Nibley City Council- 06/26/2025
2026-04-10
even I'd have to check would be possible to also do the 3% starting July Jan still for basically meeting. Yeah. You know, the timing is weird, right? Like we we thought it was a great idea because it gave two bumps to employees just for employee morale. Like, oo, I got a little oo I got a little That's why we did it. That's why we did it that way. Um, seemed like a great idea at the time. Everybody in the executive team was happy with it. But then this kind of get muddles this a little bit. The last thing we want to do is is to run people off. There's some jobs they'll do just cap out. We hope they want to increase in some piece of the company or some kind elsewhere. I'm saying it's here. But um I don't know. I I guess the main thing is as we're discussing it and decided it go either way we had motions too with Yeah. I I think that it's important to separate keeping up with the inflation from capping out with performance. And I I saw that in my own career in private practice, right? The capped out of performance. My employer said, "You can't get any better. Sometimes you work harder or less after your it didn't matter. Yeah. The whole the whole point of salaries to me is to not make it an issue because I don't I didn't want my employees that I not my employees I supervised with people. I didn't want them thinking about salad. I wanted them thinking about how to do their job and how to do it well and how to do it better and more efficient. And so frankly I that was my goal is to take salary out of the discussion and I probably asked my boss for compensation. Well well first of all I always wanted to keep up with inflation. I didn't want people to I don't want them thinking about their salaries. We certainly don't want them thinking I just took the cut and pay because inflation went up or itself except for the ones that I didn't want to work at the company I was working and to me I think merit's more valuable than cost because if they're good then you should give them more I'd give more merit. I'd almost like I'll make you a substitute motion. I'll do the one and a half cost of living with the one and a half available for mirror. So that give you your 3% so those that want to work harder can work harder. Um they don't get the 3% just because they didn't get fired that they got more than they work harder. That kind of goes for what you're saying. clarify that. So I my first motion was one and a half possible living. So I'll do one and a half possible living with another one and a half available for the merit. So give me 3%. So it's the same as the budget other than another one and a half based on what was what was in the original what was the merit for January that's cutting straight in half is it well that's oh and so four and a half% for so basic what you're saying other than I want one and a half guaranteed and one and a added on which you're taking one and a half out of three% removing it that possible change I said If you want more time to think would be a good time to make a second. I'll make a second. So, we have a substitute motion. Yeah. Change cola to 1.5%. And allow the January merit They burn some skills out of there. Mhm. To go to Lauren. Maybe we switch the if we do the merit possible. four and a half or merit now and do a one and a half cola in January. I mean that that's I mean that will cost the budget more money. Yeah. the the the merit increases if we stick with the January increases the maximum for the fiscal year not the average for this that's why you know I I I questioned last time said holy smokes the 6% increase salaries here on here is not sustainable and that's when Justin explained to me and I I think he explained tonight that that's not the average increase for the year. It's the max for the year because the merit increase only affects half the year. So people are on their current salaries cost of living would be originally proposed immediately but the merit part of it was demand for six months. So really that's where I think you said Larry it's not 6% year-over-year it's more like four and a half% year to half that's half the year right and so they get the 3% merit that's their loose salary so it does add to their salary uh 2% cola stand understand at the end of the calendar year. Yeah. Yeah. The expense to the budget is So it's not a bonus. Correct. It's the the salary. Yeah. Yeah. Well, to be honest, I mean, yes. Do you approve all? Um, well, we've had a lot of discussion at the executive level if on how to do those and we haven't really kind of nailed down exactly what we want to do, but in the end, yes, because it's got to fit in this budget. When you talked to department supervisors, you asked for budget proposals including salaries based upon this proposal. Correct. Yeah, correct. That's that's how this current budget is built and modeled. Yeah. So, this would significantly impact what they could potentially. Yes. And I and I to be honest I they're not all three and three. So, um I mean I guess in the end you just need to give me a number to hit and I'll verify the state I'm sorry increases and only gives us 7 institutions usually to error usually or whatever they So basically how if if this the motion on the table right now is one and a half cola and four and a half% possible merit. Yeah. direction. I guess I didn't understand January. So was in January you did good. This next coming year you get 3%. Yeah. So to so July 1st you would get the cost of living adjustment whatever you decide three one and a half whatever it is right. And then we were going to hold off. We were going to nail down our exact policy and kind of we've talked about different ways of scoring it. We've talked about eight core concepts now that we're going to be talking about to motivate and improve our employees. And we talked about should we roll that score them on those to equate that to a merit increase. And we've kind of gone around and around in circles a little bit. We haven't nailed down exactly what we do. That's probably another reason we could we I I took the foot off the gas a little bit because I was planning on doing it in January. Um, so I mean, but but to achieve the the merit between them and the supervisor, they know what they have to do or improve on in order to get that. Correct. Okay. Well, I mean, we don't know exactly how, but they have to show improvement. I mean, I've been preaching for because to be honest, I'm I'm a little honestly mind boggled that you guys are bringing this up because this is beans to what we have done every single year since I came to NIP. This is less uh so I'm a little surprised to be honest. um a little taken back, maybe not quite ready to attack it like I should have been, but uh you know, historically, if an employee was not topped out, they got a 2% COLA and a possible 5% increase that was basically automatic. So, if you weren't fired, every employee got a 7%. Now, COLA messed that up. Things went through the roof. Since then, I've been telling our staff, look, this can't continue. This is not sustainable. We cannot do this. We need a new policy. We need a new way to do it. That's we started with the worth of work and we're kind of in the middle of that process of trying to iron that out on exactly how does a person qualify and know that they qualify to receive that merit pay. So what do you feel would be the best possibility still three to know? I'm comfortable with three because that's how I have everything built. We start messing around with it. I I it confuses me on how I'm going to balance things. Um, so I mean I I will do whatever you want to do, but if you're asking me, I feel comfortable and confident that this sends a good message to our employees that we value you, we appreciate you, we want you to be here, and we're willing to reward you for good efforts. So, if you're asking me, I say we stick to the plan and move forward, but I will do exactly what you tell me to do. Sorry, I want to I want to chime in on this discussion. Yeah. What's going to happen is it's 2.8 and I'm going to give them one and a half. We're going to turn our city upside down because they're going to discuss every other city that took place here and they got two and a half to three. We're paying them less than what our 12 year index is or our 12 months, excuse me. Yeah, it's there's a there's a lot of activity that we do. Yeah. And I'm going to tell you the team you have here is well worth the 3%. Is it so is they almost expect it to? No, we I've been in for 25 years there's been years 2008 there was no cola keep your job. Yeah. So it just really go off of what this is. Yeah. That's employees. Like I say, I don't know, three, four years, we went without any. The last few years have been crazy, but you know, it's like we talk every day now. Our parts are still going up. Our water meters just went up 15% this year. That's going some math. $50,000. That's $1,500 raise for that year. 72 cents an hour. That helps that helps our person. Yeah. Honestly, I feel right there. I'm surprised because I feel like this is us coming back to some after a lot of very high kept some really good staff and also I'll just approve some really good staff. um and I like that there's a plan to get it under control to use it based on merit. I think you feel the same way just waiting for couples but I don't think that we as a city that so I am inclined to follow what's been planned and the department has already planned budget on knowing that by January probably first I think I know and I think we're on that track but we have been increasing significant years this is trying to be sustainable. Well, and I appreciate the discussion both because you're you're you're vouching for your team and your employees and looking for and that's what I was hoping is that we're just not they're not expecting that. There's a reason why we're going to take care of it. So, I'll give you the third substitute motion to uh to just keep the 3% that's presented. Is there a substitute motion to go back to the original motion? Then get back to the original motion and we can still Well, I just I really feel we should spend some time. I think it's a great discussion. I I before we uh I'll ask the council this is is our timing good I mean we've talked about the budget for about two months now and I'm not I'm not being uh saddened or pjorative or anything else about you know when we get down to brass tax when we start looking at the tongue I'm I'm I'm glad we do that. I'm very glad we do that. Are we Is there a way Justin you know you built this budget. Should I be ask council the same question? Should I be pushing to get to this uh down to brass tax discussion earlier in the process? Yes, please. Yeah. And if I think if Justin would have heard this two meetings ago, a month and a half ago, it it it would definitely be I would have a clearer picture of the budget that the council is going to vote on. Yeah, I I would have a clearer picture, a clear model. I understand what impacts it would have. It explains a lot better. I'll make a suggestion that there is a meeting dedicated to the budget and very Yeah, earlier in May that we focus on these discussions without having okay and will the council commit to coming to that meeting and say no I think one brass tax out because it's it's And that has to be part of the process, right? That's the question I'm asking. How do I know to get to the hard questions earlier in the council wants to get to the hard questions earlier? Okay. So the amended substitute substitute motion is to go for a 1 and a.5% goal of 4 and a.5% merit then build that into the budget. That's the substitute amendment. Any objection to voting on that? Well, no. I'm not accepting that motion. I'm not accepting that motion. That's to go back to the original motion. I don't want to go back to the original motion with substitute motion. I want to vote down substitute. We're going to make a decision. We're going to take a vote then just keeping making substitute motions. I'm not accepting that motion. Back to where Sarah, you're nodding your head like that'll help with the minutes, right? And then I'll invite the council to make all kinds of amendments and substitutes and everything else. But if we're going if we're going back to where we started, I want to do that with a vote, not with a just a motion and a set. Is that clear? You see where I'm coming from? There's not a change in my substitute. So, uh, we're voting on the substitute motion one and a half% goal of four and a half%. All right. Those in favor of that substitute amendment, please say I. I see zero. Those opposed, please say nay. So, we're back to order with a vote. We got there. So, thanks for the homes. It's a good discussion. Yeah, it's a great discussion. I have to confuse specific line questions page I think it's 39 page numbers but it's the city council and and I can give you the account numbers in fact can we look at this the overhead They're all Can you do you have that shared with you on one drive? I don't I don't think I have that team. Yeah. Go. I guess you could open the P. I was open Sorry, having some technical difficulty here getting you say you say it's the last meeting. I'll just Is it in this this year? This it's in these this week. At least I'm looking at it as budget PDF six steps to 24 presentation. That was and then I everything under nine is not the resolution. Oh, it's doesn't have a number. And it's in this this meeting. Sorry. Budget PDF. Yes. There we go. Yeah. Just wasn't scrolling. Yeah. Oh, it's not up there in the screen. I need it. stop sharing and share? Try that. Yes. Yeah, it's not working. Let's see here. Sorry. I don't know why. What is on a lyric? Maybe maybe it's my me close the presentation. There we go. Aaron, do you have a line number or page number? Yeah, I think it's page 39. Um yeah Justin I know the bugs always so printing one in papers but maybe if we had printed paper ones like you know couple meetings before we need to pass it final review that's also um okay the one I'm looking at is education travel and training so I noticed that this year we've budgeted $13,000 for that the last two years we've spent67 7 and then $6,500 for travel and training. Um I just I'm trying to imagine how we would double our spending for travel and training. I think there the two conferences that we typically attend. I just don't I don't foresee all five council members attending in the fall. Um so I would like to make I mean so if I wanted to change that, do I make a motion? And if we took money out of the line that the easy you put it wherever you want. The easy one would be to move it into the capital project transfer capital budget. Uh, I want to make a motion to amend the final budget for this year from 13,000 to like 10,000. I don't if not,000. No, thank you. There second. Okay. Any discussion? Let me do on this last budget there. We budgeted a little more than we have budgeted an extra thousand this year. I don't see us doubling our spending. This is in the accurate and less pessimistic. That rolled off your tongue nicely, by the way. Yeah. I mean, can can staff confirm that we usually budge it this high so that everyone has a chance to go? Yeah, sure. forward to go. That's how I was planning false council members. You have the same issue with planning planning commission that too. I'm grateful that every time the wife is able to come to win this is the spouses if they want to and they're gracious that she actually $10 a meeting. Yeah. Learns a lot. cancel. We do have covered. so let's let's see their discussion vault which one do you want okay uh the motion is to change the final budget number from 13,000 to 10,000 or educ or item 230. Okay. Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say I. Any opposed? Okay. 10,000. It looks like the League of Cities and Towns already did, but budgeting 13 motivating us to budget 13. Um, another question. It's further down. It's the streets department. page 48. Yeah. Uh I just have this is a clarifying question. I noticed crossing guard salaries and wages went down and also crossing guard benefits likewise is going down. Are we are we getting rid of crossing guard or why is that number going down? Just more detailed budgeting. Okay. Actual salaries of individuals. Some people are paid more than others. They've been working for 12 years. So, we just dialed in instead of being more accuracy, but we're not firing anybody without paying. Yeah. On the next page down department expenditure. I just wondered why it's so Yeah. Why? Why goes from 10,000 down to 3,000 bucks? We just never use it. We know never abuse it. Perfect. Same answer. Okay. Thank you answering my question. Okay. Uh okay, this is leading into all of the cemetery question. So, a couple pages down on community development and recreation. Uh we I noticed on the hyum senior center we have pushed last year range and this year up to 1500 and the explanation on that says just increasing the donation to the center for this fiscal year. I don't know PDF is searchable if you give us some Yeah. So yeah, the higher senior center goes up there. Um just wondering what I've never seen any and maybe I'm just not looking hard enough like any advertising about what the benefits are from the senior center to our seniors in so I'm just wondering maybe this is a discussion for a different time. Is the donation to the senior center sort of like the library? We are friendly neighbors and that it's available to nibbley residents. Do do residents use the senior center or is this just giving money to higher city? which their entire group of activities um there was a change of senior center if I reach out to that person that has caused that but I don't know how many So, there has been a change in leadership at that senior center director at Med and they're very forward thinking. They have a lot of great programs. Uh they seem to be going the right direction. Uh that money he hasn't provided anything in terms of number of newly residents. I'm sure if we asked him if he would provide that. So we we could report that later if you'd like. Just moving back to the cemeteries conversation. You get you guys suggested $5,000 as a donation to that. Um or not donation but helping pay for that road. Is that how thin air? Wait. Can I can I be clear? Is that your recommendation or are you passing along their request? There was zero no official number requested. It was just are you willing to help? And I said I would ask you all and so in the spirit of trying to be uh prepared for what the bottom line of your capital projects number would be, I picked a number that was just absolutely out of nowhere. Can be more or less whatever you want. Okay. But are you making a recommendation or passing along the request? I am making that we you're recommending that we pay $5,000 for the road. Yeah, but because I just picked a number. I needed a number to put in the spreadsheet to make the bal tell you what the ending balance would be. They did not ask for $5,000. They just said, "Are you willing to financially help us?" And I said, "I would ask you guys." So why would you recommend that we pay for that cemetery district? I just put a number there to so that I would remember to ask you what number you wanted to put in there. Yes, that's something. I would love to hear thought about that, but this is not a motion and that just I'm not sure that we need to pay that, but I want to hear everybody else's thoughts as well. Make a motion.
