Nibley City Council- 8/6/2026

If it's not too much, we'll we'll put it to your council member, Garrett ASL for all major charities.

I think it's a maneuver that's a huge requirement. And, you know, for a while there, I kinda stopped watching your new video because it's just. But as you as you watch them and that's, you know, you know, in a little pool from home, I don't know where it runs between. I have each in full, you

know, where they have a chain and stuff.

And, you know, as we see some of this stuff in both our country and politics and everything else, the divisiveness and hate is just overwhelming. I really don't like it and disagree with it. But there is remedy, and that is the opposite, which is love. And so as I know, they're not perfect, but we try to show respect in everything that we do even though we disagree. And I appreciate that because it's done a pretty good job on that. And I hope that, you know, other federal, state, other leaders can can, you know, a lesson from that. It is possible for us to to agree and still get along. I heard everyone today in a meeting that I was at that. They gave me a copy Just a minute. I think it's called our deepest fear. This is by Marion Williamson from the book of Return of Love. Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Indeed, the fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. Yet our light not our darkness brighten us. We ask our we ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, fabulous, actually, who are you up to be? Good morning, darling. Your friend. Thanks to all of the service world. We're not being racking, but shrinking so that other people feel insecure and cheap. We are all meant to shine as children of you. We are born to manifest the glory of God with the It's not just in some of us except every one of us. As we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. And we are liberated from our own fear, our presence and object that may liberates others. And with that, it's a living a free nation who this country is nothing. Let's go in peace.

In the visible with liberty and justice program.

Thank you, Gary. Mission accomplished. Appreciate it. I will call the city council 08/06/2026 meeting to order. Let's start with the roll call. Randy, Randy, Randy. This is what happens. Randy is not here tonight. He's having more fun than us. Somewhere in Canada. With that, we'll pick it up with you there. I'm Larry Davidson and Randy Spalding is not here. I'm not sure why that happens when I try to look for people's names with the department. Steph, if you would introduce yourself. Aliva Robert, chief planner.

Justin, manager.

Molly, he's the day reporter.

I'll jump in to Chad Wright, our recreation director in the back. Anybody else from the city? Okay. Thank you. Thanks for your attendance. And with that, counsel, I will ask you to turn your attention to approval of July 16, our last meeting minutes. And also, if you're so inclined, tonight's agenda.

Garrett? We need to lodge you to approve last meeting's minutes and minutes and tonight's agenda as presented.

I have a motion from Garrett. Second, Ron Nick. That's to approve last minute last meeting's minutes and tonight's agenda. Any discussion on that motion? Anyone opposed voting? Seeing none of those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Aye. Motion passes four zero. Thank you so much. Next is a public comment period. This is an opportunity for anyone, don't envy a citizen of Nibley, anyone to address the council on any topic that they would like the council to hear them. We we do have one public hearing if if on the agenda. If you're here to speak to that item on the agenda, I think it makes better sense in context to speak at that public hearing on that agenda item. However, you can speak about anything you want now. It doesn't I would like it to pertain to Nibble City, but it doesn't have to. We can't have any of your first amendment rights. We have a judge with us tonight, so I'd have to be on the ball. We'll we'll get the we'll get the judge over here in a minute. But this is your opportunity. We we do have a full agenda, so I ask you to be concise if you do have remarks. We try to limit these to to two minutes, but I welcome you to come forward, address the council as whoever might want to go first is coming up. This is an opportunity to share your thoughts, opinions with the council. Because what you mentioned to the council may not be on our agenda, We can respond to request for information, but because we have to do the public's business in front of the public with a noticed agenda, we won't be able to engage in a policy debate with you. Don't let that keep you from coming forward and telling the council what you think. We'll offer information in response if we can, but we we can't engage in a public discussion. That could what you say could get on a future agenda item that one. I see Frank Smith has signed up. Now you don't have to sign up to speak. And if you send him, you don't have to speak. But I see Frank is here. And, Lisa, happy to see you too. Frank, would you like to address the council?

Tell me to run that time. I don't too fast. I'm not studying. I was curious about the R and M and bring out some detached housing or detached. And I thought the planning and zoning said no to R and M for that. And that when you look at the new zoning, if that does turn into, that'll be like an island in between all the other details, you know, where I do know

and that

would that be I mean, would that set the standard if Hirschner or whoever it is gets the NRM for other detached areas, like, south of us where we live? I mean, they'll say something like, well, they got our employees detached before. So I was just curious about that. Yeah. Thank you, Fred.

I'm gonna ask that either you stick around for that agenda item or if you wanna watch it on YouTube because we're so popular on YouTube. Really? Because I know we have talked about that item, and and we'll ask Levi an introduction to that agenda item to to cover those questions. And because I think that gets into a bit of a policy debate, we will we will take up that matter at the appropriate place of the agenda. Mhmm. Is that is that okay with you, Frank?

Okay. Okay. Then do you do biological assessments and all these all these properties? Do you have someone who can I know you guys found the spider entities? Yeah. The big yeah. It's for visioning reasons. Did you guys find that or was it somebody who saw and brought them here to your attention?

I could give you information on that. We received federal grant money on the newly city park development, land and water, institute. And in part of the environmental assessment required to use in, federal money Mhmm. There was, there was already there was always a wetland delineation, but then there was an endangered species survey required. So yeah. And so because of that grant from the federal government, we found that you these you top ladies' dress dresses.

But, like, the three parcels out by us right now for annexation. I guess, one's our agreement. It's actually the

the One is, two are for tonight. But

do you look at those, you know, and get surveys to see what kind of weeds there are listing, for example, or do assessments that you have documents or is there any raptors that's nearby?

Weeds? Or do you do I don't have an answer to that. Levi, if you do or our engineer, Tom, is not with us tonight, we can get an answer report. I mean, not

necessarily. It it could it could come up if, depending on the type of development that happens. Like, if there's open space that's to be preserved, a lot of times we'll and, you know, like, for example, a a development that's on the agenda tonight as an open space subdivision, and part of that is an assessment of of of the surroundings and trying to preserve what you know, if if there's an area that has, you know, a special tree stand or something like that or or wetlands, those would be focused on preservation. But if it's a standard subdivision, not necessarily. So it it depend it kinda depends on what type of development,

I would say. And so that would make it come at when we receive a proposal for the Right. Right. Not a proposal for annexation.

Typically, no. That that hasn't been part of our process.

Yeah. How does the dollars before Into the city there. Do they talk to the city prior to when they bought the property? And it's not good enough that the whole

eventually get. So we've talked about this break. I'm gonna be very direct with you. This is the body that decides our annexation. Okay. Well And so if you wanna ask the council

Hopefully, they have something. And you can respond

if

but they're not they were managed. So but but Let let me know if they came to you guys and said, you know, we're we bought this property, this 40 whatever rate or taking we're we shouldn't have any problems. Isn't it?

Do you understand the question?

I have you can answer it. Yeah. I'm happy. I mean, Barb, I had turned up processes, the developer buys, pick the blend, and if it's not headed into a city, they can then begin our process and go to the city and say, we want to file a petition to annex and begin our process. I've never spoken to a developer before they bought a piece of land and said, hey. If I buy it, they've this, will you then access into this? That's It's cool. Happens. In my in my experience, I would have been the developer has come through the administrative process, file a presentation, they come and and file a petition for the annex. That's how it's been a work. A work. Well, I was just curious because you

Yeah. The city doesn't let just to

Not a the city. That's 2 or $3,000,000. Right. I guess we'll go to 5

or something. I don't even know if you instances where a city would say we don't want you in our city. No. That makes sense. I've never we've never really got the council. We've said, no. We don't want you in our city. So That's true.

Yeah. We think that's both. Okay. Thanks,

Courtney Courtney Metzor. Am I am I reading it right? Am I saying it right?

Next.

Thank you.

I'm working with I just have a couple of questions. We are on 1000 West, and I'm sure you can address with between the school district and the city. What are we expecting with the I mean, traffic that the school start school year starting? Have we hired crossing guards? Have we I just get nervous because watching my child walk across in the morning or at night. I shutter and I'm like, well, stop, stop, stop, stop. Like,

something needs to be done right there or the

across 3,200 Parents don't wanna wait in the longer line to get out, so then they hurry and flip around. Can we get signs put up that says, like, hey. Through traffic only or I don't know. Just wondering what the city's thoughts are on that. And do we hire crossing guards? Is that something you guys are willing to sit and watch for a week and see, like, hey. This is in trouble spot. Is that a school district issue?

So, Courtney, if it may, I think what we can do here is offer Justin,

city manager, a chance I did talk to him because I asked. Can I please I should he's already hired them or that was getting the works with the school year starting

those? Let's give Justin a chance to respond to how we would address your concerns without necessarily engaging in a policy discussion as to whether your concerns are being in the the matter of being addressed. On social media. That's the one you go ahead.

Yeah. So, typically, we would just do what's called a warrant study, and we would follow a new manual unit of traffic control devices across the guard. So there's a rigid procedure that we really kinda walk through to kind of to dictate what how we sign things, where Crockton dart go, and those sorts of traffic to rectification. So we could happy to sit down with you and go over those, talk about those, look at your incident.

Signs in on 1,000, but everybody ignored those as allowance. Like, what I have. So stuff like what do you do if it that fix it before it becomes Yes. Unfortunately, you know, please. No.

Look. We have chairs here. No. That's

No. And then I have another question about our property. So Let let me state one thing. Go ahead.

In addition to what Justin said, we also work closely with schools, with with the schools. So between Inglis City and the specific schools, Heritage Elementary, in this case, in Sweden will be Maple View Wales School. Safe routes to school, they establish they know where the students live. They establish those safe routes school, and that's a UDOT program that requires the city to establish according to standards like what Justin talked about, a safe way for kids to get to and from school. Okay. And they seem to be.

Okay. Then the next question. So if you look, like, at our plot map, my and Cheryl, the that third of our property is it's xed out on every map as it's, like, wetland. It's to a how can we change that now? Like, if they're building back there, can we just put a shed back there or sprinkler system? How do you go about building change?

So Leave or she can come talk to me. But Come talk to me. Probably a longer one that I need to photograph here. But Leave or see. Yeah. Get my card off.

Yeah. Talk to you. Thank you.

K. Then we'll we'll close the public comment. Very again, we'll look forward to a public hearing later in the agenda. Do we have a planning and zoning commission report?

So the one item that was addressed at planning commission is on the agenda tonight, so we we can address it at that point. Okay. Thank you, Lebar.

Chad, I think this would only apply to you. You have a staff report for the council. We've we've kinda moved this agenda item from deep at the back so we don't have to pay you guys to be here all night. They have to stay anyway. So but we appreciate you being here, Chad. Do you have anything to report to the council? Now with that, I'd like to introduce you to judge Hobert. This is the Hiram City Justice Court. We are under contract with Hiram City Court Justice Court, and it's open mic, judge. So welcome to Nibley. Thank you for your service

to our residents, and we'll we'll let you speak to us. Thank you, Mary Jacobs. And it's a privilege to be here tonight. My name is John Mulvore.

I have the opportunity to represent Iron Midway

Paradise and Men's Justice Court judge. The Utah Justice Courts are the courts that most residents of Utah are likely to interact with on a on any sort of regular basis. And my job as the judge is to protect the rights that are guaranteed under the Utah State Constitution, to explain the charges that individuals are facing and then the potential penalties and sentences that they may also face. But I'm delighted that mister, Mon, Renee, can you talk to me? It's up to you. I welcome feedback. And although I may not be able to comment on specific cases that are pending in front of the the court, I would be happy to to discuss any philosophical or other concepts that you have and things you'd like to see. Because the justice courts really are the judicial mechanism that allows us to make a significant change in the end. I really enjoyed working with the person prosecutor, John Jenkins, and he's excellent, and the rest of his associates and partners that work with him. Full background on the question if you're joining me, but we have five children in the county, but between Hiram and Wellsville. Yeah. We have been in the since 2011. The brief two years since in Florida in the middle of of that. But couple of things that I strive to do in the the courts, you may not be aware of, but the courts are not intended to be a profit center, but there are some things that we can do to, incentivize behavior. So the Utah Sentencing Commission has a recommendation. It's not a requirement, but recommendation that we look at the charges if someone is facing multiple charges, and they recommend you just pick the fine that's associated with the highest charge in that set. I've taken a small deviation from that. I will actually include the fines for all of the charges that someone is facing or is eventually convicted of. For the reason that I feel like if someone has committed the offense, that they should they should be responsible for the the fact that will result in a marginal increase in the fees of the city. But I also strive to encourage individuals to take it's called a plea of events, which is a way for them to preserve a their driving record without reporting infractions or criminal actions to the state in the same manner. So if someone is has a relatively clean driving record and they have an infraction, I will encourage them to take a clean advantage, which is essentially agreement between the city prosecutor and the defendant to pay a fine, generally parallels the fine they would pay for the fraction. And then if they refrain from having any other violations of law for a period of time, took six months, that does not go on their private rent. Hold it in the veins for that period of time. So that if it doesn't impact their insurance, it allows them to have a a clean driving record. If they do have a subsequent infraction or subsequent criminal activity, then they pay for that new infraction and the fine bill. So that also results in a marginal increase in.

The

if you have questions about me, I'm happy to answer those. I went to law school at UCLA, and I worked for two federal appellate judges, Michael McConnell, who sat on the news for appeals for the tenth circuit in Salt Lake and entering the senate in the square. It's based on San Francisco. All of you is chambered. And I I was raised all over the West, and my wife and I lived in California and Utah in Florida. So

We're glad you're here. Thank you. Questions or comments from counsel?

Yes. Yeah. We kinda talked about part of the worst person to kinda help with the idea of the community and what stand for standards, etcetera. What do you see the most as far as, you know, you being a a problem or things that have improved since your time?

Yeah. So I've been the judge for a year. I'm still gathering places to make that determination, but I would say the vast majority of things are corrections. A few small things for matters. I have seen, say, quite a few animal abuse or cruelty cases under more than I was expecting to see. And, so that's something that, again, becoming more aware of. The but in in general, I think the nice thing about being a justice court judge is I don't deal with any felons on a weighted basis. I I have occasional responsibilities on a warrant rotation where I would view search warrants or arrest warrants to make sure that there's probable cause. But the vast majority of things I deal with are misdemeanors where the most is someone who would potentially be incarcerated for six months. And in general, it's if there is incarcerations, a mandatory minimum sentence that corresponds with the sentencing guidelines that the state legislature has put in place for for DUI first time in The US. And I do see seven of but I wouldn't say there's anything that has a a disproportionate.

And a follow-up? Yeah. You may not agree because I think it's the prosecutors that usually do. But plea of liens usually include some kind of, like, education or or service back to about so, for example, you know, if someone's caught texting or driving or something, it will usually include, like, writing a thing or something that educates community here. And is that a common practice for

It's it's not. I mean, that could be. It's part of the discretion of the prosecutor, but I think that's a wonderful concept to to discuss. Typically, it would be the fine and the representation you're not going to recommit the events with

them. So that's an excellent question.

So most of the cases brought to you most likely come from the you know, they're in Italy come from the Cass County Sheriff because we contract with the sheriff's office for code and for code enforcement for law enforcement. We also contract for animal enforcement. Do you have any any advice for us on how our relationship with our contractor for law enforcement and animal enforcement laws are? Or are we doing the right thing? Are are we is there ways for us to improve there? Yeah. That's an excellent question. I think it I'm probably

not in a position to comment or offer advice to the candidate today. But Okay. Once again, I would expect this dialogue to be two ways. And if you see something that you'd like to see, continue this dialogue, and I would definitely

leave myself clear in any details. But

my way of background so my my general practice, because this is a very part time board, is I'm a health care transaction insurance consultant. So that's my background is is in contracts and initial property. One, two, real estate. But that's but I will ponder on that and give you some

suggestions.

Now feel good to that. Please get back to us if there's something we should be doing to as a representative of people of Nibley to to help the Justice Court process go better, go smoother, make your job easier. We're happy to we'd love to have those discussions with you as we think about them. One of the thing that we offer too with your land use regulations, I'm not sure who the Ghibli City

appeals authority is, but that I'd serve in that capacity for hiring as well. And I'll have you to do that for the city. That's a good first of all.

Yeah. So we have an agenda for code enforcement. Right? We're that'll be contemplated on an agenda item, but you asked about the appeal The appeal of the city code.

Yeah. And and land use, I think, is is what I heard. Land Yeah. Land use appeals. Yeah. So that that's Seth. Like, I'm blank. Seth Tate is our appeals

officer.

Yeah. Yeah. So Okay. Oh, that's good enough. Yeah. We had that come up, didn't we?

Yep. Excellent. Anything else? Appreciate it, judge. Thank you for your service. Thank you.

Thank you.

You should know what's name is next time. K. Next, we have

a '26, '27 budget amendment discussion, specifically development code, code enforcement software. This is not an item for the council to vote on. This is simply a discussion.

Justin, will you take us into that, please? Yeah. So I think we can do this pretty quick. This this kind of evolved when we've worked with the agenda together. We really kinda focus on Garrett's discussion about maybe doing the code rewrite and with the budget, amending the budget to make that happen. So Mary and I talked and decided we'll just bring it for the council to kinda do a workshop or discuss it to see if that's something that we wanna do. In the meantime, there's been a few other things that have come up that are kinda heads up that we discussed at the time of the budget, but we had to make the budget. We made the budget. Now some things have changed. Particular, Leon and Morgan will be talking about with the court enforcement. If we decide to hire Cash County Sheriff, we'll have to move that money for our program now to just another line. And there's also I brought up the software issue. We've been back for we would do with our game kind of framework, accounting software. There's been some challenges, some issues we've been facing for a while. There have been some changes in the company, so we've been investigating all sorts of options. And most of the options appear to be more pricey than we have hoped to anticipate. So we'll need to be talking about that. And then, again, the what Garrett mentioned, the code rewrite, hiring a consultant to help us with the subdivision code rewrite. So, really, this was kinda morphed into telling you and warn you that we probably need to bring that discussion back and open up the budget to solve those issues. So

So are there things that counsel should be thinking about before we get into another meeting to talk about those details?

