Transcript — Eagle Mountain City Council, 28 April 2026

Thank you. All right. Welcome to our budget work session. It is Tuesday, April 28th at 3.02.

And we'll go ahead and call this meeting to order. The first item of business today, we're going to turn the time right over to Vince, our engineer, to discuss some water and other items that he knows. Sounds good. Let me get this PowerPoint started here.

There we go. So I have three different items to present to you today. Water, wastewater, and our stormwater projects. These are all capital projects that we're proposing to fund for next year.

First of all, water. These projects on this slide are all projects that we're currently working on. They're projects that are in different phases of actual completion. I'll go through each one individually, but these are items that we have budgeted in past years.

We're going to roll that budget into the current fiscal year. And then what you're seeing here are additional funds that we're requesting for this year to complete these projects. Our 4 million gallon tank, that's the one up at Scarlet Ridge. It's currently under construction.

The floor is completely poured. A few of the columns are poured. We have two wall sections that are poured. And so they're pouring wall sections every one or two weeks.

And things are moving ahead well. Things are looking good on that project. I think overall project budget was around $2.5 million to complete it this year. We're asking for the additional $700,000 just to wrap up construction.

Any questions on that one? So $3.2 is the total overall cost for the construction of that tank? Yep, approximately. That's better than the last one we did, I think.

Upgrade well 5. What we've done on well 5 to date, I guess first of all, well 5 is up hidden hollow. Right behind the elementary school. That pumps water up to our two different tanks that are up hidden hollow canyon up there.

Well 5 specifically, it has capacity to pump more water than we have a pump for at this time. And so the upgrade on well 5 was upgrading pumps. But in order to upgrade those pumps, of course, we have to upgrade all the electrical systems that go along with it. And so we've installed a backup generator on that also.

All of those items are really long lead type of items. And so we ordered those probably a year and a half ago. Some of the items have arrived. Some are still out there.

It should be getting close. What we're budgeting for this year is to hire a contractor, get everything installed and ready to go. Functional. Benz, can you speak to the additional capacity that's going to give us?

What are we hoping to gain from that? So I think right now, Mac would know better. He's not here today. But I think right now we're at 2,000 to 2,500 gallons per minute.

We're hoping to bump it up to 3,000, 3,500 gallons per minute. So adding an extra 1,000 gallons per minute. And then well 7 on Unity Pass. That's the well that we've been drilling on for a year and a half or so.

Right off of Pony Express, right next to the middle school. Or not the middle school. The elementary school that's right there at Hidden Hollow. Obviously, we've drilled it.

We have an engineer hired at Bowen and Collins. They're doing the design on that. That was all in the budget that we've already received in the past year. For this next year, the plan is to build the well house, install the pumps, install all the electrical equipment.

And so this would be budgeting to complete that project with everything. And so hopefully by the end of 2027, we would have another functioning well. I'm going to bug you again. What's the total overall cost then for that well?

The overall cost for that well? I'm trying to remember what the drilling costs were. I think they were close to $2 million for the drilling. And so $4, $4.5 million.

Didn't we have some change orders along the way too? Maybe Kimberly can speak to that. Because I know that well has been in process for quite a number of years with bits that still live at the bottom and stuff. So I think as we discussed with the driller, because he didn't make his actual goal.

We were trying to get down to 1,500 feet as far as depth. He never got there. He had issues with drilling heads, losing drilling heads down the hole and things like that. And it was at a point where we were worried about losing the well completely and having to start all over.

And so because he didn't make all the way down to his full depth, we did negotiate with him. And I think we came in under budget on that. We didn't get the full depth, but we also didn't pay him everything that was in the original contract. Well, I think that's what they need to know here is that it was a per foot bid, right, and he didn't get there.

So what was the amount maybe that we paid? He was obviously a third short. Did we short him a third money? I know there was some change orders, so I don't...

Yeah, and it doesn't come out exactly even because there's mobilization costs and stuff that would have been the same no matter how deep he went. So do we lose capacity then because he didn't get further down? So when we did our pump test, after he had finished drilling, we were able to get over 3,000 gallons per minute. And so it looks like it's a good well.

As far as production, the difference is if we would have gone all the way down to the 1,500, as our aquifer goes up and down, it will vary a lot from year to year. And if we get into a drought cycle of multiple years, it will drop. And there is a chance that we could drop it below where we drilled. And so that's...

Is there a way to remedy that once we build the well house or... I mean, you take the roof off and keep drilling? Right. There's really not.

No. So we're at 1,000 feet. We're at 1,000 feet. Yeah, we can't go back and increase it.

Do we want to stop there? Or is there an opportunity for us to get to the mark that we need to get to? Or is this just, it is what it is now? For this well, it is what it is.

I think what we'll do instead of that is make sure we have other wells in other places so we have redundant sources. And so if we get to that point where we do draw our aquifer down that far, we have other sources. So it'll be the first one that comes offline, basically. Yeah.

Exactly. Which brings us to well 9, which is basically a redundant well for well 7. I mean, we do need the capacity because of the growth, but it is a redundant well also. This one is at the end of Lone Tree, actually closer to the airport on the bottom end.

And this one, we have funding in the past funding cycle to start drilling on that. And we're going to start, we've already hired a driller. He's going to start in July just with timeframes and other things he had going on. He can't start until July, but we'll get him drilling in July.

And so the funding that we had from last year for that drilling will move to the next year. And then we'll just move on to the next steps of that one. For this funding cycle, this $3.5 million will be full engineering design, and then well house pumps, all the electrical equipment. This one also has a length of pipe, whereas the well 7, it was right next to Pony Express where we have pipelines that could tie right in.

And this one, we have to go a little ways with our pipelines, so you'll see it's a little more expensive than the other well, but it's because we're adding on a pipeline section to it also. For what was in the current budget, Vince, for me, I'm just trying to, I recognize that each well is individual and different. I mean, I understand that. But I'm trying to just kind of draw some conclusions that we're about $4.5 million, $5 million to put in a well.

It's going to fluctuate a million, a million and a half, depending upon the issues that we have. And our hope is that we're going to get 3,000 gallons per minute. That's a good well. I know that some of them don't produce that.

Drilling wells is a bit of a gamble. Sure. You know, that's why you hire somebody to water wage and tell you where to drill a hole. So I'm just in my head.

I'm trying to wrap my head around all that. So what did we have previously in our budget? A million bucks? Is that what we already budgeted for this, or do you know?

For the drilling? I don't remember. I don't know, Kimberly, if you have that number. I believe originally, so when we do our wells, we typically will break it out into a couple of different, so you have the drilling component, and then we'll have the pump house and connecting the line to it.

So I do at least believe for well number nine, that the original was probably in the 3 million to 3 and a half million, almost that number. When we did Unity Pass, that project, just in drilling the well, not even the pump house itself, was over a $5 million. Typically, the drilling part for us, when we're looking at estimates, is about $3.5 million, and then historically, it's been another $2.5 million, $3 million to do the pump house and connect the line. But I do know there's a lot, again, it depends on the train, everything that's involved with it.

That's just helpful information to be able to share with the general public, that we're sometimes $5 to $7 million to put in a well. Yeah. Thanks. Real quick, are there any adjustments that need to be made to what we're asking for impact fee-wise, if it's more than what we anticipate originally?

Yes. And the process to that would be we would have to update our IFFP and get that approved, and then go to the IFA and get that approved also. And so there is a process to do that, and we're planning on more frequent updates than we have done in the past to account for some of these rising costs. As we know, there's been a lot of inflation in the last even couple of years that make a big difference in our costs.

Do you know the last time, Steph, we did look at what our impact fees are for water specifically? So I don't know the last time the IFA was approved officially, but we have one right now that's under consideration that has all these numbers in it, and so you should be seeing that. We'll bring it to council in a month or two. Thank you.

Yep. So these projects are all new projects. As you can see, the top three are different sections of our SR-73 project. And the reason I broke them out is because that's the way they were broken out in our master plan.

Now, at this point, we're talking about trying to do these all at the same time so that we get one continuous project, cheaper mobilization and things like that is just more efficient to do them all at the same time if that's possible. Can you just give us kind of a general idea of what work is being done in that project? Yep. In fact, I have a slide that kind of shows the area.

So this is Saratoga Springs over here. This is SR-73. So right up above SR-73 in Saratoga Springs, we have what we call the North Terminal Reservoir. That's Central Utah's main reservoir.

They built it several years ago for this purpose. Not just for Eagle Mountain specifically, but they pump water up to Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District and I know Saratoga and Lehigh all have water there too. But the plan is to connect to that reservoir and then bring this pipeline down all the way to Airport Road. And like I said, it was originally cut into three sections and they weren't equal sections as you can kind of see by the prices, but in the master plan, it was cut into three different sections.

But again, we're planning to do everything at once. Is the intent to do that before they start construction on SR-73? Is that the plan? Yeah.

It would be nice to kind of be in and out and out of their way. Yep. So, Waterline from Sage Valley to Mountain, Mid Valley Road is what that is. That's actually paralleling our Airport Road that we just put in and it connects onto the end of the SR-73 pipeline and just takes that south into the city to where more of the development is so we can get that central Utah down into kind of the heart of the city.

Will that pipe, where will that be placed? Is that, I know the sewer line kind of runs right underneath the road. Right. So when you put the water line in, does that go east-west?

What is that easement? I'm just curious. So, we will look at that when we do design. It will depend on how much right-of-way we have on each side.

And so yeah, that's not determined yet. That will be determined as part of the design process. And we try to keep it flexible because there's other utilities around that too. The airport is right there too.

And that will be a factor that we look at as far as access in and out of there and things like that. And so we will look at all of that when we do the full design on it. Okay. And then maybe just a general question for me as a new council member.

Funding from these different water projects, are they coming from a specific fee that's being imposed somewhere for some development? Or are they coming from it? Yeah. The funding for this is all through impact fees.

Okay. It's due to the growth of the city. And so every house gets an assessment for that impact fee. So that $4 million, for example, in this project is being allocated back to the developer.

It is. On this one, SR73, I guess not the airport pipeline that we're talking about now, but SR73, we're talking about doing that as part of the bond that we've done also. And then that bond will be paid back with impact fees. Okay.

Yep. One last question. When they put the sewer line in, it's my understanding that wasn't really -- it was meant to connect up to the middle school. Correct.

It's not like a large sewer line, I would imagine, along the airport. It is. Oh, it is a large. Okay.

