Alright, Dan.

Are you ready to go?

Taught us.

I'll call the study session to order.

We have form.

We're gonna move up the discussion on short term normals.

It's night.

But not to the main meeting.

Okay.

I want to tell you that I had in Herman yesterday of the calendar.

About 80% of the calendar was one Ranger party that was held at an Airbnb inheritment where all these kids came in and just had a raging giant party.

Airman PD, of course, caught like 25 of them.

But when I was making plea deals with the kids, I was talking to them.

I said, So would you like that to happen in your neighborhood?

Would you like someone to throw a big rager in your neighborhood?

And they all said no.

And I said, Well, what makes you think the people in that neighborhood liked it?

Well, I guess we didn't.

Yeah.

Well on that note.

So this is just something that we started discussing two weeks ago, so I hope you'll be okay if I just fast forward to where we left off.

Um so we're proposing to allow uh short-term rentals in all residents of districts.

It can be in all or a portion of the residential units.

It can be a detached accessory drilling unit with a permit, but not on a property that has an internal accessory drilling unit.

And we're talking about that because of the state law and the intent of that was to provide housing.

Um, and that's the only regulation that we currently have is that IADUs can't be used for shelter rentals.

Um not in a tent trailer camper, RV or other uninhabitable structure.

Um not in a unit that's current long-term rental.

And they cannot be used for commercial purposes for the debts.

The range or a wedding reception area.

For instance.

So for occupancy, we're allowing one short-term rental per residential unit with one rent at a time, and trying to divide within small programs.

Can I sorry can't Google that?

Could we switch it so it says not for events or commercial purposes?

Because I feel like the way that's written it makes it sound like the commercial events are not okay.

But that regular event, that's how I interpret it.

Yeah, commercials modifying both.

It can't be called for events, is what you're trying to say.

For commercial purposes.

But people have events.

You can't say you can't have a place to have.

But we were just talking about you can't have a wedding reception there.

Six weeks.

Which would not be that's not a commercial event.

That's just an event, right?

Okay.

Um, yeah, we'll we'll make that change.

We'll run it past Spencer here in legal, because I know um some language you were proposing previously to bad events.

Um had some concerns on how Britain.

Um, so we'll we'll adjust that then.

Because I I think the the goal of that is to not have these rangers and figures and weddings, right?

Like you don't want a house in your neighborhood having a wedding every single weekend.

Like if you have a dog.

Or a party, a graduation party.

That's a one-off.

Yeah.

I don't want that.

We'll probably have to define events.

Right.

Right.

My party in Harmon was a birthday party.

Still would have been illegal in some of its own home.

It's not because it was a short-term rental, it's because of the activities that were taking place.

But it was a short-term rental, and everybody can merged on it.

I I just think like legally there has to be conduct.

Um, so we have the minimum stay being three consecutive nights, and the maximum is less than 30 consecutive days.

Uh and then we have occupancy is based on bagging parking, which I'll get to on the next slide.

And then the event uh hotels and our RV parks and home parts.

So for our occupancy, um it looks at uh number of bedrooms or sleeping areas, so we're assuming uh two two people per bedroom or sleeping area, that sleeping area has to have a minimum of 70 square feet, and then if the house wants to have additional occupancy, it has to have 50% square feet for each uh additional person.

So that's how the seven has an occupation.

And that's based off building code.

Are small children exempt?

That's well, I mean so the building code's looking at if you have a bedroom and a house, what that minimum square footage should be.

So that's what we're racing that off.

You think in like a baby on a pack and playing?

Well, I just think like so.

I have a five-bedroom house.

Do I have four off street parking spots?

I don't know.

I have a garage and a driveway.

Yeah, I guess then.

So yeah, parking will be two off-street case spaces for short-term rental and one half for every bedroom uh exceeding two.

And then we round up.

So uh we're proposing to have an urgent response uh hotline.

Uh by telephone 24-7 during the rental period.

And then a house or decision making that individual must be available to view the property within 30 minutes of uh complaints like that.

Yeah, I like that too.

Once the commit is approved by the zoning administrator, we'll send a notice with that urgent response number to a budding property owners to verify and drink the police so that they have that number.

And finding commission indicated that they want to make sure that a budding means includes people across the street as well.

So we might be changing that tax just a tiny bit to make sure that's you could say a budding and adjacent.

So for noise, uh it's we're just requiring that the host ensures renters are aware of our noise and host ordinance.

Um we're requiring that the host posts uh the short-term rental permit and business license inside the short-term rental, the urgent response hotline, the all applicable rules, and then a good neighbor policy that is gonna be on the next two pages.

Uh so this these good neighbor guidelines are something that we uh saw in another city.

So I've seen at rentals where they have to put the number on the front door of the house.

So if a neighbor comes to knock on the door and say you're too loud or blocking that car, there's a number for them to call.

So we were hoping that the notice would do that to the neighbors, since we're mailing it out to the neighbors.

Yeah, I mean I think it'd be nice if they were posted somewhere on the exterior of the house.

We can entertain that.

I think at the previous meetings we had heard that we didn't want any type of signage on the exterior of the house.

Making it separate from the neighborhood, but I don't think like I wouldn't want my number on the exterior of the house.

I think yeah, but I think if you're really mad at your neighbor and they've rented their house and there's 200 people there, are you gonna be able to find that number?

Like there has to be some responsibility for the neighbor.

Like if I get that notice in the mail, I'm gonna keep it so that I can or put it into my phone.

Um I do think there's some responsibility from the neighbor.

And but they can also call the police and fire who have business.

Like if you have a noise problem and you knock on the door and nothing happens.

Just don't call it and you call the police.

That's a number, doesn't necessarily just call you zero for it.

Right, exactly, because no one won't answer.

I mean, whoever is this property manager needs to know that they need to be accessible.

I don't think that's too much to ask of a property manager.

I don't think so.

Either that I meant putting a number after I I think some people like this is a legitimate business that people can like I could buy the house next to mine and have a Airbnb, and it could be just fine.

Do you know what I mean?

Like we want good actors in this, right?

Like this is gonna bring tax revenue, like I think it's fine as long as the problem is not Airbnb's, the problem is bad actor area.

Maybe it's off the night.

Okay.

I just think it needs to be really clear.

And I think there needs to be strong.

We can look into that and see what other things require as far as posting on the outside of other cities do or not.

Is there any tax remote we get from Airbnb?

Yeah, so they have to.

We don't right now, right?

But we will only if they're voluntarily now registering, which is but yeah, with but with this, they'd be getting a business license.

We know that they're there.

That's good.

What is the fee for the business license?

I think it's eighty ten dollars plus seven dollars uh employee.

That's okay.

Sorry.

So again, we're uh proposing to have this uh short-term rental giving the guidelines uh posted within the unit.

It uh provides the non-emergency police number, um it lets them know that there will be an urgent response number posted in the unit, um, if there's a fire extinguisher in the unit, um that they can't have commercial events in the units to make sure that they are aware of not discussing the neighbors, especially between 10 and 7 a.m.

Consistent with our noise alignments that they should be parking on site, not blocking anybody's driveways, sidewalks, not departmental lawns, they shouldn't be exceeding the occupancy limits, uh reservation, pick up for themselves and make sure that their pets are under control and on the lease of the windows uh um just reminder to be good neighbors and citizens of here.

Thank you for that.

I think that looks that looks great.

Yeah, thank you for pointing it up.

Um for health and safety, uh they're required to have a fire extinguisher, some open carbon monoxide wants for the fire code.

If they have a fire sprinkler system, they'll have to have their annual from uh inspection, uh visible house numbers, um cards you maintain the residence according to all city ordinances in the online listing, we're gonna require the short-term rental and business license numbers to be posted in that listing.

And then just as a final uh item of inspections will be allowed as needed.

And so that's what we're proposing.

Um bring it to you guys next week.

Is there a fine if you do one without getting the business license or not?

It would just be the code enforcement process, so yes, they could be fine citations, but there are a criminal code.

I think it would have to be something that says violations are of infraction in order to enforce that.

I mean, could we re add some of our city code to make it enforceable?

We'd have to add it to you'd have to add it to the screen.

If you get if you're running, if you're doing one of these throwing the radio and the neighbors call and come in on business again, requirements that can start out as an infraction over the Capitol.

At some point there should be no more license, right?

Like if there's a whole revocation process for that, yeah.

I'm talking about people who just disregard it, do it.

Right.

Right now, we're just referencing our standards of the setting violation such.

We set our own funding for we can, but I think it's gotta be within the parameters of what municipalities can do for us to be.

Is there a maximum amount that you can charge for a misdemeanor?

Yes, yeah.

Yeah.

So varying misdemeanor levels.

No jail time class C is 700.

I think we should send for a thousand bucks.

Yeah.

I mean that's I just should be sort of real problem in the neighborhood.

I think you gotta have a T.

I'd like to see it.

First offense is a fraction, second offense, it's a C.

It goes to a B.

We could escalate it.

Let people see what their consequences can be.

I'm telling you, if your dog gets off lesion by someone's by 3,000 bucks, it's also 1800 bucks plus a lot of money.

People don't let it happen twice.

Yeah, you just have to check the state code that has restrictions on criminal classification for municipal ordinances.

I think it should be the max and the message.

Okay, we'll work with legal on looking at looking at that.

And you're talking about the penalty for not having a license or yeah, I think that's great.

Yeah, if you don't want to come to UR thing, yeah, then I think that's a huge problem.

You get to ride the expensive pony.

Okay.

Thank you.

That one's I don't want to be code.

I want to be criminal, so it's the change.

Right.

Or inherent in that one you're talking about.

Was there any like is there any sort of were they breaking any city code as far as the Airbnb?

Or it was just that they're breaking the law like minors.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Interesting.

All of them.

All motors on the ones.

I'm sure that never happened to be.

I don't know if we're hair and that with their biggest employees.

I know they use one.

Is there an age on it?

You have to use certain age to rent.

That's a good question.

I think Airbnb might have one.

I feel like Airbnb might be.

Well maybe we should look into that too.

Transcript one.

Because you don't really have a lot of things.

It might be 18 because my son and his friends rented one in California after they graduated.

So it might just be that.

Unless they're one of their parents did it, but the age you would recommend.

I think at least 18.

21.

How old do you have to do?

Yeah, I think it'll be 21 for you.

I think you have to be 21.

Rent a car, you've got to be able to do it.

Airbnb.

Yeah.

So my son and his friends, I mean, there were 10 or 15 of one of this.

The under 25 will in US, Canada, UK, Fred, Spain, guess under 25 face extra restrictions when trying to book.

I think an image would be good to put on it.

I'm fine with 21.

I'm fine with 21.

That cuts down on the TV.

Okay.

Okay.

So we also talked about the zoning subdivision cut up two weeks ago.

Um we talked about single family residential.

Uh whatever a lot of concerns, I think, about this one.

Sort of mostly stayed the same.

But based on some feedback, we did make some changes uh for our mixed proposed mixed residential zone.

So what we're proposing, uh what we revised is we split the mixed residential zone into two separate uh zones.

And so uh the new sort of proposed mixed residential one would have single family twin homes and cottage courts.

And you can see here our most dense a single family zone, which is R5 because you are has 8,000 square foot laws, uh minimum law size.

So then we mixed residential one with a 6,000 square foot law uh for single family 4,000 per 100, a 20,000 for a cottage court, uh one within a codge court's 2500 square feet for the individual lines.

So then the other part of that is the second mixed residential two, which would have duplexes three and four unit uh buildings and town homes.

What's the difference between with the share a shared home and a duplex?

So is on its own law.

A duplex is two units on one law.

Oh they're just they're just they're hooked up together, but each has its own like they could look the same, but your twin home has its own lot, so typically they're owned you know individual separately uh is owned together.

So two units owned up with one ownership.

Sometimes the person's living in one side of it and rents out the other side, sometimes they're both runs out.

So they can be the exact same model and everything, but they're just the per use is different.

I mean currently they're all grouped together under two family units, and so we separated them and defined them.

Uh they are different.

So with the mixed residential one and the twin home, you're more likely to see owner-occupied units in those twin homes because they're buying the individual unit and property, even though the uh duplex, they're more likely to be right.

Okay.

Yes, yeah, so they're more likely to be right now.

So again, the duplex three and four units in towns for the mixed residential two and then multi-family, we have the three and four units, town homes and multi-family.

Um this next slide uh really is showing, so this is RM1 on the left, and R and two are existing uh multifamily zones.

Um so we remove the single families and uh meaning mixed residential one um two family games we defined it as duplex and twin column uh duplexes moved into mixed residential two, but not the multifamily.

Um we've added the three and four units because it's somewhere it's sort of a type that you're sort of guessing at the moment that could potentially have the same.

Um and then town homes, uh they're sort of the same at the moment, so we uh move town homes uh down to multi-family to then provide a little bit larger law of town homes and everything that's residential too.

And then multifamily, we just uh uh change the acreage there uh sort of to match our consistent uh loss sites, you know, the law side.

Um so then we looked at sort of two sample sites just to show what uh theoretical maximums could be put on it.

Uh so this is just south of the edge uh development uh cable station.

This is not something that's being proposed.

Um just picked the property to look at.

It's currently uh low medium and density residential RA1, it's four acres.

Uh if we looked at the mixed residential one zone, it could have 29 units of single family homes.

Uh that would be again this is a third of the maximum just based on dividing the square footage.

Um put the roads in and driveways and everything, these numbers would probably most likely be down, uh but it could be 29 units of single family, 43 units of twin homes, or 62 units of cottage court again.

That's a maximum number uh just based on calculations, but once you have to provide driveways and access roads for all those units, it's I don't think you're gonna get that number with the cottage court being smaller units clustered around the common open space.

Yeah, it's just sort of diagram there a little bit, um something else we're gonna find on the other side.

