Um everybody in my voice is a little dead today.

So I do apologize, but we welcome all that here.

We have a full council today.

Uh, Councilwoman Newell, Councilwoman Harrison, Councilman Harrison, Councilman Freeman, myself, Councilman Stallings, and Councilwoman Lockhart.

So welcome.

We welcome also all of our staff who's here with us today.

And uh glad to have you.

I've asked uh Councilman Harrison if you'll open the meeting with a prayer.

Uh to determine what's best for the city and to hear um ideas and collaborate and work together.

We are grateful for all that you have provided this great city.

We're grateful for our um for our department and police department, all those that are in harm's way, and we ask for the special blessing upon them and their families.

Uh, we ask that the spirit may be with us that we may uh be guided to do what's best for the city and um be accountable to our residents, and we say this in the name of Jesus Christ.

Thank you, uh, Councilman Harris.

We'll start with that.

Uh let me remind the uh audience that today is a work session until our general session tonight at seven, so there won't be any public comment during this portion of our meeting.

So we'll start with two point one, the park tax recipient report from the Harrington Center for the Arts.

Are they here?

Awesome.

Come to the podium, tell us who you are and give us a report.

What do I need to do to get on here?

Um, I'm just gonna get this screenplay technology going.

Don't go, yeah.

Okay, we'll go to uh two point two, the noise ordinance review.

Kim, I think you've got some stuff on that.

And by the way, I think Craig is online from our legal department.

He's helped work on this as well.

So let's see.

Well, we so last year, um, I think about mid year, we brought a draft through, we received some input, and then we came back anyways.

I think it was in December the last time we presented some draft changes.

And at that point, it was the last meeting with uh quite a few of the old council members, and they just said, Let's bring all this back when we have the new council, and we'll just kind of run back through this.

So, and like I said, Craig's online, he's helped do some research.

And I know Ryan's spent some time kind of looking at it as well.

So, between the uh three of us, hopefully, we can answer any questions that you have.

So, yeah, if we can go back to the screen.

Um so yeah, in this first section with the findings, it's really just explaining why do we want to control noise, and it you know, there's obviously some harmful effects that noise can have, especially in the middle of the night, or if it's super loud, whatever that might be, actual physical harm if you're inside a building and the decibel levels go over a certain level.

Um so this findings is really just kind of the the why behind the ordinance.

But in this first section, we do propose, and it's in a couple of other sections, you'll see we're changing an offense.

Like if somebody is um uh what am I trying to say?

Um somebody breaks the law for our noise ordinance.

Instead of a class B misdemeanor, we're proposing to change it to a class C.

And the different there's pretty, you know, class B is a very serious offense is jail time up to a thousand dollar fine.

It just seems really heavy-handed for somebody making too much noise.

So class C still, you know, it's not nothing, but it's it's probably fits more to what we felt like for the offense.

Um then you know, the next sections that it starts to describe well what kind of noises are we talking about, and it categorizes three different types of noises.

Um, and I don't really want to go if you've read this or you can read this.

I I don't think we need to spend time going into the different types of noises, but yeah, some of them are just commerce normal, like somebody's putting a roof on their house, or and then there's noises that are caused by machinery or business, and then there's intentionally caused noises that people you know are doing to maybe to annoy people or just ignoring the the it's after the quiet hours, which we'll get to in a second here.

So again, that one has the class C instead of class B misdemeanor in it.

Okay, and then the intent again just kind of talks about our intent with the noise ordinance, and we're trying to take into account the latest scientific advances, which we'll talk about with the measuring device in a second here.

So then probably the first kind of review or the next revision after the class B to C is the hours, and we talked about this was just from our last meeting in December.

6 a.m.

seemed a little bit early to for people to be able to start exceeding certain decibels of noise.

And we did some research, we looked into quite a few other cities, and it seemed like seven was definitely the predominant start time.

There were other cities that had 6 a.m.

Uh, but they were more the anomalies.

So we felt like seven would probably be a better start time.

Now, one of the things that we talked about, and we could still do this is you know, maybe we have summer versus fall and winter, you know, distinguish because during summer you may have you know for the example of the roofing crews, they want to start early to avoid the heat is 6 a.m.

acceptable in the summer when you know kids aren't in school or what yeah, I don't know.

There may be different reasons, and we could do that.

We could say, you know, from June 1st to August 31st, it's a you know, 6 a.m.

is our when the quiet hours stops.

Um so yeah, like I said, just let me know if if as we go through this, if you feel strongly about any of this or you want us to do more research, we're happy to do that.

Um then it's mentioned again um just how we define night and day and the what hours that means.

Um the limitation of peak intensity sound.

So this is where we get into we want to make sure that the how we measure the sound is being done with the latest uh industry accepted standards or as far as instruments go.

Um I think um council member Newell provided some input on some of these, which we think would be great if you want to incorporate that.

But yeah, instead of uh it used to talk about microphones and things like that.

So we're just saying the sound level meter shall be a type one or a type two instrument, which has some meaning in the sound science world that we we would have to make sure, you know, if we buy something to measure sound with, we'd make sure it meets those uh ANSI standards.

American, yeah, those are the um formal standards that people have for those noise instruments.

Um let's see, and then we get into you know how do we measure the noise, where do we place the device?

Um and so this section and who is gonna be doing the measuring.

So I think maybe that number one is got some newer language.

The designated individual shall either be a peace officer from the police department or our code enforcement officer, which by the way, just a quick update.

We're actually doing interviews this Thursday for that position.

So we're grateful that that position is funded and we're we're moving forward, so we should have our code enforcement officer on board in the next 30 days, depending on how the hiring process goes.

So that's gonna uh what department in the city will that be part of yours?

Community development, yeah.

Yep.

I know there was some discussion, it probably could fit under either police or community development, and we've taken the direction to put it under community development.

Yeah, they'll obviously coordinate very closely with legal parks.

We our vision of that would be that we still would have kind of a committee of sorts, but the person we hire would be the central you know, person that manages and keeps track of all of the cases, and then as they need input from you know, if it's something that they need help with the police, which we definitely uh a lot of the applicants, by the way, are retired police officers, which we you know, we're we're gonna debate the pros and cons of each of the applicants uh qualifications.

But um if whoever we hire, if they don't have a police background, or even if they do, if there's ever a time that they feel like there they might be in harm's way, or you know, somebody's really angry and they don't want to go knock on their door, we're gonna get the police involved and send send the police out.

So and these noise complaints probably would be one of those when you go, you know, at midnight or 1 a.m.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

Kim, what um like how where are they driving their lawful authority if they're not from the police department?

Um I think just by city statute, I'll let Ryan on that.

They wouldn't issue a citation.

Okay, so yeah, when it comes to an actual citation that needs to be issued, it would have to be law enforcement.

Yeah, and I think that would be appropriate.

I guess they do the investigation, the legwork, and that's one of the things we're gonna be looking at too is can they document very well, you know what all everything that they've done so that when it if it does go to a citation, we have everything, they don't have to redo what this person's already done.

So it talks about um the placement of the meter, um talks about how far away from walls and buildings and things like that because noise you know it has very interesting properties, just like water or anything, it can bounce around and amplify and reflect off other objects and things like that.

So this is just trying to be fair and consistent on where we would allow a noise measurement to be taken from.

Uh and then two, we've added a statement that just makes it.

And then let's see as we go down here.

Uh let's see, yeah.

So if we do go into a building, and this would be say you have a dance going on or something, even high school dance, and they the volume's too loud.

This talks about how we would measure it inside.

Um then we've talked a lot about four.

Um we wanted to make sure if so if a noise source is identifiable identifiable at a particular location and it can be measured from either like say it's coming from a source and you can measure it.

There's commercial property and residential.

Well, we're gonna take the most restrictive.

So they if they're um violating the residential noise limit, we would cite them, or we yeah, they would be asked to stop the noise source.

Um five, we talked about in December.

I think the previous draft on five, we had it like three minutes is how long the noise had to be going, like continuous noise be uh we had to measure it for quite a long period before it would be constituted a valid measurement.

We shortened that to 30 seconds.

I'd looked at some other cities and and three minutes seemed really long.

So we're proposing 30 seconds again, that could change.

Um if you feel like that's too short.

Um let's see.

And then as we get into the rest of this, there's several tables that this is where we actually list, you know, if you're in this type of zoning, this is your maximum noise during the day, this is your maximum noise during the night.

And we're just making some changes to that.

We don't have an industrial zone anymore.

We used to.

Um but now we do still have light industrial, and then we have other commercial zones, and then you've got your residential agricultural.

So we're just trying to clean that up and match our current zones.

Um let's see.

So it does allow as we get towards the end of the ordinance, it does allow us to make exemptions.

And we we need to do that for you know, if we have a firework display on 4th of July, things like that, or um, and but and then this does talk about um sports events, other things.

Um it didn't really specify who granted the exemptions, so this now if if Jason's comfortable, it would be it would be the city administrator order.

You know, I'm sure anybody else that you wanted to designate.

Um if you wanted to keep it in your hands, we could have it come, but sometimes it takes more time to go through that process.

So let's see.

And then these are kind of a list of what noises are considered exempt, and obviously emergency vehicles when they go out on their calls in the middle of the night.

We we don't want them to not be able to use their lights and sirens.

But we also added um just roadway noise.

Um other than if somebody has an improperly uh muffled uh engine, like if there's street racing or whatever, that could still be cited.

Um then we also added, yeah, if there's any other state or federal preemptions, such as when the front runner had to start using their horns because of the quiet zone, there were a couple of intersections that fell out of compliance after they made some updates.

Uh and then yeah, I guess under that B, that's where we cover athletic events.

Um I think we added that it was either public or private, could could ask for an exemption.

Um yeah, I think we just struck public social events so that it uh because you may have, you know, I don't know, private private sports clubs that need an exemption.

Um and then let's see responsibility for violations.

So who do we actually cite?

You know, if it's on a property that somebody's leasing and they're making the noise, do we cite the owner of the property?

Do we cite the person making the noise?

And this tries to define, and it's really could be any of the, you know, anyone who's associated with that noise could be in violation.

Um yeah.

Is it um is it one or the other, or is it an and or um let's see, I'm trying to remember the following persons or entities may be held responsible.

I think um understanding.

It's an and or we can charge all involved.

Here you go.

Yeah, I guess that very last sentence responsibility may be assigned to one or more of the above parties jointly or individually.

Okay, let's see.

Um here's our class C misdemeanor again.

And I think that's the end of the ordinance.

Um like I said, we've done quite a bit of research, but we're happy to, you know, if you think there needs to be more, or we looked originally at Provo Cities, they just revamped theirs last year, and theirs was a little unique because they have BYU and they have there's certain things that are unique to their city, but they actually simplified a lot of their tables.

Their old ordinance was actually almost identical to ours.

Uh but anyways, we I think we've taken more of a I guess a gentle approach that hey, maybe we just make some of these low-hanging fruit updates.

We can always come back.

Uh we can see how this goes, see how you know, as we now have the code enforcement officer, but if there's something that we start to see this really still isn't clear, or this is overkill or under, you know, under doing it, we can come back or make more amendments.

So anyways, that really is all we wanted to do is just show you what we have.

And I think the like I said, the previous council wanted to make sure that you had a chance to review it.

If you're comfortable, we would schedule it for action.

Um just put it on the next, you know, the 27th, or we could put it on February's take your lead.

I'll make a comment.

Is that okay?

Yeah.

Um I think we should keep a consistent time.

I think 7 a.m.

seems reasonable to me.

I don't think we need roofers or anyone starting before 7 a.m.

They can get their equipment before then they can arrive at the site.

But yeah, um personally, I mean I've had roofers next door to me, and I think seven was a good time for them.

So it's close to home.

Yeah.

That was my question too.

With did you find in other cities that were doing summer hours?

Or was it most cities were consistently seven for the ones that you found?

Oh, Craig.

Yes, uh Yeah, Vineyard actually has an exception to the hours on the months of July and August.

They exempt the hours just based on heat.

So there are cities that do or have winter and summer changing, but most of them are pretty consistent.

Okay.

And then this other question I had with the time where you dropped out to 30 seconds, were you able to find other cities that had listed the the amount of time they measure for, or was that so it it's interesting?

So for continuous noise, that's anywhere from 30 seconds to to 10 minutes.

For um intermittent noises, that's uh all over the board as well.

Um where we're kind of mixing them together.

Um that's why we had the 30 seconds.

Um again, that can that that varies widely between different cities.

Uh continuous, some cities have as much as 10 minutes of a continuous sound.

Um, but that's you know, i it it all depends on that.

Uh so really it's where where you want to go with that, just because there's there's differing between each of the cities.

Yeah, I mean, just logically it sounds more on track to have the 30 seconds.

I was just wondering what kind of consistency you found.

It it did seem like three minutes was a long period of time to try and get that measurement.

So I mentioned before, sorry, I apologize.

No, you're good, Craig.

Go ahead.

Like I mentioned before, in the you know almost nine, ten years that I've been here, really the only noise cases that have made it all the way to court have been dog barking cases that have been prosecuted under the nuisance ordinance.

Um the biggest thing we're looking for is compliance over conviction on these is to make it so people know that there's relief if someone next to them is violating the law.

Yeah.

Um, I I appreciate these these changes.

I think 7 a.m.

makes sense.

Um I try to think of it as a parent if I had a small baby sleeping.

I don't think 6 a.m.

is is reasonable.

I think 7 a.m.

is is a little better.

Um I think uh I heard Provo has I think three or four civilian code enforcement officers, so I know this is new for Lehigh City.

I think it's a I think the police department won't complain too much about offloading the the code enforcement responsibilities, but if if you have a relationship with their department that runs code enforcement, I'd be interested to hear kind of their strategies.

Um the one the one most difficult part about this is enforcement, right?

Especially if you have a noise at 1 a.m.

and it's loud, right?

It lasts for two seconds and maybe a couple minutes later it's it's loud again.

The whole neighborhood's up.

But how do you prove the noise happened?

Um I was thinking through this a little bit.

If is is there I guess a legal way, and maybe this is for Craig and Ryan.

Um if you know, obviously nobody nobody has noise uh detectors outside their home to to detect noise, but if you have complaints from maybe two or three people in a certain area that says, hey, this this has happened, we can't prove it, but we all woke up at the same time.

Um how would we go about enforcing that?

Or or you know, would that pass that threshold of enforcement?

So uh I've seen that before, and typically, like I said, that that mainly deals with dog dogs barking or mufflers or those types of things.

And typically we can go after those types of incidents through our nuisance code.

So if there's a a certain number of incidents and those types of things, and then they can those individuals, if they're charged with the nuisance, would come into court and testify in front of the judge, and then you know, as long as it met the elements of our nuisance code, which we we've done that before on these ones where you can't get the measurement because of the time and those types of things.

So I think we have our nuisance code that can handle a lot of these issues, but the sound ordinance also gathers in the things that are that are outside the nuisance code as well.

Time hours.

Yeah.

No, I I appreciate that.

Let's see.

I had one more question, but I forgot, so I'll turn it over.

Um what is the city currently using to measure noise?

Since you're talking about a type one or type two device, do we have something that we're using?

Uh I'll let Craig jump in.

It's just a low technology.

Rudimentary meter.

Yeah.

When you can even download an app on your phone, and I think that's what sometimes they've just to kind of get a at least a rough ballpark of, you know, is this 85 decibels or is it a hundred?

But we plan to buy one, and I think was it Bo that was looking into purchasing.

Oh, okay.

Oh.

He knows more about it.

Yeah, so we we currently have a type two device um that we've that we've purchased.

We haven't deployed it because this code came out.

And after talking with the police department, they feel like if we're gonna be taking these uh if if the one one of these cases goes to the legal route that they felt like they probably needed the best, you know, one of a type one type device.

So that device hasn't been deployed, but we have it.

Um we played with it trying to figure it out.

So we we will be in the in the process of of looking to purchase a type one.

So thank you.

Yeah, it looks like the type two are for screening more and type two, type one or for like yeah, if you're going to court.

Yeah.

Good job.

Thanks.

So Bo, sorry, go back to Rachel, she's not done.

But is this what we discussed that you would purchase already, or is this something new you purchase?

Yeah, so we I mean it was a it was a $500 device, so it wasn't the type two one.

The type two one was um and and really it was before this code came out that said we needed a type one or type two.

So we didn't really know what we were looking for.

Um I talked with the old counsel and they they asked us to look at purchasing a device, so we went ahead and purchased one.

Um, but then after talking with the police department and this code that this part of the code came out, we we decided we probably should have a type one device.

Okay, what's the price tag for that?

Yeah, um anywhere from 4,000 to 10,000.

Okay, and legal feels that that's what's needed if it is taken to court.

So I haven't talked with legal yet.

I we just met last week with the police department.

Um that was their filling.

And and Chief can speak to that if he would like, but I think I'm kind of summing up our conversation.

So we'll do whatever you guys tell us to do.

Um regardless, we have to buy a calibrator for our type two if we don't.

Um but they just felt like if we were gonna be, you know, if any of these went the legal route that we probably should have a type one device.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Mayor, oh sorry, did you have something?

Yeah, um it's actually for Kim.

Thank you.

Um just on time of day uh and this uh code enforcer from the planning department.

Will they be working in the evening and into the middle of the night?

Or will they only be enforcing code from eight to five?

Yeah, uh our expectation is they would just work normal daytime hours.

But I think if we had a noise issue that was, you know, came up frequently, we might have them say, oh, you know, take the morning off and you're gonna be checking this out at night.

But I would think the police would be the primary responders, you know, especially if it's just like you know, random somebody's playing their stereo too loud at 1 a.m.

it's gonna be the police that go out.

Yeah, I I'm just very concerned for this person's safety and want to make sure they're working with the police department and that they don't enter any situation that would make that cause harm for them or anything like that.

You have a comment?

Can I just adjust?

Yes, please.

Thank you.

So the strategy we discussed with the city was that our officers that are working the night shift would have the measuring device at their disposal.

So they would take it, respond to the area, get a measurement, and then using a type three that's calibrated regularly would allow us to take enforcement action immediately.

And while while we're talking code in general, I would say that in any time we're gonna take an enforcement action, we we have officers assigned to code.

We would prefer to have officers there while enforcement's being made, whether it's a civilian making contact or an officer.

Our role would be to keep the peace and make sure that it runs smoothly without putting anybody into any any type of harm.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I think it you know most of these code enforcements are going to be happening during the day.

It'll have to do with, you know, overhanging trees or bushes, and I think sometimes an armed police officer, I've heard anecdotes from our from our officers where it actually escalates when they see an armed police officer coming to the door, it it kind of raises um other safety issues too.

So I think it's good that um Emily raised that and I think we can find some good balance.

I remember the couple questions I had.

Um the decibel standards, can you explain, are those the same as they've always been?

Where do they come from?

And then also um one issue I think from measuring I think if you you know if I'm in the second story of my house and I hear a noise coming from across the neighborhood, it'll be louder than if I'm standing at the front door of my house, right?

So I think if we can add just a little bit of language in trying to get the measuring device as close to where the sound has been heard as in most people sleep, you know, if you're if you're in a two-story house, many bedrooms are on the second story, I think you're gonna get a different measurement compared to a ground level with a fence and cars and other things in between the noise and the ears of the people hearing it.

Yeah, and that is covered here unless you want to make some changes, but it does talk about it could be placed at any point on the property line or any point fifty feet from the noise source.

So um yeah, and I guess in so in your example in the backyard, you could place the noise meter on your back or near your back fence so that it may you make sure, you know, because yeah, your house would act as a natural sound barrier.

Yeah, it's more of an elevation issue, right?

So if it's uh you know two feet above the ground versus 15 or 20 feet above the ground, you it's it's more of a direct line to sounds that you may hear.

Yeah, yeah, and this does say it has to be at least five feet from any wall and not less than three feet above the ground.

So nothing in there would stop law enforcement or whoever was or the code enforcement officer from measuring it from your your window uh or from the second story of your home.

Yeah, because it would be at least three feet above.

Yeah.

Okay.

And then the the decibel question, if you could um yeah, these decibels uh limits have been in here for a long time.

You know, goes back quite away to the same.

And yeah, it's my understanding in looking at all the other codes from the other cities that these are the general accepted uh limits.

Um the generally accepted in the community limits throughout the state of Utah.

Great.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Stallings.

Thank you.

Um we've been through this for a long time now.

But you originally, you know, you looked at Provo and what the updates they made and they simplified their their noise ordinance.

