Transcript — Eagle Mountain City Council, 15 September 2026

Speaker A: Okay, and we're recording. All right, it is 4:01 on September 15th, and we will call this work session to order. I want to start off by excusing Zach. He had some other obligations today. today, Councilmember Huish. And just make sure— is Councilmember Wood online? Okay, and Councilmember Wood is also online. So glad you could join us. And, uh, we'll start right off with the first item, 1A, discussion for transmission lines. And, um, Brandon?

Speaker B: Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Um, I think I don't need to belabor Kind of the background on this, we know there's, we know about the transmission line project that goes from Spanish Fork Canyon to the Mercer Substation. We, you can see the preferred route, even zooming in a little bit better, you can see it runs here in the yellow, and that takes us right through our ag zone. So we came to you a couple months ago to get council's feedback and see how you wanted us to handle— we've got this project, this transmission line project, we've got data centers that need power, and so we're like, how do we— how should we handle this situation? We need transmission lines to go through that area, even though transmission lines aren't allowed in the ag zone. So the— we were tasked, staff was, to prepare an overlay zone. So we were going to start working on that and then found out that Spanish Fork City had went through a similar process of actually establishing an overlay zone for the same purpose to give them control of where that transmission line Would go through their city, and then I talked. I spoke with their community development director to find out kind of some background of why they did the overlay zone, and then found out that they repealed that overlay zone or abandoned it. You know, several months later. So long story short, what it came down to was there's a. There's state requirements in the way that that really are a little bit of a challenge to work with, and so that's from what I gathered from Spanish Fork. My discussion with Spanish Fork City is they became more aware of the state code requirements related to cities and and the location permitting the and and having a say in the the location of transmission lines. And yes, there is an ability for local municipalities to have— to be able to permit these and place conditions on them. But the— it looks like one of the big keys here is providing safe, reliable, Excuse me, safe, reliable, and adequate service to customers. So, like it says here in 54-14-201, if otherwise authorized by law, local government may require or condition the construction of a facility in any manner if the requirement or condition doesn't impair the ability of the public utility to provide safe, reliable, adequate service to its customers. So we have the ability— what it really comes down to is oftentimes cities end up having to pay the actual excess cost. There's whatever— if our requirements cost the utility additional money, We have to pay for it oftentimes. Now there are some ways that that doesn't happen. There is a board, and I'll get to that in a second, but oftentimes it appears that we end up paying what the, again, the code, the state code calls actual excess cost. There's a process that cities can You can go through this process with the utility and have them give you the estimate, give you an estimate of how much it's gonna cost, and you can ask for competitive bids. But ultimately, it comes down to this. Once those actual excess costs are known and there isn't, like it says in A and B, the Utility Commission or the Utility Facility Review Board doesn't intervene in some fashion to absolve the city from having to pay, then we end up paying the excess costs. So there's your definition of actual excess cost. It can even include right-of-ways, you can see on the screen there. This chat, it's sub— or Section 2 of 5414 talks, kind of lays the groundwork for cities and how they can interact in this process of requiring conditions and so forth and permitting these transmission lines. Last, the last bit of language there, you can read that there. Any requirement or condition in any permit, authorization, approval, or exception that imposes an actual cost shall be considered waived. You basically have 30 days to, if you're required to pay, you have to make that payment within 30 days before the construction of the facility to avoid— anyway, if you don't pay it in a timely fashion, then your right to actually have a say actually is waived. So there is a board, like I said, the board of The Utility Facility Review Board. It is your 3 utility commissioners plus 2 other members. I think the utility company and then city gets to choose somebody from a group of people at the state government level to participate in the process. And they'll hear disputes between utilities and cities basically about you know, excess cost questions and so forth. So I just want you to be aware of this as we can prepare an overlay zone. We just want you to be aware of Spanish Fork's, uh, Spanish Fork situation, uh, kind of their experience with it, and we wanted you to be aware of the state code requirements. And so with that, I'll let you— I'm here to answer any questions.

Speaker C: Mayor, is it okay if I ask a question?

Speaker D: I'm just wondering, does it make any sense to the council to continue to pursue an overlay zone knowing that this is already highly regulated at the state level? I mean, it's really, in my opinion, it's a question of Do we want to impose some additional regulations and are we willing to pay for them? That's what I'm hearing. That's my interpretation of what we just read through. Is if we feel strongly that we want the power towers to be covered to look like pine trees and it costs $100,000 per pole extra, are we willing to pay that? And I don't know, that's a really kind of a silly example, but as I listened to this, those were my thoughts. I don't know what the rest of you think.

Speaker E: So part of the reason for doing the overlay zone was so that we could direct where those transmission lines would go, right? And just instead of, 'cause if we didn't wanna just put it willy-nilly and then that anywhere, the ag it could go and then we lose control of that. So that was part of the reason for the overlay. So is it placing an additional condition on the utility if we're telling it where it needs to go?

Speaker B: Making sure I'm still on there. If it impacts, if it causes, if our condition ends up costing the utility more money, yeah, it becomes an impact to them and we have to pay pay more money.

Speaker D: So if they can buy a transmission corridor or an easement for X number of dollars that runs right through this piece of property, and we direct that it has to go through that piece of property, and there's a cost differential between the two, we're going to have to pay that. That's, that's exactly what I'm interpreting.

Speaker A: And remember this, they can— they're, they're a utility company, they can eminent domain anyway, even if you told them no. They They can do what they want.

Speaker G: I—

Speaker H: part of me is inclined to let the market help drive where the transmission lines go, because they're in the business of providing power for residents, and in the long run, if we require something extra We end up paying for it either way, whether it comes from taxpayer dollars or if it comes through ratepayers. So I think we need to be really careful and judicious about how much we are trying to control where this goes. But I also know that when we first started this conversation, there's several areas around the city that are ag-zoned, and we don't want energy utilities just running through wherever. So It feels like a lot of this is predetermined by what the state requires us to help fund if we're the ones that are instigating the cost. So it's a little bit of— it's discouraging, I think, in a lot of ways to even talk about it. But I don't know.

Speaker D: But this relates to just the public utility. So it's not private transmission lines. So it's just the public utility.

Speaker B: It's just public.

Speaker E: So maybe the way the council needs to go on this is we don't put anything in code and we just wait and negotiate once an opportunity comes up. And then we can negotiate whatever we want, including saying this is how it's going to be and regard like and we can create in the code that they waive their rights to whatever the state says.

Speaker D: That's not the way that I'm seeing it. I'm seeing that they basically. can come and secure their own access and determine where they're going to put it and where it's most cost-effective to do so. And that we really, unless we choose to step into that process and pay the cost of modifying anything that's outside of what they're already willing to do, then it's kind of a moot point.

Speaker A: So if it's an allowed use, for instance, and it meets every requirement in an allowed use of a zone, basically staff-level approval. So it wouldn't— you would never have the chance to weigh in. Right. Well, go ahead.

Speaker D: Let's see what Rich thinks.

Speaker A: Rich, do you have a— Councilmember, what are you—

Speaker C: I'm here. What I'm thinking of is—

Speaker I: I can't hear you, Rich.

Speaker A: I can see you talking, though.

Speaker C: How about now? Can you hear me now?

Speaker A: It's not muted.

Speaker F: No.

Speaker A: We'll come back to you. Um, did you have something else you wanted to say?

Speaker H: I was just going to mention that I feel like part of our issue too is that we're surrounded by a lot of unincorporated land or land that belongs in a different city. So, however this gets to us, that will always play a role in it. And maybe that's why the state has played a bigger role in determining what can happen in this space. So, it's just a factor that we always have to be aware of.

Speaker C: How about now? Can you hear me now?

Speaker D: Is the Merkur substation the only one that is looking at upgrades? I mean, they've talked about a transmission line that might come from the Twila Valley. Are there others that we're aware of?

Speaker B: None others.

Speaker D: I mean, to me it just doesn't seem like this is something that we want to battle. I don't know how the rest of council feels. If there was something meaningful that we wanted to do and we were willing to pay for it, then certainly we could find a path forward there. But from my perspective, I think if the public utility company— I want to be clear— the public utility company determines that this is where the line should be, this is the most cost-effective route, and this is what they're going to do to put it in, why do we want to stand in the way of that? I mean, we want them to bring the power to our valley. That's the other consideration that we need to at least recognize is if they choose not to bring power to our valley, then that's going to limit our ability to But at least we're vetting this.

Speaker E: At least we're talking about it. At least we didn't just have something happen without us trying to think in advance. So, like, we're trying to still play from the front, but what we're realizing is we don't have very— we don't hold the cards.

Speaker D: You hold the checkbook is what you hold. That's how I see it. I mean, you have the checkbook that says if you're willing to pay for it, you can certainly regulate it in any way that you'd like to, but you're going to pay for it. pay for it, and you got to do it within 30 days of receiving notice, unless I misunderstood something.

Speaker B: That's how I understand it as well. I mean, again, there is this Utility Facility Review Board, um, if I keep forgetting the name of that, uh, yes, Utility Facility Review Board, that, uh, can, uh, we, we can take an issue, a dis— some type of disagreement, and have them rule on it. So there is actually a process And a possibility of this board, and the commission as well, they can take actions that may lead to the utility not imposing some of the regulations, or some of the costs, I think is a better thing to say, some of the costs that would typically come.

Speaker D: So there's kind of a built-in review and appeal process at the state level already.

Speaker E: But there's not much— I mean, we can't rely on that. Right, exactly. They're not— it's not a good backstop. So we're still not required to put transmission lines as an approved use in ag. We just wait basically for the utility company to come and tell us where they're going to go.

Speaker B: Yeah, I— well, again, yeah, I guess if we say otherwise, it's just going to cost the city money, it looks like.

Speaker E: It seems like we can still open a dialogue with them though and say, hey, here's some preferred routes we would really like you to go if possible.

Speaker B: Yeah, and we have that ability. Commissioner— or excuse me, Councilor Wright has been in our DRC meetings, and they have Rocky Mountain Power and their consultants have come in the last few months to our DRC meeting to talk about the transmission line and getting permits and so forth. So we can continue to ask for them to adjust their application in a way that'd be favorable to the city. And we, of course, have a council member on there who's well aware of what happens on the DRC.

Speaker G: All right.

Speaker A: For now, while they're working on this other issue, I'm going to let Councilmember Wood weigh in on the phone. Can you hear us okay, Councilmember Wood?

Speaker C: Yeah, can you hear me?

Speaker A: Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker C: So, the couple questions that I have, first of all, is this not covered under our overlay zone for the energy production overlay zone? And why not just add it to the zone that we've already created? That's my first question. The second question is, I think that we do at least want to have some input as to the— how the line comes into the city. I mean, obviously, it's got to follow a certain connection route. Um, but we— I think we want to have some input in what that looks like. They do that.

Speaker B: Yeah, um, we want to—

Speaker C: towers or things like that, I'm less concerned about things like that, just more or less the impact of the line itself.

Speaker B: The alternative energy overlay zone, um, it We can certainly, we can require them to go through the rezone process. I don't have the code right in front of me. I don't recall that we have specific requirements for transmission lines in there. But I know that we also have in our 1770, Chapter 1775 of the city code, there are relatively few requirements already in there related to transmission lines. So I just don't know how much traction or how much it will help to put that land in the alternative energy overlay zone as it relates to the location of transmission lines. And your other question, I'm trying to—

Speaker C: Can I ask a follow-up question to that, Brandon?

Speaker A: Yeah. Okay, go ahead.

Speaker C: So the transmission lines that we're talking about, are we talking about them coming from Spanish Fork or from the actual natural gas facility?

Speaker B: From Spanish Fork.

Speaker A: They'll, they'll come Can you see the screen, Rich? Is that—

Speaker C: No, they rebooted my computer. I think they're trying to figure out how to get me connected, so I can't see anything right now.

Speaker B: They basically start in Spanish Fork Canyon, wrap around the bottom of Utah Lake, and then cut through the backside of like the Lake Mountains and then into Cedar Valley.

Speaker C: And is this the direct connection to the, to the current line then?

Speaker B: Yeah, well, to the Mercer substation.

Speaker C: Mercer substation. Okay. I don't really have any issue with the creation of a code, frankly, but I think we can probably accomplish that with the overlay that we have. I mean, I think for me at least, that was the intent of that overlay zone for all energy production, including transmission lines.

Speaker D: I think Councilmember Wood, I mean, here's— I'm listening to what you're saying and trying to kind of process it. I think that the difference that I'm seeing is that this is regulated as a public utility by the state. And I think what you're referencing are those alternative overlay energy projects that we perhaps may entitle in the city of Eagle Mountain that are behind the meter generation facilities. And I think that's the substantive difference in in perhaps the 2 things that we're talking about. What are your thoughts about that?

Speaker A: I'm not saying that.

Speaker C: What I'm saying is it's coming through the same area. My understanding is they do have to at least follow existing zoning, correct?

Speaker E: No, that's where they— I think they have the power of eminent domain, so they don't have to. So that's where we're at.

Speaker C: What is the point of doing an overlay zone if they don't have to follow any of the zoning anyway?

Speaker E: Well, and that's the crux of the debate.

Speaker C: I think the question's answered then.

Speaker A: That's exactly what they've been saying. There's no reason to do this if there's nothing we can do, right?

Speaker D: I mean, that's— those are— I mean, I think we are coming to a consensus. That's what I'm hearing, is that if there's nothing we can do to regulate it, then why are we trying to create Create a zone that we can't regulate anyway. And if we do regulate it, it's just going to cost us money.

Speaker E: Yeah, only pertaining to public utilities.

Speaker A: Yes.

Speaker H: Yeah.

Speaker A: So, so maybe what I'm hearing is that this overlay zone would work on a behind-the-meter, but in that case, what's the impact? Do you want to do something for outside of public?

Speaker E: Well, I, I think our alternative energy overlay zone already contemplated that, if I remember right. We'd have to go back and look at the language.

Speaker A: I think Marcus is—

Speaker D: it talks about transmission lines in that, in that overlay. And frankly, they're through the development agreements. That's where we've given the entitlements to produce those energy, the behind-the-meter energy production anyway. And so I think that the city still has several levers that they can pull to help design that in such a way that they're comfortable with the outcome.

Speaker C: So are we certain that they don't want to work with us on this in the first place?

Speaker B: They, they have been cooperative. They— I think they're—

Speaker J: we—

Speaker B: they came in to the DR to, to get information about submitting applications. Well, around the 1st of June, if I recall correctly, maybe May. And we told them, so when we go through that process, we just kind of give them a bunch of background information, requirements they need to go through, and then kind of tell them about constraints they may run into. And so obviously, this ag zone, the ag zone not allowing transmission lines, that was the biggest roadblock. And so they, They actually were the ones that they've gently just kind of pointed to the fact to the state code. They're like, "You also might want to talk to Spanish Fork." And yet they didn't really give me a lot of feedback initially, but they're like, "You might want to go talk to Spanish Fork because they've been down this path and hear from them what kind of their their experience with trying to create an overlay." So I did, and I'm reporting back what I heard, what I found out in my own code research.

Speaker J: So—

Speaker A: So we good to move on on this one, or is there further direction for staff?

Speaker K: No, I think—

Speaker C: Doesn't sound like there's anything we can do.

Speaker D: Exactly my thought. I think we just say thanks for looking into it and bringing us this information. And that helps us make a decision that it's better off not to make a decision about this.

Speaker A: Okay, let's roll on. I'm going to keep you on the phone for a second, Rich, until I find out if this is there, but I'm going to put it on mute. So if you need something, raise your hand or something, we'll get to you. Discussion item 1B, I think we're going to hold off on that one. I've mentioned before the meeting, Councilmember Wood, I didn't get a chance to tell you, but that was one that Council Member Hewish wanted to weigh in on, and I think we're better served to hold off on that one to maybe the next meeting. So if Lacey, if you don't mind putting that on a future agenda. It is somewhat urgent, but I don't think it's super urgent, so we'll skip by that one. And then discussion once— item 1C, the discussion about the project recommendations from the community board. Steve, did you have an introduction, or is this Turn it over to the board. Oh, we can turn it over to Jesse, who's representing the board, and Charlotte's here as well.

Speaker J: So.

Speaker A: Give us just one second. I think we're recording. Oh, we're good. Just not what? No sound? I thought you were asking about Rich, but Rich is not back.

Speaker L: Yeah, we're good.

Speaker A: I'll keep him on the phone for a minute and tell— if something changes, we'll figure it out. Okay.

Speaker I: Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. I really appreciate the opportunity to come and present this to you today. And before I get started, I want to recognize the strain that both our staff and our budget are under right now. And the last thing I want to do is add unnecessarily to either of those, which is why we took careful consideration in crafting this list. I also want to express my gratitude for all of the help staff has already given us on the Community Services Board. And for all of the work that each of you continues to put into our city, the information that we put together here came from a few different places. We gathered it from discussing with residents at different events in the city. There was an app that was created that had customer or customer resident feedback, and then a lot of this was just things that members of the board had seen around the city. We then dedicated the majority of one of our board meetings to discussing what we believed should be priorities for the city, and we specifically tried to identify things that could be meaningful wins without necessarily taking on another massive project. And then we— from there, I did some additional research to better understand what could actually be feasible and what we could realistically ask.

Speaker G: Thank you.

Speaker I: This is the list that we came up with. I do want to point out that as a board, we did not rank these recommendations beyond agreeing that they belonged on this list. But I intentionally left them this way because I know that funding is tight right now and that it may not be feasible to address all of these immediately. However, as I researched each one further, I found some pretty compelling reasons why every one of them deserves consideration.

Speaker A: Thank you.

Speaker I: Consideration as a priority. The first one is ADA curb ramp installations. There are currently these, at least these 5 locations that were pointed out to me by a resident where the trail does not have an ADA ramp. In the staff report, Steve noted that the average cost is approximately $4,450 per ramp. And that's not an insignificant amount of money. And I don't know exactly how many there will be, but I do think that they're important improvements for us to make. One of our board members made a comment during our discussion that I think summed this all up, and it's that our city should be accessible for everyone.

Speaker D: Did you have something?

Speaker A: Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker D: Yeah, I do have a question. And it's, so at 44, 50 per ramp at each of these locations that the board has identified.

Speaker M: Are—

Speaker D: does that mean there's 4 ramps at this intersection, or is it just one?

Speaker I: There's 5. These are 5 different locations.

Speaker D: 5 locations. But let's take Shep's Ridge and Overland Pump Track. Is it just one ADA ramp, or is it multiple ADA ramps at that location?

Speaker I: So there would just be one at that one, and then on the other side is a different— so it would be the White Rock Road would be the other side of the trail.

Speaker D: Each of these 5 represent one ramp apiece? Yes.

Speaker A: Okay, I think so. Just real quick, I wanted to either get Zach or Brad to weigh in. A couple of these we had identified earlier on and might already be on some lists.

Speaker I: Is that which is very possible?

Speaker A: True. I know there was one in down here to the south. What's that called?

Speaker D: Talking about Sweetwater.

Speaker A: Sweetwater. Is this and some of them the sidewalk was meant to go 100 feet to the East or west, and then there was one. So—

Speaker D: Well, Mayor, I think that there's already a funding source identified for these ADA ramps from the CDBG funds.

Speaker A: And that's why I was asking.

Speaker D: I mean, didn't we talk about that?

Speaker O: Yeah, I think that we've had communication that that funding could be utilized for something of this nature.

Speaker D: Well, I— yeah, so I think this one's a no-brainer. Me personally.

Speaker A: Awesome.

Speaker O: Can I just make one point before we move on with that though? On some of these, we need to look at them because when we build ADAs, we gotta be careful. Like, is the trail continuing through and does that create a crosswalk scenario? Is the ADA intended to be there or is there an ADA at the corner, at the intersection, and this is a cross-section road? Definitely willing to look at the list and you know assess it, but there's a few other variables I think we need to look at through that process.

Speaker A: That's why I was wondering if there's additional feedback because I know we looked at one down here that has that exact question. So we can look further into those. All right, good.

Speaker H: Can I ask just a quick question too, Mayor? Since we only have this one item, have we fixed the loophole? In our requirements for neighborhoods so that this stuff doesn't happen anymore? How did we get to the point where one of these trails didn't have an ADA ramp?

Speaker O: I think that's something that we're going to have to assess on a case-by-case. I think as we develop our subdivisions and the communities, we look at those plans and we try to make sure that those cross-sections are there and the ADA ramps. exist. Um, some of these areas, uh, I'm, I'm not familiar with these intersections, so I haven't seen them, so I'll have to go out and look at them and assess them. But, uh, it's, it's definitely something that we try to collect in our DRC, our plan reviews, and try to make sure that everything's compliant and in line.

Speaker H: I, I totally get that, and I know that you guys make great efforts to make sure all of those things happen, but I'm wondering if we need to have something in our code or in our process that would make sure that these ADA curb ramps are there, just like we require that there's X amount of streetlights and X amount of park amenities and things like that. So I'm just wondering if this is something we ask the planning department to take a look at code-wise to help— Make it always work out the right way?

