commission members aren't good, they're not representing the residents, the process is wrong. Um, I mean, these types of conversations that are being had here tonight, and I once again, I just feel like these are good people. They're giving of their time and their talents to, to help us and to represent the, the majority of the city. I mean, do you guys want that person back on the Planning Commission that didn't think we should add parking? to apartments that we were approving so people could get out of their cars and ride their bikes? No, I don't think that would have passed muster, right? So that's where I am tonight, and I would urge you 4 to set aside to collaborate with us now, to, to work with us here in the interest of not me working with me or the mayor or Dave, But in the interest of peace for our community and gratitude for our Planning Commission members, and do this reappointment tonight. I don't know if you're saying you don't have a problem with her. Let's not play with her anymore then. Let's just, you know, vote on the reappointment, set aside, and, and put on our calendar in a work meeting to talk about this process for the Planning Commission. Let's get it solved. If you're not happy with it, I want to know specifics, and I want to know what we can do to fix it. I'm, I'm open-minded on that. I'm willing to work with you on that. Um, but I, I just really don't agree with using a person who has served our community so diligently with so many hours, um, as, as part of this, in this, upon in this process. So I'm urging— I'm asking that we bring it back.

Second.

To a vote of the council for the reappointment of this individual, and I'd appreciate it if one of you 4 made that motion.

Well, we already have a motion in effect and a second on the table, so we need to vote on that first.

Remind me what the motion and the second was. It happened—

You can withdraw your motion. You don't have to vote on the motion.

I would just like to say one other thing, and I feel like, Lynnae, I appreciate your perspective, I feel like you put a lot of words in our mouth, and that by saying that we're 4 no more, that we've been voting as a block of 4, is inaccurate and unfair, especially if you look at our voting records. When we mentioned that this was a concern for us, and that the issue is not Madeline, your immediate response was to say that the process is fine and we should just push forward and move through this. So, I just wanted to be clear that we do want to have a dialogue. If we had wanted to, we could have come in and made decisions.

Thank you.

decisions without your discussion at all and just made the decision. 4 of us voted and moved on, but we don't want to do that. We want to work with you, but we want to make sure that our concerns are also represented and that you also see that we have a concern with the process that we would like to work together to solve.

No, you don't want to work with me. You didn't call me and talk to me about this. Jeff apologized that he didn't, but I didn't hear Chris or Tom or you apologize. Can the rest of you not apologize at not calling me and telling me that you wanted to remove this from the consent agenda, that you didn't like the process? That you didn't—

I have already talked with you about the process.

No, Jen. Okay, whatever you think it was in the fall, I'm talking, I'm talking from yesterday for this agenda item. Didn't get a phone call, wasn't, wasn't contacted.

I think—

haven't heard that there's a problem with the process.

Well then, I guess our conversation was different than we both remember it because we specifically talked about this, but that's irrelevant. I think we should move on from this.

But you keep bringing it up, don't you?

It is irrelevant because you're accusing us of things that aren't fair.

No, I'm, I'm talking about this weekend. I'm talking about this agenda. No one called me about this issue on this agenda, and I just talked about it on Friday at our retreat. So put yourself in my place.

Item didn't show up until yesterday.

This, this just—

right.

And you should have called me. You've called the mayor, you've talked to each other.

There was a fast track on this. Well, but I think I was busy, you know.

I mean, Jeff and Chris called me, we talked, but we were at the retreat. I think that normally it comes out on Friday, but we were at the retreat. Yeah, it came out on Thursday, right?

So, so I think a lot of this— I mean, we can all work to communicate better and do things better, um, but I think as far as— I mean, if, if we could get a vote, um, and, and I don't— I mean, probably when I saw, um, if we would have been doing a new, uh, Planning Commission member, I would have been a lot more likely to say, okay, let's take more time, let's get this out, let's make sure what everybody wants and all the rest. But I just— so from my perspective, Madeline is a very Uh, I mean, she, she's just right in the middle as far as she's not any kind of extreme anything. She's just a good administrator and she's done a great job as a volunteer. And so I didn't think re-upping her was any big deal, and that was probably my mistake because, you know, apparently that, that was uncomfortable. Um, but anyway, as far as where we're at right now to try and move forward, I'd like someone to make a motion to, you know, to just approve Madeline. We'll move forward with that, and then we'll also agree to look at this process in the near future and work through it in, in our work meetings.

So we have the motion on currently and seconded.

And so, so remind us what that was.

It was to move it.

It was just, just to move it out of the consent items. Oh no, it was to table it. Clarification, it was to table it so we can bring it back up.

Yeah.

