Nibley City Council- 3/12/26

Is that a motion to approve with clical corrections?

»Yes.

»Second motion from Garrett. Second from Nick. Um I I'd like to ask for an amendment. Um I think it's Germaine to the topic. It's on page four. Starts on page 12 and 13. I'll read the whole sentence. Mayor Jacobson wanted to ensure there was full disclosure that Justin Ma was also a member of the Nibi Blacksmith for Canal Company. I'd like to insert the word board member because I think that was the and at the disclosure uh any objections to that amendment. Okay, we'll put we'll make that the amended motion. So, amended minutes and agenda. Any further discussion? Opposition to voting? See none. Those in favor, please say I.

»I.

»Any opposed? Okay. Shall we? Next we have public comment period. Thank you all for coming out. Um this is uh great to see the turnout. And this is a time when we have available for people to address the city council. Doesn't have to be any specific topic. It's best if it's somehow germanine to Nibbley City. Um, as you can see, we have a bunch of agenda ahead of us. And so I I suggest in advance that if you can stay on topic and perhaps limit your comments to 2 minutes, um, that'll be great. If, and the council gets mad at me for this, but if it seems like you're still making progress after two minutes, it probably won't cut you off. So, uh, we have we have a list and I can start with the list, but you don't have to sign up in order to speak to the council. I'm going to start with the list. John Reynolds, please.

»Right over there.

»Yes, please. And tell us who you are and where you live, John.

»Okay. Uh, I'm John Reynolds. I live in the Mount Vista subdivision, which is 3515 South, 550 West. Um, yeah. Anything else you want to know about me? Great. So, um, first of all, I know a lot of you guys on different ways. Um, I really like working with Nibi. Um, so you guys, most of you know why I'm here. I emailed out a copy of this to everybody, but I have two copies that I can give to anybody if they want when I'm done. But basically, we um received a notice of violation for our shed, which sits in the easement, the utility easement right away. Um and and from what I learned also within this setbacks and so um I understand that this wasn't like deliberate by the council or you guys are just following the code um as it stands. And I hope I made that pretty clear to you, Levis, and today on the phone, too. Um, so, but basically, I I learned what I could about what Nidi currently, currently rules are. Um, I actually sent this to a bunch of my neighbors who also got this, and there's a lot of different ideas on what the rules are and whether it's right or wrong. You know, I've been trying to set them straight and say, "Well, right or wrong, it is the law. What we probably need is to have it updated." Um, and so I broke down my thoughts on this, um, maybe to summarize, currently there's a default setback for sheds, accessory buildings, which is 10 ft on the side of the yard. Um, and Midway makes no distinction based on the size of the shed. So any size shed has to stay out of that 10 foot setback from what I understand. You guys correct me. I don't know if it's interactive at all or allow it to be, but correct me if I'm wrong. There could be a three-foot setback if the shed sits more than 10 feet behind your house. Um, the problem is so many smaller lots nowadays and nibbly makes this really difficult. Like on my own lot, I don't have a part of the side of the house where I can put it against the fence. Well, there's an easement anyway. Um, which is another issue as well. And so I would basically have to set my shed in the middle of the the biggest area just like right in the middle of the backyard. Um in order to comply um let's see the easement also prohibits any kind of structure within that easement. And my proposal is to allow structures that are temporary in nature. Basically not um set in a foundation. you know, my shed sits on some gravel and so we need to move it, we can move it. Um, it is a I mean, in that by that definition, it is a temporary structure. Um, so I also in this letter I sent you guys have a list of all a bunch of cities that I could find um that have different setback rules regarding sheds in this classification, small sheds. And so I filed this just for you guys to look over and hopefully make a decision in the future. I know nothing's going to change today. Um, but that's what I'm here for. Um, I also looked up some information on utility easements and different rules around that from different communities. There wasn't as much information. I mean, even NY's code itself doesn't make it super clear on what has to go on in that area or what is allowed. Um so I included a little bit of sources a few sources there. Um the the proposed solution that I propose and most of my neighbors support is to have setbacks um that have size based of distinction on these sheds. So you don't need a building permit unless shed is over 200 square feet um or over 15 feet tall. And I think the smaller sheds should be allowed to sit within those setbacks. Um, I also think that there should be an owner's risk policy for easements. Um, like I put my shed there. I I put it there knowing about the easement and it was understood to me that um it was kind of like at my risk. If they have to dig up, I'll have to move it. It's my responsibility. Um, a lot of communities do have that kind of policy and so that was my proposal as well. Um, a lot of these really small lots, I mean, ours is not the smallest by far, especially all the ones Ridgeline Park and everything. Um, so you know, some of those homes, they they just have no options at all under current code. Even if we removed setbacks for those, the easement is still a major barrier, I think, for where to place it. So, um, yeah. So, those are my comments.

»Excellent. Thank you, John. I very much appreciate the work you've already put into this, the the research you've given us. Cheryl may prefer an electronic copy. No,

»I can email you one later.

»Okay.

»Um, and you alluded to it, John. This will be instructional for other folks. Uh, Utah public uh Utah Open Meetings Act requires that we not have policy discussions that are not noticed on an agenda because we're supposed to do it's a great it's a great law. we're supposed to do the public's work in public and so um we have to let people know we're when we're going to talk about specific things like changes to code and so really this is a great time for you as John has done to motivate us to take a look at something to do something at a later meeting. Um I do have code enforcement we do have code enforcement on the agenda tonight. Uh the intention there because it's pretty if that's the only description. It's not a precise description about a code change on sheds. It was more intended for a general discussion council based on other public comments we've recently received our general codeforcement. So this could come up with tonight. Um uh but really tonight we're going to talk about the our general code enforcement. and you've given us a great place to start if the council gives me a thumbs up on me. Let's go to work on this.

»Great.

»Okay. Thank you.

»Happy to be of help. Um I I was going to mention also we have 45 days to comply, but it'll probably take more than 45 days to begin. That will be another discussion with the council about um and I won't even talk about it now because that's a policy decision, but I think we could still cover that under

»our workshop on code enforcement about holding off on uh moving forward on the enforcement.

»Cool.

»Thank you very much. Thanks, John. Uh I'm going to go a little bit out of order because I know a little bit of grouping. Lesie, mom, do you want to talk to us, please? Hello, I'm Leslie Man. I live at 33 37 South 13 West. I'd also like to talk about sheds. Uh, I'm going to send you a letter, send everybody on the council a letter in the next couple days. Um, because I had to revise mine today and I don't have an updated copy. I'm going to try and boil it down to a really short story here. On Monday, uh, enforcement officer came to my house and told me that my shed was a code violation. He said it was too close to the house. throughout the week in conversation with the officer and with Levi and with Larry and with me scouring the city ordinances uh specifically related to accessory buildings and the space requirements chart. Uh there's no ordinance for how far my shed or how close my shed is going to be to the house. Uh Levi informed me that it was fire code and he looped in. Sorry, let me back up a second. Through all that conversation with Levi and Larry uh and Evan, none of us were able to find that ordinance, right? It doesn't it's not on there. Um Levi informed me that it's fire code and he looped in uh Mr. Powell, Austin Powell, the building inspector, and he was able to direct us to the fire code, which is helpful. it's from the International Residential Code and then Utah adopts that and maybe amends it, maybe doesn't. Um, but then came back today and said after further investigation, that code doesn't actually apply to me and my shed is just fine where it's at. So to sum up, code enforcement came to my house, told me I was breaking the law. Took a whole bunch of people and time to sort it all out. Turns out I'm not. So I'm here to ask the council uh to consider a few things. First of all, why did this happen? I'm very interested to know the chain of events that led the enforcement officer to walk up to me and and tell me that obviously he read it or was told it from somebody, but that's not in the nibbly code and the fire code that we thought applied didn't actually apply. So, kind of carrying the weight of that accusation around for this whole week and trying to figure out, did something go wrong 5 years ago when my husband and I called the city, tried to do our due diligence, asked about our shed, tried to find out the requirements for building that, have we done something wrong? Turns out we haven't. So, my next question for the council is if we can if you guys can figure out what could be done about this, right? not just me, but I'm sure that other people were told the same thing that possibly is not true. Then finally, I wonder if the council can consider what could be done in the future to help other people who are building sheds to make this a much friendlier process. uh clarifying the code, clarifying the space requirements chart, linking to applicable external sources if possible. Um if I want to build a fence, awesome. City website is so helpful. Code is clear. It's like highlighted. It tells you that you need a permit and then you get you do that free permit and they say you're good to go, right? It's on file with the city. I would suggest possibly that maybe the council consider something like that for sheds as well. Um, so yeah, that's my two cents. Sorry, I just Yeah,

»thank you. Appreciate you.

»Yeah.

»And if you uh please feel free to email written comments to the council and to Cheryl as well. It'll get in the record. Dylan, can we take you next? Thank you for coming out, Dylan.

»Hi, I'm Dylan. I live at 905 West 2450 South. Um, name Bruce right next to Park. Um, so yeah, I'd like to start off by thanking all of you for hearing me out today and hearing a middle schooler's crazy idea and especially Mayor Jacobson for taking your time to email me and talk to me about this subject. And um, it's been great experience. So, to get uh right to the point and start off, uh I'm proposing that a skate park be built in our town. More specifically, a skate park between the sizes of 17,000 ft² and 22,000 ft. It it seems like a big jump, but putting it into an area is kind of well looks less small than it actually is, but um more uh and the location of where I'm thinking right now is behind the northern pavilion at Heritage Park between the baseball field and 8 West. Um that is where I currently see the best part uh place for a skatepark to be built in our town. um will be roughly the same size as the Providence skatepark. And I think that would give us a a good solid place where we wouldn't have to worry about any property issues or anything like that. And we could just start off with building that. Um and the biggest uh part of this of course is the price. And from the estimates of what I've done in the calculations and the math, um, a skate park around 17,000 ft² would cost roughly $850,000, while a 22,000 ft² um, skate park would cost upwards of 1.1 million. And all this is a lot, I believe it to be crucial to the future of Middle Recreation. Um there's not I will be totally honest to me where I live in the northern side of Nibi there's not a ton to do besides playgrounds whereas the other side there's a pickle ball courts or will be a bike course being built soon. I think this was be a very great place to start with um many future recreational projects and starting off with the skatepark there and um it will not not only that but it'll offer a safer place for skaters to skate at besides inside uh in the streets where many injuries do occur um and also a place for just building community and building a community of skateboarding and being able to have that shared love and I think that's very important for anything any know thing that someone is interested in and and um as this is quite a large project I'm not asking that as a city we will immediately jump into this like okay right now today we're going to start planning all this uh more so I'm asking today that as a council you will discuss the placement for a skatepark the cost and analyze how it'll impact taxes on taxpayers to see if this truly is an achievable goal in all of your eyes because to me it is I believe that it can be done. But overall, you guys have more say than I do and that, you know, you guys are the people that matter and um but yeah, so I'm just asking that I have your cooperation on this idea and that we can, you know, further this discussion and see what's needed to be done to get uh get this accomplished. And and overall, my goal is simple. Get a skate park here before I graduate. And though it's a it it's a big big daring task to have uh such a thing done by 2030, I think it can be done and I think is going to be the starting point for many of many future projects and a great place for Nibble Recreation as a whole. And um yeah, so that's it and thank you guys for listening.

»Thank you Dylan. Appreciate you. Good job. Um, and I've council I've enjoyed interacting with Bill through this whole process. He's been patient with me as I mayor explain things like taxes and all that kind of baloney. So, thank you.

»Yes, please.

»When you talked to Dylan at any point, did you go over the current parks master plan?

»We did.

»Okay. And there is a one proposed on 12 West for the future,

»right? as far as concept,

»but you know, if you want to send insight of like why maybe that's not a good location.

»Oh, yeah. Uh,

»you can put on that kind of like a reference point for

»and and Dylan, I may not have referenced that specific location. We actually had a special meeting of the city council because we had a forum. was noticed and everything else when we talked about that location at 1200 West actually and it's in the plan. Um I hadn't pointed it out to you specifically, but it it it's a down the road kind of thing in the plan. So it's it's not a foreign idea and we've got our marching orders by 2030. You have to go to school, you have to go to college here in cash.

»Okay. Uh any any other questions? We can exchange information like that. We won't get into the policy. Thank you. So Arian Murray, hopefully I said your name correctly.

»You did. I'm impressed.

»My fourth grade teacher phonetic teaching is Russ. Good job. Uh

»I sounded it out.

»It's amazing how many people don't. Uh my Anyway, good evening members of the council. My name is Arian Marie. I live at 619 West 3430 South in phase 1 of the Mount Vista subdivision and I'm here about a shed, too. Um, I was raised in Nibbidly through middle school and high school. My husband and I recently purchased our home here in May of last year. I'm here tonight to request a review and revision of our current city code and public mapping systems to ensure residents can accurately perform their due diligence and follow the city code within reasonable limits. In October of last year, we installed a 120 square foot shed. So, under that 200 square foot requirement and it's shorter than 15 feet after verifying the city's plat map on the city and the county websites because um the phase one map of Mount Vista clearly shows a 20ft irrigation easement on the rear of our property and we respected that. We made sure not to put the shed anywhere near that. Um, but there's no five foot perimeter easement or any other easement listed on phase one of Mount Vista's maps. There is a five foot easement on phase two and three that is on the maps and I brought copies of that to give to the council and I emailed them also to to Levi and to Justin today earlier. But here, sorry, but they're big papers. So, if you could pass those down, that would be really helpful. So, you can see for reference the phase one versus the phase 2 maps. Um, let's see. We even uh so after checking the maps and making sure our placement was okay as far as everything we could find on county and city websites, we also called the city offices here in to verify our plans and make sure that we hadn't missed anything. We talked to someone in the building and zoning department who looked up our flat map on their side and said we were in the clear where we were putting it. They said it was great. Um we also double checked with our neighbors verifying the shed didn't go against any of their wishes and we received no push back. They were happy with where we head it. Despite this, we received a courtesy notice ticket yesterday's saying we did not meet the city code for the shed. Upon calling a city that evening, a city enforcer explained there the five foot perimeter easement. And then we found that it's on phase two and three, but it's not on phase one.

»Can I just for information, what's law are you in phase one, please?

»We are law I think it's six. It's 6 by the house number.

»Okay. And I can look it up on the plat. Sure. Yeah.

»Okay. Thank you. Sorry for that.

»Yeah. And if you look um at the shape of our plot or our plat, not plot at the cemetery, the plaids, um our house is at the forefront, the more narrow section of that lot. And if we were to move a shed 10 ft away from our house behind it, we would encroach on that 20 foot irrigation easement. And if we move it closer to the house, then we breach fire code. My husband's a firefighter, and that's a big no. Um, and we we m we care a lot about following the city code and safety requirements for where we live. Um, in short, we acted in good faith. We relied on the city count and county's own digital tools. We spoke with city staff. We really truly believe that we did our due diligence before we put any money into extra time that shed. Um, we're here and asking the city council to consider three things. One is a stay on enforcement for residents who can prove they relied on incomplete or inaccurate mappings of information from the city. Um um asking to consider a mandate to update the public facing plant maps so that blanket easements are clearly labeled on the city website preventing other citizens from falling into the same mistakes or traps and an update to invisible or vague city codes on the municipal code website which Leslie talked about. I had the same issue. It was hard to understand. um so that so that citizens can exercise fully informed due diligence. Um we really do want to be in compliance. Um and we'd love some more support in order to do that. Um thank you.

»Perfect. Thank you. Thank you so much. Anyone else like to talk to us tonight? We're happy to hear you. Okay. If if no one else stands up. One, two, no, three, two, one. There we go. Uh, thank thanks again for your comments. Uh, we in general will be talking about code enforcement later on. It's clear at the other end of the meeting. Um, if you really care about where your sheds are, you'll sit here for this whole meeting. No, I'm kidding. Uh, we're one of the hottest YouTube channels, St. Cash Valley. I welcome you to stay and I also welcome you to uh tune in and listen to our discussion when we get to that on the agenda. Uh just find it on YouTube. It's it's it's noticed on our website. Okay. Thanks. With that, let's move to uh planning commission report. Levi, if you got that for us, please.

»Yes. So other than the reszone that's already on the agenda, I'll discuss that further when we get to that item. The there was a conditional use permit granted to the city for a utility substation for the well house. And so that that was reviewed and it was approved by the by planning commission.

»We're in compliance, right? Right. There was a discussion about fences, but ultimately it was approved as presented.

»Okay. Thank you. And we'll look forward to the annex or the annexation uh discussion too. Okay.

»Great.

»Uh let's talk about acceptance of the contract with method consulting for uh publicity transportation master plan. Tom, are you going to take do that for us please? Thank you. Any questions?

»No. So, uh, transportation s plan is the last one that was adopted was in 2019 with an update to the streets plan in 2021. We publicly advertised an RFP to update our master plan. It was over the course of about a four-week period where people were able to submit proposals. We received four proposals. One of them from AECOM who who had done the previous master plan. Another one was from Galloway. Third was from Jones and Deil and the and the last one was method consulting or consultants, excuse me. So we assembled a team to evaluate those and then rank them by choice. So if you look at the numbering, rank them by choice being one, two, three, and four. Your first choice would be number one, first rank, highest rank and your fourth fourth choice would be number four. Obviously, we we evaluated each proposal on the approach and methodology, the project team and the strengths of that project team, the project experience on similar transportation master plans and then fee. The fee was kind of it wasn't a whole lot of weight put to that. We have $100,000 budget in this year's budget. We have a $50,000 grant that we max out at. So the city's out $50,000, but all these proposals came in right at just under the $100,000. Within the RFB, we asked for them to express their understanding of what a master plan was, a transportation master plan, how public input, how they were going to approach the public input uh portion of master plan with meetings and reaching out to the public to get gather input on how they want the city to build and where where these roads should be and what they should look like. We ranked all those and we came up with this the following ranking. The first choice by the majority of the the group was method consultants and they ranked an average about 1.7 out of number one would be the best and then the next one would be a com. There was some discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of each team and we all unanimously unanous unanimously agreed on methodic consultants and the the total contract price would be $99,976. So if the council would approve

»50,000 of which is with a grant technical plan. So tonight staff is just asking for that bare or the authority to enter into a contract with method method consultants to update our transportation master plan. Any questions on the master plan what it is any questions for Tom questions?

»Sorry about that.

»Nick, go ahead. I got a question. Um I have a question for Levi too. Just general cost of these kind of things. Um Levi, how much did we how much it cost to do the general then? Is it 50,000?

»80.

»Okay. 80.

»Some reason I have the 50,000 number in my head.

»And and compared it in my head it was so compared to this. I was just going to ask why, but they're about the same essentially. Okay.

»Yeah.

»Don, you want to justify 100,000?