Yeah. Are those the details? I think those are the details. Really, probably the code one thing. So that's a big ticket that actually will increase the money that we have budgeted to spend this fiscal year. The others were just kinda net money around. So, really, it's just kinda how how how bad you want to do that and talk at the time about waiting for the next grant cycle to see if we received the grant, the receipt of that project, or would receive that project at on time with this consult. That's kind of kind of philosophical question, I guess, you could think about and answer in your own mind. Is is this important enough to just pull the trigger and pay for it, or we wanna pay for a grant, see if we can get a grant. If you decide to pull the trigger and we move forward, we will still probably apply for the grant. And if we can backfill, we will, but

there's no guarantee. So So that's really nice for you all. Right? You're able to receive a grant to help us with that process. This time, we didn't get this. So that's fine. Any feedback for Justin while you're waiting for wait for another meeting?

Okay. And, yes, Andrew, if anything else you're interested in changing budget, if we're all going up the budget, let's open up the budget if you have other ideas or things.

Yeah. I'll ask you this question. Well, opening the budget is is not is not allowed to open the budget and increase taxes. Correct. So this is a screwing up of accounts as opposed to saying, well, we we we didn't anticipate correctly expenses in one place. It's true, but we have other money in places where we underestimate the expense. So this is this is not the the council will not be considering a a budget amendment that would change the bottom line and and and change how we're taxed to our presence.

I've got a question, if I may begin. Remind me, Justin. So some and I can't I won't speak for here, and we'll see what's the chime in as well. Just follow-up. But some of the genesis, I think, of the code the code rewrite idea was we have this excess money. Right? And should we think about using that to pursue this project? Is the money that we discovered that was an excess from the previous budget? Was that already earmarked or something? I know that didn't it go to capital, please? Yeah. So we got moved from the general fund to the capital project. So if we decided to do that project, we would pay for a capital project and not general fund, which would back to your point of we can't raise taxes. We're not gonna raise taxes. But we can spend more money than we had originally said we were gonna spend because we had an inbound. I think if you don't mind or maybe maybe, hopefully, you actually have something. You really have to spread it with a little bit. Almost like a, hey. If this is going into capital projects, like, do you have projects that that, you know, like, this extra money? And then maybe presenting, you know, an itemized list of, like, give us some options of, like, hey. Would we wanna provide some sort of ranking or whatever? Right? Meaning, we have this group. This is where you'd prefer to spend it or, you know, whatever just as a as an option. Maybe it must be a dumb question. I think your fault. What's that? I'm following you. Okay. Yeah. Just in, like, if if we were to have this this code rewrite as an option, where would we see it as a council? It's like, oh, yeah. We could get this with this. We don't need something like that. At least I'm a single person. I like to see a list. Right? Okay. So I appreciate that.

So we have a list

like that in the dispute budget. Right. Right. So So it would just That's right. Proportionately, though, like, how does that with, like, money and, you know, the game. I mean, the simplest thing is is there's there's more money there than we have programmed right now. So we would just program a little more money to handle that work. Right. So if I remember right, it would be. And so we would just just pull that out of the phone and spend it on that budget. What what's the timing for a new application?

I think it's usually November, December, but we didn't hear about it till the spring. It takes them a while. And then we wouldn't receive the funds until the following fiscal year. So twenty twenty seven, twenty eight. Did they did they give us any feedback?

I have a call tomorrow with Call me originally. With the yeah.

To to go over that. Okay. But, yeah, it's taken a while for them to, you know, get back to me on that. But Is it the is it the Okay. Udah. Technical planning assistance. Yep. Thank you.

Nick, let me an excess of funds that get applied to capital projects is not an anomaly for the last twenty five years that I've been around here. That's how these have gone. So through a conservative budgeting approach, which means underestimating income and overestimating expenses, not spending as much as we might have in a worst case scenario. We have we have always transferred money into capital projects. And they said transfer into capital projects that lets us do things like build sidewalks for kids to get school safe again and make safer routes to school and those kinds of things. So what Justin said,

we have

we have this money to transfer into capital projects. There are we have greater we have many, many more ideas than we have money in that capital projects list. So we're we're happy to have the surplus to apply to capital projects, but it's not like we don't know how to spend money. It's technically a better place.

Right in the fair.

Yeah. Yeah. I can also say, you know, when we end this discussion, one of the main reasons for this was because of our new general plan. And a lot of our codes are in line with new general plan, and we talked about this. And so we were gonna wait a year, but then since we had some low bridge, we just felt like, you know, I'd I would rather not wait another year and a half with a you know, we have improved the new general plan. I really like to see that we get our codes and alignments with that so that this would be better for everybody in my mind. I think it'll be money well spent, but that's just my opinion. And why I why I've been asking about that. Yeah. I have no budget. We need to the MASA just to make for me, where's your thoughts to pursue?

Any other thoughts on the workshop?

Okay. Thank you, Justin. Thank you, counsel.

With that, let's move into a consideration of resolution twenty six ten. This is an agreement with Cass County Sheriff's Office for code enforcement. This is our first reading. This is the first introduction in the public forum that the council has a chance to hear this. So consistent with first reading, this is a chance for the council to learn details of what is actually being proposed. And and and this council wants to get into a get into a policy discussion. If council wants to bring it back to our second reading, as you all know, that's that's entirely up that's entirely within your discretion. So, Justin, I think you're gonna talk to us about this as well. Yes, sir. Thank you.

As you're well aware, we've been dealing with code enforcement and code enforcement issues for some time. The best way to handle that, we've been through different processes over the years. Levi's been working on this for what now? Four Six. Five years. So so we've we've tried a few different things and different ways to accomplish trying to enforce our code. And where we are at today, we had some discussions with the sheriff or been having discussions with the sheriff. It's confusing for for quite some time. And the sheriff is interested in pursuing a full time employee at the Cache County Sheriff's Office. It would be a Cache County Sheriff's employee, but it'll be a full time benefited position. They would receive their training program and kinda go through the schooling that the not the exact same schooling as what the the deputies would go through, but it was a law enforcement background and emphasis on how to how to do code enforcement. And so this person, obviously, it'd be difficult for Nubile City to hire one single full time employee. The employee we had before was only twenty hours. And so what the proposal is for this position at the Cashmere Sheriff's Office is to split that full time position between Hiram Nibley, unincorporated Cache County, and Roosevelt. And there's fortunately,

how that's shared out is

it can be detailed out. But, essentially, the the Fugitive Board of Contract, I can't remember the exact amount, I believe, just around $25,000 or so, which is a bit less than we have budgeted to pay for our salary plus the code enforcement department budget. So so this is a little bit of a cost savings to go with the sheriff's office, and they will provide us employee. It'll be it will look and feel very similar to our animal control and and our contract with sheriff for that. They would have a truck with Cache County Louisville. They would have sheriff's uniform. They would have the tools and the training that law enforcement would hope and have for a code enforcement officer. And we've had a lot of discussions about really the balance between similar to what judge Holder was talking about. We're not here just to make money. We're not here to swing a big stick. We're really here to try to change behavior and help neighbors to feel comfortable and confident and get along well with their neighbors and make sure that the rules and ordinances that you guys put in place are enforced as much as possible. So that certainly is is not an easy task. So I'm not promising that this is gonna solve all of our issues, but this is the direction the staff would like to go and give a solid effort good good faith effort trying to make it harder. So with that, I'm happy to answer any

questions. So I I just have one question. You know what we've been talking about, what women says in code enforcement. We feel like our code is in a place where we want it to be enforced, or, I mean, are we putting the we're we're splitting with this until we we have them?

It's a constant process of improvement. I don't I don't really know.

With that. Yeah. This is the this is the bot.

Well, I don't Can you send the project of reworking the code? Because that is a different issue. That's gonna that's, like, development subdivision code, not necessarily nuisance and code enforcement.

I don't think the nuisance was part of the original scope. Like, it was more it was more, zoning and, you know, land use subdivision code. I will say the nuisance code has been the the nuisance code has been reviewed and looked at multiple times in the six years I've been here. I feel like it can always be improved, but if there's anything, you know, if there's anything in the code that the council thinks is shouldn't be there or any anything lacking, it it can definitely be put on an agenda and and be and be addressed. Mhmm. Yeah. So, I mean, it I would just say it's a continual process of improvement

that we try to reflect on. So so so folks are you can start on both. This is code related to parking. This code related to where you park on your own property. This code related to land use, not as much code related to, development the development process.

Business business licenses also and yeah.

Erin?

Just how does the cost per hour and the number of hours that in this contract compare to the cost per hour and the number of hours we were paying in our previous situation in the past year?

It's pretty similar to the cost.

And I I expect the sheriff designed it this way. I expect similar to how we get more hours and more service out of deputies, we'll probably get more service and hours than what he's contracted for, but he wanted to start low, make sure that we we sure we had the program in place before I'm sure we'll be looking at this just as we look at those other contracts from a year to year basis. We can expect some sort of percentage increase based on inflation and just pressures of in the in the industry and things like that. So I'm not sure I've answered your question exactly. It's similar hours and a little bit cheaper.

I think one of the one of the challenges for a code enforcement officer that's serving more than one community is the challenge for a animal code officer that's serving more than one city because the code enforcement officer needs to be intimately familiar with the code that you all act. And so I'm not saying they're drastically different. I think somewhere back in the predawn of Cache Valley, all of our municipal code came from one source and we changed it as we go along each municipality. But there is a lot of similarity to hire on land use code, business license code,

animal code,

stuff like that. It's different than any case. So that code enforcement officer is going to have to know our code. And, also, it's code of power at in Wellsville and, yeah, before pretty accounting. Now accounting has made a push on animal enforcement to unify the animal use animal animal land use, but we haven't done that amount of hardship. We should be doing that. Some other town, when we're talking about how many horses we can have on what size of the lot. We've been through that process too, I think. I think that's one of the challenges. I think that's something for us to watch out for. Who will this person answer to in Middly City?

I think for now, until we get a good process and procedure rolling in place, I'm gonna hold on to this. I'm gonna just keep it under So The US Yeah. I'll, yeah, I'll leave a direct link for for the foreseeable future on this until we kinda get it ironed out. I expect some bumps, I mean, to be honest. So I'd like to hold on for that till we kinda get through some of those bumps and understand. And then likely, long term, we'll slide back down to Levi

and to meet Penny with this parliament.

Yeah. I'll quickly apologize. I don't know why it's a problem here. The AC is on, and we've got 72 degrees to eight. So I apologize. I don't know what's out of the thousand. The quick thinking so far.

Yeah. I think in the in the contract, it says that, essentially, they will answer to the mayor or the mayor's representative, so that would be you.

We'll ask the mayor.

Justin. I'm just pointing to the to the lawyer. I think I think it needs to be I think it's best on lots of stuff goes to the mayor of Simon. I think this should be a staff position. That doesn't mean that people don't come to me with code enforcement. The citizens don't come to me with code enforcement. Just like they come to you, we have that responsibility to work in constituents. But I think in fairness, I think city staffs someone on city staff, Justin's the the right person to be responsible for how this person acts admirably and how this contract is fair to fair down. What else? Nick Derek? Nathan? Nathan gave us changes. Just I mean, not huge changes, but got some errors.

And

those are incorporated in the document that we see.

So far, I'll talk again. Yeah. I did all of them, but maybe one, and I apologize. I didn't see your email felt way late. Most of your changes were caught by our interim attorney. There may be one that didn't quite get addressed. So on that note, there's a small chance the sheriff's office has seen those edits. Again, very grammatical and things like that. So I don't expect that there'd be an issue. But if there is similar issue,

we may bring this back to you, but I don't foresee that happening.

Anybody else, counsel?

Yeah. The only other kind of question I had that I sent to you guys was clarification on the scope of hours. So I gave you example of if this person is, for some reason, asked to appear in a court or something. Does that count, or is it just an enforcement? Some of that issue. I don't know if he talks about that at all.

Not super specifically. No. We haven't got that into the details.

Cool. Yeah. It's good. I would assume that it would just come on the hourly report. What's wrong? And we would need it. Yeah. But, again, we're paying this amount despite the number of hours they actually work. I expect the hours to come in more than what's been programmed here, but we will be still paying the same price. Well, you're apparently having all sorts of building gremlins, so I don't know if we need to be. Normal.

Damn. I don't know. It's oh, I apologize.

We're using the second reading on this, so the little

Kelly again.

I I honestly I would prefer to pass it just because we are time sensitive and wanna get this thing rocking. If you're asking me, I would recommend that we pass it if you're okay with it. If you're not okay with it, then we can certainly bring it back for a second reading. And then if for some reason we do pass it and he has issues or problems, I'll have to just back to the team.

There were no problems. Do you solve it for long, so I mean, send it.

Correct. Yeah. We just need to move right now, it's paid in salary and see department expenses. We would just move that to probably the public safety department line that says contractor code for us Right under the line that says contract for animal control.

The sheriff is actually looking at a new hire for this position outside of his front department, and

you're going to be on the hiring committee. Yeah. And he was very pleased with it. He's already advertised the job. He had, I believe, upwards of 15 applicants. He's narrowed that to five that he's pretty excited about. So

Yes. I think the only thing is this is more internal, I think, because we're the one that gives them direction of propagating re complaint based, and we're gonna try to tackle really problematic things that take longer as a city and maybe left small on things that

Yeah. That's a great question, and that's more internal belief. Yeah. And that's some of those bumps I was talking about. Right now, we envision dealing with complaints immediately when they come in. And then, I mean, for the foreseeable future, we'll probably take, like, the top few three or four issues that we're seeing for a period of time and have them go out and try to tackle those issues and see what can of worms that opens up. If it does, it doesn't and kinda deal with those and then maybe move on to a few different different time frames to kinda try to move around and get good. What we're not gonna do is hand in the foot and say, go go enforce every single one of these tomorrow. Like, it's just

not gonna happen. Yeah. It's a little of conversations. You know? It's some of the ones that are the most impactful as far as city city and cost problems take the longest

to enforce. And I think that's fine as long as we're trying to spend. So, yeah, I think

let's get try the right direction.

I have to warn the council. I believe we made it in we made an expenditure on software to help track code enforcement, but I believe that software is not going to be part of how the sheriff practice. That is correct. So sheriff will use the Spillman software, you know, is getting bug or whatever the sheriff's department uses for tracking cases such. That that software comes with the contract where we would be dedicated. Just in time.

Hey, Greg. How much longer is that?

I think we had a year.

Yeah. It's,

I think, October. Right? Yeah. And there there's a question about the equipment and things like that. Amy's reached out to them, started a conversation about how we'll get a return app for a certain amount of money or some things like that. So we'll do everything we can to know except

but it is what it is at this point.

And I think well, one one thing that they do is is they also collect. So some of the some some of the tickets that were issued, after a while, it goes through collections, and that process has still happened even though we don't have a code enforcement option. So they it's still working for us in a way. It's just for a while, you know, until that fizzles out.

K.

Motion from Nathan. Do I have a second? Second from Aaron. That motion is to approve the contract with Cash County for co enforcement and waive second meeting. K? Any further thoughts, discussion on that topic? Does anyone oppose the vote? K? Let's move ahead, Cheryl. If you'd call a role for me and for us, I'd appreciate it.

Councilman.

Councilman. In favor. Councilman.

Thank you.

For in favor and not opposed. So it shall be. Thank you for that discussion. Justin, thanks for your work on that, and we'll keep our eye on it. Citizens let us know when they're not happy about this sort of things.

We'll be in a mood.

Next is I think we're up to item 10. This is an annexation agreement with Kate Holden to LLC, setting for terms and conditions for a Nielsen or Colette annexation. I must point out that item 11 is closely related to this because item 11 is the ordinance that would actually do the annexation or possibly do the annexation of this property and also assign zoning to this property. We have we have many times in the past had the annexation decision and zoning assignment come first and never had an annexation agreement. So the annexation agreement is a little bit new. It I think it's important here because we are expecting the potential annexer to take care of some things like 5th 1500 West, which which is not only required for their proposal, but also required in a bigger sense than what has nexus to their proposal. So the annexation agreement proposes the pioneering agreement for that to happen also deals with upsize of of pipes and whatever whatever that makes sense to work out an annexation level instead of a development. I will encourage the council to be consistent with their thoughts, votes between item 10 because the annexation agreement says the council is if that if the agreement passes, if the council wants to enter into that agreement with the proponent, That agreement includes the the property will be annexed and this will be the settlement. So I would encourage you to be consistent on these two agenda items even though we will take them one at a time as we're supposed to. Levi, do you wanna

Frank had some questions? Yeah. Maybe that's presentation.

Yeah. I'll I'll give you on that. So you'll introduce this, please.

Right. And and this this was discussed with with the council before. Do you want me to give more I I was planning on addressing the the items that Frank brought up and then just giving you an update. Do you want me to give more information than that, or is that is that sufficient?

Let's start with addressing Frank's questions and then do an update. And if counsel wants wants more, then we'll keep you on. Let's see. Sounds good.