So it's something it's a product that we looked at during the stationary plan process, and we've got some good feedback for it, so uh trying to include it so that it's something that might be become up in the future.

So they would need a zone change out of RA1.

Yeah.

Again, DX or whatever.

We haven't finalized a name, I just picked mixed residential one or mixed residential two for now.

But yeah, again, yes, this would be something that comes to city council for approval and to start the water's appropriate or not.

If they if there was a zone change, and so it was mixed residential one or whatever it's called, then they would likely mix these things, right?

Or like do some single family and some third home, or do they have that freedom within this potential?

Yes.

So typically we see one product just because usually a builder specializes in a one-track product, but are there builders that are are building cottage courts that you're aware of?

Uh mostly in neighboring, I would say.

Yeah, there's different homes are probably a little too big to technically be a cottage court, but they've kind of modeled that design where they've got, you know, I think they call them homes on the green where they've got homes uh surrounding the park.

Um that's kind of similar situation where codge ports is usually a smaller home.

Um, and you know, your yard space is this park that you're you're fronting, and you and your neighbors are fronting.

I think we do have a couple projects like in the region.

I'd I'd have to look though.

The just top 138, is it Rockwell?

That wouldn't count because they don't have like a they're that size, and those lots are that's the smaller sizes maybe, but they don't have a park in there.

No, is that called?

Yeah, we didn't is we didn't want your talk on the south side.

On the south side, yeah.

Yeah, yeah, that's weed in.

Um those would actually be more in the twin home category because they're actually.

So some of them are not all of them, some of them, yeah.

Most of them are connected on the garage, so technically they are twin homes.

Um, so that'd be more of that.

But the cottage courts have what, five or six units per building.

Four to eight.

That's what our code is recommending.

Four to eight units per building.

They're not units per uh court.

That one's just uh sorry, that's just what I pulled off the internet.

Oh, so okay, so you need 15 acres to have the that's it's 15.42 units per acre and that the theoretical maximum so it's 62 in that four acres.

He's saying they can get 62 of those in four acres.

But each building is one residential unit.

Yeah.

Yes.

And you can get 62,000.

I don't see the green space.

Again, once you do the landscaping, the roads, everything like that, it's gonna reduce that.

Yeah.

This is just dividing the same less the complete max.

But you realistically could probably have 12 units in one acre, probably.

That's surprising to me, because they see it's a lot less dents.

Well, and I think it's because of share.

Yeah, yeah, they're they're centered on this open space court.

Um so you have that open feel.

Right, I like them.

I like them.

Nobody ever seems to bring them to us.

Even when we encourage them, they're nice because they they lend themselves be more owner occupied to think.

Right.

And they're nice for older people.

Yeah.

I like the ones at daybreak.

They seem bigger though.

They are yeah, the homes are bigger than your uh standard cottage court.

I thought at least I said huge.

Yeah, like the right one.

Okay, right.

So I the idea with the mixed residential one versus two is we're creating something that that hopefully you guys would be comfortable with the rezone without getting a development agreement and having to you know go through all those extra standards and steps to get something where we're saying, you know, they could do single family, they could do the cottage court, but we know it's going to be individual lots, individual units, or or the twin homes, a little bit lower density than multi-family, where right now you have to come in and request a multi-family zone just to do small lot single thing.

Okay, so the residential one, sorry, this helps me understand more.

The residential one they would all be individually owned lots though, right?

That's how that's different on versus the residential two like a town home or something would share.

Well, and town homes are typically sold.

Yeah, so I mean town homes are typically they're individually sold.

Sold, but they don't have to be but they share the land, and a multifamily if you've got like condos and you know, the this property is just south of where Edge is building, they've got their three four story condos that will be sold, but they're selling air space versus ground.

Yeah, so that's one way to look at it.

Uh people are buying ground with this versus air sprays for multi-family.

Okay, and just uh so I understand if someone came to us and wanted to do this, would there be requirements in EMR one that would say you have to have a certain amount of green space, or do you have to have and are you sh telling us those now or that's coming later?

Or um so single family, single family the lot size I think was six thousand, so that like any typical single family zone, they just need to meet that minimum lot size.

Um cottage court would have a minimum amount of open space, how big that court needs to be.

It's 20 500 for the common for the common area.

Okay.

So like they have them.

We've we've put together some standards, they're draft right now.

We really want to get your feedback on the zones themselves before we really dive into those specific standards.

I think my concern is um when you go to the other one, sorry.

Um yeah.

So if someone comes to us and they're like, I want this thing, and I I'm gonna do cottage courts.

And so I know because I came to this and was listening, they can do 62 units, and I've been told that with the roads and stuff, that's not likely.

But like I want to be sure they're actually not able to do 62 units that because there would be no green, right?

That would be all concrete, and so I I guess that's confusing to me.

Yeah, so there's yeah, there will be standards as far as uh the courtyard uh size, uh setbacks for the units, parking, roads, access, that kind of thing, and that will eat into the the acreage and what they can see.

The other thing then take no Catherine 2 is they might say they're gonna do platity court, but if we just rezone it with this new zone, they could do that.

They could end up doing twin home or single family, whatever they wanted out of those options.

Okay, which is fine, but you'd say like I just think about the edge homes one that just came in when they came in, then they had to do a developer agreement and they couldn't change any of those setbacks or anything without permission.

Right.

So these people going in here, if they get the zone, they can't change any of those things.

They're gonna have to meet the requirements.

Okay, yeah, without asking for permission.

Correct.

So the permission would be requesting the zone, and then once they get that, they've got basically these three options for type of housing, and the code will list their open space, their setbacks, their height to all of that.

I see.

Okay, that's helpful.

Thanks, sorry.

Move on to the next one.

So this is um exposed out to two, and then we've just picked a site.

This is uh 700 east and one south.

Um so for this zone you can get duplex, three or four unit, and a town home.

Luckily, the site is just an acre, so um, they could have uh five buildings, ten minutes, duplex, uh four buildings or twelve to sixteen units of three to four unit buildings or up to twenty-one units of town homes and four different buildings, like four buildings in an acre.

Yeah, I guess again, this is maximum.

The more units you get, the more roads you're gonna have to have and drive what violence to serve these buildings.

So again, yeah.

Uh sorry, I don't have the skills to lay out, you know the everything to code, um, but I was just trying to do you know, basic calculations just to get an idea of the theoretical maximum.

Can I ask one more semi-related question?

When I if I'm coming and I'm a builder and I'm coming and I'm gonna I get this and I'm gonna do town homes.

Um do I have to get permission from the city through a development agreement or in some way to do a private lane?

Because I have a lot of people complaining about private lanes now with trash situation, and so who and I keep saying that was your developer.

I'm sorry, like that's not the city.

The developer didn't want to meet the city.

So at what point in the process does someone does a developer get to be a private lane?

They they can just do a private lane with their development.

There's no specific they don't have to ask for permission, they don't have to ask for permission.

Now our code has standards for width, improvements, that kind of thing.

Um so any developer has with multifamily or single family has the option, you either meet our public street standard or you improve it.

Oh thank you.

So right now the highest non-CV is what 15 units an acre.

What's the town center?

Town center goes up to 24.

This so this doesn't include town center because it's a commercial zone.

Okay.

So this is looking at our strictly residential zones.

Okay.

So town center, the snare town center zone, I think it goes up to 24 or 25 units per acre, but with stationary plan that has been modified.

Or those specific properties outlined in the stationary.

But have we then have we increased?

I guess we have with because we didn't have really a town home zone because it would be more than 12 per acre, is that right?

We're just working with the consultant to put the maximum densities back in.

So we do have the town home zones.

But current currently we can do that side.

One more maybe.

The picture ones.

Yeah, that because currently we don't have the map that we have is is 12.

Which wouldn't really put towns up.

Yeah, so the um existing code for multifamily um is 12 for town homes, it's 12 as well.

Um or eight depending on which which zone RM1R two year you're in.

Um and then the code a lot for a multifamily allows you to do whatever type of housing you want to do.

Um with this new uh configuration or dialing more into what type of housing we're gonna get.

Um but we're also need to take into account you know cottage courts, they are a bit higher density.

Um they're they're a unique product, they're a different product because the homes are on smaller, there are a higher density.

Um so there there are there are some trade-offs to get that type of development.

I mean, really that 15 units per acre on the case you're just using that as an illustrative purpose.

It wouldn't be possible to really do that because if unless the roads were built outside of that, and if they're built outside of that, it's gonna be more than just the 10 acres.

So as as we work on the design standards that'll be in the code, we can dive more into okay if we have an acre piece of property and you have the roads and you have the open space, what kind of density is actually working.

And then we can put that into the make sure it's consistent with that.

Yeah, I think that's important.

Um so then uh I can talk about the affordable homeowners supposedly that being briefly sort of got into, but um ran out of time.

Um so as we discussed that the density votes we provide certain affordable items.

Uh these were based on what the state provided us.

So um the qualifying conditions to get this would either be 60% occupied for five years, 25% aborticed, 25% under 1600 square feet for first-time buyers get 30 days first pick.

And I know there was some discussion last time with the start I know issue more or we should focus on if we want that one or something.

Yeah, we did go back and look at state law, and it does say at least, so it says you know, at least sixty percent of the you know, homes owner occupied.

So I think there's there's room for us to bump those numbers up if you want the PowerPoint we didn't because we wanted to have a discussion of what do you what numbers would you like?

That's kind of the minimum in state law.

I'd I'd favor having a higher than sixty percent.

It's not just the sixty percent, it's that longevity of it, because at five years they could flip all of it, right?

Right.

Which is a problem.

Yeah, because then all of a sudden it's all rentals.

Yeah.

Like they could just hold it for five years and then what's the time frame with the edge home.

Did we determine how long they have any?

We haven't finished negotiating that portion of it.

Well maybe big willow.

Big will is all year, 50 year deal.

I feel like it needs to be at least that.

We are having a little too long.

I mean they can get four percent per year, so they could sell it in ten years and get it forty percent increase.

But it's a three-year danger.

Which we are here maybe can't.

Well, that's too stiff.

Do the ship or five seven west.

Uh-huh.

So it towards the does the restriction then go away, or does the new person start and start with the new?

I don't think they start with the new 50, but they just take it over.

Um actually that's not bad though.

I mean, that doesn't you can still sell it.

It has to go to another owner-occupied person.

Right, I don't see a problem with that.

Why are people complaining about that?

50 years.

And people also want to buy they want to buy uh cheap property that they can make a whole bunch of money out of.

It's more home buyers.

We don't want the investors to come.

Right.

The five years they could, like you said, just hold on to five years.

Five years is I need to be longer.

Can that be that's the minimum right now is five years?

Yeah.

So it says at least sixty percent of the total single family residential units be deed restricted to owner occupancy for at least five years.

Yeah, I agree.

But that's we're not even talking about market value there.

We're just talking about owner occupancy.

Like I don't know why you can't say that for that I mean a hundred years, a really long time because they're still selling it, they're still able to to make tons of money off of it, but we're just saying it's not a rental.

Seems like thirty uh the minimum.

I understand that fifty now, that makes sense.

Mayor, what are you thinking?

I I was thinking fifteen, but just somewhere in the middle, but just because it's been hard to get people to developers because they the trade-off they worry that the longer you know like I mean, I get it.

We don't want black rock buying that right.

That's a real concern.

I also think if we have more owner occupied, I think the percentages higher.

I think because the one that you guys are talking about, there's very few rent owners in that whole community.

But if it's mostly owner occupied, then I think we can increase it because you know that's what we're looking to develop that neighborhood as people stay.

Yeah, sixty percent is too low.

Yeah.

Well increase the percentage and length of time.

So eighty-five percent owner occupied for thirty plus years.

What about the affordable price?

Which is defined as under 20% of the area median income of the county as that's better than 80% for sure.

I think that works.

I think a percentage or twenty-five percent.

Can I ask the affordable price is only for that first buyer, is that correct?

That would be yeah, for the first sale.

I gotta have a the give and take here.

If we're gonna require that much to be owner occupied and extend the years, maybe well, but they only have to pick one of those, correct?

Well, the developer or the applicant would request one of them.

Yeah.

Oh, that's what I'm saying.

So oh, so they're not they're not all okay.

Right.

Yeah, they don't have to do them all.

I mean they could do more than one, but they have to do at least one.

Um thing to keep in mind is they're getting higher density out of it.

They're getting higher density.

Yep.

Um and the thought is the higher density makes the project pencil.

Um with drapers high property values, the multifamily extra density probably helps that project pencil the single family may not.

Um is really good.

The question is is 25% affordable versus 75% market rate in a development.

Is that what you guys want?

Do you want to see more affordable 30 70?

Yeah, I think that'd be.

I want them to pick the owner occupied.

But that's why maybe.

If it's owner occupied, correct.

Right.

Yeah.

Maybe that's why we have to be considered of maybe we don't go too high of percentage to discourage that.

But I don't eighty percent owner occupied.

I I'm mostly worried about the five year part of that.

Because I really think someone would just hold on to what I think 40% of them that could be rented.

Yeah.

I'm sorry, Brendan.

Um, I think we've seen that even in that the carriage house neighborhood where you know we had a bunch of people come in and and buy them a starter home, and then rather than selling them, they've kept them as you know, short-term rentals, long-term rentals.

So now it's completely a rented neighborhood.

Yeah.

And we've seen a lot of problems with that.

So I think whatever we can do to keep these neighborhoods mostly owner occupied, I think it should be a goal.

I'm surprised sometimes by how many of the neighborhoods are just held by one or two people and they own 15 homes within that neighborhood.

The Ralph Johnson project.

Remember all of those little townhomes?

I mean one guy who owned 25 of them.

Really?

And those should have been affordable housing.

Yeah.

