Cache County Council Regular Meeting – 08-11-2026

IF YOU'LL PLEASE STAND and join me for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. Thank you, Keegan. Um, it was great to honor those people that work so hard and we don't always see them because they're behind the scenes. So, thank you for doing that. Um, does anyone want to make a motion about the agenda for tonight? >> I move to approve the agenda for tonight's meeting. >> It's been moved and seconded that we approve the agenda. Those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> That is the amended agenda, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And then the review and approve the minutes. Um I did have um there's a couple things on the minutes. >> I should say we had a discussion about the tenative budget. We're not going to be presenting that tonight. So that is a change in the >> Okay. Are you not going to present any any numbers or like nothing? I knew it was going to be modified but um >> we're going to present all of it in two weeks. Okay. >> So that's that was our decision. And the word tentative actually has a legal meaning of of of something specific you're supposed to put in a tentative budget. It's a word used in the statute. We were going to give you preliminary numbers. And so I think the confusion over the word tenative means we probably just should not get involved in that because it will not be the tenative budget >> tonight. Okay. >> You want to strike that? >> Yep. Let me >> move to a strike 6B on the agenda. Second. >> Moved and seconded that we strike 6B from our amended agenda. Those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Okay. Thanks, George. Okay. The the minutes. When I looked through the minutes, um Kurt Web's name is misspelled and so is Shawn Mills. And so that was the not a not a huge deal, but to them it probably is. It's a it'll be a record that goes down in history. So, if we can change those two things. Anybody else have any other um things that they noticed in the minutes? Does someone want to make a motion about the minutes? >> Move to accept the amendments from 7:28 to county council the county council meeting from uh 728. >> Second >> with those amendments. >> With the amendments. >> Okay. >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded that we approve the meeting minutes from 728 with the with the amenioned amendments. Those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? >> All right. Okay. Report of the county executive. >> There there's two or three things I wanted to talk about including appointments. Uh we we have been

obtaining u applications for the fire board. Uh I think the last count I had we had like 13 and we're continuing to receive those. The time period is open through I believe it's August 23rd or 24th. That's a weekend. So, we'll look at what we receive over the weekend as well. So, those appointments are getting those responses. Um, between tonight's meeting and the meeting previously, Logan City went ahead and approved our interlocal agreement regarding the airport. We'd like to get a fast start on that. Uh, we'd like to arrange a sponsor board meeting. If you recall, that isn't um a public appointment. The sponsor board is certain positions are to be filled. Um Mayor Anderson is is going to select himself and one councilman, council person, and he's he he is going to give me that name tomorrow. So, I'll have the two from Logan City. We have three council people, county council people who serve on that sponsor board. Uh Keegan is currently serving on the airport authority board. If you could determine what three you wish to serve on the sponsor board, that would complete that. The county executive is supposed to choose two county elected officials. and I have asked u Matt Funk and Bryson to serve as those two um elected officials. So that would complete our seven. Soon as we get the seven completed, we can have a brief meeting there and begin the process of soliciting for application to the airport authority board. So, um I believe it's your decision, uh Sandy, and your council as to which three persons you want to serve, but if you could determine that tonight, we could proceed with that sponsor board immediately. >> Okay. Um does there any I know Keegan's been involved along through through the whole thing, so I'm assuming you would want to stay on that sponsor board. >> I'll publicly express my desire to Yes. >> stay there. Yeah. Um, are there any other two council members who would like to take on that role? >> Yeah, the the rule is one at least no more than one is to be from Logan. So, >> okay. So, it can't be Joan or I. That's Keegan. >> That's right. >> And we need two others from the county. >> Okay. That leaves the three of you. Is there any four of you? Um I I am very interested in doing it, but I want to maybe publicly state it just to make sure that everyone's aware of part of what would come with that. Um where the Hide Park irrigation company does actually run through the airport property and the airport does hold could be a shareholder with that organization. That would just be something that we would would come up as a something I'd have to declare as a conflict of interest and abstain from any action that would involve that infrastructure. >> Aside from that, I feel like it would be an honor to serve on that board. >> Would you state why too and what your involvement is with the canal company? Just >> Oh, just because I currently serve as the um water master for that organization. >> Yeah, I don't see that as a problem with the sponsor board position, but I think you should declare it. So there's clarity there. >> Nolan, do your Catherine from the south have any >> play chicken? >> Yeah. >> Do I already have fire? >> That's a joy, right? >> I already have PNC. >> No, >> I know everybody talking. >> And when? >> Not not a lot. Uh maybe starting up there's some additional work, but we're hoping to hold it to four or five a year. And it, if you recall, the real active party in running the airport will be the authority board, not the sponsor. >> The sponsor board. >> Okay, I'll try it out. And that was not me expressing public interest in it. So, >> you accepting a responsibility. >> My arm is behind my back. I think Dave had a crooked neck while he was looking at me here. Sure. >> So, we'll have Mark and Nolan and Kegan. And if you guys want to get together, I can fill you in on kind of where we've been and we're at now. >> So, what I'll be doing is trying to schedule a sponsor meeting maybe later this week or early next week so we can get started on filling out the airport authority board because that is one of the primary duties of sponsor board is to select the authority board. >> Okay. Um maybe I'll ask you or and Dne, what is our do we need to make some kind of a um motion like what is the actual legal process to appoint this sponsor board members tonight? If we're going to if they're going to meet later this week, we need to make sure they're appointed tonight. What is the appointing process? >> So the council is the appointing authority. So there just need to be a a vote on the appointments. >> Okay. >> I would move that we accept uh those Keegan >> Mark and Nolan. Mark and Nolan uh as a SP on the sponsor board for the airport authority. >> I think there was a $1,000 retainer to have us on there.

>> I don't think I read that. >> I read the agreement a couple times. I don't remember that part. >> Excluding that was not in what OMP review. >> It wasn't that. >> And I get a second on that motion. >> Second. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we accept Keegan, Mark, and Nolan to be on the airport sponsor board. Those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? Okay, perfect. >> One other matter. I I don't know if all of you had a chance to go to the fair, but it was a great party for Cash County and we compliment everyone involved in it. The rodeo was fun, the fair was fun, the 4 and the extension and everything was really well done. In the in the course of getting ready for the fair, we made an agreement with Logan that we would improve the parking. Uh, I don't know how many of you saw the north side, but it was done very quickly and very well by our county road crew. And I've asked uh Jeremy to bring the guys that were uh involved with that. Come on up front, Jeremy, with your these guys were down there working at night to get it done. And it's I went down and looked at it to see how much damage was done. It still looks really good, Jeremy. There's everything there. So, these are the five guys that went out there and accomplished just line. >> Come line right up here and face the camera >> and thank you. >> There's a lineup right here. >> Okay. And I appreciate that, too. So, >> Jeremy, you can do a bow or a curtsy if you prefer. >> Thank Thank you all of you. Thank you.

>> Thank you.

But I am on the county council. So that was I was happy to have a place to park. >> That was better parking than the council. >> I

require us to notice up that that there were appointments going to be made. >> I wondered. >> And so I I'm just asked that we put that on the agenda for the next meeting for the appointments to the airport board. I don't want >> I I know there's been some contention with the airport. I don't want someone coming and pointing out a flaw in our appointment procedure at this meeting. >> Okay, we will add that. >> Come back and restart that process. >> Yeah, we'll add it to our agenda on the 25th and um thank you. Okay. Um 6A we need to ask for Shawn Mil. Good evening, council, and thank you for the opportunity to return and talk about my favorite subject, economic development. Um, you'll recall that last time I was here, I gave you the annual report for fiscal year 26 on last year's activities and then made recommendations well passed along recommendations from the CEO board. And just to reacquaint you, the CEO board is a cash county economic opportunity advisory board. And as the namesake uh implies, they are advisory only to you. Oh, that's right. I am not hooked up to the internet anymore. I'm sorry. One moment, please.

