City Council · 2026-05-12

4, 5, 6, 7. Plus all of you. Welcome to our work session today. And Theresa, have you gotten everything? Okay, you're ready to go.

Yes.

Glad to have you here. We have a lot on our work session agenda as well as on our regular meeting agenda, but we're just gonna dive right into it. Our first presentation is from the Utah Transit Authority, and I would like to welcome Jay Fox, Executive Director. And I know you have some others with you from UTA. And so I'll turn the time over to you.

Thank you so much. Why don't I do that first? Why don't I have everybody introduce themselves?

I can talk a little bit. Go ahead. Good afternoon.

I'm Jaron Robertson, State Director.

Chandler Butler, Government Relations for UTA.

Nicole Martin, just recently with UTA and working with Jay. I'm Mary Delamar Schaefer. I'm with UTA down here in Utah County. I just was reminiscing about how my first Government job was in 1982. This is year 1. Thank you all.

We're glad to have you and your team here.

Yeah, yeah, Mary's a legend and she's going to be retiring soon.

So, um, all right.

Yeah, I want to jump in and certainly give you enough time to ask any questions of us. Uh, since I am sitting in the interview seat, that's what it feels like right now. Um, I just wanted to tell you a little bit about myself because I've been here 5 years, but I think most of the cities in Utah County, most of the staff and elected leaders have interacted a lot with Jeff Asjersen or Mary, who's taken a big lead on the political side and on the municipal side down here. I came to Utah in 2022 specifically for this job. I used to be with the Federal Transit Administration and the United States Department of Transportation for 15 years. And I can tell you, and this is true even today, that if you walk the halls of the Federal Transit Administration, you say, give me the top 3 transit agencies in the country. UTA, 95% of the time, is in that list of 3. So we have a stellar reputation. We're about to host the national conference, the American Public Transportation Association's Mobility Conference, which also has a bus operator and mechanics competition, international one. And we've already gotten a lot of requests to see some of the things that we're doing, our on-demand work, our commuter rail system. Really, really exciting. Did a little bit of time at Amtrak, worked for SEPTA, which is the Philadelphia area transit agency, before I got the call here. And my first question was, why do you want a Philadelphia attorney to run the Utah Transit Authority? Just go out and see it. And we fell in love with it right away. So, Jen and I have been here and we're, we're We no longer say we're in Utah, we say this is our home. So today, I wanted to talk to you a little bit about what's going on at UTA, and specifically I'll start by talking about the governance changes because I think they're important and important in terms of how you're going to be interacting with the agency. And then I'm going to turn the time over to Jaron, who is our Director of Planning, to go through the service that we have in Orem right now, as well as connecting within Utah County, and talk talk a little bit about that and then answer any questions you have as we go forward with our planning efforts. So Senate Bill 197, which was the bill for this last legislative session that changed the governance structure, was sponsored by Senator Harper. And this is his quote. You know, the focus was to have us better respond to growth within communities because the growth is enormous and they You know, the, the great thing and the hard thing about being in UTA right now is the demand for our services is over the top. And the hard thing is the demand for our services is over the top. So, so I think that's great. I will say that I don't know of any other community I've ever been in where the state's population size is 3.5 million that has such a desire for transit, such support for transit, and that is at every level, including the state legislature. So, I think part of Senator Harper's goal with this was to reinvest trust back in the executive team. We went through a little bit of a rough patch back in 2017, and we've come out of that very nicely. And it was more, you know, how people were handling some of our real estate assets. We're long past that now. And the agency's done 40 million customers 2 years in a row now. So that's fantastic. And we have now 3 successful bus rapid transits, including UDX, which you guys know well. For the governance changes, we have gone from 3 full-time trustees who I reported to over these last 4+ years. That will sunset July 1st, when a new part-time 7-member Transit Commission begins to provide governance for our agency. I will not report to that Transit Commission. I will report to the governor. I am an appointee by the governor, so all of our work will be done through that executive chain of command. However, the Transit Commission will be— I'll go through some of those in a moment. And, well, you know, we'll be— I think in some ways we'll be providing a lot of the role that our Local Advisory Council provided prior to this sunsetting. And I can say, in speaking with some people that have been nominated for that position, we don't have a commission yet. Advocacy is the strong theme. How do we advocate for more transit? How do we advocate for more transit funding, more revenue streams? To make it that much more robust. The appointments, which are now in process— I know there was a meeting yesterday to talk about the commission membership— 2 from the Speaker of the House, 2 from the Senate President, and then a slate of local nominations which are before the governor right now. The only one that I would say is set is Salt Lake County nominated only 1 individual. They did a process where they had a group of potential nominees they voted on that slate, and the person who had the most votes was the only person pushed forward.

What's your term?

So it's ultimately, I believe it is a 4-year term for each of them, but it's going to be staggered as they come forward. There will be turnover. They won't all turn over at the same time. Responsibilities on the executive director side of the house, and I say executive director side of the house because I can't do what I do with FERS without 3,000+ employees at our agency who are tremendous, who knock operations out of the park every day. But without the executive team, so I consider the executive director and executive team responsibilities. All in the same discussion. That's administration and leadership for the agency, specifically strategic leadership. We have a very nimble strategic business plan that has 5 very intuitive strategic priorities and a very intuitive and interpretive mission statement, which is, we move you. We just had our new employee orientation this morning. I love talking about it because one, there are so many mission statements that go on for sentences and nobody ever remembers them, but I can tell you that all 3,000 employees at UTA know our mission. And we and MoveU can mean different things depending on where you are at the agency, and that's the beauty of it. And so I always share in the morning of new employee orientation what MoveU means to me. We are responsible for all of our budgeting. All of our procurement work is going to come through the executive director, and then preparing the strategic long-range plan. Strategic long-range plan is a little different than what I just talked about, which is our strategic business plan. This is our long-range transit plan, which ties together with the MPO's long-range plans, as well as the state's unified plan. So the only difference with our long-range plan is it has local service in it, which you don't see in the MPO plans. Now, on the Transit Commission side, their first order of business is regional representation. I'll talk to you about that because, um, in a moment, because Senator Harper had a very defined view of what that meant. Advocacy, as I said, for transit, general governance over our agency, and budget approval. There's a number of other responsibilities, but that regional representation was very important to the city of Leagan— city of These cities, like, League of Cities and Towns. I apologize. And making sure that since there was no local advisory council anymore, there was that direct relationship between the governance leadership and the municipalities. I will say now, because I've insinuated that this statement from Senator Harper, which is, That in the legislation, each transit commissioner serves and represents the whole of the large public transit district and does not represent a specific geographic portion of the district. I know that for Senator Harper and for Representative Christopherson, your 2 chairs of the transportation committees, having a regional perspective for this agency is incredibly important. We are made of 77 municipalities. And without seeing ourselves as a large we, and making sure that we're always seeing what our service is through that lens, is, you know, would it almost become divisive over time? And because we have so much service that goes through multiple municipalities, including the spine of our service, the Frontrunner commuter line, seeing ourselves as a we was really important. And then our 3 missions from the legislature's point of view is to provide efficient and cost-effective service, maintain a state of good repair. And I can tell you that that is a full-time job for our capital team. 60% of our capital budget is simply maintaining our system, maintaining, making sure it's in a state of good repair. And that's everything from maintaining the Frontrunner in a state of good repair to replacing buses as they time out. We have a huge bus fleet, and making sure that they're, you know, they're in good working condition is really important. And then finally, reducing our debt and maintaining fiscal responsibility. So I'll pause there. I don't know if you have any immediate questions for me, or we can turn it over to Sharon to talk about our existing service and our expansion.

Any questions, Council?

All right, great.

Thank you. Yeah, let me take a moment just to talk about existing services that we have here in the city of Orem. And talk about— so we have, as Jay talked about regional significance, we have 3 regional routes that come through the city of Orem, obviously being front runner. We have the UBS line, then Route 850, which, um, from Lehi down to Provo Station along State Street. With that, and I guess if I can put that in context, so the purple line being Frontrunner, 850 ringing out State Street is the green line. And then, what am I missing? UVX here at the bottom of the screen here connecting the Orange Station through UVU into Provost Station as well. Blue lines that you're seeing here are local routes, so those operate on 30-minute services. You get east-west connection through those routes. You have connections to the Vineyard Station into University Place and University Valley University as well. Those routes, we also run 4 express routes, which are just run off during peak hours, which connect various other local areas into Utah Valley University. So we have about 10 routes really operating in the city of Orem proper already. I think As noted, and Jay talked about that regional significance of Frontrunner, of UVX, and Route 50 really are the spine of transit service in this community. And we're able to make those local connections with those other routes. And so investment into Frontrunner, the 850, continuing to make that a very successful route, are really good opportunities for us as we think about regional connection in the city.

Was it— Yes, please.

2 things to note.

You may have heard of the Frontrunner 2X project. So that is designed to bring Frontrunner to 15-minute service in the peak. Right now it's operating in 30-minute service. That's because we only— 25% of our line, and we own our line separate and apart from Union Pacific, we bought it from the Union Pacific, we only have 25% double tracking. So the ability for trains to pass each other is quite limited, and so we can only run 30 minutes in the peak. We are looking to move to— when I say we, along with the Utah Department of Transportation, who's actually applying for the federal grant for the expansion of the service to 50% double tracking, which will give us 15-minute service. That will open up Sunday service to 15 minutes. I'm also often asked the question, is not having service on Sunday and Frontrunner a religious thing? I say no, it is not. It is the only day that we can get out and actually maintain the lines. because we can't maintain the lines during the week because of the limited amount of double tracking we have. The importance of that, especially for Orem, is that will give us a 15-minute connection to Orem Central Station. So right now, every time that UVX bus comes through, it's not picking up a lot of front-runner traffic other than on the half hour. This will be true for actually our entire alignment. We have a lot of 15-minute service that connects into central stations, including Orem Central. And so the ridership increases as a result of that are going to be quite significant. In addition to the fact that once you, you know, you go to the train station, train's pulling away, and you realize that the next train's not coming for 29 minutes, there's a good chance you're going to get back in your car. That's not true at 14 minutes. That's the magic number in transit is 15 minutes. That's what people hang around for if they've missed their ride. The other piece I want to pick up on real quick is that our Mount Hipponocus bus facility, which Mary is the general manager of. We're looking to expand that facility because we are really tight right now. The ability to expand within that, what we have right now. So adding canopies, adding facilities is really important. We are looking again to a federal grant to help that. We have had positive feedback from the Utah commissioners that they would like to provide a local share. If we went in for that, for that grant. So, and that would make a big difference in terms of how we could add service to all of Utah County out of that facility.

Do we—

what's the cost to double-track the whole line?

So it's a good question, Representative. It's the cost of the 50% to go from 25% to 50% is about $3 billion, and we're looking for federal participation somewhere in the range of about 74%. One of the reasons we're asking for that, that high is when we did build that ourselves, we actually took on the lion's share. I say we, I mean the state of Utah, Utah Transit Authority ourselves. I would say in today's dollars, you're looking at probably somewhere in the area of another $4 to $5 billion to make that happen, and that's in today's dollars.

Thank you.

Sure, sure.

Can you talk about the proposed timeline for the double track or for the 2 times Frontrunner? And then secondly, while this map is up, wondering if you could talk about ridership and where we are at in those different lines in terms of our capacity.

Sure, I'll take the first one. I'll give you the second one. So right now we are waiting to move into the engineering phase, which is the final phase before grant agreement. The application is literally on the U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary's desk, and I hear positive things. I— we're hoping by the end of this month we'll be able to move into that, and then that would be— we would most likely have that grant probably by the end of the year, beginning next year, which would get us to a timeline of 2030. You know, the super goal is obviously to get it in by 2034. It's going to be a big game changer for for the event that's coming our way. But this is really a generational investment. And, you know, as the representative said, Representative Peterson said, I mean, we really want to— we'd like to see the entire line double-tracked. It's going to— it's not only going to give us— make us more nimble, but allow us a lot more express service, which we don't have the ability to do.

Oh, I'm sorry. Does that include sound walls at all?

I'm sorry, which sound walls?

That is a good question. That would be probably part of whatever environmental process we would do if we bumped up to 100% double tracking, because they normally do that analysis as part of that work. So I would imagine that if that was needed, that would happen at that time.

Yeah, I, I'm—

it's hard to say beyond that, you know, because I really would be guessing at this point. You said there was a ridership—

Oh, ridership, sorry. So, great news is the regional routes that we talked about are some of the highest ridership routes that UT has in the system. So, for some context, we do about 40 million trips per year. Half of that is on bus. So, if you look at UVX, for example, we're doing 2 million trips per year on that route. Really successful service rivals our Green Line in Salt Lake when it comes in terms of ridership. The 850 is talked about, we're doing almost 700,000 trips per year. And part of that success is noted as that 15-minute service that Jay talked about. When buses coming every 15 minutes, it makes it very usable service and a regional significant service that connects to those local routes for transfers. And then Frontrunner, just, just looking at trips we're picking up at the Orem station alone, almost 300,000 people at that location alone. That's the 7th highest out of the 16 stations we have along the Frontrunner corridor.

Yeah, one of the things that we're going to do too, as well, we're already there, we're already manipulating the data right now, is give you cell utilization, because that's what I think a lot of communities want to know, like how many of our residents are using systems. One thing to say, okay, people are boarding here, but they can be coming in from different communities. We had a question—

I agree.

In Southwest Salt Lake County, and, you know, we have a number of rail stations that are surrounding the county, so we know who people are, you know, we know how many boardings are happening there. But I think what a lot of those communities want to know, and I'm sure what your community wants to know too, is, well, how many of our residents are actually utilizing the system, because we can track them using that. And that's— that work's being done right now. We're hoping to have that done by the end of the year.

Can you also just talk about the other routes? I'm speaking as somebody who tries to ride the bus when I can, and sometimes I get frustrated on those east-west routes in particular. Just, I miss it because I'm late and then I get stuck, right? I'm just wondering where you are in terms of capacity on those other routes.

Yeah, question before you go there. Uh, in the Missionary Training Center, do you guys have numbers on UVX and Frontrunner, what that generates?

From this—

for the center itself?

For those 2 lines, UVX. Yeah, and Frontrunner.

You can look at bus stop level boardings.

Yeah, we can get that to you.

I don't have it with me today.

Don't they have all the missionaries take that to the airport?

They're using UVX to connect to Frontrunner.

Okay, anyway, I'm sorry to be that person.

We've got about 5 more minutes.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

I'm sorry.

So I think council had requested you just brief them quickly on on-demand and what that is.

Sure. So I'll be quick.

So in 2019, UTA's Innovative Mobility Department piloted an on-demand service, which is Very much not like a fixed route service, to really understand how we can serve communities from a coverage-based model approach versus a fixed route transit or a bus system, which operate very differently and serve very different populations. And so with that, what we do is we geofence a geographic region, we put vehicles within that region, and it really operates on demand, just like you'd see in the private sector with Lyft. It's been a very successful service. There is a very public transit component to this when you look at how it operates compared to how the private sector operates. Well, you can hail a ride, share rides. We have wheelchair-accessible rides. You have to operate within the service area, and really the idea is to connect you into the transit system. And so we see within the existing service areas that we have, the majority of our trips do connect into a transit center. And then people use those trips for first and last mile connections. We also do see very common locations such as grocery stores and hospitals, which are real needs for our community to use those to get to those destinations. And so we've seen a lot of success with that service. We have 5 service areas right now, including the newest one, which is on the west side of Provo, connecting both the Provo Frontrunner Station and the Orem Frontrunner Station. into that, that, that west side region along with the airport there. We're working right now with UDOT and Utah County to launch our 6th zone this— which will be in northwest Utah County. Very quick, and I know we're out of time, but any questions?

This is a— I wish more people knew about this. The on-demand is an amazing service.

Yeah, so one of the things that I think everybody was hesitant on when this service came out Was, uh, we, we, these services get overwhelmed very quickly, which is a good thing again. Uh, so there was the marketing on this one was not— less than stellar. That's all changed. We are working on that now because we want to see the service used more, and you will see that. Recognize the value of it, particularly your high school students who really use it well in our other zones. Uh, it will, it will get a lot, a lot of ridership in it. And, and we can get the— we can get the amount of ridership on each of the services for you as well.

So make sure to get them.

I'll be very quick if you want to go to— what I want to just highlight is that Orange City has been a great partner. CTA is not successful without the collaboration and partnerships we have with our cities and municipalities, whether that's planning our services, whether that's capital construction on our projects, Whether that's actually deploying the service, we can't do it without our partners. And this quickly highlights a lot of work that we've done with the city, whether it's building bus stops, whether it's coordinating on construction projects, whether it's detouring routes. Your staff really participates with us, with UDOT, with the MPOs, and we, we don't get to do that work without you. So we want to thank you for that collaboration. There's a lot of opportunities I could tell you as we continue to move forward and grow our services, but.

Thank you.

Um, want to just note that on my last note, if you'll pull one more slide, if you think about our opportunities right now, um, we work hand in hand with Mountainland Association of Governments as they develop their regional transportation plan. Your staff does as well, I believe. Um, others are involved, but we're aligned in what we— and how that plan is developed and what goes into that plan. As Jay noted, we also do our own long-range transit plan, which, which just builds upon what's in the Regional Transportation Plan and really looks at local services and how we look at the broader transportation system altogether. We're about to go out for engagement in that both this year and next year. And so we will be coordinating with the city as we develop that plan. And we work with staff, work with the MPO and UDOT. And so a lot of opportunity to engage with UTA as we develop that plan. Lastly, just as the city develops their own Local plans, as you get into transportation planning, opportunities to work with you and support you on those efforts is something we'd really like to do. Those efforts often inform our plans as well. And so having that collaboration up front in advance, and as we develop our plans, is really a way to develop and grow services as partners. So I'll just leave it at that.

That would be the underlying—

I've got more time. I can talk, especially I can talk about active transportation all day long.

Does that replace your 2030? Is that your goal to replace the 2030 plan? I'm sorry, what was the— you had your 2030 transportation plan?

Oh, the current language plan goes through 2050.

Yeah, 2050.

Might be referring to our strategic business plan, which was a 2030 plan. That's being regrouped right now, but the legislature redefined our strategic plan as our long-range transit plan to ensure that there was connectivity between that and both the MPO plans and the state unified plans.

So, okay, so that's what you're trying to accomplish here?

That's correct.

Yes.

Merging all of these plans.

That's not absolutely merging, but making sure they're aligned.

You're aligned, right?

And we're on the same time cycle as the RTPs, both. Wasatch Front Regional Council and Mountainland Association of Governments.

All right, well, thank you for having us.

Thank you.

All right, Representative, we'd like to— next, next person on our agenda this afternoon is a legislative report from, from Bell Peterson. He's one of our, our state representatives here in Orem and say my neighbor and friend and Welcome.

Thank you.

I went to a meeting earlier today and Val and Nancy Hale welcomed me.

And I said, this is so awesome. My friends are welcoming me to this meeting.

And as I come to council and I look around, I look around and see all my friends. So it's great to be with you.

When I first was elected to the House, my House committee, my House district, was all located in Orem. Today I represent Northwest Orem, Vineyard City from 8th North on, which would basically be Utah City, Lindon from State Street West to the lake, and then a little bit of Pleasant Grove and a little bit of American Fork. And so that just shows you the growth that's happened in Utah County and, and where that growth has been to the north. It's pushed our legislative districts north. So, um, so I have, uh, 5 city councils that I get to talk to and meet with, and that's awesome. But, uh, um, I've been an Orem resident for the last 36 years, so all my kids went to school here, and, uh, it's been a great honor to represent Orem. So it's safe to say Orem's your favorite? That's right.

Yes, absolutely.

I try to meet with Bryn.

Bryn and I try to go to lunch once a quarter, and that's been awesome just to help coordinate and make sure that we're on the same cycles and looking at everything. So I'm in my 8th term, and you can, you can see that I've represented Orem since 2011. So, which has been awesome. We have the largest Republican delegation in the House from Utah County.

And so I also wanted to thank you all.

You made me your grand marshal of the parade 2 years ago, and that was a great experience and just a great honor. And so thank you to all of you for, for allowing me that. And Anne and I had a great time as we got to ride down the street and have all our friends and neighbors yell at us.

So.

Just so you know what my roles are right now, I currently am the Executive Appropriations Chair in the House.

So the state budget is really what I focus in on.

I just got appointed to 2 other committees as chair. I'm chair of the Rural Health Task Force. State of Utah was just given $200 million to go towards rural health. And so we'll be providing oversight over how that money is expended. It's estimated that the federal government right now will give us $1 billion over the next 5 years. And so we want to make sure that we're utilizing those funds to the best way possible. And then I also serve on the Veterans and Military Affairs Commission within the state. And so as you can see, this year, this year was a tight budget year. We started the year by telling our committees we would like them to cut 5% of their budget. We ended up right about 2.5% is where most of the committees ended up cutting. That was okay because when we did our, our budget revenue projections for February, they were up slightly. We had $88 million ongoing and $125 million one-time that was added to that, which allowed us to get through the year. In other words, paying for inflation in public ed, compensation for state employees, things like that. Those are the things that we ended up funding, and that pretty much took most of the money. Just so you know what kind of bills I sponsor, obviously since I'm so tied into the budget, most of my bills right now are budgetary in nature. The budgetary modifications bill is a relook at how we're doing the state budget and setting up some parameters for that. We changed the way we're doing the Attorney General funding for each state agency. So instead of an ISF fund, we're making— we're putting their money into an account that they can't utilize for other things other than for how they're going to use the Attorney General's office. And then HB 342 was a follow-up bill. I had a bill on state grant processes which defined— basically set up guidelines for how grants would be given from the state to other entities within the state. This is one that ties back to the federal grants. It was originally targeted because of the rural grant that we got because of how large it was. We didn't really have any guardrails around federal monies that come into the state. It sets up who's responsible for determining how monies are spent. The governor has $10 million that they can do without the legislature. $25 million can be done by the Executive Appropriations Committee. Anything above $25 million requires the whole legislature to approve that expenditure process.

So you're comfortable with that?

Am I comfortable with that?

The guardrails for fraud that we're seeing in so many other states.

Yeah, I mean, we didn't have any guardrails up until that bill. And so right now we're watching to see how it works. Obviously, the legislative process, there's nothing we do more than amend bills from previous things that we've done. So we'll see how this year goes. We'll see how the Rural Task Force goes. And if we need to make some adjustments, we will. And then, of course, appropriating the money for the state is what HB 2 and 3 are. So some other bills that I've been involved with, the spaceport is one that I've been the floor sponsor for. I've done a number of education bills, both in public ed and higher ed. And currently I serve on the Education Committee. I serve on Political Subdivisions. I also serve on Criminal Justice. And so my bills usually tie into one of those areas, plus the veterans piece. And with that, I'm open to any questions that you might have, anything that you're interested in or Or wondering what's going on with. Obviously, uh, we'll— May, we'll start interim next week. Uh, just finished the session. Revenues, uh, are on track. I wouldn't say they're great, but I would say they're on track. And, uh, um, we're getting ready to start You know, what we're going to do next year and what our agenda will be. And then obviously, water is everywhere you go. The question is water. You know, where's water going to be? What's water going to be like? And as we all know, it's going to be a dry summer.

Is that what you anticipate the interim session focusing on is water, or what do you anticipate?

No, actually, so next week we'll start looking at rural healthcare transformation. We'll look at how that money is going to be be expended, that $200 million. We will have executive appropriations next week, so we'll look at revenues and where they're at as we're coming into this next year. We'll start to look at revenues for the coming session. And education— I'm trying to think what's on the education agenda. I think you're going to see some more discussion about district splits. As you see some other districts looking at those possibilities. So what does that look like? And then I would tell you that the other big thing that we talk a lot about is obviously growth. As you look at Utah County, as you look at the state, you have Eagle Mountain where a tremendous amount of growth is happening, and roads and infrastructure are tied back to those issues. Those are really our biggest issues, is our issues of growth.

So any other questions? All right, we just want to thank you. Thank you for coming, and thank you for your service and looking out for veterans, for your military service and your public service here in the legislature. And do— have we invited Representative Peterson to our Gold Star dedication?

Crystal invited.

Okay.

Okay.

So I haven't— I can't remember what date it was. I was looking at it.

It's a week from Saturday.

So yeah, I do have it. So anyway, if you have any issues, there's anything you want to talk about, you're welcome to call me and discuss if there's a concern. There's some questions about property tax and things like that that everybody's interested in. I'm sure that'll be a discussion throughout the year as we approach the session.

Happy to discuss with any of you.

you.

And always excited to go to a ribbon cutting with all of you, like weeks ago at Mighty Light. So anyway, thanks for all you do. I know City Council's, uh, where the rubber hits the road, where all of your neighbors are calling you about every issue that you're dealing with. And so thank you for all that you all do. Mayor and Council, also, also just to add that Representative Val Peterson is one of those that is actively, proactively, energetically available and wanting to partner and align with us and working with us. So, um, every— both privately and publicly, has always been sincere and genuine in that regard. So thank you. Yeah, I'll also add, uh, obviously the BRC. Uh, I know we're trying to do some things to Maybe reenergize isn't the right word, but to do some additional looking at startups and things like that that we can add to that with startup businesses. And excited about some of the directions we're seeing from it as well.

Where did he go? Oh, there he is. So I don't know, Representative, if you've had the opportunity to meet our new Economic Development Director.

I've heard of him.

Yeah, we're excited about—

I think you've talked to Steve though, right? Yeah, I think you've talked to Steve Anderson. So, okay. All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate your time.

Thanks for all you do.

Thank you.

All right.

You're up.

Next, we have a presentation from Roger Timmerman from Utopia. And so it looks like it's 15-minute presentation and 10 Q&A. So go ahead and turn the time over to you when it looks like they're setting up your—

they're setting up your presentation. Well, I'll talk first.

Anyways, thanks for having me here.

Welcome.

It's always good to be back to Orem. It's my favorite city. It's actually the only utopian city I've lived in. I was a resident of Orem for a little while. But anyways, I'm glad to be here. It's always good to talk about utopia. I mean, how could it be anything other than great and wonderful being called utopia? But those who have been around a while realize there are some challenges in the early years of this. We'll do— I want to cover a little bit of the history because the context is very important for what we're doing today based on what's happened. Just structurally, so you understand, there are 11 founding cities that bonded for the project. So technically there was like 16 members, but when it came time to actually move forward, pledge sales tax revenues towards bonds and build this network, there were 11 cities on board at that time. Since that time, we've come up with various structures of partnership for expansion. This is very important for our future because I remember the day going back with Utopia and explaining that, like, hey, we're never going to be able to pay these bonds with the original cities, but we'll be able to build the network and get customers. But with growth and expansion, we're able to service previous debt and improve the overall financial position of the organization. And we'll show how that's kind of worked. Utopia Phase 1 is colored here in red for a reason. It was a little rough. Now, Phase 2 wouldn't exist if it weren't for Phase 1. You know, this was very important. We built the backbone. We got a lot of things in place.

And that's This was—

I mean, depending on how you look at it on payments or, or whatever, it's anywhere from $185 to $205 million of project under that phase. And that's the pain point. Okay, so there's payments being made every year by all of the member cities towards the bonds that financed this phase, and that was a, a 33-year refinancing from 2008, and it was originally 2004, but There was incremental bonds and ended up being refinanced for 33-year structure. So that ends in 2040. The status of those gets better every year in the sense that more and more of the debt payment gets paid by Utopia. But the problem is it works against us a little in the sense that the payments go up every year. For many years, we've been at least covering the increase every year. So the city's cost to those bonds has stayed flat. in the recent history. You know, obviously there's times when they paid all of it, and then we kind of upped the amount we were reimbursing back to the cities. We'll show that a little bit more. And then it was about 2008, 2009 when UIA was created and bonded, and about 2/3 of the network was built under this for these original cities. So even Orem City, you're like, hey, we bonded for the project back here, but most of your network and most of the network for all the cities was done here. And these are not being paid for by the cities, any of the cities. These are all sustainable and profitable and paying for themselves. Um, couple accomplishments on the system. We are the largest open access network in the U.S., and we're now actually the largest municipal system in the United States. So whether it's open or not open, um, it's the largest municipal system with about 260,000 locations. And that's Or we own them, or we're at least partnered in those. So that would include projects like Idaho Falls, Yellowstone Fiber. Um, you know, you call for those for support, someone in our call center, but we get revenue in these partnerships, and we don't do them unless they're financially beneficial to us. We have no obligation to serve those communities, but if we can help with our costs, uh, and bring in some revenue, then we do like those partnerships. Uh, we have the fastest speeds in the United States. Oh, I, I Kind of bolded some of the things that have changed since last time I was here. That number's gone up, obviously. Um, this was 100 gig. We do have 400 gig customers now. So the University of Utah has a couple of those from us, um, and, uh, that's probably the fastest connection in the state. We also service the state and the state data centers, and we— I mean, we do a lot of really big things. We're not kind of a local small ISP type of thing. We are One of the largest, if not the most significant fiber provider in the state. Uh, it's the most competitive system in the United States with 19 different providers offering services to residential customers. We actually have other providers doing business too, so technically we have like 30+ providers. But, uh, again, this is a structure where we're not here to compete with the private sector. This is a pro-private sector thing. The private sector loves us. You go talk to the ISPs in Utah, and they pretty much all use us. Even those that are wireless providers that aren't listed as one of these providers, they buy connectivity from us. So we are powering broadband across the state for almost everybody. A couple companies that don't like us, you can guess who they are, probably.

Yes.

We've been the number one awardee from the school system for the last several years. Each year we get anywhere from 50 to a few hundred new circuits. This last year was our best one. We got about 250 awards— actually, no, it was 280 circuits from Utah Education Telehealth Network for schools. So we've been very busy building those, and those will start billing in July. So we— chart will go up, we'll show you our revenue charts. But that's been a very important partnership. We love to service our schools. They get a very good price. They don't give us business because they like us. They give us business because we are the best price and check all the boxes for reliability and service and things like that. At the same time, we really like the revenue we get from that. So really good partnership there. We do a lot of other cool stuff like air quality sensors and wildfire detection systems and things like that. We have a very high Net Promoter Score, which is a survey that goes out to customers. And Google ratings, very high. Last I checked, that was higher than Google Fiber.

I like to—

They're not Google Fiber anymore. They're G Fiber. It's been sold to a cable company and private equity firm. So I don't know what their future looks like, but it's not with Alphabet as a majority owner. I think they're still a minority owner. Okay, next thing, just kind of— this is the landscape. We provide a fiber system, and all these different companies, most of them local companies, benefit from this system. So again, this is not something that harms our private sector in Utah. It's something that helps them. Our network is the best out there. We, in fact, even other fiber networks, they use a PON technology where everybody shares it, feel a lot like a cable network. If your neighbors are hogging the bandwidth, your speed slows down. You say, does that even happen on fiber? Because fiber's so fast. It absolutely does. People use a lot more broadband now. And so you'll see other providers are like, yeah, you get up to a gigabit or up to this. And at 10 o'clock at night when everybody's streaming, it doesn't quite get there. We have a dedicated connection everywhere in the network. So if you have a gigabit, you get a gigabit. You have 2.5 gig, you get 2.5 gig. It's 24/7. Doesn't matter what your neighbor's doing. The whole system is built on dedicated fiber connectivity to every single location. A couple other things, uh, we have— this is relatively new with the 2.5 gig tier. It's kind of a mid between the ultra-premium user and the common gigabit. We've seen a lot of uptick in 2.5 gig. Um, still the most popular is gigabit, which is cool because we have a 250 mega option. People aren't picking our cheapest option. They want the fire— the faster speeds. So it's not just based on price. Uh, demand is increasing. for faster and faster connectivity, and we're seeing a good uptick on 2.5 gig. And we did lower the price of 10 gig relatively recently. Okay, quick, some charts here. So this is kind of total subscriber base across all the Utopia cities and the partnerships. It's our best year ever, over 10,000 subscribers coming on over the last year. Uh, for context, we only have about 82,000 to 83,000 subscribers, so 10,000 is really big growth, right, percentage-wise. This is a very good year for us. This is by city. And so each city, you're going to see they're in there. Idaho Falls, I'm in the water there, doing really well. They have less competitive options there though. So it's really nice, but they just shot up to be number 1 as far as subscribers. Orem is this one right here, this brown one. And you'll see right here, it took a big jump up in the summer. And that was a result of a door-to-door marketing effort. So we did have people doing door-to-door. We call that our light-touch door-to-door marketing. You know, we try not to be like some of the other campaigns out there. It can be pretty pushy. So we manage that very closely and make sure, hey, this has got to be a positive experience. You can't be pushy, can't be bugging people, you know, because those complaints, rather than just some private companies like, ah, we don't really care, we just care about revenue, here we do care. We, you know, we report to you and you report to your constituents, and, you know, we don't want them to be upset with any of the things that we're doing at Utopia. But it's been received pretty well. Um, generally people are pretty happy to pay less for broadband for a better connection. So it's gone well, and that's going to be picking up again, uh, this summer and next couple of weeks. This is Orem-specific. Uh, this is availability. So this is where we've built the network. You say, well, we're done, should just stop. But even in a city like Orem, we continue to see some growth there. So that's redevelopment or still finding some pockets where you can get some homes in. Uh, we do continue to expand how many people have access to this. Uh, this is your subscribers on the system. So again, you'll see that bump there in the summer sales, uh, season. We hadn't done that before, uh, and that was the biggest increase we've had. So last year when we presented— oh, the green line is last year's snapshot. So just so you can see, we presented in May last year. So since then, we've had that little jump there. Last year when we presented, we were presenting that we had grown an average of 27 customers every month over the previous year. This year, we're up 45 customers every month year over year on average. So it was a total of 534— sorry, 539 customers that come on over the last year. Just enormous. Fantastic. 5.8% growth. This is kind of hard to tell because we have so many customers in the city. You stare at it long enough, you see some differences, but there's another 540 dots on the right side than there were on the left. And it's interesting, I was looking at them like, I don't know, whatever reason right there, there's kind of a cluster that came on. I don't know what happened there, and it was— it's definitely denser. There's a couple of places, but overall we did see them mostly spread across the city. And then a bunch of business-type connections. We saw some churches come online over here and some school connections and things like that. So, but it's obviously trending in the right direction. People really like it. Also something I didn't actually observe or make this point, I got it out of Centerville, but they came back and made the point to say, you know, this is the most successful service we offer as a city. Because it's not like mandatory. Like, every single one of these people had other options. And all of these people chose the city-provided service, right? And so when you look at other things that are out there, you know, it's like, well, how many people in the city, you know, went to the rec center? How many people went to the pool or the park or the golf course or whatever it may be? It wouldn't look like this, right? This is something that's reaching a lot of the people in the city, and they're benefiting from it.

