City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. We want to welcome everyone to uh city council for Centerville City tonight being held on April 21st. Um we uh look forward to some of the things we have on the agenda tonight and um uh we thank you for your participation. Those members of the public that are here in person that may be joining online. We thankful uh the staff that helped prepare this meeting for us and put documents together for us and we're thankful for uh council for being here. With that said, we have a few items we'll be voting on tonight. So, I need to make sure we have a quorum. So, I'm going to have council do a roll call. Council present.

Bangar present. Amen. Present. Hurst present. Plumber present. Thank you, council. We have five council members and they're they're all here. Uh for those that wonder how many council members we have at our city and and I'm the mayor. Uh and we have the other two people you see up here as staff helping us out. Our city attorney, our city recorder. Um so uh let's let's uh have a legislative prayer thought by Councilwoman Gina Hurst.

Thank you, Mayor. Um I want to take a moment before we start to welcome um many members of our youth council. Um, Matt and I had the opportunity a few weeks back to spend some time with you at a youth leadership conference held up at Utah State. And boy, were we impressed with the youth in our city and the great things that you guys have done. So, I wanted to just um talk about that a little bit tonight. I've been thinking about a quote from Theodore Roosevelt. A nation behaves well if it treats its resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased and not impaired in value. We often think of that in terms of physical resources. But the same principle applies to people, doesn't it? I've seen that in my own life. It influenced my father in his career choice and I've seen it in my husband's work. He hired and trained young engineers because he saw their long-term value and potential and he wanted them to stay at our company. So, he worked to strengthen what we were building with them. Communities work the same way. Communities are strongest when the people they invest in have the opportunity to stay connected and give back. When that connection is lost, so is part of the return on that investment. I'll admit it. As we've reviewed and discussed many things with the general plan, it gives me pause to hear the idea that young families may simply need to go elsewhere that disconnects us from the very people we've worked to develop. We should be thinking about a mix of opportunities that allow people at different stages of life to remain connected to this community. Because when that balance exists, the benefits build upon themselves. We retain the people we've invested in. We strengthen the continuity of our community. And over time, we build the capacity to support one another. Tonight, we see that in a very real way. Here we have many of our members of our youth council and several

seniors preparing to graduate. They've represented this community well, including at the youth council leadership conference at Utah State. They reflect what investment can produce. So, as we listen to two of these members present tonight, it's worth remembering the effort we put into our children is foundational. We should be just as intentional about creating space for them in the future. Our council has a chance to get this right, and that matters to the long-term strength of our community. And with that, I'd like to offer a word of prayer. Our dear kind father in heaven, we are so grateful for the opportunity to be together tonight and to honor our youth council seniors and their impending graduation from high school. We ask thee to bless them as they move forward with their wishes and desires and the things that they want to accomplish in this life that they may be blessed and watched over by thy goodness and thy love. Please bless us, Father, at this time as a council that we will have thy guidance and direction to make decisions that will bless this community. We also ask thee, Father, at this time for much needed moisture in our mountains. Please bless us that we will be able to have the moisture that we need to survive the summer and the upcoming months. With that, we say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Councilman Hurst. If you'd all rise with me and repeat the pledge of

allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, before we get to our presentation of the center youth council graduating seniors and coun you council presentation, we have our open session. Now we have a number of public hearing matters tonight. So uh there's a public hearing matter on a zoning text amendment regarding split zoning. There's a public hearing matter regarding deferral of public approvements. Uh adoption of the international wildlife urban interface, a fee schedule amendment. Uh those are our public hearing. So you don't have to stand up if you uh you're here to uh to comment on those because we will get to those. So this would be anything outside of that is open game on our open session. Just want to always remind you that you we do have a a notice requirement uh of letting the public know about things in advance. So we can't go into serious discussion on a matter, but we can take it under advisement and bring it up in another council meeting or have staff work on it as well too. So, if you're inclined to comment, just please uh state your name and where you're from so we have it for the record and try and keep your comments to uh around 2 to 3 minutes. So, that open session is now available, Mayor Wilkinson. Um

members of the city council and other officers, my name is Richard Barnes. uh my ancestors from Davis County back in the 1800s, way back uh as early as 1847 with Sarah Barnes. Very pleased to be here tonight. Um, uh, Mayor Wilkinson asked me to find out information regarding the our nation's 250th anniversary and the possibility of a display of flags. Um, I've researched that today. Uh, we have Colonial Flag, which manufactures a a wide variety of flags at the south end of the Salt Lake Valley. You've probably passed by it on the freeway just past 90th South. Um they have a historic display 26 flags. If you buy the flags only, um that would be $648 plus sales tax if any. if you want them on poles that you know would include rebar so that they could be uh put into the ground for a display a standing display about $40 per flag. $1990 plus tax. So a little over 2,000 for that. If you really want to go all out and have a destination display, they also have a flag for each of the 250 years since the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Um the early one mentioned also this one includes a large standing declaration of independence that people could have their picture taken with. Um, if you

went with the 10,000 and if we went with the $10,000 250 flag field, I would suggest perhaps uh getting community sponsors. Maybe $100 to sponsor a flag. Many of these are identical flags like, you know, 1960 was the last time we added a state with Hawaii. Uh, and so there's about 62 flags that could be distributed among the donors. um you know the 48 star if you you know whatever uh and the the rare ones the 49 star as well as the 45 star when Utah became a state which to Utons that's a to me a very neglected holiday January 4th is as important to our ancestors as was the emancipation proclamation to the negro slaves um so I hope we do a lot more celebration. Uh that's what I found. There's also as a so colonial flag.com has all this on it. Uh they also offer many of the colonial and revolutionary war flags. The coal pepper, the gadsson with the coiled rattlesnake, the navy jack which is the rattles the timber snake. It doesn't bite you unless it's provoked. It says so that is has now been flying from our Navy the US Navy ships since uh the attack on uh in in New York on the World Trade Center um that's been flying there. Uh also there's a company I like I call an it's an um if you want to design flags they'll design anything you want on a flag. a nice 3x5 for under $20 and goes down if

you buy more. And G128, uh, they have the historic Utah flag that has the white shield on it. Um, a very nice embroidered one for under $60. Um, but yeah, I would I presented one to your mayor, but in for for we the people or the the people of Centerville, I'd like to present this one in addition to it and this information. Great. Um, do you have any questions for me before you turn the time over to someone else? How are orders going? I mean, if we

repeat how many uh what's your backlog? I do not work for I do not work for Colonial. Oh, you do not work for Colonial? I I I am not an employee. I only know them from being a customer of theirs for many years and working on more than I'll say much more than one project. Very good. On it. Thank you.

Let's see. Oh, also don't forget it's also the 250th anniversary of Christianity being introduced into this area with the arrival of the Escalante Dominguez expedition that made it to Utah Lake in 1776. They never did find a way to California at that point, but that provided the basis for a lot of other expeditions. Father Escalante, he wrote he wrote he kept a journal. That's why he's more remembered than the rest. So that'll be in September. It would be nice if we could set up a day cuz you know the castles and lions that was what Columbus um had on the Santa Maria when he he discovered America and that was our flag. We were part of New Spain until about the time of the arrival of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1847 at which point the MexicanAmerican War was going on and we switched over to American you had the the look up um castles and lions. Then there was would be the Mexican flag and then in this part of the world it was various United States flags. Thank you for your time.

Thank you Richie. Miss Mr. Barnes, may I ask you a question? Where would these flags be displayed? Would they look like the one that's currently in your hand with the 250th in the circle?

No. Um, this this is a separate product that they offer for the 250th anniversary of the signing of Declaration of Independence. I bought one myself. I like it. I think it's pretty cool. You can get these for $3.50, whatever quantity you like. Um, but that's entirely up to you. The the ones in the field ones, the 26 one, that would be starting um I think they called it the Union Jack. It has the British flag of the time with the stripes because they used to have the British flag on a red field. Um so to show our separation after um Lexington Concord, then they did the stripes and then added the rattlesnake for the naval vessels. But this would include that one, the Betsy Ross. Um see all the Civil War ones. So all the as we kept adding stars, the star spangled banner, 15 stripes, 15 stars, all of those are included.

And if you go with the 250 flag package, that would be a real I I don't maybe in the park that would be up to you folks to decide. Um so that's I'm just And the size the size of those would be a standard 3x5 the same as you've got behind you.

Very good. Let me explain the reason that I was asking because I like the flag in your hand. I think it's great. But of course, we as a municipality are prohibited by state law from displaying non-sanctioned flags. And I believe that that would also include the flag that's in your hand. So, I just want to be careful as a city that that we're cognizant of flags. Of course, I'm displaying mine in my individual capacity, but um we are we are now restricted as municipality for flags. So, I just but I appreciate you um coming forward with that. Thank you. I I live in Salt Lake City. Salt Lake City actually added a seagull lily to flags similar to yours so that they could display them. Um so I am we're very much aware of that in my Rose Park neighborhood where we have over 110 languages spoken.

Thank you. Um thank you Richard. That if Yeah, you can bring that up to me.