I think it's a 16-inch, which is -- it's basically a trunk line that will serve that whole area eventually. Oh, good. Okay. So as development happens along the airport, right?

I just want to make sure we're considering. Yeah. All the growth. Yeah.

Now, as it is right now, that 16-inch actually ties into an 8-inch line, which you never like to downsize a sewer line like that from a larger to smaller. Where is that? That happens right at the south end of Airport Road, and it ties into the Overland subdivision. And that's a temporary connection.

Okay. Because one of our other projects we'll talk about today will take that line and continue it. Okay. Thanks.

Just to -- for me understanding, when we run the line up Eagle Mountain Boulevard, it will be a separate line. We're not going to be running from that 16-inch line across to the west, is that correct? For the sewer? Yeah.

There's a west trunk line that's a little further out in our planning that will pick up everything on the west side of the city. Okay. Yep. Thanks.

Yep. Okay. The last one, pipeline from Pony Express Parkway to Airport Road. This one is basically a second phase of the one we just talked about.

It's going to connect on there, and this is water line, not sewer line again. But we're going to connect on to the water line that we're going to run parallel to Airport Road and just take it all the way to Pony Express. And that will give us a good loop in our water system. In water systems, we love looping, we love redundancy, just so we can shuffle the water where we need it.

But does this loop that we're going to add, I mean, with the SR 73 and all of that coming back down to Pony Express Parkway, does that create additional capacity? I'm assuming it does, to be able to take delivery of more of that acre feet that we have, our contract with Central Utah Water. It does, for sure. Yep.

Will it allow us to take the full capacity of that contract, or is it just a portion? Yes. The plan is to design this so that we can get the full capacity of our Central Utah. Thank you.

Yeah. It will probably be oversized for now, but in the long term we won't have to replace it. Yeah. So, yeah, there's the airport road pipeline and then just a connection over to Pony Express.

Our well 9 is right here east of the airport, and that'll actually connect in to this. And so this pipeline will not just be our Central Utah pipeline, but it will connect into our well system, too. So we have the redundancy. Do we have the right of ways and easements for this connection right here?

So we have the piece on the airport already with the church. All we have is permission to drill on that site, and we've talked to them. They're master planning their site right now, and they want us to run that pipeline along their roadways, and they don't know where those roadways are going to be yet. And so we're in communication with them to be able to do that in the future.

And so as we do the design, we'll take that into account. Okay. Jumping to wastewater. Again, these are all projects.

Oh, yeah. Go for it. Okay. Jumping to wastewater.

Again, these are all projects. Oh, yeah. Go for it. Jumping to wastewater.

Again, these are all projects. Oh, yeah. Go for it. Okay.

I got a question. The very last lot. The well nine. So, you know that very bottom road that goes north-south, that last lot to the north on the west side.

It looks south from your house, you'll see it. Okay. Wastewater projects. These ones are ones we're currently working on, and we're going to continue to ask funding to move forward.

The ox ditch upgrade is really the first phase of our wastewater treatment plant, and it's increasing the capacity of our current process. The oxidation ditch is really a biological process where we have bacteria that helps take out the chemicals and everything else that's in our wastewater. And as part of this process, there's going to be a recycling system put in, and we're going to use another one of the existing tanks on site to kind of expand the capacity of what's already there. And that really just is kind of a band-aid to get us to the timeline that we need to finish the full build-out of the 8 million or the 6 million gallon membrane bioreactor.

Will we continue to use it or utilize its capacity even after the new plant is built? Okay. Yep, yep. And so we'll have two different processes running at the same time, and that's part of the full plan.

There could be a time where we decide to retire that and use that land for something different, but that would be 20-plus years in the future. Yeah, but I suspect that will happen if we have additional capacity where we can create that affluent water and cease to send it into the ox ditch, right? Yeah, our master plan, I think, has a full build-out flow capacity of like 14 million gallons, and so this is just our first step to get us up to about 8 million gallons. And then, yeah, the 6 million gallon MBR wastewater treatment plant.

The membrane bioreactor is newer technology. You can put it in a smaller space, and the effluent that comes out of it is a much better effluent, better quality, and it's also more usable as far as reuse systems and things like that. We don't have to have so many tertiary or other treatments that happen after the fact to get it to a point where we can reuse it for watering lawns and gardens and our parks and things like that. But, yeah, that's going to be a big chunk this year.

That's the estimate of what we will spend just this year. And then the East Trunk Line at 5.9 million. So, just to get you oriented on this one, this is Pony Express, kind of coming down, right down the middle here. This is Airport Road, where it ties into Pony Express.

Now, where we were talking, the end of that 16-inch line is actually right there, right in the corner. And so, we're going to connect onto that with our East Trunk Line, run it down the rest of Airport Road, and then our East Expressway comes down this way. And we'll use a lot of that right-of-way where we can. The elevations don't allow us to use that whole right-of-way.

We'll have to kind of jump down here and go into some of the developments. We'll obviously keep it in roadways and things like that. But that trunk line will come down all the way south along that power corridor. And then we'll jump it to the west over to our treatment plant.

Now, the purpose of this is we have a trunk line right now in Pony Express. That one, level of service-wise, is about a C at this point, which is at the top end of acceptable. And so, if we continue to just tie in different developments and commercial or residential developments into that, it's going to be an issue pretty quickly. And that leaves the groundwork, really, for that Smiths development to come in and to utilize and also for the City Hall area to develop effectively, right?

Correct. Yep. So, the green areas in this map are everything that will drain to this east trunk line. And this actually connects into that airport road, which drains the whole northwest side of the city, eventually, up even by the junior high and across SR73.

That also, as we take that flow that's currently coming down Pony Express and bypass it basically around into our east trunk line, that opens up additional capacity and drops our level of service down from a C back to a B or so and gives us extra capacity in that Pony Express pipeline so we're not right at the top end where we want to be. And really, most of the stuff in that line, at least, that feeds into that is kind of built out, right? Probably a little bit of hidden hollow. Otherwise, that should last us.

It should last us. Yeah, there are some small areas right around where the Smiths are. There's kind of some open area there, which will actually go back to Pony Express. And so, yeah, it should, the plan is to have east trunk line taken off that we don't have to upsize anything in Pony Express to be able to do full build out.

There's a lot of one that goes on the east side that will carry almost that development, right? Some of it. Yeah. Yep, that's right.

Okay. These are our new projects that we're proposing for this year. Effluent disposal upgrades as we grow and as we push more water towards the treatment plant. That just means there's more output from the treatment plant.

And we have to have a way to either reuse or dispose of that. And so, this one, we're looking at different options for disposal. We're already kind of talking to some engineers as to what our options could be there. But this would include full design of that.

But it would also include land acquisition, depending on which option we choose to do. And really, we're looking at three different options. We can run a pipeline from the end of our wastewater treatment plant, pump it up to the Tickville wash, and then run it down the Tickville wash. There's some things that we have to talk to Saratoga Springs about.

Obviously, it flows through them and things we have to consider there. But that's an option. The second option would be to get it down to the sinks and then just let it kind of naturally spread. Right out where the water kind of collected there in the past.

There's wetlands areas down there. And we would just be increasing the size of those wetlands, obviously. That would be land acquisition and talking to property owners and things like that to make that happen, too. Well, you may be getting there.

I was just thinking about the conversation we've had with, is it Mount Airy on their lift station? I know there's like a process that we're kind of working through, but I'm just wondering if we should account for some budget. Or we have, was it eight lift stations throughout the city? Yeah.

So, what's that? Scenic Mountain. Scenic Mountain, thank you. I don't know if we've accounted for those situations or if we should consider that as a council.

It sounds like this is probably the time to be thinking about that. I've got a different question for you, and it's really, it's a philosophical question where we're looking at dumping money into these disposal upgrades, right? Are we just limited because the state won't allow us to reuse that water? Because to me, it seems more pertinent and wiser for us to be putting that money into system upgrades that will accept a secondary water source.

Yes, yes. And that's absolutely true. Right now, our disposal is rapid infiltration basins, which are basically big ponds, and we're hoping that the water just goes into the groundwater. Because we live in a valley that's lined with clay, that happens very slowly, and so we have, we really have an immediate need to expand our capacity.

So, when you're talking about disposal upgrades, are you talking about making some additional ribs? Is that what I'm hearing you say? So, that would be an option, too. Yep.

That would be land acquisition, and that's probably the more expensive and less efficient way to do it because of the clay that we live on. Now, back to your reuse question, yeah, absolutely, we would love to be able to reuse all the water, and in fact, we've done upgrades to our treatment plant to upgrade the quality of our effluence so that we can reuse it. But, yeah, it's held up at the state at this point. We can't get permitted to do that yet.

I get that we have to plan for what our situation is now without that approval, but part of me feels like a one-pager or a fact sheet or something. Or something could be created with this dollar, this fiscal impact, and the way it would be without being able to use reuse, and the way it would be with reuse, and share that with our partners on the state level that have advocated for that permit for us. Because how much longer are we going to really spend $10 million because we don't have the reuse permit yet? That seems really silly.

Not that our staff or anyone's doing it. It just seems like the state is putting us through an undue burden. No, but, I mean, you're reading my mind exactly, Council Member Clark, and that's my concern is, at what point are we going, I mean, they want us to be water-wise and efficient. At what point are they going to help us be that?

Well, and ribs, I mean, you talk about evaporation, like, doesn't water evaporate into the air if we put it in a rib first? It does. Yeah, so, like, that's just as bad as, like, watering lawns and stuff like that. I get that it's after it's treated and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

But we're losing water. It's totally different than when we can put it back into the system. Yeah, absolutely on the same page, yeah. And maybe this is a greater conversation with strategic and legislative affairs, but I totally get what you're saying.

It's like, how much more are we going to burden our taxpayers with the delays that the state's causing? Well, I mean, this comes from wastewater impact fees. So the developers are paying for this, and I just think there's a more effective way to put that water to use. Then we could send that one-page fact sheet to the Home Builders Association and let them also write letters to the state.

I mean, for me, that's all I'm wondering is, isn't there a more efficient way to do this? And I think the answer is yes, but we're prohibited to do anything effective about it today, and we need to deal with it. I'm sure you've thought about this, Vince. Have you thought about anything outside of the box that's different than this?

Is there something else that we can do in the hope that this is a temporary problem, not a permanent solution that we have to come up with? Right, right, and I think that would be the RIB solution just to expand the capacity we have to store by site. Can we build bigger berms on our RIBs and just funnel it all down there and just take longer to percolate? I mean, I don't know the answer.

