Okay, everybody, we've got about a minute left.

I'm going to go ahead and start the meeting recording so our online participants can join.

Recording in progress.

Oh, yes, Madam Chair, we're ready whenever you're ready.

All right, welcome everyone who is here and has joined us both in person and online.

It is Tuesday, June 16th, 2026.

This is the Sandy City Council meeting.

We always start our meetings with prayer and the pledge.

And Shane, I wonder if you'd be kind enough to lead us in prayer tonight.

Our Father in Heaven, we come before thee this evening.

We're grateful for uh the opportunity to gather as a community.

We're grateful for the opportunity to have influence in our uh in our government.

We're thankful for our elected officials for their desire to serve the community.

We pray for them as they strive to do their best for the community.

We also pray for the members of our community that they will be protected from harm and that they will be uh able to participate fully in our government.

We say this in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Thank you, Shane.

And will everyone please stand and we'll recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Okay, we'll do some introductions next.

And Dustin, will you lead us up?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh my name is Dustin Freddo.

I'm with the City Council office.

Uh in the back of the room is one other council staff member, Justin Sorensen.

Hi, I'm Tracy.

I'm counsel for the council.

Chris Edwards with the council office.

Chris Nickel, District Three.

Brooke Christensen, District One.

Cindy Sharkey at large.

Alison Stroud, District Two.

Brooke D'Souza at large.

Erin DeKaiser at large.

I'm Sandy Mayor Monica Zoltanski.

I'm Shane Pay, City Administrator.

Lynn Bay, City Attorney.

And I do know that Marcy Heisman, District 4, she is on her way and should be walking in the door any second.

So she'll be joining us momentarily.

All right, I want to make sure everyone's clear on how tonight is going to work, and I want to make sure everyone that's here to make a public comment is able to do so and knows when to do so.

So we have on our agenda tonight.

We'll be starting off with a special recognition of a departing um city officer.

Um we'll have three information items that we'll address.

We have one item on the consent calendar.

That'll be very quick.

Then we'll enter our public hearings.

And I suppose most of you are here to comment during the public hearing portion of the meeting, and that's here.

That's if you're here to talk about either the budget in general or any of the budget amendments or items, that will be during item number six.

That'll be our public hearing.

Um we'll also have a 6 p.m.

general citizen comment period.

So anyone that might be here to comment to the council or speak to the council on anything that isn't on tonight's agenda, or on one of the information items.

Your opportunity would to do that would be during that general citizen comment period, which is going to happen as close to 6 p.m.

as we can get there.

Generally, it lags just a little bit.

Um so hold tight if you're here for that.

All right, and if you do want to comment, I want to make sure that everyone that wants to do that knows to fill out a blue card in the back of the room.

And if you could let us know whether you're here to put um comment for the public hearing or for general citizen comment, that would be helpful.

So we know to call on you at the right time.

All right.

Starting off the meeting.

First item on our agenda is very important to Sandy City, and that is a special recognition for our departing chief administrative officer, Shane Pace.

And so I'd like to invite Wendy and Dustin down.

We'll we'll start with their presentation.

And yeah, step right up to the podium.

And thank you for joining us this evening.

Good evening.

Thank you for having us.

My name is Wade Thomas.

I'm the Assistant City Manager in Harriman City, and I'm also the Vice President of the Utah City Managers Association.

My name is Dustin Graba.

I'm the Wasatch County Manager.

I'm a member of the Utah City and County Managers Association's board.

We are honored to present the Utah City Manager Association's Manager of the Year Award to Shane Pace.

Shane's career began as an intern right here in Sandy City in 1990, and has taken him through increasingly significant roles from management analyst to public utilities director to city manager.

His journey reflects a deep commitment to excellence and public service.

Shane leads with wisdom, foresight, integrity.

He has exceptional ability to bring people together and defuse contentious situations with calm professionalism.

His insights and experience have granted him the respect of his peers from across the state.

Sandy's mayor first met Shane when she was publicly opposing a city project.

Even in disagreement, they found a way to come together to get that project done.

He's always kind and thoughtful, qualities that have consistently defined his leadership.

Shane's expertise in management extends or was built at least partially during his 13 years as their public utilities director for Sandy City, enabling him to tackle major projects.

He was involved in Farmington Farmington Station, it was a economic driver for that city, as well as major projects here in Sandy, including the Fire Station 31, Sandy's Wetland Park.

For over two decades, he served under four mayors with steady principled leadership.

During a flood, he even left church services to help constituents and uh first responders.

He's been an exemplar of professional qualities like his compassionate management.

He's on the ground when he's needed serving people alongside employees and neighbors.

He's respected by staff, elected officials, and this award represents his recognition by his peers across the state as he's built lasting relationships because he genuinely cares.

And I felt that in my interactions with him through UCMA.

He loves Sandy.

He raised his family here, and he embodies what a city manager should be.

So please join us in recognizing Utah City Manager's city uh manager of the year, Shane Case.

Yeah.

Um Shane, we we we were able to give this.

So this is this is a belt that uh we present to all of the city managers.

This he gets to hold on to temporarily, but this award, City Manager of the Year is one that we presented to him at our conference that he gets to keep for life.

So thank you, Shane.

I appreciate it greatly.

This doesn't fit, by the way.

I think the prior guy had fit.

Thank you, Wendy and Dustin.

Hey, don't go too far because we're gonna take some photos in a second.

Shane, stay where you are, okay, up at the front, and I will ask the mayor and the vice chair to step up with me up in front, and we have a couple more items to present to Shane.

All right.

Shane's been with us for 36 years.

This is kind of a really, really huge and big deal.

We couldn't possibly send him off with a lot of fanfare.

We'll do our part tonight at the city council meeting, and then of course we'll have an open house retirement event for him as well.

But this was our chance to in front of the public present our give our thanks to Shane and make sure he and everyone else understands how is how important his service to the city has been.

Part of what we'll be giving Shane is a resolution from the council.

Hi, Zach.

He had to be here tonight for this too, I'm sure, yeah.

Um this is a resolution of the Sandy City Council recognizing and honoring Shane Pace for his extraordinary service to Sandy City.

Whereas Shane Pace, Chief Administrative Officer of Sandy City, has dedicated 34 years of distinguished service to Sandy and has served in municipal government for almost four decades, where he has demonstrated exceptional versatility, expertise, and commitment to public service.

And whereas during his tenure as director of public utilities, Shane became one of Utah's most respected water professionals, mastering the complex disciplines of water management, water rights, infrastructure planning, environmental stewardship, and public policy, while elevating Sandy City's reputation throughout the state.

And whereas his leadership was instrumental in the successful negotiation and acquisition of the Ontario Drain Tunnel, Water Rights, a historic investment securing critical long-term water resources for Sandy residents and future generations, and successfully resolved issues through collaboration, diplomacy, and trust building, transforming conflict into partnership, and strengthening regional partnerships.

And whereas his extensive knowledge of water rights, coupled with his remarkable institutional memory, I didn't know that part.

I had to read that in, and expertise, established him as one of the foremost authorities on water resources in Northern Utah, resulting in his service on the board of directors of the Provo Water Users Association, and making him a trusted advisor to agencies, engineers, attorneys, and municipalities throughout the state.

And then finally, as chief administrative officer, Shane Pace has overseen and coordinated numerous transformative projects and public investments, including Fire Station 31, Sandy Wetlands Park, Public Works Maintenance Facility, Sandy Recreation Center rebuild, Monroe Street extension, and numerous critical infrastructure improvements benefiting residents and businesses throughout Sandy.

Now, therefore, the City Council honors Shane Pace for his extraordinary contributions to Sandy, its residents, employees, and regional partners throughout his distinct distinguished career and his unwavering dedication to our community.

Thank you, Shane.

Can't just let a resolution go without something else that you can take with you.

So the council has gotten a little something for you to remember, a spy.

It's just a crystal here.

And it's a Sandy City.

So the City Council honors Shane Pace, Chief Administrative Officer, for a lifetime of municipal service and an unwavering dedication to the residents of Sandy City, 1990 to 2026.

So I want to thank the City Managers Association for recognizing Shane.

This is a very distinguished award for you to receive an award from your peers all across the state of Utah.

Now everybody knows what we know how how wonderful you are, and how uh it's been so transformative to have chief administrative officer leading the city at this time of Sandy Rising.

Shane has been an early champion and early adopter, a first cheerleader of the Protect Connect Create vision of this administration of Sandy Rising.

He's marshaled resources and personnel and ideas, uh alternatives and options for building Fire Station 31, the public works maintenance facility, uh the new recreation center, the wetlands dedication, Monroe Street.

These are it's rapid-pace, transformative infrastructure projects that will change the city for generations to come.

So you've left an indelible mark on the strength of our city, have enhanced our city.

And I guess the kids would call it change my ride or die, because no matter what the time or the or the hour or the situation, if there's something happening in the city and the mayor needs to know, or the chief administrative officer needs to know, we've got a red phone that uh directly links us 24-7.

There have been so many instances where we've been driving to an event or a meeting or an appointment and we've had a call for a detour to go check something out or respond.

And the um big water main break on Shad's circle last summer was what just one of those mornings where we were both coming home from church in different directions from across the city and I saw kids wakeboarding in the gutter and I knew it was gonna be a big one.

So before I even arrived on the scene to see the firefighters and the first responders there, my first call was to Shane, and here he was in his church suit with the cuffs uh rolled up and his shoes in his hand, walking through the uh rippling water.

It was it was a real gusher to come and see how he could help and respond to the needs of the residents.

It wasn't a sandy water main break, it didn't matter, it was impacting our residents in our neighborhood, and that's the kind of ready response and the turnout uh that few people see or might even expect from an executive of his experience.

But whether it's folding up chairs at the end of a meeting or uh putting big projects, a 21 million dollar fire station together.

Uh you really can do it all, and every mayor deserves a Shane Pace.

So thank you.

And I have one uh presentation.

This is the mayor's trailboss award to Shane Pace, Chief Administrative Officer, in grateful recognition of 35 years of dedicated service, keeping the wagon rolling, the trail steady, and Sandy moving forward, presented to Shane Pace, Mayor Zelganski.

The Ray Cowah.

I'll turn the microphone over to Shane in a second.

But first we'd like to get some pictures.

So if the council members would come on down, um Wendy, Dustin, come back up.

We'll take a couple of business pictures.

Um then we'll invite family up.

And hey Zach, why don't you come down and join us for a picture down here?

All right.

Oh cut off my face.

That's fine.

All right, one, two, three.

All right, one, two, three.

One, two, three.

Truly very, let's get some family.

Yeah, we can take ourselves.

Yes, maybe.

Yeah!

All right, everyone look at me.

One, two, three.

Sure.

All right, so we face one, two, three.

Jesus.

Thank you, everyone.

And now I'll hand the microphone to Shane if he can shed some of these many uh awards.

We'd love to hear from you.

First of all, I think I should have invested in a glass award company someplace.

You know, uh I went to my first council meeting 40 years ago in Oram.

Um and what was happening is we had uh where we lived, there was an alley behind our our back fence, and there was a Safeway Coronet store.

The cornet store closed and it was vacant for a couple of years, and the city council approved a conditional use permit for a warehouse to go in there.

Well, they weren't really great neighbors.

Um they would run up and down uh the alley at uh midnight with their forklifts and and would be out there yelling and screaming and swearing and uh you know we put up with uh for a few weeks and then my father went out there over the over the fence and asked them to stop and to uh and to quit working, and of course they were very colorful towards him.

And so uh my father found out that the conditional use permit was up for a renewal.

They only gave him a year, and so my father and I we went down to the council meeting, and of course we sat, I think for four hours.

So hasn't changed much, has it.

We sat there for four hours until that issue came up, and then we got to make art have our chance to make public comment.

My father got up and he was very uh reasonable, but he was very clear that uh they were they were violating the uh conditional use permit and and they needed to stop.

And um the city council uh renewed their permit, but gave this business such a tongue-lashing in front of the public that uh they really quite they really behaved themselves after that uh for a while, and that was my first real experience, and I think I've attended now over 1200 council meetings since then throughout my career.

And uh the process is still the same.

It is it can be very ugly at times, but it is the right process.

It is the process that our founding fathers instituted, and we have the chance no matter who we are as a citizen to come to provide uh public comment to have an influence on what's happening around us and what is happening in our community.

And it's a wonderful uh thing for us to be able to have.

We it's hard for us to always appreciate what an advantage that is to us as citizens to be able to provide that.

Now, elected officials don't always go with us, do they?

Uh, because they've got to make a decision based on what's best for the community as a whole and not necessarily what's best for us for an individual.

Um I have had a tremendous experience working with elected officials and staff here at Sandy.

I I um I have to thank Marzotansky for inviting me back to Sandy.

I thought my career was done here, and I had moved on and I got the opportunity to come back and finish my career here, and it's been it's been a wonderful experience.

Has it been easy?

No.

Um because a lot was going on, and we were getting a lot of things uh accomplished.

I have to thank the city council because when I wanted to make uh public comment, they allowed me to, you know, from my position.

And they listened to me, and they took um my thoughts under consideration, and then they made the best decision that they could with the information that they had.

And I will always greatly appreciate that.

And because of that process, um, a lot has been accomplished by this community.

A lot has been accomplished by these elected officials that are uh sitting behind me and to the side of me.

Um even though it's frustrating for all of them a lot of the time, uh, it's worth it.

And uh this community is better off because of all of them.

Um I've had the opportunity to work with incredible people.

I look at Merle Marsh who's sitting here in the audience.

Uh I had the opportunity to hire Merle many years ago, and uh he couldn't have been a better position for the position that he's in, and he's he has really uh been great for this community his whole time here, and there's a lot of people uh that are in the audience just like that that um I truly love and appreciate.

Um I appreciate all of these elected officials.

I truly love them.

They might not think that sometimes, but I truly do love uh the opportunity I've had to work with them and to and to associate with them and to uh um uh the term good governance is referred to a lot, and I believe that that's what uh what happens.

I uh so I'll cherish my time uh that I've had working here at Sandy City and working with uh everyone here.

It's a from my perspective it's a brilliant process.

Um that uh sometimes we have to remind my ourselves how and how important it is in our lives and how good it is for us to be able to uh to participate in it.

So thank you very much.

Council members, this is our one minute before saying to introduce me.

Can I introduce my family really quick?

Of course.

Yeah.

All right.

So uh this is my wife, Trudy.

Um none of this that I've that I've done over the last 35 years, I couldn't have done without her.

She's been my mainstay.

And she's she's been there when I've come home some evenings frustrated with either council meeting or with work or with uh personnel issue.

Um she's always been there for me, and she's always been very patient with me.

This is my daughter, Kylie.

This is my daughter Brianna.

This is my grandson Bradley, my and Sidney, my granddaughter, and Lily, my granddaughter, and this is Baylor, my grandson, and then these two youngest is Emmy and Laney.

And they're and then sorry.

Sorry, Dan.

I got so focused on the grandkids.

Where's my other son-in-law?

Oh, there he is, yeah.

I love my grandfather's uh sons.

I hit the jackpot with them.

And that's Wesley.

Um, and then we uh brand new uh Benny Barrett with my youngest daughter there.

So sorry to drag that out.

Council members, this is our chance to um say share a few words about or with Shane if you would like to do so.

Ms.

Nichols you want to start?

Yes, I do.

So Shane and I have known each other for quite some time, and um his his wisdom that he shared with me, I've taken to heart.

His recommendations are always wonderful recommendations, and I love you to death, and it's not goodbye, it's see you later.

Um I like that.

It's not goodbye, it's see you later because look who's back, Zach.

So you get to come back and make a public comment.

Except you probably won't, because you're like, I am done with all these things.

Thank you, thank you for all of your service.

Um in many ways.

You wear a lot of different hats in our community, um, and your leadership has an impact in a lot of different ways, and you've set some things in motion that will continue to stay in motion and continue to lift and guide and help our city um continue to serve well and invite service within those who who live within our city limits.

So you've modeled service, you've modeled leadership, you brought out the best, and I think all of us and and the best in city in the city for sure.

Thank you so much for all you've done, Shane.

Shane, thank you so much.

I just want you to know that I the thing I most impressed with you.

And it look I won't even look at you.

Is that you're just a good man.

And you are always honest and truthful, and you do your job to the very best of your ability.

And that is sometimes a rare thing, but you have it in spades, and I just am so impressed by that with you.

And just a huge thank you for your service.

I know it's not easy, especially when you're put in the middle of all of us, and we're really fun.

But that and your sweet Trudy and your family, the sacrifices they've made to let you serve our community this way, and to help guide all the decisions that we've made, and I truly appreciate that.

Thank you.

Will you let me know what's on TV on Tuesday nights?

You can do it in the movies.

You're gonna do me a favor with that.

Um Shane.

I I think I met Shane in 2014 when my when I was annexing my neighborhood into Sandy.

And I was so impressed with uh all the people I met from Sandy.

I was in an unincorporated island, and we were fine.

We were doing great.

But we did realize there were benefits to be gained by annexing into Sandy.

And one of the benefits I didn't fully understand was the quality of the people that were here at Sandy, the people that worked here, the A team of municipal government that was here at Sandy.

And Shane was among that group, the most highly respected, the most highly admired, the most highly sought after.

Shane was a part of that group that gave Sandy the stature and the reputation that we so enjoyed.

And even to this day, I too am glad that Mayor Zoltanski brought Shane back so that we could have the opportunity to work with you yet again and learn by that full that deep breadth of experience that is so essential to decision making even today and will continue to be.

Thanks for all you've done for Sandy and for the city council and for me.

I appreciate you.

Shane, I many of us up here and in the room have known you for a lot longer than I have.

Not quite 50 years.

As was said a week ago.

But um, you know, for for quite a while.

You have been um a pillar in our community.

When I first I I heard your name long before I met you.

Uh Mayor Zoltanski called or sent a text at one point said, Hey, you know, we're we're gonna be looking in this direction with uh with Mr.

Pace.

Um why don't you stop by and c and come up and meet him?

So the first time I walked upstairs and and met you, and I walked in and there was some discussion, and it it's I have racked my brain to try to figure out what it was.

And it was it was there was some sort of issue that was coming up, and I can't remember for the life of me what that issue was because I walked away just feeling the comp I knew Sandy was in the right hands.

You brought a level of confidence and competence that we needed.

Sandy, our residents, our businesses, the city itself needed at that time coming off of of COVID.

Um, you know, a one-term uh mayor from from the previous four years, a new mayor.

Uh you brought the direction that we needed.

Everywhere you go, you're there, you're just you're the answer to any question that I've had.

I knew that I could contact you and you would give me a very fair assessment.

Sometimes you would tell me no.

I like that, but um every elected official needs to hear that at times.

You know, thank you for for being the person that you are.

Thank you, Trudy, for loaning them to us.

I wish you the best.

And I love Chris what you said.

You know this isn't goodbye, but see you later.

Thank you for being a friend.

So I just want to echo, say that I echo everything that's been said before me, and that I have truly truly enjoyed the opportunity to get to know you better both personally and professionally.

Um I have appreciated the conversations that we've had, um, again, both personally and professionally.

Uh those professional conversations um that we have engaged in weren't always, you know, we weren't always coming at it from the same place or or in agreement, but I will say that um they they were re for s or they were professional and respectful, and um I think overall demonstrated uh exactly the type of environment that we all need to um consider while make moving fan Sandy forward.

And the other thing that I've appreciated is that you um don't just work for Sandy, you live in Sandy, you've raised your family in Sandy.

You know, Sandy is your home.

It hopefully will still be your home in the it's not goodbye at see you later.

I don't live too far.

I saw you and Trudy out for a walk one night last week, and so I hope to see you know many more of those opportunities to um stop and say hi.

And um I just thank you for everything that you've given, and thank you, Trudy, for everything that you've given.

I feel your love, and I know you feel mine.

Uh honestly, I wish we had more time.

I kind of wanted to be your boss someday.

That's not going to happen, but you know, I think people know, but Shane's impact is rivaled by very few people in the city.

He is legendary.

Once I show my kids this build, they'll call you level 100 master uh chief because seriously, that's what you are.

I mean, from the water rights and everything setting our city up and helping numerous administrations has been incredible.

I uh I said all the lovey dovey intimate stuff in the email.

And um seriously gonna miss you.

Thank you for everything you've done for our city.

Mayor, do you want to add any more thoughts?

All right.

Thank you for that.

Thank you, Shane.

We're not letting you out early tonight, by the way.

This is embarrassing.

Can we move on?

All right, let's go ahead and do that.

Let's move on to item number two on the agenda.

That's the administration providing the city council with an update on Crescent View Middle School.

Dan Nelson.

Thank you, Council.

We'd uh like to talk about Crescent View Middle.

Dustin, could you pull that up?

