Cache County Council Regular Meeting – 02-17-2026

Oh, yes. Yeah. Like a handbag. Hey, Nolan. K, Nolan. It's 05:00. We're doing it. That's it. Alright. Welcome, everyone. Glad that you are here to join us at our county council meeting. It's like a little bit of a sparse crowd, but we'll try and maybe we'll get through this pretty quickly tonight. We will begin with an opening by council member Joanne Bennett.

I'll give it with a a prayer. Okay. Our father in heaven, we gather tonight and are thankful for the land that we live in. We are thankful for our forefathers who had the moral courage to give us an inspired constitution. We are thankful for this beautiful valley that we live in and for the way it blesses us and protects us. We pray for thy spirit to be with us as we deliberate tonight that we will be guided by the rule of law and that we will have the discernment we need to make the right decisions. We pray that thou will be with the law enforcement, and that they as they go about their duties, that they will have wisdom and safety. We pray that thou bless us, that we will be able to preserve each other's rights and liberties. And we say this in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. You'll stand for the pledge of

allegiance. I pledge allegiance

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

Thank you, Joanne. Alright. The meetings of our the minutes of our last meeting are not were not available yet, so we will put that off until the next meeting. So we'll go right ahead and turn the time over to our county. I'll I move to approve the amend

or the amended.

Agenda.

The amended agenda. Second.

It's been moved and seconded that we approve the agenda for tonight's meeting. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? One day, I'll get it right. K. Doing great. Alright. Now we will turn time over to our executive. Pardon me? It's your turn on the agenda. Appointments. Appointments or anything that you would like to present us. Get my book open. I have one appointment

that I would submit and that is to the Cache County Foundation and it's to appoint myself and Joanne Bennett as members of the foundation board. The third person is Matt Funk and he's by statute a member of that. So the three of us would then be the board of directors.

I would

ask for your advice and consent with respect to that appointment.

K. Someone wanna make a motion on that?

I'll make a motion for the Cash Foundation. We appoint George Deans, Joanne Bennett, and Matt Funt.

Second. K. It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. Anything else?

No, thanks. Okay.

Alright. We're gonna plow right through this. Public hearings.

It's not even 05:30 yet. So If you wanna stall, I maybe could put Andrew on the spot for something.

Well, I think we can set the public hearings, and then we'll look beyond

holding the public hearings. What what's the email you sent me about the

Oh. Yeah. Are you ready for

Yeah. I've I've just take a motion. Information you already have.

Well, I moved to, set the public hearing for ordinance twenty twenty six dash o eight, Shepherd rezone, ordinance twenty twenty six zero nine, Wellsville Safe Storage LLC rezone, ordinance twenty twenty six six dash 10, Greenfield Mill Overflow, and office space rezone. Resolution twenty twenty six zero seven, a resolution opening and amending the Cache County 2026 budget first amendment for March 10 at 05:30PM approximately.

I'll second that. K. It's been moved and seconded that we set the public hearings mentioned. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Let's go back to you. Do I have the right agenda? K. Initial pro proposals for consideration of of action, ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero five. Brian is Brian here yet? Brian's not here yet. Brian's not here yet. Okay. Let's look at eight b, resolution twenty twenty six dash zero eight. Matt Bunk.

We're supposed to hold the public hearing before these considerations.

K. But we can't I thought we weren't supposed to hold public hearings till 05:30.

The zero eight is

If I may, if we Sure. We have some time. So last time I brought up the approval process or giving authorization for Cash Valley Bank for the green space. Mhmm. We thought we might get that on the agenda this time and vote on it, but it was a little more complicated than that because the board has to appoint authorized users. So if I could turn it over to Andrew to just explain that process and maybe what needs to happen next. Sure. For the Is that alright? The community foundation.

Yeah. Okay.

I think this is what I get for misspelling amended on the agenda.

I was blaming for this. I was like, I wasn't trying to throw a moment to buy.

Appreciate it. So, yes, council member Garrity brought up that during the last council meeting, the county treasurer brought to the attention of the council that he wasn't authorized to manage or deal with the accounts of the Community Foundation. Keegan did reach out to me and to schedule it on the agenda for the county council to give the authorization in this meeting, but I did some digging into the bylaws of the foundation. Since the Cache Community Foundation is a five zero one three c that's separate from the county, the county council couldn't necessarily give approval or authorization to the treasurer. So that being said, now that there is a board of trustees for the foundation, they're going to meet. And one of the items of business that they must consider is the appointment of officers, and that includes the appointment of a treasurer. So if the board so chooses, they may authorize and appoint, mister McAllister to be the treasurer for the foundation, and then he can transfer funds and go from there. I hope that makes sense. Do you guys have any questions?

Nope. Thanks for running down the bylaws and keeping it all on track. Appreciate you, Andrew. Good. K.

So I can't hold those public hearings yet. So just if I may, Sandy. Yes. In order for that to be done over at the bank, we do have to have it in the motion in the minutes take the minutes over with the motion on who's going to be signing on the account.

So one of the

actions or officers that the board has to appoint is that of a secretary. So I'm assuming whoever the secretary is will make sure that that's delivered Okay. Yeah. Once they're appointed. Okay. Sorry to pass the buck and not give you an answer. But

No. That's fine.

What are what are my rules there about the public hearings?

Do I have to wait till 05:30 to start them? Yes. Okay. So you could move to you could move to any of your other Pending item? The pending item? Pending items or other business or council member reports.

K. Alright. Let's well, the pending items Can we do the initial proposal? Yeah. Can we not do eight? Number eight and do those initial proposals? No. No. Those because the public hearing needs to be held before they're there. They're really initial. Request. Oh, okay.

Happen first.

Alright, mister Davis. Alright. So

nine Scott Wells tell stories.

I know. Scott, do you have a Scott heard. You guys have a good tail? Tail? I could do long winded dog. It'll be quick. We could do report For those that are watching at home, our agenda says that we will hold public hearings at 05:30, and and we cannot do that until 05:30 in case there are people who are here specifically for that.

So You may also have a brief recess if you if you so choose.