I'm not a water guy. Right. But the more I learn about this, the more I realize that there's a lot that we can be doing that we're not doing. So the most logical step would be not to do RIBs or to put the water into a particular wash, because both will evaporate.

And the reason that the state is not overly excited about reuse is because the reuse is used in the secondary system for which it would evaporate when you put it in people's yards and whatnot. So short of using it for other uses that we're trying to figure out and come together with, another alternative might be to increase the water quality even one step further, which makes it culinary grade, and then direct inject that into the aquifer itself. You can't direct inject if it's a type 2, type 1 water, you still have to make it culinary grade, but by direct inject, you don't have the evaporation and at least would improve our aquifer. Have we considered the cost differential?

Because I'm going to tell you, if we're sitting here looking at $7 million, would that money, that's the question in my mind, would that money be better spent in investing in a system that would allow us to do something that's more effective with that water? So what we have to do in order to have the project go forward is we have to have the ability to say in our plan what we're going to use as the water, where the water will go. And the state is the one that's really pushing us away from the RABs, which are not effective because of our clay layer, to the tickle wash. We do have grave concern that when you put that water into the tickle wash, we'll be changing the environmental nature of that wash, thereby greening it up, adding the potential for endangered species or whatever we might be doing.

Once we change the environment and we start adding water to that, then getting water away from that could be a negative impact as well. And so time is of the essence, and that's why we're meeting with the state engineer's office and the Department of Water Quality, because we would much rather reuse the water in an appropriate method. But yet our plan still has to have a way to get rid of the sewer fluid, and if we don't, we don't get the permit, and we can't process our sewer. So we have to jump through the hoops, and we're following their direction at this point, but we are working concurrently to try to change the politics of it as well.

But if that changes, then we would not spend this money, correct? It's all the timing and the approvals and whatnot, but yes, that's our goal. So I mean, I would say put it in a tick to a wash, at least threaten that, because something that I wanted everyone here to know, especially on this end, these guys I think were in those conversations, but I met with Sandal Saturday, and he's kind of the water guy up at the state. I told him right now our stuff's just evaporating currently, and he's like, what are you talking about?

And I said, you know, we can get this to the lake much quicker, and so now he's also on board, and I think that we, I mean, I wouldn't be in favor. We need to have a plan, but I definitely wouldn't pull the trigger on that, knowing that we just need to keep pressuring them. What is the timeline, Vince, where we're going to be compelled to have to do something with this additional water discharge? So the initial study would take probably three to six months, depending on the option that we choose, and then after that, it would be property acquisition if we decide to go that way, and I think at that point, that's where we're really saying this is absolutely where we're going to go with it if we start buying property.

And so four to six months, I said, I would say is where we have some flexibility. Mayor, I hope you can get in front of the state and go advocate. I know you've been doing that, but I'm hopeful that maybe we can get something to change where we might be able to pursue a different course of action. But they're not in session, so even if we...

I mean, I guess they could approve the permit, right? Yes. So, and that's where it really comes out. We have to get the sewer processing permit approved, and you can't get the permit approved without saying how you're going to use the water, even though we might be working on another way to dispose of the water.

So are you suggesting, Ben, the best way to approach it is to approve this in the budget so that it recognizes that there is a plan to take care of it, but then to go to the powers that be and say, help us do something better? Absolutely, and the reason being is we can do exactly what Councilmember Clark just mentioned a few minutes ago, which is we now have a story to share of money that's wasted with our state legislators. Okay, that's perfect. I like that.

But not waste it, right? I don't like the wasted money, but I like the plan. Yes, yes, that we want to invest the money properly so that we can truly reuse that water and create a return on it and have an ever-growing water resource as our sewer processing continues to grow, as our community continues to grow. Yep.

So, Councilmember Wright, your idea of having other options, the next project is really kind of another option and another step. I did, yep. So, this tertiary treatment phase two, reverse osmosis, is the one that, reverse osmosis really takes the salinity of our effluent and bumps that number way down. Because that's the number that really is preventing us from just injecting it right back into our aquifer.

If we inject high salinity water into the aquifer, eventually it will infiltrate and we'll be getting high salinity water into our wells, and we just, we want to avoid that. And so, in order to make that process happen, we have to have a reverse osmosis piece added to, it's another treatment train that would be added to our existing train that we already do at the wastewater treatment site. Now, if we decide to not do direct injection and go with a different effluent, this would not be a wasted study or a wasted number, because this is also the next step to be able to make our effluent better for watering our parks and our yards and things like that. And it's really the next step in direct potable reuse also, which years down the road, we may have to go to that.

Just for clarification, the 300,000 that's listed under the tertiary treatment phase two reverse osmosis, is that to implement it or to study it? It is not. Nope. That's just an initial study in engineering design to figure out how we could fit that onto our existing train.

I just feel like I got the wrong degree at college. Okay. Steeplechase lift station upgrade. This is one.

The steeplechase lift station is basically the lift station that's down by Mehta. It's clear on the south end of the city, which is not too far from our wastewater treatment plant, but it's downhill enough that we can't get gravity flow into our current wastewater treatment plant. And so there is an existing lift station there right now. And this would, with Mehta's expansion and with Williams going in down there, it's just a study and a design to determine what needs to happen to be able to take care of their effluent.

Now, on their end, they're working with SOMAS engineering to kind of look at what their future demands are going to be on that lift station. And so we'll be working closely with them on that project to determine what that upgrade is going to look like. But it's more than likely upgrade of pumps, upgrade of electrical systems, things like that. I am just wondering if the city will be able to capture the cost of this study and any potential upgrades in the fees for this one particular user.

Yeah, that's a good question. I don't know, Kimberly, if you had a thought on that. I missed the very beginning part of that. Okay, so you're fine, Kimberly.

I know you're pulling stuff together. It's the steeplechase lift station upgrade. And what I'm asking is, will the city be able to capture this cost and any cost for any additional upgrades from this one additional user or this one user with fees? This is the one where the city is going to, just looking at, basically, it's been a private lift station and now the city is going to be.

No, this is the one that's over by Meta. This is the city lift station, yeah. It's down by Meta. Yeah, so in terms of, we haven't had, how about I just, there hasn't been any conversation about that at this point.

Do we have the ability to recoup fees? Yes. But only if you start breaking out your rates into certain fee areas, depending on the users that are in there. And we wouldn't be able to just single out, well, we just want this one lift station and we're going to assess only them.

Any other lift station that then the city has, we would need to make sure that we're looking at that regionally and then you're choosing to break those rates up. Even for the data center? When it's very specifically for the data center? There are, well, we could look into a little bit further, but there are certain terms in their agreements about our rates that say specifically that we can't do things that target this type of industry specifically.

And Marcus might not, but that was what, when I had done my research that they had had some information that was like, we can do rates, but we can't make rate changes that are targeted only for data centers. So we'd have to do a rate change that's relevant to the industrial users of the city, or you could say for lift stations, we want to have everybody who is being serviced by a lift station that we're going to start assessing a lift station fee as part of their wastewater billings. I would like for us as a city to look at ways to capture those funds back because we've had great robust discussions as a body about whether or not we're willing to take on a lift station responsibility for 120 homeowners. But we can't ask for those funds to be included.

There's got to be something in the development agreement or something else. I just don't see us subsidizing a business with dollar amounts when they're the only ones using that lift station. I think that's really the question is, does the development agreement require them to pay for this? And if it doesn't, then my next question would simply be this.

As we look at any future expansion or any other requests that they bring, I think we need to be conscientious of these things and make sure that it's contained in a new amendment to a development agreement. I agree with Council Member Clark. There's no reason for the citizen to bear the burden of increasing, of studying and paying for an upgrade to a sewer lift station that services one company. I just, I think fundamentally that's wrong.

Now they may have paid wastewater impact fees of which we would be able to utilize impact fee funds to be able to do an upgrade if it's increasing capacity that is for that purpose. Those would be the funds that they would have already paid that we would be able to utilize. They would have paid the impact fee funds? So if, what the original agreement was, so if this is the original data centers, there are certain fees that, anyway, I don't know if we collected them all up front or not, but if there were impact fees that were paid, regardless if it's them, right, if it's a system upgrade, then, and the lift stations are there, and it's enhancing it, we would be able to use impact fees for that only if it's increasing capacity to the lift station.

Well, Mayor, maybe as a council, and I don't know if the council supports us or not, maybe we could just ask you to bring us the, to have someone research and bring us the data that helps us understand the impacts that we're dealing with here. What's the history? What's the historical context? It would just be good to review it, because, frankly, if we didn't consider this, as we took a look at the Williams approval, then we missed it, and I think we need to learn from that mistake.

So, it sounds like a couple of things need to happen. I'm going to need some help from Marcus to review the contract and Vince to help us understand that. So, do you guys want to put something together that, and anyone else that might? Yeah, I'm not as familiar as what this upgrade is intended to accomplish, so it's hard to say.

If it is to facilitate the expansion for meta, then that is something that is baked into the development agreement for us to meet and confer and assess, you know, what portion they need to pay for things like that. If it's for existing for some reason, then that will be governed separately. But if it's for the expansion, then this is something that is baked into the agreement, because all of the infrastructure upgrades at the time we did that development agreement were not known. And so, we put in a provision that we'd come back and look at what they need to do.

That's the same data I'm looking for, Marcus. That is something that was considered when we did the development agreement. So, it sounds like this could be something that they should have to pay for anyway. So, we need to get...

I would certainly think that if it is only being done because of their expansion, then yes. So, before we fund this, we need to make sure that we get that information and bring it back, if that's okay. And as Kimberly alluded to, there's multiple ways to fund it. It could be they just pay for it directly.

It could be they pay impact fees that pays for it. There's various methods of accomplishing the same goal. As long as we make sure. Yeah, but the goal is that, hey, if it's for the...

If it's being necessitated by their expansion, then they should pay for it. So, if you get that back to us. We got another budget meeting coming in a couple weeks, I presume. So, just stay on top of that.

If you would. Sounds good. Okay. So, the last project on the list here is our effluent pond storage liner replacement.

We just talked about RIBs where we're trying to get rid of water and get water to go into the ground. We have two ponds out there that are currently our return water from Metta that we actually do use in our secondary system. And that water, we do want to save as much of it as we can. And so, we have two ponds that are lined.

Those liners over the years have worn. And with weather and storms and things that have come through, they've ripped up pretty good. And so, we're at a point where we need to replace those liners. They're beyond their useful life.