So, yeah, Frank talked about detached that detached housing designation, which I I explained during the first reading, and and maybe I'll just bring up some slides real quick. So when the applicant some when when they first submitted their application and and through a lot of the process, The city had a a previously adopted general plan that showed these designations for the two properties. The property of the north was medium density residential, and the property south commercial medium to high density residential. Recently, actually, about I I guess it would have been the week before this was heard by the planning commission. The general the new general plan was adopted, and the designations have changed in the general plan. And so this yellow that you see is detached residential, which I think is what Frank was referring to. But the just keep in mind that the the general plan is an advisory document. So it's not it's not legally binding. The council tonight and on any any zoning decision has discretion on on zoning and and the way that you would like it to go, the planning commission's recommendation was for r two a, zoning for both of these properties. But, just just wanna point that out that the the council has full discretion on on on zoning. I think that adequately

Yeah. What addresses it. The staff so the funding commission recommendation also staff recommendation. Right. What did staff make their recommendation

on? Yeah. So staff's recommendation was to approve as as the applicant has has requested. And that that's for the I'm kinda jumping forward to the annexation, not the I'm That's fine. The but, you know, it relate it it's related to the agreement. So that was and that recommendation was actually made prior to the general plan being changed, but, staff didn't didn't change or amend its its recommendation when when the general plan was updated. So that that's that's the same. So the staff recommendation is different from the planning commission recommendation.

Thank you.

And then so if we're good there, I was just gonna point out just a brief update. So we we met part of the reason this took a little bit of time coming back is we're waiting for review from the city attorney on a couple of items of of concern on the the draft agreement that the applicant had some concern for. And and since that time, our our our city attorney, our interim city attorney has reviewed it and provided some alternative language to those to those provisions regarding pending future lawsuits. And kind of in a nutshell, just to simply acknowledge that there there aren't current, pending, or future lawsuits, but it doesn't go into as much detail as before. And and there were some reasons why that was unnecessary in this agreement. So the the attorney agreed. The applicant has agreed as well. And then also this change, there there's a phrase that says that the city may assign the zoning that has been changed to shall. The applicant has requested that. So if, the way that I'm understanding the agreement now is that if this is adopted, this this agreement is is approved, then the zoning will be assigned with RM zoning on the South property and r 2 a on the North property. But that is, again, at the discretion of the council. If you wanna go a different direction, that's that's your your decision in front of you.

Great. Thank you. Does does that cover an update council and the public information packet? Do you have questions for Levi? K. The proponent is here. We always give opponent an opportunity to address the council before we dive into it and stick it around and answer questions, if you will, if they come up. So welcome. Introduce yourself for us. Dan Larson, I'm representing

Dave Holden. At least that's the. Last time we're here. In a nutshell, we're just gonna come in and be subject to city ordinances and loss as far as the pioneering agreement. And I don't know what I think you all know what that is. Just where we are annexing past other parcels. We're gonna pay the cost of it in just one when those parcels decide to develop their annex, we get reimbursed for the cost just in front of them. We're not asking for anything else. And then part of the upsizing, that's just, you know, standard state law. Once you're annexed, one quarter, you negotiate on or not. But if we're already that would stay. Nothing too extreme we're asking for on that one. Just, you know, first time we came through, like, it was the desire of the council, and we're talking about that. It said, like, hey. We do want this to be multifamily. We just don't like our multifamily code. So if you guys are paying off on coming in, we'll fix our multifamily code and then bring it in. And that's kinda where we got stuck in that. We held off, changed the updated plan, and now we're back and not jiving in that. Anyway, any other questions for me?

I'm gonna follow-up on a question from our public comment, Greg. Were you here for that? Mhmm. Okay. So I'll ask you directly. Did you have did you engage with discussions of counsel with a quorum? I'm gonna ask that. We we did not approach quorum before you put in your application. Okay. Straight forward again. We did not approach counsel

prior to purchasing the property. We did talk to staff quite a bit, went over the general plan, went over your zoning things. But, no, we have not approached prior purchasing anybody on city council. Thank you. Either as a quorum or individually.

Okay. So you're answering both questions. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. So as a quorum is is as required by you to open a public meeting deck. Proponents have a right to speak with individual council members or non quorum meetings of council members if they wanna hear where a council feels on something just like anyone else does. But you're telling me you didn't do that? No. No. You're purchasing property now. Thank you. What else?

Just have a question about logistics. Will you gonna become pioneer? These properties currently county so when when they go to improve these areas, Do we do it based upon all our standards and and notify the I I just how many watching that? Yeah. Just I think that's a question.

Yes. The question is for us. We'll we'll try to remember that. So you're speaking specifically about the roadway fifteen minutes wise? Well, there's there's there's there's a little And it's also tiny.

Okay. So, typically, by sizing, we're gonna cover the cost difference between what would be required of the developer to put in and what we hope to have put in for the rest of the city. So I mean, in this case, it's an eighteen twelve. That would be great. So we would pay the cost difference between the two, not the full price. So that's on the city, and we would pay that out of our either, you know, capital funds out of water department, the impact fees depending on how it would it all worked out. We'd cover that expense. And the the actual pioneering part is just that he's make the developer's proposing to make improvements on property that is not really part of their development. And so they make those improvements and then hope to be reimbursed when that property develops in the future

by whoever develops that property in the future. Yeah. Within ten years?

Develop that in eighteen years since it's based on the city's Correct. County standards Correct. Which could impact those residents even though the county said this is what they want.

How does that work? What do you mean impact of residents? I mean Just the assumption that we end next.

Where we're gonna make some of the curve out. Like, none of that is this and county.

Yeah. I'm trying to run through this case in my mind. There's maybe less.

So we would just have to look through those details, but we don't understand her. I I think can can I comment real quick? I I think the assumption in the agreement is that they'd be annexed. And maybe it's not their written explicitly, but they would be annexed prior to to development. And then when they develop, then it would be covered through the pioneering agreement. I'm not sure if you're talking about a scenario where they develop in the unincorporated county. Is that what you're you're saying what happens when they develop in the unincorporated county? Are they covered in this pioneering agreement? Or is that is that what you

Sir, maybe so for instance, the JKs and the Beds, like, you said, it'll be less.

Right? We're gonna build the road there, and we're putting a sign up for her that these guys are gonna put it when she's developed there. Right? That's according to our site, but these properties are not in our city.

But the right of way is, though. Yeah. That's happened. The right

would be. Okay.

We would stay in our right of way just as if that was part of our city. We needed to go above and beyond the existing right of way then have to work with the owners to purchase property or do whatever we need to do to obtain the right to be able to do that. So we wouldn't be encroaching that at the end. But still a little depending on is it a full road, a half road? Maybe those western properties don't even get touched. Maybe and there's just lots of details that you're kinda getting to that'll get worked out. But in essence, like, we'll do everything we can to minimize impact to ex any existing resident that was involved in the process.

But an important point, I think, when we're talking about the first time this was proposed and the county said no Yeah. The big issue was that peninsula of 1500 North built up to the north. We that was not part of the original annexation proposal. It was it was to go around that property to the east because it's connected to Nibley down the East. And the county said, we don't wanna own a section of road where it's nibbling on both ends. So the county has said has come back, and and this proposal is for Nibley City to annex that road, which then give us jurisdiction on the kinds of things that we need to enforce Nibley City road standards. Am I getting that right? Yep. Yep. I think there I think if I if I read it right, there's a little bit of difference between pipe sizes and upsizing pipes versus the road. And that is Nibley City agrees at this point to pay for the upsized pipe that could be needed by future developers that bring us proposals. And then I mean so that's not on the developer. That's on Nibley City to pay for that upsize. Now Nibley City needs to figure out a way to make sure that the citizens of Nibley are made whole for that expenditure that that we're that we're experiencing now for upsized pipe. And and if I'm wrong on this, tell me. The road's a different story. You guys are gonna pay the proponent is gonna pay for the development of the roads and the city standards. Correct.

Because they're just a standard. If you wanted a 99 foot right away, I would say, hey. Help me go from a 68 to a 99. But where this is just a standard road width and right away, there would there would be no upsize on the road.

Okay.

Yeah. And so does Nibley City promise there there's no there's no pioneering agreement on the road. What if there's a few development proposed to the south? I think we promised to help you try to collect some of the costs of developing this road. Is that true?

So the point in your agreement will adjust I will say exactly what that is, but it would be our intent. That would just be the exact parcels adjacent to us. So if they wanted to continue going south, they would not be subject to paying anything on the.

On the road development?

On the road or anything. Because, really, what we're saying is is since we're jumping past property Yeah. You know, say it costs $10 to develop that road, that's a benefit to that piece of property. Right? Because road's already there. They're not gonna be upside. So when they go to develop, they just reimburse that same $10. But if somebody south of us wants to hook on, you know, they're not directed benefit. I hope they are, but we weren't asking that they pay for that. Right. You you had to build the road for your development. Right. Okay.

Thank you.

What else?

I just had a question. I think it's been resolved, but the packet mentioned, you know, to read issues on the sixteenth, but this was signed after that. So we have those problem that we give.

We might need to get it signed again. They signed it. I mean, there was yeah. We'll yeah. We'll we'll we'll look at that as a fine tooth comb. I mean, if we don't do it right, the recorder's office will say fix it. So but they did sign it. So

Yeah. So I I have a few thoughts on this one. You know, where we had our past general plan, and that was meeting density. And, obviously, we were in person that, and now it's detached. And a lot of that, when the URL was is precedent on that work or coming through whether it's 1,000 or 4,400 or whatever it is, or east and west. One of the concerns on that is is that even gonna happen in my lifetime? This branch machine now works. And so do we end up with a lot of my frames and we end up with demos, you know, that are kind of on the island because where density typically goes where you have when it's transit and other items, and this really couldn't find that. But being fair to you, that you can organize films I've had. And this way, tell me if we can give this in the agreement is can we require if we can be our own zone and all the residential will be detached single family. So they would have a higher density than an RTOA, but it would all have to fall in line with current general plan. We give them the density of the past one by making all the residential residential only detached single family with the same in the density of the RN. Can we require that or ask for that and make that waiver?

I think that's within the council's discretion to to do that. I mean, obviously, for it to go forward, the app it's it's an agreement, so the applicant would have to agree to it. If they don't, then, you know, they could pull their application. But the council could, as a condition of approval, do that.

Is that something? Yeah.

Just it would be possible to get the same density as a single family. But if you're setbacks and and requirements on single time loss, yeah, then I don't think you'd get half the density. Because as soon as you switch to a single family law, your code changes with what is required around each unit, that would be the the hard part about that.

Yeah. Can I can I explain that at a a little bit of a high level of what's allowed in the RM zone for a single family development? So it'll it allows as small as a 4,500 square foot lot, 50 foot frontages with, you know, five foot setbacks, 20 foot think think think about kind of the single family you see in our other our PUD type developments that that kind of scale of single family, but only the single family portion. It and, a multifamily development requires 35% of the net available acreage, just open space. Single family requires 20. So it has it does have less open space, but, I mean, I, you know, respect, Dan, that maybe you probably can't fit as much in there, but that's just a high level what's what's allowed.

I haven't done it. But what it looks like to just

it. Change.

I'm gonna do some needs to be adjusted

for me. I mean, you can get into whatever detail you like. Just if I mean They would be they would be diff the the more that you deviate, the longer it goes, the harder it is to track and and everything. So if you get and and I will say that those were pretty well thought out, the geometry and everything. So that's just something to think about there. I think 50 foot of frontage is pretty reasonable. Seems like it works for the developments that have come through for for single family. I don't know. Maybe that maybe you could adjust it, but I don't know if there's a reason to or not.

Well, that major East West Coast. Yeah. For example, we have a work in case of what we have to be

Yeah. It's a work in progress. Do that. Yeah. First of all, he got so many moments.

Forget about this. You can blame other people. Excuse me.

No way. No. That would be nice. We proposed that to you, Dot, that Highway 101, it goes through the highway. You, Dot, would abandon Highway 101 as a state road and instead develop a new road at 4400 South. And, you know, I said, we only have a road. We don't need to build a new road. They're not sympathetic to Hiram's claim that they don't think trucks I'm not I'm not saying how I feel to Hiram's claim, but you guys not sympathetic to, at this point, to Hiram's claim that they should get trucks off of Hiram's main strip. State Road was there. I don't remember how many things changed. Right? So I'm not I won't I won't encumber any future decision of u dot, but the but the word now is that u dot is not interested in relocating. It's been brought up many, many times, and every time the answer is said, yeah, u dot is not interested in abandoning an existing state road in order to build a new state road. If you guys want that done, you figure out how to do it. What do I need to do?

So The county needs to work. So if it was done by a city, that might even push it out even further. Okay.

Or the the county is who's leading out. Because 4400 South I guess I'm understood that you're not. You need to still be okay then. That's why I'm just They've asked a number of times, and every time they said no.

It's open a clarification. Yeah.

So right now, the county is leading out because 4400 South, except for the Far East part of it, is in unincorporated part of town. So the county planning department is leading out with the proposal to build this East West corridor. We have a meeting next week Mhmm. To move that along. There's there's a bunch of right of way to be acquired. There's a bunch of things that will happen. So it's not it's going to be a slow moving project in part because there are lots of things that have to be done, and it's a it's it's a money limited project. So finding money to do all this is going to stretch things out for a long time. CMPO, it's on their plan. Again, CMPO has money that they can access. There's another pot of money available through the council of governments, which is voter approved local ops sales tax that's awarded by the council of governments, the mayors of Cache County to see what projects are are deemed worthy of of receiving funding. All of those options are on the table. But I don't I wouldn't wait for me to do that. We can't even seem to be ahead of that, you know. Now part of the complication that we have discussed is 4400 South, we have felt would be a delineation between Hiram and Nibley. And that is also in question because we don't have a signed agreement binding Tyrone to stopping at 4400 South. In answer to your question about how 4400 South affects this property, what's the road I'm looking it up. This the road of the southern boundary of the southern parcel?

Well, there's not a road there, but it's Wow. But it

It's not 4400

South. It's probably closer to 3800, 3850 ish.

So the land use issues along the East West Southern Corridor are yet to be worked out. No doubt about it. I mean, Hiram Hiram has pressed for that because they don't they don't wanna see another replication of what they have on their main street now. Right? So, you know, they they weighed in with Nibali even though they haven't agreed on that's the boundary. It's wherever the boundary is. We're gonna establish these acceptable to both communities proper land uses. But we're not in the buffer region of 4400 South yet with this proposal.

That for me, that makes it even that makes for me, that means RM is, like, not maybe RM there if that's the case.

I mean, it's it is onto the 1200 West Corridor,

and

the master plan does show 3650 going across there, so Collector Street. But, I mean, that's kind of your regional trend you know, transportation corridors there that you're looking at.

Garrett, if you were if you were using a certain type of residential as a reason to zone something for what may turn into a boundary agreement between Italy and Hiram, Hiram didn't want any residential. That's out there on the record. It's not RM or RQA or any or anything else. It's like, it'll be industrial. Because we're gonna haul trucks on that, and we're not gonna slow it down by by putting any sort of passes on there.

K. Thanks.

Yes. We need a motion to approve.

And one motion from Nathan. And second.

So

I'll state the motion. I need to wait for a second, but I believe Nathan's motion is to approve the annexation agreement as presented. With the RCO and R The entire agreement, which includes a zone a zoning designation. The new designation,

improving the streets of the planning agreement, absolutely. Awesome.

So Yeah. But what's in a second? Because I don't wanna put it on the motion. See, this one. Discussion, please.

Question for the just to read just I think I asked you this before, but under the new RN code, there would be no commercial obligated in the sign. Correct? Because there's no

I don't I I don't believe so. No. Because it's not on a state highway, and it's not at the intersection of two arterial roads or near an intersection of two arterial roads. So it would be residential. All residential. I mean, at least what's required. They could do commercial with RM, hypothetically, but yeah.

So that's that's worth maybe putting up the point because there's been a confusion about which general plan was in place when the application was made. We talked about that. If I'm wrong, let me know. The entitlement of zoning is not granted at what type of development and setbacks and densities and all that is not granted at annexation. That is granted at the time of development. And so the proponent would be subject to the ordinances on the books when they bring in a development proposal for the zone that is granted at annexation. Yeah.

Mhmm.

So we're not going back to old RM. Yep. If you bring in a proposal for development, it's new RM. K. Any other thoughts? Opposition to voting?

I just Yeah. Please. Just state one thing. I think maybe some of the hesitation that I heard from Garrett today and from Randy either week was that attached housing or multifamily housing might have felt out of place. It it it was just stuck here. But in my mind, it doesn't feel like this is that far away from what's just up the road where we haven't been in the meadows, which is kind of in the same area. It's north of here. And I think I pointed out this parcel that's also attached to or is right next to 1200 West, which is major road for us. So in terms of placement of high density homes, I see this as a a good parcel to put it on. I also have my seeing single family homes broken up, so I don't just have mile after mile single family home neighborhoods. So in my mind, this seems like a like a positive place to go over in, but regardless of why Arizona has changed.

It's not. It's only in a base of our future. When it is being out of state, we can verify that. Advisory that as opposed to a zoning that. Yeah. Yes. Thank you. Yeah. I suppose to kind of agree with that statement. I think

we need to do some RM and find that benefit, not just all the location in your city. And I'm looking at these two parcels. It's a great detached r two a with some some attached, and then next to whatever they speak to the book. And then it pulls to it, next to a what will be the major quarter if so. And there's some kind of commercial a little bit further on our city, but those two, like, storage units. So it's time to try one.