Okay. Thank you. Um, yeah, that that that would be a question. I think maybe somebody could do something about that. I would hope. So, uh before I go on to uh uh thank you other others in the open session, um just uh I we were at Centerpoint last night, my wife and I, and we saw Finding Neverland, and uh it was a great play. One of the best I've ever been to there. So unique and different and new. And my wife is a theater junkie and uh whenever she really enjoys a play, we stay after and greet uh all the people we can. And one of the people we were greeting at the time when Richard was uh Barnes was there and also Mr. Theater uh a gentleman that I won't go into the history of why he's called Mr. Theater. Uh we were also standing there with Justin Lee whose son's here with us cuz Justin was in that play. Uh Justin's involved the League of City in town. So, as we're chatting to to Justin and Mr. Theater starts telling me a story about Wilt Chamberlain, while my wife's talking with Richard Barnes and uh my wife, anyway, you know her, she's very enthusiastic and she says, "Hey, it's Richard here has information about flags." Well, I had gone to uh Haley and Bryce about potentially our flags that lined Main Street, maybe mixing in with with those flags. Uh flags of the history of our country. There's been quite a few if you look at the history of it. Maybe every third, fourth flag or something like that. Uh you know, in celebration of the 250th celebration. So, uh that's when Richard says uh oh, I know all about flags. And uh he g we he

gave us a flag last night and then my wife in her enthusiasm says uh uh come to council meeting. We have an open session. You can tell us about it. So no, he's not an employee of Colonial Flag. He's just a he's a patriot like he says his ancestors are they're barns from Barnes Bank in this neighborhood uh this neck of the woods. And also Henry Parish and and Yes. Yeah. He told me Henry Parish as well too. and uh and so he came tonight. So, thank you, Richard. We appreciate it for the invitation. You bet you. All right. Anybody else for the open session? Come on up.

Hi, city council. Let me pull up my notes. I'm Heather Taylor. Um if you remember, sometimes I wear a green shirt when I'm coming representing the tree board, but today it's striped because I'm balancing my uh treeboard chairship and just being here as a resident. really am speaking on behalf of myself as a resident of Centerville. Um we but I'm going to mention a couple of things from the tree board. We have some really cool initiatives going on with the tree board and we are thrilled about the tree planting that Bruce Cox helped uh happen two weeks ago. Um a lot of us were there and we have a bunch of initiatives that we're putting into place for the 250 year anniversary. in my work as the tree chair, we um I just want to let you know that I've been reading the general plan and that's actually what I want to talk about right now. I've been reading the general plan a lot. In fact, I wouldn't use the word reading, I would say studying, looking at it with a fine tooth comb. I've literally read every word at least a dozen times. I've read multiple iterations of it. I've been studying it pretty in depth for at least six months now. And um I'm also a copy editor by trade. And so I just wanted to let you know that um in my uh sometimes I read the notes from um planning commission and from city council and I didn't really understand um how many concerns there are with uh that I'm seeing again and again and again from the same handful of people about the general plan. And I just wanted to let you know that I've been working on a document for months now trying to make it comprehensive and yet succinct so I can give it to you that um I disagree with a lot of the complaints that I'm seeing being brought before you. And I just wanted you to know that there are people like me who think in general the plan's pretty great. Um I when I first I didn't think that when I first read it.

When I first read it it felt like copy. It felt like boilerplate. It felt like they took this from any other city and then put our statistics on it and handed it over. I take that back. I the more that I've read it, the more that I feel like no, no, no. They've looked at it like a statistician and they're trying to hand us the authority to set our own agendas, but they're giving us the information that we need to do that. And uh so I think they did a really really good job. and the the I um I have a statistician's mind and I've been very impressed with the ground that they covered where I'd think you know what we're really missing here is I need to see and then at the next page there it is. So I think all right they've covered it. There's there's very few suggestions I have for more research that needs to be done. But um I just wanted to say that I think there are some some places where we need additional insight from experts like the tree board has some opinions about what we're seeing on park strips and trees and park strips or how wide that park strip needs to be. I would like to hear from some experts about the medium density housing. But I just wanted you to know that the silence should not indicate the lack of interest or the um unawareness with the the current board. I'm sorry, the current general plan as it lies. That's it. Thank you.

Thanks, Heather. We appreciate that. And just for people's knowledge, in uh March, we uh it's it's now come to us at general plan from the planning session after four or five nights with the planning session. Uh in March, we had we kicked it off uh our part of it with a uh public public uh hearing uh on the general plan. Uh took in comments at that time. So we we can add those to our comments, Heather, as well too. And we've been trying to get through budget for the last month. And we have our last budget thing. Well, not our last, but our initial present it to the public two weeks from that the budget, but then we plan on very shortly thereafter trying to knock out the general plan. We wanted to do that public hearing first and get comments from people so uh we could incorporate that into as we discuss and vote on the general plan. So thank you. Anybody else for the open session?

Uh Kyle Greenable resident. I would just in um comment to the general plan as well. I would hope that at the time that you finish as a council going through it and making your edits that there would be an additional public hearing to see the final product because it's awfully hard to make comment on an unfinished product or an unfinished scope of work that is being changed and altered quite significantly on every given week. So, I'd hope that at the conclusion of what the council thinks is what the public would have that we would have additional public hearings on that finalized plan that we could be able to comment on what is actually being put in to code or direction for future city councils. Thank you.

Thanks, Kyle. Um, and I see us doing that. Obviously, we'd had a public hearing to kick it off. We'll have discussion uh before we take a vote on it. So, we'll have a final public hearing, too. So, anybody else uh on the open session? All right, let's get on to uh their presentations. Uh as it was so elegantly stated by Councilwoman Hurst that we have some wonderful a wonderful youth council and we're here tonight to uh honor the graduating seniors from that youth council and also hear a presentation from a couple of our youth council members. So Haley, uh, you want to come up, uh, and kick us off on, uh, the Centerville City Youth Council graduating seniors awards?

Absolutely.

Um, I'm not going to take much time from the youth. I want them to to talk on their experience, but I would like you to know that we have an amazing youth council. There is not a month that goes by in the year where they aren't involved in a project in the community. um and you can see them and as they evolve, not only as individuals throughout the year, but as a group. Um and it has been wonderful working with them. Um this is always a bittersweet time of year for me to see them graduate and move on. I know that they're going to bigger and better places and all of them are in fact doing that. Um but it is hard to see them go as I've gotten to know them over the years. Um, so I would like to invite up Kate and Liv to the stand to talk about their experience at our uh, youth council leadership conference that takes place annually at Utah State University. Um, and they would like to just talk on their experience really quickly and then we will bring up Kade and Audrey to follow. Hello, I'm Kate. And I'm Liv. Um and we just wanted to talk quickly about um our experience at the conference. Um and the theme was um united we stand. And one of the biggest takeaways for us was just knowing that as a leader um you have to know the people you are working with and you know their strengths and their weaknesses. And because you know them so well and because you can um collectively work as a team, it's so important that you place them and you use their strengths um to compliment each other. And we just really like that because it's so important that as a team we recognize each other and our abilities and that we work as a team to make something great.

And we just love how applicable that is to all of our future lives. Whether no matter what we're going into for for our careers, it's applicable. Um and so we're just so grateful for the opportunity that we were able to go out there and learn all these amazing things. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You too. I'm Audrey. And I'm Kade.

And I briefly wanted to talk about how this conference impacted me. I uh with graduating this next year, I've been thinking about my future a lot. And this conference was extra special. I went in thinking, "Oh, it's just going to be same old same old. This is this is the same as every single year, and it's kind of getting boring, and everything's the same." But um as I continued through it, I was able to look at it with new eyes and look at some of the things I can learn and use for my future. And one of those biggest things was the ability to network and easily make relationships with strangers that like people I've never met before that have different beliefs and different values than I do and being able to make connections that could last and help me in my future.

Perfect. And uh I think as a council we'd just like to thank you all for your support of the council but also sending us up there. And you'll hear a lot more about the conference specifically from our presenters, but how grateful we are that while we do get to serve the community, we have the backing of our city officials and council members and how beneficial it is for us as we're approaching adulthood and training to enter uh professional careers and enter our city as citizens and be able to continue. um just loving our community and being able to serve it and ultimately thank you and thank you for providing that experience for us in our most formative years. Thank you. Thank you.

Um really quick, I want Audrey and Kate to come back. Um they have been extremely active. Um he is our youth mayor, Kate is, and Audrey is our mayor prom. And this is for you guys. little senior gift. And here is yours, Audrey. Thank you.

So, thank you guys for all the work. I want you to know that they have not just been um working on only what happens this year. They're very like futuristic thinking and they are trying to leave the council a much better place than they found it. So, you this is not the last of these two that you'll see this year. So, we're very lucky to have them. And with that, I would like to invite up all of the graduating seniors to the front, please. And then keep this one out of the boxes. No, you can just hand it to see it. So, these are our graduating seniors this year, and we would love to get a picture with them. Good to see you.

Um, council, would you mind coming down to get a picture with them? crappy. Oh my gosh. Yeah, just a few of you on each sides would be great.

All right, I'm going to help with this photo. All right, everybody that is shorter than my shoulder, slide to the front. Everybody that's taller than my shoulders, slide to the back. Everybody, squish in. Slide, slide, slide, slide, slide, slide a little more. Little more. Little more. There we go. There we go. Looking better. Find a window. Put your head between the head in front of you. Perfect.

All the things. All right. Any family members want? Let's do it real quick. All right. On three. Okay. Ready? Robin, can you slide in just a little bit? We'll be okay. We're still That's good enough. cuz I All right. One, two, three. City council. Here we go. One, two. Perfect. Looking great. Everybody's happy. Perfect. He's at a better spot than me, right? One more.

I'll send it to all the moms. ABC.