»Yes. There'll be some se road sections that'll be produced. These will help guide like what a arterial road would look like, 99 foot wide, what a what a neighborhood road will look like. Right now we have is there 14 potential road crosssections in our master plan. We want to hone those down just be more concise and then maybe create a menu of items. If let's just say you're going to provide a 25 foot wide asphalt in a normal local road. If there's a bike lane in there, you'll add six or eight feet. If you want parking, you'll add this. So, have this menu board of different options instead of having all these these sections in there.

»And then we also wanted to have these consultants come to city council and come to planning and zoning to present these planes of of development of the plan. They they'll come to you two times. once after they gather input and present their findings and then once as we ratify the the blind itself they also are are going to planning commission with one presentation. So they also are going to assemble a team a technical advisory committee the technical advisory committee will consist of the fire department. We'll have members from other communities in in our local hire of things to coordinate their master plans. So it's it's just it does go beyond a little bit the general plan would be there's going to be some collection of data that'll be doing traffic counts and they're going to take a model that's been created by Cash Metropolitan Planning Organization. They're going to calibrate it specific to Nibi and they're going to add in all of our specific growth patterns in our zoning to help decide or help guide the plan and where our interior roads will go, where collective roads will go and so forth. So, yeah, that's good. Thank you,

»Nick. Tom, other questions for Tom? If not, I'll turn to the council to consider that contract. I'll make a motion to accept the contract meth consulting for the transportation master plan.

»Yeah, I have a motion second from Nick to accept the contract with me consulting.

»Let's talk about it.

»Can I have a question please?

»Um in the contract that that's on 6.1 is that that's not is this the final contract that was signed with them? just the compensation. It's not large difference, but if they say a contract price of $100,000, I think there's at least $25 difference. And we'll leave you

»$99,976.

»So, you'll see the actual price. Uh, I see what you're saying. There is a conflict. I see that. Now, in exhibit A, it didn't notice 99,976

»as as the exhibited, it describes the scope of work and management schedule. If you'd like, I can

»as long as it's written somewhere.

»99,976 or 100,000.

»The first number.

»Okay.

»Well, okay.

»I just didn't know if this was like

»always. We can make a little uh thermometer and get to the skate park.

»Swear.

»Thank you. No, I I mean, having been on the committee to pick the consultant, I think that they're going to do a great job. So,

»other questions, any objection to voting? Seeing none, uh, call for a vote. This isn't a resolution. We can call the RO if you want, but I'm just going to ask for a voice vote. Those in favor of accepting a contract with Met Consulting, please say I.

»I. Are there any posts?

»It's unanimous. Thank you, Tom. Good, good job on that. Okay, let's uh pick up open space subdivisions again. Uh we continued this from uh second reading last meeting. Uh the in the ask of council, in fact, it's the draft we should be looking at would be to remove references to R2A in this subdivision. So, Levi, do you have questions for us about uh that process of removing R2A?

»We didn't we didn't go through and redline the the ordinance in the meeting, but we had a red line version uh with with Levis's uh having accomplished that

»was I I don't have any any uh comments to that. Maybe I I'll just add one thing. Sure. Just one observation is that previously uh within the code meaning two iterations ago uh there there R2A open space subdivisions were allowed in an R2A zone. Now there wasn't really much incentive to do it um if any. Uh but but I I just wanted to point that out that if and the reason why is because at at that time if you were in an R2A zone, you had to use you only got the density or the the bonus density as if you were in R2 zone. And so really you didn't get any additional lots from it. And and there it came with all the other restrictions. So, I I just wanted to point that out uh that it was a possibility and and at least according to what the way the motion is, it would just be removing R2A, which I think is fine because I don't really think that there's an incentive otherwise. And you could still do a cluster subdivision in R2A zone if you want, you know, to preserve open space or, you know, if the developer wants to. So, uh, what and that's essentially accomplishing the same thing as the as the open space subdivision and and the direction the council is going. So, I just wanted to point that out, but that's a little different than the way it was.

»Thank you, Nei. So under cluster subdivision it's a non-incentivized but there is the possibility of a non-incentivized noity deis said density bonus uh for the clustering of houses and open space preservation. I'm going to stop talking real quick. So I turn it to council please. Thoughts, questions? Is anyone opposed to voting? Seeing no opposition, this will be for final. Uh, thank you, Levi, planning commission. Appreciate your work on this. Cheryl, will you call the role, please?

»Council member Lerson, what is your vote?

»Against. Council member man, what is your vote against?

»Council member Mansville in

»favor. Council member Tensa, what is your vote?

»In favor,

»council member Spalding.

»In favor?

»Thank you.

»Count three in favor. Uh to oppose. So we'll make those changes to the open space substation code. Thank you. Uh next we have a public hearing to consider reszone of parcel 0019 uh from residential R2 to residential R2A. Is there any introduction for Steve?

»Yeah. Yeah, I'm happy to. Uh so yes, we received a request to reszone uh this property. I I'll give a little bit more context on the next slide exactly where this is from R2 to an R2A zone. Um there there have been a few petitions in the past to reszone this property and um to to this zoning designation. The current use on the property is agricultural and um although the previous proposal that was considered by the council uh was that that was that was denied. It was it was um they it was done in conjunction with a specific subdivision with the with the preliminary plat that was approved conditional to the reszone. The current proposal is just limited to the reszone request. So, the applicant hasn't provided a a specific plan, but is just proposing um to consider the the zoning. And and just just to remind you, there's there's no requirement for an applicant to submit a specific plan for a reasonzone. Um that was that was just something that was proposed at that time, but just to give you a little bit of context. So, this is this is the area uh we're talking about. It's um often referred to as you know the old Gibbs property where the horse the horse track is there and and it's close to 20 acres. Um you see Stonebridge subdivision to the north and um you know other residential subdivisions surrounding it on on all sides. Um the applicant has provided following justification for the reszone. So the the need of the proposed zone change or yeah zone changes to be given the same density that's been awarded to like parcels in the surrounding area. What will the public benefit of the zone change? Smaller lot sizes will be more affordable to consumers. And how does the proposal comply with the goals and policies? This nibly city general plan will create a beautiful subdivision will be that will beautify the area continue the walking trails and help with existing water flow issues and explain how the anticipated use is appropriate for the surrounding area. The use is similar to the surrounding areas with the exception of the five lots and the hideway stage which has larger lots. a little bit more context on the area the uh Maple and and the zoning around around this the property. So, Maple Valley Estates to the West, it's an R2 zone with a PUD overlay and you know an old under an older PUD ordinance that that was developed. So, uh the lot sizes in that are are pretty pretty consistent with what you see in an R2A subdivision. um you know quarter to third acre lots. The Hideway Estates that those five lots the applicant mentioned that's that's an R2 subdivision. So generally halfacre lots. Stonebridge to the north is is an R2A cluster subdivision. And then Heritage Crossing to the east is R2A. And then there's also Maloof to the northwest which is industrially zoned. The properties access from 3200 South and 1200 West. And there is a master plan trail and storm water drainage on the north edge of the property. So that kind of shows that that general context of the property, the future land use map of the currently adopted general plan, which I, you know, it's on the agenda to to update the general plan, but the currently adopted plan is medium density residential. Um it shows this as detached residential the with in the in the updated plan. The applicable some applicable goals are landing school one which is encouraged development that respects and preserves the character of the city and provides a mix of commercial residential housing and some light industrial uses carefully plan for growth within the city city ensuring that development occurs in suitable locations and can be efficiently served over the long term. Then residential development housing goal one is ensure that new residential development is compatible with existing development protects Nubli's rural character and natural resources. In general staff has found that this application is um in in accordance with the general plan as has the planning commission. I'll get to that with the recommendation. This is the currently adopted general plan. That yellow color you see all across is that medium density residential designation and then a little bit of industrial there where where Maloof is. So the uh recommendation from planning commission as well as staff is to approve this ordinance for reszone and staff's uh findings are that the application is in support of the the general plan and future land use map and the zoning is compatible and consistent with zoning and development in the surrounding area.

»Anything to clear up with Levi before we have a public hearing? All right. Thank you Levi. With that then with an open public hearing. If you would like to address the council on this matter, please come forward. Happy to hear. Three, two, one. Seeing no public coming forward, we will close the public hearing and move directly to uh discussion and consideration of this zone with the council. uh this is for first reading if it's our it is our custom often to take uh matters like this under two readings. The goal of the first reading if we stick with that and not weigh the second reading is to make sure we understand the proposal clearly. Um we can get into as much policy discussion as the council wishes but often we uh can do the heavy lifting on a second reading policy. Turn it to you please. I understand a question. So, Levi, uh, would this application since the, uh, open space subdivision was just amended previously, this application fall under the old guidelines or the new ones?

»They would have to fall under the new ones because they don't have a they're not vested under any application that they've submitted.

»Okay. Um the last one was denied. Well, the the reason was denied and so by extension the the subdivision was denied uh because it was a condition on on that approval. I'd ask if you're if there's opposition to voting, but I don't know what would we would be voting on.

»Thank you. In other words, I need a motion and a motion that discussion is completely appropriate. Of course.

»I will make a motion to approve ordinance 26 national wrong one to go there.

»Uh for the reszone part 31719 R2 the first reading. We have a motion from Garrett, a second from Nick uh for first reading approval of ordinance 2602. Discussion please. Is there opposition to voting on this for first reading? I have a it's kind of a more of an engineering question probably, but um what I see uh for this area now with what we've currently done is unfortunately not what I had hoped um for us to get. I really appreciate the opponent working for years to try to come up with something better city and I think that unfortunately you are taking the easy route as a council than doing the right thing for the community. So, I just want to make that said, but my engineering kind of question is I assume this development will be pretty similar to Heritage Crossing. Um, and I noticed that that um specific development was raised significantly. Um, and it's a lot of independent builders that have gone in there. Do you see that it's going to be a similar kind of experience where they're going to have to bring in quite a bit and and it'll be almost elevated compared to what's to the west and north of them? So, I'm just going to relate some of the concept plans that were worked through in the original plan. And the road that came through and looped to 1200 West on that plan was raised about 4 ft. That would imply that the other lots would need to be raised to kind of meet that road elevation.

»Okay. Thank you.

»Yeah. So, council, um, it just kind of brings up why I'm saying that. I think this is this is not what I had hoped, right? But when you look at that level compared to the ones around it, it's significantly it's it's noticeable.

»The elevation

»the elevation of those homes is is noticeable. Um, and you're going to have homes that are all very different looking from each other. It's independent built probably different sizes, which is normal. It's what we want when I'm ready. But we'll have pretty similar lot size, I think, throughout, right? And this is why I feel it's I wish we could have gotten better. And so I think what I'd like for us as a council to do is go walk through there, maybe talk to the proponent, talk to your neighbors that are in that area, um, and really ask like, is this is this what we wanted? because we just got into the opportunity to have an open space force an open space I guess or work with that we had hoped with the horse property and some of those kind of things. This will just be homes and that's all that they were uh that we would be asking them to do. So just some thoughts that I had that uh they'll let you get up for a second.

»Thank you. Oh and the proponent is here. You're welcome to speak to the council as the proponent. Uh this is for first reading. You can save your power for second reading. Everybody you're welcome to speak to us as we discuss this.

»Yeah. Thanks, Mayor. Um I would just say um this has been going since 2023. I feel like we've kicked the tires on open space long enough. As pretty much anyone that I've talked to either in this meeting or outside of the meeting, I think everyone agrees or can see that it's reasonable to go from R2 to R2A. I don't think that can be argued. Um, the open space subdivision I think we've has kind of run its course and I think as far as like walking the area or making me wait for a second reading after waiting for three years, you know, I think even going through the open space, I don't think it was Cavalier of the council that off asked me to do that, but I I feel like we've We've tried our best to to do stuff for the community and I think this is a very reasonable request. I hope the council will see that that we've tried our hardest to look at every angle and this is just something that we're trying to as private land owners to get the same benefits of our land as everyone else around us. Any questions you guys got for me? Thanks for coming in.

»Everyone Everyone looks really good three years later other than my hairline.

»Tom, I I have a question for you on surface water. Uh oh, Josh, if you still have more

»Oh, yeah. No, no. Did you have a question for

»No, for Tom. An engineering question. Same engineering question. So, we see that area covered with water at certain times, right? Um, at least that's my observation. Is is that something we can deal with engineering wise? It seems like there are rules about not pushing surface water onto your neighbors. Am I Am I reading it right or wrong? I'll give you a chance to ask the engineers if I can solve a problem.

»Yeah. With with one.

»Okay. Can you can you anti-gravity this for us?

»Trying to figure out how to answer this. We it can be done. Yes. I don't know that we have codes that guide that.

»Okay.

»The only way to really do that is through an agreement with the developer. through an annexation agreement or a development agreement

»that would spell these things out because we don't have the codes that really say you have to fill in a wet area before you can go. There's nothing in there that says you you have to fill up every lot to the road elevation as part of the development. That would all have to be done outside the code through a development agreement or an annotation or excuse me, not an annotation. could make a resound.

»So, we are at a uh resum now without that agreement. We're not at a development proposal yet.

»Correct. Now, it like I said, it can be done. Engineers do it all the time. It's just how to collect it and how to convey it and it's all through gravity. Everything equilibrates and you just have to figure out how to get it moving.

»Do you think there's an opportunity to actually help? I'm not asking for any physical data to support this. An opportunity to help groundwater of surrounding neighborhoods with an engineering design on this property. We had a pretty good design the time before last or the time the time before this one. They they'd installed a land drain on the the west boundary. They brought everything up so it's surface flow into collection basins and then

»through a a master plan storm water system that's

»I do believe we have some budgeted for that and it can bathe this water to the the slope.

»Okay. Does that require cooperation from adjacent land owners say Maloof.

»So there is a drainage easement through the Maloof properties

»already.

»Yes. And then there's also prescriptive easements that canals own that that goes just south of Stonebridge through I can't remember there's there's two lots of the canal currently goes through. So the canal has those prescript prescriptive rice that could pipe it if it's part of the project.

»Okay. Thank you. Anything else council? Uh, this is for first reading. The um motion in Oh, sorry. Where are we? We can we got a public hearing discussion. We're on first reading. Have a motion in second.

»Uh, sorry, I lost myself. Thanks for getting me on track. Any other discussion? Uh, any things you would like to see staff do if and when this comes back? I'll tell you what, I'll hold I'll hold that to see if this passes for first reading. If it doesn't pass through first reading, I'll ask you if there are other things council. Is there an objection to voting on this reason application or first reading? I don't see any. So, I'll call for a voice vote, please. Those in favor of uh this reason application, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. It's unanimous. Now, I'll ask council, are are there other things staff can do uh in order to get ready for additional discussion that second page?

»I'd say engage in a possible reason agreement to talk about some of the things you just brought up. Okay. All right. Uh, we'll bring this back for a second reading. Thank you, Josh. Let's talk about Here's something I hope you'll really like. Let's talk about transient room tax.

»It's fun to say nothing else. So, we're going to have a public hearing on this. Hey, thanks for coming out, guys. Appreciate it. Who's going to introduce this?

»Let's do it. Thank you, Justin. So, this really was the brainchild of Amy. So, if you like it, you can thank her. And in talking to Nick as well on just transiting room tax. She is our city treasurer. I was looking for opportunity for revenue. So, she heard about this and we are one of the few cities in Well, I didn't I should check this stat. We're one of the few cities that don't charge the transient room tax. Um, at least that's what I was told. I should double check that. But, uh, this is a tax, a 1% tax that is put on short-term rentals such as VBOS's, those kinds of things, as well as just any really shortterm less than 30 days kind of hotel stay, things like that. So, uh, we ran the ordinance through our attorney. He checked off on everything and was okay with it. And so, we're just asking you all if this is something you would like us to move forward with and implement for the very few right now, we have less, I believe less than less than a dozen, if I remember correctly, short-term rentals in the city. So, this is really kind of getting a set up for the future thing. These 12 people have been notified by email. One of the things we're doing now with business licenses is ensuring that people agree that emailed is the official correspondence. And so they were notified each of them individually that this was coming before the council but by email. And so uh we did some tried to do some outreach there. And I don't believe we've even heard back from any of them by email or anything along those lines. And so we are just looking to you guys for direction on if this is something you guys would would like us to get set up. Again, it's going to be pretty minimal impact of the budget currently.

»Okay, thank you.

»Um I did have an individual contact me today about attending this public hearing. Um I did get some feedback.

»Okay. Were they coming or

»I I gave them the the item number and gave them specifics, but

»Okay.

»And if they missed this public hearing, of course, folks are always say we're sorry. They're always willing always uh invited to contact house members individual.

»So, I have a question, Justin. And um I'm just thinking of the logistics of collecting this tax. So the Utah State Tax Commission collects it. Um does is that tax added to tacked on top of a short-term rental agreement and then submitted to the state tax commission? I'm not certain of those details. What I believe is it's handled very similar to sales tax where we notify them that this tax needs to be charged. It's up to them to make sure that it gets charged and turned into the state.

»Okay.

»So, our resident tax expert and we

»anything say on that?

»Um, uh, no. Okay.

»We can I add one thing? It it is something I know that Amy checks on when when they renew their business license each year as well. So the city would look at you know they would provide some kind of proof

»when they when they up when they

»Yeah. We're city is certainly not inventing the wheel on this.

»Yeah.

»And there are mechanisms in place to validate and audit.

»Okay.

»We talked about that too.

»All right.

»That's that are available to Nidley.

»Perfect. Uh, if there aren't any other information pack questions, seeing none, I'll open the public hearing. And Greg, as property rights guy, I expect you to be up here giving us the business. If you desire, we appreciate you coming to all of our meetings uh, representing property rights. If you're going to say anything, come to the mic. If not,

»actually on this one, I think we're good.

»Okay, good. Public hearing is open. anyone wishes to address the council. Okay, seeing seeing no one come forward, I'll close the public hearing and turn it to the council uh for ordinance 2603. Your discussion is up for first reading. I'll make a motion to approve ordinance 263 first reading. We have a motion from Nick and a second from Aaron to approve 2603 for first reading. It's on you.

»I mean, honestly, um, I'm in favor. I don't think it impacts any of our citizens at all. I think it aligns nely with pretty much everyone else in the state valley want to visit. Um, they should be advantage economic opportunities here. Even though they're little, they may be. Just makes sense to me.

»Okay. Thank you.

»Just a question. What are the other cities around us doing with this topic?

»I'm sorry. I

»What are what are the other cities around us doing with this topic? Are they charging the same tax or is this something that

»So I think the 1% rate is established by state code and so if they're exercising their option to collect this tax, it's 1%. I don't know. I guess I'm not certain either. I think that's the max you can, but you may be able to do less as I understand you, but I'm not 100% certain. I'm sorry.

»Yeah, we

»Yeah, we find that out before secondary or staff and work on that. I don't work.

»Yeah, that's a fair question. Good question that I I can look into.

»Yeah, just more curiosity than I think must do that. I was just curious.

»Yeah, it's it's fine. We'll have that answer for you. It's not,

»but I'm I'm totally It's not a big deal. I would score on this anyway. That was just a question.

»I don't think it worth your time to investigate on that.

»Thanks.

»Thank you, Randy.