Thank you.

So I don't know if that holds true here, but we would hope that we're the most popular voluntary service in the city. It's something we would strive to do. Financially, this is what it's looked like. This is combined revenue for Utopia and UIA. I remember when we celebrated about $1 million a month in revenue, and we pushed past that to almost $5.5 million of revenue per month. That's obviously a good thing. This is our, our debt burden basically at UIA on these lines. And then our revenue at UIA. So this is UIA only, and you see the delta here continues to get better. So that's a good thing that creates revenue that we use to fund those installations. This was a very expensive year because we had to go connect 10,000 subscribers, right? But we are, we are not increasing the pace of debt, new debt, because we're able to fund more and more of that from that delta. While also increasing our payments back to the cities. So it's, it's great. I want to continue to see these trends. This is the debt service repayment back to cities. So this is what's proposed. We just had our preliminary budget meetings where we show like, hey, this is what we're going to do this year. What's proposed is to increase the amount we pay to cities by $318,000 and There's about 22% of that, I think.

So $71,000.

Uh, so it'll go up by $70,000, but that's— that would keep the amount the city pays flat. This was our preliminary budget. We're actually looking to modify this a little bit more in favor and add another $100,000 to this number. So that'll bump it a little bit more. That's not approved till we have full budget approval. But the real goal of it is actually to put us on a more aggressive trajectory, right? Over the last several years, it's been let's hold the line on the amount going back to city, or what the cities are paying, even though the debt payments are going up. So we're going to try to— we're going to put in place a curve where it's not only $100,000 this year more, but it would be $100,000 more every year perpetually. Then next year, we want to try to do better than that, say, okay, now that's the standard. let's try to do $200,000 and, and kind of ramp that down so that your payments are getting lower and lower. But we hesitate to say, hey, it's going to happen that way for the next 14 years, uh, because we are always worried about competitive pressures, right? There's things in the marketplace of, you know, here comes AT&T Fiber. They just bought, um, Lumen, which is CenturyLink. You know, are they going to be offering services and promotions at a loss just to try to compete? You know, there's, there's those types of competitive pressures out there. Like right now, things are going really well, so we just hesitate to say, hey, we want to, we want to relieve the pressure as much as we can. We also don't want to find ourselves in 3 years and say, hey, you know what, we got to roll this stuff back. And really the attitude is, once we started making these payments back, uh, in our, in our board meetings, we're like, we love this and we hope this stays forever, but just remember, this is always subject to availability, right? We have to have and preserve those revenues in order to make these payments to the cities. And if for whatever reason it's some market disruption, we may not be in that position, but we're gonna push as hard as we can. Keep that and to keep ramping that up as well. So a couple things, there's just kind of ongoing improvement, improving financial situation, increasing take rates, payments.

The original bond increased every year.

The percentage on the—

is increase.

The amount we're paying comes out to nearly 30% of— because it's a— the total payment's about $17 million, so we're paying like 5— whatever it is— we're paying $5.2 million of that this year, and that's going up every year. So every year, effectively, we're paying a bigger portion of that.

Okay.

On the newer stuff, um, oh yeah, this is the bad one, right? The payments for the original bonds are still an obligation out there, but as, as the cities pay that, we're counting that as an IOU. So in 2040, things get dramatically different if we're still charging the same rates that we have now, or whatever's appropriate for that time. Um, suddenly a lot of revenue becomes available for payment back to cities. And the way we're accounting for that is that we would pay you back with interest all the amounts you've ever paid towards the bonds. The way we account for it— I think most cities are kind of writing it off as just an expense. That's probably the responsible thing to do. But we are hoping that 2040 gets—

it's a very good year, and many years after that.

I want to make this point here. This is based on a study that was done by— it was done mostly on the EPB system, which is Chattanooga. I guess up until a year or two ago, they were the largest municipal fiber system in the country until we surpassed them. But anyways, the study was very good. It went in there and analyzed all sorts of impacts of having this municipal fiber system in their city. And we say, you know, that's pretty applicable to what we do.

Not all of it.

They had a power system that they leveraged. Um, but we took the pieces of that that were applicable to Utopia Fiber in our cities. We said, let's see what that— what those benefits would be scaled and made, you know, appropriate for our system. And, uh, and we also look at some of our market things like Comcast as opposed to their competition.

But what—

but the result was that we— this is actually cheating a little bit on the conservative side. Their point was that the entire market rates go down by about $29 per household whether you sign up for the system or not. That's the competitive impact of having this there. Um, we're only counting those that signed up for the service, but the reality is that people have a lower-cost Comcast or whatever other service they have as a result of us being here. So if we just count the ones that we have— Um, actually, I forgot to update this number.

Here.

Um, so we're actually over $3 million now, but that would— we're saving the residents of Forum over $3 million a year by having this. If you're looking at that, um, we're also saving the businesses over $1 million a year. So a lot of the things that we're looking at, um, from a city perspective, they're important, but they've gotten expensive, right? And they continue to get expensive. There's inflation, there's increased costs, whatever it is, and You know, it's not unique to Orem. It's cities everywhere. Generally, costs are going up, but this is a great place that we can point to that the— what the city has done is actually saving the residents money. And if you look at the study applied to all of Utopia over a 10-year period, it's like, hey, this would be like $900 million of economic benefit. But based on just the size of Orem relative to that, you could point to a $200 million economic benefit. over a 10-year period. Obviously, we're into it more than 10 years and expect it to last much more than 10 years. But the total benefit, including all the educational benefits and all the tie-ins, smart city functions, and just, hey, this is better, cheaper broadband for people in their homes, is an enormous benefit as a result of this, this project. So anyways, there's a link here if you ever want to dive into the details and how that's substantiated. I just like to share that. But anyways, that's— I have my number changed, sorry, that's a 35 now. Somebody redid our phone system. But, uh, any questions?

Sure.

I don't see any questions.

I do want to express appreciation for our board members too. You know, it's a time commitment to participate in our board members. Last year it was Jeff Lamson, and we appreciate his service there. And now we have, uh, Lenee Miller on the On the board, and Bren's always been on the board. So we have 2 boards, we've got Utopia and UIA. But, uh, you know, something that they've got to take time out of their schedules to attend those meetings, and it is appreciated, and they've been great. It's their job to hold our feet to the fire, but, but, uh, you know, I think they do that in a good way and work with other board members to help guide the organization.

I want to take credit. It's not me.

It's not you, Jen.

Yes, and I really enjoyed actually the meetings and the discussion that we've had.

Sorry, Jen. That's right.

I'm sorry, she was the one who made the assignments.

There's like so many things going all kinds of places.

So I appreciate you still.

Yeah, appreciate all the councils that interact.

Great job, Roger.

Um, just curious if you're going to continue that soft touch approach? And have you done that in other cities and had as favorable a response as you did here in Orem?

And will that be an ongoing part of your marketing and sales brand?

Yeah, so we, we were pretty hesitant to do it. We had done it the first time, like, back in 2010 in Brigham City, and it was not so soft of a touch, and there was a lot of backlash. A lot of people were upset. We had used Yeah, I don't know. There were people tied in with like the Vivint company and stuff like that that had kind of formed this group, and they just were like, numbers and sales, and that's all we care about. And it didn't go well, and that kind of burned our desire to use that as a tool. Over the years, we said, you know, this, if it's done right, this could be great. We started it, actually, we tried doing it in Bozeman. We were like, you know, if Bozeman gets mad, It doesn't hurt us, but if it goes well, it's a great partnership, right? So we actually started using these teams and they were Utah-based teams in Bozeman to see if we could do this without generating conflicts and things or complaints. And it went really well, you know, boosted sales dramatically. And, you know, we went back to the city and said, you know, how do you feel about this? And they were like, we haven't heard a word. It was great. So we used that same team and started doing it in Utah. And there was still an RFP process for all of that too. This team has leveraged primarily salespeople based out of this area. Orem and Provo are the ones going across all the other cities, and we just— it's working great. We're managing it well as far as complaints. We've had to fire a couple people off their team. I mean, we have that ability in our contract to say, hey, too many complaints, this guy's too pushy, he's off. And, you know, we've done that. Pretty tightly, and it's worked out really well. So yes, we're planning to continue that and, and, uh, be starting up in the next couple of weeks, uh, here, maybe even sooner.

It's—

we get most of them right after graduation because most of them are college kids.

They just came to my house, so they were great.

Well, does that mean you don't sign up for this?

I haven't yet because I haven't had time to do all the other parts to it, so I keep saying come back in another month.

Yeah, uh, can you estimate what the average homeowner, let's say, who does a 1 gig plan is paying for them? Um, and I'm also curious as to what your, um, what your percent rate of people who might leave the service in a given year is. Obviously you're growing as a whole, but I'm wondering how many people leave the service annually.

Yeah, those are good questions. Um, so our gigabit pricing is variable based on which provider you pick, but it's about $70 to $80. It's in that range between who you pick.

You pay a Utopia fee and a provider fee. Yeah, together it's about $70-ish. And, and so why would one person choose one of your 19 providers over another one?

Um, lots of reasons. In fact, our most popular provider is actually our most expensive. So, you know, they do what they can to differentiate. So some of them target like gaming and latency and peering with the different gaming servers, right? The gamers are like, I need the lowest ping for this gaming server or whatever. Others are more like, hey, we'll help you more with the kind of a white glove installation. We'll have a managed router in your house so we can help troubleshoot in-home issues. Some of them differentiate based on having a cable TV option that they offer. Or phone services. We've got one that's launching a mobile phone bundle, so your cellular phone is bundled in with their billing. So it's kind of that sort of stuff. And then different promotions. Some of them will say, hey, when you sign up, you get a couple months free. One of them does a gift card. They'll do like a free Apple TV, something like that.

What kind of provision is this?

So we provide a connection from the house to usually a data center where that service provider meets us. Now, how they handle their internet traffic from there can be dramatically different, and the features they offer you can be different. And sometimes they matter to people and sometimes they don't. So some people are like, I need to have an IPv6, or I need IPv4 address. And some people are like, I don't even know what that means. Doesn't matter to them. But if somebody wants their own IP address, and then you can even have a static IP address versus a dynamic address, like some providers offer those services and others don't. If you don't care about any of that stuff, then you usually just kind of pick low price. Others pick like, hey, they're sponsoring the, you know, they got their ad at the local baseball game or the school or whatever, and they pick out customers based on sponsorships. Because they can see that there's local benefit. One of them just started advertising at Utah Mammoth games. So, oh, I recognize that logo, right? So things like that. You'll also see on Facebook, you know, and even on the Orem group, you'll see people like, hey, which provider should I pick? You'll see right there, people are like, oh, I love these guys. They've been awesome. I had them for 10 years, never had an outage, whatever it may be, you know, stuff like that. That helps a lot. So recommendations from other people. But yeah, we always wonder, like, it's pretty cool that it isn't just cost and not even that that's like the driving factor and there's ability to differentiate. It's the differentiated ones have actually been more successful and the higher priced. I mean, it's obvious, you look it up on our website. So Xmission has the highest price. They are the largest provider by number of subscribers on the system.

And the quit rate?

What's that?

The quit rate, people who leave your service annually.

Oh, uh, yeah, so our churn rate, um, we're— it's gone up just a little bit. Uh, we were pretty steady at about 3 to 3.5% annually. Uh, in this last couple years, it's gone up to about 4.5 to 5%. Um, there, you know, we're just seeing a lot more competition and promotions from like the wireless bundles and things like that because You can get like a T-Mobile hotspot type service, or I mean, it's more than a hotspot. It's their fixed wireless. So they're running a totally separate network from the cell towers. That's a fixed wireless product, and it works in some locations and doesn't in others, slows down during peak, but they're marketing it very heavily. Doing bundles that are pretty enticing.

So we have—

we're losing customers to that occasionally. easily get them back, or they have a bad experience. It does affect our churn rate. Now, the charts I showed, when I say 10,000 customers, that's net growth. So, you know, we probably signed up closer to 12,000, but probably, you know, lost a couple thousand through churn.

Wow, thank you. This is like, I'm Well, having been one who was, who was, who's been back when I was on the council, was involved, heavily involved in Utopia. It's beginning. It's, it's good to see, see these things happening.

Yeah, again, that the early phase was a little rough, but we wouldn't have the current phase if it weren't for that phase. It was the right decision. It just requires some patience.

Well, this is—

is this my heart rate? Thank you. Appreciate you coming, Roger.

See ya.

All right, our next presentation is Fred Philpott from LRB talking about our general fund sustainability study follow-up. And so it looks like we've got 20 minutes, 10 minutes presentation, 10 minutes Q&A.

He did Laura Lewis and Acting on Rust. He's on.

So we also have Laura.

Oh, is Laura here somewhere?

No, I'm only here on screen.

Oh, hello, Laura.

And that's because I messed up and didn't put the meeting in my calendar. If I said I'm running, I'm running a little bit late, he sent me a text. I'm like, uh-oh, you're not as late as me. So thank you.

Kelsey, remember that?

To get me online.

Thank you.

They've come, came before and talked about the sustainability plan, and we gave some direction, and now we welcome you back with additional information.

Yes, thank you. Uh, so I thought I'd, uh, Refresh on what we're here for. We've been working with staff on the sustainability model and developing a pro forma that allows us to make projections and a tool that's very flexible and allows us to change those assumptions and see what happens. The intent being establishing fiscal policies relative to the general fund. The objective here is to have a model that can be reviewed on a regular basis. So we're not suggesting that this is something you're kind of one and done. It's also not necessary that LRB involved— be involved in every step of that process, but we at least have a tool that the city can use to evaluate sustainability and also evaluate decisions that you have to review. Um. One element that, um, we can consider, which, uh, you're looking at, which is property tax increases and a potential, uh, small increase relative to, uh, your property tax. So, as we look at that, um, and evaluate that in the context of the model, essentially what we can do is, again, look at trends and see the impact of that relative to the benchmarks that we're looking at. Your cash reserves. Um, and, uh, again, measure the, the impact of that. And in this case, as we look at a potential 7% increase, while important, it won't have a huge impact on long-term sustainability relative to the charts that I showed you in previous, uh, discussions. And I'll follow up here.

Yeah, I just want to clarify this 7%. We're talking about OHRM's portion?

Yes.

Of property tax.

Yes.

So not one's entire property tax bill.

Is that right?

Yes.

Yep.

And that percentage, while it's 7% of your— the municipal tax levy, it would be a much smaller percentage when you look at the overall property tax bill that an individual would pay, because you're, you know, 10% of the total tax bill when it comes to property taxes. But what this does do is it allows you to start looking at, again, impacts and establishing a policy that you can perpetuate moving forward. The objective there is to ensure that your revenue streams address cost changes over time, recognizing that those costs rarely decrease.

Yes.

Unless their level of service changes, meaning you opt to change the level of service that you provide and minimize that, then that's typically where we see costs decrease. However, inflation Uh, will affect you just, just like anybody else. Uh, this— I wanted to remind you again, the idea of your buying power over time, uh, showing you what your tax levy as percent of the total tax bill was in 2005 versus 2025. You've gone from 17% of the total in 2005 down to 9% of the total tax bill, speaking to that idea of municipal levy is only a small percentage of the total tax bill. This is purely a percentage, a percent of total comparison. In reality, every entity provides a specific level of service that will adjust according to their needs. But it does reflect, again, your piece of the pie showing that the property tax that Orem assesses has not kept pace with other entities if they have raised the property tax levy. Alrighty, um, here are the assumptions that we've used in the model. I wanted to highlight this and really focus on, um, this line item here, this second to the top, um, you know, what, what we're proposing in the model, which is a 3% increase in your sales tax revenue. Um, and then we have some growth in some other areas, but Primarily, we're keeping revenues constant other than the sales tax revenue growth. Right now, the model that we've been working on does not propose any property tax increases, just showing what happens if we have natural growth in our revenue stream. Now, there is— I do want to remind you that there is growth in your property tax base as it relates to new growth on your system, new brick-and-mortar Essentially, but that's a very small component of Orem City's property tax, which is a small component of your overall revenue. So it's a small piece of a small— Um, uh, down here at the bottom, the colored areas in blue and light blue, those are our assumptions relative to inflation, inflationary pressure on the general fund. So you can see these percentages are much higher. We have some, um, Growing at 10% on public safety, which we do see pressure in public safety, that those expenses often grow at a higher rate due to market factors and competition. Our general growth, we're looking at somewhere between 3% and 4% growth and just general inflationary pressure, which, as we've all felt recently, That really depends, right, on market and national or other environmental factors. So that could, that could go much higher, right, relative to those assumptions. But we do have some inflationary pressure brought in. This gives you an idea of the trends that the general fund has experienced. I have highlighted the sales tax since that's a A critical component in this evaluation. Historically, from 2019 to 2024, actual sales tax revenues grew slightly above 6%. Our model is assuming 3%. The caveat there is when you look at the last 2 years, '23 and '24-'25 actuals, you're actually seeing hardly any growth in sales tax revenues. It's plateaued and stabilized. So 3% could be aggressive, uh, with regards to growth in revenue, meaning if you don't get that, then we're in a worse situation than what our model shows. Overall, uh, revenue is growing at a little under 2%, where historically you've had a little bit higher, but that, that'll fluctuate based on grant revenues, those types of things. Uh, with regards to expense, we have a little bit higher expense growth than 2019 to 2024 at 6.41% versus a little over 5% historically. This has to do with, again, discussing with departments what do you need, what new inflationary pressures might there be relative to some of these expense line items. And so we've accounted for that and then tried to show your need. For example, that public safety bucket of saying, what do we think you really need to program there, recognizing that historically you've done a very good job Rolling and trying to minimize inflationary pressure, but that'll eventually come due.

That bill will come due.

Alrighty, so we showed this, uh, the unrestricted general fund balance under our all-inclusive scenario, um, versus a scenario where we took out some of our one-time expenses, essentially showing this, this is not possible. We cannot survive on 3% sales tax revenue, no new property tax. and fund everything we want to fund. So that's not really doable. All righty, so I, I did want to give an opportunity to kind of look at the model and play around with at least one scenario to show you how you as a community could maybe not engage in property tax policy and still maintain your fund balance, which may not be possible, but Let's, let's go into the model. So this is a lot of numbers, right? So I'll make it bigger.

Thank you.

You can't read.

And the numbers, I mean, obviously are important, but there's so many here that we don't want to get lost in the, in all this, this junk here on the spreadsheet. But there, there are elements that I can control, right? I can turn on and off scenarios that we could say, okay, what happens if— and in our discussions with staff, we said, okay, what happens if you just turn everything off? Let's, let's turn it all off and see what happens, but keeping that 3% sales tax. So I have triggers here that say these are our one-time expenses and our new O&M that we've said, hey, these are things that we think we need to To maintain our level of service. But let's turn all that off. Say, okay, we're not going to fund any of that. And what happens to our pro forma? So that helps, right? So you saw the chart just shifted and we got back to this green line. But we're not, we're not preserving our fund balance. And what this represents is our unrestricted general fund balance, trying to keep that at about $20 million where you're at now. Um, so, uh, turning off those requests doesn't achieve what we, uh, what we'd hope, which is keeping us stable. Now we go into our, uh, other assumptions in this model. So one area that we could look at is say, well, what if, um, here I look at those, uh, those assumptions, right, that were on that slide relative to inflation. Let's say I turn all of those off and say, well, we're gonna be really efficient, and whatever it is— technology, artificial intelligence, whatever we plug in there for our efficiency tool— that's gonna make it so we don't have growth in expense. While we may experience inflation, efficiency helps mitigate that and keeps our costs the same. So if I turn all of that off, that's a pretty big assumption, right? Turn all of that off. What happens to our sustainability model? And there you can see, yes, we actually— we can keep our fund balance, maybe even produce a little bit of surplus because our expenses aren't growing. So essentially, that 3% can save the day if we have no inflationary pressure and no requests, no one-time requests, no ongoing level of service requests. So That gives me some, you know, context, right, or bookend to this analysis to say, well, is that possible? Do we really think that we could keep our expenses that controlled in the short term? Maybe, right? When we look at budgeting, we can say, hey, this year we have to tighten our belt. We're not going to have any new growth in expense. But over 5 years, is that possible? And, you know, my thought is no, that would not be possible to try to achieve that. So let's turn those back on. Okay, let's keep our inflation. We have some trouble there. What if we assume that 6% growth in sales tax revenue and say, okay, we're going to rely on that, what we experienced in the past, and put that 6% growth back in there? There you can see it helps, right? That is putting us in a better position, meaning that our negative is not as negative as before.

That's true.

But that's not enough either, right? So at the end of the day, we're not telling you what you have to do, or, you know, we can't force municipalities to make change. But what it does help me understand is what we need to do relative to all of the tools that we have in front of us. So efficiency, yes, we need to do— we need to look at efficiency and how do we control our expenditure increase, uh, looking at economic development and promoting that as a potential tool because that generates sales tax revenues that the general fund relies on. So yes, we need to do that, uh, but even with sales tax revenue growth and inflation, we still have some, some substantial pressure. So it leads me back to that discussion of property tax and what sort of policy do we, we put in place to actively manipulate that revenue stream. Recognizing that it's not the lion's share of your revenue, right? So we're talking about controlling a portion of your revenue stream that is a smaller percentage of the overall total. So if we were to try to mitigate this funding gap with property tax alone, we would be talking about ginormous percentages, right? And that's not what we're— what we're recommending here. What we're looking at is saying, how do we think about this on an annual basis and take a proactive approach? I also wanted to just show you that the model is interactive like that, right? We can go in here and make assumptions, change those assumptions, see what happens so that we can isolate, um, what do we want to do? What are the policy decisions we want to make as a council as we look toward the future? So jumping back here, uh, uh, again, what we want to do and what we're recommending is taking that proactive approach relative to your model your general fund and the revenue streams within that model. Bonding may be an option, right, as we look at one-time expenses, maintaining a level of service from a capital perspective, that you might use that tool strategically relative to amortizing cost over a longer period of time, rather than having that upfront cost that then has to have tax policy mitigate that. So looking at bonding, um, In reality, the general fund analysis didn't have a huge amount of one-time capital investment, but there, there could be components of that that could be utilized bonding. And then I highlighted this last in our last discussion, but looking at alternative revenue resources.

So all of your fee—

the fees that you assess should be backed up with studies, and those should be updated on a regular basis. new revenue sources. The model does include an assumption relative to the transportation utility fee, starting at $250,000, growing to $500,000. But even with that, you can see we still have a need, right? So it's that proactive approach to the general fund that is our big takeaway, and we're recommending is keeping on top of that. We also wanted to highlight a community that has done this approach. So, uh, you're not the first to look at the general fund from this perspective, normally be the last, but you are, um, one of a few communities across the state that are proactively addressing the general fund. West Valley City this year adopted a policy based on this type of evaluation and analysis that essentially ensures that there's a framework to take action. Now, it's non-binding, so their resolution doesn't bind future councils, but it establishes a framework for them to continue to perpetuate that, that action. Essentially, their, uh, their tax policy is governed by inflation indices that they say we're going to adjust our property tax rate based on those indices, whichever they feel is appropriate. They have some guardrails in there. Their resolution that suggests maximums that, that they don't allow their property tax levy to increase at a certain percentage. It preserves the discretion of the council, so it doesn't take away any of that, and it has requirements relative to truth in taxation. Yes, MCI, municipal cost index, and the consumer price index. So those are 2 standard indices that are utilized to capture inflation changes. Those are national statistics. There are other indices that I've seen used. There's a Western Region CPI, Consumer Price Index, that captures more of Intermountain states, and that does differ compared to a national CPI. But the concept here is saying let's establish a resolution and a policy that our tax rate will adjust to account for inflation at a minimum. And that's again what we're trying to look at, right, is there's this pressure of inflation on your general fund that is not addressed in the truth in taxation process and your certified tax rate calculation. So West Valley City opted to remedy that by creating this resolution, and others are exploring that. We've seen it more commonly on utility rates because there's a little bit of, you know, less political pressure essentially on those and a direct connection between revenue and expense. But we're seeing now that spillover general fund elements. Alrighty. I did have some additional information here relative to resolution language and those caps. So if the CPI increases less than 3%, the adjustment shall be limited to the actual CPI percentage. So essentially And if we only have one account, and if we have a 3% target every year, let's adopt the lower of that, but we're capping it at that 3%. That can be dangerous, right? Because in some years we've experienced that 20% inflationary pressure. Sometimes that's just on a component of expense like construction costs. So I saw those indices at a much higher rate, but there's ways to massage that, right, in the resolution to ensure that there's guardrails on that, preserve the intent while allowing continued dialogue as it relates to truth in taxation. Alrighty, uh, try to get through that.

I have a question.

Yes, you go back to the first graph that if we did not do any changes.

Got one.

All right, I just want to point out, this is something I've been thinking a lot about this as we've talked about some of these items, because when I was on first on the City Council, I was 36 years old, and I'm not 36 anymore. Um, but, but it seemed like when we would see this happen, we thought, oh, this is going to happen later, later, later. As I look at this council, there are at least 4 of us who will be on the city council when those— When those dip below into the negative, we don't do anything. I just wanted to point, point that out, that the time is— I think the time's come where we'll be fast approaching where we're going to be involved in some pretty tough decisions. And so anyway, I just wanted to make everybody's day brighter that way.

So, oh, go ahead.

I can also just—

to me, the big takeaway is This is, this is a dynamic model. We are trying to, like, look into the future. I get that we don't have a perfect crystal ball. But what I am seeing is, in order to be sustainable over time, we need a multi-pronged approach, not only in any given year to multiple sources, but also over time, each and every year, we should look at this.

So I think that the solution is, is multi-year and revenue, and it shouldn't turn a blind eye to any one revenue source or anyone here.

Yeah, I was in a discussion with a water entity in Oregon. We're discussing efficiency and Great. And the challenges associated with that. And the element that we discussed and tried to bring home is municipalities are not like private entities where if we increase efficiency by reducing internal cost, that we increase profitability and therefore benefit the shareholder, right? It doesn't work that way for a municipality or local government. When we talk about efficiency or reducing cost, in most cases what that means is level of service change. And that is our business, right? We provide a service to our residents, which is why I love local government. Of all our government structures, local government is the best to me because that's where the rubber hits the road. We provide a service. If we reduce cost and that compromises our level of service, and that impacts me as a resident, I lose something. I don't gain something like as if I were a shareholder, right? Now, I could perceive it as a gain in that my property tax or my sales tax doesn't go up, but I lose that level of service. So that multi-pronged approach is very beneficial because we need to evaluate that level of service.

Yeah.

What are our expenditure growth rates? What does that look like? And how do we continue to provide that level of service while still promoting efficiency and managing revenue resources? changing those as necessary, those that we can control.

And that's kind of my question. So in the private sector, and I'll just say from, you know, a boat company that my husband worked for, Nobel, Ray Norta always had this formula, right? And every so often he had to do a RIF, reduction of forces, keep the profitability So, and then we heard Representative Peterson talk about the direction from the governor to reduce all the budgets by 5%. So help me understand how on a municipal level, um, implement both of those in your projection, or a form of those in your projection model.

Yeah, so we, we're not addressing that necessarily Although we can. So we can say, okay, let's look at those types of directives and say, um, uh, on a big scale, right, and those general assumptions that I looked at, instead of 10% growth and— or, or 3% growth in our, in our budget, let's put a negative 5% in there and see what happens. Does that change anything? But I, I think the important question is that that's easy to do in an Excel model, right? I Put a -5% in place of a 3% growth and say, there we go. This is how we do that. But the reality is, in order to achieve that, you as a council actually have to say, okay, where are we going to cut the services so that we can achieve that assumption that I just plugged into this model? And most of the time when we have that discussion, and when I bring in a model like this and say, okay, yeah, that's easy to plug in.

play.

But what expense line items— when I— if I go back to this model and I say, okay, let's look at all of these buckets here and now expand all of those and say, okay, we've got actually a lot of things we're doing in here in these categories, which ones are we going to actually cut services out of?

No.

Where does that savings come from? So again, we can make the assumptions change, but it comes back to you as a legislative body. What services do we get from the equation to achieve that objective?

And okay, just the counterpoint. There's services and there's also benefits. So, and I'm just going to say something that's um, kind of unique to municipal is, um, the 980 workweek, right? So day off every couple weeks. So when in 2009, 2008, I remember there was this— we are in a recession, a deep recession that the city was experiencing. We don't want to lay people off, so we're going to roll off some of these other benefits and not replace those people after— through attrition to kind of bring our salaries back into our new budget that we have because of the recession. So I guess my question is, how often or how should we anticipate that type of decision also? Well, can we? How does that work with this model that you've talked about? Can we preemptively look at some things like that if we're concern, because frankly, I'm concerned affordability for our residents is very difficult right now. So this, you know, you're, you're saying, oh, it's 3%, but for seniors who call me, that's, you know, so help me have that discussion.

Yes, that's a great comment. And the benefit of the model to say, as the council looks at some of those initiatives, we can evaluate the impact. Say, What happens if we assume that we were not necessarily remove a level of service, but let it expire, you know, benefit potentially? And so we can measure the magnitude of that and then evaluate the impacts on that graph that we were just looking at and say, okay, how does that help us? Does it change our perspective at all? Again, it goes back to what Bren said is that will likely be needed as well. So efficiency is not removed from this discussion, that the city will continue to have to do that. Because again, the magnitude here cannot be sustained without addressing all of that efficiency, revenue, economic development. All of that has to—

I'll just say, I mean, I went through this. I worked for a company and we had this great big meeting. Basically in this meeting, it was just this rah-rah cheerleader kind of meeting. And in the meeting they said, we're taking away your automatic COLA. We used to get a bump in our check every time the CPI went up, right? But you still have a job, so this is good.

Yeah.

You know, and I remember sitting there going, did they really just say that to me? I'm supposed to be happy right now because they're taking away my COLA? So I guess that's the question. How—

when—

at what point do you decide to add that type of hard discussion to models like this?

I think as Bryn indicated, it will be on an annual basis that you'll be looking at this in order to address these types of issues. It's a multi-year, multi-prong approach, and all of that is on the table to ensure that you can continue to provide service because, you know, municipalities are not in the business of going out of business, right? So the service that you provide has to continue. And there are other factors that influence that, you know, market factors relative to retaining employees. In some years, it's easy to make those types of decisions to say, hey, we're not going to provide these benefits that you've become accustomed to because everybody's losing those benefits. Whereas in a year where the market supports those types of benefits and you say, hey, we're going to remove that, You're going to lose employees and you will not be able to provide the service. So it's not an easy answer, I guess, what I'm giving. It's just we have to continue to watch that, and all of those solutions that you bring up need to be on the table in this model.

And I guess that's what I'm trying to do is publicly say these are some of the options, and there are some of the decisions that are super hard. Well, they all are, right?