And the Cash County Economic Advisory Board is advisory to you and you get to make the final determination. Isn't technology grand until it doesn't work? Excellent. There we go. All right. And you'd ask me to return um particularly with two elements in play. One is the CEO board appointments. We have some vacancies because this year, GOED, Governor's Office of Economic Development, Oh, by the way, Sean Melon, Bear River Association of Government's Director of Economic Development for the minutes. Um, this year, administrative rules through Go-AD, Governor's Office of Economic Development, uh, has sought to clarify that they no longer want any elected officials from a deciding body to be on the board. And so, we have a a number of those board vacancies that I'm uh going to ask you to consider. as well as the recommendations from the last meeting which are these that are shown on the screen the same as last time. the contract that the county has for Bragg for those economic development services which I'll go into a little bit more detail here in a moment referring to a contract that's in your media packet proposed contract and special projects uh related to um Bridgerland Technical College has a business and innovation center uh it's called the hub and they've been wildly successful uh several years ago they were recipients of this grant money and saw Mark Alexander uh increase the capacity of entrepreneurs or young businesses in age of the business, not necessarily young people that were founders or owners. Uh and has done a really great job of showing upward job count from those incubated businesses. He provides mentorship through well uh in line with that they've had a commercial kitchen which is separate from their culinary arts kitchen that they use at the school for the certification programs themselves. And he's now at 60 clients. That's 6 clients that are using that commercial kitchen. And he has requested of the CEO board and your consideration a contribution towards what he expects to be an $80,000 expense in order to upsize that to accommodate the increase in clientele that he has. And then the last one is airport growth round three. Uh this last fiscal year was round two and a nearly equitable amount of money uh was set aside with the idea of furthering Dr. Jones's uh airport feasibility study conducted a couple of years ago. So, round three's money would join round two, which has been unspent from fiscal year 26 in order to advance uh whatever the newly discussed airport sponsor board and uh authority boards will consider. So, with that in mind, I have a couple of slides here I can go back to if you'd like, but the CEO board uh has to have a minimum of five members. Uh you can have more and this county traditionally has had majority of the board constitutes a quorum, which is good that right now I have a majority of the board that's still in place. Um and then you need to elect a chair and vice chair or they need to elect a chair and vice chair among themselves. And another change to the administrative rules this year seeks to take those terms from two years to four years. The five minimum are a representative for the county uh which is what the previous elected officials here on this body have served uh in that capacity, a municipal representative, someone from workforce development, private sector representative, and a public atlarge representative. uh this county as well as others that I help uh manage have historically included additional seats that represent industries that you would like to see more of in our county. So I've listed some of those that have been mentioned for this county here uh in the past aerospace and defense advanced manufacturing life or biosciences a and value added food processing and arts and culture. This has been the CEO board as constituted this last year. I have a very light highlight for those that are now off the board either through administrative rules or one member who due to health concerns has asked to be excused and and has effectively resigned which leaves us with the uh chart that you see in front of you there. That gives us the institutional knowledge of Brian Carver who now becomes chair. He represents your public at large member. Uh he also happens to work for Jub Engineering. uh Kirk Jensen who is my equivalent for Logan City proper and Mark Alexander who is as I noted with Ridgerland Technical College a moment ago he represents the workforce development spot that you need. I have suggested the terms of those three individuals being amended to end at the end of next calendar year which would give them about a year and a half left on a four-year term. And as state statute requests, they want the four-year terms uh mixed up and juggled so that you're not always losing 100%. So that leaves us four spots with uh myself and Elma Burgess, your grant manager, uh rounding out some staff exeicio positions that don't get to vote on the board. Of the five minimum, that would mean out of those four spots, you need to pick someone to represent the county and someone to represent private sector. I've proposed two more private sector representatives because that's what you've had previously. And in discussions since our last since your last county council meeting and my last being before you, uh several members have proposed some names. I have discussed uh at the direction of of uh council members uh Keegan and Mark. I've reached out to Mr. Wes Clark, Wendy Hassan, Jeff Cox, and Mike Presley. But there are a whole slew of names of individuals. And um you just need to fill those spots for those particular headings that are noted there. You could expand further if you wanted. You could just choose the bare minimum. The choice is really yours. But you can see that for the four that are vacant, I have proposed that they would get the full uh three and a half year uh spots to go out until the end of December 2029. I'm happy to discuss these individuals that I've spoken with at further detail if you'd like. Happy to take additional recommendations on your part, whatever you would like to proceed before we then discuss the next element on the agenda item, which is the proposed contract. >> Okay. I I talked to Sean just before the meeting and just to stay within our appointing um process. I would like to put those appointments off until the next meeting so that we can have a resume of each one. We have a list before the meeting starts and then that gives another week or so if you have any other names that you want to suggest to Sean. um if you would get those to him within the next just few days and then at our next meet before our next meeting starts in our media packet, we'll have those names to to be able to look at and discuss at that meeting so that we can because it the council is the appointing authority on this board. >> Correct. >> And um but I don't want to do that without having those names before the meeting if that's if that's okay with the rest of you. >> Would it be helpful to explain some of the nominations and why for the ones that we do have on the list now. Or do you want to wait? >> Um I I don't know. I think we could wait until next time when we have a full list and then we can talk about them and vote on them and um unless unless someone thinks of a better uh process or a different process that you want to do, but I just feel like I wanted to have names in advance of the meeting before we vote on them. >> I I can question. >> Yes, please support that. But also um we did have quite a few conversations about the process and that was not brought up. Um just to make sure we were okay timelinewise. Does that work? >> I for the time being you see the graph in front of you a minimum of five and I have three out of five. I have a quorum if 100% of them show up.

So yes, I'm good. I will need a letter of attestation from the chair before the September one deadline for fiscal year 27's application and I should be able to arrange that with Mr. Carver because the proposals in front of you tonight as they were before are one and the same as they were in the last meeting. So it would be to an attestation that this is the recommendation that the board is constituted that they were consulted uh on the application that would be forthcoming by the September 1 deadline. So that is possible. I just need 100% of them, you know, to be engaged until there's more members appointed. >> Yeah. I just we're just going through so many different appointments at this at this point in time. I think the process we just need to stick to the processes. >> Yeah. Like I said, I thought we were asking those questions. So >> I just never saw those names before. >> Correct. >> In our media packet. >> Yeah. I think I think to Mark's point like we did discuss because I know in my report a month ago I mentioned let's be thinking about names and then last time we said let's come up with some names and so I think let's put our foot on the gas and if we're going to come up with names let's do it like yeah >> in the next three days. >> Let's make sure they're in the media packet before the meeting starts. That's >> and and I'll take care of that with my staff and and Andrew. Uh Councilman Gunnel, you had a question. So I saw on your list you had like the a value co-op food side. I would just like to see that we have somebody from the a industry whether it's farming or equipment or something related into that area I think would be an important area. >> Fantastic. I will say that in the list that had been developed since the last meeting um there were a couple of names that I could be specific with but again I I think it's been noted tonight that there may be a an additional window. I love the shortened time frame and welcome any of you to reach out and let me know if you choose to speak with somebody beforehand and just let them know what the opportunity is or the frequency of meetings, what the time commitment would be or would like me to join a call, happy to do so at your pleasure and then that way I can make sure

administrative rule change this year is that any in-house employees are contracted uh work being done on your behalf of this Royal County grant. And just to back up for the sake of the audio record, anybody present tonight or to refamiliarize yourself, you qualify for this rural county grant or RCG because Cash County is designated a rural county. Counties of the third through sixth class are designated by the state of Utah as rural and as such the state legislature a number of years ago sought to incentide flexibility for rural counties to perform economic development at the local level differently than what those legislators who had sponsored the legislation which was Senator Scott Sandal and Representative Carl Alrech differently than say Ogden Provo. And so what they conjured up and is in effect for several years now, $200,000

Okay, >> let's go to the next one. Matt, >> Madam Chair, for the next ones, we've asked the cities that are applying for those to come and present. So, Which one's the next one? >> It's the 600 South from 6 East to 10th East. >> Good evening. I'm Craig Rasmmanson with Forsrren Associates, the contract city engineer for River Heights City. And I don't have quite the same presentation as as u as the Wolfpack Way project. This is a little bit more low-key. Um and uh could we go to the do you have the um uh the the project view address that one first and just uh >> that's all right. Thanks. So this project is um the county remembers maybe last year uh similar project same project we presented to to Cog last year but um um we did not have the public hearing with Cash County. um the very easterly segment of this project which is 600 south in River Heights City uh from the River Heights Elementary School approximately 770 east over to 10th east that eastern segment of the road. um looking at uh pavement widening um and um and now adding in intersection improvements at 10th East which was um left out because 10th East is in the county jurisdiction and um we didn't have a public hearing on that last year and so that easterly segment um we couldn't do that because it was multi-jurisdictional. So, we're here today to um have the public hearing uh to get the county that on record with the county and hopefully be able to be in a better position to move forward with the 600 South widening project, including the intersection at 10th East. And um costs haven't changed too much from last year um other than just uh some the work in the county at the intersection really is limited to um correcting some some curb and gutter uh that was installed as part of some development work that didn't account for widening the road and drainage structure relocation as well as just asphalt pavement. Um we're not asking for funding from the county although we would accept it and uh and uh the project budget is with contingencies approximately $750,000. Uh River Heights City's match on that um including the match as well as ineligible COG um work is about $82,000 for that. So >> anybody questions? I don't I'll just explain the real briefly the you know the improvements. Um again widening out the road on the south side. Um the north side of the road that that was a one. Thank you. Uh the north side of the road has been developed through development growth in in River Heights City. Um the south side is in a different jurisdiction in Providence and was not uh improved with development. Providence couldn't require outside jurisdiction improvements. Um, unfortunately, it didn't happen. So, we're trying to get that road widened out. Uh, it's a regional, I guess I would say it's a multi-jurisdictional collector road um for traffic from Providence through River Heights coming on into Logan. Um, you know, CMPO has questions on whether that constitutes regional. I would say it's probably more aptly named multi-jurisdictional, but for people in that vicinity, it's it's an important uh section of road that um certainly is uh in need of some improvements for safety. Uh the project will add sidewalk on the south side of the of the of the road as well. Um a lot of pedestrian traffic and increasing amount of bike traffic there as well. Um the westerly end of this segment which is just off of the left side of the sheet um is River Heights Elementary School. So there any questions about that? >> Anybody have any questions? Public hearing. >> Thank you. Okay. This is a public hearing. If there's anyone here from the public that would like to speak about this project in River Heights, this would be your time to address us. Yes, please come forward. >> Yeah, you'll have to come to the microphone. Tell us your name, please. And in my former life, I was a school bus driver and I drove from River Heights Elementary. Often I would go east because >> Can you tell us your name, please, sir? Oh, >> I'm sorry. Brent Smith. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And often I would go east because of the conflict of traffic going west in that intersection just west of the elementary. There are so many children that walk on both sides of that street. it. And during when school kids are out, it is very concerning to go east with kids because you can tell them to walk on the sidewalk, but they like it's you have to cross the street to do that and they would sooner stay on the south side. It is very necessary that this project be done with a sidewalk for the children of the River Heights Elementary School. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak to this project? >> Move to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? >> Okay. And I just want to clarify, we are not voting on these projects tonight. This is just part of the process. We have to attest that a public hearing was held. We won't be discussing them or voting on them tonight. From here, they go back to the there's a process where they go through COG. So, I just wanted to clarify that for the public. Okay, we'll go ahead with to the 200 West in Providence. >> Is our live stream up? Got an alert saying >> someone put the stream up. >> Good evening, council. My name is Josh Nelson. Um, I'm I work for Sunrise Engineering. We're the contracted city engineer for Providence City. Um I'll also introduce Ryan Snow who's here with us um this evening uh city manager for Providence City. So um this presentation I have is the next two items on the agenda. So it is both uh 300 South and the 200 West project. Um so I'll discuss both of them and then I guess we can do public hearing separately but kind of a two for one presentation here. Okay. >> So um both projects 200 West and 300 South in Providence. Um, so I'll discuss the 300 South project first. Um, it's a section of road widening to complete a section of road on 300 South. Um, so there are sidewalks on both sides of the road, curb gutter, a