Win. I mean, I just don't know if I feel like this is the spot to try now. I think that's just my opinion. Maybe. It's just Because, typically, on this matter housing, we have locked your density housing, typically have mass transit and other things because they have less vehicles. They have you know, there's just there's other things in play for the typically type of people that purchased the the townhome versus a detached single. And so I just you know, that's why I went around the core and where it's tough. And and I think so. Well, we have to vote on this before I can even make a substitute. Right?

No. We vote on it. It's done. No. If you wanna make an amendment or make a substitute motion, do it now or or make a motion piece.

I'd like to make his substitute motion to approve this with the planning commission's recommendation.

So are you okay if I just call that up and I think we have something to do. Exactly. Let's just say Turn Queen means passed. That you're moving to amend the development premium to be r two a on both parties. Am I hearing you correctly? Yes. Okay. So that is a motion to amend. Do I have a second? My second second from there. Let's talk about the amendment.

Yeah. I I generally agree with Garrett on this one. I think it just kinda makes sense to have an agreement with the planning commission's recommendation. It's a little disappointing that we wouldn't get any commercial out of the RM. I may I agree with your sentiment to a degree, obviously, like, we do need to start connecting upon ourselves. So we do have some areas, and then we already, you know, have the rights for our RM. We need to see the success for that, obviously, too. But I just think generally in the area and kind of fitting with our new plan and whatever else we just spent a year discussing and and just describing the vision of, you know, in need to grow. Just makes sense to me that we just, you know, follow my kind of regret. So it's not any.

I have a feeling I'm gonna have to go with. I think you're actually doing a little bit more into the bay. You guys want to take care of this, folks? Because they have stated that intention.

No.

Their future annexation plan goes third to Nibali and beyond. And they have drawn us, and I've shown you a map that says this belongs they believe this belongs to Cairo. And I and and the reason we should have had was for long, long ago and annex agreement between our two cities as to where Irem stops and Marlene stops is so that we don't we don't end up and this is not an accusation of of the proponent, but we don't give a proponent an opportunity to find the best deal they can in one city or another. I have matured over the years when a unincorporated part of the county came to Nibley City and said, we wanna come to Nibley and we wanna do multifamily housing. And that piece of property was north of our current Fireflies Nature Park. I was on the council. I said, no. We don't even have an ordinance that would allow for multifamily attached housing. And so go away. Take take take that proposal away. If you don't have a way to give you what you want without writing a new ordinance and they did that. They took that proposal to Logan, And they came back with that proposal and that development, although it's right next to the end, is in Logan. And the impact's felt by traffic, the impacts felt on school district schools, not Nibley schools, but school district schools. The impacts felt on our parks are felt by Nibley City. And they don't pay taxes in Nibley City. They there's no money for us to mitigate that impact. So my thinking has changed as things have progressed. First of all, I didn't think I didn't I didn't understand why we'd ever need multifamily housing. And we've talked at length about the need for affordable housing and so on and so forth. Economic development leads to jobs, but economic development needs people to fill those jobs, and those people need a place to live. We've talked about the housing crisis in Cache County. I personally feel it because I we have kids that are trying to buy a house. Not in Nibley. They moved away. Not in Cache Valley, but but they're they would they would love to get into an affordable or at least attainable housing situation. And I I I believe we have a response to try to help solve that housing problem. So I'm foreshadowing that simply saying no doesn't mean that it won't go to another city and that we won't be impacted by what might happen in another city.

So the parcel that parcel for mix that is considered being changed is about 18.66 acres. We made an art in zones. Planning commission passed it that said that we only demand commercial on some of those things in certain areas. Mhmm. And that's what we felt good about.

And I'm hearing maybe you have hesitation on that because this is not an arterial street or

I think it's not been a state highway or

two arterials as defined in our master plan transportation. Right? So in reality,

I know this is hard to do, and I ask you to do it all the time. But in that develop,

how many units we talking under owner again for 18?

I know it's hard. Right? I mean, Dan might be able to answer that better than me. Probably But it's probably it's probably a 130, 140, I'm guessing, maybe, tops.

I can't remember you.

That's that's a that's very rough. I'm just saying, like, that's Yeah. That's about That's good. Yeah. That's that's. Probably. Oh, let's see here. Yeah.

I mean

Fair enough. About half. May maybe maybe a little bit shy of half. Maybe 50 or 60.

Yeah.

That helped. But

Mhmm. We have to some extent to turn out with affordable

housing and if you'd like, we need to have our options.

And now I can go to Nelson Holmes and saw some options that I think more people from Henry surveyed I've seen over the years. Overwhelming majority bought detached single family. And what we bought within the hospital, what I haven't shared on. But that's always being built most of the time. And I just feel like if we wanna have something, you know I mean, what we saw in Nielsen, I really liked. That was cheaper than even some of the townhouses. And I feel like that actually is an affordable home. How do we make that happen? And then we And I have kids too. I I have four in the same boat. The agent trying to buy a house and I'm only from when that'll happen.

So there are lots of nuances that the Nielsen project was done under. I know. I don't I don't think it's an apples to apples comparison to say, well, they have some single family homes. So therefore, everything's just being single family.

Yeah. Well, and and the money is competing. I mean, it's just my opinion. But as I look, you know, what's happening nationally and even in the state of Utah, we have a lot of replacement models for the past couple years. The count is nation has been that way for more than fourteen years. And so, you know, buyer pool, in my opinion, I don't know most older people that buy any of those stairs. And so, you know, you're limited to maybe, you know, a pool of people to buy and and continue on the best replacement level. In twenty years, you're gonna have a lot fewer buyers for these. So then what happens to these that they can't be sold or something because you don't have buyers go on to buy anything with stairs, they become the the dilapidated rentals. Whereas you do detached single family, that looks very funny in every age group. And I just think that makes more sense because it's more universal. That that's just my opinion.

So I didn't know we were talking about senior housing.

I'm talking about short of birds.

But let's let's turn to the people that have know a heck of a lot more about building houses and what the market supports and and what the market doesn't support and and what people can afford and what sells and what doesn't sell. And, I mean, don't don't give us any inside secrets, but, I mean, obviously, you would like to see RM in this zone because that's what we requested. Right. So what thought process led to that instead of doing single family? A lot of them were done. And then to your point, I agree. Most people want

a single open family. Nobody wants a minivan either, but you buy what you need. I'm not seeing the ability and and Ryan will go back. There might be better because he's on the home side of the ability to come within $30,000 in the same price tag in the townhome versus any single bank of, you know, square footage comparable. And so there is a huge, huge cost savings on having a shared goal. And, you know, everybody, if they have their way, they want see if I can go on 40 acres next to Walmart because they want the amenities. They want the commercial in their backyard, but they don't want anything. And I I get that. Hard. Me hard.

From live upstairs, it was targeted. Yeah. Well, there's so

many Hello. And that's kinda where we're at, and that's what we're seeing is what is moving what we people afford are our town homes. You know, we are still selling you know, we've got a comparable number of acreage, more acreage of single family home right here in the same area that we're asking for. So we're not trying to get all of it as multifamily. So we're trying to provide an extra in both. But as I look at the ordinance, it's gonna be hard to just do straight townhomes on your end with the style of stuff we sell. There's going to be some single family home in there. And so that's what we're seeing. We we wanna put together a mixture. You've got 40 acres. I think some of it ought to be townhomes. Some of it ought to be single family. And so that's kind of what we're looking at. That's why we're asking for this.

Someday, I'm sure the next one is this. So with the townhome, though, you're gonna have covenaries, you have home in HOA. With an HOA, though, if you remove that HOA by doing detached single family, does that not make up that $30,000 difference pretty quickly in qualifications?

I'm not on the qualifications side, but there are ways under HOAs that you can save a lot over what you do with a single tenant note. I mean, I I don't wanna get into specifics. Right. If you wanna go for our Smithfield project right now, most of you are probably paying 80 to $90 for your Internet at your own personal home. I'm paying a 120 because I like to gain. And our Smithfield project under the HOA because the HOA is buying the entire bandwidth for it. Everybody out there is getting their Internet less than $15. Their HOA fee for the nine acre park is a lot lower than you think it'd be. And so you're getting when you put in townhomes, you get, again, not my favorite thing, but you get social grouping that allows them to buy at a discounted rate. We can negotiate with, you know, utility companies. Obviously, Obviously, we're not gonna come get water to the scale. But, granted that companies, if they say, oh, I have a guaranteed, you know, 100 units here instead of charging them all a 100, they get $15. There is some of that too. I know you as well as I view that an HOA does change the rate you can lend and borrow, but it doesn't gobble up $30,000.

So my my fear is that this discussion is what do people want and what can people afford. And I don't know that this council knows that. I think that people that try to build a product to serve a market segment know that better than we do. And what I hear is that this discussion turns into what kind of people do we want living in neighborhood? I heard that. Maybe not from this council, but I've certainly heard that from residents. And that's an unfair discussion because the people that live in multifamily housing are just as valued as contributors contributors to our community as people who live in single family. There's some incredible things going on in Ridge Line Park. Some incredible contributions made by people that live in multifamily houses. There's no there's no distinction between the quality of citizens. And I'm not sure that we we are allowed to make a distinction between the desirability of housing and the affordability of housing if we don't know the market.

Nate? Yeah. So, again, let's run down the route of we made an RM zone. We asked the applicant to wait for us to make it better. They've done that, and now we, again, don't have faith in our RM zone, which is unfortunate. Right? So if you run down the changes and things that would happen for this property, if you know better, feel free to correct this. Right? So the arm zone allows someone who's here to leave, have a single family home that doesn't meet setbacks and is therefore qualified as multifamily. Right? So that's a possibility. Again, I understand there's not a whole lot of space to do with time to that. Right? But it allows for some of these things to break up, and we're we're trying to dictate what we want beyond what it says over and over again. And we need to get our code right and be comfortable with it instead of asking out this to continually wait for us to figure it out and just let them do. Right? And so that's one thing that could happen. If we're about a 150, they could

build a two and a half acre park.

They could also do a fee in lieu of because they're 200 half a mile from Master Park. Mhmm. So, like, if you run down the things that other than how many units are we getting and what type of thousand of it, I think we've written a pretty good ordinance so that we wouldn't pass it. So is it is it just location we're worried about, or is it we don't like our ordinance because it doesn't demand single pending outside and detached units. Those are things we need to consider beyond this deception. I think that's what's holding this up because there's hesitation to not do our own ordinance.

Okay. And that's, you know, I think that's why I'm going to go as to what I did in the beginning. You know, can we just make it go in and detach some single valley or any location because there are definitely places I wanna see our end. And this one, you know, if we were gonna have, you know you know, some commercial and different things, it just would make more sense to me. I wanna see if that road ever is gonna be in my lifetime. And so I just feel like, really create this island. And I'm not sure I should be able to go on.

And I don't know if I can. I mean,

so May I again?

And let me scroll down to the the the new general plan. If you look and you're concerned about an eye on your teeth corner from where you've got multifamily, you're half a block or a block away from where you've got more multifamily. We're not creating an eye within the sea of single family.

And

and we as council have hesitated to do detached small lots previously in other areas because homes were there.

There's no homes here. But there's one. There's one. And we need That's true. I'll I'll come back then if you meant. Yeah. Go ahead, Mickey. But I I I was kinda saying, like,

we're what do we want? Right? Like, we have written we code what we want. We've stuck our thing in the blagging.

The same notes because we're a little nervous.

I I I think previous councils have made mistakes both ways, so just be careful. I get it, though. I get neither concerned with the space in our staff, but it's close to what we're envisioning for this area. And, again, I'm looking at it as both parcels. We're getting a good mix of both parcels.

So let me let me follow-up the bottom left. So the Southwest Corner that's Mhmm. 10 acres is owned by someone who spoke at the at at Public Comments. They have established the land use. Their land use that they have established, I'm sure you're aware of, and they could impact what you wanna do. And I guarantee that you will be able to impact how they feel about this part of Cast Valor. So my hopes, if there's some way as you go along, you both realize that you could be impacting one another and keep that in mind with your developed plans. K? Garrett, I appreciate the thought that we'll just make it RM, but we'll allow but we'll we'll we'll make it R2A, but we'll just waive all of the analysis that we go through when we write a new ordinance about frontages, setbacks, and how do things actually work when you draw loads and make lot sizes that are like this and like that and everything else. I mean, if if we if we wanna write a zone that says let's do our end density in a single family arrangement format, then let's figure out what that looks like, not just create that through a a a a bench amendment that doesn't look at all those details. I mean, these are complicated matters to see how things work and see how things lay out and see what this actually looks like when when all of these constraints get brought up. These guys aren't asking for us to write a new zone. They're coming to us. At least at this point, we haven't seen the development. They're coming to us asking us for the entitlement that existing zones have instead of saying, oh, let's just ignore that now.

Some of my thought process on that came from our discussion with when we took that tour of Nielsen Holmes. He said, the only way to achieve any of this is through development agreement. And so that was kind of my thinking on this is if you wanna achieve something, you might have to do it through a development agreement rather than, you know, codifying ordinance like that because that's how they said they would refer it.

And that's that was that was one of the reasons I was thinking that way. The reason they said that, the way I remember it, is they said, when you give a higher density zoning to a landowner and there's a potential buyer and the plan is under contract, often to include something like, we'll pay this contract amount if the the zoning is increased to this density. You have done exactly the wrong thing to create affordable housing because the higher zoning density means a higher value lease of property. And so the reason they said do this under development agreement was to not drive us as developers out of the market. And then we'll come back and patch all that up. What was zoned as a low density, we'll patch all that up with the with the development grid. Now I'm not sure I agree with that approach, by the way, because I believe a council that gives a zoning designation to a piece of property carries an expectation for people that live around that property, whether positive or negative. They are not gonna just throw that zoning away and write a whole new zone that fits in that context. Did I remember that correctly about why why the motivation for development? Yeah. I think I mentioned that. So

k. So we

are if the council is ready, we have an amendment to go on. And the amendment is to Southeast Parcel would be in the development agreement changed to RPA. Dan? You have second amendment? We have second enrollment. Mhmm. Nick. Yep. So to my recollection, Garrett made the a motion to amend, and they've made this second. I'm gonna give you Does Nick look confused? No. Okay.

Not at all.

He always looks like that.

He did do that. Yeah. Okay.

Are we ready to roll on the motion to amend? Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say aye. Aye. Those opposed, say nay. Nay. I'll break the tie with a nay. So we're back to the original motion.

Do Nathan's original motion? Okay.

Yeah. Nathan's original motion to adopt this development agreement as you said. Any other thoughts, session, amendments? Is there an opposition to voting? K. This is for second reading. I'm sorry. This is not for second reading. This is the agreement that would be binding it with passive, and then we'll get to the rest of it. So if there's no opposition to voting, I'm gonna proceed asking for a vote. Those in favor of adopting the development greeting, please say aye. Aye. And those opposed? And it's two to two. I'll break the tie with a aye vote. So the government agreement passes, and we're off to the next agenda item, which is annexation of this piece property with the zoning designation that was listed in the development.

May I make the motion to approve on those twenty six zero six? The motion from Nathan

and a second from Aaron. Discussion, please? Any opposition to COVID? Shall we call the roll, please?

Council member Malerson, what is your vote? In favor. Council member Mann? In favor. Council member Chenka? In favor.

Thank you. Nick, you are in favor. I guess. Yeah. Opposed. Opposed. Excuse me. Okay. So that's Three of three of them. Thank

you. Three in favor, one of them. Okay. I don't have anything to do except announce the result of the vote. So Okay. We've always three of them in favor. And thank you, counsel, for the discussion staff. Thank you, proponents. And state of birth, how about before we get to the public hearing, item 12 will take a take a short recess. So, yeah, I'll position you to that. No worries.

Watch as you're going through here.

It's

dead.

Yeah. You can just go for it. Okay, counsel. I will be back to session. This is to prepare Friday '13, but getting to there, let's talk about a public hearing. This is for development of Duct Duct Break Subdivision. We'll have an introduction from Nephi to help us understand issues involved, and then we'll go right to the public hearing. And k. Glad to glad to see you

on this. Do you do you want me to give there's not

on this, there's not really additional background other than we did meet with the applicant and explore some different ideas on the trail. But do you did you want me to give the background information that was given previously at No. At the last meeting? Okay. Yeah. I I don't last I don't think I need to discuss everything. We we just talked about the trail. I'll I'll let the applicant speak to any anything on that if if that comes up. I don't wanna put any words in his mouth on on kinda what what direction they might be going with that. But, yeah, there's other than that, there's not really anything new on this on this application.

I think to get intelligible, how we can look, we should understand what is the proposal, whether it's what we saw last time or whether that's something different. If it's the same we saw last time, I think we should look at that. If it's if it's something different because because one of the things was let's let's get together with an engineer and staff and talk about alternatives. And so if if that process brought up an alternative, then maybe we should look at it. If it did bring up an alternative, then let's just show what what is the proposal.

So I'll turn to you. Well, I I just have you.

He said we we met.

You have this?

I don't. No. I literally just we we met on Monday. I had this drawn up. It got done today. Yes.

On the screen. So the colleague's gonna stand up and tell us what they think about this proposal distributed.

To. Yeah. I

can probably I can probably get it on the screen if you wanna do that. It's gonna it's gonna take a few minutes. But well, act yeah.

I have to take it from Taylor. Yeah. He he he he he he he he he he he he he request whatever he did. He wanted to repeat that. When we get to the public part Oh, I thought we're.

We're we're getting information in preparation to the public. Gotcha.

