Cache County Council Regular Meeting – 02-10-2026

Okay. Just one of you guys, maybe I'll frame it.

That would bode well if someone else took it for you in here.

On that particular issue.

Yeah. Hey. It's 05:00. Is everybody ready? Ready. Go ahead and get started. It's 05:00. Thank you all for being here. Close your ears, Nolan. Hey. I have to be official. Welcome, everybody. Thank you for coming to our county council meeting. We appreciate your attendance. We'll go ahead and start with an opening by council member Keegan Garrity.

Yes. So over the weekend, some of us attended a Lincoln dinner. This is to honor Abraham Lincoln, whose birthday is Thursday, I believe. So for this week, I wanted to share three quotes that have been attributed to Abraham Lincoln. There may be some questioning on the certainty of that attribution, but I'm just gonna share them, because I think they're good principles. And, so I'll go to that point. So, the first one is, Abraham Lincoln was attributed to say, I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. The implication saying that is, the more we get to know people that we work with and are around, and understand their motivations, that will come to empathize and appreciate them. An example of how he lived that is, history tells us that one of his significant steps was to appoint people to his cabinet that were opponents and competitors to the job of president, and I think that demonstrates, the ability to want to hear from other people. The next quote is, give me six hours to chop down a tree, and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe. So this principle became the basis for Stephen Covey's book, Seven Habits. One of the habits is Sharpen the Saw. And in that, he emphasizes the need for regularly investing time, and effort into renewing and strengthening four key dimensions of one's life. Physical, mental, emotional, social, and spiritual. And then, the last one, and I actually have a bonus quote, so second to last one. He said, You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. So well deception, shifting blame, manipulation, or some of the other dirty tricks you see in politics might work in the short term, the truth will always prevail. And then the bonus quote, that I think demonstrates Lincoln's self awareness, wit, and humor. He said, if I were two faced, would I be wearing this one? So one I can relate to. Please stand and join me in 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 God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Alright. Thank you, Keegan. And I was not here at our last meeting, and I know it was our new council members, Joanne Bennett's first meeting last time. Thank welcome again. Thank you. We're glad to have you with us.

We will review and approve the agenda. Does anyone wanna make a motion for that, please?

Move to approve.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the agenda. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. What about the minutes from the January 20 and January 27 meetings?

I will move to approve.

Second. K. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the minutes from the January County Council meetings. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. Alright. We'll move to a report from our County Executive and appointments.

We're beginning to get our appointments cleared up. I'd like to start with appointment to the weed control board. I ask for your advice and

a motion about those? I move to approve the

set appointments.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the appointments to the Cache County Weed Control Board. Is there any discussion? K. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay.

I am also working on reconstituting the Airport Authority Board. There's a a series of changes that need to be made in the governing documents involving the board, and there will be further changes and further development of how the board is sitting at this point. I would I would ask for the appointment reappointment of chairman John Kerr, and the new appointment of David t Cowley, who is a vice president of the university to the airport authority board. No other changes are are suggested at this time, but there will be further changes, I believe, after we work together on the documents.

Move to approve these two.

Second.

So moved and seconded that we approve David Cowley and John Kerr to the Airport Authority Board. Is there any further discussion? Yeah. I just wanna point out that will leave,

an eight member board, if I'm not mistaken. Pardon me? That'll leave an eight member board.

It will be temporary.

Yeah. He can I just wanna point that out?

K. Thank you. Alright. Any other further discussion? Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Okay. Lastly, I would like to propose new members of the Cache County Library Board. I'm making three appointments of the mayors who are in the area of the library, the mayors of Millville, River Heights, and Providence. Mayor Alder is here from Providence. So the appointments would be Kathleen Alder, Mayor of Providence. Blake Wright, Mayor of River Heights, and Dave Herr, Mayor of Millville. I'm also proposing to name Laura Smith, who is the librarian of the Richmond Library, and Jesse Eiman, who is the librarian of the Mendon City Library. So those five, there are a number of terms of existing, library board members that have expired. Some of those are council people who we will ask to continue to serve ex officio on the board.

How many members does that give total to that board then?

I believe I believe with these five appointments, there will be seven, and there will be a number of ex officio as well. But

Mark But none of those none of those other ones changed. Like, there's nobody that's term had not expired that is going to be That's changed. I'm not releasing anyone. Okay. I just wanted to clear that up. Mark continues to be

at on the board, and he would be one of the ex official on the board.

K. K. I would accept a motion for these appointments.

I'd make the motion that we accept the proposed appointments.

I'll second that. K. It's been moved and seconded that we approve these five names as members of the Cache County Library Board. Is there any further discussion? Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. Perfect. I will sign all those, George, before we leave tonight. Yeah. K. Alright. Is there any other do you have any other business? I I don't have any other business. K. Great. Alright.

We appreciate mayor Alder being here, and we look forward to receiving a report from the new library board.

K. Alright. Item six, appointment of an acting county attorney for Utah for a cash county per Utah code 20ADash1Dash509.3.

Okay. Madam chair, we intended to do this. Pardon? When did you intend to have this? What is it? Reclamation proclamation.

Oh, I will do that. You know what? I'm gonna do that first. Okay. Yep. Do that right now. I'm sorry. I forgot to Of course. I just didn't wanna miss my Before we we before we enact an acting attorney, before we vote on an acting attorney for the next five minutes, we still have Taylor Sorensen with us in the room. And so we're gonna have a little proclamation

read for Taylor. K. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you. So I will now read a proclamation recognizing and honoring Kay Taylor Sorensen for his service as the Cache County Attorney. Whereas Kay Taylor Sorensen served as the Whereas Kay Taylor Sorensen served as the interim county attorney for Cache County from 01/09/2024 to 01/07/2025, providing steady leadership and ensuring the continuity of essential legal services during a significant transitional period and whereas Taylor has subsequent was subsequently sworn in as the Cache County attorney on 01/07/2025 serving until 02/08/2026 and whereas throughout his tenure, Taylor demonstrated exceptional legal acumen representing the interests of the county and its residents with professionalism and a commitment to the rule of law and whereas Taylor's background in legislative and municipal affairs provided a valuable foundation for managing the complex civil and criminal matters inherent in Cache County's in the Cache County Attorney's Office and whereas his ability to provide clear counsel and his meticulous approach to public policy significantly benefited the county council and various county departments throughout his service And whereas, Taylor navigated the unique pressures and responsibilities of his position seeking to fulfill the obligations of his office during a demanding period of the county. And whereas, Taylor has now concluded his service as the county attorney having applied his professional focus to the county's legal affairs and provided a period of active involvement. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Cache County does hereby recognize and honor Kay Taylor Sorensen for his dedicated and irreplaceable service and thanks him for his steady hand, his intellectual rigor, and his earnest legal service during his tenure as Cache County attorney. Thank you, Taylor. Thank

you. Yes. Okay. Madam chair, I move to accept proclamation recognizing and honoring Kay Taylor Sorensen.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we accept this proclamation honoring Kay Taylor Sorensen. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. Thank you, Taylor. K. Now we can move to six a.

Heard a sign as well as that. Okay.

Madam chair, as we are now needing to appoint a an interim or excuse me, an acting county attorney, I move that we appoint deputy attorney Dane Stewart Murray as the acting county attorney for Cache County. Second.

K. It's been moved and seconded that we appoint Dane Murray as the acting county attorney. Is there any further discussion?

You want to? Yes. I'll do.

Thank you. It's a it's a fair point.

K. Would this be an appropriate time for maybe our clerk to explain how the process works and the difference between acting and interim? Sure. Yeah. So acting is Bryson, do you want Yeah. Please. Oh, yeah. I just think it'd be good to get on the record. Yeah. So the acting county attorney is, in replacement of when we don't have, attorney in place. So this acting, county attorney will be the attorney until an interim attorney is appointed and then that interim attorney will then be unappointed when we have a new elected attorney come November. Well sworn in January.

Okay. Questions, concerns? Okay. Thanks. Thanks. I just wanna say that it's very important that we have someone designated at all times as our acting attorney. There there's no telling what could happen tonight that we would need the services of an attorney that has the authority to act until such time as we go through the process of replacement that has been laid out by the party by the Republican Party. K. So it's been moved and seconded that we appoint Taylor. Those in favor say Dane. Oh, Dane. Taylor's gone. We appoint Dane Murray. Sorry. I'm gonna keep doing that. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Dane. We appreciate you. Okay. Brett Robinson, our county assessor.

Thank you, counsel, for having me. And thank you, Andrew, for getting this presentation organized and facilitate this important discussion. Council Chair Goodlander requested to discuss the interplay between real property assessment and centrally assessed property. Gaining a comprehensive understanding of this relationship is essential as we work together to make the most informed and beneficial decisions for the citizens of Cache County. Can you go to slide four? Okay. First skip. We'll just talk about this for just a minute. The inherent nature of certain industries such as railroads, mines, public utilities, and major pipelines is that they often span vast distances, crossing multiple county and taxing authority lines. This geographical reach makes assessment by individual local county assessors impractical, highly inconsistent, and prone to inequity. To ensure a standardized, equitable, and efficient valuation process across the entire state, the state of Utah intervened years ago. The state, through the centralized assessment process process, values these properties as a single operating economic unit. Today, this task is managed by the property tax Division of the Utah State Tax Commission. This division is tasked with the annual valuation of all mines, oil and gas operations, major public utilities, and transportation properties. While the State Tax Commission is responsible for determining the total value of these centrally assessed assets, the resulting property tax revenue is not. Crucially, the assessed value is meticulously apportioned back to the individual counties and local tax areas where the property exists. To ensure the tax revenue directly supports the local services and infrastructure used by the county residents. Let's go to nine and ten. We get into, Cash County, and maybe you've seen this or were sent this, this slide, so you maybe have a heads up on this. But slide 10 is perhaps the most salient point for our local context relative to the size of centrally assessed property. In Cache County, centrally assessed property constitutes approximately two percent of our total overall taxable value. This figure stands in stark contrast to the statewide average, especially in more rural and resource dependent counties. Many of our rural counties rely much more heavily on centrally assessed property taxes, particularly those with significant mining, major oil and gas infrastructure, and large scale power generation facilities. For Cache County, however, the bulk of our tax revenue is derived from locally assessed real and personal property. The vast majority of the small percentage of centrally assessed values we do have in Cache County is derived from utility infrastructure. So gas lines, electrical

lines, those sort of things. So, Brett, are you saying that 65,800,000.0 is our portion of the centrally assessed in our county? Or what what tell explain what we're looking at, or is that that can't be right. That's gotta be So all counties together. Right?

I think the 65.8 and the three zero two together constitute the 2%. So the much bigger number is approximately 18,000,000,000. I know that I don't love this slide. It says eighteen zero one three point nine m, but it's $18,000,000,000 is what that number is. That's for the whole state? No. That's for Cache County.

Oh, is it a million? Value of our Okay.

Oh, yeah. $3.68.6 is million. So that's 18,013 million. So there's a that's a but I think it's 18,000,000,000

is what we have. The taxable value

so it's I mean, the main point is is just a fraction of of our money coming in is centrally assessed. Okay.