But we have a responsibility to examine all the options.

I think we went through that a few years ago where the economy was tough.

Yes.

You know, some of those benefits, the raises, those kind of things had to be held back. And that—

those aren't—

that was before my time, but I heard about it. Um, and those are hard decisions to make.

I feel like that that's part of our annual budgeting process, though.

I feel like exec staff looks really hard at those elements, those things.

And, you know, it can, you know, continual— we'll continue to do that forward.

But yeah, I think that's a—

Because we know they're going to be a part of our responsibilities.

Yes. Chris?

I just appreciate the opportunity that there is a tool.

There's a way to analyze each of these mechanisms in a theoretical Excel way rather than have to in the economic of Oh, we're not sure, so let's make it, uh, you know, some challenge with employees or services or, or, uh, you know, citizens in their, in their monthly utility bill or whatever it is.

So this, this tool is going to be very helpful as we move forward in analyzing what we can and need to do to effectively help our city be the best it can be with the most efficient use of the tax funds that are sacred funds that we have a fiduciary responsibility to maintain.

Yes, and I think that's a great point, is that is the objective of the model, is to be proactive. But as you as legislators look at how to be efficient, we can then model that and help you with data. Say, here's what happens if we do that, and that should help inform that policy decision. The entities that I do this work with, we are often updating them on an annual basis, and it's efficient, low-cost way to provide data. And then we'll come back in and say, okay, here's what we have. Here's what the model looks like based on these assumptions. And it creates informed decision-making.

And now that we have—

now that we have this sort of started, we can bring this back to you earlier in our budget process, like our next retreat. And so that you—

so that we can use this as a tool for you to help us set the goals, the stage, the guardrails for future budget processes.

Right.

Ben, can I say a few things?

Please.

So again, as Fred has stated, it's easy for us to clickety-click on the model and say, oh, reduce expenses by 5%. And Yes, that needs to be explored. But I remember several years ago with other council members seated, I can't remember, Karen, whether you were on council then or not, but, you know, they did start tossing out, well, what if we close the library one day a week, or what if we— right? And just by way of reminder, I mentioned this when we met, I think in January, that probably something on the order of magnitude of 65 to 75% of your costs Okay. And I don't know the percentage of that.

I don't—

I'm glad the fire chief and police chief can't kick me under the table, but my guess is a meaningful amount of that personnel is police and fire. So I don't want anyone to, you know, oh, well, will this be efficient? Well, efficient means less people. That's— I mean, if you really want to impact your budget, efficient means less people. And there, you know, I mean, you can do salary surveys and there's a point at which if you seek to try to keep salaries low enough, I mean, we saw it, right? I mean, I saw police officers fleeing from city to city as cities were trying to ramp up their, you know, what they could pay their police officers because you have to be competitive. So I just want there to be some reality around those discussions of what it means So if you have— you know, I'm just wildly making up numbers. You may have 10 times as many. If you have 100 police officers today and you find we have to cut that by 5, well, cases aren't going to get done as quickly. Responses aren't going to be done as quickly. So there are real-life consequences to what those efficiencies mean. And I think that's a really important point. Fewer people aren't gonna be able to do the same work. And I'm not saying that doesn't mean you shouldn't tighten your belt. I feel like the city has been very good about that historically. I mean, when you think back at that graph that, or that picture that Fred showed us with the graphic of your sale, excuse me, your property taxes used to be 17% of your constituents' tax payment. It's now, was it 9, Fred, or 7?

I think so.

Something low.

So I look at that and say, okay, Orem's one that keeps giving and tightening and giving, giving and tightening to everyone else. So your residents aren't seeing any benefit from, you know, tax savings because others are raising theirs. That doesn't mean that's why you should raise yours. I just want you to be aware that others have noticed the need to do that so that they can keep providing that level of service. It does need to be a comprehensive view, but that, you know, that efficiency and working with less people does come with some service-oriented costs. Oh, one other thing. In addition to West Valley, I know another city that I contacted just this morning as I was thinking about—

Ogden has—

they don't have it done as an ordinance, Their council and mayor have official financial policies that they adopt. And in their policies, I can get a— I was trying to look at it on my phone when they just sent me a picture a minute ago. It was so teeny I couldn't see it. But I can get a copy of that so you can see what they do. But they seek to do the same thing, address, you know, the need to raise taxes. You know, they discuss it, I think, every year. Um, you know, determine whether they need to do that, but they try to tie it to, um, you know, sort of keeping up with inflation because their costs are going up.

All right, thank you, Council. Any other questions, thoughts on this?

I just really appreciate the work that you do at LRB and helping educate us and helping us look and explore ways that we can do this in the most Fair and efficient way possible while still maintaining our service. So thank you for that.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Laura. It's good to see you. Thanks, Fred. It's good to see you as well. Appreciate your presentation. All right, next item on our agenda is Heart of Downtown. I'll turn the time over to Gary McGinn, our Community Development Director, for 15 minutes.

Hey, I'm so excited to follow Fred and Laura. And here to ask for about $50 million. And in the spirit of what they've done, I'll try to put all of these projects in terms of squad cars and fire trucks. This project is 5 fire trucks. This project's—

10.

1 fire truck and a squad car. So, help us keep it in. So the heart of downtown was an idea that the council had a couple of years ago to where in our community can we do something and look at and create a district and create an arts and entertainment district that had recreation, things for families of all sizes and types and things. that could bring people into the community to look at. And so, uh, we worked with a consultant, the Heart of Downtown Project. It is centered around, uh, the Sierra Park and the Sierra Theater in that area. Even though we did look at across State Street to the west, over to Orem Boulevard and looked at those areas. They have now come back and presented a pretty detailed and a 99% draft to you back in January of this year. And then based on the feedback that they've gotten, have come back with this. And just a reminder, when they started the program, they They met with council members. They had a steering committee. They met with numerous people in the community, business owners, residents, members of our boards and commissions, and went through this process. And so this is the primary study area that we really ended up in. And this is a graphic showing the area around Sierra. where the majority of things that they envisioned we could do to create this arts and entertainment district. And they have put it into phases, and we'll go look at the phases. Now, the phases don't mean, oh, we need to do this Phase 1 and do everything and then go to Phase 2 and do everything. What they've done is by phases, it's more of, uh, in their estimation, logical groupings of projects that might make sense to be done together, or, or might have some sort of synergy as a part of them. And so, with that, I'll go through the different phases that they have listed. And the document has, as we saw before, artistic— I mean, design guidelines, It has treatments for streets in the area and different things like that. So the first area is— they call it the Festival Street enhancements. That's at 720 South, in between the park on the north and the Sierra Theater to the south. And here's a kind of a more detailed graphic of what that could possibly be. Where that street could be turned into a festival street where you can have people come. It shows you food trucks, activities, kind of a farmer's market thing going on there. And that's something that could be done for 0.75 fire trucks.

Sold.

And the idea is to More routinely being able to bring people into that area.

It's—

and the idea behind this study wasn't that Serra Park's deficient in any way. By no means is that the message. It's a great park. Or does it mean what's happening at the Serra is deficient? It's how can we leverage what they're already doing to enhance Things in the community. So that was their phase 1, talking about that festival street. Then you have this area, and you can see the pool that's existing there, and they call this the core experience area. And so in the core experience area, probably the premier thing in that is you can see the ice ribbon. And when we went on our summer tour, we went and looked at the ice ribbon in Harriman and looked at that and what that could possibly do. So it's something that can work in the wintertime. You see some of the cabanas there bringing people in, families participating, parents, grandparents sitting in the cabana. That's where I will be.

Yes.

While people are out ice skating. In the summer, it can be roller skating or rollerblading, that type of thing. So that's one of the enhancements in there that can begin to make this area a 4-season area. The pool closes in the fall, opens up in the spring. This can bring more activity to that whole area year-round. Now, they talk about everyday activation. And in the everyday activate—

oops, sorry.

Everyday activation, what they're talking about is if you look— oh, it doesn't show up. Mine is green. This one's red. Green shows up well everywhere. You can see what they have here. is a potentially someday a parking structure that would feed and support things that are going on here. One of the— and support what's happening at Sarah. This is a private property here. You can see our property line. One of the things that they've talked about in this plan that's a need in our community is a boutique hotel.

Uh.

or more hotel space that's unique that can bring people into the center of the city to come and participate. So, in these phases, what this is about is bringing more people year-round to the SEER area.

My question is, they're saying that we need that.

Are they—

is that based on the, the The plan, like this type of plan, has that amenity, or, and/or based on Orem needing more hotels.

Orem needing some more hotel space. They think we need it. We have a need for that and more boutique, not necessarily, you know, an entry-level motel, things like that, but something that people would come in and maybe they're staying here because they come in 6 times a year for a BYU football game and it's a little nicer. Maybe there's a large activity going on in the park, the concert series, people come in and stay for that. Those types of things. They see it being here. Not only do we have a need, but they see it here as a plan like this would really drive this and make this successful in this location.

And every, every day you have new customers coming to town.

Yeah.

To help the activation part of that.

And you have new people coming into town, new experiences. A lot of the exciting things Bryce is doing, Out there with parks and recreation trying to get— what do we call it? You got a term?

DMO, destination market type activities.

Yeah.

Where people would come in, whether that's a large race or something like that, that's happening here now with our Festival Street, other things we have going on in the park, maybe the finish line. Is there, and that's a big draw. And the bigger they are, they tend to bring family. They tend to stay several days. So it's this type of thing that comes in now. Phase 3, again, talking about this, a lot of this would would require us to work with adjoining owners that own property and helping them see the vision. Of what could be possible here. And so it's not that since we don't own the property, we just couldn't go out and build a hotel for only 5 fire trucks. But—

They're building one, Station 1 rebuild right now.

So the next phase they talked about is creative capacity. One of the big ideas that they had here is in this area. In this area would be the ideas, uh, artists, artisans, and shops, and a commercial aspect to it. But not only that, uh, bringing people in where they could come to a market. And, you know, we've heard ideas ranging from, uh, working with UVU and some sort of, uh, culinary test kitchen here where people can come in and learn. And, oh, I've always wanted to try a restaurant. Let's see if it can work. And they have a little space that they can do things. To artists that come in and have a little shop. One of my favorite places that I've been to in a long time, if you're ever out in D.C., and I knew you were just there and I forgot to tell you about it, Brett, is go to Old Town. Uh, Uh, Alexandra. Alexandra and the old torpedo factory. And they've turned this into little shops where people are there with the market doing things. It's really a cool, innovative thing. It brings in lots of people. It fosters the arts. It fosters that type of vibe and creativity. That as part of an arts and entertainment district with recreation would fit in great in that creative capacity area. And this is kind of a vision of what that type of area could be. There on the right, you could have some, some different shops and things going on with it. So that This would fit in with kind of the design guidelines and things that they're telling us about. I gotta hurry. Phase 5 circulation event capacity, taking what we've already got here, things that are really good and adding to it. You see on the south there, the rink— I mean, the ice ribbon— but has that big field where we did the car show last year.

Oh, yeah.

You can bring in food trucks, designing this so it works better for those types of things. And probably my favorite, they have put in a carousel. I was in St. George's last weekend, looked at their carousel. Unfortunately, it wasn't in operation. And if you look at the carousel, we better have a mammoth in there.

There's some.

And I was telling Pete, we'll know we have success if 2-year-olds getting in fights over who gets to be on the mammoth at the carousel. That's how we'll gauge success on this one.

We even have a sports team to pay for it, sponsor it.

An officer there to keep the peace.

We had the mammoth first.

But I'm just saying, they can now pay for it.

The carousel.

We need sponsors.

I'm talking—

The little mammoth?

Of course. Yeah, I love it.

And then Phase 6 is enhancing event capacity and flexibility out in this area. There are some things that we could do to enhance the area that allows the events to be more successful and smooth. As you can see in the top there, they, they talk about relocating some parking there. That was a Kind of a big discussion that we had with them last time they were in.

And is that the existing parking lot that's there now? The one on the far top right?

No, that's a new one.

That's a new one.

That's a new one. Uh, they—

the school still, or is that somewhere else?

And the school's just to the north. Okay, school's just to the north. And what this does, if I go back here in this area right here, Used to be a big— is a big parking lot, and they've taken that out and relocated it up over here.

That makes sense.

And then this area becomes much more usable with the carousel and a mammoth. Oh, by the way, for half a fire truck. So, uh, and then the last one is just connectivity. Connecting roads and like Tiger Way over here and putting in a divided road that people could go through, or a multi-use sidewalk, getting working with UTA and others, making accessibility for the community into this place.

Is that Road, is that the mortuary and their apartment complex? The top where the parking lot goes off to State Street?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Is that where it is?

Yeah.

And then the road I was talking about is over here on Tiger Way. This enhancing that. So, keep us on schedule. Any questions?

Yes, I do.

I know we joke about it, but this is a very difficult presentation to follow the last presentation. Maybe can you help put But, um, and maybe relating to Laura Lewis's comments about the percent of our budget and all that stuff, but how does— how can we help our residents see this in a way that they don't say, well, we're raising taxes, maybe we don't need to— this is not what we're raising taxes for?

Yes, you know, that's a great question. And one of the— so the entire document is, you know, 123 pages. One, one of the chapters that they have is how do you fund this? And so they come in and they talk about Different things. There are things such as, uh, there is general fund. So how do we stack the capital to be able to do some of these projects? So some may be general fund dollars that we would come— some could be CARE dollars that could work here. Some could be, if we're doing, say, the Festival Street, some of that may come from, uh, enterprise funds. dealing with utilities and things like that, or if we're enhancing streets around it, could come from a TUF fund. Also, they talk in here about a robust approach to going out, and we joke about getting somebody to sponsor a carousel with a mammoth. That's one of the first phone calls I think we make is leveraging those types of things and working with Sarah. As a part of them and leveraging their board, their connections to help them see the vision of what we're trying to do.

Now—

Meaning your fundraising efforts.

Yeah, fundraising efforts.

One of the things that I think I may go to the Utah County transient room tax.

Exactly.

Yes, exactly.

That we pay a lot into and don't always get back.

Right.

Yeah.

So it's, it's all of those things that we can layer all those capital sources to do a project. What you'll see on the agenda tonight is, hopefully on the consent agenda, is a resolution that you would, by resolution, adopt this plan. It doesn't mean we are going to tomorrow build any one of these projects. We would still need to Work with the council, work with the community, help them understand what it is that we want to do. How do we have the capital to pay for it? How do we stack all of those capital sources together to have a project? So, by voting for this plan doesn't commit you to anything. What it does is tells us as staff Yeah, we like the ideas in this. Now go and come back with a project that you think we can do and how, and explain to us how we can do it. And one of the questions should be, where's the money coming from? And even though I've been joking about, you know, the fire trucks and squad cars, you know, we don't want to sell a fire truck to pay for this. So how are we going to do it and still stay within our budget?

Chief, it'll just cost you $3 million and a few more years.

Something completely new.

But I think a good, a good, um, if I can, to Jen's point, I think if people are listening in, I really want to emphasize that we had some of these same presentations with our, um, ball fields down at Lakeside. So what did we do? We went out and we found grants. From the county. Yeah, we found funding. Our water reuse facility, how did we build that? You know, how did we find that, those millions? We went out and found the money. So it— this is— I just really want— I appreciate Jen saying that. Very important that we emphasize, to your point, this is a— This is a great thing that we need to find outside sources. It is not connected to our tax increase discussions.

Right.

And just to clarify, this is not— we would not raise taxes to do this. That's, I think, my point.

We're not—

we would not raise taxes to do this.

Schedule 2L.

So, Gary, the resolution to adopt the Heart of Downtown Master Plan, the resolution that does what?

As a resolution, what it does is say we adopt this as our master plan. So now, what are we adopting?

What's this?

The heart of the Orem Heart of Downtown Master Plan is the title of the design.

So the stuff that you presented, the stuff that I presented. Okay, so we're not adopting any resolution to say this is what we're committed to doing.

No.

And what we're going to build, we're just saying we like this idea.

We like this idea, and it may not say it directly in the resolution, but what it does is say, Gary, Ryan, Bren, Chris, you know, Bryce, as an executive staff, we like this. Come back and show us how we can start chipping away and, and doing some of these projects and how it'll work and, and why it's a benefit of the community. So it's kind of a visionary goal for us.

Mm-hmm.

And it has a whole lot of components to it. What we can do now is begin working on it. If, if you don't want us to work on this, then, then don't vote for it and adopt it as master plan.

All right, I just want to express my appreciation to you and the consultants and to the prior administration. The bulk of the heavy lifting was done before I came on board in January, and I'm excited about what the possibilities here, and appreciate the comments that have been made, have made about how our, our intent is to look outside the box or other funding sources. So we're not paying— we will not pay in fire trucks or squad cars or, or whatever. Yeah, anyway, thank you. Appreciate you. Let's take like 3 minutes to get our food. I've asked Lynette if she would— oh, here's— I'm so sorry— if she would offer a prayer, a blessing on the food.

Our beloved Father in heaven, we're so grateful for this opportunity we have to gather together today and discuss these issues that are important for our residents in Orem and in our county. We are grateful unto thee for the work of those staff members and community members, council members, that has got— has gone into this, um, these things that we've discussed today. At this time, we pray for a special blessing upon the food that we're about to partake of, that it may give us nourishment and strength, and we can use that strength in serving thee and those around us. And pray for thy blessings upon us constantly, and say these things in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen.

Like, you've had enough time to cover what needs to be covered. So, I apologize for running behind a little bit. So, we'll go ahead and turn the time over to you.

Um, so, uh, this presentation is on the neighborhood improvement team and parking enforcement. This is a project we've been working on for a while. And the goal of it essentially is to create efficient code and parking enforcement, but also being fair and helping as much as we can while enforcing to educate the citizens. Of course, that requires some balancing in terms of, you know, educating and being lenient versus enforcing. You know, you have neighbors who want enforcement to be fast and harsh and effective. And then we have— we also want to be able to provide leniency where it's appropriate and work in a way that isn't overburdensome on someone who's maybe not maintaining their property or parking correctly.

Um.

I anticipate that there may be a high level of consensus to a lot of the things that are being proposed here. So I'm gonna go through it and I'm gonna ask you to please chime in if you have an issue with something, or if there's a question that you have, something that you wanna talk about and get clarification on. Just as a general overview, um, there are, there are a number of things that are being proposed in this presentation. One is what we're referring to as the matrices, which, um, basically, uh, guidelines that we're creating for our code enforcement and parking enforcement teams, um, so that we Treat like situations similar. We feel like that's an important and fundamental element of fairness. And where citizens who are receiving tickets or warnings or whatever are doing so in an even way, and they're not being treated differently because, you know, maybe the code enforcement officer is having a bad day or whatever. So these guidelines will help them keep things consistent and fair. And that's, that's The other thing that I want to talk about is our code changes that are being proposed, um, both to help more effective code enforcement, but also in some cases to create some more leniency where we feel like it's appropriate. So, just as an overview, we refer to code enforcement and parking as 2 different things often. The public views them as the same, but at the city, we have a code enforcement team and a parking enforcement team. They're both under the police department, but the enforcement mechanisms are ruled by 2 different codes in our city code. And so the processes are different, and that's why we treat them differently. As a general rule, our code enforcement is going to be handling city code violations that occur on a On a person's property, whereas a parking enforcement team is going to be focused only on, again, generally speaking, on parking violations that occur on public streets. So that's kind of the division of the jurisdiction of those 2 different teams. Private property, public streets. I'm going to go over our code enforcement process really quick, just so everybody understands. If, if a neighbor— well, if a person has a bunch of junk all over their yard and a neighbor is concerned about it, they'll contact our code enforcement team and say, hey, I need— I want you to go look at this or whatever. Or if there's any other code violation, the code enforcement team will then receive that complaint and they'll investigate. They'll do their initial investigation within 1 business day. They're, they're pretty good about doing that. Um, some, some investigations take more time than others. So, for example, if the complaint is junk, it's easy to go take a photo of all the junk in the yard and you're done. You know that you've got a violation. Something that's more difficult often, and often takes a little bit more time to complete an investigation on, would be something like occupancy in a house. Too many unrelated people living in a home, um, it takes some more time. So, just depending on the level of complexity of the complaint, but within 1 business day, they're, they're making their first contact at the property and attempting to investigate that. Um, if our code enforcement team determines that there is a violation, they will send a warning letter. to the property owner, and they will say, here is the code violation. This is what you need to do to come into compliance with the code, and you have X number of days to come into compliance. We find that about 70% of issues get resolved with the warning letter. So that's, that's a relatively high compliance rate. If after that X number of days, the property doesn't come into compliance, usually then the code enforcement officer will send a citation to the property owner and will say, here's a fine, $50 for each one of the code violations that still exists. Please fix them. You have X number of days to fix it. So almost like a warning again, only this, this time it comes with a fine. We find that after receiving a citation, about 90% of properties come into compliance. We then, if it's still out of compliance, issue what is called a summons or an administrative summons where we— It is what a legal summons is. We say, hey, you're being summoned into our administrative court and we're going to hold a hearing to address your case in front of a judge. And it's going to be held on this day. And 95% of people after receiving the summons come into compliance prior to their court date. Then you have that small number who actually come into court where we'll hold a hearing, and if the judge determines that there is a code violation, he will start imposing fines at a rate of $50 a day. So they start racking up fairly quickly. And then once he's made a finding like that and started threatening those recurring fines, we find that the vast, vast majority of our problems get resolved fairly quickly after that point. Some of those cases can drag out, unfortunately. Generally speaking, most of them, once they've appeared in front of a judge, are more willing to comply. So, so that's kind of the process. This here is the matrix for— well, half of it. It's too big to fit on 1 page, so I split it up. This is the matrix for the code enforcement. And like I said, what this is, is it provides the guidelines for the code enforcement so that that team Consistently applying, um, the law independent of whether or not the property— or independent of which code enforcement officer is doing it, right? We're trying to standardize things. Um, and so what we did is we chose the, the highest number of our complaints. I think the top, like, 95% of our complaints are found in this Matrix. And, and what we have here, Sarah, in the first column, we have the violation with the code section. In the second column, we have in bold the actual language from the ordinance. And then underneath it, we have kind of the remedy or what the person needs to do to come into compliance if they violate that code. In the 3rd column, you'll see a number of days, and that is what I referred— that's the number of days that they would put on the warning. So, for example, on the top there, if they have unregistered vehicles on the property, they have 14— they'll receive a warning letter that says you have 14 days to remove these unregistered cars or to get them registered.

Okay.

And after the 14 days, if they haven't done that, then they'll receive a citation saying you have 14 more days to do this, or you'll receive a summons. And so that's what the number of days is for. The last column is common exceptions to the first rule in terms of the number of days. So, for example, with the registered vehicle, you have 14 days to register your vehicle after you receive your warning, unless you contact Code enforcement team and inform them, hey, the reason it's not registered is because I'm missing the vehicle title, which is a common issue, right? People can't register your vehicle until you've received title on it. And there are all sorts of reasons why a person might not have a title for their vehicle. But if they certify to us— Yes, they certify to us that that is the issue, we'll give them an additional 60 days because we know that it takes time to work that out with the DMV. And again, what we're looking to do here is enforce in a reasonable manner. And so where there's a reasonable reason for it to take more time, we're offering additional time in order to get that. Outside of these days, what we expect our code enforcement team to do, and I'm— well, is if If they give a timetable that is different than this, they need to document the reason why. And it has to be a logical, valid, fair reason for why we're deviating from this. I guess I believe everyone on the council has seen this, this table here and this one. Are there Would you like me to go through each one, or are there specific ones you want to talk about?

Maybe to start, Aaron, this is really helpful.

I'm thrilled that we're trying to standardize it and make it as fair as possible. What do you anticipate will be different? Maybe this is for you as well.

What will be different after adopting this than what we've had?

Well, um, so part of the reason we're adopting this is because we'll get a neighbor who calls in a complaint. And then, um, they won't see immediate correction. And they'll call in and say, hey, what's going on? Why isn't this fixed yet? And the fact is, is that, um, Some of these issues take a while to resolve. And so we're adopting this both to create fairness and standardization so that everybody's treated the same, but also so that we can help the public understand that, hey, we're following our standard guidelines. And these are kind of the guidelines that you can expect to see these different actions taken. To help neighbors understand, um, this is why it's not resolved yet, or this is the stage that we're at in the process. Does that make sense?

A lot of it is communication. I think that's great. Uh, is there anything here that we have chosen to do differently than we were doing last year? Um, and if so, how did we come to that conclusion?

Um, so Prior to this, our code enforcement officers would use kind of their best judgment in terms of, this is how long I think this should take to get done. And there's an advantage to that in the sense that not every situation is exactly the same, right? Every, every messy junkyard has a different level of junk. And, and, and Reason why it's there and why it's difficult to remove. Um, but different code enforcement officers also have different judgment on that. And so this helps standardize it so that, um, if you're a property owner and you're getting one of these warnings, you don't get 5 days. Or 30 days, just based on the luck of which code enforcement officer was assigned to.

The reality is people were getting different treatment.

Yes, yes, that, that was a potential problem.

Some of this, the ability of the homeowner to get it done, their resources, their—

who they know, what facilities or equipment they have to get rid of them. So this just gives us guidelines to say, This is how many days you have. And we've worked with them ad nauseam to come into compliance.

Um, the problem is you guys get the phone calls as to we are doing nothing, when in fact we are following.

And that gives you the turn to the constituents to say you're following the guidelines and we are getting it done.

So Last—

I'll say in the last 2 years, I've received probably 20 phone calls regarding NIT stuff. I have yet to have one where we have dropped the ball and we are just doing nothing. It's got lost in the weeds, so to speak. No, we're helping them to get into extensions or days off or helping them get a trailer. So to me, this gives our NIT guys the ability to enforce equally.

It gives you guys the ability to have expectation as to what's reasonable, to talk to your constituents when they call, say what's up. And I would say looking forward, it may help us to to be more efficient, effective, like, and report back through Connectora, or, you know, there may be ways to sort of automate communication or automate status updates. More quickly, if our code enforcement leaders know that this is the matrix, these are the framework, then They can go with confidence to enforce and engage, and then hopefully that allows us to be able to communicate easier, have less software in the future too.

And I guess that's kind of my question is, you know, I've always— is the transparency. At what point is it a protected process, protected record process, to— and or to the point of basically update to the neighbor that decides, you know, how much is public, how much is not. I, I would like to have that defined so we can say an extension, or this work should be— here's the court date. You know, if we could— I don't know that we have to tell them everything, but if we could figure out what the balance is there, that would be helpful.

I think this, this matrix will better help our NIT to better thread the needle of what we're trying to do.

advance without fines or enforcement.

Flip side, if you're the one living next to it and you're the one saying, why is this not fixed?

That's what we're trying to thread is that needle.

And I think this helps us out.

We don't— can I clarify that one more thing? I would not want to encumber these complainants with the GRAMA request requirement. If we can somehow give them updates without having to go through the GRAMA process, That's, um, so, so I'm uncomfortable with giving them documents outside of the grandma process.

I think we could work out a way where they could contact a code enforcement officer and say, what's the status? And the code enforcement officer could reply back saying, this is the status, or this is where it's at.

And I don't have a problem if they're— if you have standard replies. Yeah, so it's not taking time of our code enforcement officers. If there's an admin or something that helps them, they could say, you know, well, I look on the calendar, it's— this is where it's sitting.

I don't—

you know what I mean? So I'm okay with that too.

Okay.

At one point we were talking about changing the name of NIT to code enforcement.

Is that part of this process?

It is.

Yep.

But, um, that's another part of it. We'll get there.

Okay.

Um, so, so this is the NIT matrix. Uh, oh, and there you go. That's the next slide. So these are some changes that we are proposing for city enforcement. Um, and basically we're looking for the council's blessing on this. One is to change the name from Neighborhood Improvement Team to Code Enforcement Team.

There's—

there can be some confusion among residents by the, by the name Neighborhood Improvement Team, because it sounds like it's more of a voluntary thing. That's a neighborhood organization as opposed to a city enforcement entity. Whereas Code Enforcement Team, I think, is very clear. If you get a letter from the neighborhood improvement team, you're like, is this like the HOA Nazis coming after me? And we don't even have an HOA. What is this? Whereas if it says the Orem City Code Enforcement Team, we're going to understand, okay, this is serious business. I need to get on this. Which goes to the next bullet point, which is we want to adjust our warning letter to make it clear that the remedial action Is requested as mandatory as opposed to recommended. Um, when it was initially written, the city council wanted to be soft in our approach.

We don't—

we didn't want to come off as too aggressive and mean. We don't want to be mean. But we do want to be clear that the action is required, not recommended. And the current language refers to recommended action. So we'd like to take a look at that and change it up. Currently, when we send out a citation or summons, we don't always include the warning, and that's something that we need to change to help the— Perfect. —better understand, okay, there's a history here and this is where it started and this is kind of where we're going. And then another thing that we discovered we can do better As a code enforcement team is include better contact information on the warnings so that when a homeowner receives it, they can, if they have questions, they can call or email our code enforcement team and say, okay, I'm confused about what action I need to do to come into compliance. So, so those are some things that we discovered we needed to do.

Questions there?

Yes. This is the parking matrix, which again is on 2 slides because it was too big on the one. But on one, on this one, we have violations that our parking enforcement team have identified as safety violations, and then on the other one are non-safety violations. Part of the impetus for this, similar to the, the NIT matrix, in the sense that some parking enforcement officials were giving warnings for some things, others weren't. We wanted to standardize that. We also wanted our policies regarding warnings to come more into compliance with what the council felt was important in terms of educating the public for maybe some of the non-safety issues. Giving out more warnings for those in an effort to educate prior to being punitive and giving out citations. And so, are there any questions about the parking matrices? This again is something that I believe you've all seen. Are there specific violations you want to discuss, or? More general policy issues.

I have just a quick question, or thank you for this, for the clarification. I noticed one of them that said something about junk cars in the backyard without an opaque fence.

Yes.

And I always thought that if it was in the backyard— I, I, the reason I, I mentioned this is I just got an email the other day from a lady whose backyard neighbor has a bunch of Thing goes in the backyard and they have a chain-link fence, and she's like, tired of looking at this junk.

We do.

So, yes, so, so our ordinance does currently allow you to have 2 junk cars in the backyard, but it has to be behind a fence. So that would be a violation that they could contact about.

There's a redneck joke somewhere, I'm sure.

Yes.

Yeah.

Sorry.

Okay. Any other questions or concerns about these?

Okay.

Um, changes to parking enforcement policy. In the past, warnings have been vehicle-specific, but not violation-specific. Um, in an effort again to, to make our warnings more effective as educational tools and not punitive tools. We want to expand how warnings are given so that they're violation-specific instead of vehicle-specific, meaning, you know, if I angle park in a place where I'm not allowed to, I'll get a warning for the first time for that. And then if I'm— I'm trying to remember what we get warnings for. If I'm parking in a neighborhood without a permit, Then I will also get a warning for that, whereas in the past I would have gotten a warning only for the first violation and not for the second one. That just seems counterintuitive in terms of education, because I hadn't yet been educated on the—

Specific—

The need for the permit and the neighborhood permit. We also would like to include a bit more of an explanation about the parking violation with the warning again. In an effort to help educate, as opposed to just citing a code saying, hey, this is the code and this is— This is the way that the parking was done legally. And then you'll see on our matrix, if someone gets a ticket for parking with expired registration, our policy has always been, if you get it, if you get your car registered within 14 days, we'll just dismiss the ticket entirely. However, that has never really been communicated to them on the warning ticket, so it was just kind of policy is we do it, but you as the person on the receiving end didn't know about the policy, so that needs to be included there.

Okay.

Great.

Like I say, the last element are just some code changes we want to Uh, suggest, um, but I'm out of time, so maybe I'll come back and do that another time.

You okay, Council? So I apologize that we ran out of time.

If I can apologize, it's, you know, my fault that didn't, uh, correctly anticipate the discussion and presentation amounts.

Uh, so, like, with some of these, we'll come back with a follow-up on this presentation and make sure that opportunity to ask questions and, and give direction. All right, we'll plan on that probably in our next work session prior to an adoption of changes that then have the adoption.

Thank you. All right, next item on our agenda is an opportunity for Council Members Meekam and Millett to give City Council reports. So we'll just go in that order. Council Member Meekham, have you got commission reports for me?

Um, I can talk briefly about, uh, Planning Commission and Arts Commission. Um, I'm also over the Care Tax Advisory Commission and the Library Commission. Um, and, uh, we had, we had a very successful Care Tax Advisory, um, season. Uh, Jen Gale, of course, was with me on that one. But a couple of good things are happening. I feel like, you know, this—

we had 5 of our 7 commissioners start this year, and I've been really impressed with the way that they've jumped in and learned so quickly.