»Aaron,

»I have just a general question about short-term rentals in our city. That's right. Um, we I know Logan City has some fairly strict guidelines or rules in their ordinance about short-term rentals. Um, like how how many they can have per area, how far apart they have to be. Do we have guidelines in our ordinance about that?

»Uh, no. Our ours is ours is pretty loose and that was a lot by design when when it came through planning commission and and city council about I would say five four to five years ago when it was adopted. Um we haven't seen a huge problem with short-term rentals and we didn't want to we didn't foresee a big problem coming at least at least at that point in time. It could it it could be something that the city considers, but uh we do have some regulations, some things they have to follow. They have to they have to have fire inspection. Um you can only have one per household. So there are some restrictions, but uh not I would say they're it's probably quite a bit looser than what Logan has.

»When I was just doing a search reading about this, I was looking at just Airbnb for example. um two there are two listings in the new um are they apartments or town homes I guess in Travis Taylor's

»like right next to each other. Mhm.

»So, I just was wondering, oh, I wonder if there's going to be more pop up in that development, and if so, do we want a whole bunch of units as rentals al together right there? We want to try and encourage owner occupied by by having some stricter regulations. That's why I just wanted to check to see what what our rules look like. Yeah, the city I mean this the city can definitely go down that path if you think that's necessary, but we'd have to, you know, obviously change the code and go go through the planning commission and but yeah, I mean at this point in time, at least as staff, we're not seeing a lot of complaints

»about short-term rentals. I mean, I think we I think we got one and it wasn't wasn't necessarily a complaint about what was going on, but what might going go on because they were about to start one and there was some fear about what what could happen there. But we didn't actually get any complaints about any violations or anything like that. So, okay. Got your comments. Anyone opposed to voting on this for first reading? Seeing no opposition, let's do it. Uh ordinance 2603 for first reading. Those in favor, please say I.

»I. Are there any oppos? Okay. Passes unanimously. Thank you very much.

»Let's cruise right along.

»We're zipping. Oh, look at that. It's only We're five minutes into the meeting according to the clock.

»Don't fall in.

»I can fix that.

»I always I always change this, but they were having their yoga in here when I was going around. So,

»don't call me your Okay, let's uh let's take up for a second reading uh city storm water master plan. We had a a in-depth uh presentation from the consultant on the master plan. Tom, were you here for that?

»I was.

»Oh, I'm sorry. You were so quiet. You let Steve Wood do all You let the consultant

»I was trying to move the slides along.

»Speed him up.

»Yes.

»I think he said

»it was a good presentation.

»20 minutes and maybe it was two hours, but it was a good presentation.

»It was a great presentation.

»Yes. Smoke. Uh so we'll we'll talk about the second reading. This would be to adopt the city sorry the storm water management plan. I don't think there was an assignment for staff to do anything

»beyond um just have time to for council took

»one correction.

»Oh thank you Tom. So, Council Member Kenska identified some dates that there were some discrepancies in the master plan on dates and things. So, I sent it back to consult and they scrubbed it, got all the dates right. I haven't verified, but assuming that I got it right the second time.

»I got that Thursday night, left town, and

»Yeah. Thank you foring that up.

»Okay. Uh, it's yours, council. Nathan, make a motion to approve storm water west6. Thank you, Nathan. We have a motion to approve from Nathan, a second from Garrett. That would be to adopt the NLY city storm water master plan. Any discussion? Any opposition to voting? Cool. See, engineering can be fun. It is fun, right? Well, I reckon something.

»He had a nice speaking voice.

»Oh, that's all it takes.

»He made it very

»Yeah, you can pass that on to Steve.

»Okay, appreciate that.

»Uh, no opposition to voting. I see none. So, let's call the role on storm adoption of the storm m water storm water master plan, please. Council member holding your vote

»in favor.

»Council member M

»in favor. Council

»member manel

»in favor.

»Council member Kenskin

»in favor.

»Council member Spaldy

»in favor.

»Thank you.

»Five in favor none opposed. So good work Tom. Uh we're cruising. Do you want to jump right into the general plan or do you want to stretch your legs? Um, I guess I should ask I'm going to let let's take a let's take a short break, right? We'll come back and tackle the next the general Welcome back council. We'll come back to order and next let's talk about 2601. This is on the general plan. Uh we set a work plan to deal with sections all the sections except land use and housing. and we've made the changes to sections except for changes to land use and housing. Uh those changes have been incorporated into the current draft. Uh they were adopted by a motion to amend it. Um so tonight I hope our focus is on land use and housing. And that doesn't mean we can't go back and rethink some of the things we talked about last night. But if you wanted to start there on man housing, Levi, do you want to introduce any of this to us?

»Um, I'm I'm happy to I'm happy to reintroduce if you'd like. H those sections have been introduced in the past the just just to say that the updates have been incorporated into the the draft document. Well, would you like me to go over the those sections again or

»I'll look down the look for head knots?

»Yes.

»Okay.

»Okay, let's do it.

»Let me scroll forward. See here.

»That's a question. So, you said, didn't we also still need to do or did we already look over public facilities and water conservation? Do we already do this? Um

»they were it was in the minutes that said it was considered but no changes were made to some of those. You know

»that doesn't mean that we vote. I can't revisit that but we got the entire thoughts.

»Okay.

»We didn't have a lot of discussion on

»Yeah.

»Okay.

»All right. So just a few things on on future land use to point out. So this is our currently adopted future land use map. Let me get a different view here so you can see it a little bit better. Um, and one thing I'll point out on on the future land use map is the designations are are proposed to be updated. Uh the probably the biggest change on the on designations is the the residential and what the terminology which right now there's definitely some subjectivity when we say low density, medium density, high density and the current plan doesn't actually define what that what you know the thresholds are within within those. Um but you can you can see how you know the majority of of the area within our community is this medium density residential and and then some of the some of the areas of future growth. There's some substantial area of of um a little higher density residential going into a big a big area of industrial. I'm gonna point out I won't spend much more time on that. I'll I'll focus more on the proposed map which um I'm I'm going to highlight some of the the changes. So I I mentioned these these this updated terminology. So detached rather than going with low density, medium density, high density, we're proposing this this terminology of detached mixed and attached residential. Um and then also a a detached large lot for for lots basically greater than 3/4 of an acre. those areas, you know, which we tip which we previously called low density um is this larger law detached residential. And and the reason for this is is you can it's pretty well defined in the um and in the term itself. So that's there. I I want to highlight some of the changes here to the plan from the previous one. One is this idea of 3200 South becoming a a gateway uh kind of a a center street of of Nibi that emphasized gathering spaces, neighborhood services. So there's there's more um designations for this. we're calling it mixeduse neighborhood commercial. So, it could be there could be some definitely residential in the area, but but if if there's an opportunity for some of these areas for uh commercial uses, this plan would uh would support that. Uh there's also in in the existing plan there's this area for the town center and and the the current the or this this proposed plan um defines better what we mean by by the town center and and generally with mixed use commercial some some residential use but more an emphasis of commercial along Main Street closer to the highway and then as you get further away from there makes residential. There's um supportive neighborhood commercial and a in this area of potential future high high growth down at 4,000 south and 4,400 as well as uh really near near 4,400 and and 1200 west and and along along the highway uh meaning al sorry along Main Street and 4,400 south as Well, uh, something that's quite a bit different in this plan is this idea, uh, near 3200 South and and south of it down to about where the USU farms are. this idea of of a commercial node, you know, that's that's not necessarily new, but but supporting this this commercial and and with some mixed use in the area with with attached residential, mixed residential, putting more rooftops in the vicinity to try to set it up for success. that that commercial area where now some of those areas were showing more as lower density residential. This this puts more emphasis for for higher density to to support those uses. Uh I'll point out one other thing along the 4400 South corridor. there's a little bit less um industrial than what is in our existing plan that um al although I it's there there's still quite a bit there that there was there was some back and forth on that with the economic consultant of what was feasible getting some feedback from uh from Sean Mill the economic development uh coordinator for for the barrier association of governments and and that's what we came up with. But some there is there it does propose shrinking that just just a little bit um in that in that area to try to be more more realistic with what what the market could serve in that area in the future. Some of the policies that are noted in the plan are to continue pursuing this creation of a of a town center in that area between 2600 South and 3200 South and uh close to Main Street out west to about 400 West. Support expanded neighborhood commercial on 3200 South and other future nodes. up up up update the zoning code including adopting a commercial residential mixed use overlay focus on form for new development. So potentially considering form-based code and incentivize commercial development. Let's see here. and then establish a new residential zoning framework which would including considering communities vision market realities that enable enable a greater variety of housing product types. Okay, I'm going to flip through. So that's that's a general overview of land use. Let me get down. You know, actually this this presentation doesn't go into housing a lot. I'll just I'll just give a brief um description of of housing. It it really does reaffirm the policies that we have already adopted in our modern income housing plan and those strategies. There are a few others to to consider that were were discussed by the steering committee and and by the economic consultant, but uh for the most part uh the city is is doing a variety of different things through reszones, through access allowing access accessory dwelling units to um support moderate income housing. and and really the plan recommends continuing a lot of those same policies. So I I can get into more specifics on that if you'd like, but just just suffice it to say that there's not a ton of recommendations that are a lot different from what what are current already adopted in our plan, our modern compass plan.

»Okay. Thank you, Levi. Yep. Cheers, council. I don't Are we going to start with the specific section or just go for it?

»Um,

»thank you.

»Okay, our specific

»Let's start with that section. Um, I just had some notes one mainly one Levi about the reference to state code for the moderate income housing. I don't I was trying to find I'll try to get to the right page.

»Let me I'm gonna pull up a version that's

»I think the reference is incorrect. I'll try to get to the page that I saw. Sorry. I apologize. Um I'm looking at day 37. Just

»analysis first. Can't see it. It's code 109843. I think it's 1021201. Just direction

»got re numbered. You're right.

»1098. I read that restructured.

»Yeah. Yeah. So, sorry. What page is that?

»37. Okay. So, just just correct the the code reference.

»Yeah, otherwise I mean it was pretty interesting to see some of the the numbers right as far as the breakdowns of development what's happening. I think I sent everyone um file. I got a separate examples as well just for the a lot of the data on here was predicated on permit. So I asked for kind of like a prop type description from the assessor's office and I shared that with everybody. basically I think the summary table if I remember right was about uh 85% you know detached sing or just single family and I think they included um they included counts with that or not but it was 15% non I have to look um but it's kind of got me thinking just big picture of like as a city and many cities I was trying to do some research on like if anyone had published ratios on kind of what a healthy city looks like as far as development types in a city, right? Obviously understanding too of just the nature that it's 2026 and things are changing before us. But I was thinking about that um just in general like what a benchmark ratio of all things like that would be for midly. uh just in general just to consider as we talk about development overall. Obviously too understanding just the nature of the dynamics of housing and how it's changing moving forward. But it was just kind of interesting to see how for a long time it's kind of like singular style right of and then over the last four years how those numbers are shifting quickly. Just interesting data but that's kind of what I got out of it. Just have a couple questions. um for for Justin and others. So whenever when every um building is built um residential building is built that's currently um permitted for what is our percentage of attached versus detached houses in um when it's all done. says, "What we are right now, what would what would we be? What percentage

»when the ones under construction are currently completed?"

»That's right.

»Yeah.

»I'm sorry. I have these I could get that on off the top of my head, but to give you an idea of what's

»just keeping a ballpark rest estimate. I mean, just looking

»uh 15 18 20%

»say close to 1520 somewhere in there. Uh to give you an idea in our budget uh we right now are budgeting new residences is about 7525%. So three multif family to one single family is kind of in the ballpark of what's being constructed right now.

»Yeah. And I had the same question that what what's I mean I think the overall consensus that you would get from the citizens input and you know mostly the citizens input is that they do want to keep nimly a small town feel at what point in time is it not you know what's is it so I think it's a big question and my research has kind of been fruitless other than somewhere between 20 and 25% would probably be a threshold but there's no real data that I could find on that topic other than just opinions. And so,

»you know, I sort of 15 about 15% when it's all where I got now.

»Yeah, that's that's a rough guess. I I could pin that out pretty without too much effort.

»Okay.

»Well, that's it's just a ballpark. Once again, just so we know where we are. Y

»maybe just something I'd add to what what Justin was saying. I think in general some of the bigger subdivisions that have been approved uh have a mix of of town home single family primarily with some with some condominiums. And we see a different trajectory as far as the building permits. We see that sometimes we get a big demand for for town homes because of affordability compared to a single family and then sometimes that flips and we we start seeing more for single family. So it it takes a while for those to build out, but year to year, you know, it may for for one reason or another, we may get a lot more town homes because there's just more buyers that are bu that are buying those lots, but there's still single family lots available and titled that someone could buy, you know, build a home there. And and so I I I think it's healthy to to be responsive to the market the way those are mixed to have some of those options and where yes, there's a single family lot someone could buy, but but there's also an option, you know, a little more affordable option for a first-time home buyer. That's that's kind of what I've observed with with the subdivisions that have come in. Do I have to do I have to make a motion to to correct that statement or can we just say please update it?

»I think it Are you clear on

»Yeah, I think we're good.

»Um, how about if we do this? Do I have consensus to correct the records in state code? If it's wrong, go ahead.

»It is wrong.

»So if you don't agree to correct or incorrect mess, let me know.

»Just making sure.

»Yeah, that's good.

»Yeah, I agree with that.

»So it will be correct.

»Thank you.

»Uh I'll throw this out. Um, I felt like, and you guys know this if you looked at the packet maybe last week or during our before our last meeting, I kind of felt like we had a disconnect between some of the public input we received when we reached out to citizens and um, and what this plan uh, plans. And I think Levi did a great job of identifying it uh that a conflict and and so I I proposed some words to go at the front of the housing section. Um I'm not I'm not going to read it unless you want me to read it. I'm also not going to move to amend the plan unless somebody I'm not I'm going to have if you guys if you guys think that fits in the plan um to reconcile my perceived conflict between public input and what the plan actually does, then one of you will have to make that motion. I'll I'll just say um I'll read the first sentence or two. This plan considers how we will grow housing opportunities in the coming years. An equally important question and one that was discussed while writing this plan is if nibbly should grow by increasing housing opportunities. Uh I'll read the next one. As shown by citizen outreach, many of us value our small town heritage and wish for the nibi that we were either born in or moved to. Because we value the nibbly of today, we resist changing the nibbly of tomorrow, even if our moving here changed the the nibbly of yesterday. And then there's more words, but uh uh give you time to read it if you haven't. I'll read it again if you've read it before. And this is kind of she got it. Okay,

»Greg, if you want me to read it to you, I will.

»She cut it, so she copied it.

»Council want me to read it. Sure. So, continuing, Utah and Cash County are in the middle of a housing crisis and lack of affordable housing puts home ownership beyond the reach of many of our children and grandchildren. Should our community help solve this housing crisis? If not, then who will? Each year, the state legislator legislature shows an increasing willingness to make land use decisions uh that were previously reserved for local municipalities. Most of us could not afford the houses we currently own if we had to repurchase them at today's prices. That seems to imply that maintaining the status quo cannot solve the housing problem. This plan tries to balance individual property rights with the rights of our community. We desire open space, including agricultural fields. However, it's a struggle to buy that open space outright or to buy the development rights of that open space. Cash County and state of Utah embrace a right to farm. If a farmer decides to stop farming or a farmer's heirs don't want to farm, does that family have a right not to farm and sell their land? Changes are difficult. It can be even more difficult if we ignore if we ignore it and allow somebody else to shape our change. That change nibly has already been impacted by development on our northern border by a neighboring city. That same possibility exists on our southern border. For this reason, this plan admits the inevitable pressure for growth. It attempts to honor and preserve our heritage while managing change to create that nibly we can continue to be proud.

»Nick and you're proposing right front of like the housing section introduction

»to me that seemed like an appropriate place to put this as an introduction to the housing housing section, right? other comments, other thoughts?

»Question,

»please.

»So, in these paragraphs, are you just seeking to try and help people understand maybe the gap between what some of the survey results were and what some of our suggested methods moving forward are? Yes. I'm trying to not read but but reconcile some of the survey data we have.

»Yeah.

»That says no change. I'm here.

»Yeah. Because I agree. I mean, reading through survey data, it's like the majority of people are saying like, yeah, we want there to be no change or status quo.

»Right.

»Well, I like what the mayor's done here. I do think it's important to bridge the gap because I do think there has been a disconnect. you read it, it's like if you read the data and the comments and then you go back to read the plan, you're going it's pretty hard to reconcile it and from my perspective, but I wonder if we could, and this is maybe a future discussion on the future, Matt, maybe we could tone down a little bit of the mix, take some of that off and make that more detached, saying we recognize it and we want some mixed, we want some attached and but we want and we want more deached as well than what we would policy. So, it's kind of like we see the gap, we're going to come back a little bit on it and but still have some attached housing, you know, just a little bit of comeback a little and so, you know, if it's appropriate, I mean, we have the authority to edit the map.

»Yeah.

»So, are you are you finished? I haven't finished yet comment

»I was going to say we talked about that and we talked brought up the meeting from the south and how that might affect some of this stuff and so kind of but is there more information than driving this from we have a coordinated by Jub engineering contractor they have set up a meeting between Nibi City and Hyram City to talk about this south corridor, the 4,400 South corridor. And um that that meeting is is it next week?

»Next week.

»Right. So I won't I won't be able to make that. I have to go to a a CDBDG state meeting in Salt Lake, but we will have Tom, I don't know, Tom, you you were invited. I don't know if you can make it, but we'll have city staff there. And I mean, I don't know. I I hate to predict where that will go, but I did reach out to the organizer from JUB to uh let them know that and they're not the decider. it's organizing this effort to build a corridor. Uh that how Nibbi City Nibbi City's involvement in the process that defines this corridor certainly depends on whether we're north of the road or whether the road is encapsulated in Hyum. I think that's a fair statement to make.

»Sorry. What does what's JV? What's what they have to this.

»Go ahead, Liam.

»Uh, they're the contractor for a 4,400 South uh study to better define the corridor for corridor preservation and and um

»yeah, define the define the the road.

»There's been ongoing studies, but but yeah, they're their consultant that's been contracted to do that. And I believe the county I believe the county is is uh leaving is contracting with them but with coordination with Nibi and Hyram and I

»Wellsville but

»and do

»Yeah. So there was some I think it was COG funds to pay for that study. So they

»uh not quite there C that's a good try though

»they're CMP funds

»CMPO quarter preservation

»that come from the federal government

»but not local option sales tax funds that COG recommends on how to spend those. So there is money being spent by the cash metropolitan planning organization on that corridor preservation or for corridor preservation in the area that the last study uh where Bow West was the contractor just for reference uh to establish they looked at a lot of places where that where the corridor could be um and and the motivation for the corridor is the highway 101 Utah Highway 101 one, as you know, comes from Walesville, takes a right turn towards the dam, goes past a uh uh middle school and then turns north and goes on Highwood's main street and then that and then goes out to Highway 165. So that is the route that connects the two state highways with the Pisgo mine going on on east, right? they they want to get out to 8991 and go north or south south from there. So there may be other things to consider, but certainly Hyram has been saying we'd like to not have these trucks come through our main street. We'd like to have a southern transportation corridor. Uh and the study that looked at where that might be was 4,400 South

»as a recommendation. I'm not sure that it serves us a lot of good to get down I mean really drill down and get detailed about what we want this southern edge of this annexation map that a lot of things are still in flux with the upcoming meetings. So I I like the map that's there now for that reason.