Well, I think we can move on to nine. Let's let's look at those pending items. The twenty twenty six dash zero six, the amendment to the code regarding subdivisions, I've spoken to a few of you about that. And Catherine and I talked about it. And there the the document that we were given last meeting has there were some type graph glares. There's still some problems with that. And so we have talked to the county planning commission. We're gonna have a workshop on the March 10. We're gonna get our health department officer here. We're gonna nail this down and get a code that we feel comfortable passing. And so if if everyone's okay with continuing that until further notice, I I don't I don't know if but if someone wants to vote on the one that we have and make a make a motion, I would be open to a motion because we have an ordinance before us.

If it fails, then we have this everything has to go back to the drawing board.

I'm fine with having a workshop and getting things right. So I think that's only prudent. Are you thinking just before the meeting? I guess, 03:30? We'll we'll meet yeah. We'll do it 03:30 Okay. On the tenth.

And then we'll let the planning department

rewrite whatever we decide. And then I will put that on my calendar.

K. To get an email before the twenty fifth.

That works. Okay. So let's go to 9 B, Resolution 2025 Dash 06. Three day weekend. Removal of certain class b roads. K. This was before us last time. Let's look at this.

Okay.

K. Does anyone want to discuss that? Make a motion? We talked about it last time.

Is that in relation to this that we have on earth? Yes. It is.

I'm very much in favor of getting this getting this going, getting this done. I I think that the cities need to have ownership of that. And if they want to contract with back with us in some maintenance or things like that, that's their business. But as far as the ownership and and who says comes in and out of it and everything, that's their business. So

I'm not very much in favor. So this letter seems to

offer a different opinion? No. This they've been told that they can't they've had this in the works for over a year. They're trying to get access to that road, but because it's a county road

But they say it's county owned, and they have no plans to alter that So that seems to me we're right back where we started from, isn't it?

Where does it say the county has known? There are River Heights. River Heights. Yeah.

Yeah. We don't have to have their agreement to forfeit.

So so class b roads, if they're within a municipality, are only class b on the consent of the the county. So if the county revokes that consent, the I think the the one issue here is this was part of an agreement for twenty something years ago for the the trade of 10th West. I I I've looked through that agreement. I don't see anything that that says that's held in perpetuity. I don't see any time limits, and I also haven't been able to find anything that any resolution by the county council. It was looks like it was just signed by by the county executive at that point. So I'm not sure what the the history of that was because there there isn't real good records besides the actual agreement. So there's no resolution that that's been able to be produced agreeing to that. I I think that we're kind of in a a tough place because this if the cities are upset about this and they rely on that agreement saying that the county said that they're gonna take this road, they there obviously may be a problem there. Also have a developer who's kinda being held hostage, and his personal property rights are are kinda being interfered with by the county, and he has threatened legal action. That's the letter we got. Yes. And so I think that's the I think that's the the the rub here is there's there's two competing because I think the city would rather us keep the road. I know with class c roads, they get a bigger portion of money, so they they would have more money. And if they're gonna enter in the in in a local agreement either with us or with with Providence, there would be more money there for the maintenance of the road than we're currently getting as a class b road. But that's that's the the rub is that that history going back to 10th West and 2500 North agreement.

I've I've talked with Ryan Snow about this, and I've asked for a delay of one week. His his concern and Providence's concern is is maintenance of the road, and he was checking to see whether Providence can receive class c road funds for maintaining a road that's outside of their city, but services their city. He hadn't gotten back to me on that yet.

But wouldn't Millville get that class c money? Pardon me? Wouldn't Millville receive the class c money to put in their portion? It would. And and the question is is can the cities

between themselves decide that Providence will maintain it and receive the class c road fund? You know, it it seems to me that if Millville agrees to that, we could just let go of the road and let Melville give the class c road fund to Providence. But it's it's a little more entangled because Providence is worried that Melville doesn't the road is primarily access to Providence, not Millville, and that's where the the issue comes. So if the council wishes you could delay this until our next meeting, we could see if this if something's worked out between the three cities. I just wonder pressure to get rid of the road is simply that our road department doesn't wanna maintain this road any longer.

I don't think we own any other any other the county, I don't think, owns roads that are completely encompassed by cities anywhere in the county, do we?

I don't know. Dane, do you know? I I don't know. That would I think Matt would probably be the best to I I'm not aware of any others, but No. There are no others. Matt has told me that. This is the only one we have, and he wants rid of it yesterday.

I'm wondering if if we maybe insert, for example, in us turning these responsibilities over that we maybe just have a little bit of a delay in we put a date of May or first or June 1 or something just so that they have some time to get through winter, you know, and some changes and and kinda, I guess, act get a little more smooth transition through that so that they're not all of a sudden in two weeks, they gotta take care of all of the And where the city's The long city's budget

Yeah. Are here is kind of the opposite of ours. Yeah. We couldn't do through July. Longer we take Their budget, is that July 1? Yes. Then they need to start planning for this right now. Right. Gonna be a new thing on the budget? You're talking about, like, essentially signing a letter of intent to relinquish the road. Oh, no. We can pass it with an active date of July 1. Okay.

How does that affect the developer with their project that they want done yesterday. That it's it's

be the same issue. If we're we're not turning it over, they'd have to wait until then. So that that would that would be the the they'd have an end date at least. But

Dane, can you explain the issue with the development that they want to do and why our owning the road makes that problematic?

So so I speaking with with our I I believe it's county policy related to a road that's within another jurisdiction that we don't we don't agree to act access to our county road that affects another from the a municipality that we're not we don't have jurisdiction over. So they're trying to develop a subdivision that's in River Heights, but they need that access to that parcel through a county road. And so we don't want to interfere with the the city, and their their management of development by giving access through our road when they they might not be within their plans.

So could could we legally pass this resolution tonight with an effective date date of June 30 or July 1? Yes. And that would give them time then to work out all the details and they'll figure out how much class c money they'll be getting and they can plan it into their budgets?

Yeah. I think it's gonna be quicker than that. I think you could actually look in our next meeting, March 10. I think we'll have this resolved before March 10 between the three cities.

I would hope so because part of the problem of of us approving and not approving that development is the second access.

Mhmm.