And I feel like the discussion is really good. There's enough diversity on that Planning Commission that people sometimes have different perspectives on individual issues, and they're asking the right kinds of questions and engaging with each other really respectfully. I'm feeling really good about the way the Commission is getting its feet under it.

Very much so.

Arts Commission, one of the kind of exciting things that the Arts Commission has done in the last couple of months is Yeah, we have a lot of members of the community that would like to participate in some of our arts-related things, but maybe there isn't a spot on a commission for them. So when we interviewed commission members, Pete and I did that earlier in the year, we discovered a lot of people that we thought would be great commission members, but we just didn't have a spot for them. So, um, had a number of volunteers who have wanted to get involved in the subcommittees. We've created 4 subcommittees with the Arts Commission, chaired by members of the Arts Commission, that work in between meetings and then are supervised by the Arts Commission themselves. So I think we're in a position where we're going to get a lot done this year. Excited about that.

Good.

I think that's all.

Thank you.

Councilmember Miller?

Yes, so I'm the Transportation Advisor. Commission is one of my assignments. The UTA presentation was perfect with that. We've had a presentation from UTA to UDOT to our TAC, and one of our big goals we're going to tackle this year is to do our transportation— our active transportation plan. Transportation Master Plan. Um, so that, um, is going great. Great people on there. The— I'm not sure how to say this, but it used to be the RAC, but now is it Bryce, are we the PRAC or the PRAC?

I like RAC.

We're adding parks to the front of the RAC. So that has been, um, super fun to be able to talk about those things. Great things happening. I've just been in awe at how, how well the— our parks and our recreation facilities are run. So big hats off and thank you to that Parks and Recreation Commission. All right.

Hey, well, that'll be noted. Yeah, let's—

maybe we'll talk about that. But, um, so just a couple wins. Of course, the dirt. I'm going to talk about the dirt in the ball fields because who thinks about dirt in the ball fields, right? But it was damaged, it was injuring little kids because there were little stones and things. So that's a huge win. Of course, we use that dirt elsewhere. So very thrifty of you. We're also going to be working on our active transportation and our trails master plan, and then the trees initiative in our parks. It'll be a huge thing. Yesterday, Jen and I went to America 250, which will be wrapping up July 4th. We'll know a little bit more. But this, this is the challenge. We printed these out. If you haven't yet signed up for the challenge, And you want to be considered for the super grand prize, which will be given away Memorial Day. Are you familiar with this at all?

I'm not sure the date on it.

No.

Sometime around there, you know, hurry and get your stuff done. But otherwise, you do have till July 4th to still get all of the prizes for that. And just some exciting things, have some successful concerts and art shows thus far. Let's see, I don't have the ULCT CHA anymore. That was discontinued, new organization by the governor. And then I'm like position 2 for UVU. The mayor can't go there.

So, all right. Thank you.

Could I just mention one more thing associated with Library Advisory Commission that we have begun interviews for a new library director.

And in-person interviews started today. So we anticipate that we'll have news about a potential new library director in the future. Thank you for the update.

I was curious about that. Right, quickly going over some items on our agenda. We have a full— it goes without saying that we have a very full agenda today. And including, we get to wear a few different hats. So you can see all the items where we'll be wearing our city council hat. And to those who have never gone through the budget, through this process before, if you turn to item 12, what's going to happen is we're going to need— I'm going to need at that point a motion.

Second.

To adjourn from being a city council and convening to be a redevelopment agency. And then you'll see, we'll have certain items that we'll need to approve as the redevelopment agency. And then on item 15, you'll see we'll adjourn from being the redevelopment agency and to becoming the Orem Special Service Lighting District. And it looks like we do not reconvene as a city council, so we get to go home as a special service committee.

And those will still take place in the chambers?

All takes place. Yep, just— we just go through it, and then Brandon will give us— he'll do presentations on all of those budgets. But we do have, as a council, we do have several different other responsibilities that we will take care of take care of it this evening as well. So on the City Council agenda, you'll see we have numerous presentations: Giving Machine, Building Safety Awareness Month, National Police Week, National Public Works Week. And then we have our Youth Council report, and then some consent items. Then we have personal appearances, and we have 4 scheduled public hearings. Sure, got that right. Yep, 4 public hearings. And then a few items that don't require public hearing. And part of that will, I think, is some— those will come— the public will have the opportunity to weigh in on those at other opportunities, like the CARE tax. They'll be part of the budget, as well as the Public Safety Special Revenue Fund. And then, Brandon, it looks like you get to make some sort of statement.

Do.

To make a statement of intent. We do have— we do hold a public hearing for the tentative budget. We're not— it's my understanding we're not required to do so, but it is something that we traditionally do. And then, and then, um, the final item will be a statement that we need to make a motion and decide whether to approve or reject considering leveling to levying a tax rate that exceeds the city's certified tax rate and the approximate dollar amount. So that is what our, our agenda looks like.

Mayor, if you'll let me introduce the prayer and pledge. They're actually a young boy and a young girl.

Oh, okay.

So part of the—

thank you. So they're—

Counting America to 1776. Okay, so there's a boys unit and a girls unit, so I, I can introduce.

Okay. Any other notes for me for the council?

I'm just anticipating that we might have a number of people signing in for public comment who are appropriate for the public hearings.

Just mention, so, so tonight we have 4 public hearings. Just as you, as you're looking that they might sign up for the personal comments, they're actually here for the public hearing.

So if they've signed in, I will make sure that they That if they have— they will have the opportunity to speak for items that are not on the agenda somewhere else on the agenda.

Thank you.

Okay, and then depending on the number of people who signed up, we'll— right now I feel inclined to, because I don't know how many, 3 minutes. But let's take a look and see what we got. And I would like everybody who comes to speak will have the opportunity to speak as long as they're on the phone. Oh, do we have— do we have a time? Okay, yes, because some, some go over and, and some just ask and then—

yeah.

So there was a question, uh, Mayor. We do have, um— did you talk to her about that? What, um, I had some people on one of the items say they couldn't be here, so we chat a little bit and said maybe video.

Yes.

Okay. Yes, a video statement. So I know we have at least one of those. And then there was a question of they could read a proxy, and we in the past had let people do up to one. But sure, it will be your—

Yeah, as long as it's under— I like to keep the public hearing comments to under 3 minutes as well. If the video exceeds, or if they're reading proxy, I know we've done that in the past, is that we've had others read on behalf of I mean, council, you should have received copies of emails from Teresa that we submitted regarding some of the items on our agenda today. So, right. So, oh, that's right. We have to have a motion to adjourn. Do we have to have a motion to adjourn?

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

Okay.

Aye.

Aye.

I didn't see it on the agenda.

On there, Steve?

Not used to that. That's new. Who was that?

Jen and Chris?

Should I be putting a germ on the box?

I have not been doing this. Yeah, it's no big deal.

Let me figure out why my—

you could put just adjourn to regular meeting.

That's fine.

It's, it's already—

I love it.

First stuff.

I'm gonna make sure that this is taken out of my. Oh, I feel like. So biggest issue made total sense to me, and that was the big.

Why are you—

you want to open that? So that was a big issue. Yeah, so I can maybe make Microphone to turn on too.

Oh, there we go. And the public appearance sheet. So, I'd like to welcome all of you to our city council meeting this evening. I see a lot of A lot of familiar faces, see friends out there, and grateful to have you all here this evening. We'll go ahead and I'm going to turn the time over to Council Member Millett to introduce those who will be giving our invocation, inspirational thought, and Pledge of Allegiance.

Okay, so today we have some special guests. We have Grace Webb and Kai Harris, and they are They're both part of Scouting America Troop 1776. Grace is from the girls unit and Kai is from the boys unit. So we'll start out with Grace giving our prayer, followed by Kai leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for this day, and we thank you for our city of Orem. We thank you for that. We can meet and talk about the needs in our community. We are thankful for our freedom and safety. Please bless our leaders and those who serve in our city, state, and country. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Audience, please stand.

I, 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.

You may be seated.

Thank you, Grace and Kai, uh, for being part of our city council meeting this this evening. Right, the next item on the agenda are mayor's reports and items referred by council. And the first item we have is a presentation with the Giving Machine report. And this is former council member Mark Seestrand, who is the director of Orm Giving Machines, will give us a presentation. Welcome.

Thank you.

It's always a pleasure to be here this time of year. The Giving Machines, while they focus mostly in the Christmas season, there's a lot of effort and energy that goes on behind it, and especially with the charities that are involved all year long with providing the services to the, to the wonderful people here in the community and around the world. So we wanted to just kind of wrap up this last year's season, report to the city on some of the totals, and recognize the charities. That were involved with this last year and give them a little recognition. And it's always fun to get your picture taken with the mayor and city council. So if you'll indulge us with that, I want to just give you an overview of the Giving Machines worldwide. They started back in 2017 here in Provo. They've been in Orem since 2019. So we've, we've had them 6 years. We took a year off during COVID Didn't seem like a good time to get together and punch your number on a vending machine. But this year, the Giving Machine worldwide had over 1 million visitors. We were in 126 cities in 21 countries on 6 continents. There were 4.8 million items that were purchased. Those are tiles that were purchased. We worked with 500+ different nonprofits around the world. There were 3,200 unique items or tiles that were offered. That included 3.5 million meals, 500,000 vaccinations, 109,000 chickens and/or goats and/or pigs and/or sheep, 97,000 books and school supplies, and of course 17,000 soccer balls to help the kids in the communities. For the Orem this last year, it was our best year yet, and we had over 14,700 credit card transactions that took place, representing approximately 65,000 visitors that were part of the Giving Machine experience here in Orem. That's a lot of traffic and a lot of visitors that are taking part in that. The total giving this year in Orem was just over $1.5 million. Most of the fees were paid for by the donors. There was about $37,000 in credit card fees that were also part of the donations. We had 47,000 tiles purchased and 847,000 items donated this particular year. So when there's, you know, 3 school lunches for the weekend, that counts as 3 items but 1 tile. And also, what's really important is that 70% of the funds donated stay here locally in Utah County or in this area. So we really are helping people in this area that need help and that are, that are doing it. In addition to the charities that are so active and so giving in their efforts, we also have a lot of local community support. We couldn't do it without the help of the Woodbury family and the University Place. What a great place to host the Giving Machines. Special shout out to Cindy and Jared and Rob that do so much there with us at the University Place. Scenic Solutions is a company here in Orem that supplies the machines. If you can think about what it takes to manage that many vending machines and get them to so many locations, they're an incredible company to work with. And most importantly, we had thousands of hours of volunteers for people supporting the machines and being part of contributing with, uh, with this program. So we are honored and thrilled that the Giving Machines are here in Orem. We're also excited that they'll be here next year, so we can look forward to that. And now I'd like to give some time to some of our committee to recognize the charities that are here. So we'll start with, with Wendy.

Hello, I'm Wendy Wright. I serve on the committee with Mark. We're pleased to introduce the charities that participated in the 2025 Giving Machines located at University Place here in Orem. Once again, Utah County residents were extremely generous with their contributions. As Mark mentioned, these charities provided a variety of service including food for the needy, healthcare and good drinking water for communities that need it, empowerment for individuals with disabilities, and a variety of services for the segments of the community that need help. The first charity that we'd like to introduce is Ability First, and Sandra Cuccio is here with us. Um, Ability First recognizes, advocates for, and respects each individual's right and ability to realize their deserved quality of life. That's accomplished by identifying needs, providing resources, strengthening abilities, and advocating social and political change for all individuals with disabilities. Um, in the Giving Machines, AbilityFirst offered people the option of purchasing a wheelchair, a rollator walker, or a support grab bar. And the wheelchair, there were 498 purchased, and the rollator walkers, 374, and the support grab bar, 445. Totaling $110,000 and— sorry, $110,010. And they are an amazing resource in Utah County, and they serve a lot of people with a lot of needs. So we're really excited that we could partner with them.

Hello, I'm Tim Wright.

Tabitha's Way is our next charity, and they're represented by Wendy Osborne. Tabitha's Way has 3 local pantries, one in Spanish Fork, Pleasant Grove, and one in Saratoga Springs. They provide a robust solution for individuals and families facing food insecurity in our community. They provide temporary food assistance, recommended resources for self-reliance, and help neighbors help neighbors.

So here's some of the tiles that you would see in the giving machine from Tabitha's Way.

One tile was labeled 150 lunches, and they did 4,937. Another was a month of food, 1,000 A holiday family meal, $862. School supplies, uh, $3,299.

And a toiletry kit, $1,368.

For a total of— if you read that for us, that's so impressive. It's a very impressive number. $411,000.

So $411,208. Thank you.

Did I say that right?

You did.

You got me nervous.

Hi, my name is Tom Walker, and I'm privileged to announce the success of the Giving Machines for the United Way organization.

I'm represented by Laura Barrigan, if she's here. Hello, Laura.

So, Let's see, they do a lot of different charities in the area, so let's just kind of go through some of this a little bit. They provide essential support such as early education, mental health resources, financial security, and opportunities for community engagement. So in the Giving Machines, 2,857 people donated newborn resources, 1,605 people donated educational products, 152 people donated computers and courses, 278 donations of summer school programs. And then with some of the additional charities in the area they work with, there were 400 donations of rides for senior citizens, 250 donations for family legal support, and 1,219 donations of a hotline call. And the total donations for United Way Charities was $200,605. Congratulations, Laura. You have a break.

Good afternoon, I'm Val Hale, also a member of the committee, and I'm going to introduce Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions and the clinics that they— the pro bono clinics that they offer. I'd like to invite Cameron Martin, the president of Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions, to come up and also acknowledge Jeff Fisher. And I think Sherry Warnick, who's a member of our committee, Sherry's also here. Appreciate them. So as I mentioned, Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions has instituted clinics to The clinics help the needy in our community. They offer pro bono services to patients in need. The clinics provide opportunities for students to get hands-on experience with patients who need care and don't have the means to pay for that care. So it's a win-win opportunity and a real benefit in our community. And is it— was this the first year you did that?

Yes.

So they had just started the clinics this first year, and the tiles that they offered in the giving machines were eye exams. exams. And we, they, 529 of those were purchased. Physical therapy, 648 were purchased. Counseling sessions, 380 were purchased. And participation in a speech camp, 683. And a learning device. Do you know what kind of learning device that was? One that helps you learn.

I don't know.

A learning, learning device. How unique.

SOP language is to help you, to help you in the language learning how to speak.

Help.

Okay, I could use that. Anyway, um, the totals for all of those donations were $130,245.

Thank you, Cameron.

Abstaining.

Abstaining.

The next charity is the Food and Care Coalition, represented by Brent Crane. Um, the Food and Care Coalition is Utah County's most comprehensive resource center for individuals experiencing homelessness, as well as providing meals medical and dental care, counseling, job training, and permanent housing all under one roof. Um, donors had options to purchase winter care packets, 365 warm socks, 3,756 hot meals, 5,887 hydroponic seedling packet, 1,240, and a Shelter Welcome Kit, $539,000, totaling $197,356. Oh, I didn't see you. Sorry, Christine. This is Christine.

It's me again. Uh, many of you know that in the giving machines we typically feature some international charities. And I remember a couple of years ago, Mayor McCandless, when she was with Community Action Services, we had a meeting with all the charities beforehand and she told them, I know you all want to have the high amount, but you'll never beat out the goats and piglets. You were wrong this year.

Yeah.

So one of our international charities was Church World Services. A charity which began in 1946 in the aftermath of the Second World War. They have a mission to feed the hungry and help those in need. They operate in over 31 countries, and in the giving machines, their offerings included one goat, and they sold—

or they—

2,366 goats were donated. And Tim Wright, if you haven't seen it, Came up with a great AI thing where you put money in and a goat actually comes out of the machine. It's pretty impressive. So $2,366. They also had 4,152 female hygiene kits donated. And the total amount for those 2 was $309,458. Tabitha's Way had over $400,000. So So they were defeated for the first time, at least.

It really, this is a thing, you never beat the goats. Congratulations.

And our final charity is Water for Good. And I had to invite Tyson Wise to come up. He came all the way from Boise for this today. So we appreciate that. Water for Good is an international faith-based nonprofit organization committed to creating a future where no one dies from preventable water-related disease. And you'd be surprised how many people in this world die from those types of things. In partnership with churches and leaders, they help communities establish access to reliable water and critical sanitation and hygiene practices. Their offerings in the giving machines included a school toilet. Imagine going to school and not having a toilet. That happens in the world. There were 2,168 of those donated. A water pump repair kit, I guess, to help—

Sustainability.

To help sustain the water pumps and keep them going, 4,121. were donated, and family hygiene training. So there were 341 of those for a total of $145,048. So thanks, you can go over there.

Thank you.

And, uh, those, our distinguished City Council members, are the charities that were represented in the Giving Machines last December. We appreciate their participation and the good work They do. We especially appreciate the generosity of our community here in Utah Valley in supporting them in such a way that can only be classified as astonishing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Gotta be— well, Peter's got the good camera. All right, I'm sorry, we'll get out of here.

We'll come up in a second.

Those are all my people from a prior chapter in my life, and it's, it's so good to see them. And I can assure you that the generous donations are going— are spent wisely. Wisely, and I'm so excited to have— for our local nonprofits and our 2 international nonprofits to have additional resources to help those in our community. So thank you, thank you very much, community, and thank you those who provide services. It's not an easy task, and appreciate you. The next item on our Next on our agenda, Council, is the presentation Building Safety Awareness Month.

And is Paul—

Paul Ashton? There he is. Is Paul Ashton, our Chief Building Official, is here for that?

Hello, Mayor and Council.

I'm Paul Ashton.

I'm the Building Official for Orem. I believe Pete has, or someone has given us a video to present, but something that I also wanted to make you aware of is my team consists of 4 inspectors, 3—

well, 2 and a half permit techs, because Gary McGinn stole half of my permit techs.

Thanks, Gary.

And a deputy building official. And with those folks, there's 120 certifications between the Our crew to make sure that Orem is kept safe. Buildings in Orem are safe, safely built. I also wanted to acknowledge that we have 4 master code professionals in Orem City. I want to also let you know that there's only 36 master code professionals in the state of Utah. So we have a great crew to help keep the buildings in Orem safe. Building Safety Month is set aside by the International Code Council to encourage people to be aware of their, their surroundings and their buildings and use the buildings in a safe manner.

A building inspector is basically an editor but for a 3-dimensional building.

So right now we have 4 inspectors. And they are all certified to do commercial and residential inspections. They understand the code. They know what they're doing. They have a great attitude.

I like construction. I like seeing how things fit together. Whoa!

Right?

This has a world of practice. My job is look at the plans, make sure you followed the plans. Did we miss anything? Wiring.

And we've got the blocking down here, it looks like.

This side, we're missing blocking too.

I have 2 permit techs that take care of our front office and inspection scheduling.

They are very helpful with the public as well as, as us as coworkers.

What I typically do is I'll pull out the plans, I'll look at all of the framing and make sure that it matches the plans, and I start with the roof so I can follow the weight from the roof down. Well, I'm going to start at the top. So that's how I usually look at things. So what are you? Are you a vent?

You're a vent.

You're a big vent. And then I can kind of visually follow down. This distributes the weight down to here, down to here. We've got a beam that puts it down here. And then after I've done the framing, I'll go back through the whole house again and do the other 3 trades. It looks funky, but it works.

There.

I think a lot of homeowners think building inspectors are here to bust them when they're building things. And I think a lot of contractors think building inspectors are here to tell them they're wrong. Usually we're just here to make sure things get documented and get done right. I mean, we literally are just here to make sure that things fit together right and last longer and don't hurt people.

Building Safety Month helps the citizens of Orem be a little bit more aware of those things that are happening in their buildings so that they are kept safe.

I believe in your packet there's a proclamation that ICC encourages you as a mayor and council to sign to name May as Building Safety Month.

So, and I have most of my crew here.

So I'd like them to stand up and be acknowledged for what they, what they do for the City of O'Hara.

Thank you. Thank you for what you do. I love how she talks to the building because, you know, how—

She talks to a lot more than just the building.

Yes, I like, I like that. She just—

yeah.

That's why we had her on the, on the video.

All right, thank you. We'll get that proclamation signed. All right, not only is it Building Safety Awareness Month, but we are in the midst of National Police Week. So I'd like to invite our police chief, Chief BJ Robinson, to come up and for his, uh, presentation.

Thank you, Mayor. During this calendar week, our nation pauses to pay tribute to the professionals of law enforcement and to honor the fallen officers on May 15th, Peace Officer Memorial Day. As police officers, we honor the fallen by picking up where they left off. Take the watch from here is the phrase often heard at a cop's funeral. It's not as simple, nor is it enough for us to just check on duty and to show up. We must serve with integrity and honor, living up to the oath that we have sworn to one another and the public that we serve. I will also say here at Orem, we serve with distinction, not in order to be promoted or to be Officer of the Month, but because this is our expectation of one another and the level of service that we strive to provide. This level of service is also demanded from those officers who lost their lives upholding this oath. I can only imagine what they would give now to respond to those boring calls and those routine daily calls. Later this year, it will have been 30 years since I graduated the police academy. Since that time, 34 officers in Utah have died in the line of duty. 6 of those from Utah County. Lawrence Penrod, Joe Adams, Trent Halliday, Corey Ride, Joseph Shinners, Bill Hoosier. For me, it's a little different when you put names to the fallen. I have personal and distinct memories of working and training with 4 of those men. The men and women of your police department know what it means to be an officer with Orem Police Department. Here we require a little bit more from our officers in order to provide the high service citizens of Orem are accustomed to. We are as kind as people allow us to be, understanding kindness is not weakness and that some people refuse to allow us to be kind. We meet this mark for far more than we do not. We regularly train to better ourselves, so those instances are few and far between. The support from you, our City Council, and from our executive staff fuels us in our mission to make Orem the safest place to live, work, and play. This is accomplished as a team involving every employee of the city. To the people of our Thank you. You are a pleasure to serve. Orem is the best. You are the reason why we are here to answer your calls for service. You are the reason why we choose to stand up between you and the dangers of the most— of the moment you face. We feel of your love and support throughout the year, not just only during this week. We will continue to work hard to keep and be deserving of your trust. Thank you for your time today and during this week to recognize the great work of the men and women of your police department. They are truly deserving of the recognition and are always working to be better. It is my honor to serve alongside of them. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief. And on behalf of the City Council and myself, Thank you to your department and, and you for, for all you do to help keep our community safe and thriving. Thank you. Next item is National Public Works Week, which is next week, but we don't meet next week, so we Chris Shirkey, our Public Works Director, here tonight to present about National Public Works Week.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

I don't know why I do this every year right after the police chief. It's really hard to follow. BJ, I love you and the police and all you do for, for our community. Public Works Week happens to fall right about the same time as the Police Week does as well. So, and that's a blessing and a curse, I suppose. But National Public Works Week is May 17th to 23rd, and we are going to have a luncheon at our facility. We've invited each of you and our exec staff to attend. We usually have gathering time at about 10:30 till 1:30. Well, 10:30 at the beginning, then we have lunch, and then a variety of prizes and other fun activities and so forth. I wanted to remind you also that we have a Deer Creek Intake Project ribbon cutting this Thursday, May 14th, at the sailboat beach up at Deer Creek Reservoir. That's from 11:30 to 2:00 to celebrate the nearly $1 million $100 million project that's being completed there to provide drinking water for our community. I'd just like to share a few statistics with you. Parks this year, our Parks Division was recently absorbed into Bryce's Department of Recreation. It's now a Parks and Recreation Department. With that though, I'd like to recognize that they They have provided a substantial service to this community in providing recreational opportunities at parks, and we have some of the nicest parks I believe in the state of Utah. I'm just going to share some of our statistics with you right now, though. Parks manages the cemetery as well as places to play and so forth. We have thirty four thousand one hundred and ten. burial plots in our cemetery. Stormwater in 2025, they maintained 3,940 lane miles of road with street sweepers. In other words, they actually clean all the gutters in the streets probably about 8 or 9 times a year. So if you have a concern with that, anybody here that you haven't got your street swept, then let me know. But we do have records of that, so be careful. We have documentation on that.

We're happy to do so.

It provides—

it helps to ensure a clean environment. A lot of that what's in the street and the debris that comes in the street then goes into our stormwater systems. We help to strive to maintain that and to ensure that the water is that flow into the waters of the state, including Utah Lake, are preserved and kept as clean as possible. Our Streets Division— the cost to reconstruct all of the road surfaces that we own today in today's dollars would be about $377 million. So we, we are grateful to the community and for the support of the funds to help provide some really nice quality streets, I believe, in our community. So thank you to the council and, and our citizens for that support. We have another division called the Traffic Operations Division. They actually maintain 11,976 street signs in the city.

That's a lot of street signs.

And that's not including stop signs, regulatory signs and so forth. That's strictly just street signs, address signs on your corners. Yeah, the green ones that are on the corners. We have several other signs though that they do maintain as well. In fleet, we have 1,360 total vehicles, equipment, and small equipment that we maintain with the staff of around 6 fleet mechanics and employees. In water, In 2025, we produced 8.7 billion gallons of water. On the flip side, on the water reclamation side, we treated just over 3 billion gallons of water. You might ask, well, what's the difference there? Well, it is 5.7, but the difference is that 5.7 billion gallons of water is going onto the ground to water gardens and grass and so forth. In Water Reclamation, or our sewer division, we have 154 miles of pipe that was cleaned in 2025. In our GIS division, they maintain all of the Citizen Connect requests that come in through our help and 311 center. We had 1,522 Connect requests by citizens in Orem, most of which we have responded and satisfied. So we are appreciative of your support as a mayor and city council and the citizens of Orem for all that we are able to do to be able to provide a high quality and level of service in all of these areas. So thank you on behalf of about 100 employees that we do have at our Public Works Department.

Thank you. Thank you for the work and, and the, the I know, I'm just so— I'm just thinking I'm so grateful when I, when I flush the toilet, it goes away from me. And that's because of you guys.

One of our mottos at Water Reclamation is we're here so you can flush with confidence.

So—

Oh, and I do. I'm so confident. Thank you.

Thank you.

They have great drinking water and, and for the streets. Thank you for all you and your team too.

Thank you all very much.

That's what I expect. You know, it says— well, I don't even know where we put that on our, our seal. You can flush with confidence. No, that doesn't belong up there with that right now. Anyway, um, next presentation, our final presentation, uh, under the mayor's report and items referred by council is our Orem Youth Council. report. And I would like to invite Jenica Jones, our Strategies and Innovation Manager— Innovations Manager— Sydney Bailey, our Events Coordinator, and we have some of our Youth Council members here tonight. So I'd like to welcome you. Oh, they're being shy. They'll come up in a little bit. Oh, they'll come up in a little bit. Okay, good, good. All right, thank you, Mayor and Council.

We're excited to be here tonight, uh, with some of our Youth Council members who you'll hear from in just a bit to share a little bit about our experience this year.

Yeah, so we've been able to work with 20 amazing members of the Youth Council this year, and as advisors, our role has been to coordinate activities, facilitate discussions, and help Our youth council members have spent many hours this year serving about—

serving our community and learning more about how Orem works.

We're very proud of their learning and growth, and today you'll have the opportunity to hear from a few of our members about their accomplishments and takeaways from this past year. We want to express our gratitude to each of the members of our youth council and also to you, Mayor and Council, for your support of this program.

Thank you.

especially to those of you, Jen, Jeff, Crystal, Chris, that have been advisors during this past school year.

Yeah, and so these are probably some of the brightest kids in Orem, and we will now turn the time over to a few of them to share their experiences with you.

Welcome. Good evening, everyone. Thank you, Mayor and Council, for the opportunity to present. We're very excited. My name is June Hungerford Weiss. I am a sophomore at Orem High, and this is my first year serving on Orem Youth Council. Hi, Mayor and Council. My name is Malou. I'm currently 16, and I'm a sophomore at Mountain View, and this is also my first year on Orem Youth Council. I'm Catherine Collings. I'm a senior at Timpanogos High School, and this is my 2nd year on the Youth Council. Perfect.

So, just an introduction.

This year, the Youth Council consisted of 20 members. We are all high school students in grades 10 through 12, with 8 members from Timpanogos High School, 7 members from Mountain View High School, 4 members from Orem High School, and 1 member from the Utah County Academy of Science. Okay, um, at our first activities, we wrote and adopted a mission statement to guide our year, reading as follows: Our mission is to foster a thriving community in the city of Orem by providing exemplary service and developing leadership skills in order to contribute to our communities throughout our lives. We believe in having fun while learning and developing lasting friendships in which everyone feels they belong. Our activities throughout the year focused on these elements: providing service, developing leadership skills, learning about the city, and developing lasting friendships. So this year we participated in some service projects, not only to serve the community but also to make our city more beautiful than it already is. So we cleaned up some flower beds at Nielsen's Grove Park, and we also donated some— we did a clothing, book, and toy drive for United Way, and we also did welcome baby kits. So, and a lot of other activities such as Taste of Orem. We volunteered at a Friendship Center dance at the Senior Center and also helping with Lights On. Perfect. Learning about Orem was really fascinating. We participated in a Q&A session with our police department, learning from our representatives from many different divisions within the department, including patrol, investigations, and evidence. We also went on a tour and Q&A session for the library. learning about the circulation process, the makerspace, the new greenhouse and courtyard, library hall, and more. One of the activities that we got to participate in was Local Officials Day. So in January, we went on a field trip to the Utah State Capitol for Local Officials Day along with hundreds of other youth council members from around the state. We were able to meet with Val Peterson, one of the state representatives from Orem. We were also able to participate in mock debates where 2 of our members had the opportunity to present our Youth Council's policy idea to create a program where small and medium-sized businesses could donate unused food or meal vouchers to students in need. We learned a lot and had an amazing time. We also did a bunch of activities to learn more about our city government. So we had a mock city council meeting which we discussed issues and from our city legal, finance, and planning staff. And at At our last activity, we also created and presented our own ideas to improve life in Orem, such as improving residents' emergency preparedness knowledge, partnering with local businesses to provide opportunities for youth to gather and connect throughout the summer, and investing in bike infrastructure throughout the city. So this year at Orem Youth Council, I just want to say it's been an awesome opportunity, and I would say my favorite thing about OYC was not only the connections and memories I with everyone, but the knowledge I gained regarding service and how much of an impact that has on each and every one of us in Oron. One of my favorite activities was the veteran check-in activity where we worked with American Legion to call veterans that recently came back to just see how they were. And I just love doing that because I got to see the veterans and I met a lot of awesome people, and I'm just so grateful for what they do for our country. Um, I loved being on our youth council for the past 2 years. Um, I think probably my favorite thing was, um, Local Officials Day and getting to meet everybody from all the different youth councils. That was a super fun opportunity. Um, and I also just loved learning about how much work goes into making our city such a wonderful place to live. Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

Right.

Councilmember Gail, you guys were such a fun bunch and there was so much energy. It was fun to go to the meetings and watch you. I think it was the mock city council debate. Jeff, you and I were there watching, and there was just so much energy and enthusiasm, and you honestly look like you belonged up here. So I look forward to like 10 years, 20 years, 30 years down the road where you guys will be sitting in these seats.

So thank you. All right, thank you. Yes, it was so fun to get to know some of you, some of the council better at the the Capitol when we had our— at the legislature and meet with our legislators. And so thank you for your service, and congratulations on your graduation. And are you 2 coming back to Youth Council next year?

Yes, ma'am.

All right, so good luck to you going forward, and we'll see you again next year. Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

All right, Council, the next item on our agenda is, uh, our, our agenda— excuse me, are our consent items. We have approval of the April 28th and May 5th, 2026 meeting minutes, a resolution adopting the Heart of Downtown Master Plan, and an appointment to the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission. Rod Erickson Mr. Erickson, are you here tonight? Okay, he's not here tonight, but we— I have— those are the 3 items on our consent calendar, and I would entertain a motion if you'd like to do that.

Mayor, I move that we approve the consent items.

All right, thank you. We have a motion. Is there a second?

Second.

Right, thank you. We have a motion and a second. Um, go ahead on Councilmember Lamson and start with you.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, the motion carries. Thank you. Right, the next item on our agenda is time set aside for personal appearances. Time has been set aside for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments on items not scheduled as public hearings on the agenda. So if there something that you'd like to come to speak to that is later on in the agenda under— and it has a public hearing phrase next to it, that's where you will want to do that rather than during personal appearances. Those wishing to speak are encouraged to show respect for those who serve the city. Comments should focus on issues concerning the city, and those who will be speaking during personal appearances have signed in before the beginning of the meeting, and I have that right list right here. And I would like to just remind you and invite you to limit your comments to no more than 3 minutes. And we'll go ahead and we'll start with Grant Ivins. Welcome.