Speaker O: I mean, we can definitely look at anything and put it in code, but I think what is gonna really dictate this on how these exist and whatnot will be these future master plans with our trails and whatnot. They should outline and show that connectivity. And, you know, when it comes to ADA and sidewalk, there's other plans in place, and there's some other plans I think us as a community that we're going to probably have to get involved in because, you know, ADA is one of the biggest compliance things that we have to follow. And we're trying to get on a maintenance schedule. We're trying to add these additional ADA ramps and those things as they come up. So the best case scenario I can give you for today with this is we can assess each of these locations and see if it warrants it. And if And if we— if it needs one, or we'll do what we need to to get it installed.

Speaker H: Thanks.

Speaker E: Can I add just one other thing too? So if you're saying, Brad, that there might be a ramp down, like, down a ways, if the rest of the family's going this way, but they've got an ADA and they said, well, now we're gonna have to detour to bring you in, I'm still open to adding more ramps to make it better for those that are traversing.

Speaker O: And I hear you. If it's a through cross— if it's a trail segment that's crossing a roadway, then we need to assess it in that situation. But that's not true in every scenario. Sometimes trails go to a sidewalk and they tee. And that's what I'm saying is we wouldn't want to put an ADA into the roadway on a tee. That's why it needs to be assessed.

Speaker A: This might have an ADA ramp a couple hundred feet to the east at a stop sign. And this is mid-block where you're— now you've got a crosswalk situation or something. So we need to look at those. And then I was just going to— I think I know the answer to this. I don't remember that $4,450 was a number that you got from engineering, or is that?

Speaker O: From streets.

Speaker A: Okay, Steve got it from— I just— and we're pretty confident in that number, right? Yeah, that's reasonable. Okay, just so that we know the fiscal impact.

Speaker M: Go ahead.

Speaker H: Thank you.

Speaker I: Our next item is trail signage. The off-street trails master plan that was recently passed identified 39 signage-related issues throughout our trail system. And some of them are a little more than just an inconvenience. There are blind intersections where ATVs and mountain bikes can meet without adequate visibility or warning. Trail difficulty isn't always marked, which means a beginner can unintentionally end up on a much more advanced trail. Boundaries aren't always clear, making it easy for someone to leave designated trail without realizing it. And in many areas, the permitted uses aren't obvious, so users don't know whether it's a trail for bikes, ATVs, horses, or anything else. Our recommendation is to create cohesive signs that address all of those issues that would improve safety and make trails easier to navigate. and create a better experience for everyone using them.

Speaker H: I love this one because I think one of the things that we hear a lot from residents is either enforcing something that should or shouldn't be on a trail, noise from certain things that shouldn't be adjacent to backyards at 3 in the morning, just different things like that. And I think having good signage defining what is there, Both for the ability and the difficulty of a trail, but also just to help people understand what's allowed there and not is the first step into being able to enforce something down the road too. So I hope we can fund this.

Speaker A: Is that 39, meaning there's 39 identified locations?

Speaker D: Yeah.

Speaker A: Okay. Just as we go on, and I actually wrote down I like this one too. Melissa said that. I just don't want it to fall on deaf ears. So as we get going, great presentation. I just want to make assignments. So keep that in mind that—

Speaker I: It said 39 issues. It could be that there are locations, but I would assume that's what that means.

Speaker P: Mayor?

Speaker A: Can I just ask—

Speaker C: Can you guys hear me yet?

Speaker O: So is that 39 pertaining to the app? Is that how that is correlated? 'Cause then you collect this information—

Speaker I: No, this is from the off-street trails master plan. This is from—

Speaker O: okay. So there's no correlation back to the app. I just was wondering if that's what the 39 was.

Speaker H: No.

Speaker I: The next one we have on here is benches at Smith Ranch Park. Smith Ranch Park is an awesome park, and it has 3 different playgrounds and multiple fields and cool wildlife area, and it's It's— there's a lot for families to do there. However, around those playgrounds, there's nowhere to sit. And as a mom who has taken her kids there to play, it would be really nice if there were benches or something to sit on so that I wouldn't have to bring a camp chair to watch them. It was noted in the staff report that it would be just under $1,000 per bench. We also had the thought that if it were allowed, small businesses, or not necessarily small businesses, but businesses in the community could donate a bench. Because I know they're always looking for opportunities to give back to the community, and I think that would be beneficial. I don't know how many benches we would need, but at least a few around each playground would be awesome.

Speaker H: I also really like this idea. One thing that I've heard over the years of serving from different neighborhoods is when someone from a neighborhood passes away, like a small child or something like that, almost always I have residents reach out and say, we want to do something, we'd like to donate this memorial or donate something. And I think this allows us to achieve 2 things. One, provide more seating, but then also a standardized option for creating a memorial bench in a loved one's honor. And I think we could do it as a pilot program at Smith Ranch Park, and as we see how that works, we could potentially expand it to other parts of the city so that people can designate where they'd like for a memorial bench to be placed. And I like that the park staff is picking out the quality and type of bench so it's not just some kid's Eagle project, but it's actually something that will stay and last in a city park.

Speaker A: So.

Speaker I: The next one would be the maintenance of the rodeo grounds. This is something that I've heard from several members of the community who own and ride horses. And particularly one member of our board who this has been an issue for. Currently, the grounds are groomed and prepared like a week before the rodeo each year, within that week. And then within about a week after the rodeo, I've been told that the arena surface becomes difficult or unusable again, and it generally stays that way until preparations begin for the next rodeo. And when we're talking about maintenance, we are specifically talking about maintaining the dirt surface pictured in this to the left, not maintaining the entire facility. Um, however, during my research, I did find that the current lease agreement with Pony Express Events could create some confusion about who's responsible for certain types of maintenance, and so that may need to be reviewed. Um, but ultimately, our recommendation as a board is that the city take on the responsibility for maintaining the dirt and add it to some maintenance schedule like with the rest of the parks in the city. Our next one is more of a fun one. We are recommending wildlife-themed utility box art. This was brought to us by a member of the board who is also part of the Wildlife Alliance. And the idea is to take some of the utility boxes through the city and wrap them in artwork similar to these examples. The estimated cost is about $1,000 to $1,500 per box, and we would need to coordinate with Rocky Mountain Power to determine which boxes could be approved. And there are, as far as I understand, funds set aside from capital projects that are restricted to be used for public art, and we thought that this would be a really creative use of those funds. We also thought that it would be great to provide some community engagement for— and we could have like an art contest and decide which pieces of art could be displayed on these. And the art itself should last 5 to 7 years if we wrap it in vinyl. The next one is Nolan Park. I think we all know that Noland Park has a lot of potential, but right now we're not getting everything out of it that we could. The fields are used, but the baseball diamonds aren't configured to accommodate full baseball games. The splash pad's unusable, and there is nowhere to park. Our recommendation is that the city begin the process of a redesign of the park sooner rather than later. It's intentionally lower down on the priority list because the IAE recognized that redesigning and eventually rebuilding a park is much larger and more expensive undertaking than several of the other recommendations. But it would be useful to at least start the process, gain resident feedback, and see what it is that we want to build and where— what direction we should go, if we have to do a new splash pad or not. I know that that's important to a lot of residents. I heard that. just to gain resident feedback and see what the next steps would need to be and if we need to hire a firm. But we, we believe that that's something worth considering at this time.

Speaker H: Really quick, um, I think that this is important because it's something that's been talked about for several years, and I think we just need to rip the Band-Aid off and start working forward with a plan. If we can't pay for something for a while and we need to phase it in smaller chunks, that's okay too. The one thing that I want us to make sure we consider is Nolan Park East, which is kind of like a section not in the main square of Nolan Park, but is to the east of it. It's got a pavilion and quite a bit of grass space. South of the church there? It would be north of the church.

Speaker A: Along there.

Speaker H: It's along, what is that road over there, Peregrine?

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker H: So it's right along Peregrine and it faces the townhomes right there. There are, when I've been there at Nolan Park East, I've seen a lot of people take their dogs from the higher density housing and go over there and let their dogs run and play in that area. We've talked about community gardens that might be a place that's near density. And I think that since we have kind of a community garden pilot program we're starting up, this would be a great second location to consider. But for sure, it's important to me that we're looking at Nolan Park holistically and not just the square, but also Nolan Park East.

Speaker A: Thank you.

Speaker I: The last one is a— it's about a championship-level disc golf course. And I want to emphasize what we're actually asking is not for the city to select a location or design a course or spend money constructing one. Our recommendation is to engage with Firefly and explore whether this is something that could make sense within their community. Pictured on the left is our current disc golf course, and it works for casual play, but it really isn't suitable for more serious or avid players. The space is confined enough that longer throws can end up near or in people's backyards, which is not ideal. Firefly has expressed some interest in potentially having a championship-level course there, and they have consistently looked for opportunities to bring unique amenities into their community. So our ask is just that the conversation is had with Firefly on if this is something that could— that they could be interested in, and then if they are, that you guys seriously consider allowing and supporting that opportunity. But of course, they have not committed to anything. So that is all.

Speaker F: Thank you.

Speaker I: I really appreciate you taking the time to hear these today, and if you have any questions.

Speaker A: Yeah, let's— I know we're going to back up a little ways. Uh, I've got Council Member Wood on the line again, and we'll go to him for some questions. Did you want to go back to—

Speaker C: Yeah, yeah, I just have a couple things just to address. So with the signage, I think you're right on those, but I think we need to codify this so that everything going forward has those safety standards in place. And then we need to put it on a schedule to go address that while we're efficient on all of our Trails.

Speaker D: Trails.

Speaker C: And again, I don't think we have the money to do everything all at the moment, but if we don't put a plan in place that addresses how we're going to pay for these things and get them in, uh, into a routine of getting updated and fixed, it's never going to happen. We'll be talking about it again in a year. The second thing, uh, I agree with the assumptions made about Miller Park, but I maybe would like to see a little different approach. I think that we have other parks that have problems as well, and we need to have— this would be something that would be a real benefit from our Community Services Board to evaluate what is the most meaningful first for each of the parks, to put that in a priority list, and then let's put a plan together to start addressing them. Because I think it's more than just Miller Park. I mean, we're aware of what the splash pad issue is. But I think that there are other parks that require the same type of, uh, to be addressed. And if we don't put it on a plan to address them, then it never gets funded.

Speaker A: Rich, she did mention park benches at, uh, Smith Ranch was another one, and then Nolan Park. And those were the 2 main parks, but definitely had those too.

Speaker C: I don't have an issue with putting the benches in. I think that's a good amenity. I mean, people can use them When their kids are playing, people who are walking and want to take a break, or runners, or people that just want to sit at the park. I think that's an amenity that should be in all of our parks.

Speaker H: I just want to agree with Council Member Wood. I think that we've talked about making some upgrades to even at the Silver Lake Park where the amphitheater is and the playground and the walking trail around there. This might be a time to imagine what else could go there. We've talked about landslides that are on the side of the hill there and just different things, and maybe beefing up and adding bathrooms down by the amphitheater part so that the summer camp that takes place there every summer has an actual place for them to change in and out of costumes and just different things like that. So I like the idea of asking our Community Services Board to look at all of the parks and help prioritize some of the most urgent needs.

Speaker A: I'm okay with that, but I'd want them to have maybe an email or something to say, hey, look here, and this is an idea, because otherwise it's just kind of throwing darts. So if it's things like the slide that I know we've talked about, I just, I want to make sure we're giving them good direction.

Speaker C: Mayor, I think that we need to make sure that we're doing this in conjunction with our new parks manager. I'm assuming the global plan that they're going to be providing, and I think that they should be working with the Community Services Board, but I'd like to see a maintenance plan to bring the parks to a level that I think we're all comfortable with, which is going to require assessing each of the parks and where they're currently at with their landscaping, the equipment that's there, the trails, etc. I think adding what Melissa said on top of that, finishing some of the parks needs to be part of that. But if those aren't all prioritized in, you know, going to this park, here are the things that needs to happen. We go to this park, here's the things that need to happen. We need to put those into some sort of a budget plan or it will never happen.

Speaker A: Yeah, and just probably a good time to tell you a meeting that I had earlier this week and, uh, with our parks manager Kyle. I told him that I think he should start coming to council meetings, especially when these things are on the Agenda. And then not only that, also direction to start sitting in with Steve. Steve's got a heavy lift right now, and we invited him to start sitting in on these— the monthly meetings, because I think that for now that most of what we're talking about affects him anyway, right? And Steve and I talked about that. And I did speak with Kyle, and he was not available to come tonight to this presentation. But he is planning on coming to our board meetings whenever they're available.

Speaker H: Yes, sir.

Speaker A: Definitely on the same page there. I think we saw that same hole, and I think that's important. Was there other comments on some of those, or anything you wanna see kind of pushed up the list? With that now out there, we already know there's some funding sources for some things.

Speaker H: I would like to say, sorry, were you gonna hop in?

Speaker O: No, go ahead.

Speaker H: I would like to say that I really do support us having more regular rodeo ground maintenance. I know there's been kind of an evolution of what the city takes ownership of and what the nonprofits take ownership of and different things like that. But for it to be consistent and cared for with the proper equipment and all of those things, I would like for us to find out what that fiscal impact's gonna be on us to take that on, and whether we can work that into the schedule. And even if it's once a month to start instead of once a year, that at least is pushing us more in the right direction. Because it's a huge asset. If we support the Western way of life out here and our Western roots, then I think we should take care of one of the, you know, The biggest amenities that we have that reflects that. So I really support that. I'm glad that it's on the list.

Speaker D: Yeah, I just thought, well done. I'm grateful for the presentation, Jesse. I would just say that I'm supportive of looking at all of what you've brought forward. I think the ADA ramps is a pretty straightforward thing, assuming that our staff finds that they'll be compliant. They're in the right location, and I like that there's already a ready-made funding source to take care of that that comes from outside of the city. Okay, those those CBDG funds I think can be used for that. The trail signage certainly okay with that. We it's just a matter of where do we find the resources to tackle that. The Smith Ranch benches I love what you said, Councilmember Clark. I think. I think offering those as a memorial bench and having folks purchase or donate them makes a lot of sense to me. And if not, then we can look at something else. Rodeo maintenance, I don't disagree with that. I guess the question that I have and the suggestion I would make is if we're going to put more resources into maintaining that, then should we be looking for an opportunity to rent that space out? Reserve that space to do something that's outside of perhaps, and maybe that's a good or maybe that's a bad idea, but I just want to open up that at least that line of thought. The wildlife—

Speaker A: can I jump in on that for just a second? Just so I remember this year, it would have been our budget discussion a year ago. We bought a new tractor and I said keep that old tractor and let's use it over there. I don't know how I'd have to get some feedback from staff about how much the old ones used compared to the new one, but we only ever had one. Now we have two. And the thought was that it could sit over there, just like mowing the grass at the soccer field. We don't necessarily rent that out. It would get too much abuse possibly without the, you know, things in this type of an industry get damaged. But I think open riding for our residents and having mowed grass type of—

Speaker D: I'm open to all that, Mayor, and I'm not disagreeing with you in any way. You're the horseman. And I'll certainly respect that. For me, it's just a matter of can we find it, can we find a way to make that more useful? And I think that's probably the goal.

Speaker A: Yeah, and I wanna just, so for context, I guess what I'm saying is just like putting gas in a lawnmower and mowing the grass once a week, we're gonna put gas in a tractor that we already own and take 15 minutes to plow the dirt. That's the extent.

Speaker D: And if that's all it takes, then let's, I mean—

Speaker A: I think that's what they're asking.

Speaker J: Yeah.

Speaker D: Can I, let me finish.

Speaker F: Go ahead.

Speaker C: Maybe one step further on that. Uh, I think that— aren't we also supposed to be using the tractor over in the Memorial Park as well for, uh, the cemetery?

Speaker A: Isn't that why we kept the old one? I think is the question. And I don't know how much use is over there or not.

Speaker O: I, I don't know off the top of my head. I can't, I can't answer and say that it's this many hours, but yeah, there's several different pieces that equipment that gets transported around and used for several different items. If we don't have—

Speaker A: Both tractors are in use, I guess, would be—

Speaker O: Yeah, we use both of them.

Speaker A: Just at this point, our city's getting big enough we could have a third one, right, Brad?

Speaker O: Well, it's just time and money, right? I mean, I've, I've taken time and I've, I've groomed the rodeo grounds. I, I— you say 15 minutes, but I think it's longer than 15 minutes to turn that arena. I think it's a couple-hour deal. And if you're going to do it 3 times a week, those, those numbers add up. And so I think we just got to look within our budgets and see what we can facilitate. And if it's a service level thing and we want to bolster it up and we want to provide the services and more time and money and staff, then, then we can, we can do these things for sure.

Speaker A: Yeah, go ahead and finish, Brett.

Speaker D: All right. And then probably just the last one that I'll comment on, and everything else that's been said I agree with, but the wildlife Utility boxes. I like that idea. And I, again, there's, I think, a ready-made funding source that's available for that. And I think that you tried to identify that.

Speaker A: So you, I thought I was waiting for you to weigh in on this.

Speaker D: 0.25%.

Speaker A: Yeah, the quarter.

Speaker D: The quarter percent that we're collecting for capital projects. On capital projects. On capital projects that's being set aside into a special fund for art. I think it would be nice to start to put some of those funds to work. And I personally think this is a good place to start. Are there other things we should consider? Certainly, but this would start to give some return on those collections that we've been taking.

Speaker A: Just for context, I think there's— we were trying to figure that out today. We got a phone call and Ben and I were at the Capitol. There's about $49,000?

Speaker I: $48,000, I believe.

Speaker A: $48,000?

Speaker I: At one time.

Speaker A: $47,000 in that account just on capital Probably just a quarter of 1%.

Speaker D: Yeah, and I don't think we need to spend it all here, but I think that you could certainly identify, you know, a half dozen or 10 of the most impactful locations and then work through, 'cause we have to develop the process as to how you're gonna pick artists and who's gonna decide what goes on there. And that's a whole nother can of worms that we gotta work through.

Speaker A: All right, I wanna go back to Councilmember Wood real quick. Was there more on that one?

Speaker C: I just want to jump back to the rodeo grounds. I think that we need to make a decision of whether or not it's a park or not. If we're going to treat it like it's a— it's always going to be in disrepair. If we're going to treat it like it's a park, then we need to make it available to people. People need to be aware that it's there for their use and we need to maintain it as such. But I think we can't continue to pretend like it's not something that we need to maintain. Because we're really touching it once a year. So if we're going to make it available to everybody, then what is the use that we're going to make it available for? Are we allowing it to be a riding arena? If so, that tells you exactly what type of surface we need to put in there as far as the dirt goes. If we're going to let people come in and do other types of things that's going to commingle the dirt, then we'll have to scrape it before the rodeo every year.

Speaker H: Um, I had a similar thought to Council Member Wright about, well, maybe we should be charging for it and different things. But then as I was sitting here thinking about it, we don't really charge anyone to come and use our pickleball courts or our tennis courts or anything like that. It's an amenity that we put in. Um, if someone's going to—

Speaker D: Maybe just schedule it.

Speaker H: Yeah, schedule it. Or if someone's going to make money from it, like if they're going to host a A big event that's—

Speaker D: 4-H.

Speaker H: Yeah, 4-H something or other, or something that's not necessarily city-driven. I, I think maybe then we could look at some sort of fee schedule or something. But in general, I think that it's our duty as a council to figure out how to fund the maintenance and care of that space. And then, um, as we go through people using it, if there's inappropriate uses or something like that, let's cross that bridge when we come to it.

Speaker L: Yeah, I just— my understanding is that it is in use already. It is open to the public year-round. People come in, they bring their dogs, use it as a dog park during the off-season, and people go in and Do other sort of recreational activities there. It's just a question of, you know, we have an agreement that puts the burden of maintenance on a particular group and it's not working out and how should we move forward?

Speaker D: I think that's the suggestion that they're making is that perhaps the city should look at that and say, is there a different approach we can take to for the maintenance of it so that it becomes an even more utilized facility than what it is currently? I mean, it's certainly being utilized, and I'm aware of that, Marcus. But I think that at least what I'm hearing is how could we make it a little more useful for more people? That's what I'm hearing.

Speaker C: Yeah, I would agree with that. I mean, I think that we've listed it as one of our parks. That's supposed to be what the use of it is, so we should be maintaining it as such. And to Melissa's point, I don't think that we should be charging people unless they're trying to reserve it like a pavilion. If they want the full use of the facility, then they go through the same planning or the event— what is that— reservation that everybody else does for pavilions or a portion of the park. And we have a fee schedule that's set up for that. Otherwise, it's available for people to use, and there probably ought to be some At least some restrictions about what could be done on the dirt.