And originally that's our first draft, our first attempt at that was similar.

So I would love for the rest of the council to see that original draft.

Um I'm not saying I think maybe a mesh of the two would be good, but it it certainly simplified things.

Um these tables are probably the biggest difference.

Yeah, yeah.

And then you don't have to wonder what kind of noise it is and what definition it fits into.

But um it did have in there, you talked about who grants the ex exemptions and in that original draft, it was the mayor, the mayor's designee.

And I'm I feel more comfortable with that if you know, legislative elective body um, you know um votes for a code or an ordinance.

I think it should be an elected individual who grants exemptions for that.

Um so again, I I think looking at both those drafts and finding what's good in both of them and putting it together might be a good way to go.

Um, appreciate the chief explaining how it would be enforced, and that's um I did ask a police officer about you know how they enforce it, and they usually just use their phone.

And that seems to be good enough to just kind of get a reading, okay, yeah, it's bad, maybe go talk to the neighbor, turn down the radio or whatever.

Um so that this code won't prevent that from happening, correct?

It's mostly we need the device if it goes to court kind of thing.

Okay.

Um if that's if we want to charge under this code.

We still have the city nuisance code that we can use as well.

Okay.

Yeah, and going back with the original draft, it did have, and I think our current code has this where it um the sound level measurements are preferred but not necessarily required.

Um again, I get that you want the black and white white readings if you're going to take this to court for you know for violation, but um I just don't want that to prevent an officer from just saying, hey, these levels look pretty high, can you just you know keep it down or whatever?

So that's kind of my concern.

I just um yeah, I yeah.

Um let's see, got more questions.

It's taking out.

Um then I think James brought up a good point though where it's um the measurement is taking being taken from.

I I think it should be from the receiving location and 50 feet from the noise source.

Um I mean if it travels pretty far, I I just don't want either or in there.

I would like it taken from where the plank complaint is coming from.

Does that make sense?

Um council member or Mr.

Mayor, help me understand that because that could get really dicey.

If we're met hearing noises miles away.

Am I misunderstanding what you're saying?

I just I'm hoping for clarity.

No, it it actually protects the person emitting the noise better.

Yeah, help me understand.

Because as far well, what don't you understand?

Well just based on what you said, I'm thinking I could be three miles away or three feet away.

And I'm just trying to understand how we would record.

Does he have to closer to the noise source the louder it would be?

So if you take it from where the complaint is coming from, then you're getting an accurate reading of if it's truly a nuisance or not from that point.

Okay, but thank you.

Um let me see my notes.

No, it yeah, I think that's all I do agree 7 a.m.

and is a grid time, and also not to change it based on winter or summer.

Appreciate that.

That's it.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Freeman.

Yeah, can we look at 535, please?

Yeah.

And is there uh you know, I know we're talking about a misdemeanor here.

Is there like a warning clause or anything?

Like if someone, you know, this is this one-time thing, like how is this so we don't usually build those in because that's kind of officer discretion.

Okay.

But yeah, I mean the the approach of the city so far, not just on noise ordinance, but really any code enforcement has been to try to get voluntary compliance, and only if somebody's resistant to that would do we go to a citation.

So I would assume that would be this the same approach.

Because a lot of people, it's it's really an issue of education at first.

Most people, once they know, most reasonable people, once they know what the code is, like, oh yeah, I'm sorry, I'll move my car or I'll be quiet or something like that.

It's only the few that are resistant to that that we have to kind of go through the criminal process.

Okay, I just don't know if we had had to write in like a three-strike thing or something.

I mean, you could, but yeah, we don't have that in there for now.

Mr.

Mayor, I'm sorry.

One more comment.

Are you done?

Well, yeah, she can ask it.

It's right here 535.

I want to look over at some point.

But go ahead, councilman Stallings.

Um, I changing the violation.

I'm okay leaving a class B, not you know, with the understanding we want to educate more than we want to, you know, what did they say compliance over conviction?

I agree with that for sure.

But I I just know that in other places in our municipal code.

Um animal control, some of those violations are still class B and you know it it it seems consistent with what I'm seeing in the code.

So I I just don't want this to become like a shrug, like yeah, I'll pay the fine or whatever.

I I do want some teeth to it.

Um, but I prefer not to have to go that route.

And that's my understanding is what we do.

Okay, so just reading over this, the designated individual responsible for measuring noise.

Okay, we talked about that.

The microphone should maybe placed at any point on the property line or at any point 50 feet from the noise source.

Um and at least five feet from any wall, three feet above the ground.

Okay.

Yeah, and just comparing it to other noise ordinances, it seems like this one is pretty good, generous.

I mean, 85 decibels is pretty loud, 50 feet is pretty far.

So I'm fine with with using this as a starting point for a noise ordinance or not.

Mr.

Mayor, for I'm not sure how many edits we want to this.

I'm just thinking about when we can put it on the agenda for action.

Um do we have enough edits, maybe Kim, to bring it again before we vote, or how do you suggest?

Yeah.

Yeah, I I could go either way.

I from what I'm hearing tonight, it's pretty, you know, we're talking maybe 10% variance from what we already have.

So if generally you like most of what's in here.

And you know, I guess the class B versus C would be a great, you know, I don't know, you know, that's how council member Stallings feels, but I don't we might just have to put it in one way or the other, and then when you vote, you'd have to, if you don't like what's in the draft, you could just say, you know, either not vote for the motion to approve or make a motion but change that.

I don't know.

No, that that's that's just what I was gonna mention is that it's diff.

Are you comfortable with us putting everybody's individual edits in the draft?

Do you want a consensus on which edits should come before you for a final draft?

That's the kind of direction that's really helpful, just so we don't necessarily do this again.

But if if all five of you are comfortable with each of your individual input being put in the ordinance, then we can drive we'll draft it that way and then we'll see how it comes out when it comes back on the action agenda.

Can you summarize our points?

See what you remember.

At some point.

Yeah.

Yeah, I I'll probably go back and listen to the minutes, but um the misdemeanor is definitely, you know, that's at least I've heard from one that different than what's in here.

I think the 7 a.m.

everybody's good.

We don't want to do anything different.

We don't want different summer hours.

And then I did I, you know, you probably saw in the draft here.

I put I think that's probably a good change to just say obtained from the city administrator.

Oh, I guess I need to change that one.

I'll I'll change that to the mayor or his designee.

So he could just say, hey, Jason, I'm comfortable with you doing these unless you have any questions.

And but yeah, so I I would probably just put that into the draft.

Um then I think everybody was good on the measuring device.

I I don't know if there are really any other that's where I had a question to you if I go ahead.

Um I am concerned about the cost of five to ten thousand dollars for measuring devices and the possibility that we'll need multiples of these for those who are on duty.

I guess I I'd defer to um Craig and Ryan on that of what what kind of measurement do you think you're going to need to be able to have a a prosecution case that would be.

Yeah, I'll probably yeah, Craig, why don't you answer that just far as calibration and as far as multiples I don't I don't think we'd need more than one.

Just that's kind of cost prohibitive.

Yeah.

Just just knowing, again, like Craig says over the last nine or ten years, this this ordinance just hasn't come up often enough, my opinion.

Maybe yours is different to justify, you know, 20 to 30,000 dollars worth of devices.

But that's you know, that's kind of for you to decide, Craig.

And ultimately the standard that we're looking for is is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

So absolutely the the type one device where it's calibrated and it's just got that little extra is kind of the gold standard.

You know, if you look at it, and Chief can talk to this with regards to traffic enforcement.

You've got your radar, you've got LIDAR, they both have different um different pluses and minuses, but they they measure speed in a different way.

However, we can get convictions off both.

Um so I think if it if our code says that a type two device is is fine and it's we go through and and try some of these cases, um, unless we have an attorney or someone bring up, hey, your type two device is not correct, or it's not calibrated correctly, then we would probably have to upgrade to the type one device.

But I think with a type one or a type two device, we could go forward, and as long as we have the evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, I don't see an issue prosecuting that.

Yeah, that was my main concern is making sure that you have the they have the equipment needed for you to be able to prosecute.

But also if you're getting convictions off of a phone, like you know, from the dog barking, or maybe it's just other neighbors.

I I guess that would be my only concern is not having such an expensive device if you don't need it.

If you do need it, then I absolutely support that.

Um and then the other thing that I I would love to have your advice on, both you and Ryan is on the misdemeanor.

Um what you feel there, and it it could be that this isn't just for this ordinance.

Do you feel that the class B is um too difficult to be able to seek and get in other cases too?

Like I want to make sure that's we're doing something that we're actually going to get results on.

Because I think that if we start, you know, prosecuting these and they fail, I think that's also going to have an impact on us being effective with this I'll jump in first and then I'll I mean that if if our code specifies the level of offense, the judge shouldn't take that into account.

Okay.

Shouldn't.

Will will a judge maybe.

But I will kind of give you the category.

So first time DUI is a class B misdemeanor.

A lot of domestic violence cases are class B misdemeanors, first time drug offenses.

So it it's it's fairly serious, and I think that's why we probably kind of downgraded this from a class B to class C.

But again, the the legal answer is if your code says it's this, this is the penalty, a judge shouldn't convict someone then say, well, I think that's too much.

So I'm going to make it a class C misdemeanor.

The prosecutor can do that based upon his discretion and what he or she recommends to the judge.

But once there's a conviction, the judge should impose the penalty that's in the code.

Yeah, for example.

Sorry, go ahead, Craig.

A class B misdemeanor carries up to six months in jail and a thousand dollar fine.

Um as of right now, our code has dog at large as a class B misdemeanor.

I will tell you I have prosecuted hundreds of dog at large cases and no one has spent a day in jail for it.

Um they pay a fine and they typically, you know, depending on how many they've had, either get a plea in abeyance or they plead to it.

But that's still a class B misdemeanor on their record that you know, so you kind of have to have that balance and weigh that as a prosecutor.

It's also as a as a city council as well.

I do think some of our codes do need to be looked at because the class C misdemeanor still is a misdemeanor.

It carries up to 90 days in jail and a fine of 750 dollars.

Um it still is a serious uh offense in that you get a it will be on your record as a misdemeanor, a criminal misdemeanor.

Um so I don't think downgrading it from a B to a C is diminishing what we're trying to do.

It's just making it more in line with what the crime is.

I may make a comment.

Um yeah, I agree, Craig, with that.

Looking up all the what is a class B misdemeanor and the differences.

I mean, it's yeah, I agree with your recommendations for that.

Any other comments?

Are you good with that?

I'm good with that.

Mayor, one more comment.

I I really think it's important to look closely at the location you take the measurements from.

Because I think that's part of the problem we ran into then past.

Um if you just say at the property line, is it on the inside you know, you're looking at the receiving end, right, where the noise is received.

So is that where you're gonna put the measuring device?

If you because otherwise um, you know, if you do it on the other side of the property line, it's a different zone, uh, it's higher decibel level, right?

And that then they'll say that oh, there's no violation there.

Um so I I think we just need to look at is it a nuisance or is it a violation to the for the person receiving the noise who hears it and make sure it's um measured from where the the person is the complaint and is receiving the noise.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Mr.

Mayor, that that's what I thought it was.

I thought it was the lesser or the more more restrictive of the two zones, but maybe we need to make sure that's clarified clearly, because I also agree that it should be the the person receiving the noise, that's where it should be measured from, but at the same time I thought it was even more restrictive.

So say like if a person was in the house, the noise could actually be taken or the noise uh could be registered outside the house in the residential zone.

But it would apply to the residential zone because that's where it's receiving.

Um then I'm kind of confused because I can't really see the code on the 50 feet.

Is it it has to be also 50 feet from the noise?

Because if there's a noise that's right on the border, I don't think that that applies that if they're making it right on the fence line, it's still affecting me on my residential property.

Well, and to that point, if I may, Mr.

Mayor, that's why I was asking for the clarification.

I do feel like it it's somewhat unclear.

So I'm I'm happy to find the right answer, but I it I just wasn't gathering sense when I was trying to figure it out.

There is the We can look at that, yeah.

Oh, yeah, and that's going to be measured where the impacted party is in their zone.

Yeah.

Okay.

Any other comments for Kim?

Can we beat you like a horse?

So if you will take all that information, put a draft together, um, and then we'll we'll look at it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sounds good.

We'll get it on the future agenda.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Okay, 2.3, the open public meeting act training.

Uh Mr.

Wood.

Nope, this is a work session.

You can at seven o'clock.

We'd love it.

I can recognize that these are the opening.

We're gonna continue.

Go ahead.

Okay.

All right.

I think this is the biggest audience I've ever had for open meetings training.

I'm really excited about this.

I don't know why everybody, I mean, the word must have gotten out.

But so we've talked a little bit about this.

Um I'm gonna go.

I mean, it's quite a detailed statute, so we're gonna hit the high points.

But if you have any questions, please stop me and we'll I'll do my best to answer them.

So I'm gonna start with a policy statement from the legislature.

This is right out of the statute, right?

The legislature, I'm gonna read the middle part.

It's the intent of the legislature that the state, its agencies and its political subdivisions, take their actions openly and conduct their deliberations openly.

And so again, that's just a policy statement.

It doesn't have any force of law, but I think we should use that in guiding our decision making.

Especially when some you know, a statute cannot possibly predict every circumstance where it might apply.

And so that should really be the guide that we use when something might be on the line, you know, as to as to how we should interpret the open meetings act.

Um of you probably know David Church.

He's I think he's retired before your time on the council.

But this is a quote from him.

And if you know David, this won't surprise you.

If you cannot or will not comply with the open and public meetings act, you're not cut out for public office.

Get out now before it's too late.

You don't go to the swimming pool if you're embarrassed to be seen in a swimsuit.

A good public official has to have the courage to bear some skin and conduct the public's business in the open, even if they're political cellulite will show.

That's just quintessential David Church.

So I think before we get into the definitions of a public meeting, a lot of times the especially our residents are can be a little confused about what's the difference.

When do they have the right to speak?

And when is that up to the discretion of the mayor?

And so the before we get into the specific definitions of you know, quorum and meeting and public body, I thought it would be useful just to take a couple of seconds and talk about the difference between a public meeting and a public hearing.

So right now we're in a public meeting.

That means we have to comply with all of the noticing provisions, take minutes, there's items on the agenda, and there's certain rules about how far in advance the agenda has to be posted.

But the public doesn't necessarily have the legal right to participate in items on the agenda for a public meeting, as you've kind of said a couple of times already tonight.

Some items, most commonly land use items, or like you know, we've had some bonding hearings recently.

That does require a public hearing.

And then the public has the absolute legal right to give their input.

Now the parameters of that, how long any individual can speak, what the total time might be is still under the discretion of the chair or the mayor in our case, but we can't prevent the public from giving their input.

We could also you know choose methods so we could we could um allow them to put in written comments even before the meeting and then also the public that's here to speak.

So just again, as you're meeting as you're interacting with constituents, you and there's a hot political item discussing that difference can be helpful in in making sure they don't get frustrated if they're not allowed to speak at a public meeting, but they absolutely have the right to speak at a public hearing.

Okay, here's the definition.

So meeting is a gathering of a public body.

We'll talk about the definition of that with a quorum present.

We'll talk about the definition of that.

For the express purpose of acting as a public body to either receive public comment.

So again, it's still a public meeting, even if you're not voting on anything, B deliberate, or C take action.

So any one of those three things means that it's a meeting.

And so here we go with a couple of definitions.

Public body means any administrative advisory, executive or legislative body.

So advisory is a change from when I started my career as a municipal attorney.

There's a reason for that because there was an argument early on that with all we're doing is recommending, we can't, we don't have the authority to take final action, then we shouldn't be considered a public body.

That went on for a while until the legislature finally stepped in and said, nope, even if all you have the authority to do is make a recommendation to the ultimate decision maker, you're still a public body.

So I highlighted the and all four have to apply in order for something to be considered a public body.

And we'll go through some hypotheticals where we're kind of tease out the differences.

Quorum, again, simple majority.

That's maybe the simplest definition.

Then just back that's the back to the definition of a meeting.

Again, now that we know the definition of public body and quorum.

Um talked about this a little bit a week ago.

It doesn't really matter what we call it, what we label it, that's okay.

The statute doesn't really care if we call it executive session or work session or pre-council or action agenda.

If it meets the if it meets the requirements of a public meeting, then we have to comply with everything that the statute requires.

Okay, welcome to law school.

I don't know if any of you always wanted to go to law school, but here we go.

Let's do some hypotheticals.

Okay, number one, what if Emily and James bump into each other on the driving range at Fox Hollow?

Can the two of you discuss city council business without violating the open meetings act?

Starting start with a softball, an easy one, right?

What do you think, James?

Yes.

Because it's only two of us, it's not a quorum.

You don't have a quorum.

Okay.

Next one.

Um, oh, can't can you even discuss city council business, the two of you together?

Yeah.

We can't, because you don't have a quorum.

What if Rachel, Michelle, and Heather end up sitting at the same table at a wedding reception?

Does one of you have to leave?

Because now you have three of you there.

Not for something like that.

Yeah, because again, it's a social gathering.

You're not convening to conduct the public's business.

Um, I I use an example like that because when I first started here, this would happen.

We would have three council members show up at a social event, and they would have they would decide between the three of them which one of them had to leave because they thought they were in violation of the open meetings act.

So no.

Um can you discuss city council business?

No.

Does the statute prohibit that?

Yeah, you can't have three council members.

It's a quorum.

Yeah, I mean, can you again if it's a if it's a social gathering, so it's not considered a meeting, and you're not convened to take action on the public.

But again, going back to the policy statement, right?

This is one of those where maybe you could make an argument that you could, but should you?

Right?

Should you, if you want to remain in compliance with what I'll call the spirit of the open meetings act?

Can you, and no, is a perfectly acceptable answer.

But even if somebody was a little squishy on that, should you know?

Because again, the policy is we want the public to see what decisions you make.

And again, not just the end product, but the public has the right to see your deliberations about how you come to a decision.

So if the three of you talk about something upcoming on an upcoming agenda and you say, okay, we'll all agree to vote this way, and then you come to the meeting and you just vote and there's no discussion, violates that policy purpose of the open meetings act, at least in my opinion.

Okay.

What if all five of you show up at an Alpine school district meeting?

Do two of you have to leave?

Nope.

Same thing.

Kind of a guiding principle there is if it's not the city's meeting, if it's not your meeting, then you don't have to worry about having only three of you there.

Now, again, could five of you show up and then after the meeting, stay around and start talking about city business and then again violate the spirit of the open meetings act?

Yes.

So just again, let that policy guide your actions.

Okay, what if a resident invites all of you to attend a neighborhood meeting to discuss an issue coming before the city council?

Can you all attend and discuss?

I think there's a cutout for town halls.

Is that correct?

It's not an explicit one.

Because again, it's it's just not your meeting, so you're not convened for the purpose of conducting public business, but should you?

Now maybe there is.

I don't remember a cutout for the town hall.

I'd have to look that up.

But should the five of you go there and engage in a policy discussion if invited to a neighborhood meeting?

Should we?

No.

Again, especially if it's something coming up on the agenda, you'd want to avoid that because that could be considered your deliberations, how you came to the decision that you've come to.

So just be careful about that.

Okay, what here's a good one.

What if the mayor wants to discuss a sensitive issue, invites two of you to come to his office to discuss it?

Is that okay?

Is that in compliance with the act?

I won't use the word okay.

That's fine.

Yes.

Yeah, you can do that.

What if three of you, what if the mayor invites three of you?

No.

No quorum.

Now, again, the the you can do that, should you?

That's up to you.

I'll say in my career, um, there are issues that there's a gap, right, between something that's you can't close the meeting to discuss, so that makes it tricky, but it's not quite ready for the public.

I'll give you an example.

If Marlin had a business come to him and say, hey, we're really interested in locating in in Lehigh City, what kind of incentive you know, might the council be willing to entertain.

That's not a purpose for which you can close the meeting, so he can't get your input in a closed meeting, but he might not be ready.

That business might not be ready for to have him stand in front of you and say, hey, here's the business I've been talking to, right?

Should that be used?

Um occasionally, not frequently, to stay in compliance with the spirit of the act?

I'd I I think so.

But there might be an occasion where that's appropriate.

That's again, that's up to you.

Okay, let's um just go through a couple of meet or groups that you've heard of and whether the act applies to them.

What about DRC?

Well, I've seen it noticed on the website, so I'm gonna see that it does apply.