And so, that will be the $4 million. So, any questions on that one? I do have one question on all of these. Is there a reason?

Are these just like good round numbers? I get a little worried when I just see round numbers like give or take a million. Right. How close are we to the actual cost?

Is it going to be my question? These are probably within... Like, what's the standard deviation of where we're going to actually land? Probably 25%.

Oh, okay. Yep. Or within 25%. Until we get into the actual RFP process.

I think it's important to understand that this is our staff saying, hey, these are the things. And this is what we think it could cost. But we have not gone to bid. We don't have a design.

So, he's trying to let us, when he says 25%, obviously, we could bid it and be higher or lower. And that's more my question. So, my question, like, are we budgeting over 25%? So, our intent, and these numbers do have contingencies in them for the most part.

And so, the hope is that this is the high end and it will come down. It doesn't always end up that way, but that's our hope. I'm going to hold you to it. No, I'm just kidding.

Thank you. And what it does for us on the finance side is we're looking at our reserves and where we're at, and then we start committing. Right? We're saying this much is being killed off and we have to commit it for this project because we're starting it and moving forward to make sure that we will have the cash flow and the funds available at the time when that project comes forward.

And any funds not used stay in the capital project fund for future projects? I think that's it for me. Oh, stormwater is the next one. In our stormwater request for this year, we only have one project, and this is a project that was in our last stormwater master plan that we did in 2000, I think it was 2020 when we did that plan.

What this is, is bank reinforcement. There's areas in that plan where it shows that weathering of the bank, which is a natural process, but it's getting close to people's backyards and structures and things like that. And so the plan is to go in and reinforce those banks with either large riprap or gabion baskets, which are kind of the wired baskets that are rock-filled to keep those banks in place and to protect property from damage. Because we don't have a biologist on staff or an environmental planner on staff currently, is there going to be some sort of review to make sure that we're not destroying critical habitat and shoring up the issues that we're concerned about?

Yeah, that will be part of the design process. As we get into the design, we'll hire an engineer out, and they will look at that as part of the process. Okay, thank you. I'm curious if any of this has been done over in the Silver Lake area already.

I mean, Field's a flagship. Flagship did a lot of work down in there already. Yes. And I know they had to work with the Army Corps of Engineers to get a permit, and it was very specific.

Is this something that we're coming in and repairing that they did, or is it something that they didn't do that they should have done? Northridge. The one on the right side is Silver Lake. Yeah, so there's kind of two different areas.

And, yeah, go ahead. This does not include any of the work that Flagship did. This is, when you're looking at the Silver Lake area, this is more specific to the Silver Lake Village side. That has some serious erosion where the homes are pretty close.

And when it comes to the wash, right, we don't want a straight wash that shoots through. But in some of these areas, the wash has gone completely the other direction, and it kind of ping-pongs back and forth, right? And when it ping-pongs, that's where it makes these cuts to the wall. I don't take any issue with the need to do it.

My concern really was, are we repairing something that wasn't done correctly, and it doesn't sound like that's the case. We've already done some BDA work and gabing basket work upstream of where they did their work. And this is work that needs to take place downstream. And some of that is trying to place BDAs so that we can slow the water down and try to actually utilize more of the wash, right?

Some of this wash is incredibly wide, but when you get down to the ditch, right, it's four or five feet wide. And so we want to try to spread some of that and straighten it just a little bit so it meanders instead of ping-pongs. And then we need things like gabing baskets and stuff just to shore it up. And frankly, Zach, I mean, you're raising a point that was concerning to me when we were talking about the wastewater.

If we're going to dump that affluent into the Tickbill Gulf, we're only going to have these types of mitigation problems that we're going to have to deal with regularly. So it's not free to do that. Yeah. Okay.

Just a quick question before you walk away. Did we fix the wash wall where we had the water main leak off of Silver Creek shot through between the houses? Yes. So we've already solved that wash wall?

Yeah. I believe that's – I believe so. I guess I can't say 100%, but I believe that was all done. Yeah, because I know that was compromised as a result of that.

Yeah, which isn't part of this. This is more of – Right. While we're there, though, let's make sure that that part has been eroded. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Thanks. Yeah. Any other questions? Just going back to something you said earlier, you said the church is master planning the area north of Lone Tree.

Yep. And I'm just curious, is this the first time we're hearing this as a council? Yes. And the reason why I say that is landowners really should come to the council and be a little bit more collaborative, in my opinion.

And so if they want a master plan, we're not – apparently we're not being involved in that thought process. And I would really prefer landowners and developers to come to us first, and then we can start to have a collaborative discussion from the beginning, instead of them deciding what they're going to do, say, well, this is what we're going to do, and then come to us. Now, we want them to come to us early in the process. So I get a little frustrated when they're off planning something and they haven't even talked to us.

And so I don't know how we remedy that, but if – I mean, I would assume the council would agree with me on this issue. Well, I think the answer is developers have found if they don't collaborate, they get a very quick no. So I think that's what's there. This is one that I've mentioned to the body that would be coming and that I was nervous on our general plan that if we left as agricultural, it might leave an unknown what is it that we really want.

So I've mentioned that I knew they were working on it, but nobody's seen anything. And really, if they don't come to us, that's their fault if they're going to know. How do we know they're working on it then? Nobody's seen it.

What was the question? Well, that's – he brought it to us before, and he's like, oh, we need to leave it as agriculture. But, I mean, somebody's seen something. We know that something is happening.

Why don't we just bring it to us and say, let's talk about it? Because it's not a small piece of property. It's huge. And it's going to have an absolute impact on everything around it, depending on how they decide to develop it.

So I just – with the very likelihood of creating schools from it, that's how big it is. So I just – I agree with Craig. I think we need to push them to bring it in. I don't care what stage they're at.

Let's have a chat. Have them come forward in a work session or have them meet with two or three of the mayor and two council members, I think, honestly. Is this all the way from Lone Tree up to Sage Valley? Yes.

That's all their property. Well, I know they own all of that, but the part that's being considered – That's the master plan is the whole property. Okay. Yeah.

The zoning all around that is – And, again, I want to reiterate, I don't think anybody knows what they're planning. It's only been said to the planning commission – sorry, not planning commission – the planning staff that, hey, by the way, we're looking at this area. That means nothing. And so there is no stage of development.

What it is is we know that in their mind they're thinking about something. If they don't collaborate, then they're going to get likely known. I don't think they're as far along as you might think they are. It's up to them.

You know, I mean, I'm not calling everybody saying, hey, by the way, can you come to work session, tell us what you're doing? It's up to them to initiate the call. So maybe we need to train the planning staff, because they're probably sort of at the tip of the spear, is my guess, that if they're hearing stuff like this, that their trained response to these developers would be, hey, have you talked to the city council members yet? Have you sort of floated by them what you're wanting to do?

Have you met with them to see what the city's looking for? Maybe have them sort of plant that bug in the ears of the landowners? And my guess is that is what happens, and they're just not quite there, meaning they're in the very preliminary stages of discussion, but that is how we treat it, is my belief. So why would we be concerned about the agriculture, then?

If they're not very far down the road, why would we even have a concern about agriculture? I just exploded out there as my own personal belief that I think with no direction, there's no direction. And I wanted to indicate exactly that my belief is it should be bigger lots. That way they know what it is that we're looking for up front as they come forward.

If you think that agriculture is fine, then I think that's a fight we're going to have to fight. I'm just going to go one step further. I think what Craig's saying is we need to reach out to the church and say we'd like to talk about this parcel. I mean, the reality is I think that's where we're at.

It's too big to wait for them to come to their own conclusions, work with other entities, school district as an example of that, and make decisions that we're not even, haven't been apprised to, and then we have to live with that decision. Nobody's made a decision. That's my whole point. The church, nobody.

There's no decision in every decision. Jared, I'm not saying that. I'm saying we reach out to the representatives from the church and say we'd like to talk about your piece of property here. Yeah.

I can certainly do that. We actually met with the church today, this afternoon, and had a meeting about other properties, but that's the first I had heard that they were designing, that they were starting to master plan. We'll reach back out to them and request a meeting, or at least request either a work session or request some individual meetings. It might be even easier in a private, like a, not that we're trying to keep something out of the public, but like just the mayor and two council members, because that's easier to brainstorm outside the public eye.

I volunteer as tribute. Thank you for that meeting. Okay. And that's all I had.

I'll turn it over to Mr. Hilton to do the rest. Okay, just real quick. Can we just thank, can we just thank Ben for proactive?

Thank you. Great work. And before we go on, I probably should have done this earlier, but I just hadn't put into motion because I didn't know what it was going to fit. But I meant to mention Zach's birthday today, and our awesome staff brought birthday cake, but I didn't tell everybody to grab one, so Natalie's been over there cutting that for us.

And I'm not a singer, but I know we've got a hard stop in one hour, so I just asked her to cut it, and as we go on, maybe bring a piece up to each one of the council members and the staff, and we'll say happy birthday to Zach. So that's why that's over there. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, everyone, whoever prepared that. We do not need to sing.

We can roll on with parks, have a piece of cake, and continue. Thank you. If you want to bring those up, and we'll just, maybe if we keep our mouths full, we'll likely get through a little bit more. Yeah, I was just going to say good timing, Mayor.

Thanks. I'd prefer to do mine while you guys are all eating. So, good evening. Good afternoon, Council and Mayor.

I'm going to do the parks portion of these projects. I'm going to start with the list of projects that we are currently in, in several different stages, and I want to talk about some of these, just most of these projects will need to roll over into the next budget year. The first one is the trail from Pony Express Parkway to SR73, which is a MAG project that we're receiving funding for. This project goes from Pony Express, basically where the park and ride is located at, and we'll go up and tie in by 73 up by the Scenic Mountain subdivision.

So, we are being held up on funding for this project, it is approved, but they use some of the money that was originally meant to go to this, some federal funding, so they're reallocating some money. So, we're just waiting for the approval on that to move forward. Zach, can I just jump in really quick? I do want to just clarify on that, you're not one with the ranches trail and stuff.

So, that is the estimated cost of the project, but the city's cost will, it's only around 6% or something. Yeah, that we will have to make on that, and we have that portion allocated, I can pull it up, but that is the full estimated project cost. The second one is the observatory, which is, we're still trying to receive more donations for. I do know that staff recently just did a presentation to the county, and I understand that Metta is possibly looking at doing some extra donations.