There. I don't know if you wanna wait for me. It's gonna take it's gonna take a minute. I don't know if you wanna move on to some notes. But

So this shows the trail on the north open space being completed? Correct. Okay. That's a that's a that's one of the things you spend a lot of time talking about. That's the only thing I'm gonna put there. Okay. So I wanna make sure we're focused on them. Right? Yeah. But they're already cleaning. So, Levi, you might be just

I I'll get it on the screen. It'll just take me a minute. I just emailed it to myself. I took a picture of it, but it's I don't know how quickly it's gonna come through my phone and everything. So I'm waiting on it, but we can wait or I can kind of explain it here. I mean, in general, before that comes up, I'll put it on the screen. They if you can follow my cursor, they have shown in this proposal a trail approximately along this this corridor here Yep. Along kinda follows the contours of the of the area. So it would tie into Mount Vista, not not directly right on the north edge of the property, but would would come more toward the south edge of the open space and in a diagonal fashion.

Okay. And without getting into a policy discussion, I'll ask this. Do you believe that modification makes this plan compliant with the the BRAOMASIO plan?

Yeah. I would say it it does. Yeah.

Okay. That's the proposal that we're looking for

coming on from see if I got it.

Oh, there we go. Let me pull it up.

Might help if I turn it. Orientation.

Where we go here? Let's open.

Gonna turn it.

Turn. What are those buttons?

Something's gotta turn it. Yeah. North is north is to the right. How about that? So you can see that alignment there.

Right. Yeah. So that part that Levi is cursoring has been added to the proposal we saw.

Yeah.

Okay. Information from the council, questions, information will be the public hearing. It's okay. I'll open the public hearing and invite those of you that are here to speak to the council. Even have it list. They don't have to be on notice.

I don't see yet.

Discussion.

No. The way this works is the public gets a chance to comment and give advice to the council, and then the council goes into their own discussion.

I'll I'll start. I'll just read

it, Taylor. You're Ben Johnson. Right? I am Ben Johnson. You don't have to sign up to speak if the public hearing Oh, okay. As the proponent will let you speak throughout the process. Yeah. My name is Ben, Jonathan. I'm reading

Neil at the office of the council. We have it met in the group meeting from Taylor Hart, whose address 3510 South 550 West. Apparently. It says, in the last city council meeting, I need to comment on the opposition

to require the developer to install a path in the West part of development. Admitted admitted intent

of being purchaser of the open space. I would like to address that now. My wife owns and operates floral and landscape design business. We are currently trying to expand that business, particularly in growing these many of the power of ourselves and provide opportunities to showcase landscape designs. As long as we can agree on them with the developer on the purchase price, we do we will purchase building lots to the build home and the open space of our homes, both both of them now, usually, freely, on the North Side. We plan on growing a small orchard flowers and produce. We would like we also like to build a greenhouse to enable plants plant starts to grow earlier than the cash anywhere to the quick one. We'd also like to post community classes that focus on topics such as flower, plant, data design, and more topics. I believe these improvements all fall under acceptable land use for the open space. I'm not opposed to path existing along the northern border as it is. I do not, however, want some path to result in a lost freestand that goes along that slope. Additionally, any path that runs along the east side of the slope would be undesirable in our preliminary plan. While I feel strange making a request for my own personal benefit, it possibly it would be generally seen as the best decision for the community. I believe my family would be able to make this space truly beautiful and enchanting community. If the path is installed, I think across the open space, the new design will be your perfect. Rather than than border it, I would no longer be interested in being the being the if I do not purchase it, I am unaware of any other interest to do so, leaving it to the homeowner's association. I I do not believe each way would put the care and effort into it both completely and

drive it.

My plea is that the developer may last see the original submitted request. No path required to be installed. Right. They're not community continue to satisfy the community? Thank you. They're taking consideration well-being in community or open spaces.

Thank you, Paul. And do we have, for the record, who was speaking?

Yeah. Yeah. Anyone else? Becky?

And if you have questions about the proposal, we're happy to try to answer those. We won't debate Aussie at this point, but we'll try to answer we'll try to give information.

I agree with Taylor. He is quite friendly and do a great job with great members of the community. Unified I have some kind of business that you guys are really unfortunate Then living in that area made that area beautiful. I feel you know, I walk these paths off, and I live right there. I feel like there's plenty of accessibility. I feel like it gives exactly the purpose, which is that you can connect from one area to another. You might have to walk through houses, but let's be honest, this is not going to stay a big open green space. You know, we're developing it, so there's going to be houses regardless. I think that the it still works. Right? You're still able to think that to from one place to the next.

So that's, I guess

Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

K. I see the head head shapes, which would indicate now, and therefore, I will close the public carrier and turn this to the council for discussion and consideration as a development agreement for the Dub Creek Subdivision. This is in whatever we're calling it now, an open space subdivision.

I I did forget one thing in the background, if I might add, Mara, that there was that there has been a modification to to the existing agreement just clarifying maintenance. There was one that said it was the HOA's responsibility. It was it was added or or private property owner in that in that instance. Nate brought that up in the first reading. So there that was added to what's what's what's in the draft agreement.

Okay. And, also, we are picking this up as a council for a second reading from where we left off in first reading, which would be language that says the development has to conform to the master code plan.

Right. So it omits item 11. That speaks to those those issues on the Item 11 of the development. Development agreement. Yeah. So that's that's that's the version that's in the packet. So that's what's in front of you. So that's where we're starting.

Well, Dan, I I I appreciate the work you put in on this. I'll I'll say that. I I think last time he said, well, it's this or it's this, and there's no in between. And, hopefully, with working with city staff, so on and so forth, we I mean, to me, this this looks like something in between those two extremes. So I I I thank you for for working on that. Yeah. And then as a proponent, we welcome you to speak as the council aide gets into this or before we must get into this. So Yeah. May I please?

I I mean, I don't know if there's anything you said before before we kinda get into it, except to echo the words of of the mayor. He said, listen to people who are who are there instead. People that are he he didn't feel that he had the expertise or the councilor's expertise to speak for people in certain areas. And I think it's a perfect example. Everyone who's directly living by this and is gonna be is gonna be most affected by this. They've spoken to you. They've all said that they've for original plan even though it doesn't conform to that

master drip plan. So that's info. I have a I have a question from the Yeah. Public comment that you read. Are you under contract with that person Under contract? For the sale of property?

No. I can't. You know, legally, I can't sell anything reports. You could be under contract.

You could say, given these contingencies, I will sell you No. So no no no contracts anymore. You have talked about selling that property as his letter indicated.

Yeah.

Yeah. People, yeah, people already

contacted and settled. Okay. Lots of

I don't know paperwork.

It's plus. Okay. Thank you. Good. Hang around. You can stand right there. Counsel, it's up to you.

I just wanna, you know, tell Ben thanks because my colleague, we met we met we met at the property, and we bought all the property. And while we were there, we've done dozens of cans of motorbikes and everything running all over Chris from the mechanic. Oh, Chris. Yeah. Mhmm. We're both of these. Of that property right now. And we we talk different options, and I appreciate that. And then for a hot Friday afternoon, you know, when I don't have any discussion that as I see this plan and hear that on the letter and stuff, I guess the one question I would have is, you know, would it make sense then to put another connection through?

Just maybe look at the platform. But Yeah.

Yeah. It's a lot of Sorry. I can't figure out in terms of the thing. Yeah.

Let me do that. This one? To go back to the region.

Yeah. Add the sort of where the circle is over

Kinda in there. On the left. Yeah. I don't think this Yeah. Space.

Five and four.

Yeah. It's four and five.

What is see if you find this next. You're talking about.

Like, either right well, right here or right here. Right there. So that's 4, that's 5, and that's 6. So But you brought the term between

the client and forming no connection. That need code. I'm it's just that we we just saw. We discussed a couple of things, and this is the first thing I have. And so I'm just Potentially But

I think you've answered through the call stack.

Yes. You said that.

There I can do sidewalk and go up because you're also sent to your.

Yeah. You mean you mean you'd be a big trail straight through here. Yeah. And then they're still keep that. Yeah.

That's that's Yeah. Option that needs to be code because, you know, I feel like there needs to be some connectivity there.

Is

that a is that a would be would be happening? Or, I mean mhmm.

There let me let me ask you this. If if you're walking on a trail, would you prefer to walk through open space on that trail or walk between people's lots? Open space. Thanks.

May I ask the question, please? Yes. So for Ben, last time, since we were here, you mentioned you were concerned that in order to put the trail along the Bayard Trail Match Plan indicates that you have to cut down three, both the bigger stand on East side and then maybe all the trees on the west side. With this that you just handed us today, what do you do you still feel that way that you need to cut all the trees and cover the canal on the west side or cut any trees on the East Side?

Well, Well, I mean, that's something I was

we were discussing with Gary over there. Again, it just depends on what the canal company makes me do. Right? So we're going right over to canal, and it's pipe. Right? We're gonna keep going. But, I mean, they are pitching fifth. It's not filled with trees. Yeah. So there's a very good chance that it's getting with the new design that we are proposing that we have to cut all those trees down and pipe. On the West Side. On the West.

Have you do you have any communication within the trees since we last met? No.

Okay. To see what what was gonna be.

Okay.

Did you mentioned having spoken with Sean dust Sean Dustin. Correct? What's the law? Just

To the north. To the North.

And have you and Sean spoken in the last three weeks about options for for different trail alignment, maybe you want it's property?

I added just because, like, in the last meeting, there was not much of a chance of that being there. The council said there was at one point a not a right away, I guess, easement, but it's not currently on any drawing plan. So I thought that was a much longer process than it is.

Okay. That's that's very important. Thank you.

If you're looking for leverage with the Nibley Blacksmith for Canal Company and trees next to a canal, remind them of what their canal on Hollow Road looks like.

Alright. I'll bring that up. I won't I won't deny

Yeah. That they think they might have leverage because you're developing their eSync. But Right. You know, you can ask what is the impact of trees next to that canal compared to the impact of trees on their canal system. Yeah. Yeah. So so Thank you. Yeah. Sure. But, Garrett, Nick, do you have a question we have? So with this new

proposal, does this have to go back to any mission for the trial?

I I don't think so. I I think we could work through it just to final plat stage. Okay. Yeah.

Oh, well, so the the the the in this with viewpoints, the trail that basically should have a lot on on both sides. Would that would that enforce any weird fence height regulations? Yep. Well,

there's a there's a provision in the code on fences that if it's adjacent to, like, a park area, that's not allowed. I'm not sure on a private open space. I'd have to look at that closer whether that would But we're talking to find a developable lot of Yes. On the East Side. Oh, an an existing lot or or or one of these lots? Oh, that one. Okay. Yeah. So it I I have to look at the code more closely. I'd I it might for a portion of it. Yeah. Because, like I said, we do have a we do have a provision that doesn't require it if it's adjacent to, like, a park, public, but I think it says a park, like a city. So Yeah. And and I know, like, for example, Mount Vista right next to you, we have that question with several fences in there of do they need to be you know, they need to meet those trail requirements. There's a there's a trail corridor, but from from my interpretation looking at it, that's a park space. It's a it's an HOA managed park, but so that wasn't imposed for most of those. I mean, except in areas where it's, you know, literally just a trail or, like, between the houses. So you kinda have to parse hairs on the on those things depending on the application, but

they might on a couple of those. Sorry. Just to interrupt, is that mean the the, you know, the lot owners, the you know, for the building house, they wouldn't be able to put a fence up? They can put a fence up, but there there's a there's a maximum

instead of building, like, a six foot fence, they could build a five foot fence, and the top foot of it needs to be 75% transparent, or it could be fully transparent. So there's just some restrictions on the fence

along trail borders. So they'll they'll have them Okay.

And they can't put

There are some, yeah, there are some restrictions, which which, again, I'm not I have to check to see if that would apply in this context or not. I I think it might.

So we can put up the fence. There's a limitation on the opacity height. Yeah.

Yeah. But, again, I'm not quite sure if it applies here because it says trail corridor. I mean, this is open space, adjacent. So some of these are you you gotta kinda make a call when you're reviewing the applications depending on the context.

If I may one more, let me make a

comment. So we've got in this proposal, there's a trail right in the middle of the cul de sac and then obviously into the north. Is it written in agreement? If it is, I apologize. I missed it. Who how do we connect to an existing trail network to the west? Who pays for that?

So the one of the recommended or one one of the conditions of approval for the subdivision or the the trail that's connecting through the cul de sac is that they'd have to get an easement from Mount Vista to build that. Okay.

That's it for me, Nancy. Yeah. Eric, did you have something? Yep.

Thank you. Nathan?

I I just need some clarification on what we're doing here. We are voting on a development agreement that initially had a suggestion that the trail in the North would not have to follow the master plan and go all the way through. Our current vote is that we remove that and add language about whoever owns time and space rather than just specific to HOA. These maps and preliminary plan could still change. Yes. Like, these aren't part of the development agreement. There's no dictation of where these things are going in this development agreement. What are what steps have already been accomplished, I guess? They've already gotten the approval for the preliminary plat,

but with the condition that they that that they, yeah, make a trail connection.

And the council is weighing on this development agreement in part because there's a conservation law of less than half an acre created by this this this matter. And so the council actually has to do development agreement grant that that part of the code, which is point four nine Four four. Yeah. Point four four instead of point five that that that the proponent would receive waiver of that part of the OpenSpace code. So it's a little weird because the development agreement went outside of existing code one to not require something on the master trail plan and also to allow less than a conservation lot of less than point five acres.

Right.

Correct. Yeah. Those were with two exceptions that the council is waiting.

Right. And then there are other provisions in the development agreement because at this point, the the council is the approval authority or the development agreement because that triggered that. But and we can discuss any of those other provisions, but but, really, the rest of those are pretty boilerplate. I'll just just to say that. I mean, we can read through those.

Can I get a confirmation?

Just that one?

Yeah. I mean and and, technically, to clarify, if if if they built a a trail that didn't just go straight along the northern border border, they would likely create another one, but that exception is in the agreement already. So I think So the point I think that's covered. Correct. It's This one. It's yeah. Kinda north Northeast Corner. Unless the council says otherwise because the council really has the has the authority on on whether to grant that exception. It could if if they follow that alignment that that we showed up on the screen. It it could it could carve it into couple more.

Could be three pieces. Yeah. It could be three,

which and and and Tom pointed this out. We require rights of way. There may depending on how legally it's it's divided up, if that's just recorded as an easement, you could make the argument that it's one lot with an easement going through it. But but we felt like, you know, the code points to dedicating a right of way, that really carves it up into another lot. So we just wanted to be as transparent as possible with what we're doing and meeting the code, make making sure that we don't go, oh, does that really meet this or not? Does that make make sense? So

So in cruising around on the parcel viewer, I'm not sure I could point to it immediately, but I swear I've seen lots that are the aggregate of non continuous pieces of property. Now whereas those on the East Side, those two lots that were created by the trail could have been one lot and could still be one lot.

Yeah. I guess that's what I was saying is depending on how that's recorded,

you could consider. That one, not Anyway Yeah. So the lot not to the north and south, but maybe to the west. Even though even if there's a right of way, it goes through a lot, right, that doesn't necessarily divide one lot into two.

Right. Am I There yeah. Yeah. That's what you're saying. There could be a way there there's probably a way around it, but but this is granting that exception to just say, yeah. There could be that smaller lot. I mean, that's what that's what's shown here is that there's an open space lot that's point four four acres and then an open space lot that's, I think, point eight three. Yeah. And it's and it's just saying that's fine. We're we're okay with that. And and the difference is

a lot has to be owned whether it's continuous space, contiguous space, or whether it's in two different noncontiguous spaces, a lot has to be owned by one entity. Mhmm. So here, we're allowing separate ownership of those two lots. Yes.

What else?

So on that note, I brought some last time that I appreciate, you know, for going away and talk to neighbors and things, but I just really don't want time at Southern Open Space. I'm not really meeting the intent of the Open Space or at least I don't know if it's I don't know what percentage is of being able to view it in public space, etcetera. I mean, like, to me, yeah, it sounds appropriate. Right? Like, shifting everything down and just kind of consolidating open space, to me, makes way more sense. And I don't know if we, the city, didn't have we officially abandoned our efforts for the trail that's to the lot, the north from the other side of the canal? I believe there was work as many or property.

No. That it's between lots. It's between So it's a right of way between lots.

Yeah. So the Werner there there was there was a there was an easement on that. Honestly, when we looked at that one, there there were a lot of challenges Yeah. With that, and this seems like a lot better alignment.

But, like, we we're still not easement on that. Mhmm. I mean, compared to making budget.

Yeah. And so this This is preferred. I think it fulfills the the master plan.

So when you call me, we go tend to talk more about my own opinions. I I feel like it's happening. What I'm thinking. So I'm gonna contemplate for a minute. I'll try to be to your point. Last time, some of the things we talked about seem to equate a sidewalk to a trail. And, frankly, I I don't think that's the case. There's something neat about being on a trail that is there just for pedestrians, and we need to get the stinking motorbikes off there, by the way. Because they don't they're not allowed on city trails. But, I mean, you can talk about the uniqueness of being on a pedestrian throughway as opposed to right next to a a a a road. And and then we can talk about the number of conflicts between cars and pedestrians on a trail versus the number of conflicts between cars and pedestrians on a sidewalk with driveways, with intersections, and cross streets. So and then I think for this proposal, if it if it goes the way of the latest proposal, again, thank you. I I don't I don't need to make that point, but I don't think we should ever get in the habit of saying, well, there's a sidewalk that's as good as a trip. Otherwise, we wouldn't need a trip plan. We just require sidewalks and we're done. So

Erin? Can I go back to Nathan's question or point about this open space on the South Side? Can we just jog my memory? Are the current homes on the South side of this property buying? Are we alright. Is this getting divided up and purchased by the trunk, or is this staying as open space and being cared for by the HOA? I think one contiguous piece, they can't purchase

separately. So the one continuing piece, and then mount this is actually gonna be mine.

