08-22-2023 CACHE COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING

We appreciate everyone being here. Kind of a robust conversation going on. That's terrific. Welcome to the Cache County Council, Tuesday, 08/22/2023. We'll go ahead and start by an opening by council member Nolan Gunnell.

I appreciate you folks all being here. I do like to often give credit to our military personnel and our police enforcement and our peace officers as they do a wonderful job. I think the reason we're able to sit here and have the opportunity is because many men and women who've sacrificed their lives in in prior conflicts, and I wish to respect them and give thanks to them. And I will give the opening comments in the form of a prayer. Our father in heaven, we're grateful to be here and members of the county, and we're grateful for this government which we have, which sometimes confuses us, but at the same time blesses us. We give thanks for this and the men and wise people who drew up the constitution, and we pray that we may be able to follow it and do as we should. And as we have discussions this night, we will do so in a cordial manner and do so that it's the best outcome for citizens of the county. We give thanks for this and this we ask and do so in the name of thy son, Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. May I now please stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance, please? I pledge allegiance to the flag

of The United States Of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and I'll accept motions for possible approval of the amended agenda. Move. Is there a second? I'll second. Moving second for approval of the amended agenda. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Okay. We do have I I will mention that we do have two of our council members that are on phones, that'll also be participating today. And because we do have a quorum of of actually live bodies that are present. I guess we're all alive, but we can actually accept those as part of the minutes, and thanks for doing that. I'll also accept a motion for the review and approval of the minutes from August 8.

So moved.

Second. Moved and seconded that we approve the minutes from August 8. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Motion passes. At this point, we'll turn the time over to our county executive, and please be mindful of time because we do have a full agenda.

Yes. We do. Thank you, mister chairman. I just have a couple of items for my report this evening. First, I just wanted to start by thanking everybody who helped with our county fair last week. It was such a huge turnout, and there were so many people who helped to make it a success, and it would not have been such a great event with all of the hard work, expertise, and volunteering from so many different people. So, thank you to everybody who helped make it a wonderful event. I just wanted to mention another event I happened to go to yesterday that was hosted at our Cache County Event Center over at the Fairgrounds as well. We have a non profit organization in our community called Little Lambs, and they do an outstanding job of serving people in need in our community. They had their back to school event last night, and there was a line of people out the door, around the building, through the parking lot. It It was a tremendous amount of people. They were expecting to serve maybe a thousand people, helping them with back to school supplies and such, and I I just really, really appreciate the work that they do. I just wanted to thank them publicly as well. I do have a I do have an appointment to present to the council this evening, and that appointment is for the Board of Health. The Board of Health met recently and unanimously proposed a name for the council to consider for a vacancy on the Board of Health. That name is Blake Rose. There's a little bit of information that was given to you in the packet about his background in public health and health care in general. We had a subcommittee of the Board of Health that interviewed potential candidates. That subcommittee unanimously recommended him to the full board, and like I said, the full board unanimously recommended his name to the county council for appointment. So I would present his name to the council at this time for approval.

Is there any discussion, concerns?

No. I I I think he had some good looks like he has some good experience and interest in qualifications, so I would move to, approve the appointment of, mister Rose as onto the,

Cash County Board of Health, Berryboro Board of Health. I'll second that. It's been moved and seconded that we accept that appointment of Blake Rose on the Board of Health. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye.

Motion passes unanimous. Alright. Thank you very much, council members, for that. We look forward to having Blake on our board and helping us with many important projects we're working on. Next ask you a question, Roon. Is he here tonight? I don't think so. I just wanted to see if we could be familiar with him. I guess he would stand up if he we're here, but Okay. Thank you. I I can ask him if he'd like to come visit one of the meetings and introduce himself. Great guy. Okay. And then I just wanted to thank the council also for placing these two items that are also in my section of the agenda for this evening. I have section well, in section five, number five on the agenda, item d and e, and I'll just give you a brief overview of what those are. I've asked Phil Noble, from our finance department to give, a brief overview of the financial operations of our County, kind of how how they have been functioning, some of the some of the things that our finance staff do, some of the reasons why they're set up the way they are as far as, having, certain internal controls in place, and some of the guidance we've received from, the Government Finance Officers Association, the state auditor, various organizations like that. I know there are some very important decisions the council will be considering in relation to financial management, and I feel that our role, in in the executive branch is to provide, the best information we can to our legislators, so that you can make great decisions. So, at this time, I'd like to ask Phil if he would come forward, and he has a short presentation he'd like to go over. And then, I'll get to the next item, five

e. Okay. I wanted to thank you guys for this opportunity to come and share my thoughts with you. If I read this, it'll actually go faster, so that'll be good. Right? I also wanted to thank you for listening to the concerns and comments from the finance office. I know a lot have reached out to you. I have spoken with some of you already, and I appreciate the time you've taken to hear me out and also share with me your perspective. Although we have not agreed on everything, I'm grateful for the civility in our conversations and discussions. I know that we can still work together even though we've had some difference of opinions. I know that you've been presented with a lot of information, and you have a big decision to make, that you feel is best. And I just hope that you understand that the information I present today is based on the information and facts that I have. To give just a a brief history, in November 2013, the council approved the combining of the clerk auditors offices. One of the documents that was used to support this significant change was recommendations from the GFOA and the g o a o g GAO office regarding internal controls and the importance of of internal audits. I think I I I I didn't hand out don't have handouts for these. I think you guys have seen some of these documents. And so I'm not gonna go into a lot of detail on these because I know you guys have seen it. I don't wanna, you know, be go over things that you that you reviewed. The the the short explanation of this is that it talked about regarding inter talked about the importance of separating audit and accounting functions. It also referenced another county that is a similar form of government and the same form of government that does perform the same things, has the same organization that we have. So in with the approval of the combining of the clerk auditor's office, the finance the finance office was created so that we could have a separation of accounting services and auditing. Effective date of that was creation was on 12/15/2013. A major discussion as of late has been the need for improved internal controls and how to go about implementing them. The period that was under review is from 2018 and 2000 to 2020, which means the internal controls that have been reviewed are from that time period as well. I don't think it's fair to say that we are operating under the same internal controls or that we don't have any internal controls, But it also doesn't mean that we still can't make improvements to them. I wanted to share a document with you. Oh, I should have changed that because I didn't actually print it out. So there was a document in that the state auditor's office did in 2019. They went around to every single county and performed an internal control review. Upon their findings, they the county itself, Cache County, was considered one of the top top counties with internal controls. K? Didn't mean that we were perfect and didn't mean that they audited everything. K? But but their review addressed some concerns. There was two different findings. One was that we need to have written policies, not just unwritten ones. And two, we needed to have someone else reviewing the executive and the the finance director's credit cards, which we implemented to have the treasurer start doing that. And so, you know, the the one that that still hasn't happened is the written policies, and I still strongly recommend that we we still follow the auditors' guidance and do that. And I know with some conversations that I've had that there's there is a agreement from from you guys as well. So one thing I wanted to point out is that this report was done in 2019, which is during the time frame that is being under review. What this tells me that even though we have done a good job with internal controls, we can still do better. It it also tells me that instead of needing a complete reorganization, we just need to improve some additional internal controls. And some of those internal controls, actually have already been addressed, and others, I believe, are being addressed very soon. I know that there's, some things that that executives gonna be presented and been shared with you to help address some of the controls. But I just kinda wanted to go over, I wanted to review some of them that are in place that were made, some of the controls that the the finance office have made before the review was even done, and, ones that, you know, we think would be good to address the the known deficiencies. So just to go over some of the, control policies that we have in place already, You know, the weekly expenses, you know, right now are being approved by someone that the the executive, someone in the executive's office that is that doesn't deal with cutting the checks. The treasurer the treasurer is also provided with a list that he can review. Now if we wanna improve on this control, then we can make him an official approver. And that essentially is going to to to have the same effect as what the some of the proposed changes in the that they'll be coming up later. Cash receipts, the treasurer is already involved, you know, with with cash receipts, maybe not to the extent that he should be, and I would, you know, recommend some changes. But the treasurer already makes deposits for some depart departments, and if he doesn't make the physical deposit for them, he does receive a copy of the deposit slip and or reports from that that department. So these are controls that are already in place that help support the auditors, you know, review of the county. Payroll and HR changes now are submitted to HR instead of the finance department, which provides a separation of duties between the two offices. So we can't just make our own changes in payroll. They have to go through HR, and we tell we do what HR has already directed us is being direct has has informed us to to to be made. One one big change that I think has helped with control and with, you know, finding mistakes, making sure policies are being followed is payroll. Payroll is being reviewed by another employee in the finance office. Alright. Before, it was kind of one person doing it all. We then broke it out to where we had some cross training so that that payroll person didn't always have to be there at those payroll weeks. So we we allowed for some cross training, but then we also have someone that is not involved with the payroll process to review it. That person finds any errors that may have been made. They review they check for policy violations or anything like that and then check for reasonableness. That has been implemented since this the the period under review. You know, some of the other policies that have been adopted that that that you has been here is, you know, conflict of interest, the Atwell employees. And so I think that we're you know, improvements definitely need to be made from this audit, but I I think that we need to acknowledge what has already changed since that time of period and address the changes that that can be made and implement it without having to completely reorganize something. To say that to say that a reorganization will just fix all of our problems doesn't necessarily address control problems because we could have the same control problems, whoever it's under. And I I also want to acknowledge, and I've had the same conversation with some of you, that all the controls that we're implementing, want to implement, have implemented, you know, will work under under either method. I'm not here to say that there's only one way that works. I'm here to just present information that the my probably main concern is is the the limitation that the audit might have. For example, recently, it was passed that the auditor's office should review the expense report. He will then be reviewing his own work, so someone else would have to do that types of types of things. So I have some other recommendations for audits, but, really, I I I don't necessarily need to go into them. I'm hoping that that I know one of the plans is to to really beef up the audit committee, and then I would just make those recommendations there. I just to summarize these two reports, one of the other high scoring counties in the state was also Solley County, which is our same form of government. And so to say that it could be under the executive or under the auditor really depends on on governance and the policies that you guys pass. And so and they'll whether or not those policies are being audited. And having the audit and finance under one department, it does limit the county's ability to to use the auditor in that that function. So I, you know, I just wanna thank you for your time. I I want you to know that I know this is a a tough decision that you're making. I want you to know that that we can you know, I do believe that we can make both methods work. I just my stance is that you don't have to reorganize something when it just needs to be some some improvements made. So that's that's all I have. If you have any clarifying questions, I'd love to take them. But if not, then that's all I I have right now.

K. Thank you. Thank you. Much, Phil. I just as Phil's, leaving the lectern, I just wanna thank Phil for, his professionalism and, professionalism and his assistance during this process. Phil has a bachelor's and master's degree in accounting from Utah State. He's a CPA. He's got more than a decade of professional experience doing this, and I'm really glad that we have his assistance as we wade through this process of trying to be the best we can be in how we handle the public's money. And, that's what I'd like to talk about now under item five e on the agenda. I would like to talk about some things, that I've been working on to to help to further that goal of making us the best we can be in how we handle the public's dollars. I have, I have often said that I believe our number one responsibility as a County is keeping the public safe, and our number two responsibility is is not far behind that, and it's keeping their money safe. I I just want to talk really briefly about public safety, because many of the things we're discussing tonight are directly related to public safety. And I think it's unfortunate that there's been a recent mischaracterization that I'm not in support of public safety or in public in support of public safety funding. I just wanted to make it very clear that that's not correct. I absolutely am devoted and dedicated to supporting our public safety staff, and programs, and funding. I say that as someone who has worked in public safety for many years of my career. My very first job in government was working as an officer in a very large district attorney's office. I served under a sheriff for eight years, and I served as a probation officer for several years. I am aware of the difficulties our public safety personnel are faced on a daily basis, and I commend them for that. And, I am dedicated to doing everything I can to support them in that, including making sure that we have funding to hire them and keep them employed, and to support their operations. And with that being said, there have been some concerns recently about funding for some public safety operations. And, I want everyone to know, I am doing, I have done, and I will continue to do everything in my power to support that funding, and make sure that we continue to receive that funding. With that being said, I, I have recently met. Last Friday, I went down to the state capital, and I met with a couple of different offices, the office of the state auditor and the UOVC, to propose to them some improvements, I think, we can make to our system. Micah, actually, would you pull up on the screen, the stuff in the folder under item five e that should be labeled ordinance twenty twenty three dash 29 version two v two. And so as Mike is pulling that up, I'll just tell you a little bit about my meeting that went down there, and and Wendy is here from UOBC. Thank you so much for being here this evening. She was there along with her boss and her director, and someone from the state auditor's office as well. And the first thing I did when I spoke with them, is I let them know that not only do I take these very seriously, but I shared with them that I believe our county council takes these things very seriously, and I presented as evidence of that a list of the many ordinances that have been passed by our county council over the last couple of years to improve our internal controls, to improve our financial management. And I shared with them that we began working on those things long before we even received the first audit from the state auditors office. As soon as we became aware of some things that we needed to address, we started working on those. And so, I just want to thank the council for for that work, and I I want to thank the representatives from the state for for hearing that, and and for knowing that this is an important thing for us, and that we have been working on it. With that said, I I then, proceeded to share with them six specific proposals that I would propose, be added to, the ordinance that the council previously considered, ordinance, but I'm not proposing any changes to what you previously proposed. I'm simply propose six additions to it. Six items that I think will directly address the specific problems we had when we had issues with previous grant prosecution funding, and a couple of other items related to that. Michael, if you'll scroll down to, the page where, it has the red, I think it's page 10, on the top of more.

