Our Father in Heaven, we are grateful that we can gather together this afternoon and um do the city's business and we ask the two bless us with um guidance and understanding as we listen to presentations and um hear applicants and lessons so we can make wise decisions for the benefit of the community.

We ask a special blessing on our first responders and their families.

We're so grateful for them and for all that they do, and we ask a blessing also on our city staff and our workers and police lesson to know how much we appreciate them and all they do for our our residents here in Lehigh.

We're grateful for this wonderful community in the city we have to live in, and we ask C2 blesses to put forth our best efforts to do well by the people here.

Thank you, Councilmember Stallings.

Okay, our first uh start out today.

We have a presentation of development and analysis from the planning and engineering students from BYU.

Uh we invite you to come, whoever's gonna come present, we'll invite you up and come up and uh introduce all these guys.

So where's my input here?

All right.

So yeah, I was once a student like these guys, so be nice to them because I had to do the same thing.

But you don't have to be nice to me if you want to.

Yeah, anyway.

Although I do prefer the anyway.

Uh yeah, so these uh let's see where he's back there.

Um, Dave Simson back there is their professor.

He reached out and said, Hey, we'd love to do uh just a planning studio project, and Lehigh seems like a great town with a lot of things going on.

So we put out a few options for them to work on.

They chose this project, and it's kind of like a land use meets financial analysis for the city, you know, how kind of the question we want to uh get after is you know, can we be fiscally sustainable in the future, you know, once the city builds out, and are there a couple of scenarios we can look at um that may change what that looks like, like maybe more of a commercial focus or anyway, there's uh all kinds of scenarios you could look at.

So I just want to do a little bit of analysis using some of their GIS tools and and just take a look at what we may just kind of an initial look of what we may be looking at in Lehigh and how that can inform us to move forward.

So with that being said, I'll turn it over to these guys, I'll let them introduce themselves.

Sorry, Marcus.

Okay, so um for the for the project.

Our aim was to look at the different the fiscal sustainability of Lehigh as it pertains to different land uses um throughout the city.

So we used a a software called community vis to model the different scenarios that we um we'll talk about them the different scenarios later, but differ some different scenarios that um based on the general plan and and um future build out.

So we're we basically took an analysis of the the cost and the revenue of each of the different land uses and applied them to the city and um just just uh kind of get a picture of a big picture of the the impact of different land uses that the throughout the city.

So we started out with a community profile to give us uh a clear current snapshot of the city.

And much of the data that we found shouldn't be new to you.

You you know about the city really well.

And uh but essentially we took that data and focused on three key areas demographic structure, uh growth context, and then we focused on uh housing and infrastructure pressures.

So in terms of demographic structure, um the city has grown tremendously since 2020.

Um that's not news to you.

Um and then additionally, family sizes have have remained relatively high, even relative to other communities here in Utah County.

Um in terms of growth context, uh the city lies at the heart of the Silicon Slopes region, uh, which continues to draw new uh jobs, new investment, and uh new residents.

And so quite simply, people want to be here.

And so I would say lastly, with uh the housing and infrastructure pressures, we see that uh this growth has really put a strain on city infrastructure, transportation, utilities, public services, in addition to uh that housing demand.

And so really snapshot is about trying to uh take this data and then move forward with a model that helps the city plan for strategically plan for future challenges and align uh infrastructure and quality of life with the city's uh continued growth.

Okay.

So we worked within a program called Community Viz uh within ArcGIS, so it's a mapping tool.

Um we base it on the uh general plan and land uses.

We did consolidate some of the land uses to simplify the analysis, um, but we worked with the existing um land uses to kind of test our model with the uh current fiscal year um budget.

And so we had low residential build-out, medium residential, and then high with different transit-oriented development splits as well as multi-use splits to see how that would impact um the analysis.

And so we're working through these scenarios within community viz to um get those numbers as far as the revenues and expenditures for each of those land uses.

So in making our model, there are a few assumptions that we had to make.

We were provided a lot of information from the city, but some other dots that we had to connect ourselves.

So, like mentioned, we simplified the land uses because the general plan had a lot of land uses down to just commercial with retail being a subsection of that, residential, and then like open space, and then other which would include um like public facilities.

We also made some assumptions about the residential units like per acre and cost per acre, um, based mostly on the general plan, which suggests that like high residential, high density residential has a maximum of 12 units per acre.

So using that as kind of a starting point of like the highest level of development, and then working downwards.

And then, like mentioned, also some different mixed use and TOD splits, focusing on potentially higher amounts of residential versus higher amounts of commercial in those areas and how that could affect it.

And then finally different tax and cost rates to identify those expenditures and revenue values, such as the sales tax, police and fire cost, road or utility um taxes.

And those values were all determined using either provided city data that we were given or values used from the 2026 fiscal year budget document.

Great.

Um and so taking kind of what Kezia and Aaron are laying out is our analysis is focused on these three main uh subjects on like long-term sustainability in the city, um, how different scenarios, the high, medium, low, and different TOD splits impact budget flexibility as well as how that variation in land use just looks overall.

And all of these three categories are going to be covered more in depth in a written report that we are currently formulating.

Um we'll send that over to Mike and he can make sure that gets out to y'all.

But this is kind of where we're heading, just so you kind of know where we're taking the these scenarios.

Now that we've told you what we've been working on, um you're probably wondering what does this mean for you guys?

Like why is it important we did this?

Essentially what we've done is we've created a model that can now be used by city staff and other decision makers to determine the feasibility of different land use patterns um fiscally for the city.

So as Lehigh is approaching build-out and development decisions become more and more consequential, uh, this is a model that can be used to sort of predict how that will impact the city financially.

So it gives more information on what the best decisions are for future growth and build out.

Awesome.

Thank you guys for having us.

Any questions?

Any questions for the students?

Just I guess one question.

So in part of your throughout your research, what was the most difficult part to find answers on?

And then, second, just a statement.

I just want to make sure that we recognize that this was the best university in the state of Utah with this research just for the mayor.

That's for the record only.

I think it was hard to kind of simplify it down to the consistent variables that we could use throughout each of the scenarios.

So for the most part, we went by household as opposed to like by population, but that can have different variances in it.

And then it was difficult, or so get down to household with like area and stuff.

Made a lot of assumptions with that as well as like with sales tax, which we also related to a square footage value, which is not the most accurate way to determine sales tax of you can't just take a commercial property and be like, oh, if it's a thousand square feet, we're gonna get this much sales tax out of it.

But that was the simplest way to make those assumptions.

Um there's a lot of breakdowns like that that could be improved in the future, but that where we had to come up with something to get down.

Um those are a little bit difficult to identify, but we were able to come up with sort of replacement solutions that could then be updated with better data and information.

Um, I just want to say your and you're getting MPAs or your undergrads.

It's a mix of it's a mix.

Okay.

I got my master's and half grades.

Okay, so I got my MBA at BYU.

Um I still bleed red, though.

And um I've spent many hours in the Tanner building.

And so I just want to say thank you so much for the analysis and what you do.

I'm very impressed.

Um, could one of you sum up in a couple sentences?

What from your research and analysis of what you've done.

Um, what do you think is the most pertinent for our residents?

What do you think is the most important thing for our residents to understand with your findings?

Um I would say that for residents, it's important that Lehigh is planning well for what is happening.

That the general plan does cover all of the different like not scenarios, but that it has an understanding.

Lehigh has an understanding of what kind of growth is to be anticipated and what um infrastructure is needed.

And that while it is seeing a lot of impact from the pressures like Daniel mentioned, that it is taken care of and that there are means and ways that the city is preparing and helping to navigate that.

So awesome.

Thank you so much.

Great job.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

We appreciate your input and we look forward to the report.

Uh Mr.

West you'll send that to us, I'm assuming.

Yeah.

Yeah, I was gonna say you can follow up with me with any questions.

These guys want to move on with their lives, so they're gonna go do other things.

I'll get the report and any questions or anything you want to follow up on.

I'm happy to do that.

So I've been to both universities too, so I know which one is the better one, but I won't say no.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We okay.

We'll uh now go to item two, the power rate study presentation uh from our power department and Mr.

Dave Berg consulting.

We'll let Joel introduce.

Yeah, thank you.

Just want to introduce Dave Berg with Dave Berg Consulting.

Uh he's this is the third rate study he's done for the city of Lehigh over the years.

They typically span about four to five years, um, depending.

And um I just want to point out a couple of reasons why we do it this way.

Um I think it's important to have a third party conduct that study.

It's uh more unbiased that way, and then we can focus on his professionalism and it just helps have a different set of eyes on it when I'm focused on the budget and day-to-day, let the professional do the right study.

And although we collaborate a lot and give input, um, it is one of the reasons why we hire somebody to do this.

Um a big reason to to keep in mind when we're doing rate study.

We are a um we're an enterprise fund.

We operate a little bit differently than um other departments, and we focus still a lot on revenues.

We try to be self-supportive.

And so I often say we try to operate like a business.

However, it's interesting business because we're trying to hit a revenue of zero.

If all of our fund balances look good, we're we're you know, usually in a business you want to maximize revenues and you just do everything you can to maximize it.

We're actually trying to hit that zero mark.

That's why this gets so tricky to make sure we're aligned nicely so that we're not overpaying or overcharging our uh customers.

So that's one thing to keep in mind about these studies and why they're important.

And then uh also just want to thank Dave and point out his professionalism last rate study he did uh we adopted in July of 22, and then we had a really big market crisis that we've talked about that November it started.

And so it was it was key that that was adopted and it was important and it really saved the day because we had a clause in there for a power cost adjustment that we could just implement and go, and we didn't have to wait to do a whole new study, and it was just really smart for him to put that in there and and help us there, and it really got us out of a bad time.

So we're gonna have Dave go over that rate study, or at least where we're at right now.

Um, and then Dean wants to talk about um and get a little feedback on one component after uh Dave is done, and then I'll go over next steps on what to expect in our rate study and how this is gonna go.

So I'll turn it over to Dave first.

Thanks, Joel.

So I am not a student, I did not go to BYU, and I'm guessing when I was in college, several of you weren't born.

So we have to do something.

There it is.

Okay.

So what we're going to talk about is uh in particular capital improvements, because when we're looking at rates and needing to generate dollars for a lot of my clients, what they are ultimately spending on capital improvements is oftentimes more significant even than like operating expenses relative to you know making investments, and because of the growth that you're seeing, which actually when you look across the country, the the growth that I'm that I'm seeing in this sort of region is kind of unprecedented.

Uh, most of my clients and elsewhere are not seeing that kind of growth, but that kind of growth also then requires obviously investment.

So we're going to be looking also then at your operating results under the assumption that the existing rates don't change.

And the reason that we do that is it gives us an indication then of revenue needs.

Because if we see if you don't do anything, what's the projection?

What's going to happen?

And ultimately, we can look at operating results, but what happens to cash reserves is usually much more of a telltale sign, and because of the capital improvements that tie in there, and we'll go through that specifically to show why that really matters.

Um, I'm also to talk a little bit on about just some sort of basic rate design issues and really some of the strides that you made since some of the previous studies that I did with you relative to to the structure of your rates.

Uh, we're gonna do a comparison to uh Rocky Mountain Power and how you compare to them relative to we could call it affordability, and then really we're gonna talk a little bit about some rate design guidance and and also uh next steps as Joel mentioned, uh, and then Dean's got some other things to comment on.

So as we move along, so when we look at the capital improvements, I mean when you look there and you see some significant numbers, you know, 9.4 million in fiscal 27, you know, 6.9 million in 29, 9.8 billion in 2030.

Uh you got a couple of new substations that are in there, and and they're very expensive.

But with all the growth that you're having, you need more local capacity in order uh to serve those.

And this doesn't really even include what you're also planning to spend on some generation resources as well.

Uh and and new materials and new equipment in our industry has gotten very expensive.

Um the inflation on materials and so on is much higher than than general inflation has been.

So when we look at operating results under the assumption that we don't change rates.

Now you can see that the operating revenues go up, and that's predominantly driven by more sales because of growth.

And then obviously, you know, we've got operating expenses, and it's always important to remember that within the operating expenses, actually, the cost of acquiring the power that you then sell to your customers uh is your biggest operating expense by far.

Um, for most utilities, you're talking 65 to 70 percent of the cost of the utility is actually acquiring uh the kilowatt hours that we that we sell to our customers.

You also then have some non-operating uh revenues, but they're actually expenses.

A big piece of that is interest expense on debt.

You then get a couple of uh of interesting items that we need to talk about.

One is you charge impact fees uh to new developments and to new um folks that are coming on the system, and those dollars are available.

You also have capital contributions, like when a developer comes in and they put in a subdivision, they make a capital contribution for some of the assets there.

Now, while this the capital contributions in particular show up in your operating results, the way that they're expressed in your audit, those dollars aren't actually available to pay for things because it's really the the donation of stuff, if you will, buy them.

And so uh when I get into the cash reconciliation on the next slide, we have to make an adjustment because that change in net position, when you look at that and you say, well, it's over a million dollars every year, but to a certain extent of that, you know, like 1.9 million, three and a half million of it is capital contributions.

So the actual number is really negative from the perspective of kind of what you can have available to do things with.

So when we look at what happens with your cash reserves, so uh, and these are fiscal years, so fiscal 26, which is almost over now, which ends at the end of June.

But we started with almost 28 million dollars.

Well, now then we add in that change in net position, which was the bottom line in the previous slide.

We then in the operating results in the previous slide, interest expense associated with debt was there, but the principal payments actually come out here.

So we've got the principal payments on your existing debt.

Then I mentioned those capital contributions.

That does not generate cash that's available.

And now, since that number is in that change in net position, I have to subtract it back out in the cash reconciliation here because those are not dollars that are available in particular to pay for capital improvements.

We also then add in the depreciation expense.

Depreciation is an operating expense, but it's a non-cash expense.

You don't write a check to anybody for depreciation.

So those dollars, which obviously made that change in net position a lower number because it's up in the expenses, those dollars are added back in, and then we then have to pay for the capital improvements, which was on that uh a couple of slides ago that I showed.

Bottom line is that without any change in rates, we're projecting to go from 27, well, almost 28 million down to 8.5 million dollars.

And you actually have a goal to maintain reserves of 180 days of operating expenses, basically half a year.

And so at the bottom, I show that it basically decreases from the end of this year from 160 days down to only 40 days.

So the without any changes in rates, where we're at at the end of the period is you know, you're well short of where you like to be relative to reserves.

And Joel mentioned the the difficulties that happened a few years ago.

You learned the importance of reserves at that time because you you had significant reserves and you had to spend a lot of them in order to cushion the blow of what happened in the in the power market.

Just looking at the structure of your rates, and I'm not I'm not going to spend a lot of time here, but one of the things, in particular the residential rate, and that's that's one obviously that the vast majority of your citizens are concerned about.

When I first started doing rate work with you folks, the the monthly customer charge or base charge for residents was zero, which is was a tad unprecedented.

I only knew of one other utility that was at zero of the many hundreds that I've worked with over the years.

And so we did embark on a process to start increasing that, and so you're up to ten dollars now, which is much better.

Uh the other thing we did was you used to have just a single energy rate for residential customers, where all of the energy that they purchase was the same rate.

We moved to what's called an inverted rate, where what happens is if a customer uses more than a thousand kilowatt hours, the rate actually goes up.

And there's there's sort of two reasons there.

One is it's uh it's a conservation-oriented rate.

The idea is that particularly in the summertime when folks are using a lot of energy for air conditioning, there's an incentive to conserve because it's gotten more expensive.

The other thing is that when we moved to increasing that customer or base charge, that that customer charge is a bigger portion of a bill for folks who don't use a lot of energy.

So if you're only using three or four hundred kilowatt hours, raising that customer charge had more of an impact on them relative to a percentage basis on the bill.

So by moving also then to an inverted rate, there's that conservation aspect of that.

The other thing is that now we're collecting more dollars from larger users in this inverted rate, so that some of the dollars in the lower rate by having that is saved for lower users, and then more dollars are coming in from larger users, and it's sort of a balance of that that increasing from zero to ten dollars of the customer charge.

So it helped to sort of level that out a little bit.

When you really look at your other rates, they're they're all pretty much straightforward.

Um we've got a couple of of these city rates that are basically a customer charge and a flat energy charge.

We've also got um a general service rate, or you could think of that as almost being like a small commercial rate.

And then when we get to bigger customers, the rate also includes what's called a demand charge, which is their their maximum amount during the month.

And you'll notice that that the energy charges, for instance, let's look at that general service demand rate, where the energy charge is just under seven cents.

And if we go back up and look, you'll say, well, that's less than the residential rate.

But that's because they also get billed that $9 demand charge.

So their average bill, and it depends upon their their usage patterns, but it's more than that seven cents because there's that demand bill component there based on whatever their maximum amount of energy during a short period of time was over the course of the month.

So while that energy rate is lower, there is that demand component.

Uh and then you've just got some various uh other the rates, the structures all kind of look the same, but you know, for different kinds of customers for larger customers.

Now rate comparison with Rocky Mountain Power.

Now, I I've worked all over the country, and and almost all of my clients want to know how they compare.

And in particular, and I I work almost exclusively with municipally owned utilities, they want to know how they compare to the local investor-owned utility.

Quite frankly, nobody compares better to the local investor-owned utility than you do.

Um, when you look at these numbers, now Rocky Mountain, they actually have what's called seasonal rates.

So they have a uh a non-summer rate and a summer rate, and their summer rates are higher.

They also have an inverted rate where if you use more energy, it gets more expensive.

And so you look at the current Lehigh rates, and then you look at the Rocky Mountain power rates, and you can see those differences.

It's like in the summer, you're 30 to 50% less than Rocky Mountain Power, which is which is a dramatic difference.

In our world, on a regional basis, you just don't normally see these kinds of differences between different utilities.

I mean, it's easy to be a lot less than people in California because their rates are the highest in the contiguous 48.

But so you've got a significant advantage, and these are residential rates, but that advantage goes across your rates.

It's more significant, quite frankly, in residential.

Um you compare really, really well to Rocky Mountain Power.

And quite frankly, I'd like to pay these rates, but I don't live here.

Now, when we talk about rate design guidance, and when I look at what was going on relative to the projections, and in particular to the cash reserve balances, we're looking at probably four and a half to five percent increases needed each year going forward in order to get you so that in that end of 2030 period that you're still at 180 days of operating expenses in reserves.

Because as I mentioned, we were down to 40 days relative to what we're projecting.

Now, with regard to the residential rates, I'm also going to suggest that we'll want to continue at some pace of raising that customer charge.

Right now it's $10 on a cost basis, uh, looking at cost of service, you could justify 20, which I'm not going to suggest we get up to 20.

But in doing that, again, we can raise those customer charges, but then relative to the energy charge, we can focus a little bit more on increasing that higher rate for the large users.

Then again, we've got kind of that balance on rate impact for smaller versus larger customers.

For your commercial and general service, your rate structure is really just fine.

And so when we look at the increases, there'll be a little bit more spread across.

There might be some some minor differences on what I end up suggesting relative to certain of the rate components.

But those those rates are in pretty good shape.

Now, Dean, you want to talk about rate stab?

Yeah.

We talked about this a little a little bit last fall, and I would just like to bring it up again.

I think it's a good idea, but it's not necessarily have to happen, or it can be up to you.

Right now we have I think the idea is we have some larger resources coming online in about four or five, six years, somewhere around there.

The idea is we're growing, we have more demand.

Um obviously you don't build a one megawatt power plant, right?

And you build their 20 or 30 megawatts.

You don't build them linearly, even though our demand growth is linearly.

Um those resources when they come online are just gonna be a little bit more expensive because they're newer, they're you know, the cost of the plant is so expensive.

And so we would see when those come online a little bit of a spike in our cost, which would be passed on to the residents.

Um the idea behind the rate stabilization fund is would we raise the rates a little bit higher now so that that it's not such a peak in the future?

In other words, if we did we talk about four and a half to five percent now per year, if that was I don't know the numbers, I'm gonna just if it's six percent, then maybe it stays at six percent rather than be four and a half or five percent for five years, and then maybe we have a one-time jump up of eight or ten percent or twelve percent or something like that.