They supposedly have an agreement to go through an LDS church parking lot for the second access is what I had understood. Is that correct, Dane? That that's what I've heard that there's But that's between them and River Heights. Right? Yeah. It sure will be. If we approve Shocking. The developer. So I'm I'm leaning to what George says. If we can have an answer by March 10 and then

satisfy the developer because we have strung this out a long time for those guys. I I think that makes the most sense to me rather than have an effective date so far from now because I I I think that gives more finality to the developer than having to wait all the way. I I think they'd rather wait until March 10 than July. K.

Okay. Did we get resolution on the bridge part of it too, or is that ours no matter what? Yeah. It is. It's the

county. Nobody wants it.

Including us. Yeah.

Nobody wants a bridge.

So are we Is that true? Are we to the bridge. Okay. We just basically we could just put it on hold until March 10 and then pass it that night. If we can get it cleared up by then, I think that's at least

Yeah. That's like that. That's time. Passed it anyway and it'll be cleared up. That's three weeks. That gives three weeks, basically. Yeah. Right.

K. So we'll continue that one as well then. If you do pass it tonight, it does the law doesn't go in effect until fifteen days. Two fifteen days. I was gonna say two weeks. Yeah. So if you do pass it tonight, it has two weeks.

But do we get anywhere if we pass it tonight? We're still at a bypass with the developer. Right?

If we absolve our no?

No. Not if we if we I get the sound of it. If we just pass it and we have no responsibility for it anymore,

then within fifteen days, that goes into effect. It comes up to River Heights Road, and they're now their access is it's a River Heights question. Andrew?

Feel free free to correct me, but my understanding was resolutions went past. Yeah. It became effective. All the states are It would be immediate. It's immediate on resolutions.

Are

Ordinances take fifteen days resolutions. Okay. So so you could put any other time limit because it is a resolution. That's not hasn't typically been the the practice of the council. I think if we hold off to the tenth, we're okay. Is that or I don't know. Someone wanna make a motion and If we do pass it tonight, Dean, does that allow the developer to have some forward motion, or where do you think that puts us? I I mean, it definitely would be board motion from where they're at. I I don't know what River Heights is gonna do. I I do think where there's where there are some discussions going on, Now you hate to hold that developer over and over again, but if it resolves if it if it make sure that there isn't all sudden litigation involving cities to do with that road that puts puts a hold. If there can be some type of agreement to see if there's just complete final into the whole thing, I think that benefits everyone.

Yeah. My only thought was if to basically give it to him right now, and then we walk away. I mean, we get the big storms that we got coming and just and just there's just some immediate things that still need to happen

at least during the this winter. Yeah. There I mean, there that that I think that is fair to this the city. Yeah. I I mean, if you did it right now, there's either the county's gonna have to go clear a city's road now over the next few days when we're supposed to get

eight inches of snow Yeah. Or the city's gonna have to figure that out. So I I mean, this this is all policy, though. This is that's just Dane's opinion. That's not Can I ask a question? How often are the road are the BNC road funds paid? Like, are we already been paid for the whole year for that? Or is it paid to the cities in July when at the beginning? Like, what's the quarterly?

Quarterly thing. Summer monthly, summer Okay.

So it's it's so that could happen pretty immediately. It's not like

we've passed this resolution and they don't You probably get paid twice per quarter. Q one. Pardon me? You probably get paid twice per quarter.

Oh, we don't complain when we just

k. So that's not a that's not a a something we need to worry about as we make this decision.

I I don't see what we gain by not passing this tonight, and I don't see if it hurts anybody if we did.

I I guess, to to Mark's point, is there any scenario where we picture ourselves retaining this road? If the answer is no because that would be a case for not keeping it. Is it just waiting more as a courtesy to have people figure out? Is that the

Our attorney just said if we could have some finality with the cities to avoid litigation, and that's just three weeks' time. I think I would much rather have some finality with cities to avoid litigation rather than rush to do it tonight.

And that and I I can't say there would be litigation. I just think that that Yeah. And and you never I mean, then some of it might not even necessarily involve the county, but it could be the developer and the city if I think there's I'm just trying to to crystal ball here what could potentially arise if we when we have have some discussions going on and we could have an agreement everyone's on board with, and there's some and that that's that's just me trying to project what could happen to,

frankly, help the developer make this as smooth as possible. Okay. So you're saying potential litigation from the city. I think I misunderstood. I thought it was potential litigation from a developer for delaying it. But Well, I mean, that

that's a potential for us, but I I I feel like I mean, if we were just doing nothing with it, but we we have whether it's tonight or in March, to answer your question, the council sounds like it's going to do this. So it's it's really can we do it as clean as possible? Yeah. And I think as clean as possible would be what the the executives kind of talked about here. And I and that that that really is is going beyond just a a legal opinion. That's just maybe just given the some deference to the city because we are just it really is kinda just sprung on them at at this point, that we're giving you some roads. So I don't I don't know if there's a a right or a wrong answer. That would just

k.

I I think I'm comfortable leaving this till the tenth and making a final resolution on the tenth. We'll we'll have more information from the cities. And hopefully, the River Heights can talk to the developer and let them know that it will be finalized that night. That it'll be a resolution that'll be effective immediately. Aren't the negotiations

only that Providence wants to maintain everything? I don't know. Isn't that all? Or what is what is being negotiated between the city? That's their business. That's our business. We should be in fact what we're doing. Had with Millville?

The problem is is with maintenance of the road and and whether it will be maintained to Providence standards or to Millville standards, and that's the issue that they're working through. Providence has expressed the willingness to maintain the whole length of the road at its expense provided it can get the class c road funds for the road, which are not adequate to pay all of the cost of maintaining a road. So Providence is is willing to do that and so they're trying to negotiate with the city and the state to see if they can pick up those class c road funds directly.