Yep, just give it a moment.

Justin's gonna pull it up.

Excellent.

All right, uh while that's coming up.

Uh this is a topic that is uh that that we've discussed, but wanted to bring it out in front so people knew exactly what was going on uh with the uh property.

There are several people that are here tonight that live adjacent to this property, and uh so we wanted to really get the conversation going and and uh roll out there uh what we have, what's going on, uh why it's going on.

So let's see.

There we go.

So uh tonight um uh the mayor wanted to bring up an opportunity because it's a very unique opportunity.

We're gonna talk about uh three scenarios tonight and what makes this property very unique, and what are some of the opportunities we have with it.

Uh scenario number one is the uh basically the city take the entire property plus the building.

Uh one advantage of there is it integrates into the an existing city park.

Uh and it would uh be 17 acres that was sitting there.

Scenario number two is a combination with the city taking some of the property, some of the building, and the remainder uh going to uh development um scenario, and the third is the city does nothing, and the school district proceeds.

So we wanted to talk through those uh three different scenarios with you.

So to give you kind of a reframe about what the property is, 17 acres, give or take, about 132,000 square feet.

Uh the city is under contract right now.

The purchase price is 17 million dollars.

Uh due diligence deadline is December 1st.

And uh closing on uh on uh March the first there.

So just to give you some kind of reference to what the um to what the piece of property is and some relation and how unique this is.

Falcon Park is also 17 acres, so it gives you kind of a flavor of of what that is.

Uh Lone Peak Park 27.

You can see the rest of them there, but uh, you know, Farnsworth Farm, also not very far from me was 10 acres, and uh Sandy Costco, uh 15 acres there.

One of the things that is really unique about the location of this property is not only is its size, but it's opportunity to work, uh, but it's also in relation to other things that we've got going on with from a recreational standpoint.

So you can see that there's no other piece of property at this part of the city, uh, this far to the west, and on the south end of the city, you can see how it relates to our existing parks and rec facility and our Sandy Recreation Center uh up on the northeast.

So this is uh the piece of uh property that we're talking about right here.

Now, one of the truly and I can boil the slide down into really three things.

Uh, there's a recreation opportunity, there's an arts opportunity, and there's open space opportunity.

And the thing that is really unique is it integrates with an existing city park, which you see uh adjacent to the uh property.

So the two ball fields that you see on the picture right here exist today as they are, as well as the tennis courts and uh the rest of this here is concept, uh, so nothing to really talk much about other than their uh building blocks within this area right here, but it's basically boils down to an opportunity for recreation, an opportunity for arts, and an opportunity for open space.

So this is the building right here.

This scenario number one contemplates taking the existing building with what it has inside.

Uh so we're currently using right now the basketball courts for junior jazz program.

Uh but this uh scenario uh uh, like I said, considers taking the entire uh piece of ground.

So I'll turn the time over to Ben, if that's okay.

He's gonna talk about uh recreation.

We've got Merle here to talk about arts, and we've got Dan here to talk about the economics.

Well, grateful for the opportunity to talk about parks and recreation as it comes to the Crescent Middle School property.

Um, this is what we do as recreation folks.

Um any of the uh community and recreation centers in the state were first uh schools that we repurpose into recreation centers until we're able to build our own recreation center.

So the the proximity and where this is located is critical, as well as the ability that we'll have to take advantage of a few things.

Like uh Ryan said, the most critical thing for us is junior jazz.

Um this facility has uh double courts, um, and we are currently using it for our junior jazz, so we would rent that space through the school district.

So it's critical for us to maintain that junior jazz court space because there's just not a lot of opportunities.

Uh similar green space is always critical to have multi-use fields.

This would allow us the opportunity to get outside at Crescent and use the multi-use uh fields along with all the other concepts that were presented there, and the connection to Crescent Park.

The locker room space as well is really advantageous into this space.

Oh, I went to so a couple ideas.

The courts are really important, and then there's also this cafeteria area, which is open as just as big as the basketball area, where we could put in some end or pickleball as a concept, or um a mass exercise area, uh, but throughout the entire building, you'd have exercise equipment, you'd have workout areas, and then like I was saying, those locker rooms are already already primed for uh uh and um women in menus.

So I'll turn the time over to Merle to talk about art.

Thank you.

Um, two times ago, my birthday, last time my anniversary today, it's just Tuesday.

Good job, everybody.

Thanks.

Um, this is actually a sea change opportunity for the Sandy Arts Guild to speak candidly.

The opportunity to be able to get a space this size, particularly that has this kind of clear opening.

One of the hardest things about a rehearsal space is finding something that isn't littered with pillars, support columns, right?

And the current Kiva presents an opportunity for us to be able to do that.

So one is it could be a great rehearsal space for us, two, audition space.

Right now we're auditioning at the Sandy Senior Center, because that's all we got.

So we're doing that there, educational space.

We're currently doing the youth showcase programs, and that's a great opportunity to expand that.

We can only do that during this very short three-week window right now, based upon the facilities that we have.

This would provide opportunities to greatly expand that.

Uh, we have a theater warehouse up on the corner of the public works site that we have outgrown years ago.

This could provide a wonderful opportunity for set storage, costume storage, prop storage.

And right now where we're building in the middle of the storage, instead, we could create construction shops, paint shops, maintenance shops.

It provides really amazing opportunities for us.

Um currently the American Western Vencourus uh is homed in the parks and rec building.

And uh within this school, there are already classrooms that fit that perfectly.

So it could provide great opportunities to provide a home for them also.

And then you know, we'd love to work more with the public to find out uh other things that they may want and need.

We know that we've been working hard to get gallery space, that's something that we do not have a lot of.

Currently, our uh plain air show is on the third floor of this building for the paint out, and the quick draw is in the senior center.

So we're making use of the space as we can, but it does limit us in what we can do.

And then, of course, opportunities for maybe a recital space or more educational space.

Those are the kind of things that we are looking forward to pursuing.

We really are landlocked as an organization that makes us calendar locked.

And because we're rehearsing in the same space we're performing, that really limits what we can do.

So that's why when I say a potential sea change for us, it really is.

This could make a very big difference for our operations and how we move forward.

Dan's just wanted to go over what this acquisition would look like under scenario one where the city would keep the entire property.

Um our contract price right now is 17 million.

There's potential, there's some talk about trading for the current parks and rec building with an appraised value of three and a half million.

So that might be an offset.

Renovation, this is a very wide range, just depending on how much we would want to do to the building.

These are numbers from an architect who's looked at it and thought, you know, what we would need to do for the entire building.

And then site costs again, these are costs per acre that come from an architect who has looked at this in some detail.

Came up with a couple of of potential layouts for what we would do at the land, and uh that's kind of a range of site costs.

So the total uh cost for this acquisition and renovation would be between you know 20 to 30 million dollars.

So that would be for the acquisition and renovation side, and then for the operating uh we've estimated $500,000 annual operating costs.

Uh utilities, this is their current utility costs are $172,000.

Um anticipating some revenue that we would get, being able to rent some of the space, and uh then we'd be saving by not having to operate and maintain the current parks and rec building.

Uh so that is what the economics of scenario one would look like there.

So we can answer questions at the end, but I think we'll uh move to scenario two briefly.

So scenario two is a hybrid scenario where the city takes a portion of the building uh but gives up uh some or all of the surrounding open spaces around it.

Uh the reason for doing that is a little is it would offset some of the costs.

Uh what you're looking at here is just a hypothetical what if we kept three and a third acres and fifty-five thousand square feet of the building, that would free up uh thirteen acres for uh some sort of redevelopment that uh would uh require obviously rezoning to change that, but that would offset then a uh uh the the cost of doing this.

And so the the scenario too really incorporates kind of the in-between, there's a lot of space there to talk what that would look like, a potential housing components of you know senior housing or a missing middle uh owner occupied, so those will all be kind of options for that scenario.

And if we did that scenario, this is a picture of what the building of the portion of the building that would make most sense to keep a hold of because it keeps the basketball courts and it keeps other space in there where we can program and uh and do things for that uh particular scenario.

So, Dan, why don't you talk about the economics of that and why uh uh what would happen under that scenario?

Thanks, Ray.

And some of this depends on how much of the building and property we keep versus how much we would redevelop.

Uh but one scenario, and this is the most conservative scenario, in other words, keeping the least amount of the building, the least amount of the property, uh the you know, purchase price wouldn't change, uh, the offset for maybe trading for the whole or the current parks and rec building.

Um, and then but this one uh sale of surplus land at 13.7 million, um, that would reduce our basis in the property.

Um along with that, keeping less of the building, our renovation costs go down, and obviously our site costs go down quite a bit.

So all in once it's all said and done, we could be into the acquisition and renovation for somewhere between one and a half million to five point seven million.

And again, if you if we decide we want to keep more of the building and more of the property, we want to expand some more green space.

Um, you know, this could look a lot of different ways.

Uh and then the operating costs uh estimating under this scenario 150,000.

Umtilities at 71,000, we would still get some revenue, but not as much as keeping the entire property, and then savings by not operating the current parks and rec building.

So that would be scenario two.

Uh uh, yeah, an example of what that could look like.

And then the final scenario would be if the city uh bows out and the district moves forward as they were basically planning to do you know, before uh administration saw this opportunity, and that would just be to sell this property to a developer.

Uh the city would not have a role as an owner authority.

Uh that you know, we still are the entitlement authority as far as approving a rezone here, but it will likely go to development uh if the city bows out here.

Um, this is just one concept of what a townhome development would look like.

Um, my mass says it's about 165 town homes, uh 2,000 square feet with about $600,000 each for an asking price.

Um if it were a single family development, uh you'd be looking at about 90 homes, about 1.1 million dollars each.

And I mean, those are two options.

There's probably you know a hybrid of many of those that we could see if this goes to just to a developer.

Um but anyway, that would be this the third scenario.

So yeah, and happy to answer any questions or uh Ryan or anybody.

Yeah, so the the the reason we're bringing this up is because it's uh this what you know to answer these questions, we really need public input.

And so the clock is ticking uh as we are under contract right now, and so we wanted to give people an opportunity to understand and really so we envision some town halls, we envision some visioning uh with the public with the neighbors so that uh people in the city can get involved with what this looks like so we can answer some of those questions.

So that's what uh main reason we wanted to bring this up and and get the process moving.

Miss Houseman.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um thank you for that that final note as well.

Um I I think we've had some really successful public engagement um experiences recently, the general plan, for example, and I think this is the exact right uh approach is introduced, there's things to consider, they're all concepts, and start getting input from the community.

So thank you for that.

Um I also want to say thank you.

It was just highlighted in one tiny little spot, but I want to call attention to it.

Um highlighting one potential use, um, and it was in scenario one.

I noticed it was I don't know if it's an option in scenario two.

I didn't see it, but it it it could still be an option in scenario two.

Um but child care.

And and I really am excited about that discussion when it when it gets there.

And again, to clarify the the RDA proposal I brought now several months ago, um, that proposal was about it is not about government sponsors.

So I I just want to clarify, like we've done at the past with Alta Canyon.

When it when people see child care on that as a list of possible uses, it's not don't compare it to what we've done at Alta Canyon where we provided it.

Am I correct?

I'm making this assumption, yes, yes, I'm seeing heads not.

Correct.

Correct.

So this is about us making it possible for businesses to come together and do a co-op approach, as I discussed in my proposal, a co-op approach to providing child care to their employees.

So we make the space possible, but we are not the ones providing child care, etc.

etc.

So I'm really excited to explore what that piece of this um could look like.

And and I love that we're getting out early and and getting input from the community.

And that I just want to clarify, it was a little tiny note.

So as people are starting to discuss, and if you need me to like, you know, talk about this proposal, and I'm happy to do it.

Sign me up for whatever town halls you have.

Thank you.

Miss Nickel.

So what's the proposal to fund this?

How are we what are you gonna propose to us?

Yeah, so the city has doesn't have enough money to take this down, right?

So as a $17 million price uh for the land for the building and for reconstruction, the the most realist the most realistic option is a bond.

And so the other clock that's sticking over our head is if we want to go out to uh the public and go for a GL bond, then that would require a mid-August deadline.

It would take action from the council in order to put it on the ballot, and we would pursue a path much like we do with the Fire Station 31, where people have the opportunity to uh vote whether or not they wanted to raise their property taxes in order to fund it.

So I thought that's what you were gonna say.

And I have a really big concern that this will maybe cloud some people's judgment because we are going to put a geo bond out for a public safety building, and this may just be too much for people.

That's my concern.

Um and what is it zoned right now?

I don't know.

R140, like a one-acre zone.

Okay, so it wouldn't necessarily have to be rezoned.

It wouldn't.

Okay.

Thanks.

Ms.

Christensen.

Kate, you talk a little more about the timeline.

So August, if we want a geo-bond, we have to have a decision by then.

Tell me before that, like what are you thinking for all the lead up to that decision?

Yeah, I think in order to get there, uh, we would go through the process of organizing town halls.

Because we we you know that they what we need to know from our residents uh to have an opportunity to talk about what they want is kind of what what that looks like, you know, uh what that appetite looks like.

And so getting uh uh you know input from those that live close by as well as those that live in other parts of the city, so I think that we would uh start with town hall process so that we could get some feedback on what residents want to do with it.

But when?

Like what I mean, I'm just like probably now.

I mean Yeah, July ish.

I mean, so you know, once we get the budget uh done, July is right around right around the corner because there's only July and basically half of August in order to do that.

So that hence that's why we wanted to come tonight so we can get this ball rolling.

And you okay, so just in my mind.

So we start doing count halls, present both options just like you did here tonight, let people all all three options, let people ask questions, get their feedback, maybe do a survey, just kind of see what the appetite is for this.

Exactly.

And then we have to make a decision by August if we have to bond.

So yeah, and then we have money down on us, so we're under contract, and that deadline is December 1st.

Okay.

So if we go beyond December 1st, then the money goes hard.

If we if we decide not to do something, then that money is refundable until December the first.

So we'd have to make a decision like the beginning of August, or do we have to know sooner than that in order to meet the August deadline?

Uh we would have to get it.

Uh I don't remember exactly I don't know exactly which which date it is, but it's probably the second council meeting in August is probably the latest, which we would need to make that decision if we're going to put a question on the ballot.

Okay.

Thank you.

Ms.

D'Souza.

Thank you.

Um a lot of my questions were initially what Councilmember Christensen was going to ask, but I'm wondering on this potential, you know, geobond proposal.

Is that just for option one or is that also for the hybrid option?

It it is for yes.

So in other words, it would take even if even if there was a scenario two, it would still take money that we likely don't have.

So that's the most likely answer is yes, it would take uh a geo bond in order to in order to do some version of scenario two.

Okay, and then during the this you know, town hall education, gather feedback process.

Is there going to be um cost estimates to the residents in the event that we do to for them to also consider?

Oh, certainly.

Yeah, that's that's fairly easy to do to say here's the you know, an if then, if we bond for this a much, this is what it would take from a property tax perspective in order to meet the obligation of that bond.

Okay, it would be really helpful for the council to have that information as soon as you have it on all of those scenarios too.

I was gonna ask the same thing about the schedule.

You know, I am feeling really concerned with um how little time I feel we have as a city as a council um to make these decisions.

And so it would be helpful to have a calendar of your planning and your events that we could look at uh to help us stay informed with the process, uh as well as again, you know, the the financial numbers that matters a lot, um, even if it is a question to the public um on whether or not they'd want to.

I think we would like to know that as soon as um you have that ready.

Um so right now that school presently hosts the uh adult adults with disabilities transitional program with the district um have during this period of due diligence and whatnot in conversations with the district.

Um have there been conversations about that program and yes, and we would lease back a portion of the building um to their life skills academy uh until and it's it's a short-term lease.

They've already figured out where it's gonna go.

But um yeah, and we've told them we'll we're we have some flexibility around that.

Okay.

Uh all right, I think that's all I have right now.

Thank you.

I was just looking, um, I mean, it there's some pretty significant differences, and I between one and two.

Um and I understand because you're kind of cutting the building in half with it.

Uh, but there were I mean I'm I'm trying to I don't know, I you know, so with Merle, you know, talking about the community arts features, that's something that we just we don't have at all.

Uh you know, I mean we're sharing, you know, renting space with Mount Jordan, I mean kind of that partnership there.

Um but you know, wondering if that was I I just saw it was like a very minimal amount for scenario two, um, you know, including any sort of like child care or anything like that.

I mean, it seems to be mostly focused on on the athletic uh sports component where we have Dimple Dell, and I didn't see that marked on the map that you presented, um, but Dimple Dell that's just a you know a couple of blocks up the street.

Is there is there room to to maybe wiggle around a little bit more?

Is that something that you'd be asking the community to see if they were um more interested if it wasn't scenario one, um, but if it was scenario two to look at at more of that community arts component, more of the the child care component.

Yeah, I'll take a crack at that, and then Dan, if you want to add some things.

So think about one to two as a sliding scale.

Meaning that that you know, one is taking the whole thing.

The version just for simplicity, the version we presented tonight is kind of like the bottom end of of scenario two, the probably kind of the least amount that we would uh that it would make sense.

And are there scenarios in between?

Of course there are.

Uh for simplicity's sake, we wanted to say, you know, here's uh scenario one and there's scenario two.

So do you want to do that?

No, that's exactly right.

We've tried to bracket this in terms of the most conservative and the most ambitious options for this property.

Um if there's something in between that, you know, ideally we would have plenty of time to figure all this out and then bring it to a vote.

But um, you know, we do have a clock ticking as far as this acquisition, otherwise it will be you know likely developed.

Um and I think we would love to get some feedback from the community as far as some of the uses that we could do.

But yeah, to answer your question, um, yeah, there is something in between, and you're right that doesn't totally solve some of art's needs and may not address all of child care.

Um, you know, so that would be something that that we'd like to get some feedback on.

Yeah, so one helpful way to think about it is the amount of open space that you want because we're not getting the open space back, right?

This is you know, this this is the only uh you know, within this segment of the community for these uses, once that open space is gone, that open space is gone.

So that's uh that that you know I think causes a lot of pause on what that looks like, and hence, you know, from a scenario one standpoint that that preserves the open space that we're simply not going to get.

Yeah.

And along those lines to be able to buy a building and our architect says it has 60 years left on it at land cost.

Um, you know, that's that's pretty uncommon.

So and for our use is the the big spaces inside that can't be used without the pillars and the height of the ceiling.

So a middle school is different than an elementary school in that aspect that it's very unique for for the purposes that we would use it for.

A middle school brings things to bear that an elementary school could not.

And that's I was kind of taking some notes, so it may have been asked a little bit what when we did uh when we bonded for 31, um, you know, that was it's kind of at the low end here.

What was the average uh payment, you know, for the tax?

That's a Brian question.

Do you remember?

Uh when we did 31, what was the uh impact to the resident for tax?

Yeah, what was the what was the pay?

Okay, stay tuned.

$14.

Oh.

I I'm just presenting it.

Yeah, and I was just wondering like um, you know, on an annual basis.

Yeah, uh it because that looks like it's about at that bottom because we went for 21.

I think we'll find that out.

It'll be momentarily.

Fabulous.

Thank you.

Mr.

DeKaiser.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm just want to know the this parcel is like two residential homes from being within the radius of uh housing and transit reinvestment zone from the Crescent Track station.

What has the conversation about that element been?

You want to tackle that, and I might add something to that.

Uh I'll let you tackle it.

Okay, yeah.

So one thing you've got to keep in mind is is the um uh is that requires very dense housing uh for that scenario.

So it's we've we've looked at that, and it does not it does not work uh within that uh within the parameters of the uh HTRZ.

That's easy enough, thank you.

Mr.

Sousa?

Thanks.

I had just had one more question.

In the uh situation of scenario two where the city were to purchase, retain a portion, and then you know, sell for housing where we have um a little bit more stake in and what goes in there.

Have we I guess I'm just trying to understand the likelihood of the assumptions that have been presented here with regard to you know what it would be purchased for?

Is there any interest in that?

You know, I I think that that's important too.

I know that we had talked about my recollection was that was more of like a main cent this scenario two is more of a main central idea arounding um us considering the purchase of all of this.

And so I'm just wondering what's been done to test that um theory or assumption uh because I I find it nerve-wracking to consider this as a as an option with these numbers as assumptions without having anything real to back them up, and then you know, the information goes out to the public, we make decisions based off of hypotheticals, you know what I mean?

And then you know the information goes out to the public, we make decisions based off of hypotheticals, you know what I mean?

So what have we done and what can we do?

Well, uh, one answer to that is we know that there's there's more bids on this.

There are other people, there are other parties interested in this property.

So if the city decides to do nothing, uh there is there's interest in that.