even I'd have to check would be possible to also do the 3% starting July Jan still for basically meeting. Yeah. You know, the timing is weird, right? Like we we thought it was a great idea because it gave two bumps to employees just for employee morale. Like, oo, I got a little oo I got a little That's why we did it. That's why we did it that way. Um, seemed like a great idea at the time. Everybody in the executive team was happy with it. But then this kind of get muddles this a little bit. The last thing we want to do is is to run people off. There's some jobs they'll do just cap out. We hope they want to increase in some piece of the company or some kind elsewhere. I'm saying it's here. But um I don't know. I I guess the main thing is as we're discussing it and decided it go either way we had motions too with Yeah. I I think that it's important to separate keeping up with the inflation from capping out with performance. And I I saw that in my own career in private practice, right? The capped out of performance. My employer said, "You can't get any better. Sometimes you work harder or less after your it didn't matter. Yeah. The whole the whole point of salaries to me is to not make it an issue because I don't I didn't want my employees that I not my employees I supervised with people. I didn't want them thinking about salad. I wanted them thinking about how to do their job and how to do it well and how to do it better and more efficient. And so frankly I that was my goal is to take salary out of the discussion and I probably asked my boss for compensation. Well well first of all I always wanted to keep up with inflation. I didn't want people to I don't want them thinking about their salaries. We certainly don't want them thinking I just took the cut and pay because inflation went up or itself except for the ones that I didn't want to work at the company I was working and to me I think merit's more valuable than cost because if they're good then you should give them more I'd give more merit. I'd almost like I'll make you a substitute motion. I'll do the one and a half cost of living with the one and a half available for mirror. So that give you your 3% so those that want to work harder can work harder. Um they don't get the 3% just because they didn't get fired that they got more than they work harder. That kind of goes for what you're saying. clarify that. So I my first motion was one and a half possible living. So I'll do one and a half possible living with another one and a half available for the merit. So give me 3%. So it's the same as the budget other than another one and a half based on what was what was in the original what was the merit for January that's cutting straight in half is it well that's oh and so four and a half% for so basic what you're saying other than I want one and a half guaranteed and one and a added on which you're taking one and a half out of three% removing it that possible change I said If you want more time to think would be a good time to make a second. I'll make a second. So, we have a substitute motion. Yeah. Change cola to 1.5%. And allow the January merit They burn some skills out of there. Mhm. To go to Lauren. Maybe we switch the if we do the merit possible. four and a half or merit now and do a one and a half cola in January. I mean that that's I mean that will cost the budget more money. Yeah. the the the merit increases if we stick with the January increases the maximum for the fiscal year not the average for this that's why you know I I I questioned last time said holy smokes the 6% increase salaries here on here is not sustainable and that's when Justin explained to me and I I think he explained tonight that that's not the average increase for the year. It's the max for the year because the merit increase only affects half the year. So people are on their current salaries cost of living would be originally proposed immediately but the merit part of it was demand for six months. So really that's where I think you said Larry it's not 6% year-over-year it's more like four and a half% year to half that's half the year right and so they get the 3% merit that's their loose salary so it does add to their salary uh 2% cola stand understand at the end of the calendar year. Yeah. Yeah. The expense to the budget is So it's not a bonus. Correct. It's the the salary. Yeah. Yeah. Well, to be honest, I mean, yes. Do you approve all? Um, well, we've had a lot of discussion at the executive level if on how to do those and we haven't really kind of nailed down exactly what we want to do, but in the end, yes, because it's got to fit in this budget. When you talked to department supervisors, you asked for budget proposals including salaries based upon this proposal. Correct. Yeah, correct. That's that's how this current budget is built and modeled. Yeah. So, this would significantly impact what they could potentially. Yes. And I and I to be honest I they're not all three and three. So, um I mean I guess in the end you just need to give me a number to hit and I'll verify the state I'm sorry increases and only gives us 7 institutions usually to error usually or whatever they So basically how if if this the motion on the table right now is one and a half cola and four and a half% possible merit. Yeah. direction. I guess I didn't understand January. So was in January you did good. This next coming year you get 3%. Yeah. So to so July 1st you would get the cost of living adjustment whatever you decide three one and a half whatever it is right. And then we were going to hold off. We were going to nail down our exact policy and kind of we've talked about different ways of scoring it. We've talked about eight core concepts now that we're going to be talking about to motivate and improve our employees. And we talked about should we roll that score them on those to equate that to a merit increase. And we've kind of gone around and around in circles a little bit. We haven't nailed down exactly what we do. That's probably another reason we could we I I took the foot off the gas a little bit because I was planning on doing it in January. Um, so I mean, but but to achieve the the merit between them and the supervisor, they know what they have to do or improve on in order to get that. Correct. Okay. Well, I mean, we don't know exactly how, but they have to show improvement. I mean, I've been preaching for because to be honest, I'm I'm a little honestly mind boggled that you guys are bringing this up because this is beans to what we have done every single year since I came to NIP. This is less uh so I'm a little surprised to be honest. um a little taken back, maybe not quite ready to attack it like I should have been, but uh you know, historically, if an employee was not topped out, they got a 2% COLA and a possible 5% increase that was basically automatic. So, if you weren't fired, every employee got a 7%. Now, COLA messed that up. Things went through the roof. Since then, I've been telling our staff, look, this can't continue. This is not sustainable. We cannot do this. We need a new policy. We need a new way to do it. That's we started with the worth of work and we're kind of in the middle of that process of trying to iron that out on exactly how does a person qualify and know that they qualify to receive that merit pay. So what do you feel would be the best possibility still three to know? I'm comfortable with three because that's how I have everything built. We start messing around with it. I I it confuses me on how I'm going to balance things. Um, so I mean I I will do whatever you want to do, but if you're asking me, I feel comfortable and confident that this sends a good message to our employees that we value you, we appreciate you, we want you to be here, and we're willing to reward you for good efforts. So, if you're asking me, I say we stick to the plan and move forward, but I will do exactly what you tell me to do. Sorry, I want to I want to chime in on this discussion. Yeah. What's going to happen is it's 2.8 and I'm going to give them one and a half. We're going to turn our city upside down because they're going to discuss every other city that took place here and they got two and a half to three. We're paying them less than what our 12 year index is or our 12 months, excuse me. Yeah, it's there's a there's a lot of activity that we do. Yeah. And I'm going to tell you the team you have here is well worth the 3%. Is it so is they almost expect it to? No, we I've been in for 25 years there's been years 2008 there was no cola keep your job. Yeah. So it just really go off of what this is. Yeah. That's employees. Like I say, I don't know, three, four years, we went without any. The last few years have been crazy, but you know, it's like we talk every day now. Our parts are still going up. Our water meters just went up 15% this year. That's going some math. $50,000. That's $1,500 raise for that year. 72 cents an hour. That helps that helps our person. Yeah. Honestly, I feel right there. I'm surprised because I feel like this is us coming back to some after a lot of very high kept some really good staff and also I'll just approve some really good staff. um and I like that there's a plan to get it under control to use it based on merit. I think you feel the same way just waiting for couples but I don't think that we as a city that so I am inclined to follow what's been planned and the department has already planned budget on knowing that by January probably first I think I know and I think we're on that track but we have been increasing significant years this is trying to be sustainable. Well, and I appreciate the discussion both because you're you're you're vouching for your team and your employees and looking for and that's what I was hoping is that we're just not they're not expecting that. There's a reason why we're going to take care of it. So, I'll give you the third substitute motion to uh to just keep the 3% that's presented. Is there a substitute motion to go back to the original motion? Then get back to the original motion and we can still Well, I just I really feel we should spend some time. I think it's a great discussion. I I before we uh I'll ask the council this is is our timing good I mean we've talked about the budget for about two months now and I'm not I'm not being uh saddened or pjorative or anything else about you know when we get down to brass tax when we start looking at the tongue I'm I'm I'm glad we do that. I'm very glad we do that. Are we Is there a way Justin you know you built this budget. Should I be ask council the same question? Should I be pushing to get to this uh down to brass tax discussion earlier in the process? Yes, please. Yeah. And if I think if Justin would have heard this two meetings ago, a month and a half ago, it it it would definitely be I would have a clearer picture of the budget that the council is going to vote on. Yeah, I I would have a clearer picture, a clear model. I understand what impacts it would have. It explains a lot better. I'll make a suggestion that there is a meeting dedicated to the budget and very Yeah, earlier in May that we focus on these discussions without having okay and will the council commit to coming to that meeting and say no I think one brass tax out because it's it's And that has to be part of the process, right? That's the question I'm asking. How do I know to get to the hard questions earlier in the council wants to get to the hard questions earlier? Okay. So the amended substitute substitute motion is to go for a 1 and a.5% goal of 4 and a.5% merit then build that into the budget. That's the substitute amendment. Any objection to voting on that? Well, no. I'm not accepting that motion. I'm not accepting that motion. That's to go back to the original motion. I don't want to go back to the original motion with substitute motion. I want to vote down substitute. We're going to make a decision. We're going to take a vote then just keeping making substitute motions. I'm not accepting that motion. Back to where Sarah, you're nodding your head like that'll help with the minutes, right? And then I'll invite the council to make all kinds of amendments and substitutes and everything else. But if we're going if we're going back to where we started, I want to do that with a vote, not with a just a motion and a set. Is that clear? You see where I'm coming from? There's not a change in my substitute. So, uh, we're voting on the substitute motion one and a half% goal of four and a half%. All right. Those in favor of that substitute amendment, please say I. I see zero. Those opposed, please say nay. So, we're back to order with a vote. We got there. So, thanks for the homes. It's a good discussion. Yeah, it's a great discussion. I have to confuse specific line questions page I think it's 39 page numbers but it's the city council and and I can give you the account numbers in fact can we look at this the overhead They're all Can you do you have that shared with you on one drive? I don't I don't think I have that team. Yeah. Go. I guess you could open the P. I was open Sorry, having some technical difficulty here getting you say you say it's the last meeting. I'll just Is it in this this year? This it's in these this week. At least I'm looking at it as budget PDF six steps to 24 presentation. That was and then I everything under nine is not the resolution. Oh, it's doesn't have a number. And it's in this this meeting. Sorry. Budget PDF. Yes. There we go. Yeah. Just wasn't scrolling. Yeah. Oh, it's not up there in the screen. I need it. stop sharing and share? Try that. Yes. Yeah, it's not working. Let's see here. Sorry. I don't know why. What is on a lyric? Maybe maybe it's my me close the presentation. There we go. Aaron, do you have a line number or page number? Yeah, I think it's page 39. Um yeah Justin I know the bugs always so printing one in papers but maybe if we had printed paper ones like you know couple meetings before we need to pass it final review that's also um okay the one I'm looking at is education travel and training so I noticed that this year we've budgeted $13,000 for that the last two years we've spent67 7 and then $6,500 for travel and training. Um I just I'm trying to imagine how we would double our spending for travel and training. I think there the two conferences that we typically attend. I just don't I don't foresee all five council members attending in the fall. Um so I would like to make I mean so if I wanted to change that, do I make a motion? And if we took money out of the line that the easy you put it wherever you want. The easy one would be to move it into the capital project transfer capital budget. Uh, I want to make a motion to amend the final budget for this year from 13,000 to like 10,000. I don't if not,000. No, thank you. There second. Okay. Any discussion? Let me do on this last budget there. We budgeted a little more than we have budgeted an extra thousand this year. I don't see us doubling our spending. This is in the accurate and less pessimistic. That rolled off your tongue nicely, by the way. Yeah. I mean, can can staff confirm that we usually budge it this high so that everyone has a chance to go? Yeah, sure. forward to go. That's how I was planning false council members. You have the same issue with planning planning commission that too. I'm grateful that every time the wife is able to come to win this is the spouses if they want to and they're gracious that she actually $10 a meeting. Yeah. Learns a lot. cancel. We do have covered. so let's let's see their discussion vault which one do you want okay uh the motion is to change the final budget number from 13,000 to 10,000 or educ or item 230. Okay. Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say I. Any opposed? Okay. 10,000. It looks like the League of Cities and Towns already did, but budgeting 13 motivating us to budget 13. Um, another question. It's further down. It's the streets department. page 48. Yeah. Uh I just have this is a clarifying question. I noticed crossing guard salaries and wages went down and also crossing guard benefits likewise is going down. Are we are we getting rid of crossing guard or why is that number going down? Just more detailed budgeting. Okay. Actual salaries of individuals. Some people are paid more than others. They've been working for 12 years. So, we just dialed in instead of being more accuracy, but we're not firing anybody without paying. Yeah. On the next page down department expenditure. I just wondered why it's so Yeah. Why? Why goes from 10,000 down to 3,000 bucks? We just never use it. We know never abuse it. Perfect. Same answer. Okay. Thank you answering my question. Okay. Uh okay, this is leading into all of the cemetery question. So, a couple pages down on community development and recreation. Uh we I noticed on the hyum senior center we have pushed last year range and this year up to 1500 and the explanation on that says just increasing the donation to the center for this fiscal year. I don't know PDF is searchable if you give us some Yeah. So yeah, the higher senior center goes up there. Um just wondering what I've never seen any and maybe I'm just not looking hard enough like any advertising about what the benefits are from the senior center to our seniors in so I'm just wondering maybe this is a discussion for a different time. Is the donation to the senior center sort of like the library? We are friendly neighbors and that it's available to nibbley residents. Do do residents use the senior center or is this just giving money to higher city? which their entire group of activities um there was a change of senior center if I reach out to that person that has caused that but I don't know how many So, there has been a change in leadership at that senior center director at Med and they're very forward thinking. They have a lot of great programs. Uh they seem to be going the right direction. Uh that money he hasn't provided anything in terms of number of newly residents. I'm sure if we asked him if he would provide that. So we we could report that later if you'd like. Just moving back to the cemeteries conversation. You get you guys suggested $5,000 as a donation to that. Um or not donation but helping pay for that road. Is that how thin air? Wait. Can I can I be clear? Is that your recommendation or are you passing along their request? There was zero no official number requested. It was just are you willing to help? And I said I would ask you all and so in the spirit of trying to be uh prepared for what the bottom line of your capital projects number would be, I picked a number that was just absolutely out of nowhere. Can be more or less whatever you want. Okay. But are you making a recommendation or passing along the request? I am making that we you're recommending that we pay $5,000 for the road. Yeah, but because I just picked a number. I needed a number to put in the spreadsheet to make the bal tell you what the ending balance would be. They did not ask for $5,000. They just said, "Are you willing to financially help us?" And I said, "I would ask you guys." So why would you recommend that we pay for that cemetery district? I just put a number there to so that I would remember to ask you what number you wanted to put in there. Yes, that's something. I would love to hear thought about that, but this is not a motion and that just I'm not sure that we need to pay that, but I want to hear everybody else's thoughts as well. Make a motion.
