Welcome.

This is a little odd from oh, excuse me.

Quiet, right?

Welcome to our work session today on January 6, 2026.

My name's Mayor Paul Benz, and I'll be leading our meeting today.

And of course, we have a full council today, Councilwoman Newell, Councilman Harrison, Councilwoman Freeman, Councilwoman Stallings, and Councilwoman.

Don't tell me.

Should I be attended?

No, you shouldn't.

Emily Lockhart.

So welcome.

Also welcome all staff who's here today.

We welcome all of you and we're we're glad you're here today.

Yeah.

Our dear Father in Heaven, we're thankful for the opportunity we have to be here today and to discuss the affairs of the city of Lehigh.

We're thankful for the people of Lehigh and for their faith in us, and we have great faith in them, and we have even greater faith in thee.

We ask thee, please to help us and be with us in the decisions that we're making here and a way that we will be light and guided as to what is best to do.

And we're thankful for all the great workers here in Lehigh that to put forth our best effort to facilitate all of the things here in Lehigh City.

We also be with them and their families.

And we say these things name of Jesus Christ, you men.

Thank you.

Okay, so we'll open up our first item of business is to select a mayor pro TEM.

And so council will open that up.

I I believe probably the easiest way to do this.

Um I'm sure you've all been thinking about this, but we'll open it up for some nominations.

So we'll just take some nominations.

We can discuss those as we as we go, and then we'll take a vote.

Um wrap, but I'll open that up to you.

Um Mr.

Mayor, I'd like to nominate Michelle Stallings.

I'll second that.

So we have two um two in any any talk about that, those two motions, thoughts.

I I support that.

I think that she seems to know the code very well.

And in the previous council meetings, I've noticed that the other council deferred a lot to her uh to her knowledge of the code.

And I I think that's a good choice.

Okay.

So let's take a vote.

Uh Heather?

Yes.

James?

Yes.

Rachel?

Yes.

Michelle?

Yes.

Emily?

Yes.

Okay.

Congratulations.

Councilwoman Stallings.

I don't know what you do yet, but I'll tell you, as I learned too.

Okay.

Uh item number three on our list is the discussion of the 2026 City Council meeting schedule and agendas.

Um I believe everyone has received a copy of that.

Uh we'll open it up for some discussion.

Um, I think there's some healthy discussion here to have as we we put forth, we won't vote on it today, but we can put some um information together so that we can prepare it for next week uh for city council meeting.

I'll open that up.

Mr.

Mayor, if I if I could.

Um I think for for this new proposal, it's a little bit different this time.

Um what it does is it opens up uh several more opportunities, about nine, I think, uh, throughout the year to have work sessions.

I think with a new council, we could use uh several new work sessions throughout the year.

But the the concept is to have the second and the fourth weeks of each month.

Um Tuesday being our regular city council meeting, and then uh during the day on Thursdays doing the work sessions with staff.

I like that idea.

Sorry, can I say can I speak?

Um because of OTMA.

Uh we, you know, only two of us can speak to talk to each other at a time, and I'd love to hear what all the council has to say, especially like I just feel like it's important for us to build consensus and to um really understand and dig into some of these issues.

Um, I I loved how watching the previous council work with the planning commission at a work session there with the downtown revitalization act, and I just feels like it really um it really increases our productivity and helps us all to have beyond the same page.

So I'd like to have more work sessions as well.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

I am in full support of getting together.

I like I also agree.

I think that'd be really helpful.

Um planning commission meets on Thursdays, and it's common um or often a planning commissioner will come in on a Thursday and ask staff questions.

Planning commissioners are limited to who they can talk to.

They're only allowed to talk to staff.

They're actually not even allowed to talk to each other.

So I'm concerned that if we put it on a Thursday, number one, it'll overwhelm the planning department because they'll feel the need to come to our work sessions and talk to us about items.

They'll also feel the need to be preparing for planning commission and helping planning commissioners.

Um and then I worry that the planning commissioners won't be able to get their questions addressed.

Um but again, I fully support like the concept of us getting together more often.

I just want to throw out that Thursdays are typically reserved for planning commission.

Thank you.

Thursday, uh after reviewing last night, also there's quite a few meetings that I attend on a Thursday evening too, so we'll take that into effect.

Uh Councilman Stallings, any input on that?

One thing I notice about the planning commission, I'm actually kind of envious of is they get their agendas well in advance.

Um I think if they're you know needing to talk to staff, I think there is time.

Um, you know, unless they procrastinate like I do, which is happens.

Um the other thing, I mean, I I appreciate your point, but I a lot of times the work sessions we've got a lot to discuss, I think, besides just LAN use um decisions.

So and I love love the idea of having more work sessions during the day.

I think it would be better for staff, you know, one less late evening for them, I guess.

Um so I I'm flexible.

I'm I'm good with whatever, but I do I really do like the idea of more work sessions, we're gonna put in more counseling together, it's which I think is the intent of that.

Mr.

Mayor, can I ask you a question?

Yes.

From our perspective, I mean we're here either day, so it makes no difference to us.

Is there something special about Thursday work sessions as opposed to Tuesday or any other day?

Just I I don't know.

Help if you don't mind, um Jason, help us understand the difference between work session, which we're having now, pre-council, and council.

Yeah, and maybe Ryan can chime in too if I lead us astray.

But generally speaking, we work backwards to a general meeting, that's when council can take action on items.

That's when things are the most polished, they're ready for your approval.

Um there are times when we may bring something that's not quite there, and then we work a little bit of that out.

But generally speaking, we'd like that to be the finished product.

Pre-council, that's typically um reports or presentations, uh more informational items that will come to the to the mayor council.

Work session is really where we get our hands dirty.

We have difficult discussions, we we look at studies, we ask staff questions, things like that.

So it's it's much more um hands-on, if you will, um, discussions.

So am I saying anything wrong?

I mean, from from the perspective of the open meetings act, there is no difference.

It's just the way you want to characterize kind of how each meeting works.

So the noticing requirements are the same.

The you know, we typically we've just said we'll only items for approval are on the regular session, not so much work session and pre-council.

So it's just kind of really up to your discretion of what you want the nature of each of those meetings to look like.

But as far as the legal requirements, there is no difference.

Okay.

Mr.

Mayor, if I would just I'm interested to hear Heather's thoughts as well.

And I apologize for my voice.

Um it's left me at a very bad time.

Um but I uh I kind of like the idea of Thursdays, just because I understand Tuesdays are gonna be busy preparing for votes and and decisions that night.

Um Monday and Wednesday, I I'm not sure if if that would be great to have back-to-back uh days with with meetings.

Um Fridays, I know that much of staff is out on Fridays, and so um using Thursday with a early enough in the day uh that there's a buffer between um work session and planning commission.

I think that's that's probably a wise thing to do, but I'd also like to hear Heather's thoughts.

Yeah, I I mean number one is making sure all council members are able to attend um that it works with their schedule because this is something new, um especial especially during the middle of the day.

So that would be critical.

Um I wouldn't see an issue with I know we talked about earlier about having work sessions on Tuesday starting earlier um having everybody come prepared to have seen the items through planning commission leading up to that be able to to talk about it for the meeting within two weeks.

Um I just work sessions never going to be a replacement for the amount of work that needs to be done on an item.

There are staff members, applicants, uh council members in other cities, members of the public who you're all going to have to discuss items with.

So to think that we're able to, you know, do that just with the one work session.

There's still a lot of work that needs to go into each of these items.

So I do like the idea of being able to have more work sessions, especially since this will be newer to be able to dig in.

But I you know, the most important thing to me is that it fits with everybody's schedule, and that um I I really wouldn't like to just throw extra meetings at staff if it makes more sense to consolidate them.

Um I also know we all have a lot of meetings as we start joining and being liaisons to other organizations.

Um especially you, mayor, that's you know, there's gonna be a lot of meetings that you're gonna be required to be at too.

So the more we can consolidate that.

I think everybody knows that Tuesdays are the meetings that everybody in the city are meeting on.