Now, as far as have we taken anything under a specific scenario and taking it out to the market, the answer would be no, because we haven't addressed, we haven't heard from residents.

We don't know what that what that would likely look like.

In other words, um, you know, taking a scenario and talking about, you know, are we talking about uh 10 acres, are we talking about 15 acres and we only keep two acres?

We're talking about, you know, we keep 12 acres and it's five acres, so all those are kind of different scenarios that might have bearing might provide different answers to that question.

So the the what you know what we're trying to do is to get the public involved so that we can come up with some uh what would we like to see happen with that piece of property?

Yeah, no, I get that.

I uh I mean I totally understand that there are a lot of you know variables.

Go ahead, Dan.

Did you want to add?

Yeah, let me just add to that.

Um so they do have two unsolicited offers from developers for 17 million dollars.

Um so I think that you know is pretty likely.

Um I've done some additional independent analysis.

Um there's always some risk as far as what your disposition value would be in selling off to different portions, but um, you know, I'm pretty confident that I mean this kind of land in Sandy doesn't come up very often.

I think I think we'd be turning people away who would be looking to develop this.

Yeah.

No, and I and I get that, but the the offers are for the entire parcel of the land, right?

And so in this scenario, that changes things because there would be some municipal use, you know, adjacent and what that looks like, I don't know.

I just, you know, in thinking about the practicality of this, I I am feeling, especially with the um unfortunately short amount of time to make decisions, uh, really apprehensive about being able to get the information that we need to make informed decisions.

You know, I um like thirty the assumption here is that we would sell the surplus land for 13.7 million.

Is that even like realistic and there's a portion of the building that would need to be demolished, you know, w uh who's demolishing that at whose cost, you know, um is the renovation range that was included in that scenario.

Does that assume that the city is going to be paying for the demolition and then repair of that you know exterior wall or or what?

And so anyway, those are the things that I think in order to have a really good um uh opportunity for feedback from the public that we need to have a little bit more of that information to be able to solicit feedback because I could say one thing on one scenario, but given all of the other stuff, I might have not said that.

So that's kind of how I'll be looking at as a council member too in conjunction with you know public input.

Thank you.

Ms.

Christians.

And we still I just want to make sure we still like if we do decide to do this and have some component of housing, we still have the option to put in place the um same requirements we were talking about a couple of weeks ago, where we could say that if you're buying these homes, you have to live there a certain amount of time, or can we not do that with this?

That would all be down to a development agreement.

Okay, so we could.

Okay.

Um so my input on this.

I think the timeline is way too short to do anything practical and effective.

Um so far, how much are we into on this purchase?

Is it 100,000?

Is that what it is?

Okay, and we can get that money back.

So basically, since making the purchase, basically it's cost us a hundred thousand dollars to take the pro um take the property off the market while we could give it some thoughtful consideration, right?

As to whether the city might want to roll forward on something.

And if that something is a GO bond, and if that's for this year, because it has to align with the purchase of the property, we're not gonna purchase not knowing how we're gonna pay for it, right?

So that means that we need to have before the middle of August all the public input necessary to make a decision about whether this is worthwhile to put on a ballot.

Um I think we put something on a ballot if we can prove out the need, the benefits to the community.

I think it needs to be very, very thoughtful.

I'm not willing to just throw something on a ballot and say, what do you guys think, right?

Um the onus is on us as a city to prove out the need and ask for support.

And I simply don't think we have enough time to do that.

And so I my feeling on this is that we pass on this opportunity just because the timeline is way too short to inform the public, to request input from the public, and to be ready to cast a vote with all that information aligned and vetted and presented to the council for a decision by August.

I mean we're talking six or seven weeks from now.

I just don't see it as being feasible.

So any more input, Council members.

Is you know you can't order up these opportunities, and according to timeline, anyone that's bought their dream property knows when something comes along, you you move it, move it or lose it.

So I we've all been here in these positions long enough to see when choice properties come available, and then they go to development, different levels of density.

The first question our residents ask us is why didn't the city acquire it for a park?

We know that's coming.

And we know that open space is precious and sandy, and large lots like this simply don't exist in anymore.

And so while the timeline might be short, I think we should marshal all these city assets to put this to the community to first uh put out surveys, gauge support, gauge interest.

If it's not there, we move on.

But this should be a process that's driven by resident input and to restrict the this uh opportunity for our residents because it's not preferred timing, would we really be a disservice in my opinion?

That's why we're here presenting it tonight.

That's why we've added it.

We don't have all the answers right now, but we have a team of experts, and uh everybody here knows how valuable uh open space in Sandy is.

So I'd love for our residents to have the opportunity to weigh in.

And if we can uh at least demonstrate the effort that we've give our residents the opportunity to direct the this decision, uh then we've done our part.

And that's I think should be our starting point.

That's what I asked for.

Thank you.

Mr.

Souza?

We just had one more quick question.

And then I've got the answer to Councilmember Stratt's question, too.

Okay, perfect.

Can when did we go under contract on this?

How long have we been under contract?

So three dollars and twenty-two cents is the answer to your question.

I want to say it was March.

Okay.

March of 26.

26, yeah.

All right, thank you.

Ms.

Nicholas We've been working with the school district prior to March, right?

Because this was brought up like before I got on the council just in the beginning of 2026.

Yeah, we've been having discussions with them before March.

Into last year?

Oh, yeah.

Okay, thanks.

All right, that looks like it might be a Q.

Thanks.

Okay, we're gonna go into our general citizen comment period.

Um I have a bunch of blue cards.

I'll be calling on everybody that's given me a blue card.

If you haven't and you still want to talk during general citizen comment, just go ahead and fill one out and hand it to Dustin.

We'll also be going to our online audience after we um uh look after we get comment from our in-person audience.

So I have Craig Ulrich.

Craig, come on down.

So thank you, Council, for the opportunity.

Um I think especially Mr.

DeKaiser, because he on social media posts uh encourage residents to become engaged in the city council process.

So thank you.

As um Mr.

Pace said in his recognition that this process can be mappedy at times, but it is a good process and the best process.

First, I'd like to thank Mr.

Pace for on his re retirement.

Um working for for Sandy City, the many years that uh he has done so is remarkable accomplishment in and of itself, and you've contributed to the well-being of Sandy City.

Thank you for those many years.

And may God bless uh you and Fruity because you'll need it.

Um, during the uh legislative process for the budget, uh there's been a lot of information about uh the mayor's salary.

Um during the uh legislative process for the budget, uh there's been a lot of information about uh the mayor's salary, and um there's a lot of opposition against that, but I don't I did not hear anybody say why is that salary so high?

And so you as a legislative um body as the council, uh you're given the authority and the absolute right to oversees any employee compensation.

When Monica Zee was confronted in the past as to why her salary was one of the highest in the state, her response was simply and I quote, I never voted for my own salary increase, unquote.

Well, if you think about that, she doesn't vote.

You do.

The council votes, you vote the budget.

And there are three approved budget increases that council votes on.

The only one category that is in one lump sum is the merit amount, and each department head allocates that amount out as they see fit within their own department.

Monica Zee is obviously a department head and saw fit to give herself merit pay increases, which I believe was and is unethical, use of merit pay budget category.

So, contrary to what others may think and what has been posted on social media accounts and otherwise, it is totally appropriate for you to look at this budget category with a scream scrutiny.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Danny Poirier Poirier.

Come on down, Danny.

Um, but I am Danny Poirier, I'm the director of Wasatch Backcountry Alliance.

If you haven't heard of Wasatch Backcountry Alliance, we are a local nonprofit that was founded in 2013, mostly to represent the interest of all the folks playing in the mountains in the winter time outside of the ski resort, so backcountry skiers, slopboarders, hikers, picnickers, all those folks.

Um so I between our online audience for Wasatch Backcountry Alliance and our paid membership, uh, we have over 42,000 members.

So we represent a really big group of recreation folks here in the Central Wasatch.

Uh I'm here tonight to encourage the Sandy Council to remain a member of the Central Wasatch Commission and work that into your budget.

Um, primarily because the Central Wasatch Commission doesn't just hold meetings, it also helps advance a lot of great projects that our members benefit from.

Um, for example, one of the programs that our nonprofit runs is the backcountry shuttle.

So this is a this is a program that we run on busy Saturdays during peak winter where we are running small sprinter vans, 16 or 14 passenger vans to trailheads, trying to help alleviate some of the congestion concerns we all face here, and provide that access for trailheads, not just the ski resorts.

This program is really important, it's a great demonstration of what we would like to see in the canyons, and it's funded almost exclusively through the short-term grants that the Central Wasatch Commission offers.

Um we're worried that any reductions in participation in the Central Wasatch Commission could come back to affect community programs, ours in particular, obviously, but there are a lot of many other nonprofits who have these same concerns.

Um another great program that a lot of our users benefit from that the CWC helped start was the ski bus priority access program.

So any day when there's an avalanche closure, especially as it pertains to Little Cottonwood Canyon, it's so helpful that we're able to divert those cars off to the side of the road, allowing for residents to continue to use their neighborhood roads rather than having it be all jammed up with the infamous red snake.

Um so those are just some examples of programs that are really important to our users that we'd like to see continue to be funded, and we're worried that uh pulling pulling this contribution could impact those programs.

Um also, as we all know, Little Cottonwood Canyon, Sandy is literally the gateway to this beautiful canyon.

Um so it's really critical that Sandy remains part of the decision-making process uh to the canyon, and we think that your influence in the Central Wasatch Commission is super important, and we'd like to see that continue so you guys can continue to be part of those important conversations about transportation, recreation, um, watershed, and and really the future of how that all plays into Sandy.

So thank you all for your time and consideration.

Brian Noel?

Noel.

Brian, come on down.

Thank you.

My name is Brian Noel.

I live at 328 East, 11,000 South.

My backyard backs up to the Crescent View Park Pickleball Courts.

My side yard backs up to the seminary building there with Crescent Middle School.

I've lived here in Sandy for 26 years.

I've raised my family here in Sandy.

My children are raising their children here in Sandy.

I've uh built my business here in Sandy, and I love Sandy.

I think it offers a great quality of life thanks to the careful planning of people that have been involved.

So thank you for your service.

Moved and kind of that boondoggle and wasn't too happy with all of that process.

And in fact, I've told a number of people that I've sworn to myself I would never vote for another chance to increase my taxes.

After this meeting, I I've kind of changed that attitude.

One phrase that struck me as very poignant that was mentioned here is once that open space is gone, it's gone and very tough to get back.

That's one of the open space here is one of the things that raises the quality of life of Sandy.

I know a number, I I can't speak for everyone, but I know a number of people who would think it would just be a shame for Sandy City to let such a prime piece of property go to a developer.

So that's that's the main thing that I wanted to convey.

And I think it would also be a shame to shut down the process of finding out what Sandy City residents really would like simply because of timing, and and not to give them the opportunity, as our mayor said, uh, to voice their opinion on such an important matter for our community.

And I would hope that this council uh would at least give the residents of Sandy that opportunity was such a prime piece of land that could mean so much to all of the residents.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All right, Wayne Day.

Wayne, is Wayne here?

Oh, okay.

Come on down.

Hi everyone.

Um I'm kind of here two-fold.

Um I have all my neighbors with me.

Big happy family.

We've we've all lived there for quite some time.

Um my name's Wayne Day.

I live at 314 East, 110 South.

So we're the pie house, right?

314.

Um, kind of twofold.

One, I would love to see option one.

Um we this kind of leads into my next thing.

Um we need the open space.

We need the grass that Crescent Middle School sets on.

Um I'm I'm here because my son-in-law is uh the president of Alta Little Lake Football.

And can you imagine how many of the 300 boys that we have every year that we put through the program?

Um they're all ages seven to fourteen.

Um disappointed they're going to be when we lose those fields.

So we we really prefer to have that option available for us.

Um we already pay to use those fields.

Um we struggle every single season to find a place for these boys to play.

Um they're all Sandy City residents.

Mom and dads are there at all the games.

I think it's very, very important to have to have option one.

I love the arts part of it.

I have a couple of daughters and some granddaughters that perform in the arts.

And they would love to have that opportunity.

And the fun part is I have five girls.

And out of those five girls, four of the five girls have been on that stage in Crescent.

So imagine how excited they'd be if we could pull this off.

I kind of feel like we may be a little late to the game because of the time frame that we have.

Hopefully we can pull something off there.

But that being said, check my time.

That being said, I think by law, Sandy City has uh right of first refusal on that property.

So hopefully we can we can use that time.

Uh I'm excited to follow this process along.

We currently have our big trailers with all of our gear, all of our football pads and helmets and all of that stuff on that property right now.

We are we've been given permission year after year after year.

Alta Little League football is the biggest program.

It's the best program, and we want to keep it that way.

But one of our concerns is just to place a parker uh place the Parker trailers sometimes.

Um thank you, I appreciate this time.

Thank you.

All right, Zach Robinson.

This is the first time I've ever done this, just so you know.

From this I've talked a lot up there.

Uh Shane left, but I'm gonna talk about Shane.

Um, hi, council.

My name is Zach Robinson, and I live at 2479 East Glacier View Drive in District 3.

Uh I wanted to come tonight to an I'm just gonna pretend Shane's there, so wherever he wandered off to, somebody can tell him what I'm about to say.

Uh I I really felt compelled to come down tonight and and say thanks to Shane.

Uh Shane's put in a ton of time in this city.

Uh he's worked with all of us incredibly close, and uh I think he has done a fantastic job, and I love Shane so much, and I wish him nothing but luck and uh success as he moves into this next phase of his life with his family.

Um but but yeah, sorry, Shane, you're still not here.

I'm stalling as much as possible.

Um, but no, like we really are lucky to have a person of that caliber who who works for the city, works for all of us.

Mayor, you said it really well.

There's only a few people that truly know what he goes through and what he does, and he has always handled it with grace, and he's always handled it with a positive attitude, even though sometimes there's knives pointed in his direction, and and uh just I I just feel really strongly that we made a good call.

You made a good call, Mayor.

Council, we when we brought Shane back and provided that advice and consent.

We made a really great call to bring back that institutional knowledge.

Here he is, everybody, Shane Pay.

Thank you.

No, Shane, I'm just giving you uh a lot of love for start over, Zach.

No, no, no, no, no.

We don't need to go through that again.

But no, uh Shane, thank you for all the work you put into the city.

Thank you so much for being a part of this city.

As I said before, thank you for being a part of my experience uh with this city.

Um if I don't know what I was gonna get a picture, I would have put on pants tonight.

Um but just congratulations.

And being in a golf league is really fun, and so you'll enjoy that.

The last thing I want to say is, council, you're you're you're uh tonight you get to appoint his successor, and I think we're also in really fantastic hands with Martin.

Um having the time that I have had with Martin and the experiences that I've had with Martin.

I think we're just gonna not even see a bump.

Um, and I I really hope that you'll offer your support for his uh consent tonight, which I'm confident I think you will, but you know, uh I just want to stand up here as a resident and say uh I I believe in Martin, and I think he's the right guy for the job.

Thank you.

Uh I will I came for Shane, but I looked at the agenda.

I'm totally gonna stick around because believe it or not, I miss this stuff.

Like I absolutely miss this, so I'm gonna stick around and listen for a little bit.

Um, and I can't wait for number six.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Brian Chamberlain.

My name is Brian Chamberlain.

I live at 9973 South Glacier Ridge Drive on the East Bench in Sandy.

I became a resident of Sandy in 1990.

My purpose in addressing the council tonight is to talk about the million dollar federal grant for the Highland Drive Corridor study that doesn't hold pending the city's match to fund the study.

The study would investigate the needs for and impacts of extending Highland Drive across Dimpledale and into Draper.

My ambition tonight is to request the Sandy City allocate funding in the budget for the 3.5% match to fund the Highland Drive Corridor study.

By way of history, the Highland Drive Corridor has been envisioned and on the regional master plan since 1969.

The corridor has been preserved for the last 57 years.

Many segments have already been built, and the last piece is needed to get us across Dimpledale and into Draper.

Based on current congestion levels, it is past time to do the study and to determine how to deal with the growth and the congestion in the southeast part of the valley.

For example, 13th East and Segalily Drive is failing in the peak hours and will only get worse as the Northeast Corner develops.

By way of personal interest, since stating my wife in the mid-80s, who lived in South Sandy at the time, I have been dreaming about the day that Highland Drive would extend across Dimpledale.

Driving to and from her house in South Sandy, I would see the Highland Drive Corridor being preserved and segments being constructed further south in Draper and further north in Sandy.

I was excited about it eventually connecting to the north side of Dimpledale.

Forty years later, the connection has still yet to be made.

I have family, religious, and recreational interests in South Sandy and Draper and would love to use Highland Drive to access them.

My understanding is that funding was in the city budget five years ago, but the um to fund the city's match, but the mayor pulled this out of the budget.

I understand there are opponents and proponents to building a road across Dimpledale, but we're getting ahead of ourselves.

This is not a preserved Dimpledale issue.

We need to do the study and look at the data first and then work together to find a solution.

During the elections, I spoke with Councilwoman Sharkey, I spoke with Councilwomen Nichols, and we all agreed that we need to do a study.

We need to look at the data.

We need to figure out how best to deal with the growth and congestion.

Maybe we need a whitened Wasatch Boulevard to five lanes.

Maybe we need a widen 13th east to seven lanes.

Maybe we need to extend Dimpledale or Highland Drive across Dimpledale.

This study will answer those questions.

I feel that this is a good investment.

The Wasatch Front Regional Council has already committed 93% of the funds to do the study, and we're just waiting on Sandy City and Draper City to come up with their three and a half percent match.

I think it's past time to do the study, and I'm asking that you please fund it.

Thank you.

All right, Jack Stouse.

Jack.

Hello again, Council and Mayor.

Thank you all for having me.

I'm jumping ahead a little bit tonight.

I hope that's all right.

Um I have spoken, I spoke last week and I've emailed and talked to some of y'all about the uh Central Wasatch Commission funding, and I'm here again, of course, to speak on behalf of that.

I'm not gonna reiterate the points I've already made.

I just wanted to address a couple of uh the conversations that we've had and provide a little more context if I can.

Um, you know, the first thing that keeps coming up is budget, right?

And we've been talking about the budget, been seeing new projects that you're all thinking about, and I think some really cool stuff on the budget.

Um, by my math, it seems like the Central Wasatch Commission equates to about $3 per household per Sandy Re per in Sandy for annually.

So to me, that's a relatively uh small drop in the butt budget.

Um, and I've also seen that many of you have called out where that money goes.

Um, so how you're frustrated that it seems like it goes towards salaries and operations of the Central Wasatch Commission.

But to me, it's one of those salaries that are really important.

It's the planning, it's the moderating, it's managing of solution-oriented meetings with some of the most important people across the Wasatch Front.

Um, that's where that money is going.

It's going to these meetings, it's going to these places that we get together and talk about challenging issues of our time, of our mountains, of our cities, of our communities.

It's a massive lift, and I've seen firsthand how well the team at Central Wash Commission does that.

I don't think it's something that the state agencies, forest service, and water districts really have the capacity or directed to take on in the way that Central Wasash Commission does, which is a point I've seen many of you make in recent uh communication.

Without those meetings, steps towards national conservation and recreation area would be much harder if not impossible.

Without the meetings, finding resources to make busing and low impact transit would be much harder.

I also, like you all of you have said, I want to see the Central Wasatch Commission be productive.

I want to see the busing work.

I want to see movement towards some of these plans that have been going on for a long time.

Um and I once again, like I said last week, I invite you to come to the meetings and get involved in some of these projects that they're doing right now.

Um maybe there it are tweaks to that model that we can all work together on to affect change to make that process easier and more effective.

Um but I don't think the way forward is to go back into our silos.

I think the way forward is through this collaboration.

I think the intergovernmental space that CWC creates is the embodiment of the value that that we all have and we all share.

And without Sandy at that table, it all becomes much harder.

I can see a narrow pathway towards some of this long-sought federal conservation and recreation area and the goal federal designation goals in the next two years.

I think it's imperative that we all work together toward that timeline.

I don't think we should derail the work now.

I believe, I believe that some of us share all these goals, and I think we can set metrics for success for the Central Wasatch Commission.

We should continue to work together and help us make the place that we all share more resilient.

So thank you.

I know you're considering this in a little while now, but I wanted to make that point again, and I hope you all heard it and uh will weigh seriously the consideration of keeping your funding on the table for these guys.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Josh Chandler.

Good evening, Council.

It's good to see all of you.

Um Josh Chandler, Sandy resident.

Uh, like all of you, I'm uh part of a small group, maybe uh who have had the uh fortune of working for Sandy City.

Uh it's a great organization.

I'm really proud of the work that I was able to be a part of here.

I'm proud of the work that you're doing still on behalf of our city.