complete roadway section as one of the the major collectors into Providence City from SR 165. Um, so safety improvements, enhancing, getting the correct width of the road, also adding in bike lanes for active transportation purposes and uh, sidewalks. 200 west project is from first north in Providence um which is about 1,200 south um down to 500 south in Providence. So six blocks of roadway reconstruction. Um

this one's involved with the county because 200 West is a county road. Um this county road is is a major road through these communities. Uh there's I believe five elementary schools within um a block of this

be done here um according to the plan within the next um between 2032 and then um the 300 South project is a phase two project. Next slide. So planned improvements um both are major collectors. Um for 300 South it's an 80 foot ride ofway. Um and on 200 West it's a major collector as well. Um the existing rightway varies um from 99 ft down to around 80 ft um through kind of where these old city surveys lined up with old farm surveys. So little differing through there, but this is generally the planned cross-section for both projects. Um, so through lane, spike lanes, some parking on the side, as well as sidewalks for um some awesome active transportation. And this cross-section is from the Providence City uh Providence City's transportation master plan. Um so project cost. Um the one I have on here um today is for 200 West. Um it includes construction right away um construction management, engineering, design um as well as some contingency money. We're anticipating just over $5 million for this project. And um what the city is asking is to split what would be the match on this COG application for funding. Um $200,000 from Providence, $215,000 um estimated at this point from Providence City and $215,000 from Cash County. Um the other project um 300 South um the city is not um anticipating on asking for any contribution from the county on that little spot improvement there. So, yeah, the spot improvement max for the project from uh the COG is $400,000. So, and then our schedule um following kind of the COG timeline. Um we're working on design over the next year um with plans for construction in 2028. It's kind of the general timeline there. Any questions? >> Any questions? I actually had a question on the >> sometimes you see the bike lanes on the very outside so they're sort of protected by the parked cars. Is that >> I see in this one the parked cars are at the very edge and the bike lanes positioned between the parked cars and the traffic. Is that I just was curious how come it was designed like that. >> Protect the cars. >> Um

someone please think of the cars. >> Bikes could hit all the mayors. Um I I wasn't involved in the creation of the transportation master plan for Prev City. Um but um what I would say is a lot of times when the bike lanes are on the uh the curb, cars park in the bike lanes and then there's not room for the bikes to bike anymore um because it gets taken up by the cars. So I'm assuming that was the thought process there. Gotcha. >> Got a question on the 300 South one. Uh has there been development occur on either side of that road? >> There's >> there's a house on both sides. Residential >> just residential. >> Just residential house on each side. >> No commercial or anything like that in that area? >> At this point, >> were they recent homes? >> No, >> they're older. Okay. >> So that's the reason there hasn't been sidewalks and correct. Okay. >> Yep. the on the south side it's one of those islands where the parcel's still in the county and on the north side yeah it's a single home with a bunch of large agricultural field around them but nothing's been developed besides the >> what's the >> the other one what's the reason for the 215,000 cash county match >> it currently is a county road so the city's willing to

come in and match uh half half with the county um but It's currently a county road. >> Currently, >> yes, >> currently county road. So, we're just asking for for both sides to come together. So, >> I have a question about the 300 South. Um why is it just that one section? Is it already developed on either side of that? >> Correct. So, that's just >> there's kind of a those older homes haven't no development has occurred and they just need to finish that. There's been development to the east and west that have built out the road and there's just these two older homes that haven't been >> developed at this point. So there's there's a gap in the roadway. So there's sidewalk on either side of this location and curb and gutter but through this area there's not. >> Thanks for the clarification there. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone here from the public that would like to speak to this? Please approach. Make sure you let us know what your name is, please. Hi, my name is Joe Cotrol. Um, I >> Mr. Cockro, before I we need to do a public hearing on each of these separately. So, we're going to we're going to do a public hearing on the 200 West project first before we talk about the 300 South. Is that the one you wish to address? >> I actually want to address both. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Stand up and wait. >> Tell me, make sure I'm doing this right, >> De. So, he'd need to make his public his comment on the the one we're in the hearing and then stand up again and make public comment on the next one >> we we just want to make sure everything's done properly so that this application >> first. >> No, we're going to do the 200 West first. >> Okay. >> Um I'm I'm here speaking on behalf of the elementary schools. Um I'm a principal at Spring Creek Elementary. We are making the transition from Spring Creek Middle School to elementary. And both of these roads, especially 200 West, has a direct impact on our on mine and Providence Elementary's um safe walking route. And along that that road, there's multiple spots without curb and without sidewalk that this would have a direct impact on those families and ensuring that students make it safely to school. Um, with the transition to to Spring Creek, especially being an elementary school, we have students as young as five years old using these roads and they are busy and I think this is a great opportunity to ensure the safety of students making it to those schools. So, thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else that's here to speak about the 200 West project? Good evening, council. Um my name is Janelle Cely. I'm on the Providence City Council. Um I'm just here to express our support for this project um the 200 West 400 East County Grid Corridor um and 300 South roundabout. This is a county road. It's county road 238 and it runs through our municipality. It affects it I would say in the language that River Heights used. This is definitely multi-jurisdictional and regional corridor in the CMO. It connects from Logan through River Heights, Providence down to Millville and then it and empties out and connects into Nibi City. Um I think you know especially as we look in Cash County, we really do need these corridors to be maintained well. Um where we don't have freeways

and we have our limited highway system. As we continue to grow, these corridors are are critical. Um, this is an important regional corridor and the city is open to considering acceptance of this road from the county with these improvements being made. Bringing this road up to the city standard, adding sidewalk, curb, and gutter. That makes it um a reasonable consideration for Providence City to take this roadway on. Um, these improvements are not optional. They're essential for the safety, functionality, and long-term stewardship of the area. Um, and and it's really important that we invest in this corridor. The county has been collecting funds for the maintenance of this road for decades and so it feels very appropriate and warranted to fund this project and to bring this road up to standard and to provide the regional mobility and public safety that um our municipality and our board municipalities need. So, I hope you will consider um matching the um splitting the match with us since this is a county road and funding this project. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. My name is Jeff Kek. Um I am the principal at Providence Elementary. Also here to voice my support for uh this project. Um with recent boundary changes uh in Cash County School District, we've taken on several well quite a few families uh from the west side of Providence. Um there is no clear safe way for those students to walk um and cross 200 West at this time. Um the ideal would be to get them across the road, I'm told, to to then walk down the east side, which has sidewalk. Um, but there's no on the on the south end of Providence, there isn't a safe way to get them across the road. Um, with a potential crosswalk further north up by Center Street in Providence, we would like that west side to have sidewalk for these kids to walk down um safely to get to that crosswalk to get to Providence Elementary. Um, so again, I would also encourage you to uh consider strongly helping out with this project for the safety of the kids. I am here to represent many families that have reached out to me who are who are not uh um satisfied or happy with um the options that they have at this point for their students to walk to school. Um but appreciate your consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is anyone else that is here to speak on the 200 West Road project? Please. >> Well, my name hasn't changed. I'm still Brent Spess. So, I'd like to address 200 West. I also drove my school bus down 200 West because uh students were transported to River Heights and we came over and come went down 200 West to the south. And again, kids coming down from the elementary school in Providence when they got to 200 West became confused. How do we cross? and they stood there and the traffic school bus drivers knew what to do but the traffic didn't always know what to do and the students were there and then when they did stop then you'd see a herd of kids start running to get through the intersection while the cars were stopped. It needs to have more attention to it as these gentlemen here have spoken regarding these elementary kids. that needs to be more definitive so that they are not confused and they know what to do. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else from the public that would like to speak to this project? >> Move to close public hearing. >> Second. It's >> been moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. We'll now open the public hearing on the 300 South project. there's anyone that'll please Mr. Catrell. >> Thank you again. Um I will just note um we we share students that so Spring Creek Elementary is a dual language immersion magnet school. So we have students coming from Providence to Spring Creek that go along 300 South. And as Mr. Principal Kek alluded or talked about, we are at this time requiring that they cross 200 West to access sidewalk along the east side and then cross again at Center Street because we don't have um we don't have sidewalk along the the west side. So this it becomes a major issue once again with confusing children figuring out how to get how to access. So, I um thank you for your consideration. We obviously are in strong support of of this and for the safety of students and and speaking on behalf of Cash County School District as well. We've written letters about this u these issues as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak about the 300 South project? >> Move to close the public hearing. Second. It's been moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? >> Okay. The last one we have is the 1200 East North End project. Who's here to speak about that one? Matt. >> Meet me again. >> Okay. >> And state your name again, please. >> Josh Nelson with Sunrise Engineering um for the 1200 East North End project. This one's not in our packet. >> It's right here. >> Where should be 9 B7? Mine goes from 9 B5. >> It B7. >> I don't have a 9 B7. That's the one we've put on hold. >> That's the one that got put on hold. >> Oh, this is it. >> That's the That's the north one. >> That's the north one. >> Oh, 1200 East. >> Further north. >> North end. I don't know. >> Sorry. >> Is it the same one stated twice? >> So, it's not in here then, right? >> No. Five. We end at five. This one's not our packet. Correct. >> B2. >> That's your first time. >> I thought that was the one they said we were going to >> say that one was confused with the other, 1200. >> Okay. So, the the one that's 9B number seven is the one that is going to be taken off. >> 9B number two. >> This one we're going to talk about now. Uh that was accidentally listed under 9. The presentation that's correct is accidentally listed under the incorrect. >> Yeah. In the packet >> title in the in the packet for