Okay. Well, then I'll make a motion that we not pay that, that we pay zero dollars to the request. So, you're making a motion that we I'm going to let you discuss it because I don't know how to take that motion. It's not in the budget now. Okay. Well, it's not anywhere. It's not anywhere in the I didn't I put a number in there for planning purposes to show you so I remember to talk about it. No, you don't. The most the the appropriate thing to do I think go back to budget presentation. Yeah. Yeah. This one right there. Yeah. So if you see on this proposed amendments the last line was cemetery 5000. Oh I think That's off. Now those other Where is it at? Justin has suggested that we need to deal with those. Yes. So I'll take care of the first one. Motion to include the bleacher adjustment expense. That's it. There's a second. I have a motion and a second to uh in increase the the motion was from Nathan. The second is need a motion because this is an amendment to the existing budget that's been presented to us. So this is proposed here. Okay. We can pick and choose if we want we are we clear? Yes. Thank you. Just for my noteake, can I just for my ease of note and understand? Are we going to do take these one by one? Motion and second from here. Motion made second here is to amend the budget as we have seen it so far for a feature adjustment expense of plus $1,500. Discussion see none. Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. So that that's a yes. So we could say I say I want to make a motion to rescepting cemetery and I'll second. So there's a motion to amend the budget as we have seen it so far for the proposed amendments number two to N minus one last minus one uh to make that uh the motion from Aaron uh to make that amendment to the budget and a second from So I uh staff us removing that 5,000 you now have to make another adjustment for 5,000 or no you're just going to take out of the capital. Not not the cemetery. Yeah. That's not in right. So you you did this with a plan of making adjustments or enough because they're all capital. Yeah they're all capital. just balances just balance the fund with appropriation. So whatever these are I think if you focus on the projects and then just balance the fund by pulling out your savings which is technically termed appropriating good. Thank you. Discussion on that motion. Seeing none those in favor of the motion to amend say I. I. Any opposed? Perfect. Thanks. So now we have a further amended motion in okay um anyone opposed to voting I'll take that as a call question motion yeah and uh we achieve the required number by me saying anyone post voting no one's vote so let's vote Well, Cheryl, let's let's do it. In favor, in favor. In favor. Four in favor, none opposed. So, we uh have adopted the budget for next year. Thank you. Good discussion. Can we handle the compensation before we take a break? Okay, let's do a public hearing on ordinance uh 2522. This this was this would be providing compensation of elected staffers at the department heads of Yes. Justin, can you help us with that? So this is the second reading and public hearing for this requirement of state law that says any statutory officer, division manager, city manager, can't remember the whole list, but any that that list needs to be presented to have a public hearing and an ordinance approved by the city council to approve any increase. So this is where it's going to get a little messy. Uh back to that same issue of the timing of when the increases are implemented impacts the dollar amount that comes out of the budget. But the the way the law reads is that you need to have a public hearing and an ordinance for any increase. So, mayor and I had a good discussion about it and decided to talk and to make it the impact of the budget which would be the lower number, the 4.5%ish. Uh, some of these are not exactly four and a half, some of them are those different ones that I talked about. So, that's what I did with all these proposed red lines was I reduced that number to the actual impact of the budget. But I as more I thought about it, I don't know if that's what we want to do because at say for example, if next year we just decide, you know, we're not going to do an ordinance to increase compensation, they're already being paid more. their their current salary at that time will be more than what is shown on this because this shows actual impact of budget not what their current salary is. So my original intent was to take worst case scenario put in the highest salary so that at the end of the year they would roll over and you would already be covered with what that current salary would be. we tracking. So my recommendation would be to play it as safe as possible. Understand that this chart is not showing you impact to the budget but a specific number that a person's salary would be maxed out for the current for this upcoming fiscal year. And that is not a guarantee. That is comes back to the merit. That's just saying you are authorizing me and to pay up to that to make their salary up to that salary which is computed as an annual salary. So my recommendation is to to not to just adopt what you adopted for first rate and not accept these red lines. Hey. So, we don't we don't we don't need a motion to not accept the amendment. Correct. You you I just I I should have I think if you go, you know, reject all changes, it would go back or if if that's what I guess I'm looking for direction on how you want to handle this because I don't want to get in a situation where you guys say I don't want you to pay any more money to your salaries. I'm already going to be paying more. That's the intro to public hearing. I think you're fine. Uh since what we're looking at the redlinined proposal from staff since staff's proposal is to go back to where we were I think it's acceptable during the public hearing before the public hearing while we're waiting for public input to reject the changes that are redlined if council doesn't mind doing that uh seeing no public comment on this matter, we will close the public hearing. So, this is the 3% cost of living that we decided to do for people like city council a long time ago instead of leaving it alone. Um, I'm going to ask for an amendment then based on what you just said, Justin, and I'll I can make motions. So, I'm going to move to amend the column. Can you scroll up just a little bit? Proposed. Sorry, did I miss? Oh, I haven't. Sorry, I can't do it. Yeah, I love the Sorry. Thank you, Chrome 2522 Street. So you're motioning to approve the first reading. We've already So there's a motion and a second from Nathan. Motion from Nathan to adopt 25 2522. Now I can make a motion to amend. I'm going to do it. Insert the word maximum. Proposed maximum fiscal year 2546 annual salary.
Okay. Well, then I'll make a motion that we not pay that, that we pay zero dollars to the request. So, you're making a motion that we I'm going to let you discuss it because I don't know how to take that motion. It's not in the budget now. Okay. Well, it's not anywhere. It's not anywhere in the I didn't I put a number in there for planning purposes to show you so I remember to talk about it. No, you don't. The most the the appropriate thing to do I think go back to budget presentation. Yeah. Yeah. This one right there. Yeah. So if you see on this proposed amendments the last line was cemetery 5000. Oh I think That's off. Now those other Where is it at? Justin has suggested that we need to deal with those. Yes. So I'll take care of the first one. Motion to include the bleacher adjustment expense. That's it. There's a second. I have a motion and a second to uh in increase the the motion was from Nathan. The second is need a motion because this is an amendment to the existing budget that's been presented to us. So this is proposed here. Okay. We can pick and choose if we want we are we clear? Yes. Thank you. Just for my noteake, can I just for my ease of note and understand? Are we going to do take these one by one? Motion and second from here. Motion made second here is to amend the budget as we have seen it so far for a feature adjustment expense of plus $1,500. Discussion see none. Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. So that that's a yes. So we could say I say I want to make a motion to rescepting cemetery and I'll second. So there's a motion to amend the budget as we have seen it so far for the proposed amendments number two to N minus one last minus one uh to make that uh the motion from Aaron uh to make that amendment to the budget and a second from So I uh staff us removing that 5,000 you now have to make another adjustment for 5,000 or no you're just going to take out of the capital. Not not the cemetery. Yeah. That's not in right. So you you did this with a plan of making adjustments or enough because they're all capital. Yeah they're all capital. just balances just balance the fund with appropriation. So whatever these are I think if you focus on the projects and then just balance the fund by pulling out your savings which is technically termed appropriating good. Thank you. Discussion on that motion. Seeing none those in favor of the motion to amend say I. I. Any opposed? Perfect. Thanks. So now we have a further amended motion in okay um anyone opposed to voting I'll take that as a call question motion yeah and uh we achieve the required number by me saying anyone post voting no one's vote so let's vote Well, Cheryl, let's let's do it. In favor, in favor. In favor. Four in favor, none opposed. So, we uh have adopted the budget for next year. Thank you. Good discussion. Can we handle the compensation before we take a break? Okay, let's do a public hearing on ordinance uh 2522. This this was this would be providing compensation of elected staffers at the department heads of Yes. Justin, can you help us with that? So this is the second reading and public hearing for this requirement of state law that says any statutory officer, division manager, city manager, can't remember the whole list, but any that that list needs to be presented to have a public hearing and an ordinance approved by the city council to approve any increase. So this is where it's going to get a little messy. Uh back to that same issue of the timing of when the increases are implemented impacts the dollar amount that comes out of the budget. But the the way the law reads is that you need to have a public hearing and an ordinance for any increase. So, mayor and I had a good discussion about it and decided to talk and to make it the impact of the budget which would be the lower number, the 4.5%ish. Uh, some of these are not exactly four and a half, some of them are those different ones that I talked about. So, that's what I did with all these proposed red lines was I reduced that number to the actual impact of the budget. But I as more I thought about it, I don't know if that's what we want to do because at say for example, if next year we just decide, you know, we're not going to do an ordinance to increase compensation, they're already being paid more. their their current salary at that time will be more than what is shown on this because this shows actual impact of budget not what their current salary is. So my original intent was to take worst case scenario put in the highest salary so that at the end of the year they would roll over and you would already be covered with what that current salary would be. we tracking. So my recommendation would be to play it as safe as possible. Understand that this chart is not showing you impact to the budget but a specific number that a person's salary would be maxed out for the current for this upcoming fiscal year. And that is not a guarantee. That is comes back to the merit. That's just saying you are authorizing me and to pay up to that to make their salary up to that salary which is computed as an annual salary. So my recommendation is to to not to just adopt what you adopted for first rate and not accept these red lines. Hey. So, we don't we don't we don't need a motion to not accept the amendment. Correct. You you I just I I should have I think if you go, you know, reject all changes, it would go back or if if that's what I guess I'm looking for direction on how you want to handle this because I don't want to get in a situation where you guys say I don't want you to pay any more money to your salaries. I'm already going to be paying more. That's the intro to public hearing. I think you're fine. Uh since what we're looking at the redlinined proposal from staff since staff's proposal is to go back to where we were I think it's acceptable during the public hearing before the public hearing while we're waiting for public input to reject the changes that are redlined if council doesn't mind doing that uh seeing no public comment on this matter, we will close the public hearing. So, this is the 3% cost of living that we decided to do for people like city council a long time ago instead of leaving it alone. Um, I'm going to ask for an amendment then based on what you just said, Justin, and I'll I can make motions. So, I'm going to move to amend the column. Can you scroll up just a little bit? Proposed. Sorry, did I miss? Oh, I haven't. Sorry, I can't do it. Yeah, I love the Sorry. Thank you, Chrome 2522 Street. So you're motioning to approve the first reading. We've already So there's a motion and a second from Nathan. Motion from Nathan to adopt 25 2522. Now I can make a motion to amend. I'm going to do it. Insert the word maximum. Proposed maximum fiscal year 2546 annual salary.