Uh when I worked for Sandy, uh now almost 10 years ago, one of the projects that I had when I first got started was to represent the city in the legal review of the creation of the Central Wasatch Commission.

It was something that I really got excited about because I love the mountains.

I especially love our little Cottonwood Canyon.

Big Cottonwood Canyon is fantastic.

I'm one of the few who probably spends more time up there in the summer than in the winter time, but I love our canyons.

And I was really excited about the opportunity that I had to be involved in something that was going to have an impact on those canyons and was going to uh matter, that it was gonna make a difference.

Now I know the Central Wasatch Commission is not perfect.

Uh not much of what we as government employees accomplish is perfect.

Uh but I think it's good.

I think it's worth the effort.

Uh one of the things I love about government is that we're willing to take on the challenges uh that our communities face.

And sometimes those are small problems.

And the reason that we have to take them on is because nobody else will, but those problems matter.

Sometimes those problems that we take on are really big problems and really big challenges.

And when we take on those big problems and those challenges, sometimes there are things that we can't accomplish or that we can't solve on our own, and they require collaboration.

One of the things I love also about working in city government is the way that communities can come together, and there's not a sense of competition between each other, but there's a sense of collaboration that can come when we work together to find real solutions to big problems.

But the only way that we can do that, do that, excuse me, is when we do work together.

And I think it would be a mistake for us as a community to walk away from that opportunity to be at the table and to be a part of those negotiations.

During the budget season, I understand that there are trade-offs, right?

And we have to make hard calls.

There's not unlimited funding.

But I think the Central Wasatch Commission is worth the cost, and I hope that you will as well.

Also, while I'm here, uh continuing with the theme for the evening, I just want to tell every time.

Um Shane Pace, how great he is, and what a privilege it was to work with him.

Um Sandy City is a better place because of Shane, because of the work that he's put in here.

I'm intentionally not looking at him because I'll get even more emotional if I do.

Shane is fantastic.

Uh I'm a better person because of the time that I've had uh professionally to work with him and personally to work with him.

Uh and so thank you, Shane, for uh who you are and what you've done.

So thank you, Council.

Thank you, Josh.

All right, Don Sidwell.

I'm here, and I want to thank Aaron, Alison, and Cindy for attending the Sandy Save the historic Sandy barbecue.

And that's what I am here.

Uh Brooke, of course you were there because you're district one.

I didn't mean to leave you out.

But that's your job.

Okay.

So I want you to take a look at the signatures I acquired last Wednesday.

A lot of people there, a lot of people want to save it.

Don't let me miss the site over here.

I have some on the back.

It was very, very popular.

The people were very, very enthusiastic.

And I don't know, Cindy, if you picked up the kids.

The kids playing in that scenario.

Seeing the horses, the fire truck.

But playing with each other.

And that's what Sandy, historic Sandy needs, is a community that gets together on a positive note.

So I really appreciate you guys showing up.

And of course, Brooke, I'll give you kudos, but that's your job.

So I would like to, I would like to pass this out to the mayor, if she would like it to put in her office, because I don't want it, it doesn't match my core.

And I want to say, Shane, it took me four years to quit calling you Sean, and now you're leaving.

Way to go.

So is it okay if I give this to the mayor or do I watch Judge Judy and you're not allowed to approach?

Thank you.

All right, Doug Wismer.

Hi, I have uh a quick question, however, because I filled out two blue cards.

Um for the informational, which is I think now, and then one for the budget.

Do I get to speak at both?

You do as long as there are two different kinds of comments.

They are.

Okay.

They are.

Um for the informational comment, um the Crescent View Middle School.

Um, I you know, obviously, you know, something should be done with that property.

But as I sat here and listened and listened and listened and listened, what kept going through my head is why are the schools closing in the first place.

Is Sandy a a place, a good place for young families?

I I don't think it is, unfortunately.

Um the the gentleman that spoke before me from out of football.

I hope you're still here.

Awesome.

I I I spent 12 years on the board of Brighton Football.

Fields are a huge problem.

Absolutely.

Um so I don't know, I honestly don't know what to do.

Other than whatever we do, let's make Sandy a great place for young families.

Just maybe keep that in your head.

And thank you.

Thank you.

Patricia Jones.

Good evening.

I have to adjust my comments a bit tonight because of the um Crescent Middle School presentation.

Um scenario two is one that I would not support, and that is because of the uh public um private partnership, the PPP.

And I just want to share with you some of the disadvantages of having that.

Higher cost, PPP can lead to increased costs compared to traditional uh projects.

Reduce public control, and that's important.

The public may lose control to the private sector, especially if there's big money involved in it.

So um, and and then political risk.

The private sector, financial success can lead to political issues.

So for that reason, and I have heard that Costco is is uh interested in taking over that space.

How accurate that is, I have no idea, but I I've heard it from people working there.

Now, um Costco has 15 acres right now, and they and present the school is 17 acres, and they want to expand.

And I have heard that they want to expand is because they lose in part of their uh their um parking area because of I-15.

I don't know what that really means.

There's I-15 encroaching into in future.

I don't know.

But that is uh a a good uh very good client to have in the in the in the uh city.

So I want to move on to the uh what I'm really here to share.

You know, very sadly I have sense that there is a division in our city branches as a result of the um budget amendment proposal.

Um and it can get and it it it has worsened.

What I should say is it has worsened the existing already division there, and isn't it's no surprise because of the way our city government works, it's branches, three branches, right?

So um this is not just due to um one city government branch.

Sandy has been um as a result of how the name of Sandy has been very, very highly rated as a city, and it's just not one government branch, it's all from all branches, and the division that now exists between the two branches is giving kind of a black mark to our city.

I have heard this in our city in our in my neighborhood, and um it's uh it's when it when a house is divided, it will not stand well.

Seems to me there are three main um three main items here on the amendment proposal, the newsletter, the CWC and the elected and elected official salary.

The newsletter, one way or another, whether by by email or by whatever means, you're gonna we're gonna get it, okay?

And then the um the CWC, we have heard a lot of comments, and there will be more comments, I think.

I I expect a salary is something that uh it is something that it can be looked into, um the but it warrants meaningful and substantial deliberation based on collected data.

Um anyway, I have ran out of time, and I hope that something can be worked out between the two branches and and make Sandy rising instead of less rising.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Taylor Miller.

Good evening.

My name is Taylor Miller.

I'd like to echo the words of my neighbors and family and friends.

I live at 326th East 110 South on the lane that uh backs Crescent Park.

Um I am also typically of the opinion that families and and individuals are in a hardship right now with the amount of uh money that have they have to provide for their families.

Uh so when it comes to taxes, I typically don't vote to raise taxes.

My mind has been changed tonight when talking about this uh Crescent Middle School, Crescent Park.

I've played softball at Crescent Park.

I love Sandy.

Sandy is a beautiful place for my family, my my beautiful four children.

It is a great place.

Um I would love to see Sandy continue to grow with this concept of these open spaces not being given up and lost forever.

Um my children will grow up here.

I hope that they will continue to be able to live in Sandy and utilize the uh beautiful parks and recreation that we have.

And so uh my opinion is to give voice to the people and and the neighbors in our community to uh have a chance to share their opinions as well when it comes to this property, not to shut it down only because of timing.

Um to give it up to someone just to make a quick buck is really hard to stomach, especially when it's our back door neighbor.

And so I thank you tonight for uh this opportunity to speak, and uh I hope to be back soon.

Thank you.

All right, Jude and Gracia.

I think I filled out the card wrong because this is about the CWC.

But I'm Jude, a Sandy resident, and I urge the Sandy City Council pull the microphone a little closer.

Sorry.

I urge the Sandy City Council to reject the Christians and Nickel proposal since it is in Sandy's best interest to remain in the CWC.

Sandy has benefited from the CWC through its bus bypass service, which is a 125,000 dollar direct benefit to Sandy, plus it's backcountry ski shuttle service that picks up skiers from Sandy, and of course, we all benefit from the CWC's work as they fight to pass the CWN CRA to protect our drinking water in the face of increasing development and population growth.

When I read the proposal, it didn't make much sense to me because on the one hand, Brooke and Chris are saying that we need to make cuts and we need to leave the CWC, but in the very same breath, it gives each council member a raise and doubles the discretionary fund of each council member.

Separate from the proposal, as an aside, I also learned that the city council apparently has the money to renovate the city council chambers.

When I asked Cindy Sharkey about the renovations, you said that you're not using taxpayer money, that you're using rental income from further renovations, but that is still taxpayer money.

If the city owns rental properties, that belongs to the taxpayer.

And any revenue from that belongs to the taxpayer.

And it should be subject to oversight.

So to recap, if you vote yes to this proposal, you're saying we don't have money for the CWC, and we should deprioritize our watershed and weaken our voice in the decisions about the future for the Wasatch.

But in exchange, we do have money for giving the City Council a raise, doubling the discretionary fund, and renovating the council chambers.

I also have a question.

Why is the CWC the only membership that's under scrutiny?

Have you done a cost to benefit analysis for Sandy's membership and other groups that we pay for, such as Utah Leagues of Cities and Towns, National League of Cities and Towns, Chamber of Commerce, Utah Foundation, and South Valley Chamber.

Why aren't you questioning those dues?

Is it because Mayor Z sits as a commissioner on the CWC and you want to strip her of her role in helping make decisions about our watershed and transportation issues?

With Mayor Z sitting as commissioner on the CWC, we Sandy citizens have a chance to really make our voice heard about the issues that matter to us along the Wasatch by pulling Sandy out of the CWC.

You're silencing the people that you represent.

I want to end with a quote from the Sandy City Council from June 9th, 2020.

From the minutes, it says the future health and transportation choices for Little Cottonwood Canyon have a profound influence on the future of Sandy City, its residents and businesses.

It is therefore critical that Sandy maintain its previous commitment and continue funding to CLEC.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Iva Williams.

And that's the last blue card, by the way, that I have for in the room for general citizen comment.

If anyone else wants to speak, fill out a card and get it to Dustin.

Hi, I'm Iva Williams, and I was here last week, and I'm back to draw the lines between the work that the CWC does and keeping the gondola from being built in the canyon.

That is a priority for 80% of the residents of Sandy.

As was mentioned, each household in Sandy pays around $3 to support the CWC's efforts.

To me, we're 80% of your community, me included, as a resident of Sandy City Council District 3, where we prioritize keeping the gondola out of the canyon.

$3 a household seems like a reasonable investment.

There are three points about the work that the C or two points about the work that the CWC does and how it directly affects keeping the gondola out of the canyon.

The CWC is actively working to have the Central Wasatch Natural National Conservation and Recreation Area designated.

This designation will include Little Cottonwood Canyon.

When the designation goes through, the strength uh it'll strengthen oversight for development and also strengthen watershed protections, which are gondola prevention.

Um, another thing the CWC does is they um are currently working on increasing year-round transportation up the canyon with stops at all trailheads, not just ski resorts.

We all know that more public transportation means less people driving up and down the canyon.

When we reduce public transportation, um we increase congestion, and we also know that bus ridership and congestion are metrics that will be used to determine if the gondola is necessary in phase three of the trans of UDOTS plan.

And finally, as I said, 80% of the residents of Sandy oppose the gondola, and we as a community prioritize work of our city to prevent the gondola from being built up, or I would.

I I prioritize that in my decisions.

Um, withdrawing our city's financial support from a group actively involved in protecting Little Cottonwood Canyon is going against 80% of the constituency.

Um, all the comments that we've heard around this have been to stay involved with the CWC to keep a seat at the table with the CWC because the work they do is important and it is important for keeping the gondola out of the canyon.

And I think that the people of Sandy should get the final say in how their tax dollars are spent.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Dustin, would you like to invite our online participants to engage in public comment?

Of course, thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh, if you're joining us virtually this evening and you would like to comment during the general citizen comment period about any city business, now's the time.

Go ahead and click the raise hand button on your screen.

I'll call your name in the order in which you raised your hand and you'll have three minutes.

Madam Chair first up is Dave Eaglen.

Dave, I'm going to allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself and you'll have three minutes.

Hello can you hear me?

We can okay great little technical difficulty on my side thank you.

I just wanted to thank also Shane Pace for the great job he has done in the last three and a half years that I've got to know him and that uh he will still laugh at my dry jokes and shake my hand the next time I see him so he is a great man and hope all goes well with his retirement.

I'm also grateful for a lot of comments that were made with him between the mayor's office and uh the relationship with the city council so as I make some comments tonight I know that they may be strong or feel against city council but apparently you know that I I like you it goes both ways so the interesting thing that I am finding last week I talked about the way things look and uh you know I still have a lot of heartburn over the fact of um we have two new city council members coming in and uh Christian and nickel and uh proposing raises for the council and uh you know that spending and yet cutting the mayor's salary um it just doesn't pass the smell test for me I I I just it's not right and then hearing more of what's going on tonight with the CWC and uh I just don't understand why that proposal is there and I hope you do um don't or don't vote for it um it was very interesting last week um council member Sharkey when Martin was you asked a question and the question was quote would there be any condition under which the city council the legislative body would pass a law and you would not implement it that's a very interesting question it raised a red flag for me are there going to be more things that the city council is going to be proposing I loved his answer is that I'll report whatever's illegal and not to be unethical so a lot of weird things going on with the council right now and your in your thought processes I hope they change I hope that we can bound bind together and work with the mayor and mayor work with you and be able to make this city as great as it is and keep it going that way some of these proposals are not going the way that we this we the the people want so I just wanted to share that again and uh I agree I I think your count your your chambers are great they don't need the one million dollars we can put it towards more police vehicles or fired vehicles so thank you for letting me share this with you and hope you have a good night thank you okay madam chair up next is Kelly Forbes Kelly I'm gonna allow you to begin speaking please remember to unmute yourself and you'll have three minutes Kelly we're not we're unable to hear you okay there we go we can hear you now okay that was weird all right my name is Kelly Forbes I live at 8917 South Summercrest Drive in Sandy City Chris is my council representative I wanted to comment on several things here first we heard a lot of reasons why we should um go ahead and um acquire the property for Crescent middle school and I I concur with everything that's been said there I think we should give the people a chance to decide whether or not we should go ahead and acquire that property regardless of this timeline that you think is too short um once that open space is gone we will never get it back I think we should remain a member of the Central Wassat Commission leaving this organization is not appropriate.

Um it feels like the mayor's salary, the leaving of the Wasatch, the Central Wasatch Commission, and a few other things are being sacrificed at the expense of raising salaries for the city council, doubling their discretionary spending while reducing the mayor's discretionary spending, and she's a full-time employee and probably puts in more than 60 hours a week.

I'd be curious to know how many the council members put in every week or a $56,000 a year salary.

I'm willing to be wrong about that salary, though.

That's what I was that's what I read online.

Um it just feels wrong.

I see that you're some of you are laughing at that, so that salary must not be correct.

I don't know what it is, but that's what I had read online.

Um as far as the study to uh continue Highland Drive across Dimpledale.

Um there's probably a good reason for that study.

I'm I really hope it finds that it's not a feasible thing.

It feels like putting a road through the middle of Central Park in New York.

Um too bad we have to go around for a mile and a half.

Anyway, um, I would like to say thank you to Shane Pace.

I don't think we need to revamp the chamber, the council chamber setting.

Um that million dollars can go for your raises and to keep the mayor where she is.

So um I had more to say, but I think my time is just about up.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, next up is Sandra Hawk.

Sandra, I'm gonna allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself, and you'll have three minutes.

Good evening.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Great.

Um, I have several things to mention, and I'll start with uh a um acknowledgement of Shane Pace's wonderful leadership in our city, and I wish him well out on the golf course.

He has been very helpful to me and the Dimpleville preservation community.

He is clear, direct, and um explains things very well.

Next up, I would like to follow the previous speaker and say I don't think we should conduct the impact study for the extension of Highland Drive across Dimpleville Park.

I think that if you look at the connecting points, you'll understand that that is probably not going to work out well on the south side.

I think extending it as far as Segalilly Drive would be a good choice, but I don't think extending beyond is going to be helpful, appropriate, or work out well for those on the south side.

Uh next, the Central Wasatch Commission.

I do not understand the proposal to leave that.

Our culinary water is very precious, and we all know that the climate change is going to keep giving us less and less water in the West, especially in Utah.

And I don't understand why we would give up an opportunity to advocate for ourselves.

The salary business I find quite interesting that the council is pleased that the mayor does not vote for her own salary, although one person uh intimated that that was true during the recent campaign.

Um, but I do also find it interesting that that the council gleefully is giving themselves a raise.

I think to cut the mayor's salary and uh increase the um council salaries is like tit for tat.

Lastly, the newsletter.

I personally enjoy receiving the printed newsletter.

I think if some budget uh decrease is wanted, it could be printed at less expense on uh non-flick paper and possibly with less color.

But I myself enjoy having the printed copy hanging on my refrigerator with the calendar right there, so that I can refer to it.

I would certainly have more to say.

Oh, last thing.

Ms.

Hawk, we've reached the end of your three minutes.

Uh thank you for your comments, Sandra.

You you can certainly feel free to email us the rest of them if you have more to say.

Okay, madam chair.

Up next is Mark uh Chulo.

Mark, I'm gonna allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself, and you'll have three minutes.

Just confirmation that you can hear me.

Yes, we can.

Okay, great.

My name is Mark Shulo.

I'm at 476 East Wilds Cherry Vay.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

Uh I have emailed you all already about the budget.

So I will actually turn the attention of my comment to another matter this evening.

Tonight I heard a council member share an early concern that she wasn't sure we'd have enough time to pull something together to put a vote on the ballot regarding the Crescent View Middle School property.

I appreciate that it was offered as a preliminary thought, not a final position.

And I want to respectfully respond to it now while the door is still open.

Because that kind of hesitation, even early on, can quietly become the decision.

I share the desire for a solid, well-beded plan.

But the conclusion that limited time means we should skip the ballot altogether, would take the choice out of my hands and put it in yours.

A ballot measure doesn't have to require perfect blueprint on day one.

It requires a clear question and enough information from voters to make an informed decision.

Refinement can follow.

It's to dig deep, do the work, and meet the deadline.

Governments mobilize quickly when the stakes are high, and these stakes are high.

This property will shape our community for decades.

I've already been clear about my feelings for the farm worse Farnsworth farm rentals on the other side of my neighborhood and the impact it now has for decades.

Let's not make that same mistake again.

I'm not asking for a rushed or sloppy proposal.

I'm asking that we refuse the comfortable conclusion that there isn't enough time.

Find the time, bring in the staff, hold the work sessions, extend the meetings.

That is what urgent priorities demand.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, up next is Steve Van Marion.

Steve, I'm going to allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself and you'll have three minutes.

Thank you, Dustin.

Good evening, Council.

Steve Van Marin Draper resident.

I'm sorry.

Uh congratulations, Shane.

Good luck.

Appreciate your service.

Good guy.

I want to speak in favor of the Wall Street Supper Wasach Commission.

Please continue funding it.

There's a long backstory, but it's really needed to improve our whole environment for us.

And I am in support of the mayor's proposal to purchase the property of Crescent View Middle School.

Yes, like the last guy said.

Let the voters decide.

Look into it.

Don't waste your time.

I think that presentation was probably delayed almost two months because they went to contract in March.

That's not good support by the council.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

There are no other hands raised, Madam Chair.

All right, we'll close the general citizen comment period and return to the agenda.

And we are on agenda item number three.

Mr.

Pace, is this you presenting to us?

Good evening, Council members.

This is a an informational item about a code amendment to title Title 4 of the City Code.

And this is a fairly simple item, but it is essential if, as part of the budget, if the council decides to consolidate public works and public utilities departments, then this amendment is essential to effectuate that change.

The budget adjusts the money.

The code defines what the departments are.

So this is the this would be the change to the code.

Now the version that you have in front of you tonight would need to be updated slightly to add the changes you made a few weeks ago to the communications department.

So there would be some uh you know some numbering changes of the paragraphs and then adding the communications department at the end.

But other than that, the version you have in front of you simply consolidates the two functions of public works and public utilities into one department with really no uh text changes at all.

It's just consolidating it.

So with that much explanation, I'm open to questions.

Questions?

Any questions, Council?

Mr.

Sousa.

Um my question is uh I have to apologize.

I left after the last council meeting and got back at noon today, and I haven't had time to review the the item as thoroughly as I would have liked.

And so if I'm asking a seemingly silly question, I apologize in advance.

Um so my question is the language.

I'm assuming that you wrote this, Lynn.

Actually, I all we did was move around existing text.

Okay.

In terms of the relationship that PUAB has and the uh enterprise fund with uh water and our public utilities department.

Are those items segregated or protected enough that they don't I don't know, like mesh together and eliminate one or the other?

Well, my understanding of the public utilities advisory board is that it would remain, but it would become advisory to this new consolidated department.