»Okay,

»that's an interesting thing because I I mean I'll I'll tell you about it maybe where they made U strong request that Nibi set up a buffer zone which I think is great regional planning between Nibi and Hyram and that we we we say what's going to go on in in Nibi on the buffer between Nibi and Hyram and to me I think that's a great idea but I don't know how we put that on a future land use map. We have that on a future land use map, but it anticipates 4,400 South being the line between our cities. And we have that buffer set up that that Hyram has expressed uh uh favoring us with that zoning. It's a It's industrial commercial actually. Right. It's the purple.

»Yeah. Yeah.

»Yeah. And I mean I can go back to the map like to be clear, it's not the entire corridor.

»Yeah, that's right. But um

»but it's

»there's a chunk of it

»but it's hard to say well here's what we're going to plan on a buffer relative to the line between our towns until we actually establish the line between our towns.

»So yeah it's on the west side but I guess it's per I mean there's these I I think that discussion Erin is is definitely up in the air to be determined. Um but if the council wants to do something like oh well um move our future land use map north and change our future annexation plans north. You know at this point we could do that or we could move it south.

»Is that fair, Justin? Have I represented that?

»Yes, sir.

»Yeah, I think I'm there and trying to get some of these details when there's still unknowns. Although what are the details that I'm talking to a number of in the builders and they'll do some work within this uh you know even though we have a lot of town homes there is a lot of desire for the detached single family and and the need to try and I think that you see that that desire and that change coming. The problem is that we don't have codes really for that because I'm talking to the bandwidth they're thinking average lot size you know especially in today's market we want 7500 to 8,000 square ft which would be our new RM 2A technically in airlines I'm not I'm saying this is just from conversations I've had and where we see single family housing and blame he probably could address some of that more than others, but and so I I'm kind of hesitant to make changes till we have some of that ironed out from the south, but also saying that you think there's probably a need from not only the survey data that we got. I think Mary, you did a great job of kind of coordinating those two in the opening. I think that's brilliant and better, worse than all that be. Uh, but I think based on some of the conversation I'm having, I think there's going to be more yellow and orange, unless you specify, which it does, but maybe we highlight in mixed residential does not mean you cannot do detach single family. It does mention it, but I wonder if we should somehow emphasize that it's still allowed in, but just so we don't drive that auction away from these builders and stuff coming in. We don't have codes for a lot of the things they're hoping to see yet, but I imagine once this is drafted and the zone changes we'll have to make that will occur.

»Yeah. I mean, and and to be clear, no residential zone doesn't allow all detached housing really. I mean, PUD, RM, any of those zones allow it. Uh, and I do think the code um or I mean the the the general plan is clear that it's it's a mix

»of housing

»that the M and RM is mixed,

»right? So,

»and this is mixed residential. So it's it's not entirely detached and there's limited areas where this map is suggesting that it's exclusively attached uh specifically adjacent to Highway 8991 adjacent to those uh planned commercial areas but other than that it's contemplating a mix. I think the biggest concern we get from sort of the residents we get I think kind of points to what you said Justin that you know building permits is 3 to one right now you know on town homes versus single family that's what I think they're feeling like we don't do anything with town homes anymore there's no single family homes I think that's what the residents feel like and it sounds like they're kind of supporting that main town it's growing and I think they're wanting to see that lift Right. But how do we how do we force that? I mean, that's what that's what people are buying. That's they can afford. We could we could not allow town homes at all and then we would just get, I guess, less growth or or less affordable options. So, if someone wants to to locate in Nibbi, if they could somehow squeeze by even though they can't afford a single family lot to get a single family lot, I mean, I I'm just saying it a lot of it is market driven, right? And so, right now, there's options for people to to stay in Nibbi where if we if we force that out, some of those people might just they would just I guess go elsewhere, go to Logan, go to Smithfield, go to Nelson, would like to see some creativity in that environ. Does that kind of get something that was pretty unique and impressive in the way they because they kept some of the pricing low. Not technically affordable under the state definition of rural housing, but it's more attainable.

»Yeah, I think there were some that achieved affordability.

»That was by contract development required. They set the price in development agreement. These houses will certain houses won't more than 60 70. So affordability depends on the area median income. So I don't know what the we look at the surrounding areas. But I want to I want to say that you know if we don't have an ordinance for what you think we should be planning that's actually getting the card before the horse because the plan drives the orbits. If you want a plan for single family detached housing um and the consequences of that plan, then the ordinance falls out of that, right?

»Mhm.

»Um and and maybe maybe we need a single family detached housing that looks at single family, but 10 lots per acre, but We don't write the ordinance first for that. We write the plan for that. And so 10 lots per acre, we're talking 4,000 square foot lots. You know, we tried a 5,000 square foot lot subdivision in here a bit ago. It certainly met some opposition. So I don't know if that's a slam dunk. And you know, um I think what this future land use map, even if there's no ordinance to reszone property to what this land use map says it will be. That's that sets a strong a strong expectation of people that might want to annex to town. And I know I mean It's probably one of the first questions you ask somebody when they say, "Well, we'd like to have Nibbly City Services. We'd like to annex and uh um I'm I'm sure where was I going with this? I'm sure that's one of the first questions you asked them. Have you looked at our future land use map and does your application fit with what we anticipate in our plan?"

»Yeah. And there and and there is in our existing plan as well as what's being proposed some flexibility there and and and that doesn't necessarily mean that the applicant can can just do any any spectrum there. I think the council had the council has some discretion on whether it fits the specific context, but I don't think in the in the plan it is it is somewhat general because things change and markets change and areas change and so it's it's intended to be somewhat adaptable. No, we don't know exactly what's going to go on every little piece of property in Nibi and and to build on that I we we can we can adopt I'm not saying we should we can adopt this general plan with that future land use map and as our thoughts mature if we understand future land uses differently than what the map says we don't have to redo the whole general plan

»update We just update the future land use map and things evolve to where we we know what we want.

»Randy,

»I'm highly supportive. I look at this map and I'm highly supportive of what we've done. The changes on Highway 89. I think it's brilliant. I love the idea of more commercial there. And I do like the idea of some on the on the west side of the highway. I like that. um in the orange there and I I brown I think that's an excellent place for detached and mixed I think we get into the city of Nibble and I think we can assume that at least I make assumption that if a developer sees this future land use map and they see the that orange then they've been coident say absolutely and here comes more attached housing and and I think it's going to be I mean it's it's I think what's going to h in my opinion I think what would happen then would be the developers say well it's they would have high expectations that if it's labeled that makes residential use and they could come in there and put um proposal for attached housing all over the place there. Not that that's bad but I just think that's that's the consequence of having this future land map use stay as the colors that they are. So, I do think it matters what it looks like because they'll say, "Well, I've seen the map." And so, I would have every writer, you know, expectation that the council would approve something very similar to what I'm proposing. So, I just think that's I think we've got in my opinion, I think as we come inland, I think we have too much orange. I think if in my opinion if it's I hear you guys talk about going to North A and seeing these detached houses and they're small and they work wonderful. I'd like to see us try that. I'd like to see us put that on the map and we can say no, we want the majority of this detached with maybe some new codes that say we do want some smaller lots. We want to be able to have a variety of houses in there and maybe and still keep our threshold 20-ish% of of attached houses without getting out of control. So, I worry about this map being an indication that a developer would come in there and just and here we go with more attached housing. But, I would like the idea of of keeping this in a legislative matter with us that we can make those decisions as they come up. And second of all, I like the idea of maybe putting in the plan here that yearly, maybe every January, it's written in into our plan that the city council reooks at the future land use map and just says where are we at? Maybe the trend changes and maybe you maybe this this is a living document. Let's not let's not be adequate either. There's just some thoughts.

»Thank you.

»I just had a question. Besides feeling like you're representing your opinions and your neighbors, what is it personally that you don't like about attached town that you feel like is like a threat to the city from that much attached housing? What's the specific issue with the attached housing?

»It's a great question and it's not that I'm really against as much as I Let's go back to affordability. I I don't think it's affordability is a tricky thing for a square foot. It's one of the most expensive um things you can purchase. There's some single family homes in in Nibbly right now that you can get for they might need TLC for about $170 a square foot. a high density house, a condo, town home where you're running about $220 a square foot and they grow at approximately about 2 to 3% a year increasing value where a single family home grows about 5%. This is just given rough estimates. But I know we'd like it for affordability because it's about $100,000 cheaper than a brand new home. But I wonder sometimes if it's if it's affordable on the front end, but is it really affordable on the back end? Or how long would you stay in that 1500 foot place? You use a 10-year plan. So I wonder if you're going to get out the result that you desire. And so I wonder if it's really that affordable. I think affordability needs to look at the front end and then the back end of the house as we try to get out of the home. How affordable is that? My fear is that a lot of this takes on more more rental properties in the future. And so I just think that's we got to be careful. I just think with with build building a connectivity and and community. So it's one of those that I'm not against as much as as much as I think is let's not get too out of control. We only have one chance to develop a parcel of land. you get one shot. And I think every time a part of Atlanta goes in there, that's attached housing, you lose a little bit more fill of a small town. And and I think that's the general opinion of others. And so I voice that. I also want to say that I think every person in that is in attached housing right now that I've met many of them and they're fantastic. This is not about people. It's just about what the city's going to look like in the future. Great people. Um I think everywhere in LA and neighborhoods. So those are some of the ideas. I think it's affordability. It looks good. It it might not be the best option going forward because you don't want so many renters in our city. So what I'm hearing is that's one element. I also don't think it's great investment for the individual buyer. I think it's it's okay, but I think you can do better if we can get you into a home. I also don't know if the expectation is that a brand new homeowner needs to have a brand new home. I mean, a first home buyer needs to have a brand new house or a condo. I I I wonder if that's really mean, is that really an expectation that someone has that they have to have a brand new place? They might be better off in general having um buying a used home for a while, fix it up and make some money and come back and have a a detached house. Again, those are just some of the ideas. What about as a as like an investment for our city? I mean, you think it's not good investment for home buy for people to put money into rentals rather than buying. What about the investment for our city when we think about infrastructure costs? how much road we have to put in that services how many houses, how many how much pipe and infrastructure. Um, and we also have a big section in this general plan about like water use and we and in the plan it talks about how single family homes use how much more water, you know, per household than attached or high density homes. So, I mean, as a city, do you think that we can maintain doing an entire city of of detached homes or most of the city of detached homes or or do you foresee that as an issue in the future?

»That's a great question. I'd have to ask Justin and Tom Levi that same question.

»So, the question very specifically is

»could our community city support an entire city of detached single family homes? That's a really hard question to answer.

»Yeah, it is.

»There's no question that dens densified utilities are cheaper and there's just less of them, right? You have less utilities to take care of more people and you have more people to pay into. And so there is an economy of scale if you will I guess is maybe the right way to say it that uh multif family housing or attached family uh housing is more affordable for the utility side of things. I'm gonna share some good news about our oldest kid who will probably close on a house in Salt Lake.

»So excited for them and their partner. This is a 1,00t house. It's on a 4,000 foot lot and it was built in 1913. not a new house. It's not a big house. It's on a tenth of an acre. And uh it's a it's it's about the median home price in uh in Salt Lake, which is not far from the median home price in Gel. So, I appreciate your comments. There are a few kids out there that don't expect to move into a new house. 13 Yeah.

»And I'm scared to death. Boy, I won't tell

»he's my comment. You know, Eric and I agonize over these decisions and questions. And I don't I don't have all the answers, but I think we need to do our best to keep a small town feel the best we can. I think that's what the residents are saying. And I think in the data they're bringing in, I realize they don't have they might not study this the way that that you have and others have and that I've tried to, but the general consensus is they really don't want more. And I think if we have a little bit more, they're going to be okay with it. I do. I think if we get a lot more, I think we're not representing them. And I think we're we're doing an injustice to what our city needs to look like in the future. And that's just the

»Go ahead.

»Uh, I like her, man. I'm not sure I'm ready to put it in, but I like it. like it more.

»This to me may take us more philosophical than I desire to not the greatest we've had about implementation but you know the idea of small town feel the idea of rural I I talked a lot about this in the steering committee as we were reddrafting this plan but you know using those terms but never defining them causes bubbles. Uh, Nibi was small to me uh, 40 years ago when I lived here. Um, I'm pretty sure only Larry on this bench would have had a home with me at that time, right? And so, small town field, does that just mean big lots? Does it mean detached homes? just it's hard to do that without defining those terms for us as a city and for the future uses of this city. Um I don't think we ever kind of came to terms with what could be defined those kind of things but it was a good discussion and and we talked about that as we have an agricultural zone right this is again very philosophical so just bear with me but nowhere on our future land use map are we defining where agricultural will go right and I understand why what's the what's the incentive to annex into a city to just remain a farmer right the right a farm concept. Well, if that's what we want, our plan should say it and we should write zones and incentivize those kind of things to happen instead of just saying that's what we want and then allowing residents or private property owners to decide what to actually do, right? That makes sense like it's the right farmer versus the right to develop that the mayor's so well done. I I think that our general plan not only communicates to us as city council, our residents, the future, those people long before or after we're we're here, right? Uh but it also communicates to our fellow municipalities of what we're trying to do. I think that's where the higher kind of conversation come in. And and I think that's just as important um for us to consider. Um I I guess that's again just I wanted to kind of bring what I what the steering committee I think tackled a lot as far as those kind of things. But there are creative things we can do like if we want farming we can work hard to make sure that that happens in this community. But we don't we don't tap on those problems. We just say what kind of housing do we live on right and I don't know I I just it's it's different. I don't know if it's even something that can be done. Um, but it goes back to what do we want Italy to be? And that's why I like what you wrote. Um, but I I just challenge us to to think through through those kind of things, right? We keep using phrases like rural and small town feel. I don't know what that means. I really don't know what that means. And I don't think I think someone with 20 years will agree with the definition that we define tonight. Right? So I think it's just important to be careful about using those kind of terms to look like we are trying to do something when we actually don't know what we're trying to do.

»Can I can I ask a question about a egg use in our future land use map? How do we con what do we offer to a farmer to annex into nibble? What benefits?

»Yeah, we haven't heard of enough. Yeah.

»Right now we we we do have something I that's not Yeah, you're right.

»Question. We have transport development, right? So, um, nobody's pulled the trigger on that, but you know, if I was a farmer that wanted to get some money by selling development rights, I would consider annexing into

»and find someone who's willing to take a higher uh somewhere else in our city, according to our map, a receiving area that's that's willing and we're willing to let them take a a higher impact use. So, so there is there is a mechanism there. So far, nobody's done it. Ignoring that, um, the only reason I can see, and we actually have property on 4,000 South within our jurisdiction that's actively farmed. Uh, and when the land owner came to us 20 years ago and said, "I want to be annexed." Um, and not even sure how it's owned right now. Maybe it's owned agriculture. Doesn't matter. He's farming.

»I think it is.

»I thought so. We do have zoning for farming, but

»he doesn't he doesn't want to be annexed because he wants to farm forever. He wants to be annexed so that he gets the annexation step done.

»Uh and it I guess he just wants to pay nuclear property tax. Although that's not very much. Um I think it'd be wonderful to get people farmers especially to say I want to I want my land to be protected for farming for me and farming for my kids or farming for someone else who I sold the land to and I want Nibbly City to ensure that that's what happens right um but short of TDR I don't know how NA city plays a role in that we don't have money to buy their development rights. I mean, they could go after some of the 20 million that we as voters approved for open space in Cash County, but again, why come to Nibi? I can be a farmer in the county for less money than I can be a farmer in Nibi. So, I appreciate your thoughts. Great. Um, yeah, this is all discussion. Um, I think if we're if we're simply considering colors on a map and kind of what that represents, right, as far as what our role is up here, um, obviously we reserve the right to legislate what how we feel like our city grows regardless of what the map says, right? Um but I also agree with you know a developer will see a color infer that hey this is what they're telling us right so in in that context maybe words or maybe you know matter in terms of how we describe what this represents so if you're interested I I did it's in it's in teams proposed maybe a different kind of way to describe the residential mix description um what I've attempted to do was just to reinforce maybe what Garrett was talking about earlier was just say, "Hey, if it's in this color, we we will consider anything potentially if it fits the right context." And context could be time as well, right? Um or the surrounding areas and and and anything that would be an input to how we would make our decision. Basically saying any residential code can go in here. Um, and obviously no matter what, we still reserve the right to legislate that regardless of what the color is on the map. But I tried I attempted to basically get to the same result just with different words. That makes sense. You can say it sucks, it's bad, whatever. Excuse me. Um, but I just took an attempt to kind of maybe rethink of how the words are on the description, I guess. hopefully getting to the same.

»Yeah, that's a good I just read it for the first time. Thank you for doing that. I I will admit to you that that map is a starting point for discussion.

»Um we have we have people that are influenced by that map. We also have developers that come and sit down with Levi and somehow I get dragged into these things. And they don't they don't care what that map says. They said, "I'll build this."

»And and sometimes they don't care what our code is. They're just going to say, "We want this and make it work."

»They say, "Right, this is this is what I want to do."

»Y

»get her done

»regardless.

»And so it's starting point certainly. It's not all developers, especially some of the big ones, they start where they want,

»right? No matter what the map says, we'll get excuse me, but we'll get developers. They will see the detached residential and they'll probably say, "We don't have this here. Ignore it." Anyways, that could also happen.

