Cache County Council Regular Meeting – 11-04-2025

Everyone to our council meeting tonight. We're glad to have you all here with us. Before we start I want to excuse Councilman Mark and Dave Erickson who are out of town but they're joining us remotely so they will be they are going to join us. They'll just be remote for tonight, and we'll go ahead and do our opening is going to be given by Nolan Erickson. Sorry. I'm reading and speaking at the same time.

We live in. We're grateful for the freedoms that it provides us. We recognize the sacrifice of those men and women of previous conflicts and those who serve in distant lands today to provide our freedom and peace. We pray blessings upon them, and we recognize their sacrifice. We give thanks for this process we have in this country, listening to constituents and finding out what is best in the process of government, and that it is a voice voice from the citizens who help us in that. We may be civil in our dialogue tonight and we may and we give thanks again for this country and those who serve and protect us. Of allegiance,

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

Thank you for filling in. Okay. We need to have a review and approval of the Minutes from October 23. October 1. Oh, okay. First we're going to approve the agenda. Second. Moved and seconded that we approve the agenda. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right. Now we will talk about review and approval of the minutes. We have three sets of minutes to discuss. Two. Two. We cut two because we don't have the October 30 ones yet. Hey, madam chair. I would like

to read approving the October 23 special meeting because I'm finding some discrepancies in there regarding who was here and the adjournment time.

Yeah. It says adjourned at 07:30.

Yeah. There were three of us who weren't at the meeting, and I don't think that we should be noted as having a nay vote. I think we should just be noted as not being at the meeting. And that was done on on the review and approval of agenda,

the action,

and then as it was mentioned, it says that it adjourned at 07:30. I wasn't here, but I don't think it adjourned

that late. It was a two minute and six second meeting. Yeah. All right. Well, let's clarify that and we'll approve those later then. Thank you, Barbara. So we're only going to approve the October 28, the minutes from the regular council meeting on October 28. Does someone want to make a motion about

that? I will move to approve the minutes on October 28.

Second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the October 28 meeting minutes. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right. The next on the agenda is the report of the county executive.

I really don't have any appointments or report to give you tonight. Okay.

Well, thank you. Okay. So the next on the agenda 6A we have Jordan Mathis from the Bear River Health Department.

All right. We have two quick items of business. The first is a recommendation from the Board of Health to reappoint Randy Williams to the Board of Health. Just a little context. I've been the health director for about five years. There's only two members on that board that were there when I was hired. We've seen a lot of turnover. Randy was willing to be reappointed, and so we didn't seek any other, individuals for that seat to try to she's also on a a statewide board of local boards of health. So we didn't seek any other applicants for that position. But the board does recommend her to the council for consideration for reappointment for three years starting 01/01/2026.

K. Right. Does someone want to make a motion on that?

Yes. I will move to reappoint Randy Williams to the Bear River Health Department Board of Health.

I'll second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the appointment of Randy reappointment of Randy Williams to the Board of Health Board of Directors. Is that what it is? Board of Health. Board of Health. Okay. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Then I wanna turn some time over to Jonathan. He's over our air quality, for a request for utilization of air pollution, control fees.

Thank you.

Yeah. So today, I would like to State your name first, please, for the record. Yes. Yes. Jonathan Robinson. K. Thank you.

So today, I'd like to come forward to, bring up some vehicle emissions assistance programs that, either are coming down the pike or that we would be interested in, renewing at the Bear River Health Department. The first one is going to be the Beehive emissions reduction plan. So this is something that was facilitated under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, allocating funds to various, states and entities for, air quality improvement purposes. And and Utah was fortunate enough to receive approximately $75,000,000 towards the implementation of such emissions reduction programs. EPA received over 300 applications. Utah was one of only 25 of those that was, accepted. And so what that enables us to do is bring into place an emissions reduction program, specifically towards electrifying vehicles. And next slide. And that is going to be approximately 10 of those $75,000,000 allocated towards that electrification program. The Bear River Health Department is being allocated about $882,000 towards this implementation. The funding must be used by October 2029, and but what this is going to enable us to do is replace vehicles that are currently failing on an emissions test or vehicles that are currently failing on an emissions test or vehicles that are, over a certain age range. I've got some more information on that in the coming slides here. This program is going to be greatly advantageous to people, who are unable to make the financial obligations for their vehicles. And so those who are disadvantaged, those who are marginalized in our community, this will be a fantastic benefit as far as helping to offset some of the expenses there in replacing these vehicles. And next slide. And that's going to be broken down based on the federal poverty index. So anybody who qualifies at 300% or below will be able to receive up to $10,000 for the replacement of their vehicle. The 300 to 400% bracket changes to $7,000 and anyone under 500% would be able to qualify for 4,000. As far as applicants, it's going to be basically just proving the vehicle is yours. You have to be a legal adult, and you will be able to take out a loan. You're also able to stack this program with any other potential incentives. So just bringing the awareness here on this, EV rep program. I can probably skip the next slide here. This is just talking about the the details and stuff there. But the main reason that I would really like to come forward today to bring up the Vehicle Repair and Replacement Assistance Program. So this is something that we are fortunate to have in place from 2017 to the fund cessation in 2023. During that time, if you go to the next slide here, we were able to assist people in repairing or replacing vehicles. '96 to the current year was eligible for repair assistance up to a maximum of $1,000 per VIN. And 2003 and older were eligible for replacement of up to $5,000 and the vehicle had to be indicating that it was currently failing on an emissions test, meet a couple other guidelines there. Go to the next slide. And the success with that program, we were able to show that between 2017 and 2023, approximately 1,500 vehicles were either repaired or replaced within Cache County. And that came to the tune of almost $2,000,000 in federal grants that we were able to allocate to individuals with the program. That also, impact our air quality with a reduction of about 130 tons of significant air pollution being reduced from our air shed. So that was under the previous program. We go to the next slide here. So moving forward, and it was recently brought to our attention that there were some excess funds that were available inside of the county from APC, that's Air Pollution Control fees. And we would like to potentially bring this program back on a smaller scale. Obviously, we wouldn't be looking at the same numbers we were looking at before, with the the county funding versus federal funding, But we would like to potentially reopen this program to be able to assist those again that have been marginalized within our communities to help with the repair and replacement of these vehicles. Our anticipation, the numbers have adjusted a little bit based off of, some new information that's come in, but instead of that $75,000 to $100,000 we would invest back into the community and those small businesses and such around here. That would probably be more in the $100,000 to $125,000 annually that would be projected for that, with the goal of running that program alongside the EVRAP program. And then we would be able to assist, excuse me, people up to about that 300% federal poverty index line. We did bring this to the Bear River Board of Health and we're able to receive their blessing towards this and but we'd like to bring it here to the council as well. As far as the program goes, again, it would pretty much be mirroring what we had before, maybe a few minor modifications, the largest being, previously, it was anybody who lived, worked, or went to school here in Cache County. Since these funds would be coming solely from people registering vehicles within Cache County boundaries, one of the new guidelines we would be looking at would be implementing it solely for residents here within Cache County as well. Alright. I believe that was everything for it. So I'd like to open it up if there are any questions.

On the previous screen, it says this would require a formal request to Cache County Council to access restricted APC fee funds. Could you tell me tell me that acronym again, please? Air pollution control. Okay. And those are the fees that are assessed at the when cars are registered? Yes. Whenever you register a vehicle here in Cache County, there's a $3 fee assessed on the top. That's the APC fee. Okay. And are you requesting that those that approval this evening? Yes. Requesting that approval this evening?

Yes.

To access those funds this evening. Okay.

Yeah. And I will just say because Jordan and I spoke about this previously that the the federal government was giving grants that we could use for some of those replacement and repair and now the grants are only for electric vehicles. Yep, Jordan, if you want to explain that,

where the difference is and and what those funds we get. So with us being able to have the this new, beehive emissions reduction, it's it's limited to electric vehicles. We know that there's many people in our population, particularly in some of those poverty categories, that don't have the infrastructure to even be able to utilize an electric vehicle. So they they still may experience the need to repair or replace a vehicle that is emitting pollution. And so we're we'd like to run those two side by side so that they have the we have more options for individuals regardless. Does that make sense? Mhmm. So we're trying to make the the program was so successful before. We think running it side by side will allow those that can move to an EV if they so choose to move that way or still replace with a cleaner emissions vehicle. Does that make sense? Yes. And those APC fees can only be used for control of air pollution. So they're pretty limited on what they can be done. That was my second question. What other alternatives do we have for the use of those funds? You said it has to be something related to the acquisition. We've been using them almost entirely just to fund our emissions program. So that's our inspections and and training of it of emission stations. Jonathan does the majority of that work, so it funds his time and our time to be able to work with those stations to do the emissions program.

What's the fund balance between?

It's close to, I believe, half $1,000,000 right now. Okay. So this would, over the course, at at a 125, would still leave us with some slush at the end of that. So it's not we don't anticipate that it's gonna eliminate

the entirety of that. Okay. I noticed oh, sorry. Go ahead. I noticed when the state stopped requiring, inspections, some shops also have varying rates for emissions. Did that used to be subsidized by the state? And is that something these funds could go towards is actually helping pay for the testing itself? So

we used to set that. You weren't on the council at the time, but we actually came and we we had stations come to us and ask that we go to a market base where they get to set the market where because the fee that we were we were allowing them to charge wasn't covering their costs. So we just said, well, fine. Build it into your business model. If people wanna go to the cheaper place, they can go to the cheaper place or they can go to wherever. But the the the council voted to allow us to move that to a market, and that's why we see variability Okay. In what's being charged so that they can cover whatever their costs are.

Thanks. Jordan, are are you guys still doing mobile

vehicles emissions testing as well? Yeah. We have two. How many do we have? We have two that are currently operational. K.

Perfect. So they must buy an electric vehicle, but electric will be electric vehicles range like crazy in price and also the charging requirements. So are you putting kind of a focus on what vehicles they can purchase that are best for that? Does that make sense?

That program's being run by the state, and we're administering it. This program that we're asking for wouldn't be to support electric vehicle. It'd be to support emissions vehicles.

Got it. Okay.

Did I get that correct? Yep. What do you do to get the word out

about the program? We we work through a lot of the stations.

You wanna talk to more about that? Sure.

Yeah. As far as the EB wrap or the potential B wrap program? I was talking about the latter, but I would be curious about the former as well. Yeah. The EB wrap program, I know the state is working on some advertisement. Basically, we're just waiting for all of the counties to get on the same, foot on it, and then they'll be able to launch those ad campaigns for it. For the VRAP program, previously, we did run ads through Facebook. We did some spots on radio, did some at, movie theaters and whatnot. But largely, it was word-of-mouth from stations providing the education out there and letting them know that if somebody's failing on an admissions test, they can send them over to us. We can analyze the situation and see if we'd be able to assist.

That. Okay. Any other questions for either Jordan or Jonathan? Okay. All right. Thank you so much. Okay. I would entertain a motion on that, to be able to release those

funds. Yeah. I'll make a motion that we approve the the APC funds towards the

Yeah. So our our formal would re request would be annually up to a 125, but no more than a 125 so we can manage that that surplus that we have over the course of the program.

K. So I include that in your motion? Revise that motion to include a up to $125,000 annually

for the BRAF program. Second. K. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the the county funds for annually up to a 125,000 for the BRAF repair or replacement program. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right. Craig Hidalgo. There you are. I couldn't see it anymore.

Let's go to the next slide.

Craig, will you pull that microphone down a little bit too? Because it's it's hard to hear when you're the back of the room. Okay. Can you hear me now? Yeah. That's perfect. If you would identify yourself before you start talking. My name is Craig Hidalgo.