So there have been no changes made to its function or the structure.

It would simply be fall under the jurisdiction of this combined department.

Okay, and it doesn't need to be spelled out specifically in the department's creation.

It's it's not there, it's not in chapter four today.

Okay.

So we didn't add it, we didn't delete it.

No change.

Okay.

I may have more questions after this, but that was what I wanted to ask tonight.

Thanks.

Okay.

Anything else?

Ms.

Housman.

Um hopefully just a uh a simple question.

Um I don't like to just make assumptions, so just gonna just gonna check.

So you're you're saying this is the code amendment.

Um this allows the budget decision to be made, but this is not the decision to merge them.

This is the code that has to change.

So that yes, if you think of it this way, the code is where you define what departments exist.

So we are definitely.

If you don't change that, there'll still be two of departments, even if you adopt the budget of tax.

Gotcha.

That's clear.

And then one other question.

Um so in terms of you just said you just basically took language and whoop, didn't really change language, just brought it up.

Correct.

So it was a construction thing.

Um is is there any uh anywhere where where the the department of public utilities, for example, is floating out there where you might have to come back with additional code changes, or was it do you feel like it was very comprehensive and you you've got it all covered?

Yes and no.

Oh yes, there may be other places where that like that stray language may exist in the code.

So to that extent, this is not a comprehensive, it doesn't catch all of those.

We would want to do that, but this is the substantive change.

Uh what we would do is search for public utilities and anywhere that exists, change it to public works.

Okay.

But that is that is not reflected in the documents you have in front of you tonight.

Okay.

And the enterprise fund question, uh, I just want to echo what I heard.

Separate from PUAB, like keeping PUAP, but the but the enterprise fund remained a public, I mean, it's now a public works.

Yeah, the enterprise fund will be unchanged.

Uh, if you think of it this way, public utilities is a broader umbrella than the enterprise fund, which is water.

Now, that umbrella gets larger with the merger of these two departments, but the enterprise fund remains unchanged.

It and it is it is still connected directly to water and only water.

Okay.

Those are my three like little cleanups.

I figured I understood, but it's always good to just check.

Thank you.

That's all I had.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Any more questions, council?

I'm not seeing any.

Okay, unless you tell me otherwise, we'll clean this up, both what the text you have here, and I will do the word search you asked for and prepare that for next week's agenda for whatever you want to say.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Agenda item number four is administrative services.

Um increasing appropriations for the current fiscal year.

Yes, good evening, council.

This is uh amending the current year budget.

This is an informational item uh that we're prepping for a public hearing for next week.

Um so this is typical.

Uh we do this towards the end of the fiscal year, we come back and do some cleanup budget opening.

I'll walk you through some of this resolution and if you have it available, we can put it up on the screen.

Um if you have it in front of you, I'll just start with exhibit A.

Um, we're recommending that we increase appropriations in the fire department for state Medicaid assessment.

This is because the number of transports has increased above what we had budgeted, and there's a direct relationship to our state Medicaid assessment based on the number of transports we do, so we need to increase that.

And we've had um increased in revenue, so we're we're using increased revenues of 50,000, proposing to increase the Medicaid assessment by 50,000 to cover actual expenses.

Um the next section, exhibit B.

This is for public works engineering.

This is to cover unanticipated expenses with the surveying work that has been done for the all the annexations that have taken place this spring, especially.

Um they've gone beyond budget and professional services.

So we're asking for to be able to fund this 45,000 from the council general contingency, uh, which has not been used to date, and then 39,000 and recognizing extra revenues, total of 85,000 for professional services for surveying annexations.

Um exhibit C is the Arbor building transaction.

So this recognizes the revenue and expenses to handle the transaction that was done in March.

Also, it budgets the first quarter of anticipated expenses for operating the building, a total of 12.6 million.

This also in the tentative budget, we have we've budgeted and as part of this transaction, we wanted to set aside some funds for capital repair and replacement and for tenant improvements in case there was a change out in a tenant, and that was all contemplated with the transactions.

That's what the the last line item 451,000.

We budgeted that in the tentative budget for fiscal year 27.

That's what that's what that is.

The next some of the next items are these transactions with the Arbor Building and the Health Center Theater payoff.

They affect several couple different funds.

One is the capital projects.

We created that new fund for the Arbor building, but exhibit D is Arbor building on the debt service side.

We have bond uh issuance costs of 123,000 that we need to budget for, and then in exhibit E, we have a million dollars for the council chambers remodel that we need to budget for in the capital projects fund, and exhibit F is the debt service portion of the bond for the the council chambers portion of 17,000.

Exhibit G is the payoff of the Health Center Theater bond uh total of 31,000 31,515.

Um that came through the developer, which was Health Center Theater, and we had some fund balance in reserves for capital and for debt service that we applied to that as well.

So the the combination of that is 31 million, 515 that we want to increase the budget for.

And the very last one, exhibit H is the waste collection fund.

This is to recognize the increase in the contract with waste management in the current year.

Um so we're they're using some fund balance to cover that increase of 200,000.

Any questions, Ms.

Nickel.

So what budget is the professional services of 85 going into?

Um it'll be going to the public works department.

I believe it's the engineering cost center.

Oh, okay, good, because those used to be funded out of non-departmental, if I wasn't mistaken.

Or they've always been funded, the annexations.

And surveys?

Not sure.

I'd have to do some research on that.

But the engineering department's been covering these costs.

Because they've they've had the contract surveyor on, and they actually had to, I think they've used three surveying companies for this project.

Okay, great.

And there have been some comments about the city council chambers.

And this is something the city council has been saving for for five, six years at least.

Yeah, longer than that.

And taxpayer dollars are not being used to uh fund the chamber remodel.

And plus the benefit to this entire building and all of its people is that they can use this room for other things.

We are in dire need of space in this in this building, and we need face that space that functions, not as like this stupid chamber setup.

We need more flex space.

So that is the purpose.

There is reason, there is purpose, there is thought put behind all of the decisions that we make.

And I just wanted to make that clear.

Any more questions, comments?

Okay, like I mentioned this is information tonight, and we'll bring it back next week and have a public hearing on.

Sounds good.

Thank you, Brian.

Okay, the next item on the agenda is the consent calendar.

And that's simply the approval of the interlocal for the um hock signal that we heard last week.

Motion to approve.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Moving on to item number six.

This is our public hearing item tonight.

All right.

So the way we're gonna do this tonight and for the council as well.

So we're gonna step through these things in order, starting with the tentative budget and the changes that are being proposed tonight by the administration.

Then we'll move through the council um proposed budget amendments.

And then we'll go to public comment on everything, and then we'll go to voting on everything.

All right.

So Brian, can you step back up to the microphone?

What would you like to tell us tonight about the tentative budget?

Um okay.

If we could pull up the resolution, please, 2661C.

And I can step through some of this.

Um of these items I've already covered in a previous meeting, so I'm not going to go into all of them.

But if we could go to exhibit A.

And this is where we start enumerating the changes that we're recommending.

And items one through six, we've already discussed.

So if there's any questions on that, I could take those from you.

Um I'll move into number seven, eight, and nine and ten.

Those are new new ones that I'm bringing up tonight.

So number seven is creating uh based on your uh action as a council.

You created a new communications department.

And so essentially what this is doing is taking all of the the budgeted costs from the cost center of 1220, which was previously part of administration, and moving it into its own separate department.

We're calling that cost center 1600.

It's what we've set up, it fits in line uh best with our financial structure numbering system.

And we are moving as part of that, we're recommending that we move the half of the PIO position into this.

Well, excuse me, um the PIO position from communications cost center, which we had originally recommended in 1220 to the mayor's cost center of 1100.

So that that way the whole PIO position is in the mayor's cost center of 1100.

So that's one of the changes.

Um the second main one to call out is this creates uh the director for communications in this department, be the department head and adds some funding for that, and it also reclassifies the assistant communications director to be in line with other assistant directors of departments and throughout the city on the same classification system.

So those are the key things happening there.

So essentially we're moving all of all the funds, you know, all the operational items as well as the salary and pay and benefits of those employees into this new department, and we're moving the half of the PIO out and into the mayor's office cost center.

So that's number eight, I mean number seven.

Number eight is the mayor's cost center.

Um this one moves the senior policy director position staff to um from the mayor's office into the CAO, and it brings that half that I just talked about of the PIO position and back into the mayor, and that's the main adjustment there.

So you can see that what the tentative had with the numbers, what the revision is, and then the variance.

So this one uh overall is going down.

Hey, Brian.

Yes.

Why?

Why are we moving that position?

Um that's a restructuring that their administration's recommending, and um Martin will probably speak to that, but he's wanting to make a change in how that's handled.

So will that person report to the CAO now?

Yeah, and I I don't want to take Martin's time unless you want me to address it.

Okay.

Sorry, day two of learning to walk again.

Doing great.

Um so it's just re there's no new FTEs, there's no new additional cost to the city, it's just a restructuring.

So the the title of the senior policy advisor will change uh into an assistant CAO.

We're hiring, you may see that positions already out being advertised.

So the we'll continue with a CAO, deputy CAO, and then we're hiring a assistant CAO, which is the structure that the city uh had years ago.

So our senior policy advisor will become the deputy CAO, and then we're hiring for the assistant CAO.

So there won't be a senior policy advisor anymore.

That title will be gone, yes.

But there's once again no new FTE requests, no increases at all.

It's just aligning the budgets within the reporting structure, and it's really a function of um work day to make sure that all the the flows uh change as well.

That the workflows follow work day.

Thanks.

Okay.

Um more I'm sorry.

I so with the assistant CAO and deputy CAO, will those become advice consent, advice and consent positions?

No, they are not currently.

Okay, so it's okay.

That's my understanding.

So Miss Helsman.

Um if I'm pretty sure I did not overlook it, but if I did point it out with this restructure, are we gonna be so roles, responsibilities, like what what these new titles, what what are they doing?

I know you indicated this is how it's been done in the past, but it this feels like this isn't uh I didn't see this one coming.

I knew that you've given us heads up on some of the other things, but this one I and I'm not tracking why we need a deputy CAO and an assistant CAO, um, and why we're giving up a policy slash like work with legislators and like all of that and be up.

So I I need some definition around roles, responsibilities, what what outcomes we will see as a result of these new positions.

Good question, a fair question.

All of those responsibilities and assignments will will still still take place.

Uh government relations, working with the legislature, following uh what's what's going on, community involvement.

All of those responsibilities are are still there, they're just aligning differently with titles.

Part of the reason we're we're doing this is um we want to attract top-tier employees to Sandy.

Um we in changing the the title, hiring an assistant CAO.

Um we're able to bring in a lot of very well-versed, experienced and uh trained employees uh within the city management structure.

It's it's very common to have CAO, deputy CAO, assistant CAO.

And so the responsibilities that you just mentioned, none of that goes by the wayside.

So as we move forward, we're we're happy to come in and share duties, responsibilities.

We just started sharing this today with the cabinet as well.

And so it's a process, and it is we bring people on, we bring people in.

Their strengths will we'll utilize their strengths.

We want to make sure that we put people in in the best scenario to be successful.

And so as we look to backfill the vacancy that is created with the domino effect of Shane leaving.

We'll make sure that you're aware of who's responsible for what areas and where they're working.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um when was this in the city last time?

Sorry.

I just haven't don't know.

I would have to defer to the wisdom of Shane Pays for that answer.

Yeah, for years in the administration we had um a CAO assistant CAO assistance to the CAO.

We had at least we actually had four at one time.

Um a lot of the stuff that uh that is um being accomplished by uh Ryan Makem right now was accomplished back then the same way.

Um Martin's right.

The the part of the issue is uh um what type of what type of employees do you want to recruit?

Um senior policy advisor can be more interpreted as a real political position.

An assistant CAO is more um more interpreted as a professional position.

And so you get a different um recruiting class basically when you recruit.

Um but yeah, uh we used to have uh we used to have up of up to four different and if you look at our city code, um our city code um already has this inside inside the code that allows the uh CAO to create these positions in that way.

Um so the uh you know the uh senior policy advisor was the prior deputy mayor.

Uh it's just uh it's graduated uh uh to a more traditional structure where where we will be able to re uh increase our recruitment with in these positions.

Yeah, if I can add it, like last time I remember is when uh Scott Bond was a CAO, Shane was I believe assistant, and Corbin Lee were both assistants to so we had two of them at that time.

And Brian was an assistant to the CO at one time.

I just want to point that out.

And and I just want to reemphasize, I know I've said it twice, but it's it's worth stating a third time.

There this is not creating a new FTE.

There is no increase to the the city uh budget with this at all.

It's just an internal restructure.

Ms.

Nickel.

So this is really new, and we we haven't really had time to look at it or been um presented a plan for job descriptions.

That's usually done when we make these things.

Well, I think it's done that we we get shown job descriptions, and so I really can't be supportive of it yet.

We can always open the job the budget at a later time and make that adjustment too, but I think I want more information on it.

Ms.

DeSusa.

So it's not a change in uh like pay compensation.

Is there additional benefits with the reclassification of senior policy advisor to assistant CAO?

No, no changes.

Okay, I I do also want to express like it's really difficult at the 11th hour of these budget conversations to be presented with a change that's kind of buried in a whole bunch of other changes that we've already been made aware of and kind of talked about without having some more contextual information provided up front.

It just I'm just gonna say it it's again I it causes me feelings of apprehension and doesn't necessarily promote really good relationships under these circumstances.

So I I don't know, I don't know yet because I feel like I haven't had any time to even consider, but I just wanted to put that out there.

If I may um it's it's a similar process to when um after Kim Bell left and we we changed the position from deputy mayor to senior policy advisor.

No cost change to the budget, um, no it's a internal function of the administration just trying to meet the needs of of the current uh policy or atmosphere and what we're working in.

No, it's a internal function of the administration, just trying to meet the needs of the current policy or atmosphere and what we're working in.

And so we're trying to be nimble, trying to adapt is as things are changing with Shane leaving with the city moving forward.

This is the structure that we feel is best, and there's no cost or change to the budget with this.

It's just a structural change.

Okay.

And and I get that, and I just, you know, I understand that you don't necessarily have to present us with the level of information that we're asking for.

I'm just suggesting that it might be really good for relations and our ability to make decisions under tight time frames.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Understood.

And just uh we we've started talking publicly about this as we're starting to recruit the ACAO.

And we like I said, we just presented this to cabinet this morning as well, so we're sharing it as as quickly as we can.

And and this just lines up the the budgets with those changes.

So that's what we're recommending here.

Um number 10 is an increase as we've gone through open enrollment.

It's been in the council office uh an individual that is elected um insurance and family insurance that was previously waiving, and so we're bringing that increase of 22,000.

So sometimes if this happens in a large department, there's you know it can be absorbed with turnover and savings, but in a small department, we felt like we needed to increase the budget here before we started.

Um so those are the items I'd like to cover if there is any other questions I can try to address.

Any more questions?

Yeah, I had a I have a few more questions on other on other items.

Um the inner department or intergovernmental.

Tell me, give me the details on that, the transfer and where's it going to and why okay.

This is yeah, we've covered this, but this is largely because with our new accounting system, we have a better way that's it gives us more options.

Um so we're setting up an operating grants group that's kind of the umbrella, and then we'll contain most of our grants within that.

Um in the past, we've had a roll-up in the budget of special uh purpose funds, and we've just we've kept all the grants in there.

And sometimes grants come and and it's different types of donations come.

For example, the autism awareness that the police and I that the police does.

There's there's other police and fire donations that come, and we've created a separate fund, uh special purpose fund, and they've rolled up and we've budgeted a million dollars traditionally in that.

And it's kind of a blanket so that we don't have to come back and budget every time there's a small thing like that or a new grant.

It's already budgeted.

And this is a we're kind of so we're reducing one of those because we're reducing the special program special purpose funds by 600,000, and we're creating this operational grants fund that will contain all the grants, including CDBG in the future.

And so that's mostly what it is is kind of a structural change because of our accounting system.

So these are grants we receive.

These are not grants we give.

Yes, the ones we receive.

We do, I mean CDBG is a grant we receive, so then we allocate those uh monies out.

But otherwise, all of these are grants we receive.

And there's okay.

Awesome.

Other than uh capital grants we receive for specific projects are not part of this, they'd be in the capital projects fund.

Okay.

Thanks.

Any more questions?

Um I do not have any more.

Anyone?

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

All right, thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

Moving in to then council budget amendments.

I think yours is first, Ms.

Stroud, right?

All right.

It looks like each one of the council budget amendments has some at least a slight tweaker change to it.

So let's move through them with each of the sponsors to make sure we understand what they are and what we're looking at for tonight.

Okay.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

So I had two of them that I brought up last week.

With the RDA board because we'll be meeting as a we'll be convening as a board and passing that budget there.

So that's why that one is not on for this week.

This is the one that we're talking about for water wise landscaping.

And so we get a little closer.

So the the change that I made in here was you know trying to take some of the the feedback and looking at, you know, it the goal ultimately is to try to convince at least four of us that uh leading out and showing residents that we're putting our money where our mouth is is important.

Um the state, you know, we are in a severe drought cycle, and we've been this way for quite a while.

We live in a desert.

Uh so a couple of things that I made some changes on this.

Um one is initially I had asked for 150,000.

That wasn't to go towards a specific project or in a specific area.

It was primarily the uh you know, coming up with this idea is that the parks department had asked for $350,000 on playgrounds.

Um they had been allocated in the in the budget $500,000.

So it was just taking that $150,000 that they had not asked for and saying, you know what, let's use that.

Uh hearing some you know, some of the concern about where the money should come from.

Um I decided just to reduce that down.

Um and then there were kind of three different areas that we could pull it from.

And that's and I still want to leave that up for a little bit of discussion on this, um, you know, just in case there's other ideas of where we want to pull that from.

So initially I had suggested taking it from the playgrounds from that line item.

Uh a couple of the benefits is one is it keeps it in parks.

So it's coming from parks and it's staying in parks.

Um you know, it it's very clean, it stays in the general fund, it's coming from the general fund, it moves in that direction.

Um a second option, which Ms.

Nickel, you know, brought this up was saying, you know what, because this is something that we're looking at that that deals with water conservation and water awareness, is to to pull this from public utilities with with the water fund.

Uh and the you know, the pros with that is we are looking, we do have you know our demonstration gardens, seagullie gardens that are up there, um, that already does some of those projects, um, but it's primarily in you know, like a specific area of Sagalilly Gardens.

Uh the downside with that is that we're taking from an enterprise fund and then it's staying within public utilities, although this proposal is asking for water wise landscaping to be completed by the parks department.

So you're you're looking at kind of two different departments and moving something from an enterprise fund over to you know, possibly you know, with the general fund and the parks.

So there was some accounting um hoops that would that we would have to jump through to do that.

Um the third option, which is what is in here now, is what has administration, what administration has um suggested when and I think actually all of our um amendment except for yours, I don't believe yours came from looking at that you know from the the set of side savings for the fire uh tiller truck, you know, and that is something that we are we have been saving and we will continue to save for for a new fire truck.

Um so it's that's what is in here, that's what administration has recommended is taking money from that to be able to fund this.

So, you know, that that seems to be kind of the easiest.

Uh, I think that there are pros and cons for all of them.

Um, I'm I do think that that the merit of of this item is is substantial.

You know, we we can be leading out as a city.

We should be.

I would love to have residents being able to walk in these high traffic areas and seeing where they could add something in their yard, looking what the city has done to be able to transform either a park strip or just an area that could be within a park that turf is not being utilized as as a as a playing field or a specific playing surface.

So some of these smaller areas.

So, you know, I I'm and I I think that we had you know a fair amount of support for that.

Um I know that there was a couple of council members that had a little bit of concerns.

Um, but you know, I I'm so I'm moving ahead instead of doing 150,000 down to 50,000.

Um I think that also the benefits of having money set aside for if there are matching grants, you know, many of those grants require some of that, you know.

Well, you know, let show us that you've got some skin in the game.

So if there was something out there to match, um then we could look at that.

So um I know I had spoken with uh with Mr.

Hill and he thought anywhere between eight and twenty thousand to do a typical park, which is very typical is such a broad uh term because we've got parks of of so many different sizes of f of trying to find an area.

Um, so that's you know, we could do you know a couple of them, you know, possibly three or four, depending on the size.

So, you know, just uh throwing out um it is in here to take it from the fire tiller truck.

Um, you know, not my favorite, but you know, I'm gonna defer to administration on this one and and accept that, you know, unless there's you know support to go either back to playgrounds or to look, you know, at the water fund, you know, which and the water fund once again that one seemed to have uh more complications with it.

Questions?

Yep.

Ms.

Thank you for pointing out that because I I just threw that out there without taking into consideration all the nuanced items that we have to consider when we're using the money and where we can and can't use um different different uh money from funds.