>> there's there's two 12 east projects which is probably part of the concern on each side of Hide Park. So anyway, >> it's what we get for not naming our streets cute names, you know, >> and and part of the parenthesis is it's 12 east in the county, a th000 east in Smithfield, and it's 700 East in Hide Park. Not to make it more confusing. >> We should probably come up with another name with it so we get four. But uh Josh Nelson with Sunrise Engineering. I'm here on behalf of Smithfield City. We are the design engineer, a contracted design engineer for this specific project. Um so the objective of this project is to connect 1000 East with in Smithfield with 700 East in Hyde Park, which is 12 east through the county. Um there's very few roads that connect uh through Smithfield and Hyde Park. Um, and part of this goal is to help um, alleviate traffic off of Highway 89 or 91 um, to prevent con congestion. So, it's a phase 2 COG or COG CMPO project priority. Um, it's also identified in the Smithfield transportation master plan. Um, to the right you kind of see um, the the project map through here where it ties on to Southeast and Hyde Park. Um, it's up above the canal behind the Michel just east of that whole area. And then it ties in under that new development um on Sky View Hill on the north side with the proposed roundabout at 600 South and Thousand East in Smithfield. Next slide. Um this is CMPL map that shows the phasing priority as as well as um other future projects and roads planned through the area. Slide um the aerial exhibit of the project area. I'm just giving kind of a better view of of where this road will be going. On the the bottom of the picture, you see 700 East and then looking north, you see where it ties into Smithfield City. Um, so project details kind of the blue north is turned to the right at this point. Um, kind of the the plan for the project is to build a partial cross-section in the blue area. Um and it would be built out in the future pending development and then through the red area would plan on building the full cross section um where it's always already been developed um on the east side. So um plans to apply for COG funding this year. Um design's been funded by the CMO already. Um we're estimating $5 million um in construct in in COG funding will be the request. Um and at this point, uh Smithfield City is not, uh requesting any participation from the county, um for funding. Um that's cross-section. Um so the 80oot standard cross-section, which will be more on that north end, and then that partial cross-section. Um, part of the plan is also to build a a eight-foot path on the, in this case, the west side of the road um along the canal there to give um some active transportation routes between um Hyde Park and Smithfield City up there along the canal. You have any questions? >> Does anybody have any questions for Josh? >> Found slide four very helpful. I like that aerial view. >> Yeah. >> Like to see more of those. Mhm. >> Wish I could take credit for it, but I was very impressed with my uh engineer who helped me on it. So, thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone here from the public that would like to speak on this 1200 East North End project? >> Anybody? >> Move to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> Okay. It's moved and seconded that we close public hearing. Those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Okay. Thank you. Um, Jesse, I have all these signed if you want to just come grab them. Like I said, the these were not for us to discuss tonight. We're just attesting that we held the public hearing on those. So, >> okay. >> I move that we enter the board of equalization. >> Second move and seconded that we enter board of equalization to talk about the 2026 assessment role colle correction. Moving along. >> You got a vote. >> Do we need to vote on that motion? >> Did we vote? >> Oh, those in favor. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we enter the board of equalization. Those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the council. I'm here today to present the request for corrections to the 2026 assessment role. Under Utah code 59-2-133, the assessor may supply or correct errors in the assessment book with the consent of the county legislative body. The corrections before you today represent necessary adjustments identified since the assessor's tax role was closed on May 22nd. Uh the majority of the corrections in this memo concern a specific cluster of parcels in the South Valley Recreation Area about 16 parcels there 16- 094-00005 through 16-094-0023. So during our review, it was determined that an incorrect assumption was made regarding the property site characteristic characteristics for these cabin lots. Um the land value for these parcels should have been discounted to account for specific location attributes. We are requesting to correct these land attributes to ensure the assessed values correct accurately reflect the market conditions for the recreation area. Um, one parcel here we have identified 09-030-000012 um was erroneously removed from the from green belt status. Uh the parcel consists of 25.35 acres that meet the criteria for green belt. We are requesting to reinstate this status to ensure statutory compliance and fair treatment of of this a land. And then finally, the remaining items on the list involve um updates to the residential exemption status for four parcels. We're adding the exemption to parcel 04-183-0805, which has been confirmed as the primary residence of a tenant. And we are asking to remove the exemption from three parcels where the owners maintain their primary residence elsewhere. 08-155- 0310 07-158-0078 Um, these corrections are essential for maintaining the integrity of the assessment role and ensuring all property owners are assessed fairly and accurately. So I ask for your blessing and formal consent to approve these corrected assess values. I'm happy to answer any specific questions that you have. >> So

we have any questions? >> I have more of a procedural question. Is are these self-discoveries? Because I know we have a board of equalization hearing where someone discovers evidence, presents it to you, and that this is our office found it and we're making >> a little bit of both. I I I can't remember >> if it is both. Do you know why it doesn't go through the full hearing? >> We could we could ask them where we we we feel like it was an error on our part. We we can ask to correct that. So we felt that rather than ask them to go through the regular process of appealing, this might be an efficient way to do it. >> Okay. It's like an outofc court settlement kind of situation. >> We think I mean we think this will this is more correct obviously. >> All right. Thanks. Were >> were these more like communication error or a just a hit the wrong button? >> There's there's about 53,000 parcels. So, >> taxable parcels. So, >> um I think in the past maybe we should have and we have in the last few years we've started to come before you and ask for these corrections and I assume there will be corrections in the future but um yeah, they're just data or misunderstandings or Are these from the patrons that have come forth or you you found these? >> Um I I think one the one in the recreation area did was brought forth was brought to our attention. >> But several of them you you found the air earner. >> I like that proactive attitude actually. >> So you have a description of where these the big number of land attributes are. Um yeah, these are these are south of south and a little east I think of Sheep Creek Cove if you know where that area is east of Ant Flat Road. >> So I was wondering about that and that's why I'm asking about the green belt how that got twisted in there because I've been >> uh I I don't >> wanting to focus on that area for a while on the green belt. >> Yeah. Um I don't believe I'd have to check. I don't believe that most of those ones that I'm asking for correction are in green belt. You just had the one that I saw. >> Yeah, that different one that I >> What are the incorrect land attributes? I mean, obviously they were all about the same. What What was exactly or overview? What >> you know, there was a there was a landline in our Puma software that I think just needed to be corrected. It was just an just an error. >> Okay. It ended up being about double the value that it should be. >> Are they all about the same acreage? >> Yes, they're roughly the same. Um I believe they're around 10 acres. I'd have to confirm. >> So when we see one go from 112 112, then we have a 277 278. Is that more acreage? >> Uh re help me see which parcel you're talking. They're on um 160940018 and 0019. That's it's

the office that says this is not a bill and then they're like oh my goodness I need some help. So that allows us to um