Let's see. You know what? That

One more. There. Right there. Okay. So I guess depending on which computer you pull it up on, it assigns it a different color. So the one on the screen that you'll see, it's the stuff in purple is what I've added. And so I just wanna talk about a couple of the things that we've had concerns about, and how I am proposing that we directly address those. One of the things that happened with these municipal prosecution funds, and as I I just also want to make clear, as I discuss this, that the the people who are involved with these, are not the the people who are in these offices now. For example, our our good county attorney was not our county attorney when these things happen. So I just wanted to be clear that if I refer to the county attorney in these discussions, I'm referring to a previous county attorney. The practices that are being questioned here were discontinued four and a half years ago. Before I was elected to office, before Dane came into office, before many of you on the council came into office. And so I just want that to be clear before I talk about some things that happened in the past. So one of the things that did happen in the past is our previous county attorney received additional compensation above and beyond the compensation that had been approved by the county council and the count and the council's salary ordinance. That is is not allowed under state law, and that is is something that should not have happened. So what I have proposed to make it abundantly clear to our payroll staff and everyone else in our organization is this, this proposal that would go under section two dot 28 dot zero three zero, county officers. And, that's the section, in our code where it lays out the salaries for elected officials, so I'm proposing a new section d under that section that under that chapter that says county officers shall not receive any type of additional compensation from the county, including, but not limited to, incentive pay, bonuses, special project pay, longevity pay, or special assignment pay beyond the salary set forth in this chapter, other than as set forth by ordinance approved by the county council. So this makes it very clear to anyone and everyone that elected officials get paid nothing but what's in that ordinance or or whatever else might be approved by the county council. So for example, even a Christmas bonus would not be allowed under this unless it's within Are there any questions about that from the council? Okay. I'll move on to the next one. The next one, is being proposed for section two dot 60 dot zero five zero, additional compensation. This essentially does the same thing, but for regular employees versus county officers. And what this says, and I guess I'll give a little bit of background on this first. One of the other problems that happened, in this, with the municipal, prosecution funds in the past, is that those funds were paid to employees and officials as additional compensation. So employees received extra payments, and I've tried to understand why this program was in effect, and I have a couple of theories about why it was put into effect. And, I do not fault any of our employees for receiving these payments. It it was a long standing program. I'm not saying that makes it okay, but it was a long standing program, that was implemented many years ago. But I think it had some flaws. And one of the flaws was I'm not sure it was ever approved by the county council, and that's that's what this, proposal would do is it would require that any such pay scheme must be approved by the county council. So I'll just read what it says. It says no employee shall receive additional additional compensation beyond the employee's base salary or wage unless such compensation is expressly provided for in the personnel rules and regulations approved by the county council and complies with state and federal regulations. So, what this says is that no employee even gets extra pay, unless the council's already authorized a way for that to happen. So, that's the way we already do things. For example, overtime pay. That's something that's in our personnel policy that's addressed, that we're able to do, or, comp time that's in there. So what this means is if there are any programs out there where people are being paid extra compensation, then we need to have a policy. We need to draft that policy. It needs to be vetted. It needs to go through our committee process, either the ordinance and policy committee meeting, ordinance and policy committee, or the compensation committee, and then come to the county council so that you can adopt it into the personnel policy. So, again, this this gives the council the discretion and the authority to decide whether or not these types extra payments happen. And if that had happened many years ago, it's possible it did. I haven't heard anybody who said it has, and I haven't seen evidence of that. But if that had happened, I think we'd be in a much different situation now, because then we would have been able to say that people were operating according to policy, when we haven't been able to find a policy that, that expressly allowed that type of extra payment. Any questions about that one before I move to the next one? Okay. Michael, if you go down to the middle of the next page. Yeah. Right there. So this is one that I also discussed with the state representatives on on Friday, and and that they by the way, I I didn't mention their opinion of it. They they were supportive of these changes, and the council, I know, received an email from the director of the UOBC yesterday, expressing his support for these changes as well. So, this one is one, that addresses some concerns about, expenses being, expenses being, recategorized. And I actually had a conversation, I think it was last Monday, with, Council Member Ward, and this was something he expressed to me that he's had a concern about. And so, what this says is that the auditor shall prepare a monthly report of all expenditures for which a change has been made to the general ledger account initially assigned to the expenditure, and distribute that report to the County Council and Executive. So what these are is sometimes expenses are put into our accounting system and accounted for in a certain budget line. For example, let's say somebody bought fuel for a county vehicle, and then that was accounted for in the travel line, when there's actually a fuel line that it should go into. Oftentimes, the finance office would correct that, and they would say, well, you put this in travel, but I actually should go into fuel. They would change the account number and correct that. And what this section that I'm proposing does is it would require that a monthly report be made of any of those changes, and that that be distributed to the county council, as well as myself, so that we can see any changes that happened. And then if we have any concerns, we can then take further action, ask questions, investigate, whatever we wanna do. Any questions about any about that item? K. And, then if we'll go down to the last three or on page 13. Yes. Those. Okay. These three, these first two, have to do with contracts, and, one of the problems that occurred with the municipal prosecution contracts was that, for one, there was a contract that was entered into with Rich County that, it sounds like not everybody was aware of that in the first place, and then that contract was subsequently canceled and replaced with a private contract, which it also sounds like not everybody was made aware of. So, these next two items are some improvements to our contracting process that I think will help us in a number of ways. The first one, this section 3.16.050, is the section of our code that addresses what we have to do before we can start performing legal review, and make sure there's money in the budget, and it has to be signed by the county executive. So my proposal is to add one more item to that checklist, and that item is simply to ensure that all procurement procedures have been completed, because that's not officially or not formally. I think it would be a good idea for have for us to have that specifically as part of the process

that we verify that whatever procurement processes are required have been followed before we, you know, have

even ask me to sign the contract. And then the next item is is related to this, three dot 16 dot one one zero, contract tracking and notifications. This one says that the county clerk shall utilize a contract management system that ensures compliance with the approval process set forth in three dot 16 dot 50, so the one I just talked about with those five requirements for a contract. So it this says, county clerk has to have a contract management system that ensures compliance with those, and that gives notice to the auditor, the executive, the attorney, and affected department heads, and Ridge County, for example, is everyone would have been notified that that contract was no longer in place, and everyone would have been aware that we shouldn't be using County resources on that anymore because we don't have a contract with them anymore. And this could be valuable in pretty much every department. Let's say the public works department has a contract with Acme Salt Company to buy salt, and that contract has ended. The staff should all know about that, so that somebody doesn't them up and say, hey, will there be another vote of salt? We don't have a contract with them anymore. So this, this measure would, would require that everybody who needs to know, knows when we enter into a contract, when we change a contract, when we extend a contract, when we end a contract, all of those changes, everybody knows about. This is one, in particular, that the state, and I think he referenced it in his email, that the director of of UOBC, really liked the way that this had notifications involved, and, provided additional internal controls in our, contract process. And then the last one that I'm proposing, the sixth one of these, improvements is related to grant time reporting. And this is an issue that the UOVC has actually raised with us in years past, according to my conversation with them, that they've been concerned about. And this is actually the reason why they're asking us to pay back some of the grant money, is because this was not happening. So, I'll just read it, and then I'll explain a little bit more. Grant time reporting. For all grants that require reporting of employee time, all employees, including exempt employees, shall track and submit hours worked through the established time reporting system. So the problem is, when we had for example, in 2018, when there was a contract between Rich County and Cash County for us to provide prosecution services, there was not sufficient timekeeping, to show that we provided prosecution services in addition to those prosecution services funded by the VAWA grant. So the UOVC's position is that the VAWA grant should have paid for it, and we've submitted hours for for what people did according to that. And if we have any documentation of other hours provided under the contract, that we should provide that. We don't have that because attorneys are exempt, don't keep those hours. We didn't have those hours. We're not able to justify that we actually provided enough hours to to to meet the revenue coming from the Rich County contract, in addition to the revenue coming from the VAWA grant. And so they're saying, we think you had sufficient funding from the grant, or from the the contract with Rich County to cover that, and you don't need the grant. That's why they're asking us to pay the grant money back. If we had kept these records, if there had been time reporting, and if the work had actually been done, which we don't know, because we don't have the numbers, then we'd be having a different conversation right now. We might not be in the position where we're being asked to pay back those funds. So but but the problem is that exempt employees don't use our timekeeping system. They're not required to put their hours in. And so just just to clarify, this doesn't apply to every grant we get, because we get grants in multiple departments for for multiple reasons. This just says for all grants that require a report even employee time. Not every grant requires that. For example, our public works department gets grants to build roads. They don't ask for an accounting of who spent how much time. They just, they just wanna know how much it costs us to build the road. So this wouldn't apply to all grants. This would only apply to grants that require reporting of employee time, and this would only apply to employees who are exempt because other employees are already using our time reporting system. And this would require them to use the same time card system that we already grant, and they could code their time, and it it would be just like what all of the other employees do with their time reporting. Are there any questions about any of those last three, about the contracts or the grant reporting? Okay. Thank you very much. Those are my proposals. My my request to the council would be that as you review this ordinance later in your agenda, you'll be on this under pending action item nine later today, nine c. My request would be that you consider those six improvements, and include them if if you make a motion to approve that ordinance, that you include these proposals as well. As I said well, I didn't mention this, but council member or council chairman Erickson sent me an email a little over a week ago and told me about this ordinance, asked me to, propose anything that I felt should be, considered as well. And he asked me if I would, get the support of the auditor and UOBC before doing so. I've done that. They're supportive of these changes, and so I respectfully submit those to the council for your consideration. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. We're past a little bit of public hearing time that we need to. Let's, first of all, let's go ahead and set the public hearings for eight a and b. I'd entertain a motion.

I move I move that we set the public hearings for 09/12/2023. What was the the Cache County Drainage Districts 345, And 6, and also set the public hearing for that same date of 09/12/2023, ordinance twenty twenty three thirty one, Mountain home resort. Set those public hearings for September 12.

I'll second that. It moved and seconded that we, set the public hearings on September 12 for the appointments of the Cache County Drainage Districts 345, And 6, and ordinance twenty twenty three dash three one. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Sir, aye.

Aye.

Is there any opposed? K. Thank you. We don't we don't that's not open for comment at this time. So, if you do have questions, comments that we can deal with it later, if you'd reach out to Mike, I will make sure it's taken care of. Let's go on to the public hearing 2023 COG project on 10600 North near Richmond. Mister Phillips, would you please? Yes.

Thank you, counsel, chairman. Mike is pulling up a PowerPoint for us quick. We have two of these back to back, so I wanted to take just a few minutes and get the first and sounds like we're echoing.

This one?

As he's pull as he's pulling that up, it sounds like I'm still echoing. So maybe it's

a sign. Thank you. Benson, would you yeah. Get get her all there. We appreciate the anti glare.