Um American Fork does every Tuesday.

Um other cities are not meeting on Thursdays, so it may kind of hinder the ability to have other meetings on those days, which is typically a popular day to have meetings with these other groups too.

But can I say something?

One hesitation I have of having them on Tuesdays before the regular session is there's decision fatigue, which is like a we all know this is a human condition.

And if we're putting a lot of effort and and time into these these big issues in the work sessions, then we come to vote, and then what I've noticed is these meetings, city council meetings are going later, the issues are getting bigger, we're voting, we're making decisions, and I just I I want us to be fresh.

I want us to be able to focus fully on the ones that we're voting on.

Um the work sessions, I want us to be able to study and dig in deep to those also.

And I and I I'd love us to not conflict and I don't know.

I've heard, I think I remember you told me like Tuesdays, like those days are gone, like you're focusing on things getting ready for city council, like right, Heather.

And then, and then I just think um, yeah, anyways, that's my kind of thinking whether it's Tuesday or Thursday, we're still two weeks out on an item.

I'm seeing a work session is more as a presentation of what's coming.

Like I'm probably not coming to a work session having dug in.

I'm probably coming at that point, unless we're doing the Thursday before the Tuesday meeting, like if it was the the first and third weeks.

Um I don't know, because to me it would almost be like, okay, now I know what this is, now I gotta go do the rest of the work to understand the application.

It'll almost be like I'm I'm wanting to hear a presentation.

Um I want to make sure that I've seen planning commission be on that item beforehand too.

I want to make sure we don't have a work session before it goes to planning commission.

So if we get too far ahead of things, that's also a concern too.

Mayor, may I?

Yeah.

I I agree with Rachel.

I I would not want to have a big long meeting with a work session in the regular session.

That's too much.

And I see a work session, I would like to see a new direction with the work session.

Um I would like to see it more proactive discussion around things where the council contributes as much as the staff giving a presentation.

I don't see this as something prepping us for something that's going to come toward for us on a regular agenda.

I think this is a deep dive into budget issues or some of our master plans or that sort of thing.

So I would much prefer having a separate day dedicated.

I think if we have it early enough in the day, that'll free up our evenings for other meetings that we may need to attend.

Um who knows, maybe other city councils from other cities might want to come in, listen in.

You know, so I I support having a separate day and um yeah, earlier in the day, if you know, as long as people are able, the council members are able to attend that.

Mr.

Mayor, may I have a question as far as your approach to public comment?

Um mayors, you know, have the discretion to do it differently.

At the at this time, the public comment really happens at the planning commission level, which is why I would like to have that information from the public as we start getting into these issues.

Are you planning on having public comment during our city council meetings?

So currently we I'm planning on having 20 minutes of open comment at the start of a city council meeting.

Well, they'll have 20 minutes, three minutes, and then come share uh whatever's on that, or what's on their okay, burning heart that's and not that you have to decide today, but like on an item level basis, is that something you would open up?

We'll look at those as as they come about.

Okay.

Because that is important to me to be ordered in order to make these decisions.

We really need to have that public engagement.

And on that point, Thursday at one o'clock, um, a lot of our residents work full-time jobs um that are during the eight to five hours.

It concerns me that we'd be holding very important meetings as council member Stalling mentioned, where we'd be talking about budget issues, general plan, diving into the meet and um gri nitty-gritty of these o um topics, and our residents who deeply want to be involved in that would be working their full-time jobs at that time.

Just a point of thought, not that um everyone works an eight to five, but a lot of people do.

Um and it's just something to consider.

No, that's a thought, and I and I I think you're right there.

Um, but I also would tell you that the work session normally does not have public comments.

So tonight's a work a work session, we won't have public comment tonight.

Um it is recorded, it is an opportunity where they can go and and see that.

It is public, it is listed, they would be able to go find that information.

So there's that side of it too.

Um Jason, did you have a thought?

No, I mean, like I said, staff were here anyway.

I was just thinking Wednesdays would probably be a not good day because we have DRCs, so planning staff would be absolutely inundated on Wednesdays.

I know we're not contemplating that.

Um another thought I had was well, what if every Tuesday was a meeting, so that we had a meeting every Tuesday night, just a different form of a meeting.

Right.

Or I I don't know.

I'm just again, I don't I'm gonna be here anyway, so I I don't care, but it's so here's what I'll do.

I'll t I'll take that all under advisement.

We'll um we'll look at it.

I did have a meeting with staff this morning.

We had a brief discussion about making sure we all have information a week ahead.

Um they're gonna do their best in the coming weeks.

It's not gonna be next week.

It'll take us a couple of weeks to get it rolling and and making sure that you have the information so that you have uh contact with who you need to have contact to make the best decisions that you can.

So uh we met this morning on that.

I will take that with with advisement.

We'll put that together and then and send it out.

Um I make another comment too, it's in different direction.

Um I'm curious about the change to the all-day budget discussion being moved up.

Um I don't know why that was because we've been we've had that on the schedule for several months, but whatever the reason, I'm concerned about one, if we have people who have been um scheduled to come that day and rescheduling them, but also because of the amount of preparation each of the departments have to go in to that.

I would prefer that it was moved further into February if necessary to make sure that everybody has the full amount of time they need rather than move that up to them at at this later date.

So are you talking about the budget retreat?

Yeah, on the 29th.

So we have uh we have a council member who has a family um a great family thing that day and they should be at that.

So there will be I'm I will actually meet with um Jason in the next day or two and Cam and we'll put together to see if we can stretch that day or I would suggest moving it to the fifth then rather than to move up the schedule on staff.

We'll look at that.

We do we are aware of that and you'll and we'll give you more information as that comes.

But there is there is a uh a member of the council who who won't be able to be with us all that day.

So and I I think that's great that we're making sure everybody can be there.

We want to make sure we're at 100%.

So thank you for bringing that up.

That's and that that'll I'll talk to Jason and Cam about that.

We'll get it planned accordingly.

Any other comments on the uh council meeting schedules?

Just one comment, Mayor, on the reasoning for the second and fourth weeks as opposed to every week.

Um I think it's helpful to have weeks where we can do assignment tasks, uh meet with staff um and to have two weeks where we where we're free without any upcoming meetings or or agenda items.

I think that's helpful.

Just personally, I think that would that would be nice to to stack them on the second and fourth weeks, and I think maybe staff would appreciate that as well.

But just input on that.

No, I'm all about less meetings, so I agree there.

I'm just trying to think holistically how we can solve this.

So I think we're on the the same page there, putting it together, we'll put it together and then and then send it out to you.

Any last comments there?

Great.

Okay, we'll have uh presentation and review of rules and order and procedures.

Uh Lehigh Municipal Code 1-6-3-1.

Tisha, you are up.

Okay.

I'm gonna try to connect to this.

Just so you know, I always wondered how the council saw what was behind them.

Now I know.

Oh no, we're seeing it.

You're probably not gonna be able to read what I uh put on the PowerPoint anyway, because it's gonna be really small, but it's just way to kind of help me through the talking points.

Um so uh rules of order and procedure.

Um we'll kind of just start with a purpose of this.

Um it's to expedite and facilitate the city council um business in an orderly fashion.

And so pretty much everything that I'm taking in this presentation comes straight from city code.

Um so and I encourage you to read that section.

Um I let's see, I had it, it's uh Lean I City Code 1-6-1-3 or 3-1.

Um so yeah, so in that code it says that the purpose is to expedite and facilitate city council business in an orderly fashion.

Um failure to observe the rules uh will not invalidate any action taken by the city council.

So kind of breaking a rule, so to speak, doesn't invalidate any of your decisions.

Um and then these rules are to be reviewed every two years, and kind of at that time that we review them, uh, which is now you can also um feel free to have make suggestions or changes or have discussions if you want to go a different direction.

Um, so Robert's rules of order.

I gave each of you a um book.

I wasn't sure if Michelle and Heather had you might already have copies.

You do, you can so I you can just leave that with me and we can save it for somebody else that wants to read.