Or just have or Melville could just turn those over to them when they got them. Pardon me? Melville could just turn those over to them in agreement when they get them. Like this that's contract they have between each other. That's what we're trying to get arranged, Dave. Rather than have it

directly. Right. I'm doing so. So in any of that,

the county owning the road or turning it over makes no difference. One thing I consider is what Dave was saying. What if it snows six

16 inches tonight and the roads cloud tomorrow? Yeah. We can accommodate that. Yeah. Like, that's that was the That's not a that's the easiest of this whole discussion to resolve Yeah. I think out of the road. That that so, yeah, just to come back to my original question is

it's inevitable that we're gonna give up the road. But it sounds like it's a courtesy to do that, which is good enough for me. I just would like to get finality on that being the direction and the reason. And if that's the reason, great.

Yeah. Because I I think we're all courtesy to someone for three weeks. That's May I address that?

Let me just explain. Maybe I haven't explained what happened, but it was a state road. Yeah. And the state does regularly maintain roads through cities. And it's a benefit to the cities because they have a nice road maintained completely by the state through their city. The Department of Transportation said, we won't take over responsibility for the extension of 10th West out to Airport Road. We'll only go to 16th North or something unless county, you will take over our responsibility on this road.

And Smothers.

No. Actually, the agreement I saw was was this road only. The Hyde Park Lane was involved at one point. Was it? Okay. And I may not have focused on that, but that was how we ended up there. The cities had a road that was maintained by another party through their city. It doesn't say when this agreement terminates. I think we wanna get rid of this responsibility. We wanna detach the obligation, but it isn't really abundantly clear that the cities can't say, well, wait a minute. You said if we did that you would take responsibility for this. Logan stepped up and took responsibility for the road in their city. So we've never maintained that road. But the length that goes between about Ridgeline High School and Logan City, we've been maintaining for twenty years. About about twenty years. So what we're trying to do is is get out of that position, and I think I've got the cities agreeable to it. They're just trying to work out between themselves who's gonna pay for what. And there's there's some negotiation going on. I don't I don't wanna face an action by the cities trying to make us continue to maintain the road, so I'm anxious to work a settlement. Nobody has suggested yet that we can't disengage from running the road. So I'm focused on making an agreement with them. I have an agreement on my desk, that was drafted a year ago, I guess, or so. Yeah. Maybe two or three years ago, and I'm trying to get it done. And Ryan Snow, the manager of Providence, is is trying to figure out whether they each have to maintain their sections of it or whether they can agree between the three of them. Providence will do it and Providence will get the class c road funds. The last element was, can they get them directly or do they have to go to the city and then the city transferred them? That's that's what the issue that Ryan Snow was talking to me about. And Providence has a concern that the road be maintained to a certain standard, and that part of the reason why Providence is willing to be the active party to step in. So that I mean, there's more than just we'd sure like to get rid of the road. It's it's a series of promises and obligation between parties.

Wish they'd come to us and say, hey, we'll take them over and give you all the class zeros money for doing it, and then we maintain it. I don't think we need to worry about it. I'm not gonna worry about that now though, but that was never a thought before. But then now is a thought.

Dave, it is something to think about. We would even lose money with the class c vote. I know. But we would lose less money if it was class c than a class b. Totally agree.

Totally agree. I I just wanted to add something to that because I I I think as far as legally, I think we're on good legal grounds if to prevail if if that were to be the case, if if they wanted to challenge us having to take care of that road. But just the the fact that even that letter that the developer provided to us, I think there's some reference to This one? Yeah. The one we got tonight. Yeah. Yeah. There there's reference to the the road swap deal from twenty years ago. And so if if that is the position the cities are gonna take, if we do this with that when they were trying to work through that, that's going to that's going to at least delay further than the March 10 if there is some type of litigation, even if we would per would end up prevailing. And so my my thought is both for the county, for the courtesy to the cities, and to the developer, not to get this caught up where there's some type of litigation going on where a court's not letting us, turn that road over to the cities and saying you guys have to hold on to it while we figure this out with an injunction. We that that is a short amount of time to avoid all that if we can.

K. So does someone want to make a motion or

I'll make a motion that we continue this to March 10 as a courtesy to the to the cities involved.

K. And we actually, if we don't have to make take a motion to continue, we just if we don't do anything, it automatically continues. So we won't vote on that, but I think that's kind of does someone have a different motion or another direction that they would like to go to? Okay.

I can officially second that suggestion. Yes.

Okay. Perfect. Alright. So it is 05:35. We're gonna go do our public hearings. Okay. The first public hearing is the ambulance service request for proposal.

Council members, every four years, the state requires that the county, open for a bid process, the ambulance by on the south end of the of the county. Pursuant to that regulation, we opened, that bid process and legally noticed that process to begin in December. We received, one bid from an interested party who was interested in providing that ambulance service and that bid was, from our own fire department. And that was frankly expected. I don't think anybody else has the infrastructure or the desire to continue that. Accordingly, we received that RFP and a committee comprised of the executive, his and

Okay. Andrew, I don't see that in our packet. 7B1.

Didn't receive any any

Okay. I know we all got an email about it. It's under eight.

I believe it's under eight b.

Okay. There. We can look at that. Yeah. Okay.

Five sections to it.

Alright. So this is a public hearing. So thank you. We'll we'll turn this we'll open this up. Is there anyone here from the public that would like to speak to this proposal? K. Someone wanna move to close the Move to close the public hearing. Second. Moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? A seven b two, the frontage and access ordinance agreement.

Brian is at a conference, so I'm just logging in for him. Okay. This is a code amendment that addresses two items, lot frontage and then access. Currently, we have a code that states that a lot To build on a lot or parcel, you must have actual frontage on a public or private road. But there are It's a little confusing in the code because we have two different definitions for frontage. So this, amendment would propose to combine those and then it also would clarify the depth of that frontage. So as you can see on the image on this lower slide, we have a lot of people who wanna build back away from the road, but don't want the full width of a 90 foot frontage or their lot size. So they have started doing this kind of, neck, I guess you'd call it. So they get their 90 feet of frontage. And then as I mentioned, that second definition we have says, that frontage also has to be located at the front yard setback. So that's where that depth is coming from, that 30 feet. But then you can see there's this long narrow drive. They have to meet the minimum 20 foot wide driveway to go back to their home. Home.

And that that depth is is it just to, like, for example, in basically, the the width of the, right away the county's right away. Right? It's in this there or zipped?