So um and really that's probably a legislative decision, it's council decision because that's how it impacts the residents.

For me, I kind of like the idea of having a kind of a linear growth, but um that's my thought.

I don't know that Dave agrees.

He likes either one.

41 minutes.

No.

Because kind of we were just talking about this earlier.

The concept is then you're kind of charging people more than it really costs you.

So the idea is later on you can charge a little bit less than it costs you.

Um I just I guess most of them curious if you have any thoughts on that.

I think we talked a little bit about it last fall, but it's a we have new people here now.

So any thoughts?

Any questions?

Um my thoughts are I would not like to charge people more, and I would not like to charge residents more.

I would actually look at charging maybe businesses more.

I know you're seeing increase the rates with the residents, but I don't think that because we have Texas Instruments or some other company coming that's gonna demand more energy that we demand more from our from just the residents because I think that we everyone should have an equal load of increase.

That's my opinion.

Well, I don't think the proposal is that just the residential would increase everything would increase, right?

Yeah, everybody would focus.

Yeah.

It just sounded like it was more significant for residents.

I think his focus was on residents because that's probably what we told him to focus on because that's us, I guess it but yeah.

Well, and let me let me address that.

So uh also at the next meeting, uh, when because we've got a couple more, which we'll talk about in a second, but we'll also be uh giving you what's called the cost of service results, which basically is like a fairness looking at different classes of customers, so resident versus general service versus the industrial, and and relative to paying their sort of quote fair share based on on the expenses.

Um but certainly the increases would be across all classes of customers.

We wouldn't be because it actually would have to be more than four and a half or five percent if you only did it on residential, because they're only a certain obviously percentage of of the sales.

And relative to to rate stabilization, that is completely a policy-related decision because four and a half to five gets your regular reserves in the neighborhood of where they need to be.

But if you want to have additional, like with a rate stabilization fund, obviously then that would take more dollars, which would mean some somewhat higher uh rate increases in order to be able to put those dollars away.

And and it and you know, a lot of utilities would when they have significant capital, they do make the decision to try to save up some money ahead of time.

Um others are like, no, we just borrow it when we got something really big, and then we spread the payments over a later time.

And all those really become policy decisions and become balance.

Um, one of the things in a place where you have such a great advantage is that comparison that you've got with Rocky Mountain Power, in that you know, if you were neck and neck with them, you know, you might feel a little bit differently about you know about where things are at uh relative to what you have to do going forward.

The other thing is that the last couple of rate adjustments that you've made, while you've increased those customer charges, you've actually lowered your consumption charges, which also is literally unprecedented in the last 10 years.

Nobody lowers any rates because of the everything's just getting more expensive in the industry.

And part of the problem we have in industry is that we're running out of capacity.

And so we got to build new sources of energy across the country.

And whether you're building it or somebody else is building it in the market, all those dollars end up showing up anyway, no matter who builds it.

And we're we're just seeing a need for, you know, we haven't built a lot of power plants in in a while in this country, and we need more power to serve the growth that we're having.

So the comparison with Rocky Mountain, was that across the board?

Was it only residential?

Well, I only did the comparison with residential residential.

But you're good.

Yeah.

And I can in when I have with my recommendations, I can do some comparisons at some of the other levels as well as some other uh communities is what um too.

We'll include that in the next go-around.

Thank you.

I I just had a question.

Um if I'm understanding correctly, it it and I'm no expert in power, so please dialogue with me and help me get there.

But um the growth is equating to an increase of rates due to the capital expenditures that are coming because of the growth.

Um and then if we were to do the rate stabilization fund, my interpretation of what's been said is that we're asking for current residents to bear the cost of that future growth.

And I'm wondering why that's not being captured well enough in the impact fees.

Um I'm like theoretically, I understand this linear path, and I'm not saying from a policy perspective that's wrong.

I don't know if future residents, including businesses and all users, right, all consumers, should be bearing the cost of future impacts with capital expenditures due to growth.

So if if you guys can help me understand why how to work through that, maybe and and help me get there, I'd appreciate it.

One of the things that that's key to sort of remember is that there's always been socialization of costs and passing on a cost and through rates.

And so, for instance, right now, I mean, you've got debt right now.

So the current customers are are paying for most likely some kind of infrastructure in the debt payments that are being made.

So let's say if and nobody charges big enough impact fees to pay for all capital improvements.

Nobody would come here then because your impact fees would be so high.

And it's actually from a cost of service perspective, it's not really fair because when you put an asset in the ground, it lasts like 30 years.

And so people use it for 30 years, and and so you does that mean one customer comes in and you don't have to add anything for that customer so they don't have to pay an impact fee.

But then the next one you need something, so they have to pay one, but then everything sort of gets socialized.

Uh and so there, you know, that's just how the system works.

Um, and quite frankly, every business, every you keep adding things and it adds to your cost, and it goes into the cost of what you're selling.

So, you know, impact fees do cover a portion, but they they can't possibly, and it quite frankly wouldn't be fair.

The other thing is some of what's in your capital is actually replacing old stuff.

You know, so you've got an old power line and it needs to be replaced.

Well, then who's paying the impact fee for that?

Does that go back to the existing?

And so um there's always balance in all of this relative to fairness.

Yeah, is there an analysis you could do um with the data showing us like how the spread is placed across the generations of consumers?

That's a tough one.

But I would say you can say, all right, for instance, we add facilities that cost money.

But the other thing is happens with growth is that all right, I've got a I've got a certain staff, and if that staff can still cover everything, now that fixed cost really of staff gets spread over more customers.

Uh and so you know, there's it's very, very difficult to point to how much is this customer cost, and based on when they came on the system and how old their infrastructure is compared to this customer.

How much is a customer who's a block away from the substation versus somebody who's a mile away from the substation?

Because I have to build lines to get to them.

You know, how much and so what I'm hearing you say is at some point we all have to come together and live together and bear the cost.

You know, and when you look at if you look at the the regulatory model of Rocky Mountain Power, all of their customers in the state pay the same rates.

And so a customer that they have in Salt Lake versus a customer that they have somewhere else, you could say there's differences in what needs to be built and what what it looks like, but that's just the way our our system has always worked.

And it works that way in water and it works that way in natural gas uh and works that way in in wastewater services.

You know, you you have to socialize you you make differences relative to class of customer because residential customers use energy different than industrial customers.

That's why the rates look different.

And there's and there's different costs associated with that.

Is that as far down as you you drill down is into the class of customer type?

Yes, because typically what happens is within a class, like when you look at the residential class, you can look at the quantity, but there's also how you use energy, how often you're um you're using it at what time of day you're using it.

One of the reasons that you'll see large industry, their average rate is lower, is because they use energy all the time.

So, you know, like for a house, I've got to build a portion of a substation and a distribution line and a transformer outside your home.

And you use energy a certain percentage of the time, whereas a large customer uses it much higher.

So they push more energy through the fixed system.

So they're more efficiently using their share of substations and power plants and distribution lines because they have a higher energy use per fixed unit.

And that's why we have different looking rates and different costs, because they use the system in a different way.

Okay.

You think about somebody that you know builds a home, and let's say they only use you know the average is probably around 700 kilowatt hours a month.

Let's say they only use 10 kilowatt hours for some weird reason.

I still had to build a line to get to their house.

I still had to put a transformer outside their house.

I still had to put a meter on their house.

I still have to read the meter, I still have to build them.

And they're hardly using any energy whatsoever.

So for them, the average cost per 10 kilowatt hours is huge.

But they don't get billed that because we'd we'd socialize across different kinds of customers.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Can I mention one thing too?

Because I as you said that, I think maybe I could have explained my part better before when I came up.

So part of the idea is UAMPS will be building some projects in the that four to five year range, some couple natural gas plants, I believe.

And if I say something wrong, Jill can jump up and uh and uh correct me.

But um so what's what's the cost that's gonna go up is our power cost.

We get a bill from UAMPS every month for the power that they generate that we use, right?

So that's not really an project for us.

That's not an impact fee for us.

It's the idea that one this power that's coming on is going to be a little more expensive just because it's a brand new plant and there's a brand new cost and everything, and some of the power that it's maybe replacing it was cheaper just because it was built a long time ago.

And so it's not necessarily could be used, could be come in through an impact fee because it's not specifically related to new growth.

It's just the fact that you know power plants don't last forever, they have a life and then yes, and so that the new that's coming on is gonna be more expensive than what drops off.

Okay.

And so it wasn't just a matter of saying we're gonna build this, can we pass it on to uh uh as an impact fee to new growth?

It's a matter of our costs are going up.

Thank you.

Yeah, that does help.

Yeah.

I have some questions.

Thank you.

Um try to write them down.

So when you come back, I would like to see how we compare to other cities, public powered cities, not just private power.

Um I think maybe, well.

So when you presented the numbers you uh talked about the capital expenditures, but you said that did not include the power plants that were power generation, correct?

Right.

So is it what would that be used for then?

Well, how that gets reflected ultimately is it comes through in your power costs?

Nope.

Yes, but what okay, for capital expenses, if it's not for building new or maintaining old or the infrastructure.

Those costs would be just if if we have a power line that's been that 30 years, we got to replace it.

That money's got to come from somewhere and that would be a capital expenditure.

So replacing outside of impact fees.

Okay.

Okay.

And then so when you presented the impact fees, it was just flat from year to year.

I think it was power.

We talked about maybe adjusting for inflation every two years.

Can we do that for the impact fleet fees?

Yeah, that's that's currently built into our impact fee study, correcting?

The last one we just did.

Yeah, our impact fee studies.

Impact fee studies per current, right?

We did it last fall.

And uh that's a that's a goal we have is to get those current.

The more we keep them current, probably the higher they're gonna be, right?

Just to try to keep up with the other.

The other thing that's that's associated with with the impact fees as well is how much growth is there really.

I mean, so what happens is typically is that from year to year it'll go up and down.

Because you know growth isn't the same every month kind of thing.

And so you know we have some projections in there you know, relative to um what we think the impact fees might be, but you know, you can't if you put some inflation in there, I guess my point is that the dollar amount, even if within some inflation would not have a significant impact on the bottom line.

Okay.

But Dean, uh, for a full-on rate study, it has to be like every four or five years, right?

But with the rate or the inflation adjustment for inflation, it could be every couple of years.

I'm trying to remember the last few impact fee studies we've done have had kind of an escalating clause.

In other words, they've gone up a little bit every year.

And I think the power did too, if I'm remembering correctly.

I remember I know the PI did.

Yeah.

And so the idea is just keep those current and keep because they're still the truth is if the power if the impact fee revenue goes up, it's probably because the cost of the projects are going up too, right?

So they kind of do that's why it's important to keep them up.

Otherwise we're we're losing ground with inflation.

Okay.

But you don't think that it would change things much, even if we don't think it changes this because it probably also like both change.

I think the revenue change and the cap the cost as a capital projects would both change.

If we if we build 500 more homes than we planned on, we're gonna collect 500 more homes worth of impact fees, and that will then equate to 500 more homes of projects that we got to do.

So it kind of just washes out.

Or declines because the impact fees never keep up, I guess.

But yeah, as long as we just hopeful there inflation.

Yeah, we can get something back.

Um I'm just going down my list of notes here.

The base, did you say potentially going up to 20 dollars?

No.

Is that no?

I we we would not get there in the the five years of this analysis.

Okay.

What I'm saying is on within the cost of service, I'll be able to tell you what a cost-based customer charge you look at, because there's certain components of service that are associated with just having a customer.

Yeah, the idea around a customer charge is there is a cost to having a customer connect to the system, whether they use energy or not.

Are those mostly fixed costs?

I mean, is it because I don't want to overcharge.

And $10, you aren't anywhere near overcharging.

For that it takes to just uh have a meter and for instance, there's a there's a transformer outside your home.

And there's probably like four or five homes that are connected to it.

That's a fixed cost.

Whether you use energy or not, that had to be put in.

There is a line that goes from that transformer to your home.

Whether any energy flows through it or not, it's a fixed cost, it's there.

There's a meter that's put on the on your house and a service is put on your house.

That's a fixed cost.

It has to be read, you have to be billed.

You have customer service people.

So there are fixed customer related expenses.

Do you impact fees paper that kind of thing when you build it when you put it in?

No, if you build a new subdivision, it'd be the direct, it would be the the developer capital contributions that would pay for that transformer the first time.

So it's paid for the first time.

So you would just the ongoing costs are more like the employees or the staff.

And there's there's there's there's maintenance costs and you know they're there's just there's a there's an expense to having somebody connected to the system.

Um I would just like to make sure that we kind of stick to what those costs really are.

And if and maybe it's you're like you said the $10 doesn't cover those costs.

I don't know.

Well, customer charges, you're at the low end.

Um for municipal utilities, they're like from ten to thirty dollars.

Yeah, for in comparison, but I would like to look at if you can what the actual costs are in the C were there.

Yeah, I think that's don't you break it down like you go through every expense and assign it either as a fixed cost for the cost of service analysis, which we haven't completed yet.

I do that.

Okay.

So yeah.

Um rate structure, um, it's based on usage.

I wonder, I'm sure there must be some out there that do it based on time of day, or you you know, like peak hours, charge more.

Are you, you know, like peak hours, charge more?

There are.

Yeah, a lot.

There are a fair number of utilities who do time of day pricing as well.

In fact, Rocky Mountain has a time of day option.

What are your thoughts on doing that?

We technically can't do that yet.

We have to finish our full AMI deployment because we're not able to read meters every 15 minutes.

Oh, okay.

On about 20,000 meters.

What are your thoughts on going that direction versus just it's the most accurate, but I would say it's very confusing for the customer.

Yeah.

Then you're having to judge when do I start my laundry.

I can't remember when the time is that.

What are the times?

Usually six around 6 p.m.

It gets really expensive until 10.

Crystal would answer that better from the wholesale side.

But we're just not going to be able to do that.

Well, and it'll vary, it'll vary by season as well.

Yeah.

Summertime, it's it's typically um late afternoon to early evening, but a lot of times in the winter time, uh, a lot of utilities peak in the morning.

And some utilities have different time periods, whether it's depending on the season, but then that adds to the confusion that some customers you know can have around you know when is it expensive and when isn't it?

Yeah.

Generally, I think it'd be yeah, we're not there yet.

But I kind of like that idea to because that's when the energy costs are the highest, right?

To buy power and stuff.

So anyway.

Um I think that's all I have.

I can't read my notes, so I'm good.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Joel.

Just real quick so you guys know what to look for.

Um we're looking at uh May 11th.

We'll try to get, I think that's the work session.

Let's work with Tisha and Jason to make sure that fits.

We would do just a follow-up for more QA if you like.

Um keep in mind we'll have the draft with recommendations around April 30th.

So we'd like you to be able to digest that for what is that?

Uh almost a couple of weeks.

Ask any questions you want.

I'm free for visits or emails, or we can just um have more QA here, and then we look for an adoption approval on May 26th, and then we'll be asking for that to be implemented and begin July 1st.

So hopefully that helps.

And I will point out, Rachel, your question, look for that in the study.

I know last year we looked at discrepancy subsidies between commercial and residential.

And so you'll see there is a difference there.

It's already reflective of what you're looking for.

So can we get these slides or at least the ones with the Yeah, I think we have to provide them, correct?

Okay.

Yeah.

Um I need to make sure because we made some changes this afternoon, so I gotta send you a chance.

Send the lady.

This is send the one we just sent.

Okay.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If there's something different you want to, please let us know.

We'll do.

Okay.

Thanks.

Any last questions?

All right.

Okay, from electric to water.

So we will now have a discussion on water conservation.

Welcome, Dave Norman.

Mr.

Matt, the waterman himself.

Waterman, I like that.

Well, and Craig, the attorney's behind you, so this will get interesting.

So we're excited.

Okay.

I've been tasked to uh provide a water outlook, and I do not bring good news, unfortunately, as many of you probably already know.

Um that I want to mention before I start is I'm gonna reference all volumes in acre feet.

I don't know if you all know what an acre foot is, but it's about 325,000 gallons of water.

In all irrigation water, we refer to um the large volumes of water in acre feet, just so you're aware.

Um so a summary of the current conditions, as most of you probably already know we are experiencing our worst snowpack um ever observed since snow pack measurements started being taken almost a hundred years ago.

It's all over the news at this point.

Um we're hearing about it daily, and it is a concern for us and and people all over the state.

If that wasn't bad enough, um the record breaking temperatures in March brought what little bit of snow pack we did have and it's it uh initiated that snow melt snow melt runoff event weeks ahead of schedule and brought down, like I say, what little bit we did have weeks ahead of schedule, and and that's a heartbreaker too, because that's supposed to stay stored up there on the mountain for later use.

Uh we're not alone in in this in these pains, 98% of the stack of the state is currently experiencing severe or extreme drought.

98% of the stack of the state is currently experiencing severe or extreme drought.

Um so what does that all mean for us?

If we look at our water sources, we can break them into two different categories.

We have our surface water flows, those are natural occurring stream flows, and we also have our stored water.

Um Lehigh City gets the bulk of its natural flowing extreme or stream flows from Deer Creek or Dry Creek in the American Fork River.

The early part of the year, we are stockholders in North Bench Irrigation Company as well as Lehigh Irrigation Company, and those flows in Dry Creek, we receive the majority of those, and we re we rely on them heavily from this time of the year, April 15th, up until when dry creek goes dry or July 10th.

After July 10th, Lehigh irrigation, they get 40% of the American Fork River up to the mouth of the canyon at the weir there.

And Lehigh City, being a stockholder in Lehigh irrigation, receives above 50% of that 40%.

So we rely heavily on those two major sources of natural flowing stream water, and this year they are forecast to be at record lows as well, meaning that we are more than likely to see record low volumes delivered to us from those two sources, and that is a major concern.

The second part of our our water is the stored water.

That water is stored in Deer Creek.

We are also stockholders in a few different irrigation companies that have stored water in Deer Creek, and that stored water is quite a bit different than the natural flowing water.

It doesn't just run past us and we don't get to use it if we don't have a diversion there and we're receiving it at that time.

As that water comes off the mountain, it makes its way to Deer Creek and it is stored there until we call upon it to use it.

That stored water is a great source because on a given year, if we don't use all of our allotment, we can store some of that water as holdover water for the following season.

And we did that last year, and we have 350 acre feet stored in Deer Creek to use this year.

And that's a great news, but unfortunately, I wish it was a lot more than that.

When we call on this stored water to supplement our natural flow sources, it comes down the Probo River and it is delivered to us through the Provo River Aqueduct, or what a lot of you may have remembered as the Murdoch Canal.

And unfortunately, with this year's snowpack, the Probo River Project has issued a 50% allotment on that stored water for the upcoming water year.

That is also significant and a major concern for us moving into irrigation season.

Just for a quick reference, last year our share of water delivered from that source was about 2,550 acre feet.

Just doing some quick calculations this morning.

I figured this year it'll be about half that, about 1,250 acre feet, and that includes the 350 that we held over that is not curtailed by 50%.

That stored water will get delivered to us at 100%, but this year's allotment will be at 50.

Another stored source, uh, the Utah Lake Distributing Company, it feeds uh everything, all the developments on the west side of Jordan River.

That is the largest source for that developed area, and they're not starting their irrigation season until May 1.

So that's another concern that we'll have to work through.

This is kind of a cool image.

This is these two images are taken up to the flood diversion at Dry Creek Reservoir, and that picture's taken looking right up through Dry Creek.

The mountains in the back there are all the granite mountains up above Alpine.

Um, I think this is a great illustration of the variability from one year to the next.

Um the picture in 2023 obviously is taken on May 15th.

The flood diversion gate is open, and the flood diversion is overflowing, and there's still abundant snowpack in the mountains up above alpine there.

The picture on the right was taken a week ago on April 9th, and it shows the static flood diversion, no water coming in, and as you can see the mountains behind that we that what that water we rely on so heavily, there is very little of it left up there.

Um, and who knows what the weather's gonna do to us the next several weeks and how that drainage is going to perform, but I'm pretty concerned about it.

This graph shows current conditions as of yesterday morning.

The black line shows our current water year.

As you can see, we were just kind of right along that record low line, and then you can see that uh record heat on March 15th that just rushed 75 percent of that stored water in the mountains right off the mountain and into our drainages.