Maybe if another staff member wants to read it, they can.

Um so we we say that we loosely follow these rules.

Um these are kind of the most common things that we stick to or try to stick to in Robert's rules, but if you wanna kind of experiment and look at other things with the rules, uh feel free to do so and talk to the mayor about about those things.

But this is kind of generally the things that we stick to and follow.

So uh when there's an item up for a vote uh after it's been discussed, the mayor calls for a motion or asks for a motion, and then a council member makes the motion, there's a second, and then there, and then the mayor opens it up for a discussion on that motion.

And then this is also the opportunity when amendments can be made, and any amendment that is made to a motion also requires a second.

Um roll call vote is a roll call vote is taken.

Now city code specifies that for certain things it's a requirement that a roll call vote is taken.

Uh for record keeping, it's easier, mayor, for my end if you just do a roll call vote on every every item because it is a requirement that I have to note in the minutes how each council member voted on that item.

So of that is just easier if you would um do all votes by roll call.

And then you announce the the uh result.

Um postponing or tabling a motion.

If you are planning to, if you want to continue an item to a next meeting, if you don't have enough information, you need more information.

Um it's not ready.

Uh rather than tabling a motion, um, it's it's preferable to postpone it if you intend on seeing the item again.

So if you could make a motion that says you want to postpone this item until a specific council meeting, or you want to postpone this item until you have this certain amount of information.

Um, that's usually the best way to do that.

Then we're not tabling items because it once you table an item, it's like on the table indefinitely until you um bring it back.

And some items might never even come back, and then they're just kind of left on the table.

And then you don't have to go through the motions of untabling an item as well.

So it's just preferably just use postpone rather than uh table.

Um other things that you can do is you can limit debate before a motion is made.

So you could um say that you so the council could make a motion at any time to limit debate on an item.

Um, uh as long as it's probably not less than three minutes, which is usually specified, which is specified in our code.

Um you can also move at a time to close the debate.

Um if everyone's also if all if everyone on the council has spoken already about the item and you're just kind of ready to move to a motion, uh council member can also move to end the debate.

So just some just some options that you're aware of.

Um previous question.

This is also used at the end of a debate if council's ready to kind of move on and just uh make a motion on the item or a vote, then they can say I move the previous question.

And then if you have any questions, kind of as we're going through these points, just uh go ahead and just interrupt me to ask the questions.

Okay, code of conduct.

Um I realized I wasn't speaking into this.

Could you hear me okay?

All right.

Uh so the code of conduct, so the mayor is the chairperson, um, and he will only vote in the case of a tie.

Um so no one member, no one member of the council can make decisions for the group.

Um so uh members shouldn't give the perception that they represent the full body of the council without kind of the council's um approval or vote.

Um in the code, um, let's see, it specifies council members should not exercise individual authority over the city, its employees, and its enterprises.

Um that's pretty self-explanatory.

Council members must represent the interests of all Lehigh citizens and consider the interests of Lehigh citizens as a whole and vote accordingly.

So that's the specific language in the code.

So um so your job is to consider how your decision affects the whole of the city rather than just individual groups, um, individuals or neighborhoods.

Um so you must consider like the negative and positive consequences to the city a whole as a whole and vote accordingly.

Um adherence to procedures.

The mayor is primarily responsible to ensure the council staff and members of the public are following these procedures.

Uh and the council can assist the mayor in preserving order and making sure that these procedures are being followed.

Um the council members should not delay or interrupt the proceedings.

Um all persons addressing the city council, including the administrator, staff, and members of the public, shall be recognized by the chair.

Um so any time other members of the public want to speak, or staff or other council members, it's best to just first ask the mayor to be recognized or just notify the mayor that you'd like to speak, and then he can choose whether or not you're allowed to allow to speak.

And then all remarks should be limited to the matter that's being discussed.

Um council desiring to speak shall address the chair.

We we just talked about that, so just addressing the um chair or the mayor before you before you speak.

Umops sorry, council members uh once recognized should not be interrupted while speaking unless there's a order by the chair or point of order is raised.

Questions and debates shall be limited to just the issue that's before you avoid discussion of personalities, personal attacks, um, verbal abuse, things like that should be avoided.

Um it's also not appropriate for anyone to berate the mayor, council, or staff in a public meeting.

Um, and then administrative staff, basically administrative staff is held to the same standards as the as the mayor and council.

Um now, code of conduct for visitors and citizens.

So they should so citizens should refrain from private conversations while in the in the chambers and while the council meetings in session.

Um they observe the same rules of decorum.

Uh the mayor can actually remove any person that he feels is being boisterous, whatever that means.

The mayor can um remove that person and and for other reasons too, if they if he feels like they're being disruptive in the council meeting.

And if the council, if you feel like the mayor's not removing somebody that should be removed, you can also make a motion to to remove an individual if you feel like the mayor's not not acting on it.

But from what I know of Mayor Benz, he doesn't have a problem removing people from meetings because that's what he does as a referee, right?

You remove people from games.

I've only ever kicked out one.

So you know.

Only one, okay.

Perfect.

It wasn't someone I'm related to, was it?

Not.

Okay, perfect.

Um and then just um author unauthorized remarks from the audience like yells and um clapping uh shall not be permitted.

Uh banners and signs are not allowed unless it's like a an exhibit or a display that's connected to something being discussed.

Um, and then disruption of a council meeting uh can actually be prosecuted as a class B misdemeanor.

Um council members.

So council members, you may dissent any action taken by by the city council, so you can obviously express that you dissent and your reason for dissenting, and you can also request that that reason be put directly into the minutes.

Excusal from attendance.

If council, if you are not going to be here, please let the chair know, let Mayor Bins know if you're not going to be here.

And also if you could let myself and Jason know as well, then we can kind of make preparations or be prepared for that.

Chair duties.

Okay, so the mayor presides in the mayor's absence will be the mayor pro tem.

So the chair of the meeting will be the mayor pro tem in the mayor's absence.

And if both happen to be absent for one meeting, then council, you will elect a chair just for that meeting.

Chair, uh so a chair can also ask the uh police officer that's here.

We have a police officer that attends all of our meetings, so um you can also ask the um the police officer to remove someone if you feel that's warranted.

Tisha?

Yeah.

Um just one question back to the dissent.

Is that follow immediately following a no vote or you know it just says dissent, it doesn't say that it's directly following a vote.

I'm sure that it's implied that that is directly following a vote, but I would also expect that any time the council has a dissenting opinion that that can be expressed and recorded in the minutes if they if they choose.

Thank you.

Um see um also the mayor, you can ask for a recess too when it's appropriate.

When you feel like it's an appropriate time during the meeting, you can um have a recess.

And council, if you need a recess, just ask the mayor for one.

Um, and then also uh the chair will decide who and when well, yeah, the chair will determine when the public's allowed to speak.

Okay, agendas.

We kind of talked a little bit about agendas.

Those are um, so I prepare the agendas under the direction of the mayor and the city administrator.

And in the event that uh a council member wants to add an agenda item, um a council member uh must obtain consent from the mayor or one additional council member.

So this was included in the code as a way for the council to add items if the mayor refuses.

So if the mayor and council aren't really getting along and the mayor's refuge is refusing to put items on the agenda that you want, then that's kind of the purpose of this.

Um best practices though for this would be um if you have so if you have um an item that you want on the agenda, the best way probably to go about it is to talk to the mayor and or Jason about that and kind of discuss it with them.

They might have additional information or um additional viewpoints, um, things like that.

Um they may have information like it may be necessary to add that to a different agenda item, things like that.

So that's kind of my suggestion for best practices with that.

Um also city council members desiring to introduce items that may require substantial staff time, must first place the item on a pre-council meeting agenda.

And then after being presented, a majority vote of the council is required to move that agenda item forward.

And so um the purpose of this was to protect city resources staff time.

So if you have, let's say, like if you have one or two council members that for example, thinks that maybe one or two council members thinks that we should uh combine fire and EMS with Saratoga Springs, combine those two departments.

Example only.