How's it going?

Okay, we'll be brief. So my name is Grant. This is my co-founder Nick. We're both currently students down at BYU. Um, right now we're working on a new app, and it's designed to help with community security or community safety. So the idea is, you guys, I'm pretty sure, are all familiar with Google Maps, Waze, and how you can create alerts of traffic obstruction on the road, anything. The idea is that, but for public safety. So picture you're in your neighborhood and you can create an alert alerting someone of something going on outside of your neighborhood. And so we want to work with city council to— well, we're kind of curious as to how we can work with city council. So Nick is going to talk about kind of a legal matter that we need to kind of solve and figure out. And then we also want you guys thinking about how we could possibly work with you guys and endorsing it, promoting it, or just any possible ways we can work with you guys to get others. So one of the things. Yeah, so we are actually already in the Google Play Store with Android. But Apple is a little bit more restrictive.

And something that they require is that any application working in conjunction with community safety, crime alerts, stuff like that, needs to be, like, there needs to be a connection and, like, an agreement with the local police department saying, yes, like, they're aware that we're trying to help the city, like, be safer.

And they approve of that. It's not in any way a legal binding commitment.

It's just a recognition that, yeah, we're aware and okay with that.

We talked to a couple of the police departments by phone today, and they just told us that our best bet in getting in contact with the police chief would be coming to a city council meeting. So that's why we came here. Uh, but that's kind of okay.

So we have that.

So I don't know really if we just need to meet like a scheduled meeting to meet with the police chief, or—

Why don't you take it over to give it to our city recorder, Teresa? And, uh, Brian, would you mind— you'll talk about that at exec staff to learn what the best way to go about that is, if, if it's something we can do or Look at it.

Yeah, no promises, but we'll definitely look into it. Um, just one more quick thing. So, well, one thing we noticed when, like, doing research was that sometimes city councils, they allocate a budget to neighborhood watch with the police departments or something like that of the sorts. And I guess we're kind of curious to see what Orem has for neighborhood watch in your city, like how you guys kind of mitigate going through and doing stuff.

Tonight's your lucky night because we're talking about the budget, but if— but rather than sit through all that. If you— I don't know if someone from our staff can talk about what our budget is for community policing or Neighborhood Watch. Is anyone— or you get back with them? Okay, Chief Robinson will get back with you. Okay, on that. Perfect.

Thank you guys.

All right, thank you. All right, next we have Lenore Rudolph.

Hi, my name— whoops. Hi, my name is Lenore Rudolph, and I've lived in Utah County for over half my life in both Provo and Orem. And a couple weeks ago, I was here when we were talking about short-term rentals, and I noticed that there was nobody talking about the benefit of short-term rentals to people who don't own short-term rentals but might use them here in the city. So I thought I would put my name in the hat and give you a little bit of information. Thank you. information about how the short-term rentals have enhanced our family's life. There are 3 points today. I want to talk about the value— let's see, I do want to go back to something that I didn't say. I love that this area is family-oriented, kind, service-oriented, and that we have a community that looks after one another. I want to talk about 3 different things. Family reunions are all about family, so Family City USA is the right place for that. When a family is in crisis, having a short-term rental nearby so a family member can come and help is really a helpful and wonderful service that short-term rentals provide. And housing in Orem can potentially price out young families, and then being able to rent a portion of your home as short-term rental can help you pay your mortgage. And so that is the 3 things that I wanted to point out. I grew up connecting with family at family reunions. Knowing my cousins, second cousins, aunts, uncles, great-aunts and great-uncles, and my parents' cousins have enhanced my life. We have started having family reunions that are just for my parents and our And our family. And we have had family reunions across the nation, all the way from the East Coast to the West Coast, Idaho, Utah, Bear Lake, everywhere. And just last summer, 2025, we had a family reunion here in Orem in a large house that accommodated over 50 people. We had heard about it from the McMurray family, who is related to us because one of One of our nieces is in that family, and it was wonderful. They had brought 11 children and all their spouses and grandchildren and said it was a wonderful place to stay. So my parents, Leonard and Joanne Hadden, brought their 6 children, 6 spouses, 24 grandchildren, some spouses of some of the grandchildren, some fiancées, some boyfriends and girlfriends who were just being introduced to the family and were not, like, blood-related, but they're there because they're part of the family, a very inclusive family. The couple of kitchens, 18 bedrooms, pool, everything made it just a really lovely visit. Additionally, there was an elevator in the house, and my husband, who uses a wheelchair full-time, was able to participate in everything, which was just wonderful. So that's family reunions. Recently, our autistic son had— oh my gosh, I'm out of time. He had a crisis and we had my daughter come and stay at a rental for a month and help us out. And I will close, but thank you so much, Mayor and council members, for letting me express how short-term rentals really help people here in Orem who are here as residents.

Thank you, Ms. Rudolph. Appreciate your comments. Right. Leonard Haddon.

My name is Leonard Haddon.

I have, um, lived border to border and coast to coast, but for the past 10 years I've lived here in Orem, and before that I've lived in this area for a total of 19 years. We have 6 children. I don't think that's exceptional in the city of Orem, but they're scattered from Germany to California and from I don't know, from here to Utah and California and Idaho. And we have been having semiannual reunions. I think that's called once every 2 years. And we've had to travel many hundreds of miles most of the time to have those reunions, to find something that accommodates 50 or so people.

And that's how many people we had at our reunion last year in We found a building, a home here in Orem that would accommodate that large number of people comfortably, uh, and it was a, a very successful experience for us.

I realize that there are some problems that you are trying to accommodate, but I think by making it impossible for people to use their property in an Appropriate way is like looking for a problem, or looking for a solution. Looking for a problem that doesn't exist, or there are other ways to whatever those problems might be to find solutions. And I would really appreciate it if we could utilize our property in appropriate ways and not limit it on the basis. of who's there and how long they're here and how they're related and how they're not related, as long as they behave appropriately. And I think that's what I would like to say.

Right. Thank you. Appreciate you coming this evening. That concludes our personal appearance section of our meeting. So council will go ahead and go on to our scheduled items. The first item on Our scheduled items is a public hearing— excuse me, public hearing. It's an ordinance request to vacate a 0.16-acre portion of 1000 South right-of-way terminating at 590 East. So I would like to invite Jared Hall, our planning manager, to come forward. And Mr. Hall, while you're waiting, is the app— is this something that Is there an applicant here as well, or is this— is the city— I'm trying to remember if the city's—

There is a petitioner, Woodbury Group, but they're not here tonight. They weren't able to be here.

Okay, but okay, then I won't turn time over to them.

Thank you. Um, so this is a request, as you said, to vacate a portion of right-of-way right here, just the terminus of 1000 South. Uh, as it hits the shopping center at Union— I always say Union, I'm sorry— at University Place. Vacating right-of-way is slightly different than surplus property or other property that we own. Right-of-ways are distinct, and they have to be vacated. They're vacated to the parties on either side adjacent to either side of the right-of-way portion to be vacated. In this case, it's easiest to understand it looking at a couple of maps. This is the area that we're talking about in that red square. It's 0.16 acres, as you mentioned. Um, it's been planned as part of the new Home Depot that's being built in that area. It's been approved. As the plat gets ready to be recorded, we need to finish vacating this. Um, and that's basically what we're doing. This is the description of it. This part has already been given over in the past. These 2 properties that are adjacent to it, and the parts here as well, are all owned by the shopping center. So they're, they're the ones that will receive that acreage, and it'll be absorbed into the Home Depot site. That is the request in a nutshell.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Hall. Council, do you have any questions for Mr. Hall?

I have a question. So, you know, because I'm looking and the lines don't line up, is that because of the 7-foot buffer that we added?

Yeah, that's part of that. That's part of that right-of-way as well.

Perfect. Thank you.

All right. Any other questions for Mr. Hall? All right. This is a public hearing, so I invite— I'll open that public hearing up and invite anyone I would like to invite anyone here who would like to speak on this particular agenda item to do so now. All right, I don't see anybody who is coming forward, so I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and bring this back to the City Council for consideration.

Jared, quick question.

Sure.

Um, I think I understand this from our planning commission meeting, um, but I just want to confirm that vacating the right-of-way here is just vacating right-of-way in a property that is already owned by University Place, um, and has no effect on the neighborhood.

It doesn't impact the neighborhood at all. That's correct. So the folks that use, uh, 1000 South right now and access their properties from it will still be able to do that. It's already kind of effectively— it's bordered by only property that's owned by the Woodbury Group, and that And the shopping center.

So, right, thank you. Any other questions? All right. What would you like to do, council?

Mayor, I'll make a movement that we approve the vacation of a 0.16-acre portion of the 1000 South right-of-way terminating at 590 East.

Right, thank you. A motion. Is there a second to the motion?

I'll second.

Right, thank you, Councilmember Gale. Is there any more discussion on it before we vote? All right, I will start the voting with Councilmember Millett.

I vote aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, thank you. The motion carries.

Thank you.

All right, we have now have item 10.2. It's another public hearing, and it's an ordinance Request to amend Article 22-5-3A and the zoning map of the City of Orem by changing the zone of the property located generally at 92 South 800 East from R-8 single-family residential to C-1 commercial, approximately 1 acre— 1.0 acres, in conjunction with a development agreement limiting the use of the property to assisted living facilities. So we'll turn the time Over to you, Mr. Hall.

Thank you. And thank you for reading through the whole thing. That's— it's a long description, but this is a little different. Uh, this particular zone map amendment request, this is the Spring Hollow Care Center. Um, all the land surrounding it is zoned R-8. It's all solid in a residential area. Um, just a couple of things, we'll come back to them quickly, but there was a public hearing on March 18th. The Planning Commission did recommend approval, but in conjunction conjunction with the development agreement to further control that, because it is all surrounded by zoning. Um, one of the most important points in this particular application is that this care center— that you can see the church to the north of the Union Canal is just to the west. Um, one of the important things to understand is that the subject property is zoned R-8, and this is a care center. It's legal but nonconforming. It was approved under a conditional use permit in Uh, and at that time, the city did allow larger numbers, and they set the number of, of beds in a facility like this and allowed them in residential zones based on a conditional use. Later on, things were changed, and the numbers that are allowed under that code got smaller. So currently, in residential zoning, there aren't facilities with more— or there aren't facilities allowed with more than 8 beds, 8 residents. This one Currently has more than that, and they would add— they want to add an addition that would allow 18 more beds. Uh, in order to do that, because of their status as legal nonconforming, uh, the only, the only really— The only real recourse they would have would be to change the zoning. Um, they really just want to expand their nonconforming use, but you can only do that in certain ways, and it wasn't manageable in the, in the, in the zoning that we have. So they're asking for a C-1 zone. I think I put C-2 there, but their application is for C-1 zoning. Um, and in that, in that zone, you can have a facility, uh, for assisted living, and they've proposed the development agreement in order to, number one, limit the, the use, although there are several uses in the C-1 zone that are allowed, different service uses, et cetera. Um, they just want to expand this facility, so they're willing to enter a development agreement that would limit the use. To assisted living facilities, and then further limit that land use code to assisted living facilities for persons 60 years of age and older. That's, that's effectively how they would limit their uses. And then the applicant is here tonight and can talk more about some of those things. The development agreement has been proposed and would do those things, and that's— that would allow the expansion of the facility. Um, there are— this is— they would tie this to a concept plan for their expansion. As we said, it's 18 more beds they want to do. It would be a 2-story addition between the 2 existing buildings that would add some more space for them for kitchen and dining facilities. And again, those additional beds— there are already 32 existing rooms. This would be 18 more proposed. Um, and a few additional parking spaces as well that would still meet parking standards for these kinds of facilities. Uh, in that, in that zone, if they're approved for the rezone. Again, the reason for that development agreement is to control that rezone so that it doesn't allow anything but the expansion of their existing facility.

That's the purpose.

All right, thank you. Council, do you have any questions for Mr. Hall?

For this, um, C-1 zone, can they, um, are those parking spots What's going to— is it possible for them to be assigned to specific units, or will they always be a general parking?

Um, I don't know that they couldn't be assigned to specific units. I'm not sure. I'm sorry, but the plan was just for them to be general spaces because most people don't drive in these facilities. So it's mostly visitors and employees.

That's what it looked like from the layout of the bedroom rooms. I wondered if—

so I guess the reason I'm asking is because we have a care facility in In the city that started out like this, but now has parking spots assigned to units, and you cannot find a place to park there, and the businesses next door will tow you.

I can, I can see that would make it difficult.

Parking Wendy's.

If—

hello, that's your little hint. Parking. So I don't know, is there a way to—

um, because in this case, if that were to happen, there would be parking in the church parking lot or parking in the neighbors' The way to do that would probably be through the development agreement to, uh, to amend the development agreement, or the one that's been proposed to specify that you can't tie the parking to individual units. Um, I'm not sure that that's— there's nothing in my parking code that I'm aware of that would, that would affect that.

Okay.

So, great. Thank you, Councilmember Lamson. Did you—

So that was part of my question. The other question is, or just for clarification, so the people that live here, Uh, aren't out and about. They're, they're receiving care, so they, so they won't be driving anywhere, but it would just be parking for those who come to visit with them.

That's right.

And, and employees that would also be there. Uh, would there be separate parking for employees?

You can designate employee parking. That could be done as well.

Yeah.

Right. Thank you. Uh, I have a, I have a couple. Oh, go ahead, Councilmember Meekum.

Um, Jared, just on the parking, uh, on this map, uh, are, are those with the green designated as additional parking spaces? Is that what—

Those are the additionals.

And, uh, can you just confirm, um, I know that we've had residents approach us suggesting that there was a development agreement on the site beforehand that, uh, prohibited, uh, zone changes. I'm just curious as to, uh, the history of of this property, um, and, um, if, uh, if moving to C-1 is the only way to do what they're proposing to do.

Yeah, that's a good question. When we had heard that in emails and such, um, I think that that's probably a reference to the conditional use permit that it was developed under in 1997. Prior to that, it appears in the minutes, things that it was vacant. So my assumption is that The conditional use permit, which is what we've been able to find on it. I haven't found a development agreement in any of our records that I can find. The conditional use permit specifies that it would be a certain number of beds, the 18 or the— sorry, it started out as 16 beds, I believe, in each building.

Yeah.

So 32, and specifies a solid masonry fence between some of the properties and the development. But that's all that's in the conditional use permit. So there's nothing about changing the zoning or anything like that. Um, the legal nonconforming status is pretty clear.

We could expand the building to do certain things, but we can't expand the building.

You can't expand the unit count under that status. That would change.

But, but just so I understand correctly, I think you stated this earlier, um, moving to C-1 with a development agreement would prohibit any other uses at any time other than, um, using this as a residential care facility.

That's right. And since the development— since the zoning is tied to the development agreement, any change they would want to make would have to come back through the full city process.

So that was— it would be bound to the property rather than to the Owner gets recorded against the property.

So, so, yeah, it's a record.

Uh, I have a question. Just what is the maximum height one can build in an R-8 zone?

In an R-8 zone, it's now— so until like last— it feels like yesterday, but last week or the week before, until just recently, it was 35 feet. Um, and then now it's 30 feet if you're meeting the minimum setbacks and 35 feet if you're— as you incrementally make that setback larger.

So, if this were to go residential, let's say if homes were to be built there, then the homes could— it could be 30 feet, 30 feet. And then depending on setbacks, it would be 35.

It could go up to 35 feet in an R-8 zone if they set back further. Yes.

All right. Thank you. All right. Any other questions? Councilmember Gale? Yeah.

How, how high is this building?

That's a great question. I can't remember. I'm going to go to it. I think it's 30 feet high to the peak, right?

So it's the same basically for the residential or for whatever this is.

It's like, it's like a is kind of a typical 2-story home.

Thank you.

Yeah. All right, if there are any other questions, I'd like to invite the applicant to come up and introduce, introduce yourselves and present any other additional information you'd like to before I open the public hearing.

Okay, I'm Julie Smith. Um, good evening, Mayor and council members. Glad to be here tonight. As stated by the staff, the purpose of the zone change is to bring the current Spring Hollow Assisted Living into compliance. Um, like you said, in the current R-18 zone, you're only allowed 8-bed max, and we currently have 32. So the purpose of this is to allow us to expand, um, have a kitchen, 2 additional dining rooms, plus some additional bedrooms. Um, the rezoning of C-1 would allow the property to be in a conforming use, and the C-1 The zone promotes non-retail commercial and encourages development in a manner compatible and with adjacent uses, residential uses, which we think out of all the commercial uses, that one was the most compatible for the assisted living. Um, the development agreement will allow land use 1282 and limit it to seniors. 60 years of age and older. The property will be developed in conformance with the concept plan. The drawing and rendering that will be attached to the development agreement will require the addition of trees to block 2-story windows from vision to adjacent neighbors' backyards, and language regarding the air conditioning units. And please note that the use of this property cannot change. Without going through the zoning process again. About the project now, we are connecting 2 existing buildings that, like you said, they were built around 2019. On the main floor, we'll have 2 dining rooms and additional kitchen. Currently, there's a kitchen in each building, so those will go away, combining them into one area, and then the 2 dining rooms for the memory care unit and the level 2. And, um, Lynette, um, and we can add the Level 2 care if that, if that helps you. And Level 2 care, those people cannot drive. So currently they serve Level 2 and memory care, so none of those people are able to drive. And we can add that if, if that will help.

So you're saying that that would then prohibit the assigned parking from ever happening?

Right, because if we can't change it to Level 1 where People can have cars.

And who, who, who defines those levels? Is that on the state level, the federal level?

That's a— is that state or federal? State.

Okay.

Okay, um, let's see. So the parking requirement is 1 space per 2.5 bedrooms, so required to have 20, and we have 21. I think at the most there's usually 5 or 6 cars there. It's very underused parking. Um, let's see our setbacks that we have. Um, the rear setback and the existing is 19 feet at the time, so we're just extending that and 10 foot on the side of the church. Um, we had a neighborhood meeting February, and we had 310 notices set out with 4 people attending, and Councilman Millett was at that meeting. Um, the concerns were mostly noise of the air conditioner units, the height of the building, and senior citizens looking into the rear yards. Concerns regarding the noise, we are placing the condensing unit on the north end of the new addition, and that would be the side adjacent to the parking lot of the church. And they're using window AC units that are rated one of the highest for quietness and And in the development agreement, we stated what model or equivalent on that. So the neighbors can be sure that it will be quiet regarding the height of the proposed addition. It'll be 30 feet. In my notes, I had it was 35, but apparently that just changed. So we will be the height of the R-1-8 zone. Looking into the backyards, this will affect 2 neighbors, as you can see. Right there. Um, I wasn't able to attend the Planning Commission, so I had Mr. Washburn attend and cover for me, and he suggested that we install frosted glass in the second-story rooms, and the Planning Commission liked that, and I think they suggested that to the City Council. It made me feel bad when I, when I heard that. Can you imagine your view out your bathroom window and that Being your bedroom window or your front window with frosted glass. You can't see anything. You can't enjoy the outside. And so I was thinking about it, and I met with Jeremy— what's his last name— with PKJ Landscaping. He's a landscape architect, and I told him my problem, and he suggested that I plant blue atlas cedar trees, 20-foot So it's a real wide cedar tree, and if we put it against the fence, it will block anybody from looking down into the neighbor's backyard, and that is in the development agreement. Um, we've had a lot of questions on the canal. Obviously, we have no control over that, and I researched it a little bit, and it looked like on March 10th you had quite a few people show up and talk about the North Union Canal and When it was going to happen. I understand it's mostly funding now, but I think it will be a trail at some point. And that's all I had. Mr. Jones is the owner of the project, and I think he had a few comments.

I think, I think you've covered that.

I think she covered most of the concerns that were brought up at our last planning meeting, and I would just say there's a lot of demand. for senior housing, uh, for memory care, as well as assisted living. And we kind of fill a little niche that we're not some big, large corporation that's got 100 units. So we're a small— this is just the one, and it's in a tight little community. And I think people like that. They like the feel of this, and we're expanding because there is market demand for that. And it was my understanding also that the general feeling of the council was that that you, you would like to see more housing available. We do allow Medicaid residents to be there, which is subsidized by the government. And so we're, we're trying to, you know, be available for, for everyone that has a need. And we just think it's a great opportunity to, you know, be there for our seniors in their last years of living.

All right. Thank you, Council. Do you have any questions for the applicant?

Right.

Thank you, Councilmember Meekum.

Um, thank you for your presentation. Uh, I was also at Planning Commission, uh, when this was brought before the Planning Commission, and, um, there were some neighbors' concerns that were brought up that, uh, I think have also been shared with me by email and otherwise. And so I just want to make Sure that I understand, uh, the way you're mitigating those. I think you've addressed some of those right now. I had a chance to spend some time at the property. Um, I may show up on your security cameras. I'm sorry, but, uh, I, I really wanted to understand the feel of the property and, and the buffers. And, um, I, I think the fact that that church parking lot to the north, uh, provides a significant buffer there away from the residential area is helpful. I think the canal Also provides a buffer. Um, the, the concerns that I have heard, right, are, um, noise. So air conditioning noise, you've used— you just mentioned that, you know, your plan is to put quiet, um, air conditioning facilities, but on the north side, uh, so away from the residents. Um, parking, which we've already talked about. I did have a question in the development agreement specifically. That I saw regarding privacy and trees. So, I agree with you, frosted windows just doesn't seem fair to the resident. Um, but, um, I, I want to understand, just, just make sure that those trees would be mature trees, that, um, you know, winter, um, has this as privacy as well as summer. It sounds like maybe the type of tree that you're proposing would fit that bill, but that, that didn't see that in the development agreement. Um, and I've heard some concerns about just how this might impact quality of care for residents expanding. And if, you know, you felt like you had sufficient staff to make sure this was a great experience for individuals, those were concerns that I shared with our neighboring residents. Um, I do agree that, uh, there's a lot of demand for this. Um, you know, there's There's so much need in our community. I just want to ensure that all of those neighbors' concerns are, are well thought through, and that, uh, I applaud you for the efforts you've made in that direction, but just any other clarification you can provide would be great.

Thank you.

We did consider what type of trees, and, you know, we thought, well, in the winter, all the leaves are gone, and it's— they don't do any good. So we were planning on evergreen trees that are there the whole time. We also wanted to, um, And make sure that we're not planting saplings that take 20 years to grow, to provide any of that. So we will definitely put in mature trees to allow that.

What else?

The care? Yeah, one of the reasons we're doing this is because right now we have 2 kitchens, and it's just, it's not viable to run 2 kitchens. So we're trying to put it into 1 kitchen and serve the residents there. So it's a more meaningful experience and cuts down on just the ridiculousness of what we're trying to do with, you know, 2 separate kitchens. And so, you know, we do run this through— it's operated by Rocky Mountain, and they have a lot of care centers and skilled nursing centers. So they always have professional staff there, and we don't get write-ups from the state for having problems, and we, we try to give the best care to our residents as possible.

Right.

Thank you.

Go ahead, Councilmember Miller.

Sorry, are you a nonprofit or—

No.

Okay.

It feels like it.

All right. Any other questions, council? All right. This item is a proposed change to the zoning ordinance. So it is a public hearing. I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing, and those of you who have come this evening to, to speak to this are welcome to do that. And I again invite you to keep your comments to less than 3 minutes as we go forward in, in hearing what you think. So I'll go ahead and open up the public hearing. Just as you're thinking about coming up, I will tell you that we did receive some emails. Our city recorder Teresa did distribute some emails to us, and we've had the opportunity to review those. So I just want to let— if there— if somebody's live streaming, if as part of the live stream that we did get those as well. So, all right, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Welcome, fellow colleague or former colleague of Well, thank you.

Uh, my name is Dean Dickerson.

I live in this neighborhood. Uh, from what I can tell, this is a good project. I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but the members, me included, of this neighborhood are concerned about the C-1 zone. Uh, I can tell you from Some heated experiences. Mrs. McCandless, I'm sure, will remember that the spot zoning of commercial in the middle of residential is negative. But I do have a couple of questions that we would like not to have the parking overflow of the church.

The church used as overflow or whatever. That is R-8.

That is an older building. Uh, there are, I'm sure, potential of, of liquidating that property since it's older, and that will be R-8. The second thing is, and, and I've been racking my memory, I don't remember a mechanism where a property agreement attached to a piece of property— how does the city handle that? Has that ever happened before? If somebody else acquires this property, they're going to acquire it because it's C-1, not because it's anything else other than that. If there is, it's just not in my memory. I just don't remember that.

But how does this— how does the city search a property? Do they do a title search?

Do—

how do they do that?

The other things I think that the neighbors are concerned about— I think this has been a good project. We have no problems with this being a neighbor, but the spot zoning of C-1 is a concern. I would almost prefer a PD zone or something like that. But anyway, if the city or the city staff or the elected officials could address how do you search a property title, how is that done by the city?

Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Dickerson. Mr. Hall, would you mind answering Mr. Dickerson's question about— about— it sounds like from what I understand, Mr. Dickerson, you're wondering, it's about the development agreement. And if the— if in the future, if, if the development— if the use is going to possibly change to some other use, what would that be? Is that what—

Well, What, what my question is, I guess to put it more succinctly, is this is going to be C-1. As a former mayor used to say, you give somebody the sticks, they have it.

They have it.

That's a right of that property. And if, as the city just changed C-1 to allow a commissary kitchen, were to move in there, How, how is that in the middle of a residential area? You know, what if that church parking lot becomes homes? What happens then?

Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Go ahead, Mr. Hall.

It's a great question. So, um, to the 3 parts of it, um, we have, we have done it before. The city has done a few rezones that are tied to development agreements. Um, our code allows for that. So we can, we can limit zoning through development agreements as well. It's kind of what PD zones do in a way. Um, but so that's how it gets tied to it. So we do have a history of doing it. Um, you would find it if you were a private person buying it. Let's say a different company wants to buy it, as, as, as you mentioned, um, that would come up in the title search because we will record the development agreements for these kinds of properties against the property. So it'll come up in a title search if someone was trying to buy it. That'll come up in their due diligence. For the staff, for city staff to, to be aware of it. Uh, for people like me, it's recorded and put in our DevTrack system. It's the system we use to track these properties. So if anything comes up on this property in the future, say 20 years from now, and I'm gone— I, I plan to be gone. I plan to retire one, one day, hopefully. And if I'm retired by then, uh, someone else can come along and they would click this property, see what's going on when the request comes in. What can we do with this piece of property? And that's one of the items. items that comes up is that development agreement that limits it. So that's, that's how we tie it. That's how it comes up and doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

So, if that were to happen, if someone did purchase the property and want to— I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to— I'm going to ask anyway.

Sure.

Uh, change the use to another— they want to put some other type of C-1 use that would require this, right? To go through and change the development agreement.

Yeah, and that would require the process with city council again. They would have to renegotiate that contract and say, we don't want to just be limited by this. And the C-1 zoning is tied to that development agreement. So my assumption is we would go back to, back to formula, as they say, back to the planning commission to renegotiate the whole thing. Um, so, and really, I, I'm gonna, if, if I can be, if I can expound a little bit, I don't think that would ever be likely. Because the only reason this is, is possible, really, and not spot zoning per se, is because it exists already. Uh, if this were just a blank piece of property and someone was asking for C-1 zoning on it, I don't, I don't see that happening. That's not, that's not really realistic, uh, because the facility is already there, and what they want to do is expand it. This is a way they can do that if the council feels like it's inappropriate. expansion of the use, or it's already existing. It can stay exactly the way it is under that legal nonconforming status forever, in spite of the zoning underneath. Um, but if they want to be able to expand, C-1 is the way to do it, and limiting it by the development agreement is really the only way to feel confident that you don't have to deal with catering kitchens or commissary kitchens or other kinds of uses that would be allowed in the C-1 zone.

Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else here this evening who would like to speak to this? All right, come on up. And if you could state your name when you come up, that'd be great for our records. Welcome.

Um, excuse me, my name is John Henninger. I'm a resident on Eastwood Drive. My home is directly west of where this proposed addition is going to be built. Um, one concern I have about the C-1 classification, as I understand it, they could build a structure as tall as 48 feet. Um, although they say that it's only going to be 30 feet, but what would prevent somebody from building an actual 48-foot structure, which would be, I believe, 4 stories, which Sounds totally inappropriate for being surrounded by residential homes, which are all less than 20 feet. Um, they did talk about the noise. I wonder if it is classified commercial, if that would allow them to use commercial equipment, which is generally noisier than residential as far as Air conditioning and exhaust fans for the kitchen. Finally, I wanted to— this wasn't addressed to me at the Planning Commission. I brought up that the neighborhood plan mentions that one of the goals of the plan is to locate high-density housing on major roads such as State Street and Park, University Parkway. Also, it states that the city has a goal to prohibit zone changes within neighborhoods to maintain the single-family residential character. And that's all the comments I have.

Thank you.

All right, thank you. Mr. Hall, would you mind addressing the height and the, the— I don't If it's you or the applicant with the commercial equipment and then the neighborhood and maybe the type of street that 800 East is.

I can, I can, I can do my best to do that.

I'll try.

I'll do my best to do it in under 3 minutes. Um, no, I want the timer started, please. Um, the, the, it's a good question about the height. So the, let me go back to the— oh, I'm going forward. Sorry, spoiler alerts. So, the— it's a good question about height. So, C-1 would allow greater heights than R-8 zoning, as you mentioned earlier, asking about the R-8 zone. However, this is the concept plan and elevations that will be part of the development agreement that limits it. So, if they come in, let's say they come in in the future and say, we want to add a 3rd story. I'm sorry, that development agreement is tied to these elevations. This is what you get under that development agreement.

The—

it's still a good question to ask, though, because— and 2 points are that It is, it is a development agreement, so it could be renegotiated, but zoning and land use and things like that are always— they're always on the table for renegotiation. So there's no real safety net from that. You just have to trust that, um, it's tied to this for a reason. Uh, and that would, that would be the reason. Great point about the neighborhood plan. So your, your, your challenge is to ask yourselves if this plan and the development agreement limits the C-1 enough to say that this facility is still Um, is still in keeping with the residential character of the neighborhood. It's, it's people living there. It's a kind of residence, but it is different in the massing and the scale, et cetera. So, is it, is that out of character with the residential nature of the neighborhood? And is it too far out of character? Because right now it's already there existing as a legal nonconforming. It's a great point.

Can I make a comment to that, Mayor?

Um, Jared, I'm sorry, my 3 minutes are up.

So, so it appears that that elevation that you just showed, showing the height of the building, is not Currently shown as an exhibit in the development agreement. So if we wanted to include that limitation on the height, we would need to add that as an exhibit to the development agreement.

Yeah, it was supposed to be.

I'm sorry about that.

That should be included.

At least it's not in what I have.

It's not in there.

I have a question about that as well. I think this says it's 30 feet. Julie said she thought it was 35 feet from these elevations. It looks like maybe as it goes towards the pitch of the roof, it might be taller. I don't know, but maybe the Let's just verify the height.

I might be wrong, and Julie can raise her hand if I'm wrong. I think the 35 she was referring to was the height that was allowed in the resident in the R-8 zone, not the height of the building. Is that right?

And then the gentleman had a question about the commercial equipment. I don't know. It sounds like—

I don't, I don't know if that did come up in the public hearing at the planning commission, and their plan was to use the quietest they can get. So they've attached that for their development agreement as well. That'll be the use, and putting on the north side against the parking lot of the church to add additional buffer. Okay.

Okay. Councilmember Muelstein.

So, what is the noise allowance ordinance in a C-1 versus an R-8?

I don't know that there's a difference, really. I'm not prepared to tell you.

There's not one.

No, not that I'm— not that I'm aware of. You can still— and this is C-1 zoning, but all of its neighbors are R-8 zoning, so it doesn't get different times that it's allowed to make noise. more noise or anything like that. Those are, those are standard. Um, but, um, yeah, I don't know how to answer better than that. I'm not, I'm not sure.

All right, thank you. Anybody else want to speak to the public hearing? All right, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Councilmember Millett, you had a question?

A few questions. Um, so, So where are you putting your dumpsters? Can you show me?

Oh, they're right. It's right. It's right there.

Yeah, it's right.

You can see where it's right there.

Do you have a—

I can't zoom, but right here.

Yeah, thank you.

Okay, awesome. Um, so we don't have to worry about that being next to the homes. Just want to point that out. And then, so let me just ask you this. So, and maybe I'm being picky here, but 20 feet on center, 20 feet is pretty big on center. You're going to have a hole there for a while. Would you consider— I mean, I don't know what blue cedars are.

There's a picture of it that's supposed to be part of the development agreement also. So we, in the one that I proposed, we had several exhibits that were going to be part of the development agreement. It's a really wide tree.