And, and hopefully within the 2 weeks when we meet again in 2 weeks and have it all taken care of, everything will be resolved and taken care of.

Yes, the motion on the— before the council with the second is a motion to table the reappointment of Madeline Coleman.

And can that be withdrawn and a new motion put forth?

If the sponsor wants to do that.

I want to— I want to just, uh, let's see what the vote is on this one, and then we can talk about the other part.

Okay, so at this point, Mayor, I think the question is just before the— for the chair to, to call for question and the vote.

To call for a question?

To call for the vote.

Okay. Um, yeah, let's have a vote. The vote. So this, to be clear, this is the vote to table, uh, the— yeah, the reappointment of, uh, Madeline.

So nay.

Aye.

Nay.

Nay.

Nay.

Nay.

Nay.

Okay, so that is gone.

And there we are.

There we are. Yes, I'm ready for a new motion.

Obviously, this isn't the time to talk about the process we'd like to put in place. This is just a time to talk about the consent items, right? I move that we approve the consent items.

Second.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, the consent items pass, and I appreciate all of you coming together to figure this out. So there was a come together.

It didn't—

no, there, there was a come together. Um, Anyway, I appreciate the efforts. And, and then we'll just need to— Brent, to get on our work sessions, um, a conversation about, you know, looking in the process.

Yeah, uh, we've been taking notes and, and we'll, uh, come back and, and, uh, see if we can even do some research about other cities and, and, uh, uh, Propose ways for everyone to be involved and maybe an automated way for there to be more time in terms of notifications and just try to make sure that relationships and voice, everyone having a voice is part of that process.

Okay, sounds good. Okay, moving on. We've got number 10, a scheduled item. Uh, 10.1, public hearing and ordinance amending the current year fiscal 2024-2025 budget, and Brandon will present that to us.

Thank you, Mayor. Uh, so we were going to bring this in December, but, uh, you know, that meeting was, uh, pretty full, so we moved it to, uh, this meeting. Uh, so there are a few more on here than might normally have been on here for these budget amendments. Um, but, uh, needless to say, we, uh, there's approximately $1.7 million in, uh, budget amendments, uh, ranging from a wide number of things this, this particular time. Uh, those items that, uh, throughout the document, um, that are listed with a number, uh, 1, uh, as in all of our budget amendments in the past, uh, grants and donations that we've been awarded and/or received, and this budget amendment takes those into account so that we can accomplish spending the money on those things which those awards and donations have been given to us. I don't know if there were any— they range from obviously library to public safety to— we've talked about the Gold Star Memorial. Memorial monument, that donations for that. There's some donations with some grants in relation to the task force and, and some their operations. So I don't know if there's any questions about any of those particular grants or donations on there. Since there are so many, I'm going to kind of ask as we go through the list instead of maybe in in a big total. I don't know if there's any on there that you have questions about.

What is that grant? OJP 2024 BJA local solicitation?

Um, that's the judge, um, just, uh, judge advocate. So they, um, oh man, is BJ here?

BJ, do you know the— oh, the The BGA one? Is that the Jack— oh yeah, the Burns Jack Memorial one.

Yeah, so it's a public safety grant in order for them to buy— I think they, they submit that and, um, get awarded to buy certain equipment.

Okay, okay, makes sense. I just couldn't figure out what it was.

Mayor, you might want to point out the Gold Star family Memorial donations. You might want to talk about that, or I, I can if you'd like me to.

But yeah, no, I— as far as the Gold Star, uh, you're just talking about that we're raising money for it?

Yes.

Oh, it's good to have that showing up. And, uh, and just to clarify, we're— I mean, we're seeing those donations come in and we're excited about it. And for those that don't know what's going on, We've got a Gold Star Memorial that we're raising $250,000 for that will be in the park here by the new city building, be the first one in Utah County. And, uh, and so we're encouraging people to donate, and people are being generous, but we've got a ways to go.

Yeah, uh, there's a— you'll see it throughout the document. Um, obviously a large number of those donations come through the Orem Community Foundation, so They have to go through that fund, and then we move them from that fund to our capital projects fund so that they can be spent in that particular fund. So, so obviously every fund that those touch, we have to do something in order to get the funds in the place where we need to spend them. Um, item number 2. So if we scroll down A little. But you can see there, um, near the bottom of the screen in the water fund, um, as we've come to you before, obviously we still have money from our 2021 water, sewer, and storm sewer bonds, and those funds that are still sitting with the trustee earn interest, and this is to account for those interest earnings so that we can get those spent on those water and sewer and storm sewer type projects. So it just accounts for those interest earnings. The same can be said if you look just there to the top, number 3 in the debt service fund. We got the sales tax revenue bonds to build the fire training facility. Those bond funds are sitting in a trust account until we spend them all. And the interest associated with them.