Is DRC noticed on the website?

No.

Is it not?

Used to be meeting?

Yeah, used to be.

So DRC when I first got here was you could go find it in the code.

There's no there's no longer a reference to DRC in the code.

Because again, one of these requirements is it's officially created by resolution, constitution, statute, ordinance, and again, that and means every one of these has to apply in order for it to be subject to the public meetings act.

Can I ask a question, Mr.

Mayor?

Um, and it's DRC doesn't well, I guess to some extent they do have um authority to act, right?

You can make decisions on like offense material type or things like that.

Um anyway, but if they don't have the official capacity to act, then there's nothing wrong.

But they're not officially created.

They definitely make recommendations, they definitely impose conditions on development, but they're not officially created in our code.

And I'll get to another one that's kind of like DRC, a little less formal, but the example probably is.

Yep.

Um and that can impact an applicant and the public.

And they do advise.

Yeah, interesting.

Ryan, mayor, may I ask a question?

So what uh constitutes uh creation in the code?

Because we definitely refer to them in our code, and I think it's part of the application process.

Yeah, maybe there's some leftover references to it.

Um, but you you can't go to the R code and find like, okay, here's the definition of DRC.

It's it's cre it's made up of a representative from the following departments, da-da-da-da-da-da-da.

So and maybe we need to go back through it and make sure that we changed all of the references to just the reviewing departments need to review these plans, and it just happens that all of those required departments that need to review those meet at a certain time.

So it's really just becomes more of an internal staff meeting, and we still call it DRC just because historically then saying development review committee.

Or yeah, reviewing departments, yeah.

But yeah, we so it's not an official committee, but we we meet everybody.

Yeah, in a lot of cities, well, I don't know about a lot.

In some cities, a developer has to go around department to department.

One of the reasons that developers like our process is because they have everybody in the room at the same time.

And I think what makes me feel a little bit better about it is that decisions made at a DRC level can be a plea appeal to the planning commission.

And that would is some form of connected to a public meeting.

So Lehigh Arts Council.

Is that a public body?

Do there are there meetings subject to the open meetings act?

No.

Because they're not separate 501c3.

They're a private organization.

Roundup Committee.

Same thing.

Is the Roundup Committee a city committee?

No?

I don't think so.

Is it led by a city employee?

No.

Okay.

Private organization.

Now Mel has a lot of interaction with that committee, right?

But again, it's not mentioned in our code that there shall be a roundup committee made up of four citizens, you know, things like that.

Parks, trails, and trees committee.

Yeah, that one's that one's created in our code.

Hutchings Museum Board.

No, but all these nonprofits still have their own.

Yeah.

Requirements.

But they're not subject to the state open meetings act.

Fox Hollow board meeting.

Yes.

So if the board of Fox Hall is made up of three representatives, three from each city, and it's an interlocal agency, and so they're a public body that the act applies to.

Administrative staff meeting.

So every Tuesday morning we get on a call at 9 30, we go over the agenda.

It's not a public meeting because it's not created by statute ordinance.

And we really don't have final decision making or decision-making authority either, right?

We're collaborating on who's going to present this item, who answered this question from this council member or the mayor wanted to know this.

Okay, good.

We could keep going with that, but that's probably enough.

Tisha and Kate do a great job taking care of all of the noticing.

Um keep us in compliance with OPMA opma.

So you'll hopefully come to a final meeting schedule tonight or in the very near future, posting the agenda, posting it on our website, on the state's website.

Um as far as getting things on the agenda, you've already had a little experience in our own procedures, how that happens.

Basically, the legal requirement is again, so that the public knows what they should come to show up to to comment, it has to be reasonably specific.

Enough so a reasonable person would say, oh yeah, I'm interested in that.

I'm coming to the meeting Tuesday night so that I can comment on that.

Um this is kind of a strange one.

Can you discuss something that's not on the agenda?

The way the statute reads, you can if the public brings it up.

If you want to discuss something, then just make sure that it's on the agenda.

And you can't vote on anything that's not on the agenda.

Okay, closed meetings.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may, just a clarifying question.

For our agendas, what are the ways of getting items on them?

So either two of you agree to put something on the agenda, or the mayor can do it himself.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

So a closed meeting, when can we go into and we call it closed session?

That's tech you won't see that in the statute.

It's when we close an open meeting.

Um as long as there's a quorum and somebody makes the motion to close it, we you have to state why you're closing it.

So the reason and where the meeting is going to be held, and then at least two-thirds, which my math I think says four out of the five of you have to have approve closing the meeting.

The issue that comes up a lot more frequently is why can you close a meeting?

And I've just included when I first started 23 years ago, there was like six reasons.

Now there's like seventy.

So I'm not going to go over all of those.

I'm going to go over the ones that we'll see most commonly.

So number one, discuss we we we like to say this just we're good closing the meeting for personnel.

That doesn't exist in the statute.

The technical description is discuss the character, competence, or physical or mental health of an individual.

You can close the meeting for that.

Pending a reasonably imminent litigation, right?

That means a claim's been, we've gotten a notice of claim, a lawsuit's been filed, or we know something has happened so that one of those things are likely to be filed, right?

The courts kind of narrowly construe that reasonably in imminent litigation standard.

Investigative proceedings about criminal misconduct hasn't happened very often, thankfully, but it has come up.

And then we like to say real estate, right?

That's purchasing real estate, and there's some additional requirements or set or selling property that the city owns if we've given notice it would be offered for sale.

So those are the five most common ones.

I guess six, well, five.

Um I can't think of a time I've we've ever had to close a meeting for something outside of these five, but it could happen.

Mayor, if I may.

Um for a closed session for the item that we're discussing, is that put on the agenda like any open meeting, but it's just not shared with the public.

It's just shared with so you could do it both ways.

If you know so often if we know we're going to have a closed we're going to close the meeting for one of these things we'll put it on the agenda.

That doesn't keep you from closing a meeting.

If something comes up during the meeting and you want to go into closed session then is again as long as four of the five of you vote and you specify the reason and the location that's not usually a problem then you can close the meeting even if it's not on the agenda.

Okay.

Okay.

And basically these three bullet points means you can't take any final action.

You can't vote.

You can't adopt a resolution or an ordinance in closed session.

Electronic meetings this just allows you know if one of one or more of you are can't make can't be physically present we can have an electronic meeting.

We just have to have a an ordinance which we in place that we do minutes and recordings.

Tisha does all that if you have any questions I don't get too involved in the the minutes and recordings.

And then just a couple of things to close with so this I mentioned this a week ago this is kind of strange language but then I want us to kind of be guided by this second citation.

So nothing in this chapter shall be construed to restrict a member of a public body from transmitting an electronic message to other members of the public body at a time when the public body is not convened in an open meeting so you shouldn't be texting each other from the dais.

So outside of the meeting and again my caution is even if that even if that's allowed under the open meetings act those communications could still be subject to a grammar request.

And then again kind of our you know our conscience guided by 52428 individuals constituting a quorum of a public body may not act together outside a meeting in a concerted and deliberate way to predetermine an action to be taken by the public body at a meeting on a relevant matter.

So even though you can send messages to each other again don't decide in advance how you're going to vote on something.

So and then enforcement so there's a couple of things um this I added this 524301 because it came up last week so we can remove a person from a public meeting if they are to the extent that orderly conduct of the meeting is seriously compromised and then kind of the more the things that we're more familiar with right intentionally violating the act is a class B misdemeanor and I just gave the categories of how serious the code treats that then a private individual can also bring a civil action so if they feel like you've taken a vote in violation of the act then a private individual could bring a lawsuit to try to get that final action overturned.

And there's the citation for that.

And then finally another you know another more wisdom from David Church.

The best way to avoid problems with the open and public meetings act is to err on the side of openness.

When in doubt the meeting should be open city councils and other committees or commissions of cities should not attempt to violate even the spirit of the act.

It's important that the meetings is conducted in public and the deliberations be conducted openly.

And that's all any questions for me.

So did I did I notice that a closed meeting does not need to be noticed.

Is that what it said?

Correct.

Yeah thanks Okay thank you.

Oh sorry really quick so it doesn't I thought that's why you have it on the agenda.

It we if we know it's going to we're going to have one then we put it on there more so that you'll know like oh we need to get through these items because we we're trying to have a closed session before the regular agenda but it's not a legal requirement you can go into closed session any time four of the five of you vote to go into closed session even if it hasn't been previously noticed.

Okay.

Mayor just a quick comment if that's all right.

Thank you, Brian.

Glad to have you to keep us on the straight narrow.

I the two at a time meetings I think they've been called serial meetings I've heard them called that I would strongly discourage that because when you do that it's been done in the past they the council members that are there with the one other council member whatever it is that you only get the feedback from that one other council member and a lot of times there's information that's middle missing that other councils will members will bring up in their little meeting.

So I I'm not a big fan of those and I I've talked to you about that so I just want to throw my two cents in there.

Could I make a comment about or question maybe about that.

Are you against two at a time or is individually okay?

Maybe individually I just I know we did this with the school district split and there was a discussion right and then information people brought things up later that the other council members didn't realize and where do you get that information you know how do you go about sharing it?

You know, how do you go about sharing it?

And then I honestly I think it caused some I noticed other cities had those meetings more openly and ours weren't so some other cities got mad they felt like you know oh you you know there were some complaints I guess about the way we handled that.

So probably one of the time would be better but I it's I mean we have a counsel for a purpose to counsel together.

I I guess I just I want to make the council where practically speaking let's use Ryan's early example for for an example.

Say a business wanted to come to Lehigh.

They want to negotiate with the council they're not ready to go to a public meeting.

If I can't meet with you individually or by twos you'll be in the dark a lot longer on some of these things we won't have the ability to have these negotiations forward.

May Mayor just a question for you Jason with that is there a way to do it publicly without I know sometimes they don't want to publicly disclose some information but can we just not name a business and just have the discussion that way.

I think that would be I'm sorry finish your thoughts.

Yeah because we've had to sign non-disclosure agreements um and I don't know if our decisions to provide tax incentives for instance should be based on a particular name more of what it you know it's needed for the city or not fair enough.

I I guess I my concern would be if if we were to bring you completely redacted documents and things like that it's really up to you.

You're not going to get the full package of information I guess is what I'm saying because we wouldn't be able to give it to you.

Mr.

Mayor for me would it help to do those situations in a closed meeting.

You can't we can't do those okay that's let's literally why individual or Tuesday meetings that's the only way to do it.

Mr.

Mayor if I may offer just a perspective I believe that this is why the relationships that the six of us have are so important and why I have been committed to building those relationships with you because if you're in a meeting and I'm not present and you're learning information with Jason nothing stops you from calling me and filling me in.

And I am committed to developing those relationships so that we trust one another and so that we can have we can function as a council and have that dialogue and then when we come to the public and we're we're ready to share with the public and the applicant's ready to share having that transparent conversation.

But the relationships that we have are the key to getting the business done.

So just in response may if I may um we're talking about deliberations and I again I think we need to be very careful that those are done in a transparent manner and less discussion behind closed doors or backrooms or whatever you've been accused of in the past.

So that that's my intent there is not necessarily that we can't talk to each other or shouldn't but that we're following the spirit of open and public meeting act as much as we can I I guess Mr.

Mayor I'm just looking for direction because it it that does impact how I communicate with you guys.

So I'm just looking for direction other comments I have zero problem with it if we're not deliberating and making decisions if it's informative in nature I also think it just it might impact the applicant's decision to even work with Lehigh.

I just those meetings I feel is to be able to inform the council so we have the information that is difficult to receive in the public setting for whatever reason but I also think it's very important that in those meetings we are not then deliberating we're not like saying hey I I you know yes no I'm gonna vote on this something like that.

I think that if we just treat them as information system or um information meetings I feel differently about them than if it is we're making decisions.

Yeah and I I would just add Mr.

Mayor that I think the the principle is to ensure that all of us have the same information in a timely manner.

So if that means if that's more of a burden on staff to kind of recap to those who weren't present in the meeting obviously we'll share with each other as much as we can like Emily mentioned but I think that's the principle behind it.

So open to any suggestions or ideas on ensuring that happens.

And sometimes we just want a uh a head nod is this something you would even entertain because if not then let's not waste time on it.

Let's just tell them no and be done with it.

So sometimes it's a a temperature check you know we're not we're not giving them a uh approval by any means but are you willing to have staff spend time on it anyway I think that's good counsel.

Excuse me, and I think um in most cases uh the open meeting act will cover it, but I think there's few that we'll run into uh where I think I like Heather, what you mentioned, where it becomes very informational, but it has to be shared with all six at some point, so everyone has information as we move forward.

So uh Jason, you and I can work on making sure that that's uh equitable across the table too and moving, but I don't I don't know see that we'll have lines of people and we're doing that all the time.

I don't see that happening.

So Mr.

Mayor, one thing I I know when we were doing this before, one thing that was brought up is that there often are a lot of applicants that come to the city that don't even come to us.

It's something that staffs looked at and they're like, this is never gonna fly.

You know, this is so I don't know if that's something too, or it might help to be aware of like yeah, I think that could be helpful.

Maybe maybe not that the the council be like all six are more informed of some of those things.

And maybe it's just with mayor too that you're you're aware of those things because I I thought that was pretty interesting too, that there's a like safeguards of knowing that like this I would never recommend this as staff to the council.

We're not gonna waste staff's time, we're not gonna waste council's time too.

But I mean that may be something that mayors kept more in the loop on.

So thank you.

Uh let's go to 2.4 presentation of the transportation impact fees.

Uh facilities plan and analysis.

Uh welcome, Bone Collins and Associates.

Yeah, good evening.

Okay, good evening.

My name is Rachel Vollock.

As mentioned, I'm with uh Bowen Collins and Associates.

I'm also here with Andrew McKinnon to help answer any questions that the council may have.

And tonight we're presenting on the transportation impact fee update that we've been working on on the study.

Uh the purpose of this presentation is to help prepare the council for the public hearing um happening January 27th for the adoption of both the impact fee facilities plan and impact fee analysis, which are two documents that are directly tied to the impact fees, and I'll discuss a little bit more about them in the presentation.

Now, one of the major questions is what is an impact fee?

Um it seeks to answer one of these major questions within a city, which is how how can we pay for the new infrastructure required to service future growth so that existing users aren't subsidizing future users, or vice versa.

So for example, a developer comes into the city and they develop an area, they're responsible for building the roads and the pipelines and the power required specifically for their development and what we call project level um projects.

There is an impact of that development on the existing system as well, and impact fees allow the developers to help pay for that additional stress on the existing system.

So for this system that we're working with for transportation example is maybe we need to widen the road so that residents can make it into the development and out and go shopping uh things like that.

So we can keep the same level of service uh as was there previous to the development.

And so that's kind of the overarching goal of an impact fee.

And then just uh the definitions for the two um reports that are a part of the impact fee is the impact fee facilities plan.

So this document specifically identifies projects needed to accommodate growth and allocates cost of projects between existing and future users based on who the projects benefit.

And then the second report is an impact fee analysis, which calculates the appropriate impact fee based on information from the IFFP.

So they work directly together to help understand what the appropriate impact fee is.

Now the very first step to the study is uh working with a master plan.

So we received a master plan for transportation from Hale's Engineering.

They identified about 17 projects that are needed within the next 10 years.

Um that 10-year window is important because that's what's identified in the impact fee uh code.

We need to be looking at only what's needed within that 10-year window.

I will note that within this 10-year window, they anticipate about a 30% increase of trips within the city.

And that's what leads to the need of the 17 projects that have been identified.

Some additional considerations of the impact fee.

Some additional considerations of the impact fee is user type.

So we'll talk about the existing user, the tenure user, and the beyond tenure user.

And those are the windows, windows of users that are considered within the impact fee analysis.

The impact fee also considers excess capacity within the system that developers will be using and how they can help pay for that, as well as the additional projects that are added in.

Just a general example for how analysis like this goes for one of the projects we chose one of the more simple ones.

If we have new growth and there's a new road required, that's going to supply more than just a system level project.

We're looking at the modeling values that have been provided by HALES to help us understand how much is being used by existing users, by the 10-year window users, and the beyond 10-year windows, and we just go through and look at the percentages for that.

So, for example, for a new road, there's zero trips in the existing window because the road doesn't yet exist, but at the end of the 10-year window, that road will exist, and they anticipate that there's about a thousand trips.

So that attributes about 37% of the cost of that road to the 10-year window.

And then they show an additional 17,000 trips beyond the 10-year window, and so it's beyond the 10-year window that pays for that additional 63% of the project.

And that's how we go through our analysis.

We go through each of the projects and we understand what we're looking at, what the purpose of the project is.

Is it coming in for new growth?

Is it for an existing deficiency?

And we consider all of those for each and every project as we move forward with the impact fee.

Some changes since the previous update to the Lehigh Impact Fee.

The last full analysis was completed in 2015 for transportation specifically.

There has been a new transportation master plan drafted in 2025, which is where the projects come from.

The master plan includes updated future project planning and cost estimating.

This is important as a costs greatly impact the impact fee amount.

And we've seen a lot of construction inflation, significant construction inflation over the past couple years.

There's been updated growth projections which help impact our understanding of what projects are needed.

And then in addition to that, for the existing system, some previously identified projects have been completed, and instead of using estimated costs, we know we now have actual known costs that can be implemented implemented into the impact fee.

Now here's the real meat of the presentation.

This is what we would recommend as a 2026 transportation impact fee.

As you can see, we've presented a schedule that changes on an annual basis.

Part of this is of a credit, and that is due to a credit that's due for existing deficiencies.

As we talked about previously, there's a certain level of standard level of service that needs to be upheld.

And it's and the credit helps pay for that.

So essentially, we have this 146 dollars and eighty-seven cents that has been calculated for each trip, and there's a credit calculated based on the deficiencies within the sister, the system, excuse me.

Because future users can't both pay for an impact fee and user rates, or in this case, taxes to pay for the same projects, and that changes as the years goes on, and that's why you see a schedule of impact fees here.

Then I will note historically the current impact fee is 121 dollars and seventy-nine cents per trip.

So in 2026, this would account for about a 10% increase in impact fees, and by the time we get down to 2035, this accounts for about a 20% increase in impact fees.

So in general, just some conclusions.

Like I just stated in 2026, it's about a 10% increase, 2035 is about a 20% increase as compared with 2025.

There has been historical growth that's significantly greater than was previously projected, which is added to some of the projects.

And then as soon as the impact fee is adopted 90 days after is when the first new impact fee can be charged.

And then that's everything I have for my presentation.

Are there any comments or questions from the council?

Mr.

Mayor.

So other than with the credit, is there anywhere to add in like inflation?

That so I guess it kind of helps with the credit, but it seems almost like by the time we hit this again in 10 years, we're going to be really far behind them if we're only addressing it every 10 years.

Yeah.

So there's there a lot of cities actually will amend their impact fee uh every other year.

Okay.

Just to keep up with inflation.

The impact fee act doesn't allow us to include inflation during this first part.

But if you were to like go down two years, you could actually amend the impact fee without doing a wholesale uh update and basically add that that inflation in those those new forecasts of costs.

That yeah, that would be great.

So we just justify it based on current levels of inflation over the last two years, and that would be it.

Yeah, that'd be good.

Mayor may ask a question.

Um so the deficiencies in our current level of service, that's the we can't charge them for that.

Can you explain that a little more?

Is that correct?

Like we recognize that we're deficient, right?

And so you you're giving them a credit.

So can you explain part for the I can I can help with that?

Um so it would be for example, there's a road that uh doesn't meet your level of service.

Uh you know, it's it's you know, there's just there's too much traffic on the road.

And there's a new project that's coming in that will both provide capacity for new growth, but it's also going to relieve the existing deficiency.

So there's a certain portion of that project cost that's basically going to get paid for by impact fees somewhat.

Um but all the future users that are basically paying that impact fee, they're also going to be living in a home that's paying off that existing deficiency, right?

So those those users are both paying the impact fee, and then they're also paying taxes or they're paying a user rate where they're they're paying that over the next 20 years.

And so they'll if they if they're here for 20 years, they pay those rates or taxes for 20 years, and so they deserve a larger credit.

Then if then somebody else moves, come moves, moves into the city in five years, that person is only gonna be paying, and this is this is the uh with the idea of a bond of like a 20-year bond.

Um the person that moves in five years, they're only they're only gonna be paying taxes or rates for another 15 years, so their credit's gonna be less than that first person that moves in next year, if that makes sense.