I'm the a mayor of Clarkson, but also the chair of the Cache County Council of Governments. And I'm here to report to the county council, the projects for this coming for this year that we reviewed and approved as a cog and rep presenting to you for ratification of our decision. I'd like to go through a little bit of a history to answer some questions I've had from County Council members. The last couple of years, we've done some restructuring in the COG arena. And as a result, the 2024 and 2025 had higher than normal funds that we could disperse out. This new process that we've set up allows COG to set aside a $3,000,000 reserve fee that can only be distributed through Cash County Council approval. But it's also It was set up to address, issues that might come up, undetermined issues as far as inflation or something like that. So, that's what the purpose of that was, to help many municipalities that come forth. They do a process of review. Two years later, they get the funding. In that two years, economic conditions can change to the point that they need some additional some funds. In this way, we can address those. But again, the county council has to approve any distribution of those funds. In 2020 2026, we will be going back for funds for 2028 and that'll be for about 7,000,000 to $8,000,000 a year as what we've had in the past. So this chart up here, I've had some questions from council members and county council as well as municipalities about just where things the distribution of income, COG funds have been. If you look at this one right here, this is the sales tax distributions by county. This is what comes in per county or per municipality throughout the county through the year. And if you take a look at that, that gives you a pretty good idea of where, the sales tax distributions are coming in at. Now, if you go to the next chart, this is COGS overall fund distribution by jurisdiction. This is how the COG is this has basically voted. They went through the presentations and they vote each year on where they want these distributions to go from. And if you look at the two charts right here and I've got it broken out. I won't talk about the other two because it's broken out by rule and also, not rule, but urban. But this gives you an idea that with the tax cut revenues coming in and what we're loaning out, the COG is looking at what the transportation needs are of the valley. And I think this demonstrates that we've done our due diligence in making sure that funds are rewarded and allocated according to what's needed in the in the county. So if you go back to, original slide up one more. Right there. For this year, we had distributions or a fund total of let me get my paper straight here. We had $17,000,000 just under 17 and a half million dollars that we could allocate out. We had 15,000,003 that went towards or $22,000,000 that went towards urban and the others went towards the communities, in the areas. This is how we broke it out and this is what we're present to the council this evening for your sustaining vote is that we, award these counties. We went through the presentations. We voted based on the presentations and what was given and this is how it laid out. So, North or Logan City will get 5,800,000.0. North Logan will get about 4,700,000.0 to finish the second east, 3,000,000, 3,800,000.0 for Heights Park, and 900,000 to North Logan City for some some remainder of their part roundabout. So this is what we're ref we're referencing to the county, the council to vote on this evening. Is there any questions you have on this? Go ahead. So yes.

Last year and and maybe you addressed this in the beginning, and I didn't quite understand. Last year, you had a the contingency of a a couple million dollars, I think. And this year see. The contingency fund was set aside? No.

The the contingencies never been greater than 3,000,000. Than 3,000,000. Okay. Okay. So, yeah, there's $3,000,000 set aside. And and this year, it's not included? It is included. It's we still have a set aside of 3,000,000, and that will always be there. That's part of the reason for the real or resetting this up up and doing it. We recognized that due to inflation, for example, we had the COVID situation, that just destroyed some of the proposals that we'd already approved. We realized we needed to be able to address those, so we we decide, okay. We gotta have a set aside. We gotta have somebody that we can go back to the council county council and say, we need to use some of this to cover this. That's what the purpose of that is. And again, only the county council can approve that. Oh, okay. I just see at the top of the graph, it says contingency fund zero.

Yeah. So I'm I was just a little confused because in the year previous years, I'd seen it.

So last year, we put the $3,000,000 in the contingency fund knowing that last year, we awarded about 10,000,000 and knowing that this year was gonna be the 17,000,000. So that 3,000,000 is still being held, but we're not putting any more in that contingency fund. Oh, okay. So in the future, as those now $27,000,000 worth of projects go to construction, if there is a shortfall, we would come back to the county council and say, hey. We're here to to do an amendment, kinda take some of that out of contingency, award it to a previously awarded project. And then that following year, when we came back, we'd probably try to put that money back into that contingency fund Oh, okay. To bring that balance back to the $3.8.

Thank you.

K. K. Does anyone else have questions about any specific projects or any other questions for mayor Hidalgo? K. Alright.

Thank you. Jane, we do have a resolution later on which I guess you'll approve.

Thank you so much. Okay. It is 05:30. We're going to start our public hearings. First public hearing we have is ordinance twenty twenty five dash thirty four, the Cache County Water Use And Preservation. We'll turn that over to Angie.

Yes. Angie Zetterquist, director, development services. This item is in response to a state law creating in 2022 where they adopted State Bill one ten, water as part of the general plan. The new legislation required, most municipalities and all counties to amend their general plan, to include this element to address the impact of land use planning on water use, and per the legislation, that water element must be adopted by the end of this year. So the County, did a request for proposals and brought on board Landmark Design, who helped prepare this general plan element for us. As you can see, the steering committee consisted of Nolan Gunnell and, Nate Dowgs from the Planning Commission, and then our former countywide pran planner Brandon Bell. And then once that draft was completed, Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 2, recommending that the council approve it on a vote of six to zero. But I will turn the time now over to Aubrey Larson with Landmark Design to give you a overview of that water element.

Good evening, council members. My name is Aubrey Larson. And then I also have our engineer who helped with the more technical side of this document, Easton Hopkins, on speakerphone. Easton, do you mind saying something so we can make sure we can hear you?

Hello, everyone.

Can you hear him? Okay. We'll do our best. Okay. So I'm work for Landmark Design. I'm the company that was contracted to do the water element. I'm from Wellsville. I I grew up in Cache Valley, so I understand how important water is to to farmers, to residents, and and I wanted to make sure that this new chapter of your general plan would be, you know, fulfill these three things that, you know, as a new chapter of the general plan, this is essentially what what this new document will do. It's meant to be an advisory guide to land use decisions. It describes where you are, where you want to be, and how you will get there. It does not create regulations or requirements, but it may recommend new policies or strategies. So at the end of the document, you'll notice there's some recommendations. Next slide, please. To take a step further back, this as as I mentioned, this will function as a new chapter of your general plan. Along with land use, housing, and transportation, you'll now have water use and preservation.

Next.

So why do you need a new chapter? It came about from s p one ten. This was, from twenty twenty two's legislative session, and it requires most municipalities and all counties to amend their general plans to address how land use planning impacts water use, and the requirement for adoption is the end of this year. There's kind of a laundry list of requirements. I think it's helpful to boil it down to these four main items. First of all, to address the effect of permitted development or development patterns on water demand and water infrastructure, to look at methods of reducing water demand and per capita water use for both existing and future development, and then to identify some opportunities for the county to modify operations to eliminate practices or conditions that waste water. You'll notice in the document this kind of italicized lighter gray text. This was an idea from planner Brandon Bell that we highlight how, each section is meeting state code requirements. So that's what that text is meant to do. Hopefully, that's helpful as you review the document. Okay. I'm going to move into just giving you a very high level overview of the content, and then hopefully, there'll be a little bit of time for if there's any comments or questions. K. So the first part of the water element is introduction. This sets the stage. It talks about s b one ten and those requirements. It also includes some guiding principles for water planning in unincorporated Cache County, and then it talks about some key stakeholders, key individuals who are at the table. So we we love that there were guiding principles for your current general plan and felt that it would be appropriate to have some specifically for water planning. And I wanna make sure it's clear that these are for unincorporated Cache County. And we'll talk a little bit about the incorporated municipalities role in in water planning. But first is respect for private property and water rights. The second, to protect and conserve agricultural lands as a vital a vital economic resource that happens to be tied to water. Third, encourage locally led wise stewardship of water use and water resources. So empowering people to make their own decisions based on the best available programs and information. And four, ensure new development aligns with long term water sustainability goals and realities. So making sure that their, decisions are data, based. Next. So there's a lot of players involved, a lot of different stakeholders, but we highlight these four key roles in the document. So the county itself serves as a regulatory body responsible for land use planning and enforcing ordinances. The county itself does not provide water. Municipalities, you know, as per your current general plan are tasked with absorbing most new growth, within their planned city and town boundaries. There are also five small culinary water systems in the unincorporated area, and they provide essential water services for the residents that live there. And then Cache Water District, is tasked with protecting Cache County's water future by managing resources efficiently, planning strategically, and they also represent local interests at the state level. The next section of the document gives a little bit more context for water planning. We we look at the region and some of those considerations and then also at land use. There's a section that talks a little bit about your zoning, about agriculture and implications on water and land use, and then residential uses, and then we highlight secondary water, which is not a focus of this still part of the larger system and important to acknowledge. So as you are well aware, Cache County's water supply comes from the Bear River Watershed. This is one of five major river basins that do eventually drain into the Great Salt Lake. Note that the state has established different regional goals to reduce gallons per capita per day, from a baseline of 2,015. I recognize this isn't this is old data. I I believe they're updating these goals currently, but essentially, the goal for the Bear River region is an 18% reduction from that 2015 baseline to 2030, and so on and so forth. Groundwater. Groundwater is an important consideration. Nearly all of Cache County's culinary water comes from groundwater. We discovered that, you know, there's not a lot of current information on groundwater, so there is a study going on right now. That study will be critical to informing, both, near term and long term decisions about water allocation, source protection, and then making sure that growth aligns with the available supply. County zoning. Your zoning in unincorporated Cache County emphasizes low to moderate densities and agricultural preservation. As I mentioned, high density and mixed use development is encouraged to incorporate into the cities that have the necessary services and infrastructure. And this water element focuses on agriculture and rural residential uses for that reason. Next. Agriculture is a key component to the water element. Cache County ranks third in Utah for agricultural GDP. In 2023, it was 9.3% of the state total. There's nearly 1,400 farms that produce a variety of crops, primarily alfalfa, barley, wheat, safflower, and corn. Agriculture depends heavily on the Bear River water for irrigation, and we noted that crop flexibility and rotations make farmland critical to Cache Canyon's water conservation strategy. There's key differences between irrigated and nonirrigated crops. Irrigated relies on diversion, sprinklers, or flooding. This generally, has more stable yields versus non irrigated or dry farmed, which relies on rainfall, soil moisture, and these areas are more drought sensitive for that reason. The kind of orangish orange yellow you can see in that map represents, dry farmed areas. It's also important to consider that the conversion of farmland to municipal uses will generally shift, the use from surface water to ground water. So if you think if, there was a crop there being irrigated with surface water, you build a home that needs a well, it's now drawing from the aquifer and is more consistent drain on ground water sources. There's a variety of tools to protect agricultural land, primarily agricultural protection areas or APAs as well as conservation easements. Currently, there's thousands of acres in Cache County that are already preserved. We noted that there's strong local participation in many of the state programs, lots of support for irrigation upgrades, efficient practices, and the long term preservation of farmland. Highlighting some of the the five small systems in unincorporated Cache County, First of all, most residents do rely on private wells, but then we've shown those five systems with Benson culinary improvement district, the largest, and Paradise West, the smallest at the South end of the valley. We talked to water managers from each of these systems to just, you know, get their perspectives on water conservation, and there is an appendix to the document that summarizes, some of those key takeaways. Secondary water. As I noted, this is not the focus of the water element, but is important to acknowledge. There are over 100 irrigation companies, and many of the historic canal systems face maintenance, safety, and encroachment challenges. These canals remain vital for agriculture, recharge of aquifers, and they do support secondary water use to extend culinary supply. Water supply and demand analysis. So this section, as I mentioned, is what Easton and his team were primarily responsible for. They did a high level analysis looking at both water supply and demand and existing and future demand scenarios. So it as I mentioned, it was a high level study on both water supply and demand, specifically focused on unincorporated Cache County and those two main land use types, agriculture and residential. Note that there were data limitations, as private well users are not required to report water usage, so that made it difficult to quantify total residential demand, so we did rely heavily on data reported by those five smaller systems to get an estimate. That graph is meant to show kind of the breakdown of estimated annual demand. The dark green color is agriculture. That small sliver of yellow representing residential uses in incorporated Cache County. And then it's important to consider, you know, there's also municipal and industrial draw on the system from those incorporated cities as well. Key takeaways. So, when the residential usage is applied across the dataset, the takeaway is that per acre water use in residential areas does exceed that of agriculture in Cache Valley. Given this fact, supporting, continuing, and preserving agriculture water use can be considered a water use and preservation strategy for Cache County. Current supply status, the county supply currently meets demand. That groundwater study I mentioned will be very important for clarifying long term drinking water limits. Growth with wind limits, it's recommended that future development aim to stay within existing demand. There are shifts in agricultural use with those trends expected to continue and decline. Remember that there are those trade offs between surface to groundwater. And then with residential use, reducing outdoor water use or at a minimum, avoiding the use of groundwater for landscapes is an important strategy for preserving water. At the end of the document, there are, I believe, 11 recommendations. There are they're kind of categorized as water conservation specific strategies, and then we did go through the current general plan and listed out additional strategies that are already in place. Next. So if you'd like, we can go through the 11 strategies. What I think I'll do is just keep, moving through the slides. Keep

going. Next slide. Next one.