However, so if you have one or two people that or one or two council members suggesting that, um, if the whole major if the majority of the council is mostly against even entertaining that and doesn't want to waste city resources on that, um, then that can be used to kind of protect those those resources.

So basically it's kind of to prevent individual council members from going in a direction that's very different from the majority of the council.

Tisha, sorry.

Um it says a majority vote.

Do you need a formal vote or just kind of a straw poll kind of thing?

Um let's see, a majority vote of the council.

Um so if it's officially being presented in a work session meeting, and the mayor thinks that it's and if the mayor kind of thinks like that it's likely that the other council members don't want to move forward with this item, then he can ask, then yeah, then you can take a vote there to move forward with it.

So the item would first have to be on like a work session agenda.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, does that change noticing requirements if there's votes involved or um typically a head nod that we haven't really done an official vote?

Yeah, I think Ryan, do you have a preference?

It probably doesn't really matter if it's a vote or a head nod type of thing, because you're not taking necessarily official city action.

Yeah.

I like the idea of a formal vote because then it's clear, right?

And you can go back in the minutes and and see what the vote actually was, but I'm just wondering if it changes noticing at all.

I agree with that.

Yeah.

Um if we I mean, if we know ahead of time that we need to have a vote on it, then we can certainly notice it that way.

Um but again, where it's not official action, you can do a head nod or a vote.

And maybe probably whatever Mayor Benz prefers to do with that.

And you could just ask individually for against kind of.

Um, agendas can be amended.

So the noticing requirement, and Ryan will actually go into this at the next city council meeting, he'll have the open um open public meetings act training at our next city council meeting, but um the kind of the deadline for posting agendas is 24 hours notice, and so that also applies to amending the agendas.

So amendments can be made up to 24 hours before the meeting.

Um and then we've kind of had discussions about uh posting those agendas uh a week before before the meeting, and so um staff is uh kind of going to start working towards that that direction.

Tisha, um I've noticed in the past there's been items that have been removed last minute.

Yeah, like during the meeting.

Can you explain the difference?

Um just for individual items.

Oh, sure, yeah.

So it's what if you're going to add something to the meeting.

So like the intent, the intent behind this is um the council shouldn't be discussing something that wasn't noticed by that wasn't where the notice wasn't or the where the public wasn't given sufficient notice, right?

But if you're pulling it from the agenda, then you're not discussing it, right?

So yeah, do you have anything it's a legal requirement?

In the second instance, it's more of a matter of inconvenience for those that have come to speak on that item, but it's not a legal requirement that you amend the agenda to remove items just because again in the first instance, at least the public knows that it's going to be discussed, and the second item you've inconvenienced people by taking it off, but it's not a legal notice requirement.

And usually what um best practice, what we've tried to do if we anticipate that there's going to be public showing up for this item, um, we'll just note we'll update the agenda on the website that and I'll usually like highlight it or something that says like this item's been pulled from the meeting.

Um if it's not, if it's something that we don't anticipate a lot of, well, any but if we don't anticipate any public comment on it, we may not do that.

We may just pull it before the meeting.

And it's probably best too, mayor, if we have items like that to just announce that at the beginning of the meeting, um, just to kind of make everybody aware that you're you know not going to be discussing that.

And we can also um uh let the council know as well.

Like as soon as we know that an item's being pulled, we can notify the council.

Um yeah, any other questions about that?

Tisha for the agendas.

Um as a council member, sometimes we're noticed about this is going to be discussed, but we don't get the information until sometimes the day of, right?

And I guess this is more of a request though, because I that fulfills the legal requirements, right?

Just noticing it, but it's especially the minutes.

I am a procrastinator, so I don't have time the day out to read the minutes all the time before the meeting.

So yeah, I guess the sooner we get those things, it just helps.

I agree.

And I'd rather have time to read it and vote to approve it.

Yeah, it'll pull it, you know, until we have enough time to read it.

Yes, that makes sense.

I would just add to that.

If if there is especially a major decision that's coming down and there's documents added and not enough time for the full council to review it and be prepared for the meeting, I think it would be a good practice to push push that agenda item to a later date, if it makes sense, just because sometimes there's dozens or hundreds of pages to read.

Yeah, and I I always take that direction from the mayor.

So if yeah, if um the mayor feels comfortable moving forward with an item, if he feels like he has enough votes and wants to move forward with it, um, that's at his discretion to do so if he chooses.

Um but yeah, certainly I think it's it is best practice for sure to make sure everybody has all the information before a vote is taken.

So we can complain to him if you're gonna do that.

Yes, you can.

Absolutely.

I do.

Okay.

Oh, and then kind of like what we what we discussed earlier, so pre-council or work sessions can be held um for presentations or yeah, discussions ahead of a meeting.

And then I think kind of what we said earlier, final action generally is not taken in a work session meeting or pre-council unless it's necessary to um advance the work of the city.

So the only time that we've had um items on a uh work session that are on there for approval, it's because the mayor felt like it was necessary to to advance the work of the city.

But otherwise, generally we don't we don't follow that that practice.

And then, you know, with the difference between like work sessions and pre-councils, um, yeah, like kind of like Ryan said, it's all it's all kind of the same.

It's just how you want to how you want the meeting to run.

Um, citizen speaker rules.

So only one person can approach the mic unless approved by the chair, and only the person at the mic may speak, and uh they must clearly identify themselves, um, and that's for the record, and that's a that's a requirement.

I I have to anyone that comes to speak before the council, I have to have their name in the in the record.

So um if so hopefully you can give that direction before the public makes their comments.

Um to uh let's see, oh yeah, to reduce replication and save time, pooling of speakers is encouraged where one person may speak for a group.

Um written comments can be submitted before the meeting to the council.

Speakers shall address their comments only to the mayor and council.

So sometimes the public may turn and try to address uh an applicant or staff or something, and if you know, um if you could just redirect their attention to the mayor and council.

Um that ask a question about that.

Yeah, sure.

So I have never been a council member before, obviously.

And it there's a little button you click that says e-comment.

So when someone does that, where does it send the comment to?

Yeah, you guys will get those comments directly sent to you in your email.

Okay.

Um yes.

And in fact, uh the system is set up to where I can't specify between um planning commission and city council.

So you will also be getting the planning commission comments, which I think I mean that's probably helpful anyway, right?

So quick question.

How long before the meeting does that functionality turn off?

Yeah, so I think it's around it's like 11 o'clock or noon.

And I think I specify on the website when that when that needs to be.

And I mean, I think on the website I encourage people to get their comments in as soon as possible so that you guys have time to consider all of those comments.

But yeah, it's I think just the morning of the meeting.

And we can change that if you'd like.

Like if you um want that extended, you can or we can just kind of keep it at like noon issue.

Whatever the senior people think.

I don't know.

Heather and Michelle, are you you're getting those comments?

You have enough time to you have enough time to read those comments.

Yeah, most of those comments come when it comes to the planning commission, so we get them well ahead.

That's when it's being noticed.

So yeah.

So you're getting you feel like there's enough time if we're cutting that off at noon.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah, we're usually most comments are for the planning commission meeting because like, yeah, that's when the the public noticing goes out, like the letters are actually sent, and so the public is generally paying more attention to those letters that they get in the mail.

Um where city council, we honestly don't have very many that use that e-comment.

And mayor, it might add to my concern would be is if we're preparing for a meeting and someone does send an email and we miss it, then I feel that like if they're sending an email at five o'clock and we miss it, whereas you know, if we know by noon we have time to respond to them, they know that they've been heard, that's probably a better, you know, for them.

They can always email us.

And like I I don't know if on the web page if it has and it should like have a link to the council.

So if they can't leave any comment, they could just go to that page and send everybody an email if they wanted to as well.

Yeah, that's also on the website.

Are we able to respond to e-comments?

I didn't think there was uh so e-comments, so no, not directly.

However, you can respond um to I can run a report for you that shows the email that came with that comment.

Yeah, the email address.

So if you want to respond, just let me know, and I can I can run a report and send you the their emails.