I just was going to ask, have we reached out to QTS? They're looking for some opportunities to do something in the community, this might be something they're looking for. I do not know. I mean, I know when they very first came, that was one of their objectives, to not just come build the data center, but to actively invest in the community.

This might be a good opportunity as a kickoff for them. Yeah, I don't know that. So, I think where Metta started off in this project, and we're working through the county to try to acquire grant funds right now, we're looking to Metta to finish off this project, and maybe other opportunities for QTS, since this one's kind of there. The third is the Eagle Monument, which is well on its way.

Eagle Mountain staff has already been out there and rebuilt the retaining wall. The contractor has been out there, has poured the footings and the pad. Right now, the schedule date is to have this installed around the end of May. So, this is one project we should be able to complete without rolling over to the next year.

Well, I'll cue it in just real quick. I'll throw out the original estimate was between $40,000 and maybe $50,000. Is this an additional $80,000 or an additional $30,000 or what's the... No, the approved amount is $80,000.

This is what's approved, and it's going to be pretty close to this. Including the budget amendment from before? Because we didn't... No, we never actually allocated or approved any money until the last budget amendment.

And that's when we allocated the $80,000. And that was based off of design that was approved and cost. As well as the retaining wall. So, maybe...

Yes, yes. That's the sign versus the wall that we did there. Yeah, there's... We had to rebuild the retaining wall.

So, it feels like we approved this twice is what I'm getting at. Didn't we already approve this in a budget amendment? It's already out. All these projects that I'm going over right now are already funded projects.

It's just that a good portion of these are going to need to roll over into the 27 year. This one is one we should be able to complete, right? But most of these projects will need to roll over. I think the confusion is because we just have that one header at the top that says additional budget requested.

These projects are already allocated. Yes, yep. There's funding for all these ones that I'm going over first. Zach, timing on the parking lot expansion at Cory Ride?

So, we have... Well... We have designed for the parking lot right now. The goal is to have a contractor and be building that hopefully this summer.

This is a project that will certainly be rolled over into the next year, but we want to start construction on it this season. I'm just wondering, with some of the big events like 4th of July and some of the bigger ones, obviously not Pony Express days, but will we be able to accommodate more people? And that's why I was asking about the time, so... The parking lot won't be finished for those.

It will probably be more likely that we'll have to coordinate with contractors on blackout dates, that they're not allowed to work. And the one before that is actually the festival-filled lights, which is also a quarry ride. We were really trying to have these done for the events this year. It's still a maybe, but not likely.

We're just waiting on materials to have them in place. This one will likely still be done before the end of the budget season, but unfortunately we probably won't have it for the Pony Express days events. The last one on this page is the digital sign, which was approved at the budget amendment as well on the last budget amendment. This one, staff will work with the contractor to come up with what we think is the appropriate design.

And this one will still come back to Council for approval, because I think there still needs to be discussion about the size of the digital sign. Next, we have the cemetery master plan, which we haven't started on yet. This year we took an ambitious goal of doing all master plans. And so this is just the last one that we need to get going on.

So this one will also be one that we'll roll over into the 27. The next one is the city center streetscapes. This is funding that was from the utility cells. And we've pushed this for quite a few years due to construction.

A ton of utilities. There's two fiber lines going down that road right now. I think you should ask that question. The question I just leaned over now, Council Member Clark, is there even still a need to do it?

We're getting ready to rip these out. So to clarify, there are two. The city center streetscapes is the side of the street. There is another $500,000 allocated for the medians, which is a different discussion that we do not.

The medians we should do, the medians we should just draft that as well. Absolutely agree. And that's not on that list for that reason. The streetscape side, which is the shoulder, I think it's time we need to consider doing a bunch of that, especially where we have moved the parade route this year.

I think that means in this next year, we really need to hash out what that's going to look like and try to get that done. I think to your point, this is always a moving target. For instance, the new approval with the commercial project is going to widen that to three lanes. And so, even on the shoulders, I was looking for David because I think a lot of Pawnee Express could be...

He took off. I know he had to leave. But what I would say is this. I mean, my suggestion would be we definitely should focus on those city center streetscapes.

I agree with that 100%. And if we need to pull some of the budget out of those medians, if we need to take that $500,000 and dedicate it to doing more of the city center... And that may be that... I absolutely would be in favor of that.

So, I don't know how everyone else is going to feel about that, but I think we ought to do what we can to doll those things up real quick. And answer, I guess, some of your comment, Mayor. It's obviously something we would work closely with David to, so that we're not just putting it in and tearing it out. Next is the Mountain Ranch Bike Park Edition.

That will... This will need to roll over as well. But the intent on this one is to go out for design. This would be specifically targeting the parcel that we have between Golden Eagle and Ranches Parkway that is underneath the power line corridor to provide, like, the intent is to do, like, some parking, provide a parking spot and do maybe some more, like, beginner-level pump track type of stuff.

And then, lastly, for current projects, we have the Nolan Park improvements where we have money allocated to make some improvements to Nolan Park. You know, we've had a number of people come in and ask about improving this. It could very well. I think some of the intent is to focus around the splash pad as well, because the splash pad is a non-recycling amenity.

That water pretty much is just wasted where our other one is recycled. So, I'm going to loop it, then. Okay. So...

And that... This is just for design and plan? There's not actually anything that's happening with the 750? No.

There's enough there that that would have construction with it, too. I would assume probably not enough. It just depends on what the design is, right? Okay.

Thank you. In fact, this might be the wrong time, but I'm just going to plant this seed. I really would like to have a discussion as a council regarding parks, and what are the... I mean, what are the next targeted...

And you guys probably already know this, and I should know this. What are the next targeted big community or... I always forget the terminology that you use. Yeah, the region or the community-sized parks that we're targeting for improvement with impact fees.

I don't want to have that conversation right now, because I don't know that this is the appropriate time. But I think it would be nice to say... To understand what the planning is, where we're trying to program. This park is next, and this one's next on the list, and this one's next on the list.

I think my next slide will hit that a little bit for you. Look, you anticipated it. Good work. That brings us to some of our requests for the 27 budget.

That we would like to have $150,000 for the Pony Express Regional Park. To do a design for the Pony Express Park, as well as $150,000 for the Silver Lake Community Park. Which is in... It's in Silver Lake.

There's already a portion. I don't know. It's right there by Tickville Wash that kind of includes that L-shape that we could complete that park. We're talking about east of the amphitheater, correct?

For Silver Lake. This is like... No, it's south of the amphitheater. It's down by Tickville Wash, right off of Silver Lake.

I think the road that ties into it is called Silver Parkway. Is this the Woodhaven Park, or is this right? Yeah, it's... I think this is the Woodhaven one, right?

On the east by the elementary school, north of the Wash? It's north, yes. North of the elementary school. It's right on the north side of Tickville Wash, yes.

We have two detention ponds right in the undeveloped area and everything. It kind of makes it an L-shape to complete that park. Do we have a plan to complete the Silver Lake Amphitheater Park? No.

We already had that park designed. Like, we paid for it, and there was a Phase B as part of that. Is that not attainable anymore? Couldn't we just use what was done?

I'd have to look into that. Colby, Curtis, and I were both on the steering committee for that, and I know that we asked them to program that in because it was supposed to be a part of regional connectivity with the trails along Tickville Wash, too, and that was all part of the design. I'll have to look into that. Okay.

And lastly is the property acquisition, which is actually not an expenditure for the next year, but it's just allocating those funds. We did an additional $1 million last year with the intent that in 2028 that we have the $3 million to actually go out and acquire land to do some improvements on some of our bigger parks. We've kind of focused on this $3 million in 2028 with the mindset of doing another quad for baseball. So I'm still concerned about, and I know we've talked about this briefly in the past, but the areas in city center where there's all those undeveloped open space areas, and it seems like we've got to get that on the plan somewhere because it seems to me like there's still no plan, right?

And how long is there going to be no plan for those areas? I think that goes to Council Member Wright's point about having a discussion about what's the next thing that we're going to do and what we're going to prioritize because I feel like the list that we have right here are all the things that we decided already to program and that they were approved way prior to this and that they're cleaning those things up and wrapping those up and now it's on us to have a meeting specifically about programming and planning the rest of it. And I know it's just another plan, but to me, you know, in the next council meeting, we'll be bringing back our parks, trails, and open space master plan that played kind of the first role in that, and identifying our open space and identifying what is undeveloped because that's really what you're referring to is the undeveloped areas and what we do with those. But that master plan is a bit of a higher level.

And I think to me, the next step is identifying those undeveloped areas and having an additional plan of what identifies those, right? What are key components in those that are they things we want to develop? What do they look like? Are they land disposal?

Are they a hybrid of both, right? We've done those even. But to me, I think that's the next step after the parks, trails, and open space master plan is actually having a plan specific to the undeveloped. I feel like we need to have three separate meetings.

One, that we talk about trails. That needs to be a comprehensive discussion about what we want our trails to be. We probably need to treat it the same way that we treat our roads, have level of trails with cutouts of exactly what that's going to look like. So it's going to be an eight-foot or it's going to be a ten-foot.

It's going to be asphalt and it's going to have this on either side of it. When we go to the next level of trail, it'll be this. And then we need to do the same thing with our parks. We need to literally bring in our regional parks and go through each of those steps and say, okay, what is our plan with this?

What kind of funding mechanisms do we need to put in place? So we're, to Craig's point, we're not just kicking them down the road. And then we need to have one that's about the land that we own that is open space that is not improved and have a discussion about how we're going to move forward with it. Are we going to do something with it?

Are we going to sit on it for a while? Or do we need to dispose of this property with a plan of disposal that makes it beneficial to the community? But I think there's not enough time to have all three of those discussions in one meeting. They need to be separated and then we need to have a discussion about a financial plan to deal with those things, in my opinion.

I actually support doing it that way. I think sometimes we try to fit too much into a meeting and Councilmember Rowan, I think that's a perfect plan. You're not, just to clarify, you're not referring to the master plan that's coming back. I'm talking about the funding mechanism to take care of all three of those things.

Then your master plan actually makes sense because we have a plan in place to move forward with what that is. And yes, there's going to be some additional elements to that that aren't in the master plan, especially if we're doing cutaways of trails. You know what section I'm talking about in the streets where it shows kind of the, if I'm looking down the road for a major collector, minor collector, arterial, this is the width of each of the roads. It'll have a median or not have a median.

This is how much curb and gutter, here's the sidewalk and here's what's on the side. I think we need to get to that level with our trails so that it's very clear. And then our map needs to represent, when we're looking at it by color, it's an eight-foot asphalt path. This is the main vein that everything else will come off of and the next level will be a smaller level of trail system.