Now this is buying this piece on the South, and they're gonna be painted?

Is there a contract on that?

Yeah. I was gonna ask they just said they want them. There's no contract in place. They just said we we want that. That's

Okay. This piece reminded me a lot of small, skinny island that we have in our future, Nible Meadows Park, around the 12 plus, the Midwest.

Yes. Yes.

Yeah. Nibley Barnes Subdivision.

I also need this. I think this piece is not programmable. It's not possible to put a playground in there. It's terrible for visual, like, as a parent. If if there's something on there, I can't see my kid on their side. There's no access to it really from and no parking. So I think it doesn't make sense to have the open space with that, but I'm home to all of them. So

yes. But it's getting held privately. So, yeah, we're not we're 20 different. We're not even trying to make part of it. Yeah. Nobody can do anything.

Right. So even just visually, I'm not sure how bad it benefits. It is pride I mean, if if there's a walking trail, I don't know. Is it a sprinting path maybe? I'm just it had a hard time envisioning for this. But I do I think I like I appreciate the the clarification here in this piece that you had us tonight. I think that makes sense. I think it's where she'd go on that forklift.

Nathan?

I don't like us getting in the habit of the city

creating open space where they're private or public

with simply offers people from The United to this small of a group. I think that's the concern. Right? We've seen it not work. I also think that if if if a private entity is interested in putting a trail in there, then somebody can talk about it.

Right?

Where where there's this kind of in the air of what who's gonna own and what to do with the open space. I'm not on a hard time with that. You know, I'm voting on the development agreement. Or the flat. And I I understand that they're they're they're trying to get it. Right? And and I think that's Yeah.

I'm prone to say, throw them a balloon back in there.

I won't show it as a whole thing through, because I think that's what this proposal's accomplishing trying to accomplish now. It doesn't mean a bank. Does that make sense? And and and where we over that's why I asked about clarification and what are we going to do here? Because there's the elements

being less. I mean, really, you're voting on those two exceptions Yeah. And the and the rest of the provisions of those development agreements. The plat that's that's and the subdivision, that is squarely in the hands of the planning commission. So that's that's where it's it's difficult because it is tied to it, but the particulars of the design of the of the subdivision really is the approval authority is is the planning commission.

And looking and looking at that commission is bound by code. By code. Yeah. It it's not we like it or don't like it. And and that's to me, I I went on and on about this with where we have evolved to on open space subdivisions is we are supposed to be conserving land that is valuable to the con to the open space subdivision. But what land is conserved and should be conserved for the community depends on who you ask. And so we have made code that says it's too hard to go in and start negotiating about we like the way that looks or we don't like the way that it looks. And we like what you're accomplishing with the open space or we don't like with what you're accomplishing because we have made a list of things in the open space subdivision that say, if you do this, three out of ten Six. Six. You usually have a six, you're entitled to an open space subdivision. And so that's not really what we're debating tonight as to whether we like that strip of open space or don't because they I assume the planning commission with Levi's Health did their job and said, that strip is compliant with code. What's not compliant with code is not building the trail and allowing a small smaller than half acre lot. So it's really we're not we're not looking at that plat. Okay? Except to say there's gonna be a trail there, and we're gonna let a smaller than half acre conservation lot go in. And I wish it went so.

But But the the state has said that the city council can't approve subdivisions. They can approve development agreements with that need an exception like this one

because it's a legislative decision. It's not an administrative one. And and, frankly, deciding what's our value to the community when it comes to open space subdivisions, to me, is a legislative decision. And so I I know where we are. I'm not I'm not Mhmm. Blaming you or the state of the planning commission. I just back in the golden age, open space subdivisions, we had conversations that were meaningful about pushing houses back off of okay. Okay. Cottonwoods, off Apollo Road. We had meaningful discussions about let's preserve that roof of cottonwood trees. We had meaningful discussions about what it was that was valuable to the community. Now as meaningful as it was to me, it was incredibly frustrating to the development because what do I have to do? Well, you have to go negotiate with city council to decide what you're gonna conserve instead of saying, hey. I got people who wanna buy that land. I'm gonna conserve that land and sell it to them with the conditions of it being a conservation well. So it's it's very frustrating to a developer to have to not to not have a set of rules that they have to live up to.

I will add, though, Larry, that there is some of that in the process. It may not be as it doesn't have to be collaborative with the community, but we do require a survey of the land, of the sensitive lands, and and and, really, there there's an intent and a and a push toward preserving those areas, you know, like in this case, the canals and and the tree stands, the steep slopes. So there is there's some of that in there. It's not it's not necessarily as collaborative with the community, but there there's a discussion. It's more administrative. It's more formulaic of, hey. This is what we see on there. This is where that should go. The planning commission makes the decision, and it's done.

Yeah. I'm asking for conservation space to be context sensitive. Right. And we can't write code that's context sensitive to one place. We can be general about the things you mentioned. Yeah. Does that help me? Do you know what we're considering? We're considering that development agreement, And plan is related to that development agreement. The two items were was an exception to the code. I don't think the rest of the plan is up to a legacy process. It's already written by code and one mission looked at it and said, yep. It needs code. EMS with

us. Are you willing to vote on it? Just just for my I I have a point. I said so I was remote, but just just wanna make sure I fully understand. So we're developing essentially the exception to the last size plus the decision of the council is required.

Yes. Yes. So you could pull up the red Yeah.

Mhmm. Just make sure. Because we can't full service computer.

Yeah. So here's the red line version. I think everything else is the same, but these It's two negative. The the

omitted that. Yeah. The reading number one eliminated the omission. So you'll appreciate it. Maybe two wrongs by two wrongs make a right by that sentence or two rights make a right.

Yeah.

So in there? Yep. Yeah. Alright. Yeah. Are we ready to vote?

I'm ready.

Oh, that's even better. Let's do that. I'm gonna have a motion

to approve the presented accepting the smaller, the pound paper open space and removing term 11. She wants to be accepting Exemption yeah. Exception is due to pharmacy.

Okay. Which is how we left it in the first room, as I understand. So we have a motion from there. Now second from nay. For the development agreement, it's presented with the red line on the board. Further discussion, thoughts? Ben, would you be the last word? Any opposition to voting? Saying none. Sarah, will you please call the ball?

Council member,

In favor. Council member. In favor.

In favor. Council member Keith. In favor.

I count that form in favor and not opposed, and I didn't have to vote. I can't. I'm just slowly can't can't can't be get you back in the house. I'm gonna

run for a care system.

Let's press on to item 14. Thank you for your patience. Ben, go ahead. Sorry. You have Just for clarification for us, Peden, so we don't because I don't understand the message quorum here.

It was approved. Trail needs to still be still needs to be put in. Platt is staying as is. Trail is put in.

Yeah. Because we can't change that. We can't change your plat. Right. If you put the files on it, then you follow them. Yeah. You know? You follow the code on Yeah. So your next step is final flat. Yeah.

You wanna change the flat.

Yeah.

Go back to get preliminary again. You don't wanna change bound for yourself. I'm not touching the darn thing. You wouldn't have to come back here to get the exceptions looked at. So if I'm getting the exception, you would have to come back to the okay. You're not gonna No. Don't.

I'm already halfway till spring.

Other than, though. Well, you know, it could be cool. Thank you for your time. Next second. Okay. Another

So in our code, it talks about we don't allow people with that kind of freeze in open space. And that might come in conflict sometimes with our friends at the irrigation department. Who's the irrigation company's preference? Hello? I would like to know which one.

Because it should might.

In my opinion, it's pretty valid.

Probably a legal question. Yeah.

And and we had the same thing. I

We

prefer not. We prefer not. We are competitors. We prefer. So that if we could ask

who wins, who who is who's the designer.

Mhmm. I love that.

Just just make it so we always win. Yeah.

Even if we have the ability in our instances, we always win. That'd be great. It's not a waste of all of that. Yeah. This this this there is going to be an open space.

K. And for me, Levi, please introduce this development agreement, how it will take place.

Alright. Please. K. This wasn't on purpose, but I noticed on the agenda, each development has gotten a little smaller and smaller. So this one is is a development agreement for 504158 Hollow Hollow Road Subdivision, which has received approval by the planning commission for the preliminary plat. But the applicant is proposing through this development through this development agreement and exception to the requirement for curb gutter and sidewalk. Little more background on this. The going through the review process, Nibley City code requires curb gutter and sidewalk on the, you know, the entire subdivision. The applicant went went through the Utah State Ombudsman. They issued an opinion on this. And and, really, we based on their opinion, it's it's an unlawful exaction if we require curb, bedroom, sidewalk along the entire frontage. They said it could be allowed along the frontage of the new lot. So that this is the context. There's already house on this, on this property. They're splitting the lot in half. They'll build a new house on the other on the other half. But so so what they propose with their preliminary plat was to include that sidewalk sidewalk improvement along the frontage of the new the the parcel that has the new house. They being the ombudsman. Well, the applicant the applicant proposed that with with the preliminary plat, but then through this process of development agreement, they're asking for an exception to that requirement, which if if granted, you know, the next step would be a final plat that would not, you know, not not require that that curb bedroom sidewalk improvement. Little more context. You can see on on the screen here that's that you see kind of these two lots, and then that is the stretch that would require, curb and sidewalk.

The

so this has been reviewed by staff and the planning commission. The recommendation on this is is to grant approval of the ordinance, but with with the condition that the applicant be required to pay a fee in lieu of the required improvements. There is a provision in in the code that's cited there that points to points to a fee in lieu, and and that's what that's what staff and planning commission is recommending. This just a little bit more context. This sidewalk, there's as if you may be familiar with with Hollow Road, there's limited sidewalks along there. I mean, there are along con roads. That's pretty much it. And so the idea here is that they they would still be required to pay a fee in lieu. And when the city improves the road to expand this or to to include a sidewalk along this section, they could use the funds to to improve that. But since, you know, the sidewalk doesn't connect any anywhere, it's kind of an island. Currently, we're sent our staff is supportive and and planning commission is supportive of of allowing for the the fee in in loop, but that's that's not what the applicant has proposed the applicant's proposing just to not

require the the curb button in sidewalk. So So let me ask the question, and I'll turn it to Mike. Mhmm. What zone is this in?

This is in the R 1 A zone. Yeah. So it's so, yeah, there is a provision in the code that that does I mean, I would say without a special development agreement like this, allow the approval body to say in the rural estate zone, not to require a sidewalk in those areas. This is this isn't in the rural estate zone. It is adjacent. It is it is, you know, close to but I think it's adjacent. I think rural states. Right? Yeah. Well, so we Yeah. But it's but it's not in the rural state zone. If it's lower, it wouldn't be

allowed subdivision because this would not create two acre lots.

Right. Right. But it's it could still be granted, obviously. That's why this is in front of you today. If if the plan if the city council feels it appropriate, it's your discretion if you wanna if you wanna grant this exception.

Michael, up to the council. I think that that is.

Yeah.

I've I've kind of made a statement with all that hopefully, but, like, it's three. They've regulated the with, yep, Cities can do.

My my understanding is that fee in lieu is, like, when this

we understand for this for a fee in lieu. Right? We understand that there's going to be a side lock, and so but not now. And so we'll do a fee in lieu to do the sidewalk. And so this one, I feel like I mean, it's still in question if they're ever gonna do a sidewalk. And so my possibly, do we still need the fee in lieu? And if we do, that'd be helpful for the power of proof. Long power of the long distance. Let me know if you have any questions.

Okay. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. Questions from the council? It's up to you for consideration. So a motion or anything else we can do or discussion in the discussion. I'm sorry.

Yeah. So, and I just have two questions. So a fan movement does mean it has to be used in this area. Right? Can't use the orange if you take a fan movement. Is that correct? Has it be used for the improvements for waiting some future period?

I mean, that that's my understanding unless there's some other agreement that that both parties come to. Because it is it is an agreement. So it's it it could be something else, but that I think that's the intent

of it that that we've that we've laid out. K. So it could be something else because we're talking about an agreement that goes beyond the

I think it can. I mean, I know there's precedents in other agreements that we've had that that it it could be you it could you could contribute for for other purposes in order to get the, you know, some kind of benefit. I know there's there's been other development agreements, bigger developments that that that's been the case. But I think what we've communicated with the applicant, what the intent of the recommendation is that, yeah, would be tied to this this agreement, and that and that, I feel like, is in the spirit of the of a fee and lieu.

Right. And and the state law, no one making all those fees because you don't see it in the sidewalk ever being down at the moment. The people in the bathroom were made very pretty. And it just you know, I mean, one by a time. So

I mean, Mary, you know what I mean? Well, let's let's answer your first question. Your first question was, is there a time limit on when the so you've you've asked the spatial question. Mhmm. Does a fee in lieu have to be spent on this sidewalk that's asking for relief? And then you've asked the temporal question. Does it have to be said within a certain amount of time? Yeah. And then we can talk about other stuff after that. So you tell me.

I I don't have a good answer to that. I've I've heard different I've heard different things. I've I'm I'm not a legal expert on that one. I know we've had fees and lose for longer than that, and then we had to deal with them later. But

So we took $500,000 from

Regional engineering.

Regional. Regional management. Almost for twenty nine twenty twenty nine for South. And were we gonna build that for sure? Do we know that? Are we gonna do what our ordinance says, and we're gonna put that in the growth fund?

I think in that specific case, it was specifically taken out that it had to be spent on 2900, and it there's no strings attached. That was the case.

Yeah. I mean, like, 50 years. Fifty years. I just foresee.

And and what what's happened is that it's not going. They build a home and it's not a property and they do. You just get back to them later when they moved?

No. Maybe it can be a few minutes because these are the.

You know, could you start with it or do you just stay here? Well, I think there's this question. Does it have to be spent on this property? And then there's the if it has to be spent in this property, how long does the city have

to sit? So So what Levi has said, he thinks in this context, it does. We can make it to the developer

that it be where it be used. Okay. I don't see that in development agreement. It's not in there. I mean, that I'm just saying that's been the intent. That's what we've we've just we've communicated that. But as far as what the council

approves

And I'm I don't I don't in the ombudsman's opinion. Read that, Yana? No. Site.

Right. Right.

Yeah. I just wanted to point out that that was what we've communicated as the intent for the fee and lieu. But but whatever the council wants to do, I think there's some there's discretion. This is a legislative

decision in front of you. Yeah. So let me answer the question you asked after the fee in lieu, and that is, is there ever gonna be a side of a firm hold? I highly doubt. There's history. There's somewhat first of all, the acquisition of property is beyond belief. People that own property to the middle of it. I don't think there's ever gonna be a sidewalk on Hollow Road, and I don't think there should be. Now if you wanna talk about some other things we could do for pedestrian safety and bikes beside the building sidewalk, that's for another sketch. My worry is to eliminate the fee in lieu of everyone in R 1 A, any developer in R 1 A in fact, any developer in any of our residential zones, we have exposed ourselves to the idea that even though we require you to build a sidewalk, I'm gonna come and ask that I don't have to build a sidewalk. Why? Because my place is special. The place that I'm developing is special. Now Hall Road, I'll be the first to say, is a very special place, and I know why you're chuckling. But but, especially, it's hard to define. And, I mean, a developer could come to us and say, well, look. This this is gonna require this and this and this and this and their slopes, and it's gonna cost me this much money. And there's something very unique about the thing that I'm developing. And and I believe our residents expect us to hold developers to the standard that we have created in code. And I worry about giving exceptions to developers. I'm sorry to put you in that case, but tonight, you're a developer. To all to expose us to, hey. I don't think I should have to build a sidewalk because I can give you some special exceptions as to what I'm doing in different part time.

Yeah. To respond, I'm not sure that it's such a case of special or not special so much that it's consistency. But

I think we're saying the same. Yeah. I I think Take special and replace it with unique. Yeah. So it's unique. System. And and Good. I'm wondering

if requiring this sidewalk, hermit that we put in would make it feel more awkward to have it there when when Hollow Road is for the for much of it built out as far as, like, a lot frontage right along the road. I mean, there's lots lots of open spaces for pineapples

on both sides of the road, but not as much space right on the road.

So it's it's gonna feel inconsistent to have nothing, nothing, nothing, one side of the road, then literally nothing until you get down to not I'm not saying it. Maybe not even to get done. I can't remember. But it feels like it will be awkward placement.

Yeah. I don't think it should go outside. Yeah. I'm not saying it goes. Okay. You're right. I'm already being Okay. I think you're already putting a You're saying to another develop. So they inconsistent about you building a spend on your on your project. I get it. I'll take the word special away. It's inconsistent for it doesn't make sense for you to put a sign. Yeah. But we think you should pay for the sidewalk and move, frankly, maybe judge tell us we can't use it somewhere else.

I mean, that that's my only hang up. To build a sidewalk for kids to get to school up. I mean, that's my only hang up is we take a few MO, which I agree with a lot of what you're saying. You know? We just have a standard. We have that. Well, I mean, that's why my question is and it has to be used for this, and we know it's never going to happen. And, you know, like he even said, there's never gonna be sidewalk at all. Maybe some kind of different, but not a sidewalk. Is there really a point in taking the fee in room if that has to be used for something that will never be built?

Will will the next developer convince you of that as well?

You think to be a predator?

No. Another developer in another part of town, even Urban Money or r two a or RM says it doesn't make sense to build a sidewalk here. I know your code wants it, but it doesn't make sense to build a sidewalk here.