So the idea is just to basically reimburse somebody that moves in and is paying taxes or rates for that uh sort of making sure that they're not being paying twice both an impact fee and paying rates for the same sort of deficiencies that's helping existing users.

Got it.

Thank you.

Okay, can I ask?

Since you don't, it's you said currently it's 121 approximately per trip, and we're going up to proposing going up to 134 point something.

Okay, I just want to make sure.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

Um it's my understanding that the legislature passes um laws every year that dictate um how the impact fee can be calculated.

Um what are some of the um impacts to some of the legislation that have happened that have had an impact on the price?

There hasn't been a significant change in the Impact Fee Act uh since I think 2022.

Um but yeah, the every year there's usually just a little bit of tweaking on the Impact Fee Act.

Um I know the last change that I can think of was was applicable to ADUs, which I think a lot of the council is probably familiar with the changes on that.

Um but yeah, there's no there's no no significant changes.

I have not heard of anything specific for this next year either on changes to the act, but okay, thank you.

I it's common, I hear often that we just um aren't able to charge enough for impact fees.

Um just curious to know if if there if you guys have an opinion on that, do you feel like this is enough to cover the cost of the impact?

Uh the way the impact fee rule act is written basically makes the city the bank for a lot of projects.

Um so the way the way it's broken up, there's the existing users ten year growth and then growth beyond ten year window.

All of that growth beyond the tenure window, the city is essentially acting as a bank for because you can't collect fees on that.

Uh and so you're basically paying for it, like let's say you're you're paying for a project that's gonna last for fifty years.

Um well you can only you can only charge in the impact fee that first ten years.

And that's and that's by legislative uh direction, right?

So the city is basically on the hook for all those costs beyond the ten year window, and so you're always playing a little bit of catch up and you may need to make sure that you're accounting for all of your impact fee eligible projects.

And you need it th those need to stay in your books for as long as that project is you know exists because you're basically trying to recoup those costs as soon as a project goes in until that project meets it lifecycle.

That makes sense.

So yeah, there is uh by design from the legislature, like the cities are kind of forced to sort of act as a bank, and uh that just has to do with the makeup of the legislature and how that how that uh the politics works on that.

Yeah, I appreciate the clarity.

Thank you.

Mayor, could I could I comment?

Yes.

And maybe there's a bunch of you that are new.

Do you know what an ADU is?

I just want to make sure.

Okay.

And the and what he indicated that we tried to get some of those impact fees on the ADUs and that didn't happen.

So ADUs, we cannot charge impact fees.

That that is something that's changed.

Okay.

Thank you, Laura.

Sorry.

Lauren.

Just for clarification.

ADU is an accessory dwelling unit.

Yeah.

Right.

That's internal ADUs, not external, right?

With external ADUs we can charge impact fees or not.

As far as I can tell, it relates to any ADU.

Wow, okay.

Now if you have a multiple unit, you know, duplexes or things like that, it applies, but not on an ADU.

Yeah, so I just want to clarify what Heather was suggesting.

So we're we're looking at a fee of 2026 going to 13421, but she's suggesting that we look and calculate, make sure we're accommodating for inflation.

Is that correct?

Okay.

So this might this could potentially change based on those calculations.

Is that what we're under?

You would come back in two years and update the impact fee to account for any inflation.

If that makes sense.

And then just in connection to my so will the legislature allow for that.

For us to calculate if you're following the impact fee act and you're noticing every time you do an amendment, um, then there's no there's no need to like do it ahead of time.

And that's kind of the idea behind doing regular uh impact fee updates is to try to stay uh on to on top of that inflation.

Understood.

Any other comments?

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Okay, that brings us to man, my voice is terrible.

2.5 discussion of the council assignments including the ULCT policy committee assignment.

Who has that one?

Is that m mine?

Or the mayor pro temperate.

Yeah, Jason, do you want to speak to this?

I can kick it off and you guys can take it away.

Be great.

So we have to uh appoint three voting seats on the legislative policy committee for the Utah League of Citizen Towns.

So yeah, it's up to you guys who you'd like to appoint to those three spots, but we need it done before the end of the month.

So you could just give us some direction tonight.

We appreciate it.

Comments.

Um well typically from what I've seen, it's the mayor is one of those people, yes.

Typically.

Yes.

And uh it would make sense to me to have the mayor pro tem also be one of those people.

I don't know if we do we nominate.

How do we do this?

We can just discuss the other thing is there is usually a staff, so it's usually Jason or Cam because they're available to make sure they're in all meetings.

So sometimes our schedules don't allow us to be in all those meetings.

So normally or in the past, uh I know that we've had at least one, maybe two that have been on that board.

So the previous council we had four because Mayor Johnson was on the executive board, and then we had Cameron and myself, and then we had a a a third council member.

Right.

So for the past few years we've had four.

So we will go to three.

We will go to three.

Mr.

Mayor, I I just for the record, I think I'm interested in that assignment if if the others are amenable to it.

Um if we are gonna have two council members.

Okay, any and you're available to go to those meetings and vote.

You're feeling confident that you'll be there.

Okay.

But we can only have three this year instead of four.

Correct.

Okay.

I wasn't sure of that before this.

Unless you want to be elected.

Just kidding.

Okay.

And no one's hurting my feelings.

If you want to take my spot, it's fine.

I'm still going to be involved.

I'll still go to the meetings, I just won't vote.

And the sorry question.

The city administrators managers have their own meetings with ULCT.

We do, yeah, we do.

So you can give input there.

Oh, yeah.

I mean, I I talk to Cameron all the time, and yeah, it's not a big deal.

Okay.

Yeah, I'd be interested in that.

I've been following it quite a lot and had a fun time listening yesterday of all the bills coming up.

During the legislative session, it is a weekly meeting, um, sometimes two times a week.

Um they won't vote more than once a week, though, but they will have meetings um sometimes twice a week during the session and then throughout the year it's at least monthly that they'll have meetings.

So can I ask a question?

If if someone's not able to attend, are they able to designate someone else to I can be designated as an alternate if we don't have enough voting members?

Um, okay.

No, I think that's great, and I think is all council members to be following that.

I mean it's a large voting body, so I don't know that our voice would have you know, like be tie-breaking in any kind of way, but I want to make sure that we always do have those three votes.

So if you're not able to attend, like it could be Jason and Cameron.

I'm totally agree with that.

And I think like you will get like those summaries every week.

Because I have like I'm I wasn't a voting member, but I got those, and they would also encourage council members to be re reaching out to legislators too.

So whatever kind of influence and impact you have that way, I think it it's kind of surprising how many things come through that are going to impact us at the city level.

So I think that's great.

And and I just want you guys to know you guys are elected officials of a pretty big pretty big deal city.

So they really like Lehigh to be involved because you guys do carry quite a bit of weight.

So yeah.

And again, you don't have to be on the LPC either to contribute.

I mean, by all means, if you guys pick up the phone or shoot an email to our legislators, they will appreciate that as well.

Because they don't know who's on the LPC.

Right.

Okay, so myself, anyone else want to take a voting spot?

James.

Michelle.

Yes.

Any comments on that, Mather?

You're okay with that?

No, that sounds great.

But I think we should have Jason, at least Jason is an alternate, if you know, if not Jason and Bo Mike.

We can have me and Cameron be the alternative.

Or you and Cameron.

Yeah, yeah.

And then we also have other staff monitoring it and taking notes and things.

So yeah, we we do try and keep more and more of an eye on it as like I said, as we get more political weight as we grow.

But great.

Emily, you're good.

Okay.

Perfect.

Um this.

Let's go to 2.6.

Do you think we can get this done in 10 minutes, James?

Yeah, let's do it.

Uh 2.6 discussion of modifying the 700 South bike lanes.

So James, I'll turn it over to you for half a second.

Go ahead.

What you're thinking.

Yeah.

Um so one of the the great benefits of uh being in a campaign is you get to talk to a lot of residents.

And and I I kind of went into the the 700 South bike lanes initially in the campaign, very neutral.

I you know, I commute on that road.

Uh I didn't have strong feelings one way or the other, but I heard from a lot of residents uh that they weren't huge fans of it.

Um I would say in the most unbiased way possible, probably eight or nine out of ten um have strong feelings that we should change it.

And then we have others including an email that came in uh just maybe an hour ago that are very um fond of it.

So um I realize we have a master transportation plan, and I think I think there's ways to keep a bike lane um but make the parking curb side.

Um I'm looking at the the master transportation plan.

Uh there's a lot of different road configurations.

I want to get staff's thoughts as well as uh my fellow council members on looking at how we can potentially change that.

Um looking at a one configuration is I think it's similar to the road.

I always forget that that road, uh just east of the high school.

Um it's essentially uh in the master transportation plan, it's the 70 to 74 foot minor collector bike lane.

Um so 700 south is mostly I think 60 feet wide from curb to curb.

Um so that that would give us room for curbside parking, a bike lane, and then uh a driving lane, a middle turning lane, a driving lane, bike lane, curb parking.

Um and just wanted to get your thoughts on that.

I I I bring this up just because I again I heard from a lot of residents, I'm sure others up here have as well.

And I just want to make it as appropriate and um safe as possible.

I think some of the concerns I've heard is it sometimes it gives you a false sense of security uh writing those lanes.

I've I've heard of children just plowing through stop signs, right?

Thinking that they they have the right of way.

Um just two days ago.

I wish I would have taken a picture of it because it was kind of funny.

Uh but I saw a car parked between the pylons in the bike lane and no one was in the car, um, which raised some questions.

Um of course, you know, the bike lanes are great.

Uh, this winter has been very dry.

Um but obviously in in heavier winters we have uh they're basically unusable for most of the time.

And I see a lot of people just not using the lanes or just cruising down uh the driving lane.

So just want to get some thoughts first, maybe from my fellow council members on what your opinion is, and then also from staff if we have if we had if we agree to change it, would that include a master transportation plan amendment, or could we uh just unilaterally make some changes where we think it's needed most?

So I guess over to my fellow council members, Mayor.

Um I think it would be really helpful if staff could give us the history of how these lanes came to be and the mag funding associated to such.

I think it would be helpful for all of us to kind of get the history of how we got here, the funding, and then what actually is on the um docket to come just so we can have the fruitful conversation.

Yeah, we'll take your lead if you want if you want to have some other comments from council.

I've got Mike here and he's got a few slides.

We don't want to take a ton of your time.

We didn't know what direction, so we're kind of ready to pivot, but we're happy to do that now, or we can let you have some discussion and then we'll come up.

But we'd we would love an opportunity to just like council member Lockhart seeing anybody else comment-wise, or should we invite Mr.

Wells?

Go ahead, other.

Yeah, I think that'd be really helpful because this is something that was put in place before any of the, you know, even before uh council member stallings and I.

It was really helpful for me, like because uh last budget session, just for like I I had approached uh engineering and wondering what we could do about it.

What was and they they came up with different solutions.

Um at the time, you know, we'd start talking about a curbing machine, um, but it was so new idea that we it didn't make sense to fund it in that budget cycle.

And over the past year, I've met with engineering I w met with public works and like the possibility of like would it make sense to have a curbing machine to be able to fund these um projects at a lower cost.

Um but in meeting the public works because of the staff level, it it didn't make sense to take all five of our our you know streets and public works to be to go and do it uh the curb machine um because it would take them off other projects.

So that's why you know it was never pursued to go that direction.

Um but I think it'd be really helpful and then also just to I'd want to make sure before we you know, and then I definitely want to hear from staff and just understand the full thing is like making sure we have a really good full picture of um how people feel about those bike lanes because I think we tend to hear from um a vocal um group and and maybe not necessarily other ones who don't.

So I'd almost just want to make sure we really have a a good pulse on the area and how they feel about it because I would hate for the opposite to happen that we had, you know, we made a big change and then there was an uproar in the other direction of why did you take away our trail?

So that's yeah.

Yeah, let's go ahead and have you.

Yeah, yeah, I'm gonna let Mike well have Mike come up drive and then Brad from Engineering.

They well, all three of us elaborated quite a bit on this.

So maybe while Mike's getting set up, I can give you just a little bit of a update.

Um so I've been here at the city for 18 years and have sat on that magtech committee that entire time.

So that's the funding agency where we received all this money to build this project.

Just um really quickly.

Um this project was approved through MAG in 2014.

And um normally we would receive money to build the project three to four years later.

In this case, um we could have received that money, but the city chose to move forward another project, and we we chose to build uh 1200 west first.

And so the funding, the actual funding for this project uh was six years after its approval.

In that six-year time frame, we had a lot of projects come to the city um um trail type projects where we needed some funding.

In that six-year time frame, we had a lot of projects come through the city um trail type projects where we needed some funding, and so in this case we started out with uh about 2.9 million dollars in the in the trail project.

We pulled um $300,000 from the project, and this is all kind of through MAG.

We pulled $300,000 for the phase three of the rail trail.

We pulled $429,000 for the Tiger Bridge, which is the major uh uh trail bridge that goes across uh SR92, and we pulled um $400,000 for the Triumph Boulevard Bridge.

Um that's the that's the new bridge that goes over Triumph Boulevard, which completed the historic Southern Rail Trail.

So in essence, when this project may have started with 2.9-ish, 2.85 million dollars, when we finally got ready to start it, it was 1.72 million dollars.

Uh I think one of the things to remember on this project is that um a couple things.

First of all, we built a lot of roadway with it.

Right.

We built uh I just took some numbers down, 1900 feet of curb and gutter, 870 feet of sidewalk.

We uh constructed over 2.6 acres of pavement, so a lot a lot of pavement.

Um 650 feet of storm drain, we widened the uh dry creek box culvert structure and uh removed uh you know various trees.

Um one other thing to I just from a from a funding standpoint.

One concern that I have with pulling too much from this project, and um it was proposed as a cycle track project, and obviously the project we were able to build with the money that we were left was was less than what we had initially initially intended, right?

The initial project.

And I think Mike has Mike has maps and exhibits showing how that initial project um had curb and gutter or or had a uh somewhat of a curb that separated the bike lane from the travel lane and the parking, so that wasn't able to be put in because we had less money.

But one concern that I do have having sat on the committee for a long time, is it's important to note that we have the second phase of this cycle track already funded.

Um this that phase runs from 2300 west westerly to the Jordan River Trail.

Um I do worry that if we change too much with this concept.

I wonder what I I'm concerned as to what MAG would say if we wanted uh to then start building the second phase, the second phase moving westward because it was approved as a cycle track and it was approved as I think uh two-way cycle track, much like we did on this project here.

And you're talking about 700 south, which eventually turns into 600 south moving west into the Jordan Willows area, right?

Yes, yes, that's the that is the project there.

Um we we are funded to construct a signal at 700 south and 2300 west.

That that will we've worked with MAG and we're able to pull that money forward, but I I guess I just wanted to uh I wanted to share my concerns with if we change too much.

I don't know what it would do with the funding that we have already received that's not yet we haven't yet started the design west of 2300 West, but but I am worried about what decisions we could make would change that because we've already agreed to build a certain project.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

So what I'm hearing you say is that we were awarded 2.9 million for the cycle track project, but we took um about I guess 300 and then the 429 and the 400,000 away from what was awarded and put it towards other trail or or bridge crossing projects, um, which left us with less than what we were able what we were originally designed to build, right?

Um I'm just curious to understand how we're allowed to take money out of one if if the large sum is meant for the cycle track, how are we allowed to push it off into other projects?

It was actually a specific request that we had to make to MAG.

Oh, and it was approved.

Yes, it was so in partnership with MAG, they approved that some of that funding getting sent into different directions.

Yeah, and we saw we saw the benefit of expanding some of the past trails and and kind of making them so that they were continuous, right?

I mean, we we essentially have a trail now all the way from uh first east all the way into the uh point of the mountain, right?

That rail trail, all of those projects were along that corridor.

So Brad, if I may, the the MAG funding for this project, it it wasn't wetted to a certain design, was it?

Or it was given for the bike path, but we have the flexibility to determine how that was designed, correct?

Right.

And and I think when Mike pulls up the maps, you'll see that our initial concept report for the seventh South Cycle Track showed the trail on both sides next to the curb and gutter with parking kind of in the center in the middle of the street along both sides.

So so there was a concept plan that was prepared.

Um this case we chose to put it a two-way on just one side, so that meant that the parking only affected half as many users and uh home homeowners because only half as many of them were parking in the street.

Um so it was a uh uh you know a lesser detriment to them.

But um that was a decision.

I I'll go ahead and I know I don't want to belabor things too much.

We can talk later, you know, you know what, in a different time, but I just wanted to kind of go over the funding and some of my concerns with changing things too much.

Mr.

Mayor, just the one thing when I've spoken with you before, that's what was most interesting to me that it was it ended up costing like 1.7 million, but only 125,000 of that actually went to like doing the cycle track itself.

But because the cycle track was there, we got all that sidewalk and curb and gutter and everything else, like you know, one point six million plus of doing all that because it was funded as a cycle track.

So that was eye-opening to me because I thought it cost a lot more just to put in the cycle track itself.

So I love that we were able to get these other public improvements done as in conjunction with it.

Right.

And I I think probably one thing that's super important to understand too is when we receive these monies.

Um the city only actually pays out of our own coffers six point seven percent.

So when I say that we had one point seven uh two one million um as as part of the project, we we paid much less than that.

We paid we only paid seven let's just say seven percent of that out of our own uh road impact fee coffers.

Okay.

Mike, real quick, I was just gonna note you you guys have dinner and so we probably want to be quick.

I only want to spend a few minutes with our previous.

And we can bring this back again.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, but maybe we just yeah, just do a quick, very quick.

So we give them time to do that.

I'll be super quick.

The one thing I will say is I think this is gonna my first call is that I think this is gonna be a bigger picture discussion than just 700 south.

There's a lot that goes into design.

There's trade-offs if they're kind of design that you do.

And the design that we put here is not perfect.

It was getting something with the money that we had left over.

Um, there were some things that changed along the rail trail, like Triumph Boulevard got cut in, and now people are just scrambling frog across Triumph Boulevard on the rail trail.

So we're like, we gotta do something to eliminate that conflict point.

So we were trying to figure out everything we could do to get a bridge up there.

Um so there's no perfect design necessarily, but I do think there's better ways to design, and there's certain assumptions you have to make to actually create safer streets.

Does paint and poles, plastic poles give us the maximum safety benefit?

No.

Is it a step better than having nothing?

At least you know, it has some separation.

You're not riding with traffic.

Um anyway, but the big picture I think, and we we have a bike and pedestrian plan that we're putting together.

Well, updating we have one already, but we're updating it and trying to look at different ways to look at design.

Not that we have to do it this way necessarily, but I'll go through the slides real quick because there are a couple little examples in there to get thinking about what could be.

Um real quick.

This is the I'll go through this quickly.

This is the original bike and ped plan that just shows the cycle track was shown on that back in 2013.

We went after the funding, and Brad explained that.

This is kind of the big picture of some of these corridors.

So this right here.

If I have my mouse, the the solid yellow is existing 700 south, the green is where we got the funding.

Um in the growing section, our concept is not to use the plastic poles, it's to make it more like a trail, like where you have either you move the curb out or we have the funding to put the concrete curb, or there is no curb, we can easily just put the new curb right by the road and put the trail on the backside, just like we do in many parts of town.

Um and then in the future we would have to look after funding, but the both on our plan and the MAGs regional plan, this is shown to connect over to the American Fork front owner station, then also America Fork has trails that lead over to their downtown.

Um then we have our on our master plan, 17th West is shown as uh uh more of a that's also on the Mag plan, a regional connection up towards Thanksgiving Point.

Um UDOT put on the Utah Trail Network, now Center Street as having a corridor, whether it's a trail or some kind of an on-street uh bikeway.

Um so that would intersect with what this project is doing.

But the idea is to make a cohesive network right now.

Right now it is a bit isolated, but it should connect everything and be something that not just the you know super uh experienced cyclists are gonna use, but it should be something that's all ages and abilities.

You gotta think of your eight-year-olds and your 80-year-olds, everybody in between.

Is this and again there's no perfect design, but is there something that best captures those who otherwise wouldn't want to hop on a bike if you're riding out in an exposed bike lane that's more in the street, that just instantly gonna turn off a lot of people from wanting to use it.

Uh the confident people tend to like that a bit better, but uh there's just trade-offs if they're if you can do.

This was the original design, as Brad had mentioned, they actually weren't gonna be painted blue.

I think we just highlighted that to show people.