And then at the back of the document, there's some resources for residents. And this is links to different information, such as water wise landscape design principles, programs, funding, classes, etcetera. And this is what that table looks like. So just some helpful links to help, residents who'd like to learn more. Next. And that is it. I know that was a lot of information, but if there's any questions, make sure the hard questions are, directed at Easton, but thank you.

K. Thank you so much, Audrey. Does anyone have some questions before we open this to the public? K. We'll we'll get back to you when we discuss this. K. This is a public hearing about the county water use and preservation element. Is there anyone here in the public that is here to speak about this proposal?

Okay. Move to close.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Okay. Any opposed? Okay. We'll move to the second, ordinance twenty twenty five dash 40, Mountain Manor Springs rezone. Turn that over to Angie.

Yes. So, this is the I'm sorry, again, Angie Sutterquist. Mountain Manor Springs rezone. This rezone request is 98.6 acres, going from the agricultural A 10 zone to the rural two zone. What that would do, if approved, would allow maximum potential of 49 lots in the RU 2 zone. If you wanna go to the next slide. So, again, this is in Petersboro. The next closest RU-two zone, it would be the High Country Estates. I think, this is just an overview of the two properties from an aerial. If you go to the next slide. So, yeah, the closest RU-two is in the orange at the very top of that map. That is the High Country Estates, rezone and subdivision that was developed in 2011. The green hash marks on this map, illustrate the future annexation area for Mendon. We did reach out to Mendon City and they had concerns about this large of a development, potential development, having on their own city services, because they'd be utilizing a lot of the roads, the libraries, all of that. Although they did not outright oppose the rezone, they did have some serious concerns. So this was taken before Planning Commission for a public hearing on October 2. I can go to the next one. And ultimately, the Planning Commission did recommend denial of the project on a six to zero vote. The conclusions that they reached in making that recommendation are, that the rezone request is not compatible with the purpose of the RU2 zone. Typically, they like to see those zones closer to a municipal boundary. This one, the closest town or city is Mendon, and it's about 1.25 miles away. The rezone in High Country States is a little bit closer at, oh no, so that's 1.25, Mendon is 1.65 miles away. So it's not close to a municipality. The request is not consistent with the General Plan currently, which has this area, identified as agricultural and ranching as well as mountain rural and conservation more towards the west. It is not appropriately served by public roads and services. If you go back to the aerial there you go. You can see there is a private road well maybe you can see it. But there is a private road along the north boundary of that parcel ending in 17 and then it's basically a private driveway that extends past there. That is the only ingress egress. So, a large development, if the rezone were approved, would require that secondary access and it's just not there currently. Let me go back to the last slide again. Thanks. So again, it's not suitably, or appropriately served by those public roads and services. And, as mentioned before, Mendon had some serious concerns. So, based on those conclusions, again, they did recommend denial unanimously, six to zero. And, that concludes my report if you have any questions. Okay. Thank you, Angie.

Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here from the public to speak about this project?

I will say I haven't been able to see the applicant. I'm not sure if they're out in the crowd. But Kurt, would you ask if anyone's here to speak to the Mountain Manor Springs rezone?

I would like to speak. Okay.

Go ahead and if you'll come to the microphone and identify yourself and

Benjamin Chan Ansler from Providence. I'm a have to agree with the planning commission that this should not be rezoned. We are losing our farm land at a at way too fast, and we we shouldn't be losing in it at all. We need our food to grow somewhere, and there's plenty of vacant commercial lands in our cities that that can be may aid into mixed use developments.

Thank you, Benjamin. Is there anyone else here that would like to speak to this as the proponent here?

Okay. Alright. Move to close public hearing.

Second. Second. Moved and seconded that we close public public hearing. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Alright. The next public hearing, we're gonna go ahead and turn some time over to our county executive before we open that to the public.

Do you want me to address you from here?

Or You can address us from there if you'll speak really loudly. And and you know what, George? It might be better if you come come there just so that everyone can hear you.

I appreciate the opportunity to address, the council and those that are gathered. Our task when I was elected about two months ago was to try and get control of the county budget. The county budget had been operating at a deficit for a couple of years. A significant deficit was predicted for this year. We identified over the first couple of months of our work about $2,800,000 of reductions. Some of those reductions involve reducing employees. That's a very painful thing to do. We we have done that. We've reduced our workforce by a number of employees, and we're looking at other deductions. This library amount to approximately 10% of the reductions we're suggesting. I wanna just explain the principal reason why we're suggesting that the library be looked at. It's a double taxation problem as shown on this graph. We have a number of municipal libraries that operate in Cache Valley. There are eight of them. These libraries are good libraries, and that is that does not include the Cache County Library, which is also a good library. The operating cost of the eight operating libraries is $4,600,000 In the last ten years, dollars 31,500,000.0 have been spent by the various cities to put in new libraries. If you take a look at those costs in the cities in which the libraries are operating, the individuals in those cities are paying approximately $163 on average per household municipal libraries. The county library is paid for by general fund, meaning everyone in the county is taxed for that library. That amount to about $4.81 per household. So the individuals that are using the the Cache County Library are paying $48.01 $44 and 81¢ per household. The people who are using the municipal libraries are paying a $163 per household. You can see the unbalance. In addition, we're asking those individuals who are using the municipal libraries to pay $200,000 toward the county library. That's where we get the double taxation problem And that's the reason we're suggesting that the council address that. It is a council decision. Thank you.

Thank you, George. K. Before we open this up for public hearing, I just want to give a few instructions for anyone who wants to speak. We'll have you come to the microphone and identify yourself. We're going to limit comments to two minutes apiece and would you please, if you're saying the same things that have already been said, we'd like to hear something new, if we could. We're going to limit this hearing to a half an hour. So we'll start right now and go to twenty two minutes after the hour or eighteen after the hour? I can't do math. We'll go to twenty two after the hour. Okay. And, I just want to say also that the final decision on the future of the library will not be made tonight. This is not a night where we as a council will discuss this. We're going to hear public input from you, but as we get towards the December where we make final decisions about the library or about the whole budget as a whole, we have some pretty hard decisions to make. And so this is for public input, but we will not be discussing it and making a decision tonight. I wanted to make sure everyone knows that. With saying that, we'll go ahead and open up this public hearing. If you want to those that want to speak, if you'll come to the microphone and maybe we could have you line up on that wall over there in order so that there's some orderliness to the speaking, and we'll go ahead and start.

Benjamin Chandler from, Providence. So on on this pit apron, point number five, it says in 2010, there were there's public discussion about forming a county wide library system. 2010 is fifteen years ago. Many library patients weren't even born yet. It's time to to put other oh, to make the county wide library system.

Thank you, Benjamin. And will you all please tell where you're from? Will you give us what municipality you live in as you Roy Swoker said I'm from Providence as well, but I was a long time resident of Logan City.

I happily paid my tax fees for the Cache Library as well because I think it's a benefit not just for me as a resident of Providence City, but it is a benefit for the entire county if they'll just use it. For $4.89, that's the price of about half a cheeseburger. Right? That's not a big deal. We're talking about very little money to save a library that's contributing for 20% of our county. This is something that we just need to be reasonable on. There's a lot of ways to save money. This is not one of them. You guys are very smart. You can come up with other ways to find money savings or even increasing taxes slightly would be a better option than closing something that benefits so many of our residents and children. In fact, you're talking two thirds of the people going to the library are little kids. My kids are here with me today because I need them to know that if something like this is happening, they can stand up and they can voice their opinion. This is something that we need to consider. It's not something you guys should just do overnight and I like that you're gonna discuss this further, but it is a benefit to our county. It's a moral benefit. It's a way for kids to improve. It's it's just something that's not going to be a drain on the the economy. And by getting rid of the library, all you're doing is reducing the benefits that we have in our county and you're actually increasing the cost overall for the for the county because of the 6,000 households that'll have to go spend a $163

for a library card, that accounts to almost a million dollars. So Thank you. And, we have Andrew here that's gonna time us for the two minutes, so we'll keep an eye on that too.

Janelle Seeley. I'm from Providence. Cache County has a long history of underfunding the library. The library services in the county started in 1933 and, there was an interlocal agreement established with Logan City. By 1977, the county opted to about the tune of $3,000 to quit participating in that library system. And that divergence has led us to where we are today. In 2008, the county withdrew its funding from the bookmobile, further exacerbating the problem. Because of the county's lack of willingness to step up to provide library systems, other highlighted in the document that's been distributed. But, one of the suggestions is that a school district fills the gap in literary access, and that's simply not the case. Young children do not have access to the school system. Adults do not have access to the school system. And even my six children who do have access to the school system say, you know, to use the SORA system that the school district provides, you might wait over a year to get a book. Whereas, if you use the Libby system that the county provides, your wait may be two weeks or less. So going through the school just takes forever. I mean, to wait an entire school year for the book that you want to read, that's a little unreasonable. The county is asking municipality municipalities to take over the library, with just two months notice and that's just not feasible. Municipal budget cycles are offset by six months from the counties, and the county library is currently pursuing state accreditation. Once that's complete within the next two years, we'll be eligible for grant funding, and financial support. Utah State Code 97,501 code redesignates counties as a taxing authority for libraries. Am I okay to finish? Cities that operate their own libraries are statutorily excluded from a county tax. So the concern about double taxation is misplaced. If the county levied just one tenth of the allowable tax rate only on residents without a dedicated library, it would create sustainable funding for the library. Which for the average home in Cache Valley, that would be one tenth of what the county's allowed to tax would be $25 a year. Where Mendez's non municipal tax I mean, non municipal fee is about $40, Logan's is on the highest end at $1.63. $25 to remain library access countywide is significantly less than any resident that is currently not covered by a city library could pay to to have those access and have that service. Janelle, I'm gonna I'm gonna cut you off. I'm I'm done. So thank you for listening. Thank you. I hope everyone can say what they wanna say. Okay. Thank you.

Hi. I'm Anne Hedrick and I am the president of the Cache Valley Library Association and we sent you all, an email and I just wanted to highlight a few parts of it. 95% of Americans aged 16 and older agree that materials and resources available at public libraries play an important role in giving everyone a chance to succeed. And 94% that say say that having a public library improves the quality of life in their community. Libraries are institutions that provide and protect deep rooted American values, community. In the age of artificial intelligence, especially, there's an unprecedented need for both credible resources and human connection. Libraries provide both and much more. Libraries are one of the few remaining public spaces that reflect community community identity and defend the common good. Libraries offer a place for community groups to meet, collaborate in casual and organized ways alike. Fairness is another value. We believe it should be easy for residents to access both physical and digital library services no matter where they live. Free library service for all users is a democratic value which provides equal access to many benefits: learning and discovery, author reading, story times, other youth programs, readers guides, book clubs and social gatherings, STEM education and access to technology such as printers, wifi, computers, maker tech, and also unique materials like telescopes, headphones, tools. Libraries provide a safe, healthy environment for users of all ages and backgrounds. And then value. Some government and community services are valuable enough that they should be funded by a broader base than those who use them or use them the most, such as fire departments, schools, and libraries. Return on investment calculations vary, amount invested. Estimates place this figure anywhere from 5 to $30 return for each dollar spent on library services. So we appreciate you, taking the time to read what we wrote and hope you consider the value of libraries Thank you. For for everybody in the county.

Hello. My name is Jane Erickson. I'll give a little personal history. I was a school librarian in '2 other states and at Millville Elementary before I retired. I'm here today to urge you to keep and hopefully expand library services for Cache County residents. Since the library services are so fractured in Cache County, there are many pockets of residents without service. Your map shows that that the CVLA gave you. Well, Millville is one of those unlucky groups and gaps. Every year at Millville Elementary, I presented a program to kids to let them know where they could use a library besides the school library. They were so enthusiastic and very interested, and they would get acquainted with the bookmobile and learn about their options outside of the Millville school library. Well, the county eliminated support for the bookmobile several years ago. Millville kids who have families that have, finances, transportation, time, and energy to let them use the Hiram, Logan, or a county facility in Providence. Those kids were lucky. Not everyone was lucky. But at least they could use the county facility for free if they could get there. An integrated city county library system was voted down repeatedly. The county eliminated support for the state boatmobile. Now, the council is considering eliminating the county wide library. Why do we have this pattern? It's in our interest and to keep a educated and enriched and engaged citizenry. I urge you to keep the library services. Thank you. Thank you, Jane.