»Well, they they will bring a proposal. Yeah. And and and by the way, one of the grill one of the gorillas in the room here,

»for better or worse, the map the the plan is the plan and the ordinance is the ordinance. And guess what? If if we fall under the spell, we can do a development agreement that follows the same process as the ordinance change and do whatever we can get an agreement on. As long as we go through the same public hearings and the same public process and all the same meanings it would take to change the ordinance for a specific spot, we can just development agreement do through a development agreement change ignore or change ignore or or follow the ordinance we have. I I don't need to be too philosophical about that. Um, one of the things I got out of the Neielson visit in terms of a tactic if we actually want to do affordable housing is zone it as low density single family because the landowner doesn't get as much money for something zoned as low density single family but by golly be willing to take a development agreement that changes that. So that map doesn't matter. It does matter. a starting point. But it's it's funny how if we really want to, we could do something different than the map or even than the ordinance. I'm not I know there's reasons for development agreements. We've used them with uh watermark by the school for good reason, by charter school for good reasons, but somehow it seems funny. Nathan,

»uh, can I just shift for a second? And, um, insights on page 41 of the plan. And by the way, Nick, I think this is something to keep looking at, you know, and do our ordinances allow for duplexes currently, right? But that, like you said, the plan ordinances go, right? I think they do as internal ADU across the town. Um so this is uh this the section that's kind of like other things to consider, right? Um I liked one that was up here that talked about um city should could benefit from additional training. Um, and similar to kind of what Randy was talking about, I think that not only unless it says the city, that doesn't just mean council members and planning commission people, right? There is there's thought here of communication plans or constant workshops or as as Randy kind of suggested an annual review of certain things um that engage the community a little more often than maybe you'd redoing your future land use or your your general plan every 10 years or whatever. Um, and so one thing just kind of that popped in my head as I was reading this for review over the last couple weeks is I don't know if it's by resolution or just by practice of of constantly engaging in some of these strategies or scheduling constant engagement. So kind of strange whether that's training or communication for the entire community, right? Which I think we try to do but it's not it's not it's not the most exciting subject until it's next to your garden. Um, but these other things that we've tried to tackle, right, these parking requirements, incentives, and deed restrictions impact fee reduction, right? There's other ways, I guess, to negotiate this beyond the plan and and looking at these and saying, how can we incorporate this into our daily task at city council or I said, two weeks task, you know, I just thought I'd point that out. It kind of got me thinking about are there things we can implement whether by resolution or or tradition that help us achieve what kind of been talking about tonight or the entire community not just those that make the decisions and don't you guys seeing that type of stuff in your

»I mean feel like I mean I I feel like I'm constantly getting trained on these things. It's just whether there's an appetite to to move forward with that implementation. Um and and and maybe we're a little I I'll just put it on me. Maybe I'm a little behind with getting the commu getting the community input and the community on on board with some of these ideas, which I think is important because if the community is not ready for it, then it's not likely to happen.

»Yeah. Yeah, I think all too often the the the the learning and training process for citizens comes in the most awkward environment and heated environment and just like almost it's too late environment. Uh whereas if we're constantly just being like communication of of strategies and things like that, maybe it hurts less or it's a little less awkward or heated.

»Yeah, I agree with you. It's it's really hard to get motiv to get people motivated until it's next door.

»Yeah.

»Right.

»Or you're elected and have to write a general plan. mentioned that

»um just the next page up there's just one grammatical error I would fix this strategy six that just I think it's cut off so it just starts agency to create some words cut off there

»yeah I think it's community reinvestment or um

»economic development agency or something like that. Yeah, I I'll ask about that.

»These all start with verbs. So agency let clean up workplace. Any objection? They cheated me, but I think it might have been like utilized the

»CR something like that.

»I think I like I say comment in there. I I just want to comment on D restrictions and the one training I did out of Salt Lake. I talked to as many people if I could for what they're doing for affordable housing and every town I talked to in the Salt Lake area mostly south of Salt Lake. They kept bringing up deed restrictions in one way or another. It was a big it was this order where they said if you're going to develop these land of the homes have to be this level and it's going to stay that level for the life of the home at least 20 30 years. So, and it wasn't just one town. It's almost across the board, us talking to people. And so, I think that could be somehow I think that's I think it's a fantastic idea that makes houses affordable, but realize it's going to stay portable for the next owner as well. So, I do if we can incorporate more of that, I think that might be a benefit.

»Um, yeah. Uh, Randy, in your discussions, were was anything mentioned about Can we grant grant additional density to offset the cost?

»No, did not mention that. And maybe I didn't I'm not smart enough to ask that question. But I I we probably have to there have to be something.

»Yeah. So there's got to be a reason why I'm taking less. So I I should just assume that.

»Yeah. So having to like at Utah League of Cities and town training mid year and annual conferences where they talk about restrictions. Well, number one, I think it's brilliant. Um, it's not anything I had even thought about while we were trying to do affordable housing with the neighborhood nonprofit. And I always felt like we missed an opportunity because we created affordable housing, but we only created it for the firsttime buyer. and we did enforce speed restrictions to make them that house affordable for 30 years. Now, having said that, the reason that those houses were affordable in a large part was because the first time buyer put a ton of sweat equity into it and they should therefore reap the rewards of their work when they go to sell the house. So,

»right,

»I kind of nashed my teeth for a while and then I said, "Well, of course it went that way. We couldn't It's probably not right to deed restrict that." Because once they got done, I mean, we gave them a break on uh some densities like in um Maple View, we just talked about next to the reszone tonight, right? We gave some densities that actually weren't allowed at the time uh for affordability because the neighborhood nonprofit was in there. But we we really probably couldn't take that sweat equity. I think rightfully so. Now, the the place we can do deep restrictions that we're willing to put or some other nonprofit like uh you know the names, Jimmy Carter, Habitat for Humanity, if someone else is willing to put money into that for affordable housing and the state is actually catching on to that. I'm I'm happy to see the legislature caught on to that to some degree, but but you really you could say to any developer you want that we want you to build this burn code and we want deep restrictions on it and say no, I'll go somewhere else. Right? You have to make you have to make the deed restriction worthwhile uh for somebody to do it. It can become worthwhile if the city is giving them a break on something like density or impact fees or if a nonprofit is helping out uh with with uh firsttime buyers or if the state is helping out with first-time buyers, you know, then you can put those deed restrictions on and make a lot of sense. In general, I'm really disappointed when I go to these training things at the league how these guys stand up and crow about deed restrictions for affordable housing in South Jordan. I'll pick on them and they talk about it for 55 minutes and they got 12 houses.

»We we did that too in in one meeting. We did

»for nibbly meadows

»on uh the nibly

»nibbly meadows

»specifically mentioned

»right so we built that far as I saying in all the different discussions I mean there's such a variety of the types of deed restriction whether it's as simple as just owner occupied off people's homes who don't want to rent it all need restricted donor occup.

»There's a variety. I mean, I've heard multiple ways of doing this,

»right?

»But you have to offer something to get people to sign up for it, right? They have to give up a property right to get something from

»either a nonprofit in the city or some other government. I really thought Moab had an ingenious Oh, he tried to be grief deed restriction on multif family housing. Moab lives and dies on tourism and they're not next to a metropolitan area where they can pull service workers from another town. Park City can pull service workers for their tourist industry from Salt Lake. Moab can't do that. So they understand how their economy runs on service workers. And so they passed uh it was actually an ordinance that was derestricted that uh one half of the multifamily attached housing has to be occupied by service workers and they don't get into income restrictions. They don't get into any of that stuff. They just say uh if you're going to build that you have to take on and it's it's rented, right? It's all one big company that owns this multifamily housing. They take on the company takes on the responsibility for uh service worker dee restrictions and they they pulled it off. We'll see if it works from now. I'd like to make a motion to insert amend the plan with insert mayors suggested housing introduction at the very beginning of the housing section before uh demographic system under the section heading of introduction and background from Nathan. Second from Nick clear at the words and the placement.

»Okay. Any discussion on that? Thank you Nick. That's Nate

»and any discussion? Uh those in favor of that amendment, please say I.

»I. Any opposed? Thank you.

»Nathan, I give you another motion to continue adoption of the new city general plan for the next meeting. Okay. Motion from Nathan to continue. Second from Garrett. Uh discussion on that. Uh I I'll ask what what council can do, what I can do, what staff can do between now and then and nothing is appropriate. He said keep thinking, keep reading, keep working on it.

»What can we do?

»I do have maybe one question. I I've been redlighting this document and I would prefer to give one version back to the consultant. Um, but we could do multiple if if we need to. Uh, are you good with just continuing with this red lining until it gets adopted or do you want a clean version to consider and at what point? I mean, do you want that for the next time? Do you want it for the do you think it's going to continue? I mean, you don't have to make that decision, but if if if you could give some guidance on that if what whatever you prefer. red.

»Okay.

»Yeah, I think red certain I mean it documents where we were. It also documents where we are.

»Okay, sounds good.

»Yeah, if

»I'll just keep redlining it and then once it's adopted, we'll

»No, I'm just curious. You don't have source code, but you can redline it.

»Oh, yeah. Yeah,

»you don't have the driving document, but you can redline whatever.

»It's just an Adobe. Yeah, just an Adobe. Yeah,

»all I can do is read.

»Thank uh Levi. We've got um a couple parcels on the map that already have entitlements that don't that this map contradicts with. Um for example, Heritage Crossing already is detached, but it's showing it's residential mix. And then parcel to the north, I believe, is zone RM. In this map, it says commercial. if I'm that's correct.

»Wait, so Heritage Crossing you're saying is showing?

»See his hair is crossing up.

»Oh. Oh, right.

»And then the parcel to the north is already known RM, but on this plan says commercial.

»Yeah. And it's mixed use commercial. So it could be

»the map is mixed.

»Yeah. So mixed use. You could you could change that though if you if you feel like

»it should be different. I mean I and I think I think also mixed residential could allow for detached but you could you could adjust those if you think those are more appropriate for sure. or this

»there's a spec spectrum and it's kind both of those are kind of on the edge of one spectrum or the other and you could kind of make it in the middle of what is actually going there.

»Okay. So I think what I mean I I I appreciate the discussion that's m but I'd love to see it right. So, I'd say for me and everyone else, it'd be it'd be great maybe to focus on this map for next time. And don't don't be shy about it. It it might be harder for you to redline to show specifically what you're proposing in an amendment, but that map would be amended in this process. I don't know what you have to do about it, but

»we can we can amend it. Yeah, for sure. Yes.

»Well, I'll ask the consultant to do it. And then and then we and then we can amend it after that. But for this project, the consultant will do it. I mean, we'll yeah, if we amend it going forward, then yeah, I'll do it. But yeah, Nathan,

»um maybe just one suggestion as far as direction is I know you asked us to take our time with this and really put the time and effort in. We think we are um maybe a consideration of this on a very light agenda.

»What's that?

»I don't know.

»But definitely not one that has a workshop about code enforcement

»except you know I don't know. Um you want to do a special meeting?

»I'm almost there. Yeah. This just kind of like the wrap up final thoughts and focus

»think about anything else. You know, if you guys can do another meeting,

»I think that's a great suggestion. We'll see how far we get next time.

»As long as I as long as I get warning enough that I'm not supposed to be on a baseball field or someone else can run the meeting.

»Um, ma'am, if you could just let us know next time how this meeting goes with hire and JV, I think that might be helpful in our map

»doing. Yeah, I'm not sure it's going to be all ironed out. That's a road. That's a meeting about the road,

»but obviously where we are on road makes a difference.

»And you know, thank you for that suggestion. We'll certainly give you an update on the or you all give us an update on I mean that worst case scenario it would be one that we protest each other's annexations for a while.

»All right. Uh any objection to voting on the motion to continue saying none. Those in favor to continue this item until our next meeting please say I.

»Any opposed?

»Thank you. Thanks for your thoughts on that. Should we press right on into uh considering a denial of a annexation? I see that. Yes. Levi, can you hit us up or clean, please?

»Yeah. This one just really brief. The reason this is on the agenda is there was a former annexation or a former annexation petition which uh had didn't take there wasn't any action taken on it and there and a portion of this annexation area has already been annexed. further reading u state code there really should be action on that that annexation before another one can move forward. Now we've already moved the city's already moved forward with a portion of this but we're trying to write the ship and get this one denied so that the other one could be considered.

»Thank you. Uh Johnson, Uh okay. These parcels listed item 14. Do I need to list them all?

»Thank you. You're fine.

»The it's the map. Um we have a motion from Aaron, a second from Garrett. Thank you for denial of the annexation petition as described. Discussion opposition to voting. Seeing none, gosh, I think we have to call the roll on this. Will you do it, please? Cher,

»council member

»in favor.

»Council member

»in favor.

»Council member

»in favor. Council member Kinska

»in favor.

»Council member Swing

»in favor.

»Thank you.

»Okay. Thank you, council. That's five in favor of denial and none opposed to.

»Let's move right on into 15. Levi, will you please?

»Okay. So, you can see the contrast there. There's the old. Here's the new

»back and forth for a minute. It's pretty fun.

»Let's see. I'll even change the view so that it you can it works better. more. There you go. Better works better than wait. Oh, this is an eye test. Sorry.

»Here's the new one. So, this we we did the city did receive a petition for an annexation of this area. Um, these two parcels which are currently uh currently controlled by Carter Homes, K K Holdings LLC is the property owner. Um the this has been discussed this this area has been discussed previously in conjunction with the other the annexation that was referenced in in the in the previous um item and includes uh annexing 1500 west up to our existing border. So go to the next slide. Uh this would create an unincorporated island which would require Cash County Council approval. Uh and that's for the the property just just to the north next to you can see that finger of 1500 West. So that's something to consider with this one. It's 38.66 acres and it is included in the future annexation declaration area. Um just to just to bring up there was a previous discussion with city council included uh for 1500 west roadway looking at the condition of maintenance of that road and the zoning um they they have proposed the zoning for this but I I I would say this isn't really the the right venue to to discuss. I I I wouldn't necessarily go into discussing the zoning at length. Um that's going to be discussed by the planning commission and recommended and it will come back to the city council at that time. But really this this item is whether or not the the city council want wants to consider this petition further uh for annexation. It's not a final approval but but just to accept the petition to for further consideration. And you could, you know, you could bring up things that should be worked out between now and when and when uh it comes back for final, you know, for for consideration for final approval if you think there's there's some loose ends that should that should be worked out. Look.

»Yeah. Whether we talked about tonight or not, I mean, this is a good time for us to think about Tom already mentioned it. An annexation agreement.

»We'll annex you as long as you agree to these things. I mean,

»I'll go there with one. What the What the heck's going to happen on that long skinny stretch of 1500 North? Who's going to who's going to build that and maintain? Not maintain it. maintained it if it becomes if it becomes in our jurisdiction but if that road is deficient who's going to bring it up to standard

»right I mean we got into this in fact it it leads me to a question for you Levi you said that because this would create an unincorporate unincorporated island in Cash County council would have to approve it

»yeah they have to agree to it as well Does the city the Nibli city council both need to agree to it? Yeah.

»Um if that were like in a previous proposal an unincorporated peninsula, does that require approval of the cash?

»Either way, it Yeah. And really what led to it being an unincorporated island was

»the county not not wanting to maintain that that section of road and it just made the most sense to just include it in nibbly if we're going to be maintaining it. Okay,

»Nathan need a motion to approve. We have a motion from Nathan and a second from Nick for approval of accepting this petition for annexation. Discussion. Uh we need to consider an annexation agreement that is

»Then we would we would expect that annexation approval directly.

»Yeah. So, you could I I think you could you could adopt a condition if you if you'd like to do that.

»I just want to make sure we get along.

»You'd like Oh, sorry.

»Justin was in my other ear. Sorry. Can you repeat?

»Uh, we're in discussion of the annexation approval and I would petition the petition,

»right? I'm looking to staff and council to come up with suggested things to be discussed either to for tonight to go into an annexation agreement. So if staff or city council has some other than maintenance of the road in construction and bringing it up to code like to discuss that before

»have you got it?

»Yeah, go ahead. Yeah.

»Yeah, there are some other master plant utilities that are in that area. There's a sewer. that it's an 18inch sewer and 12in water line. On 1500 West on 1200 West, there's a 12in water line as well. Um, we just adopted the storm water master plan. I had to refer to th those maps and those capital projects that are listed in there. I don't I don't like I guess I can forget it now, but that might be another one to visit just um either negotiate a a cost share on upsizing those those utilities or something of that nature. So, we can we can get those in the minutes. Yep. Thank you. too.

»Can you show me the math again?

»Oh, pink.

»Oh, where am I at? There we go. The proposal to clarify was all residential group. uh just

»it's a M it's it's the same it's the same as they proposed before R R2A to the north and RM to the south and I think although the planning commission did make a recommendation over a year ago on this we'll probably put it in front of them again considering the new proposal and just

»for zoning yeah for zoning If I I mean I'm probably going to talk to our attorney about that if we ought to do that or uh or just leave their recommendation just considering that the nature of the R2A is kind of changed with the open space subdivision code changed. So it it might be worth them looking at it again and making a new recommendation with this new new proposal that is essentially the same as what they proposed before just just without that area that was in the previous one. And and so I'm glad we're having this discussion now. I think that we can also get a uh annexation briefing in conjunction with our annexation. I'm not I'm not sorry we're having discussion. I'm happy about it. Um Blaine, is that right? You're here representing the proponent.

»Just interested in it.

»Okay. Okay. Yeah, I wasn't sure online or

»Okay.

»Haven't seen him.

»Do you need an amendment to include the conditions of theation or the advisor will be good? Um I think that if it's if the acceptance of the petition is contingent upon okay then we would need an amendment. But if the annexation agreement is conditioned upon an annexation agreement, um I I think I would include that in the annexation, right? Unless we want to, you know, let the proponent know that, hey, we're going to have some expectations. And even then, I think our discussion, unless we can encompass everything, still means there's going to be some expectations. And guess what? Work it out because we can expect that before we accept that mixation.

»Does that make sense?

»Yes. Uh, which helps staff most do it now or later?

»Do you want the motion to accept the petition to include working on an annexation agreement? Um, or does our discussion give you marching orders to work on an annexation agreement before it comes back for adoption of an annexation?

»I think if I think if you're expecting that and you and you're you don't and you don't want this to move forward without the annexation agreement, I would I would be explicit including the motion. if if you're like, h maybe we should do it, maybe it's something we should consider, then maybe just direct us to explore it. Um, so I think it just depends how

»okay start moving at the county level.

»At the county I I mean once once this once this is decided on tonight, we expect to

»ask the county to get it on the agenda. And I don't I don't know if they're going to get it in three weeks or three months. I mean, we'll see.

»But if acceptance of if our acceptance of a petition is conditioned upon an annexation agreement, does that keep Does that stall the process until we have an annexation agreement which would allow us to accept the petition?

»It could. it. I I don't think we would bring it back to the council until then to the city council, but the county council can consider it whenever they want. I mean, they can consider before you do after at the end of the day, it can't move forward until they approve it, but there's some flexibility with the timing. I mean, they can get it on their next agenda and say, "Oh, yeah, we're good with it. As long as Nibbi takes care of the road, we agree." Would you would you disagree with that song?

»Sure.

»Cheryl,

»so after this petition is accepted, we have 30 days to have the letter sent out to property own unincorporated property owners and in that letter we have to have a date of approval included on it

»and I believe it's the next city council.

»Yeah.

»So there is a little bit of a time frame if you approve this petition.

»Is it the date? Sorry. Is is it

»Go ahead.

»Oh, is it the date of the public hearing for it or is it or is it the date of approval? Because I think the council has leeway when they actually approve it. Is it is it for that public hearing

»or not when it's next, but on the agenda?

»See, I I fear that. Oh, Tom. Well, it it'd be my recommendation to continue until these items are worked out.

»Yeah,

»that's

»continue acceptance of the petition.

»Correct.

»I I'm having trouble accepting a petition conditionally on something that's not there because I don't know how the timeline moves forward. Have we accepted the petition or have we not accepted the petition? Well, I don't know. Depends on what your brain says. That's a good that's a good suggestion.