How long does it take to get that wide? So in other words—

well, this came from the— I didn't bring the landscape architect. I told him the problem and he suggested the 20-foot on center. I assumed that, so if you have them too close, your trees are gonna hit, but that's what his suggestion was. It came directly from the architect.

Did he say how many feet per year they grow?

Oh, no, I didn't, I didn't ask. You know, he just said this would be your best Best tree, and to, uh, 20-foot on center is what he wanted.

Okay, so maybe the best tree for a winter screen, summer/winter purposes, to evergreen under Ecom's point.

Yes, ma'am.

Um, I guess my concern would be how long is it going to take to grow that to take care of a second-story tall window, you know? I mean, am I going to be long—

I, you know, these people don't see that well. I mean, these are old people So it's not like they can see 40, 50 feet anyway. So it's a big concern, but I really don't get it, right? I mean, these guys, I mean, they, they're lucky to see, you know, 5 feet in front of them. So I don't think it's a real problem.

Okay. And really, I'm just in consideration of the neighbors, right? Just to kind of— they're concerned. Um, and then let's see, what was the other thought that I had?

Oh.

So, and I'm— I guess I'm just gonna say I tend to agree with you on the frosted glass. I don't know that I, as a council member, I would recommend that. So that's just my opinion. I don't know how my other council members feel, but yeah.

All right. Okay. Anyone else have any other comments? All right. Any questions? So, council, we've heard from the applicant. We've heard from our staff. We've heard from the public. So now it's, it's time to— what would you like to do?

I have one more question. Go ahead, Jen. Just to your point about the frosted glass, that's not in the development agreement.

Is that correct?

No, not that I'm aware of. But can I— this is a good point for, for me. Can you please— I think there's another version of the development agreement, and I want to make sure that it gets the attachments that it needs, uh, the elevations, Um, et cetera. So, can you please, in any kind of motion that's for approval, including the development agreement, make sure that it includes the discussion tonight and the attachments pertaining to that?

So, the level 1 facility, level 1 facility, I think it was level 1, level 2 facility for parking.

The landscaping plan changed, including those cedars. So, those things, um, we've— I wanted to make sure we've got those as attachments like they should be, or they're intended to be.

So, so, level 2 landscaping with the cedars, 20-foot on center, and then the elevation showing a 30-foot max.

Yeah, those are—

those are— those all the items that we're talking about?

That north side, uh, the equipment on the north side, equipment on the north side in the site plan. I know that's attached. I'm confident in that one. The others are what I'm worried about, just because it is, um, a C-1 zone. If I may be frank, a C-1 zone in this area. With no development agreement attached would be, in my view, wholly inappropriate. The development agreement needs to control if it's going to be appropriate. So, if you are looking at approving it, we want that development agreement to have those correct attachments.

So, Jared, can I read this and you tell me if this is— we need to add the level 2 and maybe the type of tree. I don't know if we need to add that. But anyway, let me tell you, item number 1 in the development agreement, development in conformance with concept plan. That gives us what, um, the parties acknowledge and agree that the concept plan drawings and renderings that developer presented to the city council were a significant factor in the city council's favorable consideration of developer's request to rezone the property to C-1. The property shall be developed in conformance with the concept plan drawings and renderings attached hereto to Exhibit B, including but not limited to conformance with building location, design, layout, Lighting landscape, including trees to block second-story window vision from adjacent neighbors, elevations and building finish materials, package terminal air conditioner and condensing units to be placed on the north side. And then Exhibit B is attached here too by reference, is made a part hereof.

Is—

which one is Exhibit B? Do we have all that?

So I'm not good at air conditioning, but I understand the condenser will be on the north side And then the package AC units are attached to the windows, and they're just the little ones that are attached on the windows. But the noisemaker is the condensing unit, which will be on the north side, and that is part of the development agreement.

Yeah, there is a comma and an and there, so I see what you're saying.

Okay.

Okay, did that cover— do we have everything covered then? I'm looking at our legal staff looking at Mr.

That covers it for me.

If I could make a comment, Mayor. So, I think the main thing that we're missing right now is that part of the exhibit that showed the elevation, you know, on the height of the building. Um, you know, that, that wasn't in the current version of the agreement that has been signed. It's been signed by the owner. It's been signed by Bren. So, when they signed that, they agreed to what was already there without that exhibit.

So, probably we would need to go Get that exhibit.

You have another version of that agreement and have both parties re-sign it just to make sure that it's clear that they are agreeing to that. So, if that's what you would like to do, then maybe you want to continue this, not to just—

To the next—

go to the next item. We can come back to this item tonight. I can get that taken care of, have both parties sign it, and then you can come back to it and then You're inclined to approve it, you could at that time. Does that make sense?

Okay.

So, so we need a motion then to continue, to continue this until—

You can just go to the next, go to the next item.

Okay, we're putting a pause button on this for a minute.

No, no.

Okay.

That's an option.

I'm not saying you have to.

So what do you think?

Okay, but is that—

are you okay with that, counsel? Okay, well, we will move on to the next item while you guys go hash that out on that. The next item on the agenda is another public hearing, and it's an ordinance to amend the zoning ordinance, Article 22-5-3A, and the zoning map of the City of Orem by changing the zone of the property located generally at 1875 South Geneva Road from OS-5 open space to PRD planned residential development and to amend Appendix KK site plan Farmhaven to include the property, approximately 2.9 acres. So we'll turn it back over to you, Mr. Hall.

Thank you. Um, as you said, this is a request for a zoning map amendment. It actually has a couple of, a couple of components. So I want to take a little time and explain the best I can for this. Um, this is a, uh, an existing PRD right here is called Farm Haven. Uh, this property is the property that's up for rezoning that's been requested. It's currently in the OS-5 zone. Um, they would like to— the applicants would like to include it with their PRD that they have here already approved as Farm Haven. And make it part of that, that plan. In order to do that, they need to be included in the PRD zone. Um, the Farmhaven component of it, that Appendix KK, all of the— when the city approves a PRD, a planned residential development, they include with that, uh, into our appendix, into Appendix KK, a site plan for that development that helps control what gets done there. Um, in this case, it was Farmhaven. And I'm going to skip back to it in just a moment. But, uh, the existing Farmhaven area is here. This is the property they'd like to add to it. Uh, the new version of Farmhaven would be called Westerly Way because it would include twin homes instead of the single-family detached on smaller lots, what we call cottages. Farmhaven cottages is— yeah.

Oh, good question.

Sorry, how many were in the existing original, the approved PRD?

This is the original approved PRD.

So, 19. Let's see. No, 25. Okay, thank you.

Yep. And then you can see the difference actually just right there, the existing property, and then the OS-5 zone that they would like to add to it. Um, the twin home lots, uh, add up to a total— um, can't remember how many exactly. I'm sorry, right now, as I'm, I'm still thinking about Spring Hollow, so I got to get over that and move on. The, um, the question actually occurs as well because the planning commission's, uh, the planning commission's recommendation for approval included a requirement for a road. Sorry, based on this road out to Geneva Road, a public access that goes from the project to Geneva Road. So the planning commission recommended approval of the zone change of this land being included in the PRD. But including a road out to Geneva. Um, so the, the, the applicants have kept their design as it is and are requesting to move forward with it as it is. It includes a secondary access. So there's emergency service access, but there is not full neighborhood access out to Geneva Road. So these units then access the other roadways, and that was the concern of the Planning Commission.

So I have a question then. Just want to make sure I understand.

Yeah. Yes.

So the original PRD had a road that went to Geneva Road, correct? And the current proposal does not have that road, but has an emergency access should there be, like, for fire or police.

That's right.

And then can you go back to the proposal? And currently, it would— everything, this development until the property, it's I know the property to the east is being developed, but the road— there's nothing built yet, right? So traffic would need to go— the traffic from the 44 twin homes would go down through the 800 West and meet up with 2000 South. Is that right?

That's right. Eventually, Whitestone is the property to the east here that's being developed. Um, subdivision is being recorded now. Uh, when they build That road will connect as well. So there'll be 2 ways out of the twin home subdivision if that's the case. But yeah, all that traffic would go down 8th or up into Whitestone and then again out to 2000, out to 2000.

So there would not be any type of, of western access.

That's right.

It would only be emergency access.

Okay. Thank you.

Yep.

And the, um, oh yeah, go ahead.

Go ahead.

Go ahead, finish your—

oh, I was just going to say, this is— so I keep referring to it as the plan that they had. It's the plan that they have. It's actually on the books right now. This, this could be built. It's been approved, uh, this particular site plan. But with the— they, they developed that assuming they couldn't get this property. When they were able to purchase this property, uh, that changed their plans.

So, and before it was— I'm sorry, go back to that. 25 homes approved?

Correct.

And we're looking at 44. So, yeah, taking out the road and almost doubling the density. Um, here's my question. The road 2000 South, if I'm remembering, we had some conversations about this Whitestone, the Wilkerson Farm. That's what I know it as. The one farthest east, the exit was going to have a pork chop or a right turn only or some restrictions.

That's right.

Right in, right out.

One further west was full, but the one further east is a right in, right out.

Okay, so this one, the 800 West, would be the more flexible.

This one goes to the full access.

Okay, full access. Okay.

All right, thank you. And Councilmember Meekum has a question.

This is actually just follow-up on, on Lenee's question, because I don't have the Whitestone map in my head. Um, there is another exit to 2000 South from Whitestone. That's correct.

Yes.

Um, so, um, from those 2 properties, those 2 adjacent properties, there'd be 2 exits. Both funneling down to 2000.

Yeah, that's right.

And the railroad crossing, which I know can cause cars to back up, is to the east of both of those exits. Yes, that's right. Okay, that's right. Okay, thank you.

Right, thank you. Sorry to interrupt, but go ahead and—

No, you're going.

You're just fine. I like the questions. So, um, that is in a nutshell kind of the consideration. 44 proposed twin home lots at 6 units to the acre. Um, Orem standard sublocal street, so they get curb, gutter, and sidewalk, the buffered sidewalks. They're all 2-car garages. There are additional parking spaces. Oh, should have made you aware of that. There's some additional parking spaces provided. Some of them are actually on that part that— just going to zip back here. That's additional parking for the subdivision. This parking is for the autism academy as well. Um, most of the storm drainage happens in this area for both the project and for the Autism Academy. Um, the elevations here, you can see, uh, those need to be modified. The rear elevations, uh, and side elevations need to include, um, more stone on them, uh, like the front elevation. But those are twin homes. Uh, they're garaged, they're single level. Uh, there aren't 2-story homes in this deal, and this is like what we were talking about with with the concept plan for Spring Hollow. This gets recorded. This is part of our appendix, our appendix, and they, they're bound to build these units. So, if that's what gets approved, then that's what they have to build. Um, and that is my presentation. If you have any questions about the project or how that works.

Council, do you have any more questions for Mr. Hall?

I just have the concern. So, can you share with us, the council, what the planning commission challenge was about the street and what was brought up in that meeting?

Sure.

Um, so this is actually— the aerial is a good slide to talk about that with. This is that connection. I'm going to go back to it so you can see it clearly. That is the extension of that connection. This is the one going out into Whitestone. So when you take a look at it from the air, that's the way out of the project. And then there are 2 exits, as, uh, Councilman Mika mentioned, in the Whitestone project. This goes straight through Peyton. crossing the existing subdivision, and then 2 more out through Whitestone. The Planning Commission felt that, uh, because the existing PRD that was approved included an access to Geneva, there was no reason for the new project with additional units not to include an access to Geneva. Uh, the, the traffic study, uh, that had been on the traffic impact study that was done doesn't require it. Uh, the number of units doesn't, doesn't reach levels that requires us to have a 3rd access, but it does make all the traffic flow better. Throughout the additional subdivision here, the subdivision that exists at Payton Crossing, and then the new 44 units. All that traffic flows better if there's an access to Geneva directly west. Um, it's not required by that traffic impact study, but it does make traffic flow better. Um, and the Planning Commission felt like that was a good trade-off for the 44 additional units in the PRD.

All right, thank you.

I hope that answers your question.

All right, if there aren't any more questions. Okay, Councilmember, um, Lamson.

So the, the PRD. The zone that was previously, or is currently OS-5, proposed to be PRD. So that property, it looks like there are 12 units that would fit on that property.

So there were 25 before being proposed on just the previous land. Now that they're expanding that and on that land, then that's where they'll add 12 more.

So the, so the density for the actual land that was, that was being developed originally. Was 25, and now we've got this another, another strip of land that we're adding 12 more houses.

That sounds about correct. I think there's a few more than that. Is it?

Or are the ones on the other side of the road?

These are from the original, and these units here are on the new property.

Okay.

So those 12, so it does get a little more dense on the, on the existing property. Yeah. Somehow there's another— It's the twin homes. You lose that side yard by zeroing the lot line between the 2 units. So they're still ownable. They can still be owner occupied. They can still be purchased individually. You own the land underneath. You just have a common wall with your neighbor. It's like a duplex with a property line down the middle. So that just allowed them to increase the number of units on the existing property as well as add those additional. On the new property.

All right, any other questions? Yes, Councilmember Mellett.

So, would you compare and contrast for me the setbacks from the plan before to this plan?

That's a great question. I don't know if I can do it really well. Um, the existing plan, the Farmhaven plan, has some pretty close setbacks, but they're not quite as— they're obviously not as close as the zero lot lines. The other lot lines are— sorry, the other property line distances stay about the same between the— between each building. They're about the same between units.

Are they 4 feet to property line?

Yes, these are—

I'm sorry, they're 5 to property lines.

So what we're— what we're doing is we're pretty much what you said, a 0 property line because it's a twin home now.

Yes.

And then 4—

10 feet between buildings.

10 feet between buildings.

Um, all right. Thank you. We'll go ahead and invite the applicant. If the applicant's here, come up and introduce yourself, and if you would like to provide any other information that would be helpful in our deliberation, that would be great.

Thanks. Thank you. My name is Tricia Nelson. I'm the president and founder of Utah Autism Academy, and we're the owners of this property as a nonprofit organization. Um, and I think it's important— I know it's been a really long day of meetings for you all, but I think it's really important that help you understand where this project comes from, because as a parent of a 24-year-old autistic individual, I started our organization out of the love for this community and the need for services. I was born and raised in Orem, and I've come back here to live with my family for 13 years. And my parents taught me that it was important for me to try to do my best to make the community better based on my experiences. And that's why I took being a stay-at-home mom and went to the business world and tried to create solutions for families like mine. And this has been a dream project that we've been working on for several years. It was originally called Farm Haven because it was surrounded by farm. We never expected that there would be a high development going in where Wilkerson Farm used to be. We were told that it would always be farmland surrounding And that's why creating an access to that neighborhood that was Wilkerson Farm was not a big deal. It was never going to be developed. And so having a road to Geneva Road made sense. There was never going to be a large development of cars going through our neighborhood of autistic individuals. So we proposed that plan a few years ago to this council, and everything came to a screeching halt when the land adjacent to our property was being developed. And that created a lot of concern for our population that we're serving. And we were also in the process of building a beautiful new community center that would serve as a pillar for our community and is actually being recognized nationwide. This whole project is being looked at on a national scale from those in the autism community, and Orem is being mentioned all over the country. And I'm very proud of that because this is family city USA, and this is where I was born and raised. My concern is that, that we, as we created and built that new building while we were trying to figure this all out, we were able to purchase that 3 acres of land, which is why we decided to expand and change this project a little bit. But also, it was very important to the council at the time and to us that we create affordable housing options for these folks. And this is why we went to twin homes is because it creates a more affordable option for families like mine to house individuals like this in a way that is conducive to what the community needs. And we need more options for these folks. It does increase the density. I understand the concern. And there are, you know, I believe there's 5 or 6 homes that this street goes right past their front door. And, and for those neighbors, I am concerned. And we've looked at Tens and hundreds of iterations of what we can do to really remediate some of those concerns. And we've come to you with this plan after lots and lots of work, and we've been in front of this committee a lot of times and, and brought many iterations. And I respect and value what you guys bring to the table, and I hope I can answer your questions so that we can finally move forward.

Thank you.

forward on this really important project that our families are waiting for.

All right, thank you. I want to thank you for your— for what you do. I think, sir, I saw you today. I was— I drove around the back and I waved to you when I was looking at the property. And but appreciate what the Utah Autism Academy, how it contributes to the community, and I'm grateful for that.

Thank you.

Council, do you have any questions for the applicant. Um, Council Member Meekum.

Um, thank you for being here. Thank you for, uh, founding the academy. Um, I think it's a population that we want to thrive and, uh, care for, and it's clearly a labor of love, uh, for, for you. Um, thank you. So grateful for that contribution to our community. Uh, I am not terribly concerned about the twin home model. I think that we do have a need for more affordable housing. I know that an autism-friendly community also could benefit from, from this kind of, of housing. My, my concern and the concern that I've heard, you know, from many folks in the neighborhood adjacent to the south is, is just that It, it sounds to me that, uh, with the Whitestone development, that you're nervous about people coming and accessing Geneva Road next to your property. Um, and, um, that's— please correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds to me that one of your main concerns of taking— and the reason you would take the Geneva Road access off of your property is because it would be transiting cars through a neighborhood of potentially vulnerable individuals or going past the academy. And I know that there are a lot of children in the neighborhood to the south that they have the exact same concerns.

Sure.

And so I'm wrestling with the question of, of how do we find an equitable solution that meets the vulnerabilities on all sides of that road? And just would like to hear your thoughts process about that.

Yeah, there's, there's a lot of components to that. And one of those includes the fact that when we built our community center and saw the needs for what the community center would hold, like, we needed that space on that side of the property for parking. And also we wanted to create a pavilion and a grass area for that, that community over there. So, um, the— where our new building actually sits is right where, right where that Geneva Road access would've gone, right through that area. And so we would have to reconfigure to go through a different way and potentially cut out some parking and the playground area and the park area. And it was important to us to impact as few neighbors as possible to the south, which is why the twin home— the parking is behind the one home and the grassy area is behind the other 3 homes to try to minimize the impact. There, but we also have thought about proposing that if the, the entrance to the Whitestone property was moved to the north end of us, that potentially people aren't going to come down 800 West if they're coming through the Whitestone property, because they would have to go all the way to the top and then come all the way down in order to get out when they have 2 accesses to get out as well. Um, but there's a lot of different reasons why we had to eliminate the access One of them was in talking to UDOT, the access has to be at a specific place on Geneva Road, and it can't converge with the apartment complexes that went across the road from there as well. So it's really tricky to try to match those accesses with what UDOT would like and require for us as far as the Geneva Road access with what we currently have built. Just makes it tricky. I understand your concern. I mean, I really do. I just don't know what a good answer is. I'm not trying.

Yeah, you just, you don't know quite how to solve it, but you understand the concern that certainly do. That is that you're shifting traffic away from a previous design to a community where they might feel vulnerable to that traffic as well.

Right. Thank you. Any other questions? Councilmember Millett.

Yeah, so I've been in your facility. I was at the very first neighborhood meeting. When was that? 3 years ago? Yeah, it was more than 3 years ago.

Yeah.

When we did that, and, you know, I remember the neighborhood was very, very supportive of that first iteration, um, that you put there. Um, I, I just want to kind of get the timeline, um, in place here. Will you go back to the prior— the, the current zoning there? So, um, I'm sorry, the PRD.

Yeah.

So now what I'm remembering from when we had this, because I was on the council then, um, uh, the Geneva Road access was actually negotiated back then for the, um, Payton Place, Payton Landing. I can't remember what they're called. Payton Place. Peyton Crossing subdivision down below, because there were those concerns of down 800 West, I think it is, or something. So that was something that we had put in, and in order to approve this development.

Yeah.

And then I remember that you started adding on. I mean, I had heard that you were going to have to come back anyway because you Your addition took away some of the housing that was going to be built here. No, no, you can see the addition right there. It just extends into the parking a little bit more. So it's just the shape of what was there is just— the shape has changed a little bit, and it comes into the parking. It just affects how the Geneva Road access can come in, but it's just shaped a little bit different, but still listed there. One thing I want to note, maybe this will be helpful. helpful is that at the time we didn't have that 3 acres of property, and that owner of that property was at that meeting, and he swore to everyone he would never sell it. So there would never be an access through their land. And even if we had a Geneva Road access, if we developed the 3 acres, there would still— it's my understanding that the city would still require us to be open to their property. So even with the Geneva Road access, there would still be an option for Whitestone and our development and others to come down their property. Am I wrong? That's correct. No, but I think it was the— then the— it just provides another access. Sure. For us to take a lot of traffic off that street. So, I think their point— so, I guess my question is from— because I'm kind of looking and I'm thinking, well, I felt like there was a commitment there when we approved this to have a Geneva There was, but there was also a commitment that that farmland would never be developed. Yeah, well, I can't speak to the landowner's commitments. Yeah, obviously he didn't keep that commitment. Well, we know what happened then, right?

Yes, we do.

We know that he was given a commitment that it would be farmland too when he sold it to that person.

Yeah.

So yes, a lot of problems with lots of things that aren't written down.

Yeah.

Um, I guess my question for you is When we're looking at maybe a solution is, um, I see the parking up there on the left corner.

It—

can you kind of flip between the 2, Jared? Can we, can we move your detention basin and stick your parking up there and allow to get that access? So in other words, take your street here on your lower street out to Geneva and bump your— put some parking over there like it was originally planned in that first PRD. Or I had— I potentially, I don't know what that would mean. Obviously, the access to the community center is what we're looking for, and the front doors are on that very south end of the property. Could that mean that they walk around potentially? Yeah, I mean, I don't know how many spots you'd be moving there, but just an idea, because I'm like with Quinn or Councilmember, we can try to find a balance here.

Sure.

To pull some of that traffic off that. exit? Because we all know we've now got, you know, 100 homes exiting to the south. Um, with the Whitestone project, is that what you're referring to? Yeah. Yeah. So that's kind of the question.

I—

and then once again, I just want to kind of— the same thing we talked about before, you know, fair housing laws don't allow any respecter of persons. You know, you can't really limit this to autism-only families, correct? Right. And I, and have said from the beginning that like this would never be limited to only, but there will be an intentional HOA that will say this is an autism-intentional community, much like you would in a 55 and older community. Um, but we would hope that the community would want to be surrounded by these folks and that they— their— the access to services would bring our families to this area. We're, we're required by federal law to not limit the access to where individuals can live, and we want We want them to be able to live with executive views of the mountains, just like everybody else should.

Right.

Thank you. Anybody else have any questions at this point? All right, Councilmember Muelstein.

So, my question isn't on any of the stuff that's presented here, but in our packet, there was, you know, a mockup of the houses, and there was a top story plus basement, and the basement looked like it could be finished out. To provide kitchen area, would there ever be outside access to that basement where it could be an accessory dwelling unit? It's not designed that way now, and it's not put that way in the plans. It was— it's, it's not intended. The answer is no, it's intended to prevent that, right? That's correct.

Our—

sorry, I don't mean to jump in and interrupt, but our codes would prevent it too. PRDs. Are not allowed to have accessory apartments.

Yeah, great.

And since it's a PRD, they couldn't.

All right, thank you. All right, this is a, this is a public hearing. And so if I would invite those members of the public who would like to come and speak to this item, if you can prepare to do that. And while we're doing that, I just want to note that we did receive some emails. From individuals expressing their thoughts on, on the, on the proposed zone change. Did we, Theresa, did we have video? Did we ever receive any? Okay, we received a video. How many videos?

3.

Okay, we received 3 videos from individuals who wished to speak at tonight's meeting, but That were unable to attend. And so I've made a decision to go ahead and do that. But I will say, just ask that— I have no idea how long these videos are, but at 3 minutes we need to stop them. So we'll go ahead and, and do those 3 videos right now, and then, then we'll go ahead and open the public hearing to those who are here in the audience this evening. I did it backwards, didn't I? Should I have had them speak first? Theresa, should I have?

Okay.

No. Okay.

If you're gonna go ahead and Hello, my name is Bronson Damron, and I live at 849 West 1950 South in Orem, in the Payton's Crossing neighborhood. And I'm sending this video to convey my concern for the current development proposed by the autism center and the main egress on 800 West, which is right through our neighborhood. Um, I am not against the development itself, although I feel that it's been treated with some amount of distrust. When this was submitted back in 2023, we were battling the gas station that eventually got built behind our home. And that was very disappointing. My wife and I fought that for a long time, and it's a disappointing outcome.

So we're living with that.

We felt like the city council and many people in the city didn't support us at that point.

While there were many that were, I want to give a shout out to the people that did.

Thank you for that.

Thank you.

Unfortunately, it just didn't go our way because of the previous council, in our mind, favoring what we consider to be profits over people.

And that, again, we fought another development that's proposed in the Wilkerson Farm area.

We know that things need to be built. We're not against things being built. And the R-8 proposed in Wilkerson is, you know, fine.

That'll be okay.

Rather have it be homes than anything else. All right, it's great. But when this was proposed, the autism center development was proposed in 2023, we were initially huge proponents of it.

I said at that meeting that I feel like a civilization can be judged based upon how we treat our, um, you know, weakest individuals, and I still believe that.

However, I feel like what has happened since is the development has changed, the proposed development has changed to something that I don't agree with. And while I feel like my voice still probably won't matter because the council or whoever makes these decisions will ultimately decide to do whatever and won't listen to residents, because that's my perception over the last 4 years of living in our home. Um, I still want to express myself and say that I don't think that the current proposed development is good for that area. The autism center said initially they would put an egress on Geneva Road. Uh, now that is not part of it because they want to keep the value of their land. I think that is shortsighted and only again focused on profits instead of people. If the main egress is only through 800 West, and I know there's another one through a parking lot, very few will use that. There, if the main egress is through 800 West, that will be a huge detriment to our neighborhood where there are many kids, and they'll be just stacked with traffic and make that Unsafe. I believe that the autism center, and we need to, and they need to build an egress on Geneva Road. It's okay if there's one on 8th West as well, but there needs to be another main one on Geneva, and that is my strong opinion.

Thank you.

Hi, Warren City Council. Thank you for taking my video here and for sharing it in the meeting this evening. I'm sorry that I'm not able to attend. I'm out of town for work. I'm sending this video to express my opposition to rezoning this Spring Hollow site to be a C-1 commercial building instead of the R-8 residential classification that it has right now. I don't believe that will be good for our community. I don't believe that it will Stay a residential location. There's a note that is in the staff report available on the Orem City website that says concept plans are required as part of a rezone application, but are not considered binding documents. Any structure plans or uses that meet C-1 requirements will be allowed in this location if a C-1 rezone is passed. That says to me that, yes, right now it might be changed to continue to be Spring Hollow, and it might continue to be an For the previous—

yes, this gentleman's— his— yeah, if you would like, or if— Let's— okay.

Living facility.

However, what about in 1 year?

What about in 5 years? It could be changed, and anything that meets a C-1 commercial building could be built there. We do not want businesses in our neighborhood and in our, in our community here. And I don't, I don't trust that that won't happen in fewer than 10 years since I've lived in this neighborhood. This location has been rebranded, and my assumption is that that's because it's been purchased. So as soon as someone else buys this, they could tear it down and build whatever they want there. And we, we don't want added traffic in a high foot traffic area like this where kids are walking to school and where they are walking to church activities throughout the week. And so changing it to a commercial building, there's no way for— I don't, I don't have confidence that we won't be able to enforce that it will stay Spring Hollow or assisted living facility. Additionally, there were plans that were shared with me privately after concerns were raised that residents on the, uh, on that canal fence line, they have their windows frosted so that they wouldn't look into our backyard where our kids are playing. And I think that's just not a great solution for those residents there that already are lacking in mobility, and now they can't even look outside their windows. I don't think that it is a practical use of resources.

I think very strongly that it will not serve our community well to have 56% more beds added when I have concerns over the residents that live there right now anyways.

I—

Spend time there throughout the year as, as a member of the community. I go in there and I try and help and visit with people on a regular basis. And I don't think that it is run in such a way that that would benefit the residents there, adding that many more beds. I'm not opposed to them adding further to the building, but I don't want it to be able to look into my backyard where my kids are playing, and I don't want it to be rezoned to be a commercial.

Thank you.

structure, because the notes in the staff report say that any building could be built there as long as it meets C-1 requirements. Thank you.

Please vote no. Oh, okay.

I think I have that.

Okay, this one might be small.

I don't know how to make it bigger.

Hi, my name is Sydney Damron, and I live at 849 West 1950 South in Orem, Utah, just south of the proposed development that the autism center is putting forward. Um, my husband and I are not able to be there tonight in person, so appreciate you spending the time to listen to our videos. In some respects, it's kind of a blessing to not be able to be there tonight because we have spent countless hours fighting for our home and the safety of those that live in our neighborhood. And just this morning, we were woken up multiple times over by a car alarm in the gas station parking lot that we have so Loved being next door to and fought for many, many months. And we often feel like no matter how much we voice our concerns and no matter how hard we try to be good neighbors, that we ultimately are not as important as those that are coming in with bigger dollar signs. So in some ways, it's kind of a blessing to be able to send this in a video. So thank you. I am Extremely concerned about the main ingress going into this proposed development being on 800 West for a number of reasons. One is, if you spend any amount of time in our neighborhood, you will see a number of kids riding bikes, driving around little motorized cars, young, young kids that have grown accustomed to that way of life that I worry about their safety if we— if we flood this area with additional cars. If you spend any amount of time on 2000 South, I worry about just what it's going to do to this intersection that has absolutely nowhere near the amount of infrastructure that it needs to already support the number of cars that are now coming into the gas station. Anytime I go to turn left onto 800 West off of 2000 South, I have to sit and wait for Oncoming traffic. And if we double, triple the amount of cars that are trying to get into this teeny tiny road that is barely suitable for the number of people who live on that street as is, if we add a whole host of new development going through that road, there's going to be a backlog that affects not only 2000 South, but clear on to Geneva as people are turning left onto 2000 South and then left again onto 800 West.

I don't know.

that that has been thought through. I don't know that anybody has spent the time to go down and actually look and see how overdeveloped we are making this tiny corner of Orem. But it's important to— it's important to us that we maintain a quality of life, that we maintain safety, and that we don't overrun this tiny corner. So thank you so much for listening.

Right. Thank you. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing for those who are here in the council chambers. And if you could, when you come up, please just state your name for the record. And again, we just invite you to keep your comments to less than 3 minutes. So we'll go ahead and open the public hearing.

Thomas Fong. I live in Payton's Crossing also, just 1950. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor and city, for hearing us and hopefully listening. Regardless, I wanted to comment first on one thing I think needs to be corrected. I don't think minor. It's actually only 23 residences that were approved, 25 lots, but 2 of those are parking. So you're going from 23 to 44. Okay, and of course the number of cars that will be included. But I just want to limit my comments to the HOA statements that were made, although I know she stated that they would try to do HOA restrictive covenants. As we all know, and she admitted herself, federal law and state law prohibits certain restrictions which cannot be abided by. They can suggest them that they cannot be held to. In fact, could be sued if they tried to do so. But HOAs themselves can be changed. I've experienced that myself with some property own as an HOA. It's been amended 2 times and is in the process of being amended a 3rd time. So even the attempts they make cannot— can be changed. Enforcement is another issue. If HOAs don't enforce the rules, they mean nothing. So I just add those as considerations that HOA restrictions are limited and can be changed at any time.

Thank you.

Right. Thank you.