My name is Allison Peterson. I'm from Hiram. I am one of the 80% of people that you're worried about double taxing. I don't really care about the 80%. I care about the 20% that will be left without a library resource. Frankly, I wish more of my taxes went to things like libraries. And you're all public servants and I can't think of a more universal public service than a library other than like maybe a road. And I urge you to remember that you are public servants and this is a public good. When I was in elementary school, I was viciously bullied, and one of the only places I could turn to that I knew that I was safe was the library. Libraries became like chapels for me growing up. I dealt with a lot of emotional turmoil in my home and with my friends, but I always knew I was safe in the library when I was 16 and horrifically depressed and contemplating suicide. I ate lunch alone in the library. The library saved my life. Books make us better people. Books made me kinder. They made me smarter. They made me stronger. They made me braver. They made me more empathetic. I heard all of you to consider this. Why would you deprive any resident of this county, present or future, of a library, of books, of a safe place, of a chapel? And I urge you if you do not have this empathy, pick up a book and learn some. Thank you.

That's not appropriate. We can't we can't have clapping, please. That's I take up our time, so thank you. I'm Laura Lacho of Providence,

and my husband and I homeschool our kids. We always have. So the light a library has always been essentially a second home for our family, and I don't say that lightly. My kids and I are at the light Cal Cache County Library almost every single day. It's part of our PE as we walk there, we interact with the librarians, We we rely heavily on the resources they offer. For our family, it's primarily the books, but there are also resources that we have used. When we moved here, we we've had to move a lot with my husband's work. One of the top two considerations we've always had in moving anywhere is is there a library? And the Cache County Library was the main deciding factor in our moving to Providence. We are part of the 20%. I agree with what others have said. $4.81 is not a steep burden to bear. We would happily spend more. We utilize this. Like the previous person said, it's it's almost like their chapel. It's a safe place. My kids feel safe. It's the thing they look forward to every single day. People have already touched on the economic factors,

but studies have shown that there is a strong return on investment for the resources the library provides and how it benefits

the makes it more attractive to potential homebuyers and people moving into the community, and it can lead to a better quality of life, and it can increase, property values as well. Studies have library can increase reading test scores for children in the community. I know that's been true for my kids. Taking them to the library is what started their love of learning, And I just strongly encourage you to vote against defunding the library because investing in the Cache County Library is an investment in our community's future. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Julia Justice. I live in Providence. I've been losing sleep over the library question and have been doing a lot of my own personal emailed all of the council members some of the things that I've been looking at and analyzing and researching. And I appreciate the responses that I got from council member Garrity and, Hurd and also executive Daines. So thank you for reading through my my, my letter, and I hope that if you haven't, that you'll have time to do that. One thing that's been interesting to me to think about is how does the Cache County library spending in Cache County compare to library spending in other counties in the state of Utah. And one thing I found that was interesting is that it's about four times less. If you look at average county spending, and that's after you adjust for the cost of those who are covered by municipal libraries. So, it's an example of how Cache County is already currently under serving its residents. And, another salient point from the letter I wrote that I think is really interesting, after talking to the data state coordinator Sam Dutton at the state Utah State Library Division is that if we were to defund the Cache County Library, we would create the single largest service gap in the state of Utah for library services. I agree with what's been spoken already and the importance of children being able to check out books and take them home in order to not create delay in their language development. Something else that my letter touches on is, the number of resources per capita that are available currently to Cache County residents compared to residents in the municipalities. And for Cache County residents, it's point seven resources per capita compared to the average county, the the county average of the municipal libraries of 6.82 resources per capita. So my argument would be not that we should defund the library, but that we are underfunding the library and should increase library funding by at least four times. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Amanda Ashfield, and I am currently a resident of Providence, but also, like someone else said, happily paid that, you know, other 80% tax when living in Logan. I think I could expound on the values of libraries for a long time, but we all know that by now. I think after reading over these, these informat- the information sheet, that what stood out to me is, the people who probably can't even be here to speak for themselves because I think, if we defund the library, of those 20% of people who it's for, I don't know exact statistics, but I know the number of Cache County residents who are living at or below the poverty line is between 10 or 13%. And so for, for here in this paper, it said, you know, oh, well, you can get a municipal city card and you can pay, but that's not a live option for many, many residents of Cache County. And, the people who will who will suffer the most because of that are children who are living in poverty, and they're already at a disadvantage and doing eliminating the the funding for the library and eliminating the library will just be putting them at a further disadvantage, people who are already, you know, some of the most vulnerable in our county. So, I I hope you won't rush this decision. I think there can even be possible other solutions, but, if we defund the library at the end of the year, then we can't explore those solutions, and we can't, look at those other options, and there will be an interruption in service to those people. Well, to everybody, but especially to those people who who need it most, and need the resources at the library the most. So I I just would ask you to consider and and strongly decide not to defund the library.

Thank you.

My name is Kevin Searle. I'm also from Providence. Struggled what to say tonight since I found out that this was a potential of happening. I found this on Saturday. It's called it's a group called Raising Readers. Books build bright futures. Did you know that reading for enjoyment is the single biggest predictor of a child's future happiness and success? More than family circumstances, parents' educational background or income, reading impacts a child's future academic performance, emotional well-being, communication skills, Studies show that kids reading for enjoyment in The US is in rapid decline. In 2012, fifty three percent of nine year olds read almost every day. Just ten years later, in 2022, the number had fallen to thirty nine percent. In 2012, twenty seven percent of 13 year olds read for fun daily. By 2023, that number was just fourteen percent. And they give suggestions for how we can turn that around. And one of the big suggestions is go to bookstores, go to libraries. I urge you as a council to continue to represent the 20% that will not have access if this goes away. $4.81 is or excuse me, the the recommended $250,000 reduction is less than 1% of the of the annual budget of the of the county. So let's please I urge you to fund the library. Thank you.

My name is Heidi Barrison. I'm from Hyde Park. So I will give you a whole another aspect of what you guys have heard this evening. Twenty years ago, when I moved to Cache County, I was lucky enough to be able to attend the North Logan library. There was an agreement between Hyde Park and North Logan. When I had my children, we attended the library weekly. We checked out at least 200 books a year that we read. And when we lost that and didn't have that funding anymore, I could not afford, at the time, the $80 to be able to go to the library. That was not within my budget. When I found out there was a Cache County Library, you better believe we drove from Hyde Park to Providence three to four times a month in order to check out books. Because of that, there is no way I could afford my children's addiction to reading at this point. My 10 year old reads at least three books a week. My 13 year old, I have no idea how many books she reads. I constantly go into her room and and warn her, I will ruin the ending of that book if you do not put it away right now and go to bed. This is a constant thing in my house. I was thrilled to know that we had a county library. Right now, there are four libraries that are closer to me than the Providence library. I have to pay for every single one of them. In my budget, I can pay for Smithfield Library one year for my family. That's all I can afford right now. And, there is no way I can afford Logan, North Logan, or even Providence. So I rely on the library. The amount of books that we read a week is within 10 to 15, just my family. We do online audio. We do Kindle books because frankly, we don't make it down to Providence as much as we used to, but we use it constantly. And it would be such a disappointment if you chose to get rid of the county library. You would hurt many of us throughout the county. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi. I'm Kendra Penry. I live in Providence. I actually live across the street from the library. So I am not only willing to pay the taxes for it, I'm also willing to allow everyone to continue to park in front of my driveway to go to the library. I would actually be willing to pay more for the library even if I didn't use it myself because I understand the essential nature of it building an informed citizenry that is pivotal to our democracy. And that is actually the point that I wanted to make tonight. Clearly, people care about this and we wanna have a voice in this more than just a public hearing and more than just the people that are willing to stand up and speak. Because the number one way that we get to have a voice in this is our vote. And right now, this feels like it's happening to us. We did not get a chance to vote for the current executive proposing this budget. So if you all decide to move forward with eliminating the library, that is your choice. We understand that. I ask that you wait until we have a chance to speak through our vote because that is where we have the most power. And if you close the library before we have that chance, it's a lot harder to restart something that's closed than to find another solution to keep it going. So please consider that we need time, and we need a chance to say what we need to say through our vote because we are a democracy after all. Thanks. Thank you.

Hi all. I'm Esther Hungerford. I'm a student at USU. I have an active library card at the Logan City Library and I volunteer at the Smithfield Library. I think it's fair to say that despite our differences, both those who hope to keep our county library open and those who would cut funding share the ultimate goal of promoting literacy, education, and widespread dissemination of knowledge throughout our communities. We recognize the importance of fostering a sense of community and inclusivity in an increasingly divided era, holding suppose holding space for those like us and those different from us. We agree that everyone, especially children, should be loved, fostered, and cared for. These are pillars of our society. As a resource, libraries provide protection for the physical items of their collection just as they do for the homeless, the abused, the hungry, the immigrants, the young, the sick, and any seeking comfort. Expecting that every patron has access to even their most basic needs, food, or shelter ignores the reality of our world. Libraries serve as a valuable third space, meaning one in which people can stay without an expectation of payment, allowing people of every socioeconomic background to benefit from their services. The Cache County Library alone offers computer access in an increasingly digital world, allows access to online books, audiobooks, comic books, carries a diverse range of books, including those in languages other than English, teaches patients teaches patrons to crochet, hosts book clubs, story times, and art shows. It has become more than a repository for books through these programs. It's elevated the library experience to something not only tailored for the community, but something tailored by the community. By defunding and shutting down this valuable resource, many of its patrons will be unable to access similar services without paying for a city library card elsewhere, creating financial and physical barriers to entry that patient patrons cannot afford. I believe that a good city, community, or library cares for all its patrons, even those who may need a little more attention. Please allow us to prove our commitment to caring for our neighbors by continuing to fund the Cache County Library and its necessary services. Thank you.

Who's who's

Excuse me. I think it's out there. Oh, is there It's really loud. There's some I'm hearing They're listening to it. They can't hear there because it's Oh, it's this meeting out there? It's just the echo of it? Oh, okay. That that that'll be fine. I just I was hearing something. I couldn't figure out where it came from.

Okay. Hi. My name is Melanie Dominus Rodriguez, and I'm here I live in River Heights. I think maybe nobody from River Heights has stepped up. Shout out to the USU student. I'm a professor at USU and feeling really proud right now of our students. I'm an educator, a parent, and an avid reader. I was horrified to learn literally ten minutes or fifteen minutes ago that River Heights City does not contribute it to the county library. What I wanted to share today was a rooting of my perspective in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 29 21 states everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country directly or through freely chosen representatives. We're doing that right now and it is really exciting. And the second part of that same article is everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. Libraries are one such public service. Libraries and librarians uphold and enable rights to free and equitable access to information, to education, to free expression, and to participation in civic life. Moving cost to individuals is incongruent to the basic valuing of a fundamental human right. If the Cache County Library must close, then please only do so after you have ensured library access to all people in the county. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Looks like we're we're only gonna have time for two more comments, so we'll just limit to the next two. I'm sorry.

Hi. My name is Justin McMurdie. I'm a resident of Providence, Utah, and I grew up in Millville. I grew up going to the county library, and using the bookmobile. When I aged out of using the public school libraries, I kept using the Cache County Library. It's an important institution and I want it to stay. I want everyone to have access to the public resources, my children go regularly to get books, and not everyone can afford a library card in another city. I I do want to ask, well I should say I wanna see the library system expand instead of contract. I do have a question that doesn't appear to be answered in this document. This seems to indicate that there's a double taxation problem and it relates to the budget. I'm unclear how reducing the getting rid of the rid of the library will actually save money in the long run because eventually, you're going to either have to lower taxes to compensate for a service that you've that has been taken away. People are not gonna stand to be taxed for a library that doesn't exist. So, that is a net zero effect on the budget. I think from what people have said today, that people are willing to pay for the library system, and would like to see it expand. Thank you so much for hosting this meeting. I know it's required, but still, thank you. Thank you. It's actually not required. Oh, well, it's not. That's even better. I'm trying to hear you. Thank you for hosting this meeting and listening to the public, and thank you for everyone who's spoken. You bet. Thank you.

Thank

you. Yeah. This will be our last comment. I'm sorry. Sandy, we haven't heard anyone speak in favor of the defendant. I left for that one. Okay. Thank you. Say that one more time. Oh, I was just talking to her and saying we haven't heard anyone speak in opposition. So if there was someone, I would wanna give them that opportunity. Okay. Sandy, you put a lot of pressure on me.