So, yeah, it's the linear length along the the county right of way. Okay. But, yeah, that's the ex that extra 30 feet will just encompass basically giving all that to the county. No. No. That is actually not the right away. Way. That's part of their personal property, their private property. But it's just that depth that we're looking for because, we need to maintain area for mailboxes and utilities and all that out of the county right of way. So this helps provide, you know, again, area for utilities, mailboxes, refuse containers, drainage, etcetera. So, that's why we have that certain depth and it's not just like a one foot or one inch. We need a substantial amount. So does that answer your question? Yeah. This ordinance takes the two opposing

definitions that are in the current ordinance and puts it

clarifies it down into what was written in red. Correct. So you have to go to the next. Yeah. So the red, we would take away the second, Correct. So you have to go to the next. Yeah. So the red, we would take away the second definition that basically said the same thing. It just had the additional information about the depth that's required, and we just add that into the lot parcel frontage definition just so it's very clear. And then the next slide, that's gonna be

one more. Yeah. I didn't understand this slide. What's the red what's the red line? Okay.

And then, yeah, when when we get to it, we also added a line onto our standards table, that just addresses that depth as well, so it's very clear. So the second part of the ordinance and what's included in the definition also is primary access to a parcel or lot shall be from the required frontage abutting that road, street, or highway right of way that we've established with that minimum frontage. And that image with the red line. So we went through the whole subdivision process. This is how that parcel was platted out with that frontage to the road that goes north south there on the west side, and then they were going to go back and build their house on the larger square. Turns out after we went through all the subdivision process, reviewed it for frontage development standards, and assigned it an address, the property owner decided they didn't want to put a driveway through the middle of the ag, property, which makes sense. But now instead, they wanna come off the road to the south, go through the barnyard, to access their property.

Is that their property or somebody else's property? Family members. Okay. They're related.

So, yeah, it works for now, but obviously, if the property ownership changes in that, it would be difficult. But again, this change to the code that says that that frontage you established that's required should be also where you access the property. So that would help prevent scenarios like this. I know our fire district and public works had to go out multiple times to do site visits on this to make sure it would work, to make sure there's adequate clearance and everything. And it should just never have been a question in the first place. So

This is very common.

Is it that common, Matt? It is common, I think, in some ways when people are trying to establish that frontage.

Yeah. They're just trying they're just trying to get the frontage and everything and they're still gonna use the access that comes through

grandpa's place anyway. Yeah. I feel like I haven't seen it a lot, but if Matt has. But, again, that's something we're trying to correct so that we're not going out and doing multiple visits, trying to establish that that it is established and clear during the subdivision process.

Not in favor of that.

There is an exemption and a variance process for it though. That would be under the director. The director also oversees variances for maximum structure height and minimum setback distances. So this would be if they had a good argument for wanting to come in through a different access point other than that required frontage, we do have a procedure in place for that. So that would be also added to the code. And then that cleanup item there on the flood permit was just to put that back where it belongs with the county engineer.

So that's really a non issue there. What kind of well, this never mind because we'll get to a public hearing. Okay. Did anybody have any other questions? That would be

the end of my presentation unless you had questions. And we did have some exemptions also for the FR 40 zone that was presented to Planning Commission, but they determined decided to look at that more closely and revisit it. So this really just applies to a 10, r u two, r u five, not f r 40.

Thank you, Angie. Mhmm. Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone from the public that would like to speak to this proposal, this ordinance? Anybody?

K. Move to close the public hearing.

Second. Beat you. Moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. So now we can go to the consideration of action. So the frontage and you want if you're still there, that we're gonna go to this one first because it's on our agenda first. I had a question about the the variance that you're giving for the director. Is was there some like, a variance of a certain percentage, or is there any structure? Is it just totally a personal

opinion? That would be

no. There's actually state requirements,

thresholds you have to meet in order to receive a variance for land use. Okay. So there will be some structure to it, and it's set in state code. I just didn't want that to be really ambiguous, like, well, the director wants to give you a variance. No. No. Yeah. There's strict standards. It includes, why enforcement

would create an unreasonable hardship for that property owner, what special circumstances are present on that property that are not present on other properties that would do them service by not allowing them to have a different access. Okay. Those types of So the director's responsibility is to make sure we follow the company. Yeah. K. Or accept a ham and a soda pop. I know. I know. Punch in the country club.

We still wanna have the open up that kind of a situation. Right? No. I agree. I'm still a little worried about this the primary access.

I think a lot of these were established and then they are using other accesses because they are family. Mhmm. But if they ever do sell, then they would probably tell the new buyer, say, well, your access is now gonna be over here. And that that they're you know, they'll have to then put in the cost of it, whatever it is at that point. They just don't wanna put in those costs. They just did it to get it past, you know, the the zoning regulations at that time.

You have a true point there, but this one actually came back to the Planning and Zoning Commission because initially, if I'm right, Angie, they brought in, filed the application, and then as the process went through, they showed they were gonna try to go through the barnyard.

Okay.

Because we ended up hearing it again. It changed when it never

came into the zoning clearance, was the access.

I don't recall this because really the only way we can stop that is if we have the code enforcer out there checking on things because

Well, if you put this in place Then yeah. You know, if you say it's that gonna that's gonna be their primary access. If they just have it there, it's all file you know, they they got the right access points, the width, all that stuff put together. They just haven't built that road. But the drive the long drive Then if they do sell it, then that has to be the buyers would need to know and say, hey. This is gonna be your access. You're not coming through the barns again.