But this was the bridge up north that we put some funding towards.

It's the tiger, the Triumph Bridge, and this is that trail connection in the very north that connected over.

Um I just want to show on South South is uh the left hand side there, that's 1500 north.

We put a trail on that.

Again, it was a new build, so we're able to do it that way from the start.

Um, 7th South, most of the road was already built out, other than some of what we had to finish.

So the idea is you have your road travel lanes, your parking lanes, and then your bikeway.

The relative positions the same, it's just the way it feels, and the you know, the parking situation is not ideal because it does feel like you're out there, you're not against a curve, so I totally understand that.

Um the relative position of where everybody's moving is pretty similar to what you see elsewhere.

This is just to show this is what it was.

Here it is today.

Now, what could it be?

I mean, you could put concrete in and painted islands visually, it's a little more intuitive.

You could put tree, but depending on the utilities underneath, you may not be able to put trees, but you can get some greenery in there.

Um these are just what ifs, it's not to say this is what we're doing, but if you ever rebuilt one side of the road, you could put the trail behind this the curb, or if you did a complete rebuild, every road has to be rebuilt at some point in time, whether it's 10 or 50 years from now, but that's your real opportunity to do things uh in a different way.

There's all kinds of ways you can design it to still be all of these and abilities, but maybe be work better for how people are parking and how the street functions.

Um, this is up in the north end of town.

This is uh unfortunately that apartment building is the one that burned down, but this is the bikeway right here.

Um was put behind the curb.

Um, so it feels just like a trail like you'd see anywhere else in town.

Again, from a new build standpoint, we'd love to do it like this rather than using the poles.

The poles are just a very cost effective way to get some space that's separated.

It's just you know, you have to weigh the trade-offs of the the negatives of using that.

Um that's again the the other one.

Um, these are just some examples.

We were at a planning conference in Minneapolis and just saw different types of bikeways.

That one had a curb in the street, this one was behind the curb, so there's different ways to do that.

Uh I just wanted to say I won't go into the detail at this point, but we've been collecting a lot of data and going through all the the public feedback was very helpful.

And I will say from the start that's always you always want to be learning and doing better, especially as staff or elected officials.

You know, there was good intentions of doing better public outreach on the project, and then we kept getting different stories of when the striper was coming out, anyway.

But next time, any you know, we're doing especially a change, you know, any sort of type of project.

We want to be you know, very um do great communication with the public and make sure they are aware of what's going on.

Was a little bit of an interesting experiment, not that we wanted to do that experiment to bestow this new design upon the people and then have to see what they do and trying to figure it out.

That was definitely not the intent, but certainly we're gonna learn from that.

But through the public uh outreach we've gotten over the past year or so.

There's all the different points.

You know, people are saying, hey, this is problem or this problem, visibility, different types of conflicts.

We've been getting out there and trying to make observations and get data on a lot of these different issues.

Just some quick trail data just to show how 700 south and maybe some of our other trails in town.

These are um kind of more of your peak uh amounts of trail traffic that you see.

So rail trail, Murdoch Canal Trail are busiest trails.

You know, they get up over a thousand people a day on the more of the summertime use.

Um Jordan River Rail Trail and the different locations, you see a little less use.

7th South, the bikeway itself saw around 160 people, 360 for the whole road if you're comparing it, including all the pedestrians in that as well.

Um rail trail farther down, closer downtown because it kind of fizzes out, gets a little less use.

Um like the Traverse Trail, Terrace Trail going off from the viewpoint middle school up there, gets uh a little bit less use as well.

Uh I just want to it's great to see observations.

These are kids getting out of school, and it's interesting to see how what they do.

Obviously, the crossing guards helping them get across there.

Um then when you look at uh when they get to the other side of the street there, the difference between 17th uh west going north is just a little painted bike lane, and most of the children choose to write on sidewalk, whereas going on the bikeway, most of the children choose to go on the bikeway.

Now, again, there's there's perceived safety and actual safety.

We want to see both, you know.

Like to the comment that you made, James, people feel safe, but is it really safety?

Um we want to make sure obviously both.

We want people to be comfortable using it, but we also don't want to put people in in increased uh risky situation.

So that's certainly something we we want to keep looking at.

Um there probably don't have time tonight.

We can talk about the differences of different types of bikeways and bike lane types.

There's pros and cons, like we were talking about earlier of doing any different types.

Um generally with this type of bike with the conflicts at the intersections and the driveways is where the safety risk happens.

At the like a typical bike lane, the entire bike lane is exposed, so at any point a car can enter the bike lane, so you get a lot of people that can be hit in that kind of situation as well.

So there's like I said, pros and cons and trade-offs to the ways we do it.

And I don't know if we need to watch through all this, but you can see all these different ways.

People rollerblading, kids riding scooters together.

Um the bikeway effectively shortens the crossing distances of the streets you don't have as wide of a road to cross.

Um got people on skateboards, you know, people going for evening bike ride.

Couples running their little scooters around, people flying the flag on their cargo bikes.

Even some of the confident cyclists in their Peloton are still using that.

Um I have seen on some of these, there's pretty good yield compliance at the crossing points.

People tend to pull past that, but the green markings of the bikeway, people actually create a lot of awareness.

Um, but you can see a lot of just uh interactions there.

Um I think better wrap it up.

Uh I appreciate this.

This is very helpful.

And I I think we all want bike lanes, right?

We just want to figure out the best configuration and style.

And I know for time's sake, maybe we could, Mr.

Mayor, we can push some of the other agenda items to the end of the regular session if um if you're good with it.

Well, take a motion.

Oh, yeah.

We'll put so I don't need a motion yet.

Yeah.

We will uh, yeah, so let's go ahead and have a recess because our meeting next meeting starts at seven.

Um so we'll come back and we'll we'll do 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 at the end of our city council.

Yeah, and I think just to wrap up this discussion, I I think just having some options.

So if there's a consensus here that we would like a different configuration, we'd appreciate some of the your suggested steps on choosing a new configuration.

What would that would mean financially?

Um, and then we can go from there.

Maybe we could do that at a session later this month.

Another work session.

Yep.

Yeah.

Okay.

We'll take a recess for 15 minutes.

Sorry.

Ladies and gentlemen.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome.

We welcome all that are in their chambers tonight.

Welcome to our city council meeting.

I'm Mayor Benns.

We have a full council tonight.

Uh Councilmember Newell, Councilmember Harrison, Councilmember Freeman, Councilmember Um Stallings, and Council Member Lockhart.

And of course, our staff, we appreciate you being here.

To get started tonight, we uh we'll stand and have a pledge of allegiance that'll be led by council person stallings.

If you all rise.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Man, this is gonna be rough tonight, but we'll get through it.

Uh our first item of business today is we'll we'll turn some time over to the Utah Attorney General's office for an award uh that has been awarded.

We welcome all those who are here for that award.

Sorry, Chief, I'm not gonna have to say something.

Good evening, everyone.

Is it okay if I if I face I mean no disrespect by facing my back to you guys?

Good evening.

Good evening, everyone.

But by way of introduction, for those of you who do not know me, which is everyone in here.

Um my name is Sete Aulai.

I'm uh I'm a captain from the Attorney General's office, the Utah Attorney General's office.

And these guys are not my bodyguards, rather, they are they are also a part of the attorney general's office.

Um part of my role as uh serving as the captain at the AG's office is I um I oversee the Internet Crimes Against Children's Task Force as commander.

And to my right, I have Sergeant Nicole de los Santos, I have Lieutenant Will Chow, and then um Sergeant Juan Escobedo.

Uh, this is the leadership of the the ICAC task force for our state.

Um I'll try I'll try not to uh take too much time.

Uh I know you guys have a busy agenda and a busy night, but I feel it's appropriate that that you guys understand where we're coming from and why we're here and what we're here to do.

Uh Utah's Utah's ICAC, the Internet Crimes Against Children.

We are we are one of 61 task forces across this great nation of ours.

Um, some states, because of their size, given their size, the population, they may have more than one ICAC, such as California, where I'm from.

They have five ICACs.

Um, Texas may have three, Texas has three, Florida has three, uh, the state of New York, they have two, Illinois has two again because of the population.

But in our state, we have we have one ICAC task force, and part of my obligation is to communicate between the attorney general himself, General Brown, and the Department of Justice with what's going on in our state.

Now, Utah's ICAC, of course, I'm very, very biased.

This is the sports in me.

I'm very biased, and I I I would love to I like to say that we're the number one ICAC in the country.

Um, and this this police department, this city, is a huge reason that we are the number one ICAC in the country.

Um I I can't tell you guys how proud I am that we are associated and that we have this strong partnership with this police department and the work that they do.

Utah ZyCAC is it consists of 93 agencies, and 93.

It's not 93 just locally, I mean 93 from Lodian all the way down to St.

George from Grand County where Moab is, all the way out to Tuola.

All of us come together to represent this wonderful and strong task force called task force called the Internet Crimes Against Children, with one mission in mind, and it's to save a child.

What other mission, what other goal or vision is is better than that?

That's literally what we do here.

And we actually see the fruits of our labor in this task force by the by the work of all those of all those officers and detectives and investigators who are part of it.

All of them have one goal in mind is to save a child and make a difference.

Utah ZyCAC, it's a it's a it's a busy one.

Um just in the year of 2025, uh, we received 11,000 over 11,000 cyber tip line reports from the National Center and the Missing and Exploited Children.

Now you guys hear that, 11,000, and you're like, dang, that's a lot.

Yeah, it is a lot.

But to put into perspective, 11,000 to our state, that is what Los Angeles ICAC gets in one month.

Just to put into perspective.

Um, over a hundred of those came back to this city alone, to Lehigh City.

Not Saratoga, not Lehigh in Saratoga, not Lehigh in Eagle Mountain, this city alone.

Over a hundred of those came back to this city.

One of the stats that I love to see is the number of rescues that we have.

Our task force statewide made over 160 rescues of children being abused sexually by the internet.

Over 16.

It's crazy that that's happened.

Over 15 of those children who were rescued came back to this city.

Our task force arrested over 320 offenders who perpetuate the demand for child sex abuse material.

Over 60 of those arrests came from this city.

Now, am I saying that there's a huge problem in the city of Lehigh?

No.

But internet crimes definit definitely happens here.

It is well and alive here.

This this city, this police department, is one of three that receives the most reports in this county.

So you have Lehigh, you have Provo and Oram, who are the big three who receive the most amount of work within this county.

And that makes sense given the the population within those cities.

But the example that this police department has shown and exhibited for the rest of the state, and even to us up at the AG's office, is like no other.

I appreciate the partnership that we have with the special victims unit from this department.

The example that Sergeant Jeff Smith and his crew have done to make sure we accomplish our mission as a task force.

Just this past December, uh the task force um held uh uh undercover chat operation, and that was hosted here by this department.

It was their idea, and it was their initiative to put something on like that.

And it's not a small task to put on that type of operation.

It takes a lot of effort, a lot of time, and a lot of hours to put something like that together to bring over 20 agencies together, all again with one goal to rescue a child.

The leadership of this police department by you, Chief, and your command staff to support not only your special victims unit, but to support the task force is appreciated.

Attorney General Brown is very grateful for you, Jeff, and your crew, and for all you guys do.

And the reason why we're here is just to recognize your great efforts and to award you guys as the affiliate agency of the year for our task force.

So, with that, if I can have you and your crew come up here and accept your award, please.

Uh gentlemen, if I if I can show this to you and then I'll I'll put it up in the air too, and and then and show everyone and turn around show our crew.

Um again, uh this award and and I I know this crew, especially Bryson, he's like Sete, you said enough, shut up already, sit down.

Um but I I it it it it goes and said um the the job, the work, the hours that they that they put in to make a difference not only within the city of Lehigh, not only within our great state of Utah, but across the country, um the the work that they do.

And this is just our a small token of our appreciation for all that you guys do.

So again, ladies and gentlemen, if you guys can join me in a round of applause to award our special victim.

Thank you.

Oh, picture?

Oh, can't get a picture.

Chief, do you want to make any comments?

Are you good?

I guess just real quick, I'd I would echo uh what the task force commander said, and it's a great partnership between the attorney general's office and our officers and the other members that participate on that task force.

They work hard, they they do have that one goal, and and they do phenomenal work.

So thank you for your time, and uh we'll get out of here.

Get out of your get out of your way.

Thank you, Chief.

Congrats.

It's awesome.

Okay, thank you very much.

We will now open uh open for public comment.

Yeah, we'll open it up to the public if you'd like to come up and speak.

Uh we'll do it for 20 minutes.

You have three minutes, if you'll just please state your name and uh and come on up.

So we'll open that up right now.

Uh good evening.

Uh my name is Chad Watkins.

Uh I'm here uh representing myself as a citizen and uh representing a group called Strong Towns Lehigh.

Um I'd like to discuss um curb extensions uh around our schools, and just to give context curb extension if you're not familiar with the term, um that's sidewalk extensions specifically around uh intersections.

So uh narrowing the roadway around those.

Um we actually have a few examples of those around here in Lehigh.

Um but the reason for this discussion is the and the impetus for this comment was the recent hit of a student at Lehigh High School while they were crossing the street.

Um and the curb extensions here in like I said here in Lehigh are not theoretical idea.

We actually have run pilot programs.

Uh our group has worked with uh Luke Sugmiller and Mike West.

The results of these um these preliminary preliminary results of these have been very clear.

Average uh vehicle speeds have dropped.

And vehicle stopping compliance has increased.

Uh curb extensions work because they uh physically change driver behavior.

They narrow roadway, they narrow the roadway, shortening crossing distances and make intersections mil feel more constrained.

Forces drivers to slow down and pay attention.

The street itself uh by doing this, the street itself tells drivers how to behave.

Um here, sorry.

And this matters around our schools where kids are crossing streets every day.

Children are smaller, less visible, and more unpredictable than adults.

They deserve infrastructure that protects them, not just reminders to be careful.

There's a psychological benefit here.

Most crashes don't happen because someone's malicious.

They happen because people are on autopilot, following habit and not actively thinking.

Curve extensions are a tool that we have to help interrupt uh that that line of thinking and uh help drivers snap out of that routine that driving.

Uh this that moment of attention is often what prevents collision.

These improvements do also help everyone else, uh parents pushing strollers, people using wheelchairs, uh older residents.

We um we have proof in our own pilots that this works.

Uh we know the science of of speed and injury, and we know that where the highest stakes are, near schools where the most vulnerable people are.

Uh we're very aware, like we've I said that we're running pilots with uh Luke and uh Mike and everything.

Uh uh we'd like to have these these pilots uh extend more out to the schools as well.

So thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr.

Watkins.

Hi there, my name is Leah Jay.

Um I'm also from Strong Towns Lehigh, and I also wanted to talk about the um pedestrian car crash that happened last week.

Um so I think there's in accidents like these, what you see on the Facebook comments is like it was the driver's fault.

The driver should have been not speeding, it was the student's fault.

The student should have been paying attention.

And I think um the narrative needs to change so that it's not like whose fault is it, but how can we design our roads so that a lapse of attention, which is something that all humans do regularly, does not end in someone's life ending or you know, being paralyzed or or a traumatic injury.

And as we can see, like even that minor accident caused a lot of trauma for the students of the high school and and the citizens of our of our um of our city.

Um so I think it's important to ask ourselves um why does the United States have more of these fatal and um higher risk accidents than other developed countries?

Because they have cell phones just like we do, they have alcohol when they drive just like we do.

And there's actually a lot of data to show that we build our streets differently than other developed countries or a lot of other developed countries.

One of the biggest um differences is that we have kind of stopped distinguishing between streets and roads um in North America.

So a street is a place for people, it's a place where business happens, or people are walking, where money is made, um, and a road is a way to get from point A to point B.

Um and when you cross those two, people die.

And so it's like a big deal to have roads that are dedicated to transit and roads that are dedicated to people.

And uh the other thing too is what Chad was talking about is uh one really great tool is curve extensions because when you're on a street, you can get drivers to snap out of that automatic mode without having to you know use extra police force or extra signage which have data to show that neither of those really work that well.

Um whereas the design of the street, if you can narrow it, if you can optically narrow it, um if you can make it feel less like a highway and more like a like a street, um you can naturally slow the speeds of drivers.

So I mean I just wanted to make those two invitations that as we're continuing to plan new modes of transportation in Lehigh that we consider.

Are we putting our streets like where students are walking on the same roads as our major thoroughfares?

Like that's probably not a good idea.

You can think about 2300.

I think there's like three or four schools on that huge thoroughfare now.

I feel like that's not the last time a student is gonna be hit traveling to school.

Um same thing with Main Street.

Main Street is a major thoroughfare.

That's where all of this commerce and business is happening.

That's not the last time somebody's gonna be hit.

Um to uh to distinguish between roads and streets and to add curb extensions.

Thank you.

Thanks, Leah.

Any other public comment?

Okay, we'll close the public comment.

Okay, we'll go to a consent agenda.

Uh first 4.1, the approval of purchase orders.

Is there any question on those Mr.

Mayor?

I move that we uh approve the consent agenda as presented.

I'll second it.

Any comments on the motion?

All in favor, say aye.

Aye, aye.

Any against it?

Okay.

Okay, so now we go to five uh number five consideration of appropriate.

That's like my voice just came back.

That's great.

Consideration of approval of the 2026 City Council meeting schedule.

You have that schedule.

Um I know it's been given to you.

I will open that up uh for discussion.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

Um I I think I I do like the the version of our that we discussed last week um to hold more work sessions.

I think this will be a busy year.

Um I think that allows under the open meetings act for us to do some more collaboration.

Obviously, we need to take in consideration all of us up here as far as the work sessions go, uh so that it works best.

So I I would say based on uh council member Lockhart's feedback last week, um uh and I want to hear her thoughts.

I haven't had a chance to talk to her directly yet today, but um if we were uh you know, with school schedules, everything else, if we were still able to hold a work session on the second and fourth Thursday of the month if if we were to move that earlier, potentially at you know, 11 30 or noon or something if and and we stuck to about a two-hour schedule.

Would that be more accommodating uh Emily?

Just interested to hear your thoughts.

Mr.

Mayor, may I?

Um I appreciate the question.

I can vote for what's in front of me today um with the TBD on the work sessions and on a case-by-case basis.

I'm doing what we can.

Um I I want to be accommodating, you know, as much as possible.

I think we're all a team player here.

Um, but what's before me today I can vote for.

Okay, I I think personally I think I'd like to add um the standing work sessions, ideally the second and fourth Thursday.

And if we do have to cancel them, that's that's fine.

We can always cancel um or at a minimum um of at least you know, maybe the second Thursday of the month having an earlier work session.

Um so that during the motion, I think I would support amending the schedule as presented in this agenda to add um at least one work session.

Um ideally two.

But I'm interested to also hear from the other council members.

Um I would be fine adding one work one or two work sessions to a Thursday afternoon, depending on the time that our schedules allow.

I think it would we all we would all need to agree on it.

Um one thing I do want to discuss is when the budget retreat would be because I think we should settle on that date.

And I looked at all the statistics, and none of us could make all to make one afternoon work.

So let me help you.

That's actually going to come up in the work session at the end.

So that will be discussed.

So we'll stick right now just to the calendar to the to the meeting schedule.

Like who've um contacted me.

I I like how this is presented where the work sessions are to be determined.

Um put a work session on as it is to take it off.

My only thing is public perception if we get down the road and we start canceling a lot of these because we just don't have items to discuss.

I think that's much worse for public procession perception as why we're canceling so many um work sessions rather than just putting them on as needed.

Um Rachel brought up something to me which I really like today, so sorry, still your thunder.

Um she talked about possibly moving the regular session up earlier, starting at 6 o'clock and being able to uh possibly have work session items come after the meeting.

Um I like that idea because I I really agree with her point of that would be fresher when it came to items that we're voting on.

Um and then we also wouldn't be holding back public and applicants on late meetings if we moved our work session items to the end.

Um I spoke with Mayor Chris Carr in Saratoga about theirs today.

They actually start at six as well.

Um so I know I'm kind of like throwing an audible here with a start time that like you guys haven't really had time to think about today, but when Rachel brought that up today, I thought that was a really good idea.

Um because I I do agree that when sometimes we may start this work sessions like we did today at 4 30, and then we don't know how long we're gonna have audience members sitting here if we go break at 6 30 for 30 minutes.

So another possible idea with that that may help with some of the other concerns that were brought up.

Um but then at that time, if the meeting's really late, we could say that we're not gonna have time for these work session items.