And then of that 2%, the 65,000,000 is from the utilities as you described. 65.8

is natural resources.

Okay. Yeah. So that it's what it's showing. So I looked at this slide before, and it's confusing because a thousand million is a billion. So it'd be Yeah. If it's an 18,000,000. And then of the 2%, it's it's showing the the composition of the that 2%, which gives us empathy for when we try to explain property tax. And we're like, the county's portion is 20% of the 100%. So Yeah. We're now it's our turn to Yeah. Try and interpret this.

But I would love to take credit for this slide presentation, but it's the states, and they do 29 of these. So this is just our slide presentation for for our county.

And that value is always in dispute.

Yeah. In the courts, mostly. At least they use color blind friendly colors. They don't usually do that. So I appreciate that. Slide 11

is interesting to kinda provides valuable trend data highlighting a shift in our county's tax tax based composition. Locally assessed real and personal property has continued to exhibit a strong sustained upward trend fueled by growth in housing and and commercial. Conversely, centrally assessed property has steadily dropped as a percentage of the total taxable value indicating that the growth in local property values has far outpaced the growth in utility and other centrally assessed property values. So slide 12 is the next slide, and you probably have dug into this a little bit, but this question is important. What's causing the shift? And this slide is actually eleven years, 2015 through 2025. And the blue there is the real property, and that has roughly tripled. This immense growth reflects the significant volume of new homes, subdivisions, commercial buildings added to the tax roll, as well as appreciation to those existing properties. It's vital to know that this is a measure of the total tax value of all properties, not a claim that the value of any single house is tripled. Personal property is, should I say orange? Peach, that's more than doubled in those eleven years, so that has had substantial increase as well. Utilities, it's interesting, has roughly stayed the same. It had a bump, but it's roughly the same as it was in 2015. And so I'm just gonna, I mean, we're a little short on time. I'm just gonna say, those utilities companies, the gas companies, and the electrical mostly, those are valued based on their income. And the value of those have not gone up because the rate, the rate, the cap rate is basically, or the interest rates have gone up. And so the value has stayed the same. So that pretty much concludes the summary. I mean, we could dig into the weeds and those other slides, but I'd be happy to take any questions and try to answer any anything that you might have.

Sandy, I I have a question. You you had a little plane, on your initial sheet. What is it about airports? Is there something that airports are treated as centrally assessed? Or planes?

You know, there are airlines. Airlines, but not planes or hangars or anything. No. The the hangars that we have are real property. We we tax them Okay. Just like a house or well, more like a commercial property. Most of they don't receive a residential exemption. So is this on your real property?

Is that your 25 assessment total or will you be adjusting that further? That's that's

that's complete. Diana could verify that, but that's the blue the blue line is complete. That's

behind us, the tax year 2024. Am I correct that you're assessed? Yeah. Taxable value has gone up approximately 10% between '24 and '25?

Yes. I think that number is about 9%, but yes, just under 10%. That's around But

but to relate that to our our problems with taxation is because that number goes up, that will reduce our I mean, when we talk about increasing taxes, that will reduce the level of increase by that amount. So if you had, like, a 12% increase and your assessed value goes up 9%, then your net increase would only be 3%. That that is a quite substantial way more than what we thought we would see between the

years. Yes. Absolutely. Good to see those numbers.

If if you're into the weeds, that's good news for us.

Yep.

K. Does anyone else have a question? Why why the telecom not have an assessed value after 2022?

That is as a result of legislative changes. They basically lobbied the legislature and got it moved. They're still being taxed, but or locally assessed. Locally assessed. That is done through UAC has basically taken that on. They're helping with that. So it's not it's not assessed through the State Tax Commission or here. It's done at the NWACC. But similarly, I think it's hurt us, honestly, but that's just my opinion. It's it's not a big percent, but it's not helped us.

There there are some legislative things going on about eliminating personal property as far as Yes. Tax emitted all. Yeah. How would that affect us?

I don't think I don't know. I I'm not as involved as many maybe of you, but I don't think that that's going to happen just because it would be a big impact. So either, there's a lot of talk about it. It would be a large impact. I mean, it's it's eight or 9%, but it would shift it directly to the residences of this county. Yeah. And

then the other portion of the centrally assessed, a lot of that gets tied up into litigation for it could be for years. What is the collectibility of of a lot of that per year?

Well, so they they have to go ahead and pay that as they go through an appeal. And at the end of three years, five years, if they prevail, then they get a refund, and then

With interest.

Right. But that sometimes that can actually here we go again. Here we go again. Here we go again. I wanna ask you to I guess, as far as when we budget, how much should we really be including a lot of that in our budgets until we actually get it? Little, Dana,

until we know that it Well, I think one of the points of this presentation is to help the council understand that it's all that is getting to be a smaller and smaller part of our overall planning. We just we just

it's not that we don't plan for it, but it's it's just getting a smaller piece of it, the centrally so cesspool. My understanding, and you'll please correct me, is that they they do pay it, but then they litigate it. And then if they win, we have to pay them back with interest. Isn't that so, like, it comes in, but then it goes back out again Mhmm. If they win their litigation.

And remember, the county portion is only a smaller. Your school is six to your seven. Right. Yeah. Right. Remember that ratio still will have Yeah. We know. Now we are allowed to actually pass some of the costs of all that stuff now onto those other tax amenities. Right?

Yeah. Craig, would you come up for just a second? And so because I have a question for you as well. I'll hold it.

Sorry. And I know you weren't prepared, so I apologize. Part of the big picture is is that I always hold back in in November and sometimes in December. This year, I didn't hold back in December, but it's always better to give than to call back. So we have money that is set aside to do the final distribution that has to be done by March 31 that takes care of that. So if we have because it's cyclical like you talked about the railroads. It's it's every several years. This last time, they weren't supposed to go back for a little longer time. But if we know that that's the happening or going to happen, we can hold back so that we are giving rather than calling back. It's always easier to give than to receive.

Okay. That was that was what I was gonna ask. In the last five years, is there a typical amount that we've had to pay back when litigation has being paid? $100,000,

but, again, that's that percentage, it's a doable thing and and We're prepared for that. Yeah. There are some counties that distribute everything that comes in as everything that goes out, and then they're in a problem, then they have to bond for that or they have to do another levy that does and takes care of that. Again, our approved and our common procedures, I always hold back to just make sure that that takes care of all of that type of stuff. Because not just this, we have to personal property is distributed on last year's rate. So we have to take everything back and then redistribute on the current rates. So there's a lot of those things also that have to come into play.

K. Thank you. Who does anyone have any other questions for Brett or Craig? I think this was just more for our information. The state wanted to come and make a presentation, and we could never work out a a their schedules. So I just asked Brett to give us an overview of what they would have presented to us.

Does the public wanna see the other 70 slides?

Yeah. There are 70 more slides. I think we're good. You can call Brett if you wanna see that. K. Alright.

Six C. Keegan, do you wanna Yeah. And this might be a six C, I and

double I. Why not? It's a six C on my Two parter here.

So the first I've talked about before in my council report at the end of the meeting. So we are getting green belt funds returned to us to be able to use for things like preserving open space. And one thing we've talked about prior is the suggestion to, since we already have a mechanism for allocating funds, or recommending how we allocate funds, rather, to open spaces in the form of the Cash Open Spaces Committee, advisory committee. I am recommending that we also give them the charge to be able to make recommendations for these green belt, this green belt money. Is my time up? Trying to keep it short. So that way they can take And I sent you everyone the amounts. Mhmm. I That's significant. It is significant to the tune of, you know I think the range was, like, 700 to 1,000,000 a year. But this would my proposal is that we would combine this with the open spaces funding and have COSAC make recommendations just like they are now with the open spaces bond money. So I don't wanna be the one to make a motion, but We don't have to. We have to make a motion or just a head nod. I don't know how it works. Well, I don't know if we have an Can I can I ask something on that? Yes. Oh. Besides some other things too.

So I like that going to the open space because I'm a proponent of that. But at the same time, I'm wondering if we don't split some of that so the county has some money that it can go towards purchasing property that may be used for the fairgrounds or something in the future that doesn't rely on COSAC approving that, but it's something that the county has the money to move forward on that. We've always had a long range plan of looking for where we're gonna put our fairgrounds and other things out there, and I'm just wondering if and this is up to discussion, but this is what I was just thinking of having some of that in reserve or another place rather than just all in the COSEK thing. That make sense? It does. And we have I mean, historically, we have made purchases like the

the land Yeah. What do you In the land Sardine Canyon. Yeah. And, yeah, more recently, the one up by Hyde Park without COSAC approval. So COSAC isn't the approving body. They're they're more like, you know, as you know, the the planning commission that they're they're advising us. So I don't think that would prohibit us from still using those funds to make that purchase.

Let's I because I after we talked, I thought, well, yeah, let's just give it to them. They already have a process in place to accept applications, and we need to use that for open space. But then I after talking to some other council members and thinking about it, I think it's best if we we don't ever want to lose it back to the state by not using it. But if we if we don't just say that it's all designated to the COSAC committee, if we keep some of it, just keep it in house so that if something comes up, we have the leverage to do that without having said, we already designated that as COSAC. We can keep it for like like, there's, you know, some of the other things that we decide that we need to purchase and there might be time sensitive to to do open spaces. It needs to be used. There are restrictions for the green belt fund that we'd still have to follow. But I as as I thought about it more, I I think I agree with Nolan that having a a fund that is accessible without too many regulations to it other than it has to be open spaces, but that we as a county can still spend it. It might be better not to but and then okay. So now we've got this fund, but COSAC has an application that is is before us that needs a certain amount of money that we would have to bond for. But we have money in our green belt fund that we could say we're gonna use that so that we don't lose it. Like, there's there's the option to do both. It could be a second arm

of less restrictive funds to do some matching Yes. If we have to.

Madam chair, ultimately, I don't think it ties our hands at all. I think it it we can. We have used our open space funding without recommendations, as Keegan said, from COSAC. Yes. So I mean, ultimately, it's our decision because we are the legislative branch and and the one that holds the First Springs First Springs. So I think I don't think this restricts us is what I'm saying. No. It gives us an avenue to vet using that that advisory role that COSAC is, or we have the opportunity to do things outside of them as well. So I don't think it ties our hands

establishing it that way. I agree. We and we did it does need to be used for open spaces. And that we do have a committee that's set up to accept applications and to take care of those. How much money are we talking about? It can be anywhere from 7 or $800,000 a year to a million dollars a year. Yeah. And the the legislation that was just passed says that if we don't use it within five years, we have to give it to the state to this Leeray McCallister Fund, and they will find some other project throughout the state to use it for. And so we want to make sure we can use projects within our county. Yeah.

So I I guess my question is if we're holding a certain amount back because COSAC, when they when they make their recommendations, they're making them based on, you know, how much funding is available, how many applications are we getting. So that will be a consideration of how how much funding do we have for this project or in aggregate. So I do feel like if we are gonna hold some back, we should define, at least, loosely what that money we're retaining is and maybe what

open space projects. And I I think that we just have such a good communication tool and between us and COSAC that it it as they come up with projects, if it makes sense to use that portion that the county is holding, that's you know, we we are committed to doing that without making a definite I don't think we have to demarcate part of it. No. I just yeah. I'm just talking even loose guidelines.