Shouldn't have to come before occupancy is granted. Well, I was gonna say, and that changes access as far as mailings, as far as how the fire department gets there, all of those things. Yeah. I I kinda think we need to stick with this to

I think you're gonna affect a lot of people that have actually they went in there and they they did those things to get the permit and And then went around. And and then well, all you could say went around and say, well, but this is already established. This past fire code, everything's fine? We're not gonna go backwards and and like, this is for new proposals. Correct? Or how does that work? Father to Henry? Yeah. This is just to codify it, which should be a best practice

to access the line item. Would come with occupancy

couldn't be granted until the public infrastructure was built as the plan or to process that. That's right. On the subject of code enforcement,

I heard 20 feet is the width for the driveway. Is that

So the fire district requires a minimum 20 foot wide all weather surface in order to access That's what I was gonna ask next is the surface. And

to Dave's point, if people just pass that to or did that to pass code, are there a lot of driveways that aren't in all weather surface that have

So, the growing in them and stuff that could be an issue for a potential buyer, I guess. Because, again, when they go through that subdivision process, that's when the address is established, or when they go through the zoning clearance and they're showing their access, that's when the address is established also, and where the fire, you know, puts it in their database so that they can easily find the location. If the asks access says it's on this road, but it's actually here and there's an emergency, that's gonna cause some confusion. So, again, this was clarification on that point as well. Because I think a potential buyer could also report a code violation prior to the purchase if they wanted to make an issue out of that too instead of negotiating it. Yeah. That would all be done on the civil end too because if the house is already built and they're just doing property exchange, they're gonna have to I would worry about if they sell it without informing the the new buyer. Like, what would the requirements be on the title to to say

that you you you really have to access from over here. You can't go through the buyer. Recorded though? Yeah. I think on this one, it'd be recorded. Should be tied with occupancy. Right? Yeah. Am I am I am sticking in saying that out loud?

It it is not I mean, there is a when we review a development for a new home or structure, fire district is looking at that access point, make sure making sure it's meeting their requirements and everything. And that is confirmed prior to construction for the access itself, just in case there's emergencies while building. Okay. But yeah. To pass this, they have to build it that way. But that's the way it would appear. Before the house is

livable.

Yes. So if they did come back later, you're right. They would be in violation of what was approved on their zoning cards and all. Addresses the concerns so long as we enforce it that way. Yeah.

So this is an initial proposal. Does someone want to make a motion or do we wanna give it another give it another few weeks to look at it? I would accept either way. Okay. I'm ready. K. If there's no motion on that, then we will put it on our pending items for March 10. We're gonna have a lot on March 10, and you're not gonna be here.

I'll mention this was approved six o with the from the planning commission.

Yeah. K. Alright. Eight b, a resolution supporting the renewal of the Cache County Fire District ambulance service license for the twenty twenty six, twenty twenty nine license period. Does anyone have questions for Matt, or do you wanna discuss that? I think this is a pretty cut and dried oh, there was only one proposal and it's it's for the license that the county owns. We have to redo this every is it every three years we have to do it? Every four years? Move to pass resolution twenty twenty six zero eight. Suspend your oath, you know? It's a resolution? It's already out. Oh, it's a resolution. So you don't have to suspend that? No. It's a resolution. And somebody needs to give me a list. I'm sorry.

Okay. I'll try it again. Try it again. Would you please thank you. Move move to pass resolution twenty twenty six zero eight. The resolution supporting the renewal of the Cache County Fire District Ambulance Service license for twenty twenty six two through 2029

licensing period. I'll second it.

K. It's been moved and seconded that we pass resolution 2026Dash008. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. I think that's the end of our main agenda items. I think we need to excuse our executive. Do you need to leave?

Thank you.

I mean, I you don't need my permission to leave, but I will get a Diet Coke for you soon. You stay.

I've got a funeral I gotta go to. Yeah. Well It's not.

K. Online board of equalization training. Has everyone registered for the either the full day or the two hour online training? The follow-up info on that. Get that done. Yeah. I got an email back saying I registered, and it mentioned July 1. They will they will they have not even made they haven't even made it yet. Date on that. Yeah. Well, they have to have it to us before July 1. So they just put that as their Okay. If you registered, then it's the burden now is on them. Yeah. They'll send it to you. So one thing that that we should probably discuss as a council, we never really came to a complete firm Did it use resolution that we are gonna do all of the board of equalization hearings ourselves or have a hearing officer that we pay, or do we wanna do a hybrid where we where we contact someone who may be willing to be that hearing officer, they go through the training with the state, and then as we schedule ourselves for equalization hearings, if there's a gap, we can contact that person and say, hey. Can you fill in these dates? I don't know. If if if we want to do that, if we wanna do a hybrid, we need to get somebody contacted so they can take the training. If we want to completely hire it out, we need to have that person we also need to go through that process and see what it's gonna cost. But, I mean, we have to take this training regardless. So does anyone do you guys wanna discuss how you feel about those those hearings and what you want to do, about a hearing officer?

There's pros and cons. There are. I've sat in with citizens, and it's helped me understand their situation, calls I got from up in the FR forty. It made me aware of that. In fact, it opened up some things I think we need to investigate as a county. But on the other hand, I've sat through some meetings that have made some citizens mad. But, and that's a lot of time that it takes out, especially for those who of us who work. But I honestly think if we sit down and work it, Diane's been pretty good to work with our schedules and stuff like that. So from my standpoint, I think it keeps us connected for the for the citizens, but that's just my opinion.

K. Anybody else wanna weigh in on that?

I think I've said this before. Again, it's time. It's connection with citizens, but also it's completely subjective to whoever is the person the the hearing officer of the day, whether it's a person that has training and has any level of expertise. And I'm not I'm not being critical of anybody on the council because I think we all have good intentions, but it's completely subjective to whatever that person's level of of of of experience and expertise is. So for it to be uniform uniformly applied, a hearing officer is is, I think, the more fair approach to apply it to all

that are petitioning there. Yeah. I understand that. But I will say Diana said that if it comes to a green belt thing, she has tried to get Dave and or I on that because both he and I have green belt and have situations on it. So that has been a difference on it.

I kind of my my thoughts are that we do a little bit of a hybrid that we I I think there is still some great value into doing some of those ourselves, even though there is maybe some in in it's not always the same, but I think that we have such good staff in our in our assessor's office that we're guided well and we have learned over the years. But I also think that the time commitment is is pretty intense, and that if we had somebody designated as a hearing officer that could step in and fill in sometimes, that that might not be a bad idea. I don't know what that would cost. I don't I I think there's some good, recommendations from here that we could find here in the Valley. Somebody I think it's I I think the the hard part would be if we hired a hearing officer that doesn't live in Cache County to hear those things. I just think that our citizens would not be, open to that. I think they need to feel like there's somebody who understands Cache Valley or understands their properties.