And we will turn it over to Ian and Evelyn. Who's going first? I

Hello. I'm so happy to be here. Um I had the opportunity to be a representative for the US council today and as a team of other students we put on this whole um council retreat and it took a long time and a lot of planning but I'm very grateful because I met so many people and seven other now and we kind of all became friends during this conference and One of those people was Misa Stol and she was my partner for our breakout room and we were assigned the category of leadership and one of the main things that thought about when getting assigned this breakout room is how do you teach leadership and so we decided to kind of focus on motivation behind leadership rather than how to become a leader in general. We felt like that was something very pushed on and pressured by a lot of people is you have to do a lot of things to be a leader and you have to get involved a lot to be a leader. And we wanted to focus on kind of one word and that was passion. And we wanted to really focus on giving students a way to think about it perspective. And instead of follow the idea of being a leader, follow your passion and that will automatically get you to where you want to go. felt like it was something very special. And so we chose um a topic that me and Maisie felt very connected by when we first met. And that's how we became friends and that was through a mobile iPhone game called Clash Royale, which is actually very popular like among I think like high schoolers and middle schoolers. So we kind of took that and ran with it. And we also like talked about board games and stuff like that for older generations as well. And so we did a whole thing. So I thought I would just bring like examples of what

we kind of talked about since it's really hard to do the activity in a five minute span. So, we made these cards based on all of this is based on the game and so there's a bunch of different like cards that represent all the different characters in the game and then we made scenarios too on the bigger ones. And we had them break up in scenes with people they did not know at all. So, we split them up by colors and like made them sit at different tables and get to know them and then they had to build a team based on their each character strengths and weaknesses to battle their scenario. Which is why I'm really glad that that's what Kate talked about because that's kind of what our whole breakout room is about is how do you use these different people with different skills and different abilities to create a team because even though leaders um a timely give to like one person, we thought it really takes a whole team of to make the leadership happen. And so that was kind of what our breakout room was about. And the activity, we really wanted to do something hands-on because we know that people have short attention spans. And we thought it ended up being really good. And I think a lot of people liked it because it was obviously very current to what a lot of teenagers like. So that was our break. Yeah. Then this was basically it. We only had a few more. We did like the reflection, asking them about their team and everything like that. and also how we believe that like their passion can lead into their leadership later in life. And we asked them kind of what their passions are about and it was really interesting to meet so many people and learn what each person was passionate about and how they make a whole career and future out of that and so it was really fun.

Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Um yeah, hi I'm Lee. I'm also with the state council along with me more and yeah I had the opportunity along with Eevee to um help run and present at this conference that was really experience for us and I hope the people I confer um me and my partner Ethan who's not here today presented on the discourse um and yeah we're going to run through like a short exercise that we did in the regent. So we're going to ask everyone in the audience everyone in the city council to Please take a minute of your time. You get to list some personal opinions you have. Now, you're all in the city board and you all you do every day. So, you all pull out your phone for like the writing device. I will just take like a minute to you get to write down what you believe and why you keep time to yourself. You have to write down your statements. All

right. Thank you all for taking this time to get to list some of the things that you believe. Now that you all have chose to do it. Have a list of um

Yeah. Oh, that sucks. Um now, now you can move while you present. I know that that is nice,

baby. Now that um you be have a list of some of the things that you believe um I ask you to try to take take one more minute to just find some reasonable evidence for some of the other side. Try to find a counterargument or just some reason why someone else might think differently than you. Um yeah and again just a little bit more quiet time. Thank you for suffering with me. Okay. Um, yeah, thank you guys for going through this minor exercise. is like, well, this obviously is not going to change anything massive or like affect everything. By going through process like this, by thinking about what we think and the opinions we have and why other sides are reasonable, that's how we begin to have better discourse, which is what I'm going to discuss a little bit with a little bit of a closing thought. Um, I don't know how many of you guys know the story of the five blind guys and the elephant, but in the story, there's five blind men. They go up to this elephant and they begin grabbing different parts trying to guess what this object is. So one guy, he grabs the leg and he's like, "Oh, this is rough and scaly standing upright. This is obviously a tree." And one guy, he grabs the snout of the elephant and he's like, "Oh, this is long and bendy. Obviously, this is a rope, etc., etc."

But the thing is about the story, everyone is making logical conclusions based on the evidence they have. No one's no one's wrong here. They just don't have the full picture. But if instead of shouting out what they believed immediately, they had taken time to discuss the evidence to try to come together, they would have had a fuller picture of what was going on. So like in the story, there's always going to be valid different viewpoints in life. And because there's different viewpoints, there needs to be a need to resolve these viewpoints to come together over these problems. And the two methods to do this are either through debate or through discourse. Now, while debate's really fun, um it's actually a really bad example of how to like actually resolve viewpoints. If I go into a conversation and I say, "I am 100% right. I know all the facts. The other side is wrong and evil and dumb and I need to go prove it to them." And the other side also thinks that and when we go into this discussion, we will not have any productive results that no problems will be solved, no ideas are going to be shared and nothing's going to be done effectively because of it. Like we can see this in politics right now. Like no matter what parties or policies you believe in, because both sides are so entrenched in what they believe are so unwilling to consider other sides to even listen to what people are saying, it's just breeding hate and stagnation and polarization, right? Like if and in relationships, if I like say to my girlfriend or significant other, "Hey, time to debate you. Uh time to explain why you're dumb and wrong with these three reasons. I won't have a girlfriend for very long." So, but fortunately there's better ways to talk about different viewpoints through discourse. By treating other viewpoints as valid and actually engaging with the discussion by trying to understand other viewpoints and respectfully share what you believe, better discourse and results can be had. Problems can actually be solved instead of just thoughts being shouted out. So, I thank you guys for doing the exercise at the start, but now you actually have

to go out and do the work. I urge you to go out, continue to learn about different viewpoints and all the different sides, not just the one you think immediately is right to discuss what you find important and then stand stronger in the end because you are united through discourse. Thank you.

So Ian and Evelyn, did you present that anywhere besides youth council? No, besides the state council like at the conference that anywhere else. Okay, we each gave it like 12 times, so we have it buried down. Thank you. We've been looking We've been looking forward to hearing the having the honor honoring the seniors and hearing that tonight as well, too. So, leave that. Awesome. Thank you for um this chance.

Thanks. Thank you council for making the time to hear from our seniors tonight and for uh listening to their presentations. They work super hard on those. Um everything is youthled and youth driven at the leadership conference. Um so it's very cool. We just are there to unlock the building really and like they take it from there. So we're very uh honored that you guys would take the time tonight to hear from them and also for supporting them and the council throughout the year. Appreciate you guys. One more time for the graduating seniors.

Absolutely. And I s I also uh I know some of the councils thanked uh our council uh the youth council members, our council for supporting them, but uh I think you should look around the room and uh look at look at parents that are here and that aren't here and let's give a hand to them for supporting you. They also need to remember Haley and Bryce. Yes. Yes.

All right. Thank you everybody. Let's move on to the business items uh of our meeting. No one ever wants to stay for zoning. I know. Maybe we should do the presentation. Any one of those remains the question.

All right, we have our first item business item. This is a public hearing matter. This is a zoning text amendment uh regarding split zoning and council. you had some background of what brought this forth in your packet, but we'll have Lisa and between Lisa and Sydney, we'll have you guys uh maybe uh fill us in with some background as well, too. So, which one of you is going? Lisa, I can go. Okay. Thank you.

Thanks, Mayor and Council. This is a essentially a staff initiated uh text change. Um, as explained in the staff report, um, historically, Centerville has prohibited split zoning, which is essentially defined as one lot or parcel having two zoning designations. So, you might have a parcel that's half agricultural low and half residential low. Obviously, that creates problems because you don't know which regulation should apply and they're very different. So we have from a practice standpoint always prohibited this. If someone comes in for an application, we require them to to fix that by either moving the lot line to where it should be. Sometimes this happens with boundary line adjustments and other things or um requiring them to just reszone it if if they now own that property. So, um, a recent scenario came through where a property owner wanted to do a boundary line adjustment and, uh, the front piece was residential low and the back piece was agricultural low and they wanted to move the line which would create the resulting lot would be split zoning and we said you can't do that. Um, and it is not clearly stated in our code. I think most cities pro prohibit this because again we don't know how to regulate it but in order to be clear. So I we've said in the staff report we're just clarifying that split zoning is prohibited and kind of giving more guidance about how to handle that. So if they come in for an application or something that's when we typically um require them to fix it by moving that lot line um or reszoning. So, those are essentially the two ways to fix this. Um, we're not requiring them to fix it right now. Um, it's just like any other illegality or nonconformity that exists

right now. But if and when they come in for a change, then they would be required to fix it. And this gives staff the the code citation to point to to say, "Well, you need to fix this." And then you can move your lot line or do other applications. Um, so but understanding the city council does have the authority to reszone on its own. You don't need a reszone application. So if you want to, and we presented this to the planning commission, but there's only five that we can see on the zoning map that are actually split zoning where you have one lot with two zones. Five in the whole city. So that's good. two of them are already being resolved through a boundary line adjustment or a minor subdivision. So, those are just waiting for the subdivision to be recorded um or the zoning, you know, the lot line to be moved. So, really, we only have three, but we're not trying to require them unless the council wanted to, but that's not necessarily um our recommendation at this point, but you can. There are a lot of scenarios that where there are two sometimes people have two parcels like they gain a parcel later and and those are the ones that you know may have the split zoning or if you have two parcels and then you combine them into one tax ID number often times they're two different zonings and that's occurred a number of times but um anyway we're just recommending um a specific code section that we can site to say split zoning in Centerville is prohibited. Um, this is the way to fix it. Uh, and then in doing some research on this, there um was a property rights on Budman opinion and some Utah case law that says the zoning administrator actually does not have the authority to fix the split zoning

because it's a legislative decision reserved by state law to the council. So, we just have a provision in here um saying this isn't something that the zoning administrator can fix. If it's a true split zoning, the zoning administrator can approve the the lot line adjustment to fix it. But um but preserving because our code does allow the zoning administrator to if if it's unclear where that zoning boundary is then uh the zone zoning administrator has the authority to determine um that uh make that clarifying uh decision. But so I think it's a good code text amendment to have in our code. Um the planning commission recommends approval. Um, we did have a public hearing at the planning commission and um, we also need to have a public hearing here as well, but staff recommends that we make sure that we have this provision in our code.

Thank you, Lisa. Uh, questions for Lisa. I have a question. And so if I own a a a piece of property and part of it is like comm commercial high and some of it's commercial very high and I come in and want to do something with that who decides whether it's commercial high or commercial I mean if I want to make the whole thing I don't know how to say this. Yes. So, um, if if there's this split zoning, commercial high, commercial, very high, they could come in to the city and say, "I would like to seek a zoning map amendment so that all of my property is commercial very high."