I mean it's not the average. So what we're showing here I Justin if I'm if I'm if I heard you correctly you're saying this is the maximum annual salary for 2526 and so for a guy like me I like to know if it's average would have worked too if we had stayed with the numbers that we just didn't stay with. Okay. So let's can we use mayor as an example? So the 12 what is that 12 388? I can't 12 288. That's well okay that's not a good example. Okay. That's not a good example because they don't get merit. Yeah. So these could receive a merit. That's the number with the merit. That's the higher that they could merit and cola merit and cola the highest possible to get to if they guess. It's a substitute to include that change but also add the word maximum table. Okay. Just follow up. So we have a substitute on the motion to amend to put back all second from normal. Thanks for that. So nothing has changed between the first reading and second rating on this table except the motion then to amend this motion changed and does this satisfy code? I think it's a lot of understanding. It's more than what we needed to talk on the phone yesterday about this about this agenda item, but nothing's been changed since we spoke. Correct. It has I apologize. I'm sorry. That would be a a difference. You're correct. What What would be procedure for seeing a difference there? Uh so the amendment it was under the recreation director salary. It went from I think No. So this is the the exact same as the last reading. If you want to change that number, then you need to make a motion to change that number. Is it? Okay. I would like to make amend change the recreation director proposed maximum salary from 8584 to 90 Okay. From second from Nathan to change the reparation proposed maximum. Sorry. And there'll be a change in the right column as well. Le's working on it. Yes. at 500 or 5,000. I didn't see that it was the same. I wondered where the 804 came from. I think it was the mat. So, can you go ahead? So, change the 3% you pass. Does that work? Just give me the number you want and I'll make the math work. The number for recreation director or the number for the the recreation. I can make the I mean I have one and a half% uh bluff kind of built in. Anti-accuracy, right? So, so we haven't beat all the accuracy inaccuracy out of you yet. No, there's still self. Um just to explain why I did that a little bit. Um in the worth of work study this study that I'm referring to. I think in the work of work study there's a variety of metrics that each employee is evaluated on. Um I think there's a couple of numbers in Chad's work study that I think should should be higher. One of those was a public outreach number. And while um I think he does a lot of public outreach, I think it's important the work that he's the public outreach he's doing and the messages that he's giving to our city, I think that number should have been higher. Um there's a couple just couple metrics there that I think maybe were that I think should have been higher for him. So that's why we wanted to increase that. And maybe to go on with that with a smaller city times all you guys wear multiple hats. I appreciate that. So as St. grows then they narrow down appreciate chat all my 3% what uh maybe Eron I'll if you don't mind me asking follow question what you said I appreciate that explanation what what process are we undoing in determining the worth of work by going with this amendment, but it would just change where he falls in the range. Yeah. So, he would be But how did we get to that range? So, you had the four factors, the job that we talked about, and it's just a score. Who scored it? So, I scored it, Cheryl scored it, Mike Swallow scored it. I believe we took my scores, which were the highest. So the most generous Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So that's another good point. You know, you're not necessarily scoring Chad, you're scoring the position. Right. Yeah. And I'm not opposed to this at all. I'm just, you know, when we when we make a decision, we're undoing some other process that made a decision, which is fine. That's what we do. We make decisions. Okay. Is there discussion on the motion to amend? Seeing none, any opposed to voting on the amendment? Seeing none, those in favor of the amendment that's on the board, please say I. I. I. Any oppose? Okay, there's the amended motion for you. Uh, mayor, unless I complete messed up. Didn't we vote on maximum? I'm going to have to take the regular. So, yeah. No, I mean, we can have up to three on. So, I'm going to make a substitute motion that includes all of the blue up there. So, that's the first motion. Okay. Whatever you see in blue all changes is my substitute motion. Say native. Is that clear? We don't have to unwind. That's the whole beauty of substitute motion. You're not unwind all the amendments of amendments on amendments. So that's the motion to amend. Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say I. I. is already in post. Okay, that's the main notion in front of you as red light, blue light, blue light. Calling balls and strikes sure easier. It's a ball or it's a strike. You don't go back. Some people want to debate it. All right. Um I'm sensing that we're ready to vote on this. Any opposed to voting? Say none. Cheryl, have we wrapped it all up correctly so far that we're ready to call the wall? Thank you for keeping us uh on on task. In favor, in favor. In favor. Okay. Uh that brings us to item 12. Obviously I could use a short break. Anyone supposed to take uh uh break until 9:15. Then we will come back together. Seeing no positions. I'll call the uh council back to order. And um I much appreciate the discussion we've had on the agenda so far. And I also am going I'm never made a mo I haven't made a motion in like what years now one year once I started I move to suspend the agenda and move item 15 discussing uh support for a septic tank. I'm not trying to influence how you will feel about that, but I figured out Mr. Tori is here. We're back. Yes, I should have done that earlier in the evening, but my motion is spend the agenda, take up item 15 next. Uh, second from Thank you. Uh, those in favor of suspending the agenda, please say I. I. And opposed. Okay, Tom, take it away. Thanks, guys. Good. So source protection zone. What is it? Right. It's basically a zone that's established through a geo or hydro geologic study that designates an area where probability of ground water or anything else could get into a water source. It could be a spring. It could be offs in this case. Um well in most cases zone one is is a is an area 100 ft from the wellhead. Zone two would be 250 days of travel through this study. Three is three years and zone four is 15 years. Mr. Tory came to us. It's been a while ago. He's proposing a new septic system with a with a subdivision to support one new single family dwelling. It's located about 1375 East Highway 101. It's unincorporated county near Hyra. You can see in this picture, it's right along the highway just just above Hollow Road. So, in order to do a septic tank in in the source protection zone or any I'll back up. In order to do a septic system, he needs to apply for a permit with the Fair River Health Department. There's some studies involved with seage dissipation and things. And when he went to to Bar River Health Department, they identified that it was within our source protection zone, affecting two of our sources. Gate Springs, which used to be a a drinking water source, it's now been inactivated or deactivated temporarily. And then the 640 Well, this our other source that it's possibly affecting. Now, Nibble City Code has has things in it that protect our water sources. So in order to do a septic system, it allows the city council to consider that septic system through another hydrogeeologic study. And in this case, we hired Bill Laughlin Water Associates. And he did a study. He basically researched all the excuse me, he he researched Nibi City well sources and water sources. Nothing else. It was just specific to to the city sources and that's what our city code requires there to be considered in it also in in the code it requires appropriate measures to safeguard the newly sit water. So this is an exhibit of both the 640 well on the left and lower and then the upper section is the eight springs. And you can see those little blue arrows. They're kind of designating where any influence into that source is going. Now on the left you'll see the the well head is zone one. It's about 100 ft. Zone two is a red circle. Zone three is that big yellow one. Any questions so far? I'm sorry for sorry if I'm study through this study. The findings were from from off the 640 well is a confined aquifer and it's a sufficient distance away from this proposed septic tank that the potential of any seepage getting into that is is very low. And then also in the Yates Springs, the seepage is is most likely to get into the the upper aquifer but then discharge towards the river. And you can see here this is on the lower right. You can see the ground level and the water levels that second line down. And this is all in the packet in that report, but you can see that it's not going to get to our spring. It's most likely going to go to the blacksmith for river. So the potential of any any seepage entering either of these water sources is low. Some of the protection measures that were recommended by Laughlin Water Associates was continually monitoring what's happening in a drinking water source protection area include drinking s drinking water source protection areas in GIS system. Seek notification from neighboring communities for any land use changes. coordinate with EMS and fire to develop notification system that gives the opportunity to assess and react to potential spill and other impacts and public education to those business owners, residents and land owners of their possible impact of neighbor's drinking water. So we do are we already have the source protection zones designated in GIS and we are receiving notification from at least the Bear River Health Department when a new set of systems come in. We could probably do better with other land use changes from hiring at the county. We probably have to do some work to do that. And then public education and business business owners and residents part of the drinking s drinking water source protection plan has mailers that we send we're supposed to send out to everybody. So, it's just to say be careful when you're using herbicides, chemicals, if you have a home business that works with automobiles, be careful how you dispose of use of oils. Just it's just a helpful handout to remind people that where they live could affect everybody. Any questions so far? Okay. Comment about that? You bet. So that's required I think every five years or so on the notification. We sent those out and man people from IR were upset. Like I had to call into a city council meeting and like explain what I did and basically apologize for meeting state code because their council and mayor got so many upset people that Nibbly City would dare mail them. It was a little It was a little shocking. A great question. It's do probably. Yeah. The last time I I believe in my research, our last uh content was 2021. So, it is coming up this year. So, the recommendation is for city council to consider providing a letter of support allowing a new septic system with this within the city's drinking water source protection zone. And there's a copy of the letter in teams. There's there's a couple other files in there. I don't know if you had a chance or if you had any interest in that, but if you have any further questions, I can answer those. Okay. Um, Tori, do you want to refute anything Tom said or add to anything Tom said or we'll give you a chance to talk? We might ask you questions as we discuss things as well. I'll I'll Before I get started, he's been very patient. It it didn't reach a little higher priority and and it got moved from Levi to me and it got lost on the shovel. shuffle. So, I apologize. Starting to take a while to get here, but you're good. I'm still working with you guys. You're faster than great work. So, no problems with put together. Okay, it's good. the geology. I mean, a purse aquifer means one that's sitting on top of something that keeps it from going deeper, right? And I won't be a hobby geologist tonight, I promise. But if the if the possible source is up here and the springs are here and the springs are on a perched aquifer, how does the possible source get down to I I guess I'm not seeing that in the picture. How does the possible source get down to the river instead of being perched at the spring aquifer? In the study, it mentions that due to the hydro geologic features there that it will start surfacing at the toe of that that null or the bluff, whatever you want to call it, and then it'll work its way into the the river there. So I'd imagine there are some springs right at that base that the likelihood of it getting to the Yates in pro due to the proximity of the project the likelihood of getting it into the Y spring is well is what the report said Mr. Laughlin address it's it's not our circus but address those other springs those privately owned springs. He he was not instructed to do so. Our code is super tech. Did we hire Mr. Laughlin? We did. Yeah. Great question. We we did hire Mr. Laughlin and the cost to perform the study and and submit the report was passed on to Mr. Ah, okay. Well, that that answered my question, right? It seems like the right way to handle it since we're talking about budget. All right, I'm I'll be quiet for a while. Nathan, um, is this property uninccorporated county? True. Uh, it's ironic. Yeah. was anciently I saw the last Yeah, because there's there's one I think they're both city there's two parcels there same hillside I think it does count my question just like why I'm being conscious but if you don't answer them instead connecting facility so it's a highway separates the parcel from the sewer system so there's several homes down the hill which are actually much lower that have been built the last 3 to 5 years grand city also far the infrastructure layout subject systems. So I can expound on that just a hair. So there there's provisions in the plumbing code that allows property that's further than 300 ft away from an established sewer line to be considered for a septic tank. Otherwise they're mandated to curious other thoughts? If no one says anything, I'll ask if Oh, wait. If no one says anything, I'll ask if you're ready to vote. So, do we need a motion or just vote when it's okay to do the support of letters? didn't. Well, it looks like I'm supposed to sign the letter, but I think a motion from you would be appropriate, which would essentially instruct me to sign the letter to say that you uh support allowing a new setting system as described. I didn't make that motion. No, you're doing motion. So, Norm, there's a motion and page. Is there a second? Second from mayor. The motion and second is to uh sign a letter of support allowing a new set system the DWSP zone as described. If nobody says anything, I'll ask. It's not a resolution. It's not an ordinance. No one objects to voting. Those in favor of signing the letter of support, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay, that's three in favor, one opposed. I'm not sure what to say. Happy doing whatever you do at the San Francisco. I'm glad you don't have to hold it in. All right. Next, let's move on to this is a reszone. Um from 20 from commercial to industrial, this is our second meeting. Um Mr. Hammond, Mrs. here. I'm not sure. Actually, I don't know that Dina and Durk were here talking to us last night. Levi, do you have anything to add to that? Uh, no. From first reading. I don't think you have anything to add. Just a reminder, staff planning commission's recommendation is denial the ordinance with the findings that are shown up on on the screen. It's not not compatible with future land use map and uh not compatible with the surrounding uses um considering the residential uses in the area. There was an email from from Durk that I want to just be clear following up. You all saw the email. I didn't respond to it. I'm not Um I mean one of the things I had talked about as an alternative was to change the weddings chart to allow machine shop in the commercial zone. That would be he said permitted. What I what I meant to say what I thought I said was a conditional permit not permitted. Um, and also the conditions would put some severe limitations on the machine shop that could be in the commercial zone. I'm not saying I'm buying that. I'm just saying that's another way to get there. But I I didn't want to endorse a full-blown unlimited machine shop in the commercial cell. So, I'm just living that expectation. to clarify that it is something we can correct dear assist required. Yes, thank you. I didn't I didn't mean to imply that but so thanks for the clarification tonight. You decide whether you're reszoning and you can res if you want to have