you know help those people that need it you know within that time frame before they pay have to pay the tax. >> Okay. So we want to make a motion about this extension. >> Move to extend the filing deadline to November 30th 2026 5 p.m. for the low-inccome abatements abatement blind exceptions senior deferrals and antigent deferrals. Second. >> It's been moved and seconded that we approve the tax relief filing extension request that has been before us. Any further discussion? >> Those in favor say I. >> I. I. Any opposed? >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. On the signature pages, do you want to just send them with the clerk's office? >> Yep. I'll make sure and get them over here. >> Perfect. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. >> Thank you. >> Those afterwards. Okay. Um, we are at number 10, proposals for consideration of action resolution 2026-28, multi-jurisdiction access request. Matt Matt Phillips, public works director, here to discuss this resolution. There's been a lot of discussion tonight on Highway 238. So, here's here's a little bit more. So, Um, just as a reminder why we're here, this resolution, the road manual states that any um, municipal development that wants access to a county road needs the approval of the council for that. So, next one. Um, there there should be something letter in your packet. It's was this request came from Danny McFarland of Stackville. It's the access for a new 12 lot subdivision that was recently reszoned within Providence City. He's proposing uh this access would be a new private road off 400 East our highway 238. This is 100 west in Providence. So just kind of showing the location with respect to River Heights and Providence where this is um highlighted in your screen if you can see it with all of the colors. Providence is kind of the pink color. River Heights is kind of the off yellow color and our road is in the middle of the slide in the pink highlighted. That's our highway 238. So this is just barely on the Great River Heights and Providence. Next one. This a little zoomed in of where the proposed development is. There's currently I think some a structures on there with a small a type driveway access. So next one, this is a proposal of how he's doing this 12 lots. Um what you can't see is on the very north edge of this property. There's wetlands, there's some ponds, and there's kind of a little stream. I wouldn't say that they're part of the flood plane, but they are it is wetlands and it is um water. So, kind of that's why there's I think he's proposing a park there, but it's very difficult for this subdivision to access off Spring Creek Parkway because of the environmental stuff along the north edge of this property. So, um that's about it. Matt, can >> you go back a screen? >> Yeah, go back. So, in approving this, it's still up to the city to worry about access like if there's a sec a second egress or the fire codes or whatever that we're all we're saying is they're going to access our the road that we own. >> Correct. >> Correct. We're not worrying about the actual development standards. >> No. So, as far as those road widths, the lot sizes, the emergency turnaround at the end of the road, all of those types of things, because this is in Providence City, they're all managed in part of their subdivision code or their development code. >> The only part that we have jurisdiction over is the rideway. So, it's basically from the rideway to our road. That's the part that we have jurisdiction over. So that would be per county standards. Where we run into a lot of issues with these is this road, our highway 238 is classified as an arterial, a minor arterial. And to put that into perspective of some of the other county roads, that is the the road from Menden to Logan. So the Menden road or from the airport airport road um to from 10th west to Daryl's appliance. So that's what an arterial is in the county. So our arterial standards for the county are set up for rural. So our road spacing and intersection grids are 660, you know, blocks. And so when you get into these urban environments and you're trying to push additional accesses on our road, they they don't meet our standard. So essentially when it gets to my level and they're applying for the actual permit to do the work, we we essentially have to issue them a design exception because it doesn't meet our standards. So, but in this in this case, we've wrote the resolution um given the fact that there is some, you know, discussions with Providence on this juris on the jurisdiction of the road and essentially he he's with the wetlands and some of the natural stuff that's going on along the north property, he's essentially he needs to access towards our road. So, >> uh, Matt, how many feet is there between this, uh, this egress and and Spring Creek Parkway to Is it like a block? Like, is it >> Well, you're talking a few hundred feet. >> Like 180. Okay, >> that's it. Yeah. >> Yes. >> Wow. >> What's the difference on this and what we've set for so long on the River Heights one where they were doing a subdivision one and a county road two? River Heights is basically the same thing, Nolan, is we the council approved that. So now he's gone back similar to this one. Once if we approve this, he's going to probably go through the subdivision process with the city. He'll have to bring in his power, his water, his sewer, and and get his engineer to design the project and the improvements. So, they're not really moving forward with these projects until they get the council's approval. Same with the last one. We haven't heard back from him because he's probably in that subdivision approval stage and improvement all the improvements improvements >> like his sewer, his water, those types of thing. He's probably working through the city of River Heights for all that. So, he hasn't been back for us to actually get the permit to come in and do the work. >> It's just I've heard so much of River Heights and that issue. I've heard very little of this one. So, >> how does this if we approve this access, does that affect at all the plans that we have to like chip seal that road or the things that we plan to do before we let ownership of that change? Like, will that make any difference? >> So, he has one access that he'll probably have to close. He'll have he'll probably have to remove some curb and gutter, but he's his current access is not in that location. So where he's proposing, he'll have to move that location and most of that's going to be from the asphalt back. So because this is a private road, you're not going to see big intersections and street cuts like that. He'll he'll most likely leave most of the asphalt intact and just be working back. So Sandy, it shouldn't affect any of our more so it would be if he has to bring his sewer and water and stuff that has to cut the road. that would have more impact in his private driveway. >> He'd be responsible for all of that. >> Yeah. >> So So the frontage on 238 it would be the county standards. >> It Yes. Because that's again this is probably part of the issue going back is Providence doesn't have >> is Providence then ain't going to be mad because it's not up to their standards. >> Um >> Proidence give it to him. >> Providence isn't here. Providence isn't here to answer that, but when I reached out to Providence, they didn't have any comment of whether they were supported or against it. >> We could speed this up really fast. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> Anybody have any other questions for Matt? Okay. Thank you. This is an initial proposal. It's a resolution. Um, does anyone want to make a motion on this or do you want to continue it or pass it? I'm at your disposal. Looks like we'll continue that until the next meeting. I don't have a motion on that. Okay. 10B. Uh, ordinance 2026-33, the square footage exemption for geotechnical reports. Brian. Okay, Brian already presented this. Um, does anyone have any questions for Brian? Do you want to discuss this? Uh, >> what's special about 2200 ft? >> 2400 square feet. >> No, no, 22. We already had 200 square feet, right? >> Now we're going to 24. So, what's special about 2200 ft? >> Uh, we just thought about the the majority of the sizes of accessory buildings we get >> um are 60 by 40 or under um it when we get the bigger buildings than that, they usually have >> a second story or a loft or they're putting dividing walls in it. So, we thought if we're going to raise the square footage, let's do it to the our most common buildings so that we can help the most amount that we can. That's kind of where 60 by 40 foot building came into play. Yeah, we threw a dart at a board. No, I'm just kidding. >> Okay, any other questions for for Brian about this exemption changing this exemption? >> So, we see a lot of um buildings, barns going up and um out in the county. So are we being careful of what we're classifying as an agricultural building just because it's on green belt or what's going on in that manner? Does that make sense? >> Yeah. So right now the agricultural buildings aren't going to change how we how we issue those. This is for the accessory buildings. >> But are we sure that all of those that are being built are agricultural buildings? >> We take them at their word. They sign a document that says that it will always be an a building. They can never change the occupancy. Yeah, as far as determining people's intentions in the future, we we don't do that. >> Yeah, my thoughts are more comment than question, but if we're going to pass it, we have to enforce it. And I think that's Nolan's point. I don't know how we enforce this all that. Well, >> well, I see a lot of buildings going up, but um pickle ball courts, whatever else, something's going on in there. So, There's >> how many square feet do you need for a pickle ball court? >> Paddle, a racket tapping. >> Well, it's just that you go back a couple years and Kathleen How when she was the assessor, she had to go in and and at the request of the state checked to see what was in or going on in those buildings. And so, are we doing that? I mean, I'm not pointing the finger at anybody, but I'm just saying just like Mark said, if we prove it, how do we understand it? And that's my question. Kind buildings, you know, I've been here a long time. We've done a lot of a buildings and uh you know, if they meet certain criteria, uh they can have them. Um, if they do electrical or plumbing in them, they use a lot of people get electrical and plumbing inspections. That's about the best we can do on on an A building. I think this helps us with accessory structures because, you know, a lot of people come in with a building and they say, "Oh, we got to get a geological report." Well, never mind. It's an a building. So, I think this is actually going to help us instead of somebody maybe not being fully upfront about the A building. Now, they'll they'll get in a permit for an accessory structure and then it can be all upfront and legit. So, I I think this will help our case, not hurt it. >> Any other questions or does someone want to make a motion on this? >> I guess we'd wave the rules on this, right? I move to wave the rules and uh pass ordinance 2026-33 square footage exemption for geotech reports. >> Second. Okay, it's been moved and seconded that we suspend the rules and pass ordinance 2026-33. Any further discussion? Those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks, Brian. >> All right, Andrew. 2026-30. >> Good evening, council. Before you is ordinance 2026-34. Before I begin, I'm going to pass out a paper. Half of it you've already received. The other half just details some of the processes that are proposed in this ordinance. They're pretty uh just quick references. Let's begin. >> So, Utah code allows for counties to enact some uh several optional sales taxes. Currently, the following two taxes are enacted in county in Cash County. First off is what is called the TRCC tax. This is most known mostly known here as the restaurant tax just as a quick reference. Uh and the second one is the wraps tax which also has its own unique long title but the most important references in this are going to be the wraps tax and the restaurant tax which most of you are already familiar about. The wraps tax is used to support recreational and zoological facilities. And the restaurant tax is to help finance tourism promotion in the county as well as the development, operation, and maintenance of airports, convention centers, cultural facilities, recreation facilities, and tourist facilities in the county. >> Quick question. >> Yes. >> On that uh right there enacted in Cash County, that's the wraps tax is by vote. >> Correct. That one does every 10 years. >> So it is enacted but it is by vote by the people every 10 years. Right. >> Yes. The next one will be 2032 if >> I think that's important to also say. >> Yes.

>> So some more background. County code defines the specifics of h how Cash County implements some of the requirements of those tax programs uh that state code lays out such as the process of awarding funds. uh the size of the advisory board, what specific percentage allocations can be spent in what category of awards, etc., etc. Uh those parts of county code are chapters 3.80 and 3.82. Right now, Cash County uses a joint advisory board to advise on both the for the applications to the wraps tax and the restaurant tax. That's why it's referred to as the wraps and restaurant tax advisory board. Uh just to clear up any confusion there. So right now at the moment there are several outdated provisions in county code governing the specifics of how Cash County implements these programs as well as a lack of definition of several important issues such as out of cycle awards, formal requesting changes in in uh scope of applications and automatic return of unused funds as well as some other number of issues. up. Just in short, the ordinance itself aims to correct the provisions uh relating to these two tax programs. Uh like I said, there are several outdated and defunct provisions and there are certain processes that really ought to be defined at very minimum and some additional requested technical changes from the program administrator and just some uh some things that me and the auditor thought would be some good additions as well. So the first one is just some technical changes to the restaurant tax implementation. So on your papers it might be referenced as the TRCC but again I want to emphasize that essentially that is just the restaurant tax. This would remove some outdated language uh related to 2010 2009 2010 date clauses. Um, so state law actually allows you to use these funds for airports. County code currently doesn't list that as uh a permissible use. So that addition is important. And this uh specifically says that not only is this board going to be appointed by the county council, but specifically it's going to be exercised by a joint board reference later on in code. So that way it it clears up uh some a little bit of legal confusion if you're reading it for the first time. Uh and independent by itself, but it also updates the definition of restaurant. I had some questions on that earlier. U I believe the the state and the state tax commission uh oftent times are going back and forth on on changing what the specifics are under what a restaurant is. So, I believe the ordinance itself says restaurant means whatever the state uh defines it as. It keeps it rather simple. Does anyone have any questions so far? >> Yes. >> I don't know if this is um but is there one board to do both? >> Okay. >> Yep. And there is reason because a lot of the applications can actually cross over >> correct >> to each other and it makes it a lot more uh I guess it stretches the dollars when you're able to use some here, some there in applications. It works out really good. >> Yep. That way you also don't have to have two different boards meeting at different times and trying to coordinate all those logistics too uh between which one you're going to apply for. So it's nice to have them all at once. But in terms of amendments to the wraps tax itself under chapter 3.82 this is where most of uh this entire process is defined. So right now uh the ordinance uh sorry county code 3.82 is rather short and while it's to the point it still has uh it's lacking in a lot of details. So this ordinance would expand and reorganize a chapter. It wouldn't be essentially muddling together different details that belong in different sections. So that's more of an organizational thing, but uh it does specifically add the general requirement for voter reauthorization every 10 years under state statute. So there's no confusion about that. It adds the statutory definition of a zoological organization and it clarifies that zoological funds can be used for either capital projects or operating expenses. that is also permissible under state law. Specifically, this reassigns the program administrator to report to the county auditor. Uh this is given that the county auditor is now the county's finance officer uh given the change within the past few years and the fact that the program is just administered under the finance office. Anyway, this specifically defines the board as seven as a seven member board appointed directly by the county council and that is also by state code as well. And this is probably one of the first substantive changes here is that this would set a two-year term limit for all the appointees to the board. So far, it's been one-year appointments, but if you want to have someone on the board for a little bit to gain experience, this gives them a little bit of time, but also keeps it short enough that if you want a change in membership, you can just wait the two years and go for someone new. But it also says that the board itself will elect a chair and the chair has to be an appointed council member. So that way there's a little bit of knowledge and organization kind of leading the the board itself. Another addition is that it mandates a level of recusal for the members on the board who are affiliated with like an applicant organization before the board with the exception of a county council member if the application is from the county. Does anyone have any questions on anything that I've said on the slide? continuing on with the amendments to chapter 3.82. >> This this is probably one of the uh more important substantive parts. If you look on the back of the page that was printed out, page two of two, this is uh where a lot of this comes in. So right now there is no defined way for someone to technically apply for applications outside of the the set January to May regular cycle. That's when most of the people submit their applications. The review county council goes through them. Right now there's not an exception to any of that. And I would suggest plainly saying they aren't allowed period which that is acceptable. But with the outcycle applications as it's written now in the ordinance itself, it would establish a formal cycle by which the county council first takes I take that back.