The big blue line up there at 40, that's 40 uh snow water equivalent inches.

That's the 2023 year.

That is the drastic difference in just three years.

In the last three years, we've experienced our biggest water, snow water equivalent year and our lowest in just the last three years.

This map shows current conditions across the state.

The Provo Utah Lake Jordan River Basin is ours.

We certainly currently sit at 17% of normal.

Much better, unfortunately, than some of our neighbors to the south.

They're even in worse shape than we are.

So it's pretty poor conditions across the state.

Leased water.

This is something that we've had the benefit of in several past drought years that we've been able to utilize, and it's been available to us through a couple of different uh water utilities that we've been able to lease some water during drought years to supplement our sources.

2015 and 2020 are the most years that I would say are the closest to the year that we're currently experiencing now.

Um, just for a little reference, that 2,000 acre feet in 2015 was about 20% of our total water delivered for that year.

In 2021, but that the thousand acre feet that we leased was about 9% of the total water we delivered for for that year.

Um I have always had a great concern that we would get a little bit too reliant on that leased water, and it wouldn't be available at some point.

And that year is this year, it is no longer available.

I've reached out, I they have gotten back to me, and that lease water is not available, and I would not expect it to be available in the future.

So, what do we do?

Well, how do we move forward?

Um we're gonna we've started we've actually started up our conservation outreach committee this year already, like we have in years past.

We have representatives from admin, the public information team, water department, and parks department.

When we meet, we strategize, we talk about current conditions, we talk about messaging that we're gonna put out to our residents, and uh it's been great for us to be able to meet and and to coordinate, and and those efforts have worked the last two years in 2021 and 2022.

We're working towards providing information on PI water use to residents with installed meters.

I'm gonna let Dave touch on that just a little bit as I don't know exactly the logistics on that.

So we're looking to work with company we've just signed contracts recently.

So we haven't we're just getting ready to kick off with a company called Diopify, which will allow us to do a direct information campaign to residents, as well as that we it'll over time create a portal that residents will be able to log into and see what their water usage is.

Um we're hopeful with the meters now installed.

Um we're still most of the the meter cans now have been set, probably over 95 percent.

Um we're still actively installing meters from our department's perspective.

I don't know the exact percentage that are in, but as we continue to install those, then people will have access to that information.

And this so this will be a great year for people to be able to access that.

We hope to have it online in the next couple of months or towards probably the later part of the summer where people would begin to start be able to see physics, they would be able to go online in a portal and see what their water they're using on an outdoor water basis.

Obviously, with our culinary meters, they would be able to see they'll be able to see the same thing, but we've had that information for a number of years.

They can see it on their bill.

But this would be just a portal that they could see that and compare it to previous months and years and that kind of thing.

And so we're hoping soon in the next, like I said, several months to have an away for residents to be able to see what they're using.

Uh, worst case scenario would be next year, but we really hope to get it online this year with the concurrent conditions so people can see what they're using and just allow them to gain information for themselves, if that makes sense.

Dave, real quick on that.

We will also be able to see what what usage is going on, right?

Oh, yeah.

So we will be able to detect leaks or whatnot if the if the numbers are yeah, and we'll be able to notify people right now.

Um Allison is able to run reports, but it's all physical copies.

We have to send guys out to notify them.

This will allow them to be notified through a text message or email or otherwise.

It'll be much quicker to the residents and hopefully much more reliable for them to get that because right now we have to just go knock on their door and give them a door hanger.

So we're kind of trying to get into the modern age and get information to people quicker if they have a leak on their side of the meter.

Allison, even in the past couple of years has been sending me a high usage list on PI meters, and I've been able to go out and make a few of those visits.

The problem is is just manpower to be able to go and do that.

Um, public outreach outreach has been great for us the last couple of years when we were during drought and during water restrictions.

Our public information team has been great getting out information to people about current conditions, um, suggestions on uh landscape watering and what uh what a what an intelligent water watering really looks like and what their yard really needs.

Um she's been great about their they've been great about getting resources out available on through Central Utah Water Conservation District and the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District on tips to conserve water, uh all kinds of tips from mowing your grass longer to watering times and and things like of that nature, and that's been a great help for us too.

Uh the restrictions, we would we we intend to begin in phase two of our restrictions.

Uh that's the we've done the phase two the last two years in 2021 and 2022, and they worked out great.

Phase three could be implemented depending on real water supply.

That'll be looked at throughout the year as we go along and we see how these irrigation companies perform and then how that stored water holds out.

Um this is really could be a year that we have to implement phase three.

We don't know that.

I don't know what real water supply looks like just yet, but it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Can I ask what is phase three?

Right here.

Yep.

Yep.

So this page, this slide shows our um water shortage management plan and the phases of the different restrictions.

Phase two going right in this year to phase two, it states that they may uh resident may only water two days per week with at least 48 hours in between irrigation cycles.

And if you go up on top, uh no hard surface washing either.

Phase three would be that one day a week, which we hope to stay away from, and also no hard surface watering unless it's for health and safety concerns.

Just quickly.

Um what we have on city council for adoption.

This was updated a few years ago, but apparently we didn't get the same exact language in the ordinance, and so the ordinance needs to be updated so they match, and that's what we have on the council agenda tonight for adoption.

If that makes sense.

Um, real quick before I finish up, um, one source that I did not mention in this presentation is our groundwater sources.

We do have a handful of wells located throughout the city that are that are designated secondary water wells only, and and they are there to meet peak demands and to help these surface water sources during drought to maintain water supply.

Um, a couple of things to mention on our groundwater sources.

Um pumping them to meet demands year after year after year, um, could come with some consequences.

We know that our groundwater is doing the same thing that the water above us is doing.

It's just not getting the recharge that it needs and it's suffering as well.

And secondly, we could run those wells nonstop throughout the entire summer and not meet the demands of that gap that we're not going to get from our surface water.

That surface water, when we talk about the conditions of our natural sources and our stored water, and then not having the availability to lease any water, those are huge um obstacles to overcome.

It's a lot of water, and uh it'll be a challenge to make it through this summer.

Um I've listened to a lot or I've uh read a lot of articles, listened to the radio the last couple of days, driving to and from work, KSL, and I'm hearing 20% a lot.

Of people are asking their customers to cut back by 20%.

Just looking at it, um, my gut tells me that we're gonna need to be we're gonna need to do better than that.

We need to be up around 30 percent, and we were close to 30 percent between 2020 and 2021.

2021 was a our 2020 was a record delivery year for us, almost 18,000 acre feet, and we implemented these things that we've talked about today the following year and a drought year in 2021, and we've seen um six thousand acre feet saved, so almost that 30 percent that we'll probably be looking for this year.

Sure, something while we're on this page.

So there's two ways for us to implement um our restrictions.

The first one is through this plan, we have the ability in our departments to put out there that we're gonna be in a phase two um shortage, and so that people need to water two days a week.

And talking with Craig recently, um, our attorney, the there's also a way for the mayor to make a proclamation.

And so that's something that we might want to consider as we move into the summer if we're not seeing a lot of compliance or if we're not seeing a reduction.

What that proclamation does is it allows you all to ratify that proclamation, and if then it becomes from a civil offense to a criminal offense.

And so it's more enforceable.

Uh I know Craig prefers that because that's what he does.

But uh but in a in a sense that in a sense, he and I say that because honestly, it is his opinion.

It gives us more tools.

It gives us uh a better way to to really uh enforce it if needed.

Um so that's something that we want to have out there have considered if necessary.

Uh in years past we haven't gone that route.

We haven't felt that we needed to.

This year scares us.

You know what I mean?

Uh we hope that it scares everybody else out there too, just like some of our previous drought years, like Matt talked about in 2021-22.

We saw good compliance.

And so we're very hopeful that that'll be the case.

We hope with some of the new tools that we have with being able to share with people what they're actually using, things like that as we move forward, that they'll buy in and that kind of thing as well.

One of the things that we've talked about a lot, it's interesting this year.

Um in 2022, I don't know if you all remember, but because it was also a statewide drought, the governor and the state really put a strong emphasis on that it was a statewide issue.

We haven't seen that messaging come out yet.

We've seen a lot of messaging coming out through the news.

We've seen a lot of messaging coming out in other ways.

Um, but we're not seeing it from the state.

That concerns us personally.

Um I think my own opinion and and that whether this is right or wrong, I do not know.

I'm I'm concerned that they're putting such a heavy emphasis on the Great Salt Lake.

And the water that Matt talked about that we've leased in the past, all of that water is now being leased and it's being sent to the Great Salt Lake.

That's why we anticipate it not being available for anybody else in the future.

Because it's all going to be tied up on the Great Salt Lake.

Because that is one of the mayor's major goals is to keep that lake filled and viable to a point.

Um our concern is we're not hearing a lot of that messaging from the state and statewide.

And if we really felt like 2022 was a huge year for residents to really buy in because it was an issue statewide.

Um this year, I'm not hearing that same messaging, which I'd love to start to hear, but I'm concerned that they're conflicted at a state level because they're saying we're going to send all this water to the Great Salt Lake, but hey, we don't really have a lot of water.

Like I said, just my own opinion.

I don't know how else to read it.

Um maybe it's something else.

But so we're gonna I think as cities and municipalities and utilities, we're gonna have to get our own messaging out.

Um I'd love to see it, like I say, more as a statewide issue.

Um I know the news media is putting it out there, but hopefully it will get some support from the state as well, because it really did make a big difference.

But hopefully we've learned from the past and and people will comply.

That's that's all I have.

If you guys have any other questions.

Go ahead.

Um in 2021, did you have fines for violations?

We did not.

No, I mean the what we had was implemented.

They they were available to us, we didn't find anyone.

Okay, but and you saw um just by messaging that there was a change in use.

Yeah.

And like I said, in 2022, in 2021, we saw we saw a reduction.

2022 we saw even more, and we really attributed it to being a statewide issue and this then and so much messaging going out from the state that people really bought in.

So we saw significant reduction.

We hope that'll happen again this year with people seeing what the situation is and if we can get the messaging outright, what we're dealing with.

Okay.

And then have you um I know the environmental sustainable committee is really interested in this.

They've been working on messaging that they would like to include in the Lehigh Ledger or online or whatnot.

Um and like we had a whole meeting, multiple meetings about it with all of their things.

I don't know if they're if you have tapped into there, then, but they seem like a good resource as citizens.

I met I met with the sustainability um committee.

It's been several months ago, but I I forwarded them a bunch of reports from several years that I have going over water use and and water availability during that year and would be happy to continue to work with them because I think they'd be a great resource as well.

Okay.

And Todd has been included in that uh meeting that Matt mentioned that we've been having with a group of us.

So yes, they have been involved in in those.

So he's okay.

I've just been to those meetings and I know they have a bunch of tips they've put together.

Um we are not allowed to reuse our gray water.

Is that what I understand?

We cannot reuse our water.

Right.

So a couple of years ago um uh TSSD started a project to look at producing reuse water, because it'll help them with their permitting and that sort of thing.

We were one of the first cities to say we would absolutely love to participate and be able, because we're close enough to the plant that we could bring that water back and utilize it in our secondary irrigation system.

A year after that process started, because of the focus last year on the Great Salt Lake, our state legislature put a hard stop to all new um reuse projects.

And that is currently still DOA, dead-on arrival.

Um TSSD is trying to resurrect it.

Uh they still feel it's critical for their operations.

There's uh engineering firm out there that's done a lot of research, believes that it will not harm the Great Salt Lake to do research reuse.

We we feel very strongly that it's a critical part of our future, that it needs to happen, but it's not going to happen in the time frame that we had originally hoped.

We had hoped in the next year or two we would have some reuse water available.

But that was based on two years ago us starting the process, if that makes sense.

But currently, no, there's not reuse of water available, and the state has put a stop to any reuse projects.

So because of the state, we are not allowed to do that.

Correct.

And the reuse would have to come through Timpanogus, the sewer district, because they're the ones that would produce that water that we could then take back and use.

Okay, so tonight you want us to ratify uh something that is going to have either for the first violation of using pressurized irrigation more than twice a week within or within within 48 hours or closer to 40 hours.

They'll get a warning uh like a notice.

The second violation, they will get a hundred dollar fine, and the third violation is a five hundred dollar fine.

Right.

Um compared to other cities, it seems a little bit high to go to five hundred dollars.

Can you explain?

And then I heard that a fourth violation can consider turning off their water.

So I don't think a fourth, it would have to be several at the at the 500.

You know what I mean?

That and honestly, in years past we haven't done any fines.

Do you know what I mean?

Um it was just basically nice to have it available in our tool belt for those that are repeat of our agregious offenders.

So how would you know that they are offenders and how would you enforce that?

Any anybody with a meter, we can track that use.

We would know if they were using it daily or every other day, or we can track that use with anybody with a meter.

And if they don't have a meter, then it it wouldn't be a word to word to mouth thing.

It would be it it's it's not gonna be a neighbor calling in a neighbor, it would be us physically seeing that usage.

And just say, no, we're not you use the word ratify.

This is already on our books.

We can already do this in a sense.

We're just trying to get the two documents to match up the the exact same language.

We're taking out there's an education course option, but we don't have the course or anything with that.

So the previous city council made the decision to do these fines at this level.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

I was just going to say, having been a resident during that time before, um, I thought it was incredibly helpful the PR and the social media campaigns that were done.

Um to have like the rates shown, and this is how much you're saving, this is how well we're doing.

I think that the response was really great.

I can understand why it never went to feast, because I think our residents respond really well when the the education component is there.

So that's what I would encourage is starting that with our social media team and PR.

We have some pretty great interns that are doing some fun stuff.

So I think that's and they're on our committee, and we will be doing exactly that.

Okay.

I I need you to know that these will not be quick to hand out fines.

Okay.

These will not be a quick process.

This will be us putting all of our efforts forth that we have in the past, educating information, um, hoping uh and and expecting people to really chip in and comply.

That that's our that's our first primary.

Is the thought with these fines because we aren't metering the water just yet, but we will in the future.

So in the future, you could then discharge them more.

Is that yes, yeah.

In the future, the goal and hope is that with our what's once we set our water once we set our PI rates and tiered rates, that people it'll hurt once they if they start to use more than they should be, like, then they would be paying for it.

You know what I mean?

And that's where so I live in Eagle Mountain.

We don't have a secondary system, we're in a culinary system.

I water my lawn with the culinary water.

And so they have tiered rates that if you use more than you should, you're gonna pay for it.

And it hurts, you know what I mean?

For most of us, there are some people that don't care and have the money and they want to pay for it.

Um but you know, with our current system, there's no incentive for people to reduce because they have acts, they have they pay their 15, 20 bucks a month and they can use whatever they want.

And that's just not a world that we can continue to live in, um, being the third driest state in the nation.

That's just not feasible.

Um, you know, and we've got to change our culture.

That was one of the we were down at what's called the Utah Water Users Conference last month, and the guys from the state, um, the meteorologists that do all the forecasting, one of them said something that's really stuck with me.

He just said, you know, in Southern, we were down in St.

George for the conference.

He said Southern Utah has shifted the culture.

Grass is not the normal thing that you put in as part of your landscape anymore down there if they want to continue to grow.

He said Northern Utah hasn't figured out that the culture has to shift.

And I I've been in this business for over 25 years, and that has been my concern my whole career is that in Northern Utah, I do not understand why we just cannot shift the culture.

Even with the droughts that we've had, even with the shortages that we've had in 2021, 22.

I hoped it would take hold.

It hasn't.

As soon as we got a couple of good water years, everybody just goes back to what we're used to.

We have to figure out how to shift the culture.

And that's going to come up back to us and you guys and figuring out what are we really willing to do when it comes to new development.

We're kind of losing some of our ground because we're we're building out quickly.

You know what I mean?

There's there's a new uh development up on the hill that just put in a huge detention basin with tons of grass on all the sidewalls of the slopes.

And I can tell you that Matt loses sleep over at night over those kind of things.

Uh it just drives them crazy.

And it me too.

But it's it just it's hard to watch the continuation of us landscaping in ways that just don't make sense for where we live.

Trevor Burrus, Jr.: And that's one suggestion I have is is maybe Kim uh can work with you guys on proposing new development standards to lessen the grass.

Right.

And we some of those have been put forward, and we had to adopt some of Central Utah's ordinances, which a lot of that's in there, but there's there's no way we've had no mechanism to enforce it.

So it just doesn't get enforced.

So the question is what is in there that makes sense.

What could we add in addition?

And then the biggest question is how do we then implement and enforce it?

Does that make sense?

How do we require somebody when they're building their house to have a landscape plan that meets the requirements, then somebody could go out and inspect and say, yes, you put in what you said you would put in.

Because that's that's not happening today.

I mean, can that be part of the inspection process for I'm sure it could, yeah, but it adds a layer of inspections that we can't currently have.

I tell you that they what they don't have staff for.

We would have to have the ability to have staff to do that kind of thing.

And then you'd have to have somebody that's able to watch it over time and make sure people aren't changing it.

You know what I mean?

And that's like I said, that's what Southern Utah has figured out.

That's what they're doing.

You know what I mean?

And so Rachel, you had emailed me earlier about and in the in the concerns that you have.

Um I've looked into it as much as I can.

I don't see any reason why that couldn't be taken out if you really want to do that tonight.

Um just so the FYI, if that came up during the policy session.

Because there's some info, there's some stuff in our in our water management plan, right?

Our conservation plan that says that we could incentivize people with a digital density or things like that.

I and I don't I don't know when that got put in.

I think it was a few years ago as part of an update.

I know it didn't come directly from us, that language, but I don't feel like those things need to be incentivized.

I think if people want to keep building, that's enough incentive to say we need to make a change.

Do you know what I mean?

Because that's what that's what um I've been to several conferences over the last three, four years, and and uh Washington County water conservancy district is is presented at several of them.

And they literally went to all of the home builders and said, you either have 500 more homes that we can can that we can support in this county at the current way that we build and landscape, or if you will change the way that you landscape, um we can build 5,000 more.

Which do you want?

What are you willing to do?

What do you think Tom Builders did?

They all said we want 5,000 more homes, so we'll do whatever it takes.

You know what I mean?

Because that's how they make their money.

And so and if you drive down there, which I've gone down there a few times this year, I just got back last week, there is development everywhere down there.

Um it's shocking to see how much development, but it's all going in with low maintenance landscape.

Let me ask a question real quick.

How do we how are we handling school district commercial level type so like who do you know on the school district board that we could have influence with?

I mean, school districts get to do whatever they want to do, and we don't have any say in it.

The frustrating part about the school districts is not only how they plant, um they put grass in all those unusable areas, but they were irrigating yesterday.

Yeah.

I I reached out to Stephanie, um, our administrative assistant had her reach out to Travis to get a hold of them and give them a violation warning of using before April 15th.

They were irrigating yesterday.

And so much of it is unusable.

That's the frustrating part as somebody who delivers water is I watch nonstop of where we where we put sod.

And we continue to plant and irrigate like it is an infinite resource and it is not.

I think that's where we start if we're gonna change our code or whatever.

Um the unusable space where grass it's pretty there, but you know, it's not needed.

Something better can go on.

Yeah, yeah.

I have one suggestion.

I'll wait until the regular agenda because it's gonna come up again for a vote.

Um, but just for time's sake, I'll save that question.

I sorry, can I go?

Would you like one more question?

Yes, I'm um have you what do you think about recommending watering between certain hours or not recommending water in between?

That according to ordinances require that that there are limit tights overnight that they need to water.

Okay.

Um years ago, when I first started here 10 years ago, that was a challenge, especially for our parks department because we had some uh deficiencies in some of our water line sizes and things like that.

We've corrected most of that in the last 10 years.

It's not as a big issue now.

We can water, people can water overnight, have pressure, the things that they need to.

In the past, if while everybody was watering at night, if you went out and watched the parks, uh you would see that they had this cute little round circle of green grass because they didn't have enough pressure.

Um but that's those systems have been updated over the last 10 years, and so that's not as big of an issue.

So no.

And then one of the other things that's come up in previous years is there's this whole belief that it's an odd-even thing is the way to go, right?

This side of this odd even odd numbers do one night, the evens the other night.

My concern with that in my career is then you're encouraging people to water more than twice a week.