I just wonder, is this a one time thing, or is it something you do every year? It

totally dependent upon basically what is taken out of green belt. Yeah. Yeah. So it could fluctuate.

I mean, a half million dollars. Can't be you know, it's

it's hard to even bond against it or things like that because it you just don't know from year to year. I mean, it can vary greatly depending on really what land is taken out of green belt and have those taxes,

basically, go in arrears for five years. Yeah. It just seems like we have a lot more flexibility if we don't

combine them. And but but I think the COSAC I think they should be. And we talk like we they're we should be aware that they should talk about it. And, hey, we still They should know how much we have. Still have the this this money over here that we can use to leverage and help. Right. George, did you wanna You know, there's a

estate transactions Mhmm. That are and and I'm not comfortable revealing, but we're we're getting ready to present a couple of real estate option to the council that are, in some ways, they are supportive of open space, but they also involve some of our projects. And I think having the flexibility with those funds what we ought to just make sure is that we don't let the fund as cheap to this date. So if we haven't figured out something to do with it by four years and nine months, then we could formally put it in COSAC at that time.

But then it would go back to the the state. Yeah. It has to be It has to be all the rest. Well, that's what I'm saying. You put it in COSAC

and use it before it's I mean, if if we we've got three years or three and a half years to find a project

I think we're splitting hairs. That we prefer to use Yeah. So I guess all agree. I guess just to to tie a bow on it, what is the directive if if Chris Sands, chair of COSAC was sitting here, we would say your directive with the green belt funds is just

maybe use them. Like, until we were drowning in applications.

Like, so I'm like, I say I say go for it, but Here's what I say. When it comes time to actually fund a project, something that's been vetted and we've approved it and we're ready to fund it, we we can decide then we should bond for less than what we need because we have this money we can use, or we're not gonna we wanna keep this money because it hasn't been five years. You know what I mean? That determination, I think, will be made at the time, but it'll it'll happen with bonding. Or if they're doing an application and they need a match fund, they then they come to the council and say, hey. Would you be willing to I think we take it on a case by case basis

and see what we have. I wanted I wanted to keep it so the county has the option of saying, here's this bucket. We can pursue things outside of COSAC, but yet that bucket is still available to COSAC to tap into. So that's my look at it. It's so that because I see there's opportunities out there if it comes next to some county ground, and we go.

Does that make sense, Keegan? Is that enough direction for you as a COSAC member? Yeah. I I guess what clarification is what We got some insight. Some clarification from our treasurer.

Let me give the status. Currently, we have spent more than five point whatever we did our bond for. So we spent COSAC money. So I combined, currently, all of our rollback into that same account. It sounds like we need to put two separate accounts, which I'm fine. But when we get the bond money, it would go into another account that we leave a very minimal amount, but we have spent all of that 5.8.

Craig, do we have two years of COSAC currently in reserve? We spend all of that. Of COSAC. Excuse me. Not COSAC. Excuse me. I'm saying rollback. Do we have two years of rollback?

Well, that's it's in there now. You've got about 300,000 if I'm not mistaken. Okay. But all that's rollback stuff. All that is rollback. So Snyder, originally, the bill was we we got a very small amount that Casey Snyder's bill, we got 20% and then it was changed last year that now we have a 100% of all rollback. So it will be more after this. It just depends, like Dependent on development. Dave said, councilman Erickson, it depends on what farmers takes their land that's in Greenbelt out of Greenbelt. That's the money that we get a 100% that would go into. What I'm hearing, you're directing me to put a second account other than another one. Because right now, I've just combined those because they're just for simplicity. If you want me to separate those out, I can separate them out. Yeah. Separate.

Separate. That's kinda and thank you for clarifying, Craig, because that's what I've been sitting here thinking as well. Keegan's suggestion simplifies it, but if it's just a matter of you can have two different accounts that that are somehow your office, because we're not gonna remember how much is there. We'll come to you and ask. It's great to know as long as your interest separate and As long as you're keeping an eye on the timeline when we've got to do something with those funds before they get forfeited to the state. That's that is the most important part of this to me. But Agree. I mean, I think it's pretty simple. We say, COSAC, this money is available. We're not we're not earmarking. We're not budgeting it specifically for that. We're just saying, this this revenue is available for COSAC to factor into product. To a specific project. And so therefore, it could be in that account for visible product. Accounts because if we see a deal, all we gotta do is make a call to Craig, say, what's in this one? Boom. Yeah. Yeah. Which which is the same as all we have to do if it was combined. So it's just a matter of Yeah. Craig has to keep track of two accounts instead of one. That's all we're to get discussing, I think. Yeah. Because we're talking about restrictions, but we're the legislative body who decides how the funds are spent. So I I really don't understand when we say, well, the

the green belt money is less restricted. Like, no, it's not. Yeah. Right? No. It's not. Am I crazy in thinking that? No. I don't think so. Okay. So if we wanted for if we want for accounting purposes to separate them, I think that's fine. And what I what I was hoping to report back to COSAC is true or false, we can consider the green belt funds in application approval and fund allocations. Because that all comes The answer is true. True. Right? Okay. That I think That clears it up for me. I proceed we all agree on that. For for Craig, I think what clears it up for him is two separate accounts. Two. Okay. One more thing while Craig's up here that was discovered during this process that he revealed to me is that he doesn't actually he's not on the signature card for Cash Valley Bank

and For the foundation. I just need the legal body to just say In minutes?

In minutes. And it seems to me that it should be appropriate for the treasurer to

Move the treasurer. And and with that money that's coming in on that $5,000,000, I think that Matt should also be on that and at least two, if not three of the council. So it's not Keegan going rogue and just saying, Craig, I need you to do this. It protects. So I would suggest that on a signature card that we have, myself, Matt, Funk, Keegan, I don't think you need to have the open space on the signature card. But I think that there should be at least two other of council so that it it comes from you rather than from one.

K. Let's let's ask Andrew to prepare that officially, and we'll bring it to the next meeting and pass it. Thank you. Thank you so much for clarifying that, Greg. We appreciate you. Thanks, guys. K. Do you have you're you're good? Yeah. Okay. Good. Perfect. K. Diana, 7 a or just seven.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. You have before you, the reporting for all of the tax relief that was granted in 2025. So first page is a summary page of the next two reports, one by parcel number and one by abatement type if you're interested in that kind of detail. Otherwise, you can get the summary just on page one. And then close to the back, you have two separate reports that are on mobile homes and that tax adjustments.

And I I really appreciate this, Diana, because it's so interesting to me with all of the current legislation that is going ongoing that our circuit breaker total was a 141,000.8 for the year, and our veterans is 1,400,000.0. Isn't that interesting? It's very interesting, especially where they're talking about

getting rid of the circuit breaker. And those are those are folks that have really limited income. Diana, I know. Very, you know, few options. We have we have talked about that. Sure, but a lot of them, you know, they're getting their their veteran checks. They There's no means testing. There's no means testing. So we've suggested, like, a market value review because we have some that are in multimillion dollar homes. And

Yep. So Yeah. We don't know where that will go. Yeah. I that's part of the legislature, but as we all are speaking to our legislators, I'm glad to see that number quantified.

Mhmm. Yeah. And so and then you'll see in the red, that's just a little reconciliation because for those of you who whip out your calculators, the line doesn't add up at ten seventy eight. There's we have to reconcile that because those that get, circuit breaker also get that 20%. Circuit breaker comes back from the state. The 20% comes out of the county coffers. Veterans out of the county coffers. All the rest of them. So and also then, there was one circuit breaker that also had blind exemption and one veteran that also got a circuit breaker. Okay. So that's all that reconciliation is. Any other questions for me?

Any questions? Does someone want to make a motion to accept these numbers?

I'll make motion to accept it.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we accept the tax relief numbers that have been presented to us tonight. Is there any further discussion?

Yeah. K. It's not easy. It'll be harder if we lose Amazing job. A very, very thorough and amazing job. It's a it's a lot of work, and we appreciate that very much. We do. We send that

Diana. Oh, those those in we need to finish the motion. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the tax relief that's been presented to us. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. K. I'll pass it on now. Thank you. Yeah. Bryson is to And that's Bryson, sign that. Okay. Our public hearing, we went a little past. Sorry. Can I get someone to make a motion on a and b, please?

We'll move to set the public hearing on I I guess, the first one would be ambulance service request for proposal RFP acceptance on on February 17 at 05:30. And then I guess we reschedule. Right? Mhmm. The public hearing for February 17 at 05:30, ordinance twenty twenty six dash o five on the frontage and access ordinance amendment.

I'll second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we set public hearings for the seventeenth that have been put forth. Is there any further discussion? Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Those are both done. Okay. It's time to hold public hearings. Ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero four, the Mountain Manor Springs to rezone.

Brian. Good evening. How are you? Brian Abbott, the interim director of the development services. Tonight, we've got the Mountain Manor Springs rezone. Let me get that pulled up. No problem. Okay. Looks like we're having some technical difficulties. Sorry. I'll try to to to talk you through it. This is a a rezone of 98 acres from the agriculture a 10 to the rural R 5. 500 North, 7200 West in Petersburg Has a max potential of 19 lots in the RU 5 zone. The nearest rural five zone is approximately a little over a mile and a half southwest of of this property. It is within Mendon's future annexation area. Mendon is concerned about the negative impacts to their city if the rezone is improve is approved. The previous, request to rezone to R U 2 zone was denied in 2025. Wish that we could see this map. Maybe you have it in front of you, but it's it's currently surrounded by a 10 zone and also by F R 40. There is a commercial zone of, of autonomous solutions, which is a little ways away from that. The planning commission recommendation, there was a public hearing held 01/08/2026. The planning commission recommended denial of the rezone to the county council on a a six to zero vote. Some of their conclusions were that the rezone request is not compatible with the purpose of the RU five zone. The request is not consistent with the Cache County general plan, which includes agriculture and ranching and mountain and rural conservation. It does not appropriately serve by public roads and services. And the property property, again, is located within Mendon City's future annexation area, and the city is concerned about the potential impacts if approved. That's all I have for that.

Anyone have any questions for Brian before we open to the public? Okay. Thank you, Brian. Yeah. Alright. This is a public hearing. If there's anyone here that would like to come up and speak to us about this ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero four, this is your time. Is the proponent here?

It's my thought.