So thank you.

Um I really appreciate it.

Mike, when you said we were able to do maybe three projects.

I was I was gonna ask you, is this enough money to do a really high impact, impactful, meaningful something?

Do you and that's what that's what can't so Mr.

Hill when he had put in there that he thought between eight and twenty thousand.

Okay.

Um and you know, the I think that'll if we have that impact this year, you know, and seeing residents, and I think we can do this in a way where people when they're out, they're walking their dogs, they're they're walking with their kids or they're going to you know to church, to school, to a park, um, to the store, and they're out in their neighborhoods and in their communities, that if we have the the proper signage um there that they will see it and go, hey, I can do this too.

And I like having the money to be able to move on it quickly to do the projects that are very impactful and do them on our own.

So I think it's great.

Thank you.

Questions?

Any more questions?

So I get and the way that it's written in here, um, is there concern about where the money?

I mean, I do.

Yeah, I well, you know, my position on this is that we have been chipping this is worthwhile work, and we have been doing this, right?

So we've been spending in the parks department money every single year to um swap water wise landscaping for turf and do medians and do park strips and do all that.

Um we will be completing the Sandy Rec Center, and that will be all water wise landscaping.

That'll be completed in we're expected to open hopefully in January on that.

So that'll be another example of our work brought up to date for waterwise.

And then in next year's budget, there is a projected um expense of 450,000 for this very same thing.

So I I feel really bad about all this money being taken from the fire department's uh fleet.

And so I feel like this withdrawal from that specific fund saving fund is a concern to me.

And but I would still approve it if there I felt that there was some amount of urgency.

But I do feel like we're doing this and we're budgeting more money from it for it.

So I personally I'm not feeling the need to do this right now, knowing that we have big projects coming and money that hopefully a lot much larger amount that'll be uh fingers crossed, allocated for this next year.

So I would rather not take this money from the fire department's fleet.

Um that's that's just where I am.

But of course, I'm fully in support of this swap out of water-wise landscaping and showing there our residents and the world that you know we are doing the right thing as well.

Of course, I support that.

I think part of you know, with the median um the funding that's coming next year, that's it that's also just median replacement.

Um so it's not specific 100% for water wise, but we could also look at next year and you know, instead of doing um 450,000 is when budget comes up next year saying, well, then maybe it is 400,000 and we're replacing we are replacing some of that 50,000 from this year and putting it back towards the the tiller.

Um I do think that there is urgency right now with the the uh uh the state that we are in um and talking about water and water conservation and what we can do.

Um there are some grants, a grants that possibly could be coming out to be able to look at that uh that that then we would have some money set aside that maybe could be some of that matching fund.

So um, you know, that was something that I thought about as well is to be able to return that because this is this is my least favorite, um, you know, pulling from the fire department, you know, for this.

Uh but we could take some of that next year because that is you know money that's set aside and and then refund part of that with the tiller truck, or you know, uh when uh carryover comes, you know, if we have some of that as well, because I I did have concern and was not as thrilled with the administrative suggestion to do that.

Okay, Mr.

Susa.

I was just gonna add, um, you know, this conversation reminded me of something that I wanted to share, and I don't know where the appropriate time is, so I'm just gonna throw it in right here.

Um but so while I was gone, we took a trip to New York, and one of the things that we did there was the High Line Park.

And anybody that's been there is familiar with it.

It's an old decommissioned or abandoned railroad track set above the city that they've turned into a walking path park.

And it was um it was probably one of the favorite, we did Central Park quite a bit too, but it was probably one of our favorite areas.

And they set it up, it kind of reminds me of Sago Lilly Gardens in a way that it was a kind of non-profit um kind of experience that you'd walk through.

It had um demonstration uh plants because they did a lot of uh native waterwise plants also.

Um, strangely enough, the climate is similar, and there were a lot of plants that were used there that are recommended for our climate here.

Um, and it just reminded me of the opportunities that we have to show residents how it can be done and how it can be done well, how it can be done in a very pretty way.

You know, the the density of the plantings helped with the lead mitigation, and so you didn't need as much rock mulch, which creates more heat, right?

And so anyway, and the at the very end of this thing, and maybe at the beginning too, um, there was a little market that was very specific to the high line.

It was kind of a destination that people came to, right?

And you bought something, and then that money went back into like the conservation and the the maintenance of the park.

Anyway, I I that's not necessarily part of this, but I definitely support these types of um projects.

I appreciate that you've taken the feedback to um you know not use the funds that you had originally proposed and have scaled it back a little bit to kind of get us through.

Um, but I just wanted to share that and thanks.

Okay, any other feedback, comments, questions?

Okay.

So next um budget amendment is Ms.

D'Souza's, and I think I misspoke relative to yours.

Yours hasn't changed, has it?

Let us know that.

No.

No.

So should I just re reiterate it really?

Yeah, that was a couple weeks ago.

So nothing has changed from my proposal.

I am proposing to increase the equipment line item for the senior center by 5,000, um, which would be two five thousand, I believe.

Uh funded by a reduction in the non-departmental special programs community engagement line item.

Uh the intent is to ensure that the senior center has funds that they can use for um any issues that arise during at least the budget year, right?

They are hoping to be able to grow this to an amount that would adequately cover some of the large um equipment items that they have, such as some of the commercial stoves, the ice makers, the refrigerators, um, their other um equipment that the the city of Sandy is responsible for.

Um, and unfortunately, uh when those equipment, when the equipment breaks, it's usually something that has a larger cost, you know, anywhere from um six to eight to fifteen thousand dollars is kind of what we were told.

And so we have been, as those things have happened, there has been a delay in getting them replaced or repaired because the money isn't budgeted for it, and so we have to come and and they have to come and find money, and Brian's been very good about helping um to find that money, but we're just trying to, I'm just trying to help make the senior center a little bit more independent in that way to respond to their needs as they arise.

So that's my proposal.

Any questions?

Thanks.

Not seeing any.

All right.

Next budget proposal is Mr.

De Keysers.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm happy to bring this back because I genuinely believe it's in the best interest of the city.

Um in our last discussion, the main thing that stood out to me was that everyone seemingly saw that there was value in the position.

So I think that's an important place to start, and if we agree on that, it's the question becomes how should it be structured?

And um in response to the feedback, I emailed all of you uh some metrics on what we could use to make sure that the position is held accountable through uh clear, transparent reporting.

So I hope you had a chance to look at that.

Um I also spoke with administrative services and learned that they have an existing need for additional support with financial compliance.

So this uh grant writer position kind of morphed into a you could call it like a grants and financial compliance administrator, where approximately 60 to 70 percent is focused on grant writing and 30 to 40 percent would be dedicated to financial compliance.

Um and I believe that change is really significant and important because one of the concerns raised uh in the last meeting is about whether it's it's okay to add an FTE position right now.

And I totally understand that, but I do think that this revised position helps address that because it's not just solving one problem and be solving two in that it expands our capacity to pursue outside funding, but also dedicate someone to doing some work that administrative services has identified needs to be done.

Um more thing I want to point out there was a resident that sent an email that observed that this is the only budget amendment before the council that's designed to bring in revenue, and I think that's there's something really powerful about that observation.

Um most of our amendments are just about moving money around, but this is focused on helping us secure additional resources into the future to the tune of millions and millions of dollars to make Sandy City better.

And um, as far as budget amendments go, I think that's a really compelling combination.

So again, this this is not intended to be like a cost center, it's intended to be an opportunity center.

The sky is the limit for Sandy City.

Um I hope to have incorporated your feedback as best as possible.

Um for those reasons I ask for your support.

I if it's appropriate, I'd maybe like to invite Brian to come up if there's any questions about how the needs that the administrative services department had or or why that works well with the position, he'd be happy to speak to that.

But if there's if there's no questions, then that's fine too.

Okay.

No, I have questions for you.

Sorry, Cindy.

Okay.

So you frustrate me so bad.

You do.

I was really looking forward to to hearing this come back.

You're right, we were all enthusiastic about your plan, 100%.

And we want to go forward with it.

We just wanted to go forward with it in a uh more economically conservative way, which was maybe contract for a year with somebody, right?

And I I look at this and you come back, it's now it's a jack of all trades, master of nothing position, right?

We know nothing about it.

I love the idea, Aaron.

I really do.

And I would have been a yes on it had the financial aspect of your plan be what we all had had shared with you.

Totally understand that.

Um an email went out about the position, and if you want to hire a grant writer for $50,000 that grabs you a five, ten thousand dollar grant here or there, that's what you're gonna get.

But I am investing in the capacity of the city and what the literature is talking about in terms of securing big grants over years and years, and that just doesn't align with the intention of what we're we're trying to do.

Madam Chair, I didn't mean that to be offensive, Aaron at all.

100%.

We just wanted to try it.

Like I said, I'm not like personally attached to this.

I think it's for the best uh in the city's interest, and so if you want to vote against it, go ahead.

I'm not I take no share my thoughts.

No offense any of it.

Ms.

D'Souza.

So I do have a question about um first I have a question about the um uh additional compliance needs of your department.

And so are you suggesting that this person, the the financial compliance needs of your department, Brian, that this per it's only related to grants that we take in, right?

It's not related to other financial compliance needs that the department has.

Yes.

Yeah, I reached out to Councilmember DeKaiser after last week's discussion because our department struggles to manage all the compliance securing the grants is great, and that's what we all celebrate.

But there is so much work that goes on after you get the award.

And our staff is taxed tremendously.

I shouldn't probably use that word taxed in this setting.

But they are I mean, I know we get our department gets awards and you see all that, but we're just barely getting by.

We try to run a really lean department.

We're very tight.

Even this budget year, we're eliminating positions.

Um not in this area, not in the accounting area, but I could I want to I reached out to him and I said we could definitely use help in compliance with these grants because they do take a lot of time.

And any time to get a grant more than a million dollars, it triggers an extensive an additional layer of auditing from the external auditors, and so I just said we could use the help if there's support for that.

And that's kind of where we're at.

Okay, thank you for answering my question.

Okay, so here are some of my thoughts.

You know, I I too see the value in this position, like I had said last week.

Um it has the potential to bring in millions of millions of dollars.

That's the hope, right?

Um my concern is still the same because nothing has changed at all from last week.

Um so that is that creating another full-time position where you're adding benefits and all of those other things create additional um potential hurdles, and uh, I don't know that we uh we have a lot of people in a lot of areas writing grants right now, and I understand that these this idea is to kind of centralize that to be able to free up other resources the the resources in those departments to be able to do other things, right?

And to maybe still assist this person.

Um I am concerned um about the adding another FTE right now in a lean budget year where you know the administration has reduced positions over over various departments.

Uh I really liked the contract idea.

I'm not necessarily balking at the cost proposal, and so I'm not quite sure where this, you know, hire a grant writer for 50,000 dollars has come from because that's anyway.

I wasn't balking at the proposal, I was balking at it being an ongoing full-time or not bulking, but concerned about it being an on-time, full-time um ongoing expense, especially when your funding mechanism is literally like a one-time funding, and so I don't have any understanding or or confidence that we'll be able to adjust for this position in a full-time ongoing basis in the next budget year.

And so, you know, it if you're if if you're really open to that, then would you be open to like amending this proposal to be on a contract basis at that amount with measures to, you know, with I mean, we don't have to write in measures right now, obviously it will come back for next year, and they can be reevaluated next year for a full-time ongoing position if it's kind of proven its concept.

Like I would be all over supporting that, but I I'm having a hard time with the way that it was written and it hasn't changed from last week.

And those were my comments last week.

So just just wanted to throw that out there.

Sorry, so you're saying just my own brain.

So you're saying you you would want to propose it if he found if he said in there somewhere this is a one-year position, and it will be re-evaluated in the next next fiscal year.

Yes.

That's the only contract.

Like RDA does that with small businesses, right?

Um, with a small business position, and I think that this could be an opportunity to try this idea out considering all of the economic conditions of this year's budget.

Well, thank you.

I appreciate that.

I don't think there's a need to try out this position.

It's gonna come in and be successful.

What wouldn't be a successful is a contract position where they come in and they make a buck here and there by grabbing these small dollar grants.

We want someone who's gonna come in and be willing to apply for the three and four-year grants down the line that are gonna bring millions of dollars into the city.

And these metrics that I sent you all out in the email I talked about part of the problem with measuring them on this is because they might after the first year they might be like, well, I don't have any deliverables because I'm a really good grant writer and I'm doing the job, and it takes years and years.

It's not just about applying, it's about developing relations.

It's figuring out the strategy of the city and where to bring in money, how to help the departments, and so it really and I explained this in the email, but it really is my intention is to build long-term capacity for the city to compete and bring in funding, and we that's just not gonna happen with a grant writer uh that's on contract.

And so it's a it's an FTE.

Okay.

Well, I I just want to say, you know, I do disagree, and you can build in renewals on the contract, so it's not you know that that there is not incentive.

I just I'm just trying to provide feedback, and I I wish that there was uh maybe a little more um I don't know.

I can't think of the word right now, but we've been talking about it a lot.

Thank you.

Ms.

Townsman.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll I'll just it what I'm about to share is not gonna have an impact because you've just made it clear it's an FTE, but um I I will be a no on this proposal because I have the same concerns that have been shared.

I'm not comfortable with an FTE right now.

Um I was interested in outcomes-based contract.

Um you're gonna hear me say that a lot tonight.

Uh outcomes-based contract where we would come up with agreed upon measures, we would um upon those measures being met, then compensation could be released.

And I think we should be doing a lot more of outcomes-based contracting.

So um, but obviously you just said your line in the sand is this needs to be an FTE, so I'll be a no on this.

Just a question for you out of curiosity.

Um you are very sure about the fact that this position will pay for itself.

How long will that take?

I don't know exactly um to to recoup 160 grand.

Um you could probably do that in a year once you're up and running.

But whether that takes initially two years, three years.

I'm not really certain.

The point is that we know other cities have this position and it's working out really well for them.

Well, of course, we we do have employees that are writing and getting grants, right?

So you are just looking to have an employee who is focused entirely and exclusively on that and hoping to maybe even get a better result than they were we're already experiencing.

I think that I'm hearing support for the concept, but maybe not the terms and conditions.

Um I wouldn't mind seeing this come back next year in another budget year.

I'd love to see it come back maybe in a tentative.

I'd love to see it as a test.

Will it come back in the mayor's tentative budget?

Is the administration of the belief that we have this deficit, and if we added an employee that we it would pay for itself and the and the expense would be fruitful, that would be interesting to know.

They're the ones that manage the employees and maybe have a really good feel for what we might be missing, what might be falling through the cracks.

I'm still just overly simplified this year.

I just can't support adding an FTE when we are laying off employees.

I just um I I can't do that.

Just one other thing is we did, was it last year or the year before, that we authorized adding an employee at a much lower cost that we were told they were going to pay for themselves right away and they aren't.

So it's at a much lower cost, and there is still a benefit that I feel we derive from adding them.

But that same that same assertion was made.

And so far that hasn't been the case.

But um I'd I'd like to see this come back.

I just don't think that this is the year.

But I think you're making the right call.

There you're hearing interest.

You you are hearing it.

Just seems like we uh terms, conditions, timing might just be the issue.

So ahead.

I could and I don't know if this would even change any, but could we hire somebody for a year and make it clear that it's not like an ongoing and then that would give them time?

I mean, I don't does that I mean that way it doesn't have to be you know a contract, but it could be hiring somebody and then it's saying it is only a year, and then when the budget committee meets, they start getting together, they can see if there's been progress, if they're feeling that there's uh that momentum in the in the direction of getting you know million-dollar grants, um, you know, or even a couple hundred thousand dollar grants.

Is that is that something that we could do?

Okay.

So we have had employees like you you could have an independent contractor, uh, which is definitely they're not an employee of the city, and you can have an employee that is on contract and they are an employee.

We've had situations of doing that.

So you could I guess I think that's what you're describing there.

So we have done that.

We've done that with some, I believe, uh building inspector types in the past and some other various positions that were based on some funding.

It is harder to recruit because you do have to, even though they're a contract employee, we have a written contract and they know that it's based on funding approval, and they know the terms that it may just be a year.

So it does uh affect your recruiting pool.

And you don't really know for sure how it's gonna, you know, who you're gonna attract, if you're gonna attract the right people until you go out and try it and see what you can get.

Okay, thank you.

Does that answer your question?

It does.

That's it.

Thank you.

Hey Brian, I have a question for you before you walk away, and it's not only for this one.

It's the same source on this one.

Um one-time funding.

It's the same, it's the fire department fleet again.

Can you please tell me why the administration, why you are recommending when we are looking for money in a very tight budget to try to accomplish some worthwhile goals.

Why you are recommending taking from the fire department fleet?

Yeah, just because we have uh still a couple years on the lead time to save up for that.

We have over a million one already saved.

And yeah, it was our balancing number and trying to using the ongoing for one-time purposes.

So that's we have two hundred and seventy-five we're adding to it, but that's kind of the biggest number that we could draw from, and it was our kind of our last balancing number, and and we have some runway to still try to save up for that.

So it may just put off the timeline for being able to buy that.

Right.

We're definitely any amount we reduce, we'd look at carryover to add more, and we'd look at next budget, and we're I think we have another budget cycle before we have to finalize it.

So any more questions or comments at this point in time.

No, okay.

Um, Miss Christians and Miss Nickel.

Okay, I'll do the first change.

Well, actually, it's really not a change, it's um addressing the CWC contribution.

I said it before in the meeting.

We make hard decisions, we reset research them, and we have good reasoning.

I've sent out my reasoning to a hundred of people this weekend, and they I don't really think that I need to repeat it on the stand tonight.

I want them to leave with some dignity.

Um we are still proposing that the CWC funding be used to our critical water infrastructure.

Okay, um, the other changes the I was we were just gonna hit the only items that changed besides um talking about the CWC reasoning um in this uh changes were on the mayor discretionary spending account.

The original proposal was 10,000, and based on the administration's request, we've increased that discretionary spending amount to 20,000.

There is also um the mayor's office general fund.

This is a slight adjustment from Brian's, like he was suggesting moving the PIO into the mayor's office, which was 100% what we asked him to do before.

But based on um the feedback from last week, we are now wanting to move that into the communications department.

Um maybe at the next but yeah, if you have any.

This is more of a clarification.

This is more of a clarification of some of some comments that were made.

Um the council is not increasing their their wages.

We're not.

Did we look at elected official pay?

Yeah, we did.

And we talked about all elected officials.

So the council is not increasing their wages.

We did ask for an additional 2500 from the 2500 that we use for training conferences, and it's not excessive, so we're talking a 2500 increase, and I think that's reasonable.

And there were some people here last week that voiced that they felt it was reasonable too.

Then we have community events, um, events supplies and events.

So originally on 6.9, we had suggested.

This is the only the change part, guys.

So the original budget request for the heritage festival was $13.5.

And we recommended Dustin, am I saying it right, 10,000?

Sorry, I was reading something else in your proposal.

Could you repeat that question?

It was 10,000, right?

We went back down to 10,000 on the Heritage Festival.

Yes, so we just you just left the heritage festival of what was in the tentative budget.

Okay, so it stayed at 13.5, which was the original budget request.

And instead of cutting out the historic barbecue, we adjusted the amount to the average that was spent over the last four years, which was uh six thousand six hundred and sixty-seven dollars.

We heard everybody loud and clear, and Brooke heard it loud and clear as well.

Thanks for um showing your support.

Yes, for that change.

Then also um on the newsletter, the administration also asked us if we could support some of that in there, and so we have adjusted the line item there for to 15,000 from zero to fifteen thousand dollars, which would either allow for a quarterly newsletter or a reduced color space, whatever the administration wants to more often, but that's the amount we increased it to.

And then the last one is the communications videographer.

Um the original pose proposal was to cut that down.

I don't remember if the number you guys and the new one is to fund that fully and to put 215 of that in the communications department and 215 of that in the council professional services.

So those are the only changes.

Are there any questions?

Councilmember Christensen, Madam Chair, may I just make one really minor comment?

You guys hit everything, just one one thing.

Um we in your proposal you've also reduced the amount that you're taking from the fire tiller savers.

Yes, sorry, sorry, the fire tiller truck savings.

And that's based upon um some of the changes that have been made here primarily accounting for the um movement of the the PIO, which wasn't fully accounted for last week, and so that's why you see a large reduction there in what's being uh taken from the fire.

So the balancing number is down to eleven thousand seven hundred and seven dollars is the difference from the tillers, so it's significantly less money that we need for this proposal.

Seems like one of the things that we could do.

It's pretty close to that number.

Well your proposal also increases council contingency by almost ten thousand dollars.

It's pretty close to this.

Do you want to use that for that instead of taking from fire fleet?