I would love it with the new website if we can just have an email address attached to whatever comment comes to us so we know.

You know what I mean?

It just saves a step, saves you a step, saves up a step, like we can engage with the public.

Yeah.

If if needed.

In fact, we may have that ability to already add that.

I will check and see if that's something that's a good idea.

I would just like us to be able to be as responsive as possible.

Mr.

Mayor, if I can add on to that, um if they send us a comment with noticed that this is a part of the public record.

This isn't just an email that would have to be grandma'.

The comment given becomes a part of the public record.

So I think it'd be important for everyone to recognize that your response, I'm assuming would also be.

Um, and that you would as you would want to respond accordingly with the knowledge that it would be the public record.

Yeah, thank you.

Kind of instead anyway, right?

What's that?

Our responses are public record anyway.

I mean, well, I mean, they're all they're all um they can be criminal requested, they're subject to grandma, so somebody could request those, and that's the same whether they submit something through e-comment or um directly to your email.

So I'm with you, Heather.

I think as long as we have that and someone made a comment, but there was a cutoff.

Yeah.

So we know the comments are there, then because I'm I'm with you.

I would hate for a comment to come in five and we miss it.

So Michelle's fully right.

I think I'm getting more emails than I'm getting e-comments typically.

So yeah, and that's on our website.

There's that option as well.

And some people do feel just more comfortable emailing you all directly.

And so that's why we have that option on the website too.

So I think we keep it cut off, so that's pretty good.

All right.

Um speakers, okay.

Let's see.

Public hearing remarks must be limited to the matter being considered.

We've kind of covered that a lot.

Uh speakers have approximately three minutes.

So in our code that says speakers have three minutes.

Um, however, the mayor may grant longer time or shorten the time just based on the circumstances or the amount of people there to to speak on the item.

Um sorry, quick question with that.

That has to be decided beforehand, right?

You can't just um it should be decided beforehand.

Now, what if you have, and I know this has been done in the past where you have a representative of a group.

Yeah, and they say, well, I yield my time so this person could have extra time.

Is that again could at the mayor's discretion or is okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

And I it I think it's good for the mayor to encourage a spokesperson.

Um if a neighborhood can get together and kind of have a spokesperson that can grant them more time.

Um I think that's very appropriate.

But again, yeah, that that kind of thing would be the mayor's discretion.

Um, and then just that the council members will refrain refrain from debate during the time allotted to speakers.

So um have everybody give their give their public comments first.

Um it's really tempting sometimes to respond to uh citizens or applicants when they're right here, um, it's uh best just to go through everybody.

It's um more efficient, and then everybody's questions can be be addressed um after the public comment.

Okay, electronic meetings.

So uh council members may uh uh participate electronically as long as the method allows for real-time interaction to discuss, ask questions and vote.

So we don't need a camera, uh, you don't have to have a camera on in order to participate in a meeting, but you do have to be able to listen to the discussion and participate in the discussion and vote.

You can't just text your vote into the mayor and say you were listening, but there's no way to actually talk to you.

Um anyway, yeah, just yeah, texting texting your vote in, it doesn't work.

Um let's see, and then just um pre-meeting if you're planning, if you do want to participate electronically, if you could give us a heads up notice, that is very much appreciated.

And then um if you want to make sure that everything on your end, uh if your connection's working on your end, just contact um contact myself or um a management analyst, and we'll make sure that we make that connection with you before the meeting to make sure that everything everything works great.

Um yeah, it's the mayor's uh responsibility enforce the rules and the council should insist that the rules be followed.

Um council members uh um if the mayor is following the rules, I guess, then um you don't have necessarily like a um it's hard to raise a question as long as the mayor's following the rules.

Um mayor is responsible to see that both the public and members of the council act um civilly.

Um but yeah, again, assistance from the council is appropriate and appreciated.

Okay, we'll go any questions then before we move on to the ethics act.

Any questions about rules, procedures, suggestions, changes, discussion?

One um just curiosity with the disruption by the public being a class B misdemeanor, does that also apply to planning commissions at any meeting or is it specifically city council?

I would have to look at the code and see if it says meetings or meeting.

Okay.

Okay.

I may or have a couple questions.

Um I'm gonna ask Jason this because it says in there we're supposed to address the chair, but when we have questions for sta staff are supposed to ask them of the city administrator first.

I know we typically call an individual, so maybe I'm speaking out of turn.

Yeah, you just the mayor have a question for staff and then we can dialogue from there.

I don't think every single question is.

Like we've never done that that I would say.

I think it's just to prevent sidebar conversations and things like that.

But address the mayor and then usually the mayor too will say, well, in the past the mayor mayors have said um, you know, does yeah, does council have any questions for staff?

And then you can kind of just informally have that interaction with staff.

Okay.

Do you I'm happy to hear that we can postpone items.

Um is there any reason to table them versus postpone?

Um yeah, there could be, there could be reasons.

Um if you're not sure when you want to bring it back, like if you don't have or if you don't want to bring it back too.

Um or if you're not sure.

If you don't want to bring it back or you're not sure, then tabling it is the best option.

Okay.

Okay, so question about that.

If you're done.

Um I'm not, but go you can finish.

Go ahead and finish.

Oh, I have other questions.

So if you have a full question, well, just how would you untable something?

So just at like a next you would just say, hey, I would like to bring do you put on the agenda.

I would untable something.

Yeah, so I would normally put it on the agenda to untable.

But it would have to be requested.

So the mayor, you know, I would take I would take the direction of the mayor and and he would say, like, um, we need to put that on the agenda to untable that item.

And then the very next thing on that agenda would be that item.

So if you untable it, then you can discuss it and vote.

If you choose not to untable it, then we just skip it.

Okay.

And Mr.

Mayor, same realm of questions.

So sorry to interrupt you, Michelle.

Um this is how in my mind maybe this is what would work.

So we've had the instance where we've tabled something because we've had them go to a developer agreement.

So there may be this undetermined amount of time.

So the tabling would be when they come back with the developer agreement rather than saying postpone is we're going to set a date of when it's post-pone too.

Is that when you kind of that makes sense?

Yeah.

Just I think if you if you intend to um uh um delay a vote, but you have intentions of bringing it back, um, whether that's at a very specific date or if it's something where you need more information, you can also postpone for that.

You can say that you know, I move that we postpone this meeting until we get this traffic report back, or until we get um this, or until staff is ready to bring this back to the council.

Um so if you have direction, yeah, you can.

Yeah.

Um it's just kind of the um yeah, on unta you can use them interchangeably.

Okay.

There's just kind of just the procedure is different.

There's also a different message on the item.

Right.

Yeah.

Tabling it has a somewhat of a death to it where postponing doesn't.

Yeah.

Yep.

Wait.

Michelle.

Thank you.

Sorry.

Okay.

This is um I do not see any problem with this with our our mayor here and his experience refereeing things and enforcing rules.

But if there's an instance where we think, okay, that's not a pro or you know, the rule.

Is there a way to kindly, you know, bring that up?

Point of order or you know, um, yeah, I think it is a point of order.

I would have to break out the little book to see if I need to make the best appropriate but just kind of going off of what I know, I think point of order is the best, and then he can address that as part of the procedures.

So yeah, any time there's like a procedural question, um, yeah, point of order is probably the best way to bring that up.

Okay.

And then um when the public is addressing the council and maybe they felt the need to be rate us or make personal comments or whatever.

Where's the line of freedom of speech, you know, versus decorum?

And the one thing that I I can see is that we are supposed to address the topic at hand.

And so if they get off the topic, you know, in any direction, then we can bring it back.

But I'm gonna turn free speech stuff over to Ryan.

I I just know other city councils have dealt with that.

So yeah, so certainly I mean, so there's kind of a different purpose, right?

The 20, 20 minute citizen input.

They can talk about whatever they want.

They're just limited in time.

And even that's not a requirement of an open meeting.

It's just more of a again, a consideration of the public.

You know, if they get off if they get off topic, that would be something I'd you know, want to see the mayor try to bring them back.