I mean it's not the average. So what we're showing here I Justin if I'm if I'm if I heard you correctly you're saying this is the maximum annual salary for 2526 and so for a guy like me I like to know if it's average would have worked too if we had stayed with the numbers that we just didn't stay with. Okay. So let's can we use mayor as an example? So the 12 what is that 12 388? I can't 12 288. That's well okay that's not a good example. Okay. That's not a good example because they don't get merit. Yeah. So these could receive a merit. That's the number with the merit. That's the higher that they could merit and cola merit and cola the highest possible to get to if they guess. It's a substitute to include that change but also add the word maximum table. Okay. Just follow up. So we have a substitute on the motion to amend to put back all second from normal. Thanks for that. So nothing has changed between the first reading and second rating on this table except the motion then to amend this motion changed and does this satisfy code? I think it's a lot of understanding. It's more than what we needed to talk on the phone yesterday about this about this agenda item, but nothing's been changed since we spoke. Correct. It has I apologize. I'm sorry. That would be a a difference. You're correct. What What would be procedure for seeing a difference there? Uh so the amendment it was under the recreation director salary. It went from I think No. So this is the the exact same as the last reading. If you want to change that number, then you need to make a motion to change that number. Is it? Okay. I would like to make amend change the recreation director proposed maximum salary from 8584 to 90 Okay. From second from Nathan to change the reparation proposed maximum. Sorry. And there'll be a change in the right column as well. Le's working on it. Yes. at 500 or 5,000. I didn't see that it was the same. I wondered where the 804 came from. I think it was the mat. So, can you go ahead? So, change the 3% you pass. Does that work? Just give me the number you want and I'll make the math work. The number for recreation director or the number for the the recreation. I can make the I mean I have one and a half% uh bluff kind of built in. Anti-accuracy, right? So, so we haven't beat all the accuracy inaccuracy out of you yet. No, there's still self. Um just to explain why I did that a little bit. Um in the worth of work study this study that I'm referring to. I think in the work of work study there's a variety of metrics that each employee is evaluated on. Um I think there's a couple of numbers in Chad's work study that I think should should be higher. One of those was a public outreach number. And while um I think he does a lot of public outreach, I think it's important the work that he's the public outreach he's doing and the messages that he's giving to our city, I think that number should have been higher. Um there's a couple just couple metrics there that I think maybe were that I think should have been higher for him. So that's why we wanted to increase that. And maybe to go on with that with a smaller city times all you guys wear multiple hats. I appreciate that. So as St. grows then they narrow down appreciate chat all my 3% what uh maybe Eron I'll if you don't mind me asking follow question what you said I appreciate that explanation what what process are we undoing in determining the worth of work by going with this amendment, but it would just change where he falls in the range. Yeah. So, he would be But how did we get to that range? So, you had the four factors, the job that we talked about, and it's just a score. Who scored it? So, I scored it, Cheryl scored it, Mike Swallow scored it. I believe we took my scores, which were the highest. So the most generous Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So that's another good point. You know, you're not necessarily scoring Chad, you're scoring the position. Right. Yeah. And I'm not opposed to this at all. I'm just, you know, when we when we make a decision, we're undoing some other process that made a decision, which is fine. That's what we do. We make decisions. Okay. Is there discussion on the motion to amend? Seeing none, any opposed to voting on the amendment? Seeing none, those in favor of the amendment that's on the board, please say I. I. I. Any oppose? Okay, there's the amended motion for you. Uh, mayor, unless I complete messed up. Didn't we vote on maximum? I'm going to have to take the regular. So, yeah. No, I mean, we can have up to three on. So, I'm going to make a substitute motion that includes all of the blue up there. So, that's the first motion. Okay. Whatever you see in blue all changes is my substitute motion. Say native. Is that clear? We don't have to unwind. That's the whole beauty of substitute motion. You're not unwind all the amendments of amendments on amendments. So that's the motion to amend. Those in favor of the motion to amend, please say I. I. is already in post. Okay, that's the main notion in front of you as red light, blue light, blue light. Calling balls and strikes sure easier. It's a ball or it's a strike. You don't go back. Some people want to debate it. All right. Um I'm sensing that we're ready to vote on this. Any opposed to voting? Say none. Cheryl, have we wrapped it all up correctly so far that we're ready to call the wall? Thank you for keeping us uh on on task. In favor, in favor. In favor. Okay. Uh that brings us to item 12. Obviously I could use a short break. Anyone supposed to take uh uh break until 9:15. Then we will come back together. Seeing no positions. I'll call the uh council back to order. And um I much appreciate the discussion we've had on the agenda so far. And I also am going I'm never made a mo I haven't made a motion in like what years now one year once I started I move to suspend the agenda and move item 15 discussing uh support for a septic tank. I'm not trying to influence how you will feel about that, but I figured out Mr. Tori is here. We're back. Yes, I should have done that earlier in the evening, but my motion is spend the agenda, take up item 15 next. Uh, second from Thank you. Uh, those in favor of suspending the agenda, please say I. I. And opposed. Okay, Tom, take it away. Thanks, guys. Good. So source protection zone. What is it? Right. It's basically a zone that's established through a geo or hydro geologic study that designates an area where probability of ground water or anything else could get into a water source. It could be a spring. It could be offs in this case. Um well in most cases zone one is is a is an area 100 ft from the wellhead. Zone two would be 250 days of travel through this study. Three is three years and zone four is 15 years. Mr. Tory came to us. It's been a while ago. He's proposing a new septic system with a with a subdivision to support one new single family dwelling. It's located about 1375 East Highway 101. It's unincorporated county near Hyra. You can see in this picture, it's right along the highway just just above Hollow Road. So, in order to do a septic tank in in the source protection zone or any I'll back up. In order to do a septic system, he needs to apply for a permit with the Fair River Health Department. There's some studies involved with seage dissipation and things. And when he went to to Bar River Health Department, they identified that it was within our source protection zone, affecting two of our sources. Gate Springs, which used to be a a drinking water source, it's now been inactivated or deactivated temporarily. And then the 640 Well, this our other source that it's possibly affecting. Now, Nibble City Code has has things in it that protect our water sources. So in order to do a septic system, it allows the city council to consider that septic system through another hydrogeeologic study. And in this case, we hired Bill Laughlin Water Associates. And he did a study. He basically researched all the excuse me, he he researched Nibi City well sources and water sources. Nothing else. It was just specific to to the city sources and that's what our city code requires there to be considered in it also in in the code it requires appropriate measures to safeguard the newly sit water. So this is an exhibit of both the 640 well on the left and lower and then the upper section is the eight springs. And you can see those little blue arrows. They're kind of designating where any influence into that source is going. Now on the left you'll see the the well head is zone one. It's about 100 ft. Zone two is a red circle. Zone three is that big yellow one. Any questions so far? I'm sorry for sorry if I'm study through this study. The findings were from from off the 640 well is a confined aquifer and it's a sufficient distance away from this proposed septic tank that the potential of any seepage getting into that is is very low. And then also in the Yates Springs, the seepage is is most likely to get into the the upper aquifer but then discharge towards the river. And you can see here this is on the lower right. You can see the ground level and the water levels that second line down. And this is all in the packet in that report, but you can see that it's not going to get to our spring. It's most likely going to go to the blacksmith for river. So the potential of any any seepage entering either of these water sources is low. Some of the protection measures that were recommended by Laughlin Water Associates was continually monitoring what's happening in a drinking water source protection area include drinking s drinking water source protection areas in GIS system. Seek notification from neighboring communities for any land use changes. coordinate with EMS and fire to develop notification system that gives the opportunity to assess and react to potential spill and other impacts and public education to those business owners, residents and land owners of their possible impact of neighbor's drinking water. So we do are we already have the source protection zones designated in GIS and we are receiving notification from at least the Bear River Health Department when a new set of systems come in. We could probably do better with other land use changes from hiring at the county. We probably have to do some work to do that. And then public education and business business owners and residents part of the drinking s drinking water source protection plan has mailers that we send we're supposed to send out to everybody. So, it's just to say be careful when you're using herbicides, chemicals, if you have a home business that works with automobiles, be careful how you dispose of use of oils. Just it's just a helpful handout to remind people that where they live could affect everybody. Any questions so far? Okay. Comment about that? You bet. So that's required I think every five years or so on the notification. We sent those out and man people from IR were upset. Like I had to call into a city council meeting and like explain what I did and basically apologize for meeting state code because their council and mayor got so many upset people that Nibbly City would dare mail them. It was a little It was a little shocking. A great question. It's do probably. Yeah. The last time I I believe in my research, our last uh content was 2021. So, it is coming up this year. So, the recommendation is for city council to consider providing a letter of support allowing a new septic system with this within the city's drinking water source protection zone. And there's a copy of the letter in teams. There's there's a couple other files in there. I don't know if you had a chance or if you had any interest in that, but if you have any further questions, I can answer those. Okay. Um, Tori, do you want to refute anything Tom said or add to anything Tom said or we'll give you a chance to talk? We might ask you questions as we discuss things as well. I'll I'll Before I get started, he's been very patient. It it didn't reach a little higher priority and and it got moved from Levi to me and it got lost on the shovel. shuffle. So, I apologize. Starting to take a while to get here, but you're good. I'm still working with you guys. You're faster than great work. So, no problems with put together. Okay, it's good. the geology. I mean, a purse aquifer means one that's sitting on top of something that keeps it from going deeper, right? And I won't be a hobby geologist tonight, I promise. But if the if the possible source is up here and the springs are here and the springs are on a perched aquifer, how does the possible source get down to I I guess I'm not seeing that in the picture. How does the possible source get down to the river instead of being perched at the spring aquifer? In the study, it mentions that due to the hydro geologic features there that it will start surfacing at the toe of that that null or the bluff, whatever you want to call it, and then it'll work its way into the the river there. So I'd imagine there are some springs right at that base that the likelihood of it getting to the Yates in pro due to the proximity of the project the likelihood of getting it into the Y spring is well is what the report said Mr. Laughlin address it's it's not our circus but address those other springs those privately owned springs. He he was not instructed to do so. Our code is super tech. Did we hire Mr. Laughlin? We did. Yeah. Great question. We we did hire Mr. Laughlin and the cost to perform the study and and submit the report was passed on to Mr. Ah, okay. Well, that that answered my question, right? It seems like the right way to handle it since we're talking about budget. All right, I'm I'll be quiet for a while. Nathan, um, is this property uninccorporated county? True. Uh, it's ironic. Yeah. was anciently I saw the last Yeah, because there's there's one I think they're both city there's two parcels there same hillside I think it does count my question just like why I'm being conscious but if you don't answer them instead connecting facility so it's a highway separates the parcel from the sewer system so there's several homes down the hill which are actually much lower that have been built the last 3 to 5 years grand city also far the infrastructure layout subject systems. So I can expound on that just a hair. So there there's provisions in the plumbing code that allows property that's further than 300 ft away from an established sewer line to be considered for a septic tank. Otherwise they're mandated to curious other thoughts? If no one says anything, I'll ask if Oh, wait. If no one says anything, I'll ask if you're ready to vote. So, do we need a motion or just vote when it's okay to do the support of letters? didn't. Well, it looks like I'm supposed to sign the letter, but I think a motion from you would be appropriate, which would essentially instruct me to sign the letter to say that you uh support allowing a new setting system as described. I didn't make that motion. No, you're doing motion. So, Norm, there's a motion and page. Is there a second? Second from mayor. The motion and second is to uh sign a letter of support allowing a new set system the DWSP zone as described. If nobody says anything, I'll ask. It's not a resolution. It's not an ordinance. No one objects to voting. Those in favor of signing the letter of support, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay, that's three in favor, one opposed. I'm not sure what to say. Happy doing whatever you do at the San Francisco. I'm glad you don't have to hold it in. All right. Next, let's move on to this is a reszone. Um from 20 from commercial to industrial, this is our second meeting. Um Mr. Hammond, Mrs. here. I'm not sure. Actually, I don't know that Dina and Durk were here talking to us last night. Levi, do you have anything to add to that? Uh, no. From first reading. I don't think you have anything to add. Just a reminder, staff planning commission's recommendation is denial the ordinance with the findings that are shown up on on the screen. It's not not compatible with future land use map and uh not compatible with the surrounding uses um considering the residential uses in the area. There was an email from from Durk that I want to just be clear following up. You all saw the email. I didn't respond to it. I'm not Um I mean one of the things I had talked about as an alternative was to change the weddings chart to allow machine shop in the commercial zone. That would be he said permitted. What I what I meant to say what I thought I said was a conditional permit not permitted. Um, and also the conditions would put some severe limitations on the machine shop that could be in the commercial zone. I'm not saying I'm buying that. I'm just saying that's another way to get there. But I I didn't want to endorse a full-blown unlimited machine shop in the commercial cell. So, I'm just living that expectation. to clarify that it is something we can correct dear assist required. Yes, thank you. I didn't I didn't mean to imply that but so thanks for the clarification tonight. You decide whether you're reszoning and you can res if you want to have