a playground out in the middle of nowhere. You can't come in just a week before and say, "By the way, we need an extension." You probably should know that something has has gone ary. So, that gives a reasonable uh amount of leeway for review. >> Hey, let's go back. >> Yes. You said that unspent funds they return to the county. >> I Yes. >> They didn't really ever get the like they apply for the funds, but if they haven't >> they don't get the money until, you know, they they show that the funds are or that they've spent. >> Yeah. It's a reimbursement, not a >> No. And I understand. >> Yeah. It's a reimbursement. It's not a you don't give them the money first and then >> So there's nothing to return unless money has been spent. >> That's what I'm saying. Yeah. >> And well, the idea is specifically if Oh, sorry. I know that with a lot of the requests, I know that some have been before the county council to do change of scope awards. It's kind of like, well, we've spent this much money and now there's a surrounder. So, there isn't necessarily an automatic provision saying that that just goes back to the county. But, um, unless I've uh been misinformed, which may very well be the case, but um >> I think your idea is correct. I just think the word return the money version is a different term. >> Fored and then we they forfeited. >> That's probably better. Sorry. That's probably >> Yes. >> Is that right, Matt? >> Yes, that's correct. >> Okay, then. >> Okay, >> that's a better >> Yeah, forfeited. Not the >> Yeah, for uh let's see. >> Sorry about that. >> It's all good. >> Yes. So with the scope of award changes, which is something that has come before the county council a few times, there's also not a defined process for that. Um in this event, the ordinance would say that the if there are uh unforeseen uh events or the grantee submits a formal uh writing change of scope request to the administrator prior to the grant's expiration date. Uh the county wraps a tax advisory board, then convenes to review the request. Then after that, it gives the recommendation to the county council. Um then after that the council evaluates the request and uh grants formal authorization via a legislative resolution if it so chooses. That's not a mandate. >> I I worry about that one. Yep. >> Because I think that at that point when we've accepted and we've actually passed the allocations, uh I think that that at that point it is the council that owns that and that uh advisory board does not. So I think it would just stick with the council to make that change. Am I wrong? I I don't I just don't think we have to go convene that board again >> for the scope of change >> because they've just given us the ideas and then when we've enacted on it >> then that is the ownership of the council >> and so I don't think that review board would have to go back and look at it again. >> I agree. >> Okay. >> Can I just want to hear his whole presentation and then maybe discuss. Would that be all No, I'm I'm fine with taking questions along the way, but uh with let's see, where was I? >> Sorry, Keegan. Interrupted again. >> You're good. >> 13. >> I have these questions, too. I'm trying to jot them down on the way. >> Yep. So this would codified a a a fixed reporting schedule which is currently not in county code. Uh specifically says here you have to give a number of progress reports and then a final closeout report to the program administrator just to make sure that everything is going to plan. That also helps keep those accountable along the way to make sure that they're meeting that 31 and a half month deadline. And the last thing that would be an amendment to chap this chapter would be it would establish an official board logo and it would encourage and give permission directly to the grant recipients to display it on unfunded assets and marketing materials. That had been a question before that had been brought up to the administrator and this would just be making it explicit that it can be used. So,

voting, the way you typically do things is by majority vote. If I then veto it, it comes back and you have to override the veto with a twothirds. If if you require something to be a twothirds vote, no need your veto's gonna >> veto proof. And and I guess what I'm saying is is I I think if a majority of the county council wants something, um it doesn't really make a lot of sense to put a twothirds on it. I think it's an appropriation. Um, I kind of question whether we should ramp up to twothirds vote on anything because what you're doing that way

about >> I'm sorry we didn't notice a public hearing so we can't accept public comments at this time say something >> Paradise submitted an application that was late like 10 minutes it was early >> okay whatever it was >> I'm trying to help you I'm trying to help you by paring what I understand about Paradise so that you have the benefit of that information. Paradise had two requests. Our the report I received inaccurate or whatever is that one was not considered because it was delayed or incomplete or something and so Paradise has been sitting out there with a proposal that didn't get into the queue that was considered by the committee. That's that's one of the things that happened this year. >> Okay,

let's go. That's for now. Let's go through this ordinance. If we wanted to consider passing it tonight, we need to consider any changes to it. And it looks to me like we're not going to be able to pass it tonight. >> We didn't get your questions. All right. Well, no. I still had some, but it's 30 pages and I think I got it yesterday. I need more time and >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> What the Let's keep talking about specific things. The the one is 3.82.080 number four. Remove the 2/3 vote. Um that would be that was the other one. Um, when you have the paper that you gave us that said the money is returned to the county, that's not any that verbiage is not anywhere in this ordinance, is it? I >> was going to say we have to check the specifics. >> I didn't I didn't see I saw it in your explanation, but I didn't specifically see it in the >> 10 >> in the ordinance. >> Yeah. >> Also talked about changing returning to forfeit. >> It's on page 18, I believe. I'm just looking through it. >> 3.8210 clawback. >> It says uses the word clawback. I don't know that that's >> under C. It says unspent project funds must be returned to the county within 14 calendar days of the Okay. Yeah, that that verbiage is not okay. All right. So, there we need to do some work on this. Um >> Sandy, >> yes. >> Excuse me. If our discussions, we talked about the composition of the advisory committee. >> Yes. >> Um >> we'll deal with that in the before we convene committee in the spring. >> But that doesn't need to be addressed in the in the actual ordinance. >> No, because that's already part of state code. We will we will deal with that. why it's with our state. Okay, got you. >> I just wanted to mention just something to consider about the logo or some sort of attribution that it's paid for by county. I I think it's presented as an option in here. I'd love to make that a requirement and maybe we we make it a requirement if a certain percentage of the project is funded by wraps, but I think it gives the public the opportunity to have that feedback loop of like this is my tax dollars at work. So currently they do have to give some credit like on a a plaque or on a program or something they do have to say funding is provided by but the logo would if we could develop I thought we had a logo >> just just to have some sort of standard >> we do >> there is one I've seen it >> I don't remember the workings >> I've seen them on a lot of facilities but I don't know that it's on >> I see a lot of the signs but I didn't know that it was required I think it was just smart >> it does say application No, >> I know. But I think it was smart how they, you know, that they do attribute and there's signs put up for the brass, little things. But >> I did not know that it was ever required, but >> but maybe we define that a little bit more clearly. Yeah. Like, you know, if there's a disclaimer, it's like it has to be displayed prominently or has to occupy this much percentage of the just some sort of guidelines >> so people people know what that means. >> Okay. So, we've got all some work to do to get back to Andrew the things that we want amended on this. >> Would it would it be all right to suggest that this go through and P? >> That would be perfect if they can do it in the next two weeks. >> Can we get that added to this Friday's agenda and still meet the posting deadline? Andrew. >> Oh, you guys already have a meeting? >> Yeah, we have a meeting this Friday. >> 8:30. >> 8:30. Anybody who has any changes, they need to make sure they get it to someone on the OMP committee before >> Thursday night. >> You add that Mark needs to bring donuts to that meeting. >> The suggestion that we move this to be >> they can clean it up for us to pass next week or next at our next meeting. Okay. >> So, we want to continue that one. We won't want to take a vote on that ordinance tonight. And then so we need to so 10 E and 10F need to be struck from our agenda because we are not allowed we are not able to consider those requests until this >> um ordinance is passed that that outlines the out of cycle procedure >> and I agree with what you're doing here but um on these two requests for out of cycle view. There there are certain standards that have to be met before these should come before us. Should should these parties be advised that they need to do that so that they're they're properly before us at the next meeting? >> Yes. >> That is they should presume we're going to pass the ordinance. >> Uh Mr. s uh I've reviewed both applications and they do meet the standards that are >> that we have received. >> I didn't want to get a surprise to them. >> Okay. >> They've already they've already submitted letters and submitted the >> and they do have in them the reason why they're being asked. Okay. I mean, that's that's what I worry that we're trying to hold one hostage because we haven't >> and that's why we need to make this a a >> I mean, so they went ahead and did what we told them to go do and now we're the ones that getting the stink on our face for it. So, >> and that's why we need to make sure this works. When is our next appropriations meeting? Is it August 24th? >> Our next appropriations uh let me back up. Our next uh budget opening is the second meeting in September. And although I haven't discussed this yet with Mr. uh Mr. Andrews or Mr. Ericson, uh we are hoping to do appropriations on the 14th of September. >> Okay. >> Monday. >> That gives us time then. >> We can get this done on on >> the 25th. Y >> we can make this work if if if the board would advisory board get together that fast. >> Do we not have one? >> We had one on the 24th. >> On the 24th. >> So are we going to cancel the appropriations meeting on the 24th then? Yes. >> Okay. That was your going to be your suggestion. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> That's because you were assigned donuts on that day.