It's not even affordable rent.

Right.

The government can't fix everything.

No.

What's the 25% under 600 1600 square feet?

Is that the the dwelling is under 1600 square feet?

That's the state's book considered sort of the first home.

Yes.

Yeah, they can also be a bunch of rules and try and make it all work on.

Um, they can that's at least 25%.

That's a minimum.

So that would say at least 25% of the units are 1600 square feet or less size.

Interesting that first time buyers get 30 days first pick, but that's one of their conditions.

Then I don't know how opening it just a first date to first time home buyers.

That one just sounds like it's like a throwaway one.

Yeah.

That's one you pick.

Yeah, it's not do we have to have all of them.

Do we have to have that?

Well this this is not mandatory.

It's not mandatory, it's an option, the state set up.

Um so it's it's an optional zone that the state set up in order to get more affordable housing and first time uh homeowners.

But that does not help affordability just because you get to be the first time buyer you get to pick.

Get the first pick.

That's really strange.

That doesn't the government.

That's not that good and all that stuff.

Right.

I'm curious as to who wrote that code for the legislature.

Where they got the ideas from my whole thought during this is this something that any developers ever even.

Right, that's what I'm thinking too.

Does it even send out I did send out an email to uh contact with Ivory Edge and Walks Residential to get their feedback on this home.

Um and I haven't yet to hear back, but I just fairly sent it.

Um, I think that's a good idea.

Because if if a developer looks at this and says I I was in work at all.

I was in this realtor's work group meeting last week with Pax and Guyman and me and I are sitting by each other.

Paxton said the one internal truth.

The only afford the only way government can make housing affordable is subsidizing.

There's no other way.

So we either give people money to lower their costs, whatever, but you know, that's it.

And that's the only thing that really works is given buying down their interest rate, buying down their mortgage, giving them a down payment.

But you know, there's been times in Republican history where that's not been the Republican way, but now we're talking about subsidizing I mean it's the only thing that works, there's nothing else that works.

Because they won't do this, they'll just be like, oh but like what we're doing with Edge and Ivory, where we're taking the C B D money and giving people money to help lower their get in cost, that's what works.

Yeah, because even that they subsidize it.

I I think that's just gonna increase the price of the home.

What?

But what I think the most effective thing to get people to be able to afford to buy a house is subsidy gives them to buy it, and then we have to restrict the time they can sell it, and such.

Okay, cool.

What is it?

A hortible the definition of an affordable housing, the number two offered for offered for rent at a rental price affordable to a household with a gross income of no more than 80% of the area meaning income.

So it's saying that someone can buy one of those homes and then rent it.

No, this one's for the the multi-family bonus.

This one would be for the single family bonus.

Okay.

So the 25% affordable price, the state law is setting what that affordability amounts.

So they have to rent out 25% of them at an affordable.

Yes, at that 80% of the or if it's a for sell product, um, a hundred and twenty percent.

And that and that changes the mix of apartments, right?

Like instead of all market rate.

All of a sudden that changes you really how how high of a percent do you want that to be then?

I don't know, that changes my view.

But that's different than the owner act, but there's a different points, right?

They're choosing either sixty percent or twenty-five.

So they're not mixing one, the sixty the twenty-five, twenty-five hundred, sixteen hundred, or first-time buyers.

Why don't what do we get the input from those you've reached out to and then can you bring it back to see what what the market right now is for this type of thing?

The other truth Paxton preached was that everybody that sells land will sell it from the absolute highest price they can get for it.

They can sell it for.

Every homeowner, right?

Like everybody.

So then you put it all out in this context and all you've done is just raised everything up.

Right.

I mean, like we talked about last time, this just might be something we put into the code and no one ever uses.

Because it just doesn't apply in Driver at all.

You can't pass the price of that age.

No, but you can have first time buyer can have the first choice.

You know.

So I wonder what's the incentives so that Scott has enough time to come to this.

Um so part of that was then they pick the orbital sort of component, and then um you were gonna provide some of these extra incentives.

And this sort of goes into the theoretical density.

We can always say they can have more density, but sometimes we need to reduce some of the standards to actually get them to that density.

And so that's what this is sort of trying to get to is you know, reducing uh lot coverage or increasing lot coverage.

Um instead of keeping standard that we have um so that they can get to that uh elements density.

Um so we proposed uh lot coverage increase for single family losses reduce uh setbacks reviews or fast track approval for multi-family is reducing open space, parking, uh extra story or fast track approval.

Do we have to have these or can we take it?

No, okay.

I guess I don't like the parking lot.

Yeah, because we want to know what you like and what you don't like.

The parking is gonna be the next target next legislative setting.

The problem is when you don't have enough parking on these multifanal, you just push it out in the street.

But the builders are going after the parking here.

It came up in this work group, it's crazy.

The parking is costing too much.

That's you know, they're so they're gonna run it to the state to reduce the parking.

So I don't know.

I mean that's complicated.

Right.

Where the parking on the street.

But it was a big topic of these developers is like, oh, parking's a big issue.

One space pretty how many people are living in a unit.

That's reduced.

Yeah, that would be um there was one of them that said there should be no parking requirements at all.

Yeah, that's that's a builder.

No money conversation.

Yeah, but that's what what I'm telling you is the building, the homeowners association is gonna go out the parking, I think this session.

Right, but I still don't think that we need to put it on there.

Tell Cal to be the we need the parking champion.

Stick and spine these things to resist.

I think Max and the set in stone those numbers.

Um like the three or four year or the D clock to go from ten to twenty.

Yeah, the state code says uh anything under a certain density has to go to six, and then for multi-family under a certain density has to go to twenty.

Yeah, so it's um it's a little weird, you know, that's yeah, if it's under six, it has to go to at least six.

And if it's six or more, it needs approval density of 0.5 residential units per acre greater.

That's for the single family.

Yeah, that's for single family and then multi-family, it's 20.

So we heard parking is not a good option.

Is there anything else that you can think of?

Or 1021 401.

The setbacks, excuse me, is a concern too.

And the lots then they make driveways that can't fit a truck.

That came up too.

So I we do have our, I think the driveway might be optional.

I don't think drivers are gonna be within the setback standards or not.

And I thought of you maybe, but it came up.

So we might require the 20 feet still for the driveway, but the other part of the home could be used by 10%.

So that's a you know, 20 foot setback, that's what is a fast track approval.

That's something we're putting together.

We haven't gotten to that section of the code yet.

Yeah, so it it would be um basically going getting through the process a little faster, basically cutting ahead in line for your reviews, that kind of thing.

Um not shortening uh what's reviewed and necessarily what's required for not just eliminating standards to get them through, but just getting them through the process a little faster.

And their big argument on this is the time's money, every time they have to wait three more weeks, or it takes them six weeks to get their they're carrying the cost of the interest carrying cost, all that makes the cost of housing go up, and that's why they have the irritable legislature.

They want compress the review time to get it out quicker because it makes the house they can theoretically pass on the savings to the dogs, though.

Oh right.

Yeah.

The other true thing is totally what they do.

I don't know if they pass on any savings.

All said savings.

That's what should be in the code then.

All that they have to pass it on, because that's yeah, try to enforce that.

There's principles of government that won't cross.

Yes, that's one of them.

Okay.

So did you want to talk about that one thing?

No, I no.

Yeah, we're I I think that we're we're gonna go ahead and make some changes.

Um our kind of main goal, I think, is to uh we'll we'll make changes based on your feedback, but at this point we kind of want some public feedback on just the general chapters that that we sent you, um, or that we've kind of reviewed, just to make sure we're we're getting feedback from the public.

So we'll do that, but we'll open that up after we've addressed your comments.

Okay.

Thanks, you guys.

Well, yes.

Just waiting for the green light.

Uh so talking about parking, this is exactly the topic that we need to be on for this discussion.

Um so a few years ago uh traffic committee discussed this at length with police fire, everyone council.

I took it to the council, council decided that we should go ahead and sign these roads in this area, these that we're looking at here in the South Mountain area.

Um these are the areas where there's alleyways that there's homes, and then they have that uh detached uh living space or detached garage that could be a living space, and those uh back up to our value.

Well this wasn't so much council driven as the residents were mad about the no parking size.

Well, so there's what what happened is uh because there was so much parking on the streets, um fire, especially fire, right wanted us to limit parking on one side of the road.

So we did that, and it was not what happened.

It wasn't cloud outcry.

And um Scott's optimist and we lived through it.

We're gonna tell the tale that those signs are still up, but they are not being enforced.

So that's the problem.

Um it's really kind of uh an issue of enforcement, and we we intentionally police is intentionally not enforced this because we've asked them not to uh because the there's really the parking is needed.

There's not enough parking up there, and well there's not enough parking up there because a lot of them have been turned into dualxes and triplexes and quadplexes illegally, I might add.

So we were kind of hoping that it would resolve itself.

Remember this, that when we crack down on those, there would be reduction in the number of a cars parking.

And there's not.

I don't this entire drive home because I just live like often as that.

And just today when I drove up director view, that entire right side going, you know, going sow was just lined with more trucks, right?

Because they can't probably fit in the driveway.

Um so you know, there wasn't anybody parked on the no parking side though, but yeah, it's everywhere.

And there's there's commercial vehicles all up and down Vestry.

Um just when I was coming to the capital, right?

I mean RBs and that are parked, yes.

So this is this discussion does not include investree because it's not really part of this alleyway system.

So what we have since we are this is like the state's current vision of affordable, and it's not a great one.

So it's not hard to reflect less the no parking spaces.

But I think this does impact vestry because people can't park there's not enough parking in there, so now they've started to move because it wasn't like that when we moved in.

But how has it gotten worse?

It's gotten worse.

There are more rentals than there were the when I moved in.

But more subdividing?

This is what they want us to do everywhere.

Just it's because homes that are overoccupied.

Right, but how's that more theoretically?

It shouldn't necessarily be more cars.

Because there's more families per there are people in this um neighborhood that have divided those homes.

That's where we need done more.

You can have four dwellings in one.

We really shouldn't be able to think about it.

But that's what they've done.

That's what they've done.

Yes, that's what they've done.

And as and they do not all that as we've worked on enforcement, there's um there's been several landlords that have are just renting out as one rental, but now you have you know a six-bedroom house, so you have larger families, more vehicles still, you know, there because you've got a larger family.

Or they're sub-renting too, aren't they?

Potentially that's that I'm not sure because we're working with the property owner itself.

Um so there's two questions here.

One is we do not have to resolve this issue here today.

The main purpose for this discussion is to know if the council wants us to leave the signs without enforcement, which doesn't really make sense to us.

Or if we should remove the science because we're not enforcing it.

Oh, yeah.

Or I mean, those are really the two decisions.

The other is we can kick this can down the road and and just say we're gonna we're gonna decide on a final determination of what to do later.

Uh Spencer has prepared uh an ordinance that will satisfy fires requirements or fire entities, really, or emergency access in the alleyways which will allow parking on both sides of the street.

Um really the only requirement for that is that they have to put house numbers on the back so that you know emergency responders know which house they're going to, and since that's their main point.

It's really not just a problem for emergency.

I can barely get my car up to these streets.

Like they turn into one-way roads, but they're not one way.

Right.

My friend lives on Candy Pole, and I hate going to her house because I cannot get up and down her street.

Why can't we enforce it?

I I know you said that, but that wasn't one of the options.

Why is it okay?

So we were we did.

We posted the signs and we started enforcement, and people hated it.

Well, there's about a 50-50 group, I would say.

But to Brynn's point, like some people are abiding by it.

During the day, especially all down.

I feel like it's just gonna be a free-for-all.

Have we thought about doing permitted parking in some neighborhoods like this that are so dense and liked green?

That was something we thought we should do up here.

We haven't really considered that because we I mean it's not that we can't.

We certainly could.

Um we we just don't have anything like that in the city.

It would be a whole new aspect of a different kind of enforcement and um a different area that would work.

Yeah, right.

I think contract it, right?

You could contract.

I think senior band, so that senior band row, those town homes.

I think they have contracted out now to Ateling.

So we do enforce well, we're supposed to be enforcing senior bands.

I don't know.

Um the only because it doesn't have the alleyways, the only roads that were supposed supposedly not enforcing are the ones that have the alleyways adjacent.

So this one, this one, not that one.

This one over here.

There are no parking signs on Masses Mill and Adobe School, so like that's how I go to take my kids to school.

And there are often people, I mean, it like the bus comes and you're coming to the it's scary almost every day.

I don't think it's safe, and there's kids that walk through there too.

So I do think like on Molasses Mill and Adobe.

When some I'm just gonna say it, loser parks on Adobe School Drive, they screw up the entire already tough um carpal situation, right?

It and it says very clearly no parking but and I think that that is enforced because it doesn't happen as often.

They always should be enforced.

Yeah, but molasses mill and that turn into Adobe, they're they're pretty intense, pretty scary.

And I don't know if that's well kind of thing.

It must be like 315 that we have to make sure it was taken because you can see the line of cars all around the parking lot of Hollow.

Oh yeah, yeah, yeah.

And uh that's right before it gets bad.

That's not bad.

Well, but you can see the you can see the cars on park school.

Yeah.

Um and I mean so I was the chair of the community council protocol, and we I I want to say that we were kind of influential again signs because it was such we were seeing so and it so much you know we're very grateful for parking.

Well, it's and I think it made a big darting out from the cars.

Yeah, yeah.

So around the intersections, we have no parking on both sides.

That's my recollection just for site visibility and there you are over here.

So right here there is parking along and right here there is parking.

This is where so the buses come out here and they come down and people are coming in here, and there's a whole bunch of parking here.

And so this is very exciting around the square parking along there.

No parking here.

Is that been removed?

Because people sometimes remove our side.

No parking where, sorry?

Right here.