What if that isn't what we wanted or what isn't was the best,

right? Then staff would review that and and the council and say, "What does our general plan say about this area? What makes sense? What's what are the adjacent properties? um is this an island? You know, those sorts of things. So, on a lot of these, I I think they've been created by boundary line adjustments that occurred and the zoning was not addressed at the time. So, these are sort of old problems. So, yes, we would have to look at that and the council preserves the authority to determine what the appropriate zoning should be on these, but the applicant, I mean, the property owner could come forward with an application suggesting what zone they want. Um or the council could initiate that.

But so say they want commercial very high and I only want commercial high or think that's what's best. Then could they lose their commercial very high because of this? They could lose their commercial very high right now. I mean, I honestly I don't think this is changing the status quo, but um yes, if they if they came in, they would have to correct it under this, but from a practical historical standpoint, we've always made them correct it. Lisa, on on some of these, so I'm looking at the it looks like an Excel spreadsheet. So, um where you're showing the five parcels. Um, so first question is on one of the parcels there's not a recommended zone on these actual split zoning on one lot and then down below in the green section there's three or four. Is there I guess my question is what are we thinking those are becoming especially in the case of the one that is residential high and commercial high um split zone. And then also, is there a possibility that any of these owners would want this to stay agricultural low instead of residential low? And maybe that's not a decision that they get to be involved in because of what you just said to Robin, but I guess I'm just curious what we're doing with those.

Yes. And I realize this chart probably analyzed too much. Um, okay. This was sort of staff notes and thinking, uh,

anyway, I generated this chart. We I worked with the GIS um our GIS specialist and we agreed because I had a list and we both we agreed in reviewing the map on the five that have split zoning. Um but I knew there were other situations because I know there's these situations over by the school. I know there's situations up on the hillside. And so that's when I went further to try and figure out, well, wait a minute, why do we have some of these, you know, their one tax ID number with two. So when the Davis County School District quit claimed property to adjacent property owners, about 10 of them, um, we they they just quit claimed it. The city probably didn't even know. And so all of those properties are one parcel ID, but they have public facility zoning in the back, which is problematic. That might be an area where I say the city should just go in and fix it. When the Flowers came in with the Summer Hill Lane subdivision and they were going to take some of the Summer Hill Lane, we made them reszone as part of that. So it would be nice to fix some some of these particularly with public facility because obviously one parcel number for residential property is not we do not want it to be public facility.

So how are they taxed? Like if they have public facility this little strip are they paying different property tax because one's residential low and you've got a little strip that's that's interesting. I I don't know how the county assesses that.

Most likely a well I I I'm not speculate, but I did want to sorry get back to your commercial very high and you know whether it would make essentially if they have a use that was legal at one time. So on their commercial very high and they put a car wash that was only permitted in commercial very high. if that was legally existing at some point and we reszone it, they would still have the right to have the car wash. So hopefully that helps on that. But if they wanted to change that to another, and probably a car wash isn't good example, but um if they wanted to change that to another very high use, they may now be limited. Is that correct?

But if we don't want very high in that area, it would be limited anyway. Okay. with what they I get what you're saying. I I do have one other question. When we talk about this area over by um Reading Elementary Yes. and the public facilities, it seems like we had a resident come in and and do a lot of work to get his property to changed, reszoned, correct? Yes. Because someone wanted Yeah. They were coming in for a permit. When we talk about fixing this, I mean, he paid a fee for that. Are we now fixing this for other people and they're not paying the fee? I'm trying to I

well it's up to the city but again this is this was just hey since I was doing the research I thought look this is really what it should be like some of them are very clearly like public facility and residential low they need to be all residential low they're one partial ID but this is not recommended for tonight we're just saying we want to amend our code but okay

like on some of these in a future discussion maybe we do want to say hey the city should initiate this reszone on these public facilities or the city should initiate the reszone on the anyway there was there was a piece where we did a boundary line adjustment with our own property and I thought for sure we said you need to reszone this but they were still on the list so those those ones that you know are clearly public facility I think they should be reszoned at the city's expense are these property owners being notified that this is happening like

no because I don't it's not changing and I like I said this probably should not have been put in the packet but that was that was my fault. This is just trying to give you an idea of what's out there. What what we're adopting really only impacts three properties because the top two are being corrected and then there's three left and okay the rest of that other situations. They're not technically split zone, but but these yellow and green highlighted areas sound like something needs to be done to clean them up eventually, but we can wait. We're not worrying about that tonight. We're dealing with the five and you're saying the first two are already

need to be fixed. Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to make a bigger deal that was No, you you give me the data. I'm gonna I know. I know. Well, then I started digging into it and then I couldn't stop. So, this is this is where we're at. Yeah, that was my only concern was did we need to notify these people? I don't want another group of people coming in and feeling like I don't think my question. We won't we won't name names, but we don't we don't want anybody else to come in and feel like we weren't open. Yeah, this doesn't change what the way we've been doing it in the past. It just clearly states that if somebody wants a code citation.

Okay. So, so if the city initiates that though, like you're suggesting, we would still put signage up and publicize. If we if we initiate a zone change, we actually do have to provide the property owner with notice. We have to tell them this is what it was zoned, this is what it's going to be zoned, and here's the the differences. So, there is very detailed noticing that would have to occur if we decided to initiate a city initiated zone change.

Okay. Thanks. Okay, let's go to uh the public hearing portion of this. This is a public hearing of regarding the zoning text amendment on split zoning prohibited. This is ordinance 2026-12. So, any member of the public that is here or is online, you now have an opportunity to to uh express your feelings on this. uh we would just ask that you state your name and where you're from if you're so inclined. So that public hearing is now open. Richard Barnes once again. Um uh hadn't thought I'd comment. Didn't know what else was on the agenda tonight. Uh just a point of information question. um is is in case of a downgrade. So like if it said very high commercial down to say low commercial or agricultural, is there a provision to compensate the property owner for the loss of value in their property? That would be my question. Thank you.

Okay. Uh we'll keep those uh we'll answer that question if there's uh after any other public comment. Any other public comment on this before I close the public hearing? Seeing nobody else, nobody online, I'll close that public hearing. Uh Lisa, do you have an answer to that question?

Sure. So again, just to clarify, we're making a zoning code text amendment tonight. We're not actually reszoning any property. If the council wanted to reszone someone's property, we would have to notice that and have a public hearing and go through a different application process, but um the city is authorized to determine appropriate zoning and that is not considered a taking um under Utah law. That's compensible.

Thank you. Further questions for uh staff at all? But you do get to continue whatever legal use you have of your property as a non-conforming right. So we can change the rules, but if you were legally existing as a car wash or um agricultural use, you would get to continue that until a separate triggering event. So could I sell it? Could I sell my car wash to somebody else? Yes. non-conforming use rights generally well run with the land or the building or you know Yes.

Okay. Uh not seeing further uh any other questions. So do we have a a motion on this?

I'll make a motion to recommend the city council approval of the zoning code text amendment to CZC 12.30.0. 040 zoning map amendments and enacting CZC12.30.045 of the same prohibiting split zoning on any parcel or lot and setting forth guidelines on how to resolve existing lots or parcels with split zoning based on the following reasons for action findings. Shall I read the recommended? You can just say findings. findings as uh stated in the staff report.

Findings one through four. One through four. Thank you. Second. We have a motion. We have to include approving the ordinance. Yeah. Just throw in there or uh ordinance 26. Approve the ordinance as well. 2026-12. Okay. Second. I'm seconding that. Yeah. All right. Further discussion. Shall we vote? Counciloman Mikum. I I I I

I uh mo motion passed unanimously. Thank you. Let's go to public hearing uh uh deferral public approvements. Uh this is this is brought by member of the community. However, we're going to have staff report and then we'll have the member of the community the applicant report and uh then we go to this is a public hearing matter. So, looks like Sydney's coming up uh to give staff report on this.

Um, thank you council members for letting me present tonight. So, um, I was going to go into a little bit more detail in this staff report, but just in lie of time, I'm going to do, um, a summary of my staff report. So, the applicant, Mr. Kyle Green has applied for the zoning code text amendment proposal for CMC 10.04.170 the deferral of public improvements specifically subsection F. Um this is to allow for the city council to review the applications for deferral agreements if certain criteria is met. So, um, just to clarify, this was something that was, um, that the planning commission had questions on. It's not an outright being permitted that somebody can have deferral agreements if in a certain area or meeting certain criteria. It is saying that it is presented to the city council for them to make an agreement if they are in a certain area or meet certain criteria. Um, so this application was presented to the planning commission April 8th, 2026 where the motion was to recommend approval of the city staff redline version of CMC 10.04170. This vote was not unanimous. Um, and this motion was not what staff recommended and what staff still does not recommend. Um I can you please bring up um exhibit F please? So these were the staff comments and the staff feedback prior to the planning commission meeting and I was going to read off a few of those but I'm trusting that you guys read them. Um some of the

biggest takeaways without reading them verbatim was staff is aware um of the concerns that were proposed to us. um staff recognizes that there are geographic constraints that the community in the history of the area um of certain areas in Centerville and that there are money constraints for residents of the city who put in um sidewalks at the time of subdivision. staff also recognizes that the residents are not asking to be outright permitted um but get the chance um to defer these public improvements. However, staff also recognizes that the cost to put in sidewalks have only gone up and most likely will still continue to rise. So, what happens when the they call for the deferral and the price goes up five times? Will the city still say, "Yeah, you need to put in sidewalks. Is that fair to the resident?" Um, staff recognizes why sidewalks were created in the first place. It's a safe area um away from cars. What happens when a car is coming off of a busy road and a family is walking in the street? Is the car going to see that? Is a kid going to accidentally trip and fall and be too close to the car? You know, I'm I think that with the comments and the discussion that staff has proposed and then what um the applicant has proposed.