I'm Terena Lund. This is a happy surprise. I wasn't expecting to be able to have this opportunity. I'm actually the owner of this land, and, I wish I could borrow that paper. I really don't have any notes. Like I said, I wasn't expecting to do this. Actually, Mendon City didn't have any, problem with this. They, were part of the future what what did you call it? The future Annexation. Annexation. Thank you. And what we had suggested was with the 19 lots, with the approval of the 19 lots, we would be drilling a well at the top. And I know the map doesn't show it, but there's like, if you scroll let's see. I'm trying to think which direction it would be. It's to the to the North West, I believe. No. Yeah. The North and the West a little. There's a huge, sub development there where they've used a huge well and there's like, I don't even remember how many homes. Right? Do you remember how many homes? There's like 30 or 50. And they've done that. And, I know that with the state of Utah, they come and they, you guys, I'm sorry. I really get flustered when I'm in front of people. They test the water to make sure it's par whatever. Anyway but without that, then I will I will be selling off land, and they'll be drilling their own wells. So I believe I would be allowed seven eight lots without providing that but at the top if we were able to get the. The 19 lots we would be able to do a great big well, and there's enough pressure that it would, we would have to actually have a reducer on that land or on the well. And, it would make it so we wouldn't have to punch so many holes in the ground. So that would be a nice plus. Also, we were planning to improve the road, obviously. Obviously, that would be one of our big, big pluses as well. I can't remember what else you said, but they were opposed. I remember them really struggling to find a reason to to turn it down. It seemed like it it was a it was a big it was a big deal. I know that there's been a lot of growth around us and I know that the open spaces is a big deal, but we were going to, you know, put them all down at the bottom of the land together. So

Does it wait. Does anyone have any questions for the proponent? K. Thank you. Thank you. You bet. Is there anyone else here from the public that would like to speak to this ordinance? Okay. We move to close public hearing.

Move to close the public hearing.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we close public hearing on ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero four. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Did you wanna say something? Do you We'll discuss it later. Okay. Okay. Then the next public hearing we have is ordinance twenty twenty six dash o six amendment to the Cache County code regarding subdivision and subdivision amendment standards. Yes.

Okay.

Alrighty. Subdivision regulation amendment. For the last year or so, we've had a subdivision moratorium. That was enacted due to large 20 plus subdivisions proposed and concerns about water availability and quality. There is a water study currently ongoing right now. Once complete, it will help to inform subdivision regulations in the future. That's a kind of a joint study between our university and the federal government. Each time the federal government shuts down, the study gets pushed back a little further and further. We hope that it's done towards this summer, towards the end of the summer, but who knows how that will go. This proposed ordinance is a result of a joint workshop with planning commission and the county council. The proposed ordinance adds additional requirements for water, sewage requirements, fire control, and it also limits subdivisions over seven lots to a future annexation area of a of a municipality. Some of the raw water requirements, it requires proof of actual water on the subdivided lots sufficient to support the subdivided lots sufficient to support the use on those lots. New new additions would require proof of actual wet water on the proposed lots in addition to the paper water rights currently required showing one domestic use per lot. If there is a proposed subdivision over seven lots, it requires that the subdivision be located in a future annexation area and connected to that municipality's water system. Alternatively, they can create their own public water system to service that subdivision. Sewer requirements, on subdivisions greater than seven lots must be located in the local municipality's annexation plan, must connect with the municipal sewage system to meet the sewage requirements. Unless a public a public water system is created, then the septic systems may be allowed based on requirements from the Bear River Health Department. The fire control part of this amendment, subdivisions over seven lots are not allowed if they are within a quarter mile of wildland urban interface area. This change was originally limited to a maximum of three lots in the wildland urban interface, but changed by planning commission during their public hearing to more than seven to be more consistent with the other proposed changes in the subdivision code.

Ryan, the ordinance we have on on C 4 under fire control says subdivisions over three lots are not allowed. Is that a mistype? Is that a Yeah. That's what it is now. This amendment is going to take it up to seven to be more consistent. The red line. It's red. It says seven in red. It looks like it's red. It says three. It says three in red. So Okay. I might have to

have a case before.

Yeah. Yeah. We we can make that we can make that amendment here as we make a motion, but I just wanted to point out that that is different than what you read. Thank you. K.

The new section added to this subdivision amendment talks about, again, the increase. If it's over seven lots, must be located within a municipality's annexation plan, and the supporting infrastructure for the subdivision must comply with the local municipality's requirements such as roads, curb, gutter, sidewalk, water and sewer, and whatever else the city may require at that time. K. Questions for me?

What questions do you have for Brian on this? Yes.

So I'm familiar with I'm just gonna say Nibali's annexation declaration. Right? Because that's where I'm from. So they've pretty much declared that they're gonna annex across highway everything that is College Ward. Right? Well, Willsville, they've declared theirs as well. Right? They're gonna go down north, and they're gonna they've declared everything. So if you were to look at a map and and one were was blue and one was red, you'd see a lot of purple in that area right there because they both just it's a it's a group land grab. Right? Sure. It's a land grab. So how would you know which standards that if they were gonna have a seven, a seven lot subdivision there, how would they know which standards they would need to build to Sure. If they were both within that deckler they were both if that was located within that deckler? Here's a question.

It's tough to to know which city would kinda get there first. I know in the building code, they often refer to the, you know, the the strictest requirement shall apply. So I think whichever city has the, you know, the the strictest requirements as far as their water control and road management and water and things like that, that could possibly apply, but that would definitely require a meeting between both cities and Would that be the county then that would go and look at each of their like, the cross section for a road. Right? And Sure. Yeah. See what the cross section and the curve better. I think we would wanna discuss with the the city which one it's really gonna be in and then work with closely with them. All annexation

boundaries then if there if there is disputes, that goes to the boundary commission.

And the boundary commission is formed less At the time of actual annexation petition. Right? Yeah. But but in their declaration, it's just free game. Yeah. If we if this happened,

before it was annexed, what city would you ask to follow the requirements? That's probably

at the time we would have to make that decision. If I may, when we consider that in planning and zoning, it's city has a different zoning for their neighborhoods and everything else. And so if they're going out there, for instance, Wellsville came to us on a subdivision before and so k, you're considering this subdivision, but that zoning is not compatible with our zoning in that if we annex it. So I think that becomes what you said. There's stringent law as to what goes on. Not law, but guidance of what the city is looking for and how we can address it. So that helps us in making a decision from P and Z.

And the choice of annexation is often also if there are disputes, it's often to the landowner.

They could probably pick which one they want to be in.

Yep. That happened. I know it's Logan Nibley.

A

dispute on this one was offering more more units for acre than this one. Yeah. Allowing.

Yeah.

And so is our additionally, it says the proposed subdivision must connect with the municipal sewage system from a municipality. Most of the municipalities that I know will not allow connections outside of their municipality.

Sure. I think that they would have to prepare for that. Similar to, like, what Millville's gone through, how it's been so hard to connect, whatever is approved, they would have to make that connection. Probably at the time they were building, kinda stub out in that where they would would need to. Okay. So that when it was annexed, it would be as simple as making connecting a and b. Okay.

We're trying to create incentives

for them to annex, ultimately. If it's over seven lots just to be able to handle the sewer and the water. Yeah. Mhmm. Yeah. Because it it does say in six, the proposed subdivision must connect,

but maybe it's must be compatible with a potential connection

Yeah. To be more accurate. That that's a great point.

Yeah. Because there if they won't take them, then they're kind of Right. Yeah. You don't wanna have to dig up this whole street and their whole yard to connect. It you need to be much simpler than that. Right. Well, I wonder if we need to change that change that wording to say it must connect with it must be compatible with Sure. Yeah. That's fair. Something to the point of ready to connect when Great idea. Services are available.

This is a public hearing too. Right? Yeah. These Yes. Yeah. Sorry. This is okay. Alright. Anybody else have questions for Brian? Okay. Thank you. Alright. Is there anyone here from the public that would like to talk to us about this? This is your time. Will you please make sure you state your name?

Ry Lund. This just just is really restrictive to a lot of people. It takes, you know, a 10 zoning in in all of Cache County is over it's, like, around 180,000 acres, and we're taking that and it's being restricted to to, you know right now, we can we can make our own water system. But with this plan, it restricts it and puts a government thing in charge of the water. Right? Is that what I Brian?

If you have your own water supply system, then there was an exception for that.

Right. But with this, being next to a muse municipality would have to be connected into the municipality's water system and sewer system, and then they would be in charge of it. I'm I just think this looks like restrictions, restrainment on on the people. You gotta trust we gotta trust the people. I strongly oppose this stuff, and I challenge the you know, whoever wrote this law to try and make a law that's less restrictive on the people, less restraining on the people. This just looks like, you know, we're limiting everyone to what's safe and what's gonna help us in the long run. Yeah. I just I just strongly oppose it. Did the I I don't know. I'm sorry. Did the county council approve this?

That's what we're doing tonight. We're discussing it tonight. Okay. We're discussing it. But on the last public hearing,

was there one already for this subject?

Planning commission. Planning commission. Yeah. The planning commission has discussed this. Correct, Nolan? Had a public hearing? And had a public hearing about it in planning commission. And they voted on it or no? Forwarded to us. Forwarded it to us. They they they recommend to us, but we are the final vote. Okay. Right on.

Opposed.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak to this project?

Mark Cardell. I oppose I think there's a lot of question here. I think you're on the right path, but I would say put the brakes on it so we can discuss more. I live in the county. I moved out there for reasons. I wanted to build a ranch and make a living. But if you're forcing the people to the boundaries of the city and you have an established county subdivision there, people don't wanna go into the city. They have regulations. They restrict their pets, their animals, what they can raise, what they can't have. Plus, you're going from an independent county subdivision that has their own water, their own septic. Why would you want to go into the city to pay a $130,140 dollars a month into this. The city's gonna have to come and and and put a lot of money into this to yeah. If you do the the construction preconstruction into this, maybe it's gonna be easy, but it's ultimately up to the landowners. If you have a penthouse subdivision and none of them wanna go into the county, isn't it going to create a checkerboard and and limit and restrict the the cities that can and want to annex? I mean, if if you're sitting here forcing people to be there and say, eventually, you're gonna be into the city, What's the purpose of having all these restrictions in the county? Why not just say, well, you can't build until you go annex into the city? This this is for the county. RU 2 And 5 is for the county. And you're also, in my opinion, you're gonna take all the land that's around these cities and make it more valuable. Here comes the rush for the developer because they can't go out into the county and develop anymore, so you're taking away my value. I can't develop to what I need to. We don't know what the future is. No farmer, no rancher wants to sell their land, but who knows what the future's gonna bring. And if they get into some financial burdens, they wanna be able to sell that land to get out of it, And you're restricting that. To make it personal a little bit, I wonder if there's a I write an ordinance and I say, Nolan, half of your house is gone for value because of this ordinance. That's what you're doing to the land owners. You're taking away my value because I don't have the right as a property owner to develop like someone does within a half a mile from there or a quarter mile from there. And I don't understand why it's just subdivisions. What happened to commercial and industry? How come that isn't involved in this within a half mile and a quarter mile? To me, that's discrimination on land owners, what they can do. I can go build a Walmart five miles away, but I can't go build a seven home subdivision. It doesn't make any sense. Like I said, I think you're going on the right direction, but I think we need to rethink this a little bit more. This is for ten years down the road. What happens with this is going to affect and can affect families financially. I went through this process, this this developmental service. And I'll tell you what, it was absolute hell for four years. What this what this county did and what they proposed, all of a sudden I'm in in development and you can see it last time you had a meeting. Here's Chris Chambers sitting here saying, I went to the county for help. I spent $25,000 and and I got told the wrong thing. I'm $25,000 into it. How how do I get out of it? That's the same thing that happened to me. This was four year five years ago, I went to Aubrey who was a permanent administrator down there. She says, I had no idea. I'm a rancher. I I don't know your laws and ordinances, so I go there for help. She says, this is what you do. We did it. A year later, I met Matt Phillips. Oh, no. No. You can't do this. So we had to resurvey. We had to redraw everything, thousands of dollars, lawyers, surveyors. This discretion is good if everybody's aboard, but not everybody gets aboard with it. If you have a side where someone is powerful and and wealthy, Some of you council members are gonna take that side because you wanna impress them. So we get voted out.