Maybe it's just dirt. But that way it's at least clear to us how we're maintaining them and where we need to be spending our focus of time and money on. I personally struggle when I see that we've got $3 million allocated for purchase when we have so much land that we could spend that $3 million on developing what we already have. So just to be clear real quick too, that is impact fee money.

So it's not like we can take that money to go just develop any, it looks like Kimberly's. And I think when you're talking too about the plan and what you're missing a little bit is we currently have the Parks and Trails Impact Fee Facilities Plan, right? So I believe that the first phase was working on the Master Plan. Is that kind of how they work?

You do your Master Plan. Then from your Master Plan, you move into the Impact Fee Facilities Plan and then you move into the Impact Fee IFA, which is our funding source. So I believe all that is tracking forward, but I think what it is is that we've got to get through the Master Plan in order to move to the next phase, which starts to get more granular. So that Master Plan is that higher level.

Then we're going to get the IFFP that's going to get more granular. And then from there, it converts to how much is this going to cost and we have this funding mechanism that comes into place for the Impact Fee and what we're going to try to spend. Yeah, and there's going to be some restrictions on what you can spend in the Impact Fee for parks, too, based off of acreage. So I think this is a good opportunity to just plant this seed.

We can look at every single detail of every trail, but one of the reasons some of our citizen boards haven't worked in the past and I've sat on almost every one of them is because they don't have a specific task. I think this is one of those areas that specifically we could task with the Community Services Board to do most of what you're talking about first and then get in. And I agree the funding part is probably the next step. But I think the first task that we as a body would want to say, you know, I want the direction to come from the body is, hey, go identify.

And I know Zach and I, even on Facebook, had some conversation. Identify all of our parks. Prioritize which ones are the most important. Our trails, which ones are the most impactful, you know, in order.

And then we can start chipping away some funding. But to me, that whole process, before we even start having multiple meetings, is let's empower that board to locate every single park and trail, prioritize each one, and then come to us with an idea and then we can start allocating money as it comes in. And expand on that idea if you wish. But I would say that's where we could start and just empower them to do that before we go even another step forward on what you're saying is the plan, right?

Is that just the idea that I've had with the board? I think Steve and I have talked and Zach and I for sure. Is that what you guys want to do or a different direction? I think you have to have instruction first for them to be able to act on.

So I think the community services board is exactly who should be doing it, but we need to give them clear direction on what to do. And they can bring that information back to us and we can move forward with that. But I think the master plan is only as good as your ability to understand what it is and what its purpose is. If it's just to show us what we have, it's not really a plan.

It's a map. And I think that we need to have something in place to set a financial plan in that master plan of how we're going to move through each of those trails, parks, starting from regional parks being the most important that we've identified. But there's a lot of parks that we have half finished that need to be finished. As part of that, we also need to talk about the paths that run along the right-of-ways that we haven't completed.

So, I mean, there's some broader discussions, but you can't eat the whole elephant at one time. So, it's better to break it apart and say, this discussion is going to be about parks. This discussion is going to be about our open space. This one's going to be about our trails.

We can give instruction at that point for the community services to gather the information, bring their ideas back, and then we can move on to those things. Okay. I agree. I think we're meeting with the community services board tomorrow.

We've got a lot to get incepted and get everything rolling, but that's certainly a task they can take on. I commented on Facebook that we have our own asphalt machine, and it's like having a baby grand piano, but you never play it. I want to name that thing baby grand, and I want to see it going 365. So, just to touch on that, right?

Well, and this is, because we do do a lot of projects, and we do use our paver a lot, but this is also the streets department does the paving. So, when we're committing to doing trailways and parking lots and things like that, being aware that we're using up a department that has their own duties that's budgeted for something else, right? It isn't like anyone can just put jump on a paver. For employees, that's what it sounds like.

They're building a trailhead right now, right, which is grant money that we received, that basically we're building a parking lot and parking areas and a turnaround that's pavement and concrete, but it's the streets department building it. And we use these a lot in places where we receive funding just so that we can maximize that money instead of bidding it out. Those are one of the ones we really like to do in-house. So, we can maximize those free dollars.

And just to clarify, in your presentation, the projects that you're putting forward, those are coming from the general fund, you're not anticipating any wrap tax dollars for these projects? No, not on these. Okay. I just want to clarify.

No. And I would just add one thing as far as when we talk about adding these trails and things like that, just a friendly reminder, and I know we talked about it a little bit, is just remembering that it's, when we develop these areas and we add trails and we add things like this, it's a two-fold expenditure, right? It could cost money. We can't just go out and build them and then cheer and walk away.

Like, we need to be prepared to have a level of service that costs money to maintain those too, whether it's trees or it's trails or it's undeveloped open space. These are all things we have to, if we're going to build them, we have to commit to maintaining them. So, agreed. Just for a little clarity, Zach, you said 365 paving can only happen early in the summer.

It has a certain temperature. We're double-timing in the summer. Okay. Fair enough.

Ground the clock in. But that's, it does get, that thing gets used. It does. And like I say, just a reminder, right?

It is a whole different department that's capable of doing that, that we have to be prepared to take away from them doing maintenance on roadways. So, yep. And then just to wrap, I wanted to make sure, and it's not necessarily for this because I know we're tight on time, but is that something that we wanted to, I'm not sure if we were saying the same thing, are we going to task the Citizen Board, Community Services Board to identify those projects and prioritize them as far as a need? No.

Explain to me what I have some thoughts about that, Mayor. I don't think, I don't think that the Citizen Board should be prioritizing that. I think they can make a recommendation regarding prioritization if they'd like, but what I'd like to see them do is to identify the holes in each of those individual networks and to identify where we're lacking and where they'd like to see some emphasis placed and then allow the council to take a look at that and prioritize it because we're going to have to prioritize it based on budget constraints, whether there's impact fees that are available, whether it's grant money that's available, whether we're going to use parks, wrap tax money. So, I think the prioritization needs to land with the council, but I would love...

So, I said that... I used a bad word. I'm sorry, because you and I are saying the same thing. I'm not sure.

I'm asking what is their task? And if that is to identify the park and put into an order, without using the word prioritize, some needs of their recommendation, and then the council would obviously have to look at that. Is that the right task? Yep.

I think in a lot of ways, the difference, what I hear Council Member Wright saying, is to really take stock of something or to inventory what is deficient and what needs improvement, not prioritizing what needs improvement. Agreed. It needs to just be what needs to be done, and then we can give priority for them to go back and evaluate. And there's plenty for them to assess.

So, I was trying to facilitate a project for them based on Craig's question. Zach and Melissa will be there tomorrow. Are you in agreeance and understand what the will of the body is based on Craig's original question? Identify the gaps that exist in the current system that we have.

And making a list of future needs. Or something else in open space. Yeah, but I think each one of those has its own individual gaps, right? What is the gap?

I mean, what I would start with is, what are the gaps in the trails? What are the gaps in our parks? Where are we missing a level of service? I think we start with the most expensive one first.

Yeah, it's got to be the parks. That's an asset that's declining if we don't do something about them to improve them. So, to me, what is the thing that's the most treasured thing first? It's got to be parks, seconds, trails, open spaces, and improved.

That's got to be probably last. But I think, yeah, sorry. I agree with you, Council Member Wood. I think that there is going to be some prioritization that has to happen there.

But my personal feeling is, I think they need to be working on at least those two, and perhaps all three simultaneously. I'm just recognizing that there are gaps in every one of those areas, and then we're going to have to juggle which ones we're going to get to first. I think you've got seven people. Let me come into subcommittees then.

There's plenty of people to take on some tasks to go through those things. I think we need to give them a level of creativity, though. I'd like to ask them to think creatively and bring us things that are thinking outside the box and not feel like that they're just doing objective assignments, but they can be very creative as well and bring us ideas. I agree that that eventually needs to be part of the process, but before anybody can get creative about anything, I feel like we have to look at what we're deficient in.

And I feel like that's what I hear Council Member Wright saying and Wood as well. And I think Zach said, yes, we're going to have them do kind of an assessment of it. But I think we need to look at what's deficient, how we're going to fund that, and then give them the opportunity. Okay, we want your creative ideas for this park or this trail.

But I, yeah, go ahead. I just want to get something that I have been thinking about that I would love the Council's input. I'm sorry, Zach, to get it. Do you have more slides?

No, I'm done. Oh, you're done? I'm just making sure there's no questions for me. We're off on a tangent.

We're like down the rabbit hole going somewhere else for a second. But the question that I wanted to ask for the Council, coming back to Council Member Whiting's comment about them having creativity, when we look at expenses, we could just save the money and compound it and grow it and create a money printing machine over time. We could use it to fund people's salaries to go out and take care of the fields, and then you eat up that perpetually, that fund, every year. You know, if you hire somebody, let's say $70,000, and you bring in $600,000, there's 10% of your budget.

Or we could look at one-time big expenses like putting in a trail. You have to maintain it, but maybe not as much as putting the thing in initially. And so I'm curious on the Council's thoughts around giving them a little bit of creativity in these areas. Are we looking for, do we want to have a policy where we're spending, you know, money comes in and then it goes back out?

Are we looking to keep some of it aside? Are we looking for one-time expenses? Are we trying to avoid those expenses that are recurring heavy expenses year to year? Does that make sense?

I think the financial side of it is really something that we, as the budget makers, really have to come to terms with. I think their role is to bring us deficiencies and when assigned, bring us ideas to make those deficiencies better or to dream big and have something different. And I feel like that dollar question and prioritizing all of that stuff takes place in the three meetings that Council Member Wood spoke about. Maybe one other thing to be thinking about too is there are some different categories in each of those, right?

perhaps we're underfunding our maintenance. That's part of the problem is that we're not being able to keep up with it because we're either undermanned or underfunded or both. And then if we're talking about the completion of a park, that's a whole separate issue and a different funding mechanism. There's a design element that has to come into part of that.

to Jared's point about the time of the year. If we're talking about trails and laying asphalt, that has to follow within a certain period of time which is going to be right around the budget time that it completes and we're fighting to get every other project done at the same time. So prioritization has to be part of that as well. Yeah, I'll share a couple thoughts with you, Zach.

I mean, it really comes down to the funding mechanism and how you choose to use it because impact fees have to be spent in six years. They have to be spent on those things that you're identified in the IFFP and the IFA. I mean, you can't just willy-nilly appropriate those funds. You have to already pre-appropriate them as you're collecting them.