It's good to be in the middle of or just to see familiar faces. State your name. Yes, sorry. My name is Natalie DeFries. I'm from Providence. I'd like to just slow down for just a second and take some time to explain to these people. These are good people. They're here to help us. That's why they're here. It's them who are trying to do everything that they can to help us so that we can have a library. So I understand that there's a lot of you wanted to act naturally, sometimes, if you feel like there has to be a bad guy, I just want everyone to know these are not the bad guys. You guys are the good guys and that you are trying to make the right decision. We understand that. As you can see, we feel very deeply about this library. I love the Logan Library too. We go there, but this is a small town library and I feel like the quality is just so much higher. And the citizens that are there, my boys who go there, this library is turning them into someone who I could not have done with a Logan library or a larger library. So we do love this library. A few questions I have, I'd like to know if you can take some time to look at an itemized statement as to why it costs $250,000 to run this library. It really isn't a large library and there was a mention about how much it costs to run the smaller libraries which is closer to $35,000 for Newton, Richmond a Hundred 15, Mendon 14000. I just don't see it costs $250,000. That could be there's something I'm missing, but I'd invite you to look in an itemized statement. And we absolutely, we are kind of what's the word, wealthier populations. And so I know with full confidence, we could find funding. If you give us time, we absolutely can find a way. So let's find a way so that we can solve the problem with double taxation, but also find a way to keep this library here. It is so important to our citizens. Thank you.

Thank you. Before we close the public hearing, I I just wanted to ask, is there anyone that is here to give an opposing view to what's been expressed? I just wanted to give anyone that chance if they wanted to say something different. Thank you all for being here. We really do appreciate hearing from you. Whatever we have to decide and it will be decisions that we make later, we have some really hard decisions to make and there are like our executive said, there are people that work for the county that will be losing their jobs because of budget restraints. And so it's there's some really heavy things that we have to decide, and nothing is ever free. We talk about a free library. Somebody is paying for it, and they are people who are already paying their own city for a library, so those are just some really hard things to always have to think about. And any of you that live in Providence or River Heights, I would really encourage you to contact your city administrators because some of the other cities do provide libraries for their citizens. So those are just some things to do to think about as we move forward and we, again, really appreciate all of you being here. We really do. And we I know that I grew up or I raised my children, taking them to libraries. Anything we have to decide is not because we don't appreciate libraries. Just want you all to know that. I think we all probably agree that the benefits of having a library available, so, thank you for being here and we will have all of that under our consideration as we in the next six weeks have to finalize the budget for next year and it's a tough deal, so thank you. We're gonna move on with our meeting. You're welcome to stay. If you wanna take a minute and leave. We have to have a motion to close public hearing. So moved. Second. Moved and seconded. We close public hearing. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Thank you. And if as you leave, if you would if you want to keep continue speaking, it gets really loud in here. If you would go outside, so that or stay for the rest of the meeting. You're welcome to stay.

Yeah. Why don't we

make a small recess?

I wouldn't mind. K. We're gonna take a small we're gonna take a five minute three minute recess. Thank you.

Cool. Sure. You're going there. Yep.

Thank you.

Right here. Right here. K. Alright. Sorry. We don't usually take a recess, but I think we we just needed to, reset here for just a second. So we'll get started. K. The next thing on our agenda is consideration of the proposals that we need to take action on. The first one will be ordinance twenty twenty five-thirty four, the Cash County water use and preservation element. Angie, I don't know if anyone is going to have any questions for you or Audrey, but this is our time to discuss this. I don't know if anyone has questions for Angie or Audrey or Nolan, if you want to maybe speak to educate some of us a little bit on your involvement.

It was an involvement. As Audrey said, it's a guideline, but we need to have it there. I think everybody on the committee sat and looked at what's going on as far as water and agriculture. It's hard to look and say that there is so much water appropriated to agriculture, but yet if you look at what's going on in agriculture, we're the third largest county in the state that provides GDP to the county and what's going on with the agricultural. And the very important part is is if you take away from agriculture, the use of residential water explodes the use of water versus what the agricultural is doing. So I am an agricultural guy. I grew up on a dairy farm. I still run 300 acres. I have spent more money in my lifetime in improving my distribution of water, and I think every farmer is doing that. So when they come and say, well, we need more water. We're gonna take it from the farmer. The farmers are the guys who dug the canals, who put the dams in, and who are doing everything they can to meet water optimization. I am a participant of the water optimization plan from Utah, and that is not cheap. I'm paying a lot for that, and that's to help preserve water and make my farm more efficient for the use of water. I would only say that should we put that demand on other citizens for more efficient use of water, such as your yards and everything else,

and maybe this is an unfair question for you. Are the you mentioned that the the homes that are built in the outside of municipality, so those that are built in the county, have more use than ag they're using more, water than ag use. Is that the same in in the homes that are built in within the municipalities? Is it because they typically have larger lots with you know, because that our zoning is has because that our zoning is has larger lots outside of municipalities. And and, again, I don't know if this is a fair question for you. No. That's a good question. I think

oh, sorry. Nolan kind of, you know, discussed how there's trade offs with agricultural use Mhmm. That are just different. You're going from surface water to ground water, and, I remember we talked about as a committee. When you have a well and domestic use that's you're you're showering, you're watering your lawn, you're doing laundry, and that's consistently using water from the aquifer versus agricultural use. You take your irrigation turn. If it's dry farm, it's dependent on soil moisture, rain. So there's just different. And I think we discovered at the end of the day that based on the best available data we have for Cache County that protecting ag land is also protecting water.

Perfect. Does anyone else have any other questions or things you wanna discuss before we take a motion to vote on this? I would just like to say that last Thursday, we were at the water and

meeting with the planning and zoning, and my eyes were opened a lot with that. And I think we really do need to take a good hard look about how we're going to preserve our water here in this valley and the best way to go about it and help our agriculture to stay where it needs to be. And we are looking at that. We're we came up with some good plans a good plan. Nolan, we're looking at o and p and maybe working with planning and well, not maybe, but working with planning and zoning to create some ordinances and policies for when developers want to come in and there's not enough water in that area, how to work with them or help our people so that we know that we have water for those that need it. Help our people so that we know that we have water for those that need it. And I was I was very happy to have been to that meeting.

Anybody else have questions? Not not so much a question, but just a comment. I know there are 11 recommendations. I'll pick on number six, for example. Assess county properties for underutilized turf that could be converted to low water use landscaping. I'd love to see us turn that into an action item if it is a recommendation. I feel like if we're voting for it, we're voting that we'll do something about it. So I don't know what our follow-up process is, but I think we should discuss that or earmark an agenda item for discussing how we could chip away at some of these recommendations.

I think so too. And I I as I was thinking about that, I was thinking about the municipalities and, you know, that's gonna be a bigger we can we can do we can make a small dent as a county, but, you know, maybe we could even come up with some recommendations for municipalities. And I think that would be really helpful and really forward thinking for our county. And maybe it's a subcommittee that

looks at tactical ways where there's some people taken from the cities and some from the county.

K. Alright. Does someone wanna make a motion on that? That's fair. I will make them I will suspend the rules and make a motion that we approve ordinance twenty twenty five dash 34 Casa County water use and preservation element. I'll second that. K. So moved and seconded that we approve ordinance twenty twenty five dash 34.

Is there any further discussion? Okay. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? But just to make Thank you, Dave. Yeah, Dave. Sorry. I didn't ask you before, so thank you, Dave. Okay. Is Mark on? Okay. All right. 8B, ordinance twenty twenty five-forty, the Mountain Manor Springs rezone. Did anybody have any other questions for Angie about that one?

I'm ready to make a motion. K. I suspend the rules and propose on ordinance twenty twenty five dash 40. We follow the planning and zoning's recommendation and deny

this zoning request. I'll second that. K. It's been moved and seconded that we deny ordinance twenty twenty five dash 40. Is there any further discussion? K. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right. C eight C, the COG funding recommendations. Craig, we'll if anyone has any questions we'll ask you to come up, Because I I don't know if anybody has anything they want to discuss, or do we want to, spend some more time looking at this before we approve it?

I would like to. K. Maybe just a reminder of how many were present from the municipalities and how many participated in the voting process. Basically, to understand who's who's making the recommendation.

K. So we can And I have a and I do have a question. Okay. Yeah. Well, if Jesse Jesse will be available over here.

My if I understand your quick question correctly, you wanna know how many municipalities were involved in the voting? Every one of them. Yep. And everyone all the mayors who were present and All the mayors were present and all of them voted in favor. No. We had three that well,

we sent out a scoring sheet to all the mayors, and there were three mayors that did not submit a scoring sheet. Oh, was there? So, yes, there was three cities that did not. One of them, I've never met the mayor in five years. So Cornish? Cornish. Now and again, we do see one from them, but they've never been to a meeting. So, again, if they're not involved, it's probably better maybe that they are voting if they're not coming in. Normally, in that situation, they haven't even submitted anything and don't don't care. Yep. Thanks. K. Yes. And and

I couldn't find this information, but since Jesse is here, it's easier to ask him. All of these are following, like, the CMPO plan. Like, none of these have made any real changes to what has already been, like,

what we've had for any of the Yes. If you're within the urban area projects, then there's a requirement that you that you fall on the CMPO, their master plan. So all these ones would fall on that as it's currently outlined.

Yeah. Thanks.

That's perfect.

So I'm I'm fine with it. I did have a question on the Wolfpack Way in Hyde Park because they requested, like, 4,800,000.0, wasn't it? 4.6. Around about. Yeah. Yeah. I'm like 47.

How much is how much is it for us? One for 3,800,000.0 and another one for 4.6.

When it's We've helped them in the past from the COG, have we not on this project?

No. Not on this project. This area. So But Wolfpack Way, has it not been done? Yes. Wolfpack Way has had CMPO and COG funds on it. Again, as we look farther south into North Logan I mean, they were talking four hundred to forty four hundred north. Right? Yeah. So even high North Logan's request this year to finish funding between 1350 North and 1800 North is kind of that 200 East corridor as it gets out of Logan, goes through North Logan, Hyde Park, and goes towards Smithfield. So this next part, they just did the roundabout there on Hyde Park Lane or by the Maverick, and they went another couple 100 feet north. This phase that they were funded for would push that a few more blocks north. Few blocks. And continue with that. Point $8,000,000.

So That ain't cheap. That's all I wanted to look into is just what are the comparable costs? What have we put in so far? What have other entities contributed in the past that There's a pretty You guys are ready to vote. I understand. But I just wasn't here last year. When you look at that corridor as a whole, it's probably, like, $40,000,000

on that second east corridor from, again, all the way from the South End Of Logan. And Providence has someone 100. What east does it trying to figure out how those connections take place, and then again, getting it to Smithville. So at this point, it is up there. This one takes it from Hyde Park Lane. So, again, we're just past Hyde Park Lane. It's really getting it there up into into Smithfield's about it's the last remaining piece. It will connect? Hyde Park just Not this not this funding. Not this one. So there's part a is the first chunk, then part b, and then there's another little part to get that final connection into Smithfield. So this was from probably the first of three, maybe four total requests of getting that

into Smithfield. So You know, you gotta understand that's that's the problem we're having with the COG is we only got so much. So the municipalities are looking at this and saying, okay, you know, what can we think, what do we think we can get through this time around? That's part of the problem. We don't have the funding we need. We look at increased costs every year and they increased every year. That's part of the reason for the contingency. So, yeah, we see some of this, what you're talking about coming on, but the municipalities are looking at it and say, okay, what can we get? What do we really want? What can we get? And it's chipping away. It'd be nice if could've got what we needed, we could've funded them all this time around. All of them. Is the contingency fund set by statue or ordinance, or is just like you said, increased cost, do we look at increasing the contingency fund for other costs that go up now? We did not. What's the fact? With the contingency fund, we we presented that to the council. We set that as a we're gonna set a contingency fund at 3,000,000. 3,000,000. Right. That's just all it is, is to help with some of this. Some of these issues where they come up and say, okay, we didn't plan on this. It's gonna cost us an extra $405,100,000 dollars. They come to us. We have them filed. We bring it before the Cache County Council, and you guys either yay or nay it.