We want to find a middle ground because we do want to be um aware of what um the residents have to deal with. staff is also torn between what is um what should and should not be um the recommendation. So I think that allowing for staff to come to the podium and present what their thoughts are would be beneficial if you do have any questions apart from what they stated in the exhibit. Um Lisa has provided um red lines for recommendations if the council does choose to approve this um this application. So I hope that I articulated what the context was and about the kind of process moving forward. I hope that you guys were able to see some of the planning commission discussions and see that meeting. Um the applicant has worked really well with the city and this was not just solely the planning department. This was the GIS department. This was the police department. This was the public works department. This was Lisa like the attorney. Like everyone has really put thought and effort into this and still the recommendation is to deny the applicant's request for public deferral. So, um, that is my report. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. And I might ask other staff to come up to answer questions.

We have a question for staff on this, either Sydney or any of the other staff. Before I turn it over over to the applicant, I I guess I have a question. If if somebody is required to put a piece of parking lot in and reading or uh sidewalk in and it's other neighbors have not complied with that previously. Uh in order for them to complete other neighbors to complete that in the future, we would probably require a special improvement district and an approval for funding to do that. Correct.

That is a good question. I'm not too sure what's the fact scenario. One person comes in, like we haven't done a special improvement district in quite some time, but yes, that's one way to get improvements in that have not historically been there. So, if we're going to require somebody who's doing an improvement on their lot that requires

bring it up to snuff with parking with sidewalk, uh, but it serves no purpose if neighbors are are not doing that at the time. Uh, in order to get those neighbors to do that, it would require, if they wouldn't agree, would require a a special improvement district, right? To then make that a usable sidewalk for the street.

Well, the way we're doing it now, and this historically, essentially development pays for the improvements and then the city takes over those public improvements and maintains them in perpetuity. So when someone comes in to develop their property or remodel, well not remodel, but they they want to develop their property, that's when they have to put the public improvements in. And so we have had this mishmash. And if you see in the the packet, there is an area and it shows the sidewalks that are there and that are not there. And you'll see over time, people are finally developing their property or they own, you know, a large lot and they want to subdivide it and they have a home here and then they want to subdivide it. then then the sidewalk goes in. And so over time, yeah, over the last 20 years, we have received and required sidewalks in this area. Um, so that's really how it's done. I mean, the city hasn't initiated a special improvement district for quite some time. We just wait until they completely demolish a home or or other triggering event that would require the improvements. But that's why the deferral language talks about yeah if if there's no sidewalk within 250 feet on the same side of the street either way or at least the whole block then you can enter into a deferral agreement with the city. So we have also talked about the historic district maybe above the historic district where this is maybe making an overlay where we don't require sidewalks there anymore because most of the citizens have came in and said we don't want sidewalks. I walk those streets every day and even where there are sidewalks people are not walking on the sidewalks. I mean there it's not a hightraic area and it's a slow traffic area and people are walking in the roads um in this area. I don't know if you've been out and driven it but I mean

there's one yard that has a huge retaining wall right where the sidewalk would have to go. I can't I don't can't imagine what it would cost to take that down, move it all the way back and and and be able to do that. And the city actually, I think, paid for some of the retaining walls and stuff to be put up there that I think the city at some point really decided we're probably not going to put sidewalks in this area. And then as Centerville was growing, they've came out and said, "Hey, if you, you know, develop your lot, this is a good way for us to get our sidewalks." But unless you know, you're you're putting little pieces of sidewalks that go nowhere. And most of those, there's very little in this old area that has not been developed. So, you're not going to get many more sidewalks that way unless you're going to start knocking down the older homes. So, I don't have I I personally have been up. I've looked at it, talked to neighbors. I don't have a problem. I do like the city's red line version. I think it gives us a lot of protection, and I appreciate Lisa for all the work she's done on it.

Yeah. Agreed. Well, and as discussed, yeah, it was a lot of discussion with the development review committee team and sort of a balance and um as Sydney has mentioned, I think overall staff is still sort of mixed. Some think we should have sidewalks and this is the best time to get the sidewalks um because it is difficult calling on them many years in the future when the property owner may be someone different than originally entered into the agreement. But I think if you're going to if you're inclined to move in this direction, staff would recommend the more detailed version than the applicants version.

Okay. Qu further questions. Staff, you'll have the chance to do more if you want. So this is applicant driven. The applicant is Kyle Green. Before we go to public hearing, does the applicant want to present?

Sure. So, um, I made this comment in, uh, maybe you guys has watched the planning commission meeting, but I'm basically the resident of the neighborhood that drew the short straw on this. Um, there are a lot of people that were very upset about the um, about the idea of these sidewalks just being put in, in our opinion, sidewalks to nowhere because of the way that the situation is. So, I'm here on behalf of many of my neighbors. um to in lie of pitchforks and torches, we decided to come the route of trying to do it through a text amendment. Um there is in the staff report a a substantial amount of history that I included from the 1993 special improvement district that was that was um used in that area in the 90s. During that time there was much discussion and at the initial onset of that special improvement district it included sidewalks, curb and gutter and asphalt roads. Um some of those roads had asphalt with no curb and gutter. Some of them had rounded gutters, some had back stop curb.

Some had dirt road. So I lived there in the 90s. I remember it well. There was the empty lot that is in question right now was actually the staging lot for the city to do those improvements. A lot of the neighbors got up in arms and basically said we don't want the sidewalks and many even said we don't want the back stop curb. We would like to keep our rounded curb. So if you'll notice driving through the neighborhood a lot of the curbs are still the rounded curb which my house is one of those. And I thank my lucky stars every day that uh Karma Rossi put up a fight and said, "I want rounded gutters." The kids in our neighborhood use that as the back stop to slow down before they get to Northeast. My yard is the runaway truck ramp for wagons and Tonka trucks and anything in between that has wheels that they can ride. Um I digress from the the point here. The um the provision in question was a simple um basically an 8 to 10 word amendment which was in section F where it stated that the city council has the jurisdiction to uh grant deferral agreements when applicable. But in this case, the number four section said if it's a subdivision, a new subdivision, then it does not qualify for deferral despite the fact that every other criteria was met. So, the text amendment that I initially requested was a simple one of for minor subdivisions of two lots or less to be eligible for deferral pending the city council reviewing it and seeing whether or not it makes sense. It is not, like I said, a rubber stamp to say, "Yes, this is automatic. Everybody gets one." This is just the opportunity to present their case to the city council and say, "Hey, here's why we think we

shouldn't have to do this." Now, um the staff has been we've gone back and forth on this in many meetings. We've had many discussions, phone calls, um and and sat down and worked through this. I feel like staff has done a good job of going through and trying to mitigate the city risk while still allowing citizens to speak with their legal representatives to discuss whether or not this is a good idea and provide some common sense and in some of the code. Um, and this the the lot that um triggered this is not the is not unique to the neighborhood. There are other lots that have similar issues. Um, it is not just a onetrick pony amendment, but this is one that triggered it is the fact that the two sidewalks that would be required going across there, one will dead end into a six-foot retaining wall of large rocks and large maple trees that extend through the next three properties. or the other side, it dead ends into basically a bush and shrub that would also have to be moved, replaced. And then in addition, city infrastructure, things like the street lamp are currently in the rightway of the sidewalk. The um dual creek irrigation taps lay right in the middle of where the sidewalk would be and several other things. Part of this comes back from the 1993 special improvement district when at that time the city because of the backlash and I I'm not saying that they didn't want sidewalks still. I think that everybody always wants the sidewalk, but at the time it was chosen not to do them. And in fact, the city came back and as part of the putting the properties back together on many of these properties, actually paid for the retaining walls that started at 2 feet back of curb, which tells you that those

were set 2 feet in from the road, which would be 2 feet prior to where the easement for a sidewalk would start. So there's six feet of retaining wall that has been built by the taxpayer by the city on those areas. So the idea behind this is mostly just to give us an opportunity as citizens in our area where geographically and um because of former decisions and things that have happened in the neighborhood, it just doesn't make sense sometimes to put the sidewalk in. And I know that there's always a push that says there's no time like the present. And I would contend and I would and I don't know the answer to this question, but the question is is what is the average lifespan of a sidewalk? Are we putting in a sidewalk now and it's going to take 30 years for the neighbor next door to put one in? So now we've got a brand new sidewalk next to one that's run down and needs to be torn out and replaced. Are we building um infrastructure that'll be obsolete by the time the next guy puts his piece in? And if it really is that critical, then I would say then it probably needs to go to that special improvement district methodology of putting it all in at the same time so we don't just end up with a patchwork of some cracked sidewalk, some lifted sidewalk, some sunken sidewalk, and a brand new piece of sidewalk as is currently the case on parts of the streets that are over there that are that way already. Um, I've got a lot more I could go through. I think most of it's already included in the staff report. A lot of it's included in the notes. I'm happy to take any questions on the matter. Um I think it's mostly for us. It's just giving us an opportunity to present from the city council and say is this a good opportunity for this? There are deferral agreements in the area existing including the neighbor right next door to the slot and two or

three right in the um adjoining block which you know might be said well if we wouldn't have given them deferrals we would have had sidewalk closer if you know that you could make that argument and I'm not going to deny that's an argument that could be made but for us this is just simply trying to get to the opportunity to be able to present and say is it worth having a deferral here. And the groundwork for deferrals is already in city code. The entire section of this code already writes it in and I think it's been cleaned up quite extensively by um Lisa on on the attorney side. I think it looks good. I think we resolved some issues that were within that code as is that were some ambiguities and other things that would have been problematic. I think it helps outline a little bit better things like if we do grant the deferral, you still have to build your driveway with the sidewalk portion poured in it so that at that next time you don't have a weird driveway approach in the middle of where your sidewalks are going to be or you can't put a big retaining wall right on that easement of where the sidewalk would need to be. And I think it creates, you know, a nice pattern that if and when it ever comes to it, the sidewalks get there, it's not going to be a catastrophic problem like we currently have on a lot of the lots. So there you go.