So you're collecting them in order to accomplish and pay for those projects in a six-year time frame. I mean, the wrap tax, if we're going to extract that through the sales tax use, which the citizens said they're happy to see us do it, in my opinion, I feel like we need to expend those resources on behalf of the citizens in a timely manner so that we're not dealing with a deflation of that dollar that we've exacted as a tax through a sales tax exaction. And so I think it needs to be put to community use. And so I understand your question about, well, should we just invest it and we're perpetually pulling interest off of that?

There may be a case where that could be made, but that's a pretty hard thing for me because I would just as soon leave it in the citizens' pocket as to take it and invest it on their behalf. I think there's things that government should be doing and there's things that government should not be doing. That's good feedback. The other thing, you know, if you take those funds, wrap tax dollars, and you fund salaries with that, you now create a perpetual need for that resource, which it will expire in 10 years.

I'm more just trying to get the councils where everybody's at. So as we're meeting with them and laying it out, so Council Member Wright, what I just heard you say is let's spend it. Let's put it to use in some kind of, wherever we're deficient, right? I think we should put it to public use.

If the public is going to contribute it, we ought to put it to public use in a timely manner. I mean, we're looking at funds that we've been sitting on. I don't know how long ago the utility sales happened, but we still have money in accounts that hasn't been spent that is worth half what it was when it was put in those accounts. Now, it's drawn some interest, so it's earned something, but it certainly has been more devalued in my estimation than if we had taken that money, someone had taken that money and appropriated it to something that benefited the public.

I think one question that I would ask Council to weigh in on is do we want to prioritize bringing our amenities that we have up to where they should be? I have a lot of concerns and I've heard from a lot of residents about how bad our field space is and how it's hard, hard mud basically with little patches of grass and kids are getting hurt on it and stuff like that. So like, whether it's so that we can put additional funds into our existing amenities or continue to create amenities that maybe we're underfunding maintenance for, I think that needs to be part of the conversation that we're having too. Don't you think the Community Service Board can help us recognize that?

I mean, their input, everything's going to be invaluable. Because they're going to help us understand what the community, I believe, really, really values. Council Member Clark, to your question, I think if they're asked to evaluate those things and say, look, where do you think these things are best, these resources are best placed? Is it in field improvement?

Or is it in making some trail connections that don't exist today? What is it that you see will bring the greatest value to the community in the short term and long term? What would you like to see happen? There's never enough money in government to do all of the things that we would like to do.

And that's why, Zach, it's really hard for me to say, and I'm a saver. Stick it away for a rainy day. I live on a ton less than what I generate. It's just my nature to do that and to compound interest.

I like it. Those who understand it earn it and those who don't pay it. And so I see the value in that, but in the circumstance that we find ourselves today, I just, I don't think that's the right course of action for the citizens. Steve's got some thoughts.

No, I'm, he's next. So yeah, we've got the next portion. We're going to go, if we're good with Zach on that, we'll move on if there's no other questions. Oh, we can read that.

And the only thing I'll say to that is I'm excited to meet with the Community Services Board tomorrow and we'll give them, we won't have a lot of time to dive into details on that, but we can give them an overview and some direction and then request that they go back and think through and bring back ideas and come back to you with parks, trails, open space, recreation. The next meeting following that, I think we're going to talk more about the RAP tax and that's where we can dive into more of those details. Well, just quickly too, I think they're also tasked with the Memorial Day program that's coming right up, right? So, I mean, that's going to be one of their first jobs.

That's in a month. It's a little less than a month. We're going to talk about the Memorial Day and Pony Express days immediately because those are two that are coming up fast and then give them an overview of several other, of all the focus areas that they'll be tasked with and then give some assignments and I'm excited. We'll have some built-in subcommittees basically as volunteers that they can help with our various projects and, yep.

Okay. So, next is facilities. This isn't really me, but the only facility that we have planned right now for this next fiscal year is the wastewater treatment plant admin building. Can you teach other departments how to budget like that?

Right. I don't know if, Ben, if you have anything to say about that or anything to expound on. Sure, I can share just a little bit and that's mostly what Brad has sent me as far as the specifics on it. It's right now what's being planned is a 21,000 square foot office building with 16 office spaces and 22 cubicle spaces in that new admin building and we're going through the value engineering with the design right now with our engineering firm.

Okay. Any questions about facilities? We'll jump over to this and then if you do then we can go back but these are just what we're calling administration projects but just because they don't fit within any of the specific departments necessarily. So specifically for the 2027 budget we've proposed 500,000 for the civic campus and that's really the first phase after the master, the downtown master plan that we did the next step would be you know Council Member Whiting Mayor Gray and Evan and I talked with an architect down in St.