Um, I don't think there is on that side of that one.

Yeah, but this right here on Adobe at the bottom.

There are like six cars, in fact, on the last day of school.

I thought, do those people ever move their cars because it's the same cars blocking it in front of us every day.

But I don't think there are signs on molasses mill on the north side of molasses mill, because I mean that that's how I drive I drive down senior band to go to um Highland.

Um it's it's tricky to see because you've got so many cars there that you can't see people coming um the last is mill because there's so many cars parked there.

But we don't need parks.

So we know it says do away with park.

Builders There's absolutely a problem.

We know that.

So this is not a discussion about the problem, it's just a matter today of do you want us to enforce the parking?

No parking signs, or should we remove the no parking signs, or should we just leave them up and not enforce it?

That's really I think it's a free for all remove those signs.

Yeah.

At least some people are are not parking because of the signs.

I think it needs to be enforced.

Um like I said, I mean, I I drive through this every single day.

And I it's got it's gotten worse and worse and worse over the years.

The problem is if we go to enforce it, then all those residents are gonna come back in.

That's okay.

They can come meet with me, I'll talk to them.

Well, I guess the problem is I think they even forest enforce it though.

That that's exactly the point.

They're when we start to enforce, there is no place for them to go.

They already are on that stream.

There's too many people in the street.

I think I think it's it's that we need to be enforcing better are the number of people in those houses and the people the the multi-unit rentals.

That's what the intent was.

That was our like thoughts and prayers was park, we might not be able to rent them.

Well, they need to clean out their garages.

That's that's that's another thing.

So well, I mean, maybe if you can look at the parking permits, I guess each house gets four parking permits or whatever or two in in big cities, you get two because you have your driveway and you have your garage.

They these don't have driveway.

I will find my picture.

I have drive.

So Scott, right now, like the senior band lane or Oregon band road.

There's there's no parking on one side of those streets or senior band.

I thought we were enforced.

And we're director view lane.

Senior band is being enforced.

It was already there.

So the only thing that we're not enforcing are the new no parking signs.

New thing as of what, three years ago.

Like Radial Lane and Peppy Band and Winfield Scott Way.

Like Orgle.

I mean, and this problem goes farther back on what we see.

Because candy pull is a mess.

I mean it's like which is surprising.

Farther down the way.

Well, it's because people are parked on both sides of the street with SUVs.

Everything that was signed before we made that change is my understanding we're enforcing that.

Now I I haven't verified that, but that's my understanding.

Is that tow company enforced or Rich Ferguson enforced for me?

I don't think they told, but it's possible they do during the winter, but we'll tell if it's uh blocking a driveway or if it's too close to the intersection.

I don't think it's a good thing.

Is it truck lover and like everyone's driveway?

Usually a full-size eight footbed F 250.

That's like awful looking.

That's what that's what those alleyways look like.

I I say give that guy a medal.

No, I think parking parking lot is very much.

It's an alleyway, because it's the driveway, you can't even fit like your little geo car on the tongue.

Good choice of trucks.

So trashy now, guys.

I support looking into permitting.

I mean, I don't know what the cost is of what that bet.

And not even just the trucks, but like I mean, all I think is a little bit more.

I'm not sure that's gonna resolve the issue.

We're gonna still have to enforce it.

You still have the same number of vehicles that need to park there.

All it turns into a revenue source for the city, but I don't know that it goes to resolve the issue of too much too many vehicles for nothing.

How are we doing with the enforcement on these houses that have been subdivided into apartments?

It's it's been hit or miss.

Some have come into compliance, some we've taken to court.

What happens when it goes to court?

Does it get resolved eventually?

That's the hope.

We're still working on it.

Yeah, still working through that.

That's really the answer.

That's really the answer.

Well, here's here's my plea for the permit parking one more time.

Um I think if like we said, if everyone had you know two permits, um, we know that they can't fit in their driveway.

Um they might have to get out, you know, clear out their garages to be able to abide by that.

Um, because right now they can just park they can park wherever and they just go further and you know, they go up to vestry or they go to candy pull or whatever.

But if it's permitted, that the you can't park there.

Or you park on vestry over by the brick center and you walk a mile if you're not willing to clean out your grush.

Do you know what I mean?

Like I there is parking, it's farther and farther away, and I hope that they don't park on the street.

But there are places to go if they're you know, if we were enforcing it.

It's also gonna convince some families not to have six cars, you know.

If you have to pay $500 for it to live in this, yeah.

Well, and my and my other thought too is that um then we know like this is what we can this is the capacity that that area has, and so we issue the number of permits for that capacity because right now people are just parking whatever vehicle they want wherever they want, right?

Right.

Or only on one.

I think it still needs to just be one.

Because I think people come in and out, like you know, you can only fit one car when there's two cars.

So you want to do permitted parking and keep no parking on one side of the street.

The state is gonna hate you, Brad.

That's okay.

The state and fire are gonna want to use the on your channel.

Would there be other than so you're seeing that as a reduction?

You're seeing that as reducing the the amount of vehicles.

I think it could.

She thinks it'll push them into their garage.

You think there's a yeah, one you're reducing the vehicle or parking it in their garage.

Or getting rid of the car that you know you you've had for 25 years and doesn't really work that well, but you know, we'll just keep it because you can't.

That's my neighbors.

So how about we take this to the traffic committee and discuss this?

Um every time I can just assure you, every time we go to solve problems, we create problems as well.

So sometimes we can predict those and sometimes we can't.

Well, I I still go back to their the solution has to be that these are single family homes that are not subdivided into the enforcement.

Where are we with this?

Really?

Like how many of them have we cracked down on?

I can pull some numbers.

Um just see exactly where we're at, because I know we have we have been working on it, and some have sold.

Yeah.

Um, because they didn't want to come into class, they just sold the the unit.

Right.

Um, some are renting as a single family house now.

Some have gotten cited, or we've taken them to court, but I I'd have to pull some data.

They're going to court to fight us, and Spencer Ben, what what's happened in court?

Does it eventually come down on our side and they have to fix it or uh I believe we're still working through one of the law statements, so that might be more appropriate for closed.

Okay.

We have yet to really go through the whole cycle.

We're not all the way done with it, yeah.

My hope is that if we end on we end up on top of a lawsuit that we're we'll get out.

Yes.

That we're not playing around, and that other people will just voluntarily come into compliance.

Right.

Because I know at one point there was a list of like 20 homes that have been subdivided into that we moved.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

There's that one gentleman that would come periodically with the list.

Right, and I I still have that list.

Um, and we you know, we did give that to enforcement as well.

Twenty homes is not a small number.

Really?

And that's what we know of.

There's others that we don't even know of because they're like if you fixed those 20 homes, it might alleviate some.

Think of 20 less cars.

Right.

40 less cars.

That's 60 dwelling units.

So it could even be more than 20.

But I'm just saying just two apiece.

That'd be 40.

Yeah.

That there's the there's the impact.

It's so easy to get to this place because right now I have three teenagers.

We're very soon gonna have five cars.

Like right now, we have it's so many cars.

Yeah.

So many cars driving.

I can't get out.

I keep going to the parking lot.

Well, why are you right?

The status quo for now.

We'll take a look at um paid parking, parking passes, whatever, and we'll all give a spenser on the time of this speaker.

And we'll see when we bring us back to you.

Thank you, Mr.

Cooley.

I do think the enforcement though is something that just needs to continue.

Not on the parking, but on the working on that.

I don't want to make one.

That gives us about 10 minutes before the meetings and they've got anything else you want to take a break before the meeting or can I have something really quick?

We have a okay.

So there's this um referee in girls' softball.

Her name is Gator.

She's beloved.

I all the softball, like it's third, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade girls, and like literally, I've never seen anything like it.

And um we would like to I'd like to recognize her, and I will make a certificate and give it to her.

And I was wondering if I could do it in the next on the ninth.

I talked to Red about it.

He hired her 12 years ago.

He is a hundred percent on board.

He's like, that would be so wonderful.

Um that I just need to.

Yes, we can we can make a certificate for her.

Uh okay, great.

I think we'll have a bunch of um girls softball players who will come and just recognize her and just stand up and not cheer because I don't think we're allowed to cheer, but maybe they will.

Um, but and then and I have a couple pictures.

We have to cheer for the recognition, yeah.

Okay, great.

Anything else before we take a little break?

And then I'll just take a break.

We haven't had seven minutes before a meeting in like months.

Oh we got our songs.

Yeah.

Okay, I've got those.

Okay, sorry.

Testing one, two, three.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to welcome you to our city council meeting this evening.

We'd like to get started if we can.

So I'm calling our meeting to order.

The next uh item on our on our agenda is to engage in the Pledge of Allegiance, and uh council member Johnson is going to lead us in that to that this evening.

And two recovery for which it stands one nation under liberty and justice for all thank you for the pledge.

The next item on our agenda, item number three is an opportunity for the public to make a general public comment to the council.

We do have a few, we do have some items that are set for public hearing.

If you're here for one of the public hearing items, wait for that opportunity so we can keep our record clear.

But if you have a general public comment, is there anyone that would like to make a general public comment?

Come on up.

And you know the drill, Mr.

Dibby, give us your name and address.

My name is uh Reed Gibby.

Uh I live at um 667 Mandelay Lane.

Used to be uh Suncrest, but I've got too old for the snow and uh to take care of the yard, so we don't we don't have any backyards to anyway.

Um we're celebrating our 250th uh anniversary of the independence and constitution, and um sometimes I get a little bit concerned that some people don't think that the constitution is very good because uh a lot of the uh people that developed it were slave owners.

Um but I think that uh at that time the primary sources of energy has uh wood, water, wind, animals, and human slavery.

It been that way about over 5,000 years.

Um then uh within a hundred years, uh by the early 1900s, by and large uh slavery was on its way out because we had another source of energy, uh fossil fuel fuels, and uh with the industrial revolution, uh machines can do a lot of the manual labor, and now we have things doing our manelberg now as well.

Um but uh I think it's very disingenuous for a people to make the claim that our constitution is flawed because slave owners helped uh develop it.

Anyway, thank you for your time, and uh, I'm gonna come back on the budget.

Thank you, sir.

Is there anyone else who would like to make a general public comment to the council?

All right, seeing no further general public comment, we'll go to item number four.

Item number four is the items for consent, and we have one item four A, which is the approval of the May 19th, 2026 CD City Council meeting minutes.

Is there a motion?

I make a motion that we approve the meeting minutes from May.

All right, we'll have a motion by Catherine to approve the minutes.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

Second by Brent.

Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none.

Catherine, how do you vote?

Bryn?

Yes, yes, Sasha.

Items approved unanimously four to zero.

Item five is next, and this is the disclosure and action items.

Um the budget officer intending to state that the fiscal year 2026-2027 tentative budget includes a proposed property tax rate increase.

Item five B.

I guess John, is that the statement then thus made?

That is a statement that needs to be made.

All right, I'm but I'm making as the budget officer um that the 2026-27 tentative budget will include or does include a proposed property tax rate increase.

And I'll read the full statement so that we are compliant with the law.

Let me get it up here on the so um Draper City is considering levying a tax rate that exceeds the city's certified tax rate.

The proposed tax rate is estimated to increase the current tax rate from 0.000936 to 0.001170.

The proposed tax rate increase would generate approximately $2,696,000 of additional ad valorum tax revenue to be used to pay for operational and compensation costs.

The proposed tax rate increase would increase the city's ad valorum tax rate revenue by approximately 25%.

If the city proceeds with the proposed tax rate increase, the city will provide notice and conduct a public hearing as required by Utah Codes Section 5929194C.

Current Draper City property tax rate is.000936.

Current Draper City property tax revenue is 10,186.

The proposed Draper property tax rate with the tax increase would be 0.001170.

The proposed Draper property tax revenue with the tax increase would be 12 million eight eighty-two.

The proposed new property tax revenue would be $2,696,000.

Estimated increase to a primary residence valued at $87,000, the median home value in Draper would be $866 per month, $103.86 annually, and would be represent a $25% increase.

The estimated increase to a business valued at $1 million would be $19.50 monthly or $234 annually, also representing a $25% increase.

All right, thank you.

And that covers item 5B.

Or have you got we've got to do 5B as well?

You covered that.

So that's that was 5B, and now so we can move to 5C at this point.

All right.

So 5C is a presentation.

Property tax impact schedule.

The budget officer presents and makes available to the public a property tax impact schedule as a separate document from all other budget documents as required by Utah Code.

Section 59-2-924 and 59-2-919 sub-4 sub small A.

So I have the property tax impact schedule on the on the display here.

And that property tax impact schedule is required to show what the property what the budget would be with the tax increase, what the proposed budget would be with the property tax without the property tax increase with the property tax increase and what that change would represent.

For the majority of that um Draper would have the same property the same budget whether we have a tax increase or whether we do not the difference would be that Draper will fund the the difference from either fund balance meaning we draw from our rainy day funds or we have a little extra and we don't have to draw that money from fund balance and we're able to leave that money in the current fund balance for a rainy day.

Draper will reduce its reliance on fund balance to meet the ongoing operational needs of the city.

Now there are two more um pieces to the impact schedule I'll read each of those as well next within the fire department the city is proposing uh a 250 the budget without the tax increase of firefighter overtime would be 2500 and the budget with the proposed budget would be 415000 a difference of 165,000 and this is fire department overtime as well as staffing costs and so within the budget we're proposing three additional firefighters with a reduction in overtime to fund for a fund a portion of those firefighters.

And lastly, within the parks department, um, we currently have a budget of 130,000 for playground maintenance within the proposed budget with the property tax increase.

We have increased that amount to 200,000, uh, a change of $70,000.

And the impact is the city will have the necessary funding to continue annual playground replacements at the recommended level in order to.

Maintain compliance with risk and insurance mandates.