I'm Sherry Fong. I also live in Payton Crossing. Thank you, Mayor, council members, for time and consideration you're giving to the matter before us. The desire of the school to provide housing for special needs community is very commendable, but that project should not be allowed to place the burden of their development on the neighboring residents who purposely bought their homes in a small community to enjoy a small-town feeling in Orem's Family City, USA. We chose that nice rural area. I'm very concerned about the proposed changes from the Farm Haven original development, which was approved, to the Westerly Way development which I should— I feel should not be approved as it was presented to the City Council— City Planning Committee, excuse me. After much consideration and research, that commission decided to not recommend it for approval as it was presented, but rather recommended approval only with the addition of the access road to Geneva put back in. And it was stated by a city rep That an exit to Geneva would make a 1/4 reduction to the 800 West daily trips that they calculated would happen. It would take it from 800 trips down to 600. And so that makes a difference to those of us who live there. The school's plan to have no access will add hundreds more cars a day to 800 West. With their 44 units and Whitestone's 54 units, and the right-in, right-out only is going to force everybody down to 800, which is either way. And so it's really going to make a big difference to the traffic on 800. Unfortunately, 200 South has already become a major thoroughfare without the school's traffic and the farmland develops, the Provo side and the Orem side. When 2000 has a backup of traffic waiting for a train to pass, or the red light on Geneva to turn green, sometimes we sit for 10 minutes trying to get out of 800 West, and that's with just 19 houses there. If we're adding all of those other 100 on our side, 50 on the Provo side to 2,000. It's just going to get worse and worse. Um, we need more exits. We need Geneva Road. I understand this school's desire to make it safe for their students and their community, but they— and please, you consider the safety of our children. The school gains a lot from the sale of the homes, but they're trying to not have any of the inconvenience of noise pollution, congestion, and danger from all the added traffic. Um, our 20-plus children in those 19 houses need to be protected as well. The best solution that we've been able to come up with As a family is that the exit proposal that was adopted originally, having the road to Geneva be put back in. This way there are 3 ingress and egress, you know, which makes it safer for the minors and those adults, autistic adults, who might need additional consideration. Most importantly, that section of Geneva Road in front of the school Will have hardly any traffic at all with the implementation, implementation of the Lakeview Parkway connectors, which is going to make that local access only. So they won't have any trouble getting out left or right when everybody gets on the connector and bypasses that section. So it's not going to be a big deal for them. In the Planning Commission, the Academy indicated Their new adult building that they built behind is larger than was proposed and approved. I don't know if that enlargement was approved, if it was authorized, or if they just did it with an assumption that they were going to get approval to not need a road there, or if it was an effort to discourage an exit to Geneva. But even if they just took out one duplex, one twin home, And made parking there. There's plenty of room for that road to go back the way it was designed to be originally. Either way, whatever the reasoning was, the Planning Commission talked about alternative ways, and they recommended not approving it unless the access to Geneva was put back in. So I respectfully asked the council to maintain maintain the originally approved public access to Geneva plan to prevent all of the excessive traffic being routed through 800 West. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right, something just to remind you that we've got, um, we, we need to stick to 3 minutes on that. So thank you.

I am John Porter. I live in the same neighborhood.

I will incorporate what my neighbors have said about this project, but I would like to add one thing.

I was a trial attorney in Southern California for 50 years representing fire and police and the municipalities that employ them. I became very close to those professions. I saw those men and women show bravery and sacrifice time and time again. often without any concern for their own safety. When I saw this new plan that has extremely limited access to this neighborhood, I thought of certain situations that, that often arise. There could be a residential fire, vehicle fire, medical aid call. Heaven forbid, there could be criminal activity, a hostage taken by an armed suspect. Barricaded in a home.

In any of those kinds of situations, we are going to see police and fire arriving at the same time. If it's a fire primarily, the police are there to back up, but ready to step in if they are needed.

And just the opposite, it's a police issue, a fire develops, fire will be there and able to assist.

You know how big those fire trucks are. And you know how many police cars come on an incident like this.

And there's going to be an ambulance and an incident commander and who knows who else. If you take out a real road going to Geneva, you have eliminated a major access point to deal with these sort of situations.

You will have placed the people that live in that community at danger, and you will have placed our first responders at risk, and that's wrong. A plan has been approved.

It has the access to Geneva, which will make this situation more safe. And thank you for your time.

All right, thank you.

I'm a little sparky, so my name is Connie Porter and I'm 78, and I can see pretty well.

So, uh, I, I live in Payton Crossing.

My backyard looks at the beautiful gas station parking lot, and we have plus 20 little children on our street, and they ride electric cars, they ride scooters, they ride bicycles, they run like children are supposed to do. And if you dump 100 more cars on 800, what's going to happen to our children?

Our children are as important as any other child, and they need the same consideration. So when you look at this, it sounds lofty, but who's it lofty for? For our little kids? Or, you know, we'd all like to support autism.

Thank you. But really, we have to protect our children.

And I think your motto for Orem is family-friendly city, or is it developer-friendly city? And I say these things with a sincere heart. Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak to this issue? Right.

Hi, my name is Ryan McDougall. I live My family and I, we live on 800, and we have 7 kids. So I feel partially responsible, about halfway responsible for a lot of the kids running around. So apologies to my neighbor. Um, I, I too, um, I have a brother-in-law who has autism, and, and he's, um, just turned into an adult. So I understand, you know, the need. Um, my concerns are What this proposal— I don't have any problems with the proposal as it was approved previously. Um, I think my concerns center on the fact that, um, this proposal would create what the planners would recognize as an inverted density pattern, placing the highest density housing furthest from the arterial access and directly behind an established low-density single-family neighborhood. That runs contrary to standard planning practices. Higher density uses should be located closer to arterial or collector roads where infrastructure is designed. And I think the problem is compounded by the fact that the street exactly to the east of us that goes into the new neighborhood is a right-in and right-out. And unfortunately, what that does is it, it makes 800 a shortcut. to get to all those homes that are just to our east. And so I think there are other ways to handle this.

I think there—

I don't understand maybe why we don't have a sole access on Geneva, and then maybe we could put a crash gate on 800, or there are a lot of different ways I think this could be handled. And I would be happy to speak with the developer and try and come to some type of solution that would be good for everyone. I think greater density, if, if, if the traffic were all directed toward Geneva, I'd be okay with that. I, I think that would be a good, a good option. And I think there are ways to do that, um, other than just putting all the burden on us as, as on 800. And I won't, I don't want to belabor the point that my neighbors have made, but I agree with. And so I would say, um, I think it You know, I don't oppose the development. I supported the development to the east of us. Even the townhomes I was okay with, just because it didn't— they weren't placing the access burdens, or at least I didn't think they were placing the access burdens on us. They had 2 accesses, but then it turned out to be one of those to be a partial access, which already is going to push a lot of the traffic onto us. And so I believe that there are some ways that that could be mitigated. mitigated. And so I, um, I, I would ask the council to please, uh, not recommend that this proposal be approved, but that maybe it be sent back. And, and, you know, I'd be happy again to work and, and talk with, with people to, to try and help something that would benefit everyone and work for everyone.

Thank you for your time.

All right, thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak to this this evening? Okay, um, I would like to give the applicant the opportunity to, to say anything before I bring it back to the council, if they would, if they would like to.

Sorry, I'm sorry that I'm emotional. I will just say I'm not a paid lobbyist. This is outside of my wheelhouse. And I think I take A real issue with people that are not trusting the entirety of what we're trying to do. We can talk logistics, we can talk roads, but saying that there's money in it for someone, that we're trying to pay developers' pockets, that's just not the case. We're nonprofit. We don't walk away. We help autistic people, and that's what we're gonna do here. Trying to say that I have ulterior motivations, it's not the case. I care about these neighbors.

I've visited with them.

Thank you.

Them a lot. I do care about creating a solution that works for everyone. So the personal attacks are a little bit challenging for me, and I apologize for my emotions. Like I said, there have been a lot of iterations, and the reason we had the initial iteration to Geneva Road, and I think everyone can agree that that iteration has changed a lot because of the developments that are going on adjacent. It wasn't just us trying to flip The script and, and pull the wool over anybody's eyes. It changed for us too. It totally halted our project. So we're trying to do the best that we can. So I just want it to be on the record that we are very also wanting to work with these neighbors. We care about their lives. We don't prioritize these children that we work with lives over their grandchildren's lives or their children's lives. We care about that. Um, and what we're trying to do here is out of the integrity of the importance of everyone's life and to increase the quality of the entire community. So that's all I'll say, and then I'll sit down.

All right, thank you. Let me go ahead and close the public hearing and bring it back to the council. Oh, okay. Councilmember Millett would like to ask you a question, if that's— if that's okay.

Sorry, I'm so sorry. Usually not. We do appreciate— like I say, I visited your facility. It was really fun to see all the great work Great that you're doing. stuff. I do have— I also have members of my family who deal with autism, so I just— and need services. So it's so grateful to hear that. And congratulations on your awards and your notoriety, I guess, your, you know, Thank you. fame or whatever word you want to use. So will you— my question is kind of just a basic— are you building these homes? Are you getting this zone change in And selling the development for someone else to build, or are you hiring a development company? How is that going to work? That's a really great question. Honestly, like, we've talked to several builders ourselves. We've talked to developers ourselves. Um, the priority for us is the integrity of the project and how that happens. We're not certain until anybody that is a builder or a developer that wants to do this project, we're absolutely committed again to the integrity of an autism intentional community to whatever extent the law will allow, as this gentleman said, right? Like, but we don't have a set plan that way, and I'm open to discussions about how to do that. But I can tell you we're absolutely committed and we're not interested in just saying like, yeah, we're doing this to sneak our way through to grab some money from a developer to sell to. That's— I understand what the concern might be that That is not our intention, but we don't have a designated developer or builder lined up. We're looking at lots of them to try to see who can align with our mission and our values to complete the project successfully.

All right, thank you. All right, um, Councilmember Gale.

I just do have a question. Do you have anybody helping you through this process, like a, like a Julie Smith type person that can help you negotiate the planning and the zoning and all that? I think some people that were Who was at that first meeting can attest to the fact that we had some help initially and it went a little awry and it wasn't true to what— and people felt misled by the information that was given. That's why we decided to handle it ourselves. We have contracted with professionals and builders and developers, but my dad, who is a retired business owner, has put his whole heart and soul into this project and he's talking To a lot of folks as well, and, and I'd be happy to have him answer any questions. But as far as, like, the communication of what this project is, um, we felt it better handled by the honest truth right from the horse's mouth rather than going through another agency, if that makes sense.

Right.

Thank you. Right, council, um, let's come back to us. Would you like to have a discussion on, on this item? Councilmember Meekum.

This has been a rich discussion tonight. Thanks. Thanks to everybody who has come and sent videos and shared their thoughts, and really appreciate the applicant for the work that they're— that they've been doing on this. You know, some of this sounds kind of tricky, but I also— I'm just really encouraged that there's just so much goodwill here. Um, I'm grateful for the residents of Peyton Crossing for thinking about, uh, what good could come from that, from this project and that development and the support for, for doing that. I mean, you don't have to, you don't have to do that, right? Uh, I mean, you, you're on your own little cul-de-sac, uh, away from the world, and being willing to support a development to the north of you, I think, is, is a great thing and appreciate Your generosity toward the applicant there. And to the applicant, you know, I appreciate your, your thoughts in terms of trying to make sure that, um, you're open to working with the neighbors and, and understanding their concerns. And so, I don't know what the technical, uh, solution to this might be tonight, but I'm encouraged by the fact that there could be a creative solution here. And I think what I've heard is there's a lot of support from the neighbors if we could find a way to get to Geneva. Um, and, um, I would love to see, uh, you come back. I'd love to see this get to— this get built, and I'd love to see you come back in a way that, uh, satisfied a lot of the concerns. I, I've spent enough time on, uh, 2000 South to recognize the concern about turning left and, and, uh, you know, again, Again, with that railroad crossing that helps back things up sometimes. And I, I think the traffic concerns from the neighbors are valid, and they need to be thoughtfully addressed. I'm just optimistic that they can be.

Right. Thank you, Councilmember. Okay, Councilmember Muelstein.

I agree with Councilmember Meekum on this. Um, just because the traffic could be handled on 2000 South and on 8th West doesn't mean that it necessarily should. And I think that there can be a real win-win here. For both communities that we can get this autism housing project built and ensure that Payton's Crossing isn't bearing the burden of the extra traffic. I'm wondering if there is a way for that traffic to be routed. So there's not that straight shot into the Whitestone development, but going up and around. I think I'm hoping that we can come to some creative ways to solve a problem. this problem to meet both needs. And I would love to see it come back with a creative solution that we can do that. And let's work with you to make that happen.

Right. Thank you, Councilmember Gale.

I also agree with Quinn, Councilmember Meekam, and Mielestein. I think it's a great project. I think there's a lot of support in the community, and I've loved seeing that tonight, just, you know, from Payton's Crossing, but also from us and from you. There's a lot of passion around it, and I'm 100% convinced that there is a solution to this problem if we just work at it a little bit more. So I, and I encourage you to do that, but that's kind of where I sit.

And then just to clarify, just from what I'm hearing from the 3 of you, that, that the solution you're thinking we hope to see would be something that would have some connection to Geneva Road. Is that what I'm hearing?

Just so that, that Payton's Crossing doesn't bear the entire burden for all the traffic for this autism community.

Okay, thank you. Councilmember Kilpatrick.

I would just say that that's so that on record you're hearing my opinion as well. Love the project, love the ideas. Um, it would be nice to have some form of continued communication, though, just so we can mitigate that concern about the traffic and the children. And so everybody's safe. So I think the concept's perfect. A little more look at it, and I think we're in great shape.

Thank you.

Well, thank you, Councilmember Lamson and Councilmember Millett.

Well, not to belabor the point, but I'm in complete agreement. I'm inspired by your vision and what you're doing and what you're building and the service that you're providing to a group and to families that are sometimes neglected or overlooked. So, huge applause. Thank you for all that you're doing. And again, thank you for Your vision. Um, and thank you to the neighbors of Peyton Crossing. Thank you for being here and sharing your voices. I don't know that I could feel good about directing traffic through that neighborhood. And, uh, along with my fellow council members that have already spoken, I feel completely confident that there is a solution. There's something that can be done.

Uh, that's a win-win for, for all parties.

So, Thank you.

Right. Thank you.

Yeah, so I'm going to echo that too. And, you know, actually, I'm looking at your red lines on the— what's in the packet here, and it is kind of indicating that there are some issues with that detention basin that, that, that, that, um, if I'm looking at the notes here, that, um, you know, that probably will need to be moved. It didn't seem like it was going to pass our DRC, our Development Review Commission and Committee. And then also it says it needs some better fire access, which we heard that comment too. So I, I just feel like it's saying put a road through, because I think that that's going to be— if I can just, uh, just common sense say, I think that will make your community safer too. If, if you can have access for whoever's living there, especially if it is a community of of families with autistic children. Um, there needs— there will need to be a lot more calm if there is an emergency, um, in that area. There will need to be some, um, safe exits and easier access. And I just feel like that we can make this work. You know, the original diagram that had the parking up in the top, I don't know, like you say, it will affect your access to your facility you just built, the, the auditorium. But, um, I agree with my other council members that, that, that the access to Geneva is going to be a, a, a game changer for me. So if we can make that happen, I think that helps Payton Crossing and actually helps your facility too. So that's my point.

All right, thank you. I have a question for you, if you don't mind. It looks like I'm the last one to speak here. I, because of the time, I'm just going to say that I agree with my colleagues. And so I express my appreciation to you and, and what the type of project to do. I'm completely supportive of the type of project that, that you are proposing. I'm very grateful for the willingness of the neighbors. Everything that I've— that I— everyone in this room and in the emails that I had received on this were— the one was— the ones I received were like that no one said no. Let's— it was, let's come up with a solution. So I have— you're at a crossroads here as the applicant. Sounds like the council would like to continue this item as you work to come up with a way to obtain on your property an access to Geneva Road. So you have a decision to make. If you would like us to go forward with the application that you have presented to us this evening without that access to Geneva Road, or would you like us to continue this to give you time to work on that? So I know not to put you on the spot, but I'm putting you on the spot. So thank you.

No, I appreciate everyone's comments and support of everyone, Um, I'm tired today, clearly, um, and this process has been tiring for me, and it's hard to want to continue to go down this road over and over.

But we will.

And I would hope that this council will engage outside of these meetings with me so that we can talk about it, and that the city planners will engage with me because there's a lot of barriers and hoops to jump through to get here. things through a process, and it's been very difficult to create any sort of iterations. And then it gets brought before a committee and it's told to go back and told to go back, and it's tiring. So I'm committed to this, and I will— I'd be happy to work with people, and I hope that people would be willing to have dialogues with me outside of this venue as well.

Nope, I don't believe anyone's trying to intentionally exhaust you.

Certainly.

I'm just exhausted and you're General session experience that you kind of feel like we call it— we would call it the whirlpool cycle that you just keep it going. That's not the intention.

Yeah.

And, and again, I apologize that people attacked you personally this evening. It stings. I've had that from my own personal experience. So don't, don't worry about getting emotional about that.

Thank you.

So what I'm understanding is that you would like us to go ahead and perhaps continue this item. Continue to work it out. So see what we can do to get Geneva Road, get a Geneva Road access. Council, is that something that you—

expedite conversations? That would be helpful too, so we can move the process along.

Okay. Council, is that something that you'd be comfortable doing? All right. Would there be a certain applicant? Would there be certain time, a time certain that we want to continue? Or just how would, how would we do that, Mr. Earl?

So if you continue it to a date certain, Then you won't have to re-notice everything. If you just continue without a definite date, then we'll have to do the re-noticing.

That's what I thought.

When—

so we have the time.

But she's already got some problems, some DRC issues. They're going to have to redo this. Could we— I don't know how we're going to know what date.

Yeah, so maybe— Gary, do you have a voice on that? I mean, do you, do you mind if we have to re-notice this?

No, that's not a problem. Um, what you could do is continue it that way. We're more than happy to work with them. Depending on the nature of the project, we may want to go back to Planning Commission and then come back here. But if we can work something out and get that connection, which seems to be the big issue, yes, we would just notice it and come back here.

Come back here because— so as we continue it, if we do continue it to a date And say that to give time for that. And I guess if, if it comes to that point and we're not, and we're not ready yet, we just continue it again. Would that work?

Good.

Rather than renotice everything, I don't want the applicant to get caught in the—

It kind of sounds like it might be best to continue it without dates because of the uncertainty and because it doesn't seem like it's a problem to renotice this. So.

Okay, that might be the best course.

Okay, so go ahead and continue it indefinitely. All right. Um, what would, what would a motion look like for, for a council member were to make a motion to that effect?

I think it would just be a motion to continue this item to give the applicant an opportunity to go back and see if they can rework their plan to find a way to provide access connectivity to Geneva Road and then bring it back.

That motion.

All right, we have that motion from Councilmember Millett. Is there a second?

I'll second.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Meekum. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion before we vote? All right, Councilmember Meekum.

Do we need to refer— do we need to read that? Can we just say, uh, okay, that's, that's fine.

You can just, uh, adopt what I said, what he said, if you want.

Yeah.

Okay.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right. Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. You made the motion, but you didn't vote yet. I'm sorry. Yes, motion carries. All right. So we'll go ahead and that's going to be continued. And do not fear, my colleagues. After— I would like to go back and take care of item 10.2. Then, then I would like to take a little bio break. Because we're going to— we're coming up on hour 6 of the meetings that we've had today. And so, are we ready to go back to item 10.2?

So, Mayor, if I can give you an update. So I went and revised the development agreement to include that exhibit that Jared had showed in his presentation to show the elevation of the new building at 30. It's actually 30.5 feet. But, um, and so that's part of the exhibits of the agreement. That, that binds them or limits them to that, that height. Um, the other thing, there was some discussion about, you know, language regarding level 2. I wasn't really clear if that was something you wanted to include in there. Um, but I, I did one version with that and one without, so you can have a discussion as to which one would you want to use.

The parking, the parking was the issue. Level 2 would have less parking. Required assigned parking. Excuse me, not less parking. Level 1 would have assigned parking. So, what, council, what would you like to do?

I think including the Level 2 specification is a good idea.

Okay, is that the consensus?

I just want to make sure the applicants are comfortable with that.

Are you okay with that? So you'll do Level 2, not Level 1 care.

Speak into the microphone so we have it on the record.

And so the question would be if it would be all right as part of the development agreement, if the, uh, if the facility was level 2 care.

That'd be fine.

All right. So with that, are we ready for a motion?

So I'll motion. Do I need to say anything about the RDA? Or not the RDA, sorry, the development agreement.

Uh, yeah, you can just reference that it's subject to this development agreement that's been signed by both city manager and the, uh, it's actually manager of the, uh, company that owns the property.

Okay, I move to approve by ordinance to amend Article 22-5-3A and the zoning map of the City of Orem by changing the zone of the property located generally at 90 82 South, 800 East, from R-8 single-family residential to C-1 commercial with a development agreement limiting the use of the property to assisted living facilities, as has been signed by the city manager and the—

by the owner.

By the owner.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Gale. We have a motion. Is there a second?

Second.

Right, Councilmember Lamson, there's a second. Any more discussion on this? Okay, Councilmember Millett.

Um, well, it looks like everybody's cleared out here, but I just feel— I just, I just want to ask about one thing. Um, so this is a legal nonconforming use right now. And my experience thus far is the goal of planning is to, when the opportunity presents itself, to bring things within conforming use. So I'm feeling conflicted here because there's 2 things that are making this nonconforming. The height, because we're now adding a 2nd story. Am I correct there? The height is the same as the other buildings.

It's the— it's—

it would conform to the R-8. So it's, it's not— the structure itself is not nonconforming.

It's the use, the use.

But weren't the setbacks changed? I read that somewhere.

The setbacks in the, in the C-1 zone are a little different, but it would still meet all of those. Um, for C-1, but not for RH, but it's not nonconforming to the setbacks because it conforms to the conditional use permit that was approved originally in 1997.

Right. So, so, but it was a conditional use. I guess my, my issue is here.

Um.

I just always was taught that when you have the opportunity as a city to bring something into a conforming use, because there is some revitalization, some changes, some something to that property, that's the natural path to follow, um, to try to have good zoning principles throughout your city. Would you speak to that? Help me feel about that.

It's a really good— it's a really good point. The difference here might be, if I could articulate it, the difference here might be that the use actually What's changed has been what we allow in the R-8 zone. So it's nonconforming that that's changed. And you're right, I, um, it's kind of the long game. Zoning sometimes selects things for extinction over the slow course of history. This would counter that, but that's the weight you have to— that's what you have to consider is, is this still residential enough? Because we do, we do allow some facilities in residential zoning that are assisted living. Just not ones that are this large. So that's really the— that's really the question.

Okay, thank you.

All right, any other— okay, Councilmember Muelstein.

So I have similar conflicting feelings about this. Why is a PD not more appropriate? Because like Councilmember Millett was saying, changing the zoning It's, it's the camel's nose coming under the tent in which what's to stop that zoning from spreading around this residential area in the future as things happen. You've got farmland on the other side of 8th East, and you've got all residential around there, and putting commercial in the middle of there makes me very uncomfortable.

Sure. Um, I, I think In some ways, it's not— it's not— PD zoning wouldn't be less appropriate. It's just, it's not necessarily any different because a PD zone, let's say that they did a PD zone that would do exactly what we're proposing, or what's been proposed with the C-1 zone in the development agreement. It would be a version of that, and any zoning that gets put in place can be petitioned for change at some point. Nothing is ever Nothing is ever set forever. Um, the development agreement tying to this zoning, you could, for example, let's say that the PD zone, we did a PD-50, I think we're at 56 now. We propose a PD-56 zone instead, and that PD-56 allows assisted living facilities for elderly persons, level 2 or level 2 care, et cetera, et cetera, all those same things. Somebody could come in in a year and a half or 2 years or 10 years when the property changes hands and asked to amend that PD-56 zone to be different than and allow different uses. Um, that happens. So it's not any— it's not really any different. Um, it's not really any different or more appropriate or less appropriate. It does the same things.

I do think the public perception, though, is different with it being labeled commercial, and that's where my mind is still trying to Wrap around that.

I guess that our thinking on it was just that, that we have the zoning that allows it. So the applicants just applied for C-1 because that's— they're already in— that's already allowed by C-1 zoning. And so it wouldn't be inappropriate to do it. It would just be a different method.

Jared, maybe one clarification.

PD zone is not PRD.

Oh, true.

Right. And so there are commercial uses in PD zones and residential uses or mixed uses in other PD zones, right? Maybe you could summarize that clarification.

That's a good— that's a good point, Brent. Thanks. So PD zones, and there are PRD zones, planned residential developments, PD zones, planned development zones, and those can include commercial uses, mixed uses, residential uses that are different than the residential zones that we have. Um, those are all possible. So there could be a PD zone proposed instead.

Could it be—

I just point out too that unfortunately, or fortunately, depending how you look at it, our ordinance requires 3 acres to do a PD zone.

Yeah, but could it be a PRD?

Uh, no, this wouldn't be allowed in a PRD zone.

These different kind of multifamily—

it is residential. So I'm just wondering if there's a way to allow that. Why aren't we using the same That was used before, the same conditional use back in 1997.

An assisted living facility of this size, and this one was approved at 32 beds. It was permitted as a conditional use in an R-8 zone. It's no longer allowed as a conditional use in an R-8 zone. So that mechanism that existed back in 1997 no longer exists.

And I don't think we— that was one of my reasons why I'm going to vote for this, is that I I don't think we don't want more conditional use permits in our city, because I think to bring zoning into conformity, conditional use permit means, yes, you will approve this.

Yeah.

And that there are enough conditions that are possible in the universe to allow this. I think the C-1 zone that we've done makes sense because it does allow it. It removes that conditional use permit off. the books, as I understand it, because now it's got this C-1 zone. Because I'll just say, conditional use permits are nothing but trouble.

So, yeah, that's absolutely true. Yeah, there's been some change in the, uh, in the law regarding conditional use permits since 1997, which made it really unattractive, as the mayor's indicated, to have them as part of your ordinance. And so we, we made a concerted effort to get Get rid of them to the extent we could out of our ordinance.

Yeah.

So, yes, I'm sorry, I did a big interruption. Go ahead. Um, but I'm going to go ahead and this is why I'm going to vote for it, because I know that, um, Mr. Dickerson said, and he's absolutely right, a C-1 zone, you got a bundle of sticks. Each stick is a use or a right, but the development agreement only gives them 1 stick. And we're not talking about apartments. apartments, as far as what we're talking about, high-density apartments, or it— like in the traditional sense, which I would never approve there. But the fact that this development agreement does not have any other uses besides that, and it's bound to the property rather than to an ownership, it's— so that sticks with the property. And one thing that was very important to me is that the height is the same as the R-8 zone, because I didn't want— I'm sorry, what was the height? Like the gentleman said, I wouldn't want a 45-foot or 48-foot. There's no way. And so having this, this 30-foot height bound by, by a written contract, it was appealing to me. And then also eliminating conditional use. Any other discussion? Okay, we've got a motion and a second, and I guess it's my turn to go first. A motion to approve, and I vote aye.

And I second it, and aye.

Nay.

Aye.

Aye. Nay.

Aye.

All right, the motion carries 5 to 2. Thank you.

Thank you all.

Okay, Council, what time do you want to reconvene here?

What do you need?

5 minutes? Okay. 10 after? Okay, 10 after. Gives Pete time to run to Taco Bell or wherever. We are here and we are ready for the next chunk of our meeting.

And it's a chunk.

It is a chunk. And so we are on item 10.4. Ordinance, cultural arts and recreation— I can't talk— recreation enrichment care tax allotment. So I'll turn over to our chief financial officer, Brandon Nelson, for that presentation.

Great. Let's see if I can make this a little bit— I don't know if you want to go bigger or smaller.

I'm not sure.

Get more on it, or Okay, so tonight we are here to, um, have a final discussion and then approval of the CARES tax awards for fiscal year '26-'27. And so, you know, we've had previous work session discussions about various items, and realistically at this point Um, I just need to turn the time over to you if there's further discussion that you, you guys feel is necessary. Um, and then, uh, if based on that discussion, um, and then an approval of some sort for the CARE tax awards via ordinance.

Right.

Thank you. Any questions for Brandon or Trevor? All right, council, this is not a public hearing, and I don't see— do any of you have a desire to speak to this? They're laughing at— you guys are laughing at me, so I take that as a no. Um, all right, council, it's our turn now.

One comment.

Okay, we have a comment from Councilmember Meekum.

I'll just say I'm so grateful to live in a city with the CARE tax. What a privilege it is to have funding that goes specifically to our arts and recreation. I don't think I appreciated this as well before I had a chance to listen to some of these folks. And I just, just want to say that this is one of Orem's great strengths, and I'm just delighted that we are able to fund often at a very startup level, but fund a wide variety of groups, some major groups, some small groups, but they all bring really great things to the city, great opportunities for us. And that just, just contributes to a culture where we get to celebrate lots of diverse arts. So I'm grateful for that.

All right, thank you. Anyone? Okay, Councilmember Kilpatrick.

Okay.

Mayor, I move that, uh, to approve by ordinance the fiscal year 2026-2027 CARE tax awards as outlined in Exhibit A of the ordinance.

All right, thank you. We have a motion. Is there a second?

I'll second.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Gale. Any other discussion? All right, Councilmember Kilpatrick, how do you vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Thank you. Um, item 10.5 is a resolution, creation of public safety special revenue bond— excuse me, revenue fund and statement of intent to dedicate the general operations portion of property tax to public safety. So turn that time over to Brandon Nelson again.

Uh, sorry.

So, thank you, Mayor. Um, this is a continuation of the discussions we've been having in our work sessions regarding, uh, the creation of the Public Safety Special Revenue Fund and a further dedication of the city's current property tax to that special revenue fund, as in— as allowed state law. Just as a reminder, and, you know, for all the public that's here to, to know what exactly it is we're talking about, Utah State Code allows the city to create a special revenue fund and dedicate any amount of its current property tax towards that fund, and, and that fund has to have a dedicated purpose behind it. in this case, public safety. And as mentioned up in the right corner there, why we are interested in doing that are several reasons: to further identify the costs of public safety and be able to see that the elements that go into our public safety and see what kind of funding is being applied to towards that, to that end, being that one of the city's major functions is to provide public safety.

services.

Um, based on this resolution, it is a resolution, not an ordinance. So the, the resolution that is before you is to be able to indicate to the county as well as the State Tax Commission what the city's intent, um, when we move to our June 9th council meeting, so that they can be prepared for that meeting. That does not not bind us in any way in that June 9th meeting. You still have the, the right to make a decision one way or the other at that point. Um, just to give you an idea, the, the approximations— this was on fiscal '26, so this, these slides were before we actually had our tentative budget completed— but approximately $38 million in fiscal '26 was related to the police and fire budgets. Um, by dedicating our property tax, approximately $8+ million would be moved towards, um, covering those costs of that $38 million. Um, the, uh, dedication, uh, um, would show up on, uh, the, uh, property tax notice that each citizen receives. And you would see the City of Orem's property tax go from a existing amount to 0 and a new City of Orem Public Safety Tax that would start at 0 and show its current balance based on these, um, whatever the county auditor's certified tax rate and associated revenue would be related to that.

So, so, Brandon, just to clarify for the record, all of Orem's collected property tax, the intention with what you're proposing is to move all of it Into this public safety, to the special revenue fund?

Correct, 100%.

100%. And then going forward until further notice of some sort, I guess, other— to get other direction going forward, 100% of Orem's property tax will go into this special revenue fund to, um, to partially fund police Correct. Okay, thank you.

Um, we are here at Phase 2, the tentative budget, uh, that with this resolution before you. I've mentioned the June 9th meeting, which will be a public hearing, and at that point, um, there would be a consideration of the adoption of the, of the budget. At that point, it may be the adoption of of the, uh, certain portion of the budget when what is referred to maybe as— there's been some debate with Steve and I as to what exactly the legislature intended between the term tentative budget and interim budget, but at some point here we'll, we'll make that conclusion. Uh, this, this particular thing does not in any way associate with a property tax increase. They are 2 separate considerations. Um, and just some more information regarding that timeline again related to this meeting as well as that June 9th meeting.

Um, so, okay, just kind of because you kind of confused me with that.

Okay.

So just to clarify for the public, there are 2— go back to your other slide there— 2 separate Decisions. What you're trying to say is tonight's vote, and then when we vote on this, are 2 separate decisions.

So tonight's vote isn't— you are not adopting anything tonight. Tonight you would, you would be adopting this resolution that tells the county and the State Tax Commission what your intent is. The tentative budget that we will be doing later has the same impact. You are, you are, you are just accepting it for consideration. You are not adopting it at that point either.

We're showing what could happen.

I am saying our future—

here it is.

You have a month to review it. Not only you, but citizens at large. You have a month to review And look at it.

Thank you.

We then come back on June 9th, and then we would make a decision based on other factors, whether those be property tax increase or not, whether there are things within that document that— but that tentative budget you would like to see changed or have questions about. Those kind of things would then be addressed during that June 9th meeting. Um, and then you will see in the— down in the bottom right corner, um, in further— my annual financial report that the city, uh, issues, you would then start seeing that particular special revenue fund that separated from the general fund, and you would see it within, uh, the— what was referred to as the ACFR, as its own separate item. As far as the actual financial results of the year as well. Are there any other questions?

Council, do you have any other questions for Brandon regarding this? All right, is there anyone who would like to speak to this? Nobody's here to speak to that, so I'll bring it back to the council.

I'll make a motion.

Okay.

Um, I move to approve by resolution the creation of a new public safety special revenue fund and state that the Orem City Council intends to dedicate all of the City of Orem's regular general operations property tax levy to this new fund.

Thank you. We have a motion. Is there a second?

I'll second.