George to get some ideas on okay what really is the next step if we're not dead set on we have the funding ready to go build City Hall how can we get going and not just wait for that and so they really suggested concept architecture programming that's that's the interior use of the building and all the sizing and everything and a feasibility portion to that and we can also add you know utilities maybe some utility designs on the off-site utilities as well so that's to get us moving on the civic campus land acquisition we're adding we're proposing two and a half million to go for land acquisition and that's some of that is property that the council has somewhat recently asked us to look into and some of that is up near the property that we purchased for the public future satellite public works campus there's additional property there that's possible and then other property that we may need for future facilities for the city and then we're putting one million dollars in for relocation of the rodeo grounds of course there's been talk of partnering with the ACUB army compatible use buffer program they have several other names as well sentinel landscape and our portion would be approximately a million dollars if we're able to tap in and use ACUB funding and sentinel landscape funding for that so we put that in there and then this last one is design and like initial design feasibility for a field house ice rink offices for what in the future would be community services but could be public safety offices in the meantime we've talked about that idea at least at the visioning meeting that we had whenever that was a while back in the winter time and then Kimberly's probably told you I'm sure that we're working towards a five year plan for our capital projects and we're not quite there yet but we're so we do have like on these that have a phase one or a phase two and we're showing in 2028 or 2029 a lot more funding for actual construction but we're today we're just showing you the 2027 proposed budget any questions on these projects or any other others that you think should fit within this is the intent that a field house and ice rink and offices be paid for with RAP funds I think the idea is we could use various sources so the county has some funding available through TRCC funds Ryan Smith has some funding available for ice rinks the state has some grant opportunities as well certainly we could look at RAP tax funding for a portion of it for something like this we probably end up doing some sort of bond and then using some RAP tax funding as well as other funding maybe park impact fees as well to help pay the bond each year at one point we had talked about kind of doing an assessment with our survey company that does the surveys for us and asking the residents what they want for recreation and park programming and different things like that and I know we haven't done that yet but part of me feels like before we put a chunk of money into design for something we should find out if this is what the residents want in a scientific way not just anecdotally what we've heard in passing so and maybe maybe I'm the only one that feels that way but I think as we look to design and different things like that it would be useful to know what our residents actually want and I know that we started not me but we someone here started talking with On Point Insights our survey group about that and I think it was either put on hold or anyway those conversations started so we can certainly go back and start doing that but if that's the desire of the council is to do a survey related to that specifically I want to make sure I leave enough time for Kimberly to wrap us up with a few things I'll just make sure that we're all on the same page here because I feel like there's a little unrest on maybe this entire page but I'll start at the bottom because really this started with the ice rink and it's because there's a large chunk of money and I know I've had conversations with most of you that could pay for depending on what this looks like a lot of this so we can go ask the residents if they don't want a free gift or if they do want a free gift I guess is kind of my question obviously depending on the size we would upsize it and that's where the bond would come in but at least one sheet of ice and probably some extra you'd have to fill me in because I haven't heard for quite a while where that's at but the only reason this was brought forward is because there's an opportunity to do that and if we're not interested in the ice rink part of this I say scrap the whole thing and save Steve and I a bunch of time so do we want to pursue what we've talked about or no can you the ice rink when you say it's a free gift from Ryan Smith I'm assuming is a half a million dollars no can you can you just this has been talked about for the last couple months I was in a meeting I believe at the state I don't really remember specifically when when Commissioner Beltran said hey we need to put an ice rink somewhere I can get X amount of dollars from the state X amount of dollars from Ryan Smith X amount of dollars from this the tax the the TRCC yeah the TRCC funds which is the it's the transient room tax basically that's used the room tax that's used for recreation to the tune of seven to nine million dollars is what they're offering contributed from those parties I think the one sheet of ice was somewhere between nine and eleven total if we went to two or three sheets it could be Steve's been looking at this but this is stuff that we've been talking about for the last couple months so now we're at a point where do we want to look into this or let's just pull the plug because there's about seven to nine million dollars floating out there that we could get our hands on if you're interested if not by all means just an idea so I've seen that same offer given to Lehigh and Saratoga Springs how do we get claimed to that because I've seen that from both councils and mayors and the other municipalities it's been offered to Orem it's been offered to Spanish Fork it's been offered to every single place in the county and none of them want it and I said to Skyler well nobody's offered that to us we reached out that's when I started the conversation with the council and said is this something you want us to look into and that's where it was at so so what do we need to do to say yes to them I guess and then for them to say okay it's yours well right now it's down to two people according to what I've heard it's Orem and us they're kind of racing to this and I think Steve maybe you could address a little bit more I think that's what the $30,000 is if we can say yeah we want it and here's our design and this is what we're going to do I think we'd get allocated the money is that am I close I don't know what I don't know the total amount of funding that's available he's kind of danced around with that with me I think it's less than what he's saying than what I've heard but he did tell me the long kind of the longer you wait the more money is available through the TRCC funds those transit room taxes at the county but his original proposal to us at least when he talked with me was you should do one ice sheet out there in Eagle Mountain and then they were trying to get more somewhere else like in Orem so under that scenario it was going to be two million dollars to each municipality that would do one sheet and he was kind of trying to get everybody to do it I think everybody except Warren and us basically pulled the plug Lehigh said no Saratoga never even entertained it they don't want it if the county would rather be central between the Salt Lake ice sheet and the Provo ice sheet which makes more sense to be Lehigh Saratoga Mountain that's what they've been saying if we're in competition there might be a chance they split that we get four million each you know what do we have to put up I guess is what I'm trying to understand well if there's if they're I'm blind yeah we're showing well we're showing there about eleven million dollars the estimate that Commissioner Beltran had was about ten million dollar cost for a one a single sheet a double sheet was somewhere in the sixteen to eighteen million dollar range and when you say sheet we're talking rinks like one full rink yep I know he calls it a shink but a hockey rink or a yep okay yeah and so so if you're asking how much we would have to put up let's say we do a single rink that's about ten million dollars if if they're only giving us two to three million dollars from the county there's about a half a million or so from Ryan Smith per sheet is what I've heard but it could be more and then from the state so I think we could get half or or so of that single sheet now I don't know if you've heard differently mayor but to me I was interested in okay if we're gonna get some funding maybe half of the funding for an ice sheet then why not build something additional with it as well a gymnasium field house whatever you want to call it attached to that for economy of scale build it all all at once with the offices and everything but then we're talking then we're talking maybe I don't know fifteen to twenty million cost for all that maybe twenty five I don't know what the what would the field house that's what would be determined like what would go in there you're talking about basketball courts yeah I call it a field house but our biggest need probably is basketball okay because the schools we rent all the schools and some schools won't rent to the city yeah and junior jazz is a ton of kids but there's opportunity to do other indoor sports volleyball indoor soccer I think that would be pickleball yeah I think I like the direction where this is going so because originally I think we were thinking field house with offices was the original idea now you're thinking okay let's combine it together field house ice rink offices and that's beginning to make more sense to me it's basic I mean I don't know we want to go there it's not a full rec center it's something different right and it's it's a it does meet part of those needs part of it we need to do things that are unique in Eagle Mountain and an ice rink would make us unique in Eagle Mountain so to bring that back that's why there's $30,000 in there to figure out what that is are you in favor of that that's really the question that you're trying to get answered right yes because if we're we don't want any of it yes pull the plug because I don't want to waste time even looking at it anybody else yes there's two yeses yes sure so it's going to cost us $30,000 that's an estimate to look into feasibility it's very rare that we have other entities willing to match dollars I mean I've worked in the retirement space where I always tell people take the free money when you can I just think we need to be considerate I'm sorry go on I was going to say I just think we need to be considerate about how we're funding things and getting getting to our our half so and as far as our half goes we can certainly approach big companies and other other potential donors as well and try to get and don't let this get lost on you ongoing expenses will be ours according to Skyler as far as the ice sheet it should pay for itself I'm just saying don't let it get lost yeah don't let it get lost on you the ongoing expenses will be ours I think to your point Councilmember Huish is we need to be mindful where that rest of the money is coming from because $2 million to like a $20 million or even a $10 million isn't really a match and $2 million seems very shaky at this point because it does not feel like the numbers of what's available is really clear or that we have access to that money so yeah I'm willing to dig into it and find out what is possible but I think in the meantime we really need to figure out where these funds are coming from because it would be a huge travesty to me if we built a field house so that it would have field space but our fields that we literally have already aren't in playable condition and I want us to keep that in mind too so one of the things that I would suggest if you guys agree is make sure before we spend that $30,000 that we get a commitment from the county on yes we have an approval but I want to know are you committed because I'm going to tell you I have personally been putting a lot of pressure on Skyler saying are you going to keep flirting with us or are you going to go with us because if you're going to sit and string me along because you'd rather it be in Lehigh then I'm out and so I've been telling him that all along that commit to us and he told me that he was going to call Steve which I don't know if that's happened but I have been putting a ton of pressure that we want the full match which like I say is between seven and nine if he's going to tell us that oh we're going to split with Orem then I don't know that I'm as interested and I don't want to spend the $30,000 if we're not committed that we're the chosen city for instance so I think that's what that I would are you saying that you think we ought to put a condition on that that we're willing to entertain it if we get a letter of commitment from the county to give us the full funding that they have available I think some sort of a commitment at least which would encourage you guys to start pressuring as well I've been pretty hard on the county to make sure that what are we doing and I don't know if you have greater insight since then but I don't you know he texted me we texted a couple of times somewhat recently but that's all Do you know if Orem is conducting a feasibility study? I don't know the level that they're going to I know they were interested according to that question and I'll tell you a little more insight in a few minutes and then to go back to that list real quick so I know we got a I think Kimberly only is here to answer questions I can't go back to it but it's because we're on a different computer now one I don't know anything about and I just want everybody who may watch this that's not driven by me but if Brett wants to I'm working on that one I mean I think I've had some conversations with individual council members Ben and I met with a couple of representatives from different entities and I think we're going to be able to pull pull some additional resourcing from a couple of different entities to help us perhaps relocate that so I'll talk to each of you offline give you maybe an update on those conversations what was the other there's the rodeo the ice sheet and the yeah the civic civic campus field house ice rink rodeo and the civic campus is one that Craig and I went to dinner while we were in St. George I thought we could get started with was it only $50,000 so the $500,000 it's $500 but yeah we could we could certainly reduce that I think we talked down in St. George about $50,000 and I think we could probably increase that a bit to expand and do utility concept and a little bit more but they said $50,000 they could do this is just an example not that we're going with this group necessarily but $50,000 could get the programming and a concept architectural design and the reason for that so you understand is that because we need to have something that everyone can bid apples to apples so we're going to start with one company to give us you know an idea of what the civic campus looks like and then they may re-bid it or someone else may bid it but we want them bidding apples to apples what this looks like is that a fair statement yeah and we don't want to dive in and do a full architectural and get a CMGC on board and then not have the funding to build it for two or three years but at the same token I'm wondering if the $500,000 is in order to to also because it will happen within the year I suppose it will start the design as well right we'll actually go to bid and then award we certainly could do that is that what the full $500,000 is for and if you didn't use it all on studies and whatnot you could use it for infrastructure as we're doing Mid Valley Road to be able to put sub-ins and all that type of thing so that we're more prepared so it's more or less just kind of putting a little bit more money aside so that we can move the City Hall project forward correct is that and we could we could do some site prep if needed after after we get some initial concepts done any question if there's nothing else I think we're good to go to Kimberly right and mine is it is a continuation and a recap and we're out of time so what I wanted just let you know because this was the kind of that beginning of funding I'm going to send this sheet out so that you can look at what kind of these future costs are for the next five years that we're kind of anticipating with some of these projects okay and then with that you'll get I just have to find my mouse we're going to need to have maybe a conversation that we can continue on like the agenda and stuff like that but this is our programming that we have for the utility cell proceeds so everything that we have committed we already talked about on those plans that were there for projects and stuff but what we do have still is $3 million that's currently not committed to anything on the list if it says committed it it means that it has been committed towards that purpose but nothing has necessarily been started with it it's not currently in a budget anywhere it is just kind of committed for that particular purchase purpose the ones that say assigned mean that they are currently funded in this year's budget for 2026 of that those resources when you guys were talking a little bit about your utility cell proceeds so $13 million is originally what came in when that happened and 100% of those funds were programmed out at that time most of it most of it happened what you had was some big chunks that didn't happen one of them was originally there was $2.6 million that was committed and assigned towards a rec center of which later the council again there had been decisions that had happened from 2015 forward to not really move forward with that at that time so that money got pulled back in and that's part of what makes up that unassigned funds that you have we had some other programming where we tried to do some match funds for neighborhood parks where we could try and say if they were able to gather money to improve the amenities at their neighborhood park then maybe the city could do a match it wasn't able to really progress and move forward the money that came back from that was about $900,000 that was there so those are some of those bigger ticket items that came back to make up what is unassigned at this point that you have for there so as part of the conversation when you're looking at what are these things that we have what do we want to do what are the connectivity things you want with trails or with those open space lands that we have there's a lot of things that really are on the list a lot of things we've talked about but this is money from that utility cell proceeds that is currently uncommitted or unassigned to a project that's supposed to be moving forward that we would want to keep in mind then in fund 47 which is our capital project fund part of it makes up this but we also have about $8.4 million that's over there that is currently not committed or assigned to a project now of the list that we showed just a minute ago let me get this one can you restate that again we have $8 million in our capital fund project that's not currently assigned or committed don't we have to assign it every year so what it was let me pull over is that as we have projects that finish off right and that money gets re-released and stuff so right now I know that's really super tiny and we don't have a lot of time to dig into it but we have this $8.3 million that is not currently committed towards a project that we would want to look at and and then there are some where we have funding that is currently committed that it hasn't moved forward I think the only one let me think if I've got that one up there maybe not we have this and Jeff Weber isn't here to be able to kind of state to that but like for example we have a million dollars roughly that we've been carrying forward for a number of years because we had this project out at the public works yard where we really wanted to get this paving done and be able to handle some of the drainage issues and at the time when this project came forward I think originally it was like $1.2 million and it included the fuel storage tank the council asked us to hold off on doing the paving and the improvements to the yard until a facilities master plan could come out that we could look at what we might use that land for so that we weren't paving and then digging things back up so we moved forward with the council's approval and we put in that diesel storage tank but we have a million dollars that's committed towards doing those grounds improvements and I know it's something that Jeff would love to be able to see us move forward with and be able to address some of those needs that's probably the only project out there that's really been hanging on there on this side and doesn't have any traction that we either need the council to say yes move forward or that you want us to uncommit those funds you know for another purpose or something like that and then we can talk about you know our fund balance levels and things so what will happen is we're just going to send you that five-year list of those what we call like our general capital project items where you're looking to say okay what money do we have available and in this particular area we want you not to just be focused necessarily on 2027 because this is a resource that you don't the only way to add money to fund for these projects is to have extra money in the general fund that's where this money comes from and so as you know where we're at we don't have extra money that we're pumping over okay and so that's why we wanted to make sure you're looking at as things are moving down the pipe of what resources are there and that is also kind of part of that conversation of recognizing why we want to be able to generate excess reserves in the general fund because that would be transferred over to help fund these capital projects that the city has that don't have impact fees and other resources that can be utilized for that purpose these are those kind of quality of life type things that we're starting to experience in our community so with that I know that we do need to close so I'm going to end what I have to say but we'll continue this conversation at the I'll make sure I'll add an item to the next council meeting for next week at the end too to continue some budget conversation about this so is there any quick questions for Kimberly or are we good with that okay the just for point of information I'm going to announce this and I think Brett's got a motion but we will adjourn this meeting from the hallway basically because of planning commission there are some closed session items that we did want to talk about if you guys are open to that so once we finish the closed session we will adjourn from out there so with that explanation I'm open to a motion Mayor I move that we adjourn into a closed session for the purpose of discussing items pursuant to section 52-4-205 subset 1 of the Utah Code annotated second okay we have a motion by council member Wright and a second by council member Wood and we'll start the vote with council member Huish yes council member Wood yeah council member White yes council member Wright yes council member Clark yes okay we'll move into closed session and we will adjourn from there