If you say you water ivory odd, you water every even.

And people are like, well, what if everybody waters the same night?

Well, let's test it and see.

What we found out is that's not a problem.

We've been able, if people self-monitoring, so people doing it on their own, choosing what two days of the week that they want to water in our previous experiment a couple years ago, we were fine.

We were able to keep our reservoirs at a level that were safe for um both the irrigation and for our fire flows, because that's where we our fire flows are is in our PI system.

Um we were we we did just fine.

And so it's the kind of that self-governance.

It worked out well to allow people to self-govern which days they felt were best.

And we didn't see that everybody watered the same day, if that makes sense.

Let me just uh verify one last thing and then we'll we'll be done.

So tomorrow is the 15th.

So technically we are on level two where people can water twice a week, period, correct?

Yep.

And that does begin tomorrow, although we've I know there's some encouragement going out that they don't start till May 1st.

We are asking us and all of our neighboring cities are asking everybody to wait till May 1 to irrigate.

And some cities are even asking their residents to wait till May 15.

So May one um this time of year.

If if you watered one time now between now and the first of May, I mean, it'd do your lawn a ton of good.

I've not irrigated mine yet.

It looked awful before our rainstorms the first of April.

I fertilized when I knew the rain was coming, and you would not be able to tell I've not watered my lawn.

Um I do give weekly reports.

Uh that those are sent to admin and other folks throughout the city.

I will keep an eye on this as we move forward what real water supply looks like and and what we're using and provide continual reports and and uh hopefully we can get through without anything tragic.

Great.

Thank you.

And and use us.

I know myself I've already written an article that will go out on May 1, so use us as we can to assist if needed.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, item number two, small business advisory council discussion.

Um Council members Harrison, we'll start with you on this.

Yeah.

Um so this item I'm gonna um propose tabling this for now just because we've had some changes that we all haven't been able to review.

Um thank you to Marlin for his his work on editing.

Um I think I'll cover some of the changes in the last few days.

Um Heather had some really good edits, so I'll just kind of bullet point those for everyone.

I think you should have received an email from Marlin in the last few minutes uh with the most recent um edits, and then a couple, I guess, questions we can bring up for discussion.

So some of the things we've s we've strengthened the document is to make make sure it's an advisory only um and not a policy making committee, right?

It's like the parks, trails and trees committee.

They're sure, Marlon.

Um and then there's there's a few other uh two-year terms, but no limit on those terms because obviously there's gonna be businesses that are around for a long time, but they do have to reapply for appointment.

Um another thing that Heather brought up rightly so is uh I think there was an exception for the full there's uh the qualifying businesses who can send a representative, it's fifty full-time employees or less.

I think there was a provision in there that made an exception.

I don't I don't see any reason why there would be an exception unless I think Heather, you mentioned like unless it's like a very niche industry that we think should be represented, they may have 60, right?

Right.

Um committee participation when those committees are formed, making it mandatory for those members.

Um meetings instead of quarterly would be every 60 days, just to make it more um frequent.

Uh voting majority would be not the majority of those members, but those members present at the meeting, um, which makes a lot of sense.

Um the also for the so to meet the qualifications to apply to be in the small business advisory council, they need to maintain those qualifications throughout the life of their term.

And if they don't, let's say they go from 40 employees to 100, they need to resign or inform the chair um and they'll they'll leave the committee.

Also the one thing I've I recognize a couple days ago it said business owner, but I think it would be appropriate if a business owner could appoint someone else to to be part of the council.

Virtual or hybrid meetings would also be allowed.

And then also having a periodic review of the effectiveness of the council every five years.

So those are some of the new edits in the last few days.

I think one I'm just going back to my notes.

Let's see.

Something that we should probably discuss if I can find my email.

Marlon, do you have anything to add to that until I No, as I went through it, I tried to take everything out that was like voting and put in recommendations.

So I also, as I put this together, now again, complete draft form, so we still really need to massage it, was uh that they do not need to follow the uh Utah the rules for public hearing and stuff like that.

Uh now, if you as a council decide that they need to, then obviously we can put that information back in.

But I set it up as a uh past chair, chair, vice chair, and then a secretary that's responsible for maintaining the minutes of that.

Um, but I did not have that fall under the uh the public meeting notices and stuff like that.

Uh I did put in there that staff and or public and or private could be designated as the secretary to be in that.

Um but again, I tried to strip out anything that would lead to setting policy for you as council.

It purely becomes a recommendation approval by 50% of those that are there and present at the meeting.

We have to have at least 50% of the membership there to form a quorum uh to even have the meeting.

Uh the chair is the one that sets the chair and the vice chair set the agenda.

Um I put it as a standing committee that that's what the chair and vice chair oversee, and then they can create an ad hoc committee if they so desire to really deep dive into an issue that's been brought forward.

So I do need to, there are a couple things, James, that you brought up that we do need to make sure are in there to include the the five-year uh implementation by the council as a review.

Uh and there's a couple, but I think there's one or two other items that you brought up that I need to make sure got slid in.

But the rest of it, I've really tried to strip out a lot of those things.

Yeah, I think the other big part too was making that uh what was previously a city liaison a more kind of defined and robust role that that is going to be an advocate.

So we have the difference between a council liaison and a small business advocate who's a staff member.

Oh, and I left it as liaison.

I need to change it.

I did start with advocate.

Uh the beginning part starts with the advocate, but the end uh I did leave in the liaison, so I've got to change that to the advocate.

But I did put that as city council member as the advocate as well as an alternate uh being decided by council and mayor.

What is the problem with them both being liaisons?

Because I've looked in other cities and they have uh they have a staff liaison and a city council liaison.

So it's just like, you know, I mean, the committees I'm on, there's a staff member and there's a liaison.

And I I mean I'm not on a committee, I'm a liaison.

Correct.

I'm a liaison to, there's a staff member who's there also.

I think I'm gonna speak out of turn, so please correct me.

I think the advocate was the term advocate was being used as the city council is the advocate for the business community and the lead and the the bridge between the council, the city and the small business community.

So the term advocate was preferred to be used by liaison.

Or was it the other?

Yeah, it's the other way around.

It was the other way around.

Yeah, so city council is a liaison.

That's the committee can function with or without the liaisons.

But the advocate is a staff member that basically helps facilitate.

Oh, so the staff member, so I left that as the public, uh, the public side that so I can be on as staff, Kim could be on a staff mic, whoever is designated.

I think it'll also be determined as to what the recommendations are or what are they looking at?

Is it going to be water issue?

Well, then we might want somebody the public works on.

Um if it's in regards to the business community, then we would probably want Kim myself on.

So I think that's going to kind of change a little bit based on the recommendations.

So we'll have to work with whoever the city liaison is as well as the chair to ensure that we're fulfilling those needs.

So we might want to spill that out a little define that a little bit more.

Just because seeing like the staff members typically would be the one to go back and forth between the different departments defining policy and working it through.

I don't really typically see a city council member facilitating in that way is more that they are.

So do we want the city council member removed from the documentation?

I think we'd want at least the city council is the liaison on the you know if if the council member can inform the mayor and the rest of the council on what's going on while the staff can inform departments and keep them up to date within the city staff.

Okay.

And that staff member can really help the the business council know current policy, what you know, they're gonna have a much better information on that than the like a city council leader.

Exactly.

That's what I'm envisioning is we we become the support staff to provide the historical, uh, what is current ordinance and stuff like that.

Things that can be researched, whatever cities are doing, those kind of tasks.

Why why is the ordinance in place today?

So I have a question with that.

Are we going to have this committee directing staff to do work without coming to the council first?

No, I think so they I think in the document they're required to present twice per year to council formally.

So that's when they can make their recommendations.

Um the kind of the the relationship between the staff advocate between staff and the council itself is just to facilitate sharing of information and getting resources to the small business council as far as like, hey, can you tell us about a certain regulation?

Um vice versa, right?

If so if if they need to inform staff of hey, we're having trouble with this across the business community, then staff can look into it and they can work together to put together a formal recommendation to the council.

Well, that's what I'm asking then.

To me, that's like directing staff to work on a project.

Um to me I see it a little different because the committees that I am liaison to, there's a staff member, and they help them anyways.

They connect like the environmental society mill community, the park shall treat committee, but I know that one of the committees is looking at changing their code and changing their policy, and I know that me as liaison, I have to kind of advocate for them if they're wanting to do that.

And I just think a staff member is going to be there.

That's hopefully I know y'all are good, and so whichever staff members there is gonna help this committee.

And I think it might be an evolving process as we see what this ends up happening, like maybe we'll have to reevaluate in six months or what whenever, you know.

It's kind of it's it's a new thing.

So I think it would be good to keep it a little broader and just have staff member and then see is what's working, what's not working, and kind of go from there.

That's the first draft that staff member kind of read as a secretary, taking notes in those kind of things.

So it seemed like more of the staff members probably gonna be typically what you would see a staff member be on these other boards.

You know, kind of like what you see Kim being on the planning commission.

So yeah, so when we originally put it together, the thought, the train of thought was that we were gonna have to follow the um public meeting laws.

So we were gonna have a staff member like Tisha or Katie or somebody there to take the actual minutes and verify them everything like that.

But since we've changed, and again, it if council wants it put back in place, we can.

So when we changed it to where they can designate a secretary, then I from my perspective, what I would envision, I think is what Rachel's talking about, is we would have a staff member or two members, but for example, Kim and I would be liaison to this uh group, and we would be present for all meetings to be able to answer the questions that they have.

Okay, where can we find this?

Um can you help us understand this?

Why is this ordinance in place?

And maybe be that that person that helps kind of direct and okay, as a recommendation comes forward, um, become that advocate to say, okay, here's how you might want to put your recommendations together to be to be able to bring before um city council.

So I guess that's to answer your question, Michelle.

Yes, I would envision that there would be some staff time that would have to be dedicated to this.

Yeah, that makes me nervous.

I don't because there don't be more employees kind of thing.

I've already got an ask for an employee for this.

Um to chime in on that point.

I just the planning commission can ask staff to do work.

Um mission is very different and they get paid and they're uh it's state law to have that.

This is something very different.

So that's my concern.

And the other concern I had is if we create uh committee by ordinance, I believe they have to follow the open meeting act.

Is that correct, Ryan?

So they would have to be Yeah, we've talked.

I mean, it doesn't mean they have to follow Robert's rules necessarily.

No, we're talking like posting notices.

No, but then we have to follow the open meeting law.

We have to post it.

We will have to then that would probably require more staff time because we would then have to record it.

The meeting minutes would have to be transcribed.

Um those would have to be made available.

So we would have to just when Tisher posts everything like she does for city council agenda, everything like that, this would now become another line item on that.

Our meetings would become public.

We'd have to post the 14-day notice or at least a probably what seven-day or at least 14-day notice on that.

So I have to say that I'm part of a liaison to two committees, and they just record it.

It doesn't have to be video, it can just be audio.

And they designate like the chair who's a citizen, just either does the minutes or ask someone else to do the minutes.

So it's an actual so it doesn't have to be this like the staff member does record it and sends it to Tisha, but it doesn't have to necessarily be all this on on the staff, like to do it.

The chair can really like it's citizen led, like citizen kind of empowered, I guess.

And I I agree with that.

Yeah.

Yeah, go ahead.

Sorry.

The yeah, because the committee, one of the committees I'm on is in state statute, and we do that, and it's I don't know if I've ever seen minutes, but we do record it.

We have an agenda that is posted.

But again, I think my biggest concern is if you're having staff research something, you know, draft policy, that kind of thing.

Um that's a lot of work that and we have no control over where that goes and how much time that's gonna demand of staff.

So I guess that's my biggest.

Yeah, I think I think I'd still recommend that the um the advisory council themselves put that together, and if they have questions, they can go to staff.

And the way I see it is we're actually overall in the city, the goal for this is to reduce the amount of individual questions coming from multiple businesses at you know throughout the weeks and months and years and consolidating it into a new vehicle to get information to and from the city, which actually I think in the big picture would reduce the burden on staff, if that makes sense.

A possible solution for moving forward would be if somewhere in the um ordinance it could say if the committee so desires to change a policy, their city council liaison would would lead that out.

And currently, you know, two council members can engage to some degree with staff, right, before it becomes something that the whole body needs to address.

That's a quick solve, right?

And so um I still like I I don't want to lose out on their opportunity to have input.

Um, but I also share the same concern as Michelle of ri reading reading the original draft.

I was concerned about needing a full-time staff member to facilitate this and the increase of FTEs.

Um so yeah, I think there's a fine balance.

But if you're if the council member liaison is willing to take on the policy role to the extent that they can within the code, I think that solves the problem.

I I think too, James touched on it.

Residents can reach out and ask questions of staff at any point.

Um but I think that this is something where staff would be very mindful of the amount of time that they're putting into something.

It's like you have an idea, we've generated it at the liaison brings it to council.

Is this something we then want to instruct um staff on to move forward on policy and writing?

I think the direction to move forward on any kind of policy writing or that kind of level of work would come from the council.

But if we don't have at least some kind of level of staff involvement, it just what does it even matter?

Why, you know, how is this really going to be effective and and helping, why don't why don't we just have businesses form their own chamber and be able to come and do it this way.

So this is something very different where we do want to have the city involved.

If we're gonna do it at that level, it is going to have to take a little bit of staff time.

Yeah, and I would I would say the staff, I mean the staff is there to um teach a man to fish, right?

As opposed to just giving the fish.

So I think you know, being there present in the meetings, you can answer questions and say, well, I don't know that answer, I'll get it to you.

I I do want staff to be protective of their time.

Um and the way I mean we have presentations all the time from different committees, the park tax committee, others that put together their own presentations or recommendations, and then they give it to council, and then we take that.

And if it's a great recommendation, then we take it upon ourselves and staff to to direct and use resources.

But again, the advocate term I like because you're with them, you're answering questions in the moment, you're providing resources, but not beyond a certain threshold of like, holy cow, we need a part-time employee for this.

So maybe if I could make a recommendation first, let me the document you received today, do not review.

If that's okay with council to modify that.

Number two, uh maybe what we do is staff is uh the advocacy during the meeting, hour-long meeting.

Um if anything above and beyond that comes out where there's an additional research or something like that, the chair gets with the city liaison and says, hey, we we need X, Y, and Z, then the city liaison can direct if they want to come back to staff to take a look at it.

So that could tamper the time.

I like the direction you go on, one thought.

Maybe if there's a project that takes significant staff time, maybe the council liaison can bring it back to the council, say, hey, this is what they're thinking.

Do you favor that?

You know, get the three, say, yeah, that's a good idea, and then you can go with it.

Yeah.

And and maybe that's just part of the recommendation that they bring that forward if staff, if the council says, hey, we like the direction of that recommendation, then the council directs staff, hey, Kim Marlin, whoever it happens to be, we would like you to take an ad hoc committee deeper dive into coming forward with an actual full recommendation, whether it's ordinance or whatever it happens to be.

So we can rewrite and put that, make that a little more solidified in the document so it states that more clearly if that's okay.

Yeah.

That works right.

I look forward to reading that.

Thank you.

I prefer it to just be called staff member.

That's my preference.

Yeah, the advocate is that's just my preference being looking at all the other committees that I have looked at at their rules.

But um but thanks for all of your work and I look forward to reviewing it.

Not a problem.

So advocate being staff member, liaison being city council member.

And I think if if if it's okay with the council, if we can get, I guess we'll work on a draft in the next day or two.

Yep.

I will have it hopefully back out to you before by tomorrow afternoon.

Okay, and if we could get feedback from the council by next Tuesday before the next agenda is posted, that would be ideal.

And if we're all aligned, then we can vote on it.

Yeah, I I just want to chime in.

I agree with Rachel and Michelle.

I would prefer to see staff member than the word advocate.

Um then happy to give my feedback.

I just wanted to let the council know that today um Heather and I had an opportunity to, we were at a lunch event, and there was a business uh a resident of Lehigh who um started bringing us the very issues that this count this um council would need to hear from the small business council, right?

And when we told them this was on the agenda tonight and this was gonna happen, you know, possibly happening, they were so excited and felt like there wasn't going to be an opportunity to engage and be heard.

And so I just wanted to reaffirm my support for this and appreciate all the time given by James and Marlon to make it happen.

Okay, we'll get it taken care of.

Thank you, Council Mayor.

Thanks, Mark.

You good?

Councilmember Harrison, we're good.

Okay.

Um we'll go to item number three, uh, commercial and low density residential buffering discussion.

Uh Kimmy, you've got 20 minutes.

I may yield to you uh 10.

So let's go through this and see what we get, okay?

Okay, we'll see how far we get.

I don't want to limit Mike from being able to at least present a little bit.

So we're getting a little bit short here.

Okay.

I am gonna start out.

Let's see.

You want a more full talk about it?

There we go.

Mr.

Mayor, I don't know if you heard that, but you say if you wanted to spend more time on this, Mike can always come back and do the bike bike plan later.

We also have the closed session that we we do need some time for as well.

Are you okay with that, Mr.

West?

You're fine to come back.

Council, are you okay if we push this item to uh the next pre-ORA work session?

Thanks, Mike.

Great, thank you.

Thanks, Mike.

Okay.

I yield back to you 10 minutes.

Okay, 10 minutes.

620.

I'll be done at 6.30.

I don't know if we'll be done with the discussion, but we'll be done.

Um so this we have been balancing around this draft um of our buffering and screening.

There's actually an item later on the agenda that you'll have an opportunity to take action on.

It was more of a kind of an immediate low-hanging fruit that you asked us to quickly address where do the buffering standards apply to only property that's zoned residential, or if it's an existing home, even though it's commercial.

So that that will be later tonight.

But in the interest of time, instead of going through all this, what I did was I I created a PowerPoint that I'll just run through.

And I I tried to just summarize all the big issues, and we'll see what you think.

So this uh this is kind of based on that draft that I was showing you.

And like I said, it's been circulating a little bit with with some of the city council, but so this is the first time I think we've had an opportunity to discuss it as a group.

And tonight is just for general discussion based on your input, then we would then bring bring that draft to a little bit more of a robust discussion, kind of like we talked about, and then later, if everybody's comfortable with that, we'd move it forward for action.

So this kind of illustrates what we're talking about.

You know, you're in a commercial area adjacent to a residential.

What are the appropriate buffering and screening requirements that we should have?

So this is out of that newly drafted, we're trying to consolidate the language a little bit, but we're just trying to say the whole purpose of this is to mitigate, not necessarily eliminate, because I don't think you'll ever, I don't know, maybe in some cases you could get really close to eliminating all of the effects of living next to commercial activities.

But we're trying to be realistic.

Um I know we've had issues in the past where you know it's almost like this expectation that hey, I shouldn't see here or you know, have any impacts, and it's like uh you chose to live in an area that is in proximity to a commercial use, but we're gonna do our best to minimize them.

So that's kind of the purpose statement.

And then the applicability, this would be for all uh non-residential zoning districts.

Whenever they side or back onto a residential zoning district, or and we've added it in this new draft existing residential uses, even if they're in a commercial zone.

So that would be the applicability.

One of the big things in this is fencing.

And I think this is probably the best buffer out of all the requirements.

I think this would be the one we'd want to make sure we get right.

Um so what we're proposing is a six-foot tall fence for typical commercial zones, and then an eight-foot fence for our heavier zones like light industrial, heavy commercial, technical manufacturing, some of those where you probably have some really intensive noise and other uh impacts that could be going on.

So if it's just uh an office building next to a neighborhood, six foot, but if it's you know it's got a construction yard or whatever, that then goes to eight foot.

So the height is one issue, and then the material is the other one.

So right now our code, it just says six foot side obscuring, so that could be chain link with slats, it could be vinyl, it could be wood.

So this uh our proposal would be to modify that to say it has to be either masonry, which would be like literally, you know, they put cinder blocks or bricks or whatever, build a masonry wall, uh pre-cast concrete where they set the posts and then they lower the panels in place.

Uh and then similar to that is this lightweight precast fiber reinforced concrete fence, which the most common term that you hear for that is rhino rock.

It's like a a really dense foam in the middle, but it has a concrete shell.

So it has a lot of the same benefits, but it's not quite as expensive as a full pre-cast fence.