So relieve me of that, and don't make me pay recompense. I see what you're saying, but I mean, does it make sense for us to take a fee under the for the next hundred years just since the name?

Unless who says it's gonna sit into an account? Be used elsewhere. Unless it can be used elsewhere. That's the question.

I mean, you can tell me Maybe that's a legal

question. I I wonder if we That's okay.

Yeah. I want I wonder if we Sure. It sounds like we're getting a little bit hung up where the council's getting a little bit hung up on that question of, k. Does this have to be used on the sidewalk on Hollow Road? I know the applicant has argued and said it it should.

And there's more. The the applicant has an email from the ombudsman that says, this raises red flags and points out the problems that that could be associated with this. Is it is it a is it a in kind of action? But the letter from the ombudsman was not an official opinion. Right. The research wasn't there like the Westmore official opinion. And the letter and the email from the ombudsman said and by the way, there this new city has no chance has had no chance to rebut this. So

we've got So so, I mean, I think it might be good to get a legal opinion from our attorney on if that if that's factoring into the decision of whether to approve this as staff and planning commission has recommended, can do do we have to use this fee in lieu for, you know, improvements along the front of this spot and within a certain amount of time. Right. Yeah. And from let me question. I I'm not an attorney. I'm not gonna Yeah. I mean, I pointed out some examples out there, but I don't really know in this case. I'm not an attorney. I'm not gonna try to say, you know, the the answer to that question.

Between versus

Mhmm. Yeah. Because that's the whole.

So let me let me just talk about one of the things that makes this weird. Right? No offense to you guys. You live in an R 1 A and you have you're entitled to what R 1 A entitles with you. Since for twenty five years, I've looked at zoning maps, especially on Hollow Road, and I've always wondered why almost all of Hollow Road is are real estate, Two acre lots. Except a little strip that parallels Highway 165, that's R 1. Now a little strip further off of 165, that's R 180. And I wondered, which, as far as I can tell, happened somewhere in the mid nineteen seventies when rural state was even created. And also that creation of rural state created a bunch of nonconforming blocks. Well, go look at the parcel viewer. Right? Mhmm. Yeah. But the weird thing is whoever was the body the the council that was adopting the zoning map, it didn't say Hollow Road is rural estate. Hollow Road is rural estate except these strips of land that parallel 165. And that became an issue on the Cottonwoods Open Space Division because everyone said, that's that's rural estate. It's like, no. It's not. It's R 1 and R 1 A. And and so that's the weird part, and I can't explain historical weirdness because I can't get back into the minds of whoever made that decision in the mid seventies. But that's the way it is, and that's what makes it harder. If it was if it was our real estate, right,

because

the item just before this item three, the council has the city. It doesn't say who the decider is, but the city can waive the sidewalk requirement in agricultural and rural estate to preserve the agricultural setting. You know? Let's say, wait it. But, again, Michael, if you were in rural estate, we wouldn't be talking about the subdivision of property because it wouldn't be allowed. So it's it's it everything has two sides of the coin.

Yeah.

Erin? Can I have a motion Please? To approve or just what do you say it's allowed in for first reading?

We have a motion from Aaron. We have a second from Garrett. Motion is to approve, this development agreement for first greeting. So that means that if this passes, that means we'll have a chance for staff to do some research, answer some questions we've identified as a very important one. How how long should we wait for the ombudsman to come back with an opinion? Because our our attorney will give an opinion. We haven't really seen an opinion from the adolescent. We've seen an email, but that's a high that's a rhetorical question. I know you guys have felt frustrated with how long this has taken.

So

discussion on motion to approve the first reading with with the expectation that we try to answer the legal question of space and time about v in lieu of

The time too. Yeah. Spend

on that space in in some time. And what and and when we're talking about motion, what else what else do we need to answer?

I wanna say whether or not v in lieu is even okay. Right? It was an exaction. Yeah. Rather than saying exact, this is a fact. I'm not a law. Exactly. And so it is. It's what what is what is

if what is unlawful is if we would have required it along both lot one and lot two, but they said that it was allowed along lot one, the new lot. The new lot. So the so the fee in lieu is just for the improvements along

that one. Yeah. Button was clear on that that we can't require curb and sidewalk.

On the old lot and the new lots or on That's good.

But the other one, I think, was clear. Mike, you agreed. The other one said, yeah, city could require curb and gutter

on the new lot. Yeah. It needs to yeah.

Then so I I think it's it's a question about who is Blue Ocean.

Just a question for me. I mean, my bigger picture question Sort of I mean, this is the context of the question. I mean, the whole part of the session, but it's got more about our code. Is there something in our code the staff interpreted originally that the question was, do we need to require it on both lots? And then we got, obviously, the ombudsman's opinions, which, I guess, begs the question to me. Is there some Gremlin in our code that we need to look at that says, can based on our interpretation, we are original suggestions required both, and we need to address that to you.

I mean, I I I think that's something to look at in the future. I think I don't think we need to hang up this application. Okay. But I think but I think that's something we should maybe have some legal review on our on our subdivision code. I think there was a conflict, at least in the way that staff interpret our code, the way we, you know, gave that information to the applicant the the information we gave to the applicant based on what was in our code and what this the state ombudsman, how they interpret state exaction law. So Sorry. So, you know, it they could be that we need to clarify that in our code in the future that if it's a developed lot, that's gotta be well defined. I think this this was this is a pretty pretty good case, right, because you've got you only have two lots here. They get more it probably gets more complicated from there on what constitutes a developed lot. But

Yeah. And there's clearly a residential application of the existing lot Yeah. That's been there for a long time. It's just Yeah. I think I think it

that's gonna be one we gotta contemplate maybe different context and how it might apply because there's developments come in all different contexts. So

The other thing is that we we have, I think, a great working relationship with the ombudsman, which is a little bit ironic because the ombudsman does not represent the city. The ombudsman represents the individual property rights, not the community. So while I certainly respect the ombudsman's opinion, believe that full blown opinions or well researched is not thought out, and there's a chance for communities to respond and so on and so forth. It's not law. The judge decides law.

Nathan? Is there still East Hampton involved here?

Right of way? They didn't they didn't ask for an exception on that. So I think Right. We would we would still ask for that. And, actually, in the preliminary plat, it shows along the the whole frontage a dedication. Dedication.

Headfield of any p. We're

already dedicated. The citizens are helping. Thank you.

Yeah. So that is, I guess, being dedicated as part of this.

Okay. Any opposition to voting on Bert Green? Is that what you wanted to tonight, Michael? You'd probably like to have it resolved, but that's where Brad came. Mike is Michael okay? Any opposition to voting? Those in favor of adoption or worth reading, and we'll get those questions answered. Say hi. Hi. Any opposed? Word in favor, not opposed. Great. We're giving you lots of property rights questions tonight, aren't we? Mhmm. Very This is why you're here. Yeah. Yeah. You have the difference. You have the opportunity. Ready to press right on number 15. This is Torwin's points six zero nine. This is a many accessory dwelling unit standards, including impact fees, etcetera, etcetera. Just to know, is lead by.

Yeah. The the only update is I I mentioned during first reading on this one. And and, honestly, actually, this language isn't in this this specific amendment, but I just wanted to do a little bit more research after going to a training that kind of gave me some pause on on prohibiting mobile homes as ADUs. And consulted with the attorney. He said that's fine. That's allowed. I and he suggested to go back to the presenter who I I did go to, and they said yeah. And that the intent wasn't to say you can't allow mobile homes, but modular manufactured housing is a lot would be allowed, and the state, you know, prohibits us from looking at that differently than, like, stick built housing. So, anyway, that was clarified. So the recommendation is the same. I I think the correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the motion was to go with the planning commission recommendation for out of first reading, which was to allow them on 10,000 square square foot lot minimum rather than 11,000, which is what the state's minimum is, for ADUs. But, yeah, there's that. I well, did we have anything else on

the impact fees to report on? Or Well, I just we had a question in the last meeting about what what we've just done. So previously in few months, I had a huge brain cramp. Couldn't matter. Gary brought up. Fortunately, Cheryl can quickly find my memory. We talked about utility fees, not impact fees. So this is separate. This is different. We have not done this and yeah. Just for some email. Okay.

Maybe. I need to ask her. We we actually looked at we actually looked at paper that said, yeah. I owe you a lot to we talk about meter fees and utility fees. We didn't we didn't

Thank you for clarifying. Good job, Cheryl.

Yeah. It's probably been a few years since we talked about impact fees and how they relate to ADUs. So that's that's all I got as far as an update.

Questions if we don't have any

answer. How? Judgment user judgment. How what what's the, like, minimum lot size do you think people can actually build? A reasonable 80 because do we even need to go lower than 10,000? Is that even possible?

It gets more difficult because of the setback restrictions. Yeah. You could try.

I mean, give me your vision. Do you have

I mean, maybe you could fit one on an 8,000 square foot lot depending on how the house is how big the primary house is. And, you know, I mean, I I think a lot of cities allow them on smaller lots with different setback restrictions. But, I mean, as far as what we have written in our code, it it does make it difficult on smaller lots.

I mean, my first thing,

it's we it's useful. We're getting a good product out of it. We can go lower than 10. I'd be okay with that. Yeah. We're getting quality. You know what I mean?

In a practical sense, we don't have very many dentists.

Right. Right.

So I think it's worth passing that when we start writing code that allows us to do smaller than 10 than 10 per kilobytes blocks. Yeah. Less than a quarter.

I mean, in the in the PUD areas, we've got a lot of that are under 10,000. And then in some of the open space subdivisions, we've got a fair amount as well. So a lot of the newer lots do have them. But the problem with Remedy,

we have two year lots, but they they match as far as possible.

Yeah. To You're probably not gonna build a five by 30 well, five by 60 ADU. I guess maybe you could fit that on some of those 300 square feet because you probably got about five feet and 60 feet wide or something like that.

So was the planning discussion that 10,000 is better than 11 because it's a rate x 10?

You know?

The that it's ones and zeros instead of the adding off to the nearest

I have to use the word that it extends.

Troy made the motion, and he said, I think we could do one better than what the state requires. He's like, we we got ahead of the state before when we when we allowed ADUs. We can we can get ahead of them at least by a thousand square feet.

Crazy idea. We need it. It's a good

question. Yeah. I will get it seen.

If it fits, it fits. If it fits, it fits. Yeah.

Maybe I'd I'd rather see, like, the zoning. Yeah. They take Yeah. And go, the size.

But you gotta be careful with the zoning, though. The state

Said no.

Yeah. I don't think I don't think you can. There were some weird exceptions that I I didn't get too into because we're not a university town. There were some exceptions for university towns on where you can allow and not allow them in the pa and I think that was actually internally used. But I I think the current legislation, it's irrespective of zoning. It's so yeah. I don't I don't think I don't think he could tie it to his own. Something like that. That's probably about right.

You know, both of the.

We had a few a year. Usually, I think the most we've had in the year is, like, maybe four or five applications. But yeah.

I think that would have been an interesting question maybe for Dan. Like, some of the ones that you're seeing where they're already built in now, that becoming more of a problem.

We're seeing now the internal will be more in. But they've and the ones we've seen have been internal ADUs. Yeah. We've seen quite a few of those with new development. Oh, right. Yep.

You guys have a meeting?

My question is for the function plan. Do we limit internal accessibility limits to do outside?

No. So we we and and we we treat internal accessory dwelling units. We just call it two family housing. We don't whether it's a duplex or and we allow that pretty much everywhere. How was it? Every everywhere residential is allowed. Yeah.

Nick? Follow-up. I wanna make a follow-up. What were you needing after that question? I just

it's just me working through the process of till we even get seeing whether or not I'm brave enough to just make a motion to repair, but I'm not. So I'm

gonna The second motion. The third report is 2609, the nineteenth, 2014, and 15. K. Make a motion from Garrett. We have second.

Second from Nathan. Clarification

is at the ten and the eleven. I

mean, the we're first stream.

Oh. I think that was 10,000, wasn't it? Yeah. Details. I think it's the planning commission recommendation. Yeah. Great. Thank you. Yeah.

K. Motion to be Second, Nathan. To adopt as as as recommended by the planning commission. Thoughts? Discussion? You happy with the I mean, let's not let's not lose focus on impact fees. We need right. Happy with that. K. I'm happy with it. Multi family housing. Not attached, but some of them are internal ones. Do we collect impact fees on internal? ADUs?

We don't even know they're being built. Oh, we know they're being built. They gotta get a permit, But I don't believe we're allowed by state law. Okay. Yeah. You're right. We're not.

Yep.

Anyone opposed to voting? Say none, shall we call the roll on ordinance twenty six zero nine, please? So, Amy, welcome. I think you're gonna help us talk about the consolidated fee schedule. Were you watching from home? And when you come in? Or

Sure. You could.

I was gonna ask how we look, but I'd rather not know. I'd rather not know how we how we look on you. Oh, I was gonna ask, can you hear the conversation? We will you know, are we it's okay. Alright. Item 16, who's gonna talk about that? Amy, are you or is Justin still there? Yeah.

Take it away.

Thank you. It

has as it says in this agenda item report, over the past few years, in the past week, we tried to do this and enter our consolidated schedule annually. And the past couple of years, it seems that we're just having some adjustments that are occurring during during the year. I mean, like, we just rate to improve our garbage collection rates, nine one one communication fees and the borrower rates. And so we we may find ourselves updating this because all the data fee scheduling. So some of these

Tell me to pull it up.

Some of these changes have already been previous dates, which includes these these adjustments with the ADU impact fees that they have not yet been they have this, and we we have included those payment payments. So do you okay. I'm happy to just. Okay. Alright. So short term rentals with business licensing fees, we decided it was important to distinguish whether they were occupied or if they were, you know, do you think and then because if they are occupied, they're classified as a home occupation business, and if they are commercial or or and if they're not occupied, they are classified as commercial business and so the fees vary. So we just have, like, indigenous to distinguish that. Our temporary vendor solicitor application fee. We've been already but we felt it was important to kind of identify or to distinguish between the application fee and the licensing fee. So so we have a link for each of those items now. The buyer commercial inspection fee increased from $45 to $65. We were informed by the agency of a rate increase recently. The one inch large service fee increased in April 2026. We had the last committee that we scheduled was. And so that was not getting on the rescheduled. This Utah division of drinking water fee is a new fee that was just recently fixed. This will be charged going forward. It's 0.0165¢ per thousand pounds of water used, and it will appear as a new line item on each of our business water bills active immediately. There are some people who will not have this beyond their bill, which includes just searching to vote no federal residence simply because their usage is paid by their homeowners association. So the homeowners association will receive the billing for their usage. But, anyway, this fee will just be passed through directly to the users of our water system, and it's a minimal amount. The example I used was if you use 5,000 gallons of water a month, which I'm choosing that example because that's what my family uses. We'll we'll see a charge of approximately 8¢ for that that money.

And Just to be real clear, that is directly past the statement. That does not stay with Vibliciti.

So the first thing, the date, 07/01/2027. And so we need to start from the table's grand day so that we are prepared to pay for the fee when when we have to when we are billed. English on that one? Okay. And there are communications that would be if you recall, the increase from $3.30 to $3.40. That's awesome. And according to that, we're in a group agreement. So it's just a a 3% increase per year, and some next year will go out in the. Which rates we have for home based management, and they have established their increase from May '25 to April 26 to be 4.9%. And so they issued some new rates to to us. And these rates that are highlighted here are the rates that they have given us plus administrative fee of 10¢ for each each cam or service. The right away permit fee will increase from a $150 to $250 more closely aligned with the cost of our stats training to prevent that service. Public notice fee is just just adding the word billing. The The b did not change. B u c one impact b. Hopefully, discuss this, but for a shared server connection, now that we're distinguishing between shared server connections or new server connections, the shared in half price. And the super connection for an ADU is $11.89. The local wastewater treatment impact fee for ADUs, we contacted local city to see if those differed, and they have promised what the prices were for a one inch two inch and four inch here, which are listed at $2.00 3, $6.50, and $20.30, respectively. The ADU wire in the hatch fee, we've got the $27.57

for a separate walker and for the share Sorry, Amy. Can I interrupt you that I should have done this a long time ago, but did what is Logan charging for an ADU?

For the wastewater treatment impact fee? Yeah. These these right here. $2.00 3 for one inch here, 50 for a two inch, and $20.30 for a four inch. Okay. 50. Sorry. Oh, those are good.

Is it it has one for multifamily? Is it is that the same or no? Or about multifamily.

Okay. Okay. Alright. So back to the AU water impact fee $27.57 for a separate water meter and $13.78 50 where it should. If they're just using the same. The GAU part impact fee, this has been changed from, you know, $3.02 $6,006.01 3. The transportation impact fee has been established for ADUs to be $6.88. And this is just sort of a a clerical thing about the Hill's Corner. We've we're just definitely finding a $10 kitchen add on fee for tools that include a kitchen use. We we could have had when we were getting right now. We were charging $15 in some situations and 10 in others, and so we needed to clean that up.

So we made

I did. It will always be $10 for a VM, but Okay. You have anyone in there?

Thank you, Amy. I I see what I want. I I like I like logic that brings me to a number because I can't remember numbers. And sometimes it's easier to remember logic. So the logic of an external ADU would have these impact fees that are related to multifamily Mhmm. Impact fees. How do we how do we remember that logic? Where do we get that corporate knowledge that when we change one, we need to go change the other? I mean because because I would like to stick with that logic and and but I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the lot. Got any ideas? Just you have to live forever and can never retire?

My opinion is if it's in the ordinance, then that's what we have with your team.