Have we hired somebody to help with Diane so they're sitting for the next

BOE? We set that I don't know. We talked about that. I don't know if she's hired somebody. Do you know, Matt, if she's been able to hire somebody as

somebody to working on on on that. Okay. The council didn't wanna overlap that with the current staff or anticipate that happening in probably

Okay. Some succession planning there. Yeah. Diana needs Diana is very good at that. We need somebody who gets up to par there. Mhmm.

K. Anyway, we we don't this is not like a motion or anything tonight, but let's be thinking about that and maybe, make a decision. Because if we have to designate someone as our hearing officer, either full time or even as a part time hybrid situation, we need to be getting that person registered to take these classes.

So with that, the I mean, the the truth in taxation hearings take place over, I don't know what, a month long period. So by full time, do we mean full time during that month? Or Board of equalization. Is that what you're referring to? Yeah. They're usually on Tuesdays and Thursdays. So it's not it it wouldn't be a full time job, but they would do all of the equalization board of equalization hearings. Okay. And by hybrid, you mean some would be with the officer an an officer and some would be with the council? Council. Okay. Because I I I think Katherine's onto something with a consistent experience. I think what you're trying to say is Dave's a softie, but you didn't wanna say it out loud.

I'm just kidding. Dave, I didn't even I wouldn't even list them, to be honest with

you.

It's okay. That's the absolute minimum standard of being a council member. But You said you said something before, and I was just taking that on a on a tangent in my mind. So You're good.

I thought that was a good comeback for being slammed. So so either way, both sides won. Yeah.

Anyway I thought he wouldn't listen to me is what he was saying.

Well, let's all listen to each other here. It is valuable, valuable education for

a member of the council to learn those things. Mhmm. I can tell you, you have a deeper understanding of taxation in general, and how it relates in the whole process after you've sat down in those. And and and listen. Yeah. There's some complaining. There's some whining. Take a little cheese and give it to them for their with their wine. But, yeah, most of them, they're trying to understand. And then when it is education's given to them, most of them pretty well understand the whole process, and and they look a little bit deeper next time and find out, oh, I'm not paying that as much taxes to the Cache County

as what I thought I was. Or if we had that material that we had for that open public meeting that George showed It's gone.

That was Yeah. That would be eye opening. Sorry to interrupt. You're okay. Yeah. I was just gonna say with the officer, I think we get consistency, and then I think there's less I don't know what the right word is. There's if it's someone in your district, if there's pressure to not upset that person because they're a potential constituent or voter, I think it having a an equalization officer removes that component. I do think that it would still be good for council members to sit in on those hearings, especially the ones that are in their geographic area to because I think the understanding is important. I just don't know that the execution of the decision I mean, we have the final decision still. Yeah. So I just wanna remind I think we all know that. But just to to to state that in terms of this discussion, we still approve those at the end. We are still involved. We still have a say. Yeah. We we we actually to body. So that's not going anywhere, but I I do think those recommendations are more likely to be consistent and fair if

It's an office It happened with the discussion about having the executive included as one of the people sitting in. That would spread out the workload so it wouldn't be as many sessions for each one of us. I know we talked about that, but I can't remember why that became something we weren't talking about. And in addition to that, we had had a discussion

about existing staff receiving the training to be

certified as one of the Very knowledgeable. As the hearing officer. We talked about maybe somebody in the attorney's office, but I don't know. So but back to the executive question. Yeah. I don't remember what we've Do you remember why we stopped talking about that being one of the options? Well, I

years ago, Executive Butters, he, as a matter of fact, he was almost there for most of them for the you know, during that whole BOE. He was all seemed to be like one of the two during most of the BOE, and he participated in all those knowing that everyone else, you know, were was working. And he took up that time. And then when the executive changes, you know, it became filled with all of us. So So there's lots it sounds like we don't really have a I don't know the legalities of it. I think he just Yeah. It could mean if, you know, ultimately, the

final say on it all happens here with this body in one of these meetings. It doesn't Hearing officers may correct me. The question was, is it that the executive cannot be a part of that? And it goes to all the points we're trying to make, The the continuity, you got someone that's consistently there more often. There it helps spread out the workload that each of us have to bear there. I'm I I quite enjoy it even though it is sometimes really tough to have to tell somebody who's made a good case, but it's would be inequitable to give them what they want. We we are consistent. That's why it's the board of equalization. But and then the third thing would be that instead of having to hire someone, we are utilizing someone who's already a full time employee to shoulder some of that burden. So I would like to throw that back on the table if we don't remember that it's not possible. So if we can get some answers on that Yeah. We have a test. A task for Andrew or if that's a question in the attorney's office. Diana.

That's a good idea. See there's some legality to the

But at the same time, staff, every time you go in there, has a pretty good case as to why the county is where they're at. So it's Yeah. Yeah. It's well researched. It's it's very well documented. I don't think I've ever gone against the staff because they have some such good data and everything that way. So it helps that the staff is there when we present even if was even with it is a constituent or whatever. Because And the staff is the ones dependent. Yes. And he appeals later, and and they're they're prepared.

Yeah. They're really prepared. One hearing that I was in that I thought the the constituent made a really good case. And the assessor was in there, and he said, these are the this is why I'm gonna stand behind my guy. And I said, okay. If this person takes it to the state appeals board, do you feel like you can defend this? And he says, absolutely. I said, okay. Then I'm gonna I'm gonna back you up on that. And so,

anyway A lot of the standard for the call and the reason falls upon the staff and their research and what they've got as far as appraisals and everything else.

Okay. Well, let's we have to figure this out soon. We don't have to figure it out tonight, but it it sounds like we've got several different let's let's find out if Andrew can find out from Diana whether we can include the executive in the training. And I would maybe suggest maybe a previous assessor or someone from that office that is no longer working there that might have the time to take the training and help us out off and on. Or or like Catherine says, maybe they would be willing to spend the whole month of August doing it. And then we could join as wanted. So there's there's three different option. There's a couple different options. We either hire someone to do it. We do it all ourselves. We do a hybrid.