»Give you a substitute motion to continue. Okay. To the next meeting with the direction that staff start working onation agreement. Motion from Nathan, second from Nick. This is substitute motion. uh which means that we will debate something altogether different which is to continue until the next meeting acceptance of the petition so staff can work on an annexation agreement. I think that's very clean very good. Thanks Tom for that's my opinion discussion on the motion to continue with that direction staff and council. I mean, if you've got conditions on annexation leads between now and let's say a week and a half from now so we could get those in the agreement that you all can review before our next meeting. Please let let staff know about them. And even if staff disagrees with it, you know, they'll put it in and say, "Let's talk about it." They assume that's true. because you guys will take input from us.

»Yeah, we can we can start that. We'll see.

»Okay.

»We'll see how long it takes.

»Uh recommend to engage some of the county as well so they know that we are doing that. I I don't we started down a path recently that when these annexation petitions come in that

»we were we're going to reach out to the county and coordinate like this is you know what what do you need to see this happen? What you know just kind of coordinate our efforts and our our requests. I don't know that happened on this one.

»Well,

»I mean the county gets notified. They're aware of this. We've had discussions. We can have further discussions

»on this. Yeah, it's just

»it's just so we don't get to these meetings and it's like, oh, we're going to continue or no, we're going to deny it. If we can come to terms and just describe everyone's expectations before it gets to this point, it's I think it'd be a lot more s.

»Yeah. I mean, this so we have to get this on the agenda quickly. the state code says that we it's got to be considered at a certain point and so that's why it's on the agenda. Like they just they just submitted it. It's it's on there.

»Uh

»we've had discussions with the county. We'll bring those up again. The county has been notified of this like but yeah, we can continue those for sure. Nick, just for a minute, um, in these kind of contexts with this the moving parts that involve these kind of things with the county, I mean, what specific kind of details do they need to know from us? Like basically when there's a road, they annex now in it more than that. I'm I'm honestly asking, they don't know.

»So, because it creates that island. Yeah, they're that I get that

»or peninsula. Then if if it didn't create any of those, they wouldn't have anything to say.

»So it's just in those certain situations that we I'd like to see some coordination before it gets in front of council.

»I get the peninsula and I think I wasn't sure about that.

»Please.

»Um I learned again some training today that is utilizing civic review. So after this is uh the petition is approved by the council, we submit in their civic review portal the entire uh petition as well. So they are going to get that information out when this is accepted. And I've never gone through this process as I said I just learned about this um but I'm assuming this gets it to the right place. um that's all hopes that that

»thanks. There might be sorry there there might be some deadlines for accepting or denying sorry I'm not an attorney and the the the law for annexations is very arduous and but I'm just off the cuff kind of reading this state code. A petition shall be considered to have been accepted for further consideration under this part. If a municipal legislative body fails to deny or accept the petition in the case of city third, fourth or fifth class at the next regular schedule meeting that is at least 14 days after the date the petition was filed. So I kind of think we need to the council needs to actually take action.

»When did they

»otherwise otherwise it just by default is is accepted. Um, well, it's they they filed it. I I I can I can look at the date, but but I know I'm positive that by the time we get to the next meeting, it's going to be more than 14 days from when from when they filed it. So, I do think if the council doesn't take action, by default, it's accepted. The petition is accepted. I think like I said this code it it's complicated and there's a lot of overlapping steps but the way I'm reading that like we've the the council's never continued since I've been here at this stage now you can you can go you can continue as long as you want at the next stage but I think

»the next stage I think

»the final Yeah, the final annexation.

»But I do think

»you ought to make a decision tonight.

»We're now talking about substitution.

»What was that?

»Cheryl said it was submitted 14 days ago.

»Okay.

»Well, I I mean I think that matters because there's a qu fire on that

»you have to consider it or it will be deemed accepted at your next meeting if the thing was filed 14 days before your next meeting

»well just no it's

»it doesn't say 14 days checked. So you better consider it going to be if it's not on your next meeting. If they file those 14 days before we could not have for 6 months and month.

»Yeah. My recommendation is to build a substitute motion at this point.

»All right. Let's have a substitute motion on a substitute. So I don't want to unwind. Uh, so I'm going to go back to that's the motion and Nathan has a motion. I'll try to state it. I'd rather state it after I get a second.

»A second from Garrett.

»Can Can the person that made a substitute kill their own substitute?

»Of course.

»Okay. You can amend your amendments and substitute your substitutes.

»And you also vote to deny the substitute.

»Yeah, we just deny back to the original.

»Um, do you have the original motion written down?

»Um, yeah, that was just to accept the uh annexation petition. You were debating whether you wanted to include all those. Right. I think in uh accept the petition for annexation and it doesn't really matter whether it's part of the motion or not, but instruct staff to please work on an annexation agreement before we get to acceptance of the annexation. So, let's include that in the motion. That's the way I'm interpreting it. Unless somebody objects. Okay. So, the motion we're considering is to accept the petition and instruct staff to work on an annexation uh uh agreement for us to have in front of us before we consider accepting the annexation. That's the motion in front of us. I'll take discussion on that. And if there's no discussion, I'll say, "Are you opposed to voting? Was there a second from the substitute? Substitute. Okay.

»Nathan first.

»Okay. Um

»I don't see this is a resolution. The ordinance changed. So I'm just going to ask for a voice vote. Thank you, Cheryl. Those in favor of the motion to accept the petition and instruct staff to work on an annexation agreement, please say I. I.

»Any close?

»Okay. passes.

»It's only 9:30.

»Yes. Okay, press on. We're on.

»Let's do it. Let's talk about code enforcement. Um, I put this, as I mentioned earlier in the meeting, I put this on the agenda based on public comment we got from the last meeting and continuing public comment we get as we go along. Tonight, we heard additional public comment um about a specific ordinance related to uh ordinance or fire code or uh public utilities related to the placement of sheds. I don't think we want to talk about that specific ordinance change, but I think we still have a great opportunity to talk about code enforcement in general based on public comment that we receive here and also private comment we receive from individuals. Um I suggested you know um questions we could consider. I'll leave it up to you to consider those or consider others. Can I have a can I just talk for a second on philosophy on this?

»So this morning I

»and we're not voting on anything tonight. So we don't need motions or anything else. Thank you.

»I run this morning um the barn short province to the dry canyon just instead of going higher I say quite a lot this morning and run as you both hearts of Providence Trail and Logan there's a big large a sign that dogs should be on a leash on the viral shoreline trail. The past seven dogs with owners. One dog was on a leash. The other six nipped at me several times. You know, I'm running and dogs do that. It's not the dog's fault. They're, you know, they're just exploring. So, I got back and I got back in the vehicle and I'm driving home and I'm thinking, you know, this is I knew something on the meeting tonight and so I'm the reason why I mean the sign's there but there's no enforcement. There's no one to enforce that. And so it might not even exist. And so I I'm I'm in favor of of card enforcement. Um, and yet I'll say about 11 months ago, I know a lot longer than that, but uh about 13 months ago, I had my vehicle that we've had for, you know, almost 20 years. It it died and I got it just I wanted to fix that in the springtime. I didn't get a chance. It was with the hitch. It was 6 in over the sidewalk. I mean, we're talking 6 in. I took the receiving hitch off. It was now 3 in over and I got a ticket. three inches and I couldn't move it until I can fix it and it's like it was like January and I'm like so I just got rid of it. I paid the money and I was bothered. It was 3 in and what do you do with that? I mean, I'm wrong and the code enforcements the code's there, but it it I felt like the ticket lacked a little common courtesy or sense was 3 in. So, I look at this and I think it's very important for co code enforcement, but there has to be a human element of touch. There has to be a little bit of that. I don't have to find that. But for a person to write me a ticket, they had to get out, look at it, examine it, and then write the ticket. It so it was so close. So that's all I have. I just thought

»Yeah. Thanks, Larry.

»I'd like to speak to that.

»I would challenge that that ticket came from me because the code says parking on the sidewalk. I have never issued a ticket. The wheels of the vehicle are not on the sidewalk. It does not say blocking the sidewalk. It says parked on the sidewalk. And I have proof of every ticket that I've ever written with a photograph.

»And you can stay up there, Evan. Thank you for coming to our meeting. We want you to be part of this. Um, I mean, if if it's important to work this out and and maybe it is, then if you have a photograph of that, I'm not saying we do it right now, but you must have a photograph of Brandon's ticket.

»If there if I wrote the ticket, I have a photograph.

»When did it was written by

»When did you do that ticket? When was when would when did you start?

»October 25. Levi, who else would write that?

»I mean, Sergio is a previous code enforcement officer, but yeah. Um,

»and if I could say, again, I am I'm in favor of the code enforcement. I I have no I I I pay it and I didn't have a problem there in the sense that I was the wrong. So, I think that we should continue. I mean, I have no problem what we're doing. I think if we don't enforce it, then I think that's um that's the worst problem. And then I have to call I mean, we're going to have to call I have to make I have to call on every neighbor. So, you know what I mean? I don't want to have to do that. I don't want to be the bad guy to to call on call on, you know, call and say these neighbors are in violation and that just doesn't build community at all. So, I I'm actually supportive of it. So, I have no I I have no problem with it if it was you. I don't. It's It doesn't feel good, but I realize it was okay. I accept that and I paid it and I didn't say a word complaint. Yeah, technically that makes sense.

»Technically, you would not have to evade it because it was incorrectly.

»You weren't in violation of code.

»Code says parking on the sidewalk, not blocking.

»It was definitely not parking the sidewalk.

»Well, so

»I mean, maybe maybe if I could just speak to this topic. I I do I I do want to give Evan a lot of props to and I I want to I don't know push back or or just just speak to the comment that there needs to be a human element. Evan spends a lot of time having difficult conversations with people and and coming to resolutions. Sometimes people in many cases they're they're unhappy and they want you know they they want to complain about the situation because it's difficult right to change to change a habit, change something that someone feels feels like they're wrong or maybe they've done it a long time. So why is the city bugging me about it now? But Evan's Evan really is, you know, as a supervisor, I just want to vouch for him that he's doing a great job spending more time communicating with people, coming to a resolution, going out to the site that we just didn't really have before we had a code enforcement off, a designated code enforcement officer. We didn't have the bandwidth to to do that. And that's even against a lot of the train. So Evans also spent a lot of time getting properly trained as a code enforcement officer, which we didn't have that element before. Some of that is actually against a lot of the protocols and trainings on on code enforcement for for safety because most of the time you're approaching an individual and you're telling them, "Okay, you got to do do this." They're not going to be happy with you. and and there might there might be uh altercation and and they're not they're not he you know it's it's it's not like an armed police officer situation. It's um so I I just want to point that out. It's it's a very very difficult job. And Evan is doing a really good job towing that balance between, yeah, I've got to be quote the bad guy, but I'm going to I'm I'm going to be human with this person and try to come to a resolution. He doesn't make it personal. It's not I mean, but he takes it to heart to enforce the the city's codes effectively.

»Yeah. Well, I had I just had one question. So, some of the complaints tonight were about sheds. I haven't heard a complaint about shed before. So, do we like pick codes or times or anything to look for enforcement on some of these things? Like, how why is it now we have sheds? People complain about shed code enforcement. So,

»we didn't add about that before, didn't I?

»I can I can speak to that. We did receive a complaint about a shed and then and this has happened with other issues too.

»Okay.

»Evan went and and looked at a shed. Yes, it was in violation. That neighbor goes, "Well, what about on my what about all my neighbors? They've got the same problem. Okay, I'm going to go enforce those ones." We try to do proactive enforcement and we but we also prioritize complaints when when we get those and and and Evan came to me and said this is going to be a can of worms. Should should we go I go after that? And I said yeah it's a vi if it's a violation of code we should do that. And it has opened up a can of worms and we're seeing that maybe there's some things we can do differently. Maybe there's some ways we can look at this differently in the code. but he didn't do anything wrong going out. And and and and by the way, just for the record, there haven't been any citations issued. There have been some courtesy notices sent out. Um and and so, and Evan and I talked about this when I when I was a code enforcement officer, I didn't have as, you know, as much time to dedicate to this. So my approach was drive around the community once a year and try and see what violations there were and then um and then that kept me busy for the rest of the summer on code enforcement. You know 70 violations that I that I noticed at least I saw the one town. Now we approach it a little differently now and sometimes we focus on a specific issue and if and if we come across other issues then then yeah we'll enforce those as well but we we try to balance and we and we try not to pick favorites and we go you know we we try we try to go across the community and and get different codes but it's also a a learning and training opportunity I found the first time I went out to do code enforcement. I didn't know what I was looking for. After you do it time and time again, and Evan's been here a little over a year, you notice more things you and and you're and you notice those those violations. So,

»so it happens over time.

»Balance that a little bit, at least in one specific case, and if I'm wrong, show me the body cam and I'll be proven wrong. But a resident told me approached by Evan, I know you're doing your job. Your shed is closer than 10 ft to your house. You have to move your shed. That's not the right thing. I mean, I I spent a bunch of time on I got three interpretations of our own code about what an interior yard is and the three feet versus 10 feet and then oh yeah, but then there's utilities ements and all that stuff. I understand. But the fact is there's this person according to them was told your shed is closer than 10 ft to your house. You have to move it. And I I believe after a bunch of effort on a bunch of our parts that's not correct. Now mistakes get made. If that's the case, fine. And if that person relayed it incorrectly, let me know. Show me the body can.

»The body cam was dead.

»Why? because I didn't get a charge and it's not connected to the cloud and it doesn't have a charging port. So, it's on me to remember to charge it every day. It's not a real body camera. It's a sports

»pro. Would it have resolved? First of all, did you tell the person that?

»No.

»Okay. Would the camera have resolved this difference of opinion? What they heard and what you said?

»Yes. Okay,

»then let's use it. I I use it. I used it today. I forgot to charge it. It died.

»Let's use it all the time.

»I can't do that because it doesn't last long enough.

»Do we need battery packs?

»What? What's going on?

»Why can't we use the body cam to resolve question? I have a question. You have a difference of how this all came down.

»Yeah,

»we're we're we're trying, mayor. We really are. It's a new thing. we're implementing a lot of different a lot of different things. Um, and and may and may and I think Evan will be the first to acknowledge that there were there were things that he said that had to be later corrected and and then and then I got involved and those needed to be corrected and it took us a while to get to the bottom of that, but we but we worked through that and we communicated and we and we we continued to communicate with that that individual. Sometimes we we make mistakes and we we think that there's a violation and and we find out later, oh, actually there isn't and we we own up to it. And took a few days to get down to it, but

»it initial conversation. She told me she had a permit. So, I told her that I would go back and check on the permit. I would also check on the setbacks because the setbacks are different for every subdivision. At no time did she receive a warning. At no time did I tell her she had to move her shed. I told her that we would investigate and I would get back to her. And in the meantime, she obviously called you and called whoever else and called

»Yeah. Well, any any citizen of this town can call me,

»right?

»And I've made an enemy out of that person through this whole process. And now I'm going to make an enemy out of you guys if I'm not careful. I'm saying we're in an intenable situation here. I don't want to be the HOA president. We have talked about code enforcement and talked about code enforcement and talked about it and I don't see a solution. I want to know what we're going to do because I'm tired of our citizens hating this city and and I know that's what happens when people get infractions and when they get warnings. That's their natural reaction. I know that's the case. But I every employee of this city, no matter how hard the job is and no matter how difficult it is, is an ambassador for the governance of this town. And so let's talk about training at code enforcement. Do they teach you how to interact with citizens? And if so, what do they teach you? What what do they teach you?

»They do teach us

»what do they teach you?

»They teach us deescalation. They teach us they teach us all kinds of things. Okay.

»And I can tell you at no time in my opinion have I ever been rude to a citizen.

»Did you approach this citizen when there were she had company in the yard with her and started talking to her about that when other people not involved in the case were there?

»Yes.

»Thank you.

»Justin, do you have some? So just one thought and so as you asked what do we do like we we as staff have had a couple of conversation obviously and we feel like one of two things and maybe both need to happen but one step might be as we're trying to learn this process that we go out if we're going to pick say for just example sheds we go out we spend a week or more sending code enforcement out there to investigate to see what's going on, to take pictures, to look at things, figure out what's going on. Look at the pros, look at the cons. Come back. Don't talk to anybody during that investigation. We all sit down together, talk about, okay, what does the code say? Is this really a problem? Is it a code issue or is it, you know, h should is this a is this something we want to change or is this something we want to enforce? and kind of go through a process instead of going out there and testing our ordinance by citizens because I feel like that's kind of we we've said that in this meeting before is that the only way to test it is to go out and talk to people. And I'm I don't I don't think that's the case anymore. I I maybe I didn't think about it hard enough then, but I feel like we could make some movement on trying to test our code and see what things may or may not need changed out there investigating before we involve citizens.

»I I agree. And on sheds, I mean, Levi, you and I in our conversation, thank for thank you for engaging me. You said the code is confusing,

»right? So if if we're trying to figure out how to enforce confusing code,

»let's fix confusing code before we hit the hard enforcement.

»And so that's my second thing that we have talked about is like we we have got to buckle down and go through the code. And I don't know exactly if that's staff, if that's a committee, if that's the council, if that's a consultant or exactly what that is, but we we some point need to just go through the code. And if we don't want and we don't care about sheds, Ross it all.

»Yeah. Now, it's it's hard to go through all the code and just say we're going to get all the gremlins out of there, but but I think before I mean, so we got a complaint, we decided we're going to go hard on code enforcement. Hard means we're going to at least go talk to people and tell them they're out of compliance when in fact, we have questions about the clarity of our own code. I don't I don't know if there's questions about where to draw the We didn't feel like there was questions on whether it was a violation or not. Um it it was I I think we're we're starting to realize that maybe it see it's starting to seem a little unreasonable the more we dig into it. And unfortunately the nature of it is it it it it is complicated. I don't know how to because there are multiple overlapping regulations um with fire code with the city with restrictions on easements. I don't I don't know how to take that out and that's part of the reason we have like permitting processes and things like that. But um

»well I have suggestions you know put in a space chart that not only are these space requirements in place there's also fire code to worry about and we don't replicate fire code but you should know there's fire code and here's the reference to it. Um you're also expected to uh uh meet building code even if there's not going to be a a building permit and building inspection. you're still expected to meet building code. There's also public utility easements to worry about and you might refer to your plat before you decide uh where to put your shed. I mean, I really feel like people have we heard from two of them tonight. They three of them tonight. They they honestly tried to follow the law and we couldn't provide code references that allowed them to do that. Maybe it's our fault, but I think we can do better.