Eventually, I think the mayor could cut someone off.

I don't think we'd ever want to, you know, initiate the procedures to expel somebody from the meeting if it's just content-based, or they go but because it would need to come to the point where no matter what they're saying, it's not it's not the what they're talking about, but it's disruptive to the meeting that we would excuse them for the meeting.

So, yeah.

Because the First Amendment, there've been cases where uh legislative bodies try to kick somebody out because of what they're saying, and that gets them in a lot of trouble.

So versus manner.

Yeah.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may, on that point, I think the line really comes down to threats of violence.

Um council member Newell and I have both been a part of a meeting where someone was escorted out because of something like that.

And so for me, I I absolutely believe in the first amendment, but any threat of violence would be where I would draw the line.

It could be more than that, but that's certainly one category where you could kick somebody out.

But even if somebody just refuses to sit down after their time.

And again, with some discretion, they go three and a half minutes.

You're not going to throw somebody out of the meeting.

But after you've asked them a couple of times, okay, your time's up, thank you for your comments, and they just won't stop, or they're yelling at people, then we'd escort them out of the meeting.

So you want to maybe talk to you about like the difference between like a public forum, like creating a public forum versus kind of our public comments.

Yeah, I mean that's there's that's a much broader discussion because when you talk about public forum, you're talking about websites and you're talking about, you know, also probably not tonight, but yeah.

Okay.

That would be a discussion, a good discussion, maybe when we do open or something.

But any other questions about that then before we Okay, sorry, one more.

Just to clarify.

Um in the the code here, it it talks about that you're not supposed to represent that you're representing the body unless there's a vote of the body making you that spokesperson.

And that comes from the the body, not the mayor necessarily, right?

The mayor's not the one who designates a spokesman.

Correct.

Um sometimes the mayor will know that he has the support of um at least three council members.

Um so um it does say though that it requires that I think in our code it does say a vote is required.

Um that can be a head nod.

Yes.

Yeah, just a head nod or direction.

Yeah, go ahead.

Because there's a whole range of very formal things where you need to appoint one of you to speak on, you know, to attend a hearing or attend something.

And then there's I mean, I'll just I'm sure everybody has in mind something in the newspaper or goes on the radio or gives an interview.

That one's a little more difficult to have some formal procedure where somebody's been designated, but still, you know, the the precaution would be if you're speaking, and this is the mayor, and the mayor is one of the council members, just a non-voting member.

But whether it's the mayor or one of you as council members, that's more of a caution to just be careful that if you're just representing your views that you make that clear um and and not say, you know, not give the impression to the media and therefore the public that you're speaking on behalf of the city or the entire council.

So that's tricky.

You know what I'm asking.

Yeah.

Yes.

So we we have freedom of speech rights.

And as long as we clarify multiple times whether it's included or not.

You can certainly speak on anything you want.

Okay, so being reprimanded.

That's great.

Okay, perfect.

So do you say that then, like if you're doing a Facebook post or you're saying this is my opinion?

Or this is my view instead of the case.

Well, and here's your not designated.

If it's already and it kind of if if it's something that you've already acted upon too.

Like so, if the council's already made a decision about something, um it's it's probably a little easier for you to just say your opinion.

But if you're speaking to something that the council hasn't decided, that's probably where you just need to be a little bit cautious with saying just clarifying that you're you're just representing these are just your views.

Okay.

Do you have a comment?

I would just say, because I I did quite a few interviews, I would always start the interview with that statement that I represent myself.

These are my opinions, having that clear.

I would never use we statements saying we is you know, the council or anything like that.

Just I think if you get in as you are doing the interviews, make sure that you are and then I also think what Tisha was saying, like really careful if you're doing something before it's been presented to council.

But yeah, it's I know it is tough because they can always just you know take a quote from the middle of what you're saying, but I think if you just you know make that really clear, and that was just something that it just became almost automatic uh being able to say this is who I am, this is you know, I'm speaking on behalf of myself, I do not represent the city, you know, and that's Mr.

Mayor, while we're on the topic, uh can we put TUL on the spot and maybe just talk about media requests and how the best way to handle that?

Yes, please.

Yes, do you want to come up here, too?

Welcome, Till.

Thanks for having me.

So when it comes to the media, um, and you'll get requests all the time.

Most of the time they'll come directly to me, but if they happen to come to you for your own, I guess you can say like protection and to make sure that you are knowledgeable about what they're asking about.

I prefer and we ask that you come to me.

Um I like to also be in those interviews as much as possible.

Again, it's just that I don't want them getting you in a situation where they it's like a I gotcha situation.

Um it's obviously there's gonna be stories um that don't paint Lehigh in the best light, and we understand that it's not about hiding anything, it's about putting out the right information.

Information that is gonna help our community, information that is accurate and that is relevant.

So do you guys have any questions?

No, thank you.

Yeah.

Okay.

Any other any other questions before we move on to ethics?

Okay.

Um so the municipal officers and employees ethics act, um, I put the code on there, so it's Utah code um 10-3-13.

I encourage you all to read that section um thoroughly so you um understand it and know what's in there.

And um feel free to reach out to Wright as you're reading through it too, if you have questions.

Um please reach out to to Ryan on that one.

He knows more about that code than I do.

And so as I'm kind of presenting this to uh Ryan, I hope he'll chime in and um yeah, give us additional information as we go through these things.

Um okay, so just the purpose of the employee uh well, I'm just gonna call it the Ethics Act.

The purpose of the Ethics Act is to restrict officials from acting in a way that benefits them personally or financially.

And um officials may not act in a way that creates a conflict between private interests and your public duties.

Uh requirements.

So prohibits officials and employees from using their position for personal gain.

Um disclosures.

So new last year the state um passed a requirement that all um council and mayor uh members uh submit a financial disclosure document to uh actually to myself, and then I am required to um send a link to the state.

These also have to be posted on our website, and those will be on our website until um such time that you leave office.

Um so and uh the requirement is very specific, it has to be submitted between January 1st and January 31st of each year.

So I will be sending you all a copy of the disclosure um for you to redo and and sign and uh get back to me, and then we'll have those posted on the website.

Um also just a note on any disclosures, um, just disclosing it on that document isn't good enough if um there's a conflict that arises during a meeting.

So if you have a conflict during a meeting, you are also required to disclose that at the meeting.

Um and we'll kind of get a little bit more into that um later.

But um and then also just gifts.

Um you cannot accept any gifts over 50 dollars.

Um however, this doesn't include campaign donations.

Oh, go ahead.

I missed something.

No, no, no.

There's a there's just a little bit of nuance.

Okay, perfect.

So the $50 limit is a safe harbor.

And so there's a there's a there's a term, I think it's an economic benefit tantamount to a gift or something like that.

Yes.

So you stay under 50, then you're you're good, right?

But that's not so somebody I often will get a question like, well, a group wants to take us golfing, and actually the green fees are 65 dollars.

So does that mean I have violated the municipal off, you know, employees as an officers ethics act.

And I'd say, not necessarily, right?

So let me just read a little bit of language to you, and again, we can go over this in more detail later if you want.

But it's basically it says if if accepting that gift of substantial value would tend improperly to influence a reasonable person in the person's position to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of the person's public duties, or the person knows or that a reasonable person in that position should know under the circumstances, it's primarily for the purpose of rewarding the per person for official action taken.

Plain English.

The first of that is are they trying to influence your decision, i.e.

your vote?

As it applies to you, this you know, be a little bit different context with an employee, or are they rewarding you for some decision that you've made again, it's mostly expressed through your vote.

So, you know, if a department head comes to me and says, you know, what about the $65 gift or $65 golf, is that a violation?

Well, it's not an automatic violation, but if you're in a position where you're deciding whether to recommend a contract with this company to the city council, then you better stay under the $50 limit because if you go over it, you're now outside the safe harbor, and so somebody can then conduct the analysis of that language to see if a reasonable person that means it's an objective standard, right?