If you wanna go to the next slide, that's fine. I just wanted to take a few minutes and briefly introduce why we're having the public hearings and kind of what we're trying to do with them. So if you guys are familiar with the council of governments, they have a local transportation fund program. Basically that's the rules that sets it up for how the communities come and ask the COG and the council inevitably approves those fundings for transportation projects around the valley. In the past if a project came in say Hyde Park wanted to do a project, only Hyde Park had to have a public hearing. They changed those rules this year and if that project inter crosses multi jurisdictional boundaries, so if Hyde Park's project extended into North Logan, both jurisdictions would have to have a public hearing. And so that's a requirement for them to even apply. It doesn't necessarily mean they're going to get funding or that it's going to get approved. But even to apply they need that public hearing by both jurisdictions. So next slide. So that's why we're having these public hearings because we have a couple of these projects. The rules state that we need to talk about the general concept of the project, estimated cost of the project and the financial responsibility of that jurisdiction. And again, the reason for this is because they want if there's a a portion of a project in the county, they want those county residents to come to this meeting for their voices to be heard as opposed to the county residents going to Hyde Park or vice versa. They want those residents to have an opportunity to voice their opinion in their local jurisdiction meetings. So the first public hearing is for Richmond City. Next slide. Next one. Richmond. So to go through those, the general concept and give information about that project, we this is a Richmond City project. The the address is 400 West, 150 North. I'll have a map of that in a second. And there's different types of projects. This is a construction project. So they're asking for money to actually build something. They're asking for a little over a million dollars. That's the total project. The COG request is $970,000 and Richmond City would have a match of 84,000. And in this project, the county has no financial obligations. This project is being funded strictly by Richmond. So, next slide. This is kind of a big map. If you guys are familiar with the new Leazes, this is a road that is just south of Leazes and extends to the west. Next slide. The proposed project is shown there in kind of the blue. So it would extend from the Richmond boundary right where the new lease is. And that's the portion that's in the county is that East west leg there. We have right away. It's just kind of a gravel road. Great project. It will help provide another access to Lees. The project involves constructing two fifteen foot asphalt lanes so we will have 30 foot of asphalt, and drainage swells. There is a sidewalk. It's on the Richmond or on the South Side. And in our discussions with Richmond, they've agreed to maintain this road along with their other regular maintenance service. So next slide. There's kind of a cross section of the road and then any questions. And I know that mayor Erickson is here if there's any questions for him.

K. Well, let's go ahead and state our questions for a second, and we'll go ahead and have the public hearing. So we will now open up the public hearing for anyone that would like to come up and speak in behalf of this, for or against, whatever it may be, and please state your name and come up to the microphone. You can get crowded if you'd like, and I'll run if you want at the same time, looks like. K. Seeing no movement, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. Seconded. And seconded. We we close the public hearing. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Motion passes. Public hearing is closed. Okay. And as we have further questions,

next, we can go to the next post. Any other questions specifically? Can I ask the question? Yes. When you talked about the total of the project was a little over 1,000,000 and you said COG would give 900 and something, and then Richmond would match that with 87,000. But you said Richmond would pay for the whole project. Explain that. And where does the COG get their funding? Will you explain that to me?

Yeah. The COG gets their funding from a portion of the sales tax. Okay. That money, comes to COG. COG collects all that money, and then these this COG manual is the instructions on how that's dispersed back. So I apologize if my I was trying to rush through that presentation. But, when they come to COG, they'll ask they'll have their project project and they'll ask for certain funding. In this case, they have asked for the million dollars but the COG requirements require Richmond to match 8% of that. So Richmond's cost is 8%. The COG would pick up the rest of that. So when they're paying the whole project, I just mean that we're the county's not paying anything for that. So sorry. No. Thank you.

And these projects, though, they're they're dotted all throughout the whole county at different times and Correct. Deputies and different there's a lot of the Yeah. Communities that have benefited from this.

They're yeah. They're beneficial to all the communities. So so it's this one's a good project. So hopefully it will go well and and score high when all the presentations come back to you guys. Okay. Any other questions?

Let's go ahead and

Okay.

We're fine. Thumbs up. Okay. Let's go ahead and, the next one Next public hearing that we'll introduce.

If you need do you need to open it, council?

Or am I good to just Go. K. No. We'll we'll have you to do the description then we'll open it up for the public hearing. So the next one's in Mendon City. So next slide.

Again, this is, Mendon City's the sponsoring jurisdiction. The project name is 300 North Street. It's basically from 640 West to 200 West. It's a street improvement project. And again, it's for construction. So they're asking for money to actually build something. Their amount of theirs is 400. Their cog request is 369 and then Mendon would match the 32. And again, this one, they're not asking for any money from the county to help with that match. So this project is on a road that we can call it a deep canyon. So if you guys are familiar with the trail up that way, this road goes to that trail that's up in Mendon, the Wayne's Loop Trail. Just to kind of help you kind of locate where we are in the valley. All the way to that trailhead? No. That road does go all the way to the trailhead. This project is not. No. The project is not. Okay. The next slide will show you the project. The project starts down around the 300 North and the 200 North area. There's some intersection there that they'll be improving. And then it extends up to 6400 West in the county. I apologize for the graphics but it's that last little part there, the county owns half the road. This is one of those half road situations. So along that portion of the top there's half of that's in the county. So that's why we're here because it's multi jurisdictional. For the most part that's Mendon Road. Most of the development on that road is Mendon. The county does help with plowing that road with our equipment. So next one. This one's not quite as big. This is 12 to 12 foot lanes with two foot gravel shoulders. So we're looking at a 24 foot wide pavement area with some shoulders. And again, this project involves reconfiguring and widening the intersection at 300 North and 200 West. Good projects, good safety improvement. There's a cross section. So

Question.

I mean, before or after? Either way. K. Go ahead.

So we're pulverizing that county has responsibility for half the road. What is this going to do to us when it comes to no removal time because when it comes to travel we do different types of plowing the snow. Correct.

This and how does that work. Pulverizing is kind of like a recycle in place so instead of hauling it off or breaking it all up and hauling it away, pulverizing has a big grinder that grinds it all up and then that way you can reshape the road both slopes and both profile grades and then you can recompact all that known and then you pave on top of that. So when it's all done, but a lot of these old county roads, you know, the slopes are up and down and the cross slopes are 2% to 5% because we unfortunately we just kind of went out and topped these roads and so pulverizing is a cheap way to not lose your materials but recycle what you have there, be able to grade it and then be able to basically install a new road without the expense of hauling everything off and hauling new gravel in. So So we will be asphalting on top of this? Correct. K. And then they'll have to follow the county specs. Both projects in both these areas will need to follow the county specs, county standards for the roads that fall within the county.

Okay. Let's go ahead and we'll open up the public hearing for this COG project on 1000 South near Mendon. Anyone that would like to come up and state your name? Boy, it is so reverent. Move to close the public hearing. Second. Moved second. We close the public hearing for the 100 South near Minden. Okay. Did anyone have further questions? I did have one question there and where we're gonna be owning half the road. Just make sure, let it be known that as soon as the other half, the north half, as soon as those properties are gradually pulled into Mendon in the future, they get the road too. Right? Yep. K. I wanna make sure that that's

they get the road. We we do our best job to make sure annexations and development

are are reviewed and try to get that, David. So I I appreciate that because we have dealt with some other issues in some other cities that we shouldn't have any part of the road in their city. So okay. With that in mind, let's go ahead and go to ordinance twenty twenty three thirty. That's amending the title 16 and title 17. And and I don't mean to kinda speed things up, but we'll we'll keep her going. Not quite auctioneer style, but almost.

Yep. I'll be quick.

Do I like your password?

Okay.

So just a quick update. So this has been an ordinance that the Planning Commission has been working on for months now. One of the things that set it off is over the last several over the last several years, but particularly the last couple of months, we've had a few projects that have came through that have ran into some administrative issues with our sensitive lands code that have prevented them from moving forward with our projects. And so a large section of this code was updated in response to some of these concerns that have been brought up by residents and applicants through the application process, through zone changes, and through, or through through zoning clearances and through the subdivision process. So the big, the big main change is that this would allow sensitive areas to count towards density in A 10 zones. We also added some additional clarification for sensitive lands development. And this through this PowerPoint, I'm gonna hit on several of the main key code changes, but I wasn't gonna hit on all of them unless you want me to and we can pull up the actual ordinance and go through that. But the first main change that we did was we updated what how we defined steep slopes. And so before steep slopes was defined as land having an average slope of 30 over a horizontal distance of 20 feet or greater. So what we've done is change it to add a more a less restrictive definition for what steep slopes are. We still keep the 30% or greater over horizontal distance but instead of 20 feet, it's a 50 feet. And so if you look at a map, an aerial map, and you measure over that sensitive land, if it was 20 feet or more, then we consider it undevelopable. But now, the definition changes it to 50 feet. And so if you have a small ridgeline or a small hill that goes across your property or small, wash, that won't count as that won't count towards your steep slopes if it is under 50 feet. Another thing that we added is that small washes, hills or rock outcrops which have a slope distinctly different from surrounding property may be excluded from slope determination by the Development Services Director. If the exclusion of such small areas from slope determination will not be contrary to the overall purpose of this title. So one of the reasons we put this in, we recently had a zoning clearance that had a pile of rocks that had been on the property for years. It has been picked up by our lidar and it was calculating the sensitive lands. But when you went out and looked at it, it clearly was distinctly different from the rest of the property. It was small in nature and didn't have an impact. And so we wanted to provide something a little bit more clear within the code to give us some clarity to be able to waive some of those sensitive land requirements for those type of situations. So one of the other items that has came up several times is accessing property. Through with steep slopes. So with this, the planning commission created a couple exceptions and requirements to allow for development through or development access ways and utility lines through sensitive areas. And so under the same sensitive land definition, it says no development shall occur therein except for the following, required public roads, utilities, or other facilities in accordance with county road and fire access requirements. And then private roads, drives, and utilities on steep slopes no greater than 50% in accordance with county road and fire access requirements. And then we also added some ex exceptions also for building structures within limited seep slope areas. And we'll look at a couple pictures that kinda show what some of this means. But one that so the update says structures may be built on limited steep slope areas within defined development areas based on the following studies to be included in land use application. So a site plan showing the defined area boundary of the development area. A development area shall not include any portion of steep slope areas that measure perpendicular to contour lines over a horizontal distance of a 100 feet or greater. So we have a limited so we try to measure out the area that could be included. And then the average grade or proposed grading plan shall not exceed 30% measured by cross section, drawing across any proportion of the defined development area. And an elevation municipal elevation study and geotech report must be provided. And then the planning commission also added in that agricultural structures and accessory structures less than 200 square feet are exempt from these standards as well. So the next thing, those are kind of the big changes for the exempts exemptions, but we also allowed for density to count differently in a 10 zones than what they are counted in other zones when I reference to density. Typically when somebody's subdividing property, we make a final of the sensitive lands and undevelopable areas and exclude that from their overall calculations for how much developable property they have in order to help us calculate their density. And because within the county, they can cluster development that can have an impact on a property where they could clearly build on areas that are not sensitive, but they may not be able to do it because of how this how density is calculated. And so we define that that net acreage shall be calculated in FR 40, RU five, and RU two zones by taking the total gross acreage and subtracting non developable sensitive areas. But in a 10 zones, area sensitive areas and areas of right of way roads may be counted towards developable acres for density calculations. The planning commission, well, actually maybe I'll show the pictures first, to try to help visualize what this means. And so these three parcels that you see up on the screen or these three developments are each 40 acres in size. Typically, so this middle one, if it's 40 acres and is zoned as an a 10, they would be able to get four lots as you can see here. But if you have this property right here, everything in orange and up would not be able to be counted towards their overall developable area. And so when you're looking at the overall calculations this the far one on the left hand side would all under our current definition would only be able to do three lots, but under the proposal would end up being able to do four lots. Because essentially even though they wouldn't be able to build on these areas, they would be able to count them towards their overall density. And where in A 10 you can go down to as small as a half acre lot with clustering under our subdivision code, we've staff and the planning commission felt like this would be an appropriate exception. The planning commission did review this and consider applying the same type of standard to an FR 40. However, after review of most of our FR 40 areas which are pretty mountainous and forest and forested, There is a fear that the clustering would be too, impactful and access could be an issue. And so after a a lot of consideration, the planning commission decided not to include F R 40 as an exemption like the A 10. And so looking at a piece of property, this is also a few things that we'd look at to consider the developable area. And so as you can see on this, the yellow represents the moderate slopes and the red represents the more the extreme slopes which are non developable. And so when we're looking at calculating how much developable space they'd have, we take a measurement of how far it is across and take that into consideration and how impactful it is. We have a lot of property within the county that have small hills or ridge lines that go through them that don't have large impacts on the development. And the code change proposal is to allow the county to prep some additional guidelines and, some flexibility in allowing for people to utilize their property. So one of the other things that we talked about is the private roads and access. And so this parcel This illustration kind of highlights that occasionally you'll have somebody who wants to build up higher on their property, but haven't been able to because we haven't allowed roadways or access ways up through sensitive areas or steep slopes. And so this change with this exception would allow for somebody to say they have a buildable space up top on top of their property. It would allow them to build a roadway and access point through there to access that that portion of their property. And these next two slides, these are examples of how roads can are potentially built on steep slopes. So you have one that can cut across the face, and you can also one that kinda cuts through a sensitive land area. So one of the last big changes is an exemption for agricultural buildings and buildings under 200 square feet. Currently under our code, if you are in any geological geologic hazard area, you have to provide a geotech report. So essentially you have an engineer that goes out, drills a pit, takes a soil sample, and then gives us a report to tell us what the foundation should be for that building. And that code broadly applied to any development or any structure. Just in the last month, we had somebody who came in. There is liquefaction soil on their property and they wanted to build a hay bar. And according to our code they had to do a geotech report. And so we made them do a geotech report and the property owner reported to us that the report itself cost 50% of what the building was gonna cost. So we raised his cost of development up quite a bit just be just to put up a hay barn. Under state code, state code was changed a few years ago to exempt agricultural buildings from these type of requirements. However, our code there within that state code, there is an exemption for state for local standards that were adopted prior to 2015, which our code was adopted in 2014. And so our code's still outstanding. And so this is a way that we felt like we could make it so these buildings that clearly won't be habited by people and won't pose a risk to an individual for them to be able to have an easier process with the zoning clearance in order to build out their structures. So those are the primary changes. There are a few other changes within the code itself, mostly just clarification and adding onto these big develop onto these portions. As far as the public hearing, I just wanted to note that we received quite a few emails. I actually received three right before this meeting that I haven't been able to send out yet. If you'd like, I could pull those up so you can see them, or I can plan on just sending them out to the counts, the council. But all three were in support of adoption of this ordinance.