Questions for the applicant?

Mr. Green. So let me just make sure I I'm clear. You have no objection to the city attorney's red lines as proposed in exhibit A. Those are all acceptable to you. Um, the only the only one that I find just I I'm trying to square with would be on page four. Um, the 250 ft boundaries to the subject property. Feel like sometimes that might be a little bit excessive distance to another property with the with the cement. Most of the other concerns that were raised during the planning commission already addressed in current code. Um things like safe walking paths, most of those areas that we talked about, schools, churches around, those would already require sidewalk and most properties in those areas would also and again this comes back to the city council being able to say yes or no. So there's not really there's not really a big risk of all of a sudden we're going to have 5,000 deferral agreements. This is just a very simplified um if we take it at its very base core is just the opportunity to present and allow the council to decide whether or not there's good cause to grant a deferral or not. It like I said there's no rubber stamp. It's no guarantee. It just gives you a chance to present and have an opportunity to have a yes or no. And if the answer is no and you say, "Hey, that's not good enough cause. You still have to go through with putting the improvements in." Great. But at least we get the shot to present and say, "Hey, this is why we think we shouldn't have to do it or why common sense would say this doesn't make sense to put it here right now."

So Kyle, 250 ft could be depending on frontage of lots in the area that could be four or five lots away possibly, right? If he has an improvement that triggers this. So, do you have a recommendation of maybe a distance or is there another way to look at that which might

Well, in the current code it stated if there was um for example, we own property at the top of Parish Lane 5 acres. Um we would not be eligible for the deferral for a couple reasons. One, the staff map makes Parish Lane a main route and says that that road requires sidewalk regardless. So, that would take us out of that. But in just the current code without any red lines or anything else, we still wouldn't be eligible because we have a sidewalk that runs up and is adjacent to our property and connects to our property. So we're already bumping into it. So it says it's a continuation. You have to build it as a continuation of that. Um so there there's I feel like the 250 ft because that could be upwards of five lots away. I mean, that's saying, well, there's one on fourth east. So, if you're up on, you know, on on on third east or second east, or if you're or up or down, if you're up on um, you know, sixth east, if it well, probably not quite that far, but pretty close, you're you you're basically eliminating any chance of that good cause again. Um, because it just feels like that's a little bit of an excessive number, a little far. I would say if your next door neighbor has sidewalk, yeah, you definitely should have to have sidewalk attached to it.

Kevin, I'm just wondering if you could tell us what the average length of a block in the old part of Centerville is. I mean, I know my house is that I'm on a double block, so I don't I don't know. So I think uh Lisa and Lisa can correct me, but I believe minimum lot frontage is maybe 60 feet. Maybe it's 60 ft.

So and in a culde-sac you can get uh maybe 40 ft. Um it's 60 ft at the home. So yeah, I think uh maybe four lots is about right, maybe five in a culde-sac. Um but the question is the average of how long is a block in the old park? So, if a lot is 60 ft, we usually get what? Three houses. Four houses. So, you might get

So, here's the map. I mean, you can count the lots. Um, on most of them, it's it's four four lots. One, two, three, four, five. You can see on some of them um is that so there are different blocks. you know, blocks are shorter and longer, but um the idea of the block was well, if it's around that rectangle or that circle, you know, on the same side of the street, then it it should go in. Um I do want to point out that although these requirements are very specific, it's still these are just requirements to apply to request,

right? And then the introductory sentence says, but it's within the council's discretion to decide. So, we were just trying to make a cut off of who can even apply. Um, but the prior language just said that there's no improvements on the same side of the street in one or both directions, but it didn't really say how far. And so, it was hard for staff because the public works director is the one that receives these applications and has to make a recommendation. So, as staff, we were just trying to say, yeah, if you're in the same block, you can apply, but it doesn't mean you you you get it because if there's other reasons or, you know, distances, then the counselor could still say no.

So, would you be comfortable if we change that to being in the same block? Well, it does say in the same block or 250 ft, whichever is greater. Um, so, and we did whittle that down. that seemed likely. So like at first that started out at maybe 1,000 or 500 ft and uh staff did look at that and whittleled it down to a shorter distance because it did make

Yeah. these were not included but we have a 500t radius and a 250 foot radius and the 500t radius went one two it could include up to three streets. So if you went right from the tip of Porter Lane it would include anything on 300 South and 200 South you know. So, it was obviously too far. 500 feet was definitely too far. But then if you go down to 250 ft, you're really just touching and and again, it doesn't even go then we said no on the same street. We're not even looking in your backyard, you know, a street away. So, only in your street. And if you have the middle house on 100 south between 300 East and 400 East, 250 ft is basically that one block, the short side of the block. So, see these short sides?

Okay. Well, that's 255 blocks that I like you can see. Well, one says 144 plus 144. Let me see. So, that might be 300 ft. See right there? 145 plus 144. That's about 300 feet. The short side of that block. Okay. I'm comfortable. When you're talking about five blocks, I'm like, well, but if it's No, but five houses. No, five blocks.

Five houses. Okay. So even on the long side of a block, well then that or greater would kick in. So if you're on the long side of the block, um then it could kick in if there's something. So but again, this is just to apply and we were trying to do something within reason. Um, so could could we say like if you're not if it's not within two or three lots of you

instead of number of lineal feet. I think we're trying to be also make this objective so that a and uniformally applied and so if you're saying lots like someone might have a 200 foot you know and so anyway it just seemed like a distance was more equitable

because that's yeah and if if your lots are generally 60 foot frontage you're talking about four standard lots but not all of these you know some of these and that's what we were trying to show with this as well is like, well, which of these are really big lots like that could be subdivided. So that's why we were putting the 144 ft. You'll see that that could be two lots eventually. I'm fine with the 250 ft. I because when somebody said five blocks and I'm thinking it's a sidewalk five blocks away, but No, I think it was five lots. Okay. All right.

But this could make it the 250 ft. Your whole block could be non-sidewalk and the the block next to you, the other side of the crossing street, could have a home three lots away that's that's barely under 250. And then you've got to do it when doesn't it say your same block though

or 250 ft whichever is greater. I mean I don't want to I mean you could just take out you know whichever is yes I mean these were the things that staff struggled with what's what's reasonable but 500 feet was definitely too far we were trying to come up with something I mean you could even maybe just say within well we felt like it was important because if A block does have some sidewalk, it makes sense to try and finish that. But remember, it's also on the same side of the street, so you don't go around the corner in the block calculation.

But you would go straight up the street.

I think it says, okay, no public improvements of the type requested for deferral exist on the same side of the street as the subject property in one or both directions. So, you're not going to go around the corner. So, let's say you're on the long side of the block. Um, we're just talking that one line, not all the way around this the rectangle. Am I making sense? So, if it's on this the same within the same block, but it would still have to be on that long part of the rectangle or 250 ft. But if there's sidewalk on that the long part of the block, depending on where you are, if it's clear on the other side, well, if it's clear on the other side, if we say the block, you would have to put it. If anyone on your side of the block has sidewalk, it has to go in.

Okay. But across the street, no, we we did have that. We did have a diameter. And Kevin's right. We tailored it back and said, "No, we're just looking on the same side of the street." Because we actually want to encourage building these sidewalks together. So, we're not going to look at the other side because we'd rather just have the sidewalk on the same side because you're not going to leap frog back and forth. So, no, the way it's drafted, in my opinion, it it's not going to count just across the street. So, so I guess what I'm talking about is a corner lot, though.

Okay. it. If you're if you're in any one of these blocks, you've got a same side of the street uh whether you're going horizontal or or vertical can be another side of the street but the same side as you. Yes. But how we've handled that is we have said the sidewalk has to go on this side because there's sidewalk there but the other side you can request a deferral. the side that doesn't have it nearby. So, let's look at exactly Wish this was bigger. Let me Can you zoom in on like the one where you'll see it's

there's one on 7 East and um Center Street, I first right there number C62. So, there Yeah, exactly. So, they were required to put in the sidewalk on their north boundary line because their neighbor had it up the street in the same block, but they were they were given a deferral around the corner because no one on that block, see right there? No one on that block has a sidewalk. And I think that makes sense. I do too. And I think it says that. Didn't that lot already have an existing sidewalk on Northeast, though? We're just talking hypothetical. Okay.

And fourth piece would require it because it's arterial. But I'm just saying as a an example. But yes, same thing with the next one over then. Well, actually, you'll see 400 is the arterial. And so that's where you can you can walk all the way up the sidewalk. Okay. Let me c can you look at look at block 21 and 24? Okay. Okay. right where her cursor is. If 21 if one of the middle homes in that block on the left side of 21 Mhm. right there. Yep. Okay. That that home right there wants to make an improvement.

But straight up the street, straight north of there in the in block 24, there's a home. Yeah. Up in there that has an improvement. Does that same side of the street, but does that trigger because it's within 250 ft? Well, it would not be within 250 ft. um you'd have to take the lot just up from that. So, but but there are some But if it was 250, yeah, that's still the same side of the street. So, it seems like there are there are some blocks there where there would be a home crossing a street that has your whole block has none, but one in a block above you does. Yeah. So, you got to do it. We'll say 200 ft.

120 180. You know, 200 feet or the same block so that you're not jumping the street too far. That's my point. I think that's reasonable. Okay. Yeah, you could lower that.