Can I ask you to to wind up your comments, please, and keep it to the subject? This isn't a public hearing? It is a public hearing, but we usually limit people to three minutes, and I didn't say that at the beginning. But just if you'll make your points and

Discretion doesn't work. You need a system down there. Someone walks in there. Someone's got to fix what's going on over there. I had Matt Phillips come to me and say, you've got to put a stop to this. Five months, we went through this because he said there's a county road going through here. Thousands of dollars we spend on surveyors and lawyers, title insurance. No one could find out where this this road come from. Well, he and Jeff Nelson said, oh, it's an 1860 drawing. 1860 drawing held us up for five months. The discretion doesn't work. You gotta go in there. You design a glove. If the glove fits, you pass it. If it doesn't, this is what you gotta do to make it work. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Is there anyone else to speak? Yes. We still have time. Yes. If you'll keep your remarks to three minutes, if you can. Stop me when we get there. My name is Cody Yonk. I'm with this gentleman that just stood up, too many restrictions here. And I don't like how he said you're going the right direction. I don't I don't think we're going the right direction. Don't don't we want more people in this valley, or or is this body trying to stop that? Because that's what it seems like. This is supposed to be the land of the free. It seems like our freedoms are being taken away by what you're doing here. And I don't like that. I don't understand everything that's going on, but I know that there's farmers that get in a pinch and they want to do what we're talking about here, and you guys are making it impossible for them to do that. And I don't like that. Amen.

Thank you.

My name is Larry Yawk. I live in Petersburg. To go along with the last two people who have spoken, you are making it impossible for my kids to build on my property. You're making it so people my age or your age who have kids can't afford to buy a piece of property and a house. So what do they do? And they're doing this, if you check around the county. They buy a travel trailer, put it on their home, buy their home, and their kids live in it because that's the only option they have to help their kids. I think that's all I want to say is is you need to think to the future. Our future according to the dominant church in this area and the leaders who have spoken about this, look it up if you want. Wilford Woodruff and others have said, there's going to be millions coming into this area from California, Oregon, Washington, and all over The United States because of what will be going on in their states. They won't be safe there. Unless they take up the sword against their neighbor, they have to flee to Zion. Right now, this is Zion, and that's where they're coming. And your restrictions are gonna make it impossible for them to have a place to go.

Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah. Please.

Good evening. My name is Paul Keller. I just wanna make a short comment. I I think that green space is a valid principle to try and try and accomplish in the valley. I think it's very important, that we have water, that we have services to homes. With that being said, this law is creating a transfer of wealth. It absolutely will. It will create a transfer of wealth in a timing fashion, first of all, towards the cities, and we'll take that wealth from the county. That's inevitable. So what I think needs to be proposed or or changed in this law is a thought that if a land owner is capable of providing, the amount of water necessary, the services that are necessary for a larger than a seven home subdivision, that should be an option. If they can provide enough water, enough services, why seven? I think that that is probably not arbitrary, but it is punitive to those in the county who have the resources, and it is a wealth transfer. So that's my comment. Thanks for your time. Thank you.

Hi. I'm Angie Keller. I just had a quick just a thought that might be a concern in this too. When you if you have to have the city involved in your development, then I just wonder if the city also includes the outlying communities in their other facilities. Like, Peters we lived in Mendon for twenty five years, so I love Mendon. We moved to Petersboro, so I love both. But as a member of the county now, we don't have access to things that the city has that we used to have, like, discounts on the community, like the Mendon City rental and the library and things, because we're county. And if you're required to comply, with your subdivision to be within the city limits and use their facilities, are you also going to allow the county communities to have access to the city, facilities at the same as the same as the city members would be. Does that make sense? I'm just concerned that you're pulling a little bit from one to make it work, but not including everything. So I just want the cities to be aware of that if they're gonna do a if if you decide to to pass this, that you consider that all of the city benefits need to be included to the county people. So that's all. Thank

you. Trina Lund again. Obviously, I oppose this. It does seem like you're taking freedoms away. And if I could, I would replay everything that that gentleman said, the the farmer in the white hat. I do feel like, I am recently divorced, and I built a business with my ex. And I was financially manipul whatever whatever that word is, the suppressed, whatever. So I did not get to have half the businesses or whatever. I I got the land. I got the land, and it is landlocked. I get landlocked, and I cannot have a future. I can't give that to my children. I am begging for you to let me provide for my own future. Please. Please hear me. I don't have I stayed home, and I raised the kids. I did my job. I did my job. I was a good person, and I really, really just I thought we lived in America. It feels like you're taking away freedoms. Dang it. I'm old enough to see that there's red tape coming down. I'm really I'm I this proving that you have water first before you can develop, it's it's really lucky that the first people that came to Utah didn't have to prove that there was water before they settled. They they just they just believed. And you know what's really cool? The land where I live has a free flowing spring. It is the best water you will ever taste. I invite you all up to come and taste it. It is fantastic. Anyway, I hope you will really think about this because I believe in you. I believe in us. I believe in this county. Dang it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak? I know twice. No. I don't think so. That's not usually our protocol. Is there anyone else that wants to speak? I think there's anyone else.

Okay.

Move to that. Move to close the public hearing. Second. It's been moved and seconded that we close the public hearing. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Alright. The initial proposals for consideration of action, ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero four. Brian, do you want to come back to the podium for us in case we have questions? Okay. This is the Mountain Manor Springs rezone. Nolan, do you wanna give us any kind of an update from the planning commission?

Sure.

Planning commission has listened. At first, it came through as an RU two. That was denied, so they came back with the RU five. That's what we're addressing here now. Thanks for all the comments that have been been brought forth today. The planning commission held a public hearing also, listened to things. Presently, there are places in Box Elder County that you do have to prove that you have water before you build a subdivision. That is just if we look around and see what's going on with the water study, that is what the planning commission is trying to look at so that we're not saying build a house and then or buy the land and then find out there's not water there. So that's something the planning commission is trying to understand. I think it was two years ago, the state water rights division had a meeting couple meetings up here and said they were going to close open open applications in the state of in the County Of Cache because of what's going on with the Great Salt Lake. So all of these are things that we, as the planning commission, and also the council are trying to look. I understand the property rights. I own property in the county. I understand that there's water out there, but I don't understand where it is all the time and how long it lasts. Just this past summer, I had three neighbors who had to redrill wells because their water was being affected. In fact, two of them didn't even have any water. So this is a path that we're trying to look when somebody says, look forward. Yes, that's what we're trying to do so that it doesn't hit that. When you talk about subdivisions in the county, the county does not provide utilities or resources, and it's hard for us as a county, and this is me sitting here from my personal opinion as a council member, to provide fire, roads, all of those things in outlying areas when the cities do it. In fact, when we sit and listen to cities, because every time there's a subdivision, we ask the city to talk about it because it talks about the annexation zone. Many cities are saying, well, if you let a subdivision come by me, then those people are coming into my communities anyhow and using those things, and they're not paying tax into it. So there's a balance that we're trying to look at here. The nice thing about these things is we can sit and look at into it in the future and say, okay, did we make the right decision? We look at it again. I think the predominant thing that the planning commission and I am looking at right now is saying to our citizens, okay, build, but we don't know if there's water. If you're if you're aware of what's going on in the state right now, we don't have moisture coming down. That concerns me. And so when we start letting subdivisions go we can provide as services, and we don't provide utilities. We don't have a water district. Those are things we're starting to look at and try to see if that's something we can do from that side. Should there be a water district? The seven lots, that comes down to what's a state law and how you can take water from it. As we said, if we could have one well and providing for a bunch of houses, is that better than having seven wells? That's what I have to say.

Okay. Anybody else want to comment? I just want to say that that land use decisions are one of the hardest things that I think we do as a council. Decisions are one of the hardest things that I think we do as a council. And it's it's hard to there is a plan. There's a general plan for where development should happen and where where it makes sense for everybody. And sometimes that goes against personal property rights which we all believe in really strongly and so it's difficult to say just everybody if you own land do whatever you want to with your land then that eventually is not gonna be the best thing for our community as a whole. There has to be some planning. There has to be some organized rules that are made. And that gets difficult there to find that balance of what's what's best for the people that we represent and balanced with what's best for the community as a whole. And so just want you all to know that we hear you. We it's difficult. Sometimes it's really difficult to make those decisions and we

this is the American dream to be able these farmers have the land they want it for their family and they want them to be able to build and enjoy it. But like you said, there was other considerations we have to take into account.

I don't think anybody

wants to stop the American dream. We all want it, and we want also to give you the liberty that you need to live like you want, and we don't want the restrictions.

Well, and we have our public health director with us too today, and there's always public health. When you're talking sewer systems, there's public health to think of. And there's been areas in our county that developed without organized sewer systems that didn't match the standards of the cities. And as they grow into where those cities that causes massive problems with water quality, There's there's some of those things to consider as well. Anyway, we need to stick to the discussion about the Mountain Manor Springs rezone. I don't know if anybody wants to make a motion on that. It was recommended for denial by the planning commission who also held a plan a public hearing. It was recommended six to zero for denial. I it's this is initial proposal. We can either continue it till our next meeting or I would accept a motion tonight.

Okay. Any adjourned? I will suspend the rules and recommend denial as what the planning commission did for the Manor Springs to rezone.

Okay.

I'll second that.

Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we

deny ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero four. Is there any further discussion on that? I'll I'll say something. Just because it was brought up that the planning commission keeps coming up with reasons, and I I just wanna point out, I've looked at several of these, and there's a standard for policy and review. Some of those are what is nearby, what's the county's future plan, what resources are available. And it's the reason you can't just put a power plant in the middle, you know, right next to a daycare center or something. And so I think, in fairness, we have to look at these standards that are established for these approvals. And as I look at this, I I can't find something where the planning commission is picking on someone selectively. So and and that's our job is to uphold those things. So that would be the reason for for my vote when it comes time to do that.

Alright. Any further discussion on that motion?