Find someone that is not enjoying their retirement and and ask them to do it.

Alright. Everybody keep thinking about that, and let's let's figure that out. Was the original training

I I put it in my calendar as It's March. Okay. So I can That's canceled. And we don't need that. We don't need those dates. Thank you.

K. The NACO conference, I'm going on Friday. I'm so excited. I'll tell you how it goes. Mhmm. The UAC conference in April, has everyone looked at their calendars and given Andrew have you got everyone registered that can go?

So far, I have received

five yeses, and I've registered four of you. Okay. Okay. So it starts on Wednesday No. You need that. The twenty eighth? That's the board meeting. That'll just be the board meeting that night. Council meeting the '20 do we have amend that?

We have council meeting on the twenty eighth.

And it's all the way down to Saint George now? To Saint George. Yeah. Uh-huh.

So Okay. I didn't look at that. Yeah. '28, this counts me.

You guys just take just you guys just come down on the twenty ninth early for eight and be there by 08:00. I'd rather leave my house early and sleep on You leave right after council meeting. You can come down.

Oh, that's yeah. We might need to amend our schedule on that. That's okay. So that we can do that and meet on the twenty first. K. I'll work on that with Andrew, Catherine, and I will look at that. Thank you for looking at that date. I thought it was a Thursday and Friday. It is Thursday and Friday. And, no, it's Wednesday and Thursday. You're dumb. I know. Why wouldn't they put it up against a weekend? I don't know. Give that feedback. I will do that because they listen to me.

K. Alright. Who's today?

K. This has gone off the rails. Does anybody have any reports that they wanna give? Mark, let's start with you. Do you got

Just the the library board slash executive have scheduled and rescheduled and scheduled and rescheduled the the next library board meeting multiple times. Currently that yet? No. Haven't been able to meet with the new board that was appointed last week. There was several dates that have been set and then canceled. Currently, it's the next meeting is set for March 2 at 5PM in this room.

K. Thank you. Anything else?

Well, Andrew has renewed our efforts to be in contact with those involved at the ice arena slash the North Park interlocal agreement. So we're still pursuing establishing a board meeting timeline. So there's we've got some great questions, but we we need to get the board to actually meet. So still working on that. The $80,000 is dried out. It's it's Long time. It is Definitely part of the discussion. We gotta resolve all that. We're done.

Okay. Dave.

Legislative down there, I tell you, it is ramping up and it's it is I mean, it's going crazy right now. They have, I believe it's it been really interesting in committees. They're actually been very picky as to what they're moving on, and there's fewer and fewer. I think that there's been from leadership down there, they've come down and said, hey. We're passing too many bills. And literally, they're becoming they're scrutinizing a lot more of the bills and there's fewer that's actually coming out. So I think there'll be a a lot of them that'll get dropped. I'm hoping there's some of them that will be. But they're just fewer. They're just numbers overall numbers are are quite a bit. Wasn't it something like 800 that were proposed? Yeah. But just getting them through but even committee committees, if there's fewer and fewer of those that are are being sent through. So Yep. Anyway, it's it's ramping up. I tell you, it's it's it's getting pretty pretty wild right now. So other than that, I don't have any. Okay.

Catherine?

We had another fire board meeting. I'd like to say we had made a lot of progress. But I don't know if I can quite say that. Oops. That's safe to say. But maybe incremental progress. And so we're still working on moving forward with the fire board. That's all I've got to say.

You're still the chair. You're still the chair. And I'm still the chair. Anything else? That's all. Okay. Nolan. Hey. Keegan. Nope. Joanne. I have questions. K.

Please. Mhmm. I'm confused about the the size of the subdivision

thing. You know, it says 7 and that says 3 and that The three was a mistake. It should have always said seven. Oh. The three was a typographical error. And we're that's why we're gonna have that workshop on March to to to hash out all the details on that. So does the county, as a rule, have subdivisions or not? Or is that rare? Or is that Subdivision is that's just what they call any development that has more than

The county has many

subdivisions. There are many subdivisions in the county. They're not ours. Anytime that county doesn't hide.

Let's clarify

that. So it says that there's one residence per 10 acres. That's It's it's zoned a 10. A 10. So what makes the seven

Seven homes. If they it's seven lots. Anything over seven lots. And so they but they have to be on 10 acres if they're zoned a 10. That's why there are some people who come to us and would like us to zone their property a five. They or r five. They want to go to five acre lots.

Increase the density.

So, r five gives how many, lots? One per five acres. One per Depends on how many. Two is one for two acres. Is that the deal? Yep. And then so they are requesting variances in that.

Or just A rezone. They just want us to change the zone. And then they can once once we change a zone, then that gives them a lot of leeway to do what they want.

K.

Thank you. You bet. Anytime you have questions, call somebody in. I remember there were lots when I started.

K. Nolan's number is Yeah. Call Nolan.

Well, it's very interesting to me to watch the the planning commission and their deliberations. I enjoy that. I've I've listened to the last two.

Yeah. They go through a lot. Great. I do have a question. Andrew,

any update on their planning commission compensation?

So for the research that I have conducted, I believe you would have to be part of the compensation package that's done for all county officers. It would be appointed

I know Logan City pay used to pay $25 and then they paid 50 per meeting. Nibley pays 50. So I don't know why the county would be held to a different standard unless there's something in the code. I think that it can be changed. It would just have to be set

per By us.

Yep. Dane, do you know anything on that? Because we asked about that before. Legal came back and said we were held.

And I'd I'd have to I remember looking at that that issue. I can't remember why we came to that conclusion, so I can look at that again and get with Andrew. As far as per year, I mean, you technically if that's the only thing holding it up, you could change that through an ordinance and have a public hearing about changing their compensation. That doesn't have to necessarily be just once per year, but it does require a public hearing when you're changing anything that's related to the compensation of the county officer. So Sounds good. But I I can look more into because I I remember this issue coming up. We we looked into it. It'd be interesting to see if there is anything that's snagging that to be done. To be done. Yeah. I I'll look into that again and get with you. Cool. Thanks.

K. Somebody wanna make a motion to adjourn? Let's go home. Second. Done.

Maybe you posed. Nobody opposed.