Let's go ahead with the public hearing, and then we'll go from there. K. K. Let's go ahead. We'll go ahead, and we'll open up the public hearing to anyone who'd like to come up here and speak. Just state your name as you get up here. It'd be great.

My name is Marylyn Pierce. I've been a resident in Cache County nearly my entire life. Currently, I reside out in Petersburg. It may have been my hay barn that he was talking about, actually. So, yeah, I'd like to speak specifically to the proposed changes for ag buildings. We applied for zoning clearance to build a pole barn. It's not even big enough to require a building permit. We're gonna store hay in it, park a tractor in there. Current code requires that we have a geotech report done to get zoning clearance to build it because of a small retaining wall that we have near our driveway. The projected building costs are about $6,500. The quotes I've gotten for a geo Geotech report range from 1,000 to 3,500, and they are way far out. And many of them didn't even get back to me because it's just a small project. It wasn't big enough that they wanted it. So with the proposed changes, I may not have to do that. It would significantly decrease my cost, making it much more feasible to build this barn. And I I grew up on a dairy farm here in the valley, and I haven't been able to make farming my full time career, but I love agriculture, and I'm very passionate about it. And so I think these code changes could tremendously increase the availability of buildings to farmers and and people interested in ag. And for small scale hobby farmers like myself, it makes it it would make it way easier to make those endeavors possible. And so I urge the council to accept these proposed changes regarding ag buildings in sensitive areas. Cash Valley is founded in agriculture, and that's why many people love this valley and community, and let's find every way we can to make it possible for everyone to continue that. Thank you. Thank you.

Others?

Hi. I'm Joe Hawkes. We we actually applied for a subdivision, what, two years ago, I think. And, in the subdivision, there's an ag remainder. We have some sensitive areas that were identified late through the subdivision process that are in that agreement. So we're not proposing to build on them and that limits us from being able to to subdivide. This this, the proposed change, which I really appreciate the staff and everything they've done, they put in a lot of work and the planning commission as well to to thoroughly vet this. The proposed change would, of course, benefit us and I I I believe that there's other people that will be in our same situation where they go through, months and thousands of dollars of work to have a subdivision application taken away from them, essentially, because of this technicality, even though there's no risk to, public property or private property. We're not looking to build on anything. The staff has made sure to protect the sensitive lands, which which is important. I don't think people should be building in wetlands or on 30% slopes with homes. I'd also like to add that I believe the sensitive code or the sensitive area language that's currently in the code was implemented in 2016. When you look through the valley at most of the subdivisions before that, it would have changed how those were were built. So there's a lot of parcels that people are living on and using that would not have been available if, the current language existed further back. So I I feel like this is a revision back to, what we used to have and it supports property rights. So I urge you to to support it as well and thank you for your time.

Thank you. Others? You bet.

My name's Doug Latham, and my question is, how is a 30% slope calculated? What is a 30% slope?

So we calculate the slope beyond its rise. But what does it mean? That's why Oh, so it's anything over 30% in slope would be considered undeveloped.

No. But what is 30% slope?

Like So it isn't it? No. It's my

my understanding that a 30 slope would be 100 feet out and would drop 30 feet. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. I just wanna make sure I know what is happening.

We went to the same school then.

Any others? Okay. Entertain a motion to close the vote. Go ahead. Sorry. No. You're fine. You just

we thought you'd jump and run rather than wait and think. I should have jumped and run. My name is Steven Wood and I just I'm a local engineer. I work with a local engineering firm I have for the past eight years and I've had the opportunity to work with a great deal of agricultural farmers as well as municipalities and developers. Majority majority of my work is with the agricultural world. And a lot of things that I've seen with in terms of I get calls about geotechnical reports all the time for agricultural buildings that they seem excessive to require geotech for such a a simple building. But per the code, we, we look at those. And it I guess professionally, it doesn't seem I don't always feel right sending my bill at the end of the day for those geotechnical things just because it it didn't seem quite quite warranted. As well as looking at the other codes and dealing with, land development as well as municipal boundaries, the the freedom that this could provide for develop for landowner rights, I would be in support of and I a lot of the agricultural world that I work with and municipalities would also be in support of it. So just wanted to come and state maybe a different different perspective to that side of the coin.

Thank you. Any others? On the way back, kick him harder.

Okay. Something personal there. Yeah. K. K. My name is Rand Curtis, and I just like to speak to the common sense of this change. The idea that someone with with 20 acres can't, can't subdivide because, three of those acres are steep slope just doesn't make any sense to anybody who looks at it. There's plenty of of, flat place on that property that, people can build a home, without ever getting anywhere near a sensitive area. And it may not may not make sense for all of those out, obviously, but for a 10. And there's already, there's already, things in place to keep someone from building a house on a steep slope anyway. But subtracting that from the developable acreage just doesn't make sense in an a 10. So I'm hoping you'll support the common sense behind this one. Thanks.

Thank you. Any others? Is this the guy I supposed to carry? I love another step back. Guy with the tie. Oh, there's six of them. Go ahead and hit all of them. Any others? Okay. Entertain a motion. So moved. Second it. Moved and seconded. We close the public hearing. Elizabeth, say aye. Aye.

Aye.

Any other comments, questions that we'd have here, Steven?

I don't have anything else for at this point. If I may, I have some questions.

I sat through planning and zoning, so I'm pretty aware of this, but I've had some constituents ask and I'm gonna tread forward, so counsel apologize for the questions going forward. On page two, right at the top, and you have this on the screen, small washes, hills, or rock outcrops which have slopes distinctly different from surrounding property may be excluded from the slope determination by the development services director. So the question came down on hills. And the leniency or the latitude that the development director has in there is that being

watched and careful on that? Yes. I believe so. I think a good example of this would be we went out and did a site visit to a property a few weeks ago that had a the home was built across the hill and so the hill dropped down. The hill itself was over 30%. We had an upper floor and a lower floor and they wanted to expand the house across the back and it made perfect sense for them to be able to do that. The slope itself and the size of the hill I didn't feel were gonna be impactful or dangerous for the person to build on. We still require them to provide us all the foundation and other information that is required. But my intent with this and I feel like my direction would be is to try to work with the property owner to protect them from any dangers that may come for building on or in sensitive areas but also to allow them to move forward when these areas may meet definitions, but may not actually be a danger a danger. Okay.

Go to page three Would you just describe to me a legal parcel or lot that is less in size than the minimum zoning density acreage is developable provided that all develop standards required in this title and other applicable county and state code requirements are met. So

less in size is where I wanna see what you're headed to there. Yeah. So what this is referring to that we have a lot of parcels within the county that have been legally established but don't meet minimum lot size standards. And so this is, but so this statement is going towards that these lots would still be considered developable because they were legally established probably before the zoning code was in place. And so we didn't want This is this is echoed elsewhere in our code as well, but we want we felt like it was appropriate to put it in this section.

So as an example, you're going out into an a 10 area of zoning. We've got a house and a lot that is probably three acres. So explain how that's gonna situation because they're they don't have 10 acres, but they're sitting on a three acre lot. So what's happening in an eight

ten zone? So they would be able to make that lot would like, that lot would not be subdividable. But if the home burned down or was destroyed or whatever reason or they wanted to remodel it, there wouldn't be any restrictions on that parcel. They'd be able to I agree.

And so now moving on. This one, I'm on the cluster subdivision option, and so I really like to see how how the subdivision goes. Let's go to c. Explain c to me because the lands proposed for a cluster subdivision shall be a single ownership or the application for a sub cluster subdivision shall be filed jointly by all owners. So to me, there's not a whole bunch of owners before that subdivision has been approved for the cluster part, so I'm wondering how we're talking about all owners on there.

It is possible that you could potentially have multiple owners who have a few lots that they would like to subdivide together and create a new subdivision plat that could involve multiple parties or multiple property owners. And so that's what we see. So let's say you have a couple property owners that decide they wanna subdue, you know, they have maybe 40 acres and there's two of them and they want to subdivide their properties into four lots and cluster them, and that's what that sentence, that's what that standard is referring to. It allows for property for multiple owners of within subdividable property to apply.

K. Go to e. Total open space areas for cluster subdivisions must be 50% or greater of the total area of the subdivision. So if you go back to your slide where you showed the slopes and everything else, you've got 40 acres, basically. So in here and and this just makes sense to me, but I'm just trying to get why we got that just so I have an understanding, and the other person asked that as well. So what you're saying here is is if they cluster and there's 40 acres, the open space has to be at least 20 acres, and so then those four lots can't be any bigger than a five acre lot?

Correct. No. Correct. Well, they could be you could on average, they're gonna be any bigger than five acres. They could potentially be, you could have a two acre and a 10 acre and whatever else, but cumulative. They couldn't be greater than 50% of what that total amount that's there Correct. Meaning the 20 acres on this example. Yep. And that's our current cluster subdivision policy. So that's our current but that section of code is we have not made any alterations or recommendations to amend.

K. That was my questions. Thank you. Yep.

Other questions? Okay. Thank you. Public hearing, resolution twenty twenty three dash 11, opening the 2023 budget. Michael, you take care of that since we talked about that?

If I can get this Okay. The budget opening. Pretty simple budget opening. There is only one item. That is to rescind $607,500

that was

counsel previously awarded in ARPA funds, to our county finance department for a a new software package to do accounting budgeting asset management software, three and a half year contract. Feeling has feeling amongst those of you on the council that I've spoken to, that considering circumstances and recent audits, including financial audits, it would be best to to not pursue that at this time. And, as these are ARPA funds and they there is a spend by date that it would be best just to return this back to the pool of ARPA funds we have. And if we get some of the issues figured out, we may council has the prerogative to reaward this, in the future. I will remind the council that that that date is 12/31/2024. So a little over a year, that that money has to be encumbered that Committed. Committed. Yeah. So that is that's the entire budget opening.

Okay. At that point, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing to anyone that'd like to speak in behalf of this or against it or whatever it may be. Come up here to the microphone.

Move oh.

Go ahead, Bill. So I I just have a couple clarifying questions on this one. Though, I understand the reason for doing this, I I the the question I then have is is would it be the intent to just never do it? Because it's a good opportunity if, you know, this system that is being would have been would adopted with this money, can improve processes. I know it has some integrations that would make things easier for HR, and just improve the accounting of the the county overall. I'm not opposed to postponing it or anything like that. I was just curious if this is something that, you know, maybe after things settle, that could still be an option. And if it is an option, then I would recommend that the budget can be taken away, but maybe not the award itself be revoked. So that's because if the budget's gone, then then we can't act on it until you award the budget, but it would still then potentially be earmarked for implementation later next year, possibly, once things have been, you know, settled and different things like that. So

that's fine. Nice question. Yeah. You bet.

I agree with what you're saying, but just help me and the public understand the benefits of this software package in going the course you're talking about. Does that make sense? Yeah. So the, you know, we we use the

accounting software right now that's Cassell. And they they, you know, they they are geared towards government, so they have their their price tag is, you know, reasonable. But they're geared towards smaller smaller entities. And so they have some limitations. Now we're able to do everything we need to, but there the limitations that it does have, you know, is there it it does crash more often. It, you know, has it it doesn't implement you know, it's been there's a lot of things that it's been saying that is available that's been available for years. Or or they've been telling us for years it's available, but because they're so far far behind and they're not keeping up with, you know, online things and stuff like that, it it has some limitations. The moving over to Oracle. Oracle is, you know, a massive software company. So it's well well established and stuff, but they also have this NetSuite that's specific for governments that would allow us to be able to go online, you know, talking about using ARPA funds in in case of, you know, shutdowns again in the future. It would be allow us to to to do remote work. Not saying we're going to. It has special integrations with certain systems that we have. HR is moving over to another software that the as of right now, that won't communicate to Cassell. But Oracle would allow HR to communicate, which would reduce double entry for the, HR office, which, you know, anytime you're entering multiple times is cause for error, and some different things like that. And there's potential integration with the grant software that we have as well. So so that's that's all I asked is to consider is if if it's a potential change, then then ARPA is a great opportunity to to implement that. So Another question.