Um it's a little bit lighter weight, um, but it still seems to provide a a lot better buffer than what our current standard is.

So I'm just wanting to clarify.

So just to be clear, this is only for those businesses on the edge of their zone.

Mm-hmm.

Approaching residential, right?

Unless there's a home next to them, even if it is commercial next door, if it's a home that's being used as a residence, they'd still have to put these buffers in.

Okay.

Thanks.

If we well, that's if we change the code tonight.

That's currently you're right.

Tonight's uh next item later on the agenda would be what I just described.

So we would have to proactively remind those develop the the business that you're on the edge of that development or you're bordering a home.

So these requirements are different than being in the middle of a commercial zone.

Yep, yeah.

The middle of the commercial zone, there's just like a minimum 10% landscape for their site, so that you know, in the parking lot and adjacent to the streets, they have to have some 10%.

Yeah, the middle of the commercial zone, there's just like a minimum 10% landscape for their site, so that you know, in the parking lot and adjacent to the streets, they have to have some 10% is I guess it goes up to I think it's 15% in light industrial.

Other questions on this part?

So yeah, I think, oh yeah.

Would this just be for new like going forward?

Yeah, yeah, we we couldn't apply this retroactively, at least I don't think so.

Ryan left, but um this would be for any new project as they come in, or if it's a major renovation, you know, if they're if they're reconstructing the site, I think we it would open it up to where we would apply it.

Um there is a provision, and this is already in the code, but it just says um if there's ever a great difference at the property line, the height of the fence should be measured from the higher of the two properties.

So just trying to illustrate, uh, and that's the language.

This doesn't change, but I just wanted to make sure it was clear that we're gonna keep this part of it in there.

Just on this note.

You know the problem where it's it's built on a hill, but the property line's at the bottom of the hill and they put the fence and it does no good kind of thing.

We've had that before.

Have you ever figured out a solution for that?

Or well, yeah, we we dealt with that in a couple of previous instances.

But if and what we determined was if the difference in grade was at the property line, we could have required that fence to be on top, like it's shown here.

But the way they chose to develop the site, they had the wall and then they had space, and then the so if we would have required the fence on top of their wall, it would have been not on the property line.

You know what I mean?

So and it would have given the neighbor more space.

I don't know.

Yep, yeah.

Then they, you know, kind of by de facto they absorb more land because fencing is normally on property line.

So yeah, that one's a challenging one.

I guess you know, each site.

And even if it was, you know, let's say let's take this example, and let's say the grade continues to go up, you still could have a building, even even with all of this in place.

I don't think we'll ever eliminate when you're on grades, you're you're still, you know, there's no way to completely protect their privacy and the visibility of that upper property owner being able to see in, especially if it's a multi-story building.

So I don't know, there's not there's it's this is a difficult issue.

So the new draft or what we're proposing is to kind of put this in a table format.

But this, so how wide should so you've got the fence, and then we require a landscape buffer.

Well, how wide should that be?

And so right now it just is all zones, it just defaults to a 12 foot.

But we feel like maybe the more intense the zone gets, the wider that buffer should get.

So in you know, these neighborhood commercial TOD mixed use, we just keep it at the 12 feet.

That seems to be fine for because those uses that are going to be in those zones are probably a little bit more compatible with residential.

Then when you get to the heavy commercial business park, some of those um zones that might have more intense uses, we go to 15 feet, and then when you get to the even the heavier ones, we go to 20 feet.

So it's it's again it's kind of a balance.

We don't we don't want to be take so much property that then it it literally cuts into what they can even use their property for.

So again, and this is all obviously it's subject to your input if you think this is too much or too little.

We can go either way.

And let me get it just kind of illustrate what that looks like.

So this would be, you know, this here's a one-story building, they just have to meet the 12 feet if it's under 20 feet.

So sorry, and then this slide, this kind of outlines well what types of vegetation would be in that 12 feet.

And so it talks about trees.

Um they can't ever have more than 30 feet between the trees, just because the whole idea is to try to create a little bit of a screen there.

Um we would require tall shrubs.

We used to require low shrubs, but in our drafting of this, we figured that those really don't have an effect on you know the buffering.

So we're we're just going with trees and tall shrubs, which are um I think it's 10 feet tall.

Um I don't know if it says it on this slide.

Um yeah, they have to be larger in size so that you're not waiting 10 years before any of this takes effect.

Um and then yeah, you have to have some evergreens mixed in there so that there's at least some benefit year-round for the screening.

Um you can if there's existing trees on site, you could use those and then not more than any four 40% of any one plant, just so they don't have all the same.

We we think a mix, and that was something that the our urban forester recommended to have kind of a mix of tree types.

Okay, so now in this case the building is taller.

So for if you go over 20 feet, we add another foot for every additional foot of building height over 20 feet.

So in this case, in this model, the building's 55 feet tall, so now you have a 47-foot setback.

So you just start to create a little bit more breathing space so that you know it tries to take into account you've got windows and things, it separates that building a little bit more.

Um and they can, you know, again, we we're trying to not limit the usability of the site.

So we do say some of that additional buffer can be used for parking and dry vials, as long as they maintain the minimum buffer at the property line.

So yeah, there's um there's that one.

And there are some exceptions currently, and we want to keep some of those, but um so we could the planning commission is the way it's written currently, but they could allow an exception if the adjacent owner consents in writing.

If the property uh adjacent is a uh commercial or non-residential land use designation on the general plan, even though it may not today be zoned non-residential.

And then we wanted to make sure if there was ever any right to farm issues that that would take precedence over any buffer reduction.

And then there are currently some flexibility standards for mixed use zone and the the I guess the consensus so far from where this has been circulated.

Maybe we just take that out so everybody meets the same standard.

I know we put that in there for the mixed use because mixed use is challenging.

It's a lot of times smaller pieces where it might be basically prohibitive to even do the buffering, but I guess we can try it and see how it works.

Um that's that's all I have.

Did I?

I went over three minutes.

Sorry, Mayor.

Any questions for Kim?

Thank you, Kim.

Um I would just talking to residents about this who live in the who live this life where they are backed on to commercial.

I would I would be in favor of having the eight foot wall minimum requirement for them.

I just across the I mean I'm over six feet tall, so I can easily look over people's fence as I'm walking.

And I just think it, you know, if to me that's not that's not tall enough, I guess.

Um it is for the neighborhood fence, and I guess people don't care if I walk past their fence and look for their yard, but I just think having the commercial uh anything right next to residential, I do want to protect both zones and and just create kind of like this nice um buffering between them.

So yeah.

That was my concern too, is mostly the fence height is for privacy.

Yeah.

Not necessarily noise is some of it too, I guess.

But I'm but I know that that's expensive, right?

When you get into an eight-foot fence.

Cost goes up quite a bit.

Yeah.

But if if our priority is to create this buffer, we you know, we could modify that.

And I know we've had some comments from the public, and there's an individual here that would probably prefer that eight foot, and we're happy to, you know, whatever the majority feels is the the appropriate regulation.

We'll change it.

I just had two comments.

So the adjacent property owner, the the only concern I have about that is that property owner may move.

Right?

Oh, if they consent to a reduction.

If they consent to it and then a week later they move and the new owner comes in and they're not okay with it.

Um and then the second thing, if if you have a very small, you kind of mentioned this already, but if you have a very small lot and they need to have 20 foot buffer, and that's maybe they're on a third of an acre, right?

That takes up like, you know, a third of their property.

So I don't know if we want to make it more of a ratio on a lot that's under a certain size.

Does that make sense?

Yeah.

Yeah, we could lose.

Just so they have space for their building.

So maybe we have a separate regulation for properties that are under Yeah, under a certain threshold.

And we'll you'd have to kind of figure out what that threshold is.

But yeah, that's an interesting.

But I think the 20-foot buffer is just for heavy commercial or light industrial, it's like for the heavy, heavy.

Well, there's 20 or 15.

Yeah, I'm just thinking if you have a very small business that's on a small lot.

That's doing light industrial.

And if it's 15 feet on a fifth of an acre, that's a lot of their lot.

Right.

Yeah.

Um I asked this in some ways, I'm just kind of poking fun, but can you give me an example of a conditional use that the planning commission could actually use in this situation?

But can you give me an example of a conditional use that the planning commission could actually use in this situation?

Oh, for where it mentions the conditional use for the for the fencing or your last slide where that like they could approve it as a conditional use with conditions, but that's not I guess in that case.

So it would it would trigger the planning commission's review, and then they could say we agree with the reduction, or we'll we'll let it be reduced, you know, instead of 12 feet, we'll let it be reduced to 10, but not to five.

So the the condition would be they could impose what they think the limit should be.

I just know that the feedback from legal is always like whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, don't do that.

Don't you know you can't back that up, right?

And so I would prefer to have either permitted or not permitted.

Um I think I think it's no exceptions.

Yeah.

I think it it um I oh and I see the place for an exception, but maybe that's the different path we take.

Is the exception?

I I do not um think the conditional use is an is the right lever to be using.

But that's just my thoughts on that.

And I I'd rather not have conditional uses or exceptions because again, there's the perception or maybe the reality, I don't know, but it's like if they present it or ask for it, they get it kind of thing.

And maybe put have it go through city council for exceptions so that it's not on planning commission.

Or if they're if you have an exception avenue, have very strict criteria for them to be eligible for that exception.

I don't know if that would be instead of just no, we just wonder if we're gonna do that.

Like if you meet these and for example, not saying I agree with this, but a very small lot, or like James was saying, or something, then you can ask for an exception.

Yeah.

But you might as well allow it because we look at it.

I don't know.

I think the thing we see too with like exceptions and conditional use, we try and like there's something we haven't caught.

Like James is you know, catching this right now, it's a smaller lot.

Usually it's something like code can always change.

So like maybe that's a better way to go that we don't have exceptions and conditional use baked in and then see what comes up and we're yeah, we can always change it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, this is just kind of the appetizer.

Like I said, we'll I'll take some feedback.

Is there any consensus on the fence height that you want me to put in there?

Should we go eight foot in all instances?

Or do you are you okay with six?

I I'm right now I'm kind of wondering if the evergreen trees.

If my lot is our neighbors are higher, but we have nice big evergreens that are wonderful here round, if that would be enough.

And again, maybe ask I would want to reach out to residents to see what they think about that, if that would be effective.

Because I do hate putting that cost on you know, the property owner.

Yeah.

Um, but you know, we're I guess we're looking at instances where they're coming in and there's an existing home there.

So it's kind of you know what you're getting into if you buy this.

I don't know.

But I don't have the answer, I guess.

We'll bring back a draft.

You know, leave it the way it is and we'll debate it later.

Okay.

Great.

Thanks, Kim.

Okay, are there uh any agenda items or any questions you have for the regular session tonight?

Not at this time.

Not at this time.

Mr.

Walker, any uh administrative for me?

Uh any updates or calendar items or committee reports for the council?

Mr.

Mayor, I actually have to need I want to report a formal vote that was taken for the Jordan River Commission.

Um I just want the council to know there was a resolution presented to increase the operating budget two and a half percent every single year.

The trickle-down effect of that would be that the membership fees we pay would also increase at that amount every year.

Um I voted to not pass that.

And um it did not pass with a vote of 11 to 8.

And so I just felt like I needed to report that to the council and let you guys know that that is not going to be something that's baked into those expenses that it might happen on a year-to-year basis, but it's not an automatic two and a half that's baked in every year.

Great, thank you.

Any other reports really quick calendar item.

Um we have a second historical marker unveiling on Thursday, this Thursday at 6 p.m.

and it's the Knutson's house, and I'm do not have the address, I'm sorry.

So it should be fun.

Great.

Okay, only other thing is we cut a ribbon to a uh brand new building yesterday.

So welcome.

It's our first official city council meeting in this room, and so it's uh it's nice to have everyone here.

Uh with that, um I will take a consider a motion to enter into a closed session for uh specific purposes allowed under the open and public meetings act, including to discuss the purpose exchange or lease or sale of real property litigation, the character, competence, or physical or mental health of an individual, or any other lawful purpose.

So I mentioned I have a first from a first from Councilmember Harrison and a second from Councilmember Freeman.

All in favor?

I so we'll see what we will go to closed session.

Councilmember Lockhart, our staff, and we welcome you to our council meeting tonight.

We appreciate that you're here and uh we're grateful that we're to move forward.

To start tonight, we'll stand and I'll lead uh the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.

If you'd please rise to the pledge of the United States and to the republic for which stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for the okay tonight's uh we're gonna start with a pretty special item uh in my opinion.

Lehigh city is 174 years old.

This year, so we celebrate the 125th year of the existence of the Lehigh Fire Department.

Uh as you can see, each of our council members tonight has on their honorary fire badges.

Not that we're ready to go fight fire tonight, Chief, but I'm sure that if we were called upon, we would do so.

So we do have a resolution to pass tonight.

I will read that resolution and sign it, and at the end we will maybe gather here in front of the dais for for a photo if that'd be okay.

So a resolution of the Lehigh City Council commemorating the 125th anniversary of the Lehigh Fire Department, whereas this legislative body is just is justly proud to commemorate the anniversary of the Lehigh City Fire Department and to honor its past and present fire fighting members for a hundred and twenty-five years of fire protection for the citizens of Lehigh City, Utah.

And whereas the fire department has been a cornerstone of a community safely uh safety and resilience.

Its inauguration station on Main Street was established in 1901 with a hand-pumped engine, horse-drawn responses, and a team of determined volunteers.

And whereas today the department operates from four stations, reflecting its growth, an unwavering commitment to serving the community.

And whereas the Lehigh Fire Department provides a broad array of services, including fire prevention, fire investigations, incident responses, and comprehensive medical services.

The department also coordinates hazardous materials, technical rescue teams, and wildland fire suppression in collaboration with local county, state, and federal agencies.

And whereas the legislative body cannot express sufficient gratitude to those individuals who recognize that that the preservation of life and property is a sacred responsibility and who make that responsibility their own by serving as firefighters.

And whereas it is the sense of this legislative body that we should give special recognition to those who work so audaciously for the betterment of the community and publicly acknowledge the heroic good works performed by the Lehigh Fire Department, their officers and auxiliaries.

Now therefore, be it resolved that this legislative body of Lehigh City pause in its deliberations to proudly commemorate the 125th anniversary of the Lehigh Fire Department, approved and adopted by the City Council of Lehigh City, Utah, the 14th day of April 2026.

And I will proudly sign that.

So put put your hands together for our Lehigh Fire Department.

Chief, I think it'd be appropriate if your firefighters came and stood in front of the dais and we stood for a picture if you'd be okay with for that.

Thank you, Mayor.

We are honored and proud to serve this community.

Thanks, Chief.

We appreciate that.

Thank you again for attending tonight.

I I know you're probably listening to those uh responder things that you wear everywhere you go.

So thank you again.

Okay, we'll move forward here with the next item.

Uh the next item is citizen input.

So for public comment for items that are not listed tonight in the uh agenda, we will open it up for three minutes uh per comment.

If you do want to make a public comment, we invite you to come up front.

We invite you to state your name, and we'll give you three minutes uh to make your comment.

If you go a little bit longer than three minutes, I may interrupt you and ask you to uh wrap up your comments.

So we will open the public comment at 737.

Good evening, good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Bernie Meller.

I'm a freshman at Willow Creek Junior High, and I'm excited to go to Lehigh High School this coming yeah and be a part of the Lehigh football program.

I want to take a few minutes tonight to thank you for supporting and funding the Lehigh Police Department Citizens Academy.

I was lucky enough to go through this program alongside Mayor Benz, Councilwoman Freeman, and Councilman Harrison, which made the experience even more meaningful.

I also got to do this with my Aunt Angie and my dad, which made it even better.

It was pretty cool to be able to share this experience together.

I also want to give a big thank you to Chief Darren and Darren Paul and Sergeant Thing Call for coordinating this academy.

You can tell a lot of time and effort went into it, and it really made a difference for all of us.

Before this program, I thought I had a decent idea of what the police officer did.

But honestly, I really had no idea how much really goes into it.

During the academy, we got to do some really hands-on and for unforgettable things.

We participated in uh simulated SWAT situation, and even went through some scenarios where there's an active shooter in a school.

And one of the scenarios I had to make the decision to go and stop the perpetrator.

That was pretty intense.

And it really opened my eyes to how serious and fast these situations were.

On top of that, we had to we got to use tasers and shoot nine millimeter firearms and learn about investigations and how those are and how cases are put together.

There was a lot of really cool stuff, but that was something bigger.

I gained real respect for how tough this job is.

Officers are put in situations every day where they must make split section split-second decisions that can impact people's lives.

It's not simple, and it's not always clear what the right answer is in the moment.

Being able to experience even a small part of that gave me a new whole perspective.

Because of this program, I truly believe that Lehigh has some of the best of the best.

Every officer we worked with was professional, patient, and generally cared about helping us understand what they do.

This experience has also changed how I'll act moving forward when I get my driver's license.

Mr.

Mayor, I think that's pretty amazing.

That was our first citizen comment in this building, and thank you for that.

But my family heritage is my grandfather was born here.

Do you mind stating your name real quick?

Jaron Davis, middle name Lee.

My grandfather that was born here is Lee.

Thank you.

Leo.

I've had an opportunity to work in this community for decades.

And it brings a great deal of satisfaction to me to see a community grow as it has, and to be able to be here on the first night of this meeting because I remember meeting across the street and working with Noreen in the basement.

So that's quite an accomplishment.

Dear friends, George and Joyce who owned the Lehigh roller mill, very dear friends, but it takes us back to that time with the dancing in the mill and some fun time.

So congratulations.

Thank you for your comments.

My name is José Zulaga.

I represent uh Western State Unit Carpenters.

It's tax easy.

So it is a estimated that constructed tax fraud is responsible for cheating communities out of millions of dollars and tax revenue.

That's millions of dollars of lost tax revenue that could be usable buildings and renovations, schools, repairing roads, caring for veterans, sheltering homeless, sheltering homes, and funding other essential uh public programs.

The prevailing prevalence of construction industry.

Tax fraud has reached crisis levels that must be stopped.

This April 6th to the 18th local 801 and the United Brotherhood of Carpenters are taking part of the national tax fraud days of action.

A week and a half and a half long series of events to raise awareness about construction industry the tax fraud.

The tax fraud days of action grew out.

Why spread outrage about construction industry tax fraud and range of practice where employers evade their tax responsibilities in several ways.

After they tensionally miscassed classify workers as independent contractors or pay workers in cash only arrangements.

And now as committees are facing budget shortfalls, it's more important than ever to crack down on these bad actors employers who are stealing from our residence in the city of Lehigh and the state of Utah.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Thank you.

My name is Teresa Gonzalez.

Thank you for allowing public input.

I appreciate it.

So I want to give you a little bit of input just from my perspective.

I realize I'm not the only resident, but I did want to give just some input as to my request.

So I live uh along uh a section that's adjacent to West State Street, so between 400 and 1500, which is in the city's general plan to eventually be a commercial zone.

Um only the lot behind my house right now has been rezoned commercial.

Um so this is why I am concerned about the buffering and the screening requirements.

Um but it will affect the that entire stretch, not just my house.

It will affect our entire neighborhood.

Um let me give you a little bit of uh background knowledge.

Um when we bought when we bought our place in 2006, it was an orchard with a resident there.

It was rezoned in 2019 as commercial when it was sold, and I went before the council then and said, hey, would you please address the screening and the buffering requirements?

Then it was uh permit was put in to build.

I again went before the city and just what I'm doing now.

Just uh please address that.

So I this is now the fifth or sixth time.

I as a resident and I'm imploring you to please um uh address that um requirement.

And my main request would be an eight-foot fence.

I did speak with um Kim.

Uh so I I appreciate your input and just said why six foot and not eight foot.

Um and there is a cost that's associated with that, and I recognize that as a resident.

I'm not trying to, I don't want an undue burden on a commercial entity that goes in there.

But one of the issues I've had with the six-foot fence that shrubbery doesn't fix is I've had people hop over my fence.

And it's just easy to grab that fence and just hop over it.

And so shrubbery and and landscaping doesn't solve that.

Whereas an eight-foot fence, you could probably still get over it, but it's going to take a lot more.