>> So you you want to do it on September 14th. >> That's a Monday. >> At what time? >> It is a Monday. Yes. >> I have two meetings that day at noon already. So it's going to have to be later in the afternoon. >> It is. >> Okay. Um, yeah, this is kind of I'm sorry. This was a little confusing. I was hoping we could get this passed tonight, but it obviously needs more work. Okay, I need someone if they would make a motion to strike number E and F off of our agenda. D was a duplication of C. So that >> moved. It's been moved and seconded that we strike >> strike it or just move to the next meeting. Just yeah, continue would be fine. >> Continue. Continue E and F to our next meeting. Strike D because it was a invitation. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded. >> We don't have to make >> Do we need to vote on the continuation? I don't think we >> No, that's fine. Okay. All right. Let's continue. Pending items 11A. Resolution appointing members to the Cash County Regional Recreation Center feasibility study. County Council Regional. This is a council board. >> Andrew, go ahead. >> Council, I'm listed as the presenter on this, but you were all present last week when this was discussed. The names that are still in the appointing resolution to this advisory committee to the county council are still the same. Um, if you have any questions, um, I am here to answer. >> Okay. Any >> question, >> what happened to the additional names that were submitted that aren't on the committee? >> Sorry. >> Yeah, our intention was that was a fly. >> Excuse me. Um I believe so to answer your question the appointing resolution itself has three spots for council members up to three and for the advisory members there are six there were 10 names that were floated uh from my count and so there were four names not included. These were the ones that I was uh directed to put in the resolution as placeholders. But this means that the ca anyone on the county council can motion to amend or strike any names that they would like. So if you are unhappy with any of the names, you are uh within your right to insert the ones you would like into the resolution. >> Well, I'd prefer an uneven number of people. So would it be possible to increase the number? maybe have three from the hour, three from the south, three from the county seat instead of one. >> That is a good question. Uh there is a way to do that. Uh in terms of the actual composition of the committee, I don't think that that can be changed by this resolution, but you could appoint a you could list a third member of the county council. So then the number would be nine in total, not just eight. So >> well, or more. I mean, what's wrong with 13 or 11 or 15 or >> the resolution that originally established the advisory committee itself specifically laid out the number of members? Um, so that would have to go back and amend that in a different resolution, but >> that's what I'd recommend that we make an amendment to it. >> I understand. >> Sorry, I don't want to interrupt. Are you going to make a motion or >> Well, I don't know. Do I have to or can we say we want to amend it and then work on it for another time or what? >> That is up for the body to decide. >> So I I just want to clarify something. There was a previously passed resolution that set the number of members. And so there would need to be not this resolution appointing members. There would have to be a new resolution noticed up changing the number of members on the the board. So that you could vote against against appointing anyone or ask this be continued. There need to be a new resolution, not just an amendment brought to change the actual composition of the board as far as numbers >> on this board where it being even

if the votes were all for it. It's just a recommendation. The council still has to settle and accept that or not accept it. So the importance of the number seems lower to me on this committee. Am I right? >> Yeah. I mean it's an advisory committee. >> So a tie is just no recommendation. It's still up to the council. >> They may not even take a vote. That might even be part of the process. >> I know one reason we um continued it was so that we could vet the the people on the committee. And I don't know, did any of you try to vet them? >> I tried, but uh I didn't get a hold of all of them. Not they didn't respond. >> So we >> So I would like a little more time. Personally, >> we So we heard from three I think who were here last time and I see >> two one new one and I think someone was here earlier and >> I he he's >> don't know if I can blame him for not sticking it out. >> Speak on his behalf.

So I guess that's a that's a

a load for you to carry Matt. >> So I will say there is an opportunity to to address at least you know one here making it four of the six but yeah I to answer your question I did have the opportunity to talk to a couple of them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I move that we approve the um excuse me the resolution 2026-26 with the names as listed. >> Second. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we approve resolution 2026-26 appointing members to the Cash County Council Regional Recreation Center Feasibility Study Committee. Is there any further discussion on that motion? >> Just who's going to be responsible for training us all to use that acronym? Um, it's up to not me. >> Okay. If there's no further discussion, those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> I. Nay. >> Okay. >> And hopefully you'll have a chance to to that people will get back to you. I I know personally know these people and I think >> I don't personally know them and I contacted them but they haven't all got back to me. >> Okay. All right. the UAC annual convention in Provo. Has everyone given Andrew your travel plans for for that week? >> Anybody who hasn't. Do you have what you need, Andrew? >> There's someone who is not responding yet, but I will not name those. >> Okay. >> Male, female. >> You're not going to throw anybody under the bus. That's very good of you. >> Well, it's not me,

>> Mark. Okay,

>> I'm just narrowing it down for you. >> All those that have have

raiser. >> Okay, let's let's get home. Um let's let's go to council member reports. Um Joanne, do you want to start us out? >> I don't have anything. >> Okay, Keegan. >> Sorry, I know I'm standing between us and home, but I do have a few things. So, go ahead. >> If you'll bear with me. >> Nope, let us. So, um, KOSAC a while ago, um, I think you might remember when we presented the option of potentially combining the funds with the green belt roll back >> and we declined to do that and to keep them in two separate funds. So, there are situations in the meeting where they have applications that really make more sense as agricultural preservation that don't necessarily meet the criteria of the broader open spaces bond. for example, like public access. We may get a project that doesn't really have any of those factors, but it would be a good use of the green belt funds or or maybe more accurately more appropriate use of those funds. So, one of the things that came up in the meeting was COAC, the body asked me, do you want us when we make a recommendation to the council that we recommend the type of funds that we're we're saying ought to be used for this project? And I understand where they're coming from. Sort of like we talked about the difference between the wrapped tax and the restaurant tax. like I don't know if it makes sense to have a co-sac board and then like a a green belt board as as well. So, and it also I think it makes it more confusing to the applicant. Are you applying for open space? Are you applying for roll back? So, um, I guess my question for this group is, and you don't have to answer right now, but would would you appreciate if KOSAC made those recommendations on how the funds ought to be applied or do you want them to stay out of that? >> I'm trying to go back when we talked about this. It was agriculture was definitely included in the open space. >> Are we trying to boot them out of the whole Kosak project? >> So, no, not at all. It's a factor. So I think it's like a 15 point factor on that. >> So we've covered it because that was definitely a discussion in >> this council when that was brought forward is that agricultural meets open space which people are wanting. >> Totally true. Yeah. >> So Keegan >> maybe I'm not explaining >> could they come with just their recommendations and then this body determines the funding mechanism for it. So some of it could be roll back and some of it could be the bond and and then they just come with their recommendations and then and then the funding mechanism is part of discussion in in this forum. I don't know what does the council think of that. I just don't want it to evolve into a trails committee and you know and public active committee and >> I would I think >> I'm going to try to re to state it correct me if I'm misunderstanding it but what I think you're saying is someone applies Kosak reviews it like no this is roll back you're just saying can we authorize COAC to say in their recommendation that it's a recommendation for denial of a cosac step one or whatever and that they recommend they talk to us about roll back. >> Yeah. So maybe another way to state it is let's say a project comes forth and it score their scores out of a 100, right? They look at I think seven different factors and let's say it scores like a 21 overall on COAC. So they're like we would probably recommend this for denial because it doesn't really stack up against the other projects >> just because it's a based. No, just just because there's several factors that it might it might score 20 out of 20 on a but it might score a zero >> because it's a based it scores low because they did not allow public access in those things. >> It's a riparian areas and and if the wildlife and I mean it's it's one of the many factors. I don't know why it would score that low if it were a because it would most likely >> have a lot of other multiples. I think that that example >> we could get into the nuance now if you want example might just be a little >> I'm just trying to keep it high level because >> maybe even more broadly stated it might score low on KOAC relative to other projects but if it was just looked at from a >> green belt roll back it it might be a very appropriate use of those funds. Well, and I guess you know we voted not we voted to keep the two funds separate. So there has to be some mechanism that we would consider spending our roll back money, right? >> Yeah. And I think the public voted for a bond for a certain purpose with a certain understanding. And I think if we don't delineate what those are, then that those that water could get muddied and they'd say, I didn't really vote for the bond to to go towards this necessarily or at least I think there's another project that's a higher priority. But so then we would have to develop a type of screening process for that uh the the roll back. >> Well, we don't have to do that necessarily. All I'm saying is would it be appreciated if CO-AC made a recommendation on what funds we should use or do you just want them to present the score for COAC and leave the green belt side of it out of it? That that's really the heart of my question. But the part I'm trying to understand here is when they go to CO-Ass, we're using some agricultural entities to support and go with that funding. And if we're saying it's not agricultural or that it's not a cosack, where does lead where does that leave the applicant if he's looking for NRSC funds or barely land bare river land trust who you call land trust all >> of those all agricultural based and they're involved in the open space and I thought it's been a good marriage. >> Yeah. And so, uh, I'm not I'm not attacking, but I'm just saying we separate the agricultural app. And now, does he get the help or they get the help of matching with those others if we've got the green belt? >> We need to look at that. How do we anticipate being able to make decisions about using that green belt fund, the green belt fund, because we we know we have it and we have to use it within if we don't use it within five years of when it's um put into that account, then it goes automatically to the state like we want to have an avenue to use that that fund. >> I don't I don't know what that is. >> And I do have those amounts. I had uh our treasur prepare those if you'd like >> score higher and then it would then those funds could actually then be used for that.