We have access to Cassell when we go in there unless you're sitting in there all day. It's very tedious to come down to something and get it this new software package if the council which the council should, so we can see cost and everything else. How's the familiarity or the friendliness of that software compared to Cassell for us who are gonna go into it That's a good as frequently as county employees do? Yeah. That's a that's a good question.

The where it's where it's at online access, you would be able to have access, you know, from anywhere instead of having to have a hard line into a system that is only on the the county servers. You would be able to have that availability. They have some cool features as well that you can design reports that just automatically email out to whoever we set it up to. So you can have access to it from anywhere, and you could also have prebuilt reports that you request and get sent out, automatically.

So in your opinion, this software, when we eventually get it, would be much easier for us to view and see and Yeah. Do and what to sell this? Yes. K. Thank you. That's all the questions I have. I have a question.

$100,000 is part of that. Just to purchase the software, it's not gonna be an ongoing 600,000

every three years. Or tell tell me about that. And I don't I don't have all the numbers, in front of me, and I could pull it up pretty quickly and share. But the the the price tag of this one is the majority of this is actually implementation. Implementation, when you're dealing with massive amount of data like this, payroll systems, coding everything. The a good chunk of this is the implementation. And then this was would cover the, three years after this. So there would be an ongoing cost. It would be a little bit more than what we are paying now ongoing, but for a much better system. But not all of this. Not this much. Yes. Thank you. Yes.

Hey, Phil. I was wondering if you could just briefly address the concerns that Micah shared about the reason for postponing. What would happen to the data in our current cell system when if we were to transition to a new software system?

So and that's a good question. So, you know, we're early right now. And I guess a quick update is just knowing that this was a concern. I've contacted the the Oracle and put a pause on on the implementation because we had encumbered everything already. But and they understand that. So the the implementation package would give you three years of data of all the detailed data. You can add more to that if if desired. It would give you the entire history of the GL data, and that's mainly just the all the journal entries and different things like that. If you want all the subsystem data more than three years, then you would we would need to request that, and that is an option. So and at the same time, you know, especially during the dual process or getting it up and running, we still have Cassell available. And a lot of the the stuff is scanned in to, like, some of the IT systems. You'd have all that history for expenses in terms of things like that that were tied to the GL data. So if the reports and everything are better, then once we go to the new program, then we can pull reports from way back or whatever else, and they're gonna be easier than if they weren't good to sell? Yes. You could pull pull reports from from way back from the the the general ledger, so the accounting structure. If you're wanting to go in and and say, I wanna pull this specific invoice from, say, five years ago, we would either need to pull that into the implementation process, or there is other methods because it's through an IT system that already houses those invoices and different things. So depending on what you wanted to see, yes and no. But the the information's there. It's just possibly in different places. So

yeah. Appreciate that. Yep. Thank you. Any other comments? Yeah. Go ahead. Mister Latham.

Yes, again. Doug Latham. Is that a cloud program? Yes. So everything will be stored somewhere else. And in case of some sort of a glitch, you would not be able to retrieve it. Is that correct? So it is a it is correct. It's a cloud program.

But they house the accounting for many major governments. Right. They have all the best security

out there. No. I I appreciate that, but I've I've gone. I have a problem now with my own Excel that I don't own the program. I'm renting it, and when something doesn't happen just right, it goes away. So just a comment. Thank you. Thank you. Any others?

Make a motion to move to close the public hearing. Second. Moving to second, we close the public hearing. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Unanimous? Okay. Micah, any more detail on that? I'll have more detail. K. We'll be talking about that here in a few minutes, and we'll go from there. So okay. With that in, let's go to pending action. Oh, I jumped past. Let's just jump past. Let's go past. We're doing some other things. Let's go back to six eight. Go ahead, and we'll turn the time over to sheriff Jensen.

It's probably good you did jump past me. I just got out of a dentist appointment at 04:30, so if I slobber on myself, I'm not having a stroke. I'm still struggling for a minute. But, anyway, thank you. I'm on the agenda tonight just for the merit commission, which by statute 17 dash 30, all my sworn staff fall under the merit rules, under the sheriff's merit rules for the state and that deals with all the hiring processes, discipline processes, and promotional processes within my office for the sworn staff. With the passing of Darla Clark, she was our chairperson for a long, long time and she was a great member of of our mayor commission. But a few months ago, the county council accepted Jack Draxler, and he's gonna take that open spot on the mayor commission. My only point for tonight is that these run-in six year cycles, and they gotta be opposite of each other by statute. So Paul Davis, who's been a long standing member of the Merit Commission, is up for reappointment by the county council. I'll just bring that to the council tonight for your appointment.

Is there any discussion on that?

I'll entertain a motion. I would move that we approve the of the appointment for Paul Davis. Paul Davis. Yeah.

Second up. Move and seconded. We approve the renewal to the merit commission member of Paul Davis. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Motion is unanimous. Aye. Okay. Bear Riverland and Conservancy. Who is representing them at all? Okay. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Gabriel Murray. I'm the operations manager for Bear River Land Conservancy. We are here this evening seeking a letter of support for a conservation easement project at the south end of the valley. This project, known as Evans Ranch conservation Easement, is about a 54 acre project. It's just East of Avon, Utah. We are seeking a letter of support for the Leeray McAllister working farm and ranch fund. Happy to answer any questions regarding the easement.

Do you have a map or anything on there? There's nothing in there? Been impacted or anything that way? We haven't had anything provided.

I had provided a map to the planning and zoning, but I'm happy to share this with you.

Hang on. So would you have that back there at all?

What what would the the county letter of support what kind of support would you be asking for?

New Yeah. We'd be yeah. Happy to. So we'd be asking for a letter of support that basically addresses a few concerns that the Leer and McAllister program is interested in and why they want a letter of support from the local land use authority. One of those is whether or not the project has an impact on on housing affordability.

Thanks, Tim.

Whether or not the project has an impact on housing affordability and whether or not the project provides scenic resources, are two of their concerns. Given that the project is zoned f r 40, it doesn't I don't believe it has an impact on high density housing because of the zoning. Who owns the property? Cole Evans.

So he wants to put a thousand acres into a conservation easement? That's correct.

Yes.

Are the conservation easements close to that surrounding Bayou

at all? So this parcel is adjacent to the Little Bear River, wildlife management area. It actually shares a boundary with that public public space, and there are easements within five miles. John White's conservation easement is also starting more farm. So there are easements in that vicinity as well. But it doesn't a jay it doesn't border adjacent easements currently. However, Bear River Land Conservancy has received additional funding for a project that does border this easement, and we are actively pursuing that conservation easement as well.

K. How time sensitive is this?

It's fairly time sensitive. Unfortunately, the the program had a very short window of opening and a very short window of application, and so that's why I'm here before you this evening. This letter of support, I would need by the September 1.

Kim, thanks for bringing that up.

K. Where's the problem? We we'd like to even I think a draft of the letter really ought to be made available to us before we Agree to you know, what I'm sure it's just a letter of support, but it gives us some more we just need more detail. I don't know. What do you guys think? What's your

I think part of the clarity we were looking for was if we this could be delegated to development services. We just wanted

to defer to council and make you aware of this, and that we could Is that just a letter of support? No financial or anything? Or is this not coming? To say,

go ahead and move on with it if you'd like.

And that's that basically all we're needing there, Dane. Yeah. I I'd I'm not I haven't been made aware of any of this, but if it's a letter of support from the county, I think that could be delegated to development services if the if the two things that we have to say we support are that it doesn't interfere with high density housing and what was the other? Scenic value. The property provides scenic value. I I'm familiar with that area. So if you want my opinion, I can give that. That's not illegal.

Define scenic value. Is that when I'm standing on it or when I'm looking at it? Either one. Either one.

Or if you're on it.

So do we need to make qualifies it right there. So Do we need to make a motion for that?

Or do we just give her I think we could probably just come to agreement that we could turn it over to development services to go ahead and draft and approve that. With us being emailed so we can see it Yeah. For them. In the final, we just send it to even us in case we have some questions or if they have questions with us. Would that be okay?

Because September 1 is right right there. That's the next step. Unfortunately, yeah. It was a short window for their application period.

Okay.

Hey. I'm for it. Okay? I'm for it, but I just wanna see something. Catherine, Mark?

I'm good, bro. K.

Well, then, we'll go ahead and, if that's okay, Steven and Dan, you guys turn that over to you and and you can draft that. And just when you get drafted, send it out to the council. Will do. That'd be great. Thank you. Thank you very much for your patience. Yeah. Let's go ahead approval of the Matt, you're up next for that grant matching letter to the state hazard mitigation officer fee that's to do with FEMA? Yes. Yeah. This is annual,

isn't it? It has become annual because we keep applying for grants. I thought they Last time we were here, it was for some generator grants, and we the county was unsuccessful in getting any of that money. So similar process where, anytime we apply for BRICS grants, FEMA wants a letter from the council saying that they'll support the project and that they'll provide the match amount. This one is for Birch Canyon. There's a little bit of information about it. I put this on there because I thought it would be important for you guys to know the time frame. So, short window, the state's applications are due August 31, so I'm kinda down a little bit. Submission to FEMA is January 29. So we submit to the state and we're just a sub applicant. The state's the actual applicant to FEMA and so the state takes our application, they review it. If they like it and everything looks good then they'll submit it to FEMA and that doesn't happen till January. Then during the summer, FEMA reviews them, they look at them, they might say, hey, your project's picked, but we won't even get an award notification probably until 2025.

So That's what they call government efficiency.

Yeah. So this is the Birch Canyon. So this is an aerial from Birch Canyon, almost to the forest service boundary on the one side and down towards Smithfield City Limits on the other side, if you're familiar with it. I apologize for the graphics, but this was just to show you the yellow areas. So if you guys are familiar, the Public Works Department has been spending quite a bit of money up Birch Canyon to improve the road, to do watershed stuff, to do a lot of work. And because of over time flooding the river has pinched the road in a lot of spots between steep slopes and the only way to really get that road back or to maintain that road is going to be either stabilize the bank or do a stream alteration where you move move it way back. So we've worked with bio west and some other firms locally to come up with a plan to restore the road to do flood improvements to do all that stuff so that we don't lose the road completely to bicycles, pedestrians, cars. If you talk to Smithfield City, this is heavily used by pedestrians, bikers, all those people. It's a beautiful canyon. And without some kind of mitigation, we're we're gonna lose the road and some of the access to get up there. Hyde Park's water line is also goes down part of this road. So, anyways, it's a good project. That just kinda shows you the areas. So we have, all those yellow areas. I think there's probably 13 altogether. On the next slide, we'll just show you, again, I apologize for the graphics. It's small, but it's all I had, was that these repairs are gabion baskets. Gabion baskets are wire basket, maybe the size of a bell of hay or a little bigger, and you fill it with rocks. And so you're not it's very small construction project, small footprint. You're able to dig next to the stream. You put these baskets. You fill them with rocks, and then you're able to make a wall. So if you kind of look on the side, you can see the the hay bale looking structures, and then at the very top, you can see this one happens to be three hay bales. One on the top, kind of the side, but they're just little gabion baskets. They're they're so just a little bit about the project, but there's 11 different areas where we we wanna do this. Up in the corner, you can also see the road. It's where there's not a lot of contours, then you see the wall and then you see the stream. There's only, you know, five or six feet from the edge of the road to the stream. And so without doing a big stream project, we believe that this is probably the best solution for Birch Canyon to maintain that road access up there.

So What's the life of the wire on those baskets when they're in water? Long time. We have some up South Canyon, Nolan.

There's a steep section. They've been there for quite a while, but right now that's galvanized stuff. So Has it been there a while? Yeah. It's gonna be there for a long time. Okay. So what we're asking for again, as you alluded to, Dave, is approval of public works to go after the grant funding is one thing and then just authorize the county, the council chair to provide a letter for the application stating that the county will provide 25% non federal cost share. It can be some of that can be in kind, that can be matching, that can be the county providing those rock, providing the labor. There's lots of different ways that that 200,000 can be provided. We just have to provide

FEMA letter. So they could come collect and put in there. How to provide

that? The preliminary estimate is all that together would cost 800,000 and the 25% match for us would be the 200,000. So that's what we're asking for. Any questions?

Any questions that you'd have? Any No. I think this is a good Makes sense to me. Yeah. Fill it fill it out and k. Well, worth last week in a couple years. K. Almost.

Thank you. I I would I think a a vote would probably be Yeah. Let's go ahead and vote.