»Yeah. I'm going to say I'm sorry to cool down and stop. Um

»my my whole approach to this when I put this on the agenda

»was the only thing we get from are the perpetrators, right? And I know how hard it is to get caught. Randy, I got a ticket from a Logan policeman for an expired registration. I felt he was aggressive. I got out of my car to walk into a meeting with George and uh the policeman said, you know, I thought he was going to pull his gun on me because I got out of my car on the practice stop. You know, I reacted calmly because I didn't want to get shot. He calmed down. And so I understand how hard it is. I understand how we all failed when we got taught. But one of the reasons we're putting this on the agenda is we hear from the alleged perpetrators. We hear a lot from them. Um their complaints are very similar to what we hear from other towns. Too black and white. Uh no understanding of unique situations. No common sense in applying the code. And you know, I I go to parks and rec committee meetings and I hear how often we're surveying the living crap out of our citizens on recreation things. Maybe that's all good, but is the council endorse us putting a survey together to ask people that aren't perpetrators about how they feel about code enforcement in Nibbi City? Are we doing the right thing? Is Nibbi City a better place to live now than it was two years ago? Because I can tell you the perpetrators have given us that answer. And I'm really hoping that there are people that don't tell us, hey, we're glad you're enforcing the code that are out there that aren't telling us that. So, I'm asking the city, the the council directly. will you will you let me um and I'll work with staff and if you want to review the survey that's fine because I know you can ask surveys and I'm not interested in a random survey you know it's going to be self- selected and anything else but will you allow me to work on a survey to find out if our citizens are happy with code enforcement especially the ones that we haven't heard from I'll take that as a head nod

»okay and I'll let you review the survey before we put it All right. Now, I'll be

»Yeah. I mean, this is not an easy conversation. I'm saying I have to imagine every city that does code enforcement goes through that kind of philosophical conversation, right? Um, but I I really am excited about the discussion at hand because I think in a roundabout way what this should represent and kind of Justin what you're saying was like it's it's working and that maybe the how we got here we could obviously soften or think about how we philosophically understand like does is it even working right but in the end like I'd imagine as we go through these cycles right um we can use the ship one as a as a pointed example of hey, if you go out and you see 50 violations, you know, in a in a half day or whatever it might be the number is, does a is that a law? And if it is, is that just a code issue? And then it comes back to a a council like in this kind of environment, then we should just consider like um and have this exact same conversation we're having now like, hey, is this working? Is it not? Um I love your appro your thought and your to your approach of like let's just go see what the lay of the land is. Um and then we can start making those determinations of this this if we keep it as is this is the scale of this problem and if it's if it's a huge problem then is it a code issue or is it just the fact that we started looking at an issue or maybe mix a boat right um yeah I'd imagine we could probably you know there's better ways to kind of measure and figure out you know I'm sure that's what like the citizens feel right is just like we hear you staff hears it we hear of just um being in like cities are just punitive right out of the jump, right? And how do we this should be a process of like I I'm I'm for being proactive in the space. I I I believe in that because I think code enforcement makes good neighbors and a lot of oldest, right? But I think um there's good ways to educate the public too and use this part of like this legislative process that we're talking about now to educate ourselves about where the grand's in our code to borrow your phrase, right? Um but to me, as I kind of see this in my first kind of discussion up here, um I feel like this is a good thing for us. Um and it should allow us an opportunity to better understand the good, bad, right? how we can maybe be more clear in how we describe like when the shed came up I had five neighbors call me this week and I was like what the heck's going on

»and it happened to be your neighborhood up

»where and I started to deep dive and try to find the nibly code that says shed can't can or can't be within a distance of a house couldn't find anything started looking deep diving deeper well it's the IRC code that Utah generally adopts blah blah blah but it was not pointed or clear anywhere that I define in our language, right? Um, yeah. I don't know like to to what degree do we have to spell out the nitty-gritty and I don't know if that would make it easier for staff to administer. I don't know what the right answer is, but I think the more clear we could be, that's not a bad thing either, right? If we're going to say we're adopting fire code this and give give the like give it a diagram, right? So, it's

»Well, I said it was going to be quiet. Um, we heard a success story about fence regulations and I remember we had put in a zero fee and you've mentioned it a zero fee code review on fence permits right so we don't have to do building permits for something that's less than 200 ft

»but we could do a code review

»um no charge I don't know maybe there's a charge because it takes time but uh a console a no charge code review

»and and tell people well that's in the

»people don't know how to even look at their plat. They buy a house and live for 30 years and find out they should have looked at the plat.

»Well, I can tell them that's on you. It's your fault. I'm not going to worry about it. But guess what?

»It's on it's us. It's up to us to somehow fix this.

»So maybe and Levi suggested maybe a no charge code review and at that point we can say look let's look at your plat and maybe they don't even write anything down. I mean they just come in and talk to somebody.

»Yeah. On the shed issue I um we can we can discuss specific items. I will I I will point out that it is in our land use ordinance and if the council would like I think there's been some some good discussion on it tonight. we could get it on a planning commission agenda and try to tackle some of these issues and come back with with a specific recommendation from the planning commission based on some of the things that it

»yeah based based upon some of the things that have been discussed and some of the suggestions we've heard from from citizens and and other cities and if if you'd like I think that would probably be the appropriate venue to start rolling with that uh with that discussion of of amending that.

»Yeah. I So I'll ask the council um do you want to revisit the placement of sheds in our code?

»Yes.

»Okay. Yes.

»And do you want to suspend code enforcement on the placement of sheds of all the work?

»Yes.

»Okay. That's the word. Wait, can we clarify your your second question? Suspend. Oh, suspend. Not not

»Oh, suspend enforce. Oh, yeah. That's okay.

»Which Oh, sorry. Which way would I hope would we also follow up on any warnings that we give them?

»Yeah. And we we can tell them

»tell them hold on.

»Just tell them just tell them hold on. This is on hold. We'll get back to you if if an issue persists if you if you want to do that. Um if we can do that uh maybe sorry maybe another comment on the on the survey I would I think it's going to be a little bit difficult to craft the survey and to administer it in a way that you don't get the self- selection bias of people that are either agrieved with code enforcement or on the other hand they're agreved with the lack of code enforcement. I think getting the people in the middle that that may be fine with it or it it might be difficult to tease that out. So, I think I think that's just something to be aware of when when approaching it.

»Do you have a bigger way a way to let people that are happy with us tell us that they're happy with us?

»Have you have you had any phone calls from the people that I've worked with that are happy with me? No,

»exactly.

»That's my point. I believe there are people that are happy that we hired you and that you're doing code enforcement. I don't mean to make it about you,

»you know.

»That I've interacted with them.

»Yeah.

»Okay. Good. Glad to hear. Um but I mean I don't want to keep assuming that we're doing the right thing.

»Yeah. It it it's a it's a sorry it's a little bit difficult thing to tease out because it's hard to say what would it be like without code enforcement.

»We did

»we did the neighbor tattletail stuff for many years. Maybe that was better. I'm just asking the question. I

»mean we haven't since I've been here

»put on the survey.

»We haven't done that since I've been here but um we've we've done proactive enforcement. We just haven't been as effective with it until the last few years. But

»I just say just for reference, we had a discussion with Chad about some of his contacts and company consultants and I believe the estimates came back like 9 to 10 grand to do a kind of random style survey go after the middle. So just to give you an idea and they had different packages and different ways of kind of running that number, but it seems like it was big number up front and then they had follow-up numbers after that. Um, but seems like it was it's it's pretty pricey to try to hit that middle if you're going to go with the consultant. The other thing we talked about potentially doing instead of a 15 20 question survey was to try to do a question of the week and try to get one question per week and get a following of, you know, people that are willing to take the time to answer that one question. And so that's just some thoughts we've had as staff to try to get to that middle that you're talking about.

»Yeah. And um I understand the difficulties of a survey. I understand we can do better surveys with more money. Um I'm interested in I'll be happy to do a taking a crack at a five question survey related to code enforcement and maybe it's three and I won't do anything with until you all see it. There are two things on that. So uh on that survey is that something we could put in newsletter that with the website for me to go to absolutely created ourselves about having I don't know but

»it's still self- selected

»right until we do random sampling and have a way to randomly sample the population that it's a self- selected survey.

»The other the other point I thought Justin mentioned maybe We have some gremlins in our code and Nathan remembers and and so do you. In fact, we all most of us when we redid the animal juice, we created a committee with, you know, citizens and elected officials. And I feel like through that process, we actually created and crafted something we were all pretty proud of. Maybe this is something similar that we could create a committee with some of these, you know, I know with citizens and elected officials and staff to work through and hopefully discover and find and remove the gremlins from the code.

»So, would you like to remove the code that says it's illegal to play on the sidewalk?

»Yeah, that seems like a good example. Thanks for pointing it out.

»We have that. Like I said, I think link in committee be the best way to do that.

»Right. I appreciate that. I think what's different on animal land use versus our whole code is we can focus on animals which was one section, one small section of code as opposed to we're going to go through all the land uses. We're going to go through all the code. We're going to somehow get a committee focused on that. I think that's hard. There there are there are things that Levi and I are focusing on trying to rewrite to bring to you guys like the winter snow removal stuff, the trailers. There are things that Levi and I are working on. We're just doing it slowly because we don't want to overwhelm the council. So, we are working through code as as I'm going through it, as I'm enforcing, I bring stuff to Levi's attention that we don't think we should be enforcing, such as planning on silo. Yeah, I have a question for Evan.

»Yeah,

»this might change seasonally, but what as a broad category, what do you see are like maybe the one or two most common complaint issues that you calls that you get about code enforcement versus what are the one or two most common things that you see as like the most egregious people being uh just out of compliance generally in our city? um a lot of obstruction of public ways,

»which what you see or what others

»bushes and trees and I get a lot of calls from mostly the elderly as they're trying to take their walk down the sidewalk and have to duck under trees or around bushes or um that's also in the winter with snow.

»And then the most egregious thing is parking in your front yard.

»Like I don't know why people like to park on their grass. I don't I take pride in my grass so I don't park on it. But it it's it's big and parking in general. Parking on the sidewalk is huge.

»Don't understand why people think they can park on the sidewalk, but that is against state law. Well, we talked about it. It's because they don't understand and it's an educational thing. I spent two hours on the phone with the weeks who were here three weeks ago too many times to use that same word. They don't understand that they see it as parking on their driveway and we see it as parking on the sidewalk. There's an intersection of area that they flat out maybe to their advantage because they want to think of it as their driveway cuz because like you say it's to their advantage, but the fact is I don't know how many times I said in the two-hour conversation uh with with uh with that resident, "No, that's the sidewalk.

»No, I'm just parking on my driveway. How come you guys are giving me a bad time for parking on my driveway? That's not your driveway. That's the sidewalk. Now, so that's education, right? And so it's we we flat out had to understand that we have to define what is the driveway and what is the sidewalk and code. It's amazing that we have to do that. State code does it. Yeah.

»But when we talk about education, I I understand how hard this is on education. But people are way more willing to live to the letter of the code, the letter of the law, if we can somehow relate to them the intent of the law and the spirit of the law, right? If we can say, well, look, when you when you park on the sidewalk, you're blocking pedestrian access. That's why we do that. You know, when when you build when you put your shed here on a public utility easement, this is this is what you're subjecting yourself to. We're trying to protect you from that. And if there's fire code issues, turns out there's not, but if there's fire code issues, you're you're submitting you're you're putting your family at risk. I mean, this is the spirit of the law. I I'm I I've even made up something in my mind as to why the accessory building setback is 3 feet if it's 10 feet behind the rear of the house, but 3 feet if it's not 10 ft behind the rear of the house. But that's a stretch. Why is that in there?

»I have we discussed some more detail of why that might be in there, by the way. Um, but with with Evan and with Austin, it's starting to we're starting to see the logic at least behind

»on my own as to where I can explain that. But

»yeah,

»but this is what we have to do, I think, for education is not only say, well, we'll give you a warning instead of a a ticket. It's like it's a warning because this is how it benefits our community to have this code in the first place. This is the contract. This is the social contract we all sign up for when we decide we're not going to live by ourselves in in a cave somewhere. It's crazy. Sound pretty good.

»Yeah. And I think I think Evan does spend a lot of time explaining the why if he knows the why. Um I know I sometimes struggled and I didn't like to just make it up if I didn't know why. So, but I it was still my duty and it's still Evan's duty to enforce the code even if we don't understand the full spirit of the law completely. Um I was going to say something else but

»keep thinking about it. Randy, did you have something? Mayor, can I ask maybe develop a speaker list?

»Can I?

»Yeah. Well, yeah, just the workshop. They're kind of jumping around and I think I've seen a few hands go up. I don't know. Does everyone feel like they're not getting

»an opportunity?

»Okay, never mind.

»And then Nathan. Okay. Um, on my case, um, I found two pictures about my vehicle. One where I was parked on the sidewalk and one where I was not. and they were backto-back days. And so I apologize. I apologize to you that that might have happened. I would have had some of that. So I want to apologize. Um you might have taken me appropriately. It's depending on when that vehicle's moved and so or meant what I said prior. I looked I looked the pictures. I'm not sure what say date in the so I won't just the second thing is this. When you purchase a home in Gibbly, do you come into the city office and and get set up on on um on bill to pay or Cheryl, how does that work?

»How do you work?

»Well, when you move to the city and

»building service agreement,

»you know, I bought a home in the afternoon office and do anything.

»Um, not necessarily more. It's online.

»It's all online. I just wonder if there's a way we could get them a one page. Here's 10 potential violations. Here's 10 codes that every resident needs to know. I mean, really, how many how many do you really need to know that are most common? I would just Is there a way we can educate dog education? How do we do that? And may we have a newsletter? That's true. But as as you move in, here's the here's the top five or seven things just to be a good citizen about how to function. I know how to distribute that, but it's not yet. um mayor, I think your three questions you asked are good. I think you have started to engage some of those conversations tonight. Um I think the lie is boring. Uh, in my time here, as Garrett alluded to, I mean, I can count animal, land use, vehicles and yards, weeds, no removal, parking, a lot of them. I think a lot of them initially were under the nuisance part of ordinances where we've had committees. we got together and board of the council talked about it and I believe in most cases if not all the ordinance got better. Um, and just some of this was even prior to us going full-time part-time enforce more more consistent code enforcement, right? Um, so Justin, I like your idea of, you know, is is enforcing the only way to test? Probably not. I think it's what we've relied on uh currently. Can we have a committee maybe look at things and tackle them? Yeah, those are always good, especially if they involve citizens. Um, we talked about the small town feel. As more people move in here, they bump into each other more. As the house houses get closer together, they they bump into each other more. Um, Nibi probably at one point operated solely on the idea that people would volunteer to talk to each other and resolve some of these issues. Um, that gets harder and harder as you get bigger as a city. And so, I think that's also part of what we're dealing with. Um, we spent some money to help uh you do your job um with software and hardware. Can you was that a subscription? Was that a onetime purchase?

»It was a subscription.

»Okay. Renewal of that contract is roughly 6 months from now in the budget when we decide if we're going to pay for it again.

»Okay. Okay. So, that's something to think about as far as if that's helpful. If we're going to be continue to be kind of a little more proactive, I think that's something that we consider budget-wise. Um, most ordinances we've bumped into so far, I think initially came because there was a problem at some point or we just adopted what some of the city told us we should think about because they had more experience. That's my guess. I don't know for sure. Um, as I've worked on some of these, I feel like a lot of them at points were under the vague kind of assumption of health and safety. Uh, but some of them were very aesthetic, right? Health and safety was maybe I just don't like the look of that. It makes them angry every day, which is valid, but maybe a little less valid than you're leaking oil into the water system, right? Um, I think we've tackled a lot of the aesthetics. I mean, cars parked in front yards was long enough. We have said, "Well, you can do it in your backyard now." Because we had no way of enforcing that really, right? That was that's just one example that that popped into my head. Uh, so I think that um I think it's a good idea to maybe break down and I would suggest the nuisance ordinances are a good place to start. But when I've engaged with citizens, I usually propose six questions to them that maybe we should think about. One is the complete suspension of enforcement altogether. Um for most of the kind of smaller issues and hope that residents can go back to the good olden days that probably didn't exist where they just take care of themselves, right? If the number one complaint you're getting is that people don't trim their trees so I can walk down the sidewalk, like that's a service project I can handle every Saturday, right? like there's there's there's opportunities for us to be a community again and resolve these issues without lines, right? The second one is whether we do and mayors approached it reactive enforcement strictly, right? Complaint based only and we only send someone out and and enforce when someone is upset enough. I will tell you, it's not my personality, but there are residents that are more afraid of doing that than anything else in this world. Just p on their neighbors, right? Even if it's their health and safety at risk. So, there's some problems there. Um, another option I always throw out to them. Number three is is as a service of reduction. We don't have a code enforcement officer ever. And we rely on the sheriff's office to do what they do, which is usually the more kind of threatening

»criminal

»criminal situations, which maybe have a little higher stakes, right? Um, we've lived in that world before. Maybe it means lower tax base. I don't think it does, but we're either paying our enforcement officer or we're calling the cops more, right? I don't really like that one, but I always throw it out. No one ever says they like it. Uh, four is is looking at things and removing specific provisions that we care about. I think that's very similar to just having a task force look at things. Um, the other one is more weather dependent like on parking. So, I'm going to skip that one. So, I guess there's only five and and it kind of goes along the last one which just language updates. It's updating ordinances to be more easy to enforce as well as understood. Um, so all that being said, after I've written all these notes down,

»what was the one before the last one?

»I think the last ones were all kind of the same, which is rewrite the ordinances

»that that Yeah. What was between reduce enforcement maybe only law enforcement and language update

»specific specific provisions

»which I think is like adjusted. Yeah,

»last ones are all combined. I figured out sorry it was also dependent because I was talking to people about very specific like codes they were met.

»Um so I think we consider those you know we're talking about the general plan and what we want the values to be. Those are our approaches and I do think that a handful of uh planning and zoning, city staff, residents that uh could tackle it or we pay someone $10,000 to do the course. Uh I think that that it's important. I like the idea of survey and things like that, but I think that uh us trying to tackle it first and then presenting suggestions that we think we want to make is probably going to work a little like the changes we want to make as a city might be easier but I don't know that I'll end there's a lot sorry

»no thanks for your patience Justin

»I was just telling we do have that sheet it's got a lot of information on already we hand it to people that come in and it's PDF for online stuff but it's more of utilities and stuff like that

»starting to become fine print right where they don't read it they just check it It's It's a little weird. I I appreciate the suggestion. I'll put it soon. It's a little say welcome to Italy. Here's what you think. Yeah,

»I think maybe Nathan to your to your point I if you do go in that direction I I I it sounds a lot like different scenarios

»and I think if you can present that in a way to say here's one scenario of per of approaching code enforcement and explaining the pros and cons of that approach. Yeah,

»here's another kind of like we did in the general plan with four different scenarios. Um, there's pros and cons to each of those. It It's good for this, not so good for this. I think that could be helpful because I think when you when someone says, "Oh, I just don't want code enforcement because he's a jerk to me when he comes up to my house and tells me what not to do." Like I think it would be helpful if we are going to go down the survey route to say this these these are the implications of of this approach to code enforcement so they can kind of get the whole picture.

»That was my intent with the questions. But I'm happy to if if you sound like you don't want to do the survey.