My my point was is if we dip into it, then the next year when the COG money comes up, is it automatically

rebuild the contingency fund before any other project? That was the intent. The contingency fund was something of our own making because we had projects like, 1200 West in Nibley and 11000 North in Cache County up there by Cherry Peak that came, got money a couple years past working through right away other issues, and then we needed more money. We can only come to the council for an official approval once a year. So talking with the other cities and how the other counties we met with Weber, we met with Davis, they worked that and we'd probably view that more as a contingent as a amendment because we're not changing the project list. Hey. Trying to put it in this holding spot, and then we could use that at a future time. So, again, right now, there's with these projects, we'll be sitting on almost $40,000,000 in awarded projects that are somewhere in that process. So I deal over the next four years. Most Most of those should get done. At that point, we could reevaluate lowering the contingency fund, doing everything, but we try to pick an arbitrary number to say, hey. We need some fluff in case as we're awarding these out in such large amounts that if we do have a shortfall or somebody doesn't have to wait two years to come back and get more money to be able to keep that project renewed. We don't wanna stall projects. And I agree with that. I mean, the contingency funds only is less than 10% of what you're awarding out. So we gotta have something there because the increased cost over four years And we based that off meeting with Davis

and Weber and saying, what did you guys do? And they said, this is where we set it and it's worked well for us. So that's kind of what we did as well. And said, okay. Let's try that. Okay. Executive Dean? Yeah. I I just would say,

what we could do to help COG is to try and reduce our dependence on that sales tax. That's I mean, if we could reduce our draw on that portion and kick that over to COG, it would it would shorten this process and give you another you know, there's quite a bit of money involved in that. So the pressure is on our budget because anything we can save on our budget transportation is our biggest problem in Cash Valley, we're sitting on the ability if we can reduce our draw on that sales tax to fund to fund more money into COG.

Yeah. Like I said, if if if we could have got that quarter sales tax this year, we could have funded everything we had, all of it. If we could have got to 40%, we could have funded another 6,000,000. And we're not gonna argue, you know, we're not gonna debate you over what you guys need to do. We I'm a mayor. I know what you're dealing with. I had to do a tax increase last year. I it's not pleasant. I get what you're going through. So I'm not gonna debate what what you the decisions you gotta make because I know I've been there. I know what you're dealing with. But we really do need to come and get it back to where, like executive Dange is saying, get it back to where it'll help transportation needs throughout the valley because it will help us be able to fund more and stop this repeated phasing that's going on. Get a project, fund it, get it done. Look, let me just add.

We're number one in the state in property taxes compared to per capita. And and we're not and I know this isn't a popular thing to say. I'm I'm logged. I'm not saying popular things tonight. But we can't we can't fund the county on the sales tax, because we won't raise property taxes to what others other communities are doing. We are the lowest property tax in the state per capita. And we will still be the lowest even if we pass the increase we're talking about. We really are out of balance on our revenue sources, and it's causing us to use this sales tax that's that's, starving our transportation projects.

That's still not a very popular position to be in, because me, I was the lowest in the county when I raised my taxes. If you don't think that caused a big iron with people because they just don't understand the impact and what it really is. So I I hear what you're saying. Any other questions?

Anybody else? Thank you so much. Keegan, would you still like some more time? Dave have something to say. I would, but Oh, Dave. I understand if you guys are ready to vote. We're we're gonna let Dave Erickson speak.

Go ahead, Dave. There. Yeah. We can hear you. Okay. I I have, I have one question that could probably help this help this situation. It's that, in all of these projects, that we somehow allow a pioneering agreement be put into place that when we fund these and development goes on, those developments will then return money back continue on building those roads.

Is the pioneering agreement has that been taken to OMP where we I know that the planning and zoning And that would have to be a different one. Again, I know the county is currently working on theirs, but part of that would be discussion with all those cities. Oh, okay. So, again, I and I don't know if Dave, sorry. Return

money back to the hog pro project rather than basically allowing certain developers along those roadways that you're building are going to have a just a cash free fall of increase in dollars because someone else built the road for them. No.

That's that's partially correct, but not all the way because each municipality, two years ago, we started to focus on just that. When they bring their projects forward, we take a serious look at it. And if they're gonna develop a project, we had two of them this time around, where a vacant lot right across the street, we're basically challenging them saying, okay, so if we do this, isn't that just helping that neighbor across the street? And if the answer is yes, generally, the voting takes that into consideration and they usually don't get funded because people recognize that. The municipalities are recognizing that developers need to pay their fair share. I'm doing that in my own community and all of us are starting to do that in all the communities. And making them pay their fair share before they come to the COG to get more money.

And, again, that's been the life that's been the million dollar question every time is when we start to balance what again, we the the some developers definitely came from that. What is there more of a gain for the transportation and for the public as a whole by having these new connections and things? Again, I know when Hyde Park originally submitted their request, it was higher. There was a lot of question on that in the presentations and after about, hey. We're we're building this out, curb, gutter, sidewalk, shared view paths, all those things. And they did come back. Hey. Let's narrow it down. Let's put in instead of doing that full section, let's put down 30 feet of asphalt. We'll do the Shergys path on one side. And then as those developers come in, they can finish the widening. They can do the curb and gutter. They can do the sidewalk on the other side. So there has been an effort made by the mayors and by the cities to say, find that balancing point of, hey. We need this connection. It's been something that's been on the plans for twenty, thirty, forty, fifty years. But how do we get that connection, but not give away the money to to the developers.

One part about one part about that would be the commercial appraiser. Because as this property or this road increases, that is drawing in commercial businesses. And if we appraise or value them right, then that helps us in our tax revenue. Exactly. So We just lost our one commercial appraiser. Yep. So we've that's the other part. So that equals out. I agree with what mister Erickson said. I think it's important, but if you're covering it in your discussion on COG We are working diligently to do that. Yeah. But then the commercial appraisal would help from the county standpoint too because we know that as that Wolfpack way went in, those property values go up.

Yeah. So And, again, to the kind of the whole pioneer agreement, again, that's something that would have to the county's working on its own for the unincorporated areas, but if that was looked at for the as a cog, as a whole, there was a little bit of discussion. Some of that is, you know, that has to be an active member of the city. How does that there's a lot of more complexities to that than just, hey. The county has it for the incorporated. Individual cities have that, but how do you roll that out on a large scale? It would have to be more discussion, more research, working with the attorney's office on what could even be done there. But, again, it is definitely something that as we're going through farm fields in a sense, it's something that is definitely discussed with the COG and they kinda try to question those cities on, hey, what what are you doing to not just build it for the developers and how can we get the how can we get the most out of it and stretch the money? Again, as we look at the list and this next year, we go back to $7,000,000. I mean, Hyde Park's next on the list in Providence. That's 7,000,000 right there. So, hey, we've had these year of 10,000,000, year 17 as we go back to seven. We're not funding eight, nine projects. We're funding one or two in the urban area and maybe a few of the smaller ones in the rural area. But, again, the the construction's gotten more expensive. All that's gone up. Sales tax is not increasing crazy quickly. So we are seeing that, hey, it is limiting what can be done. But, again, we're grateful for the project we are able to do every year. So

Okay. Dave, did you wanna say anything else before we maybe take a motion?

No. I I appreciate the comment from the chair, though. I appreciate that.

Okay. Madam chair, I am going to go ahead and suspend the rules and recommend that we approve resolution twenty twenty five dash 41 approving the twenty five Cass County Council on government's funding. I understand the cog does their work, and I understand we gotta work with the executive talked about sales tax. We're all aware of that, so we hope to work together on that. But I do appreciate your work on it, and so I'm recommending approval.

Second. K. It's been moved and seconded that we approve resolution twenty twenty five dash forty one. Is there any further discussion? Those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right. Thank you for all that you do, mayor Hidalgo. We appreciate you.

And Jesse and Jeff, all of you that work. I know it's We're thankful for them, again, mayor for moments here. Some of them have their own council meetings. Mayor Peterson was here this earlier. So, again, it is hard to compete with everybody, but we do have a lot of support from the mayors, and it makes it a lot easier. So We appreciate what you do. Thank you.

Okay. Pending action. Ordinance 9A. Angie, do you want to help us work through

this? What I can do the applicant who spoke last time, Cole Stalker's not able to be here tonight. So but I hope you did get the information that he forwarded with the links to different solar facilities they do operate, and including the sheep grazing around these facilities in Texas. But, yeah, I'm here to answer any questions that you have.

Okay. Does anybody have anything they wanna ask Angie or I have questions. I just have concerns. And so I'd like to continue this is my personal feeling as I've been talking and and I read what he sent us and that was helpful. But at the same time, it just made me understand the differences of what Cache County has and what he was pointing out on the other projects.

So is there what resources do we have to answer those questions, Nolan? Where would you go for your answers?

What could I think there isn't as some very, very influential people or knowledgeable people who can help us understand the impacts of solar of this size in this type of community. I mean, we said 20 acres or larger. What's larger? A 600?

Do we what if we wanted to set an We're we're throwing an industrial zone

in areas that are very, very much agricultural, and we just talked about agricultural and that. I mean, where they're proposing this is in Cass Junction where there is no irrigation of farm ground. And we gotta represent and understand the property rights of those guys who own that ground because I'm a farmer and there hasn't been much made money made from farming. And so these guys who are out there can say, hey. I can make money from solar. But what does that do to the other farmers there when we throw an industrial zone into that area? And I want to see the furtherness

of what this means to us. So So I have some potential references. I I said I would look into it, so I tried to follow through on that. And I I don't know if I'm saying this county correctly, but Currituck County in North Carolina, they actually added a a use in an ag zone, and they had a whole bunch of restrictions. I can email you the PDF. It It takes up about five pages, but they have land use definitions for solar facilities, which type of facilities are restricted, requirements and standards, a whole bunch of different things, includes erosion and sediment control, a vegetative buffer, decommissioning plan, fencing, all sorts of things. The other thing I looked into was and this is more on a state level, but some states I mentioned requiring potentially, you know, the municipality or the local area to have access to, or at least right of first refusal for the utilities. That's less common on a utility base, but I did see it was common if if the local utility wants to build a connection to to transport that electricity. That is a common thing to give the local utility right of first refusal. That way, they can collect the revenue that would be generated from that rather than have it be entirely out of state. So those are factors that I think we ought to consider. And to Nolan's point, I think those would require more time. I'd love to even reach out to that county and and ask how they went about that or if they feel like it's working. And that's not something I I it's gonna happen super quickly for me. So that would be my preference.

I mean, the planning and zoning guys really delved into this and as well as staff, and that's why we looked at it as a zone because then you can do a CUP. But I've stated before and I'll state again, I don't like CUPs. You very much, once they come, cannot deny a CUP.

Yeah. And I'd I'd rather have this. We do call them solar farms. I'd rather have a provision in the agricultural zone than require, a specific rezoning to industrial, if I'm showing my hand a little bit.

I mean, we all know we gotta improve our ways of energy. But

And I'll call back on that. I a minimum of 20, but maximum of what? I still think we can say there's a maximum. I think it can't be, like because within so many, certain amount of distance of each other. Right? And to cite this example,

renewable or I think I think it's

It's just

new to us. And so we're trying to be cautious. Right? Yep. And we're setting a precedent. Yeah. Absolutely. So so if we were going to Angie, if we were going to do something like that, talk about maximums or, look at some different kinds of zoning, like Keegan is saying, doing it in an ag zone, is that something that you guys have discussed in your department? How would we how would you like that kind of input from us? Does it need to go to our OMP? Give me some guidelines or give us some guidelines as to how we can proceed and make use of our time. Okay.

Yeah. If you wanted us to look into those few components in that county ordinance that you mentioned, we can definitely bring forward some changes or some options for you to look at and review. I don't believe it would need to go back to Planning Commission at all, Taylor, if they wanted to make changes to what Planning Commission recommended, but No. They can make it there and change those. So, yeah. We can definitely bring those forward and give you some options, give you some different looks. We did talk about and I think Mark Hurd mentioned it during our last meeting, but maybe creating a new overlay just for solar projects.

So that would take out the question of Didn't we look at the or did the planning and zoning

look at that? They did because they didn't like the public infrastructure, but it didn't get very far. But I I see that zoning things industrials, you know, zoning large partials industrial that could stick to that land forever is a concern. And so in my mind, it seems a good idea to kind of narrow an overlay just for this type of facility. And it would still require the rezone to apply that. It would still be a legislative action to try to consider on a case by case basis. So I mean, really what we're saying on this, this is

pretty much going in the agricultural areas is what we're talking about. And and I'd like to see what other counties have done when it comes into the agricultural area. Not so much the impact now because the impact now is, hey. I got energy. That's great. Down the road, have we looked at what? K. We've got an industrial zone forty years, and none of us are sitting here forty years from now. If you are, you've served too long. So but we need to take that into consideration. Yeah. That into consideration.