All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? It's unanimous. So, can you work with Mike to draft up that letter and we have it come down? To him. So thank you. Signed, sent. So you probably already have a copy of a a letter that we sent last time. So okay. Let's go on to the taxation tax relief extension of the filing deadline for the tax relief applications. This is basically we have done this annually. Mhmm. Is I don't see Diana here. She's not Diana's not here. You'll take care of it for just go ahead and just share that to the public.

We actually need to make an amendment to this only because it's just the date on the very bottom. The date is 2022, and we just need to make it 2023.

So 11/30/2023.

Yeah. So I I have the amended version k. Here on the screen. This is just approving, extensions for tax relief applications for, low income abatement circuit breaker, indigent abatement, and blind exemption.

Indigent abatement for the public is for hardship?

Right. Hardship. Hardship needs. Those are the three forms of tax relief applications that are allowed to be extended by the county council. And so this this action would just extend those deadlines until November 30.

Allows to make sure that they if they haven't heard, it gives them a little bit more time. Don't ask me any more questions because I I We're

talking about an extension to pay their property tax. Or to have mitigation of To file Or to file filing. For a Right, Craig? Yeah. K. It was.

K.

Move move to approve the extension of the date. As amended. As amended.

K. Second up. Moved second that we have go ahead and approve this, with the extension of this, request for tax relief, filing the extension to 11/30/2023, 5PM. All those in favor, say aye. Aye.

Aye. Any opposed?

Aye. Motion passes. Okay. Let's go ahead and go back to the pending action on ordinance twenty twenty three dash 38 or dash 28. Does that have some do we does that maybe have some things that might be dependent on other legislation that might occur?

Yes. So if you remember the last meeting, the county council directed staff to meet with the applicant to see if there is other options besides the zone change or all the consequences of the zone change. So we met with the applicant this last week and went through all those options with them and part of it will depend on actions taken on the new sensitive lands code and other of it depends on some other studies that they're doing on the property boundaries and other sensitive lands within the within their boundaries. But they've asked for an extension for more time since they have not had a chance to adequately study and see if there's another option. But they're currently working on it. They he's mentioned that he has somebody looking at the project in more detail, but has just requested some more time.

Should we go ahead and then basically postpone that to the next meeting?

Yes. He's ready by the next meeting. I'm He said he'd probably be ready within a couple weeks. When I talked to him last I talked When we met with him, he said it'd probably take him a couple weeks to get all the information. But he would text me and let me know for sure if he was gonna be ready by today, which he wasn't. So I think so, but I don't know for sure. What Given the changes

in these ordinances that we have looked at today, would would a rezone be necessary if they were

Potentially potentially not. That's one thing that they're reviewing. Some of the most extensive sensitive lands is within their a 10 zoned area. And if you could rule those towards the overall developmental area within the subdivision, that could potentially allow them to add additional lot.

I think that was the planning and zoning commission's wish, so you're not altering the border of F R 40 or anything else. So

Okay. I'd entertain a motion maybe to postpone this then till the next till September 12. Is there a limit on that? Like, if we postpone it and they're still not ready? Exactly. I'd say postpone at least till the next meeting or if you want as far. We do it thirty days or

thirty days is yours. Yeah. I think that would be appropriate. You could do if they're ready sooner, would it be okay with the council if we brought it to the next meeting? Agenda as such. K.

K. Thirty day? Yes. Is that motion then? So moved. And seconded? And seconded. Moved and seconded that we postpone this for thirty days. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye.

Motion passes. Thank you. Okay.

Monica, you take the resolution for the twenty twenty three zero nine. Resolution amending the organic act for the government of Cache County.

Alright. So, much like a couple weeks ago, I'm going to just talk very briefly about, these next really just the next two ordinances or the the next resolution and ordinance together. They're very similar. I won't rehash everything I I said, two weeks ago, but I do have some additional, information that I that the the council, should be aware of. So up here on the screen, I have the organic act as it currently stands. This is an amendment. I think it was resolution 2,000 dash o five. That was the last time the Cache County Organic Act was amended. And this is this is what we're looking at. You can see some red lines from that change. And I'm going to go to the the sections that resolution twenty twenty three dash o nine change, and that is powers and duties of the county executive. And we can see and and I I frankly don't have a, a good explanation for this other than that it's it's there and, that for since at least the year 2000, accounting services in the Organic Act, and it is also the case with county code, that that accounting services have been the duty of the executive. Now in practice, it hasn't looked that way. In practice, as Phil mentioned earlier, the accounting services were largely in in the auditors the the auditors office until, ordinance twenty thirteen dash 17, which I have here. This is an ordinance that combined the clerk and auditor's offices. It was put into to effect in in January 2015. And, actually, nowhere in this ordinance does it mention accounting duties. It's very short. It's just the consolidation of county auditor and the county 11/12/2013 council meeting when this was being discussed, it was it was agreed kind of in an informal way, really, that all accounting services would be moved fully into the executive's office. So one of the one of the advantages that that personally I I see in what what is being proposed here is that we we are doing this through through ordinance, doing it through code. Until 2013, accounting services it wasn't clear who who was supposed to be providing accounting services in the county. And and after this 2013 was kind of an unofficial change. It it was just kind of spoken, in in a council meeting that accounting accounting services we moved from the ex executive. At that point, the practice of the county matched code and the organic act. And our changes tonight would would also, change code and change practice. So, moving to resolution twenty twenty three dash o nine. Is this the right one? It should be. Yeah. So, just to review, this is an amendment to the Cache County Organic Act. And again, this is akin to an amendment to our county's constitution. It requires a two thirds vote by the full body of the council, so that's five members of the council. And it's this particular change would would not require anything beyond that because it does not change the fundamental council executive form of government that we have. So to review, the this, resolution would change the organic act to clarify the executive's responsibilities as preparing an annual tentative budget as provided in the uniform fiscal act for counties, and then also to supervise and direct personnel management and other functions of the county delegated to the executive by state statute or county ordinance. And that is removing the accounting functions, which again, that those accounting functions in the organic act have been listed there since at least since at least the year 2000. Moving to the the duties of the county auditor. The county auditor shall be the finance officer of the county as defined in Utah code, except that the county executive shall be the finance officer solely for the purpose of preparing tentative budget of the county in accordance with Utah code. The county auditor shall have authority to audit all county departments, offices, and entities, though the county office of county auditor may not audit the auditor's own office or accounts. These things are not new. We're just being a little bit more prescriptive in the organic act. This actually, so far, is no change, but the change starts here. The office of county auditor shall provide accounting services for the county and have all other functions, responsibilities, and powers provided by law. And the office of the county auditor shall support the county executive and assist the county executive in his role in preparing the annual tentative budget. Next down to the county treasurer, this these are changes, like I mentioned last time, copy and pasted from from state code. The county the office of the county treasurer shall receive all money belonging to the county and disperse county money by warrant, check, or other payment mechanism, as well as keep a record of the receipts and expenditures of all money, and have all other functions, responsibilities, and powers provided by law. That is the, full extent of the changes in this resolution, and, I'm I'm open to any questions.

Any questions? Council?

We've studied this a lot. Yeah. We have. We have.

And if there's no other questions, I would like to make a motion that we approve resolution twenty twenty three dash zero nine, a resolution amending the organic act for the government of Cache County.

I'll second that. Moved and seconded that we approve resolution twenty twenty three zero nine, a resolution amending the organic act for the government of Cache County. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, we'll proceed to vote. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? It is unanimous. Okay. Thank you, Micah. Thank you. We'll also go with the ordinance. Would you Yeah. Give the clarification for that, please? Ordinance twenty twenty three dash 29.

K. Ordinance twenty twenty three dash 29. This is a very similar ordinance. It is a little bit more detailed. This this changes county code to reflect the change that was just made in by resolution. And so I I would now say that this, this ordinance is an effort to align county code with what is now our organic act. So I'm gonna go down to the red lines version. A lot of it a lot of it is the same language. That the county executive prepare an annual tentative budget for the county that shall be presented to the county council for approval and supervise and direct personnel management and other functions of the county delegated to the executive by state statute. And again, that's removing centralized budgeting account and accounting, purchasing, and then just clarifying that those functions are those delegated to the executive by state statute. Roles and duties of the county auditor. The office of the county auditor shall have all functions, responsibilities, and powers provided by law, including provision of accounting services for the county, except that the county executive shall be finance officer of the county for the purposes of preparing a tentative budget. So, again, this creates this ordinance would create, in effect, two finance officers of the county, one that would that that the county executive, which would be the finance officer for the purpose of preparing the tentative budget, and then the county auditor, that would be the finance officer, basically, for everything else. But that primarily centers around accounting for the county. And then also assisting the the executive in his role as in preparing the budget. Oh, we so we get into a little bit more detail there in finance officer. County auditor shall service finance officer as defined in Utah code providing accounting services for the county. County auditor shall assist the county executive. And, again, the county executive shall only direct the preparation of a tentative budget as, provided in Utah code. No accounting services are delegated to the county executive. The elected official department head responsibility. Here, we start to get into some of the pre procedural changes that are currently in code that need to, need to be changed as we make this larger change. So this is okay. This is in the the the presentation and preparation of the tentative budget. And transfers, the county auditor shall may authorize and record an interdepartmental transfer over $1,000 with the consent of the county council. Any transfer under a thousand dollars may be authorized directly by the county auditor under this change. And that so that the only change there is just that what the whereas the executive can now authorize any transfer under a thousand under this change, the auditor would be able to make that change. At the request of the county executive, the county auditor or upon its own motion, the county council may, by resolution, transfer any unencumbered or unexpended appropriation balance. So here we see we're we're just adding the county auditor to, an additional, individual that that may request that the county council by resolution initiate any sort of transfer. Purchasing procedures. And, again, most of this is is just replacing the whereas the executive can authorize certain, actions in regards to purchasing that is being replaced by the county auditor. So purchases must be approved. These are, for purchases in between equal to or less than 2,000 for single items or $5,000 for collective value of multiple items. Such purchases must be approved by the department head and not exceed the respective budget unless approved by the county auditor and reviewed and dispersed by the county treasurer. So we're starting to see the treasurer's role in being the one who actually disperses funds. So all funds are all purchases are approved by the auditor, but then dispersed by the treasurer. Purchase orders. Going down to b one, the department head shall file with the county auditor a request for a purchase order. So our PO process is right now handled to to the finance department, which finance department is under the executive. And now this will be and and in practice, it will continue to be done through the finance department. The difference is is that the finance department is now under the purview of the county auditor. Two,

again, the county auditor and county treasurer shall review the documents, so we're removing the

county treasurer shall review the documents, so we're removing the finance department, department under the executive, and putting it directly with the county auditor. Of course, this would not prevent, in practice, the finance department from performing these. It's just under the direction of the county auditor and then the county treasurer's office as well. So now two elected offices, per approving these these purchases rather than just one finance department. Approved vendors. All approved vendors will be approved by the county auditor and an individual department head and they are valid for purchases made during that fiscal year that they're approved. We are also putting in this ordinance that the audit committee shall create a process for regularly reviewing and approving approved vendors. As we were preparing this ordinance, we we, came to the conclusion that as those of you who are part of these discussions, myself and the attorneys, that that were writing this, decided that this would probably be an issue. This process probably needs another look and that the audit committee should take that look. And so the expectation here would be that the audit committee is gonna make a recommendation to replace this code in a more permanent offer a more permanent replacement of this code for approving approved vendors. Finally, we have travel expenses. This one, I think, many of you have talked about this with me and with each other and with other individuals in the council in in the county, consistent with procedures in the previous section, the the, purchasing section. All requests for travels, conventions, seminars, inter conferences must be approved by the employee's department head and the county officer to whom that employee reports. Oftentimes, that is the same person, and that would, so there would only be one approval. But the the important part is that it is being approved by a county officer, an elected official. Payment for such approved travel expenses will be authorized by the county auditor and dispersed by the county treasurer. So that that is, consistent with the rest of the the ordinance that purchases are authorized by the auditor and dispersed by the treasurer. And that's what I've got on ordinance twenty twenty three dash 29. I I would also add, as we've talked, we know there's more ordinances coming. We heard additional ideas earlier in the meeting and this is not the last change that is going to be made, but this ordinance is an opportunity to move this responsibility from one office to the other.

And, yeah. So I just might comment. I I thought, Taylor made quote quote just a really significant quote, I thought, in our meeting this morning. The the ordinance may not be perfect and there will be some good suggestions made by the executive and things that we could add to it. But Taylor's court of judge, I think, said don't let perfection be an enemy of the good. So in other words, it's not perfect yet, but it is good. And so I think it's worthwhile that we get this put in place so we can move forward and and take care of any issues that we may have been experiencing in the past.

Any other comments? Mister chair? Yes, Dean.