So every year we replace a certain number of playgrounds to be able to make sure that we are in compliance with those those required statutes and things.

And so that's the need for the additional 70,000 dollars.

If the but if the in if the property tax is not increased, then we would live with the hundred and thirty thousand, but we would not be able to do as many playgrounds.

So that is the property tax impact um schedule that we are required to do by state statute.

All right.

That takes us.

Thank you, John.

Yep.

That takes us to item six.

Item six um includes um public hearing items and an action item towards the end.

Item 6A is a public hearing on the fiscal year 2627 interim budget.

This is an opportunity to fo for the public to comment on the fiscal year 2026-27 interim budget prior to its adoption.

I don't know if you want to make comments prior to the public hearing or not, Mayor.

But council members, do you want to do the public hearing first or public hearing?

We'll do the public hearing first.

Okay.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, if you're here and like to make a public comment on item six, a how many of you would like to?

All right.

Um, I'll just take you in who can race to the to the diasp the fastest.

Um just let me go over our meeting rules if I could.

Um everyone gets three minutes, so when you come up to the microphone, if you'll give us your name and your address, that will start the timer, which is to my right.

Um, we're fair, everyone gets three minutes.

Um you don't get more, so if you're in the middle of your sentence at the end, we'd we're we treat everyone the same.

Um you don't have to use all three minutes, but you certainly can.

I don't have any cards, but um I've I can whoever would like to be first, come on up, give us your name and address.

Question you're at least does not have a full agenda on it.

Yeah, I don't I don't know what it's time for public hearing.

If you'd like to make a public comment, come on up and we'll start with public hearing.

Who'd like to be first?

Dan, come on.

You're my hero.

You may not like restate.

I love these things, bro.

I know some of you from quite a few years.

Reed, give us your name and address again.

Sorry.

Okay.

Uh Reed Gibbby, um 667.

Vandalay Lane and uh Draper.

Um I know some of your by the way, I liked your speech last uh Wednesday at the graduation.

Thank you.

It was short.

It was short, but it had a lot of punch to it.

Thank you.

Um 25% sounds like a big jump, but uh you haven't had a raise for a long time.

And uh being down here and seeing some of the streets and so forth and so on.

Um I'm not uh overly concerned about the increase you're proposing because when I look at the total property taxes, uh DAPER does not merit much attention in terms of the volume of money that uh some other organizations take.

And so I trust that you're doing the best that you can under the circumstances, and so I do not oppose what you're proposing.

Thank you, sir.

Who'd like to be next?

Come on up, sir.

Tyler Ashby 116 East, 1320 South.

Um I'm actually okay with increase of taxes, benefit of citizens.

My question is how much money is gonna go to the planning department?

How much money is gonna go to the department that holds developers accountable that are taking advantage of our property and making money for their own benefit and not benefiting the citizens?

I have several open issues before the city related to a developer who has made millions of dollars, absent following city processes.

I brought this up in 2021.

I lived in the Philippines for 17 years.

I use the internet, I am not a trained lawyer, I am not a trained planning department lobbyist.

I am in favor of increasing our taxes.

Should those taxes benefit the citizens, not the millionaire developers who are willing to cut corners on the very few acres we have left.

Okay, Ogden, most number of acres of developable, lowest common acre price.

Draper, lowest number of acres developer, highest acre price, and you have developers that are cheating citizens, the city, and it took me four minutes and thirty-one seconds of a bike ride to prove that you have a developer funded by Dwayne Shaw.

Yes, that Dwayne Shaw, who is funding incompatible developments, they're making money off of avoiding draper city policies.

I am in favor of taxes.

I will pay double.

Protect me.

Thank you.

Who'd like to be next?

Come on up.

My name's Penny Rasmussen.

I'm on one twenty-eight, twenty-seven thirties.

The gentleman who just spoke is so correct.

I've lived here for 30 years.

I have watched the development come into this city, and it has literally been sickening.

I and my husband wanted to subdivide our property.

It took us five years from the city, they lost the plans, made us pay for new plans, and it cost us thousands and thousands of dollars.

We had to separate our garage from our house.

We can't even go into our garage from our house now because of one foot.

And now we sit and watch all these developers come in, build within the measurements that we were criticized for, but it's okay because money buys happiness.

But for those of us who don't have it, we're screwed.

I watch roundabout weeds grow high, we watch trees lay on the road forever, and it just to up our taxes.

I I watched someone on company time in the city buy stuff for the city and then buy their own stuff while they're on company time, and we have seen tons of things that is so wrong with the way the city is ran, and it breaks our heart, but we have been a victim of it.

Who'd like me next?

Come on up.

Hello, my name is Terry Rasmussen.

I live at 128-27 South 300 East.

And we've been residents there for 30 years.

And some of the things that I just observed, it's really nice that I've been able to come and spend some time with you guys.

25% is ridiculous.

I see that happening in other cities.

But I have to ask the question where's the money?

Where's the money going?

We talk about, you know, let's raise it because you mentioned two things up there that you were going to be uh using the money for.

However, my question is we have new development going on in this city.

We have new buildings, we have new businesses, we have new homes.

How is that not offset?

How's the how are the taxes not offset by that by the new businesses and new homes coming in?

That'd be a question.

The playground stuff.

I I appreciate the fact that we get new uh playground stuff here and there.

I don't know too many, I've you know, 30 years here.

You think I know all the all the parks that we put the playground stuff in?

I think that's a very high price.

Uh I don't know how that money is being spent from year to year just for maintenance.

Um what was it, a hundred and thirty, hundred and seventy thousand dollars, something like that.

Um I think that's just about it.

Uh we see a bunch of stuff that is just doesn't seem right.

Sidewalks.

Uh it's nice to see some of the sidewalks getting fixed around the neighborhood.

If you walk around Draper, you're gonna trip and fall.

And just make a comment about that.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Who would like to be next?

Anyone else?

I can't believe Dan Portwood not getting up here.

Come on, come on.

I'm calling you out of the audience, Dan.

Oh, is this somebody's phone?

Did somebody forget their phone?

Oh, is this your phone?

Uh I'm Dan Portwood.

I live at 1411 South Wand.

And honestly, uh, it was really good to see the information about the tax increase.

And I'm uh Chicago boy, and so property taxes here are really low.

I mean, really low.

And yet I'm finding that people in Utah think that a little bit of property tax is too high.

And I honestly think that if you want to have a premium city, you have to pay a little extra for it.

And so, even though some people are crimped by it, it's actually a pretty small amount when you look at really what the property taxes are.

So I just want you to know that I actually think it's a good idea.

And the parks, you know, I see the little thing about adding uh full money to the parks and recreation areas.

I think Draper is probably one of the best places to live in Utah.

My wife and I lived in Park City for about 25 years before we moved to Draper, and so we know what premium living is like.

And the thing about Draper, it's literally the last bastion great city left in Utah.

And I think to add a little extra money to make it stay that way is a really wise investment.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dan.

Is there anyone else?

Whisper Ridge Road.

Um, as far as these property tax increases and what have you, I'm totally against them.

Um, despite what the previous gentleman just said.

Um we are one of the highest tax states in the country, so you know, we can make comparisons to all kinds of cities and states and all that kind of stuff, but bottom line is we pay a lot of taxes here.

Um as far as the budget taxes, um, correct me if I'm wrong, I was trying to dig around on your website and whatnot, but we have a hundred and sixty-eight million dollar total annual budget.

Um you're just discussing just simply the property taxes.

There's obviously lots more other revenue and so forth that comes in.

Um thing I find that government all level, I don't care, city, state, county, whatever, federal government is nobody ever has the the stomach to cut budgets or look into separating what are the wants versus the needs.

And in tough times, tight times, you gotta make a distinction between those.

You know, there's things that are nice to have, but are they necessarily absolutely necessary?

And with people's budgets being squeezed every which way we turn, um, you know, everybody's going, well, we need more money, we need more money.

Well, fact of the matter is, and and and the other part I don't like is it's always thrown in our faces here in Draper is oh, we need to hire more police, we need to hire more firefighters.

No disrespect to you guys, by the way.

I uh I admire everything you guys do, and if it were up to me, you guys all get raises, all that kind of stuff.

You guys are an important part of our community.

And I want to make that clear.

But you guys spend money in other areas that are totally unnecessary.

I would rather that money go to these gentlemen and to those professions.

Um, you know, I mean, I just my simple observations is government never wants to look at where can we cut budgets?

Where's the unnecessary spend?

I mean, things that I've I just personal observation, you know, which I didn't see on the the website today, but like draper days.

We used to have fireworks, that was the Saturday evening and the whole show.

Now that goes to now we're doing fireworks two nights.

Unnecessary.

Um now it's moved to a drone show one night, fireworks the other night, but either way, I don't think we need both of those things.

Um other simple things is is an example.

Last summer, some city workers show up in front of my house and start digging up my sidewalk.

I walk out there and go, what are you guys doing?

Well, we're replacing these sections of these these two squares of concrete.

For what?

Well, there was a little crack on the corner of this one.

Really?

I mean, uh concrete cracks.

It's wasn't even a major crack, it wasn't uneven, it was a little corner, but we're ripping out two things.

These guys spent a day and a half just prepping the area for concrete.

So I don't know that that was even necessary at all.

Secondly, totally inefficient that it takes these guys that long to do that.

Now it didn't even include then another whole day of messing around pouring it and smoothing it and all that kind of stuff.

Um, I don't know if it's just keep them busy kind of work.

Again, maybe that that's just an inefficient way.

We need to make some cutbacks there.

Maybe we should be outsourcing that stuff.

I mean, a concrete company is gonna come in and pour two squares, they're gonna pull it, rip it up, prep it, pour it, probably within the morning, not all that uh time.

So we need to be considered uh turns up, thank you.

Yep.

Is anyone else would like to address the council?

All right, seeing no further public comment, we'll close the public hearing on item sixa.

Next item.

If you want to move, we I guess we can after the whole public hearings.

Um item six B.

This is a public hearing as well.

This is municipal water rates.

This is an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to municipal water rates for customers serviced by Draper City.

Mr.

Vike, go ahead, sir.

Oh sorry, I closed my slide.

Um, so we uh within the water fund, we are proposing uh a rate increase.

Um this year, Jordan Valley Water increased the rate that uh Draper City pays to buy water.

Um and so we have uh proposed to pass that same increase on to the residents through the um through their variable rates, which are uh divided into the zones.

Uh what that looks like is in FY26, you can see the rates on top in the gray.

Um the proposed increases are again four and a half percent above what the rates were in FY26.

So you can see those new rates in the green.

What does that mean for an average resident?

Um, well, if I can so an average resident um falls within this 29% range, um, which is between 50,000 and 149,000 gallons.

Um, the other one that is higher is the one right below that.

Um that is the up to $50,000, um, 50,000 gallons.

Uh so uh an average resident in zone one would see an increase of uh 650 to $13 a month.

Uh average resident in zone two would see an increase of from between seven and fourteen dollars, and an average resident in zone three would see one from there to twenty point five, whatever that number is behind.

Uh really fast.

I can pull that up.

Uh so from ten dollars to twenty uh dollar rate increase.

Wait, I that was the resident, that was not the residential, that was the commercial rates.

So um sorry, let me back up.

This is the residential rate.

Um again, the average falls within the 10 to 20,000 gallon or between the five and ten thousand dollar range.

So those rate increases would be um for zone one a dollar forty to three thirty.

Um for zone two, a dollar fifty to three fifty, and in zone three, um two dollars and fifteen cents up to four eighty-five.

Um so the the one that I had originally showed was for the commercial rate, not for the um uh residential rate.

So that is the proposal.

Um, and this is a public hearing, so I don't know if you want to comment prior to or just go to the public hearing.

Can I ask a quick question?

Go ahead.

John, is that so the rate increase is coming from Draper City, or that's the rate increase from Jordan Valley that then so Draper City will have to adopt an ordinance um to increase our rates.

So we we have a rate that we have we establish, but we are simply passing on the rate increase that we've seen from Jordan Valley.

So we purchase water through uh a contract with Jordan Valley Water, and they have raised the rates that we will be charged, and we are simply passing that rate increase along to residents.

Um I'll go back to the first slide.

You can see in every year, Jordan Valley continually increases those rates, and there have been a number of years where we did not increase the rates and keep up with what Jordan Valley has done this year and moving forward, kind of the plan is to uh pass that that increase along to the residents just at the rate that Jordan Valley does uh in theory this year.

At least at least that.

I mean, depending on whether the cost influences we may have, but yes, that is the biggest cost that we have is purchasing water.

So on the commercial slide, can you go to that one?

It did look like the zone three jump was more significant.

Can you speak to that?

Um well, zone three.

The re the difference between the zones is the number of pumps that uh that the water has to go through to be able to reach that area, and so in zone three, um that is typically on top of the mountain, so it has to go through three different sets of pumps to be able to get there, so it's a much um more costly uh delivery for that.

Now we don't have very many businesses that reside in zone three, so if any other questions for yeah, I have one real quick, Mayor, if that's okay.

You go back to that schedule of where if you would please, John, where we're showing the rate increase, the rate history where we didn't raise rates for so many years, we end up subsidizing.

That is correct.

That kind of and really that's we've we've done raised rates the last few years in order to try to make up some of that and to get ourselves in a place where we can have the water fund be uh solvent, and uh we feel good about where we're at, but we need to be able to continue that moving forward.

Okay, thank you.

Anyone else?

All right, thanks, John.

This is the public hearing item six B municipal water rates.

Anyone like to make a general or a comment to the council regarding the municipal water rates?

Any hands?

Come on up.

Well, thank you again for hearing me.

If you would please Terry Rasmussen, 128, 27 south, 300 east.

Um again, uh we've lived here for just about 30 years.