So to protect residents and businesses as well, because that would be a liability for a commercial if something were to happen, I would think.

I appreciate it.

Thanks, Mrs.

Gonzales.

Okay.

So it is 747.

We'll close public comment and bring it back to the dais.

Our next item, uh item number 10, the consent agenda.

Any questions on the consent agenda?

I'd be happy to take a motion on that.

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve the consent agenda as presented.

So I have a first from Councilmember Newell.

Do I have a second?

Second it.

I have a second from Councilmember Freeman.

We'll start with you tonight, uh, Councilmember Harrison.

Yes.

Councilmember Stallings?

Yes.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes.

Councilmember Lockhart.

Yes.

Councilmember Newell.

Yes.

Thank you.

Item 11 number one, uh consideration of ordinance 14-2026, amending the Lehigh Municipal Code, Title IX, Chapter 2C, Section 2-3, Water Shortage Management Plan and Enforcement.

Mr.

Norman will talk about that and then we'll Yeah.

Um so this is an update to our ordinance.

Our water managed water shortage management plan was updated a few years ago.

And we noticed this year when we were doing some work that the uh language in the code hadn't been updated to align with that.

Um so in the phase two, um the moderate water shortage section, it was just being updated to uh align with that, where it's water users um may not use sprinkler irrigation on consecutive days, may only water two days per week and at least 48 hours in between irrigation cycles.

And previously it just said only two days, it just said two days a week.

It didn't give any real definition of what that looked like.

And then on the um phase three uh lawn water and waters water users may not water more than one day a week if we need to go to that phase.

And the previous one has still had a two days a week on the phase three.

And that's the bulk of what the update on this uh ordinance code is tonight.

Is there anyone in the audience that came to speak on this item?

Okay, so we'll close that.

Uh back to the dias.

Any questions for Mr.

Norman?

Yeah, Dave.

Um for the the violations, right?

I think it says um the first violation is a written notice.

Second violation is one hundred dollars, um, third violation, and each consecutive violation is five hundred dollars.

Um have you considered I'm thinking of you have a townhouse or very, very small lot versus uh a full acre of lawn.

Um is there I guess have you considered the fine being based on tiers of property size representing how much more water was wasted in violating the the ordinance.

Uh we hadn't actually that uh hadn't been talked about.

Um I could see how like a tiered water rate that that could make some sense.

Um yeah, no, that hadn't been an item of discussion to this point.

Okay.

I'd my personal opinion, I think that would be maybe more effective.

I think um you know, wasting water, we don't want to do it, period, but the overall volume is important to consider.

So I would be supportive of having some sort of tier, maybe something less than a third of an acre from a third to half acre, half acre and more, something like that.

Something that would make sense that ref represents the volume of wasted water.

And I think that's if if there was consensus on that, I think that's something that could be made in the motion that we would be happy to add into both of those plans.

I could I don't know if I could put it into the motion just trying to figure out exactly what those tiers are.

And I can honestly tell you, and I know we talked about this in on our earlier session tonight, is our goal is not to find people.

That is that is a last resort, and we have not done that in previous years, and and we honestly hope not to have to do that this year.

Uh it's the uh giving us the ability to if there are our egregious offenders, um, if that makes sense.

That that would be the only case that I would see us doing that.

Um but I yeah, I don't know if um I don't know the best way to go about that.

I would have to ask our attorney if as far as language for tonight, if we were to move forward with uh put potential tiered structure, um how could we pass it in a way that we could update the language so the two documents match, but then still would we need to bring something back or how could we do that?

That's what you just said.

If they just make it part of the motion, then we can we can draft it in there and it doesn't need it wouldn't need to come back.

And I apologize I hadn't had time to think about this previously or could come to the case.

We should have asked it in the world session.

Yeah, you give me a few minutes or give me a few minutes to think about it, Cameron What's your I wonder if it might be a good idea for us to take some time to come up with a plan and maybe we go as as presented tonight and then come back even in two weeks or in a in a meeting in May with a plan to work uh to present a tiered structure.

I I would be good with that.

I just want to make sure there's at least two others that would be supportive.

Yeah, I'd be happy to we'd be happy to bring that back um as an addition as an update uh for sure.

So good idea.

We could potentially pass it tonight with direction to bring it back to amend.

Yeah, I'd be full supportive of that.

Yeah, be happy to work on that.

Mr.

Mayor, before a motion is made, may I ask another question?

Yeah.

Um I just was seeking clarity on what happens if the city violates this.

I want to make sure that the city is also being treated just like we treat all residents and business owners who are using water.

Um what is the w how what are we doing to make sure we don't violate our own policies and what are our own consequences if we do violate those?

Those are great questions.

Yeah.

You should have asked earlier when Steve was here.

I was going to, but we ran out of time.

So I thought I'd put you on the spot in front of the phone.

I can tell you that we in meetings that we had in in the previous months working up to tomorrow, which is April 15th, when people can legally start to water, and we really hope that people would, with the weather that we've got forecasted these next week, the next 10 days, people would continue to hold off and water at a very minimum.

Um as we talked about in our earlier session tonight, we we anticipate about 50 percent allotment of our normal irrigation water.

And that's different from our culinary water, but our irrigation water, we could be about 50 percent of our normal allocation.

So we're gonna need all residents to participate in helping us really do our best to keep our watering outdoor watering in a minimum minimum this year, as we can all tell from our uh where the lowest snowpack in recorded history since the 1930.

Um you have very little snow excuse, excuse me, little very little snow on the mountains today.

And so it's a big concern for our department to make sure that we have enough water for people to use, keep their their yards alive as well as to keep it safe for uh for our firefighters to fight uh any fire that comes up.

Um so along with that, the parks department has been very good to date to follow all of the ordinances that have been set forth.

Um and I can let Cameron maybe speak to that, but I would anticipate and then hope that we would follow the same ordinance, if that makes sense.

Um but I know that there has been talk of um some of the critical fields that where they play some of the sports that they might need a little better attention or special, but I don't know what that looks like because I I don't work on those.

I apologize.

Yeah, and maybe it's a part of the motion that we ask the parks department and the water department to come up with a plan for that that third tier if that were to happen, how the city would handle that, if that's appropriate.

Yeah, so I I I don't know that we have any consequences in place for the city.

Um but I will say that historically, as we've practiced this in the past, Steve and his team have been very diligent in making sure that they are uh practicing what we preach.

Um it is challenging as a perception in the community.

People will see our sprinklers watering regularly, but we have a park, a park could have 15 zones in it, right?

And so it might appear that that what that park is being watered every day when in reality each zone is only being watered twice a week.

So from a perception perspective, sometimes it is a challenge.

It looks like the city is watering more than we actually are.

Um, but because there are so many zones it in reality we're we're following our same ordinance.

But maybe that could be part of the education piece too.

Yeah, absolutely.

You know, this is how the city so that's more.

And that is something we've talked about a lot is getting that information out that they're supposed to be putting together a plan that we can put out to the public of how they plan to water and what that looks like.

But I think that would be a great uh item to bring up on our discussion here whenever the next we put bring it back to the next meeting with those two weeks or the following.

I know that um during the budget discussions that Steve Marchbanks uh mentioned the rain sensors that we do have on our systems.

They don't always work.

There's always gonna be you know, an instance of writing and seeing sprinklers on, but um I think at least in the areas that does work, that's helpful.

And I'm I think that's part of the budget request to improve that system.

And I know that they started that process in 2019 of upgrading all the park systems to put in this mark control systems that do to utilize those types of systems that if they do get ran it, then postpones their next watering, and so they are actively trying to to conserve water as well.

Any other questions for Dave?

I'm happy to entertain a motion.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, I move uh to approve ordinance 14-2026 amending Lehigh Municipal Code Title IX, Chapter 2 C, Section 2-3, water shortage management plan and enforcement.

Do you want to add those directions in?

And to include the directions to um add a tiered uh system of depending on the property size when it comes to enforcement and penalty.

And include a plan for action on if the city is in violation of the same code.

I second.

I have a second from council member Lockhart.

Councilmember uh Stallings will start with you.

Yes.

Councilmember Freeman.

Yes.

I just want to say though, can I qualify my um when you if you return, we talked about some regulations with development and incentivizing or not, and I'd like to see some of that looked at as well.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Yes.

Councilmember Newell?

Yes.

Thank you.

Oh, Councilmember Harrison.

Yes.

Sorry, I almost forgot you.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mr.

Woman.

Okay.

Item number two under number 11.

Um is the Lehigh budget amendment.

This is a public hearing.

Do you want me to talk first?

So yep, we'll turn, we'll give you some time first, Dean, and then we'll open it up to the public hearing.

Yeah, I'll do these briefly.

We talked about these um a couple of weeks ago.

There's uh the fourth amendment of the year, there's four items.

Uh the first one relates to the cops grant that we received.

So it's a federal grant that helps us uh hire police officers, and it's a grant that we get for a time, and then the grant slowly dwindles away, and then the cost of those officers come on the city.

But we needed to budget the revenue that comes in and the costs associated with that, both the uh the wages and the equipment that's associated with them.

The next one is the Ocala well.

Um it needs to be religned.

It's kind of an emergency thing or an unexpected thing.

It's uh that cost of that project is six hundred and thirty thousand dollars.

Most about half of that they can come through existing budget, but the rest will come from their fund balance.

Uh police overtime.

We've had at the incident Utah Valley University last year.

We have been had officers over there.

A lot of that will be covered through a grant from the state, but the same thing.

We get the grant revenue, but we still need to uh uh an amendment to authorize it to be spent.

And the last one is similar, the wild land fire grant.

So our firefighters will often go off to to work on fires in various areas in the country during the summer, and uh we get paid for that, but we need to uh budget that money to be spent.

Even though we receive it, we still need to budget it to be spent.

So those are the four items.

Do you have any questions?

Nope, let's open it up for a public hearing real quick.

So it's eight o'clock straight up.

We'll open it up for public hearing if anyone has a comment.

Okay, so we'll close the public comment, bring it back to the dias.

Uh, any questions for Dean on this um amendment?

With that, I'd be happy to take a motion.

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve resolution 2026-27, amending the budget for the city of Lehigh for fiscal year 2025 through 2026.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Councilmember Lockhart with a second.

Councilmember Freeman will start with you.

Yes.

Councilmember Lockhart.

Yes.

Councilmember Newell.

Yes.

Councilmember Harrison.

Yes.

Councilmember Stalinks.

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay, item three, consideration of resolution 2026-28, adopting a tentative budget for the city of Lehigh for the fiscal year of 26 to 27.

Dean back up.

Okay, just a quick explanation on kind of how the process works.

So uh the direction of the mayor, the staff, we've been putting together a tentative budget or budget to be presented to council, which is what we're doing today is essentially just presenting this budget to the council for their um to begin their process of asking questions and doing more work on it.

Um so the resolution today doesn't adopt the budget by state law the way it reads is by um by the first meeting in May, which we're ahead of that schedule, you need to the council needs to tentatively adopt a budget, which is what we're doing today, which again just essentially means that you're receiving the budget and can start asking more questions on it.

Um just briefly there's and end up being three resolutions related to that, because we have one is for the city, there's one for the local building authority and one for the redevelopment agency.

The reason those have to be done separately is because even though they're part of our part of one budget, they're legally separate entities, so they have their own budget that needs to be adopted.

Is there anyone from the public here to talk on this item?

Okay, great.

So we'll bring it back to the dice.

Any questions for Dean on those?

Um Mr.

Mayor, I have a question.

I just am seeking clarification, especially for um the public.

So a part of the mayor's presented budget um includes a property tax increase.

And I just want to be very clear that if we adopt this tentative budget, it isn't we're not saying it's a position of the council that we are in favor or opposed to the increase.

That's not what we're saying.

Absolutely.

It's saying that there's a proposal in there, but you're not accepting the proposal, but that doesn't mean that we are for or against the proposal.

Yeah, the whole process of whether or not the tax increase is adopted is a longer process that would go on for seven several months and and quite a few public meetings.

So thank you for the clarity.

I'd also just like to take this opportunity to thank the staff for fielding a lot of questions from the council members over the last couple months and the great presentations that we've seen from different department heads on their new requests.

Um learned through this process um is that I'd love to see even more information over a longer period of time.

And so I would hope, and I um I might put Rachel on the spot here just because she she kind of brought this up before.

Um maybe next year we could use a new process of starting earlier in the season, even in November, to begin with the the goals of the council to begin talking with department heads, not only on new requests, which the current structure is mostly the the new the net new requests to the budget.

And that's what we've been seeing in these meetings, which is great.

Um I'd also like to see um more specific expenditures to see where we can be more efficient, where we can um cut certain fat from the budget, um, which I think over several departments could save significant amount of money.

Um but I wanted to again put Rachel on the spot to I know you talked to me about this structure, but I wanted to let you um say it firsthand.

Yeah, I've talked with other cities, um, not even in Utah, um, and to kind of just see how they do it since I'm very new to this and to know what to expect.

And you've been so wonderful explaining what to expect here.

So I would love I was we could only have two council members in the department budget meetings, and so I wasn't able to be in most of them.

And I would love to to also talk to the departments.

And part of me wonders if you know, coming up in two weeks when we I I'm under in the understanding that we that's when we are really going to workshop this budget and or present it as a city council is what kind of our responses to the mayor's budget.

Yeah, I think the idea is in two weeks you'll have that's your opportunity to ask in the in this public meeting whatever questions you want to ask of me or department heads or anything.

Yeah, so we have approximately two hours to ask all those questions and delve into it.

And just with how this council is going with our time frame.

Part of me wonders if we need to kind of even go earlier in the day and and discuss more, uh give ourselves more time because we tend to run a little bit long and ask a lot of questions because most of us are new and we are very inquisitive and I've already emailed you or Alison, sorry, Allison.

Um so many questions about the budget.

Um that's something that I think might be beneficial to us, especially with four of us being relatively new.

I mean, okay, the mayor's already done his part, but three of us.

So that's that's something that I think would be helpful this year.

I don't know how the rest of the council feels about that.

And I don't know what what time to start that, but I I think I could see definitely starting much earlier in the day to kind of spend time digging into it because we have a deadline for when when we have to have the budget finished, and we want to have it have it put in place so that the public can give hearing we can have a public hearing to hear their comments about what our what our insights are.

So I'll I'll answer that, Councilmember Freeman.

There will be, besides in two weeks, there will be other opportunities and open meetings to discuss it.

So we're not going to be limited just to those two hours.

Uh in the first week in May, there will be a few other opportunities that come up as we're planning for those meetings, just so you're aware.

And I will say we've typically done been I we're supposed to have the tenant budget prepared by the first council meeting in May.

We've always been a little bit sooner, partly because the last council meeting in June typically gets canceled because it's roundup week.

We do have until June 30th to get the budget adopted.

So we have maybe a little more time, but yeah, I'm nothing says the high round up like approving a budget.

I mean, I would like to approve it before before.

Like I would love next time to really go through it all and then get it done by the beginning of May.

And Dean, don't we typically approve it the end of May?

I think I think we've gone the first meeting in May has been the public hearing.

The second meeting in May has we've tried to adopt at that meeting with the idea we would have one more meeting if we needed it.

I think that's what we've done historically.

Yeah.

Um but again, I'm happy to do whatever.

Yeah, we we just never wanted the council to feel like their backs are up against the wall.

So at that second meeting in May, you could table it or continue it up into the other.

But there is a deadline at some point.

It's the end of June, I think, right?

It is the end of June.

I just want to voice my support for what Rachel has said, and I would love more time as well.

So however we work that in, I I agree with her.

Um whether that's just an additional hour or two to that same meeting.

I'm open to you know, adjusting my schedule.

Come early, whatever works.

Um but anyway, I think that's a great thought, and I just wanted to make sure you knew I agreed with that.

I think we have the foresight that this is gonna be a longer meeting.

I would rather go earlier than keep staff to eight.

Yeah.

So if that, you know, like if we're like we were gonna start an hour early for a work session.

Yeah, I would be decent to be able to do that.

Oh, no, I was gonna say, Mayor, if you're okay with that, we can we can put a schedule together.

I think let's let's work on the schedule.

And to further your point, Mayor, we also have the May work session that we could devote the whole thing to the budget as well.

Correct.

So we have we have a few coming up.

So yeah.

Uh and we'll plan of it line with me.

Whatever we do.

We'll start earlier.

Yeah.

Yeah, I would love to start midday really in person.

I'm gonna speak too that I support that, especially if we're looking at a tax increase and I think it's been official for us long time council members that have been here.

So I'd appreciate it too.

Yeah, I I feel just as new as you guys do.

So you teach us the ways.

Okay.

Anyway, I'm looking happy to entertain a motion.

Oh, we're doing that.

Mayor I move to approve resolution number 2026-28, adopting a tentative budget for the city of Lehigh for fiscal year 2027.

I have a second.

Second.

I have a second first from Councilmember Freeman, a second from Councilmember Harrison.

Councilmember Lockhart will start with you.

Yes.

Councilmember Newell.

Yes.

Councilmember Harrison.

Yes.

Councilmember Stallings?

Yes.

Councilmember Freeman.

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

Item number four.

Motion to adjourn for a Lehigh Local Building Authority meeting to adopt the tentative budget.

We need to leave this meeting for a brief moment and go into a Lehigh Local Building Authority meeting.

We need a motion to do so.

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we adjourn the city council meeting and convene in the Lehigh Local Building Authority.

I have a second.

A second.

Second.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Welcome to the Lehigh Local Building Authority meeting.

Roll call.

We have all five of our council members.

Councilmember Newell, Councilmember Harrison, Councilmember Stallings, Councilmember Freeman, Councilmember Lockhart.

We're going to go to item 2.1, consideration of resolution L 206, 2026-01.

Adopting a tentative budget for the Lehigh Local Building Authority for the fiscal year of 2027.

Dean, any comments on that?

No, really the same thing applies.

It's just the tentative budget or just for the just for that one fund.

Anyone in the general public here to talk about the Lehigh Building Authority General Budget.

No, so we'll bring it back here.

Any any questions on this one?

I'm happy to entertain a motion.

Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve resolution L26, 2026-1, adopting a tentative budget for the Lehigh Local Building Authority for fiscal year 2027.

Second.

Second council member Lockhart.

Any questions on the motion?

I know I haven't asked that yet tonight, but just came to me.

Okay, with that we'll go ahead and vote.

Councilmember Newell?

Yes.

Councilmember Harrison?

Yes.

Councilmember Stallings?

Yes.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes.

Councilmember Lockhart?

Yes.

I will happily take a motion to adjourn the Lehigh Local Building Authority meeting.

Second, all the things.

Councilmember Harrison with the first.

Councilmember Lockhart with a second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

All right.

Welcome back.

I don't have to do anything to start our next meeting, do I, Ryan?

We're ready to go.

Okay.

Just gotta make sure I do this right.

All right.

Item number five.

Statement of notice to the public the 2026-2027 Lehigh tentative budget includes a proposed tax increase.

Dean.

Okay, so this is new.

It was passed this as a state law this year.

Then increased noticing related to any uh adjustments to tax rates.

Um the law states that with the tentative budget, if there's a tax increase proposed, tax increase defined as a rate that's higher than the certified rate that we need to have this statement.

This statement's included in the budget.

Um I'm gonna read parts of it, at least the part I'm not gonna read the whole thing.

Um but it's not really something that's voted on, it's just I think the intent is to make sure it's out there in the public.

So and I'm still a little unclear on how often this needs to be read, but I'll try to figure that out.

I think any time there's a public hearing related to budget, we need to read this, but if it's more often, I'll do the best I can.

So this budget, the tax increase or the tax rate would be higher than the certified rate.

Now I should say I don't have any information on property valuations yet.

I don't have any information on what the certified rate is yet.

So these are all estimates.

But the additional generated additional revenue generated would be 1,729,474.

Uh it's anticipated that that rate would be 9.78 percent higher than the certified rate.

The average impact for a Lehigh homeowner would be $35.52 per year or $2.96 per month.

That's based on a property value that's $600,000.

Uh for a commercial property, it would be $64.58 per year or $5.38 per month.

Uh the proposed increase will provide additional funding for police, fire, parks, and the justice court.