I know there is a whenever we do a lot of these, and I will call them intense developments out there within the county. Often they they get together and sometimes they form an HOA or they say, okay, we're gonna do the roads and they throw the costs of the roads onto the developer. And they build all these roles roads, and then they do turn them over to the county. And then as soon as that happens, then all the costs of maintaining those roads then goes to everybody else within the county. And so it does it becomes a burden, tax wise on everybody for that, public safeties, even snow removal, you know, all the all the little things that keep adding that we that everyone has to. And when you get these areas that are have, you know, long roads and they're they're high clustered together, sometimes it becomes quite costly for us to provide services that basically, cities and towns that have been put together already have a a setup and a means to do that. And so it becomes more costly for us to do it. And that burden is again passed on to everybody else. But with that and yet, you know, that these are agriculture areas and a lot of that open space is getting swallowed up too fast.

So k. Anybody else before we take a vote? K. It's been moved and seconded that we deny ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero four. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Alright. Ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero six, amendment to the Cache County Code regarding subdivision and subdivision amendment standards. Open that for discussion amongst council members.

I'll I'll just say that I think there are enough amendments on this and further things to investigate that I would I would prefer to postpone it. To continue. That's what I was gonna suggest. Prefer to continue as well. Yeah.

K. Do you wanna make that well, I don't think that's a motion. Do anything. K. We'll just it's an initial proposal. We can revisit that. So we we're not gonna take a vote on ordinance twenty twenty six dash o six. We're gonna continue that until our next meeting. Okay. Twenty twenty six dash zero seven, amendment to Cache County code regard regarding development services director accreditation requirements. Amy.

Good evening, council.

Before you is a ordinance to change our county code that outlines, the director of Development Services and the requirements for that position. What's being recommended is that we remove the requirement of being accredited by the American Institute of Certified Planners or AICP accredited. This is because as I looked at all of the other development services or community development positions throughout the state and throughout where with other counties, no other counties are requiring this accreditation. And we do have a planning division, and with that planning division, our planning manager does hold that accreditation. And a couple of our planners are working on that accreditation. So it's not that it wouldn't be present in our development services department, but it just wouldn't be held or be be a requirement for the director to have that accreditation. So that is what is being put before you. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them the best I can. Just a question. When was that enacted, and why? Do we know? I'm not sure when it was enacted, or or exactly why. I have some personal thoughts that maybe wouldn't be appropriate for a public meeting, but, it has been in place for, I would say, since I've been here in my career and just to eight years. So Okay.

Mister Erickson, resident historian, you you know.

What do you say? Don't die.

Day. Well, in 1917, I was thinking about it. I I don't remember right off, but I it's been a long time. Sorry. I were I was talking about another

couple little things in here when you were asking that question. No. That's okay. I just wondered if there was a reason why it was enacted. Enacted in the first place. And

Historically, Keegan, the director of development services has been heavily educated in planning and been a planner. And so I think that may be why

that has been one of the requirements. They were double duty, maybe? Because I know we've had some positions in the county where there's a a clerk auditor, a executive surveyor that Mhmm. Maybe it was a residual The director or something like that? The director has generally been a planning manager that has moved into that position.

This just gives us where the the development services department does cover multiple divisions including the GIS, the building, the planning. That just gives more depth and and Yeah. Yeah. Broader scope, I guess, that we could look for a to a director.

Okay.

I mean, this is speculation, but could we have been trying to offer more money for somebody to come here and that's why we attach that accreditation?

It would it would enhance a small amount, but it wouldn't be It would have been. Pay no.

I think as as these accreditations came about, they came available, all of a sudden, we had personnel personnel in there that were getting these, and we just felt like they were necessary, and they would just grow and evolve over time. Now I'm they're supposed to that that continuing education is supposed to make them better, but sometimes they just knew more and didn't manage any different. And so I I hate to, like, narrow the scope up for people that we are looking for when there can be huge other disciplines or a huge amount of experience or just quality leadership that we bypass because of a certain title or or Laurel or what they'd earned. I, I think maybe it's just evolved over time. That was they get in those groups and that's the thing to do. That's the thing. You know, this will make you better, better, better. And now all of a sudden,

there's only three people in the country that have all those. And I don't think we're diminishing this accreditation by any means because it is very important. But we do have our planning division that will hold that accreditation and it doesn't need to be necessary for the director of the department to hold that accreditation.

Is it is it over oversimplifying to say that we would consider doing this so that we could focus on hiring the best possible director or manager Yes. Rather than accepting a planner who

might be the good manager. Is that all the simple part? Yeah. I think it it broadens the applicant pool. Right? It's not just specifically for someone who's been in their career in planning, but it could be for someone who has the other

divisions and the expertise that way. The number of personnel in in the development services department. Oh, wow. Now you're challenging me. I mean, it's it's a dozen more than nine. I would say 15 to 20. Yeah. So it's it's not a small department is my point. And so we need we need to be able to choose when accepting applicants for this position. It needs to be the big majority of their job is gonna be the manager function. Yeah. And the leadership skills. And that's important. Orchestra is not necessarily the

leader of the orchestra has to play all the instruments. Right. You know, they can all be different people. Yeah. And that's why it's important that we have these division managers because they do have the expertise in each of those divisions. You you probably won't find one person that is an expert in all of the the divisions of the development services, but they can learn and help direct those division managers.

Executive James, did you want I was just going to say in terms of administering the department, I don't mean to downplay the idea of having education and credentials. But I I think we don't need to necessarily say that the leader of that has to that person have all those credentials and education. The management of the division requires a lot of skills that are not included in these credentials. And I just tell you, Brian is doing an excellent job.

Well, I just think from some of our testimony tonight, it's obvious that it's been a while. We've been looking for someone to take over this department, and they have needed leadership to be able to serve the citizens of our county. And so I think this is a good step to allow us to to get the right person in that job and to move forward and be able to help the people that are making applications so that it's not they're not getting different answers and and confusing processes.

Mhmm. So

Tegan's a lot of you used a lot of those quotes from Abraham Lincoln.

I pretty will follow in what we're talking about. Yeah. So with that with that being said, I think we all know Cache Valley is exceptional, but I don't think this is an exception to all the other counties that we need to make. So can I suspend the rules and make a motion that we pass ordinance twenty twenty six dash o seven amendment to the Cache County Code regarding development services director accreditation

requirements? Second. It's been moved and seconded that we suspend the rules and pass ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero seven.

Any further discussion? I would like to make a comment. Please. So I sat on planning and zoning for many years. And if you think we take heat tonight, sit in a planning and zoning and see those guys take There has been many times that I've sat in planning and zoning, and I needed somebody from the department that knows their there that's there and to support our planning commission, I'm fine with this. But I know in times past, we didn't have. And we need and it's evident in what we're dealing with and going to be dealing with going forward. So I'm fine with this, but I'm just saying there needs to be somebody in that planning and zoning that is helping our commissioners because these are lay guys. They're putting a lot of time in, and they're doing their absolute best, and yet they take a lot of bows and arrows. Forget the bows. They just take the arrows. Yeah.

K. I know I went to Utah State and I got my degree, and then I went and got my education. And that's kinda how how a lot of people really, you know, it it happens in what you deal with, how you deal with it, and the research, and constantly learning, constantly learning. The titles didn't mean as much.

Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Those in favor of it's been moved and seconded. Those in favor of passing ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero seven, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Resolution 2026Dash05. Andrew.

We can bow if it's close combat.

Good evening, counsel. I've been told that I am very soft spoken, so I'll try and speak a little bit louder. So I apologize. That being said, this item is the appointments to the Cornish, Millville, Nibley, and Richmond Cemetery maintenance boards of trustees. Under title 17 b of Utah code, it is the county legislative body that appoints for these boards. That being said, you adopted resolution twenty twenty six zero one. You made appointments to most of the cemetery districts in the county, but there were three that still had openings that needed to be filled. Unfortunately, I did not receive any more applicants on the online form for anyone to serve on the Cornish Cemetery District Board. That being said, there were multiple applicants for the Millville Nibley and Richmond Cemetery maintenance district boards. So that being said, this resolution would if we take the reality that Cornish didn't have another applicant, this would be appointing the board members for the Millville Nibley and the Richmond Cemetery maintenance boards. I believe I printed out a sheet and gave it to you all with the names of the applicants. I believe the most appropriate way forward would be for someone to make a motion to amend and insert the names that they would like, but that is up to you.

Andrew, how many are they are the cemetery district how many people are supposed to be on there?

Like It varies from district to district. What about Millville Nibley? How many members do we need to appoint? So there are five members in total, but there are two openings for four year terms. But there's also an additional seat that is now opening due to resignation. So in total,

three. So we need to choose three of these five names?

Yes, ma'am. K. So what I was gonna ask is last time, I think our homework or our assignment during the meeting was to put our preference and give that to you. I'm guessing you didn't get one from everybody.

I got two. Were they

inclusive? Not particularly. No. From whatever So that doesn't help us, in other words, is what I'm getting at to narrow it down. I'm sorry. K. Are any of the applicants here?

Yeah. Hey. If you're here, would you please come up to the microphone and state your name and tell us maybe nine ninety seconds. Yeah. They spoke last time. Oh, they spoke last time when I wasn't here. They spoke last time. I'm sorry. Thank you. Greatly we have great leadership. Willing. Thank you for being willing again. Okay. I wasn't here last time, so I apologize. K. Alright. Thank you. Alright. So does someone is someone ready to make a motion on the Millville Nibley Cemetery Board appointments?

Since no one else lives in Millville Millville or Nibley, I will make a motion. For the four year term, I will move to appoint Dan Ames and mister Jim Jensen to fulfill the four year terms. And for the two year term, I moved to mister James Christiansen. The remaining term. Is it two year? Remaining term. Remaining term. Okay. Mister James Christiansen.

Is there a second on that?

I'll second that. Okay. Well, I have a question. Weren't there three names that we that we vote for? Yeah. So I said She gave three. So Dan Aims and Jim Jensen and and James Christiansen. Okay. Yeah. She gave these three names that we've kept. Of the five

that Yeah. K. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the three names that have been brought forth for the Millville Nibley Cemetery maintenance district. Is there any further discussion? K. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. Congratulations. Thanks, Dan. Yeah. Thank you. K. Now we come to the Richmond Cemetery maintenance district. How many names are we supposed to approve there? Five? And there's six there. Okay. This is someone looked into that and want to make a motion? I think if we're gonna continue tradition Hey.

I I live I live almost I live almost in Richmond, but they may not still accept me when I die. So but I I would move that we accept Kelly Crafts, Amy Sadler, Jared Gillman, Kevin Graham, and Samuel Roberts. Those five. Jeff Young is the current mayor, and I think he'll have plenty plenty to do. So

I'll second that. K. It's been moved and seconded that we accept the names mentioned for the Richmond Cemetery maintenance district. Is there any further discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. That is done. Alright.

Yes. The proper procedure would be motion for passage of the resolution with those names. Oh, yeah. Okay. Two different sets of names for one resolution.

Okay. I apologize.

I've moved that we pass resolution twenty twenty six zero five with approved appointments that were just agreed upon by the board or by the the council.

Second. K. So we moved and seconded that we approve res that we is is do I have to suspend the rules on this one? It's an initial proposal. No. It's a resolution. It's a resolution. Okay. That we accept resolution 2026 dash O5 with the appointments that have been Presented. Presented. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? K. Alright. Twenty twenty six dash o six, removal of certain class b road segments from the Cache County's class b road system. Alright. Who's gonna present on that?