I would just like to to thank our executive for bringing those forward. I think looking at those, I think there's some some improvements that could be made to make them just a little bit stronger even and to I think the best practice would be to include a concurrent resolution with those to amend our personal policy manual as well. So it's in code and policy. I I did talk to miss Winder from the UVOC. So I I think that's something we should be trying to bring before the council very shortly so we can be in compliance with some of the requirements that the the county executive mentioned earlier. And so that'd be the the attorney's office opinion there. Yeah. Thank you,

mister Murray. I just wanted to add that as I drafted those suggestions, I did consult with our finance staff and our HR director, and specifically in relation to the ones that have to do with HR functions. I asked our HR director to to start drafting those necessary policies, and she's already been working on that and has some draft policies ready to go to the ordinance and policy committee for review. So so, yeah, I just wanna echo what mister Murray just said that it the suggestions that I made, some of them, the the ones related to the extra compensation for employees specifically, will require the adoption of personnel policies, and we we're already working on that. So that that would be a future a future item for the council to adopt those as additions to the personnel policy.

Thank you. Any other comments? Ideas? Is there anything you'd like to share?

You know, I had I had one thing that I thought on the three point o eight point o six. So I I think I've mentioned this to you before, Micah, that when it says that all travel had to be approved by the employee's department head, I think it should still say in advance. I think it's gonna solve a lot of problems if we have that approved in advance. And I don't know, like, I know we're gonna add a lot of other things to this in the in the coming weeks, but that was just one thing that I thought would be That

that's certainly an an easy amendment we can make right now.

That's Well, even to that, it also needs to come out of a very specific budget items and not be shared amongst several budgets. And that's what a that I think that's a huge issue. Having one one conference be shared with five or six different budget areas. And that's that's what we got. It's it's basically, if it's a conference, it goes to, you know, basically the budget that covers conference under travel. So Is that okay if we wait? We don't need to add that in tonight with an amendment, because obviously we wanna even adjust it to more. There is gonna be some refining on on some things like that. I know there's still is kind of a hard pill to swallow on, the transfers that we've talked about too as a council, and we're gonna dig into some of those. A lot of these will be really hashed out and detailed out within the audit committee, that we'll get those details put together. I think it's a to me, it's it's a great start. And I want to first before we even get this thing comes to a vote, I would like to first share, I will give thanks to executives for, those items and that. But I as I read those also, and they were discussed in detail, we do need to go a lot deeper in those areas. There needs to be more to it than what we than those. But they're they're they're general, and they they move in, but I still think that we need to dig deeper and make sure we get more detail into them. The other thing is I want to make sure that those that have provided us with some investigations that have helped us in this process, helped us to to move in this process that we're have undertaken. I wanna make sure that they know from the state that you know that as a county council, we are committed to make this right, to make to do what's right for the county. We are we are unified to make sure that the county's money, the county's funds are spent accurately and that they're they're in good faith and that the county or that the entities that that actually give us that money. They can trust us all the way through. I think that is a they need to know that we support them and we are gracious and thankful for the openness and help that they have actually come and shared with us and and talked with us about it and wanted to help us in every way possible, despite some defiance with, with other people, other elected officials. And, but we really appreciate them working with us in this process. Like you say, it is not it's not even quite perfect, but there is so much good to this that gets us down that road to where I think that we we will get to a point where the employees, the people of Cache County can actually have a feel good about what's happening with their money and how we do things. So that's how that's just my point of view and what I'd like to share and hopefully that one thing, employees, please do not feel fearful at all. We will will make sure that things are taken care of. We're going to have to have probably hire some new people for help in some of these areas. We will get it. We will work feverishly to make sure that this works for all the departments. So and all the employees themselves since you're covered. Any other comments?

I just if I could ask the council. I I agree. I think that's was great of Taylor to to quote Voltaire or Collins, whichever it was he was quoting about not letting perfect being, be the enemy of the good. With that being said, I think, even if we could strengthen, even further my proposals, I would love it if you further refining. And, most of it especially because I, am going to be needing to send a letter back to the OVC with a response about our, our, steps to address their concerns before the next council meeting that will be due, address exactly what went wrong and exactly what they pointed out in their audit. So I would I would ask the council if you would consider adding those additions into the ordinance tonight, so that I can, include those in our list of measures that we've taken to make improvements.

Counsel, could I ask your thought on that given what you said earlier as to how we we find those and go on and beat this? Can we do it all? Does it need to go step now, step later, add them now, add them later, refine them?

Well, talking Advice. I I spoke with miss Winder. I don't think UVOC expected us to pass those changes today. I think the fact that the council and the executive are working on those, I I think that will give them give the executive something to report that we're taking these steps. I don't think they have to be passed for us to be approved for payment. And I don't know if miss Winder can can make a comment on on that, but I I I do think that reading the the recommendations from the from the UVOC audit, there are some things that need to be changed and some things that need to be included in these before they they actually go far enough in in my opinion. So my recommendation would be to come back with a a new ordinance with concurrent resolutions for those and pass the ordinance that's been considered previously.

Thank you for your comments. Also, thank you for miss Winter being here. It's a long night, a long drive for her, so it shows her commitment to helping us in Cass County. So thank you both. Any other comments?

So I guess we can pass this ordinance now and then we can do the amendments.

We can do the amendments. We can write up what we what we need and make sure it goes through the committee and have input from everybody. Make sure it's it's formatted

properly and everything's covered.

K. I'd entertain a motion or

Well, since everybody's so reverent, I'll make a motion that we approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash twenty nine financial administration amendments.

I'll second it.

Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. M Hearing none, we will proceed to vote. All those in favor, say aye. Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes. Okay. Let's go to resolution twenty twenty three dash 10. A resolution authorizing a reduction in force for Cache County.

Okay.

Nope. That's not it. Okay. So the previous, ordinance and resolution that was just passed, is going to significantly change how finances are administered here in Cache County. The effect will be that the duties that have previously been held by the Cache County finance director will now be under the auditor and the treasurer. And so this has created a redundancy in the, position of a finance director. So this reduction of force eliminates the position of finance director in Cache County. And it would, it would not affect any other individual employee in the finance department. They would continue to work in in that department. And as we implement this transition the next fifteen days as that ordinance goes into effect, they will they will find themselves in in one or the other office, but there is no longer a need for finance director. And so that is the the sole action of this resolution. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Okay. Thank you. Is there any comments? Any on this, questions?

I'll just comment, this is one of the most difficult things I've faced as a council member in the years I've spent.

I haven't spent as many years as you, but it has been difficult. So I agree with you. But as we work to meet this, here we are. So given what we've passed, we're here and we need to continue on. So it has been difficult.

Any other comments? Mark, Catherine, any comments you'd like to share?

Not for me.

Yeah. Nothing at this Yeah. I have

them at this time. Thank you. Comments anywhere? Okay. I'll I know I agree with the previous speakers. This has not been easy. There's something about this whole process that has been easy, but I think there's some things that are that we as we take responsibility, as we take understanding of all this whole process, this is something I think that we need to do. So but it is tough. I'll, entertain a motion or

I guess I get to be the unreverent one, so I make a motion that we approve resolution twenty twenty three dash 10.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

It's moved and seconded that we approve resolution twenty twenty three dash 10. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, proceed to vote. All those in favor, say aye. Aye.

Any Aye. Any opposed?

Motion passes. Let's go down to initial proposals for consideration of action, ordinance twenty twenty three dash 30. Steven, you're back up. Are there any questions on that? Are we we had quite a few questions there.

I'd just like to say how much I appreciate all the letters we got from from the public that the people are engaged and that they were able to express their opinions to us. I really appreciate that.

You bet.

Yeah. I would generally agree with that. Not most ordinances I work on, even though they might be impactful, don't have much public comment. So it's been good to see that the public has been following this and have generally been supportive of the process.

It has been really interesting in this whole process for this is to you know, you look throughout even the world, or you look throughout even neighboring states and counties. Is there really anything that's not buildable? Yeah. You know, if if money can do it, if they seem to be taking roads everywhere, they seem to be taking, you know, tunnels, whatever it may be. It's just a matter of economics. And I I am one of those that I hate to get in the way if someone's I know I have a real a guy I know that he's a good friend. He has a lot of money. He built a $13,000,000 road just to a cabin, and it was at places where when you drive it, you wish you weren't on. He he had the money to do it, and he had the engineers and the professionals to make sure it was safe to do it. Well, as safe as can be, and we we can't we can't protect everybody for everything at every moment. They need to have some private property rights. That's such. So, with that in mind, any questions that you'd have? No. I do governor.

I do maybe just wanna let you let the council know is that as we've been reviewing this, we've found other sections of this code that we believe will probably need some additional review, but we wanna take a little bit longer time with that. We feel like this first round of changes really addresses the need of residents right now to kinda get out of the way so that so that they can utilize their property in a way that complies with their code or in a way that is safe and usable and also reasonable. But there are probably sometime in the near well, maybe not in the nearest future, but sometime probably in the next year or so, we'll probably be coming back with some additional guidelines.

So the quote from councilman Ward tonight stands, again, true. I've gone through it. I've listened to it. I'm I almost don't wanna pass it just because the Hawks have been coming to all of our planning and zoning. They're honorary honorary members of the planning and zoning. Oh, we keep coming at

You need to get live. With with each other and on your own.

Own. So they've been very patient is my point, and so thank you. That's the kind of citizens that are very much a joy to work with. So thank you. So, I'm ready to make a motion.

I just there's one thing that burns me. That 200 square foot. It's in, like, a that's like a dog pen. Yeah. So

There and I go, okay. You know?

There was some logic behind kind of tough shit. You know? There is some logic behind the 200 square feet. That's the cutoff for when you need a building permit. So once you have a structure that's 200 square feet or more, that's when you need to apply for a building permit. But if it's under that, then you don't. And what makes the difference? I think the difference is the building permit process looks at it as if it's under that 200 square footage, it is not likely that a building will have, will likely be habitable and will not have human occupancy in it. And so they believe it won't be dangerous to those who are to residents or owners of that structure. Once you start getting over that, that's when you start finding buildings that are habitable and may have people spending long terms of period within that structure. And that's why we picked the 200 square feet.

That's that's almost like a tiny home. Yeah. No. Okay. Any you feel like anything we need to look at? I guess initial means that we'd have to Suspend. We won't waive them. We'll suspend the rules. Suspend. But that's up to the council.

I will suspend the rules and make a motion that we approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash 10.

Ten or thirty? Let's go to thirty. Thirty.

Thirty. Yeah. Yeah. We already did it. I need new glasses. I'm reading there. Okay. I will suspend the rules again and have a motion that we approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash 30. I'll second it.

Move seconded that we approve that we suspend the rules and approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash 30. I'll is there any discussion on that motion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Motion passes. Resolution twenty twenty three dash 11, opening the 2023 budget. Okay. We've got that small little detail there, or is there any other things we probably I'm wondering if do we need to somehow act also as part of that on that $78,000 or the possible up to $78,000 that we may owe on the UVOC report. Phil, will you answer that question? So And Oh, go ahead. I did hear one explanation that we may try to take it out of another year.

Yes. So as it applies to prior years, it would be appropriate to put it into the 2022. I've talked to our external auditors, and because it is not a material to our financial statements, we don't have to restate our financial statements to show those payables back to 1819, and '20, but we could put it into At what time does it become material? That's a threshold that they assess based off of revenues and different things like that. I don't have that specific number. They can just tell me something is or isn't, but they don't aren't supposed to give me the exact amounts.

So And to do that, we'd have to do that in a different budget. So if we if we were to throw it back into 2022

had nothing to do with this one. Correct. If we do because we've held the we've held the financial statements open. They've been done since, you know, May sometime or June of sometime, but we've held it open waiting to see what the outcome of this would be. So the the recommendation was is we could put a contingency saying that we, you know, owe this, or we could just go ahead and book it and then record it in 2022. So

Okay. We're gonna go into legal now. So Could you share insight on that? I I guess I

I see this as a a cost that arose in 2023. And I I I guess I need maybe more time to talk to Phil about some of the some of the background here, and some of the advice they've gotten from the external auditor before I can offer an opinion on that.

Yeah. So if that's the case, then we can postpone

that. Okay. Well, it's we know it's necessary. We know we we wanna make sure that we're that we're moving on things Yep. And that we that we are gonna take care of our our business. I don't wanna violate any accounting practice or law in paying back something that came from And then we'll just have to do I think we have a scheduled budget opening in September. Yeah. And if we decide have it taken care of by then and then establish what we need to that at that point. Is there a date that we have to have this money repaid

by?