So the This is set by code Okay. This

way. That's what you look to as a driving document. Perfect. Great. Great, guys. So that means our ordinance is driven by logic.

We def there was definitely a discussion on this at the time that it was established. But yeah.

It's driven by an algorithm. May not be able to. Any other thoughts? Any reason why we wouldn't waive a second reading?

I don't think it could be very important to have to wait just so that basically that we can start collecting the point zero one six five and b because if we and, initially, as long as we pass it before the end of August, that would be sold. But if we don't start collecting that, that means that it is going to have to claim that money because it's still going to be home due.

Which if I remember right, it's about 9,000 a year. Yes. Yeah. It's it's a mistake. Yep. Yes. It's it's not a question that Okay. We want to hear this. It is the same one we voted and put it directly on the middle of such. Right? Yeah.

But the the staff recommendation is for first grading. Is that still the staff recommendation?

We had it recommended that way because we were sure you'd pass the ADU. As long as you've passed the ADU ordinance that you just did, it's filed at WhaleSeqing now.

Yes, sir. No. For crystal. Don't don't

need a public hearing.

We can we can we can we can jack these around all the time with camera stacks. It's not adopted, sir. By the way.

Nick? Sorry. I meant maybe you mentioned there approved. Resolutions twenty six nine. Wait. Second.

Motion from Nick. Second from Garrett. Is that a second, Garrett? Yep. Or you're just in the map. Okay. Thank you. That's to approve forty six zero nine as presented. Do you think he's second? More discussion? Okay. Anyone opposed to voting? Seeing no opposition, Sarah, will you please call the roll?

Already catching up. Oh, we're getting good.

Thank

you. Or in favor of the post. Thank you, Amy. Thanks for coming out. Justin, appreciate the work on this and all of the departmental work. Yeah. If if you're interested, yeah, you're you reviewed it, but we're gonna talk about authorizing reallocations of last year's budget.

Justin, you wanna take us into that? I'm just gonna turn it over to Amy and answer Oh, good. Sales.

Alright. So while the general plan is Ben's step up, we've had three departments that we have budgeted expenditures that outpaced their individual revenue sources during the last week of June. So we've we're kind of creating a trade off because we are trying to budget more closely. And while we are tightening up our budget and and getting those closer, we just have a smaller margin for everyone and for for anything unexpected that comes up. So so we contacted our auditors and our accountant and asked them what the best way would be to handle this situation about these governmental overages. And we were informed that the best way to handle it is to just reallocate unspent funds from one area of the general fund budget to to these three areas that will be produced by the rules.

So I think if I could just interrupt

you really quick, if you recall, just for history's sake, do we try to do our best guess at where this was gonna come? We actually amended the last fiscal year's budget. If you recall, we just didn't quite hit the mark. So that's why we're here with this process tonight.

Yes. There's a there were there there were a couple of reasons for that, but, anyway, I'm I'm happy to to talk to you a little bit more about this. So let's let's go into a little bit about these three departments for our street store credit bandages over extended by $17,002.09 due to anticipated costs associated with new development infrastructure. So the new development infrastructure are the things that we're paying for, the big new new street mining. That's that's a good portion of it. Things that we things that the city is paying, we're I mean, we're able to develop for it later. And so because we had some additional work going on, say, we we spent more than we anticipated, but but then, at this time, we also far exceeded but we haven't exceeded the expenditures and also what we anticipated or seeing. So, yeah, it was more than offset with the developer revenue. And that's what happened with the streets department. With the parks department, I made an error with fiscal timing fiscal year timing, just due to you. We have some pay some payroll calculations that we had done and or some some funds that were earned by our employees in June that they were paid for in July. And I made the assumption that that it was going to hit March of July in the school the new fiscal year. And, unfortunately, I was not correcting my assumption, so that was actually my my and so so we were both in that department by ten percent three hundred fourteen years. And then in the community development creation department, they all expended by 46,056 due to an unanticipated increase of a lot of concern employee benefits. And there were also some higher budget expenditures and department expenditures, heritage days that is programs in the parking committee within that department. Those were small amounts compared to the young adult programs, which we just have. It's very difficult to understand how many people you're going to see, you know, for these youth adult programs. And the more people that you have seen at, the more, the more uniforms you're purchasing, the more equipment, you know, balls and things like that that you're you're purchasing. And so it's important to note that our even though our financials programs exceeded the budget and amount, I'm twenty eight hours, and we received an initial review of the early work, I think, seven '27. So okay. If if you were to approve this budget reallocation, it would align our departmental appropriations with our actual expenditures while still maintaining a general the general fund for fiscal year 2526. Do any of you have any questions on any of this?

It's a crystal ball exercise. I mean, does does the state allow us to close out the fiscal year some amount of time after the fiscal year ends? Like

We we are definitely allowed to to do these departmental or these reappropriations

within that. But but not without counsel. Fiscal year. That that's the key. It's not without counsel approval. Yes. No. And

And and and we don't have to do this. And if if you didn't want to, like, heard that we would have when we actually comment in any of our upcoming point. And so that's just an issue

we make. Yeah. And, frankly, I'm a I'm a little bit surprised that the auditor said, why don't you take it back to the council instead of letting us note it as as something in the audit? I think I think we have a good auditor if that's their attitude because I think sometimes auditors spend time justifying their existence.

Mhmm.

Yeah. That's not anything. Against the auto community. Right? Engineers do that. Attorneys do that. Mayors do that. We don't need mayors. Just hey.

Yeah. Who will be advised who were given anywhere at work that anything in Utah do the speaker that is very common.

Yeah. It'd be nice to have have something in our audit to talk about.

I don't see every day. Yeah. Nothing.

Nothing. Good job. Counsel? I don't see a staff recommendation. Do you have a recommendation for us?

My recommendation is that we that that they have to approve better education.

And do you recommend waiving second reading, or do you wanna come back and talk about it again? I would love to face it. Okay. That's that recommendation is approved and waive second reading. Yeah. That's a fair recommendation. Thank you. Nick? Mhmm. Do you have a motion?

Sure. I make a motion to approve resolution twenty six fifteen. Wait. Sorry.

Thank you. Motion from Nick, second from Nathan. Probing twenty six fifteen and waiting to You guys do a fantastic job. I can't tell you how how easy it is to be proud of what you do. Okay. School district.

Yeah.

As simple as mine item as ours.

So maybe we don't

we're not in taxes. Discussion on our budget and on a motion. Anyone opposed to voting? Cheryl, when you're ready, if you would, please call the roll. Thank you. Or in favor, not opposed. Great job, guys.

Thank you.

Hi. This is Brock. Hi, Sam.

Sam.

Let's move to staff reports. Council staff reports. Nick, do you wanna lead us off, please? Sure. Yeah. I had

a beautiful conversation when you called the resident. I don't know if you reached out to him. Any other council members about horse pasture idea, and I and I just through that conversation, his name is Clint. We're requesting that. Maybe we get this on an agenda just to talk about it as the the council. I don't know if you need me to send details later or whatever. But Can I jump in? Yeah. Because I I sort of

this is this is the beauty of and bane of the open meetings act because we all thank you, respond individually and, again, necessarily give a coordinated front. I I suggested to Nick that I would reach out to council members on this property and other property and poll you or discuss with you individually about how you feel specifically about this proposal, but also how you feel in general about surplus in public. And then based on the straw poll that I get while speaking to you individually, then we could decide. We could we could bring a proposal on his property to the accounts. I I don't think we're ready for a agenda either. I think we need a more fulfilled proposal. Like, I asked him, do you wanna rent the whole thing? Do you wanna buy it? Do you wanna lease it? The whole thing, carve it? And then I think that we should find out a little more about what he actually wants to do. So there's this property. There's also a property on Ink West that we've been approached you out, abandoning. That's the word for disclosing some public surplus property. Are there any others? I don't know. But so if you would, counsel, I would I appreciate you thinking in general. I think this solves the little problem.

It's a horse bastard.

And now that we have relaxed our You can get a horse. Thieves, we could put right in people's backyard. And they won't have a house there, but they'll have a bar with no water on on that by a senior.

They could probably fit too with our current ordinance combined. If they live there, they got another lot.

Maybe.

Are you okay?

I'll I'll see if be a you said nothing else.

What you the the better flush out what you would like to see on

That's great. Yeah. Now our Let's In our conversation, I understand. Yep. That's it for me. Thank you.

Okay. Yeah.

I wonder if anybody knows when this goes major to your part is my. And I saw how things started. Thirty two hundred thousand celebration of life building. So give me just, like, an update.

Yeah. They got they got a grading permit, but nothing more than that. So they still need they were we just got an application for final plat. They need to complete that before they do construction, but they're pushing. We'll we'll see how how quickly we get through the final plat process. They've got they're kind of ahead in the process in a way because their plans were reviewed at the time of site plan and their site plan has been conditionally approved. So there's some things they need to true up, but should be pretty soon. Yeah.

Yeah.

There's a big, big branch

that

reaches out, and its branches actually, like, go down and touch the ground. And it has split off from the big chunk, and it's only really being held up now by its fingers that are touching the ground. And, mostly, I my kid's just playing over there, and I'm pretty serious. So I think something probably needs it probably needs to be cut off, otherwise, it's gonna be dangerous. So I should be thinking about that. Yeah. And that happened, like, years ago. And and then I just didn't see the solicitation ordinance come back this time. Your deputy just left it off because it was a long agenda or.

We're waiting for the attorney to read to finish the review. Yeah. You you'll see it as a reverb.

Great. That's all.

We'll have an update on any discussion whether in this meeting or privately on discussions with the residents on ten eighty, workshops, and the properties possibly being purchased. Some of you may or may not have read the news. I was an omnivore in the new rec feasibility study of the county. That

that has been delayed for the next meeting.

It's actually approved, but it may be out. These are under our last one. We need serving that necessary, please let me know.

What are your objectives? I'll I'll talk to you later. How are your objectives different than the first year? What's diff Who's on it? I'll talk to you later.

Do you have a predetermined outcome? That's those are great examples of the type of questions and feedback I'd like to receive. Okay.

Yeah. I I mean,

it's impacting that we see, and I've made that appointment clear. The steering committee that they let me be on. I'm not asking. Tisha, the second. I think you're a great source. I really do. But I know it was an eighteen month delay when we started down that eighteen months ago, and it continues to cause us angst. Jeff, you give me a head nod on that to figure out what we need to do. So I'm glad you're on it. I'm glad that Yeah. With your representation, we'll we'll, but we'll know what's going on if you know what's going on. We'll get to talk to Whitney next week, Wednesday, v CTO, and try to figure out what this means. Of course, you're on our steering committee too. So thanks for thanks for accepting that nomination. I assume they're accepting the dates. Didn't know if they were gonna start. We

just didn't they didn't make those proposals apparent according to their own goals. So what it took a second?

Thank you.

That's good. Anything else? I believe I'm done.

I'll mention fire a little bit because it is consuming so much of my time and Justin's time, and Talon has been pulled in. So there's the cash fires. We've talked about that creation in '25. As we figure out what that means, what that does, we've created a subcommittee for the South as an advisory to the cash buyer district board. Because the South and North have different issues. The South is a lot more complicated because the county has been providing EMS, whereas Smithfield, fifth, would've been providing EMS in the. So the South is. We've then made a subcommittee of a subcommittee.

A subcommittee.

So you see Oh my god. You see you see how much effort can be dumped into subcommittees and subcommittees of subcommittees, and then there are meetings between people between subcommittees and subcommittees. And so I don't know where this is all gonna end, but I do want you to know that Justin's spending a lot of time on and I appreciate the amount of time. Justin's the secretary for the South Cache. Security. Don't know why he did that, but he's doing a great job. I want you to know that as we get into all those details and all of these things that seem complicated and everything else, my guiding principle is that Nibley City needs to be we have come of age to the point that we need to be in control of our own destiny. That instead of renting a house for the next fifty years, we need to be thinking about buying the house even if it takes a little bit of extra doing, you know, to make the equivalent of a down payment or something like that. I'm not saying it's gonna be bad for any of us or some incredible influence of birds, but that's my guiding principle is that we need to be in the room as co owners of assets of fire district and assets of the co owners of assets that provide that service to you. Otherwise, we're just at the whim of what may be a great landlord today, but not such a great landlord tomorrow. I'll leave it at that. That's what's guiding us. We're probably doing at least two meetings a week. I was driving home from the fire board meeting and got to Ginny's and turned around a dirtbag for a ad hoc. Unexpected. But definitely I went to an unexpected. So there's a lot going on. That's what that's what that's what's guiding us. And when they when it all gets confused, I just remind myself, here's what we're trying to do. If you think that's the wrong approach, I'm happy to I'm happy to give you any other details, but it changes on an hourly basis. That's about the other thing I wanna talk about, disposal of surplus property, we did that. Thank you, Nick. I'll come around and get that information. I mean, that's all for me.

I think I'm good. Yeah.

Let me go backwards. Remember, annual conference is October 28. That's a Tuesday Wednesday. Please RSVP as soon as possible. I'll give you the date that you have to RSVP by two. Nibley City's day of service is September 12. We're bringing two fifty into that, so we're gonna do a flat retirement the morning. So it's slated for e three, direct flight retirement, then nine to eleven for service. There'll be opportunities at Morgan Farm, here at City Hall, and also Boardroom, we're seeing some tree plants and some work for sure. And, at finalist, they never just leave the concrete. They have surfaced things. We're setting meetings and discussing things, and then just becoming that. Then lastly, you should all receive emails about the employee's summer party, Monday, August 17 in. We don't need you to serve food,

and please, for your most awesome wine shirts, you can be voted on for the most of us. That's all I have.

Cheryl, I have a question on the day of service. I can talk to you afterwards, but the that mister from USU is kinda coordinating this kind of white thing. He he had asked us about a bin. I think you and I were both on the email. I was hoping you were taking care of that, or do I need to talk to you about I'm not sure we wanna do it because there's a bunch of I think there's a bunch of strings attached. Maybe you're on it, and I don't have to worry about it. Yeah. There is some concern.

It just become positive

side. Communities that I am

gonna be talking to the minister of also and Okay. Being detailed. Yeah. And you could ask. I think they're intended for the only stuff that goes in there, not resident stuff, but the only stuff that goes in there is stuff that comes from National Day of Service public property cleanup.

Mhmm.

So

And he has questions why Netflix City's projects are not on the Cache County's list of service opportunities. There has been a little bit of a a break off of Nexley City with that organization. We always have a great time to have a newly residents for our projects. And and if it is the council's desire, we can have them put on that same list with the county. It's just become a little more complicated than we were willing to we are able to provide services to the entire county. And there's a lot of details in this. I'm happy to talk to any of you about. Yeah. The spirit of sorry. Spirit of charge, I guess,

we're serving. Yeah. Great great project going later in the community.

There might be a marketing opportunity to show the rest of Cache County how cool we are. But, I mean, there were issues of they had to do it on the eleventh. Now they've gotten all we didn't wanna do it on the eleventh because that's Friday. We wanna do it on the twelfth. At least talent's helped me understand this. Now they're allowing stuff on the twelfth, and I'll talk to you about it. Okay. I think we're I think you guys are doing a great job, but I'm not stepping in the way,

not intending to. Yeah. And we've certainly offered our support to CashNet. Well, it's not CashNet. It's a different organization that's incorporating all CashNet. We've offered our support. We've offered to advertise

in any way possible. We don't wanna lose that.

Thank you. Okay.

Thank you. I just have a couple of quick things to share with you. First of all, Nathan, thank you for being willing to represent Nibley on the the county steering committee. I mean, just to see how that plays out and appreciate you keeping us informed on that and and participating. Also, for your information, Mariah spent one of our residents is very active and very motivated in gathering people across the the South End Of The Valley to move forward the idea of indoor recreation. So far, she has people in Hiram, River Heights, Providence, and Wellsville that she's meeting with on about a monthly basis, and I'm trying to keep her based on where things are at with indoor recreation. So be aware of that. I think it's been mentioned that we'll be meeting with BCBO. They're crafting us. They're here's, like, where we're at with the feasibility study for indoor rec, and, we'll catch up with Wendy and and explore that with her. Also, in her favor, approached by an event company that was hired by the the folks that build our bike car, and they were excited about the possibility of hosting kind of a regional national level athlete contract competition. Levi and I had it Levi and Ron and I had an opportunity to, have a a telephone call with them. We talked through some of the things that they're interested in and and what we have currently in place. They're now interested in exploring that for next year, perhaps putting that on their schedule for next year. So that's the latest update on that, based on what they're looking for. And then last but not least, the Mapleview Middle School will be doing a grand opening. I had a conversation with one of the school counselors there, and they'll be giving us an invitation. I'll I'll pass that along to you. It'd be great if any of you attended that. But I know that's coming up very quick, and they have a lot to do inside that school is what I've been told. So that email comes together in time. And that's it.

Thank you, Chad.

So a couple of reg meetings tomorrow. Those are all on the calendar. K. Thanks. Friday's reg day. Usually, Friday's Friday. Every day's Friday. Tomorrow, we talk about reg. Yeah. If I may just add Please. Yeah. Yep. We didn't Yeah. Fire and Dean have a lot of my efforts. So there's other things looking. I do apologize, but there is

every meeting we have is, about, four or five phone calls that follow that meeting. So it's definitely

very active, changing rapidly. It's something that really is a full test if I figure out. So do apologize if there's things that are they and staff as well. I thought I haven't been in the office for a week and a half. But,

anyway,

I will keep her on there, and that is all I have.

Anything else, counsel? We're getting the agenda. There's no objection. We will be