So, I was going to make this comment about it. So the previous the previous reading was no street improvements exist on the same side of the street contiguous to the lot or parcel in one or both directions unless otherwise approved by the city council based on good cause or the lot or parcel. And the area the city specifically designated an area where sidewalks are not required. I remember when that code was written was for this specific reason was the historic districts and other things to create that zone which you've recommended potentially doing a like a a zone where they're not even required period. But that was that was my only concern is that if you basically what you're s we're saying um Rick is that if I'm if I'm sitting on lot in the corner lot of 21 and the top house on 24 has one all a sudden I have to I'm the only one that's still on my block has one but there's nothing coming to me or going for me. And this is and and and this was one thing I was going to make about the safety cause on this. If you had a corner lot that had sidewalk or even a lot that has sidewalk, there's nobody that is going to walk down the street, jump over the curb, over the park strip, get on the sidewalk, walk for the 50 or 60 ft of frontage of that house. And even if it's on the corner and they round the corner to then jump over their park strip or off the park strip, off the curb again and back into the road, it actually creates, in my opinion, a bigger hazard. We've I've lived, like I said, lived in our neighborhood for 40 years. 42 to be exact. And we all know that we don't have sidewalks in our neighborhood. And so we watch for each other. We watch for the kids. We watch for the cars. People drive slow, reasonable. I'm not saying that accidents don't happen, but I don't know of in my lifetime in our area any pedestrian auto pedestrian in this area accident where there were no sidewalks.

Now, I do know of ones where there have been sidewalks where autopedestrian accidents have occurred, but not in our area of no sidewalks. Can I ask Chief is there do you have any off the top of your head? We had a pedestrian accident in our city last week, but I know that was a different area, but is this a concern for us from a safety perspective? That's actually interesting read that because that is part of the area within this mapped area but that area does have sidewalks but it just so

right. So the auto pedestrian crash occurred on View Drive which only has sidewalks in that area on one side of the street. the area.

Um yeah, my my stance on this is sidewalks particularly on areas I mean this one in question is a kind of a bigger block area. It's a corner where it gives people a safe place to to cross the street. But I understand that one particular little small area, but it's not my money here. Yeah. I think I think so. I'm really torn on this because I do I completely see um where the applicant is coming from. It does seem difficult to be requiring sidewalks to nowhere. I actually just looking at this map while it's up. I I did not agree with the deferral on block 62 because of the fact that it was coming around from a busy road and I felt like it gave a pedestrian a chance to even though they were going to have to get off that sidewalk, um it gave them a chance to get around the corner and maybe avoid that intersection stop sign of traffic where uh you know a driver may be at a stop sign and not paying as much attention as they should to whoever's on the sidewalk. So, just personally, I didn't agree with that deferral when it happened. I do remember it happening. I um I'm also concerned about several of the comments that our staff have said. Um I don't know that I feel like we have uh

Mike Carlson for me to buy in this. I feel city council needs to create a map of where they want sidewalk and where they don't. I don't see that this map creates that or addresses that statement. Um Kevin Campbell uh granting deferrals for improvements can be very subjective and calling on deferrals will be extremely pro problematic. Having a very good friend who lives on 650 West in Farmington. I know how very painful that was when the city did have to require sidewalks to accommodate safety for Farmington High. Are we going to ever have a high school in this particular area of the city? No, not likely. But I don't know that those people, some of those people on 650 West in Farmington, it had been so long since their homes had been built, I doubt they thought there was ever going to be a high school there as well. So, I I think that I'm I'm concerned about going against several of these comments from staff because I do think they are best practice and they provide for safety. I'm I'm really torn on this one because I I I get that it is so frustrating to put in a sidewalk where there is nothing else.

Have you driven the road? Yeah, because there you couldn't put sidewalks. I mean, there's there the city paid to have retaining walls put where the sidewalks are supposed to be. I do think from way before I was on the council, they have said the historic district, we would like to make that area not have to have sidewalks and to go up. So, I agree with you. But it's not 1993 anymore and that special improvement district is not that doesn't necessarily mean that's best practice for today's standards. No, but what you can't go in and change I mean I mean I don't want an outhouse anymore either. So, I think you can't just say, "Oh, well, it was determined back in

Oh, but I'm just saying that that particular road would be almost physically impossible to put sidewalks in." I mean, it's like Kevin said, you can't put a sidewalk on the on the hillside. These these retaining walls, which were are massive, are are built right where the sidewalks go. I I think I but I would prefer to have like I in my mind I don't think we've addressed totally what staff said. And I guess that's where I'm at is I'm Yeah, I felt like Lisa staff is still not recommending this. So I guess I'd like to have a little more information from staff. Not necessarily.

My my concern just is I agree with you from long before I was on the council. They've talked about this area that does not want sidewalks. And I know that that's still how they feel. So, we've had people from this area come in and be very concerned about the speed of traffic on 100 South. The speed of traffic I agree is a sidewalk keep the kids safer on if there's I mean it isn't just there are a couple of streets and maybe we would hope that city council would say well it doesn't make sense if it's the road going up to the hillside.

So that's what I'm saying is I think we need to make that map. So my concern is we're saying, but why are we making any decisions till we make that map? We've got people that are developing this piece of property right now and it's going to be an odd piece of sidewalk in there because there is I I do get that part. So, we're going to say you you put this sidewalk in, it's going to look stupid for the next 60 years cuz we're going to make a overlay map that's going to say we don't need sidewalks. So, that's my concern is I wish we could just do

we really do that and bind future city councils to that. Well, you're you any city council can change anything they want. So the qu the question to what the council mumm just said is is there no way to get a uh deferral a deferral or yeah or or some sort of not without changing this there's no deferral these two lots there there's not on this one because it's a two lot subdivision correct oh there's got to be way there's not unless we come on there's always a way

there's always a way but staff I in discussing that I I agree with staff when you go down to the comment that says next time it'll be well we we want to do an exception for two two lot subdivision no more well pretty soon somebody's going to be asking for three units or four units who said that well they are but you're going to have a

you're going to have a council that is I mean obviously right now tonight we wouldn't do three or four or five I mean you hopefully we'll have council members that have common sense we're we're only doing this for two we're we're It's a very small area. We're not going up to North Centerville or West Centerville. I mean, we're we are doing it in an area that it makes sense. Like I said, I just don't know. I just feel like we should get I do I I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm I'm pushing back. I do not like the fact that staff does not I wish we could and I would I would like a little more. Can I get a little just maybe just a little more input from you guys because

it's hard for me to go against what our professionals are recommending coming from. Let me maybe clarify some of my comments that I made. So, okay,

you know, Lisa and I as as we know and we work with deferral agreements. I don't know if in 25 years we've called on a deferral agreement. So for me, in my opinion professionally, I think that okay, if you're not going to require a sidewalk there, let's just not require a sidewalk. Let's make that decision beforehand. But a deferral is it's really not a great mechanism to say, "Oh, we're going to put it in later." Because it gets recorded against the property. Okay, maybe we can call on it later. But it's much more simple to say, "Okay, these are areas of town or these are lots." You could even go lot by lot and say this lot if it were to develop sidewalk is not required. But in my opinion, the deferrals for subdivisions or side plans, it they're just not a good mechanism to come back later in 20 years or 30 years and say, "Hey, homeowner, by the way, you've got a deferral agreement on your property. You need to put in this curbon gutter and sidewalk." It's uh it's just as Farmington found. Farmington paid for most of those deferrals. The the homeowner didn't pay for them. And so it's uh it's very problematic.

If they did, don't tell my friend that cuz she was really mad at how much money she had to put out. Well, maybe it was a 50. Maybe it was 50/50, but I know that extensive like I could not believe how much it cost those homeowners. So I guess that's my point is let's just say okay this sidewalks are not required in these part on these lots but to to me that seems like a slightly different tool right am I am I getting the right am I understanding this correctly that you're saying I'm okay with no I'm I don't know that I'm just I think I'm just not comfortable with the tool we're using maybe

yeah deferrals are not a not a great mechanism in my opinion to come back later 30 years 40 years and say, "Hey, by the way, you've you've got to put in5 to $10,000 or whatever the number is of of improvements." Uh we have areas of town where secondary water is not required west of I-15. It's just not required. But, you know, we're not deferring those improvements until later. So, anyways, that's that's kind of my two cents. So, Kevin, you just said something. Did you uh maybe I'm going to quote it wrong because I didn't want to interrupt you that you can make an exception to sidewalks in that area.

I think that you would have to decide as a council and and you know, maybe it was based on staff's recommendations, but you could pick lots in that area. You could identify, you could go lot by lot. Maybe that's simpler than saying 250 ft. But you just go each property and say sidewalks required or it's not required. if you develop. Well, that's what I was kind of saying. There's Come on. There's a way. There's always a way. I mean, am I wrong? I mean, you're saying that's a way if you wanted to do that. That's a way to basically say that sidewalk is not required in this historic town or which lots it's not required on and where a while to get done.

Yeah. And these people have been waiting to build on this lot for

I mean they were ready last fall to start this building and they've waited for it. Now we can't do it for one person. I agree with that. I that's where mistakes have made. I I don't want to do it just for this one lot. But I just feel like we're putting it I mean if we really are willing to do what Kevin I agree with Kevin 100%. and we've been trying to get this done since I before I was on the council. They talked about it. So, I agree with that. But this might be the only tool to hold us over till we get to where Kevin where to where we just say no sidewalks. Lisa, what is the liability of going in and identifying areas that we don't have sidewalks? And then if somebody is, you know, hit by like there's an accident, what's what happens liability-wise with the city?

Is there any case law?