If a reasonable person would think that they're trying to buy your vote, then you should refuse golf even if it's $65.

So again, the fifth the $50 is a is a great thing to keep in mind, but just so you know there's a little bit more nuance than just $50 under the circumstance.

You know, there's no exception, that's gonna get me charged with a crime.

So there's a little more to it than that.

So Ryan, is there um excuse me?

Is there a way if when I was in the federal government?

Sorry, my voice is going again.

Um there's a way to donate it, like if you if you get a gift or if you get jazz tickets or something, is there a way that you can donate it to the city and you could give to staff?

Is there is there some I can't foresee a situation?

I don't know of a formal way.

I think you could again if you feel like it would be inappropriate for you to accept it.

I think you could just call the J call the Jason.

Call Jason.

Just funnel all the gifts to Jason.

He's a new attorney.

I mean, you could say I've got you know, I was offered these.

I don't feel like I can accept them, but I'd love to make them available to city employees.

So I don't know if a formal way, but I think you could do that.

Yeah.

That that's appropriate.

Yeah.

Again, Jason would have to make sure that he doesn't give them to an employee who would also who would be influenced by that, right?

But Ryan I mean, a reasonable person, I mean we also won't be influenced, but I probably the safe thing also is if they an entity organization comes before the city for every anything, just thank you.

No, thank you.

That's the safe approach for sure.

Yeah.

If you think in the future, even if you don't think it's something immediately before you, but that you know that it's a developer or somebody that comes before you quite often, if you just want to stay free from any accusations, that's the safe approach for sure.

Thank you.

Um so recusal from um discussion and voting.

So if you if there is a conflict that exists on an item that's brought before you the council, you may be required to uh refrain from the discussion, abstain from vote voting, and you may even need to leave the room during the deliberation.

Um I don't really know to be honest what the differences are.

Maybe Ryan can clarify that for us.

Yeah, in my experience, it's just that some I know of the city that I worked for previously required that their code had you you have to leave, you know, leave the dais and can't participate in the discussion.

They added that as a requirement.

That's not a requirement of state law, but that was for that specific city.

We don't have something like that.

So you could decide whether you think you know, if you want to you you could stay up here and just not discuss and participate in the discussion, but if you think even staying here might influence your fellow council members, then you could certainly leave for that item while the discussion and the vote happen.

And is there is there any case where a council member member can disclose their conflict and still vote?

Yeah.

So let me get to that at when you're done.

Because it goes back to the one we just talked about, 1304 and the word felony.

We'll talk about felonies in connection with that.

Okay, perfect.

Um just a couple examples uh that we can go over and maybe just kind of discuss or help you um kind of think through some of these things.

Um so if we have an example of a count if there if this were to happen, a council member owns property next to a proposed rezoned area.

Um should the council member uh disclose this at the meeting but still vote, or should they disclose it at the meeting and recuse themselves?

Any guesses I guess it depends on if they're gonna benefit from that rezoning.

I think the safest way would be to recuse.

Um but if it if there's no clear benefit to them, then maybe they could still vote.

Yeah.

I honestly don't have a great answer.

And uh that was probably a great response to that.

And if you are ever in doubt of whether you should vote or not on something, uh certainly consult with Ryan beforehand.

Yeah, I mean I'll just say I agree that that's a good answer.

If that there's not the line of personal benefiting from using your office, and again, voting is a way to use your office for your own benefit.

But if if it's just yeah, I understand this is happening next door to me, but you don't own the property, you're not gonna benefit from however it's rezoned, then I f I think you could not I think you should still feel like you can vote on that one.

Okay.

Next example, um a council member's spouse works for a developer on an item before the council.

Um should you disclose it during the meeting but still vote or disclose um during the meeting and recuse.

I think you should disclose and recuse because you're gonna benefit financially or not benefit financially as an employee of that development.

I like that answer.

Do you have anything to add on that one?

This is what I was gonna do later.

So hypothetically, um because we had really close to the same scenario where a former council member said that their spouse worked for this company, but that didn't affect their judgment, and so they were gonna vote anyway.

And I it sent me into a panic because that was great evidence that maybe a crime had just been committed.

Okay.

So yes.

Again, you you identified the line, right?

If that vote could somehow benefit you personally, whether it's you directly or through your spouse, that should be disclosed and absolutely you need to recuse yourself from that vote.

Just so nobody can make the allegation again that you used your public office in to benefit you personally, either economic financially or any other, you know, some benefit derived from that vote.

You just want to stay away from that as completely.

So by the way, chat GPT helped me come up with these examples, so I didn't intend none of them are intended to be.

Maybe it's a common one.

It was, yeah, this was chat GP generated.

Um the next one, uh a city employee re um helps review bids from a company they own stock in.

Should they be allowed to participate in that review, not allowed to participate, or can they participate if it's disclosed?

So this is more dealing with like a a city employee situation rather than council.

So what is there what is their when they're reviewing the bids, are they making decisions yes or no?

Like they would have their role.

They would have input on the decision.

They may not make the official decision, but they would have they would provide in input and feedback.

I mean, they should for sure disclose.

You're you're talking ethical, ethically here, right?

Not necessarily legal requirements, right?

Yep, uh-huh.

Okay.

And I guess I'm with Ryan.

I mean, better safe than sorry, right?

Just I would not participate in that if it was me.

Yeah.

And then it's yeah.

I I I don't know.

We all have like 401k.

It's like I don't know where their stock is.

That's too that's too remote.

I mean this is another really good one because the the statute itself would say you just need to disclose that.

It's a bit it's an interest.

What's the what's the um an investment creating a conflict of interest with your duties.

So under that statute, you just have to disclose, but then again, if you're involved in it in such a way that a recommending which bidder to approve could then benefit you personally, then you ought to stay out of that decision.

You ought to remove yourself from the bid um review process altogether.

So uh that's what our department heads would do as well, or the employees should just well, employees are also required to submit um conflicts of interest statements.

And so um, yeah, a department head would not have an employee um on a committee or a review committee for bids if that employee had uh financial or personal interest.

Okay.

And then too, like how much of a mutual fund do you own?

Do you own you know you own a million of this mutual fund, 10% of it's in TI, so you know.

Yeah, it's a it's an interesting question.

Well, and I I agree with you, like I'd just rather step out of the the vote than to to mess around with something like that.

But it's something I don't think we've ever really dove into of thinking that that's going to your bids now influencing the volatility of the stock.

For publicly traded companies, it's probably not much of an issue because you own such a minuscule.

So I think this probably has uh I don't know, again, chat GPT probably came up with the word stock.

But if you had an ownership interest, right?

Like yeah, like if you had a major share in it, I I know people who are being like, oh, I've always got to buy Apple because I've got a hundred shares of it.

So I'm gonna, you know, if I don't get my Apple iPhone, I'm not affecting my stock.

So I don't think it's like the you and four family members might have a closely held corporation that their company wants to submit a bid.

So he's very different.

Yes that we okay.

I take the word stock in this example and then apply it to anything that you have a business interest in that with a company that wants to make a proposal or something.

And I if I've if I remember right too, um the state has clarified too on your conflict of interest forms because it asks you if you have any.

I I don't remember it uses the word stock.

Um it does it doesn't count ETFs or mutual funds but specific companies and it needs to be over 5,000 worth okay.

Um let's see.

Yeah, just uh municipal office officers or off yeah, officers I meant to say there must not use their um position for personal gains.

So um an example, uh a city council member asks the planning uh department to fast track a permit for their family or friend um or if a council member pressures uh staff to award a contract to a friend's company, um those uh could be um considered personal gains, even though it's not a fine a financial um gain, um it could kind of be a personal personal gain, so just something else to just to consider and and think about before you before you're making decisions.

Um another.

Oh, that's the same one, never mind.

Okay.

Um a council member meets with applicants and or residents before a council meeting.

Is this a violation of the ethics act?

I hope not.

Yeah, so no.

Yeah, some yeah.

So some like the the um planning commission is really they have specific bylaws, and it might even be in our city code that um uh refrains them from talking to developers or residents about issues or uh amongst themselves too.