just changed the map today. Okay. Motion from motion to deny a second from Garrett to to deny the 25 discussion. Please should consider some of your offering suggestions if they want to take it up. Yeah. Thank you. Discussion. If you don't say anything that's then I'm going to call for a vote. Cheryl, will you call the role please on on this motion to tonight? Yes, this is the a motion a vote in favor is to be in favor. So that's four in favor of denial and none opposed to denial. So the reason Okay. Um then we're going to talk about mixed use RM modifications amending the mixed use zone. Right. Yeah. Um, and if if I might, what's on the screen right now, a couple meetings ago, Garrett suggested a chart to kind of break down the the changes. Hopefully, this is kind of what you were looking for. Um, but because it's been a little while, maybe I'll if it's okay with you, I'll spend a little bit of time reminding you of what's what's in front of you here. It was continued in the last meeting. Uh, but I'll I'll start with this with with this chart. Um, so the I'll just run down it here. So the RM zone size, there isn't currently a a size limitation in uh for for an RM zone, but the proposed code would be that it needs to be between 10 and 40 acres for the RM zone. And um the for RPUD it would lower it from a 40 acre minimum to a 20 acre minimum. The for the location that an RM could could be um approved. Currently there's an adopted map that just shows two two areas. Um one of them is in Logan City. probably isn't going to move uh from into Nibbi. And the other one is the Weston Nelson property which already has been approved as RM. Uh but what would change is that areas that are designated as high density or town center within the general plan could be zoned as RM. Uh what's something else that's added that's not currently in there is a mixeduse requirement for RM and these are for areas that are either near a state highway or an intersection of arterials. there specific measures and I I can get into those if you'd like, but just in short in in those specified areas, they they would require that 10% of the ground floor area be um commercial use. uh the maximum density. One thing that is is changed is that if you do u meet that mixeduse threshold within any of of an R any area, not just with if you're required to uh you could get up to 12 units per net 12 develop acre instead of 10. uh the in the RPUD ordinance, there's currently a maximum density of five units per net developable acre if if you're not using the TDR bonus. Um and that would be a raised to seven units per net developable acre in this if this were approved. Uh there's this provision in both in the RM and in the RPD ordinance that if you're within 300 ft of single family residential um that you need that the homes need to be also single family within the development unless it's unless there's an arterial roadway that buffers you. And this is changed to just to say that the buildings they can be multifamily of of some sort but they are limited to two stories and no more than 100 ft in build building length. Uh the current ordinance, just in short, it does encourage reloaded garages, but the the language is strengthened uh that it would actually require reloaded garages for like town homes and and condos. So, and then the current ordinance removes the requirement for clubhouse pool and splash pad within the open space amenities both for RPD and RM zone. And then also there's there's specific language which allows for a fee in L of open space and amenities uh in the RM, RPD and open space subdivision. if they're within a half mile of the park. And this is based on for amenities. Uh if if they want to be in lie of amenities, it it's just based on the estimated cost of the amenity. For open space, uh it's not defined currently in the ordinance. It would have to be added. If if this if this were adopted, uh we would we would um come back with a you know at a future date with with a specific um amount whether it's per acre. We we'd have to do a little more research come up with an amount on on the fee and L for open space. But uh there is a provision in there that still requires at least 10% if there's any kind of multif family component to the project. It still requires 10% of net developable acreage at minimum open space. So it doesn't allow for completely removing open space even if you have the fee in L but but reducing it. I mean, that pretty much summarizes u everything. U I I can get into more detail here if you'd like, but just to get back to the reason we're doing this, some of some of these changes, trying to balance a lot of different things. um planning commission put a lot of there's a lot of discussion and that that led to these changes but they're trying to direct the RM zone and appropriately planned areas consistent with the general plan um disperse rather than concentrate higher density residential development that's that's part of the reason for or part part of the reason for the 10 to 40 acre maximum on the RM zone is it encourages that that dispers dispersement uh just with with some recent changes to RPUD code. There's it there's been uh some more appetite from developers to use RM instead of RPD and it's it's trying to some of these changes point more toward making RPED more enticing by reducing the acreage and incre increasing the density a little bit for example. uh also requiring some level of commercial mix use at least in some of these appropriate areas where it seems like there should be some viable uh option for for commercial development. There's some provisions to improve the design of of new housing and then and then allowing for fee in lie of open space areas that are already well served by parks. And this will allow uh using those funds toward improving those park spaces rather than you know just adding adding more acreage. We've it was it was one finding of the parks recreation open space master plan to be more selective on the open space that the city takes on and and to focus more on improving the spaces rather than just getting more acreage and this would get us more in that direction. Yeah. So this is a list of aggregated amendments that occurred in the proposed RM and has already occurred in the RPV. This is just this is just the purpose of all of what's in front of you tonight. But we're not voting. You are. You are. There there's RM RPUD. There's even open space subdivision. There's there's a they they started with RM and then they kind of opened up a bigger can of worms as as often happens. So yeah, that that's all right. So I already kind of explained all all of these from the chart, so I won't go I won't rehash these slides, but planning commissions and and staff's recommendation is approval of this ordinance with a long name that I came up with. And now I knew I knew that but somehow it slipped my mind for a minute. Sorry. Yeah, that's what that's the way it started and then it evolved into more. Right. I think I st I think yeah I think it's called RM but it we just kept adding. Thank you. Are there questions for anybody? So out of these which one do you think will be the most popular? I know describes the RPD with like the developers. I think it depends. Um, I I I think it will help. So that I I feel like kind of an unintended consequence of when we adopted a TDR ordinance is we significantly lowered the density for RPUD. And I think because of that, we're we're hearing developers saying, "Well, gee, five units doesn't get me anywhere." And TDR is a difficult thing, a bridge to cross. And we just saw with for example Nibbly Meadows they developed at about seven units per net develop acre. So I think seven is is pretty reasonable. There's still an incentive for something like TDR if someone wants to do something more dense. 15 is really 15 units per acre would be something real a lot more significant. But I I think it depends on on the project. If they have 10 acres, then an RPD is not going to work and an RM might might be better. It because it uh doesn't necessarily require multiple housing types and and that might fit within that area. Like in the town center area, let's say there's a 10acre piece of property. someone wants to do a even in, you know, a town home development for example, they could they could fit something there. So, yeah. So, it kind of depends, but I think it's just trying to balance and provide some options, but also just not open it up completely. There was some concern on the planning commission of just everyone everyone's going to want, you know, an RM or an RPD and this aims to to kind of balance that and disperse and but but still provide some more options. Just making sure there were no changes to the RPD map. There wasn't. Yeah, they didn't. That you you could do that. Yeah, but they ultimately they I think they got far enough they discussed enough of this that they were like this is good enough. let's let's push it to city council. But that that was brought up. It just they didn't come to a conclusion on it. So I I appreciate the work that the planning commission you put in on my the following comment is not to disregard or disrespect that at all. I'm going to ask it anyway given where we are with the general plan update. Is this something to keep hot but or warm on the on the back burner and wait to see what the general plan turns out to be? Or is this in your opinion okay to move forward with it while we're working on the plan? I think it's okay to move forward with it because I think we've identified deficiencies that need addressing. I I don't think it's necessarily it doesn't mean that it's not going to change again. And there might be some bigger changes after the general plan of direction and structure of our ordinances and it might lead to something else. But I think I think just over the you know four or five years working with these with these codes and seeing what has come through this is more a reflection of and and and market conditions and everything. This is more a reflection of trying to address those deficiencies and and and trying to acknowledge that there's options when a developer comes in. So I I I think it we might be doing this again in another year, but I think this is a positive okay uh positive direction. Okay. And and I point out that this doesn't reszone anything. It doesn't change any RP maps, at least not yet. And uh it doesn't create RM zones. It just says if the council negotiates an RPU where the RPUD map says it is or the council changes with planning commission's advice the RPUD map or the RM map. Then these would be the rules. So it doesn't change where this can be implemented. It changes what would be implemented if there was that additional change. And here's my question. Does having the the change build an expectation in a developer's mind? Say, gee, I'd really like to do that and they have a code for it, but they kind of forget that it's not even allowed anywhere at the moment. RM, for example. Well, it's I mean it it would it requires a reszone. It requires a resone. Yeah. Does it build the expectation that we would reszone something to that without having gone through the plan the general plan? It could it could build that expectation that we but yeah I mean there's there's that there is that discretion but it could a developer could go oh the city is supportive of anywhere it says high density and anywhere it says town center. Yeah. It doesn't change it doesn't it doesn't change it for the rpud because the map's still the same. But they could yeah it could build that expectation that there was there was serious discussion of just getting rid of the map altogether and just leaving it completely open for RP for RM RPD the map wasn't really discussed to be honest at at the planning commission at at length at least. the next meeting. Is there a second if you want me to repeat it? This motion to continue second that second. Okay. So the motion by Nathan, second by Norman, is to continue till our next meeting. Yeah, I'll give you some reasons why. I guess those are required. I think I'm going down the similar path as what mayor was as I looked at it. Um, our future land use map, which I think will be very much revised in the general plan. I compared where high density there's no just high density zones they're all mixed with either high density medium or commercial we have a little color the designation of them nowhere on the map so basically we're talking about anywhere we've design high commercial sub um and then when I compare that to the RPU the there's some weird things going I feel there and I I I actually would say that it makes me want to do RN more because there's more space whatever land I own I have more probability because I don't own just the one on the RPG map. So I think that's one thing that I just need to more time to figure out and maybe come back with proposal of getting rid of RPG or changing some things. I think in the end my concern is with our future use map but by passing this there is the clarification of well it doesn't guarantee that everything is automatically RF. So that's just one thing then um the setbacks are something else I'd like some more time with. I think they're still too big for an R. So it's great. Okay. Thank you. Is anybody waiting for this to pass to develop? I know you looking at Not really. Uh because so Kartchner they wanted to uh well I I I should say I there probably are a few but not necessarily specifically what's on paper here. This wasn't proposed by any developer. This was based on planning commission discussion what was appropriate. But C what started this whole thing was Kchner did ask for the RM zone for a portion of that annexation area. Well then they asked to withdraw their application and then we found well Sierra's in talks with them on buying it. Blaine mentioned that in the meeting and their intention at least for that property is R2A that they would that they were okay with R2A which was what was kind of the motion that was on the the table. Uh there there's definitely discussions of other higher density developments in other parts of town including you know just south of there is potential future annexation area but nothing that's like imminent I would say that they're really waiting for this. Yeah. I'm okay. All right. Is anyone opposed to voting on the motion? All right. Those in favor of the motion to continue until our next meeting, please say I are any folks. Okay. Well, thank you. I hope you're not mad at us. I think this is something. Well, there's no there's nothing for staff to do though, just to clarify between now and the next meeting. Okay. This is ordinance 2520. This would uh amend our code regarding snow removal. Justin, you've talked about already everything say okay Motion to approve ordinance 2520. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the change to the ordinance that show that that was Eric. Thank you. Sorry, I should I'm getting lazy. Cheryl, I figure you'll watch it on YouTube. We know you with everyone else with all the rest of Thank you, Nathan. Are we opposed to voting? Seeing no opposition, chair, will you call the role, please, on ordinance 2520. Council member favor in favor. In favor in favor, none opposed. Thank you, council. Thanks for your consideration on that. Justin, thanks for your suggestion. Uh that brings us to the last item in the city council meeting and that's council and staff reports. Norm, let's start with you tonight. Thought of days was good. Um it was fun. I get the opportunity to drive the tractor pulling clothes with spray with coloring kids and those kids are just excited. It's amazing what a little water sport do on both ends. So anyways, I just think Thanks all that please thanks for your help. Thank you. Uh comments really appreciate it as much as I used to and I appreciate Scott including me in some develop. So thank you Okay, Eric. Thank you, Nathan. Yeah, Ditto and Harry did great. We had some friends visiting from out of town and after the end of the weekend, they were like, I think trying to buy a house here. So, they're in the process of buying a house here. The kids were like, here, oh, don't let them go to hire. Fourth of July. Will you get a commission fee then or referral? discussions questions people ask me. I had a couple people ask me about some of the park spaces and stuff and some the one that I've been asked the most about specifically 250 west and 3650 corner maybe maybe consider doing some of the underutilized pocket parks or or you know open spaces that aren't used and really aren't usable or explain anything. You're just neglected and I know it's hard talk about how hard it is to get all those. I'd like to have a workshop on that. See some options. We sell some of those I'm sorry by I had a discussion with the property owner recently that in the background there there's something going on. We haven't received an application, but we've we have we have had a few discussions with the property owner. Yeah, you can pick a movie in the park. Oh, so it'll be it'll be in conjunction with another event. Okay. And then uh I didn't make it Saturday to the Heritage Day. I was curious how the general plan survey went in park. Yeah, but I I did this turn. Great. Um I mean it was like kind of slow but steady stream of people who come up and were interested in. Um I got a lot of people putting dots on the four different options about which growth pattern they most interested in. People who put comments on the map suggestions they thought they wanted to change or things like that. So it was good. Um like you sort of captain. Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. Yeah. We had dots on the map and in general kind of the the key takeaways there at least from those at at Heritage Days that attended that talked to us and interacted that they don't want us to just do things the same way we have been doing them. So the most popular was the centered growth pattern and the next was connected communities. So more parks and open space th those are pretty close. And then growth as is and low low intensity were were quite a bit lower than those. That's kind of what we heard from people. Uh but a lot of good discussions. I heard a lot of people saying we should do more with commercial development and nibbly pushing pushing economic development. So yeah. Yeah. Right. Um the um yeah we anyway it was it was good. It was worthwhile. Good discussions Tuesday. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, yeah, Tuesday I I would say kind of similar sentiments. So, when we had Yeah, we appreciate any everyone that participated in that one as well, but but yeah, I I would say pretty consistent. Uh, there's more depth to it, but but yeah, pretty consistent with what we heard in the park. my haircut today. I don't have my chair, but the Barbara, he lives in him and foury old go toward the park leave from their house and they do all the parks and it takes about an hour and a half. He was very connectivity and use Mexico. uh I I'll be brief. Justin, I I talked with you about a specific piece of open space that I need to get back to you. Yeah, that's not on you. It's on me. Reminder for myself. And then various days was great. Yeah. Thanks for all your support. Staff did a great job. Uh I said this last year, I'll say it again this year. You or you or you or you or someone who did spell me on driving the tractor. You did short. I needed No, I'm not expecting. I need to figure out how I can beat the ground. This is city, right? which is you know my sort of favorite thing to do in the whole world I feel like I should do reminder to myself on two things uh kind of already mentioned the appreciate all the help with with heritage days for the general plan as well as well as the open house thanks for everyone that was participated there or the the workshop that is that we had on Tuesday. Uh just wanted to ask, so we have there's a developer that's interested in pursuing an annexation and development on the on the south of Nibi Farms there, south of the current uh annexation that's that's on the table. And we felt like they started getting into detail on some ideas, concept plans, and we we felt it was it would be more productive if we had we've done this before with with other developments, kind of convene a development review committee for this. And so, just wanted to ask if there's a it it'd be good to have two council members um get involved in that discussion. We'll probably have a meeting in the next few weeks with the developer and and just kind of chart a path forward for them. Um help help uh you know again any decisions need to be made by the whole planning commission, the whole council, but but just to help give them an idea of of where to head with this. So for volunteers Yeah, volunteers. Garrett, Garrett, and Nate were the first to raise their hand. Are we good there? Okay, I'll I'll send invite to you. And that's all I've got. Thank you. Update on a couple projects. 1300 West. I expect construction be done the end of next month. and they crop on that. So, it is actually going along. There hasn't been anyone working this week. They for a retaining wall. They're waiting for that to cure concrete 70% or 80% excuse me, pull back and continue on, but they're expected to finish that up four weeks. 1200 West. I don't know what happened from the time that Staker Parsons bid to today, but their original schedule had them starting the first week of June, ending the the 3rd of August, I believe. Now, they're planning to start about the third week of July, and that'll run them into late September. So, it's just I have no control over it. The deadline is October 15th. Uh this week I I've been working with Amy and on grants, reimbursements, reporting. There's there's several that I that I'm helping manage. And then the rest of the week I I was working on a protective easement for the Nidley City Center Park. I almost said the wrong one, but formerly known as Ridgeline City Park. I have a draft into council member Larson and the mayor. We're running into a really critical deadline. If we don't get permitted with the army board, we may not be able to get our permits in construct this year. I hate to put the pressure on you, but if you have any comments on it, I included a cost estimate of what the estimated cost would be to m or comply with this conservation emanological assessment that's included. build it. It's roughly about $18,000 over 20 years. There's a lot in the first two years because it has some survey word from Bow West to continue the ub populations surveying them and reporting back to Fish and Wildlife Service. After that, it's just like a volunteer go out count to see how the habitat is reacting to any changes in in conditions in the environment. So, if you wouldn't mind expediting any comment, concerns, complaints you have on that, I'd like to get that to the fish and wildlife tomorrow or Monday at least. It's already been through review by the city attorney and uh Cole, no Coleman Klein. He's he's the guy that did our presentation on the environment. So, we're winding down on a final comment. other than that. So you I thought I I did miss it, but I didn't miss it by that much. So I was sent that What again? I missed something again. Yeah. 4:42 hours still. That's like yesterday. Seems like syrup Steve. Well, thanks for a good discussion earlier, but I'll speak on behalf of public works. Thanks for appreciate that. Um, one thing I, you know, are talking about money tonight and pretty intense it seems like of how we want to see how our money's being spent and we have an asset management that we've set aside. What importance about asset management, what that would do for us is show what real time costs are to a project. equipment to supplies to material man that would give us real time stuff. So with that being said, I learn the cost there, but if I break that into five departments, it's it's roughly $5,000 per ear. So we have really chief to really cut and see, you know, what what's being allocated and where. Now it's just project, put a 250 number on it and turn it in. So, um, another thing, our big 10 wheeler will be showing up on Monday. We're going to Salt Lake together. So, really exciting. This is the one we've been paying now for two years. Um, it's the clean fleet grant. So, we pay for the truck, they reimbures 25%. Who gets to drive it? Solid. Um Jared Jared Pratt's going down with me. So yeah, he'll he'll get the luxury of running the interstate with plow and sander in. So yeah, with is there a nibbly sticker on it yet? Probably not. They say those idiots. Thank you, Steve. Justin. No. Okay. Council, we've come to the end of the uh city council meeting and so if there's no objection, we will adjourn. But don't go away. No objection. We are journ. We have other I think a lot of people might be coming. Well, that'll be a favor to us. Yeah. the broker is the objections if I give you a strike objection don't listen to that I'm the decider someone has to situation Okay, ready to jump right into the next meeting without objection. Okay, I called the meeting of the community reinvestment agency to order. Um, first thing for us to consider is approval of the May 22, 2025 meetings and then tonight's agenda. meeting wasn't that long, but we figured it. Okay. Motion to approve from Garrett. Second from Nor. Thank you. All those in favor? Any vote? Okay, we have minutes and an agenda. So this is the fiscal year budget which I think we saw last let's answer any questions but I have a motion we we we discussed it motion to approve uh resolution CR 185 that's no that's correct I'm enjoying the Hold up. That's it. Okay. I have a motion for second. Nathan, I can see it. Discussion on that. Is there an opposition to vote? Seeing none, those No, sorry. Will you call the RO for us, please? Darl, what do we call in favor. Agency. In favor. I count all agency members in favor. Therefore, the resolution passes. should say council member to agency. So much cooler means a special agency. How about how about free agency? All right, we've come to the end of the agenda for the CRA. Is there opposition to adjourning? Seeing none, we are next. I call you have to Yeah. Sorry. I don't know if it's a different recording device or stop and go. Okay. Uh, next I welcome you to the meeting of the m the MBA, the municipal building authority. We call that meeting to order and I ask you to are we approving or ratifying? It says ratify. Oh, sorry. It does say ratify the minutes and approve tonight's agenda. It's a ratification because the minutes have become official without your vote. Motion to Okay. Motion to do those things from Norm and a second from Garrett. Those motion, please say I. Oppos. All right. The first item on the agenda is resolution 251. This uh sets the offices of the Nibbly City Building Authority and adopts the fiscal year. Next motion to approve. Second from Aaron. Thank you very much. We've seen it. We've looked at it. talked about it. Any further discussion? Anyone want to post voting? Seeing no opposition, gentle call the role, please. in favor. I count that as four in favor. So the resolution passes. We've at the end of that agenda. Is there any else turning?
just changed the map today. Okay. Motion from motion to deny a second from Garrett to to deny the 25 discussion. Please should consider some of your offering suggestions if they want to take it up. Yeah. Thank you. Discussion. If you don't say anything that's then I'm going to call for a vote. Cheryl, will you call the role please on on this motion to tonight? Yes, this is the a motion a vote in favor is to be in favor. So that's four in favor of denial and none opposed to denial. So the reason Okay. Um then we're going to talk about mixed use RM modifications amending the mixed use zone. Right. Yeah. Um, and if if I might, what's on the screen right now, a couple meetings ago, Garrett suggested a chart to kind of break down the the changes. Hopefully, this is kind of what you were looking for. Um, but because it's been a little while, maybe I'll if it's okay with you, I'll spend a little bit of time reminding you of what's what's in front of you here. It was continued in the last meeting. Uh, but I'll I'll start with this with with this chart. Um, so the I'll just run down it here. So the RM zone size, there isn't currently a a size limitation in uh for for an RM zone, but the proposed code would be that it needs to be between 10 and 40 acres for the RM zone. And um the for RPUD it would lower it from a 40 acre minimum to a 20 acre minimum. The for the location that an RM could could be um approved. Currently there's an adopted map that just shows two two areas. Um one of them is in Logan City. probably isn't going to move uh from into Nibbi. And the other one is the Weston Nelson property which already has been approved as RM. Uh but what would change is that areas that are designated as high density or town center within the general plan could be zoned as RM. Uh what's something else that's added that's not currently in there is a mixeduse requirement for RM and these are for areas that are either near a state highway or an intersection of arterials. there specific measures and I I can get into those if you'd like, but just in short in in those specified areas, they they would require that 10% of the ground floor area be um commercial use. uh the maximum density. One thing that is is changed is that if you do u meet that mixeduse threshold within any of of an R any area, not just with if you're required to uh you could get up to 12 units per net 12 develop acre instead of 10. uh the in the RPUD ordinance, there's currently a maximum density of five units per net developable acre if if you're not using the TDR bonus. Um and that would be a raised to seven units per net developable acre in this if this were approved. Uh there's this provision in both in the RM and in the RPD ordinance that if you're within 300 ft of single family residential um that you need that the homes need to be also single family within the development unless it's unless there's an arterial roadway that buffers you. And this is changed to just to say that the buildings they can be multifamily of of some sort but they are limited to two stories and no more than 100 ft in build building length. Uh the current ordinance, just in short, it does encourage reloaded garages, but the the language is strengthened uh that it would actually require reloaded garages for like town homes and and condos. So, and then the current ordinance removes the requirement for clubhouse pool and splash pad within the open space amenities both for RPD and RM zone. And then also there's there's specific language which allows for a fee in L of open space and amenities uh in the RM, RPD and open space subdivision. if they're within a half mile of the park. And this is based on for amenities. Uh if if they want to be in lie of amenities, it it's just based on the estimated cost of the amenity. For open space, uh it's not defined currently in the ordinance. It would have to be added. If if this if this were adopted, uh we would we would um come back with a you know at a future date with with a specific um amount whether it's per acre. We we'd have to do a little more research come up with an amount on on the fee and L for open space. But uh there is a provision in there that still requires at least 10% if there's any kind of multif family component to the project. It still requires 10% of net developable acreage at minimum open space. So it doesn't allow for completely removing open space even if you have the fee in L but but reducing it. I mean, that pretty much summarizes u everything. U I I can get into more detail here if you'd like, but just to get back to the reason we're doing this, some of some of these changes, trying to balance a lot of different things. um planning commission put a lot of there's a lot of discussion and that that led to these changes but they're trying to direct the RM zone and appropriately planned areas consistent with the general plan um disperse rather than concentrate higher density residential development that's that's part of the reason for or part part of the reason for the 10 to 40 acre maximum on the RM zone is it encourages that that dispers dispersement uh just with with some recent changes to RPUD code. There's it there's been uh some more appetite from developers to use RM instead of RPD and it's it's trying to some of these changes point more toward making RPED more enticing by reducing the acreage and incre increasing the density a little bit for example. uh also requiring some level of commercial mix use at least in some of these appropriate areas where it seems like there should be some viable uh option for for commercial development. There's some provisions to improve the design of of new housing and then and then allowing for fee in lie of open space areas that are already well served by parks. And this will allow uh using those funds toward improving those park spaces rather than you know just adding adding more acreage. We've it was it was one finding of the parks recreation open space master plan to be more selective on the open space that the city takes on and and to focus more on improving the spaces rather than just getting more acreage and this would get us more in that direction. Yeah. So this is a list of aggregated amendments that occurred in the proposed RM and has already occurred in the RPV. This is just this is just the purpose of all of what's in front of you tonight. But we're not voting. You are. You are. There there's RM RPUD. There's even open space subdivision. There's there's a they they started with RM and then they kind of opened up a bigger can of worms as as often happens. So yeah, that that's all right. So I already kind of explained all all of these from the chart, so I won't go I won't rehash these slides, but planning commissions and and staff's recommendation is approval of this ordinance with a long name that I came up with. And now I knew I knew that but somehow it slipped my mind for a minute. Sorry. Yeah, that's what that's the way it started and then it evolved into more. Right. I think I st I think yeah I think it's called RM but it we just kept adding. Thank you. Are there questions for anybody? So out of these which one do you think will be the most popular? I know describes the RPD with like the developers. I think it depends. Um, I I I think it will help. So that I I feel like kind of an unintended consequence of when we adopted a TDR ordinance is we significantly lowered the density for RPUD. And I think because of that, we're we're hearing developers saying, "Well, gee, five units doesn't get me anywhere." And TDR is a difficult thing, a bridge to cross. And we just saw with for example Nibbly Meadows they developed at about seven units per net develop acre. So I think seven is is pretty reasonable. There's still an incentive for something like TDR if someone wants to do something more dense. 