>> Yeah. I feel like examples of applying it and in a situation where you're running into that particular question would be helpful for me at least. >> Y >> yeah and maybe that's >> in this council members reports discussion. >> Yeah. So I I can give you a specific example where upon um an applicant they originally presented their land that was on frontage road and then they they came back and and so when it was voted on when it was scored by Kosak they thought yes this has public benefit because it's on a frontage road people are going to see it. If it's preserved as a that's great that's part of Kosak. And then the proponent said, "Well, actually, I want to have my family build, you know, six lots and they're going to put them along the frontage." So now the frontage is potent potentially blocked. So the public benefit, one could argue, is lessened. However, because it's preserving a, it's still a great use and the state wants to preserve a, but it doesn't have the same it's not meeting the same standard as CO-Ass, the the the scoring mechanism. So the question was, do we take it back and rescore it? And if it scores low, maybe we don't recommend it to the council because relative to other projects, it's very low. But for green belt money, this could make a lot of sense. So should we bring it to the council and say, "We recommend you use these funds, or do you want us to just stay in our lane and just score CO-AC projects and move on?" Does that make sense? >> I I think what is suggesting here makes a lot of sense if we're interested in preserving agricultural uses and there is a difference between preserving agricultural uses and Kosac standards and I think we ought to recognize that and I think our Kosak committee is perfectly attuned to make that distinction because I think we want to preserve agriculture with those green belt monies. So, I think I think we ought to have them give you advice on it. >> I agree. Like, what other what other avenue are we going to set up to consider using that green belt money within the 5-year period that we have to that we're restricted? Is there any other way that makes sense? >> But it should augment >> the COAC monies, too, though. >> Yeah. Y >> we shouldn't just like boot them out of CO-AC just because it's straight A. >> No, no, no. I'm not. >> No, >> no. talking about booting anyone out. It just >> because I I voted for that. I did not vote for that for trails. >> Yeah, >> I voted for it because of the ad con. >> Right. But some people did vote for it for trails and that's why it's a component in the scoring. >> Okay. Any what else, Keegan? >> Okay. Sorry, guys. I still got a couple more. So, airport board, we heard about the sponsor board. I won't go into that, but that's forthcoming. Um, I wanted to talk a little bit about taxes if I could. Um, just to frame the context of our upcoming discussions and budgets. Um, the Cash County School Board recently approved a 37.1 tax increase. Um, they went six years without an increase. If I did the math correctly, compounding interest, that would have been about a 4 point or a 5.4. four increase every year that would have had the same result. And they they did apologize for delaying it that long. But that's something we ought to consider is incremental increases where they're appropriate rather than trying to wait for one big one. I do understand the pressure there. Um Logan City, for those of us that serve on that side, they're considering a 23% increase. Their truth and taxation meeting was tonight. >> School district or this Logan City, >> the city. Um, and that would essentially replace what we've eliminated from the fire um, their portion of the fire district. So, >> exactly $1.3 million. Yeah, >> I I I wish I didn't have to talk about this, but um this is kind of a serious subject, but I don't know if you saw, but a man who also commented our truth in taxation last year, uh he threatened to kill everyone on the council, and he was arrested for for terrorism. Uh what's troubling about this is um >> it was the council. I thought it was just our officers, not the council. >> The school board. It was the school board. school board, >> the school board >> for the 37% increase. >> But what what was troubling to me is I know I know the advice is never read the comments, but I read the comments and I just want to share some of them. >> So you you did the bad advice and now you're going to share it with us. >> Well,

thanks. >> Okay. >> I think it's important to know >> I think it's also important not to throw fuel on a fire. So >> I I don't know if I'd I don't know if I'd stir a whole bunch of things up. aware. Okay. >> Yeah, I >> I did read the comments. >> I I read the comments, too, but I I wouldn't bring them out in public because that's >> Yeah, >> I just don't think that that's appropriate here to throw fuel on a fire. So, >> okay. Well, let me just statement my intention was not to do that, but um >> to raise awareness. >> I'll just say that we're one of the top five lowest counties in the state for taxes. We're one of the top three states in the nation for the lowest taxes. Many of us voted to forego a raise last year. Um some people have had their taxes lowered in the last three years and um I I've never heard a thank you for that. So, um I think suffice it to say we're trying and um and if you look around there's a lot of pressure from other entities to raise taxes and and we're doing our best to uh keep those reasonable. So, that's something I'm going to take into consideration um when it comes time to vote on those things. >> Okay. Any any other one? >> Nope. Thanks, Kegan. >> No one. >> Um, I think everything that I wanted to touch on with the fire is uh been addressed with the executives um uh his review earlier. So, I think that's it. >> Okay, Dave. >> Yeah, >> I just we have OM coming up on Friday and um I'm assuming Sandy, you want to talk a little bit about the fair board meeting? Not. No, you go ahead. >> Um, just there was a fair board meeting last week and most of it was review of, you know, are we ready to go? The executive brought up some great points. If you want his summary, that would be, you know, I directed to talk to the executive, but he uh ran the meeting well. Um, and I just want to say thank you to those present who pulled off the things at the fair. I know that the executive recognized the roads crew, but the sheriff also had a big hand in his department in making that event go well. And I know Logan PD and I'm sure our county fire obviously emergency response was heavily engaged. And it's a huge celebration to steal the words that Dave usually uses to accurately represent the situation. I think fair was an amazing thing. Uh, and there was one major injury, but the young man, I think, will uh live a productive life, but he might not get back on a horse again, unfortunately. >> But it was a good >> I, you know, I'm grateful that we were all able to be together that night on Friday night at the fair. I think that was nice. Um, I saw some people that I knew waving at me. There were, I heard some make a comment that they heard people saying, "Who are who are these people?" So, I guess we're not as famous as we as famous as we think we are, but >> I think we tried. So, um, did you want to say something? >> Yeah, I I missed one thing that I thought I probably should have brought up with you, if you'll indulge me. Um, our uh DMV contract has an 18month termination clause. Um, and so if we want to terminate their use of our facility, I have to give them 18 months notice. Um, I've gone through this with Dne and and I have authority to do that, but I'm advising you of that to see if any of you object to my giving him that notice forth with. >> Nope. No. >> No. Let me just say this, and this is somewhat responsive to Keegan's concern. >> We're looking at how to harden the administrative building, and moving DMV out or to a different location would allow to significantly reduce the traffic in the building that that we don't have any control over. So we we may not only look forward to them being out of the building, we're looking at reorganizing the building where different functions are and how one enters the building because we we have had threats uh with respect to life safety in the building. >> So we're trying to address that. >> Okay. Thank you. Anybody have any objection or want to talk about this DMV termination letter? >> Where they are to go? It's been talked about though. I believe that's underway. >> Yes, >> that's I think that's important to know. >> Yeah. >> I just wanted to say goodbye. >> Yeah, >> there is a plan. >> It won't be a surprise to them because they're looking. >> No, I just wanted to finish my report by saying that I was able to go Saturday morning to the fair for the junior livestock sale and

it it was the first time I had been to that and I was so thrilled. It was really an amazing thing to see the community come together and support those kids and bid on their animals and help them to get the money that they need. And um it was and there was a century award that we gave out to a a farm. It was Jensen Hansen >> that that had been there for hundred years. And um I just think it was a really good way a cap to the celebration that the fair is and and the biggest part is our a culture. And so I thought that was good. Um I've been in a couple of meetings with the uh health department lately, the board of health and just so you I know that we all are aware that we signed an interlocal where the substance abuse now is connected to bear river behavioral health. There was a lot of changes and they decided to go with capitation instead of a fee for service. The bottom line is there will probably be a higher amount expected from us to match the Medicaid match because there going to be more Medicaid dollars coming. And we met today to talk about to you know beghavioral health making sure that they are offering more services with some of that um increase in revenue. So I as we go through the the budget and I know you're right in the middle of that. Hopefully you've been talking to Jordan and we can get those numbers and I know Matt that you had talked about getting that with them and >> I sent him an email. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Hopefully we can get those numbers as soon as possible because it's going to make a difference to our budget. >> We may be able to get some budget material before our next meeting, but >> we don't have a tenative budget, but we have a preliminary budget at this point. >> Okay. Yeah. and we the sooner the better. If we have papers in front of us that we can actually look at, it's going to make a big difference to the process that we have to go through um pretty quickly here. So, that's the last thing I had. Does anyone have anything else they want to say before we go home? Take a me a motion to adjurnn. >> So, move second. moved and seconded. We journ this and invite you to come to the tribute end of >> your input and assistance. Unfortunately, I think there was a little bit on Friday, Saturday. >> I am so sorry. >> I understand. One of the reasons government moved so slowly. >> Well, yes. And part of the thing that we were talking about was this whole emergency concept. >> You create your own emergency. That doesn't doesn't all of a sudden mean special, >> you know, accommodations because of the one that we had in my discussion and for which I had several. One of his big concerns >> was what he got us >> because all of Emily to our >> it was there weekly.

>> I think we waved. >> Yeah. But no good for you. >> Thank you so much. >> It didn't submit and the other one did. And so he was saying yeah I have asked for upgrades but >> and haven't gotten it. >> That was one of the things I was here for to say give Elma some software that works. I mean there is submitt software that is easy to use and provides feedback on a regular basis. >> You have to know there's a bigger story. Oh yeah. >> Our department >> which is driving us all. >> Yeah. Alma kind of expressed some of that. And that's why I was kind of hoping well if I come as a as a user and say give Alma some support here people that may be able to help me. There's a whole system throughout the county. >> So they're saying if you change one thing, you got to change it all. >> And what what's actually going on is everybody who actually >> has their copy of Excel and Microsoft uses it and then converts it to sheets. >> Yeah. But this this portal that we open >> since the advisor meeting anyway >> I don't see why you don't try and meet those criteria and submit it >> and that was the thing we don't know what the criteria is. So that's what Alma says why don't you come to this meeting he was the one that suggested I come to a meeting have the discussion with the council and and they'll give you the feedback you need. I Alma gave me a description of what happened. >> Okay. >> Somehow I got in the middle of the Lyric meeting these seats and and so I've been trying to be honest with the lyric about the problem because they're not in the time machine. They have a a season and they're trying to put the seats in between the seasons. understandable. >> So, >> which doesn't mean that they couldn't have submitted the request >> on time. I mean, the work that we were doing is months away, but we still when we were supposed to. >> They were doing the remodeling and they really didn't focus on the problem with the seats until they got remodeling done to sit >> and so they created their emergency. Well, however, however you want to say it, what I would suggest is I'll get the criteria. >> Uhhuh.