»No, I'm fine with it.

»And maybe I shouldn't write the survey credibility here.

»No, no, I'm not. I was I didn't know what the questions were. I was just I was just trying to

»Yeah,

»you said it, not me, but I don't think the survey is as good idea as uh just looking at some of our most frequently mentioned problems. Looking at those codes first and then taking it to the public and saying like like sharing that code and saying like look we have updated these codes. These this is how we are we'll be enforcing this is the spirit of these codes. These are the five or six most commonly broken codes in our city. And so we have taken six months and we've looked at these and we tried to update them. I think that you're going to get a more positive response from people than ask them survey questions because people behind keyboards are angry and need. And I don't think that you get real responses um from people. I think you just either people are happy so they're apathetic about responding or they're angry so they're rude and you unfortunately are getting the brunt of the entire angry city's uh passion about this and I think you you've gotten beaten down a lot over the past however many months but I just I think a survey is going to continue to allow us to get beat up

»okay

»verbally. Well, then with with that, I think that fits well with Justin's suggestion that we quietly inventory the most uh uh infracted code. And I mean, let's let's do that inventory and then let's ask the question, what has that done to make our city a worse place to live? And that's the decision for us to make. We wouldn't ask our residents that because they're going to have a very divided opinion on it whether they got cited or didn't get cited. But but make the make the list. Let's instead instead of saying, "Well, we're going to we're going to go enforce this code because it's on the books, which is a great approach, but let's make the list. find out what's most infracted and then decide whether that seems like good code or bad code before we go jump on.

»Yeah, I still say that as part of that we really consider what has the largest negative impact on the city as a whole, right? Because blocking a sidewalk has big an impact as not having the right stuff on your second dairy water, right? There are there are there are significant impacts that I think have way more weight that we should be enforcing and make sure we have code has to show to like maybe more convenience or and I'm not trying to say like walking silo is more important or less important like drink yourself water I am right.

»Yeah. It's like there's a criminal tier like you're going to die if you were this tier and then like that's not how we want our community to make it better. I think they're focus on the problem that

»I'm not ready to give up safety.

»No,

»no matter how impacted people feel.

»Next step is

»no enforcement on shed straighten it out for a minute here. So for shed specifically um everything else I I mean I think it's a good suggestion to get inventory but keep in mind that Evan Evans charged to enforce pretty much all of Nibli city code. There's a lot of little things here and there and if there's if there's a violation I mean his job description is to enforce everything in the code and is it feasible like I I like I really like Justin's suggestion but I I would I would suggest that yes we'll do that as much as we can on on things as we see okay this is going to bubble up to an issue like the shed heads and we'll take that approach, but he still needs to enforce the code um in general. And there's all the other like we can't do that for everything, I guess, is my point. I if we do, I I I definitely think we need a full-time code enforcement officer to spend three times as much time doing doing what he does because That's that's a big task to take that additional step of okay well let's let's see where we're at across the city and then and then we'll decide if we're going to change it and then we'll decide to enforce the code right so that's that's the it's a it's a tough it's a tough balance I like the approach I like the philosophy but on a day-to-day basis I think it'll be uh difficult difficult to implement um depending you know just because there's a variety of different different issues. I I'll speak to that a little bit. There are seven known mechanics throughout the city who are operating a business illegally that we have spent months documenting pictures of different cars. What are they doing with their oil? It takes time and when we start going after these guys, it's going to bubble up. And just so you know, takes months of building the case, doing inspections, investigating, trying to find a way to prove that those aren't their vehicles takes a lot of time. And to do those bigger to do those bigger issues, part times, it's rough. So to tackle the bigger issues that for safety, we might die by this guy dumping one in the sewer system. It there's a lot of time involved in an investigation to prove somebody's running an illegal business. I personally would rather see you spending your time on those things. I really would. no matter how long it takes and no matter what the conclusion comes to, those are the things I think we the city and our residents care more about. And I think the other ones, they might naturally go back to resolving issues themselves and be a little more inclined to talk to each other about it. You know what I mean? Um, but I I personally, even if it's part time, I'd rather see us working on those things as a city than if we trim the trees. the right size in certain times, right? It's a case scenario. But

»so how

»I appreciate that you're doing that. I had no clue.

»Yeah. And how did they decide to prioritize placing of sheds over that activity,

»illegal businesses,

»right? Well, we we received a complaint and and I and then and then Evan asked me, "Should I get after this since we've got we've got another complaint?" Yeah. We don't we don't turned a blind eye to any code violation that we're aware of. That's been our approach.

»So, we went from one complaint, which was it one complaint or two complaints?

»It was Well, it was one and then it was that I I guess it was two. They then they said what about

»yeah what about which is the exact same thing that happened with the animal land use that's how that all bubbled up

»and like code enforce I mean I I don't know I I think yes we you can prioritize certain things and focus on those things but it's you're also putting putting out fires constantly of and and not and and not turning a blind eye when you when you see a violation. So that it's a tough balance, right?

»Especially

»like, "Oh, there's a violation." Ah, and and I know I know he's had to because of limited time say, "Look, I'm I'm going back I'm going back to the offices. I don't have enough time to deal with any more violations." Right? Um, unless there's something really egregious, but it's it's a tough balance. Anything else?

»Someone want the last word? I don't. So, I I'll just I'll just if if everyone's good with it, I'll I'll get it on the next planning commission agenda, a workshop to talk about sheds. I'll bring up the issues and hopefully come up with some recommendations to bring back council within a few months. Um, working through it part of the workshop or is that you want it to be just planning commission? I mean, we we we have a

»I don't know if you like what John did or not, but that seems like a pretty darn good place.

»Well, that's I was planning on taking all that all that input. It however you want to do it. I I I was just suggesting an approach. If we want to do a committee, if you want to do something else, I was just saying that the the prescripted approach for the land use ordinance is for the planning commission to consider it, consider something, work on it, make a recommendation to city council as an independent body, but it doesn't have to be that way. I was I was just saying that that's that's an option. We already have meetings set up. We already have a process in place that we could do that. If if you want to do it another way, you can. I feel like for this specific case, we very quickly generated some good sensible ideas and examples that could be considered by the planning commission and brought forward to city council who could I feel like we could nail we could boil this down to I don't know four to six changes.

»Okay.

»And and then and then they could be considered by the council. I don't know if we have to make it more complicated of a process than than just that for this for this specific issue. Now, if we're going to make it more broad like, oh, let's look at this whole animal, then that probably takes more.

»Yeah, that's actually really well said. I think we have the committee structure in our in our set of governance, the framework that we have. I think maybe the the only task force thing I would say ex outside of that is the approach to code enforcement. So I appreciate that. I think that getting another committee to tackle each one of these things we have that that's what the planning commission does. They then come to us. We're then that committee we represent citizens. We can engage where we move. We have public comments. I appreciate that. That's good insight. I think if we wanted to tackle how do we approach code enforcement that might be I have nothing.

»Yeah, I met with Angie Olsen. She's a city counselor in Wellsville now and had just got to know her a little bit. She's new city counselor and talk for a little bit about her thought about the Wellsville's council's opinion about joining the recreation district. and she she felt pretty favorable about about it. If not on their agenda for next weeks, maybe in 3 weeks they might look at that issue about joining direct district. Um

»that's Wellsville.

»Wellsville,

»right? I think Chad has an update. Have you talked from him lately?

»Not not and Chad's a That's okay. Well res pretty close.

»Yeah. Um I have some neighbors um who are have sump pumps and they're pumping it quite heavily out of that sump pump. Um it's in the circle just a couple down from my house um in the house. I can give you guys the address, but essentially they were um they were digging in the yard and around the house trying to like dig a hole to put in a sump pump. And they found a cloth land drain. You guys probably I think you probably been over there. Um and so they found that as long as they're pumping this pretty much constantly, their backyards don't flood. But as soon as they stop pumping, the one house's basement floods and the other backyards are like totally flooded. So, u I just kind of wanted to hear from you guys what what your thoughts were about that. If we could help them get that land drain unclogged or or what we can do to try and help mitigate that situation.

»You didn't know what I'm talking about.

»This is different than the one you have already spent. This is a new one.

»Same same

»same one.

»Okay. So, yeah,

»there's two property owners I've been working with. one since about summer and he says he's his is coming like right underneath his floor and out and running over his patio

»in the backyard.

»Is that it's um Zack Casper?

»Okay. Yeah. So, they're like backyard neighbors.

»So, just to the north of there is Steven. I met him last week.

»Yeah.

»We we we're collecting data right now.

»Yeah.

»No one had any record of that drain. Uh I think I'm calling on favors from some of my co-workers and things. We've gotten survey ground shots. We trace that line. We we actually I recommended that they called Rotorooer because we it's really not a publicly owned utility. It's someone put it in. We don't know who. So I recommended they call Ro. They were able to trace it out. They never found a blockage. And then we as a city, we asked them to trace it the other way and and the city's going to pay for that portion of it to see where it went. We we traced it all together probably three or 400 ft. Two it was probably 300t to the west or 200 feet to the west and about about the same to the east. And and they started taking these turns in the pipe and R says we're not going any further. We don't want to lose our equipment. started going into some backyards that we're not really prepared to go into. So anyway, with these ground shots, I am just going to put a sketch level thing, just an analysis to see if it's even feasible to maybe put a yard box in and connect to this pipe and get it to the canals because the pipe does go to the west and it connects to a canal pipe that's on the west side of town west. So there is a drain. It it does convey somewhere. Other than that, that's all we know right now. So,

»we'll continue to gather the information, see what we can do.

»Okay. I'll let I'll let I told I just told her last one last night that I find out what the update was and we haven't done

»Yeah. At this time, like like I said, it's we're living on a publicly owned utility. We we'll do what we can with the constraints we have. Right now, we're just in the in the information gather.

»Great.

»Just real quick on that. At some point, we're probably as a city gonna have to start dealing with these things as we find them. Whether they're ours, whether whoever put them in, but I think there's a fair amount of landings that have gone in and we got zero record of them where they are. But if they're not maintained, we'll be back to Lake B.

»Yeah.

»So, heads up. Okay.

»That's all. nothing for me.

»Um I so I I've sent an email out to every single city council member in every city on the southern end of the valley to see if there's any interest in potentially having like a quarterly meeting nonorum of course um just for anyone who's like new or like me that's new and wants to just learn about what other cities are going through and share good bad ugly. Um, so I'm hoping we can get a a meeting done or proposed on the books. There was a pretty good response. A lot of people want to do it in person. And so if anyone here would like to join that becomes formal, just reach out to you, let me know. And then hopefully if this thing becomes popular, then we just rotate and whatever. Right. Um, so I'm trying to get that started. Um, we did have the the economic meeting. I don't know, maybe you want to talk about Go ahead. Uh, so we met with um the governor's office of e economic opportunity. Is that right? Is that what they call themselves this week? Um and they kind of did an initial assessment interview. I think Nathan were part of that meeting spoke about that last meeting. um they came forward with some plans on how they were going to put together kind of a recommendation or maybe a strategized action plan for steps that maybe we could take that to to help um formalize I guess economic opportunity in our city. So that was pretty cool discussion and I thought um looking forward to seeing how that progresses and then um depending on kind of what they propose um the gentleman's name August said he come up here and probably present canled or I don't know if like we adopt anything or it's just like hey this is what we determined and there's some things we feel like you could do strategy wise to encourage whether it be infrastructure issues or whatever it might be right there for some good discussion there so

»and Jathan you're on that you were on the meeting too. Anything to add?

»That's a great just a couple thoughts on the the modifications we made at 12 West. One of the the project that was there I believe and Tom help me on this was to put a rumble strip down the down the middle um separating the lanes and I've had several com complaints from citizens um on 12 west and 3200 south so that area that the last thing that they wanted was kind of the noise the nuisance of the hearing rumble strips and so I just bring that up for the the council maybe for Tom is is that are we do we have enough money left after the modifications to actually implement that or do we need to make some action have a conversation at some future time if that's really going to happen. So, per the resolution, council allocated $40,000 to do improvements. It included the intersection studies. I've got an RFP out right now. I expect proposals on Monday. There's three three companies that are interested in. So, whatever is left over from there would be applied to the the other three items. Some one was a rumble strip in the center. Some were some signage improvements along for the for the bike lanes and things like that. So, in all reality, doubt there's going to be a whole lot of money left to do the rumble strips. We've already taken out the concrete bolts and everything. So,

»so do I we need to do anything? Um, will that happen? I mean, is that something that I need to bring up with council and say, can we amend this and scratch that if they're willing to do that or do we just need that just not worry about it or you say they're out of money?

»So, so what I could do after next week, I'll know how much money it remain. I can report back to city council before we take any further action on.

»Okay, that'd be great. Then we could discuss if that's something we're going to tackle. Thank you.

»Yeah, that's a consequence. I didn't either until I got worried that was a problem.

»Thank you.

»Um, you probably get fall out from our residents on this one. For all the things that it seems like I'm got in the balls I've got in the air. I'm trying to figure out how we fit in with our neighboring communities. Um, one of them is the library.

»Oh.

»And Cash County is shutting down the county library province and the county executive asked me to be on the library board. He asked at Kathleen Alder, mayor of Providence's suggestion and they the county council hasn't appointed me to that board yet. Um, there's no doubt the county library system, the county library, not system is going away. I I libraries are fantastic. I am willing to serve on that board no matter what Nimley's role is in that board. But by me serving on the board in a public meeting which was recorded and I welcome you to listen to the recording if you want. Uh the hiring librarian was at the meeting and I explained in the public meeting that yes I think it is fiscally responsible for Nibbley City at the age that we are. We're going to rent a house for the next 50 years. I think it's fiscally responsible for us to think about if there's a path to ownership. And so, not only do I love libraries and have them to sit on be willing to sit on the board for that reason, but I told the folks at the meeting, the board and and the librarian that um I'm here to look at options and maybe we're getting big enough to to maybe join with somebody else on a path to ownership. So that's that's what I said. Um reports from citizens and the library board, the library board as I said something very different than that. But I will tell everyone that those are my motivations for serving on the board. One to do the right thing for libraries whether nobody's involved or not. and two to see if there is to to investigate what our options are in terms of library services for newly citizens including the possible path towardship. And don't forget that our library costs increased by 50% year-over-year last year. So I actually accomplished another thing which was an intended thing that I didn't say in the meeting is to let the landlord know that the let the landlord knows that the lease has options and uh the landlord got the message. That's it. Um if so if you hear if you hear from residents I I have a whole email worked out. I knew I was going to have to be careful about this. I uh you know so I I spent time a lot of time on that that on on that uh email to the first resident who contacted me about say it ain't so Larry because I know we have generational uh um ties to the high library and so I have to be pretty careful about and I I really want to talk to you about these but I can assure you that I'm not going uh bring any proposal to you and I know that that hasn't had a lot of careful thought and you all will be in a lot of very very careful uh deep indepth deep inepth deep I'm tired deep discussion about what the right thing to do in terms of library and we may even sort it on a ballot province is going to put it on a ballot see with a non nonviding vote to see if their citizens want to support of as confidence library and we can do the same thing. Now that's a true it's not random but that's a true ballot that actually at least has advisory power. I'm not on library board yet. So one of your options is to say don't get on board. I'm happy to.

»So you're getting on a board for a library that's shutting down.

»Correct. But it's also that board that will likely turn into what do we do next,

»right?

»In terms of probably city and anyone else that might join.

»Is there an actual date for that shutting down?

»Yeah. Um the county had it at uh the end of June. Um they got George F said he would take a proposal if the Providence library would cut some budgets. They would he would try to get additional funding through November. There's still a timeline because province is talking about putting this on a ballot in November and you don't shut a library down and turn it back on just like that. You lose personnel and staff. So one of the things I I know through this whole processing order process is uh patrons develop deep loyalties to library staff. So I'm telling you with fire I know try to do the right thing hard to do.

»Okay that's what I needed. Thank you. All right.

»I'm good. for other requests by the council. I reached out Dylan Mace. He is the administrator for the public notice website. He was able to provide me with some reports um on usage of the public notice website. Um there isn't such reports as that will give statistical analysis of updates and news and and and less use but he did give me the um he said I can run these reports myself so I could go through and run it quarterly. It just gives us a list of who's using the public website and it breaks it down by each um entity we have on there. Um, I was a little disappointed in what I saw and I'm happy to share it with the council and whoever. Would you all like to receive those reports?

»Yes, please.

»And any direction you want to give me about writing, how often would you like me to run those reports would be great. Um, and then I would just like

»right after I write those really impactful newsletters.

»Yeah, exactly. Um and and if I keep them viable, we can of course just little a little data can go a long way if you use it correctly. And then just an RSVP for the Utah League of Cities and Towns Conference. I'm just going to go down the line and everybody please give me your RSVP. Just do not single anybody out that hasn't told me already and to make sure I have the correct information. So mayor, are you attending the

»Right. I thought I knew. Is tonight your drop dead date?

»Yes.

»I thought I knew. Uh,

»does it pass?

»It's like ordering a restaurant.

»Well, then I I'm not going to be full.

»I will be attending.

»Thank you, Nathan.

»I will not be able to

»Garrett Nick.

»Yes. and Randy

»two three days.

»All right. Thank you very much.

»Yeah. And so specific and if you want to follow,

»here's my recommend. Here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to drive down Wednesday evening.

»I would like to check into the motel Wednesday evening. I would like to attend the conference on Thursday and stay in the motel Thursday night. Attend the conference on Friday morning and I think it's done at noon and then drive home. So, I need a hotel for Wednesday night and Thursday night by May and I plan to attend everything but their Wednesday night which their Wednesday night stuff. That's what I'm doing and that's exactly what I need to do. We have work to take that policy.

»That's fantastic direction. I love that. Very specific. And thank you.

»All right. And Oh, yeah. Justin, please.

»Sorry. I just had one thing that uh one of the staff members brought up to me that we just wanted to throw out for your thoughts and discussion. You got to tell me tonight, you tell me next week, but we thought about would it be useful to do staff reports at the beginning of the meeting instead of the end in which we might be able to get more staff here, maybe get some more interactions before 11:30 p.m. And so chew on that. Let us know what your thoughts are. Do you have thoughts? Send it off to Justin. I mean, we could just make our meetings longer, too.

»I'll point out that our current library board members term ends.

»Yes. Just

»and according to the agreement, it's like the normal stuff I recommend and then you confirm it. Um, thanks for that.

»Anything else council? We're at the end end of the agenda. If I don't hear an objection, we will journ. We are I didn't know what to leave.

»Thank you, Greg.

»You're a hero.

»No way. I just wish you wouldn't talk to me before I

»want you up here at the podium on every

»Are you grading us each week? Oh, there were actually no it's if I see anything that is a real red flag then I take it back to my committee but I it's

»we talked about me going to one of your meetings um let you guys just shoot arrows at

»we definitely could right now as many statements but

»u you got bumped I pirate would appreciate where several of our agents are.

»Are we done? Are we off? Good