Speaker A: So I think what I've seen in other cities, I'm just floating this out there for you guys to consider. For instance, it's just open riding, and the key here is that the ground's in a condition that it can be rode, you know, rode in. Compare it to a pavilion. The pavilion's there, there's tables there, you can sit down, you can eat lunch, you can come and go as you please. It's open to everybody. If you want to rent the pavilion or block it off to where others can't use it because you have a birthday party, You call the city and you reserve the pavilion for $30 an hour or whatever that is, and then you have your event and then you go on. And that's, that's exactly how Spanish Fork and other arenas do that.

Speaker C: That's what I'm talking about.

Speaker A: So, so there's— if you're the 4-H and you want to block off from 7 to 9 on a Monday night, you call in and you pay your $30 an hour fee type of deal, and— or $50 or whatever, that would be in the fee schedule. But it's open riding unless you're bringing in an approved use.

Speaker H: I agree with that, but I also think that we should have an application for a fee waiver for specific things that are serving our community. For example, the FFA kids at our local high school may need it for something specific, and they may need it to be blocked off specifically for them, but they're not a for-profit entity.

Speaker D: Mutton busting.

Speaker H: Yeah, mutton busting. They are kids that are growing up here in this community And I think that there should be a mechanism by which organizations and people can request that that fee is not assessed or waived. So that's just something that I also think that the Community Services Board could help tackle.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker E: I was just gonna say, 'cause I haven't chimed in, I'm very supportive of what the Community Services Board's been doing. Super grateful for what your work is, and I'm really good with your recommendations. And my one question, Can RAP tax dollars go towards some of this?

Speaker H: Certainly.

Speaker A: Any of it.

Speaker E: Absolutely. And since we have RAP tax dollars, it seems to me that this plan can be implemented. So I think we go forward.

Speaker A: I think my understanding is that RAP tax dollars could go to any of this, yet there's other— Except for operation. Well, there's also additional restricted funds that we use as well. So for instance, the ADA would be RAP tax and/or the CBDG. The trail signage would probably be RAP tax.

Speaker E: The maintenance of the rodeo grounds could not be RAP tax is my guess.

Speaker Q: That's it.

Speaker G: Right.

Speaker L: That could still be RAP tax. You can use it to fund operations.

Speaker C: Oh, okay, there you go.

Speaker J: Yeah, you actually could.

Speaker I: My question with that would be we're currently developing a process by which people apply for RAP tax funding. Is this something that would need to go through that process for things like this?

Speaker H: I don't think that it should. I've seen that other cities, Lehi specifically, There's a chunk of that money that the city designates to go toward projects that they've heard from the community broadly need to be done and taken care of in their parks. And then there's a chunk of their rat tax that the community service or rat board goes through and makes determinations and awards grants and different things like that. I think that there will be certain things that we as a body who has that responsibility over all budget and all funds to say, yep, this chunk is gonna go to take care of some of those needs that have been identified by the Community Services Board and identified by listening to residents and still meet that objective of letting the people on the Community Services Board be able to weigh in on how those funds are used.

Speaker A: I think that's kind of, that's one of the things that I've said for a long time is, I like that they've come with the initiative of these are some kind of low-hanging fruit, as I would call it, that we can do. Like the Smith Ranch benches can be funded with sponsorship money, but that it's— we can do this with all kinds of different funds, and that's up to us to allocate funds on whatever that looks like, right?

Speaker E: So some of it could be RAP tax, of course, but some of it could be all kinds of different How long do you want to wait for donations to come in on Smith Ranch Park before you decide we just got to do it ourselves? Like, I don't want this to hang out forever saying we're waiting. So I think you put a deadline out there, you say we want sponsors, and if the sponsors don't come in by a certain deadline, we build it ourselves and not wait.

Speaker C: What method are you going to use to solicit them? I think that needs to be decided, right?

Speaker I: Like sponsorships? That would be decided. Remains to be seen.

Speaker E: Can the city help with advertising for that, for the sponsorships?

Speaker H: Are you talking about for benches? Sorry, Councilmember Wright. I think it could be just as simple as the process that they put in place for the banners on the sides of the pickleball courts. But it also could be something that's listed where we have our cemetery plots. Like, if they're memorial benches, we could put them there as an option for people to purchase as a part of that. And then they also could be listed where we have sponsorship opportunities for rec-type stuff.

Speaker O: We already have—

Speaker C: And if you slid a piece of paper into their utility bill also.

Speaker A: Sure.

Speaker O: We already have an amenity, like, replacement repair line item. And it's something that we could add some additional benches to out of— that's in our— that's already budgeted for. And so I, I don't think we have to go to the level that like we want benches there and we have to go to a memorial program. I'm not saying that you, you can't. You guys could develop a memorial program and that's something that we could implement. But I think we could get some benches in sooner with some of those funds. The other thought that I have is I think it's going to be good to go out and obviously assess the parks and whatnot. We do have our asset management program that we've been trying to get all of our data into, and that's playgrounds, benches, everything. And one thing that we gotta be aware of is sometimes, you know, we're gonna make large purchase scale items like playgrounds and whatnot, but we have to be protective that we wanna try to use those out for their useful life. And that's part of what this asset management program's And so as we see things in disrepair or whatnot, we definitely want to know about those things. But then we have to weigh it against the overall condition of it and a replacement schedule of it as well. And so there will be some balance as we work through that. We're willing and we're trying to develop that, and it's getting a little bit better each day. Obviously, our playgrounds, our benches, our trash cans, our pavilions, and all those things—the high, the most visual things are the first things that we put in there and we're trying to manage that. But what that's gonna do is that's gonna kick out a maintenance or a replacement schedule long-term too. And we have to be careful. And the other thing I wanna bring up is after these amenities are installed, we can't use impact fee dollars to replace them. It's general fund dollars that will replace these. Impact fee dollars can only be used when we're developing or we're continuing that level of service in the community. So I think it's just important to make sure that we distinguish those pots of dollars and where they'll come from. But every time that we add a park in the community, we gotta make sure that we have that longevity in it built into it that we can replace it over a long-term period of time. So I just wanted to add that for the record.

Speaker D: Thank you, Brad. And Council Member Whiting, I think you're right. I mean, look, I would certainly be okay funding some benches sooner rather than later. With this caveat, I think there's still an opportunity to— because you can use impact fees to do that. It's a new improvement, right, Brad?

Speaker O: If they don't exist technically, we probably could use that for them. I think we went on the shorter end on Smith Ranch because as we— me being heavily involved in the process, we go through a design process of a park and then we hit a price threshold, right?

Speaker E: Yep.

Speaker O: And then you try to figure out how far you can make your dollar stretch and try to develop this park out. And some, some things just have to get cut when you're doing a price, when you're doing value evaluation engineering and you're doing it on the fly. Like, some things get cut and it's just part of the process. But I know that it seems small, and but everything in the scheme of the picture, it adds up.

Speaker D: But I like the idea of putting them in early and then finding someone that wants to donate some money so that they can memorialize someone that they wanna memorialize and just have a system in place so that we can just add a little placard or something to do that to even an existing bench and then allow those funds to continue to grow and perpetuate upon themselves where we can then, rather than an impact fee, those dollars begin to fund some of the replacement.

Speaker A: So just real quick, I wanted to double-check with Lacey if it's possible. Rich, do you want to try? I think maybe the microphone's working. Do you want to try the other?

Speaker C: Yeah, can you guys hear me?

Speaker A: We can move on.

Speaker M: How about now?

Speaker A: No, I see him.

Speaker H: Yeah, I see him talking and his sound's off, but it's not coming through.

Speaker A: Okay, we'll continue working the way we have been for a minute. Councilmember Wood or Carson's going to try and see if we can— so any other feedback for Jesse and the board? Can I talk again, Councilmember Wood?

Speaker C: How about now?

Speaker A: That rules out that.

Speaker H: I wanna hear who's the Pirates of Penzance.

Speaker J: Nothing.

Speaker G: Okay.

Speaker D: How about now?

Speaker I: So is that something that you would like the Community Services Board to develop, would be a mechanism to get either sponsors or memorial benches going?

Speaker D: Yeah, I think that would be cool.

Speaker H: And I would say, I don't know that they necessarily have to be sponsor ones. Maybe they're memorial or honorary, honorarium type benches. I like the idea of us funding our benches, but also having an opportunity for people who wanna do something for a loved one that's passed away, so.

Speaker A: It's like buying a brick or some of the other projects that we could do.

Speaker I: Is there any other thing that you wanted us to work on?

Speaker A: Like some of those other parks like the—

Speaker I: I got plenty. But I'm happy to add more.

Speaker A: The, like, the amphitheater and some, you know, prioritize some of the other parks, which I think they've been doing. I don't— just haven't had time to report yet.

Speaker H: I definitely think that should—

Speaker C: I'd like to see them take the parks and prioritize them. What needs to be done at them? How do we get them up to a service level that we're comfortable with? And then give us the opportunity to do a funding schedule for them.

Speaker I: Yes, I have that written down.

Speaker A: Yep, got that on the list. So, all right, awesome, good work.

Speaker F: Thank you so much.

Speaker A: Make sure you tell the rest of the board that doesn't come every time that we appreciate them too. Thank you. All right, just sit tight, Rich. I'm gonna set the phone down long enough that— but you're still with us. So, uh, going right along, that's all for our discussion items, and then, uh, We'll look to our manager Ben for any information items.

Speaker J: Over the weekend, I sent a lot of information items out to our council in a series of email— emails that I'm sure was a little bit overwhelming, but we have a lot of great work going on in our city, citywide, with different projects and planning, funding undertakings, and infrastructure improvements. With that said, I just want to extend appreciation to our staff for all the good work that they do and ask the council if there's any questions that you have on anything that's been shared.

Speaker A: I think just because it's a work session, this is a good chance to talk about what we got done today.

Speaker J: Yes, if you want. Yeah, do you want me to talk about it? Yeah, do you want to talk about—

Speaker A: okay, if I find something I need to fill in, I will.

Speaker J: Okay, so, um, today we, we, uh, met, had the opportunity, uh, to meet with House Speaker Mike Schultz, and he was very gracious in welcoming us to meet with him about our transportation needs specifically within our community. The meeting was set up by our representative Stephanie Grecious, and she attended that meeting and helped facilitate that for us, and she did an exceptionally good job. I think there was some, some maybe fear interpretation walking into that meeting that perhaps we might come in with tons of demands, and I think they were very pleasantly surprised that we were coming in with ideas and solutions on how to meet those demands. That we see ourselves as being a partner with the state, working on economic development opportunities, working on transportation and water opportunities, and recognizing that if we are to continue to grow as a region, not just Eagle Mountain but Saratoga Springs and West Lehigh as well, that there has to be transportation relief to our area. And some of those transportation funding dollars are already programmed out to 2032 and beyond. And so some of the ideas were, how can we get state funding allocated to meet the needs of our area and do so in a manner that we could either self or work with our development partners to try to self-fund some of those projects with state dollars coming in in later years to help program and offset that. That would benefit us specifically because we would be able to undertake those projects today and then provide our residents immediate relief. But second and most important, we would be able to do it at a less expensive price than it would be to construct in 2030. 2033, 2034. And so if we can do those things up front, that saves dollars for the state as well over their long term, and it opens up things for, for our entire region. The concerns expressed by House Speaker Schultz was that he wants to make sure that we don't circumvent or break the process. We have processes in the state of Utah for funding, but in articulating that the processes that we have had locally have been maybe a little bit broken to some degree because we have larger geographic areas with less representation on boards like MAG, where other parts of the county have smaller municipalities with lots of mayors and funding can go to different areas. And everybody wants a bite at the apple, and yet we really need to look at what are the, what are the roads that are failing and how do we address those failing roads, and how do we do it in the most expeditious way possible. And so our ask was really not to circumvent or earmark or circumvent a process. It was really how do we fix the process so we can work together to meet the needs and demands of our area. The mayor did an exceptionally good job sharing our story that we're adding as a community more than 200 cars per month, adding to our overall region when you add Saratoga and West Lehigh to it, nearly 500 cars per month. And the programming dollars are already spent. And by the time we hit the next available funding cycle, we will have 24,000 more cars on our streets. And sharing that story and laying it out on a map, but doing so in an empathetic way, saying, look, we, we have a desire to help the state meet its needs because we want our kids and grandkids to live near us. We want to have opportunities for them to have homeownership, single-family homeownership, not necessarily everybody living in a condo or a townhouse type of thing, but we want them to have the same opportunities that we had growing up here and living in Utah. And, and so being able to align our priorities with the state's priorities and being able to find solutions along the way turned out to be a very productive meeting. We certainly appreciate the House Speaker if there's anything that he maybe appreciated the most is that, is that we were direct. We came to him with solutions. We weren't trying to necessarily lobby things from him, but we were trying to find solutions together in partnership with him and, and do so on face value to meet the demands of our community. And so the mayor did a great job. Stephanie did a great job. David and Evan were both there. They did a great job. I just sat in the I sat back and watched them all, and I was just glad to be part of an exceptionally good group.

Speaker A: I think going into that, Speaker Schultz was probably, yeah, everybody's got needs, and what makes yours more important than the others? By the time we got halfway through the meeting, he extended our time by almost double, stayed and visited with us, and said, you know, we've really got to address this, and kind of got on board with we've got to figure this out. As David has pointed out, I think our current funding for things like Lake Mountain Road is 2033 to 2045, roughly. Well, Lake Mountain's not even funded right now. It's currently in plans. The Phase 2 is the '33 to '42. Yeah, so that's Phase 2 of SR 73, and I think we've shown that both those roads will get done before, you know, we need those or we can't continue. I think we made headway, you know, on some of the things that we were trying to do. So I just wanted to make that report and let you know that we'll just keep the foot on the gas pedal, I guess.

Speaker J: I think they were pleasantly surprised because I really feel like they were maybe a little nervous and a little—

Speaker A: Yeah, what makes us different?

Speaker J: A little defensive, maybe a little nervous about meeting with us. And I think they left feeling like we were partners. I thought it was a very positive meeting.

Speaker A: And making us stand out to why are we different than everybody else that also has needs, but we were able to identify why. So I think that's, we're going in the right direction. So anyway, any questions on those meetings specifically, comments? No? Okay. Any other update items? They're in the emails, right? Ben?

Speaker J: I think that's it.

Speaker A: That's it? Okay. Then let's go on to the consent agenda real quick. Let's see. So there's a proclamation on 9A that I was just looking at, and I'm wondering if Councilmember Whiting wants to read this when we get to that.

Speaker E: I'd be— I'd be happy to.

Speaker A: Okay, I got it here. Then, uh, we will go to the change orders, which were Mr. Salazar.

Speaker C: Yep, I can have—

Speaker A: I have a presentation I included, and I'm happy to go through it if there are questions, or if we're good with it, we can just move forward. No questions. And Council Member Wood, I think he's still here. No question.

Speaker L: And for the record, that will close out the No questions.

Speaker A: Okay, uh, minutes September 1st. Nothing. Uh, preliminary site plans. This is, uh, Mr. Lemons is back there. Is there any questions or presentation? No? Anything?

Speaker E: So one item I had on, on the— I know this is on the consent agenda, but there is a Planning Commission recommendation for Spring Run Plaza Lot 2. And so I think when we make the consent agenda approval, we probably want to call that out specifically, that the PC recommendation is also—

Speaker A: just so everyone's aware what that is, make sure they agree. What was the— I'd have to look it up.

Speaker E: That was just my notes. Now we got to go take a look deeper, but whatever it was, I liked it.

Speaker A: So did everybody else—

Speaker H: do we want to just pull it off of the consent consent agenda since we have such a—

Speaker D: No, no, you can make the motion. I'll read, I'll read it for you. It says the Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to City Council for the Spring Run Plaza Lot 2 site plan with the following conditions: the east elevation be clad in at least 60% high-quality natural materials. Staff note that the applicant has since updated the east elevation to contain at least 60% high-quality natural materials. And the shared parking and maintenance agreement be filed with staff as as part of the site plan application. And as I read it, it's 2 parking spaces that they're short on too that they wanna share with Lot 1.

Speaker E: Yeah, and it's really, so they, of those conditions, Condition 1 has since been met. So it's Condition 2 that is the shared parking and maintenance agreement.

Speaker A: So you're okay with that?

Speaker D: Yeah.

Speaker H: Yeah.

Speaker A: Recommend, okay. You're good.

Speaker D: Yeah, you're good.

Speaker A: So as noted, we'll just make that into the motion. 15A, resolution of Eagle Mountain approving the agreement with Utah Public Solutions LLC to provide lobbying services. No question? Pretty straightforward on that?

Speaker E: Well, okay, so the question I have, so I guess maybe this was just included in the material, but I think pages 5 and 6 were the submission from the lobbyist with the terms he wanted, is my guess, because the terms, the term that was in 5 and 6 was different. The dollar amount requested in pages 5 and 6 were also different than what was in the actual contract. So I guess, was that just provided to us for our visual reading, and that's not actually incorporated into the overall agreement because the term and the, the pricing were different?

Speaker D: Right, the, the pricing is what's part of our agreement.

Speaker B: Um, the, the $40,000, that pricing was negotiated afterwards after receiving that The proposal was brought in as an exhibit more to help delineate what the scope of his specific offerings will be as far as what he'll contribute to our needs as a city, not necessarily the cost proposal that's part of there.

Speaker E: And his— he needs to update GOEO to GOED as well, 'cause that was outdated. True, yes.

Speaker A: So is it identified which one is approved in the consent agenda if they're different? I know the answer, but it's the $40,000?

Speaker D: Yes.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker E: He'd requested, I think, $80-some-odd thousand.

Speaker A: If it was full-time services, but we've got them on a job-specific, and so that's what what the change was. I just want to make sure that the contracts— we're comfortable with the way the wording is. Yeah. Um, just did you have another comment, Council Member Wood? If no, I had one quick— I had one question.

Speaker C: I was just trying to remember what it was. It was actually not I don't have a question specific to the site plan for the one over on Spring Run, but I saw something that I wanted our staff to take a look at, and you reminded me about it when we talked about a drive-through. There is a restaurant that I believe is in American Fork or Pleasant Grove where they have a double drive-through that helps to accommodate some of the problems with having multiple drive— or multiple fast food places in a small area. The name of the restaurant is Tava, I believe. I'd love for you guys to take a look at that and see if there's a way we could implement something like that for some of these smaller parcels where they want to do those drive-throughs.

Speaker A: What was the name of the restaurant?

Speaker C: Tava. It's an Italian restaurant.

Speaker A: Italian restaurant Tava. T-A-V-A.

Speaker J: Okay, thank you. We can look into that.

Speaker A: We'll look at that during the break. Um, the next one, 15B, right? Is that where you said we were? Uh, Mr. Draper, that's the Spring Run Partners, uh, reimbursement agreement.

Speaker L: Yeah, this is in relation to upsizing that's being required by the city for that development. The lion's share of that is the upsizing of Wagstaff Way. So which will increase certain construction costs. Additionally, there is some upsizing of water pipes and stormwater and wastewater pipes, but that would take the balance of the agreement. This is just the terms of the agreement as far as us reimbursing them for the upsize.

Speaker A: Any questions on that one? Okay, we're good. The other one—

Speaker D: I just want to be clear, Mayor. I mean, you wrote this, Marcus. I just want to make sure this is clear, that this agreement would not cover the cost of purchasing the additional land for the wider road.

Speaker L: Yeah, that's coming at a later date in a future agreement.

Speaker D: Just wanted to make sure that—

Speaker L: Yeah, this is just for the construction costs for the developer. It's not the purchase of the land from the landowner.

Speaker D: Just— that's clear. I wanted to make sure that was clear. Thank you.

Speaker A: OK, now there's one scheduled item. We do have a little bit of time, I think, before we're ready for break, so I do know that there are probably some clarification and things would be good to talk about this. Is that all right? On the budget amendment. So Terrence, if you would like to present this. This has to do with our first annual budget amendment. There are a couple of things that we definitely wanna make sure to get in this budget amendment. One of them was Silver Lake or Woodhaven, but the roundabout there at the bottom of Silver Lake, I believe. And it's a design. Yeah, so Terrence has some slides he's gonna pull up.

Speaker J: We can talk through this.

Speaker A: So we can, yeah, we'll just wait until you get there 'cause I know it's probably to the end.

Speaker P: Mayor and Council, I don't know if you want me to do the full presentation later since there's a public hearing, but I can touch on some of the changes between what's in the packet and—

Speaker A: I think the highlights, and, and maybe just, uh, because I do want to see the presentation one for the public hearing.

Speaker P: Sounds good.

Speaker A: So jump to the highlights.