Um so city council, that wouldn't be a violation.

Um what could be maybe uh maybe we can discuss best practices instead.

Um I know one training that I went to, it was suggested that um you know council members are gonna meet with residents and um you know developers before meetings.

Uh it just it just is it happens.

Um but the kind of the advice or direction uh that was given to me in this training is that it's probably best for uh for you uh for the council to disclose that during the meeting in which you're voting on that.

And so you know, just saying like I met with a developer beforehand, and this is what we talked about.

Um that that seems to be a good um a good approach.

Or the same can go with citizens if you're meeting with residents and stuff before a meeting that you're gonna be voting on, just uh as you're having the discussion, you know, with the council, just stating that you you met with residents and these were these were their concerns.

Um so that's that's one approach.

You could also take the approach of you don't want to meet at all with with a developer before the meeting, or you don't want to meet with any citizens or residents, or you tell the residents if they approach you with a concern, you tell them come to the city council meeting instead.

So there's just kind of a wide range that I think is kind of an individual choice on how you want to approach it.

Yeah, Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

I understand why we do it on the planning commission that way, but I would just really encourage everyone to engage because it I it's one of the things I'm very excited about now being on the council is having that opportunity.

And I um have no problem disclosing the conversations in you know in a meeting, but I just think there's so much value there to engage at that level prior to making the decision.

Thank you.

I do like the idea of disclosing it just because the public open meeting is to deliberate in front of the public so they can see you know how the decisions are made, and uh you can't get all the information in their two or three minute, you know, time that I do I do like and my policy is I'll meet with anybody who asks, you know, developers or residents or whatever.

But I do like the idea of being able to present what was discussed in those meetings.

So I have a question about that.

Let's pretend that I meet with someone or two of us do because we can.

And then we want to kind of uh get in get everyone else's on the same page, kind of and say, hey, we met with so and so.

This is you know, prior to the council meeting.

Can we send out a can I send out an email to the whole council and say this is what can I send out like a voice memo, you know, like how you know I think you know, how does that work?

Yeah, we'll cover this on the open meetings training, and I better verify that it's still there.

But that there's this really weird exception to the open meetings act.

And hopefully there are no state representatives listening to this, but I I I imagine they probably carved it out for themselves.

Um but it's it's blanket to any government official that you can have you you can basically do that electronically, not from the you know, not from the dais.

So you couldn't be texting each other in a public meeting, but outside of a public meeting, you can exchange that kind of information electronically, so by email, by text.

So again, let me make sure that it's still in the code, but it's it's a very strange exception to what you would normally expect from the open meetings act.

But then we just can't really respond because we can't have like a discussion about it, but we can inform each other.

Like that I'm questioning.

It doesn't really put parameters on it.

Do I think it's a good practice?

Absolutely not, because you could definitely violate the spirit of the open meetings act by having all these kind of discussions outside of the public view.

So again, my job in a couple weeks will be to tell you what the exception is, and then you'll have to govern yourselves as to making sure that you're complying with the spirit of the act.

So I was talking to someone from other, I've been looking at other councils and how they do things, and someone gave me that idea that they just if there's an issue that's important to them, they in email it out to everyone and then they speak to them individually, say like, hey, after they've had time to read it, like what do you think about this?

I don't know.

Anyways, and that seems like a better way than having, I guess, an email discussion or something with all people on the same email chain, because then it's not a good idea.

One-on-one would certainly again be safer.

It's a safe harbor for you to have conversations one-on-one than for all five of you or six of you to be having an electronic discussion that's outside of the public view.

I would just add, Mr.

Mayor, that I think there's a difference between sharing information, informational uh exchange versus discussion.

So if I if I come across something that I think the whole council should see, I I think it would be a good practice to to pass that along through an email or a text, but not expect a response or a discussion.

That's a good point.

I guess the only other thing I'll add is just remember that grandma and the open meetings act are two separate acts.

So you you may be able to have an information sharing thing electronically that doesn't violate the open meetings act, but it's still subject to a grammar request.

So and kind of also uh with this too, um maybe just meeting with staff before before council meetings and such or asking staff questions.

I know that um staff is very appreciative if you can um reach out to Jason before council meetings if you have if you have questions that um can be directed at staff, and then that way the staff is prepared to to answer those questions.

And and if you find that you know your questions um kind of are um relevant to your decision or discussion, then certainly I I would certainly bring that up during the meeting that you know you had this discussion with staff, and you know, this is what you talked about, and you may find that it's irrelevant too to your decision.

And of course, during the meeting, questions are gonna come up, obviously, that are that you're not gonna know beforehand, obviously, but um any time that you can provide those questions to Jason, it's helpful.

In my opinion, that goes back to for us having all the information as far in advance as possible.

So if we can have it a week in advance and have all of it, not just the agenda, then we can digest it, then we can ask the people the proper questions instead of the day of we don't have information or 6 p.m.

or whatever it is.

So Mr.

Mayor, real quick on that point, if I may.

Yeah, I think that's just something that we're gonna just have to get staff used to do, and we're we're committed to do that.

So we'll we'll get that out sooner.

Now I will say this there may be items that that we need to put on on a 24 hour notice, and we'll try and keep those to a minimum.

Um but but that will happen very infrequently.

So we really don't, yeah, it's not good practice to amend the agenda either.

Like we just kind of save those amended agendas for just uh like emergencies and um yeah, we'll we'll try we'll yeah, we'll try this out.

Okay.

Um violations.

I guess Ryan, this is kind of your your chance to add anything that we haven't already discussed, but um violations can result in.

Yes.

So for most of these, you know, the investment, um what were some of the others that you know it's a business that the city regulates or something like that.

The penalty for not disclosing is is potential removal from office.

But the reason I want to go back to that 1304, you know, using your public office to benefit you personally is because depending on the amount, it could be as serious as a second degree felony, which in the state of Utah is one to fifteen years in the Utah State prison.

So and I think that's where, again, giving this previous council member the benefit of the doubt that they they thought disclosure was the important thing.

And so again, they rightfully disclosed it as part of the discussion, but just not realizing the second half, which is in that specific section, 1304.

If then using your office benefits you personally, then you're then you're talking criminal penalties.

The other one I think was there's one that's a that's uh class A misdemeanor only, but again would the degree of the crime is not as important as let's just make sure that we don't commit any crimes.

So yeah, but they but it they take it very seriously, right?

Like prison is where the really really bad people go.

You don't want to go to jail either, but you certainly don't want to go to prison.

Did he scare you?

Okay.

Um and just so you know, this this particular case happened very, very long ago.

Yeah.

Yep.

Um that's um yeah, just some other things to consider, just um making sure that your decisions are fair and impartial, so decisions based on facts, law, policy, um, not um personal relationships and um kind of emotions or outside pressures, like you're just you know, um looking at facts, law and policy with your decisions.

Um and then just um yeah, best practices for the meetings, so just the conflict of interest, if you do have one that needs to be disclosed at the very beginning of um before that item is is even discussed, and then clearly state uh your uh recusal, and then we'll make sure that that gets documented in the meeting minutes.

And then, of course, as always, if you're unsure, consult with Ryan before the meeting.

Okay.

Any questions?

Okay.

We'll have more fun trainings with uh Ryan's um open meetings act training in a couple weeks.

Ryan will be ready, I'm sure.

There's some hypothetical I think.

So I believe that's uh that's the end until six o'clock.

So we'll adjourn this meeting uh till six o'clock when we'll return to this room for the uh ceremonial um oath of office administered to myself um councilman Harrison and Councilwoman Freeman.

Um so we'll adjourn uh till six o'clock.

Yes, do you have a comment?

I'd like to move for a recess.

I'll second that.

Okay.

Recess is granted.

See at six.

You gotta hold a vote.

Oh, revoting.

Heather?

Yes, James, Rachel.

Yes, Michelle.

Yeah.

We'll have to vote for this.

Oh, okay.

Oh, we just did.

Sorry, the mayor, I don't know.