Uh we moved here when it was more of a rural uh town.

It's very nice, very quiet, and we've seen a lot of change, obviously.

Uh, one of the changes that we've uh seen big time has been in the in this, you know, water now.

Um we used to water uh just about an acre and a half for about six dollars a month.

So think about that.

Right now it cost me probably uh we've cut that in half because we could because we did subdivide it.

And uh right now, my just to keep my little over uh half acre uh nice and green and beautiful, uh runs me almost four hundred dollars a month.

That includes my culinary.

Um the question is is when we pre uh pressurized uh the arigation, and now everybody else has to pay on top.

Um there's a lot of money being made somewhere, and does that not help out?

And if it does, where is it?

That's my questions.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Come on up.

Tyler Ashby, 1116 East, 132nd South.

Water increases are great.

My question is does the cost that we put into the East Jordan Canal impact our water rates?

Does the way our developers develop impact our water rates?

Does the way our developers fill out their plat applications and their water use forms, whether it be single subdivision or multiple subdivision, or several houses hiding as one house?

Does that like all culminate into the cost that we pay?

I'm also a bit concerned that the person describing the costs we have to increase couldn't read the table.

I'm also concerned that the person increasing the cost said we couldn't have as many parks.

These are not financial instruments, these are not things that the public can comment on.

If he misreads the table, I don't understand.

If he says we can't have as many parks, I don't know what that means.

This is not finance manager presentation enough for me as a citizen to comment on.

Anyone else?

Um I think I'd be good to point out that uh the uh rate increase for the water district will have a public hearing in August.

And so those people that might be concerned about uh the increase might want to attend that.

Thank you, sir.

Anyone else on item six B municipal water rates?

All right, seeing no further public comment, close that item.

Item C is next.

This is a public hearing, statutory officer compensation.

This is an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed changes to statutory officer compensation associated with the fiscal year 2627 interim budget prior to adoption.

Mr.

Vike, go ahead, sir.

So again, this is a public hearing.

Um we have two separate public hearings.

Um I'm not sure which one is first on the agenda.

Uh, but we have a public hearing for the executive officer compensation as well as in a public hearing for the statutory officer compensation.

The the compensation uh changes within the city are five percent, and so we are listing out the executive officers as well as the statutory officers.

There are two statutory officers, the city recorder as well as the city treasurer, and we're just um by state statute showing what we are proposing for each of those compensation changes.

All right, this is a statutory public hearing or start.

I'm sorry, item six C public hearing statutory officer compensation.

Is there anyone that would like to address the council on this item?

Jared Harper, 12811 South, Whisper Ridge Road.

Um, in regards to these increases, don't have a problem with the increases themselves, but going back to the city budget, maybe with increased uh wages and so forth, maybe part of their job needs to include where can we make cuts?

Give them a number, go through, audit your budgets, figure out where you're gonna cut to affect impact the overall budget to bring the money we're spending down.

Thanks.

Tyler Ashby, 116 east, 132nd south.

I think that everybody deserves more than five percent increase.

The cost of living increase in America over the last five years is more than that.

With the exception of people who have not done their jobs, the planning department has not done their jobs.

I'm an idiot.

I use the internet, and I can prove that they did not protect me, my family, or the citizens, or the financial sanctity of Draper City.

So everybody except maybe the planning department.

Yeah, they deserve an increase.

All right, so anyone else would like to address the council on item six COVID.

All right, seeing no further public comment.

I'll close a public hearing on item 6C.

Item 6D is up next.

It's also a public hearing item.

It is executive municipal officer compensation.

This is an opportunity to public comment on proposed changes.

The executive miss whopper compensation associated with the fiscal year 2026-27 interim budget prior to adoption.

I think you can stay.

I think this slide up here.

The statutory ones were the treasurer and the and the uh city recorder.

And they're denoted with the little arrow into the right.

So everyone else, other than the up, I know what do you call that?

An up arrow or up.

An upgrader than.

I'm gonna go back to elementary school.

The treasurer and the city recorder were addressed in the statutory officer hearing just a minute ago.

This is for everyone else on that list.

Is there anyone that would like to address the council on item 6D?

Executive municipal officer compensation.

All right, seeing no one interested in public comment, I'll close the public hearing on 6D.

That takes us to item six E.

This is also a public hearing, and it is a resolution 2625.

It's a resolution amending the adopted budget of Draper City for fiscal year 2025-26.

We have a few items uh that we are proposing some amendments for uh within the current fiscal year budget.

Uh so I will address each of those items.

So first we have some housekeeping items.

Uh we we received some requests for some equipment this that for next fiscal year that we felt like we could fund out of the current fiscal year, or we had some other sources that we could use to fund some of that, and so we are uh proposing taking care of that within the current fiscal year.

Um fire asked for some additional funding for radio replacements, police asked for a Faro scanner within their current budgets, they have enough money to be able to do that.

So we are proposing that uh we approve the purchase of those uh CIP items as well as transfer that money into the CIP fund so that we can be able to purchase those uh through the CIP fund.

Um is a financing mechanism that we are required to use uh where we if we sign a lease, uh we are required to expense the full item up front, and then we expense each year the actual cost that goes out the door.

And so this is really just an in and out, so it's just being up making sure that we have sufficient within our budget to uh expense that and capitalize that equipment during the current fiscal year.

Uh, within the fleet fund, uh, we are proposing a purchase of one new police vehicle, uh, a golf cart for community events, um, upgrading unit number 702 within the fire department uh slightly uh at a rate of fifteen thousand dollars, and then adding a plow wing, which is an extra extension of the plow uh to uh one of their units, uh the cost of fifty thousand dollars.

And we were we are proposing to fund that from fund balance within the fleet fund, and I'll talk about at the end where we're gonna get that uh money, and then the ambulance fund.

We are proposing purchasing some CPR assist devices as well as EKG monitors from the ambulance fund fund balance.

Second item is uh we had a pump overheat uh in pump station number two, and so we need to be able to go in and replace some of the motors and valves.

Um, that cost is budgeted at 750,000 dollars.

And um, we are gonna pull that funding from water fund balance.

Um we have begun some upgrades of at pump station number three to be able to help with the capacity, and we've had some cost overruns and some other things that have happened to be able to drive the cost up, and so that three there's an additional three hundred and fifty thousand dollars needed there that will be funded again through water fund fund balance.

One is at $300 east and $13,800 south.

And there's a proposal to be able to put in a traffic signal at that intersection.

That will be a cost of $450,000 that does sit on the boundary of the East Bangder CRA.

And currently we are proposing to fund that through CRA funds.

And we also have a proposal to do a high T intersection traffic light at the intersection between Highland Drive and Rambling Road.

And so we're gonna we are we have looked at using transportation.

Well we originally talked about transportation impact fee.

Um we don't believe that we can use that, so we're actually going to pull that from a different fund class, fund class 240, which is our BNC road fund.

So as you adopt that, if you can note that we'll fund that through BNC roads instead of through transportation impact fees.

Um within the stormwater fund, uh they have requirements to be able to go in and clean out the stormwater drain systems uh that run through the golf course.

Um they don't have really a vehicle capable of doing that, and they have asked for a uh trailer with a storm line uh jetter on the back, and that is a hundred thousand dollars, and we'll fund that through fund balance, and we're also looking to upgrade our stormwater master plan that hasn't been done since 2012, and we'll again fund that item through the storm water fund balance.

We're also upgrading our transportation master plan.

Um, we have that within the current uh CIP budget, uh, but we have since received a grant to be able to fund that, and so we're just recognizing that grant revenue and transferring uh the funding source to the grant revenue.

And uh each year we do sidewalk gap replacement.

Um we have 120,000 remaining in there, um, but projects totaling 170,000, and so we're gonna fund uh that additional 50,000 from fund class 241, which allows us to uh use it on sidewalk replacements.

We have a bridge at 1300 east.

Um this is a bridge for the trail uh at 1300 east, and we are um we went out to bid uh as we got the bids back in.

Uh the cost came in thirty thousand dollars over uh what we had originally budgeted, and we had originally budgeted budgeted fund that through park impact fees, so we're going to fund the additional thirty thousand dollars required through park impact fees, uh raising that total project cost from 150,000 to 180,000.

We're proposing adding a city beautification project within our um capital uh projects, and uh we're proposing setting aside seven hundred and ten thousand six hundred and seventy-five dollars uh for citywide beautification projects, and then lastly, a transfer of five hundred thousand dollars to the water fund um for future water uh CIP.

Um as I mentioned, we have a funding source.

We received a reimbursement of 2.9 million dollars, and so we have uh that this is just at the bottom.

We are showing you where we are putting that 2.9 million uh to be able to fund a lot of the projects that we talked about within this budget amendment.

So this is a public hearing, so I don't know if you have questions for me before the public hearing, or if you want to just go to the public hearing.

John, do you mind explaining what about that reimbursement?

Um so we had a storm.

Uh we had the big rainstorm on August 3rd of 2025, 23, 2023, and uh we reached out to the state and uh through different means we've been able to secure 2.9 million of reimbursement for that storm uh that we had originally already paid for.

So we're looking to use that funding uh to meet some of the various needs throughout the city.

Thank you.

Any other questions for John?

Thank you, sir.

Okay.

It's resolution number 26-25.

It's a resolution amending the 2526 budget as presented.

Is there anyone that would like to make public comment on six Eric?

Six six seven Vandalay Lane.

I'm glad to see the two new traffic signals.

I do roll through uh those two air areas, and so I appreciate that.

One suggestion would be uh just north of the corner canyon campus when people drive through their leave a school zone uh in their subconscious, and it'd be good to put a 25 mile an hour speed limit just beyond there because there's some that are being cited uh 30 miles an hour.

Uh one in particular hasn't had a traffic ticket in her whole life.

Anyway, thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Jared Harper on 2811 South Whisper Ridge Road.

Um couple comments on this, uh going through a list of projects.

Um there's some definitely needed things there.

There's some nice to have.

Um, I'm gonna assume the beautification project for 710,000 is much like a lot of the other projects, the beautify draper um, and that we do them, but then we don't take care of them.

Um we don't take care of our existing infrastructure, taking care of trimming trees and and maintaining those things.

We're always about just moving on to the next project and leaving those other items to just go into disrepair, get overgrown, all those kinds of things.

Um, so that to me is uh nice to have.

Um, also um this reimbursement funding.

I think I just found your three million dollars uh property taxes you're trying to increase.

Um if this is this is obviously money that got spent, um, it's gone, it's now coming back in through these reimbursement funds.

So um there, there's your three million dollar gap.

Thank you.

Anyone else, Tyler Ashby 116 East, 132nd South.

Again, I struggle to follow exactly what he said.

Like I run a hundred and thirteen million dollar company, comparisons, none of them are there, don't know what I'm looking at, don't know if it's good, don't know if it's bad.

What I can't tell you is the only thing I object to is the stormwater fund.

The reason why I am against increasing the stormwater fund is because the planning department has not done their job in holding developers accountable for doing their part in stormwater funds.

You want me to pay for a millionaire to steal from residents?

Everything else on that, I'm in.

I'm double in, just like the taxes, I'm double in.

Do not take a single dollar of mine for storm water when for five years you've had developers ripping you off in things that I proved in four minutes and thirty-one seconds.

Anyone else?

Terry Rasmussen, 128-27 south, 300 east.

Um everything looks great.

Uh, with one exception, I just have a question.

With the uh I I have a little bit of a uh traffic signal background, so I have to ask about this.

Uh it's it's important that we have that there.

It's it's a very interesting intersection, and it and it needs to be done.

And uh putting up the uh the traffic lights and so on is very expensive.

I I totally get that.

Uh what I'm wondering though is um, am I correct that we have a Smiths uh marketplace going in in that area?

And if so, uh, wouldn't we put it incumbent upon them to help us out with that?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else?

Um my question is just um we know that Draper likes trees and that residents are required to put trees in the parking strips to beautify and this beautification project.

I agree, let's work on beautifying what we already have.

Um I come through I call it the frontage road because it's always been the frontage road to me, um, where waffle love is and every night I come through that light right there at the crossing, is there's just garbage sitting there every single day.

And if you drive around the major streets, garbage just sitting there.

So I think beautification is good, but let's try and beautify what we already have.

And the point of the trees is I don't think you would be repairing multiple sidewalks if you didn't require so many trees.

My husband and I walk a lot, and tons of those broken sidewalks are from the branches of the trees that have lifted the sidewalks, and half the time we have to go out the road because the trees aren't trimmed.

So I think we need to work on what we already have before we decide to add more.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else?

All right, seeing no further public comment that ends the public hearing on item six E.

It is a resolution.

Council members.

Can I respond to a couple of things that stuck out to me that um and I I'm new, so I don't know the they'll tell you lot lots more things, but a couple of things.

Um the light at 138th and 300th east and the new Smiths development you suggested, maybe having the developer pay for that.

That um, so that intersection at 138 and 300 is already failing.

So the city is doing that independent and and needs to do that independent of any new um development there.

So that's why the city is paying for that because that Smith could be it is still a few years away, but that um intersection is already failing.

And and there is there will be a they're doing a study for a crosswalk signal that the Smiths developer will pay for because that will be directly related to that development.

So just something I've learned.

Um I I do think also on the beautification, a couple people mentioned that.

I agree, and I think and I think that um the parks department agrees that we want to be maintaining what we have as from my understanding, it's not um putting in new stuff.

It's that beautifying what we have, taking care of what we have.

Um but having the budget to do that.

I'm sure there's more things, but that's all I'll say.

Anybody else have any other comments on this?

I just have one comment, Mayor, about the the almost three million that's been found.

Um that actually meant that we didn't need to increase our budget by six million instead of three because these are expenses that we've had to cover, and even with our existing that budget, we're still gonna be pulling from our our general fund.