Well, that numbered work now, all these numbers are balanced.

Was it nine thousand nine hundred?

It's nine thousand nine hundred and fifty.

You could reduce that and it would offset the amount that you're taking from the fire tiller truck if you wanted to do that.

But our uh council contingency has dwindled to almost zero.

So what is council contingency?

Uh in the t it it did get down to the low f the low forties in the current fiscal year, but in the tentative it's funded at 55,000.

Fifty-five thousand.

And I think we have management study coming from that.

I'm not sure.

So I know I know that Dustin had mentioned that we were taking it down.

We moved management studies into another fund.

Yeah, the management study is in a capital line item and it it was funded, I believe an additional fifty thousand in that capital line item this year if I'm remembering correctly.

Is that right, Brian?

I I uh welcome that.

I I like the change.

So yeah, yeah.

That's fine.

It would adjust that down to I don't know, Dustin, to do the math.

Less than two thousand.

Yeah, that's correct.

I don't I don't I'm not as good at mental math as that either, but uh that's about right.

Okay.

All right.

Questions.

Um, Ms.

D'Souza.

Okay, so I have a question on the communications portion first.

And so the proposal is to um is it it's currently in?

Okay, sorry, I've got a lot of pages and a lot of it's currently paid through two.

It's through communications and the mayor's office.

Is it we would like to is it the mayor's or is it the P A O it's the PIA or not PIO, I'm sorry, the CAO.

Right.

Currently the PAO.

Currently the PIO is funded out of uh the mayor's budget.

Okay.

It was proposed in the tenity budget to move half of the PIO over to communications to the communications budget.

Oh, okay.

Thank you.

So none of that's in your office.

I don't know how I got my wires crossed there.

Okay.

No, PIO has always been in the mayor's budget.

Okay.

And currently, right now in the existing budget is 100% in the mayor's budget.

In the existing budget, but in the tentative budget that was approved, um half was it was split, and you're suggesting that the entire thing be consolidated to the communications budget.

Okay.

Okay.

Um and then the uh community events, you know.

I just want to say that I I appreciate and commend the consideration that was given to the original proposal.

You know, I I understand, you know, what you were trying to accomplish.

I also understand um how it may have been surprising to some and um concerning.

And so I you know, I I support the new proposal.

Um but I but I do want to say a couple of things, you know.

Uh I I it I think last council meeting, the mayor had mentioned that this um historic Sandy Barbecue had an effect on on crime in some way.

And you know, if if if that's the case, you know, then um I think it would be helpful to have some information and statistics from our police department in the future to kind of you know back up that claim because and here's the reason why.

Because outside of that, it is it is citywide taxpayer money being funded for an event that is for one area that nobody else in the city is really, you know, can attend or should attend, otherwise, you know, there wouldn't be enough supplies for the people of that area.

And um on its surface, we have had criticisms over the years when this has come up because this has been a discussion a few times that um other people in the um and other areas of the city uh criticize this exact thing, and you know, they'd like their own barbecue and they have their own needs, you know, and I'm sympathetic to that.

But at the same time, if if there is a benefit to the entire city and this area that has issues that are maybe different than other areas and it is being uh productive in reducing crime in some way, then it would be helpful to know that.

And so personally I could see that as being a greater good benefit of citywide dollars being used for for this purpose.

Um and so I I think that I would like to maybe ask that we start looking at that for next year just to make sure that um you know if that's if that is the goal, if that's the reason that this was created and it's not this isn't achieving the objective, then we should absolutely continue continue with the objective.

We just may need a tweak how we're doing it.

And so again, like trying to be objective based with this, I I think is what I'm I'm trying to get at.

Um and so overall, I you know I support what you guys are are doing given all of the circumstances.

Um but that would be my request for next year was just to have some information and make sure that that's you know effective.

Otherwise, we may need to reconsider again.

Thank you.

Ms.

Townsman.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Before I jump in, are we going, are you wanting like feedback in the order of things, or are you wanting like however you want to do it, and we still need to take public comment as well.

So yeah.

Okay.

Um I I second what Councilman D'Souza shared.

I I understand that a change was made.

Um I still I still obviously recognize there's a duplication there.

Um I still have the same concern I expressed about uh staff time now that we're back to the two events, and and so we're essentially doubling the amount of staff time.

So my my um my hope, I guess I will add upon what Councilman DeSusa brought forward is just inviting administration to think about um what what uh first of all, yes to everything.

I think that's a really great approach to data-driven, how is this addressing um you know improvement in in that particular neighborhood relative to police data?

So I really like that.

But I would add um think about structuring uh these events, and I guess I'm not this is more to administration be very, very aware of of staff time.

Um that's not that concern did not go away, even though like I know you brought it brought it back, but that's we're still duplicating.

Um and and so maybe there's an opportunity for administration to think a little bit differently about how things how these events are staffed.

So but I understand.

I understand what you brought back.

Um I have a lot more, but I feel like I just want I thank you for bringing that forward because that didn't even come in my mind to factor in staff cost because this is not staff cost, and we we're never told what it costs to have our employees in events, so maybe we can get a report on that too.

Yeah, so you can see there's a perfect.

Um so I'll just yeah, I'll just keep going.

And this sort of this sort of uh if I'm reading the this proposal in alignment with the additional amendments that administration just presented, there is conflict between the two uh recommendations or amendments relative to the CIO.

So I I just want to clarify that I support this approach.

I not CIOC now I did the same thing.

My goodness.

Do you want me to answer?

PIO No, I'm just saying I support I support 100%.

It is a the PIO is a city communications role, and the whole reason we established the communications department is because it is a citywide department, and so I believe the PIO position 100 not half of it, but all of it should be in the communications department.

So which is in conflict with administration.

So that's why that piece of administration's amendment I won't be able to support because this is my preference.

And so all we can do is communicate legislative intent.

Printed versions are placed all over the city in our library and our senior center and lots of places so they could be picked up and made available.

But my intent here is we're saving costs of printing and postage.

The others are I haven't heard you really bring up, but I did go take a break.

So I'll just I'll just pause there.

Do you before we go to public camel?

I'd also like to address one thing.

And this is additionally about the CWC.

There have been some concerns about the bus bypass system.

And I I know they can call that a win for them.

But it's not a win for Sandy residents south of that area.

It has caused a tremendous amount of traffic congestion and idling cars on residential streets.

And they know they're going to be parked there a while.

They pull out hibaches and they do that, they pop open their beers at 9 a.m.

in the morning, more power to them.

But they also relieve their um relieve themselves on our sidewalk.

So while you can call it a win, it is not a win for Sandy residents.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just since it's already at the bottom, we'll kind of start at the bottom.

So the uh you know the videographer, um, you know, appreciate what you've done there, you know, and I think even the discussion earlier on Crescent View Middle School, you know, looking at that and seeing I I mean I could just envision it in my head, you know, of trying to to uh educate residents, you know, if if we move forward on looking at language of putting it on as a geo bond, and I know that we were kind of undecided with that, but you know, I can really see that benefit there.

So um, you know, making sure that that's funded, and some of it, you know, in council, and then some of it in comms, you know, to make sure that that we are involved and we have a say, you know, in how that that money is being spent, you know.

I I appreciate that.

Um the the newsletter, you know, understanding, you know, and going down to quarterly, you know, it's a you know, I I thank you on that one as well.

You know, I know I brought that up last week.

I believe you know you had spoken with administration on that, um, and knowing that yep, it is, you know, they deliver it up at the Sandy Library at the senior center at the eight assisted living facilities, you know, to have that, um, and this could be it's just a another scaled down opportunity, and then we can we can get feet get gather, oh goodness, uh, gather feedback uh for possibly next year, you know, to kind of see where we stand with that.

Um, you know, and definitely continuing to have that online presence, you know, for those that that get the information online that are comfortable there that want it, you know.

It hey, got my phone with me, let me pull it up.

So, you know, that's a I think a great win on that one.

Um, you know, understanding what you're doing uh with the heritage festival and the historic barbecue, you know, looking at both of those and that the you know going with an average over the past four years, you know, so so bringing it down from the requested 10,000, I think is usually what's in there.

Um but looking at what that average is, you know, and you know, and possibly something you know looking at that data, you know, to come back you know to show some of that benefit, I that may be a bit of a challenge.

Um, I I know that there's a lot that goes on in that area, you know, so trying to bring that community together, but you know, that's hard.

So, you know, but I understand, you know, bringing it back in and and just seeing, you know, people down there last week.

You know, that was, and uh, you know, having great music, I mean opportunity to have that music down there, you gotta have that.

Um let's see, then cultural celebration, lobbyists, uh council contingency, comms, um, so discretionary spending accounts, um, you know, looking at that going from 2500 to 5,000.

It really for what we do and the amount of what we do, 5,000 is not a significant, you know, a significant amount for us, and I think that that many of us, you know, may even exceed that, which would mean that we are pulling from our own pocket.

Um, you know, I have done this, I have pulled, and it's had a comma in there.

Two, three, and this year, probably four thousand dollars of my money to cover costs that I have done for the city.

Um, and I also do not get uh guests or a car allowance.

I do not get a cell phone allowance.

So if I was to even add that on to it, um it would be even more.

So I think $5,000 is very fair.

It's very fair.

Um, you know, it's it is what it is there.

Um, you know, we do try to reach out to as many residents as we can.

Uh sometimes that that comes down to, you know, if we're doing town halls and just trying to provide, you know, cookies and water, something for people to come and to have, you know, that those those little those little amounts they do add up.

Um business cards, that comes out of it for every one of us.

You know, it is Ms.

Edwards does I I mean she has an incredible ledger on what uh what date it was spent, what it was spent on, how much you have left.

I could ask her right now, do I have anything left for the end of the year?

And she could pull it up.

Well, you spent this, this, and this, this is how much you have left.

Um, she does a great job keeping all of that for all of us.

Um I I mean I have zero concern on that aspect.

Um I would be and this is and this is coming, I I mean it's telling you I several thousand dollars.

And I know that Ms.

Edwards could even corroborate this, Mr.

Frado could corroborate this, you know, seen because I have to turn in the receipts, and they go, Yep, you don't have the money to cover it.

Um I could even hold back on that because it's going to go into something else I'm going to say next.

Um, you know, I have concerns.

Um, you know, the $20,000 proposed for the mayor's discretionary account.

I think that she would easily spend that.

That that is and not in a bad, I mean, it's I I think that you know, between the opportunities that she has to be able to travel and connect with other leaders in the country and the items that that we spend money on, I know that she spends that money as well.

Um, but I think that we combine those two as well as salary that was brought up, you know, as a reduction of the mayor's salary.

Um I think that all of this should be evaluated.

I brought this up last week.

I think that we need to take a look at it.

Um, you know, I've had I've had residents text me, I've had employees text me.

I've had um I've had emails come in about people saying, you know, well, I heard you make sixty thousand dollars.

And I'm like, really, where?

Let me know.

Because I don't make sixty thousand dollars as a council member.

None of us do.

None of us do.

Wherever that got dispelled, that that was even suggested, is I it it really is so frustrating to me as a council member.

When things are posted, oh, I read it somewhere online.

Can you find it?

Can you send it to me?

Because I'd like to be able to go down and correct it.

Um but but there is so much misinformation that often what we do, and we do this as people, I read it somewhere.

And because it's something that we feel is a trustworthy source, whether that's my neighbor, whether it's a family member of mine, um, that that we take it at face value.

And that is categorically incorrect, and it is frustrating to hear that.

Um I have tried to correct some of it, only gotten through about half of my CWC emails because I'm trying to correct other things along the way.

Um, but but I do think that we should look at there's nothing in here that is raising our compensation.

I know that it was suggested at some point to say maybe we should look at at doing a percentage of what that looks like.

So that way you don't have one branch doing something without going, well, it's gonna impact the budget in more than one area.

So I mean, I you know, I I 100% support an evaluation and then coming up with a policy.

I can't support it right now because I do think we need to have that evaluation beforehand.

We can open the budget at any time.

Two-week process.

Open it, and then we can adjust at some point.

You know, I think that you know, it's a to become an elected official.

There are no requirements.

That's why I mean that's you know, we have uh a canyon school district board member that was elected when he was 19.

I think he was actually just turned 20 when the election had occurred.

That's and and from you know my perspective.

I mean, he's he's working his tail off, and he's doing what he can, and he's doing a really good job.

Um, but it's it is something that we should look at.

You know, what is a fair compensation for Sandy, the size, you know, six six largest, sixth largest city.

Um, where do we stand with that?

And let's make sure that residents understand transparency, how we are paid as council members, as any elected position, how we're paid, so that we can defend that if we need to.

If you guys are frustrated with what I'm doing, every four years you have that opportunity.

But I also need to be able to look at you and say, this is how much I'm compensated.

This is what I'm doing, and if I'm not doing enough for you, then let me know.

Let me know so that I can do more.

Um, so that part of this I have concerns with.

I just think that we need to have an evaluation before we look at adjusting anything.

Okay.

And just so you know, there is a policy that's very tentative that's been written, and staff is going over it at this point.

So that should be coming forward in the next couple weeks, I would assume, month, maybe.

Love it, and something to kind of look at.

So it's but that's the part here that I'm I I struggle with, you know, and and if we needed to wait on discretionary, you know, with both council and mayors on there, then I would do that as well.

I'm okay to move forward on some of it.

Um, you know, but uh, but I would be willing to wait if that's you know, if we need to look at it as the the whole piece or the whole pie.

Um to, and I think kind of the last one, uh, the mainline replacements, fleet savings, uh, the CWC.

I still have probably about 50 emails to return to or to reply to.

If I have not gotten to you, I am sorry, I will get to you.

Um we've had a lot of information provided to us.

Um, you know, in uh fiscal year 23, which was so the winter of 22.

We had it was a significant snow year for us.

Um, you know, we we received just over 72,000 from the CWC and fiscal year 24, 22,000, just over 22,000.

Um fiscal year 25, just over 26,000, and this last year, nothing.

Um, and that and that's because we it wasn't needed up there.

It wasn't that they did not give it to her or refused to, it was because it was not needed for avalanche control.

Um the water quality that we need to be monitoring is important to me.

That's it's important to me, it's important to um to my children, um, to my parents, you know, to residents.

Um I do think that what the CWC set out to do in 2017 was very important.

Um their work is something that that I I don't do.

Um I'm not sure that it's 95,000.

I think if we had a lobbyist that could work on some of that, that maybe we would have they have, and I know a lot of residents in the emails have have said have tied this specifically to the gondola.

I have gone through and looked and I've asked.

They have not come out and specifically said we are opposed to the gondola.

So that makes another layer, it's a challenge.

That is a challenge.

We're hearing that 80% of Sandy residents are opposed to the gondola, and the CWC will fight anti-gondola.

They they have said some strong things opposing the gondola, but they have not put out a document saying we oppose it.

Um I don't see, I don't see West Valley on there, I don't see West Jordan, I don't see South Jordan.

Um, there are many cities that I do not see on there fighting for water water quality.

We have the Department of Environmental Quality through Utah.

We have the EPA through the federal government that will fight for our water quality as well.

I am not proposing, and I'm not I'm not comfortable with completely pulling out of CWC.

I think that they do have and they provide some benefit to us.

Next year, maybe a different story.

Because we have tried for quite a while, and things have not gone, they haven't moved forward, and we've been hearing they're right at that time.

It's right at that time.

I heard that last year.

We're right there, we're right there.

I heard that the year before.

We're so close.

I heard that the year before that as well.

Um I know it was it was suggested that we pull out entirely in 2020.

Um, and there have been times on the council that we have have discussed that.

You know, where do we pull money from?

So I think on that one, um, I am I would be comfortable reducing the amount, you know, even by half, um, reducing it, and then next year, if we don't have and we put out some of the metrics, you know, that they need to come, you know, that there's not a lot.

I believe Ms.

Houseman, when you were the representative on the CWC, you know, we heard kind of some updates.

Um, I believe they came in maybe a little bit more often, and maybe they're just a little bit busier right now.

Um, but but trying to get that that information from them.

You know, what are they doing?

Um, you know, and how is it providing you know this this resource to Sandy?

Because that's what that's what you guys need.

That's what we need.

We need to make sure that doing either a 1082 study.

Um, somebody brought that up, you know, looking to say, well, how does this resource um help us?

You know, you you are giving money to this organization.

And we've done 1082 studies in the past, uh, you know, to to determine the amount of funding for that.

And that may be something that we need to do if we have not done that in the past.

Um, but so I would be um hoping, and maybe you know, as a as a kind of a starting point as an option here is to maybe talk about a reduction in the amount because we do have mainline replacement issues.

We were we paid out a lot of money last year for damage for mainlines that were blowing holes in them, you know, our roads, you know, our residents.

We had a sinkhole, you know, up in the neighborhood I grew up in.

You know, a guy fell in it.

I mean, he fell in the hole.

I'm so glad he wasn't hurt.

So, you know, I I it's we need to have, and I so I appreciate where you're trying to put that money to, but having a reduction to it, it gives them that chance, you know, puts them on notice, come back to us.

So that's kind of where I am on those.

Thank you.

All right.

So that would be a review of the changes and clarifying comments on the budget amendments.

I'm gonna open the public hearing and invite the public to provide input.

Madam Chair, I have some thoughts I'd like to share briefly before after public comment.

Do you want to do it?

Do you want to do it after?

I think there will be a lot more comments after, too.

Okay, we will definitely make sure you have that chance.

All right.

Um I do have blue cards for this item.

Um if anyone else would like to speak, make sure you fill one out and hand it to Dustin.

We'll start with the people in the room.

I'm gonna try to go back to the order on which I received these.

Okay.

Danny Richardson.

Danny.

That's me.

Still here.

Okay.

Madam Mayor, Council members, thank you for the opportunity to comment on your proposed cutting of funding to the Central Wasatch Commission and the Sandy City budget.

As I mentioned in my comments last week, I am a 48-year resident of Sandy.

I have served in several important executive roles in the Utah ski and tourism industry for 50 years.

I was actively involved with the ski bus program as a UTA employee for seven years.

I've been the committee chair of the Central Wessex Commission Transportation Systems Subcommittee for four years, and I'm currently a member of the CWC stakeholders committee.

I speak from a position of knowledge and involvement.

Since last year, it has been noted that there have been a great number of citizen emails, almost exclusively in opposition to the council's proposed cutting of CWC funding.

Again, overwhelmingly in favor of continuing CWC funding and involvement with some rather pointedly strong specific arguments against cutting funding.

Several of the council members have been engaged with that back and forth.

Council members, I ask that you carefully consider the overwhelming opposition expressed in the citizens' comments, along with your rebuttals that have often brought even more often very specific opposing comments and advice.

Better to be a strong participant in the efforts of CWC guiding and influencing the actions and programs of the CWC, land use, transportation options, sales tax benefits for Sandy businesses, winter and summer canyon use, water from the canyon that directly benefits Sandy City, our Sandy City residents, Salt Lake County, and truly the entire state, as opposed to being disconnected observers.

Is the CWC perfect?

Yeah, perhaps not.

But be an active team member and participant to help guide the organization and influence the outcomes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

John Adams.

John here.

Sounds like John may have left.

Okay.

Lindsay Neilson.

Counselors, my name is Lindsay Nielsen, and I'm the director of the CWC.

What a week this has been.

I've had conversations with many of you, and I've had I've heard important comments as well as a concerning amount of false information about the CWC, and I feel it actually imperative to correct some of that false information.

The CWC, as we know, was created in 2017 by interlocal agreement and was first staffed in 2018.

Not 15 years ago and not three years ago, both of which Councilor Nickel claimed, each on different days.

Passing the NCRA is still our top priority, and we haven't become solely focused on small projects, though a grant program is part of our portfolio of work.

I do also have to say that the CWC does not have a stance for or against the gondola.

That is true.

Councilor Nickel, whoever is telling you or whoever you are listening to who is giving you this false information that you were then sharing, please stop.

I am here any time to answer your questions.

Um here to speak with you about your vision for Sandy and District 3, my home district.

Um yeah, I'd also like to invite you to attend the ski bus planning meetings that we host with UDAT and UTA and Sandy City PD and Cottonwood Heights PD if you have other ideas for how to address the traffic congestion issue on heavy snow days.

Welcome you to join.

Okay.

I've heard from counselors that the effort to pass the CWN CRA has taken too long.

To that, I would say, well, I agree.

Um I we've all been under the impression that we could get the NCRA passed faster than it's taken.

I've mentioned in conversations this week that legislation like this requires windows of opportunity to be open.

Um it is true that in 2021 that window closed, but it's reopening right now.

Stakeholders are back at the negotiation table, and I am imploring you to just stick with us for two more years, not forever.