Speaker P: Okay, so pretty much, um, I sent you an email this morning about, um, a couple more projects needed to be added on the budget amendment for tonight. Those are the eagle— some leftover money for the Eagle Monument project, the digital sign info, and also the fencing for the wildlife corridor, which is tied to a grant project as well. Um, I'll go over— sorry, aside from those rollover projects which already approved before There are 3 more projects that will be added for the budget amendment discussion for today's, um, tonight, today's meeting. The first one will be the Pony Express Widening Phase 1 construction. That will be from Eagle Mountain Boulevard to Shadow Drive. The amount being requested is about $1.8 million, and the construction is planned to be starting on February 2027. Um, part of that project is removing the median and also going from 2 to 5 lanes, so a widening project. And then the next one will be Pony Express, which is the Phase 2. The design— the proposed is to put some funding for $250,000 for the design for this project, from 3 to 5 lanes, adding some improvement for traffic signals and also realigning some of the Paul Canyon Boulevard and the Point Express intersection as well. So this one, the Phase 2, will cover from Shadow Drive to Public Works area. And then the last one is the Silver Lake Neighborhood Improvement Design. There is a proposal of $250,000 for the design plan for this fall. This is, uh, to do roundabout removals from the Woodhaven and Silver Lake area, and also Golden Eagle and Silver Lake to become Woodhaven, to replace the traffic signal and also do some realignment with road and crosswalks as well. If you have any question, I have David here as well.

Speaker A: Would you go back to the fence and trail? I didn't know how those were related, so I was curious. I think it was 220. $25,000 maybe?

Speaker P: Let me open up the— sorry, it will be a lot easier to see it from here. Let's see.

Speaker A: Wildlife fencing. Give me one second. It's opening up. All right, you've got it right there on the right. New asphalt trail, Walden Park to Cedar Corners. I don't know if that's the same one, and that's why I'm confused.

Speaker P: Give me one second. Sorry. There you go. I don't know if it's big enough, but let me make it a little bit bigger. The one that I emailed this morning is the additional money, about $474,000, and that will Let me just find the exact one. So this is the new— let me just—

Speaker A: It was on the same line item with the—

Speaker P: Yes. The first one will be the $6,800 for the leftover for the Eagle Monument, and that is to cover some of the landscaping portion of that project, and it's about to be done sooner. And then the next one is the— it was part of the budget amendment from last fiscal year, the $268,000 for the digital sign projects, and just— we're just rolling it over for this current fiscal year. And then there is a grant money that we got through the Division of Wildlife Resources that Todd was working before. That's about $200,000 also that could be rolled over for this current fiscal year. So these are the 3 projects that—

Speaker A: That makes sense. In the email it said that it included a trail, and I didn't know how the trail was, was, uh, correlated with that because they're kind of different areas, but maybe it was different. So my other Question or clarification, Brad or Zach could maybe weigh in. It's right there if you leave it on line 88, basically the asphalt trail from Walden Park to Cedar Corners. Do you need to include from Cedar Corners to—

Speaker P: Mayor, are you referring to this $25,000 project later?

Speaker O: I don't think we need to adjust anything really. I think really what we're trying to here in the fund is obviously we received some grant money for this project, correct?

Speaker K: Mm-hmm.

Speaker O: And this is showing that we have an expenditure account so that we can bill the resources and the materials against it. We just, we just need it for bookkeeping and whatnot. So, and then once we submit all the funds, whatever we end up using on that, which we anticipate we'll use the full $25,000 on that project, then we would submit that for reimbursement. But it's just really— it's an expenditure account that we have to show that we can spend the dollars for the project.

Speaker A: Any other questions as to what was in our packet? We'll wait for the public hearing for the rest. If there isn't, let me make sure. Councilmember Wood, did you have any other questions on this? If you didn't stop me, I'm going to assume you're good.

Speaker C: No, I don't.

Speaker A: OK, perfect. The training—

Speaker J: Mayor, before we move on from this, I know that as we are traveling today, we are talking about some potential changes that would come maybe potentially by motion. Would you like David—

Speaker A: That's— they're in here. That's the ones we just talked about. The Woodhaven— that was the— that was the Silver Lake and then the the, uh, Point Express, the waiting, the design. Yes, they were in there. So as it's presented, we'll, uh, either by motion or as presented. Uh, the next one was the 17A, the training. Marcus, does that need to wait for the next meeting, or can we do that right now? We've got 20 minutes, maybe.

Speaker L: It's going to take more than 20 minutes, so we'll talk fast. This is, uh, annual training on open public Meetings Act as well as municipal ethics law.

Speaker A: Can we start it and continue? Go ahead.

Speaker J: Mayor, we are talking about— we have a portion of our closed meeting that would need to start at 6 o'clock because of other attendees, but there we could cover other things prior to and maybe take care of all of those things so that we don't necessarily need to come back after the entire—

Speaker A: If we can get it all done, that's what I was trying to either do, this one or that, and I'm I think it makes sense to use the time for closed session. Okay. In that case, I'm open for motion.

Speaker E: I move that the council adjourn to a closed session pursuant to Section 52-4-205, subsection 1 of the Utah Code Annotated.

Speaker D: Second.

Speaker I: All right.

Speaker A: We have a motion by Councilmember Whiting and a second by Councilmember Wright. And I'm going to start the vote with Councilmember Clark.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilmember Wright?

Speaker D: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilmember Whiting?

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilmember Wood?

Speaker J: Yes.

Speaker C: Yes.

Speaker A: All right, we'll adjourn at 5:36 to a closed session and be back at 7:00. And, and we will start sending a link to Rich. Yeah, he's got it.

Speaker G: All right.

Speaker A: Good. Stephanie's good. Okay. All right. Before we get started, Councilmember Wright is going to offer a prayer.

Speaker D: Our Heavenly Father, we're grateful to bow our heads in prayer on this Tuesday evening. We express gratitude to live in this free country and this beautiful city and, and to be citizens one with another. And we pray thy Spirit be upon us as we consider those matters of business that will come before the council tonight, that we'll be kind, respectful, listen, and be able to disagree without being disagreeable and express our opinions and Amen. Pray for any that may choose to offer public comment or engage the council or the mayor on, on any level this evening, that, that they'll feel heard and have that opportunity to express their thoughts and feelings and help us to have listening ears and feeling hearts. We express gratitude for our first responders. Pray thy protection and safety upon them, as well as our military military families and veterans as we, as we know that they find themselves in harm's way from time to time. Help us to be neighborly and look after one another. These things we kindly ask in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Speaker A: All right, thank you. It is 7:03, and I'll officially call this policy session to order. Before we get started, I just wanted to mention Councilmember Hewish and Councilmember Wood have been excused. They have some prior obligations. There's a chance we'll get Councilmember Wood remotely, but maybe not. Looks like he's off for the night. So we appreciate all of you guys that have made it here. And it is the 15th of September, 7:03. And as we get started, we'll have Deputy St. Peter lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Speaker B: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation Under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Speaker A: Thank you. You kind of acted like that was a surprise, but everything we do around here is throwing you right in the fire. So thank you. Start off, there's actually— I know of a couple of things, but hopefully Steve's ready. From what I understand, there's a couple of information items. I was at a UFA meeting this morning. Um, Chief— or, uh, I almost called you Chief Perchet. That's pretty good, right? You just want his pay too, right? Chief Fossum was there with me, and we learned some cool stuff. And I know as a city we've, uh, been working on some, uh, e-bike regulations and different things like that. So, uh, go ahead.

Speaker J: So, um, as I'm— as Steve is coming up to, uh, show that video, I'll go over the other information items if that's okay while he gets set up. We'll just need to have the thing set up there. Some of the other events coming up this week is Days of Service, Tuesday, September 15th through Thursday, September 17th. So look for your opportunities to volunteer and serve throughout our community to make a difference. Fall dumpsters are coming Wednesday, September 16th through Wednesday, September 23rd at Quarry Ride Park. And so it's a great time to clean up your homes prior to winter. Eagle Mountain Academy begins Wednesday, September 16th. This is our Citizens Academy, and we're excited to bring our 4th cohort through and to share what goes on in our city. Utah Rotor Pathway Fly-In, Friday, September 18th, from 4:30 to 6:30 PM at Cedar Valley High School. A helicopter will be landing at 4 PM. There's a farmers market, of course, every Saturday from 9 AM to 1 PM through October 10th at Cory-Royd Park. There's an adaptive trick-or-treat Saturday, October 3rd, from 2 PM to 4 PM at City Hall. And then our movie in the park Saturday, October 3rd, 7 to 9 PM at Cory-Royd Park. That is the memorial park featuring Hocus Pocus. And with that, I'll turn it over to Steve to play this video.

Speaker H: We're going to watch Hocus Pocus.

Speaker M: We know e-bikes and scooters are becoming more and more popular in our communities, especially with our kids. Unfortunately, we're seeing a significant increase in the number of injuries with riding e-bikes and scooters. We want to get your attention. E-bikes and e-scooters are not toys. They are vehicles. Here at Unified Fire Authority, we want to make sure that everybody understands the risks of riding, knows how to ride safely, and has the proper safety equipment and wears it every time they ride. Riding a traditional bike requires physical effort to build speed. E-bikes and e-scooters are different. They provide a lot more power with little to no effort, making it easier to reach higher speeds. That combination of speed and minimal effort can make it harder to recognize how much risk you're taking and how quickly things can change. More speed means less time to react, which can lead to very serious injuries, especially when not wearing a helmet. In 2025 alone, Intermountain Healthcare emergency rooms across Utah treated 536 people for e-bike and e-scooter injuries. Furthermore, only about 40% of bike trauma patients were wearing a helmet at the time of their crash. A new state law is now in effect requiring e-bike and e-scooter riders under 21 to wear an approved helmet when riding on public roads. Ideally, a full-face helmet, which offers the most protection. These statistics are concerning, but there are steps we can take to avoid many of these accidents and injuries. So, what can we do about it? Parents, pay close attention to the e-bikes and scooters your child is riding. Make sure it's appropriate for their age. Helmet on every ride, every time, no exception. Teach your kids to follow traffic laws and signs, ride at a safe speed, and always stay alert to what's happening around them. At intersections and crosswalks, teach them to yield to drivers and pedestrians, never blow through an intersection, and make sure both parties can see each other before proceeding. Make sure they're wearing visible clothing and have proper lights, especially in low-light conditions. These simple steps can help keep our kids safe every time they ride. Remember, e-bikes and scooters are not toys. They are vehicles. So let's all work together to make sure that our kids make it home safely every time.

Speaker J: Chief Fossum, we— this is a great video. Is the OFEA okay if we put this on our website and also post it on our Facebook page? Great, thank you.

Speaker A: Yes, I just wanted to bring that— something that we looked at this morning. I know as we look at code, also at safety, I think it's just a good reminder to teach our kids, first of all, that helmets are required under 18 on e-bikes, just like motorcycles, under 21, and that they're not toys or vehicles. So the, as a reminder, as we kind of, I think this is just an evolving situation, the e-bike situation. So anytime we get good information like that, I think we can bring it to the public and share, so.

Speaker D: Thank you.

Speaker A: Wanted to bring that out. With that, we have introduction.

Speaker K: You're good, Mayor Council. Mr. Reeves, thank you. Before I introduce one of our newest deputies, I was going to introduce both of them, and I'll publicly apologize to Deputy St. Peter. He was not ready to come here and give the Pledge of Allegiance. So, um, but, but thank you to him for that. Before I get into that introduction, just let me first thank you, all of you, and Eagle Mountain staff for all the hard work they've put in over the last several months for, you know, especially dealing with some of these financial decisions that needed to be made and, and, uh, and that you guys have worked through. So thank you. Um, and again, on behalf of the Sheriff's Office, thank you very much for that. So let me call up Deputy Deputy Cunningham. So in the past, as I've done, I just want you guys to meet some of our newest deputies. We have a lot of newest— new deputies. St. Peter has been here for a little over a year. He comes to the table with experience. But tonight I wanted you to meet Deputy Cunningham. She's new out here to Eagle Mountain. She is not new to law enforcement. Her career kind of started in dispatch many years ago. She spent about 8 years in dispatch and And she spent 5-plus years on patrol with another agency. During that time, she was involved with criminal investigations, special victims investigations. She was part of the traffic unit. She is currently motor certified, and I think she's been authorized to ride our bikes already. Close to it?

Speaker N: Close to it.

Speaker L: Close to it.

Speaker K: So we'll get her certified as another motorcycle rider here in Eagle Mountain with one of the 2 bikes that we have out here available to them. So you might see her out here doing some traffic enforcement. Some of you may have met her already. I'm not sure if you've met her in that context yet, but— Anyways, I just wanted to introduce you to her and to the citizens of Eagle Mountain. I think she's super excited. We are super excited to have her. She comes to the table with a wealth of knowledge, with a lot of experience, and is a great addition to our team out here in Eagle Mountain. So welcome.

Speaker A: Yeah, I'd say, I'd say welcome for sure. I've already had the opportunity to do— I can't even remember what we've done, but you've helped me on some calls already, and luckily you haven't been the one to pull me over yet. So, although it has happened, and it's a great challenge to pull the mayor over. So it's just a matter of time. I got pulled over last week pulling into City Hall of all places.

Speaker K: Again, thank you guys, and I thank all of you, and thank you, Deputy. Appreciate it. Appreciate it.

Speaker D: Thank you.

Speaker A: Yeah, welcome. We love our guys, our law enforcement, and we've had a lot of things. But yeah, I think so. You're afraid of this one? No, you were going to—

Speaker E: Oh, I was just going to say, I think we should clap to welcome you to our city.

Speaker A: All right, thank you. The next item on our agenda is 9A, the proclamation of Eagle Mountain City proclaiming Eagle Mountain as a just-served city, right around the corner with 9/11. Craig's going to read the proclamation.

Speaker E: Okay, proclamation proclaiming Eagle Mountain City as a just-served city. Whereas Eagle Mountain City, Utah recognizes that volunteers are an essential part Part of a strong, connected, and thriving community. And whereas meaningful volunteer service provides opportunities for residents to build relationships, develop a greater sense of belonging, meet community needs, and make a positive difference in the lives of others. And whereas JustServe is a service that connects individuals and organizations with meaningful volunteer opportunities in their local communities, helping people find ways to serve. According to their interests, abilities, and availability, and whereas Eagle Mountain City desires to encourage and strengthen volunteerism throughout the community and to help residents discover opportunities to serve their neighbors and improve the quality of life in Eagle Mountain, and whereas the city recognizes that service is most powerful when residents, organizations, businesses, and community partners work together toward the common good, And whereas designating Eagle Mountain City as a JustServe City demonstrates the city's commitment to promoting volunteerism, connecting residents with opportunities to serve, and supporting organizations that seek to make a positive difference in our community. Now therefore, be it proclaimed that Mayor Jared Gray and the Eagle Mountain City Council do hereby designate Eagle Mountain City as a JustServe city and encourage residents, organizations, businesses, and community partners to participate in meaningful service opportunities throughout our community. Dated this 15th day of September, 2026.

Speaker A: OK, thank you, Craig. Marcus, just as a reminder, proclamation executive, or do we need to accept that by motion?

Speaker L: I think historically we have just done it as an executive proclamation.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker H: Well, it's included in the consent agenda, isn't it? Or no?

Speaker I: No.

Speaker P: Okay.

Speaker A: That's why I was wondering if it needed to be. Just executive?

Speaker L: I think that's what we've done historically. I think we should continue with what we've always done.

Speaker A: Okay, be it done. Um, next item is, uh, public comment. Time has been set aside for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments. As a reminder, public comment is an opportunity for the community members to address the city council, and each speaker is allowed up to 3 minutes. If you wish to speak during the public comment portion, please complete the comment form located in the back of the room and return it to our city recorder, Lacey, on this side. Council members will listen but not engage in discussion during public comment. We ask that everyone remain respectful. Disruptive behavior, including cheering, booing, clapping, or comments directed at individual city employees, is prohibited. If you have an issue or question regarding staff or personnel, administrative staff will meet you in the foyer for further discussion. Lastly, public comment period is for items not associated with the scheduled public hearing. If your comment relates to a public hearing item, please wait until that item is called. And tonight's public hearing items are 16A, resolution and public hearing of Eagle Mountain City approving the first amendment to the fiscal year 2026-2027 annual budget. So that one we will call in just a few minutes. Right now I will open the public comment period at 7:16 and ask if if there's anyone here.

Speaker C: I do have Brianne Salazar.

Speaker I: She noted 16A but also wanted to comment on 17A.

Speaker A: 16A is a public hearing. OK, 16A we can wait, but 17A is fine.

Speaker I: Brianne Salazar.

Speaker A: We will allow you to come back again on 17, just so you know. You get 3 minutes, but in the public hearing you'll you'll get a chance again. So you will get a chance to speak again in '16. Make sure the mic is on. There you go.

Speaker Q: Okay, so I am Brianne Salazar. So I just have a couple of questions, and I know you can't answer my questions, but the one question that I have is, one, why do you think Do we pray? Why do we not have a clear designation of church and state? That is concerning to me as a non-prayerful person. That is troubling. Second, I just want to state that I hope or would ask that we do not. approve the property tax. And then I also ask that we stop having data centers come into Eagle Mountain. So as a resident that's just further up towards city center, I just ask that we stop having data centers come in.

Speaker A: So that's all that I have.

Speaker G: So thank you.

Speaker Q: Thank you.

Speaker P: So Joy Rasmussen as well, general comments, and then the public hearing comment for 16A.

Speaker N: Hello, I'm here once again to ask, I heard the news that Meta is building a bunch more data centers, and I'm not sure if those had been approved, like, a long time ago, or that was just like a recent thing. But the sentiment I'm hearing from everybody I know, most everybody, not everybody, but most everybody, is they're very concerned about building more and more data centers, that it's taking up so much land, and that's what we're going to be known for. That's going to affect our property values. There's lots of— it's very unpopular right now, data centers. And they're getting these deals to not pay very much property tax, which doesn't feel fair when you're raising it for us. And so I'm asking you again to please issue like a resolution that you will stop approving data centers until like safety measures have been taken to protect us. Like there's a lot of talk about AI being dangerous, and that's what these data centers are for. They're not for like just going on Facebook. They're all doing AI. And there's a lot of concerns about like the infrasound. So there's sound that you can't actually hear, but your body feels. And it damages your heart, people living near them are gonna be damaged by these data centers. It takes a bunch of energy, and it just feels kind of backwards to be raising our property taxes and giving these data centers the deals. So maybe if you were like publicly disclosed all the deals and showed the citizens like, hey, here's why they're benefiting us, like we've mentioned before, that might be a better way to do it before you announce a bunch of new data centers. Like, take citizens' input. And the second thing is I'm going to ask that you repeal the property tax increase because, um, we haven't been given the line-by-line budget numbers properly. Um, the pamphlet is inaccurate that we were given by the city. Um, the pamphlet says it would be on the ballot August 27— August of 2027, but the code says it should be on this coming November election if it gets enough signatures. So that's inaccurate. We've emailed the, the recorder to ask you to correct the pamphlet. I'm asking you guys to respond to that email and correct the— there's a lot of things that are inadequate or inaccurate according to law. So that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Speaker F: Missy Perry. Just kind of piggybacking off of Joy Rasmussen, my name is Missy Perry. This is the first meeting I've come to. I've I've lived here for about 6 years, and I feel like you need to represent the citizens and also listen to the concerns that we have. And I find it incredibly concerning what has been happening recently in our city. I would like there to be a clear, concise outline of the budget, of the allocations of funds regarding our budget, and why the property tax increase has occurred. I want that to be put on the ballot to be voted on or either repealed because citizens have a right to choose. This is affecting my family. This is going to affect my future children. And I just want to see on the budget, I want to see the proof of your work. Where did you come up with this? What did you— did you look into other budgets to cut things, to kind of cut the fat to put money into other things to allocate that to help with what we need for public safety. Because I'm not against public safety or anything, even though that's been purported like throughout the media. Like, that's— I want to support the fact that we have an increased need for public, um, like police or a couple more deputies and whatnot. However, I want to see the proof of your work. I want to see where on the budgets we couldn't cut things. So, um, I want a line-by-line thing. I would like to see something similar to what, um, Saratoga Springs has and what they have shown their citizens. And I find it very concerning that every time it's brought up, it's deleted from the city citizens page. It's deleted, um, on all these different forums where usually we all come together and It's just very concerning to me that this is happening here in our town, and I'm having to come here in person and say, please just show me your work, show me the physical proof, because the links that are provided are not adequate at all. Thank you for your time.

Speaker I: I do want to clarify that she did also request 16A, so we'll come back And that's all I have right now.

Speaker A: Okay, is there anyone else that is here that came to speak in our public comment period that did not get an opportunity? Seeing no one, we will close our public comment period at 7:23, and we'll bring it back to the council. But I can answer a couple of quick questions. Marcus can help me on some of this. The question about the ballot. The county required— they're already printing ballots. They get mailed out in a couple of weeks. For us to say whether or not the referendum would be— would have the signatures on the ballot, we don't know that answer yet. So what the law actually says is that we can hold a special election.

Speaker L: Yeah, it says that it'll be held the next regular municipal election, whichever is earlier, unless a special election is called. So the intent would be to call a special election In the event it qualifies for a ballot, right?

Speaker A: There's no way to get it on the ballot because we don't have the signatures yet, and it's already required to be into the county right now. So given the signatures, it will be an item that will be voted on. It'll just be voted on at the appropriate time with the next election. I think that's most of what I'm going to address right now. I'm happy to address any of the other concerns or questions. After the meeting, so with that, we'll bring it back to the council and Melissa Councilman Clark. Thanks, Mayor.