Let's let's do a Thursday meeting and do these work session items then, or maybe we don't really have that many work session items to go through this week.

It's gonna be a light week in two weeks, so we'll get through them at the end.

But Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

Yep.

I um I I just I really struggle with the Thursdays because of the com planning commissioners and all that they may have or that staff may have for them.

I'm open to like those TBD work sessions being on Mondays, if if that's better.

Um I know DRC is Wednesdays, I was just trying to think through, but um I really think we need to um respect the the recommending body that that has public hearings and we'll need use of this space um and those things happen on Thursdays.

But I'm open to if staff is in a position where they also think Mondays could work, that works for me.

Can I say something?

Um I would love to hear from staff and openly give your thoughts about it freely.

Um I think if we did it early enough, like a 1 to 2.30 thing or 12 or 12 30 or whatever, I don't know, whatever time you want to say to be done.

And I know some of us have constraints with picking up children or you know, other work things if we can if we need to have an end time.

If we can do one, I think a compromise maybe one Thursday afternoon or something.

That's what I that's what I would think might be a good compromise.

I'll I'll speak on behalf of admin and then Kim can speak on behalf of planning.

I don't I don't think it matters much to us other than Wednesdays would be really hard.

I think any other day of the week would be okay.

We're here anyway.

Um our concern was more for you guys and your schedules, but Kim, I don't know if you have anything to do.

No, I I would agree with that, and I I appreciate Wednesdays are definitely busy, and sometimes DRC can spill all the way into like 5 p.m.

hour.

And Thursdays, I think it was early enough in the day so that it didn't conflict with us trying to get ready for planning commission if we had a planning commission that evening.

We could make that work as well.

Yeah.

If we're already here at the office, we can work around what's convenient for you.

I've got strong comment uh feelings on this.

Um I don't like that we are looking at combining the work session with a regular session.

I think a work session needs to be standalone.

I think we need to dedicate our time preparing for a regular session for the agenda items that are coming before us.

And I I one or the other is gonna fall on the wayside.

Um I don't like to be decided meetings.

Uh we all have lives to plan.

We have other meetings to plan.

Um if I know there's a city council meeting that takes priority over other things that I'm invited to attend or other meetings that come up.

Um I I liked your original idea, James, of having two an extra work session a month on a Thursday during the day would be great.

I I just think it needs to be separate, and I actually preser prefer what we have been doing instead of combining them, you know, we having a separate work session the first week of the month.

Um but I'm I was totally open to moving it to another day to have another free week to do our other obligations.

So as far as starting at six o'clock, I kind of have concerns with that too.

I know back in the day when I'd go to school board meetings and they started at six, it was it was hard to get there at six when people are getting off work to get there on time.

And since this is a regular meeting where we have public hearings and public comment, I think we need to make it accessible.

I don't think seven o'clock it's it's later, so it gives people time to get home from work and get to these meetings if they want to come.

It's early enough for you know older folks that they can, you know, if we move up the the heavy public hearing items or the items that the public is interested in commenting on.

If we move those to more the beginning of the agenda, I think that would help a lot.

I think a lot of people would appreciate that.

Um Mondays before the meeting would be difficult too because again, I think I I want that time to prep for the regular council meetings.

So I support, I would support um starting our regular meetings at 7 o'clock, having our pre-council meetings and having our work sessions on another day.

And um it sounds like Thursday is okay with staff.

Um, you know, and that could be any time during the day, as early as people are available or um, you know, as late as we can go without interfering with other meetings.

That's that's kind of where I'm at.

And uh Mr.

Mayor, I think um and I I thank my colleagues for for their input.

I I do think we will use most of our work sessions, um, even if they are scheduled.

And and to support what um Michelle said, I think it's it's hard to add them on last second because we all have family or work obligations that that may prevent us from doing something last second.

Um so I would tend to support uh the proposal plus the second and fourth Thursdays in the early afternoon or earlier, depending on the preference of the council.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

Um it was my understanding that due to some of the council members' conflicts on the first and the third week, due to their work schedule, that we wouldn't be holding work sessions Tuesdays on the first and the thirds.

But what I'm hearing is that to pay no regard to the other council's work schedule, we're gonna put work sessions in the middle of a work day on Thursday afternoons with no regard for that council members' work schedule.

Yet we're not gonna hold work sessions on a normal typical Tuesday on the first and the third week to accommodate that.

All I'm asking is for what's fair and applicable for everyone, so we all have an opportunity to attend.

I appreciate that.

Just so you're aware um council personal law card, I think the elimination of the first Tuesday was so that we were tier two weeks.

So you had an open week, another open week for your other meetings.

So I don't think there was correct.

And I don't I don't know that there was anything malicious there.

So I'm I'm happy to to do the right the 2025 schedule of the first the first week of the month doing a work session and then kind of continue with some of these pre-council work sessions we have we have here.

Um if we treat them kind of like we did today, but if we are doing like a heavy duty thing, going over a master plan of some sort or something like that, I do think it uh maybe on the first Tuesday or some separate time would be the appropriate time for it.

I want to make sure we all make it there.

And if and if it's a no-go for a Thursday afternoon, I mean for me personally, I'd want to be done by 2.30 or 3 on a Thursday afternoon.

I don't know if if commissioner commissioner, if I don't know if counselor lockhart, if you are have like a firm like no, you can't do it, or if there's a certain time, or if you're just like no, I would just if you're if that's a no for you.

Yeah, so um I it's it comes to no shock.

Um we are a part-time council.

It should shock no one, no member of the public or any staff member, any member sitting up here that we all have full-time jobs.

Um and it seems like I'm being put in a position where is the provider for my home.

I you know, you're you're you're asking me to not provide for my family, which I love my commitment to Lehigh, and I'm happy to have conversations that I need to have, but um it's a it's a sacrifice that you're asking me to make that you won't that I'm understanding the others won't make for the first and the third week.

And um I am committed to the residents of Lehigh and I can have conversations um that I need to have, but I'm asking for a professional courtesy to recognize that I am the provider for my home.

Yeah.

Sorry, I don't want you to misinterpret what I'm saying.

I I definitely respect that.

And I just wanted to make sure that your s that your work schedule wasn't flexible with that.

Because like I work evenings, so that's why I'm saying the time constraint for me.

Um so I just wanted to to double check that time constraint that you have as well.

So thanks for clarifying.

Yeah, I I just want to be sensitive to everyone.

I think it's really important that we have uh a time here that can work for everyone, and I know we all have different schedules, so I want to be sensitive to Councilmember Lockhart and also uh you too.

Councilmember Freeman.

Um I thought you had a great idea.

So but uh I I know that it it worked really well to have the the first Tuesday be a work session and to have you know our regular meetings on the second and third.

Um that might I I would be open to that.

I don't know that I mean I'm not a fan of the doing the extra work sessions.

Um the the extra one a month unless it was actually if it was necessary to do so.

Um but just to because I I don't see the the same need, I guess um with how also having these pre-council meetings and the presentations and stuff go there, but that may change like as it is right now.

So it's like that's why I'm I'm open to the fact that we may try something and it we may need to amend it and we may need to change it to to fit better with what work schedules are and also what the needs are.

So Mr.

Mayor I think you know, obviously we we all want to do what's best.

Um we all have work schedules and family commitments as well.

I think uh maybe as a compromise we could try one Thursday, so the the maybe the second Thursday of the month as a work session.

We could leave the fourth Thursday as a as a TBD, just kind of, you know, we can kind of try to keep it open in case something comes up to call a meeting.

Um and maybe just keep the seven o'clock with the pre-council prior to that starting at five thirty.

That's something I I'd be willing to compromise on.

Okay question here, Councilor Harrison.

What do you think about going to the first Tuesday having a work session and then the rest of the schedule as is.

I think again, my my preference, I like the fact that we would have two open weeks for our assignments.

Um we may have additional assignments.

Um I know that city staff uh would appreciate an extra evening with their families as well.

Um so for me, I I think I would much more prefer the second or fourth Thursday.

Question to those who have compliments.

I I have a concern with that.

And when we we've heard from a council member that that doesn't work, the Thursday afternoon doesn't work, but what about an earlier Tuesday?

I don't know what time because typically on on the the work sessions we would start early.

I feel like it might be four that we've like it's all kind of a boring.

In the past we started at four.

Yeah, so if it was a work session starting at four on Tuesdays that was an hour and a half to two hours, would that fit schedules better than the fact of having it Thursday middle of the day?

So are you speaking just to the first Tuesday of the month?

Just the first Tuesday, yeah.

I don't know.

You're talking the first city council or the first week of the month.

First week of the month would be the the work session on Tuesday starting at four.

And then additional work sessions as needed.

Um personally I I I guess it it would be the same as before.

And I would say because of that, we're all the everybody meets on the Tuesdays, so usually that's kind of kept as a day knowing that everybody's at City Council.

So I didn't typically have other meetings scheduled on that day because everybody assumes you're gonna be at City Council.

Um where I often will have Thursday ones.

I know we're not talking about Thursday evening, but that's Mayor May Captain.

Yes, please.

Okay, I I'm willing to compromise a little.

I said I didn't want it on Monday because I do spend a lot of time prepping for these meetings when we especially have bigger agendas, but what about Monday?

Um whatever time.

That could even be in the evening.

I mean, that's it their thoughts on that.

I appreciate that.

I can do a Monday evening.

So we're talking about talking about like the second or fourth Monday, right?

Yeah.

I'm I'm I'm okay with that.

We could try it.

Um it and I will just tell you from my experience because I research everything that was on our agenda.

It will be it might be difficult, but um, you know, if we get more of the information sooner, that might help.

Um it's just um a lot of things come up last minute and you tend to get people calling you last minute and it might be difficult, but I think it it might accommodate everybody that way.

Sorry.

Go ahead.

I I was just gonna say, would that be something we could do at like a 4 p.m.

or would we want to I'm just thinking I guess there's no reason during a work session when there's no public comment to do it at 7 p.m.

we could potentially do it at 4 p.m.

but I want to make sure it's good with Yeah, I I come from West Jordan, so um that that's where I work.

And so I c I got here at 4 29 today due to traffic, right?

So if 4 30 would be appreciated.

And I and I really appreciate the the olive branch here.

Thank you.

And that might be a good change because typically our work sessions start at four, so different day, a little later, that might help everybody.

I don't know.

I would I'm out of your I just okay, sorry, that's a new idea.

So I would rather just stay with the work sessions before the council at four or whatever, just because I if I'm going to work, I'm going at four, so it's just another night.

So let me let me point something out.

So typically we start work sessions at four.

Today we started at 4 30.

We kind of crammed some things that would typically be in a work session in our pre-council meeting, right?

Um we didn't have nearly enough time to cover them all.

So if you're doing work session pre-council and a regular session, you're probably gonna have to start before four.

So uh you know, you can try to cram it all in, but I don't want to do a disservice to our public.

So that would still open up a week, right?

So if we get the the second Monday, the second Tuesday, and the fourth Tuesday.

The work session starts at 4 30.

I believe it needs to be done by 6 30.

Because I think Monday nights are the guaranteed nights that our staff should be home.

But well, Mayor, I was just gonna throw out we can we can help mitigate that too by if we know there's time constraints that we can thin the agenda out and push things out a little bit if we need to depending on what's on there.

Yeah, keep the agenda time under control.

Yeah, I I would just say too, work sessions are very different.

I mean, look at the work session tonight.

I wasn't I didn't have any items for this.

I wasn't prepping on it.

I didn't have, you know, other than the two possible resolutions.

Whereas, you know, your council meetings, you typically are doing a lot of prep before.

So I guess that's why I've been okay with work sessions being same day.

Um so it it doesn't really matter to me because I don't think it's gonna impact the amount of um prep that needs to be done unless it's something that I myself bring into the work session, then I think that changes it.

I yeah, uh we have a new council and a new mayor, and I'm my hope, and I think I mentioned this last time is that our work sessions will be more proactive, that we'll have the council inputting more bringing ideas forward more.

Um, more discussion.

So I you know, and hopefully this is one thing I noticed too is that if we get information about a work session before the work session, we can come prepared to ask questions questions as well.

Um so it it depends what the body's vision of work sessions will be going forward.

Is it gonna be staff presenting to us and we just listen kind of thing?

Are we actually gonna are we going to be more engaged?

And so that, you know, I I would prefer the latter, but you know, it's up to the body, I guess.

I've been here a whole week.

Just saying I'm not that new anymore.

Okay, so Emily uh counselor Lockhart.

Can you get here at four o'clock?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yep.

Are we seeing are we is that an idea proposed to have two Monday evenings in addition to two Tuesday evenings?

Be one.

Is that what we're talking about?

I mean, I I think I'm open to that.

I'm fine with it on the second and fourth Mondays if we'd like to do that.

Um or we can start with with one of those Mondays and then have kind of a sturdy pre-council work session on the on the regular council Tuesdays.

Mayor, may I staff a question?

Yes.

Tisha, is it would you prefer, sorry?

Um I'm thinking maybe doing one Monday work session and then adding others if we need them, or is it better to just have them in council?

Uh like if we have two Mondays set aside for a work session.

Yeah, um, I think it's I you know what I don't it doesn't matter to me.

It really doesn't.

It's the same.

Okay.

I I would prefer to start with one.

Yeah, too.

So I that would be my my vote on that.

And and maybe we just all have it that we know.

Keep your your uh what are we talking about?

Fourth Monday?

No.

Yeah.

Fourth Monday, just keep that is knowing that we may schedule a meeting, but at least we don't have it out there to the public to plan for.

So we might know that first or second Monday if we need to have another one that month.

You know, if we don't get through it all or something.

So is that four o'clock for both Tuesdays and Mondays?

No.

Just Monday.

And then 4 30 for Tuesdays.

Do we want to just make it consistent and do four so we never get confused?

What typically what has happened is the the Tuesday meeting may change depending on what we have.

If we have a lot of presentations or you know, like when the park tax grant comes in, we need a lot of time for that.

So maybe it starts at 4 30.

Other weeks maybe it's 5 30.

Uh the Tuesday meeting will move.

Go ahead.

All right.

Do you post the times on our schedule for the pre-council meeting for the annual schedule?

Um I put a general schedule out, so I would if I would probably say 5 or 5 30 be the general schedule, but then that can be adjusted for meeting.

I think it's important to keep the seven o'clock time consistent with the regular agenda, but you yeah, there's lots of flexibility with the work session.

Any other comment?

I'll take a motion.

Mr.

Mayor, I move to approve the 2026 City Council meeting schedule with the additional uh second Monday of each month uh work session beginning at 4 p.m.

I second that.

Uh any questions on any questions on the motion?

Yeah, James, I have a question.

So do you want to keep it listed as a work session on before every council meeting?

I think it gives us flexibility if like pre-council slash work session prior to the Tuesday regular sessions.

Any other questions towards the motion made?

Tisha.

Just for clarification then, um, would you prefer that I work with the mayor then to determine when the start time would be for the work session based on the amount of items we have as we're preparing the agenda?

Or do you want kind of like a more of a hard start time and then we can adjust that as needed?

Are we just talking about Mondays?

No, the Tuesday's.

I think Tuesdays it would be great to change according to what the agenda is the mayor thinks because I really hate wasting people's time and I've been an audience member out there and sat there for 45 minutes while there's a break.

Um I want to be respectful of that because if you're involved, you're you're coming and you're you're watching it.

But maybe the a fixed time for work sessions on Monday, I don't know.

Yep, so that's how it is.

So you and I would be fine determining that start time on Tuesdays.

So I have a second in motion, so we'll take a vote, Heather.

Yes.

James?

Yes.

Yes.

Council.

Councilman Stallings.

Yes.

Councilman Locker.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, item number six consideration of resolution 2026-1.

Approving the resolution of intent to annex property for the Kirkcom estates annexation.

Approximately 7.24 acres located at approximately 500 east, 700 south with proposed TH5 zoning.

Is the petitioner here?

You come on up, introduce yourself and Luke McCollum.

I'm with flagship homes.

Just yeah, representing the property owner and petitioning.

So one of those things.

Any questions on this?

Yeah, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I read through the notes in the planning commission on this, and it it looks like there's a future plan to develop, even though it's not relevant necessarily to the annexation, but I'm just curious kind of the vision that flagship homes has for that plot of land.

Um like what I guess what kind of information you want from that council member Harrison.

Yeah, I mean, uh I mean it's gonna be annexed, right?

And that that'll facilitate um you know, utilities and and so forth.

Um just curious on eventually down the road uh what the plan is for that land.

Um there's been no I guess set plan.

We're just working on the annexation that the TH5, so work with the as it comes.

Right.

I think in the annexation, they want to know if we're gonna annex it first before they get too far down that river.

So I think that that just comes from I think Kim maybe in the uh DRC comments is is that that's where I read the eventual development, but I was just curious.

It looks like the general plan has VLDRA.

So anything within that they could essentially go for you could go for something else, but then that's just more complicated.

Any other comments?

I'll take a motion.

I'll make a motion.

Mayor I um move that we approve resolution 2026-01 approving the resolution of intent to an annex property for the Kirkham Estates annexation, approximately 7.2424 acres located approximately 500 east, 700 south with the proposed TH5 zoning and include the DRC comments.

I second that motion.

Okay, any questions on the motion?

So we'll take a vote.

Commission uh Commissioner Nod, Commissioner, Councilman Harrison.

Yes.

Councilwoman Freeman?

Yes.

Councilman Stallings?

Yes.

Councilman Lockhart.

Yes.

Councilman Newell?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Okay, item number seven, consideration of resolution 2026-2, making an assignment to the Utah Lake Authority Governing Board.

Does anybody have any questions on that?

That would be myself that is appointed to the board.

Um I'll take a motion on that.

Okay.

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve consideration of resolution 2026-2, making an assignment to the Utah Lake Authority Governing Board, and which will be Mayor Pauldens.

I'll second that.

Any questions on the motion?

Uh Councilman Freeman.

Yes.

Councilwoman Stollings?

Yes.

Councilman Lockhart?

Yes.

Councilman Newell?

Yes.

Councilman Harrison.

Councilman.

Councilman.

Sorry.

Yes.

You probably remembers the limit.

Yeah, remember.

I'll write myself a note.

I told you I've done this a long time.

Okay, we're going to go back to the um work schedule uh with item 2.7 discussion of establishing a Lehigh Small Business Council.

Um Councilmember Harrison, I'll turn the time over to you on that.

Sure.

Um so this is a kind of an idea.

Um, and I've socialized this with the community and and I think even uh previously Councilman Condy um also uh kind of ideated on this concept.

Um but I would just like the help of of staff and and the advice of my colleagues here on establishing a Lehigh Small Business Council.

And I think the goal of this is to facilitate organized feedback from members of the small business community in Lehigh and being able to present maybe twice a year to the council on different ways that the city can better support small businesses uh if there's red tape or regulations that are are causing heartache.

I think a lot of businesses operate in a silo, and so they may experience something that other businesses are experiencing as well.

And so this council can can help aggregate that type of data.

Um I think if if my fellow council members um are supportive of this, I think we would just have to come up with kind of the structure.

Um, you know, just some ideas for myself.

I think you know, maybe at a maximum 50 employees or under um having a business owner represent that business.

lot of businesses operate in a silo and so they may experience something that other businesses are experiencing as well and so this council can can help aggregate that type of data um I think if if my fellow council members um are supportive of this I think we would just have to come up with kind of the structure um you know just some ideas for myself I think you know maybe f at the at a maximum fifty employees are under um having a business owner represent that business um it can it could be a homeowned business with one person it doesn't really matter but having members of this council uh plus maybe a chair and and vice chair something like that uh but I would really appreciate the feedback I think it'll it'll allow some of the smaller businesses we have massive businesses in Lehigh that are really great for our economy Adobe Texas instruments others um and and so this is just a a way to better uh support those businesses allow them feedback um and I think it will uh get the community excited to participate and and provide us um both the council and the mayor as well as staff on how we can better support um I'd love to hear anybody else's comments of her question yeah I I support having uh you know getting more feedback from small businesses how would we go about creating the small business council do you have idea like you know from a we we're not necessarily putting it in code we're not um you know this isn't like a paid organization like how does this happen who are yes anyone yeah I um have an idea but I'm sure you know staff probably has historical experiences of this um it was also a similar question I had because I love the concept and I think it's needed.