Yeah. And I believe one of our planning commissioners talked a lot about, you know, he travels back and forth across the state all the time, and he sees some of these larger ones and sees the impact. And Yep. It's not always sheep grazing or, you know, goats. It's There's they even mentioned there's some that have not working anymore. Yeah. Yep. And that's why our planning and zoning says, okay. There has to be a funding method

as they're in there to take that down so that it doesn't Yeah. If they that's the decommission plan. Yes. For tier. Yeah. I like that decommission plan. I think that's I think that's a lot of thought into it. It's just industrial and how large.

K. Thanks, Angie. And we'll we'll all do some research too. I'm thinking I'm wondering if there's a resource that you Andy?

Yes, Dave?

You know, we we bought really hard for open faith. We fought we fought it on the the premise and the that everyone wanted that our that our valley was so gorgeous. Valley in everywhere that we went. We wanted the open areas. We wanted these beautiful business. We wanted these beautiful areas, and the people focused for that. We even owe a lot of certain amount of money, and we're doing our darn to keep these spaces open. And I cannot I cannot personally support this at all in good function to put a to put literally change the beauty of our valley to the black field or black, you know, well, literally, the the black shiny field. You can call them that. I can't often get conscious vote for that to allow that anywhere in our county. That just that just goes against my conscience with the with the a member of the council and what we have fought for and maintained and what we've tried to make sure that we keep in our valley.

K. Thanks, Dave. Yeah. And that's another thing that we might wanna consider as we as we set up this code and set up these parameters is because we've identified our gateways and our vistas as so important to the people in the county actually voted to put $20,000,000 towards that, that maybe even we restrict it to, you know, area if we, you know, vote for something that there would be a restriction on the proximity to gateways and to some of those vistas that we have identified as being, something we want to preserve. So

that's another That's a good consideration.

Project that they're proposing would impact one of those cases. Yeah.

Okay. All right. Does someone want to make a motion to

continue this? Yeah. I'll make that motion that we continue ordinance

twenty twenty five dash 35. And do we need that as a motion, Taylor, or do we just say we're not voting on it? It's still pending action, so you just leave it as pending. You just leave it. You just leave it as pending. Just leave it. Okay. Thanks. Alright. Twenty twenty five dash thirty six. Amy.

Twenty twenty five dash thirty six is for discussion for council member adjusted salaries.

And so if you have any questions, I'm happy to entertain those, but I think it's a discussion item for you to have. I think that one, we wanted to just continue that one too. We're gonna keep that one as pending. Sounds great. Okay. So we'll move on to 2025Dash37.

So 2025 dash 37 is in compliance with the Utah State Code that we needed to have a public hearing

for any appointed officials of the county. We had that last week or yeah.

Officials of the county. We had that last week. Yeah, actually last week. It was just here. And then it was put before the council to review and vote on and it was moved to this week. So I'm here to answer any questions. I did notice that the updated copy is not in your media packet. The chief civil deputy attorney and the chief criminal deputy attorney the pay ranges should both be the same and it should be the one forty seven as the minimum moving up. So, if you are to vote on that, if someone would please make that in their comment, to adjust that, that would be great.

The

low should be but the high is right. The high is correct. The minimum should be the 147 for both of those. Okay.

There's $1.42 in there. I'm pulling it up right now. The civil deputy is $1.42. 142. Okay. 2. It needs to be 146. Yeah. That just didn't get updated in your media packet. Okay. Are there any questions that I can You don't have any questions for Amy about this? Yes. I do. I let me pull up my notes here. I did notice I put this into a spreadsheet and I did the floor and ceiling and looked at the percentage increase for each of them. I think on average, it was about eight and a half percent. There were a couple that stood out. The chief deputy executive increase is 15%, and the chief deputy auditor is 24%. So I just wondered why those ones were considerably

higher than These are based off of the market values of the comparison groups that we compare to, and we've covered those comparison groups in previous meetings. I'm sorry. I don't I mean, I could give you kind of off the top of my head of who we compared to, but it's second and third class counties and then also, cities that are, throughout our valley and a few on the Wasatch Front and one in Southern Utah. So Anyway, so that it's the the market comparison. One thing to know is that you're just voting that this pay range is okay. You're not voting on any specific pay increase for any individual.

Sure. But if someone doesn't hit the minimum, they would

There would be a market adjustment that would be needed. Sure. From my evaluation, I don't people that hold those positions are making below what the proposed minimum is. Right.

So I guess the next question, the follow-up to that is, is it something we look at every year and did the market increase by that much? Or were we lagging behind in making those increases? Maybe in the case of the auditor, that wasn't that position wasn't there prior? Or is that

So we look at this every year. We do a market study every year. Compensation committee reviews those those numbers and then makes a recommendation. This is part of the recommendation that has come from the compensation committee. Okay. So it is possible that,

comparably speaking, the chief deputy deputy auditor did go up Correct. 25%?

It is important to note that last year and the previous year, the pay ranges were the same. They did not increase. And if I believe right, that's because the council did not approve the pay range increase with the market adjustment.

Okay. So maybe you recommend I didn't look back, but maybe a recommendation was made, but then it wasn't followed. Right. Yeah. So we got behind by Yes. Not passing it. Yes. Can the council speak to that? Is that Yes. That's right. That's right. We just we just were so we we didn't raise nobody got raises last year. None of the elected officials got raises. So or the appointed. So just to follow-up on that, the eight and a half percent really represents

Two years. Eight

so it would be a three to 5% each year had we followed that Yeah. The previous year. Yeah. Is the recognition of you out there? That sorts a lot of my questions out for me. Yeah.

It's also important to note that in the media packet, what this resolution is looking at is just that section of the chief deputies and the department heads. It's not approving anything above above that on the sheet. So keep that in mind. No elected officials. No elected officials. Thank you for saying that's a better way to say that.

Yeah. That that vote already took place for everyone except the council. Yes. Yep.

Yeah. Any other questions?

I don't I don't know. Does anybody else have any other questions? Don't need Okay. Just so I would entertain a motion.

I move that we approve the What's the ordinance? The ordinance twenty twenty five dash 37, the compensation of the Cache County Executive Appointed And Deputy Officials changing the amending the oh, I just lost it. The pay range for prosecute chief civil deputy attorney.

We need an amendment to go with that.

I think that's what she's saying. To do right now. Okay. Yeah. Amending the the chief civil deputy attorney to $1.47 $4.22, for the minimum.

I will second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we approve ordinance twenty twenty five dash 37 with the proposed amendment. Any further discussion? Those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. All right. I think we are getting there. Okay. The USAC full workshop, are we all set up for that? Okay. I know. K. Council member reports. Barbara.

I don't know if you saw this, but Dave Erickson sent me or sent out a an announcement that the Farm Bureau was contributing 4,000 pounds of meat to the food pantry tomorrow, and we're asking that a council member, and I think the executive be there if they could possibly make it. And I rearrange my schedule so I can be there for that at 02:00.

Is it at the food pantry?

Yes. K. Yes. And I I have some things I want to say, but I think I'm gonna save them till next time.

Game is serious.

You may not wanna hear

them. It's the truth. I always wanna hear it.

K.

K. Thanks, Barbara.

So I just have one and actually, I have a procedural question real quick. If I wanna email out that North Carolina example, as long as we don't discuss it, that's above board. Right? Just to share it. K. I'll send that out. I just have one for COSAC, which is, I requested they get on the agenda for the next meeting. If you recall, they they're gonna be requesting a modest amount to get the word out to those areas that fall within the scenic gateways just to remind those parcel owners that they are potentially eligible for the program. They'll share how they identify gateways, how many are on that list, and the amounts that they're requesting. So very modest amount, so I I would encourage you to to consider that. And then also, to follow-up on the earlier solar discussion, they'll identify the the gateway so we can see where where that falls into.

Pardon me. But didn't we discuss as a council that we has had we had hesitancy of picking certain parcels of ground based on gateway because this is a tax that's paid by the whole county, but yet we're favoring or showing favor for certain pieces of ground. It's I I I can speak to that if you want. So,

there's some properties like mine for that wouldn't even be eligible, for example. So the the methodology they're using is that the the voters who approve this bond are interested in preserving those gateways. There are only specific properties that fall within what the voters stated their desires were, and there's a concern that the the property owners aren't are unaware of this. And if they're unaware, then they can't really fulfill their obligation to the public to preserve those areas if there's no applicants. So that that's the reasoning behind it. But, yes, there was there were two concerns. That was one of them, and the other one was using funds to let people know about a free program. So they're going to address both of those concerns. And and that was discussed.

Yeah. And I think it's a part of their scoring, you know, being a part of the gateway as part of their scoring process too. So identifying what those are is

I think that would be helpful to us. Mhmm. Yeah. Whether or not that resolves their concerns, that's a different matter, but they will attempt to address them. K.

Alright. Nolan?

Angie, did you get any responses? You sent out an email about a possible meeting. The next water meeting, we were looking at, like, November 19 or twentieth. The twentieth and twenty first is USAC. Mhmm. So I wanna check to see if you guys are open for the nineteenth. Did any other things come back, Angie? Yeah. I got three or four responses

that they were good for either day. So since you have that constraint, I don't know if you The nineteenth, some of you have to be gone down to USAC.

Yeah. I have to be at a board meeting at 05:00 Yeah. On nineteenth. So is Dave Yeah. On the nineteenth. Thanks.

Any other days pop up? Because later, the next week is well, that's

out. What about the eighteenth? That's our council meeting. That's our council meeting. I know, but could we not meet earlier in the day? We're doing that truth and taxation open house. Oh, that's right. Never mind. The eighteenth is a bad day.

What open house does that count? Oh, maybe we'll defer to the executive to talk about what he has planned for the Truth in Taxation open house. Oh, yeah. 02:00.

Sure. Is that is right now okay for him to talk about that? Yeah. Well, let's talk about this meeting Okay. For the the water meeting. That's that's like, what about the Monday on the seventeenth?

We need to have it. So we need to find a date because our our Well, could it wait till the week after that? No. That's Thanksgiving week. Yeah. But maybe that Monday.

I know there's an appropriation meeting at three, but we could

I don't know.

We do have an open space site visit on the seventeenth. It would be about 03:30. It does involve one time.

Oh, neat. What about the twenty fourth, that Monday?

Mondays are really hard for me. K.

And then Tuesday We have fire board meeting from Tuesday.

I'm leaving Tuesday for Thanksgiving. So Yeah. K. Well, you might just have to still hold it.

If you did it on the nineteenth, it just means that Dave and I wouldn't be there. I can't believe it. Can Hendry send out a poll, and if we get a quorum, call it again? We have to have a quorum. No. I mean Oh, I guess we don't. No. No. It's it's more of a workshop than anything else. True. It's another We probably want at least three people there. Yeah. I Well, with the recommendations that were made last meeting, I think we need to be some

you either you're aware or we update you because Yeah. Because I I need to know what happened in that meeting on the thirtieth. I I feel bad that I couldn't be there. And I would like to be able to be to the next one if possible. I on also on the nineteenth

in that afternoon, I have a brag meeting.

So Could it wait till December?

December?

I'd like to have to unless if we can't do a Monday, the seventeenth Barbara can't do a Monday. How's that for the other council members, like, the seventeenth or twenty fourth? I can do either of those days. We have appropriations on the twenty fourth, but we could do it after appropriations. Yeah. I could do the seventeenth. Seventeenth would probably be best. Can you send out a thing for the seventeenth if we make it happen?

Sorry, Barbara. And I think it's

Or the twenty fourth after appropriations? Or twenty fourth. See what works because And we'd like it that late in the day?

Yeah. How about are that when people are most able to if this is their day job, can they come during their job? Well, but I'm bringing in, like, the State Water Division and the other guys,

air over health who have another job. So just like us. So that's why it's Okay. I mean, certainly put it in there five ish. I mean Well, I just wondered if it was part of their day job if this would be part of Yeah. Of their work hours. I've got the planning and zoning guys. Every one of them have a job. So Yeah. Okay. I'm asking them to leave work to come to a Mhmm. County meeting where they really don't get paid a whole lot. So Speaking of planning and zoning, I know the past couple years, we've given them a box of candy for Christmas. Do we want to continue to do that? I think so. Absolutely. Wonder where we could get some really good candy.

Yeah.

Are are they having planning and zoning this week on Thursday night?

Yes.

K. We are. That's this month's meeting. Yeah.

K.

K. Till I end. Alright. Catherine. I was gonna ask the executive to speak in to the truth in taxation open house that he had I'd spoken to him this week about and I was gonna defer to him. Yeah. Give us some information.