But leaving now will just will do nothing but rob Sandy of being part of the work, and it will hurt us right when the window of opportunity is reopening.

So if you believe in the protections and the balance that the NCRA would bring, give us these two years.

I've heard this week that you would appreciate periodic progress updates on the NCRA so that you can know that when I say we need two years, that I am being honest.

My offer is this.

I can be right here at this podium once a quarter to present progress reports.

You can all ask questions, and at the end of two years, we can reassess together instead of the CWC being blindsided like we have been this week.

I've heard that Sandy CWC membership is too much money to contribute to the effort.

And I do know, and I'm really sensitive to the fact that funds are tight and that all municipal funds go to good uses.

Um if a 95,000 dollar uh contribution is too expensive for Sandy this year, uh, for these two years, I would agree to a reduced uh we could agree to a reduced member contribution.

Was that really three minutes?

Yes.

It's really important.

One hurry up.

Okay, thank you so much.

Believe that I would not be here making comments to you for the second week in a row if it wasn't if I wasn't confident that the NCRA could uh we could achieve the NCRA as much as I love four hour meetings.

Uh I could be doing other things with my Tuesday nigga.

Um we need you at the table, so I'm here at the podium.

Okay.

Um vote, please note vote no on the CWC budget amendment, vote to remain a member partner with the CWC.

Yes, that was more than one sentence.

Thank you, Lindsay.

All right, Doug Wismer.

Just looking for Jack.

Is he still here?

No, he left.

So CWC, yeah.

Right on.

Alison, yes, I have not heard back from you.

9218 South Orange Bowl Court District 2.

I know I'm working on it.

It's okay.

Um I I think we need out of the CWC.

Because despite what they say, very much anti-Gondola.

Very much anti-gondola.

And um I didn't know you could bring props, but I'm gonna bring them next time.

And it's gonna be a picture of all the traffic in the canyon, and all of the all of the problems with transportation that we have.

Um so the reason that you're having problems getting through all the emails is because some of our favorite lobbyists groups, Save Our Canyons, um has a smear campaign against Ms.

Nickel and against Miss Christensen, and I know that because I get their emails, and I see what they say, and it's talk about false information, the same kind of false information that the gondola is gonna cost 1.4 billion dollars.

Mayor, that was on your billboard last summer.

That is a hundred percent not true.

And what I'd like to know is back on March 31st, Devin Weeder of Utah or of UDOT came here before this body, and I sat right in that same seat, and I listened to him give his presentation about the busing, the phased approach, and yes, the gondola is still on the table.

What I want to know is where were all those 80% of the people in Sandy that are against the gondola?

Talk about a made-up statistic right there.

I I never got that survey.

So where were all where was all this like I want to get involved then?

The room was empty.

Yeah, I got 34 seconds left.

So you know, if we want to talk about false information, Save Our Canyons pedals it with their CRM that they use to send out their mass emails.

So yes, please get out of the CWC.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Patricia Jones.

I'm up here just to um say a few things too about this whole entire budget discussion that's been going on for the last several council meetings.

So, first I want to thank the mayor.

Thank you very much for bringing forward a budget that required no tax increase.

This is the second consecutive year for Sandy with no tax increase.

I don't believe there's one person living in Sandy who would not be happy to hear that.

So I want to thank you very much.

Now, about the council.

The council, I want to thank you very much for the substantive work, amount of work that you put in carefully in reviewing the mayor's budget.

All the the the amendment proposals that you came up with, you give careful consideration because knowing it's gonna bring up oppositions.

So thank you.

Um about your salary.

You guys vote.

You just did not have an increase now.

You're not going to have an increase now.

Now I want to point out for some people here who do not know this.

I only came to this information just very recently.

Council member Cindy Shockey and Councilmember Marcy Houseman.

You have the lowest council member salary because you have refused increase in the past.

The highest increase, if I remember, my memory is not that great really, is around 34,000 for a few of you.

One or two or three, I don't know how many.

But yours are somewhere around, if I remember, somewhere around 28,000.

Nowhere close to 60,000.

Misinformation is very dangerous.

Next door postings have misinformation.

When I say misinformation, I'm really meaning talking about not complete information.

Members, uh Councilmember Cindy Shaki, you actually told us in the room that this voting last year was not a binding vote.

It is just to bring forward to today for all further discussions and to hear further amend changes that you guys will make on the uh proposed amendments.

And yet it's brought it was brought forward as if a binding thing, you know, it's it's it's voted in.

It's not.

Later on, we will hear your final vote.

Um, and I want to thank you very much.

But again, going back to this division, again, I want to emphasize that we need to get closer together.

Really, we do.

Thank you very much for this opportunity.

Thank you.

Don Sigwell.

Well, well, why am I not surprised here tonight?

Again, historic Sandy barbecue, historic Sandy is not a big priority for any of you up there, except for maybe Alison, who has been very active.

And as far as Brookness also, why don't you're at large?

Why don't you come down and see Historic Sandy?

Have you ever spent any time?

I didn't say you campaigning.

Oh, I didn't see campaigning in Historic Sandy.

So you and Marcy, quote, quote, I know, talk and pair up and pair at each other.

So let me say something.

You would love to get rid of the picnic, thinking everybody else in Sandy would like to have a picnic.

Well, nobody else on Sandy has the history that we do, and if you were at large, you wouldn't know that.

So I've I got a question for you.

You took on a project for autism, correct?

Yes, you did.

And that's a personal commitment.

That's something you took on because your daughter has autism.

So how would you like it if all the other children with disabilities threw a fit and now want their piece of the pie?

So think about it.

You guys are very, very self-centered, and I've said it and said it every time I'm up here and always saying it as long as I can talk.

Okay.

Uh Janet Kinneber.

Janet.

Good evening, council members, mayor, dedicated Sandy employees, and fellow Sandy residents.

My name is Janet Kinneberg, and our family has lived in Sandy for 22 years.

I'm here tonight to respectfully urge the City Council to restore the 93,000 contribution to the Central Wasatch Commission.

We truly appreciate the council's dedication to public service, and we know that each of you puts in more hours than you were designated to work by the council policy booklet.

Because our mayor already submitted a fully balanced budget, I do believe that reallocating funds away now, excuse me, from a vital environmental protection program to structure a future council pay adjustment is not the way to move forward at this time.

I think it's very important to not treat our CWC membership like a basic cash back grant program, because that misinterprets what a political shield the CWC is for all of the municipalities who rely on the canyons, not just for our drinking water, but also for myriad ecological services.

We are paying for a unified voting seat to prevent our water source from being compromised by state overreach.

Under Utah Law, the Sandy City Council is a policy-on body.

By charter, the council does not possess the executive authority to hire police officers, deploy patrols to residential roads, or direct public utilities.

Those administrative responsibilities rest on the mayor's plate.

And I believe that the best way of managing these complex regional canyon issues is in conjunction with other cities in the CWC.

I truly believe that widespread collaboration results in better results than piecemeal efforts.

And that just one city working on its own is less effective.

I also think that we really need to listen to public utilities director Tom Ward's professional expertise.

At the last council meeting, Director Ward explained a critical reality.

Modern water plants cannot filter out heavy metals, industrial runoff, or PFAS forever chemicals for massive canyon construction, whether that includes a gondola or something else.

Our primary tool for making drinking water safe once such pollutants enter the water is dilution because we cannot actually eradicate these kinds of pollutants.

If we lose our canyon purity, Sandy will then be forced to rely on deep groundwater pumping as a mixing source.

An incredibly energy-intensive process that will drive up utility rates for every resident while further depleting the aquifers.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Zach Robinson.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to preface this by saying I have not had any of the conversations you've all had with each other.

I'm not privy to all the information that you're all having sharing with each other and that you've received.

But these are just some observations, and it has been incredibly fascinating to be sitting out there and watching.

So just some general thoughts.

Take them or leave them.

I hope you take them.

The fire truck, I feel like that's a really slippery slope.

When that funding starts to get pulled away, that that replacement vehicle gets a little bit further down the road.

So I would recommend and advocate that you leave the funding intact for the fire truck and look for those other projects, perhaps with capital contingency funds like the water wise project.

I like the idea, Alison, but perhaps address that during carryover.

Or if you do make the change and remove the funding for the fire truck, make sure and fill that coffer back up with contingency funds.

I think I just feel like that's a really slippery slope.

The grant administrator is really intriguing.

I had the opportunity to pull up all the proposals back there and just kind of read through them really quick.

So again, this is total all over the board, really legitimately back of napkin notes.

Uh the grant administrator is incredibly uh intriguing.

I think I like the argument that it could generate revenue for the city.

I think that is a smart way to approach this.

One thing that I would advocate for is fund that position, honestly, and then put in with the funding, that person has to fill their coffer back up for their job.

So they get paid, they have they basically bring in their own pay, but you front the money up front.

I think that would be a really interesting way to possibly approach that.

The council chambers has to happen.

Bottom line, that has to happen.

We've been struggling with this for so long.

I know that this body is now struggling with it.

Um this is a room that is evident by all the people that have been here tonight needs an upgrade.

The tech struggles on occasions, or but but uh just generally the room needs an upgrade, so I would advocate keeping that funding in and using the the dollars that have been allocated for the council chambers.

That's absolutely needed.

As somebody who's uh keenly interested in county uh uh assets right now, I really like the the investment in the Sandy Senior Center.

I think that's something that could be really important uh for the long run.

Um the newsletter.

I debated whether or not to really kind of go on and on about the newsletter.

I'm gonna let that one go.

I just uh a couple of final thoughts.

Oh, the last thing, two things.

I love that these proposals are trying to reduce as much as possible from non-departmental.

That's just a piggy bank of nothing.

So putting it as uh putting it in budgets is really appealing.

And then I do want to offer some comments on the CWC.

I think you have the opportunity to negotiate with them right now.

It's been mentioned tonight that they're willing to listen to you.

Use the legislative pen, fund the fund the involvement in CWC.

Use your legislative authority to put some metrics out there, and then hold them to that.

And then if that doesn't work, you've got something to fall back on of like true hard and fast metrics that Sandy has agreed on.

And if it doesn't work, you're gone.

But I would advocate that you do maintain your membership in the CWC, but use your authority to tell them what you want them to do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Lori Wilson.

I'll start by saying I do not envy your job.

Um, but I do have a question.

Uh do I sense uh tonight from the things I've heard that the proposal to uh increase your salary next year has been withdrawn.

It's never proposed.

It was never proposed that it was never so there is not a raise proposed for the council this year or next year.

No, ma'am.

Okay.

Um is the the proposal to reduce the mayor's salary withdrawn.

No.

Okay.

Um that proposal really um scares me.

Uh I did a little research, um, hopefully not as much as you have done or should have done.

Uh the Sandy City mayor is exactly in the 50th percentile of mayors nationwide.

Uh, if you bring it to Salt Lake Valley, umor, Ogden, and South Jordan are both much larger or much smaller than Sandy City.

Ogden mayor is through 136,000, South Jordan is 117,000.

Let me say this.

You get what you pay for.

If you want an executive that can actually do the job, you need to pay for that.

Um it just doesn't make sense to reduce the wage of the chief uh the chief executive of the city.

It doesn't make sense.

Um you have you've heard a lot on this tonight.

Um of the things that you have heard is that the animosity that exists here does not go unnoticed.

And it has to stop.

Um you are not representing the citizens of Sandy when there's this kind of animosity in city government.

We have enough weaponization of government at the national level.

We should not be doing that in Sandy City.

We are better than that.

We are better than that.

Please, please stop bickering.

Stop fighting, stop trying to attack each other and serve the people who are paying your salary and the salary of everybody in the city.

I plead with you, come together for our benefit.

That's why we elected you for our benefit, not so that you could play political games.

So please come together, do whatever it takes to forgive, forget, and come together.

Thank you.

Mike Marker.

Council Chair, members, Mayor Sudanski, Frank Marker, President of Friends of Locatwood Canyon, that group that uh is committed to fiscally responsible solutions of October Canyon.

Last week, with few exceptions, I heard discussion of budget cuts without clear and full explanation of the rationale behind them.

In previous comments, I suggested that your decisions on this matter should be both consistent and congruent with the principles you publicly state.

For example, if the purpose of uh these budget reductions is to avoid layoffs of city Sandy City employees, then increasing or adding uh any budget items would be difficult, would seem difficult to reconcile with that objective.

It's neither consistent or congruent.

That brings me to the Central Law Sachs Commission of which I was in the stakeholders commission up until about six months ago.

Last week, Councilmember Nichols stated that the COC had nothing to do with the Gundola.

Many people in this audience and around the the city, which strongly would disagree with that statement.

Likewise, a suggestion that Sandy could remain a participating member while this continuing discontinuing payment of the annual assessment is not supported by the Commission's governing structure.

Last week I urged the council to not be short-sighted.

Tonight I want to offer a constructive alternative.

If your concern is the productivity and effectiveness of the COBC, you have other options than a full financial uh commitment.

Use your influence, but stay a member.

Um use your influence to insist on measurable results and adherence to the commission's public charter, which puts guardwails on CWC activity.

That includes also the charter also includes language opposing the gondola.

That commitment is to mean anything.

Require the commission to vote on a resolution opposing the project.

A similar resolution failed several years ago as it was blocked by a single member.

This time, assistant the con the commission follow the majority rule decision process is spilled out in this charter.

You have the votes on this council to pursue this course of action.

And for the four or seven of the council members here tonight, doing so would entirely be consistent and congruent with positions you presented to voters during your campaigns.

Councilman, it's decrypt the Kaiser has consistently opposed the gondola.

Councilmember Stroud campaigned on having changed her earlier position.

Councilmember Christensen was clear on on her opposition.

Council Member Nichols stated later in her campaign that she opposed the project as well.

Elections matter because voters rely on the comments, the commitments that that uh candidates make.

Tonight is an opportunity to honor those commitments.

And also, 1.4 billion dollars for the gondola is not something that the opponents came up with.

That was a WFRC number.

If you don't like that number, talk to them.

But that's their number.

Um, so anyway, thank you much for very much for your time.

Thank you.

And lastly, I have Laurel Livesey.

Okay, so most of what I was going to be talking about had to do with you guys getting raises.

So you're you're for sure not gonna be giving yourself raises.

Okay.

Then I have a lot less to say.

Thank you for that.

Um say thank you.

Also, I want to I want to thank you for um not raising our property taxes.

That that really meant a lot to me as a single parent mom who still has her son living at home, but we still, you know, it's it helps.

Um but I do disagree with um with you guys trying to lower Mayor Monica's um salary by the 12 percent.

I don't understand that.

Um she works really hard, and if you guys aren't giving yourself a raise, then why do you still feel like you need to lower her salary?

I guess and I know that you don't answer questions, but um, I would just ask that you don't lower it.

Either I mean she'd be happy with just keeping it the same, but there's no reason to lower it.

So if that's what I need to say about that.

Um I'm just gonna go through some of this stuff that don't have anything to do with the raise.

Um I would like to see the comment time lengthened to five minutes instead of three minutes.

I know we can ask ahead of time, you know, but I just think five minutes would give people more time to say what they want to say.

Um I think that you should stay with the CWC.

I think that she made a point that if if it's too much money if the $93,000 is too much, which I think that's a lot of money, and that it could be lowered to uh, you know, maybe half or three-quarters or you know, something, but don't pull out completely.

It's I think it's really important.

I think our water needs to be monitored.

I think what they're doing is good, and I think that we need to stay a part of that.

Um so and I would like to propose that there be a mediator put into the budget, because and it's you know, it's a repeat of what other people have said.

There's a lot of animosity between the city council and the mayor, and it didn't start with Monica.

It started way back with with Kurt Blackburn.

Um I wasn't here prior to that, but he specifically told me City Council doesn't, there's members on City Council that don't like him.

That's what he told me after he'd only been there for a couple months.

And that's just you guys need to work together.

It's really important that you work together.

And that's why I think it if they could consider having a mediator or somebody to sit down and really mediate.

Ma'am, we've hit the three-minute mark for your comment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It was a quick three minutes.

Okay, that's for listening.

Thank you.

That's all the blue cards we have from the room.

It looks like we have a few online participants.

But Dustin, if you want to go ahead and open up that opportunity to submit comments from the online members.

Of course, madam chair.

Uh, if you're joining us virtually this evening via Zoom and you'd like to comment on this evening's uh public hearing item, which is item number six on the FY27 budget.

Uh go ahead and click the raise hand button on your screen now.

I'll call your name in the order in which you raised your hand, and you'll have three minutes.

Madam Chair, first up is Sandra Hawk.

Sandra, I'm gonna allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself, and you'll have three minutes.

Thank you.

I'm Sandra Hawk.

I live at 10953 South Bay Middle Circle in Sandy, Utah.

I am also serving as the chair of the Sandy City Historic Preservation Committee at this time.

And I wanted to speak specifically to the barbecue in the Horace Historic District.

Um that neighborhood is indeed special.

It is designated on the National Register of Historic Places as a um as a historic district.

The barbecue is important to bring those residents together to emphasize to them that their houses are special to Sandy, and we would like them to uh keep them that way.

We recently did a survey of the historic district's contributing structures to discover how many had been lost since the uh original application in 2006, and we were pleasantly surprised to find that not quite as many as we had expected were no longer listed as couldn't could no longer be listed as contributing.

However, in making that determination, we were very, very generous in allowing changes that could be reversed to count as still a contributing structure.

The value is to keep that district vibrant and um so forth, and perhaps the historic committee needs to do a stronger job of emphasizing that point to the residents.

But I really urge you to maintain the barbecue in the coming year and in the future, otherwise the claim that Sandy supports historic preservation will be lost to the city.

The district has been nibbled away around the edges.

The original Sandy District footprint is um different than the national district because one quarter of the district was no longer contributing when the national survey was done.

So again, I urge you to recognize the importance of the district and the barbecue that supports it, and the rationale is that it is a an historic district, and other neighborhoods in the city are not.

Thank you.

Up next is Jack Stouse.

Jack, I'm gonna allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself, and you'll have three minutes.

Jack, we heard you for about one second and then you cut out.

How about yes, but you're a little choppy?

Okay, I'll do my best.

I'll do my best.

Um hi again.

Yes, still Jack Stouse, the executive director of Save Our Canyons.

I appreciate you all letting me hop on here again.

Um I just wanted to say a couple more things.

Um, you know, I'm sorry I had to leave early, but I haven't listening uh remotely.

And I had a couple comments I really needed to respond to.

Um, first, and something that I'm really proud of as a new ED of Save Our Canyons.

Um, I've worked really hard with stakeholders from across the city valley and the mountains to listen to people and find commonalities that we have.

An example of this is working with UDOT, working with the ski areas, um the GMs up there, and I hope in time to work with you uh on Sandy Council as well.

Even if you all decide to leave the CWC, I really do hope that we can talk about some of these issues and find strategies.

I once again hope you will not.

I hope you'll continue to support the CWC and come meet us where that's put in that place that's already happening.

Um at least my to my next point.

Uh we've sent out a fair amount of communication around this, and I've directly reached out to all of you.

Um I I am happy, I'm going to email forward you the emails that we've written to our members, the 11,000 1100 of which are Sandy City residents that we represent.

Um we have not smeared any uh of you on the council.

I don't know you that well.

I'm excited to learn more about your beliefs and what you all want to do here as Sandy City counselors.

Um I want to I want to work together.

I uh I also uh just yeah, just want to reiterate that I'm coming from a place of trying to work in good faith with all of you.

And that's my um core driver, core belief as the director here.

And uh yeah, I hope that you will continue to support the CWC and that we can all work together.

Thank you.

Okay, next up is John Adams.

Jan John, I'm gonna allow you to begin speaking.

Please remember to unmute yourself and you'll have three minutes.

Hello, this John.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Hey there, thank you.

Um my name is John Adams.

I'm uh I'm a Cottonwood Heights uh resident.

Um I thought I was late for the meeting when I got there, but um I had to leave, so I'm apologize.

I was there for a while, but I'm glad I caught this online.

Um I didn't really know why uh I want to make comments about CWC.

I didn't really know why Sandy was considering leaving um through the comments tonight from both yourselves and people that have come up to speak.

I've heard things such as CWC hasn't gotten enough done over the years, or you know, Sandy's budget is tight.

Um heard things like it's political.

Um in other words, I'm I'm against her and she's for that, therefore I'm against that.

Uh yikes.

I'm not really sure.

I have no idea what your individual interval individual reasons are.

But I want to bring up a broader view of the CWC in hopes that you will vote to remain in the CWC based on something important you may not have considered, and frankly, it hasn't come up tonight as much.

Um but everyone in our community is feeling the pressures of growth aspects of how complex and interconnected everything have become.

Uh locally, we can look to the Great Salt Lake.

We can look at pressures of the data centers and right up the road pressures of our watershed and the canyons.