Um I I had the opportunity to go to the small business forum um with council member stallings and our mayor on Friday and I'll just tell you what I saw and maybe this is in line with what you're thinking James but they brought uh business leaders together in a room and then um they divided them out based on industry and had side like um siloed conversations on their industries and then they came back came together and reported on that it was cool to see multiple industries have the opportunity to create that dialogue so one of the thoughts I have is we should definitely um on this council however it's formed we should have multiple industries represented um and and I'm not sure again maybe staff has the better recommendation of the how but I would just want to make sure that it's a diverse group with like manufacturing retail food you know all those things right like we should include everybody I guess Mr.

just to add to that Mr.

Mayor um uh and Emily I think that's a great idea I think I guess it's you know like any other commission or board that we'd create they'd be subject to our favorite law open meetings act and um and in my opinion I don't think it should be paid or compensated.

I think this is something that businesses will proactively want to participate in.

But I think around the bylaws you know my question which may be similar to um Rachel's is do we create those uh do we create the the council first and then they can kind of create their bylaws and it comes before for approval.

I'm just inter interested to hear staff's opinion.

To be honest I've never dealt with one of these before we've always just worked with chambers of commerce so yeah we can definitely research it and look into it and see which ones have been successful and how they're set up and so that I understand what you're asking for.

You're asking for like a advisory board just to give feedback to the council.

Exactly yeah and they they can advise us but also in the meantime let's say if we decide on maybe twice per year presenting to the council um in a meeting in an open council meeting you know they obviously can meet monthly or however they determine on you know whether it's by industry or if it's as an entire council um so it's just working through the minutia and the details of that.

Do we want to make it distinct from the Chamber of Commerce or not get the same benefit from the chamber I I think the chamber's great I think it's more regional in nature um and I think the goal for this is specifically for them within the Lehigh city boundaries to provide feedback on how government and business work together which is a little bit different from the chamber which is has a much more broad authority and and mandate.

I I think something that I've discovered talking to people through the campaign season over however many months was that a lot of small businesses were saying this might work for a large business but for me this is really prohibitive this is really difficult for to bring in small businesses or l local and um and I think the chamber provides a a good overarching view of of certain facets of business but to s have the kind of more small business owners who'll give us the loots on the ground perspective and tell us what's what about our code um helps what maybe doesn't maybe something from a state level but you know some of those things I think could be helpful from with this council.

Yeah yes go ahead sorry um I I really like this idea and we we do have a number of committees that are volunteer you know the parts committee or um even uh some are mandated by state law like the historical historic preservation committee um typically we have staff members that are involved too and a council liaison but it's volunteers so you might want to think if does this fit under with Marlin with economic development or sorry Kim community development I know you need more stuff to do you know um but yeah so it but I like this idea and I like that it's small businesses that you know the chamber has to use sometimes it might be cost prohibitive or something.

But I I would love feedback like um our downtown revitalization plan.

I you know I got to talk to some of the business owners on Main Street.

I would love to have more of that you know their input and feedback on on things like that or um looking at what we can do in our code to I know there was concerns about um home occupation business license thing that it's not very clear or something and so what can we do to make it easier for them or more clear or so I think this could be really useful to get um resident input.

So Jason is this something we take to Marlin and have him do some research for us.

We'll have Marlon chase it down and figure out you know what the successful boards look like and how they're set up and what their bylaws look like and yeah we're not shy about copying what works so and no you and Mr Mayor I think you know I think Michelle you mentioned it with even having a council liaison obviously I'd love to do that unless anybody else would would like to do that.

But but having having that feedback and working with Marlin andor Kim and those who are most closely connected to the small business community in Lehigh from a staff perspective.

But I think as far as how we go about it, I think it's just kind of coming up with that broad concept down to maybe some you know a resolution forming it and then determining bylaws and then eventually we can vote on it uh later this month or early in February on establishing it and then we can of course um announce it to the public yeah I I was just gonna add too I would like to see this more expansive than just a committee that gives recommendations.

I would like to see especially if you have somebody like Marlin involved how we're helping them what tools are we able to give them how are we gonna you know help them be more profitable.

I know like the size up conference um that was in conjunction with the chamber but it was different because it wasn't like you know a paid thing is like everybody could come and do it.

So I would love that too that and I think that they as a committee would probably be able to help a lot with as far as tools but I'd I'd love to see that where it's also ways that they're building and helping supporting other small businesses maybe things they can develop things that say this is what works this is what's been really successful in Lehigh this is you know and then maybe that's gonna help us with these revitalization areas that we can promote and assist small businesses and and the committee can then make recommendations on maybe there are policies and things that we can do as a city itself to help support and build up more and encourage and so I would I would love to to take this and and expand it in a way and I totally agree with you know the chamber has a great place and I think there's a lot of ways the chamber can partner with us on this too.

We'll start with my thank you.

Okay item 2.8 City Council and planning commission procedures for resignations and vacancies.

So we just went through this we didn't the uh city did and I think there's some things to be learned there.

Um Mr.

Mayor if I may see as I was um obviously a part of this process um we heard earlier that items can get on the agenda one of two ways if it was it you who put it on or if it wasn't council members and I'd like to know which council members put this on the agenda it was me.

I I want to make sure that we go over the code of city council resignation and I just put planning commission on there too since those are the ones that people resign from more than the other and who is the second so I was on the email at least when we presented it to to Mayor Bins.

But just so for some context on this it's it's not so much you know obviously there's no malintent or or or anything.

I think um what was done it's it's it's done and I'm I'm happy about it.

But some concerns were raised both my through my own research as well as other residents who just look through our our code and the bylaws on planning commission and city council vacancies and things were done that didn't necessarily meet that code so I'd like to just ask staff questions not to look backwards but just to you know vacancies are a big deal.

So I'd like to just ask staff questions, not to look backwards, but just to, you know, vacancies are a big deal.

Um so down the road, you know, if for whatever reason one of us needed to resign, we'd know kind of exactly what steps to take, and then the remaining members would know kind of what to expect.

Because I I'd I get the very strong feeling that maybe that wasn't the case in December with two vacancies.

Um of course, you know, former council member Albrecht and and Emily as well, they they did what they thought they were supposed to do.

They did everything they should.

Um but I just want to make sure from the city's perspective that we provide the advice um needed.

So I'm happy to go through a couple of those.

I guess the questions I have if if Mayor Benz, you're up for it.

And I just want to explain my reason for putting it on is there have been rumors, questions out there by the public, and I want complete transparency on this.

I think that is a good thing for our us all to have going forward.

Like, you know, starting January 5th, whenever we took office, or just so that people know we've looked at this, this is we're all transparent, we're all on the same page.

You know, the rumors can stop.

So Ryan, are you can you talk to this a little bit on the procedures and how that happens?

Which one?

Let's talk about resignations of council first.

Yeah, I mean I didn't know what it was on for, so I haven't looked at the statute to be ready for your questions.

Um but basically the the city council resignation and filling appointment to fill the vacancy is completely controlled by state law.

We don't have anything in our own code that talks about a city council how they resign or how that is filled.

So you know, I mean we Tisha and I started looking at this back in like August when there was the potential for a then sitting city council member to become the mayor, and so we're working through who gets to vote on what and when, and so yeah, uh so I don't know what your specific questions are other than.

And I don't know if I'll be able to answer them without some research because I didn't know what you were gonna talk about tonight.

Yeah, and my apologies.

Um it it did come on late.

Um so I I guess with the the council vacancy in state code, it's in 20A-1-510.

Um it says before acting to fill the vacancy, the municipal legislative body um shall immediately notify the municipal recorder or clerk, give public notice of vacancy uh at least 14 days before uh the day on which the municipal legislative body meets to fill the vacancy.

Um so I I guess my question is around uh my understanding, and I'll have to rely on Michelle and Heather because they were the only ones um actually in the council when this happened, um, is that the person resigning would have to submit their resignation um to the entire legislative body.

And in the state code, the executive body is the mayor, legislative body is the entire council.

Um and then when they determine that there's a a vacancy, then they move forward with the filling of that vacancy.

Uh my understanding was with the the resignation letter simply went to the mayor, the mayor forwarded it on.

Um, but there were no decisions made.

It wasn't a legislative body issue, it was simply one person, the mayor, making the decision about the vacancy and the procedures.

Um similar with the planning commission, I believe the in the bylaws itself uh that were adopted, readopted on February 11th, 2025, in section Article 2, Section 2.1, it says members proposing to resign shall give reasonable written notice of such intent to the city council, planning commission and the mayor, and make the date of resignation effective in such a manner as to allow time for appointment of replacements.

Again, my understanding was um, and I mean you're here, so you can clarify, but um that it didn't go to all of those, the entire planning commission, the entire council and the mayor.

So my question is if if this were to happen again first, you know, if it happened that way, it happened that way.

But I just want to know if it's in the bylaws, if it's in state code.

Um I just want to make sure that as a city that we're following that to the to the letter.

Well, and I guess I have a question if it happened or not, but if it didn't, does it matter?

What what do you do if it doesn't?

My legal opinion.

Yeah.

Of course it matters is the question is the remedy.

So a lot of times there will be I'll speak generally first, technical violations of a statute.

Um but a lot of it depends a lot of what can be done about a technical violation depends on the timing.

So like take take an election law, for example.

Somebody might point to irregularities in voting or noticing or what the ballot was put together.

But if those don't come up until after the election is over, I don't know of a higher bar in the law to try to get over than overturning the results of an election based on a technical violation.

So it it's in the law it's called a harmless errors.

Like, yeah, you missed something, but therefore what, right?

So like maybe we can use the example of Paige's resignation.

You know, it went to the mayor, the mayor sent it out to the rest of the council.

Technically, maybe she was supposed to send it out to all of the council at the same time.

But it's kind of like, well, was the purpose of the statute fulfilled?

You know, we'll do it better next time.

We'd never we'd never done been through this before.

And it's also difficult if a council member or somebody like that just kind of does it without consulting with us on whether that was the whether it fulfilled the statute or not.

Um but yeah, that's kind of the short answer is a technical violation is normally not enough to overturn something as long as the purpose of the statute was fulfilled.

So notice may not have been given the right way, but did at le did the legislative body at least get notice.

So that's the kind of things that I I would analyze as to whether, again, ultimately standing in front of a judge, if the judge is gonna be like, oh no, that's serious enough that I'm gonna order, you know, the vacation of the appointment, and that technically that person's now still on the council.

And I mean, that's undoing a lot of things that way.

Um I mean, I don't know, I don't know how to get a better answer than that, other than yeah, having learned now maybe some things that could have gone better and been in more technical compliance.

Well, sure we're s we will certainly do our best to make sure that happens.

But I don't know that it was a great cause for concern as as if looking at through the lens of whether it was potentially over could be overturned because of those technical violations.

Okay.

Mayor might make some comments.

So I get that, you know, it's done and maybe not the right way.

Um I uh I think a lot of times the process is important, so I hope going forward be thoughtful.

I mean I they I didn't know about the planning commission res resignation until the night of.

Um so that was kind of a surprise.

And I guess very deep in the bylaws, there's things, the procedural things, so you know, things we never read.

We may want to in the future, I guess.

My my big concern was the night of filling the vacancy that um the previous council member created, the mayor went through and I I spent a lot of time reading the resumes.

I came up with questions and I interviewed those the applicants, and I spent a lot of time doing that.

And then when it came time for a vote, the vote ended after three members voted, and then a majority was achieved.

And I and Councilmember Condi was and myself were never allowed to even vote.

And um I was very caught off guard.

Um, gave my opinion anyway, but you know, looking in in state law, it does talk about a vote of the legislative body.

I'm fully a member of the legislative body.

And in the resolution we passed, it um it says that each council member shall state his or her vote on record.

And to me, having been a dissenting vote quite often, those dissenting votes are powerful.

You know, even the Supreme Court gets you know opportunity to write a dissenting opinion.

Um it's you know, I don't know what you could do except go back and okay, let's retake the vote again, it's not gonna change anything.

Um, you know, so again, there was the recourse that you know it it is what it is, and that's that's fine.

I'm okay with that.

If I can jump in, I'll take a little bit of responsibility for that one.

Well, the Tisha and I had a conversation with them.

If I'd have known he was gonna do that too, I would have been prepared to to stop him from doing that.

So we had a conversation that basically went as we were talking through the resolution and the procedures that you'd agreed on before.

I don't remember my exact words, but it was it was basically in our minds we were talking about the successive rounds.

So I said in the first round, when if if somebody gets three votes, you're done.

Well, obviously he took that as meaning once we have three votes, we're done.

And so I'm sitting there and he says, okay, we've got three, and I was kind of like uh uh and I should I mean again if I had it to do over again I'd speak up and say, no, let's let everybody vote.

Yeah.

But it was kind of like this really quick analysis like, well, if we've got three, you know, it's can this be undone because even if we do it again, it's gonna so I'll take the blame for that one because he took what I said differently than what I intended.

I meant the rounds are done, and he took it very literal to mean the voting is done, and so I was like, oh yeah, I wish that would gone.

I wish that would have gone differently.

I voted for this resolution and I had to go back and look at it because I'm just like that didn't seem right.

So I get it, I get it.

They caught me so off guard because I didn't know he'd interpret it what I had said that way that it's kinda like what do I do now?

So yeah, that I'll take that one.

So it I sorry, I was just gonna say I felt really bad about that too.

I even kind of leaned over and said like they all should vote and I got shot down.

So I would I it was a total error.

I th I felt like every you and Chris should have had a vote.

So I and it I'm glad you had a moment to speak and say, but I did feel that that wasn't right, and what do you do when it's like your vote?

And it wouldn't change.

And I think the the point of this conversation is to just recognize that the process does matter, so we just need to be thoughtful and careful, I guess, going forward.

Is that Mayor Vince, if I may.

Yes.

Um I'm gonna speak plainly, and this will be the last time I speak on this issue.

It is no surprise that the two of you were ticketed during the election, and it is no surprise because you made your vote apparently clear at the vacancy that you did not support me.

I am absolutely disgusted at the fact that you have politicized this meeting tonight.

I have asked multiple times to put it down.

Let's move forward on the behalf of the people of Lehigh.

They expect us to work together.

They expect us to put it down, come together and work together.

I have committed to doing that with you.

Every single one of you sitting up here, and I sincerely mean it.

I have done everything I can to tell you, both in my loss when I offered my helping hand to you and wanted you to do well, and after I was appointed to fulfill the vacancy, I have extended a helping hand, and I have tried.

What has happened here is a slap in the face to the residents of Lehigh.

This is not a moment for politics.

We need to come together and do the good work for the people of Lehigh.

And that's the last I'll say on it.

If I may, Mayor.

Um just to make a comment, is that okay?

Yeah.

So the the reason why I bring this up is because to be honest, it wouldn't change the election.

I would have voted, I mean, if if we had to do it all over again, I would have voted for Emily Lockhart.

I think she's capable.

Um she came in a very close third when I committed even before the election results that I would vote for in a vacancy for the third place candidate for um because it's so close to election, the voters have spoken.

I think that's respectful to the voters.

So I'm sorry, Emily, you're taking this personally, it's not personal.

For me, it's about the residents and the rule of law.

And if we have rules, if we have bylaws, we should follow them.

Again, I would have still voted for you.

Um this is about how our procedures are in place.

If there's a code, if there's a bylaw, we should follow it.

And even Ryan himself admitted, like, yeah, there's things we could have done better, and that's all this conversation is about.

Because if the people lose confidence in their legislative body because we skip process or rule, then we lose legitimacy.

And it's not about any one person, it's not about you, Emily.

This is about whether we follow the code or not.

And to me, that's that's more important than any individual up here, and it always will be.

Yeah, and if I can make a comment, Mayor.

Yeah.

So again, I feel like transparency is so key here, and one of the reasons I brought it up is because I want everyone to know that that Emily Locker has a legitimate spot on this city council, and that it wouldn't change the outcome.

Uh, you know, even if the procedure wasn't followed exactly correctly, and I want that to be clear because I've had a lot of comments.

Um publicly, privately, you know, social media, whatever about that.

And so I just want to make sure we have we've consulted legal.

We've had a discussion about it.

We we all are in support of of Emily Lockhart being here on the council.

And I and I do want us to come together, and I think it's really important that we recognize that publicly, and that we we recognize the how the people spoke, and we recognize how the former city council spoke and whether the things were the code was followed exactly the intent and the outcome would be the same.

So that's that was my sorry mayor, also comment.

Go ahead.

Yes, I I didn't ask for this to be on the agenda.

I didn't know it was going to be on the agenda, but I do appreciate that it's it's being cleared up because I have had residents reach out to me saying, Oh, it wasn't done right, they the letter wasn't sent to everybody or whatever, you know.

But I think this is a good thing to go through to clear that up and just say that you are appointed, you are you have a rightful place on the council.

And and I'm I'm glad we're doing this in a public meeting, and I uh I understand that it it you might take this the wrong way, Emily.

Um I know I've been there.

Um but I think it's good to recognize, and I I think we all are that you are here and you're part of the council, and even if it wasn't done to the letter of the law and mistakes were made, you have a legitimate spot in the council.

So I almost see this more as a moment to show our support for you and clear the air for with some of the concerns some of residents have brought up.

So um I I hope you can look at it that way.

Thanks.

Heather, I'll give you one last if you Emily, I'm excited you're here.

I think you're a fighter and you've shown that tonight, and I think that's what we need more of.

Um I saw after your appointment was a unifying of Lehigh from very diverse and very uh different opinion opinions of people who came together who are very supportive saying that it should have been you.

So I thought that that right there just paralleled what had happened with the election and how close that election was.

Um and I thought that was pretty amazing because it was from these sides that had been going head to head.

Um and during the election, it was almost like this healing of like, hey, we we got through this election, we are Lehi.

We're here to represent.

Um we're here to represent everyone.

And I I thought that that was pretty amazing to see that reaction on social media because I think this could have been something that was very polarizing.

And so I I'm I'm grateful you're here.

I'm excited to see what we're able to do together.

It's a it's new fun council with lots of fun and cool ideas that we all gotta like, you know, chime in on and whether or not they fly or not.

Like I I'm thinking these we've had two meetings and I've gotten the joint out of both of them.

So it's like learning new things.

And so I'm excited to work with all of you.

And um I we're we're gonna get things wrong, just so you know.

There's gonna be technicalities we're gonna get wrong all the time.

And luckily we have really great staff to pull us up on that.

But um I know we're striving for perfection and we'll never get there.

But I'm glad that we have everybody who's willing to dig in and to make sure we're we're following the law as to the best of our ability as close as we can.

Thank you.

Let me just maybe add my last comment to that is um my jobs to help staff, so we'll we'll make sure that we do our very best to make sure that when things come up we read it, make sure we know what we're doing, we'll move forward on it.

So I appreciate the comments there.

2.9 discussion.

Um I did, I go to the case.

Um discussion on request of the state for equitable trans transportation investment and local flexibility and housing implementation.

Uh I'll speak to this for a second.

Um this is a resolution that's been drafted.

I don't know that anyone's seen it staff-wise, uh, but it's a resolution that's been drafted simply by us at this point in time.

There's no one else.

It's only a resolution.

It's something that we want to want to partner with our neighbors uh in going to the state of Utah to uh let them know of the growth that we've experienced and the lack of I hate to use the word lack of or the um the lateness starting us to some of the um infrastructure that should have come with that growth.

And so I know a letter has been just written, nothing's been done with it to this point.

Um it's a resolution that we're looking at to potentially uh take to the state.

I would offer my only opinion is that I don't think we do it alone.

I think we do it with our neighbors uh in showing the state that we're here, we recognize them.

Um we recognize their efforts moving forward.

So I'll take some comments to that resolution.

Hopefully everyone had an opportunity to look at it.

But I'd love to to hear what you think about it.

Yeah, Mr.

Mayor, if I may.

Um so I I put these two on the agenda.

One just for Lehigh City, um, in case other cities maybe don't want to, I'm sure they do, and then one for a multi-city resolution.

And um and and so obviously we're not gonna vote on it tonight or or sign it, but and and this is a rough draft, so please please tear it apart, edit whatever I'd love in input from from Ryan and Craig as well as Jason and staff on this.

Um I I also had the opportunity to talk to Emily and Heather, and they talked they reminded me of the letter that went out after it was announced that the UTA funding was not going to happen for Utah County, and it was very disappointing, and there were other letters, multiple mayors signed at the county was involved.

So I guess my question for this is uh I'm happy to keep it as is.