Speaker N: Thank you for being here tonight.

Speaker H: It's fun to see first responders and some of our residents coming and sharing their thoughts about what's going on with the city and the questions that they have. If I could, I would sit down with you each on your front porch and talk to you about some of the decisions. decisions that we've made and help you see just some of our reasons behind them. So if you have questions, please reach out. It's very difficult to conduct a conversation on Facebook with people. So, um, that— I also want to thank our tiny, tiny army of staff that has done so many great things this summer with us. Between water pipes busting and wells going down and having to write and do huge packets and to do the publicity and information about different events and answer questions. And I really wanted to acknowledge Evan Barrett. 10 years ago, our city had an intern that thought it would be a really cool idea to have a street fair so that there would be a place for our small businesses to be able to go and sell what they make to our neighbors. And that street fair grew to the point where it didn't fit on the street anymore. And it was really, really cool. We liked that street because it was shaded and there were lots of trees there. But this weekend That street fair celebrated its 10th anniversary, and, um, none of that would have happened without Evan Barrett's dedication and foresight and drive to help support our small businesses in our community. And Evan, I just want to thank you for all that you've done to help economic development and our small businesses. So thank you.

Speaker D: Thanks, Mayor. Welcome. It's good to see so many who've come out tonight. Just want to express my gratitude to each of you for taking the time to come and to share your thoughts. Even if we have a difference of opinion or we understand things perhaps from a little different perspective, I'm always grateful to, to have those who see things differently to help me see things from a different perspective. I want to, uh, I, I want to, I want to highlight Mayor Gray. He's not expecting this, He doesn't know this. I'm probably going to embarrass him, and I'm going to do it on purpose, okay? I just want to express my gratitude for the work that he has been doing. He has been running around Utah. He's been running around the nation and meeting with anybody and everybody whose ear he can get to try and help us advance those things that matter to Eagle Mountain. Citizens. He spent some time— and look, I know there are some who will say, well, gosh, why are you doing that? We're doing it because we're trying to improve our situation. I know he's met with Senator Curtis, with Congressman Kennedy. Certainly he met with the Speaker of the House today, Mike Schultz, and he's talked with Stuart Adams, our Senate President, worked with our local representatives, both House and Senate. And I just, I don't think the citizens really see the work that goes into what our mayor does. He's a cowboy at heart. He's used to getting up at 4:00 AM and taking clients on a hunt. And he works hard all day. He rides his horse, which anybody that's ridden a horse knows how much fun that is or isn't. I don't do it, can't do it. Some of you here do and enjoy that. But I just, I wish that each of you could spend 24 hours with him and just see the effort that he's putting forth on your behalf. I think that the way you feel about him and perhaps this council would start to change and modify a little bit if you really understood the work that we are about. So thank you, Mayor Gray, for your leadership, your example, and for your advocacy. advocacy, and in spite of your many imperfections, which are smaller than mine, I just am grateful for you and for the efforts you've been putting forward.

Speaker E: Thank you for those who made public comment. One invitation I'll extend is I'm very happy to meet with any of you who have concerns or questions that were brought up. It would be a lot easier to to go through and answer the questions in person, on Zoom, whatever, live. It'd be a lot easier than in an email or text messaging or definitely, or like instant messaging, whatever it may be. And I've extended that invitation to any who's had questions. Some residents have taken the opportunity to meet with me. And those of you who presented today, I'm happy to meet with you as well to ensure that your questions are all answered. and that understanding could be provided back and forth. So I'm very happy to listen and to share what I can. So just reach out to me individually. I'm happy to set up a private, or you can make it public if you want to bring people as well, that's fine. I'm happy to meet with whoever you wanna meet with, so, or have come and join on that. Grateful to be part of this great city. And, you know, we, This city has significant opportunity, and in many ways there's a blank canvas before us more than any other kind of city that's here in Utah. And so with that, there comes great responsibility that we guide it in a way that it becomes a prosperous city for all, not just for a few, but for all. And as a council, we feel the burden to make sure that the way we develop the city and grow it and and nurture it, it's done in a way that is with a lot of foresight and that we are contemplative of the various opportunities and to make sure we execute those in the best way possible to bring the greatest amount of prosperity possible to the greatest amount of people. It's really our endeavor as a council. We dive into the details. We research. We struggle, we debate back and forth, we listen to a lot of people. One thing that's opened my eyes is before I got elected, I was warned that it was going to take quite a bit of time. The warnings were not strong enough. It takes a lot of time, a lot more time than I anticipated, and it's weightier than I anticipated. It's also very rewarding. It's also very challenging. Thank you. But it's weighty because we are trying to do something that has not been done. We are trying to create something that has not been created, and we're trying to elevate this city to a place that no one thought it could go. It's going to take a lot of energy and drive to do that. I can tell you that as what Councilmember Wright just said about our mayor, that it's true. Mayor Gray is leading from the front, and it's also true that we are We endeavor to take this city to a place that no one thought it could ever go. When I say we, it's not just the City Council. The staff is on board with this, and citizens. We're grateful for public participation, public input, and ideas that come from the citizenry. Your ideas will help us be stronger and better. I can tell you we are going to go places that no one thought we could go. We will accomplish things that people thought could never be accomplished, because we're going to think larger than other people have thought. I'm grateful that we can be a part of this great society that is and will be.

Speaker A: Thank you. It's my privilege to have a little bit of time, so I'll save it for this. I will say that it's a lot more time than we expected. I know the Morandis are here tonight. I used to ride horses every Monday and Wednesday. Since I've been elected. I think I've been twice, but I only remember once. So they can attest that my riding has been on the back burner. Going back to— I saved this for the personal time— to some of the questions. I just want to say this the way that I say it every time. Before I open the meeting, I say, as is our tradition, we'll start with a prayer. Then I call the meeting to order. That's before the meeting. It's something that happens before we start. And that's by design. So I wanted to answer that question. The other thing about the line-by-line budget and stuff like that, I mean, Craig just told you the hundreds and hundreds of hours that are recorded and posted. And you're welcome to look at it. We try to answer every question we can individually. I'm not saying that. We answer the best we can. They're posted in 300 pages of books that we've attached to the website. I mean, we have done our best to show everything we can in the budget, and we'll continue to do that. A lot of citizens tell us, I don't want to read 300 pages and go to thousands of hours of meetings. I expect you guys to do it. That's what we've done.

Speaker C: Thank you.

Speaker A: happy to sit down and go through every bit of why and how and what we arrived at and discuss that, because I think that's the other part of our job, is helping others understand the Cliff Notes version of why we did what we did. And that will help us all get to a better place and a better understanding. Just to add to some of the other things, I'm grateful for Shop Fest, the way that went off. I spent a few hours there in the morning before I had to go to some other things. And then also the farmer's market that for 3 years in a row, I think I haven't been to everyone, but I've been to a lot of farmer's markets the last 3 years. And it, man, it has grown this year. It is unreal how big. And all the vendors are saying the best market around. They go to other markets and they're like, we go to Eagle Mountain and some of the others, but they love this one. So great opportunities in our city. And a lot of that to our staff. Evan started some of those ideas and we appreciate those going forward as well as, I mean, the park staff that's shown up this year. The market's been amazing thanks to those guys every Saturday coming in. The other thing you mentioned, the Rotary stuff, with that, the reason that's happening is it's homecoming week. So just a special highlight with our kids at the high school. Be watching out at the restaurants, they're probably going to be all dressed up. But the homecoming game Friday night, if you get a chance to come out, I'm going to go. I've been a couple of football games already. It's super fun. Just love supporting those kids. So just remember some of those other activities that are out there. But we appreciate you guys coming and helping us with perspective and being part of the process. It really is— it takes all of us. And I can't wait until I get to sit back down there and maybe start riding on Mondays again. So welcome to run and come and do this job. It's a lot of work. So thank you.

Speaker J: Thank you.

Speaker A: Thank you for being a part of it. With that, we have a few items in our consent agenda. I hope you guys made notes 'cause I know there's a couple changes, but we did talk about most of these. There was the 14B, right, had a change, and then I thought there was one more in— It was just the one. Which one?

Speaker H: I think that's it.

Speaker A: Okay, okay, with that then, Unless there's discussion, will entertain a motion.

Speaker D: Mayor, I, uh, I move that the Eagle Mountain City Council approve the consent agenda, uh, and on item 14B include the Planning Commission's recommendation number 2 only.

Speaker E: Second.

Speaker A: Okay, we have a motion by Councilman Wright and a second by Councilmember Whiting, and we'll start the vote with Councilman Wright.

Speaker D: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilman Whiting.

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker M: Councilmember Clark.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker A: And just to be sure, Council Member Wood is not online. Okay, that passes 3 to 0. And we'll go on to our first scheduled item, item 16A, resolution— and this is a public hearing— of Eagle Mountain City approving the first amendment of the fiscal year 2026-2027 annual budget. Uh, I do know that Terrence has a, a presentation to go over some of the budget amendments. These are some of the things that we do go over line by line And he's going to show us some of the things that we've updated in our budget.

Speaker P: Good evening, Mayor and Council. As mentioned, I'll be going over the first budget amendment for this current fiscal year. In your packet, this is the information that you're Currently, it's in the packet, but as discussed in the work session this afternoon, there will be some few items that we're adding to the budget amendment. I'll go them quickly and then we can talk about them in details later on. The first one is some leftover rollover amount for the Eagle Monument Project, digital display, wildlife corridor fencing project, and then we have some transportation project, widening Pony Express on the south side of the area, the Phase 1 from Eagle Mountain Boulevard to Shadow Drive, and then from Shadow Drive to Public Works area, and then some improvements in the Silver Lake area as well. Um, I want to provide some context on the requests that we received for the budget amendment. I'm looking at it capital projects versus operational budget requests. Majority of the requests, and especially for this first budget amendment where we just end our fiscal year '26 and we're rolling over to a new fiscal year, um, as you know, projects tend to span multiple, uh, fiscal years. So majority of these requests are related to capital projects, and then about 7% are related to operational, um, budget requests. If we're looking at capital projects, um, About 89% are strictly rollovers, so that means those are previously been approved as part of the fiscal year 2026 budget. We're just rolling them over, whatever is the leftover, to continue with the project in this current fiscal year. And then there's about 11% for the new capital project funding requests, which I will go over in a bit. Now looking at operational budget requests, Majority of the requests are tied to vehicles. As you know, a part of our current fiscal year has approved some new personnel requests, and then they will need some vehicles, so we need to purchase those for those individuals. And then next is equipment. There are quite a few departments that have requested some equipments that they need, which we, um, probably using some of the one-time money from the reserves that we can use for this one. The community development is requesting for a software to help with their plan reviews, and then there are some IFA or impact fee analysis, some airport feasibility study that we need to roll over as part of professional studies. We also have one personal request in the general fund. I'll go over that later. And then we have a couple of programs. We have some rebate money that we receive for our premiums, which we can use for some safety-related initiatives for the city and for our employee. And then one of those programs is tied to the soccer program, which we started this fall. And then the tiny, tiny blue bar over there is for the office rental space for the water department, the trailer mobile office. Now I'll be going over the items fund by fund. First is the general fund. The general fund net change budget request, about $1.4 million. Some of the rollover items, as mentioned, we started our soccer program this fall, and then we're— our recreation department is running that program. So we just want to roll over those approved budget last fiscal year. Economic Development has some airport feasibility study that they're doing as well. In terms of new items, as mentioned, there are some equipment requests from the streets, parks, and open space. Comes from skid steer— skid steers to some attachments, some large containers that we can put in the parks as well. As mentioned, majority of requests are tied to vehicles. And that rebate money that I mentioned about safety initiatives that we get from that premium firm rebate stuff. And as mentioned, we have one personal request, which is to add a new deputy city recorder to help with the workload in that department. Any questions about general fund? And the biggest is the capital project fund. So, um, some of the rollover items are some improvement in Nolan Park Bike Park. We're currently doing the Quarry Ride parking lot and, um, some money for Pony Express Regional Park, Silver Lake Community Park, and then, um, a street or a transportation project, Silver Lake and Woodhaven Right Turn Lane Project, that was previously, um, approved. And in terms of new funding, um, there is grant money that we'll be receiving for the new asphalt trail from Walden Park to Cedar Corners, and, um, also some sidewalk widening on Golden Eagle near Brookhaven Elementary School. And then as part of our discussion this work session, these are some of the few items that are being requested. These items are for rollovers as well. Eagle Monument, about $6,000, $7,000. Digital info display, about $268,000. And then wildlife corridor fencing, which is the grant money that we received through the Division of Wildlife Resources, about $200,000. And some transportation items are, as mentioned, some widening in the Pony Express area. This is for construction that is planned for February 2027. The, um, budget requested is $1.8 million. Um, it will be 2 to— for 2 to 5 lanes and removing that median. Um, so this one is from Eagle Mountain Boulevard to Shadow Drive. And then for Phase 2, um, they're requesting a, a design money or funding for $250,000 that will be, uh, hopefully be done this fall 2026, looking into between 3 to 5 lanes, putting some traffic signals at Parkway Fields and Paul Canyon Boulevard, and also realigning Paul Canyon Boulevard and Pony Express intersection. And then some improvement in Silver Lake neighborhood about those roundabouts in Woodhaven and Silver Lake and Golden Eagle and Silver Lake areas. It's $250,000. It's— the plan is for this fall of 2026, replacing them with traffic signals and also realignment of roads and crosswalks. Any questions about capital projects fund?

Speaker E: So if we— I mean, I know we have the speed study that's happening right now. We're going to get the results here pretty soon. There's going to be Money that we're gonna need to help execute that? We're gonna just have to reallocate from the currently planned capital projects? Is that what we'll have to do in order to fund that?

Speaker P: I think part of the plan is to, as part of our retreat, that will cover some of discussion about capital projects. So right now, once we roll over some of this money, I think there is a $200,000 that is already budgeted, which is not enough. And then when we do the retreat and we can discuss all these capital projects, and then we can figure out the priorities and then reevaluate, and then we can reallocate some of this funding. Any other questions for capital projects?

Speaker D: I have one question. The trailer rental that you referenced.

Speaker P: Yes.

Speaker D: I'm just curious why we're not buying a trailer. I guess that's the thing that's been banging around in my head is why are we renting one instead of just buying one?

Speaker P: That's a good question. I don't know if Brad or Mack can help me with this one.

Speaker O: I don't have a solid answer for you today. I just, I mean, it's how we've done it. It's been a rental trailer since It's existed there. I think it's probably been there 2, 3 years. And so—

Speaker D: We just keep renting it. And I'm just thinking—

Speaker O: It's something we can definitely look into.

Speaker D: If we're renting it year after year, why aren't we just buying it if we need it? Here comes the answer. Yeah, this has been a temporary solution as we try to get the funding mechanism in place for the admin building.

Speaker A: So this will be a part of this project that we're underway Okay. Our hopes was to do that building first, but with funding and whatnot, I didn't—

Speaker D: I mean, what's that look— what's that timetable looking like?

Speaker A: 3 years?

Speaker O: Yeah, we're tracking like a 3-year window on that.

Speaker D: So, Mac, maybe you should come back up. So, I mean, if— so if, if, if we can see, if it's foreseeable that we're going to be using this trailer for the next 3 years, why aren't we buying it? Or what does it cost us a year?

Speaker A: my understanding, these things are not cheap, and the, the rate that we're paying, we'd have to have it for probably another 7 years to break even.

Speaker D: But that'd be a question that we could ask Jeff, as he was the original facilitator of this.

Speaker E: Do we— what's the— you're asking what the lease rate is, right? Do we know what our lease payment is on that?

Speaker A: It's, uh, $18,000 a year.

Speaker E: $18,000?

Speaker J: $18,000.

Speaker E: Oh, $18,000.

Speaker A: But it is fully furnished.

Speaker D: Yeah, for me, that's, that's just one— that's the, the thing that stuck out to me is I thought, man, why aren't we just purchasing this?

Speaker A: And I know that one of the solutions too that we've talked a lot about is the North Service Area, and, and maybe we could put a trailer up there in the meantime, but hopefully that's less than 7 years. Potentially a City Hall, less than 5.

Speaker J: Originally, it was hoped, and this might have led to this, originally it was hoped that we would do the admin building first. But because of the cost of the overall sewer treatment plant, we want to make sure that we have the wiggle room and have the administration building at the end to make sure that we have everything that we need to take care of the citizens' needs with sewer processing and then use the rest for the administration building.

Speaker A: It's all timing. What does Kimberly say?

Speaker D: It's all the Yeah, you know, I guess I don't have any major concerns about it. I just, I just wondered if we'd been down that path with that one item.

Speaker A: We can look into it. Any other questions on the presentation before we go to public comment?

Speaker P: I just need to finish a couple more, sir.

Speaker A: Mayor, you're right, I'm doing 5 by 5.

Speaker P: I can finish them up and then we'll do the questions later, if that's okay. Thank you, Mayor. So the next one will be special revenue fund. Mostly these are related to the IFA study, the impact fee analysis for water, wastewater, stormwater, transportation, parks and trails. The new items being requested is the software, as I mentioned, that community development looking for plan reviews, and also some contractual agreement for the White Hills well water line project. For Enterprise Fund, we're rolling over some of the water and wastewater projects: well number 9, well number 7, the 4 million gallon tank in City Center, well number 8. When it comes to tied to the wastewater treatment plant project, the Ox Ditch upgrade, then we have Type 1 tertiary Treatment, and of course our 6 MGD wastewater treatment plan. In terms of new items being requested, there are some equipment requested by these departments for water and stormwater, which included in the budget amendment. And then also there are some additional funding needed for Well Number 5 upgrade. This includes updating the electrical control panel, the switchgear, and some PLC items for that, um, well project. Any questions for the rest of the items?

Speaker D: I, I just have a question for Ben. Ben, you gave us an update on well number 9 that they're at 1,000 feet plus or minus. That surprised me, meaning they're moving along pretty well with that. Is that going to come online for some of these others that we've had trouble with.

Speaker J: I see Brad raising his hand and Max coming up to speak to it, but we have a very good, experienced well driller, and so we're very pleased with their progress.

Speaker A: Yeah, so they're at roughly 1,300 feet. Yeah, they're cruising. They're anticipating this being wrapped up by the end of tomorrow as far as the drilling, and then they'll start the process of What does that mean for timing, Mac?

Speaker D: I mean, what do you think?

Speaker A: I mean, timing, we're probably another 45 days from wrapping that up. We'll have to do a test pump. Once we get that reviewed, then we'll go into design.

Speaker D: So we're probably another year before that's operational.

Speaker J: We're just trying to improve the average from wells 7 and 8 and having 9 all come together too. a consistent average.

Speaker D: But Ben, that's why I asked, because having had the experience with 7 and 8 and what a miserable experience that's been, frankly, and at 7 in particular, right? And our residents don't know all that story, but seeing that number 9 is going the way it is, I'm thinking maybe that will develop quicker on a shorter timeline than what we've been dealing with 7 and 8. That's hopeful.

Speaker O: I also think that there's some other components just for record too. So Well 9, obviously we'll have to test pump it to see what it is so that we can design the well house and all the motors and everything. But there's also the conveyance, the water lines, the water system that we need to connect into it as well. And so those are future projects that are on the capital project plan that we'll have to facilitate, and they'll have to be built in conjunction with that. Coming online. So yeah, within the next couple years. So yes, just for context.

Speaker A: Yeah, that, that well was done in less than a year, and the other one's been 5 years and still not done. It's pretty impressive. So any other comments on that? All right, seeing none, we will open the public hearing at 7:51 and Look to Lacey. I know there's a few.

Speaker I: Brianne Salazar.

Speaker Q: Okay, so my question was, um, At least in terms of the vehicles, um, why are vehicles not, um, kept at the facility? Um, why are vehicles allowed, specifically like police vehicles, um, uh, park vehicles, um, not kept here, um, at the main Like City Hall. Why are they allowed to be taken back and forth? If you go to other states— I'm from back east— police vehicles stay at the stations. Police officers arrive to work, get their vehicle, and then take it out for service, go back to the office, get their, their car, and then go home. That extra additional mileage, and if the officer is not required to live in that county, they're adding on additional mileage that's not needed, damage to the vehicle that's not needed, you know, all that additional extra wear and tear on the vehicle that is completely not needed unless the officer is required to live in Utah County or at least within Eagle Mountain, which I don't think that they are. So that is a lot of extra money that we are having to spend on vehicles that don't really need to be taken, one, out of the jurisdiction or out of the area. So that's something to look into. And then the other thing is the transportation bid. Um, is this the best bid that was reviewed and received? Um, $250,000 just for a design, um, seems really high just for showing what we're going to do for a 3 to 5 lane. I mean, call me crazy, but it's a straight line. Um, and then for the additional things for the parks, um, are all of those things absolutely necessary to do right now during this fiscal year? Um, I think it was—

Speaker F: 30 seconds remaining.