What we're gonna try and do is is teach people a little bit about how property taxes are computed, what the elements are, and then let them see exactly what's happening on our property taxes. It's it's interesting that 80 or 90% of people perceive that their property taxes have been going up every year.

It's not true. Well, they have, but it hasn't been because of us. Yeah. It hasn't been the county. Well, actually,

Sandy, even the whole tax bill hasn't been going up.

Because people tell me their taxes have doubled in the last five years. Yeah. I mean, I know Logan City's gone up a modest amount, for example. I don't understand. 5%, but it's not But we gotta talk we gotta talk the difference between residential and commercial taxation, because right now, it's the residences.

Yeah. We're

It's the residences that are seeing to push up, aren't we?

Well, we're we're going to talk about that. We're gonna throw up averages on the screen, and then we're the way we're actually setting it up to do is we're gonna have five or six county people being able to take a computer and show an individual their own personal tax bill and walk them through how it's computed in their thing. So that's that's what we're gonna try and do. I am hopeful that we'll rotate through about three different sets of people over that three hour period that we can kind of take the first group and run them through and then do it again and run them through. I can't imagine anybody's gonna stay for three hours and then come back for the truth in taxation hearing. But most people don't understand property tax. I have to confess, I had a general understanding of them. But I I can just tell you there is common misconceptions about property taxes. And I think it will help us if we take the time to explain them to people.

I wonder if there's any because I thought about this before. Is there any way to encourage people to bring their property tax statement with them? It can print it from where I'm here. I know. But, I mean, that takes a long time. No. It doesn't. Actually, we've we've got it to the point.

If, Kurt were here, we could demonstrate it on the screen. But we we can pull up your taxes, Sandy. We've got a graph that immediately populates, and we can talk it's a minute. Okay. One minute or two minutes. We can have anybody's taxes. We can show them over five years or ten years what's happened to the tax rate. There are praise The taxes they're paying. Nolan, did Kurt do this with you?

Or anything else on there. Okay.

But we did it with you, Catherine. Didn't we? And we I've done mine. I I've got mine. I can I've looked at mine. But but I think you've been gone. Catherine, we Yeah. Yeah. We did it with you. We were able to do it instantaneously with you. Mhmm. And you were surprised at at your tax bill, weren't you? Yeah. It had

$5 difference over the course of a few years.

Okay. Now there's a a letter signed by me, in that inviting him to come. I think we'll try and get the newspaper who had left tonight already Might be out there. Might be out there Yeah. To say something about it. What else can we do? Radio. Radio.

Jason Williams would probably like to interview you. Yeah. I think he did do an interview a few weeks ago. Give me a follow-up.

Long as they don't ask me when the bluebirds can open up, they're not people. I'll be happy to do anything. I I think the critical thing is is to have you understand the property taxes so you can talk. And if we use the same vocabulary, it will be helpful. Man, I

But let's talk about that. So everybody says their taxes haven't gone up, but Wolfpack Way is a very good example of what we showed our citizens who have ground on Wolfpack Way because the value dramatically went up, which caused their taxes to go up because the value goes up. So there needs to be a relationship or an understanding about that. Does that make sense? Yeah. And that's that's what we're gonna try and explain, because I sat I don't know how many during September I sat on Wolfpackway.

It's a really interesting thing about property taxes is they're detached from an understanding a percentage tax. So, you know, when you make more if you make twice as much money I'm paying more taxes. You're gonna pay more income taxes. If you go out and buy twice as many goods, you're gonna pay twice as much sales tax. The concept that your property goes up in value, well your property taxes would go up in value. Now the truth is, we have lowered the levy rate 26% over the last five years. We've we've lowered the levy. If if we stop lowering the levy and and maintain the same percentage tax, our income will rise with the valuation, the tax valuation. Interestingly, last year, you advertised that you were gonna increase the tax rate by 20%. Up to. Up to 20%. You actually raised it 12%. But what you actually raised was not the levy rate. You raised the revenue that you were going to make by 12%.

Including growth and yeah. But what the public heard is my house is worth $500,000. My taxes are going up 20%, and that's how it was understood even though that's not accurate. It's just a tax sanction. This is such a valuable

Yeah. Service and activity and Keegan, if we can accomplish it. Yes. So And I'm I'm sitting and writing it and trying it out on people. I've I've tried it out on several people. Had a really interesting discussion with Craig, the treasurer, about it. We he's saying, okay. If we raise taxes 18%, my tax they're gonna your county portion of the tax are gonna go up 18%. No. They're not. They're not because you're going to have all of the new property that comes in and the increased appraisals. Many peoples are seeing their homes go up in value, but, you know, my home hasn't gone up in value in three or four

years. Well, and that's the part I'm hoping the assessors here. Because I think any any councilman who sat through those And They come in and they're like, holy whatever. My my value has gone up a huge percent, not just what we see in CPI or inflation. So we need to be able to differentiate how we're coming to that value and why we're coming to that value. And that comes to the state law, but I think peep because we're right. We're saying, okay. Your value went up. You're gonna pay more taxes. But a lot of times, I'm hearing, but that value increase is unproportionate

to what really should be talked about. I'll give you three examples, and they're hitting me too. Dick Sacket comes in and says this property has gone up in double. Yes. Okay, Dick. Dick didn't get into he he didn't file the request for a board of equalization in time. But I then said to Dick, well, Dick, this is that property that was out of South Main, right? -Yeah. -He says, it's gone up. It's worth rated 100%. And I looked at it and I said, well, so, Dick, is the value that's on it now? Would you sell it for that?

No. Yeah. You'd sell it for more.

So well, Dick, we're supposed to appraise things at market value. But how could the market value have doubled in one Well, Dick, let's assume that you're right. It didn't double in one year. But it is worth what you all say it's worth now. What you're really telling me is you got a real stealing deal last year because it wasn't high enough. And the year before and the year before that, probably. Right. And and that's what we're actually seeing because most of the time, if you say to the person, I understand it went up, but is the value that's on it now

market value? That's the real test. And, see, when you're sitting in those hearings, most people will sit back and say, okay, I I can see that. I mean, because we had to sit, like, on many places and say, okay. The street has been widened or the access to your place has gone up. Or I sat and listened to many of them on South Main Street, and you sit and talk about, hey. What's changing in South Main? It is becoming a commercial hub, and that is really increasing what's going around there. And and when we sit and talk to him about it so those people who come in

get that, but I don't know how many percent of the people who come in were not getting that high of people that's recognizing that. This is the guy that can do it. Kurt, can you go over there and just grab somebody's tax return and flip it up here and do what we're talking about? Evaluation. Next statement. Andrew will let you Andy, can we dismiss Barbara? Can we dismiss Barbara? Yes. Yes.

Thank you, Barbara. What do you want? I want you to do what we're gonna do with the tax. Should we just say Where you get somebody's taxes and throw them up here. Oh, before we get to that, I just wanna speak to the what I think is happening in a lot of cases is an adjacent sale will happen flag. That causes it's the catalyst for reassessing the value of the nearby properties. And I believe the reason that's happening is because of our surveyor and their availability and and our staff, and I think it's a reactive approach. So I don't think, a lot of people when they point it out, it's like, well, your neighbor's property just sold for that, so do you disagree that yours is worth that? No, I don't disagree. It's just the lack of predictability. It's a sticker shock. So I think one potential solution, and this is an executive function, that's why I bring it to you, is hiring a competent and capable surveyor that's proactively going out, so that we, instead of someone getting away with a lower cost for the last six years, it's incremental and it's fair, and the the perception and the the predictability is gonna be better. We initially cut the assessor's

request for commercial new commercial appraiser out. We came back. We said, no. You find somebody, we'll hire them. Because that's we're actually losing money, Keegan, because I know. We we aren't. We we we should not be waiting that long. We shouldn't be on a five year cycle on something like South Main. And and if we're paying a commercial appraiser a 130,000,

I guarantee if they're doing their job and being proactive, we're gonna bring more than that in assessed property value. So I just wanna indicate that that would be something I would be supportive of. We we need to get a county surveyor,

and we need to get a couple of commercial appraisers, and we need another county engineer. Those are professionals we need in our system.

Are we getting any I Are we getting any suggestions? Well, I

encourage I I came in and sat with sat with Kurt and with the executive, and we went through multiple properties. I mean, Kurt was willing to show us his property, and and we could very well illustrate this same principle. Yeah. You did you gave me mine. Yeah. You gave me a your words. You gave me a graph of mine. Yeah. I am. And it real it illustrated the same principle really well. And I thought it prepared me to have a good conversation with constituents, at the open house. And I I encourage anybody if they can find the time to come in and schedule time to sit with with Kurt or both of them to try to do that. Have a workshop. What I'd really like to do is run every one of you through it, look at the words we're using to describe the thing so you use the same words.

It just it is so misunderstood. It's unbelievably.

I had three people out here, and I just happened to get a conversation with them. I said, so do you so did your taxes go up or down? And they said, oh, it's gone up terribly. And I said, let's go see. So I said, we actually went in the office, and every single one of them had gone down.

Really? Not just even. And, Kurt, you're talking their total taxes? I'm talking total tax shutdown. And they were shocked. Oh, yeah.

Can you print that? I said, sure. Here.

Yeah. Yeah. K. So I think we it behooves us to get the word out in any way we can. Can you talk to people come? Can you swipe up one of those charts on Yeah. Because he He doesn't have access. He doesn't have access.

Yeah. What what we're gonna do is reason I notice it. If you It'll be just for us. Oh, okay. That's your Well, I mean, we'd have to if we're all gonna show do it. That's But but the idea is we're gonna try and train a bunch of That was fun. Sure. So the it can actually be done that way that

it's really

eye opening. Eye opening. It really is.

K. I think that's a good idea to have some of those computers set up and ready to show

people. So so how would you guys like to approach it? Would you like to have a workshop with all of us or have groups of two or three to come in with you? It's and and you show them kinda like it was me and Dave, I think. How do you envision that, George? I I have it in my mind, but kind of your show.

demonstrating it on the screen for anybody who's willing to have theirs shown, and if not, we can do it ourselves. Right. Use our own. And show them the graph. Yeah. And not, we can do it ourselves. Use our own. And show them the graph, and then invite them to come and look at their own. And we'll Everybody's

tax notice and their property value is public information.

Yeah. Use mine. I don't care. Yeah. It is all public.

But that that doesn't mean you wanna necessarily throw it out in front of everybody. Right.

Thank you. K. But that was I I used mine to to encourage or reach out to Janine. How do you wanna do this? Yeah. You'll set up appointment with Janine.

K. K. K.

I'm gonna make the presentation, and he's gonna run the

The computer.

I'm just finding this out. The software.

Matt runs the software too. Hear what they wanna hear. All they heard tonight is it's $4.81 to keep the county library in there. That $5 is a good part. And so that's Well, I would People hear what they wanna hear sometimes.

There a lady out there took names. She probably only got about half the people, but she got names of the people that were out there, where they were from, whether they were willing to pay more in taxes to keep their library, and if they had any other ideas. It's I laid it on the table in there. You can look at it.

K. Alright. So We said adjourn? Yeah. Let's let's let's adjourn with me. Do you have a report? I've been gone for two and a half weeks. I don't even know where I'm at.

Oh,

Dave. Erickson, the owl. Hello, owl. Yeah. Dave, do you have a council report

for us? Yes. I do. First of all, I just feel like I'm a problem. I'm just kidding. I one thing that's very interesting here is that one is the letter of what went out the junior livestock sale this year? At County Farm Bureau, they were willing to pay for the processing of all of the animals that would be donated by the buyer of the was raised by all these youth. They were willing to pay for the processing, and that's what they did. And so when buyers would donate animals to the county farm bureau, they paid for the processing. Adam to the Cash County Farm Bureau that paid for the processing, had a process, brought it all of it. And this is statewide being done by the Utah Farm Bureau, but the portion that it was bought specifically in Cash County is coming directly back to Cash County and then and I think I think that was a wonderful place. You got two ton of meat that's coming back when it's most needed, and I'm hoping that we can have two people. I would like to be there, but be there to to help support them in this effort because this is stuff I think is gonna grow really, really big from the food pantry.

I love that. There's a 02:00 ceremony

k. Thanks, Dave. Thanks, Dave.

K. So thank you. Motion to adjourn.

So moved. So moved. Motion. Those in favor, say aye. Aye.

K. K. So that's like it'll count.