Umcrease for the police department would uh be three patrol officers, one new school resource officer, one records clerk, and implement a shift differential pay program.

Increase for the fire department would be to increase pay for fire department personnel to get them to market.

Um increased funding for the parks would allow for three additional parks positions needed to keep up the city's increasing park acreage, and the increased funding for the justice court would be the hiring of one additional position to meet the demands of a growing city and uh additional patrol officers.

That's all.

Sir, did we take a motion on this?

No, this is just for public.

This just says we're doing that in the public, yeah.

Thank you, Dean.

Okay.

Okay, item number six.

Consideration of resolution 2026-22, approving a purchase and sale agreement for commercial real estate between Lehigh City and the Lehigh Mill Pond LLC, located approximately 535 South Mill Pond Drive.

I believe Lawrence is yours.

I think mayor and council.

Uh we able to get that up.

Yeah, I don't know if I can.

I haven't tried doing it from here.

If not, I can do that.

You're building new things.

Oh, here we go.

See if this works.

While he's doing that, let me just maybe it take a little while, huh?

The mill pond has been around for probably ever.

It's been there a long time.

In the 30s, in the early part of the before the 30s, the uh mill pond was actually, it's called the mill pond because there was a sugar beet factory built there.

It was what I've heard, one of the biggest in West Union and Mississippi.

And it hired a lot of people.

The smokestack you see there is part of that, and they had a great big facility here back in those days.

Uh sugar beets were a big deal, and then the pond was used in in the processing and so forth.

It's now called the mill pond.

Back in the early days, it was called uh millener's pond or something like that.

Totally different.

Back in the 1985 and 84, 85, we created an a special improvement district out here, and we also created an RDA.

And the special route district encompassed this property and this property and all of the industrial out there.

It also, the SID was uh created to actually put the road in on the west side.

As you see down there, there's a road in the industrial park and improvements.

And we thought at the time that it'd be pretty exciting to have that, but uh 1985 nothing happened.

It was dead.

If we sold over four or five uh uh billy permits a year, that was too many.

We put the pressure aviation in 1990, and about 91 it started to move again.

And ever since it's moved.

But this set for a long time.

We've collected funds from it.

This is now closed, the RDA is closed.

The SID part was built.

There was a gentleman that owned part of this property.

He owned one of the properties, and he got tired.

I don't remember the detail, but he he got tired.

His name was Guiman.

He didn't uh like paying these assessments on the SID.

So we paid off his assessments, and for that we got basically four acres.

And we've been holding on that since 1985.

Uh we've had different issues and different arrangements.

Uh we've never it does have a few issues on it.

Currently, the we've been working on a plan with several people here to uh is it showed up yet?

Just Kim showing up, huh?

Uh in this whole pond area.

We've been looking at uh different ways to use this facility, maintain it.

Uh to me, it's a quite a unique thing in the city.

It's probably one of the most unique things in the city, other than the low hills, but I call the low hills.

Uh it's probably the most prominent thing you'll see going along the freeway.

I think it has enormous uh historical and benefit for the city.

Uh so I've been working on this for several years with the council approval on the okay, now he's got it up.

And the top, right at the top off to the my.

I'm gonna talk from my right, which I don't know, it's your left, probably.

In the top right, there's a parcel of the ground that a person had picked up years ago, and he was just holding it in order to complete property around the pond.

And actually, there's in that parcel, we have a drain that goes all along from Wendy's down to there.

We have really no access to the end of that drain.

So I we actually worked a purchase of that property, which is some land and part of the water.

So that's off to the right, your left, I guess.

And there's kind of an orange piece in the middle.

That one had a sign on it.

It's actually the sign that's out there now.

A prior uh mayor of the city, Howard Johnson, did own that property.

His family, it went to his family after he passed, and his wife passed, both of them have passed.

We worked with that group with their family and with the sign company.

And so the sign company, we didn't want to pay for the whole property, it'd be expensive with the sign.

So the sign company actually bought the piece where the sign is.

And to continue our trail or road around the pond.

Now, part of that's in the water, so we also got water as part of that purchase.

Uh now to get over to Mill Pond Drive.

Uh, we still own that four acres.

Now, if you see on the bottom where you see the orange, and if you went to the I guess it'd be your right, there's a road we've maintained, we're going to maintain 20 feet of that for a road or trail that we can access these properties and access our drain and get around the pond.

The the propos uh and I'm going to talk about the whole proposal.

The proposal before you right now with these, it's actually between three parties.

It's the city, the mill pond management is the Peck family, and uh the uh it's called a mill, what is it?

Lehigh Mill.

That's actually another entity, and it's actually they also go by another name of Moto United.

They bought property from Miyagi, which is just above there, and they are building.

If you've seen a building out there, it's being built by uh Moto United.

It's a very nice building for them.

They uh sell a motorized equipment, uh what boats and all kinds of things.

They have a facility in St.

George, they want to move up here.

They bought that from Miagi, uh, and so they're in the process of finishing that building.

They would like to buy the four acres, which we have to expand their facility and make it better, enhance it, and own the ground around their facility.

So the and then the we need a piece, the orange piece, not the orange, not the orange piece.

Is that the one I'm looking at?

Maybe it is an orange piece.

I'm sorry, there's oh, there's another piece over on the other end.

The orange piece, we actually need to continue our road through.

That is owned by uh Moto United.

Uh they are willing to sell us that piece so we can actually get from that road into these other properties and over to the drain and the pond itself.

So that the arrangement, and they're a little different in order here, but I'll just tell you about the the three that are here.

One is this purchase from Lehigh Mills LLC, which is Moto United.

They own this piece and they own some water.

We're buying the land for a different price than the water of $340,000 to purchase that property that they have there.

That will complete uh uh access all the way out to Mill Pond Drive and into that.

You can actually see up by the freeway if you see a light colored, that is where the drain is.

It's a huge drain that starts way up by past Wendy's across the road.

That's where it empties.

And so it's it's going to give us access to that, which we really have no access at this point.

The second part of this arrangement was with uh Motor United to buy that uh the four acres.

It was a little more four acres.

We're keeping part of it for the for the trail, a little more four acres.

We'd be buying that, they would be buying that from us for four million dollars for the four acres to enhance their property, enhance their development, and have give them control of that area.

The third part of the transaction is involves the peck family, and that involves if you look at the green.

That our intent is to take that four million dollars and buy exactly four acres from the pecs.

Most of that is that bottom area, which is just area we could use in any fashion.

Part of it is a trail around, probably three quarters of it is in that green area that can be used for whatever.

It has been our intent in the past to create a trail around it, and this has been discussed with several different councils.

Uh but the intent is that to spend that four million to buy the green uh property, and it's four acres for four million.

They're buying from us, we're spending four million, four acres for this.

Pond has a lot of advantages and a lot of uh recreation capabilities and other things that isn't constipated what we need, what we have now.

Well, and maybe I need to back up a little bit.

The pond over the years, uh many of you, if you were from Lehigh, you would hear this thing that the pond has no bottom.

Well, we drained it uh two years ago, and we found a way to drain it.

It actually keeps it at four foot level, and we found a way to drain it down to a 12-foot level, which is huge.

And when we drained it, a lot of the pond was three and a half feet deep and full of sediment.

In my mind, it was turning into a quagmire.

It was bad, even for the irrigators and us, we take water out of this.

We're probably 65% owner.

It it was just hard for us to even get good water out of it.

And that's our water.

So we've created a arrangement where if we buy this, it appears that the Peck family may provide another date when they could be here to uh donate part of this part of the water that they have.

Uh, there's a lot of advantages down here, a lot of different things you could do.

We have it, we haven't set out any particular thing.

This just appears something that would be good to own.

If we don't, uh it will go to somebody else, and whatever they do with it would be up to them.

Seems like an opportunity for the city.

We do have some RDA monies to actually make all this transaction work, do some more work on the pond later in the year, and uh we have 1.3 million.

We've done some work just about three weeks ago, but we had to stop because the irrigators want their water, so we had to quit.

We had trucks lined up.

I think I had what 24 trucks lined up, I don't know, but we had to quit because it was time to for them to load up.

So the intent is to do those three transactions, and they're on here.

The first one I think is the one for the four million from selling to Motor United.

The second one is us paying Moto United 340,000 for that orange piece, and then the last one is for the green area.

The four million would be used for four acres, which is the green area.

I think it's a fantastic deal, but uh that's the proposal.

And let me make and maybe I could answer a couple other questions that have come up.

Uh, there was some questions about sediment.

As far as I can tell, this has never been dredged or anything down.

There's there's an inlet that had to be dredged.

Probably not been dredged since the uh, as far as I can tell, and probably 90 to 100 years.

I think that sediment, in my opinion, uh, well, and I've been here, most of it came from the work over in the American fork area.

It didn't come from the normal runoff.

American Fork does have their own detention basins, they have their own basins to settle it out.

I do not believe this is an ongoing thing.

There is some, but it it'd take enormous number of years to get back to where we're at.

At least 90.

That was one comment.

There's the green ditch that does go south.

There's three ditches that go out.

The green ditch, if we had to maintain it, it would probably be it has a certain flow.

There they're probably only in the what, a couple of second foot, I would guess.

If we had to do that, and it came up in another setting, I think what we'd do is just pump that flow so we could use the entire pond.

It wouldn't take much to put that little small pump in if we had to do it.

Or lower that channel if we had to.

I I think this has been a this is this has about 160, upwards of about 200 and some odd acre feet.

The most we have in our whole entire system is 260, so it's an enormous facility.

And during the drought, the prior drought, we actually there is a pipe, it goes over, and you can actually see it right at the mill pond.

We hooked a pump up to it, and that helped us in normal enormously in that drought year.

We're a little bigger city now, so it's probably not as helpful, but uh that was a huge benefit.

We bought one pump, that didn't work very well, bought another pump.

And uh in those days, three CFS or four CFS was a lot.

Today that's not, but but it was a huge benefit in those days.

That pipe is still there, still capable of serving if we wanted to do it.

Anyway, that's uh my I'll take whatever questions you have.

So, real quick, Lauren, is anyone from the public here to discuss this item?

Okay, so we'll close that.

So we'll bring it back up.

Any questions for Lauren on item six?

Mr.

Mayor, I have a question.

Yes.

The um on the uh map, the two pieces that say remainder, the 1.17 acres and the 0.62 acres off to the left side.

Who who owns those pieces?

Put the vent back up.

Oh, sorry, right here on the left side of the pond.

There's that um 0.62 acres right there, and then up at the top there's the 1.17.

The pecs will maintain those acres.

Okay, and then they're not part of the transaction.

Okay, and then off to the right, the TRC mill pond LLC.

That's owned by a when they built that, they had to do a uh uh like a PRD PUD.

That has to stay open space.

It was given for that density.

Okay.

And so it has to maintain, it is an American fork, but it has to stay in that position.

And stay open space.

Okay.

We've talked to them and they're open.

If we want to build a trail on around, which we have some of one to in the past, but if we want to, they're open to that.

And we've discussed it, they would be willing to work with us.

And no trail currently exists.

No, that is correct.

Okay, thank you.

Just one clarification, Lauren.

So we're buying property for four million, then we're selling it for four million.

That's correct.

And then we have the one transaction of purchasing what 350,000.

Coming from 340.

That comes from the RDA funds that expire at the end of this fiscal year.

So if we don't use them, we lose them.

That is correct.

Okay.

The funds that would be if we if this transaction goes through the way I've laid out the funds for the remainder of the year.

I can't go into the water now, I can't drain it because it's it's irrigation season.

There's a pipeline you see in there that would go through there.

That pipeline is intended to serve our property no matter what we build.

I wanted it big enough, it's a dead end line, so it has to be a 10 and a 12.

We usually run an eight and a 10.

We're going to run a 10 and 12.

So whatever building we build, we can serve it.

Whether it's a high rise or something else, that pipe serves us.

Now it goes to the end of the property, so it can also benefit the PECs, because they're keeping a piece that's going to be a valuable commodity for them to sell.

But that pipeline is intended so that we can build whatever size of building we want to build.

And so that's a pri that it's about a hundred and hundred thousand to a hundred and fifty thousand.

The uh the 340 would be spending.

We did spend, I have 1.3 right now.

I looked it up.

About 200,000 we spent just a little while ago to do some more dredging before irrigation season came.

Then uh let's see, what else was I gonna then we have some more dredging to do in the fall?

They were we actually built some some facilities out into it, and it looks kind of kind of like fingers if you look at it.

Those fingers have to be removed.

And in removing those, we'll actually lower the entire pond even more than we have now.

Mr.

Mayor, can I ask a question?

Yes.

So that's what I was wondering because you were saying that you had put money that you have money, or you have over a million dollars that you've been putting towards basically making improvements on this pond currently, and do you plan to do so in the future?

Can you expound on that a little bit?

Yeah, that's what I was saying.

Okay.

The intent is to use all that funds this year.

So part of it would be for the 340, the uh pipeline, uh additional dredging in order to take out those fingers that we built to get out and make the pond lower.

Those would be removed.

And is that from the RDA or that's all coming out of this fund?

Okay.

That's all for that.

And I can't do some of that work until they until you have all the property.

No, till the till the irrigation season is over.

Oh, okay.

In October.

Okay.

And if I may what building are you saying that we're going to build?

No, if we build something.

If we built something you have that pipeline pipe.

Because they're underground and they come off through some properties.

I want to make sure they're there so we don't have to worry about whatever we build.

I I don't anticipate.

Well, no, I think we will build buildings.

We spent another two million across the tracks to get to this property.

And so we can build anything we want on there with we had a sewer now.

We had no sewer.

Uh we would this property is not sewerable except what we built.

And so now we have an opportunity to do whatever we want on that property.

Just on this bottom portion that's green.

Oh, all the way up.

All it all of the yeah, okay, all of the pond area.

The actual part of that uh the good and beautiful had to connect, they'd connect to that.

We had a sewer on the over further to the west.

It's it's going to be overloaded.

That facility probably would have taken several million dollars to redo.

Now I have that facility plus another brand new one.

So I have two facilities that are that go through this that sewer, this there's an easement through there.

Well, there's it'll be through our property if we we get it, but that sewer goes through that property.

So another huge advantage of having that property for us.

Can you speak, or maybe Marlon can speak to this?

The I guess the economic benefit factor of this with Moto United having that piece of property.

Um, what economic benefit to the city do we have?

Probably be Marlon might be.

Um to answer your question, uh Councilman Harrison.

So Moto United uh is an organization that sells ATVs, watercraft, um, everything from large boats to bombarders, uh single motorcraft, uh, motorcycles, I think they do the Triumph brand, uh, and other um uh motorized vehicles.

Um so their current facility, and it by the way, they received no incentives for their project coming.

Um I and I'm gonna be way off base on these numbers, but I want to say that they wanted like 120,000 square foot facility.

They were only gonna be able to build about an 80,000 square foot facility.

Um the new model is such that all of the sales go on on the main floor.

They do a mezzanine up top, and that's where they bring in all the vehicles on top to do all the maintenance work and stuff like that.

Um also mezzanine sales for the motorcycles and stuff.

What this is going to do is allow them that uh additional 40,000 square feet or whatever they needed to finish off their building.

They'll end up with almost two buildings.

I don't know if they're gonna combine them or not, but then they'll utilize the internal piece for storage of vehicles that are being uh worked on and stuff.

So the economic impact would be the uh um retail sales tax generation from that extra piece.

So let's say it becomes boat sales.

Um you're anywhere between 150 or 100,000 up to 400,000 for some of these ski boats.

Um, you know, if you sell, let's say, you know, 10 of those, uh, you know, your four million bucks uh of our generation would be what about $4,000.

I mean, we're 1% of that, or half of that, uh half of the 1%.

So again, you run the numbers out.

When I talked with Aaron, um he said that their goal was to start generating anywhere between 80 million and 100 million in sales annually out of that store.

So I would say that this would probably be 40 percent, 30 to 40 percent of that sales in that expansion.

So that intro question.

uh you know your four million bucks uh of our generation would be what about four thousand dollars I mean we're one percent of that or half of that uh half of the one percent so again you run the numbers out when I talked with Aaron um he said that their goal was to start generating anywhere between eighty million and a hundred million in sales annually out of that store so I would say that this would probably be 40 percent 30 to 40 percent of that sales in that expansion is that in your question thanks okay thank you Marlon Lauren no sorry I just got the wrong name never mind what time is it um so you said you have one point three million in the RDA left one point three correct three uh three hundred and forty thousand for the parcel and then two hundred thousand for dredging and then what else did you need to there was some dredging that occurred just now that I haven't got the bills on it's about two hundred thousand okay that we've already spent and then we are spending the whole one point three on this project with various things there won't be any left over like eighty thousand for a fence or no it could go to fence that's possible I mean those are some things that come up and if we want to do that I think that would my intent is to take out the fingers but I may have I probably will have funds that I could do some work if if we needed to do more fencing or something you know that could be done.

That's why you think it you know if I mean like that's a new thing that came up today and I think it could definitely work within that.

There's fencing on part of the properties we'd have to do some fencing on the other parts.

Okay but you but I do have enough funds that I think I I wouldn't do I would cut down on the dredging and actually put in these other facilities if that was the case.

Okay.

So I think I could actually that wouldn't be that hard to do.

Okay.

Um on the southern portion is there I'm not seeing any road access to that is it comes off of we were going to come off of over the other one.

We're actually coming off of what's the road that goes north and south road pond Mel Pond Drive there's an access right there.

Right there.

Oh okay right here.

And it's and it's existing actually there's an existing access right now you can go in.

Okay.

That's all I had thanks.

Mr Maybe just a couple of clarifying questions.

So this Lehigh City Trail that's right below the four acres that we would be selling that's what we would keep because we have 4.5 so that's what we would be included as part of that.

And then RDA funds were what you're going to use to buy that other section to connect it all together.

Can you help me understand why does Moto United care about being party to what does it matter if we do a transaction with them versus why does it what do they get out of this having multiple parties involved if you think they're well I'm not sure I haven't I'm not sure of that totally but they they like the transaction of the whole property.

They like the fact that cities coming in doing something that's very valuable to them.

That we're having something that that they could use there their people come in if we whatever we do there they would have access to a public facility rather than a private facility.

Sorry that I've had a lot of conversations with Modo.

Yeah.

They actually do want to buy a little bit more of that property from the PECs.

They really want to work through this whole thing.

I mean this all started with a trade I know you're all very familiar with what we were proposing.

The reason why I pulled Moto United in is because when the if the trade happened we did four acres for four acres of the PECs that four acres to the north was in a two year moratorium on a trade.

So I went to Motor United and said you want to jump in now they they said absolutely that's why that's why it became a three party thing instead of the trade and Moda wants so Modo will still want to work with us on additional property that the PECs own.

Okay.

And we'll work through that as we go.

I I don't know if that answers your question why they want to be a part of this but they really do want to be part of the whole picture.

May maybe you can help me with some more questions.

I'm having a hard time with so yeah we'll try.

Yeah so this piece that we have has a lot of commercial value.

If Moto doesn't want it someone else does it's on that road it's valuable tell me why this property that we're shopping at four at four acres has the same value that we could turn around and have commercial value from in the same way.

Why why is this an even trade?

I mean that's a totally fair question.

If the intent is to have this be totally developed that corner piece down there on the bottom end is not four acres for four acres you are getting some trail corridor on that you still have a huge benefit if you want to do that south end of the pond is commercial and working with but but if that's the intent if you're saying four acres for four acres on a value of what what is the value you're looking for if it's commercial intent and you want it to be a commercial project that's a little different than I guess what we were we were evaluating.

If it's commercial intent and you want it to be a commercial project, that's a little different than I guess what we're we were evaluating.

Right.

Yeah, because I I think that the the deals aren't necessarily as mixed as they they seem.

Like the fact that we need to get four million for this land cell that we can then turn at any point and buy this other property.

Like they, you know, they don't need to come together.

I don't know that we want to invest in a trail and a pond in that.

Is that something we really want for Lehigh?

Um I do see the benefit to selling the land to to Moto United, because we're not going to develop it, but it's a really good commercial piece that's a value to the city.

Does the city get the same value out of having these other pieces?

Do we do we want to have this trail system?

Do we want to have these things?

Is that the same exchange?