Right. Thank you, Councilmember Meekum. Is there any further discussion? Right. I'm just going to say that I, I really, as we've talked about this before, I, I'm very supportive of this idea. I like the idea of the clarity that property tax is going to be spent for very specific uses in our public safety department. I like that it gives a stable, more stable funding source for public safety. And, and I just, I like the transparency. transparency that this, this will provide. So any other discussion? All right, um, Councilmember Muelstein, how do you vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you, motion carries. Okay, item 10.6. Oh, so we don't— we just have to listen.

You do.

We don't have to take—

move—

take any action on this item. We just have to listen to our Chief Financial Officer as he makes a statement.

Yes. So, a part of the new legislative law regarding property tax increases is that during a— not only on our agenda, which you may have noticed, but as part of this meeting, There's a separate agenda item specifically where I tell you and the public there is a property tax increase of $450,000 included within this tentative budget that we will be presenting next.

That's it. And that's the end of the item. Okay, thank you for your statement. All right, item 10.7, we're gonna have a public hearing. It's a resolution, fiscal year '26-'27 tentative budget. And so Brandon, we'll turn that time back over to you.

All right, buckle up. So to— hey, look, yeah, I got your picture even. How about that? I had to bribe some people. This year's tentative budget that's being presented to you is, you can see the total amount, of all funds of the city, excluding the RDA and the Special Service Lighting District. Those are not included as part of, of this present specific presentation and not included as part of that $211 million. Um, just to review the budget calendar that we went through, we had our council retreat in January, we had a work session in April, where we discussed revenue at the time and compensation elements. April 28th, we had another work session where we discussed operations and operational expansions, as well as the IT component of the city. On May 5th, we had a special work session where we discussed the fleet needs, as well as all capital elements within the TAC. Margaret presented that are also either part of this budget or part of the use of those, the reserves that we transferred back in, I think it was February, whichever way we were using those towards those capital needs. And then obviously here we're presenting our tentative budget this evening. Some highlights from the, the budget. First thing you'll notice, that increase, $34 million That is a bit deceiving, I will tell you, and we will get into that a little later, compared to the prior budget, and we'll discuss that. Know that this budget does cover the city's compensation programs, including step adjustments and merit increases. It also addresses various other targeted adjustments that may occur during the year as we continue to evaluate HR. HR continues to evaluate individual positions' pay. It also funds all of the healthcare, any potential healthcare increases, as well as any URS retirement costs that have been passed down to us. As mentioned, we talked about fleet replacement and capital projects. It funds all of those dollars as well. Okay, so in discussion, Our budget overview. You can see the, the revenues from the various adopted budgets over time, and you can see the big item on there is the transfer to the new Public Safety Fund. So if you take that $25 million, which is the amount necessary because we have a new fund and property tax doesn't cover it all, And all of the other associated public safety revenues do not cover it all. The general fund has to cover that variance. That's what that $25 million represents. So keeping in mind, this is the city as a whole, right? So that's, that's why it's there. So you can see, if, if we were not creating that special revenue fund, That $25 million would not occur and not be considered revenue. Therefore, you can— you could, if you want to look at it, and you should look at it this way, that $211 million would be reduced by $25 million because it would not exist. So keep that in mind as, as we talk about that large change in revenue. As we look at, and you can see again, the transfers in the public safety item, that's where that shows up in, in this concept of where do all of the revenues come from that make up this $211,000— or million. So these are all the various fund, large major funds of the city, and then And the other funds, just so you're aware, the large portion of the other funds are all those internal service funds that we have, which include fleet maintenance. The largest portion of that is our IT fund, self-insurance, purchasing and warehousing, and facilities maintenance. They are the lion's share of that $13,870,000 near the very bottom there. So really though, I just— this table is to just give you an idea of where do those revenues come from and which funds do they belong to? You'll make an— please note that the little tiny print up at the top, I've tried my best to pull out the public safety dollars out of this comparison so that you are seeing the general fund only as it technically now would exist. And you can see the revenues from the $52.9 to the $55 for the current year. That increase is primarily sales tax related. Sales tax and franchise taxes with the property tax removed and ambulance revenues removed And Vineyard and Linden fire contracts removed. Those all now exist within the Public Safety Fund. Sales taxes and franchise taxes primarily become your biggest sources of revenue for the general fund. So out of that $55 million, approximately $43 million of it is those 2 revenue sources. Obviously, there are a large number of individuals that exist within the general fund, um, whether it be from yourselves, city manager, city finance, legal, engineering, many other individuals, departments, community development, etc., that exist within the general fund. That transfers in line, um, are those transfers that we are charging to other funds For our services, if you will. We do work for the water fund. We do work for the sewer, all of the enterprise funds. That's primarily what those charges represent, is our best guess and estimates as to what our services to those other funds is. You know, the biggest change in that transfers in, just to give you an idea, So that public safety fund, again, we talked about the $25 million that exists only because we've created that new fund. $700,000 of that transfers in only exists because we're now technically providing services to public safety. Same concept. So that $700,000 would not— also would not exist. Had we not created that new fund. Engineering costs are up $182,000 as far as the money being charged to other funds. They are doing more work in relation to those other funds than they have in the past. In GIS, that group exists within the general fund. Prior to this year, several of those individuals that are in that division were in those— directly in those funds. They are no longer in those funds. They are now in the general fund and being charging their cost out to those other funds. So those are 2, 3 big components of that difference. This one, I, I made it— I just wanted to give an idea, so I didn't pull out public safety for fiscal year '26 because I wanted you to see What does that change of moving public safety out on its own— what does that do to those percentages as far as the comparative to the total? So you can see taxes now become a much larger portion of the total revenue of the general fund because property taxes were not a large portion of the total. Especially when you're only adding $8 million of property tax, but you would be adding some $35, $40 million of public safety costs to that bottom line. So just wanted to give you— and then you'll see charges for services is one of the other ones I already mentioned. Ambulance, um, Vineyard contract, Linden contract, various other public safety costs or revenues.

Those were—

are now pulled out, and you can see the impact of pulling those out and how that drops from 19.5% to just under 13%. So again, it's just to give you some relative picture there. We've talked about sales tax revenues. Getting into the specifics for general fund, the fiscal year '26 estimate that you see there for $33.7 million is based on a 3% estimate increase for the current fiscal year. Then the proposed $34.7 million is another 3% increase on top of that $33.7 million proposed increase for fiscal year '27. Are we clear on that? Do we understand what I mean?

Yes.

So what's your— isn't that what you normally do? Do 3 to 4?

Generally is what we're generally in the 2.5 to 3 ballpark. Yes. So, so it's not out of the ordinary by any means. I mentioned franchise tax as being one of the other large tax or revenue sources for the general fund, but you can see it's relatively flat over the last 3 years. We expect it to be relatively flat this year and not go up by much next year, but it is a large dollar amount. So it is a stable— as I said, or let's say it's a stable source. We can pretty much count on it. This is primarily Rocky Mountain— Pacific Corp, Rocky Mountain Power, Enbridge, and Comcast. Those are the large 3. The city also does have a franchise tax associated with its enterprise funds as well that become part of the cost of this revenue source of this fund as well, and all the telephone providers. So any cell phone or telephone provider is also part of this franchise tax revenue source. Just to give an idea, the other— some of the other larger revenue sources within the general fund, and/or in this case, the— I've just indicated the development fees fund there for building permits, just to give you an idea. So they're not part of the general fund, but you're We're not really going to necessarily talk about the development fees fund, but you can see that that building permits revenue has been pretty stable just overall. So there's not— when we talk about property tax and we talk about growth, this is usually a key indicator as to whether you're going to see any growth in your property taxes. If you're not seeing stuff being built, you generally aren't going to get more property taxes. So, Just to give an idea there. And then some of the other larger sources of revenues— interest earnings. Obviously, we've spent a lot of money in this building in particular, as well as several other projects that have reduced the amount of cash that we have available to invest. And on top of that, obviously, interest rates have declined just a little bit from their highs, and so we are proposing a slight decrease in interest earnings. Our Justice Court fees have fluctuated pretty dramatically over time as we catch up and don't catch up with various cases as they come. And then our cemetery lot sales and interment fees, which are also relatively stable over time. Any— I guess before I jump to the expenditure side, any questions about any of those revenue points?

Great.

Uh, expenditures, uh, just to give you an idea of comparison from the prior year's adopted budget to the current year. Again, you see that $105.9 million in the middle significantly impacted again by that almost $26 million because There's also an expenditure side to that on the general fund side. So it has both sides of that element, and, and so both sides get inflated because of that. Obviously, as we go down the road, that'll just be normal. What you, you know, you wouldn't see that kind of fluctuation in the future. So this just gives you some kind of idea of where our expenditures lie. Do they— are they in that personnel Are they in operations? Are they in capital? Just so you're also aware, operations includes regular operations, any debt payments that we have, as well as all of those transfers that we refer to, in case they're transfers out, not in, in this case. This is just to give you an idea of the size of those expenditures in relation to the total. for each fund and, and how those break down between personnel, operations, and capital for each of the major funds of the city. As mentioned in our discussion with LRB, you can see the, the, you know, and this is where sometimes people get maybe a little lost in the sense of, well, $71 million, that's only like a third of, you know, I mean, $211 million. But as we talk about the operations, and especially in total, that $105 million is a pretty inflated number. So when you back out a lot of those transfer elements, personnel becomes a large, much larger percentage of that total. And it's— so I just want to make you aware of that. And you can see we talked about the general fund and public safety. by far the largest 2 places for personnel costs. And then as you look at capital, you can see our enterprise funds, the significant amount of capital that they expend on a regular basis.

Okay, that's a good question.

You bet.

Based on what you just said, that $105 million figure is an inflated number, and is that because of all the transfers in and out?

Correct.

Thank you.

And Brandon, though, showing those transfers is— and being transparent about that is required of us, correct? Yeah, so it's just accounting in order to have a balanced fund, which is required by law. Every fund in the city has to have an equal amount of revenue and an equal amount of expense. In order to do that, we have to make transfers that balance those accounts, those funds.

So if you were to pick a more accurate number, and this is obviously ballpark, what could you do that? Like, what would it be?

I could, yes. So, but in the future, I expressed my— in the future, I would have, if I'd had a little bit more time, I'm not sure how many of you were, of my— the issue with my son last week, but I, I ran out of time to really be able to identify those transfers separately from those operations. So in the future, uh, you would see a transfer line, uh, column there because they are such a significant impact in relation to that. Um, but good news, Brandon, next year when we don't have that big transfer, it'll look like a big Budget savings. This is— this could be true. Um, if you would like, I'm more than, more than happy to provide you— to take that same one and break those out for you. So I can, I can send that to you each individually just so you can see that breakout.

So, okay.

Um, as we've talked about in some of our work session meetings, uh, just summarizing those, uh, operational expansion items, That were discussed in those meetings in relation to personnel and various operational elements. We've talked about fleet replacements and the totals in relation to the various funds for those elements. Just, just kind of gives you a visual idea of what kinds of vehicles are being spent in that arena comparatively to the prior year.

Is the increase in police vehicles, um, for the 2 officers?

Uh, a portion of those, yes. So yes, so the vehicles would be included as part of that $855,000. Yeah, and I forget, it's like $100-something thousand of that is related to those vehicles for them. Um, then Okay. Then the Public Safety Fund. So this year, thought it would be relevant definitely to kind of give you an idea of— and then again, I wanted— I don't have a way to be able to make those perfectly equal, so that's why I separated out the transfers in, is so that you can have some idea of if you were to remove that. Uh, you know, obviously we would expect it to be in that same $45 million neighborhood as we go down the road. But when we're comparing to past, I wanted to give you some idea in relation to, well, what kind of property taxes are we talking about here in relation to their revenue? Kind of grants do we get? What do we budget for, I should say? Kind of charges for services, the ambulance and Vineyard and Linden And various other components that we've talked about are in that charges for services line, and you can see some of the elements there. And, and then, as we've talked, some fees and fines, whether they be related to fire inspections or various other revenue sources that are related to public safety in there as well. Just a brief graph. Kind of showing you the general property tax that now would be applicable to the Public Safety Fund, just to give you an idea of the history there graphically. And then the expenditure side, just to break down those components for police and for fire to give you an idea of the makeup of each of those particular departments in relation to this new fund.

Thank you.

Um, and they, uh, again, we discussed in those work session meetings, uh, those, uh, operational expansions in relation to them. Uh, the property tax increase item that I mentioned that is included in this budget, you can see as related to those 2 hiring of those 2 police officers, um, in relation to that $450,000. $1,000 property tax increase. Um, the other operational items down below are just included as normal, uh, coverage within our, uh, that, that $25 million that's covering that, that portion.

Um, oh, you bet.

So sorry. Um, so how do we— so we are considering short-term rental legislation, and part of that legislation, we haven't got to this part yet, but is The costs associated to the city with enforcement if we do end up legalizing short-term rentals. Um, I have had discussions with our police where there is a, a suggestion of 2 to 3 more officers to assist with short-term rental enforcement. Um, so that would be right, I guess this is 2 officers is $450,000, so we take another half. And add that, and that would be our 3. And then how do you, how do you put that into our budget for next year? Because that would then go into effect immediately, the need for those officers.

Yeah, so depending on the timing, exact timing of that, we would either need to come back with a budget amendment adding that additional officer, or potentially if it was at a later point in the year, there's always a possibility that we evaluate how our available funds are, and potentially you can cover it through the remainder of that fiscal year. And then you would put it within your— you would add it at that point to your fiscal '28 budget. It just becomes so.

And then, because I should have added too, there's also a conversation of at least one, maybe 2 more, for our attempts on long-term rental Code enforcement.

Same concept.

So how—

that's— we're getting up in the numbers there. So how do you, Brandon, how do you, how do you make that magic work?

So any, anytime we're discussing those, then we would have to determine where— what the revenue source that is going to cover those costs is going to be. Obviously, if we're already into the new fiscal year, It's not going to be via any sort of property tax increase because that's come and gone. That would have come and gone by then, potentially. So then again, it would be going back and determining, okay, our sales taxes, for instance, better than what we anticipate, better than that 3% that we anticipated. So are those going to cover it? Are we going to use reserves from our general fund to cover those costs? Are there other revenue sources, be it franchise taxes or other revenue sources, or cost savings. For instance, maybe there are benefit— fringe benefit estimates were too high. Maybe there are salary type of items that are not being— not needing to be spent for various turnover reasons. So all of those things would need to be evaluated and determined in order to figure out how exactly are we going to cover the costs of those particular officers if we are going to add them at some point during the year.

And does that also affect when we would add them?

It could determine that as well.

That could be an issue, correct?

Yes.

If I can add to, uh, to Brandon's point of figuring out the revenue source, also what we would ideally come back to you as part of the overall short-term rental consideration and long-term licensing and permitting enforcement is associated fees to go along with that.

And then I'd also say, we would also, we'd also look at the cost of code enforcement officers potentially not, maybe not necessarily police officers per se, because the pay ranges might be different between those titles. Of course, code enforcement or our neighborhood improvement team is in the police department, but they're not sworn peace officers.

Okay, so you're saying that cost could be reflected differently from this?

So, so that's perfect.

The total cost of salary, benefits, equipment, etc., uh, would likely be different than what we're seeing here for police officers.

And then just to clarify, we do— we can do Truth in Taxation this time of year? So when do we have to always do that? We can do it once a year?

Yes.

And we have to do it by August or by now?

June?

We have to do it by— yeah, June. Yeah, or June.

So that's why you said we'd have to wait a Just to clarify.

Yes.

Listening.

Yeah.

That first meeting in June, we have to have already notified them that we're going to move forward with a property tax increase so that I can get a date in August with the county auditor.

So the licensing is most likely the way we're going to go to fund these additional—

At least for initial increased enforcement. Uh, we, we would look at landlord licensing fees and, and probably engage with LRB to help us do that fee study to make sure that there's a good nexus there.

Perfect.

Okay, moving on to our streets. And again, we've touched on this in part of the work session where we discussed capital projects. This is just kind of giving you an idea of of, you know, that was more in total. This kind of breaks that out between the 2 different funds that we have and, and which type of project is being funded by which revenue source, just so you kind of have some idea as to what our pro— our plans are in this— that are in this tentative budget. Our debt service fund, uh, obviously, uh, here in Utah we're very attuned to our debt elements. This just gives you that breakdown, kind of a little slight history here of, of what that debt service fund primarily covers. The primary elements right now of that are the Utopia payment that we had a discussion about earlier today, the new 2024 sales tax revenue bonds primarily funding the public safety building remodel and the fire training facility. As well as we have a lease where we did a bunch of energy improvements, and so that lease runs through this fund as well. And all— so those are the 3 major elements in there. And then the GO bond, the 2019 GO bond, which is the only GO bond we had left, which funded city— the library hall and the fitness center. So those are the 4 items that are part of the debt service fund. I mentioned our 5 internal service funds. Just again, just to give you an idea of the magnitude of each of those particular funds and the dollars, how they break down between personnel, operations, and capital. The biggest item of change in these particular ones is, as discussed in our work sessions and is what I wanted to mention here is in our information technology area. That $5,050,000 that you see there, the prior year was just high, just around $4.2 million. So that $800,000 increase is related to some, some regular, you know, pay increase items. But these particular operational expansion items, which we discussed in those work sessions, So these particular 3, 4 individuals, well, 3 individuals and an intern. So the intern's a part-time, and so they make up that amount and various elements that, as IT goes, I know not what many of those things even do or are, but I know they're all important. So you add up the 2 of those and you're $600,000 of the $800,000 increase. So all I know is that Azure one, I have to put in a stinking password all the time. So yeah. So moving on to the— starting into our enterprise funds. Well, before I do that, is there anything else that's popped in your mind about anything that's not enterprise fund related? Okay, great. Water fund. So this year, the bigger— biggest items in there Are the increases over on the left side. You see the water source fee and the change there to that fee down in the bottom left corner, the, the new state regulatory fee, which all of these we've discussed, we discussed when we brought the revenue work session item to you, but they're all put into this slide here. And the water base rate on a 3/4 meter, and then, you know, the base rates as mentioned down there on other meter sizes are shown in the fees and charges section of the tentative budget. Um, just to give you an idea in relation to our water and how that water, even with those increases, where Orem City's rate for water falls on the scale comparative to these particular cities. Each, each one of these is going to show a slight slimmer of this, but you should know some of the cities I changed, but that's because I wanted to put the highest one in and the lowest one in so that you had some reference as to that full— because this isn't every city that you saw on that other comparison, right? And so I just wanted to make sure you could see The range that we're talking about in relation to the highest and the lowest of that— of those tables. Our water reclamation, otherwise known as sewer, you can see the cost in relation to the kind of a historical size-wise there, as well as the sewer base rate increase that is being proposed and the volume charge associated with Um, that increase as well.

Can I just say something to that? Just, you know, so just common sense. This is inflation, folks. It is, right?

Okay.

Yes, you bet. A pipe with corrosion inside of it, right, Chris?

It's true.

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay, I said corrosion. He says struvite. Cholesterol in your arteries, what he says.

Okay, so no, none of our public's hearing you say that, so I want— that's important. I want you to say that.

I'm sorry.

So, so he's, he's just indicating, so So we always have inflation. We have construction inflation, still not as bad as it maybe has been in the last little while, but most of this increase is related to unfunded federal mandates primarily, and which we're just needing to cover.

That's good to add.

To remove nutrients and various things.

Okay, thank you.

So improvements to the wastewater treatment plant, which then causes us to do major capital improvement projects. And so then we have of construction inflation associated with doing those capital improvements. Um, then just to give you an idea again where Orem falls in the pantheon of cities in relation to these, uh, the fees, um, for everybody else, and, and we still fare even with these, especially these last 3 years, the rather large increases we've, we've had in our fee. We still sit pretty well, comparatively speaking. And Brandon, just to emphasize, these tables here are Orem's proposed FY27 rates with the other cities' FY26 existing rates, correct? Correct. And there is a table at the very end where we kind of sum them all together with an increase, a standard 4.9% increase to everybody else's to see where we stand in a total. So you'll see that, but these are all compared to our 27 versus whatever their existing rate is. Stormwater, again, kind of, you can see a history there in relation to it. And we have a lot of stormwater projects that we're trying to get resolved related to obviously the West Union Canal, North Union Canal, etc., trying to figure out how to get those taken care of. There is an increase to the ESU rate in relation to that in this, in this budget. And then you can see where Orem City falls with that new proposed rate in comparison to other cities. Our recreation fund, they're, they're just boring. 4.4, 4.5, 4.6. Can you do something about that?

Dang it.

Um, the, the biggest item to, to note are the 2 items on the right, um, that we are increasing the daily admission at the fitness center for the first time in over 3 years. Um, so, you know, and then the indoor classes continues to grow, maybe not quite as, uh, big of a percentage jump as in some past years, but, uh, 10% is still a pretty good growth rate. So our solid waste fund, you can, you can see the increases that have occurred there. We recently have negotiated an extension of our solid waste contract with Waste Management, so that hopefully will be steady here for the next few years. And then just give you an idea of what those rates— you can see from '25 to '26, we held the rates with no increase. And then the current rates are all a 2.5% increase from '26 to this proposed budget. And those are primarily just trying to pass on the costs of, of our rate increases that Waste Management had given to us in To be honest, in prior years that we, we used reserves to cover, but now we need to cover those going forward. And then just again, to kind of give you an idea where we fall with our solid waste rate comparatively to other cities. And that total that I was referring to, so this one, Includes them at that adjusted. So everybody, every city there is adjusted by 4.9% in their total, so that it's trying to give a better picture comparative to our 27 rate. And you can see that somehow we just got to take Springville out. So I don't know what we got to do, but anyway.

Yeah.

So that's It—

for our regular tentative, our regular budget, are there any questions in relation to that? As mentioned, uh, you are being just presented this to you. I— you're welcome to review whatever questions you may have, review the actual tentative budget document. Um, please do go through that if you, if you have certain questions that are in there. Uh, Trevor Bell or myself will be happy to try to answer those. I can almost guarantee you, you might find an error or 2 in spelling or the aesthetics or things like that. We are still trying to work through our new ClearGov budgeting program. It's only the 2nd year that we've fully used that program, and so we can continue to find things that We didn't know before, so we're trying to improve there as well. So, uh, we would appreciate that if you found things in there that didn't make sense or looked weird or whatnot, that you could bring those to our attention as well.

All right, thank you. Council, do you have any questions? Councilmember Gail?

I just have a comment, and that is you've been going over this with us for months and months, and, and we appreciate the effort. I know it takes a ton of work, and you've done a great job. So, thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, thank you.

Uh, this is a public hearing, and we have one esteemed member in the audience who has declined by shaking his head to not provide any public comment at this time. You're a good sport that I could tease you a little bit. All right, I'm going to open the public hearing, and I'm going to close the public hearing. And bring it back to the council. So we have, uh, like I say, we can't, we can't tentatively accept the budget. We have to accept the tentative budget. So this, you got to be pretty solid in your motion if you're going to make them.

I'll make your motion for you.

Okay.

I move to accept for consideration the City of Orem fiscal year 26-27 tentative budget and set a public hearing to receive public comment and to accept, modify, or reject this tentative budget on June 9th, 2026 at 6 PM, and to set the specific date and time for an August public hearing to accept public comment on the proposed Public Safety Special Revenue Fund property tax increase.

Right, we second that.

All right, we have a motion and a second. Where did I leave off? Let me see. Um, so we took it. Hey, Council Member Gail, how do you vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, motion carries. All right, item 10.8, statement that the city is considering levying a tax rate that exceeds the city's Certified tax rate, the approximate dollar amount of and purpose for the additional tax revenue that would be generated by the proposed tax increase, the approximate percentage increase in tax revenue for the city based on proposed tax rate increase. And then if the city proceeds with a proposed tax rate increase, the city will write notice and conduct a public hearing at which members of the public will have the opportunity to provide comment.

Thank you.

Comments on the proposed tax rate increase and presentation of the property tax impact schedule, period. That is a long sentence.

Congratulations for completing that.

You are welcome. I did, even though I went to school in another state, I learned to read.

Um, you want to know who wrote that? An attorney.

Yes, paid by the word, right? This requires— will require an action from us as a council after, uh, Brandon does his presentation.

Yes, thank you, Mayor. Um, so as part of— again, as part of new legislation in relation to property tax increases, uh, part of the requirement is, number one, that I, as mentioned previously, I have to state that that tentative budget included a property tax increase, that that tentative budget includes a separate line item so that you can see the amount of the property tax increase that is being proposed. So in that tentative budget, you will see that line item existing within there. And then a— the third item is that there's a separate agenda item related to this property tax impact schedule outlining what is the amount that we are asking for in relation to property tax increase. That is this $450,000 as stated in that first paragraph. And then gives you an idea of what our— and since I don't know what our— what the certified tax rate is going to be yet, I don't know that until the 1st of June. That is what our current certified property tax rate is. And then what the budgeted revenue based off of that rate Was for 2025.

And that is again just for the City of Orem's portion.

Correct.

Not the entire property tax one pays.

Correct.

It does not include the school district or the county or any of the other rates.

Which, please, please say, do you have in front of you the dollar amount per month it is anticipated to be on a $550,000—

Oh yes, getting there.

But, but thank you for bringing that up.

Yes.

So—

It's a great segue, right?

You will notice that we, in parentheses there, we've also then indicated, as, as we indicated earlier, related to dedicating our property tax, all of our property tax, to that new special revenue fund. We've also tried to indicate here that that current certified property tax rate actually still belongs to the city, but under what we are attempting to do, that this property tax increase would be going towards public safety And would be included within that special revenue fund that is going to be part of the budget. And then see if I scroll down here a little bit. You can see the increase of the $450,000 and what that would mean to our revenue. And then that means that that's approximately a 7— a little over 7% increase. To Councilmember Millett's point, then we have a calculation. Calculations here of what that means to an average primary residence. The $513,000 comes from the county, and so that would equate to an $11.85 annual increase. So I'm going to have to make you do a little bit of math.

Less than a dollar.

Less than a dollar a month. And then for residents, and then you can see the business one is just a little over $2 a month. Um, in relation to, to that value for them. Um, it identifies here on this impact schedule that it would be going to the police department and be increasing their budget accordingly by that $450,000. And the last item is, what is that being spent on? And that is, do we hire 2 new officers and all the related vehicles and equipment related to having those officers? So, are there any questions about that? This impact schedule will be posted online with everything else. It does need to be posted front and center, and this schedule needs to be available to the public. And so, via not only that method, but if they, you know, we'll have it in a couple of places as well so that they have it available.

Thank you.

to them as well. Any questions about anything on there that I've discussed?

Any questions, counsel? All right, well, it looks like they've given us a motion that's much shorter than what— yes, for someone, if you would like to make a motion.

I move to approve the resolution acknowledging several state-required actions related to Increasing the City of Orem's property tax revenues as part of the fiscal year 2026-2027 tentative budget.

Thank you. We have a motion. Is there a second?

I'll second that.

All right, thank you. All right, go ahead and start with you, Council Member Lamson. Oh, is there any discussion? All right.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Right, motion carries. Next item on the agenda is city manager information items. What we've learned. It says, okay.

It's okay if I'm closing all these things.

Um, I just wanted to say thank you for your full involvement, uh, during the city's birthday, 175th birthday.

7th birthday and Kindness Week. Uh, we as staff enjoyed seeing all of you help us pass out birthday cake and plant flowers and do service, so thank you so much. Uh, the next big kind of, uh, city event that we're looking forward to is, uh, during Memorial Day weekend, first with our Gold Star Family, uh, memorial dedication and then with our Memorial Day program at cemetery on the following Monday morning at 10:00 AM at the cemetery. So, but again, thank you so much for being so involved, and, and sure appreciate working with you.

Great, thank you. And just a reminder, there is the Miss Orem and Miss Teen Orem, Orem Teen Pageant this weekend as well. Um, there are no other pieces of other information. I would entertain a motion to adjourn From this being from the City Council meeting and reconvening, uh, to a meeting of the Orem Redevelopment Agency.

So moved.

All right, thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Right, I have a second. Thank you.

Oh, okay.

Oh, hi, hi, hi, hi, hi, hi. All right, motion. This is like, we're going, we're— this is great, you guys. All right, welcome Redevelopment Agency members. We have 1 item on our consent calendar, and that is approval of the meeting minutes of December 9th, 2025. Do I have a motion to approve?

I move to approve the consent items.

Motion. Is there a second?

Second.

Second. Um, councilmember or agent, whatever your title is, Ms. Meekum.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

I, I can vote twice. Never mind. No, it's past my bedtime. I apologize. Motion carries. That's what I meant to say. All right, our next item is number 14, RDA scheduled items resolution, Redevelopment Agency of the City of Orem fiscal year 26-27 tentative budget. And we turn the time over to Brandon Nelson, Chief Financial Officer.

Thank you, Mayor. This one's really short. So our Redevelopment Agency, um, as Thank you. As mentioned before, the only— there are some remnants of the prior old RDAs that we still have monies that we're expending, but there are really no, very little revenue coming in for those. And so the really the only remaining item is the University Place CDA that's part of underneath the umbrella of the RDA, which we have an agreement with them to rebate 90% of the property tax we receive for their developments that are part of the CDA agreement. You can see the prior year there, kind of in the middle bottom section there, the current year estimate. We refunded almost $1.7 million. We expect that to be a little bit higher here in '28— or '27, sorry.

'27.

of 1.8. The 2 items below that are related to that. So I mentioned 90%, 5% stays within the fund, and that's that future projects item. 5% is charged as an administrative overhead fee and goes back to the general fund for services of all of us, and as well as various other elements that may be needed related to that CDA. The bottom area, the project area totals item, are those— the remnants of those old RDAs. And so that's the makeup of the RDA and the elements within it. Are there any questions about the RDA?

Right, any questions? All right. And this is not a public hearing, and I'm not going to open it for public hearing, but go ahead. I would entertain a motion.

I move to accept by resolution the Redevelopment Agency fiscal year 2026-2027 tentative budget and to set a public hearing to adopt the final budget on June 9th, 2026 at 6:10 PM.

Second.

All right, with motion and second, and I, I'll start with me. I vote aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, motion carries. Um, I would entertain a motion to adjourn from the meeting of the— as the Redevelopment Agency and reconvene as the ORMS Special Service Lighting District.

So moved.

We have a motion. Is there a second?

Second.

The motion is second. Um, okay.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Right. Motion carries. Welcome to the Special Service Lighting District meeting. Um, we have 1 item on our consent items, and that's approval of the meeting minutes of June 10th, 2025. Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Right.

Motion. Is there a second?

Second.

Right. Motion is— all right. Councilmember Muelstein, how do you vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, motion carries. We're on item 17, resolution, Special Service Lighting District, the City of Orem, fiscal year '26-'27 tentative budget. Brandon Nelson, Chief Financial Officer, will be presenting.

Thank you, Mayor. Uh, so our street lighting, uh, fund and, uh, is a separate entity, and that's why it's, uh, A separate budget discussion. You can have an idea here of what we are proposing in relation to the streetlights, the revenues associated with them. And then you'll notice in the far bottom right corner, the appropriation of surplus. So we are using some of the surplus that we've accumulated over a number of years to try to finish up the very streetlights. I believe it's The old poles from Rocky Mountain Power, if I remember correctly. But anyway, that we're using some of those funds to complete some capital— those capital projects. Here's a breakdown of the expenses related to street lighting. We have a few personnel that exist within there. As you can see, most of it is related to that.

The—

you'll recall when I talked in the debt service fund that energy Savings lease. This fund actually pays money to pay for that debt service, as a large portion of that— those energy savings were changing out all of the bulbs in the streetlights to LED bulbs. And so they participate in paying for a portion of that debt. The holiday lighting, which obviously we have a lot of lights out in the City Center Park now, The street lighting fund pays for a large portion of all the power and lights for that particular event, as well as various other paying for power for many of the other— all the lights throughout the city as well. You go— the capital amount there, the $420,000, is larger than it normally would be because of that appropriation of surplus. So you may notice that if you were Comparing that to a prior year. Just to give you an idea, the proposed rate changed for the street lighting, again changing from $3.28 to $3.36 as a 2.4% increase. Um, the residents pay that monthly on their utility bill. Businesses pay that all up front. As you can see down at the bottom there, the $40.32 when they, um, renew their business license.

And that's—

is that it?

That's it.

All right, any questions? All right, I would entertain a motion. I'll do it.

I move to accept by resolution the Special Service Lighting District of the City of Orem fiscal year 2026-2027 tentative budget and to set a public hearing to Adopt the final budget on June 9th, 2026, at 6:20 PM. Second.

All right, thank you. Motion and second. Um, Councilmember Gale?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, motion carries. All right, friends, I move that— Mayor, that we've got one more motion.

I move that we adjourn.

Second. All right, do we have to— I can't remember. Do we do a roll call? Can you just say aye? And if you say nay, you can just sit here.

Yeah.