15 is really 15 units per acre would be something real a lot more significant. But I I think it depends on on the project. If they have 10 acres, then an RPD is not going to work and an RM might might be better. It because it uh doesn't necessarily require multiple housing types and and that might fit within that area. Like in the town center area, let's say there's a 10acre piece of property. someone wants to do a even in, you know, a town home development for example, they could they could fit something there. So, yeah. So, it kind of depends, but I think it's just trying to balance and provide some options, but also just not open it up completely. There was some concern on the planning commission of just everyone everyone's going to want, you know, an RM or an RPD and this aims to to kind of balance that and disperse and but but still provide some more options. Just making sure there were no changes to the RPD map. There wasn't. Yeah, they didn't. That you you could do that. Yeah, but they ultimately they I think they got far enough they discussed enough of this that they were like this is good enough. let's let's push it to city council. But that that was brought up. It just they didn't come to a conclusion on it. So I I appreciate the work that the planning commission you put in on my the following comment is not to disregard or disrespect that at all. I'm going to ask it anyway given where we are with the general plan update. Is this something to keep hot but or warm on the on the back burner and wait to see what the general plan turns out to be? Or is this in your opinion okay to move forward with it while we're working on the plan? I think it's okay to move forward with it because I think we've identified deficiencies that need addressing. I I don't think it's necessarily it doesn't mean that it's not going to change again. And there might be some bigger changes after the general plan of direction and structure of our ordinances and it might lead to something else. But I think I think just over the you know four or five years working with these with these codes and seeing what has come through this is more a reflection of and and and market conditions and everything. This is more a reflection of trying to address those deficiencies and and and trying to acknowledge that there's options when a developer comes in. So I I I think it we might be doing this again in another year, but I think this is a positive okay uh positive direction. Okay. And and I point out that this doesn't reszone anything. It doesn't change any RP maps, at least not yet. And uh it doesn't create RM zones. It just says if the council negotiates an RPU where the RPUD map says it is or the council changes with planning commission's advice the RPUD map or the RM map. Then these would be the rules. So it doesn't change where this can be implemented. It changes what would be implemented if there was that additional change. And here's my question. Does having the the change build an expectation in a developer's mind? Say, gee, I'd really like to do that and they have a code for it, but they kind of forget that it's not even allowed anywhere at the moment. RM, for example. Well, it's I mean it it would it requires a reszone. It requires a resone. Yeah. Does it build the expectation that we would reszone something to that without having gone through the plan the general plan? It could it could build that expectation that we but yeah I mean there's there's that there is that discretion but it could a developer could go oh the city is supportive of anywhere it says high density and anywhere it says town center. Yeah. It doesn't change it doesn't it doesn't change it for the rpud because the map's still the same. But they could yeah it could build that expectation that there was there was serious discussion of just getting rid of the map altogether and just leaving it completely open for RP for RM RPD the map wasn't really discussed to be honest at at the planning commission at at length at least. the next meeting. Is there a second if you want me to repeat it? This motion to continue second that second. Okay. So the motion by Nathan, second by Norman, is to continue till our next meeting. Yeah, I'll give you some reasons why. I guess those are required. I think I'm going down the similar path as what mayor was as I looked at it. Um, our future land use map, which I think will be very much revised in the general plan. I compared where high density there's no just high density zones they're all mixed with either high density medium or commercial we have a little color the designation of them nowhere on the map so basically we're talking about anywhere we've design high commercial sub um and then when I compare that to the RPU the there's some weird things going I feel there and I I I actually would say that it makes me want to do RN more because there's more space whatever land I own I have more probability because I don't own just the one on the RPG map. So I think that's one thing that I just need to more time to figure out and maybe come back with proposal of getting rid of RPG or changing some things. I think in the end my concern is with our future use map but by passing this there is the clarification of well it doesn't guarantee that everything is automatically RF. So that's just one thing then um the setbacks are something else I'd like some more time with. I think they're still too big for an R. So it's great. Okay. Thank you. Is anybody waiting for this to pass to develop? I know you looking at Not really. Uh because so Kartchner they wanted to uh well I I I should say I there probably are a few but not necessarily specifically what's on paper here. This wasn't proposed by any developer. This was based on planning commission discussion what was appropriate. But C what started this whole thing was Kchner did ask for the RM zone for a portion of that annexation area. Well then they asked to withdraw their application and then we found well Sierra's in talks with them on buying it. Blaine mentioned that in the meeting and their intention at least for that property is R2A that they would that they were okay with R2A which was what was kind of the motion that was on the the table. Uh there there's definitely discussions of other higher density developments in other parts of town including you know just south of there is potential future annexation area but nothing that's like imminent I would say that they're really waiting for this. Yeah. I'm okay. All right. Is anyone opposed to voting on the motion? All right. Those in favor of the motion to continue until our next meeting, please say I are any folks. Okay. Well, thank you. I hope you're not mad at us. I think this is something. Well, there's no there's nothing for staff to do though, just to clarify between now and the next meeting. Okay. This is ordinance 2520. This would uh amend our code regarding snow removal. Justin, you've talked about already everything say okay Motion to approve ordinance 2520. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the change to the ordinance that show that that was Eric. Thank you. Sorry, I should I'm getting lazy. Cheryl, I figure you'll watch it on YouTube. We know you with everyone else with all the rest of Thank you, Nathan. Are we opposed to voting? Seeing no opposition, chair, will you call the role, please, on ordinance 2520. Council member favor in favor. In favor in favor, none opposed. Thank you, council. Thanks for your consideration on that. Justin, thanks for your suggestion. Uh that brings us to the last item in the city council meeting and that's council and staff reports. Norm, let's start with you tonight. Thought of days was good. Um it was fun. I get the opportunity to drive the tractor pulling clothes with spray with coloring kids and those kids are just excited. It's amazing what a little water sport do on both ends. So anyways, I just think Thanks all that please thanks for your help. Thank you. Uh comments really appreciate it as much as I used to and I appreciate Scott including me in some develop. So thank you Okay, Eric. Thank you, Nathan. Yeah, Ditto and Harry did great. We had some friends visiting from out of town and after the end of the weekend, they were like, I think trying to buy a house here. So, they're in the process of buying a house here. The kids were like, here, oh, don't let them go to hire. Fourth of July. Will you get a commission fee then or referral? discussions questions people ask me. I had a couple people ask me about some of the park spaces and stuff and some the one that I've been asked the most about specifically 250 west and 3650 corner maybe maybe consider doing some of the underutilized pocket parks or or you know open spaces that aren't used and really aren't usable or explain anything. You're just neglected and I know it's hard talk about how hard it is to get all those. I'd like to have a workshop on that. See some options. We sell some of those I'm sorry by I had a discussion with the property owner recently that in the background there there's something going on. We haven't received an application, but we've we have we have had a few discussions with the property owner. Yeah, you can pick a movie in the park. Oh, so it'll be it'll be in conjunction with another event. Okay. And then uh I didn't make it Saturday to the Heritage Day. I was curious how the general plan survey went in park. Yeah, but I I did this turn. Great. Um I mean it was like kind of slow but steady stream of people who come up and were interested in. Um I got a lot of people putting dots on the four different options about which growth pattern they most interested in. People who put comments on the map suggestions they thought they wanted to change or things like that. So it was good. Um like you sort of captain. Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. Yeah. We had dots on the map and in general kind of the the key takeaways there at least from those at at Heritage Days that attended that talked to us and interacted that they don't want us to just do things the same way we have been doing them. So the most popular was the centered growth pattern and the next was connected communities. So more parks and open space th those are pretty close. And then growth as is and low low intensity were were quite a bit lower than those. That's kind of what we heard from people. Uh but a lot of good discussions. I heard a lot of people saying we should do more with commercial development and nibbly pushing pushing economic development. So yeah. Yeah. Right. Um the um yeah we anyway it was it was good. It was worthwhile. Good discussions Tuesday. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, yeah, Tuesday I I would say kind of similar sentiments. So, when we had Yeah, we appreciate any everyone that participated in that one as well, but but yeah, I I would say pretty consistent. Uh, there's more depth to it, but but yeah, pretty consistent with what we heard in the park. my haircut today. I don't have my chair, but the Barbara, he lives in him and foury old go toward the park leave from their house and they do all the parks and it takes about an hour and a half. He was very connectivity and use Mexico. uh I I'll be brief. Justin, I I talked with you about a specific piece of open space that I need to get back to you. Yeah, that's not on you. It's on me. Reminder for myself. And then various days was great. Yeah. Thanks for all your support. Staff did a great job. Uh I said this last year, I'll say it again this year. You or you or you or you or someone who did spell me on driving the tractor. You did short. I needed No, I'm not expecting. I need to figure out how I can beat the ground. This is city, right? which is you know my sort of favorite thing to do in the whole world I feel like I should do reminder to myself on two things uh kind of already mentioned the appreciate all the help with with heritage days for the general plan as well as well as the open house thanks for everyone that was participated there or the the workshop that is that we had on Tuesday. Uh just wanted to ask, so we have there's a developer that's interested in pursuing an annexation and development on the on the south of Nibi Farms there, south of the current uh annexation that's that's on the table. And we felt like they started getting into detail on some ideas, concept plans, and we we felt it was it would be more productive if we had we've done this before with with other developments, kind of convene a development review committee for this. And so, just wanted to ask if there's a it it'd be good to have two council members um get involved in that discussion. We'll probably have a meeting in the next few weeks with the developer and and just kind of chart a path forward for them. Um help help uh you know again any decisions need to be made by the whole planning commission, the whole council, but but just to help give them an idea of of where to head with this. So for volunteers Yeah, volunteers. Garrett, Garrett, and Nate were the first to raise their hand. Are we good there? Okay, I'll I'll send invite to you. And that's all I've got. Thank you. Update on a couple projects. 1300 West. I expect construction be done the end of next month. and they crop on that. So, it is actually going along. There hasn't been anyone working this week. They for a retaining wall. They're waiting for that to cure concrete 70% or 80% excuse me, pull back and continue on, but they're expected to finish that up four weeks. 1200 West. I don't know what happened from the time that Staker Parsons bid to today, but their original schedule had them starting the first week of June, ending the the 3rd of August, I believe. Now, they're planning to start about the third week of July, and that'll run them into late September. So, it's just I have no control over it. The deadline is October 15th. Uh this week I I've been working with Amy and on grants, reimbursements, reporting. There's there's several that I that I'm helping manage. And then the rest of the week I I was working on a protective easement for the Nidley City Center Park. I almost said the wrong one, but formerly known as Ridgeline City Park. I have a draft into council member Larson and the mayor. We're running into a really critical deadline. If we don't get permitted with the army board, we may not be able to get our permits in construct this year. I hate to put the pressure on you, but if you have any comments on it, I included a cost estimate of what the estimated cost would be to m or comply with this conservation emanological assessment that's included. build it. It's roughly about $18,000 over 20 years. There's a lot in the first two years because it has some survey word from Bow West to continue the ub populations surveying them and reporting back to Fish and Wildlife Service. After that, it's just like a volunteer go out count to see how the habitat is reacting to any changes in in conditions in the environment. So, if you wouldn't mind expediting any comment, concerns, complaints you have on that, I'd like to get that to the fish and wildlife tomorrow or Monday at least. It's already been through review by the city attorney and uh Cole, no Coleman Klein. He's he's the guy that did our presentation on the environment. So, we're winding down on a final comment. other than that. So you I thought I I did miss it, but I didn't miss it by that much. So I was sent that What again? I missed something again. Yeah. 4:42 hours still. That's like yesterday. Seems like syrup Steve. Well, thanks for a good discussion earlier, but I'll speak on behalf of public works. Thanks for appreciate that. Um, one thing I, you know, are talking about money tonight and pretty intense it seems like of how we want to see how our money's being spent and we have an asset management that we've set aside. What importance about asset management, what that would do for us is show what real time costs are to a project. equipment to supplies to material man that would give us real time stuff. So with that being said, I learn the cost there, but if I break that into five departments, it's it's roughly $5,000 per ear. So we have really chief to really cut and see, you know, what what's being allocated and where. Now it's just project, put a 250 number on it and turn it in. So, um, another thing, our big 10 wheeler will be showing up on Monday. We're going to Salt Lake together. So, really exciting. This is the one we've been paying now for two years. Um, it's the clean fleet grant. So, we pay for the truck, they reimbures 25%. Who gets to drive it? Solid. Um Jared Jared Pratt's going down with me. So yeah, he'll he'll get the luxury of running the interstate with plow and sander in. So yeah, with is there a nibbly sticker on it yet? Probably not. They say those idiots. Thank you, Steve. Justin. No. Okay. Council, we've come to the end of the uh city council meeting and so if there's no objection, we will adjourn. But don't go away. No objection. We are journ. We have other I think a lot of people might be coming. Well, that'll be a favor to us. Yeah. the broker is the objections if I give you a strike objection don't listen to that I'm the decider someone has to situation Okay, ready to jump right into the next meeting without objection. Okay, I called the meeting of the community reinvestment agency to order. Um, first thing for us to consider is approval of the May 22, 2025 meetings and then tonight's agenda. meeting wasn't that long, but we figured it. Okay. Motion to approve from Garrett. Second from Nor. Thank you. All those in favor? Any vote? Okay, we have minutes and an agenda. So this is the fiscal year budget which I think we saw last let's answer any questions but I have a motion we we we discussed it motion to approve uh resolution CR 185 that's no that's correct I'm enjoying the Hold up. That's it. Okay. I have a motion for second. Nathan, I can see it. Discussion on that. Is there an opposition to vote? Seeing none, those No, sorry. Will you call the RO for us, please? Darl, what do we call in favor. Agency. In favor. I count all agency members in favor. Therefore, the resolution passes. should say council member to agency. So much cooler means a special agency. How about how about free agency? All right, we've come to the end of the agenda for the CRA. Is there opposition to adjourning? Seeing none, we are next. I call you have to Yeah. Sorry. I don't know if it's a different recording device or stop and go. Okay. Uh, next I welcome you to the meeting of the m the MBA, the municipal building authority. We call that meeting to order and I ask you to are we approving or ratifying? It says ratify. Oh, sorry. It does say ratify the minutes and approve tonight's agenda. It's a ratification because the minutes have become official without your vote. Motion to Okay. Motion to do those things from Norm and a second from Garrett. Those motion, please say I. Oppos. All right. The first item on the agenda is resolution 251. This uh sets the offices of the Nibbly City Building Authority and adopts the fiscal year. Next motion to approve. Second from Aaron. Thank you very much. We've seen it. We've looked at it. talked about it. Any further discussion? Anyone want to post voting? Seeing no opposition, gentle call the role, please. in favor. I count that as four in favor. So the resolution passes. We've at the end of that agenda. Is there any else turning?