That's what I'm having a harder time trying to grapple with.

And I think it's harder because instead of looking at these individually, I'm looking at them all combined together.

Whereas if the city had four million dollars to go buy property, would we go buy property around the mill pond with it?

It's a fair question.

There are there's more to the situation.

Like was said, there's been some other things that would require us purchasing easements if we don't do the if we didn't do the trade.

I mean, that was one of the reasons why we approached the trade.

Yeah.

Because we were having to pay for property anyway, and you're paying 50% you know, to get an easement through.

So we constructed a storm drain through here, we constructed a sewer through here.

A lot of a lot of different things happened for for years through here.

And to be fair to the pecs, we've kind of said help let us get to this stage before we purchase the easement.

So I mean, if we walk away, I'm how do I say that the right way?

If if this isn't part of the deal, we still have quite a bit difference.

We still have quite a bit we've got to deal with.

This was to solve a lot of issues.

Uh uh I mean I shouldn't say it like that.

They've been very good to work with these situations with us.

Very helpful.

None of these things would have been accomplished without involving that family.

Um thing that was really good is and the reason why I've been concerned, I work with the irrigation companies immensely.

This pond was disappearing.

By going in and doing some of the excavation, we found the springs that have helped immensely.

I mean, that pond is so much more healthy than it was three years ago.

So I I mean I don't want to say it's if you're looking at it from just the perspective of we have this, we have this, that is a challenge.

I I totally agree.

But there's there's a lot more to it with these easements we're gonna have to go back and purchase anyway.

Um part of the agreement that we had with the good and the beautiful is that we would construct a trail on that piece.

How we work through that would be another situation.

I mean, we're bringing up a whole bunch of things.

No, and I'm I'm looking from the city perspective of like, okay, is anyone going to come in and put a trail there?

If we were to come and say as a city, we want to buy some easements to improve the land and put a trail and put you know access to the pond.

Uh yeah, that's that's a good deal.

But they're also getting on the other side of it.

We're purchasing land that I don't know that anybody else wants to purchase for four million.

Yeah, it's yeah, if we need if I mean if we need to go to the bottom part's not true.

That you think that's you think that there's others that want to buy that for ours is actually I mean they they do, they have an offer right now.

I mean yeah, I don't think that's these are like I'm not putting water on it.

I'm like, I've got to wrap my head around it.

You know, and you're you're helping me more than anybody has been able to.

So I'm really glad that you're like helping walk me through this.

So let me whatever I can do to help you understand this.

This has been years in trying to work through quite a few things.

And I understand from your dilemma of coming into this situation and seeing four acres for four acres.

But they have worked with us immensely on trying to get some solutions to this area.

And I'm seeing four acres of rec traded for commercial that a commercial entity really wants.

And if that if that's I guess how you look at it, we would we need to reevaluate how you want to uh look at this, but no, that south end has no has major potential for commercial.

If that's if that's okay.

I mean, that hasn't been the discussions we've had with the past city councils at all and how we've presented it.

And it's more not that we would ever develop it as commercial, but are we justifying the value in the fair?

Totally fair.

So yeah, that's what I'm looking at.

Yeah.

And so can I ask a follow-up on that?

Absolutely.

What who appraised the value of the land we're s we're swapping for?

How did they find four million of value around a pond when the commercial property like I I think who did the appraisal?

Was there an appraisal done?

Do we know the value of this land we're swapping for?

Is it truly market value at 4 million?

Or are we giving four million and getting really two million, but we're calling it four million because it's four acres?

Yeah.

What like who appraised it?

Fair question.

It's actually the purchases that were there.

They're actually higher than this number.

Yeah.

The people that are proposing to purchase the rest of the properties are above that.

We've been working on this so long.

Moto said they were willing to purchase it for what the packs were willing to sell to do that.

I mean, if you want to take a step back and go say, do we do we really need to evaluate what we're selling with Moto?

I mean, that was the intent.

It was a trade.

And to be fair, it was probably me who brought Moto United to the table.

I mean, Marlin had been working with them a long time.

We were trying to preserve this to make it work to create a really nice environment at the mill pond, which to be fair, there's some challenges with that.

But but man, what a what a huge blessing to a city.

You you just can't find something like this anywhere.

That being said, there's always going to be challenges with it.

But to your point, if if the whole point is we need to know exactly what the values are, right now there's offers on the table for the rest of it at 28.

So it I I mean I gotta be careful saying numbers.

I don't I don't want to throw things out there.

I don't want to be disrespectful to this group on what's going on, but we had an agreement and understanding with the PECs, and they said we would.

We'd take a million dollars an acre if it's the city.

We went to Moto United and said, would you buy the four acres at a million dollars an acre to trade for the trail on that issue down there?

And they said yes, we would.

They they really they're very interested in that four acres, but that four acres has challenges, quite a few challenges.

And you guys are aware of that, I hope.

No, no, no.

I don't think we are.

We're not and I think that's the missing piece right here.

Not on our four.

No, the four acres has a sewer going through it diagonally, which is a good thing.

Which board and we're selling has issues.

That's what I'm saying.

Yeah.

Which board.

They're taking it as is, which is very good.

So that's to your point, what's the value of that four acres?

Yeah, you have a sewer going through right through the middle of it.

They have to do some mitigation on that property, which they're very aware of.

And we've gone through that a number of times with them.

They've been very good to work with us on that.

And to be clear, the the four acres that Moto United would take are going to be immediately commercialized with the expansion of I mean, that's their goal, right?

That's the to expand their business for more revenue, right?

Yeah, they they've wanted it for a long time.

Marlin was trying to come up with a solution for them.

We did the pecs were going to sell it to them.

Basically, the pecs were going to trade and they were going to sell it back to Moto United.

I mean, that was the idea years ago.

Um the problem is when we did the trade on the four acres, they came back and said you you cannot sell that four acres again for two years.

That's when I went to Moto United and said, man, it makes a ton of sense for you to jump in now.

And they jumped in.

So they really called out the point that I think we're concerned with, right?

Is if we sell this highly valuable asset to the city of you know, commercial land for four million, and someone grabs it and sells it for more.

I think that that's why we're like, wait, wait, wait, what are we getting in return?

You're getting yeah, that's the right thing.

We're trying to protect the asset that the city has.

Aaron is desperate for this piece.

And I I think Marlon maybe explained that before.

The reason why they really wanted this piece, they have to have a certain size building to draw in this specific boat.

They're the only dealer that can bring in this specific boat.

This is what they've been explaining to us, but they have to have this property to do that.

That's why this is becoming a very viable thing for them.

But but but that the four acres that Lehigh City owns, uh, we've always known that there's some challenges to that.

It's not just something you can buy and develop with the sewer the way it is, with some of the mitigation you've got to do.

And Moto United, because of their situation and needing it right there, they need it right there, have been have been willing to jump in and help us do this.

So I've got some thoughts and questions as well.

Sure.

We're just assuming here that our parcel is worth more than this one on the bottom, and I don't think that is necessarily true.

Um I guess with the challenges.

Yeah.

And I'm not going to call it lakefront property, but it's, you know, if you want to sell it.

Pond front.

I don't know.

Maybe it's more valuable, but I don't know.

But one thing that appeals to me is that it's kind of a wash, right?

We have these funds that we have to use.

And we get water in return.

The storage of the water, which even if it's a little bit, it probably helps.

Every drop helps now.

Anyone who's not trying to preserve water.

We just had a whole conversation about that.

Yes.

So and I I like the idea of Good and Beautiful's going in there.

And this other boat or whatever they sell, you know, I think that that's going to draw attention and it will it'll increase the value of this land.

Now I do have some questions.

You said we.

Are you referring to the city or you as far as we agreed to put a trailer?

When I say we, I guess I'm representing every party of everyone.

I don't know how I'd get in this position.

Well, I'm just saying who who committed to do a trail for Get and Beautiful.

That's when we went through the city, yes.

So part of the deal is we're putting a sewer through that section.

We have to construct meaning the city, access along that sewer.

So we kind of we, the city.

The city.

Have commingled it in the fact that rather than purchase an easement there and construct it what I'd call a gravel trail.

Let's let's do it as a trade and construct the asphalt trail that benefits everybody because it needs something needs to go in there anyway.

This is a benefit in something that we're gonna have to do as a city, a good portion of it anyway.

I I don't know if that I and I apologize it's not coming across across quite right, but if we walk away from this, I guess there's still quite a bit we've got to do anyway.

We're gonna construct a gravel access all along there.

We're gonna we're gonna have to maintain that area because it's an easement for the sewer system.

The we have a storm drain there that needs to be maintained.

So these things were all kind of done a little bit in good faith with the pecs.

But if if we need to take a step back and go purchase the easement and construct the gravel access and do it that way, we'll do that.

It just didn't make a lot of sense to me if we can get this other benefit for not for not what I considered a significant difference.

But but to be fair, there's there's more to it.

So me, I I'm 100% on board with selling the four acres to Motor United.

100% on board with using RDA funds to buy the 1.635.

And then this is what's been helping me to be able to understand because I don't Lehigh doesn't have the the money, the resources, the manpower to develop a trail, maintain a trail, to make this you know, we're we're doing dry creek right now, and we don't even know how that facilities get it.

And so we still haven't seen that come to fruition and how it's even then to take on another water property.

So I think that us doing something is going to be way in the future.

So it's like us securing land for for now.

Um so it's the thought of like to me, I have to separate the all those deals on my mind.

Like, yeah, do I want to sell this for four million?

Yes.

Do I want to purchase this bottom property for four million?

I I don't know.

But this has helped me a lot more, especially when you're talking about like, yes, I I need to hear those, like these are a fair trade.

You're getting the value out of this.

You may never develop it, you may sell it off, and you're gonna get your value out of it the way you would have gotten the value from the north.

Um, do I want Moto United to be able to expand their business and have the commercial aspect?

I see a huge benefit to doing that.

Um, but it was it's basically these deals that have been all commingled that really don't commingle.

They are like separate deals.

So to pull this all together, is not but I also have to recognize a family is the one that put these deals together.

You know, that they were all you know, trying to do all these things too.

So I mean we we've had a vi we had a vision, I say we.

I mean, I've been involved with the city for a long time.

I've I've dealt with this mill pond for a long, long time, and I've had a vision that this is one of the nicer places in the city.

It's just a beautiful place, can be.

I was watching it disappear.

And three years ago, we looked at that mill pond and it was just chuck full of algae, and it kind of depressed me a little bit.

Um I I really have no skin in the game, but yet I've vested myself immensely in trying to make this a viable thing.

And I just I just think it's a good amenity.

We're going to have to do things anyway.

This was a way to solve a lot of a lot of the co-mingling things that I somehow got it all mixed together.

And like I said, I we had a solution for Moto United.

It was going to take them two years.

So we went back to the drawing table and said, come now, let's just get the solution done.

More to help them.

And it it did delay it.

I mean, that's why this has been delayed what eight months maybe.

So Tony, sorry to interrupt you.

Sorry.

Go ahead.

I I just want to say um there's probably a lot more to the story, and I get we've got to be careful with land deals, right?

We know that, right?

Yes.

Um, but there's a lot more.

I'm very supportive of this.

And I'll say why is I've been on the council where we've given a lot of tax dollars in tax incentives to bring commercial in.

And if we can get something like this here and then still get a valuable piece of property for this city, and then water and the access that we need.

I'm I'm very supportive of this.

And one thing the trail though is, I mean, this is a future thing.

So as it is, I'm supportive.

The trail maybe in the future, it to me it kind of is going to benefit this commercial area.

I mean, there's some housing, but I think it's American Fork down there.

So I'm wondering if Lauren, you would know this.

Can we do like a um what do you call them?

Special assessment district where they it'll benefit them and maybe they can pay for that trail system.

Is that a it might be difficult?

You can explore that maybe.

We can, but I think that'd be difficult.

Okay.

Yeah, we could explore.

Because maybe I'm I don't know.

I'm kind of hearing that they they want to come in because they like this trail idea, but I'm not ready to spend city funds on that.

So I don't I don't think the intent was to put a bunch of money into the trail right now.

I think so someday.

So it's in the danger.

Yeah, some of the developers down there on that south end would really love up here development.

So I I don't know if you're part of the agreement of the purchase is they'd like to preserve the ability to cross that trail.

So you could go put I I mean those are all that's a future consumption.

Future thing that would be associated with if they're developing across, absolutely.

We'd probably come in and say, hey, it's part of it to cross it, you you do the trail.

You're talking about are there options?

I I think absolutely 100% there's options.

But to preserve the corridor, we thought now's the time.

If we need to take a step back and say, you know, that area over there, w there's still some variables, let's say.

Let's say we pull that.

I mean just working with you as a council.

We pull that area out.

We use some of those funds to go back towards the 1.6 acres we have to bar buy from OTA United to your point.

Are we what's the fair value?

So maybe it's 3.5 that get purchased from the PECs, four that goes to there, and some of it goes towards that.

I there's options available.

If you're saying right now to preserve that trail on the eight acres is what would prevent you from trying to accomplish something, maybe let's I mean looking at the building the trail and maintaining that's that's preserving the corridor has been the number one.

Okay.

Can I say something?

Yes, go ahead.

Um I'm supportive of this project.

I've studied it a lot, and I think you've done an excellent job.

It seems like there's a lot of two for one benefits here.

So you have a storm drain that you have to have, you have a sewer line you have to have.

And in theory, you could build a trail over those, or you could not, but you we have to have those.

So we have this line.

We have pressurized irrigation, culinary lines that we have to have the city is gonna get and purchase that land anyway.

So let's try to utilize this trade.

I don't know if if everyone understands how RDA works, but we have a limited time to spend this money in this area, and the expiration is coming up, and this is a great solution to try to utilize that and to to kind of clean up an area.

And I've had a lot of of uh residents who ask me what is happening with Mill Pond, right?

Like and and they're concerned, and so this is um you know, I think we have heard from I I don't know what's gonna happen in the future, but to have a potential for some open more open space there where we already have some required open space at the TRC Mill Pond LLC area makes sense to me.

So there's just a lot of things.

I think you it's it's been a complicated situation.

I've wasn't but involved from the beginning at all, but just walking into it and having you explain it to us and have Lauren explain to us.

So thank you.

Kim, you had a comment.

Yeah, I just thought it might be helpful or relevant to this whole conversation to show you.

Um the trail that it is part of our overall master trail plan, that it's not just this isolated trail that would just go around the pond.

It connects down to Spring Creek Ranch and it goes up into our commercial area along Main Street.

If I can get to pull up here, I've got our trails master plan for some reason it's frozen.

Yeah.

Anyways, just for context, just because we've had a lot of talk about the trail, but it's more significant than just this.

It does connect into a north-south network on that east side of the city.

Anyways, just that helps.

Piece of information that might be helpful.

Great.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Mr.

Train or Lauren?

Nope.

Okay.

So I would be happy to entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion.

Um we're on number six, right?

We are on number six, yep.

Um I move that we approve resolution 2026-22, approving a purchase and sell agreement for the commercial real estate between Lehigh City, the seller, and Lehigh Mill Ponds LLC, the buyer, located at approximately 535 South Mill Pond Drive.

Do I have a second?

I second it.

I have a second from Council Member Freeman.

Any question on that motion?

Great.

We'll start with you, Councilmember Newell.

Yes.

Councilmember Harrison?

Yes.

Councilmember Stallings?

Yes.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes.

Councilmember Lockhart.

No, and if I may, Mr.

Rand, I just want to explain my vote, and this will apply to all of the three items relevant to this discussion.

I fully support, you know, um helping the motor company grow and bring sales tax revenue.

That's great.

I um I'm very concerned about the appraised values and the lack of there has been no appraisal given to the council that I'm aware of that I've seen showing that the asset we're selling is equivalent to the asset risk being received.

I'm very concerned there there are no plans that our parks department or anyone has approved to show the the cost of build out, the cost to maintain, the cost to operate, this future idea.

Um we've talked about a potential peer, and I've I've received no costs associated to this.

There are pieces of this deal that makes sense, but because I don't have the appraisal information to to make sure the deal is correct for the taxpayer, as well as all the future costs.

I I cannot vote yes tonight.

Great, thank you.

Um go to item seven consideration resolution 2026-23, approving a purchase and sale agreement for the commercial real estate between Lehigh Mill Pond LLC and Lehigh City, located approximately 411 South Mill Pond Drive.

Um I'm not sure that we need to.

Well, I'm happy to take any questions on this one.

I think this is all lumped in.

Any questions on this one?

This is just uh with the RDA funding, just purchasing this for 340,000.

It's the green beat.

It's not up there anymore.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, I move that we approve resolution 2026-23, approving a purchase and sell agreement for the commercial real estate between Lehigh Mill Pond LLC, the seller, and Lehigh City buyer located at approximately 411 South Mill Pond Drive.

I've got a first from Councilmember Newell.

I have a second.

Second.

Second from Councilmember Harrison.

Any questions on that motion?

Councilmember Harrison will start with you.

Yes.

Councilmember Stallings?

Yes.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes.

Councilmember Lockhart.

No, my comments prior apply to this one as well.

I'd love to see the RDA funds used to help with the div with the growth of that business and selling that upper that northern parcel, um, but not in the full context of tonight.

And Councilmember Newell.

Yes.

Okay.

Mr.

Mayor.

Yes.

May I ask Marlin a question on number eight?

Yeah, so let's let's bring up number eight and then yes, we can do that.

Uh item number eight, consideration of resolution 2026-24 approving a real estate purchase contract and addendum number one between Mill Pond Management and LLC the seller and Lehigh City the buyer, located approximately 801 South Mill Pond Road.

Um you would like to ask Marlin a question.

So we'll bring Marlin if you're available.

I just won't.

Yeah.

Hearing Mr.

Train and what he was talking about with the exchange between the two pieces.

I just wanted to get your input on it with the fact of do you feel like this piece is valued at 4 million to the city?

Do you think that we're this is an exchange that's you know I just want to get your economic input on this.

So you're about $23 a square foot.

Um the saying in the in the real estate industry is uh properties worth what people are willing to pay for it.

Um the two pieces of property that you guys approved uh or that was approved last year for us to purchase um for the booster pump stations up on Traverse Mountain and over next to uh tsunami.

The piece by tsunami was really unusable, and I paid $29 a square foot for that property, and that was by an appraisal.

Uh the other property was $33 a square foot.

Um the property we're talking about here is about $23 a square foot.

Um it is commercial.

Um it will allow Moto United the opportunity to put some type of a sign up that will be able to be seen from the freeway and stuff like that.

Again, the one thing that Lauren didn't bring out, that sewer line that's in the ground there is gravity fed, but it is so shallow in that area.

It Lauren, inches.

I mean, we we were inches away from getting the deal done because we couldn't get the grade all the way through.

So there are some serious issues with that that have to be resolved before they're gonna be able to build on it.

So taking that into account, I think we are getting a really good deal for the property itself in comparison to what we're doing.

I'm with you on that property.

It's more the southern property.

Is that worth $4 million to Lehigh?

With everything else that we're getting in it, I would say yes.

But again, I'd have to sit down and really analyze it and take a look at it.

If I had to give you just a knee-jerk reaction at this point, based on the entire entire deal as it's being structured right now, yes.

Okay.

You know, and Lauren's been showing this vision for a long time.

I love the idea of the trail.

Some day grandchildren or great-grandchildren may enjoy it.

It's me being able to justify this.

And so like I really value you and Tony being able to, and I think it it really helps the public understand too of what we're doing.

So thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Yeah, one last comment.

I've threatened Lauren for the last 10 years.

I'm going to sell that property, and we're finally to a point where I'm grateful that we're moving on in the property.

And again, Moto United truly does need it for that boat sales component.

And I think this is going to be a huge win, if anything, for the sales tax generation for Lehigh City in the future.

Yeah, we found a great buyer.

Somebody found a great buyer.

Yeah.

So agreed.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Lauren?

Yeah.

I will have the items.

I am then happy to entertain a motion.

No.

Mr.

Mayor, I move to approve resolution 2026-24, approving a real estate purchase contract and addendum number one between Mill Pond Management LLC and Lehigh City, located at approximately 801 South Mill Pond Road.

Yeah, I have a first from Mr.