We're just striving to be good stewards so that we don't continue to pull too much from the general fund so that we can be prepared for a rainy day such as the one we saw in 2023.

Anyone else?

I would I would just you know echo what's been said that you know a lot of these um expenses are going to towards public safety, which encompasses more than just police and fire, it's about um adding traffic mitigation measures, updating our water system, and improving sidewalks are all safety issues, and um that's something that is is very important to me.

Uh, you know, I agree with those who've said, you know, as we walk around the city that you can sometimes see problems such as um overgrown frubbery and um sidewalk cracks that um can make it difficult to to walk uh safely, and so I think a lot of these um revenue streams are are going to those measures to mitigate those things.

Um and just to to clarify um just the city beautification, I think it it will be a little bit of both.

Um like we we've seen I've seen it as I walk around too that we that we have so many parks, we have so many trails, we have so much public space that we need to maintain um we want uh our city to feel welcoming, and part of that does have to do with with uh the beautification of it.

Anyone else?

I've got two comments on a couple items.

One um just for everyone's point of reference, the the 2023 storm that we had, it was about if I remember 24 minutes of about as intense a rain as I think I've ever seen.

It did more than 2.9 million dollars damage.

It did 3.2 million dollars damage to our infrastructure in the to the tune of stormwater boxes that were lifted and blown away, entire section of Pangator extension completely washed away.

There was a there was a significant amount of damage that that storm did.

Fortunately, we have been smart with our fund balance over the years, and we were able to immediately hire crews to get out there and make those repairs, and that's the the one reason you have that fund balance with respect to the to the stormwater master plan update and the transportation master plan update.

Those the grant funding is funding the transportation.

This is all the 26 budget, too.

This is not the new budget we have coming up.

Those beautification projects, like they've said, that 710,000 is not new projects, it includes new and it includes a whole bunch of get it nicer, make fix up what we have.

We we get that.

We want it to look good.

With respect to the um pump station and emergency repairs at 750,000 dollars.

Um, one of the things that most people don't realize about our community is we have two water companies or two water systems.

We have for everyone in the flat land, you are on water pro and you are that is a private water company.

For everyone above the flat land, you are Draper City water.

Again, you've learned tonight we don't pump water, we don't have a well.

We buy it from Jordan Valley, and then we take it through a series of four pump stations to lift the water to the top of the mountain.

Um it's I think it might be the most complex city water system.

It's definitely the most complex in Utah.

There are some cities that lift water, but we lift it four times.

There's a section of our pump on pump station four where that transmission line under the road is transmitting water at 400 psi.

There's no city around pumping water at that pressure, and so we we need to have money in our in our rainy day fund as you call it our our emergency, our you know, our fund balance to cover those kinds of contingencies, maybe a little higher than even some cities would have because the contingency of a water main rupture at that pressure, it'll cost a lot of money in a hurry.

So we part of that, and I I think it's just really it's interesting to be able to see these these two pumps, and this price, these pumps have gone up a hundred percent in cost in repair and everything.

So it's it's just an interesting thing to see it.

One pump costing you, you know, almost a million dollars.

But that's without the pumps, no one has water above the flat land.

So those things are all part of what we're trying to accomplish as far as you know, keeping the keeping the city livable.

The water fund transfer, that's money we're putting, we're saving.

That's a five hundred thousand dollars we're saving for that eventual water main issue or whatever we have down the road.

So that's that money's going in the bank to be prepared for something in the future.

Um, obviously, the the equipment that we are buying public safety in this 26 budget, the CPR equipment, if you're ever so inclined to need it, um that that device will go around your chest and do CPR on you, keep you alive.

Um the the police uh radio improvements, all those things are all things that are are making our public safety better.

It's already high quality, but making it even better.

So those things being said, I think it's I think it's just amazing to see that pump at 750,000.

I say I tell people that all the time.

People look at me like, oh, it doesn't really cost that much.

It does.

So all right, is there a motion?

Mr.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to approve item 6E, resolution 2526, and I'd also like to amend I think it was fiscal year 26-30 to specify that the funding will come from the BNC road funds.

Okay.

The motion is to approve the resolution 2625, amending that the signal at one third 13800 south and 300 east will come out of BNC road funds, but the expenditure is the same.

That's your motion.

Yes, all right.

But motion by Tosh, is there a second?

I'll second.

All right, we have a second by Brent.

Is there any further discussion?

Tosha, how do you vote?

Yes, Ren.

Yes, Catherine.

Yes, red.

Yes.

That takes us to our next item six F is an action item.

Is resolution number 2626?

It's a resolution certifying the authorized individuals to access and or transfer business within the state of Utah Public Treasurer's Investment Funds and to execute any necessary forms in connection with such changes on behalf of Draper City.

Mr.

Vike, go ahead.

Um this is just an action item uh of a form that we are required to fill out.

So all right.

This is an action item for action.

Council members, is there a motion?

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve item six F resolution 26 26.

Well, sorry, motion by Brand to approve item 6F resolution 2626.

Second, I'll second.

Second by Tasha.

Any further discussion?

Hearing number, how do you vote?

Yes.

Tasha Bred.

Yes.

Catherine.

Yes.

Items approved unanimously four to zero.

Item 6G is next.

This is an action item as well.

It's resolution 2627.

It's a resolution setting the date of August the 12th, 2026 as a truth in taxation hearing for Draper City.

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve item six dot G.

Resolution 26-27.

All right, motion by Brenda approve 6G resolution 2627 second.

Oh second.

Second by Tasha.

Is there further discussion?

Can I just say I I'm glad that we're having this?

I'm glad I really appreciate the truth and taxation process, and I appreciate the you coming out tonight and sharing your things as your thoughts as I have looked through this budget, and this is my first time going through the budget process as a council member.

And um and and I do think it's it's really interesting to look at where our city is right now and the the shortages, the places where we are just trying to get where we need to be.

The cost increase, I've looked and all the information is public on our website.

There's a lot of information about the increases in spending over the last five years.

There have been greater increases in spending than there have been in revenue, and a lot of that is in public safety.

The mayor last month when we were starting to talk about the budget, talked about the difference in the cost of like a fire truck over five years ago, and um and if you look at where the largest budget increases have happened, they are all in public safety and in police and fire, and um which I've asked lots of questions.

I'm sure I've made people frustrated because I've asked lots of questions about why it's increasing so much and why and um but if you look at things like the the crime statistics in Draper over the last five years as we have come to a place where we are full we have a fully staffed police department, our cry it we we live in a safer place, right?

We live in a um in a much safer place, like burglaries, car break-ins, accidents, though those things are all coming down because of that investment, and and I am I would definitely call myself a um I I don't want to raise taxes, um, but I can see why the Utah Taxpayers Association says that because of our tax structure and how it is inflation proof, our taxes don't go up with the inflation with the increase in prices of our homes, and so they um support modest tax increases in municipalities every five to seven years or something like this.

But but I can see the definite benefits of the same thing with our fire this year, looking for three more fire um people.

Um we have to have uh enough people to keep our insurance rates down, and so that our home insurance because our our fire department is highly rated because they get to our homes quickly, and so I do think that that investment, some of this as I'm learning about it and trying to decide where we go, appreciate the input and also appreciate the things that I'm learning about where and why um this money is being spent.

And I would like to thank you for coming up and letting us know about the truth in taxation for the water board.

I think that was really helpful information.

And I'd also like to say to those of you that said that there are sidewalk issues and tree trimming issues.

You are our eyes and ears, so let us know when you find those things so that we can address them.

Sure.

We don't we don't talk out of the crowd.

That's not how we do it.

You got your chance, so please don't burst out.

Um is there anyone else wants to make a comment?

I wouldn't mind making a few if I could on the budget if you don't mind.

John, could you go to my slide deck for a second?

Um I I'd like to make just a couple of comments about it because I'm I'm the budget officer, and it's I've spent the time this year with our staff looking at at this budget.

Um I've also been elected the longest of anyone on the council, and so I've been around a long time.

I've been I spent six years as a council member, and I've been the mayor for 12, and we've done one tax increase in that entire time that I've been elected.

And it was a 20% tax increase in 2024.

Now, I've always been of the opinion that we shouldn't take your money unless we need it.

And we have had a lot of years over the last few years, well, up until about four years ago, where one of the things we do really, really well is as a city is our sales tax collection is um it's it's heavyweight fighter level.

I mean, we for a city our size, we collect more.

Could you find my there?

You got it right there.

Where's the sales tax collection?

I mean, Sandy, which is substantially larger than us at 30 million, we're 22.4 million or 22.4 million.

I mean, look at South Jordan, which is you know 100,000 people compared to what we've got.

We are a blended budget, so we are a budget of we take our property tax, which is about 10 million one hundred thousand, and we take our our sales tax at 22.4 million, and then we have some other tax and franchise taxes, but we blend that money and we pay our bills.

There are two cities in our in our that we share a SWAT team with.

I will just give you Riverton and Harriman.

They're part of our joint SWAT team.

What they do that's different than what we do is um Riverton City Council member can look you in the eye and say, we have no city property tax.

They can't because they don't.

What they do is they take public safety and they split police and fire into two special service districts, and they fund police and fire in their entirety out of those two public services.

So those two public service districts, a fleece and a fire one, tax those citizens to cover the entire cost of public safety.

If you look at the rate that they pay as opposed to what we pay, it's significantly higher.

Now, there are some that would argue that's the way to do it.

It might make sense to do it that way.

Public safety protects property.

The firefighters obviously protect it, police officers protect it.

Those two cities have gone that direction, and they've done it for a number of years, and their rates are significantly higher, but they cover their entire public safety cost in that uh in those service districts.

And then what they do to fund the rest of their city operations is they live off their sales tax collection.

If you look at the rates, and I think this is this is telltale for for everyone to look at.

Bluffdale um is the only city right now below us is Bluffdale.

And they're barely below Draper.

Um, and then and even after the increase, you can see over here to the right where we go.

Um, we really we really go up.

But I think the key thing is for our citizens is this blended budget.

You're you're having an opportunity to see how all of our revenue stream, and we pay all our bills out of that stream.

Whereas these other cities split it, so you can feel really good if you live in Rivertown Herman.

You could say, well, I don't pay any general fund property tax.

You don't, but you're paying a lot of property tax to fund your public safety.

That's one way to do it.

It's a thing I I'm actually interested in exploring because I think it is it it gives everyone a clear view of what public safety costs.

The next thing I want to say is in the 18 years that I've been here, I have never seen cost increases like we have had in this last since really the COVID pandemic.

And uh this chart, you know, I I don't know what you do.

Um we we bought some fire trucks because we started a fire department about eight years ago, and these costs are legitimate.

We went back and bought fire trucks um when we started our fire department, and you could walk into this fire truck store, Pierce Manufacturing.

The coolest thing I've ever done as elected official was go to the fire truck store.

But uh a production facility, handmade trucks, Pierce.

You could walk in and buy a fire truck at at 500,000, and you could get it back here in about a month and then fix it.

Today, that same truck is two million dollars, and you don't get it, you don't get to go to the store and get it.

You give them a million bucks, and then you wait two years, and then hopefully they haven't raised the price.

That's so bad that the United States Congress drug these manufacturers in front of them last year and said, tell us why.

And I don't know why.

I don't understand it.

Garbage trucks, I mean, look at police vehicles.

Um, we have a one of the things we've implemented in the last well, since Mr.

Cooley came on as our public works director, is we have a we've we've figured out what the best way to buy the car, how many years to how many miles to drive it, and then when to trade it in, so we get the best bang for the buck.

But that you if you've bought a car lately, you know this is not fake 75,000.

That's a fully equipped police vehicle.

The snow plows now, arguably they didn't apply a lot of snow last year.

I sure hope they start plowing more.

Um, but you can see the cost.

Just in road, I got just some other data just for you.

Just for example, we just widened 138th from 13th east to to bang it or extension.

Um, well, not quite to third east.

That right-of-way acquisition, just to give you an example of of what it was.

It was about um it was about sixteen dollars a foot when we started, and when we got done, it was it was over thirty-six dollars a foot just to acquire right-away.

I mean, that's a doubling in price.

Um, that whole length of asphalt, Scott, I can't I can't find the number.

How much was the asphalt?

Now I know we had utilities, but look, the the Trump gas is is affecting everything.

I mean, we have asphalt slurry, rock, uh reinforced concrete, uh, a box for stormwater, just a stormwater box has gone up over a hundred percent in cost.

Granular borrow is a hundred and seven percent more in the last uh two years.

Um, everything has gone up.

Manhole covers every single thing has gone through the roof, and I know you all feel it because we feel it, um, but we still have to operate and we still have to provide you the service that you expect.

We've we function um primarily as a as a public safety budget.

I look at this budget and it's all people, it's people and their equipment that it takes to do their jobs primarily.

To the to the comments that were made about we should cut, we should cut.

I'm gonna tell you what we did do at the beginning of this process.

We told every single department, just like the governor said, cut five percent, find five percent that you can cut.

And I would say I think every department did it with the exception of public safety.

Um, we didn't have an increase in parks, we didn't have an increase in most of the departments.

But we got people, we got a pair of people, they're good people, they work hard, they do a good job.

Um, we need equipment.

Obviously, we have to operate.

One of the things we have with our public safety at the current level, we have an actual SWAT team.

When Chief Ferguson took over, he pulled me aside one day and said, Mayor, we we got to talk about the SWAT team.

I was like, okay, cool.

He said, Yeah, we don't actually have a SWAT team.

I said, I thought we did.

And he said, Well, nine officers is not a SWAT team.

And so I I learned about SWAT teams.

But we have a joint SWAT team with Harriman and Riverton and South Jordan, and it's an actual functioning high-speed law enforcement group.