They haven't given us well, we still they haven't given us a specific date as to when it does, but I think that we could we could probably have it available at any time if we use do something in the budget opening for

the September. Mhmm. He has comments. Mister chair, I think we just need to present in our response that the executive is preparing our plan for repaying it. So if our plan is to repay that in September, if that's included in a response, it's minor saying that would be sufficient for the short term for the UVOC as long as we're we have a plan to repay it.

I'm good with that. I'm I'm very good with that. We make sure that that be put in that plan, and that and then if that is the case, then we'll make sure it's taken care of that that budget opening in September. So

I just have a question. I'm I'm still a little bit confused how we can take money from a previous year's budget

and pay something. So there's there's actually two ways to look at it, and I I would wanna do a little more research on it. Because it was a revenue provided to us, it could just also be a reduction of revenues. Again, dealing with material audality of the auditors, and so it wouldn't even require a budget amendment in either year. If we view it as a as a payment that arose in 2023, which we can discuss, then it would be be appear more as an expense. So that's something I I think we should just further discuss.

So Dig into that? K. Yeah. And no matter what, we make sure that we it gets taken care of. Mhmm. We have a final decision by the September.

K. Sounds good. Will that work out? Yep. I I think it just needs to be clear. Yeah. Yeah. I mean

Yeah. But still sometimes we're moving books around to Yeah. To do something, and I'm not comfortable with that. I'm not either, Carl. Reduction of revenue.

Well, it wasn't it was a you know, the it wasn't an expense that we've spent out. It was a revenue that came in. And so if we are giving it back, we're giving back revenue that came in is what happened. Now it is related to three, you know, multiple years ago, but that is one of the reasons. Yeah.

I think let's give confidence. Will Phil and Dane. Dane, you work through it and everything, and then come back with the exactness that we need. K. And so to make sure these things are taken care of there. Okay. Let's go to ordinance well, let's see. How about the the rest of that resolution in freezing those funds? Yeah. Yeah. What do you think?

I like that. I'm

I'm in favor of it for the mere fact that I I hate to just go through and with as we are changing things, and we can even bring them back as we get things solidified exactly where they need to be. And and then when the audit department and finance, you know, as they're working all together and they feel like they need it, I don't I say we don't spend that money Yeah. That it will as it sends back to that ARP account, but we we definitely hold that at least that under expended money will be held until that decision can be made, and then we can

go ahead and go forward with that. Just to can I make one comment on that? Which I I I agree with that. I support that. I think, you know, in talks with the budget committee, they're going to discuss, I think, at the end of the first quarter in twenty twenty four. Any appropriated or approved projects are gonna need to be addressed so that if they're not gonna be fulfilled, that's the the date that they're going to decide. Are they gonna need it, or do we need to just take it and put it somewhere else? And so that would be a good time to to then readdress this. You know, we have ears on the budget committee, and they say there's three of us on there. And I I appreciate your

point about this and needing it in the finance, but and I I will be a strong advocate that this money does go for the software in the future,

but it's just I wanna put a hold on it for now as we walk through what we're doing. That's fine. That's a problem. K. I agree with that. Everything that's in motion, we wanna make sure it finishes out before we And I I make a major change like that, Phil. Phil So

do we need to act on this or Yeah. We just need to suspend. I think we need to suspend. I think we we basically where are you re returning that? So

Phil alluded to this earlier in the in today that this is this is changing the budget. This isn't necessarily rescinding the award. You'll remember I don't have the date, but it would have been in July. The council approved all of the ARPA awards, and that was prior to the July budget opening and or June budget opening. And and and so this this action doesn't change that award that was made.

But I I agree. I mean, if that's how it is, then great. I would ask legal then to say does now being revoked, is that implying the budget, or is that implying the ARPA award? Because it does say to be moved back into the pool of unused ARPA funds. Yeah. We need to amend. I think we need to amend that and pass it differently tonight. I I think for clarification,

amending that would be helpful. I think where we're talking about a budget amendment here, it's not actually rescinding the ARPRO award. And that So it'd be moving that back to the pool, but the award would still be there because those are two different actions that the council took. So I think we could amend it for clarity, but I don't think that just a budget amendment, undoes the award. It just takes that that fund back and puts it in the pool Uh-huh. And keeps that award in place because there would need to be another resolution to revoke that award.

So so Okay. I I would then recommend that we strike the words and move back to the pool of unused ARPA funds.

Maybe replace it with suspended for now.

Just just for clarity, I think because sometimes you get a couple months down the road, and then what did we what did we talk about in there? I I think for clarity, just striking that. I think Mike is right. That would be helpful in the future when we come back and they're discussing this. We don't need to vote on a re award. We just need to reauthorize the funding. But we need to finish the sentence because then if you strike that part at the end, it's an incomplete sentence. We need to say what we're doing with these funds, and we could replace the one. Just say suspended suspended. Yeah. And just say suspended

for and And now now being revoked and suspended and moved back to pool of unused ARPA funds. We don't wanna say it goes back to the pool. Right? Well, it it

it is going back to the pool of unused ARPA funds, but it's it's being earmarked. Got it. It's been earmarked by the council. It's just that that earmark isn't reflected anywhere in the budget. No contracts can be encumbered against it and everything at that point. We can only do the contracts if there's budget. Yes. Perfect. That's great.

Would that does that feel good? Yeah. Would you then make that an amendment as such then? Okay. I would move that we that we strike the words

what do we strike? Revoke. Move move

Word revoked. Replace

it with suspended. Replace it with suspended. Yeah. Suspended and moved. Okay.

Is there a second? Second. Move and seconded that we, in this suspended the rules on We have a We're just making sure that we're not gonna be On this amendment that, we strike out the words revoked and add the words suspended. Is there any discussion on that? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. K. Motion passed. Now, I will go ahead and entertain a motion on resolution twenty twenty three dash 11. If it be the

Sandy said I have to do this. Posture. Okay. I'll suspend the rules and, move that we approve resolution. The amended resolution twenty twenty three dash 11, for the 2023 budget opening.

Second. Moved and seconded that we suspend the rules and pass resolution twenty twenty three dash 11 as amended of the opening of the 2023 budget. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. It's unanimous. Let's go to ordinance twenty twenty three dash 32. Who was gonna Chair. Oh, yes. Not sure I heard that Katherine Houston's vote. Katherine, was that last vote aye or nay? Aye. Aye. Did you hear it now? We all heard it now. Thanks, Katherine. You're even reverent where you are. You're probably sitting on the balcony of the cabin.

She's in price.

While you're getting that up, can I bring one thing up? One is as we passed resolutions twenty twenty three nine twenty nine and ten. Nine and twenty nine, we were talking the possibility of, putting a committee together to help in this transition. Mhmm. Committee of, the Craig McAllister, David Benson,

three council members. Can we put Phil on there? And, Bill?

Could you be on there? HR. HR director, Amy. If you be out there, then we could, you know, to to just help with all this transition to make sure everything is taken care of and that we do this as smoothly and help everybody in the in the work. I would take who who on there would like to help out? I I I wonder if

I would, mister chairman. Okay.

If the audit committee should be a part of that where the audit committee is gonna be an integral part of approval of things.

We thought about a separate committee on this one with the Well, no. I'm just saying members of the audit committee could also Oh, the three the three council could also be on this one? Yeah. How do you feel? Yeah. Mark.

It'd be Mark. Committee?

No. I am the liaison with the Clerk Auditor's office, so that's why I spoke up. But you go. Good. I'm open to suggestions. There's one volunteer. What's that? I'm emotionally batched. Two more.

I'd be happy to do it. I'm sure you can do it. Carl?

Carl? Carl? Sure.

Okay.

We have three. Carl, Sandy, and Mark. Sandy?

Okay. Well, if you three then, we could be with them and and keep us abreast as how things go. Okay. And work with Great. We're, again, with David Benson, Craig, everybody, and Bill. And staying on there. We'll get the details. Dane will be on there. Dane or Taylor, we'll get the we'll make sure we get those details. Now time and everything.

Oh, Mark, did you have a question?

No. I was just saying okay. I appreciate the opportunity. K.

Both that in mind, as far as time and meeting, we'd like to actually move on that fairly fast. So, do you chair the budget audit? Will you be the chair of this committee then? Sure. K. Carl, if you'll take that and then and then get with them and arrange a time to be able to meet and and start working towards this. So yeah. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, council members. This should be fairly simple. This is basically a proposed ordinance creating definitions that are required under creating, definitions that are required under state code. For So we're essentially bringing our code into compliance with state code, by defining what constitutes a significant parcel of real property, and reasonable notice for purposes of Utah code 17 dash 50 dash three twelve, five. And then also just adopting what that, state code requires counties to do. And so if you'll just go down, you'll notice that we've defined and disposal is is defined under Utah code. So we've just taken the same definition under Utah code. Reasonable notice is defined by the by the County Council, and so this is the recommendation from myself as an attorney in the County Attorney's Office. You'll notice that real property, or reasonable notice is taking on one, that it's provided in the newspaper, two, on the Utah public notice website, and three, the county website. That those are things that are pretty consistent throughout Utah code as far as providing notice. And then, the fourteen days prior to a public hearing, making sure that that notice is published is a requirement under that state code as well. And then significant parcel of real property. We've, at this time, are recommending that it just be defined as any real property owned by the county that constitutes parcels of real significant parcels of real property. And the reason for that is there are not a lot of, parcels of real property that the county deals with, and so having those would not be an, overburdensome. That can change over time and and then, of course, then the the code could as well. And then if you just scroll down to three point three eight point zero two zero, this is just basically taking what is required under state code before the county may dispose of significant partials of real property, the county must give reasonable notice of the proposed disposition. And so that's the, the entirety of the proposed ordinance, And, this will allow us, just so the council is aware, will allow us to, as we are working on, the property for the Bailey Building, this would be one of those that would be required under this reasonable notice. And that would then allow us once we this becomes takes effect, then that notice would need to be published. Fourteen days thereafter, then we could act, or have that public notice and then act on that property. So it updates the code to where now we can actually

legislate that be taken care of and done.

Correct. Yep. Okay. Is reasonable time and fourteen days the same?

So reasonable notice is, I I think that it would be, especially where the state code itself is saying giving at least fourteen days. The the part that the code is is really trying to get defined is what that notice is is provide like, how that notice is being received and provide and then publishing of that notice to the to the public. So the code really defines what that time is. What the county is required to do is what are the or not precautions, but what are the actions that we're gonna take to provide that notice to the county or to the citizens of the county.

K.

Any questions? He gave you the $300 an hour version. I gave you the thirty second free version. But no, it's great. We've actually this was vetted through policy committee. We went through all that there too. So I'd entertain a motion or create any questions.

I'll make a motion that we approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash 32, an ordinance creating chapter 3.38 on real property.

I guess we ought to suspend the rules. Oh, I'm sorry. No. It's it's one of those slap things we gotta keep doing. I'll reevaluate them. I miss you. I

move that we suspend the rules and approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash 32.

Is there a second? Second. Moved and seconded that we suspend the rules and approve ordinance twenty twenty three dash 32, an ordinance creating chapter 3.31 on a real property. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. It's unanimous. Thank you very much. Any let's go to any business down there as far as other business? Everyone, all the council members, all going to USAC, fall conference? Terrific. I like it. Yeah. That's terrific. Down for being there on the sixth. Correct. I think most all of us, don't we? Okay. Okay. And we did get the July treasurer's reconciliation report. It also was sent to us, and we appreciate that. There. Council member reports. Carl, we'll start down there.

I've said enough tonight.

There is one quote there's one quote you haven't quoted yet. Okay. And Sunlight? Oh. Sunlight is the best.

Yeah. Sunlight is the

best disinfectant.

Disinfectant. Disinfectant. Yep. That's right. In other words, we wanna have everything open and everybody see what's going on.

Terrific. Any other report? No. Okay. So Sandy?

I just was in a meeting today about the code blue legislation for when it gets down below 15 degrees and also the overflow making application for a plug in for overflow housing when for the warming centers this winter, so we're working on that.

Terrific.

Barbara? No. Thank you.

No one.

No comments. Kath Catherine?

Nothing today.

And Mark?

Nothing today for me either.

K. That being said, I want to personally thank every one of you. Can can I can I make a quick motion here? You bet. That

we make a motion that Mark can't ride his motorcycle for the next thirty days.

Only if he votes in favor of it.

I second the motion. Okay.

Okay. But I I seriously wanna thank each one of you. This this process is still we're still going through it, and we will get through it. I have faith that we will because we're we will we we know it's right, and we will get there to that point. We'll make sure that it's effective for everybody, and I appreciate every one of you working through it, asking the hard questions, and getting to the getting through with what we've done. But now we're now we've got still kind of an uphill battle on some things, but we'll we will make it, I know. We've I I really appreciate each one of you. With that, and that's for your time too. You put more time into the That's well, I'm gonna hurry and adjourn before you say that. K?