I'm happy to split it up, maybe have one around the housing mandates, the heavy-handed housing mandates that that fall down upon municip municipalities and expressing a desire to see those uh I guess relaxed or or lessened.

Um there's the transportation funding issue and in in the resolution uh, you know, I'm not going after Davis or Weaver County.

Um I'm happy they have that funding.

Um just showing the discrepancies between our county and Davis and Weber, who have less population than we do.

Uh their economy is smaller, but we are getting far less transportation monies.

Um and and Emily also rightly pointed out, you know, transportation is it's complicated.

There's federal dollars that are that are considered.

Um I'm happy to to talk about combining this as is or splitting it up.

But the other issue that's kind of come about in the last couple months is the state's attempt to um take over zoning authorities in some way and land use.

There's a Senate bill and a house bill that are gonna go before uh the legislature this session.

Um it's very concerning.

I know I've emailed staff about it.

Um I'd love to get maybe a brief from Ryan and Craig at a future work session, maybe at the end of the month if it's possible to talk about these bills.

And um so all that to say, uh I welcome your thoughts on maybe the best strategy to go about this.

I'm sure other cities would be willing to go on board if this is the language we'd like to use, if we'd like to add other additional language, I'd love to hear from my colleagues and staff.

I'll offer a thought.

Um we may want to just coordinate with Cameron Deal at the league.

Um they might be doing something league-wide because again, this preemption from the state as far as local land use authority, it's it's not a new thing, unfortunately.

The the state's been chipping away at our autonomy for the past several years.

So he might have some advice, he might have some strategies that he wants to implement as far as who it should come from, how it should be worded, things like that.

So we could maybe send it to him and have him get his eyes on it.

Yeah, I one thing I I would want to do with it is uh we don't really have anything to offer.

We're they're they have all the control.

We're at the mercy of the state.

And so I would be concerned with leading out the gate with a resolution that could upset some people.

And especially if there are committees who are they've got um they've got frying pans in the fire right now, things they're doing for us.

Like, I mean, last year we got the the 1.4 billion that isn't included here.

Um it's like I think it's 2.1 billion invested over the next decade um in Utah County.

So I just want to make sure we have everything really crossed here.

Um I think it would be far more impactful if this was it went to Mag.

You had the mayors on board, you got you had everybody on board with it, and then also with the league to make sure that we don't put something out there that then they just kind of scoff at, or you know, worse, then they they don't want to work with this.

I would love to have you working with legislators and like go and see what what are they doing, what's their plan when it comes to housing, go and talk with Steve Walder, because I think that really was effective when Saratoga Springs did it.

They took that um map that um you've seen too with all the entitlements and being able to show the state like, hey, we've got a lot of housing that it's entitled.

That's not the problem.

Problem is we don't have the infrastructure.

And so that's what's really slowing it down.

So I think having you get in there and work with the legislators, see what they're seeing, and and then you'd be able to say, okay, this is what they're they're working on, but this is really what's gonna be most effective for us as a city, and then I think it would be really important to have it be joint city, not just from Lehigh.

I don't I don't think they're gonna look at something coming from us and and think it's gonna be anything.

It's like, well, Lehigh just did a resolution to name a road.

That's basically what they're gonna like look at that as.

But when you start to unify everybody behind that, I think that's when your voice is gonna have power.

Mr.

Mayor, if I may, I noticed in this resolution um that the 1.4 billion dollars granted to um the northwest part of Utah County was not included in this.

Um and we may want to like just for context and recognizing um that 1.4 billion was an out of the norm, incredibly rare piece of funding that we got due to the successful efforts of the staff in this room, the staff across all the cities in the region.

It was um all the legislators and elected officials, and and frankly, what had to happen in order for us to get 1.4 billion dollars in funding is everyone else in the state had to give up something.

We are required to balance our budget.

So they literally said we love Northwestern Utah County enough to give up for our people so that they can get what they need for theirs.

So the tone of the message and what we're saying, really we sh we should have nothing but gratitude and and and solution first, and how can we work with you and do more?

Because what we just got from them was rare, and um and it the entire state saw our need and came to the table.

So I I think this is a great starting point.

I would love to um be involved in conversations and help with drafts.

Um I love the idea of having separate ones, one for housing and one for transportation.

Transportation funding is very complicated and um would require maybe some more nuances, and I don't want the housing piece to get lost in the transportation because the housing, the zoning, that's very important to us in Lehigh.

Um but I I'm I'm there on sentiment and effort and and I think this is a starting point, but there are just pieces to it that um need to be considered before we send it off.

Um I would I love the idea.

Um I love other recent resolutions that have come out also.

Um I would suggest maybe including all the station area plans that Lehigh has done.

I think we've done more than any other city.

Um so we we went through the process, even there's no fi you know, there's no existing um high capacity transit there, but we we put the plans in place.

We we're putting some of the zoning in place without the transit, fortunately, in my opinion, but it's there.

So you know, we are stepping up, so I think that should be included.

But I do have a question for staff.

Did so catch me up to speed.

North Utah County got 1.4 billion dollars, and does that include federal the federal funds that we got?

That's Both funds.

Yeah, I don't think so.

North Utah County got 1.4 billion dollars.

Yeah, it was Mountain View Corridor, 2100 North, Pioneer Flex Lanes.

It was in May of 2024, they did the big announcement.

Um and things that have been planned, so not future.

No, it's it's it's how we got Mountain View Corridor to happen so quickly, and it was two months early.

2100 or 100%.

23 north will come.

Things that are in plans now that they're working on, that's what the money goes for.

So it's not any of the the new things that were drone.

Okay, but no, just accelerated the timeline.

Yeah.

It took what was supposed to happen in 2030s and made it happen in 2025 because everyone else in the state gave up something.

Yeah, and I would Mr.

Mayor just say like you know, move it up from 2030 to happen in 2025 that probably should have been done in 2020.

Um and again, like you know, Mayor Johnson was nice enough to to invite me in and show some of the studies that I don't I don't think are available to the general public.

And it shows a lot of our roads failing as soon as we finish them almost because it takes so long to finish them.

And when you when I drive up to my in-laws up in Weeber County, I mean it used to be I-15 only.

Now you have I-89, which is basically a freeway.

You have the West, is it the West Davis?

West Davis Corridor.

I mean, so many great options.

And I'm I'm I really am happy for for them up there.

Um but I I think with Heather and Emily that we we don't want to be hostile, we don't want to be untactful in how we approach this, but I think in some ways some of the statements from state leaders have been very untactful toward the cities and our um authority over land use and and zoning.

Um and we are struggling.

And I think just Eagle Mountain, Saratoga, Lehigh and American Fork alone, um we need things today.

Uh and I'm worried that if we don't push harder, if we don't get the public involved and make these resolutions public as well.

It you know, there's there's the soft diplomatic pressure that we absolutely should pursue.

And then there's um the public, the PR um route we can go as well.

And I think I think we do need a push back um and and we do need to kind of stand up for cities' rights as well as the funding that we need here in Lehigh, because um, you know, night I'm excited about 1900 South.

Hopefully you can get that built right the first time, five lanes.

That'll be enormous, as well as that north uh I-15 to Redwood connector, however that looks, whatever route we determine.

Um I I just think we need that fast tracked much, much quicker than 2035 or whatever.

Um just something, you know, that along with this is we we're trying to, you know, we did the ULCT um appointees or whatever you want to call it tonight, where you have relationships with our legislators to try to make this happen.

But I would you know, maybe something in the future to consider would be to have our legislators come meet with us and kind of do a little review prior to the legislative session starting, that we can kind of have this conversation with them face to face, even about some of our needs.

Um I know some other cities do that, and it it might not be the worst idea.

Yeah, love that idea.

We we have tried to reach out to them in the past.

Um and and some of them are great about coming.

Um are less great.

But what really helps is if we can start helping you guys develop those personal relationships where if you shoot them a text message that they'll respond to you back personally.

Um so that that's one of our goals is to try and get you guys to have that first name basis relationship.

Sorry, and I think that's where it it's helpful when if we gather coalition of cities who have these concerns because our one or two representatives might not necessarily make a difference, right?

Um, you know, the upper whoever we have a relationship with that one or two votes might not matter.

So but um I know on so many of these things that there's the concern, you know, especially preemption about the housing and density and all that kind of stuff, or taking over controls.

They um I don't know if any of you listened to the meeting yesterday, but they're going after property tax now, um and probably don't understand how that works on a city level.

Um and the issue there was that you know the state has no skin of that game, they don't get any money from property tax.

And um I I think I like the idea of resolutions, but it it also has to be combined with education and a discussion from a lot of cities and you know, a lot of them are doing that.

We just I think we just need to be more coordinated going forward.

Yeah, and I'll just add Mr.

Mayor, I think there is some timeliness to this as well.

I mean, obvious just this is our second week, so it's not like we could have started before now.

But it would be great if we could um come to a consensus on how best to move forward on a resolution before it gets too far into the session, even if it's a couple weeks in, that's fine.

But I I just don't want to wait until after mid-February when decisions are already being made.

Any other comments, Heather?

You good?

I mean, ideally, if we could reach out to Representative Christofferson, he's the chair of the um transportation committee.

Um but we do have some representatives who are over our area with Lehigh.

I think forming those connections, that's that's gonna be the most key thing, even more important than doing a resolution from Lehigh is your relationships with them and having it be on the basis of where they're letting you know what the inside scoop is, what's going on, and so I think um what we can do more as individual council members to form those relationships that we feel like okay, I can I can reach out to that member and say this.

I know Senator Baldry, when she was here the other night, made it very clear.

She would love to come present.

She anything that comes up to you know, text her, let her know that she's gonna be on it.

And so I thought that was great.

I love having uh somebody who is that way.

Um Senator Brammer is up for election, and he's been really making the rounds.

So I think you know, he represents East Lehigh.

We can bring him into the fold too, and he's been great on other stuff as well.

So um, but yeah, that's why I think that that would be my advice.

I think uh, and then the more we can do to build consensus and coalition with more cities to get behind it, then I think that's gonna give us a lot more sway.

Yeah, and Mr.

Mayor, if I may, and uh said with um love and kindness for you up at MAG.

So the the efforts that you make and the coalitions you build at MAG um will determine a lot of the prioritization funding.

And you have my full support.

Um and I stand behind you and all the efforts you make on behalf of Lehigh in the region.

Those priorities that get determined at MAG or the the MPO created by the federal government, regulated by the federal government, those will go to what the Utah Transportation Commission decides to prioritize.

And so those recommendations that our mayor can collaborate with all the other mayors in the county to come up with is what will ultimately determine what we get.

And the 1.4 billion was a rare out of the norm side track from that process.

So we're not gonna get it again.

Um but yeah, Mr.

Mayor, that I I fully support you and all that you do to further our needs uh or the solutions for our needs in that capacity.

Great, thanks.

Um Jason, maybe what we'll do is we'll talk to Cameron about that.

Um we'll get back to you then on the resolution movement resolution forward and talking about that.

Okay, item number three.

We already did uh the mayor and the city council discuss anyone have any questions before our regular session.

No, good.

The budget, the budget meeting.

So Jason, I'll turn some time over to you for the administrative.

So we talked about it a little bit earlier, but um yeah, we had a difficult time finding a day that worked for everyone.

So we we had a compromise position.

Hopefully, you guys think this is a good idea.

We thought probably for this group, because everyone's so new, um a budgeting 101 public finance 101 course would be really good.

And just so happens we have a BYU professor that works for us.

Well, a few of them, but one is our finance director.

Um so he has that kind of in his back pocket, right, Dean?

You're ready to go?

I think so.

Okay, go ahead.

I'm just kidding.

Not now.

Not now.

No, it's it's like a half day is kind of what we're thinking.

So we were thinking if we did that half a day and then we did the rest of the budget retreat another half day, we could break it up into maybe two days.

That maybe that's more palatable for this group.

Because we really want everybody to be there for all of it if we can.

So we thought maybe we if we did Dean's part in January, what day is that?

Like the 20th.

I just took my glasses off, so not can't start.

The Thursday or the Tuesday.

Yeah, I mean whatever in that last week of January.

And then we could find another half day in February, or we can even put it on the front of the meeting on the 10th, or we'll take your lead.

Sorry, me.

So I've been trying to build a consensus about different things today.

I've been texting different people, finding out different constraints since I looked and saw none of us could make a half day work.

Um and Heather and I were talking about possibly the 29th of January working if I think you were the only one who wasn't able to be there then, right?

Yeah, so I talked with Jason too, and with this came up with Dean that he would be prepared.

So I'm like, that totally works on the 29th.

Because I think that when we look, I looked at the RSCPs that I think there was a sneak spy or name.

So I just want to mine was genuinely sensitivity to staff and like wanting to be really careful that we didn't move up an entire week.

But then I don't know if uh if we were talking about doing the work sessions on the Monday the second, would that what if we did the budget retreat on the second?

Since we already just kind of somewhat blocked that out for us.

Umother half day to actually do the the other portion of it.

It's groundhog day, so it'll feel like groundhog day.

So I'm gonna do that.

Just kidding.

I think we're I think we're talking about the second Monday, so that would be the ninth.

I would just I would just add that's that's one uh week I will be out of town the the ninth.

Let's see.

Yeah, ninth through the twelfth.

Um something that's been on the calendar for about eight months.

But are you on are you around the second?

Um yes.

Yeah, so any other week, again, it's fine.

It's just those those few days I wouldn't be here.

Or could we do it all day on the 29th?

And just the concern was staff.

It would be hard for us to get the back end of that done.

That's why I was thinking if we could get Dean's ready to go.

Like I said, he's he's ready to go tonight, but we won't get in here that long.

Um I did put the fifth afternoon when it worked for me.

I just have a meeting at four that is kind of important.

But if we do it in the afternoon to get done by four ish, maybe where I can see if I can move that meeting.

What time would you be able to start on the fifth?

Emily, because you had the morning conflict on the fifth.

I can be to City Hall by like 11 30.

Okay.

So 11 30 to 4th.

I mean we can try our best to get everything.

We might not get everything done, but we could save whatever we don't get done for a future work session or something like that.

If you guys are okay with that.

But are you saying half a day on the 29th and then kind of that 11 30 to 3 30 on the fifth?

Is that what I'm hearing?

Yeah.

And I uh I can see if I can get that meeting changed.

Okay.

And then you can go as long as you want.

Okay.

And if you just let us know if if that's good with everyone else.

I mean, if if counselor Lockhart has time constraints in the morning, then we can if we can start at noon or you know, whatever on the fifth.

I don't know what you have.

I think Counciling is gonna make a like well I'll I'll meet in the middle.

We'll figure it out.

So we're we're thinking like 11 30 or it we could start on the fifth, is that what you're saying?

Is that okay?

We can start with a working lunch and just keep going.

So half the day the 29th, half the day the fifth.

And what site does anybody have any conflicts on the 29th for start time?

I mean, I would prefer to start in the afternoons if we can get work done in the morning, but it's up to people what other people think.

I don't have a preference, so whatever works everyone else, I'm fine with.

Do we have a time?

Do we have a time we want to start or end on the 29th?

You guys tell me we'll Dean says he needs four hours.

I don't know that any four hours we probably need to be done like at 5 30.

Okay.

So we'll start at 1 30.

So again, working lunch to 5 30.

Oh, you can start it.

Yeah, we can start.

Why don't we start at noon then?

Then then when we're done, we're done.

Yeah.

Are you okay with that?

Council Member Logart, good.

Thank you.

Can we can we get a recap of those times and dates, please?

12.

Thursday the 29th at noon.

And then Thursday the 5th.

Thursday the 5th at noon.

Wow, we're actually going to line up the times.

It's so easy for us.

No more changes.

Yeah.

Oh, there we go.

No biscuits and bananas for breakfast this lunch.

Yeah.

And I just want to can I comment on something?

I saw some cities doing budgets, multi-day budget.

I mean, we're obviously doing multi-day but multi-half days.

But maybe in the future we can plan ahead a little obviously a little more because we won't be brand new in January.

And um, if we it it might be beneficial to have more than one day.

Um anyways, something to look at, maybe.

Sure.

Again, we're here all the time.

Um just want to be respectful to your schedules, and we understand that you guys have things to do too.

So any uh any other items that need to come before this body tonight.

I think we could only do a closed session, so I'm not up for that.

But I have a council report on my assignment.

I just want to brag on the Hutchings Museum.

They did a presentation on Skinwalker Ranch.

And it's cool.

And actually went with my daughter was interested, and they filled two rooms.

They had to put another screen.

Anyway, I'm just they're doing great.

They have these different things each month, and anyway, just proud of them.

I just want to note that uh a few of us went to the Hutchins Museum in December.

Oh, yeah.

And Mayor Bins was very excited about the jail in the basement.

So we have two extra spots.

Yeah, I know we only have one representing the police department, but you have that extra and and while it's not my assignment or yet, or you know, we don't have an assignment for the police department.

I was able to go on a ride along uh last week at the police department, and it was unbelievable.

It was great.

Um it was about five hours in the patrol vehicle with Corporal Hammer, who's a true professional.

Um got us see a lot of really interesting things, pick his brain.

Um I really really it just reinforced at least my priority and I know the priority of this council to uh ensure that the police department is um fully staffed, uh ready for the future.

We have a lot of growth, so um that that confirmed it.

So thank you.

Um I know you're representing a I'm just looking at you because you're representing the police department.

Um but thank you for your service and your colleagues.

Um I was very excited about that.

And and next will be the maybe a ride along with the fire department.

Um I was able to attend the production by the Lehigh Arts Council in December.

They did a fantastic job.

Um and some and I and yeah, especially with what they have.

I I believe that Pleasant Grove has reached out to us and about the roof and you know, kind of invite a Lehi to come see what they have and and g give us a discounted tickets and things like that.

I know that they were talking about uh some of them someone had wanted to come present tonight, but they weren't able to make it.

So um yeah.

Just wanted to make people aware of that.

Mr.

Mayor, I um recognize that I don't have an assignment for me personally.

I know those are getting reassigned, but I did take on Paige's Parks assignment and seeing in this weird space where maybe it was mine, maybe it wasn't.

I wasn't quite sure.

But um, I went to it.

It was productive.

Actual actually, Rachel um joined the meeting.

Wait.

Um yeah, it is all good though.

Um they have some they have an innovative idea that um I'm learning more from them.

Um whoever gets that assignment, happy you know, to share with them, or if it's me, I don't know, but whatever happens, they've got an idea, and I um look forward to working with the parks department and them to see if we can do something with it.

So thank you.

Yeah, sure.

Uh uh I wasn't able to attend the library board meeting.

Thank you for stepping in and doing that.

Um my sons are performing this week.

The coming that was the time a week ago is last night.

Um, but uh they did a bookmark contest with our schools recently and picked uh winners for um four different grade levels.

There's going to be bookmarks that are available at each of the desks in the the new library um that will have those designs and they were fantastic.

I'm like, I'm like, there's no way a third grader did this, but they were so cute.

So I'm excited to have those.

Um and then uh with Lehigh Arts Board, uh last meeting was really productive, went over their budget, the success over the past season.

Um something else that I've also take taken on is uh I've been working with the Temp Arts Um in American Fork and trying to coordinate better between our two arts programs.

Uh Lehigh Arts is very excited about that because historically they have not had relations, and which is why both of them perform Joseph over the summer because there's no communication there.

Um both are very excited because there's ways that we can share costumes and also that they're aware of the different um things that are going on and be able to do cross promotions.

So that uh I think is gonna be really beneficial to the arts community through the whole area in ways that we can because they're I'm finding out there's tons as you s of uh arts programs that um need funding and support and a lot of them love arts, but they don't necessarily are great at the the administrative side and the promotion side and the marketing side.

So that was uh pretty great too to start you know bringing those together.

Awesome.

Uh last but not least, uh Chief, you'll know this.

Ricky Evans retirement is this Thursday at 3 30, correct?

Three o'clock.

And that's at station 84.

Uh so what a great opportunity to go and wish Ricky well and and uh great opportunity to stop by and say hello.

So I would invite all of you to make your way out that way on Thursday afternoon.

I I heard that language out for you guys.

Boots and wranglers.

Oh my coming shorts and a polo.

I think that's a prank.

I think they'll be the only one that show up.

With your shorts.

Yeah.

Oh, classy keeping it real.

Uh thanks for everyone.

Uh thanks for being here tonight.

Sorry, my voice is toast.

I hope in two weeks it's a little better if I uh can calm it at home.

So um with that up, we'll adjourn this meeting.