Speaker Q: Talked about previously to add some ADA things, but any of the additional things, are they absolutely necessary to do now? If not, Wait. Thank you.

Speaker P: Joy Rasmussen.

Speaker N: So I'm going to ask that you not pass this budget because when you were showing the slides up there with where things are going for what projects, there was no dollar amounts listed. So we couldn't, like, add it up and see if there's something else being funded that's not being shown to us, like the admin building. I'm wondering what this admin building is. Is that by chance the new city hall that you already bought land for and hired an architect to do a study on that? Because I just feel like there's not enough details here for the citizens, and I think you could look at your budget and cut some things out so you don't have to do the property tax increase. So I'm asking that you don't pass it. Also, the requirement for the pamphlet for the referendum requires a fiscal and legal impact statement that should identify all funding sources for the estimated cost.

Speaker L: This is off topic. She needs to stay on topic to the public hearing.

Speaker N: Okay, yeah, I would ask that you not pass the budget because there's not enough details. Citizens have lots of concerns, they're paying a lot more attention, and there weren't enough details up there. We can't sit here and do the math and make sure that what you're saying you need is going to just those things and not something else that hasn't been revealed. Thank you.

Speaker A: Missy Perry.

Speaker F: Hello again. So I was kind of pondering some things while he was giving the presentation regarding the budget and the different things that are like being added. And to be honest, a few of them kind of raised my eyebrows a little bit. And I can't help but think that this is similar to like a shopping list of items. Right? You guys are going through like, okay, we have parks, we have vehicles, we have all of these different things that need additional funding or that we can like put into like, um, projects and whatnot. However, when times are tough and things like are a bit tumultuous, which I feel like we're kind of going into a big change with the transition from Alpine School District to the Westlake School District and everything that's gonna be happening in 2027. Those are also things that are gonna be coming forth. And I feel like when that happens, you need to start cutting things from your wishlist, from your grocery list of, okay, what do we need to keep? Obviously meat and vegetables are necessary. Maybe we can skip on the dessert this year. Maybe that's something that we can hold off on a year or two. Maybe we don't change roundabouts into more lights. Maybe there's a better way to use the roundabout. Maybe if we actually paint them and properly sign them, maybe expand them, they could be utilized correctly. And actually, they're better. Roundabouts are better on traffic and congestion if they're used properly. And you don't have to put up a light. You save $250,000. And you don't have to run electric to a currently existing roundabout. Maybe just widen it a bit, add proper lines so people can see the lines and know how to navigate through them correctly. But that is a big— that's another item that could save us some money to help cut the cost from having to put taxes on citizens for their property. That money could then go— instead of property taxes increasing, we could use These funds are things that we push off for a different day or a different year that aren't necessary, that aren't— we have to have these right now. It's the things that are needed. Absolutely, we need public safety, we need less congestion on the roads, but there are some things that I think if we think about it—

Speaker A: 10 seconds remaining.

Speaker F: You can come up with a better idea than just ripping it out and putting in a light or just adding things to parks. Maybe we just wait on that until things are a bit more stable. Thank you.

Speaker J: I'd like to thank the residents for, for the, the questions and concerns that you've brought up. We do want to make sure that we're addressing those. And so if I've asked the mayor if I could take just a minute to maybe answer a few of those questions, and maybe I'll go backwards Just hang on, Ben.

Speaker A: I just want to make sure that everyone's done. I don't know if you meant to wait till the end, so I didn't know if you had a specific comment. Are you— we're good? I have nothing else. Okay. Is there anyone else that came to speak on this item that did not get an opportunity? Okay, seeing none, I'll close the public hearing at 8 o'clock. And, uh, go ahead.

Speaker J: Thank you, Mayor. Um, so first of all, I just want to address some of the things that, that were brought up. As far as traffic safety improvements and things like that, we do have a responsibility to ensure that we provide the best possible safety to our residents and that we do so using engineering standards and that we follow those standards through studies. And part of that is ensuring that we don't have intersections that fail. And so when we have an intersection like right out here here, um, where it's not a roundabout, it's a, a light at, at Trailhead and Pony Express where it is failing and there is a safety hazard, um, that's where those type of improvements go forward. And so, um, those type of studies are needed in order for us to move forward, and we also need those type of studies so we can have cost estimates to be able to, um, plan for in our budgeting process. Um, as far as, um, the budget amendment, this isn't the budget, this is an amendment to the budget. And as Terrence has reviewed, most of the things that were in this— and I, I believe it was close to 90% or more than 90%— are items that are carryover projects that are currently funded with current contractors and everything on board. And so what we're doing is we're taking the funding that was approved last year— because the project has spanned, uh, fiscal years— it is moving that money so that it can be spent this year, and we can fulfill those contractual obligations. Otherwise, we would just leave those projects undone throughout our community. We have to complete those projects, and we cannot spend money unless it's been approved by our elected leaders. There was a question with regard to the administration building. This is not the new City Hall. Our new sewer treatment plant has a planned administration building for the sewer department personnel that would be operating that facility. facility or doing the collection system for our entire city. And part of that sewer treatment plant envisions an office building. We just want to make sure that we can afford the processing portion of it before putting in the actual building portion, because if there's something that needs to be cut, it would be the building, not the processing. That's the most essential component. But it is not a new city hall. You also—

Speaker A: And I think that's a good point. You know, I mean, what can we cut? What can we tighten? We're literally— didn't we just hear that we're in a trailer?

Speaker B: Exactly.

Speaker M: We are currently—

Speaker J: And paying rent on a trailer.

Speaker A: And paying rent. I mean, it's literally exactly what we've been doing. And as we move forward, if we can afford an admin building, it would replace that trailer. And like Brett said, we hate renting. Owning is way cheaper, and that's part of that construction of a new sewer treatment plant. We've got a bunch of employees. That plant doesn't run itself, correct? Uh, and we're currently in a trailer. That— and by the way, that's been 16 years of no— of cutting, correct?

Speaker J: Um, the last thing I wanted to address was, um, the take-home vehicle question and the police vehicles and on-call vehicles and whatnot. Now, every city employee has a vehicle that they take home. It is those employees who are on call or would have responsibilities to come out during an emergency or during a fire, during like as far as building inspection, a water break. And we have those at all hours of the day and night. And when we have an emergency need, our person— Every hour of the day. Yeah, exactly. Every time there's an emergency, we have to have personnel that can respond with the tools that they need to be able to immediately provide benefit to the residents incidents and not drive all the way back down to the Public Works building, which is on the south end of our city. If that problem— let's say they live in the ranches or they even live in Saratoga, they'd have to drive all the way to past City Center near the data centers where our Public Works facility is and drive all the way back in order to respond. And homes could be damaged, water could be lost, all sorts of problems could take place if our personnel didn't have the on-call vehicles with the tools they need to do the job effectively for the safety of our residents. Specifically, it was talked about with public safety and police officers. Of course, the Sheriff's Department is separate and they have their own policies when it comes to that. But having been a city manager in both Utah County, outside of Utah County, and in the entire nation, I can tell you that on-call vehicles or police officers across the nation, typically the standard is that they do take their vehicles home, and that is especially held true in the state of Utah. I'm from New York. I lived— I've worked in Iowa. I've worked in other places. The reason that police officers, especially in the state of Utah, take their vehicles home is because the prevailing feeling is that police vehicles on the road create a sense of safety and stability, even if they're in the commute mode. And having those vehicles out out and about instills safety so that people drive better, they're more cognizant of what's going on, and there's more security. And if an officer actually did need to respond and they were off duty, they would have the tools and equipment that they need to be able to respond as well. This is so much so in the United States that the difference between regular take-home vehicles and police department take-home vehicles is that the IRS requires that if a take-home vehicle goes home, let's say, with somebody who's on call, that commute time is actually a taxable benefit to that employee. And that taxable benefit goes on their paycheck and whatnot, and they're responsible for that— those miles and the fuel that they would use in their commute time. But police vehicles are exempt from that by IRS standards, and that is because of the overall greater good of having police vehicles on the street. And so police officers, sheriff's department deputies, they are not taxed for their commute because they could be called upon to respond at any time for any emergency anywhere in the state. And they're all licensed by post throughout the entire state. And so it's not just a jurisdictional thing. They could respond anywhere. So I just wanted to answer some of those questions. Hopefully I've hit them all.

Speaker A: There's a couple more I can touch on, but also just On that vehicle one, why are they not here? Because they're parked at our Public Works. We have limited stalls. We barely have enough spaces.

Speaker J: But we do have several that are parked here.

Speaker A: And we do have some that are here. And then also on the sheriff ones, even though it's a need, newsflash, we pay $9.8 million no matter where they park because we're on contract. So it doesn't save us or cost us. It's absolutely a set price. And I don't care where you drive that car because it doesn't cost me any money.

Speaker J: But these were all good questions, and we're glad that you asked them so we could answer them for the entire public.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, so that's—

Speaker Q: Mayor?

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker H: I think there was one more, and I think it stems from what you use the money for. There was kind of this parallel idea of like maybe a family budget and going grocery shopping and getting the extras or the fluff. And I think a lot of people see the parks as The difference between a family budget and the city budget is there are certain funds that can only be used for certain things. And when there's parks funds that come from parks impact fees, we can't just shift those over and use them for water or sewer or for an additional employee or anything like that. They have to very specifically be used according to state law for the things that they were collected for. for. So while, um, I had the same question before I ran for office, I was like, why are we spending money on Corey Ride Park? Um, and before it was built. And I, I think that it's helpful to understand the legal limitations of certain dollars within a municipal budget.

Speaker J: I, I think that is a really good point. And I maybe just to add on to that as well, um, we do have certain assets in our community, and we want to make, make sure that we take care of and maintain those. It's our responsibility. Those are your assets, and we want to make sure we preserve them. And, um, to not take care of some of those assets would be equivalent to you not changing the oil in your car. Um, it might get you by, and you might not be able to— you might be able to live for a period of time, but eventually you're going to have to replace that engine. And so we want to make sure that we maintain our assets to the very best of our ability for our residents. And yet our level of service is really strained because we're spread very, very thin. And that's why the council's looking to bring more staff on to be able to help with enhancing our parks and open spaces.

Speaker E: Can you also address how it costs $250,000 to engineer something?

Speaker A: That's the last thing that I was waiting to get on right here.

Speaker E: Yeah, and do you— and what's the process of determining you're going to choose that particular engineer?

Speaker A: So we do have a procurement process, first of all, and this is something that I did for a living. Not the procurement, but the actual construction. And when we say design a road, you know, for $200,000, first of all, the $250,000, we had talked about this earlier today and we think it's going to be 70% of that. But this is a budget amount. This is what we're putting in the budget so that we can make sure that we can get the job done. Doesn't mean that's what it's going to cost. Doesn't mean that's the bid amount. That's how much we have in our budget to make sure that we get the job done. We think that that design's probably closer to $200,000. But what that covers is engineering for road base and inspections and the water line and the sewer line. It's not just the surface that you see. It's everything underneath it and designing everything from the roads, the curves. I'm sure you want to weigh in, so I'm just going to let you go ahead. Sure. And so there's other things too. There's also signal I mean, you know, conduits, controls, being that they're— it's more complicated than that, especially when you widen a road. You also have to get, you know, on-site survey as well as look at the elevations, because roads aren't actually flat, they're actually curved. If they were flat, we would have water standing on there and you wouldn't be able to drive on it. So we have to look at what's the curvature of the existing road, make sure we match it so it drains properly, we don't have standing water out there. So then that drain is going to go into the storm drain pipe that's actually underground. Yeah, where does that water go once we design that? It can't have a belly in it or it's no longer going to— it has to go downhill and then it's got to be pumped up and it's got to go downhill, right? That's all design. The size of the pump, how much water— if it's 7 lanes wide as opposed to 2 lanes wide, how much surface is that in a 100-year storm? Can that pipe hold it? That's a lot of math.

Speaker M: How many hours is that?

Speaker A: It's a lot. It's a lot of hours.

Speaker J: So a lot of engineers, there's site surveys, verification. I would just like to add to the point of this is that not only do we comply with state procurement laws, we comply with our own city procurement laws and responsibilities, our codes, to make sure that we advertise properly, that we receive bids from all competent contractors, that we go through evaluation process, a scoring process. It's very regimented. We have a purchasing person. We're going to be bringing on another because we have so many projects, but it just doesn't include that one purchasing person. Depending upon the project, if it's streets or if it's parks or water or whatever, we have a whole group that score those things out. And it's not necessarily always the lowest bid, I will admit that. It is the greatest value to the city, and we have to look at that based on their qualifications, what work they've performed in the past. You know, if someone right out of college versus somebody who's done a sewer treatment project of 6 million gallons per day before, and that they have proven competence to be able to do that. We want to make sure that we have the right people on the job and that we're using the taxpayers' resources to the very best of our ability. We consider those dollars to be exceptionally important and, and, and, and treat those with the greatest of respect.

Speaker A: And typically that does land on the lowest bid a lot of times.

Speaker J: A lot of times they are. A lot of times, sometimes they're qualification-based as well.

Speaker A: Yep. So, all right, I think we've answered most of those questions. And again, we're happy to speak to anyone. You know, one thing we're trying to do is make sure that the information is out there because the last thing we want is to leave that unanswered. So if we didn't answer something, by all means, we've all posted our phone numbers and we love talking to residents to help you understand why we're where we're at.

Speaker E: There's one more question that didn't get answered. So it was brought up that the presentation that Terrence did did not itemize the expenses, but if you, if you go to the public agenda, it itemizes every single item. So if you go to eaglemountain.gov, you click on public meetings, you go click on the public meetings portal, and then you click on today's meeting, which it'll scan right down to it. You click on today's meeting, you click on the agenda item, And you'll see a budget worksheet that itemizes everything line by line by line.

Speaker A: And that's also in your packet, so you've already studied it, so this was more of a highlight, correct?

Speaker E: Right, and the presentation that Terrence did was more of a, it was not intended to go line by line by line by line on everything. He was sort of hitting some highlights that gave us an opportunity to ask questions, but we've been given this line by line by line by line in advance so we could read through it. So we could give Terrence questions, but it's there for anybody to see. It's there for the public to see. It was not hidden. And then the other thing I will say, so when it comes to a city hall, because this has been brought up a lot, it's a long process to build a city hall. And you have to, you've got to buy the land and you got to design and it takes, you can't just do it all at the same time. So you just, Budget for it slowly, year by year by year, by completing step after step after step. So are we progressing down steps? Yes, because we need to. And if you look at other cities our size, they have city halls, and we're living in rented trailers. And and I would invite you to talk to our staff and ask them. Do your own independent analysis. Ask the staff if we have enough space. Don't just trust what we have researched.

Speaker A: Go ask them. I'm gonna say something on that real quick. Quick if you want, because this just came up today. Fly a drone, go take a picture of this building and look at the square footage of this building. From where we're sitting, everything on this side of us is the library. There's no staff in there. This is the council chamber we use for planning commission. We use it every single day for trainings, for meetings. We have the sheriff's department in this quarter of the building on this side. We have over 200 employees, but I'll call it 180 employees roughly, and that's over 200 now, that are in that quarter of the building, which has about— and plus 3/4 office, which is 4 more employees. 9 offices for 200 employees. That's it.

Speaker D: Well, you've got that in addition to the Public Works building.

Speaker J: Yeah, but I mean, here, and, and the rent office space that we rent on our north end of town, all rented, and you can own any of the vehicles Cars parked outside of there every night.

Speaker A: All rented, and there's not enough space over there. Here in this building, we have 9 offices for all of our— that we could put in one building, be more efficient, and save a ton of money. When we have a meeting here, and this is— I think the residents don't understand this about the City Hall. It's not because I want— when the City Hall gets built, I'll never see it. I'm building this— it's like plant a tree for somebody, for shade for somebody else. I'll never enjoy the shade of that building. The problem is when we have a meeting here and Steve needs to come from that building and Brad needs to come from this building, and we spend hours of wasted time coming to a meeting where we could be in the same building and have our— get our work done and go to work and get more accomplished. We will save money building a city hall. I will advocate for a city hall all day long that I will never sit in because it is the right thing to do and we need it. Our city is way overgrown for this building. It's not even close. So, you know, I mean, I'll have that conversation all day long. A city hall is not a want, it is a need, 100%. And I will advocate for that every day, even if I never sit in it. So that's the city hall. I kind of cut you off, Craig. I want to make sure—

Speaker E: No, it's all right. You took my thunder and ran with it, and you did a great job with it.

Speaker A: Because I think the number's important. We got like 9 buildings or 9 offices.

Speaker E: Well, to your point, and you said it, like, we're doing something that I'm not gonna— this is gonna be completed after our terms are done. And this is a lot of decisions we're making, and that's why I made the public comment earlier today. We're making decisions today to benefit the future. This is not benefiting us specifically.

Speaker A: And another thing that I wrote down, I was just gonna let it go, but 99% of this— I can't reach back there. Will you pat my back a little bit? Because you already did earlier today. None of this is funded with tax dollars. Most of this is money that we've gone out and got from MAG, from other partners, from federal appropriations, from the state. Today we were talking about $600 million, $700 million, $800 million today. $500 million on the one road and $300 million with the extension of Mountain View, that I went up there and spent the whole day advocating for, that I think we just moved up 15 years. Wait, I can't reach again. I'm just kidding. It's not taxpayer money.

Speaker D: But I think this is, this is the point, Mayor. I mean, this is something that I think our residents completely miss. Property taxes last year raised $2.8 million in Eagle Mountain city, period, across the board. That's all taxpayers. $2.8 million. Every single thing we touch, every project we touch is well in advance of $2.8 million. A well costs us $7 or $8 million to put in. So it's not coming from property taxes. I, I just, I just think that we miss that, and I think it's important that we underline that even with an increase of 60 67% or 69%, that number still is only going to go to somewhere around— $4.5 million. $4.5 million, which is, which is a truckload of money if it's in my bank account. In the city's coffers, $4.5 million is a drop in the bucket and will fund perhaps one small section of road improvement. I mean, I just think that's really important that we put it in context. We don't all deal with budgets like this. I never dealt with budgets like this. I don't deal with budgets like this in my own personal finance. But I think it's important that we understand it, and we need to get— we need to get to a place where we can actually have a meaningful conversation and quit harping on those things that are just myopic and lost, in my opinion. They're just lost. And I think it's because we haven't done a good job of giving context. I think that's part of the problem, is we haven't done a good job of giving context so that she— so that our citizens can understand what we see and what we're dealing with on a daily, weekly basis. And so that, that's where we need to do better.

Speaker J: And I think it's probably important to note too that with the council passage of its code last week, it bound themselves by ordinance to use those dollars in—

Speaker A: Orderly.

Speaker J: For public safety, as they committed to verbally. Now they're bound by ordinance to use those for public safety purposes, and that $4.5 million is really only half of the cost of the police department's contract. So money is still coming from other places to pay for But all of the public's property tax dollars, 100%, whether they come from residential or commercial or data centers or wherever, all property taxes go to pay for nothing but public safety because we all benefit from it together.

Speaker A: All right, I'm going to pull out my inner Marcus and say we're getting off track.

Speaker J: Let's go.

Speaker A: And say we got to bring this back to the item at hand and ask if there's any other questions. I think we've answered those questions and we're happy to have conversations further. Even if we don't disagree, don't agree, I still love the conversation. So no other questions? Terrence, do you have anything to add? If not, Brett, go to work.

Speaker D: I'll make a motion. Mayor, I move that the Eagle Mountain City Council approve Resolution 16A, approving the first amendment to the fiscal year, the budget fiscal year 2026-2027. 2027 annual budget as presented by Terrence.

Speaker H: Second.

Speaker A: Okay, and just to be clear, that was with the, uh, with the— okay, although I think it was presented as he presented it.

Speaker D: Yep. Yes.

Speaker A: Okay, uh, we have a motion by Councilmember Wright and a second by Councilmember Clark, and we'll start the vote with Councilmember Whiting.

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilmember Clark.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilmember Wright.

Speaker D: Yes.

Speaker A: Okay, that motion passes. All right. Marcus, stay on topic. We're going to have some training and learn about the Open and Public Meetings Act.

Speaker J: And, and maybe as an opening to this too, uh, this is Open and Public Meetings Act for the public's sake. Uh, once a year we're required to provide that training to our elected leaders. And so, Mayor, I, I would highly encourage you to ask our 2 council members who are not here to watch this portion of the meeting because this is really beneficial. But not only them, but our planning commissioners and any other boards that's really—

Speaker L: actually, uh, so I delivered this to planning commission last week, and I talked to the board between the meetings and told them they should listen to this.

Speaker A: So, and I know Charlotte's still here, um, so we can pass this information on. I believe Jesse might be online. So, um, she is online. So I think I think, to your point, I agree, and I think we need to make sure that gets out. Steve is— maybe we lost Steve, but whoever sits on those boards, make sure that we get that out. There he is. I just couldn't see you.