Old man. I can give you a Are you talking about roads? What's wrong man? Yeah. Where's Matt? Okay.

Alright. Y'all have a map in front of you. Is someone missing one? I have an extra one. It's it's on here too. It's on here.

Yeah.

So council, this resolution was brought forward as a result of the discussions that happened during the last county council meeting. Jerry, you weren't here. But

And by our request. Yes. Exactly.

By resolution, this resolution twenty twenty six dash o six would be removing a certain segments of the class b road system designation that we have here in the county, and it would effectively then transfer those to class c, meaning they would be taken over by their respective municipalities. The printed version that you have in front of you is different from the one that was put into your media packet. I spoke with some of the fellow employees in the GIS division. I couldn't remember the name. And they had some input. And so just the amended text is what's been printed in front of you. Just making certain clarifications since Logan took on a a portion of their of the road that was running through. So these just have technical corrections, but overall, this would be removing that designation. Is there any questions?

The bridge that they're talking about, excluding from that, is it

It's technically an unincorporated county. Okay. So that's the only portion we would maintain? I believe so. Yes.

K. Given that too. Are we

Mhmm. Are we sure the bridge is unincorporated? I'm pretty sure that's Nibali's Bridge.

Well, as the resolution is written,

regardless of what what the reality is, it would That's Why wouldn't we give them the bridge? Yeah. Really I mean, yeah. It's something it's We don't want people committing crimes on that bridge to escape the Like a driving car. The jurisdiction. Bridge and drive away. It should be there. It should be there. That's the most expensive part of the road. I know. I know. I'd like to find that out. Mhmm. Adam chair. So

Oh, sorry to interrupt. Go ahead. Oh, I was just gonna say I believe mister Murray has a comment. And and, sir, I I mentioned to you yesterday that the executive had had some conversation with

Providence about maintaining the road. I he might have to be able to better explain that conversation. Providence? It's gonna take a little time if we want give them an opportunity, but Providence is offering to take over maintenance and continual you all expenses involving the road. They'd like it left the county road, though, and they would pay for all maintenance and so forth. Got to work that out a little bit. They have some reasons why that's their preference.

Does this cause us a pinch like we discovered last meeting, as we got got some people who want to do something with their land and yet They can't do it. They're in the middle of nowhere. Nobody's answering on the city. Nobody's answering on the county because each one's expecting the other to do something. So I don't want to put a landowner in

in time out because we haven't figured out what to do with this road. Does that make sense? Well, I think our our current policy precludes them from developing where they are because that road is ours. And if we make a policy exception for that, it's it could have long range effects for the rest of the county. Yeah. If it's a county rule, then you got all egress and ingress of every of of anything. It's a different road, they come to us. Yeah. It's a different set of stipulations.

And I wanna turn that over to the cities. Let that's their business within the city limits. Let them take care of it. That's what we're after. Well, we've held a a a group of people up quite a long time Yes. On the end.

And to me, there's not been a good reason for that.

Catherine? So I just clarifying question of the executive. They want us to retain ownership, but all maintenance will be shouldered by And Providence?

It isn't an an issue of giving a person permission. I don't think I I don't think there's any hesitancy by letting the city make those decisions and and having those executed. What Providence is concerned about is they want the road maintained to a certain standard. And because the road is a major entry into their city. And so what they want is is to have a level of maintenance that's consistent with that, and they're not sure their neighboring cities will provide that level of maintenance. That's the issue that Providence raised with me. But

I just

Pardon me? Did River Heights talk or have any issues? Involves

River Heights. I think it I think it goes through River Heights. One of the problems with Road goes through River Heights. Yeah. But the road road goes through River Heights. I don't think there's a problem with it. But the road also goes through Melville, and the road has been cut to pieces by the sewer system going through it repeatedly. And Providence wants that fixed. And I I understand. I drove the road. I looked at it. I understand the problem. I don't I don't see any reason not to give permission to the landowner to proceed, Nola. I'm not quite sure how to resolve this issue. What I was thinking of doing is sitting down with Melville, River Heights, and Providence and working out an interlocal agreement between them that Providence would maintain the road and we would give up the road. But I haven't got that done yet. But that was the solution I could see is that we would disclaim the road to three cities, but have an interlocal agreement that Providence would maintain it. And I think Millville would be happy to have a better road than they wanna maintain. So that's that's

I get these funny requests. I'm just trying to respond to what the cities are asking of. Well, okay. So I'm still but as you say that Yeah. There it's like Providence can still maintain that road. They can have an agreement. They can maintain that road to a certain level, but

but that would be between Providence, Millville, and River Heights. If we get out of the way, and that's one less in the They have an agreement. Their road, and that's their business. That's what I'm trying to arrange Yeah. Concurrent with us giving up jurisdiction is that interlocal agreement, David, between the three cities. And this might speed that up a little bit. Right. The other thing it does is there is a little legal issue here that you may not be completely familiar with. We agreed the county agreed to take responsibility for that role in return for the state finishing tenth west. Stupid agreement, but we entered into it. And there's there's an argument to be made that we can't just unilaterally voiced our responsibility back on the cities because we agreed in writing that we would continue it as a county road. This this interlocal agreement that I'm trying to negotiate settles that issue and lets us get out of this without having a disputed claim, David. That's that's a complexity of the problem I'm dealing with. So you're talking two weeks? Yeah. We we we continue it for sure. I'd actually like it done by next week. We have a meeting a week from today. Let's just hold on to this. The deadline You can do it. You can do it. Yeah. Yeah. If if you give me a deadline, I may not have the interlocal done, but if I have the three cities in a line with I think that's a better way than just walking away from to get them to accept that it comes back. That solves our problem of getting rid of the responsibility. And if Providence is willing to maintain the road, River Heights and Millville are going to be happy to have it come back. And the the county maintaining it, Providence will be maintaining it. So Providence is willing to resurface Millville's portion of the road?

That's what they told me. Wow. Yeah. I just feel like it Yeah. They're taken out of the library. Do not own it by the the county shouldn't own that road. We can get to that.

Sandy, you go back twenty years, and how important was it to the county that the state take over responsibility for 10th West. Yeah. So we

Yeah. We have to deal with that in a way that the answer come on the bridge saying I'm so confused on the bridge.

Well, we'll figure that out. If we continue this, let's

Sometimes I'm solving problems in the tangled web. And this is this is

why I want a delay. Bridge needs to be included as the road. Yeah. The bridge is being included. Yeah. We're not gonna exclude the bridge. Thank you. K. Okay. So week. If we could just delay this one week, I'll see if I can solve the problem in there. We'll look at it in two weeks when we meet again. So Don't you meet Oh, we meet on the seventeenth. You're right. We do meet in one week. Figure.

Well, we'll just We'll look at it then. Work toward it and get her done. K. And you're

done. Alright. Other business council member committee and liaison assignments. You all have a copy in front of you of what has been proposed that we take those assignments. Is there anybody who is opposed to what they've been doing or what

Did we ever decide if there really is a hardware ranch rating? No. I'm happy to be on that committee then. It's cool.

I already claimed it. Yeah. She holds on it.

Well, you guys are doing great work. Yes. We are. Yeah. I looked it up. You're right. Yeah. I I talked to you about mine already. I'm good with it.

K. And, Mark, just so you know, with Barbara leaving You're just gonna ask. Conduct committee, you are the then we're just gonna move you there because you were the

alternate to full. K. You're okay with that?

K. I had some questions about the North Park interlocal, and we can talk about that later, but I don't know what the status on that is. And I would be Andrew and I are working on the status of what that is. So Perfect. Yeah. I can give you an update if Thank you. Catherine, your iPad's gonna die soon. Right? Yeah. K. Alright. Does anybody else does anybody wanna propose any changes or do you want to accept what is on this document?

I wanna reach out to the attorney.

Is is that okay? Yes. Phew. Good. I'm worried. Okay. I don't think do we have we don't have to make a motion and vote on this. This is just these are the assignments that we, And if somebody has an assignment that can that gets to a point where it's not working for you Why is the auditor listed twice?

I don't know. Why is it under you and me? I'm willing to trade two for one.

I I shouldn't be under me.

I thought we put the auditor under me.

The finance. It was finance. And then we changed it because we don't have finance yet anymore. We just have one. Alright. K. Alright. Anybody wanna trade? Anybody wanna trade one of their assignments? Are we good? These two can juke it out in the parking lot, I think. That's the hardest one right now. K. Alright. For now, we're gonna just let that go. K. K. And then online BOE training. Is everyone signed up for the two hour training? When is it? It's okay. They originally told us we had to go to two full days of training. Now the state tax commission has allowed us a two hour webinar. You have to sign up. Diana sent out the email. There's a click on it where you can sign up. When it talks about who's gonna pay for it, just say not applicable. It's no nobody's gonna pay for it. And you can put our address and phone number from the county building. But then what's gonna happen they haven't even designed the webinar yet. It'll have to happen sometime before July the July. And so once you register, then they will send you the webinar once it is prepared and ready. And we all have it's required. If you if you can't do the two hour webinar, you're required to go to the two day seminar, and you still have the option to go to two days if you would like. Oh, boy. I'll add one more thing that they unregistered everyone automatically. Yes. So if you had already registered for it. Yeah. If you already registered for the two days, they unregistered you, and you have to re register Diana. Day would we have had it? Diana just needs a raise of hands as well. It was Yeah. She was going to be in March, I think. Oh, what day would we have received the email? Just look for Diana. Oh, it was from Diana? It was from Diana. Okay. Yeah. It's got all the links in it. And Bonnie will make sure to get that emailed to you if you don't have it. Diana wanted me to ask for a raise of hands who is already registered. Because at the end of this meeting, I will have been registered. Alright. We're done. Alright. Does the executive need to do this? No. We need him on board. No. Oh, darn George. I think he needs to be there. And we still need Love to have you. Yeah. We still need to discuss the idea of having a hearing officer, maybe a hybrid of both where we mostly do our own board of equalization, but we have someone who is willing to go to that two days of training that we could hire to fill in when there's, and there's been a couple of names suggested for that that might be really good, might be excellent. So give that some thought, and we'll, work on putting together an ordinance or a resolution or whatever we wanna decide. But