You've taken away the top line. Is the right the current budget and the left is the— no, the right was a former budget and the left is the current. So instead of spending $75,000, we've spent nothing?

No, the other way around. So we had no—

oh, I didn't like it.

We had no interest earnings.

Oh, these are interest earnings? Correct.

We had none before and now there are $75,000.

It's a good thing. Yes, I was seeing it as an expense that went away, but it's earnings that came in.

Correct.

The same good thing.

Thank you, Brandon.

Um, obviously these all— I, I only generally focus on the, the revenue side. Obviously there's an expenditure side on the bottom of the spreadsheet that outlines kind of where those funds will be spent. Um, so anyway, those 2 are the, you know, similar concept related to the bonds. Item number 4.

Let's see, I think it's right here.

So you can see on the self-insurance fund up near the top, as well as down in the senior citizens fund near the bottom, there are 2 items that are being funded. One is the fire alarm system for our seniors over at the Orem Friendship Center. It has been failing, so we obviously don't want that to be the case, so we're Having some funds from their fund as well as the self-insurance fund is contributing a portion to that safety issue. And then I, I believe they are having some problems with the lighting around on the outside around the flagpole, and so they're also intending to make improvements to that lighting to, to make sure that we have The flag's lit. Item number 5, which you'll see in several places, but I'll just leave kind of where it's at here. So if you'll recall from— I know December meeting was a long meeting, but our auditor was at that meeting. He mentioned our facilities maintenance fund is in the, in the red, and we are required under that to make an adjustment to be able to meet state code in trying to alleviate that, that negative. This meets that qualification, and that spread from how we allocate the facilities fund. So there are several places that participate: the water fund, sewer fund, stormwater fund. Water Fund and the General Fund. So you'll see an entry from each one of those adding up to that $70,000 that's in the middle of the page there, which will help us meet that requirement to alleviate that requirement. And then we will, during our budget process, we will also for fiscal '26, we'll also be trying to make sure that we again also accomplish Um, uh, in making that negative better. Any questions about that one? Because that one's a little bit weird, but okay.

Uh, number 6, let's say I gotta go up for number 6.

So kind of up near the middle of the screen, top, top middle of the screen there, you see number 6, fees, passport money orders. So what we're really trying to do is set a new fee. We have started collect— a money order capability on in relation to our passports. You'd be surprised at how many people no longer carry checks or have checks, so they are required to pay with cash, and a lot of the times they don't realize that and they don't have a check on them and they don't have enough cash. So we force them to go to the bank somewhere and then come back. So we didn't feel like that was very efficient, not only for them, obviously it's an inconvenience for them, but it's also painful for our staff who are right there ready to help them. So we were able to set up these money orders, to be able to create the money order to put with the passport. Obviously, we need to charge a fee for the time to be able to do so, and so we just threw some $100 in there just to show that there's going to be some money associated with it. We expect it to be higher. In the first 2— our first week that we offered that, we processed 10 money orders. Just in that week alone. So we have no doubts that it's going to be used. So you see here that, but in the notes, you can see the fee that we are hoping to have you approve as we move forward. Any questions with that one? Because that one's also a little bit different, but okay, great. Right below that item is number 7. Our wildland, as we alluded to earlier and talking about the California fires, so when those individuals go on those deployments, we eventually receive either state or federal funds back. The wildland has some costs, so we receive the money, then we need to make sure that the costs associated with sending those individuals are covered by those funds that we receive. So this budget amendment takes care of covering those costs. Number 8, which you kind of see there in the CARE tax special revenue fund, I believe Tyler Pay had a presentation a little while back regarding the bike Trails Phase 3, um, and the associated grant award from the Utah Outdoor Recreation folks. So, um, this budget amendment uses— and we also had the discussion a little earlier about excess care tax dollars. So we identified that we had some excess care tax dollars that we could then apply to get that project to a point based on the grant. That does not fully fund what Tyler presented to you, that full, um, to make it as, you know, I think we refer to it as Dave Spencer's yoga platform. All of those things are not part of this. That, that's a bigger dollar amount. But this at least meets That, that very base initial thought related to the grant award. Any questions with that one?

Okay.

And the last item, which you see kind of at the bottom of the screen under the Major Crimes Task Force, is sale of fixed assets. They sold a vehicle, which obviously they then want to turn around and be able to use those funds to— for the purchase of task And so this budget amendment accounts for that sale and then the eventual use of those funds for the purchase of equipment. That's all I have. Any questions?