Speaker L: Okay, so this is a combination Open Meetings Act training and Municipal Ethics Act training. So we're gonna start with a little video just to highlight the Importance of understanding the rules.

Speaker A: Okay, please thumb—

Speaker L: oh, there you go.

Speaker A: I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, because I've worked in a lot of offices and I tell you, people do that all the time.

Speaker L: So, uh, It's important to understand the rules. Ignorance is not an excuse. It's a well-known maxim in the law. As an attorney, I always advise clients, you know, you need to inform yourself, because ultimately you're responsible to abide by the Open Meetings Act in this case. So the purpose of the Open Meetings Act is the intent of the legislature that the state, its agencies, and its political subdivisions, including cities, take their actions openly and conduct their deliberations openly. So that's why we have open meetings. That's why we make these decisions in meetings like this, is so that it can be done in the face of the public. These laws are important so that citizens can see how the process works. Okay. So just as an opener, potential penalties for violations of the Open Meetings Act are somebody could institute a suit to void a final action on something that's done in violation of the Act, that there are criminal punishments involved, and ultimately a violation by an elected official could lead to expulsion from office. Okay, so the default rule is that a meeting is open to the public. Meetings can be closed only for very specific reasons outlined in the statute. I think you're very familiar with What the reasons we usually close a meeting for are related to pending or reasonably imminent litigation, land purchases or sales, or discussing the competency of an individual. So whether that's in relation to hiring or firing, or if it's in relation to contracting, or whatever the case may be. So it requires a 2/3 supermajority vote to close a meeting. So in this case, it would typically require require 4 votes. Okay. So the question then is, what is a meeting? It is actually a term that is defined in the Open Meetings Act. It is the convening of a public body with a quorum present. So the convening is done by the person with authority to convene a meeting, which in our case is either the mayor or 2 council members. So with a quorum present, which is 3 individuals on the council exclusive of the mayor, including a workshop or an executive session, whether in person or by means of electronic communications, for the purpose of discussing, receiving comments from the public about, or acting upon a matter over which the public body has jurisdiction or advisory power. So the simplified version of this is a— you have a quorum, so 3 individuals, and you are discussing public business. Yes, are you going to say something?

Speaker P: Craig?

Speaker O: Oh, it looked like you were gonna say something, okay.

Speaker L: So this, a meeting can include phone calls, video conferencing, emails, text messages, et cetera. It doesn't have to be a formal setting. So the rule of thumb is if you are in a quorum, don't talk about city business, which I know can be hard to do because what one thing do you all have in common? So, it's that you're all elected to represent the city. So as I said, a quorum is 3 members of the city council exclusive of the mayor. It's specific in the statute. The mayor does not count in determining whether a quorum exists. Chances of social meetings are not subject to the Open Public Meetings Act, but they cannot be used to circumvent the requirements of the act. So if you wanna go bowling together, that's fine. Just don't discuss city business. It's not a meeting and therefore not subject to the act. Again, typically we would only discuss items that are properly noticed. There's, again, noticing requirements, there's emergency noticing requirements, all sorts of things. But you can't take final action on anything that isn't properly noticed. So if there's a discussion item and you— there's something that comes up where it says City Manager items and we talk about it, you couldn't take final action on that unless you specified what item you were going to take final action and notice that that separately. Okay. So this is an important one because this is, I think, 2 years old now since the legislature added this. I think it's an important rule, which is individuals constituting a quorum of a public body such as the city council may not act together outside a meeting in a concerted and deliberate way to predetermine an action to be taken at the meeting on a relevant matter. And relevant matter is a defined term. It's just anything within your jurisdiction. So, what that means is that if one councilmember talks to a second councilmember about a relevant matter, that's fine. They can even predetermine their action if they want. I wouldn't advise it, but that is not against the law. If they then talk to a third councilmember, even if it's not all together at one time, then that, and they predetermine the action, that would be considered a violation. And here's a good example of it. I think most of you have seen this. But I think it's hard to find Open and Public Meetings Act videos, but this is a good one, and from a— you wouldn't expect it from casino.

Speaker A: Chairman, members of the commission, Mr. Wollstein is pleased to be here today. And when the day finally came, I was ready. I felt so confident that all I had to do was present my case. And we have documents, one of which is a report by retired FBI agents which completely absolves Mr. Rothstein from any wrongdoing. I'd like this marked, Mr. Chairman.

Speaker E: Pardon me, Counselor, before you continue.

Speaker B: No, I want to have this marked.

Speaker J: This commission is prepared to act on a motion denying the Rothstein application.

Speaker H: Deny it!

Speaker A: Do I hear a motion seconded? Mr. Chairman.

Speaker E: Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.

Speaker A: Do I have a vote on the motion?

Speaker G: Mr.

Speaker A: Chairman.

Speaker K: Aye.

Speaker A: Aye.

Speaker H: Aye.

Speaker E: The ayes have it. This hearing is adjourned.

Speaker L: Okay, so I show that video because it I think demonstrates the rationale behind the Open and Public Meetings Act. Here, obviously, you see this really, you know, very full table full of what appear to be case reporters. I'm not sure why they would need half a dozen case reporters filled with mostly irrelevant cases, but apparently they have that. They have a bunch of documents. They spent hours preparing for this. And before they've had any discussion on the matter, they vote and decide it. Obviously, this is not the purpose of the Open and Public Meetings Act. What we want to do is have that deliberation, let them present their case, deliberate about it openly, and then make a decision, not have it predetermined like it was, as what happened in this case. So now I'm going to go with some hypotheticals. Hypothetical 1, and I've changed these from previous presentations. So Councilmember A meets with Councilmember B to discuss a preliminary plat application coming coming before the city council on the next agenda. Councilmember A convinces Councilmember B that preliminary plat does not meet the legal requirements. They decide to vote against it at the next meeting. Is this a violation of the Open and Public Meetings Act? It's okay to answer if you know the answer.

Speaker E: Not a violation.

Speaker L: Why?

Speaker E: It's just 2 of them. Does not constitute a quorum.

Speaker A: But it still does create—

Speaker D: But what you don't want to do is predetermine an outcome.

Speaker P: Yes.

Speaker D: That's the key. That's where you're trying to trick us.

Speaker L: So I would say that this is not a violation, but does somewhat go against the spirit.

Speaker D: But it kind of borders on one that is potential.

Speaker L: Well, this is not a violation because there's not a quorum. Now, I would not recommend that you predetermine actions. It's fine to form opinions, of Of course. You look at the preliminary plat, you think it doesn't meet the legal requirements, it's natural to form that opinion based upon review. I would expect you to form an opinion. Certainly, maybe not set in stone, but certainly form an opinion prior to the meeting, because that means you studied the issue. What, you know, even predetermining in this sense is not actually a violation, but maybe against the spirit of what you're being asked to do. Okay. Hypothetical number 2. Councilmember A speaks to the mayor about a development agreement on the next On next week's city council agenda, and they agree on several specific changes that need, sorry, there's a typo, need to be made to the agreement. The mayor contacts Councilmember B and discusses the matter. Councilmember B agrees that the changes are important and indicates that he will support them. Is this a violation of the Open and Public Meetings Act?

Speaker D: Trick question.

Speaker L: It's not very tricky. So it is not a violation. Again, because the mayor does not count towards the quorum, that's the principle being illustrated. Again, when you're going through agreements, if you think something needs to be changed, obviously you're the policymakers, you make those decisions, and it's okay to form an opinion on that. Obviously you should be open to reconsideration or amendment or modification of those, what changes you think need to be made, or be willing to be convinced that they don't need to be made. and discuss that in the meeting. But forming these opinions and even discussing it among 2 council members and then the mayor is not a violation of the Act. So there you go. Hypothetical 3. Council Member A speaks to Council Member B about a rezone application in front of the City Council next week. He convinces Council Member B to recommend approval. Council Member B speaks to Council Member C to get her support. Council Member C dislikes the rezone application and declines to give support. Is this a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act?

Speaker H: Yes, because they combined A, B, and C and had a discussion by proxy.

Speaker L: That's correct. So the fact that Councilmember—

Speaker P: Oh, sorry.

Speaker L: The fact that Councilmember C predetermined something different than Councilmembers A and B does not matter.

Speaker H: Okay.

Speaker L: So it's still a violation. Okay, hypothetical 4, same facts except that the discussion occurs via text messaging. Is this a violation?

Speaker C: Still yes.

Speaker L: Still yes. Okay. Text messaging doesn't change the legal landscape. It's still a violation. Okay, hypothetical 5, during an open meeting, council votes to go into closed session. During the closed session, the city council discusses potentially suing a contractor over a bridge contract issue. Councilmember A asks how this will affect other agreements with the same contractor. Is this a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act?

Speaker K: Got it.

Speaker E: Well, they, they can go to a closed session because they're talking about litigation, so that's acceptable. They can discuss that, and I think they can discuss the ramifications of it, is my own opinion of it, but I don't know on that second part of the question.

Speaker D: The problem comes for me when Member A asks how this will affect other agreements with the same contractor, because those are not part of the closed session item.

Speaker L: So my favorite answer in the law is, of course, it depends, right? So I think a narrow discussion of how potentially suing a contractor, which again would fall within the reasonably imminent litigation, because you're actively discussing, should we sue this person? You know, whether, how that will affect the total landscape with that same person, and the effects of actually instituting a lawsuit, I think if you keep it in that narrow scope, you're fine. The issue comes when you don't keep it in the narrow scope, and then you run into problems. So, it's one where you have to be very vigilant in making sure that your discussion is specific to the lawsuit, and so your discussion of those other agreements is specific to the lawsuit's impact on them.

Speaker D: And that's why you sit in every closed session and keep us on track if we start to wander slightly. I mean, Marcus has us on a short leash.

Speaker L: Anybody who sees me out here knows I like to enforce rules, or at least I'm willing to. Okay, hypothetical 6. Same facts as hypothetical 5. Councilmember Beas About whether the city should terminate the contract, and what contractor the city should procure as a replacement. Is this a violation?

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker L: Yes, and again, this is what I talked about last one, right? We gotta keep ourselves very narrowly tailored on that discussion of those other contracts, and discussion of the lawsuit. And the second we start talking about, well, who should we get to replace them, then you're all of a sudden, you've crossed the line. So don't do that. Okay, hypothetical 7. During closed session, the city council discusses the professional competence of Company 1, whose services the city is considering using. Is this a violation of the Open and Public Meetings Act?

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker C: Why?

Speaker H: Because it's an individual, not a company.

Speaker L: That's correct. So the— you're allowed to discuss the professional competence Competence of an individual. Individual is defined as a human being in this context. Sometimes we use the word individual in the law to not just mean human beings, but also legal entities. But in the context of the Open and Public Meetings Act, it literally means a human being. So talking about a company, unless you're talking about— unless company 1 is like an individual, say like it's a lobbyist, and they're the company, it's just one individual, then maybe you could talk about that individual's competence. But as far as, you know, you're talking about like Meta, obviously no. You're not talking about anyone's, any specific individual's confidence. You're talking about the company. So that would be a violation. Okay. So thus concludes the Open Meetings Act portion of the training. Are there any questions?

Speaker D: No, but it's always fun to have you try and trick us, Marcus.

Speaker L: I do what I can. Try to make it interesting, so try to make you think so it's not just rote memorization but actually critical thinking. So, alrighty, let's go to Municipal Officers and Employees Ethics Act. All right, from the beginning.

Speaker N: Okay.

Speaker L: So the purpose of this, of the act, is to establish standards for conduct for municipal officers and employees and to require these persons disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest between their public duties and their personal interests. Okay. So here's the first thing. It's unlawful to disclose improperly used private, controlled, or protected information acquired by reason of your official position in the course of your duties in order to further substantially your personal economic interests or to secure special privileges or exemption for you or for others. Okay. So this is pretty straightforward. In the event that you come into contact, and I don't think most of you would on any sort of regular basis, but in the event you come into contact with private control or protected records or other information that would fall under that, you can't use that for your own gain. I think this falls in the common sense category. Whenever you obtain something via your public service and you try using it for personal gain. I think common sense tells you that might be wrong. Okay. It is unlawful to— and so anytime— so I just want to clarify something. Anytime in the law we say unlawful, it means it's a crime. So sometimes you say, you know, you can violate the law and it's just there's implications where you could be liable in a civil suit. But anytime you use the word in a statute or in an ordinance that says it's unlawful, it means you're committing a crime and could be prosecuted. Okay, it is unlawful to knowingly receive, accept, take, seek, or solicit directly or indirectly for the officer or employer or for another a gift of substantial value or a substantial economic benefit tantamount to a gift that would tender improperly influence a reasonable person in your position to depart from faithful and impartial discharge of your duties, that you know or should know that under the circumstances is primarily for the purposes of rewarding you for official action taken. So either of those things. However, there is a safe harbor provision that says an occasional gift valued at under $50 is okay. So if you're at a conference and you receive a free meal from a sponsor and it's less than $50, that's presumptively okay. Again, these are— That's the safe harbor provision. So that's a presumption. It doesn't mean that because something's $51, it's necessarily a violation. That's always a case-by-case basis. The $50 is simply a safe harbor provision. So when I was younger, not so much anymore, I used to like Law and Order. When I became a lawyer, I started to dislike it, because I see all the things that are wrong with it. But when I was younger, I liked it. And there's one episode where one individual murders his brother, and his mother, who is a rather wealthy individual, a wealthy businesswoman, then essentially bribes a judge to let the surviving son, make a ruling in favor of the surviving son to get compelling evidence of his guilt suppressed, and thus the case dismissed. And so the way that she undertakes to provide this bribe is to arrange with the bank that her business banks with to provide a substantially below market rate loan for the mortgage for the judge. So she's not actually providing anything, and that is basically, if you look at the definition of substantial economic benefit tantamount to a gift, that is basically what is described, is what occurred in that. Episode. So anything where you would receive something of value, whether it's, you know, somebody is going to sell you something at below market rate because you are on the city council or an elected official, that would be problematic. You know, again, the language here is it has to be something that would tend to improperly influence you. Or that would tend to be a reward. So, you know, you get invited by a developer to some sort of event that they're hosting, not just for the city, but for many, including employees and elected officials of the city, and they're offering you benefits at that thing, then it's just a question of, is this less than $50? If it is, I'm probably under safe harbor. If it's more than that, then it's probably a bad idea to accept, because it could be construed as a reward for official action taken. Okay, so let's go to another video.

Speaker A: Hey, Tom, check it out.

Speaker L: Norton Construction just sent this over.

Speaker A: Whoa, mama. I love Great Lakes wine.

Speaker H: No, no, no, no, no.

Speaker P: You know as well as I do that we are not allowed to accept gifts over $25 for corruption reasons. We live in a fishbowl, and the public is always watching.

Speaker A: But you cannot enjoy this basket.

Speaker P: I'm so sorry.

Speaker A: And so to avoid temptation, I'm going to lock it up.

Speaker L: Okay. So apparently the rule in Pawnee is $25, not $50, as a safe harbor provision. But so again, that's kind of illustrative of the, you know, if it's something You know, when in doubt, you know, just don't accept the gift. I mean, maybe this is a bit overkill here, but there was booze in that if you watched the episode. So probably not a good idea to accept.

Speaker D: Ooh, hey.

Speaker L: Okay. So, all right. It's unlawful to use or attempt to use the officer's or employee's official position to further your personal economic interests or secure special privileges for you or others. Again, this kind of goes in the common sense territory. Don't use your office to make money for you or your family or your friends. So, cut.

Speaker A: There's a million ways to exploit your power, but have I ever given in to that temptation? No, never.

Speaker E: I'm not that kind of politician.

Speaker A: Official Parks and Rec business. Just need to grab a quick hot dog. Sorry about that, little girl, you can have the next one. I have a moral code and I never violate it. People look at me and they say, wow, Tom, You are so pure. You're like a brown Superman with a beard that just stands for justice and truth and the American way.

Speaker L: Yeah, don't do that. So obviously this is, you know, a humorous representation of kind of what not to do, and it's obviously on a very small scale. But yes, we don't use our office, our position for personal gain. They call it public service for a reason, so. Okay, so these violations can be prosecuted criminally, and depending on the value of any benefit received, it could be up to a second-degree felony. Anywhere from a Class B misdemeanor to a second-degree felony depending on the value of the gift or other benefit received. So just don't do it. When in doubt, you have my number, so just call, we'll discuss. And yes. Okay, so part of the Ethics Act, In fact, I would say the majority of it is dedicated to disclosure requirements. So it is an offense, which is another term that means it's unlawful, for a city council member to receive or agree to receive compensation for assisting any person or business entity in any transaction involving the city, unless you file a sworn statement with the mayor. And follow the requirements. You give a description of what's going on, and you disclose it in an open City Council meeting. So those are the required disclosures. Under state law, that's all you're required to do. As we'll discuss later, under city law, you would also be required to recuse yourself from any action related to that. So, okay, more disclosures. A City Council member who is an officer, director, agent, or employee, or the owner of substantial interest in any business entity which is subject to the regulation of the city shall disclose the position held and the nature and value of the interest upon first becoming appointed or elected to the city council, typically elected, and anytime thereafter if any of the information changes. So disclosure is in the form of a sworn statement to the mayor and the city recorder. And the mayor provides a copy or outlines the substance of the disclosure to the remainder of the city council. Okay, an interest of $5,000 or less need not be disclosed, and that's out of the statute. A city council member who is an officer, director, agent, employee, or owner of substantial interest in a business entity which does or anticipates doing business with the city shall publicly disclose to the members of the city council immediately prior to any discussion of any— by such body concerning matters related to that entity. And the nature of the interest. So again, so there's the disclosure you give to the mayor in writing, and then hey, now it's got business in city council on the agenda. You have to disclose it immediately before the item is called on the agenda. And you know, again, under city code, you would also recuse yourself. So violation of the disclosure requirements could lead to expulsion under the statute if they were proven would lead to expulsion. And it also makes any action in violation of the disclosure requirements voidable, which is important distinction under the law. Void and voidable mean 2 different things. Void means it never took effect. Voidable means if you do certain things after the fact, you can void the action. So you can void it. It's not necessarily per se voided. Okay. All right. City code. Each public official who is a member of the city council shall disclose disclose every conflict prior to consideration of any action. And again, also for purposes of this chapter, the official has a conflict of interest if they know or have reason to know that a parent, spouse, sibling, or member of the same household, agent, principal, client, employer, or employee also would violate any of these things or would meet any of these requirements. So if you're required to disclose, Under the state act, you have to both disclose and then recuse. If you have an ownership interest in a business having matters under proper consideration for the city council, same. All these things would involve disclosure and then for an agenda item recusal. Have an ownership interest in property within Eagle Mountain City for which zoning, conditional use, or development approvals are under consideration. This would not apply to a principal residence. So if you own a house, you live in it, that would not apply. But otherwise, yes. Represents as an agent, professional services contractor, or other advisor individual with matters under consideration before the City Council. Again, if in your day job you're doing something to that effect, for example, say you worked for LRB, there are municipal financial advisors. When we're doing municipal financial stuff, then you would have to recuse from that. Okay, so has an ownership interest in business or property that has been issued a business license by Eagle Mountain, uses or develops property located within the city limits other than your personal residence, And which offers the same goods, products, or services, or would use or develop property in a similar way as a business or property which has matter. So again, this is related to, you have, you know, you own property and you're a competitor to the person that's being, that's getting rezoned. So you would have a conflict there because they're asking for a rezone and you're their competitor. Again, this relates to zoning, conditional use, or development approvals. If you own property that's gonna be affected indirectly or directly, other than, again, other than a primary residence, then you would have to disclose and recuse. If you have agreement with party seeking approval that would finally financially benefit you, then same thing. So hypothetical 1. Okay, City Councilmember A attends a conference to receive training on his duties. Company 1 invites City Councilmember A to dinner and pays. Company 1 has business before the City Council. The cost of the dinner is $40. Is this a violation of the Ethics Act?

Speaker H: No, because it's under $50.

Speaker L: That's correct. Safe harbor provision, you know, again, the standard is if it would you know, reasonable person would, you know, would be, I guess, influenced to not impartially discharge their duties. However, if it's under $50, there's the presumption that it's fine. Okay. Dinner costs $75. Otherwise, it's the same hypothetical. Is this a violation? I would say probably not. It's outside the safe harbor provision. Would a $75 meal cause you to change your vote? So I would assume not. But again, at $51, is that a per se violation? No, it's probably not a violation. At a $10,000 meal, they take you to some White House fundraiser dinner, it's probably a violation. Where you draw the line in between those 2 numbers is unclear. So my advice is always just keep it under $50. You don't have a problem. At $75, is it not a per se violation? But it could be. So that's why I say it's probably not. You know, in some contexts maybe. But again, my advice would be don't do it. So, okay. Hypothetical 3, city council member has a 25% ownership interest in Company 2. Company 2 does business before the city council. Does City Council Member B have any obligations under state or city ethics laws? If so, what are those obligations?