We have a major crimes task force that we run with those cities, and they have taken fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, human trafficking, you name the crime.

This group has pulled it off the streets this year and last year.

We stopped a famed bank robbery group that was going around uh the mountain west and they would glue, they would glue their ATM card in the ATM machine, and then the bank would have to call a service tech to come open the ATM machine.

Then these dudes would jump them and then take the money out of the ATM machine.

Um, you might be interested to know that there's about 300,000 in an ATM machine, a lot more than at the teller.

So these these guys were knocking banks off right and left, and we caught them in Draper.

Our team did.

That's the kind of law enforcement that we have going on.

It's fantastic.

Um it it, you know, it again, the nice to have.

Um, I I look through that budget, and the nice to have's maybe you don't like draper days, but I'm gonna tell you most people do.

Um, maybe you don't like you know, the events that we have.

If you went through our budget and cut everything out that was extra, you would still you would still need a tax increase to balance it because the cost of human beings, specifically firefighters, police officers, and their equipment has gone up.

The cost of roads and all that's gone up.

We we function at a level of employment.

Our our full-time employees are less than I think it's 251.

We're under 300 total employees in the city of Draper.

I I don't, I mean, we have people doing multiple jobs, they don't like me to say it, but they're working hard, and we they they do a good job for a number of people we have.

Um we we've we provide really high quality uh parks.

I don't think of the I can't think of a city has better parks.

Can we do better job beautifying them?

Yes, we can, and we're trying to.

Those kind of things are important to us.

The comment Jerry, I think made was why, and uh we get this comment the only time we've ever done this one other time.

Well, we tried a tax increase last year.

It's the other point I want to make.

It was about 10%.

It was a bond that you were already paying for that rolled off.

We had our truth in taxation, went through it, and we screwed up.

And we didn't do one little thing on the check, it wasn't on the checklist.

Now I'm not making an excuse, but there was a checklist for what to do, and the thing we didn't do wasn't on the checklist.

I'm a pilot when you fly retractable gear airplanes.

There's one thing, the last thing on the checklist is geared down.

Well, they didn't have that on, but we didn't get that 10%, so that would have been even lower.

But if you look at our budget, we need to get ourselves to where we're covering the true cost of public safety, and we're gonna do it.

25% this year.

Um, we're still taking 3.6 million out of our fund balance.

It's not balanced.

We're gonna need a little bit more as we go along.

Now, part of the reason I'm I'm okay with the 25% now.

Our sales tax is going up.

Someone brought up some of the retail, uh, the potential store over on 138.

There's a bunch of retail projects that we're trying to land that will increase our our revenue.

But one of the key points that Jerry raised is everybody's property value's gone up.

People argue with me and tell me that if you do this over here, it'll ruin my property values.

It ain't so.

The property values have just gone up in this town.

Highest median home value in the county, $990,000 is the median home price in Draper, Utah, highest in Salt Lake County.

Because of that, you would think that as it goes up, we would just get the increase.

And if we did, we would never talk to you about raising your taxes.

We would just take the increase and we would go.

But the beautiful thing about our our property tax system, if it's beautiful, I think it is actually a very good system, is that we know year to year how much we're gonna get.

We're gonna get the same amount this year or last year, we're gonna get the same amount this year.

We don't get the increase.

The only way we can increase taxes is only one way is to have a truth in taxation hearing.

There's no other way.

So we don't we don't get the natural growth.

If we did, we would never have this conversation.

We don't.

Um, but the beautiful thing about our property tax system is we can budget because we actually know how much money we'll get year to year.

And if we need more, we can come to you and say, hey, this is why we need more.

Um I appreciate the council members.

Um they've they've all spent a significant amount of time with me, with Mr.

Vike, with Mr.

Barker on this budget.

There isn't a council member up here that hasn't dug in, and I mean they dug in.

They were every one of them to a T.

Catherine asked a lot of questions, but she's new.

But all of her questions were good.

Well, most of them.

No, I'm just kidding.

But they they your council members, they they're they own this.

They're not there's nobody sitting here that didn't look at it, didn't didn't add it up, and didn't say, yeah, this is what we think is what we think that you as Draper citizens like the level of service we're providing.

We want to maintain that, and that's kind of where we're going.

Um, I've probably rambled on too long.

Mr.

Mayor, can I add something real quick that you're talking about for us that I think is an important thing to note too about uh our public safety.

Uh we're making that adjustment, adding those three firemen.

And I I want to just uh reiterate reiterate a couple of things.

That net difference is really because of the overtime we're paying, uh is really only 165,000 to add three more firemen or fire fighters.

Um with those three firefighters, that on not only improves the morale of the existing uh firefighters, but it also improves our retention.

But the other big thing is if we remove those three firefighters, what happens is that can impact our ISO fire rating.

And by that impacting our ISO fire rating, that will undoubtedly change what the homeowner, your your homeowner's insurance cost will be, and that homeowner's insurance cost will be much higher than what this tax increase is.

So I just want to make note of that too.

Yeah, the I ISO rating is 10 sucks, one's great.

We're a two because our fire department is made of two.

One of the reasons we're two is because we have a fire station in the wildland urban interface at Suncrest.

And number two, these guys do wildland urban interface firefighting and they do mitigation.

And we have to have it.

And I don't think it would be, I think insurance rates would go up.

There would be a whole lot of people would not get insurance if we didn't have the level of because they've dropped people already.

I mean, it's a it's not a it's not a thing.

Anyway, you're right, Fred, and I just want I just almost want to say I appreciate the council members their diligence and their time to do it.

Um, we're trying to use your money as best we can and make make the most of it we can make, and we're hoping we do have a future um with respect to future sales tax growth.

mitigation and we have to have it and I don't think it would be I think insurance rates would go up there would be a whole lot of people would not get insurance if we didn't have the level of because they've dropped people already I mean it's a it's not a it's not a thing anyway you're right Fred and I just want I just I almost want to say I appreciate the council members their diligence and their time to do it we're trying to use your money as best we can and make make the most of it we can make and we're hoping we do have a future um with respect to future sales tax growth we're one of the cities in the state that has a real upside and at the point of the point of the mountain state land authority which is developing the prison site the point is going to be the future of our real retail growth and it's a bright future I'm very excited about it we're gonna make an announcement about the point of a a brand new you know kind of a kick off tenant in a couple of weeks um it'll be impressive and I will tell you that as the point develops um this is still going to be the best place to live there is and it's gonna have um some really interesting amenities and connections to it as it goes forward anyway thank you all hopefully I think I've covered everything I wanted to cover is there anything else and if not is are we ready to vote Brynn made the motion Bryn how do you vote?

Yesha Catherine Yes Fred Yes I're resolution 2627 passes four to zero next item is item seven we need to recess to the Draper city community reinvestment agency I need a motion motion by Tasha second second cather second by Catherine Tasha do you vote?

Catherine yes yes we are by unanimous vote four to zero in the Draper city community reinvestment meeting I'm also the chair of that so I'm gonna call it to order um items for board consideration item item two a is a motion to approve the May 19th 2026 community reinvestment agency meeting minutes item two b is a public hearing let's go with two a then is there a motion on two a motion by Tosha's there second who Brynn defined my left year okay motion by Tasha second by Brynn Tosh how do you vote yes Brynn yes Fred yes Catherine yes approved unanimously four to zero to B next item this is a public hearing it's the fiscal year 2026 27 community reinvestment agency interim budget this is an opportunity for the public to comment on the fiscal year 2627 community reinvestment agency interim budget prior to its adoption we're gonna have a staff report by Mr.

Vike go ahead sir this is this is the uh CRA budget and we're really just here to have public comment on the CRA budget um I can certainly answer questions if anybody has them or we can just go straight to the public hearing anybody have any questions for Mr.

Vike all right this is the public hearing is there from the public like to address the council on item two B in the uh community reinvestment agency meeting uh six six seven mandilary lane um I don't know if I understand a lot about that uh investment agency uh perhaps somebody could uh give a two minute summary Mr.

Vike it sounds like a decent question by uh Mr.

Dibby sir what we let me ask first is there anyone else who would like to address the council in this public hearing on 2B all right we'll close the public hearing Mr.

Vike would you maybe give a little good explanation for what this is so there are certain areas within the city um where we have made agreements with the taxing entities um to be able to forego their taxes so that we can use those taxes to reinvest in the area to improve the area and hopefully increase the property tax base uh within those given areas uh we currently have trying to remember how many we currently have it's five um CRA areas so we have um this the West freeway which is actually um closed uh so we're no longer collecting revenue uh within the West freeway um but we do have some left some funding left within there uh we have the sand hills the crescent the east banger the front runner and lastly the south mountain CRA so within each of those areas um they're given geographic outlines um the city can uh well the are the CRA can then use that funding that it's the property tax that would have that's been paid but now instead of going to the city or the county it goes into the CRA and the CRA can then use that to uh use for investments or different things to uh encourage people to come in and improve those different areas so that's really what the CRAs are and um this is really just setting out the budget uh for next fiscal year for for that uh reinvestment agency and just where the someone within the CRA have to make application and come in and say hey city or say sorry hey community reinvestment agency we would like you to help us make these improvements we'll bring this to the community and if we have funds available we could spend it on infrastructure or things like that to get the that business

outlines um the city can uh well the our the CRA can then use that funding that it it's the property tax that would have that's been paid but now instead of going to the city or the county it goes into the CRA and the CRA can then use that to uh use for investments or different things to uh encourage people to come in and improve those different areas so that's really what the CRAs are and um this is really just setting out the budget uh for next fiscal year for for that uh reinvestment agency and just on each other where the someone within the CRA have to make application and come in and say hey city or say sorry hey community reinvestment agency we would like you to help us make these improvements we'll bring this to the community and if we have funds available we could spend it on infrastructure or things like that to get the that business or that uh operation in the in the in that specific designated area correct it's been key in developing our business community over the years we've used it extensively and some of it's pretty quiet down now but we have front runners still active a bunch of them are still active so all right thank you John yeah all right council members is our motion mr mayor I'd like to make a motion to approve the fiscal year 2026 27 community reinvestment agency interim budget all right motion by Tasha's or second I'll second second by Brynn any further discussion we are actually not doing the budget adoption until next week we just have a public hearing just a public hearing sorry my bad got had so many public hearings I was in the mood I was in the mode so all right no no no vote on this folks make the record clear this is a public hearing we'll do it next meeting all right that takes us to item three which is I need a motion to adjourn back to the city council meeting so moved our motion by Brenda do so is our second second second by Catherine Brent how do you vote?

Yes Catherine yesha Fred yes my approved four to zero we're back back to city council and that takes us to item eight which is often our favorite item on the agenda and that is the adjournment of the meeting is there a motion are there any council minutes that you do that if you want do you maybe have stuff maybe a couple things oh you should have made your motion close you were that close go ahead Bryn.

I wanted to talk about uh the uh some events that are happening with America 250 we're doing um Utah is has you know advertised this um picnic or potluck um and uh Fred and I have been talking a little bit about what that might look like um I was hoping to do one at the uh rec center up on um by Ocalo I haven't been able to get in touch with anybody at the county to see if I can use that facility um and so I was wondering if anybody might have some ideas of how I might be able to get permission to use the they've got a big field there and if we think it's okay for us to host some of these potlucks or picnics.

Well we do have the ones we're hosting at our public parks but like an individual like if I were to say council member Johnson's hosting this party would that be okay or do I think Rhett could get you squared away with the county for the use I think they rent it and we could get it.

We have we have our America 250 meeting tomorrow but we do have eight eight sites in the city reserved and we're working with Coca-Cola to try to have Coke floats and and um advertise that potluck we can I know I tried reaching out to the county once for you but we can try again if yeah we'll find the right contact and is everyone okay if we kind of host them in that way or would you particularly but they they've encouraged though too if uh haven't they Kelly if individuals want to host a neighborhood one neighborhood one that they can right they do encourage it and they just want you to go onto their website and pin it so people are people know um so it's up to you.

I'm sure there will be some people that host their own we're focusing on those eight city ones for us but individual right you're talking about using it for your own neighborhood okay yeah yeah we can figure out how to get it's in my neighborhood so I figured you know I know Rec can figure out how to get that field that we still need volunteers to to host the eight city ones if you can't get it we can give you a pavilion is what time I can't remember did we set that was at 5 p.m or 6 p.m you know I can't remember either um we'll we'll figure it out tomorrow.

I think we said five I think we said five to seven but I'll clarify.

And rocket pops we're gonna have rocket pops too maybe with the Coke maybe not.

But we talked about rocket pops because you know it's red white and blue yeah.

It's just they're just urging every community in the state to go on their website, pin a potluck, try to get their neighbors together.

So they're not really helping us other than their website.

I see.

And we're pinning that we're doing that through sorry, through their process.

So we're pinning on theirs.

Ours are all pinned and noticed.

Good for us.

Our parks are all listed on the website.

We registered those.

Okay.

And we have uh most uh some of our committees helping, but we are still need a few more to host some of those pavilions.

One of the committee members too at just an FYI has made these uh what do you call them?

The big other postcard birthday cards for America.

That's fun.

The idea is that they can sign them at the park and then we're gonna want to maybe have them at the We're gonna have the two of them at concerts in the park tomorrow.

And if you sign you get a little America two fifty pin and he did a really good job on them.

They're really cute.

Yeah, they and then we can put them on display at Draper Days too.

Is is the US mint making a quarter like they did in the they are 200?

They are a couple of them.

I haven't I've seen pictures of them, but I haven't seen it.

So Brendan, you had nothing else, Red.

You have some anything?

No.

Kevin?

Yeah, Mike.

Anyone else?

All right, thank you all for your time and thank you to the public for coming.

Is there a motion to adjourn?

Motion by Tosha's second.

I'll second.

Second by Brent.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

We are adjourned.