Brandon, you have a fund, you have an increase by fund. Do we know what the total increase is? Do you summarize that anywhere?

Yeah, so if you, here, I'll scroll right down here, right there at the bottom. So $1.709 million for 2024. All of the budget adjustments, budget amendments. So that's for basically September through December of the year, of the year we're currently in, fiscal year ending in June of 2024.

Correct.

So I will definitely be coming to you sometime, usually in June. We'll do a final budget amendment for all the stuff that we, you know, receive unless there's something major. Usually if there's something really big or really major, we'll do immediately do a budget amendment meeting to handle everything up to that particular point. But if there are routine things, like generally I would consider most of these, we will come back in June to, to, or potentially late May, to round up all of the remaining things for the fiscal year.

Can I just ask you kind of a managerial Or whatever question.

Do you do— do you—

what's our— how do we refer to this? Because I'm hearing different— I'm hearing it referred to, you know, budget year '24-'25, budget year '25. I've heard budget year '25, that you say the year it ends, that that's what you call— is that how we do it, Norm, then?

Yes.

So this is budget year '25, and it ends July—

June 30th.

June 30th, yeah. But July 1st is when the next one starts, when '26 Even though half of it's from the year before. Okay, I just want to make sure that our public understands that because it took me a minute to understand that.

The, the real definition is fiscal year 2024-2025, but that's a mouthful to say, so we usually refer to it as either fiscal year '25 or budget year '25 for that purpose.

Yeah.

And Brandon, just for clarification, So is this $1.7 million number, uh, that you come up with, is that in line with what you're expecting? Is that more than you expect, less than you expect, just for these extra things?

Yeah, I mean, it's hard to say because obviously budget amendments are a reaction to things that occur, you know, or that we're looking at that may— will probably occur.

I'm just saying from experience, is this like—

it's normal.

Yeah, it's within the range of normal.

Yeah, um, when we did the CARES Act dollars and ARPA, that's unnormal. So any other questions?

Any other questions, Brent?

I mean, I'll, I'll just say that, uh, we talked about in the retreat how over the last 4 years, you know, we've had a higher amount of donations than, than previous. So in that sense, it's, it's more, but now we have 4 years of first CARES Act ARPA, and then more recently a greater focus on applying for additional grants and donations. And then the other thing that's maybe newer or a little bit abnormal is just that we've had these debt funds in an account accruing interest. And so that's, you know, quite a big dollar amount there that you see. So just highlighting, you know, that there are some things about this that have become a little bit more unique.

Yeah, for instance, you know, the tourism tax stuff related— or the stuff related to the water reuse facility. As soon as those were awarded and/or available, then we brought those budget amendments, and they— those were big dollars, right? Um, we try to bring those to you as soon as we can so that, again, our— the individuals who are creating the purchase orders to get— and the agreements to get those projects going know that the funds— the funds have been funded.

Any other questions? Is that everything, Brandon?

That's everything.

Okay, we appreciate it. Thank you.

We do it well. I should— we need to approve the—

we just need to approve this.

Yeah, and it's a public hearing.

Okay.

Yeah, got to open the public hearing.

All right, I'll open the public hearing. Anybody like to say anything? Okay, we'll close the public hearing and then we'll just— would someone make a motion?

Yeah, I move that we— the city council moves to approve the amending the, the fiscal year amendments for '24-'25 budget.

Second that.

Second that.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Thank you. Passes. Thank you.

Okay.

Item number 12. Bryn, you're up. City information items. City manager information items.

Yeah, I just wanted to express gratitude for the council retreat. I, I joke with my wife and kids that this is, you know, my Super Bowl, and— but appreciate, uh, just, um, just appreciate being able to work with you and work with our executive team and, and, uh, the, the Areas of focus and goals we come up with, we take very seriously, and we incorporate it not only in our budget process, but in all of our communications and interactions with the public. So it's super important. And so naturally, we're very grateful to have been able to go through that with you. And if I can just put out a request, you know, we want to be able to— we're open to ideas on how to make sure that everyone knows from top to bottom of the organization and in the public about what we're doing and about your areas of focus. So, you know, we want to put it on as like a watermark on a notebook or, you know, come up with a one-sheet. We'll have, you know, a State of the City event coming up. So if any of you have ideas that you'd like to suggest or Or share with us on how to proliferate the messaging, then just know we're all ears.

Okay, thank you. I started— I did a video about it today. So now it's up to the rest of you.

Wonderful.

Okay, I think we're ready to adjourn if someone would like to make a motion.

I'll make a motion that we adjourn. To a closed session in Room 107 to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation.

Second.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.