Speaker D: Yes, you have to disclose your ownership interest, right? And, uh, let's see, and then if that business comes before the council, then you need to recuse yourself and walk away and allow the council to deal with that outside of your presence.

Speaker L: Yes, so you would have the written disclosure obligation to send something to the mayor, also would have a disclosure obligation in the meeting to disclose it immediately before consideration and recuse yourself. Okay. All right. So last part is standards for civil discourse. So this is in the city code. I think it relates to ethics in that obviously the way that we relate and talk to each other and the people who come and do business before the council, I think, has an ethical implication. And so we do have these standards for civil discourse. And state code basically says you should adopt them, and that's what that reference to state code is in here. But the purpose is, again, to meet our obligations to each other and to the public by following these. So let's talk about the standards. Conduct or language that is condescending, uncivil, abrasive, abusive, hostile, or obstructive impedes the fundamental goal of participating in civil discourse and public processes, and the rational, peaceful, and efficient resolution of decisions, and is a violation of this standard. Such conduct tends to delay and often to deny resolution of issues in the public interest. So that's something to keep in mind, is that when we are speaking to one another, sometimes discussions can get heated, or when an applicant comes and they have a proposal that sometimes discussions can get heated. It's always good to keep in mind to keep our conduct and our language within these bounds. So, you know, they may say something that you think is stupid or that doesn't make any sense. We still treat them with respect and we explain why we hold that position, not just say, hey, that's stupid. So. Elected and appointed officials and city employees should exhibit courtesy, candor, and cooperation in dealing with each other and the public and in the administration of the city. Elected officials, members of city boards and commissions, and employees shall not, without an adequate factual basis, attribute to other persons improper motives, purpose, or conduct. Each person affiliated with the city should avoid hostile, demeaning, or humiliating conduct and words in written and oral communications. Neither written submissions nor oral statements or conduct should disparage the integrity, intelligence, morals, ethics, or personal behavior of others. So, uh, pretty, uh, self-explanatory. And that is the end of the presentation. Are there any questions?

Speaker D: Very thorough. Thank you for the reminder, Marcus.

Speaker A: Perfect. Thank you. I was thinking to myself as you go through that, some of the other things that I just highlight as a reminder Of course, that was ethics and somewhat code of conduct, but in our own code, you know, Section 2, just a reminder to read that, and maybe the way we treat each other and talk to each other, a reminder to do it civilly and treat people with respect. So I sure appreciate that. Is John still with us? There he is. You move to a new seat every day, I swear. It's not your fault.

Speaker G: Good evening, Mayor, Council. Um, so I finally got the quotes back for the reinforced— or the precast fences. Um, to have a custom panel will range between $20,000 to $30,000 to have it designed, and then it would be no more than any regular panel after that. So if they wanted to— if we want to come with a design standard, we can create panels, a couple panels, and then we can have whatever they have as fencing material to come back to make it look blended all together.

Speaker H: Do you think that the arts facility fund, a quarter of a percent could be used for that if it was designed in such a way? Because I'm all about finding alternate funding sources for it. I know that we had discussed something like that.

Speaker J: I think certainly, um, streets, you know, a streets project, a percentage needs to go towards arts, and you're beautifying the street while also Providing the safety enhancements, and that's really what it all comes down to. You want to have a safety enhancement, but the beautification aspects of it, if the cost is the same and yet this element adds the beauty to our community and continuity, sure, absolutely.

Speaker H: It kind of reminds me of the bridges on I-15 that either have like a wildlife something or the Olympic something that's on them, and they're restricted funds that can only be used for that. So it's like Can we kill 2 birds with one stone? Not literally birds.

Speaker A: I think one of the goals— this is something I think Rich and I was kind of talking about a long time ago— and could we, you know, have our emblem on, on these walls and different things? Uh, but really the goal was to save money for the contractors to be able to have our own Forms, and all we'd be buying is concrete at that point. So I think I heard you say, uh, same money as far as the pour.

Speaker G: Yeah, after they design it, it would be just as expensive to buy that panel versus one off the stock panel they already have.

Speaker D: If you're gonna buy it.

Speaker A: Yeah, if you're gonna have somebody custom pour it. But if we found a way to get a concrete company to store those panels, I mean, They're obviously making a profit margin by building those panels, so I would hope that it's not— that if we had our own forms, that there's a cost savings.

Speaker D: What's the longevity of those forms? What's the lifespan of them? Do you have any idea, John?

Speaker G: Anywhere from 800 to 1,000 pours. So you would only have a few of those custom panels mixed in with a standard panel.

Speaker D: Yeah, I mean, that makes sense to me. I just wanted to know how often are we gonna be looking at a mold charge?

Speaker G: Right.

Speaker J: In one of my previous cities, there was an HOA, a larger— yes, okay, it was Santa Clarita. In Santa Clarita, there was a large HOA and large subdivision, Summit Ridge community, where the HOA went and the city The master builder actually went out, got the forms, pre-built all of the panels, and those were available as different builders were building different areas so that they had continuity. And it just made it one source and easier, and they were able to buy it wholesale. So it's just an option, but—

Speaker A: So, So anything else on that? You said $30,000 and then—

Speaker G: $20,000 to $30,000, depending— it depends on how intricate the design gets. The harder it gets, the more expensive it gets for the poor.

Speaker A: So an E might be a little cheaper than the full logo.

Speaker G: Right. Or just— or the eagle. The other thing is, some of these places, some of the 3 different manufacturers I was able to get a hold of, 2 of them— Pretty much do the installs themselves. They do sell some to third-party fence installers, but most of this they do the install themselves too. So we could be in a position where we'd be locked into one installer.

Speaker A: Yeah, I mean, if, if we own the forms, we own the forms. We can move and we could pour here if we wanted. But if we're asking somebody to store stuff, we'd be— probably have some kind of arrangement. But I So I don't know how to really handle this report. It's something that I think we need to talk about. So I don't want you to check it off as done. I think we need to maybe bring it with Evan or something to a discussion because now it's— now we have the info.

Speaker G: What do we wanna do with it?

Speaker J: We could put it on a work meeting and let you guys have an open public meeting about it.

Speaker A: So then in that case, you wanna assign that out to, as far as who's gonna get some info and bring us, you know, I mean, we got the costs, just now what do we wanna do with it? Whether it's design, do we do a couple logos, whatever.

Speaker J: And I could see what other cities are doing as well. Just do a simple blast to the City Managers Association, that type of thing.

Speaker G: I know Herriman has some custom ones.

Speaker A: So next time we have a light agenda, Lacey, we'll add this on. So plan on like 2028.

Speaker H: I wanna make it clear that I don't wanna spend extra money on it, but if there's restricted funds that can only be used for something like the art piece or whatever, we talked about this when the art quarter of a percentage was created, and I remember Mayor, when he was on council, talked about manhole covers. Like, we have to buy manhole covers anyway for a project. We could put a design into them to— Do whatever, and that's just part of it. So like, I don't want us to try to find money from someplace else, but if we have it in an art fund, to me that seems like a good use for it.

Speaker A: I'm fine with whatever direction you guys say on that, even though I might slightly disagree because of this. The goal is to help improve some of the developers that haven't, you know, that don't find that cost-effective. This is a way for us to get an elevated fence and keep it cost-effective. So I think there's some value in that. Although I do wanna use restricted funds, I don't know that that's a limiting factor is all I'm saying. So yeah, let's bring that back with those type of discussion points that we can hash out. Next?

Speaker G: At the next meeting, you're gonna discuss The traffic calming, traffic study stuff. So that is coming back. And that is all I have for you for all the updates on my side. The only thing is, is there anything you guys want to add?

Speaker A: I think just for Councilmember Weitig's sake, I'm going to throw this out there. As that comes, tonight it was brought up, the funding source. I know we set aside $250,000. $200,000? It was $250,000. Anyway, I think we need to know if there's, you know, 5 suggestions You know, each one of those allocate a dollar amount so that we know kind of what we're dealing with when we—I mean, we just—we're kind of throwing darts to try to get this project moving, and we need to know what it's going to cost. Yep. So we're meeting with them next week, and we'll make sure that we have some estimates in there for all the recommended traffic calming solutions for each location. I'm pretty sure you've been in the same meetings as me, so you've heard kind of the higher priorities. Maybe start with those, and you know that we kind of bring.

Speaker D: So it will come with a. prioritization. That's what I'm hoping.

Speaker A: Our goal is to present like a matrix, so we have like all the locations, what they recommended for the solution, and then also we thought for some locations, you know, why the speed tables may or may not work for that location and kind of talk through options so you guys can see it and make those decisions.

Speaker E: So one thing we talked briefly about, ladder signs and adding more ladder signs to the part of the city because we've had growth there. Where, where are we at with that discussion?

Speaker G: We were waiting to hear back from that.

Speaker H: Mayor, do I need to get up and leave?

Speaker A: Huh? Okay, we won't have a quorum, but I— we're just seeing reports.

Speaker G: So, and let me reach back around. The chamber was supposed to be, uh, giving us information on that. I haven't heard back from them, so let me reach out to them.

Speaker E: Sounds good.

Speaker A: Okay, was there anything else on that?

Speaker G: Unless you have something else.

Speaker A: We can wait for a minute. We can do some liaison reports. It's not a voting issue, so.

Speaker D: She's back.

Speaker A: Okay, no sweat. Anything to report?

Speaker E: Laison? I'm meeting with the library board for a quarterly meeting next week. Chamber of Commerce is rocking and rolling. Met with them last month and they're just, we're very blessed to have a very active, robust chamber and they're doing a great job. And I visited Shop Fest, it's epic. We're very blessed to have it. And the— and we had a meeting with the Eagle Mountain, the Youth Council, and there's tons of energy with the Youth Council right now. We have tons of people coming to our meetings, and it's just awesome to see that. And the youth are providing lots of ideas. This last meeting was amazing. The youth are leading it, they're driving it, they're providing a lot of input as to what's going on, and it's, it's just, it's an awesome organization to be a part of right now.

Speaker A: Yeah, there's been some youth that have reached out to me that want to join. But they wouldn't be voting members at this point because of the new—

Speaker E: Correct. They would not be voting members, but they can definitely come to the meetings and give their input for sure and participate.

Speaker A: Yeah, and I wonder if they could be voted into the quorum if that became, you know, I mean—

Speaker E: We could. We just wanted to cut it off at some point, but I mean, could we? We could for sure do something like that. I mean, it's—

Speaker A: Do— does that discourage people to join it late? You know, I mean—

Speaker E: Yeah, I mean, we ran a few weeks before we cut it off, but—

Speaker A: Let's just see what it does. But I know there's a couple, and I think maybe you've been made aware of some of them.

Speaker E: I'm aware of one person that reached out, and yeah, but I said come to the meeting and participate. I mean, at this point, there's so many people that are voting that one additional vote— I'm not that it's gonna persuade things one way or the other, 'cause most everything they talk about seems unanimous anyway, or very close to it. But what's powerful about people coming is they're giving great ideas, and then there's just more bodies to enact those ideas as well.

Speaker A: I should have said this earlier, but I'm even wearing my— I went to the suicide walk and the youth council was there, and I've got my— I went and walked, and that was cool. Some of the events I've been involved in the last couple weeks have been pretty fun, and I, for some reason, I just believe in this stuff, so I still wear the wristband I got. So that was cool. And the Youth Council did— I see them everywhere. It's just fun. Anything else?

Speaker D: Yeah, just quickly, Mayor. I mean, LPC, I volunteered to be part of their water committee.

Speaker A: I'm not surprised.

Speaker D: So just so that you're aware of that, and Justin Lee confirmed that they're going to allow me to help with that. And we do have LPC next Monday, just a reminder for you and for Ben. Seniors—

Speaker A: Wasn't Zach on there as a voting member?

Speaker D: Zach as well. Yeah, I'll reach out to Zach and remind him. And then the seniors have got, you know, our chili cook-off coming up in October, as I remember, and they're starting to work towards the donations for the Thanksgiving basket. So if you want to help with that, reach out to the seniors. They'll have a list of Items that you can contribute.

Speaker E: I, I see 5 o'clock, 5 PM senior games on September 28th. That's on my calendar. But that one got, that one got moved?

Speaker D: Yeah, it got shifted around.

Speaker A: That's the chili cook-off?

Speaker D: Yeah, they, they moved it to the end of October. I need to verify the date.

Speaker E: Okay, I see October— sorry, October 26th is what I see on that. The September 28th I can remove off my calendar?

Speaker D: Yep, take it off. They changed it. Okay, they switched it on us. Got it. And then just DRC. I hope each of you get a chance to sit on the DRC for a year. It will really increase your appreciation for what our staff does preliminarily before we ever see anything.

Speaker H: Mayor kind of gave me an assignment since I'm an evangelist for UTA to meet with Chandler, who's their government and community outreach person. One of the issues that we found with UTA, the new on-demand system, is that the system won't take you more than 6 miles unless you're going to a transit station. Well, for anybody who lives in City Center and needs to get to a job at Ridley's or Walmart, you can't get there. And that's a problem for a city that spans from Cedar Hills to Provo.

Speaker O: Thank you.

Speaker H: So we are working with them to create some special points that could get them up to Walmart, and maybe Walmart's one of them, City Hall. That is something that we're working on. I had the opportunity to go to the kind of grand opening of On Demand, and that was really good because I made sure everyone who had anything to do with planning at UTA heard about the 6-mile limitation, and it was good. I got to be there to represent our city while mayor was in New York. I think it was when you were busy with that. No, I think you were gone because I remember telling the other mayors.

Speaker A: Yeah, that one, that one I met with Chandler and he— and by the way, he gave me like 4 on-demand passes that I would offer to anybody that would try and use it or any of the council. One of the— so 9 miles to Saratoga, we've talked about, to the kind of employment center where Costco is. And I was asking that we bump that up to get a little further distance. And as long as they're not busy, they've kind of been pretty lenient on that 6 miles, but that's the rule. So we've gone to Skyler Beltran and asked him to expand that. And that's where I passed the baton. I didn't have the bandwidth for that one.

Speaker H: Well, I also think that Part of the issue is that they have a limited number of vehicles that are in the system, and we are out here on the outskirts of it.

Speaker J: If we can—

Speaker A: 16 vehicles, and I think they had 1,000 rides the first day.

Speaker H: 1,000 rides the first 9 days, but that's still a lot.

Speaker A: Okay, yeah, they gave me some stats. I was like, yeah, it was good.

Speaker H: 'Cause at the grand opening, they announced that it was 1,003 rides. I think one thing that we as a city may need to consider is finding funding or getting support from some of the corporate partners within our boundaries to help fund additional vehicles that are— will help staff up more of the Eagle Mountain side of things so that they can't say we don't have enough vehicles to do that. This. So we'll go through the hoops of trying to get them to add miles for us and add additional locations that we can go to. But if that fails, which I'm not completely convinced that it will pass, like UTA has kind of let us down in the past, if that's the case, then I think we as a council and a city need to look at whether or not we seek funds from someone or some entity to help pay for that because it's a huge benefit to our residents. Council Member Wright just talked about our seniors, Council Member Whiting talked about our youth. Everyone is using this on demand and it's had a huge turnout. So I think it's something for us just to think about.

Speaker A: They said a lot of the kids, like kids getting off of football practice because the buses have already left, have been using it. So one of the other things that I think we could advocate, and we could use the public to help us with this, is it's kind of meant for those first and last miles to get you home from a bus stop or something. But what would help is they will only do 6 miles in those cases, like, you know, to your home. But if we identify Costco and Walmart and the high school, they'll do 10 miles if it's one of, you know, a specific location.

Speaker K: Right.

Speaker A: So we're trying to identify and employment areas.

Speaker H: Exactly. I think the inherent problem with their 6-mile limitation, Mayor, is that the whole thing— the reason why they justified doing on-demand instead of the bus route that they came and announced to us and said that they were bringing and then pulled back— is that they want to find ridership numbers. Well, if there's a third of our population is outside of that 6-mile limit to get to Walmart or any other employment employment centers, that means 1/3 automatically isn't going to be factored into ridership numbers because it's not useful to them. And I think that we have to be a squeaky wheel with this. And you picked the right person to send.

Speaker A: I was just going to note that I got a call from Bob Allen with MAG letting me know that Saratoga Springs and UTA are applying for UDOT innovation grant money in order to expand and extend that 6-mile limit, and, and they wanted to know if Eagle Mountain wanted to join in on that same application.

Speaker H: I thought so. I know that I sent something in to Mayor and Ben, and I think that you guys had talked about Kimberly was going to have our grant writer start looking at that. That deadline's coming up, and I don't want us to miss out on it. When they had told me about it, there was only one other city that had even submitted anything, and I know that Saratoga is doing it too. We have a stronger case if we do something with them, I think.

Speaker J: Um, I, I had a meeting with Mark Christensen as well, and, um, he, he encouraged us to put in an application. He thought that it would be more beneficial. You can go up to $3 million per application, and if we join in, then of course we're limited, but there's an opportunity for both cities to put put in and potentially get $6 million for our region. So he encouraged us actually to do it separately and try to meet that timeline.

Speaker H: I think we could have a whole other fleet with that amount of money. Does it say— is it $6 million in a year or $3 million in a year?

Speaker J: I don't know the specifics. Those are just numbers he provided.

Speaker A: The grant's a 3-year funding, so that number is probably a 3-year number total. But then, then we would have to decide at that point whether we want— whether we have some other funding Or we ask a corporation to do a match.

Speaker J: Or we petition UTA to bring our own tax dollars back because we are already paying for those dollars.

Speaker I: That too.

Speaker A: Of course, you know, you've heard a lot of my reports with UFA and at the Capitol, just different things I've got going. So unless you have specific questions, I won't bore you with my 40 hours by Monday.

Speaker H: Mayor, can you, and maybe you talked about it and I just missed it, did you talk at all about where we're at with UTA and the process that we're trying to get figured out with UTA, not UTA, UFA and UFSA and where we're at with that?

Speaker A: I met with them this morning and that we're 90% on the contract. She said she'll have it this week.

Speaker L: Yeah, that's what she indicated to me was that she's 90% finished with the draft for me to review.

Speaker A: Yep, that's what she said. And then we're working through the tax code to try to figure out how to make sure that we don't overtax in the transition or undertax in the transition. And I think we got it figured out today, some solutions, but it's more about also working with the state on how to pull those funds in and to do it properly. We've seen where mistakes have been made in other counties. So that's really what the holdup. But right now, the answer to your question is December 31st, 2027. Right.

Speaker J: And we're also working with the league. We met with the league this week as well to— because while it would be an increase to our taxes, it would be a decrease to UFA taxes. And the net effect is zero to our residents. And so Ultimately, it should not trigger truth in taxation. It should be a net zero to the residents. And is there a possibility for legislative changes that would allow for that? Logan ran into a very similar issue this year between the county that was providing a service and a city, and they ran into that issue and it became— it got onto the state's radar. We believe that that would be very important for ARC.

Speaker C: Thank you.

Speaker J: because truth in taxation should just be that, truth. And the truth is your taxes wouldn't go up, it would just be transferring from one to another.

Speaker A: And the interesting thing is that the House rep, the rep that runs a lot of the tax bills is in Logan. So it's hopefully that it's on his radar.

Speaker H: Well, I think it's just like with the school districts. We have Alpine School District, as a taxing entity right now. The Lake Mountain School District doesn't have to do a truth in taxation to switch and bring that over. So I think I'm glad you guys are pursuing that.

Speaker A: That's what we're working on. So yeah, lots of meetings. We've met with the league, we've met with the state, we met with all those people this week. It's been busy. It's Tuesday.

Speaker I: Yes.

Speaker A: Anything else? Yep. Go ahead.

Speaker D: Mayor, I move that, uh, we adjourn to a closed session for the purpose of discussing, uh, discussion of pending or reasonable imminent litigation, the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual, the purchase, lease, sell, or exchange of real property, a proposed development agreement, project proposal, or financing proposal related to the development of land owned by the estate or political subdivision and/or the deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems pursuant to Section 52-4-205, Subsat 1 of the Utah Code Annotated.

Speaker E: Second.

Speaker A: All right, we do have a motion by Councilmember Wright and a second by Councilmember Whiting, and we will return to this meeting afterwards to adjourn, just so you're aware. We'll start the vote with Councilmember Clark.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker A: Councilmember Wright. Yes. Councilmember Whiting?

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker A: Okay, at 9:17 we'll go to closed session.

Speaker D: Sometimes I think it's good to read those so that the public understands the things that we can address.

Speaker A: It's what we just learned.

Speaker L: You recording?

Speaker A: All right, it is Maybe my thing doesn't work.

Speaker D: 10:21.

Speaker A: 10:21, 10:22, and we're back in our regular session, and I will entertain a motion.

Speaker D: Motion to adjourn. Second.

Speaker A: Okay, I got Council Member Wright with the motion and Council Member Clark with the second. All in favor?

Speaker P: Aye.

Speaker A: Nobody opposed? That passed unanimous, and we are adjourned at 10:22. I almost called you Council Member Wood, by the way.