Appraisal applications? It's the,

no. It's it's gonna be the Board of Equalization. Board of Equalization training online. It's For '66. Yeah. K. So everybody make sure and try and do that this week. K. The, NACO conference, I will be going to NACO on the February 20. I hope to come back with a report to the rest of our council as to whether there's any value to our taxpayers, to us being more involved in NACO. I don't I I just don't have any experience with that. So we'll see if that's something we would like to budget for or whether we're just gonna say we'll just take care of our county. Yes. So is that something the county pays for? No. UAC is paying for Membership? We don't pay for the membership? Well, we do pay for membership through our UAC membership. But Yeah. But most of the entire county would pay for this. Yeah. So UAC is paying for my way to go because I'm an officer of UAC this year. So I thought this would be a good time to kind of judge and come back with a with a idea. Had a meeting in Hawaii. I know. The WIR is in Hawaii Yeah. So in June. So if we wanna send a couple people there. I just I just don't know whether it's an expense we wanna take on or not, but but I'll go and see. The the thing that has been presented to me is that the NACO groups that meet come up with policy positions that they then send on to let the congress people. And they say, here's what the counties believe in. And if there's not enough Western conservative type voices, the majority of the voices are from the East Coast, the the counties on the East Coast. So those policy positions may or may not be to our best interests, and it may behoove us to be there to be one of the votes in the room. But I don't know how much that really is gonna be worth, what it would cost for us to attend these conferences. So think about that, and we'll I'll come back and tell you what I think after I go. Being held. This one's in Washington, DC. Every February, they do Washington, DC. The Western the Western the WIR is just the Western states, the counties from the Western states. And three years ago, they met in Saint George, and so we went. I thought it was very helpful. I learned a lot about Western policies and and issues. But, like, this year, it's in Maui, Hawaii. It would have we'd have to pay for one or two people to go there, and I I just don't know. We just need to talk about that as a group. Food California, Food California. Mhmm. Oregon and Idaho. Yeah. Yeah. It's the whole Western all the Western states. So do we wanna be a voice and be a part of that? Our our from Garfield County, Jerry Taylor was just named as the president of the WIR. So there are other count most of the counties in our state go to NACo. I hear I talked to other commissioners. Almost all of them go. Their county pays for them to attend. And so, thanks, Gia. So anyway, it's, there's two ways to look at it. Are we missing out on something or do we just wanna save the money and not be a part of it? So we'll have to talk about that. K. The NAICL or the UAC legislative conference is April. It's the registration is now open. I plan to be there. I don't know if anybody else has cleared their calendar and wants to give Andrew a positive. I will be. Go ahead to get us registered. Where is it at? It's in Saint George. Okay. And the final day ends at 03:00, so you'll be able to drive home on the thirtieth. It won't and the twenty eighth is only the board meeting. So the actual meetings start the '20 the morning of the twenty ninth. So as far away as we are, we'd have to go down the twenty eighth, but the meetings are the twenty ninth and the thirtieth. So let just let Andrew know if you are available to go to that, and he'll get hotels and everything booked for us. Council member reports. Mark, do you wanna give us any updates?

I know this meeting's been long. Well, the only thing that many of the departments I was involved in since we met last was discussed in the appointments from the executive on the library board. So k.

I think that's it for me. David?

The legislative session is heating up. It really is. So

Are you planning to go down Thursday? I am. K. I am too. If there's anyone that would like to join us on Thursday, we will be driving down to the UAC meeting in the capital at 10:00. Catherine, do you have any council member report? Probably just a reminder to do your

training that we were asked to do on Oakland Public Meetings Act. I did it today. It took about nine minutes. Okay. That was an email? Yep. It was an email from the state. The but yeah. I'll forward it to you if you guys don't remember it. But, yeah, it takes ten minutes. Get your certification and forward it to Matt. Right, Matt? Right. What? Yes. Open and public meetings. Forward certification from the open and public meetings act certification. Right to Matt. You got mine. Right? I'll just forward all my emails to you. You take care of it now. Just a little reminder to get that get that done today as soon as you can.

K. Nolan.

K. I'm gonna speak tonight. Tonight, we heard a lot of people who were talking about property rights. But if you wanna hear property rights and say that they can do with what they want, then sit and listen to somebody who's gonna put a gravel pit in next door to you or something else. Mhmm. That is why we have a commission and a council who reviews those. How long ago was it we did a master plan for the county, and we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on that. And we had open public meetings, and there was many chances for people to come there. So I I really take into consideration the people that talked tonight. But when I hear that we need to have more meetings, we've had a lot of meetings on that. And so and and we are all Republicans here on this board, and we say that we look for property rights, and we respect those. And I agree that. But when I first got on planning commission, it was a said, my rights don't come at the cost of somebody else's rights. And we have to be aware of that. But I I just don't like it when I hear, hey, this is my land. I get to do with it what I want. It's that's a great thought and that's America, but we have to watch those things. And so I'm just saying, when I sit and think of all the things I did and all the time I did on planning and zoning commission and the guys who are on there now, and this thing that came before us, they have vetted. They have thought. They have worked. They have put blood, sweat, and tears into it. And there is no way we can make everybody happy. There is just absolutely no way. I mean, yes, the county's gonna grow, but can we do it in a manner that we understand the growth, we control our costs, we do all of those things. We're not taking the ability for them to develop their land. We're just saying to a certain point, you can develop your land without impacting those who are around because those people who came for the subdivision, there were a lot of people who were around them who were saying, this impacts me heavily. Heavily, not heavily. And so there has to be and and it's tough. We're sitting here saying, okay, we gotta weigh this and we gotta weigh that. And so I'm just saying that when people say they wanna study and look into it more, come to Planning and Zoning and sit and listen to those guys go through it and vet everything out. I mean And, Amdu, did you find out anything if we can pay those poor guys anymore? Let's go working on it. Because I just think we say here comes serve and then they get ripped from the public in those meetings and and then we sit and second guess them. And and that's our job, but at the same time, I hope we put into consideration what they're doing and how they're serving. And the fact that we just cannot say to everybody, do oath your land. It's it's impossible because that's why we have zoning. That's why we have those things. I mean, I had a developer who wanted to be annexed into the city of Wellsville, and the Wellsville said, okay, you pay for the water line, you pay for the sewer line. It's not on the citizens of the city or anything else, and that developer was ready to do it. And that's, I think, what we're asking is, is don't put this on other citizens if you're trying to develop. And like Joanne mentioned, the farmer who wants to bring his children there. That's why we did this in an A-ten and everything else. We can let a farmer put a house in there here. When we throw I mean, when we throw 20 lot subdivision in there, that's more than the family. And it's hard to have pockets of development. We're just gonna And then ask our fire department. Go take care of them. Yeah. And and you look at Mendon who doesn't have a lot of volunteers, and how do we cover all that? Those are a lot of volunteers, and how do we cover all that? Those are things we need to take into consideration is the safety and quality of what's going on in those areas. So that was my $10 worth tonight. So

k. Joanne, do you wanna share anything with us? I don't think you've probably been to any committee meetings, but Well, I did listen to the planning and zoning

discussion, and I really feel like supporting them because of just what he said. They have put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into those decisions. And I know we have to approve it. But, you know, this does tear at your heartstrings. I was kind of conflicted as you could see. But I think we do have to have policy and 20 I the 20 lots out of one of those is what's scary. You know, seven is kinda okay. But on that class b road, that map looks like a straight shot. It's no straight shot. You said you drove it. I tried. Then quit. You drive aways and then that that road was gone. There was no such road. Anyway, it was a good adventure.

Four wheel drive next time.

Four wheel drive. Well, I don't know. I think it went through the farmers Mhmm. Or a resident's barnyard or something. I couldn't see any road there. But

k. I had a finance meeting at the health department yesterday. They in their integration with that we all approved within integrating with Bear River Mental Health, one of the biggest issues they have is they're they're moving about 20 employees that are already have retirement. They have built up personal time off, sick leave. So they're trying to make them whole and make it so that it works so that as they make that transition, nobody loses out. And I think they've done an excellent job of putting together a plan. They will be coming to us in the next few weeks to present that to you guys for your approval, but it doesn't cost any money. They've got the money. They they always had money budgeted in to pay everyone's personal time, and so they're just gonna have to make some adjustments to their budget. But I think they've done a really good job of trying to integrate with Bear River. They're gonna change their name to Bear River Behavioral Health instead of Bear River Mental Health because they've taken on the substance abuse. And

anyway, that's mostly where my focus has been with them. That's been a great thing to watch. Yeah. It's been really good. I've caught a lot of I mean, that it's neat to just watch them work together, and

it's been good. Catherine and I met with our executive Monday morning. We'll continue to do that most Mondays or at least the Monday before our council meetings. If any of you have issues or you want to join us, we can have three of us there. Or if you want us to advocate for something, please let us know. Welcome, Dane. We're glad you're here. And I think with that, I'm gonna call it good. Does does somebody wanna say something?

We've got a lot of issues coming up in the fire district, and meeting. What is it? Thirsty Brady. I'm trying to keep lines of communication open, but the information coming is is hard to correlate and make it fit with what everybody's expectations are in this situation.

I think it's probably gonna take a couple of workshops as you gather information and then wanna share it with us. That that'll be We need to figure out

what we can actually do in terms of bringing the cities to some kind of a consensus. To some extent, they're against it, but they're not all against it in the same way. And that makes it very hard to come up with solutions. Brady's comment to me is data need to divide to what what was the phrase you used? You said data needs to drive the decision. And and trying to get everybody to accept what the data says has been difficult. So we're continuing to work on that.

Somehow, someone released this, said it is some, like, big fundraiser.

Yeah. It is not a fundraiser. It's not gonna be a moneymaker for anybody.

It is just what's quality of service. Are we after what do we need to provide?

And that's these are the cost to provide it. And it's pretty clear. We need to make it fair Yeah. That everyone's paying the same amount, and everyone's receiving as much as possible

the same level of service, if possible. And that's gonna be the hard part. This county is not possible, Sandy. And it just we just need to understand, and it comes back to Nolan's comments about you're out in the county. You you you cannot deliver fire service to the far reaches of the county on a same

same basis. But can we do better than you know, do the best we can?

That that is a good goal.

K. And just one more thing, there is a debate for the county attorney office, February 12 in on you at Utah State. What's where is it at? The Huntsman Building? Huntsman Hall. In the Huntsman Hall. K. 260 is it. Yep. If any of you want to be there to listen to that, that would be great. K. I would take a motion to adjourn. So is the debate with respect to who's gonna be named the interim attorney? Yes. I

Yes. Wasn't clear. It wasn't clear. It hasn't been clear from the party. Oh, is it interim or is it for the convention? I think it's a kind of a combination. Combination. Okay.

A combination. Okay.

Because the the public party and the radio station. Because the because the party were the ones who make the decision on the interim. Yeah. I'm If there's only three applicants. The party just chooses three applicants. So I was told about it last night, and I haven't got any more information. Because then they come on. Hang on. I'm I mean, you are the body that makes that decision. And then we make sure that decision Why have a public debate and get everybody excited? Yeah. And so they're going to influence you? Yeah. That's what I don't understand. Yeah. I'll talk to I'll talk to conduct a debate and have them I'll talk to Natalie, and we'll we'll discuss that. Unless That's I'm confused. That's I I mean, that that was Okay. It would make more sense to do that when it comes to a primary election. Not passively. Yes. Not not at this point. I thought it would be more to have it later, but It makes more sense to the conversation. Was happening, so that's

I think it's held on March 7. Or twelfth at what time? And they'll come the party

recommends one person. No. They recommend three people. Recommend three. Oh, three? Yep. They can't they can't designate one down. I wanna debate Kurt.

So who started this

Well, it's it's the party. We they we just found out today. We'll figure it out. Okay. Motion to adjourn. Salute. And

welcome. Yeah. Sure. Hey. The Aggies are playing right now.