Our law turn our law intern research that because the question always comes up, is the city going to be liable when someone gets hit in the road because we don't have sidewalks? Um the answer is generally no. But now we have the case law and the uh code citation. So essentially Utah courts have held that a municipality is not obligated to build sidewalks. However, if we do we have to maintain them. So those are the lawsuits that we get is when we don't maintain the sidewalks we are not obligated to put them in. So that's case law. And then the statute also says a city may establish streets and sidewalks etc. It's not obligating us to. Um so no. And then interestingly this I didn't know but there is a citation in our traffic code that actually says a pedestrian has an obligation when there is no sidewalk. So the so it's anticipated that there are areas with no sidewalk. And 41-6A-10009 says that a pedestrian shall walk as close as possible to the outside edge of a roadway where a sidewalk is not available or if the sidewalk is not provided. So the pedestrian actually has the duty to travel safely on the road where there's no sidewalks. So again, no, we're not liable if somebody gets hit because we decide not to. I do have some other concerns though about like you know it has to be an analysis that's done and for good objective reasons why we're saying but we did talk about as a development review committee is hey can we hire an intern to go walk these this area and see where it really doesn't make sense because of the topography or where they are or can we recommend as we said that the streets that you know the

sidewalks go on one side of the street. So, at least we have streets on half as as we're working our way through. But again, you have to put a sidewalk in if you know $25,000 right now and your neighbor across the street doesn't. So, it creates other issues and problems. But yes, we could do an analysis and see what makes sense and come back. Um, but again, that would be probably a six-month project to to really give you some some better input on this area and where sidewalk should be. Speaking of potentially like if we were to say, "Yes, let's create a map of this area." And we said, "Okay, it makes zero sense to put the sidewalk on one side because of these retaining walls, but we should have it on the other side." I I'm not saying that that would happen in your specific case or anything. I'm just saying. Um, then can you form a special improvement district where all of the residents in that area contribute to the cost of those sidewalks? So, you're

balancing. So, you wouldn't want to do that in an election year, but I'm not saying you'll ever want to do it, but I'm just I don't want to do that. I'm just wondering if a special improvement district could be the tool. I guess Yeah. Again, I don't that that's where we finally as a team had to bring it to the council because there are so many policy considerations and and I think there are there are lots of options. So if the council, you know, wants us to go back to the drawing board or to get you more information about each, you know, this analysis, it can be done. Um, so we're happy to do that because these are this is a great discussion. Um, I just want to make sure that we don't forget our public hearing because we do have Yes.

one. Can I just bring up one more solution possibly? So, this subdivision could come in, post a bond for the sidewalks, not put them in, wait for the decision of whether or not sidewalks are required, and they can move along with their project. But in my again, in my opinion, allowing deferrals for subdivisions is just kicking the can down the road, and it's a mistake in my opinion to open that up.

So, I have a question, Kevin. It's two lots, so they can't have it because it's a subdivision. But if they divide into their own lots and then they come in and bond, then can they each apply for a deferral because now they're their own lots because right now we do allow for that on a single lot and we have done that many times. And now I agree with you. I'd rather get this all taken care of but down the road when we can do it right. But could they come back in and and requ

No, they would post that bond as part of the subdivision and that bond would, you know, unless the city council decided that the sidewalk was not required in certain areas, that sidewalk would be required before the bond was released. So, no, they couldn't come back and say, "Okay, now I'm getting a building permit. I'm a single lot." It's it's a subdivision. Yep. Okay. I'm just I'm just not comfortable with this tool. I I'm not unsupportive of what Kyle is asking for in that neighborhood. I just don't love this tool. So, here's my question, Councilwoman.

I know Georgina, but here's the other scenario. Okay. So, we post they post the bond, they put in the sidewalk, and then the city comes back and says, "Oh, we're not going to require sidewalks in this area." Now, we legitimately have a sidewalk to nowhere that that will always be that will always be a sidewalk to nowhere.

And so, so we run into this is kind of the the battle back and forth. And the stop gap measure in between is we say, "Okay, great. We put in a deferral." And you can put whatever conditions in the deferral you want to to tighten it up. And again, I guess back to the very base base base nature of this discussion is whether or not a citizen has the right to petition the city council as to whether they can have a deferral. Again, it's not a rubber step. This isn't I think we get lost in the weeds of well, what if what if what if. At the end of the day, the city council still has the ability to say nope, you don't get a deferral. It's not there's not it's not a rubber stamp. It's not just you get to go ahead and not have to do this. It's not automatic. We're just asking for the opportunity to present it. That's that's the simplified nature of this. And I understand the subdivision thing. I remember the exact city council meeting where that code was written. And it was because there was a a concern that somebody like a Brighton Homes or a an Ivory would buy a big piece of ground and decide to have zero sidewalks in 30 new homes because there was there was no there was no code. And so that was put in as a subdivision, but that was never defined as is that two lots, is that five lots, is that is this a commercial subdivision? is some somebody's splitting it off to have their kid build a home next to them. It it it changes, you know, these guys aren't developers. They're not they're not sitting on, you know, developer money to put in roads and fire hydrants and all those kinds of things, which is which was the heart and intent of that code when it was written. That was the discussion around that. And I think this is is a casualty of of that discussion of of trying so hard to prevent one thing that this is

one of the negative consequences of the other. And I and I get that that happens. But then I would my next frustration I guess I would say is the development currently going in on Parish Lane and Northeast the Chad Morris development with exactly zero driveway and next to zero sidewalk through that entire thing where they're planning on parking cars down one side of the road to accommodate the cars that they're going to have in that because it's a PUD. So, and that is actually a safe kids route. I see people blow that intersection time and time again. And there's not going to be a good place for kids to walk there or anything else. And so, it's a little bit hard for somebody in an area where the citizens are requesting this to see that kind of development go in with these huge houses, zero yards, zero accountability for driveway, zero accountability for sidewalk. I mean, literally the sidewalk is the driveway. So, are those cars going to be parking all over those and those kinds of things? And that is literally where the kids are walking that got through.

And then we start looking at something like this on the other side where this is what this we actually want and what we're seeing. And I I'll even say today, I was driving up northeast. There was a guy running. He was running in the westbound lane going east right in the middle of the lane and cars had to go out and around him and there's sidewalks all the way up that. So we can't we can't mitigate stupid. I mean people make choices. People have a choice, right? They have a choice. I I'm not I can't control. Let's get to the public hearing because Kyle's speaking as as a citizen now or as a resident now in a public hearing. Sorry. That's a good point. Sorry.

You're okay, Kyle. You're just f you're just fine. You bring up some great points, but those are those are valid points, but let's make it a public hearing uh points. So, we're open opening public hearing for zoning text amendment regarding deferral of public improvements. Those that may want to comment, just state your name and where you're from.

Richard Barnes again. Um I it's been a good conversation listening to back and forth. Um I I live down in Salt Lake. Uh Rose Park area is very different than up along Wasach Drive or Capitol Hill. Um, one thing we have are neighborhood councils, uh, with representatives elected from the residents and the property owners, uh, that are close to it, such as perhaps a special historic district of Centerville. um where those that are there day by day make a lot of the decisions and leave you free to make the larger decisions. Um and again thank you for your service. It's been very interesting.

Thank you. So uh any other public uh comments on the public hearing? I will close the public hearing. I have one question. Uh um did the just just for clarification, did the planning commission Sydney approve this with the red lines? Yeah, it recommended that city council give approval with staff's red lines and the map that was staff report. So they they were doing it with the red lines. Those red lines were done before it came down. I thought I just wanted to clarify.

Okay. So obviously the planning commission was as as concerned as you guys were because I know this was a 4 to2 vote. So what other comments and questions because we got to at some point either do a motion or defer this or or something. I'm ready to make a motion.

And we can have we can have further discussion with the motion. So go ahead, Councilman Banger. I recommend a motion to approve ordinance 2026-13 regarding city code text amendments to the Centerville Municipal Code 10.04 permits with the following findings for action include all four of the findings with an amendment to that to to diminish the the distance from 250 ft to 150 ft. Okay. Uh, do we have a second to that motion?

I would like to I like what you're saying, but because we've now we got 250 now you have 150 and we've talked about 60 ft being the frontage. Can we make it a number divisible by 60? So that's like three lots 180. I'll accept that amendment. So if we do that, are you seconding that? I would second that. Okay. So we have a we have a motion and a second. Further discussion before we vote on that motion.

I am going to be voting against that motion. And I am convinced I I really appreciate Kevin's comments. I suspect that the planning commission didn't consider this alternative that you've proposed to us. Gina had suggested that she feels like we're using the wrong tool. And I think that's right to Robin's comment. Like there's this one area that you feel like doesn't need a sidewalk, but we're passing a a code amendment that will apply to the entire city. No, no, no. Read it. It only It's only a small area. Well, okay, that's fair. I But it is the It just has to meet the requirements. No, it doesn't. It doesn't. It says right in here. It does not apply to the rest of the city. It's only the map

either. I I I'm going to let Shaylin finish her comment, then I'll make one here. Larger than the larger That That's a fair point. Larger than the specific area that you are particularly concerned about. And And I feel like I I am persuaded by Kevin's comment. Like either we want sidewalks in an area or we don't. Right. Um and deferrals are I think problematic. And it's not that I am necessarily unsupportive of making exception for this particular area. I'm just not persuaded that this ordinance is the appropriate tool to address that particular concern.

And I'm I I feel the same way. I think we're we're kicking the can down the road. We're going to pass it, move on, do something else, and we're not going to develop the right tool that would really protect all residents in this area if they We do need to tell staff that we want that. And we need, if we pass this, we still need to do it with staff saying, "Staff, we've put a band-aid on this, but we want you to come back sooner than later with a map showing the historic district other than the main roads as not having sidewalks."

And and that's fine. I hope we do tell staff that. I I suspect that this will probably get the votes it needs, but I I can't in good conscience go against what staff is saying when I do feel like that they have given us um other recommendations that make better sense and are frankly better tools from a planning perspective. Every time that we do this and do a band-aid situation, then we end up making it difficult to make future decisions and they become not consistent. And so I think this deferral thing is just an inconsistent tool and it's not really it's too ambiguous and it's it can be different for every I mean I know we've written some rules and we're trying to make it consistent but it never works that way and serving on the planning commission that's probably the one lesson I took from that is that we end up we end up causing issues that are bigger. That said, I'm supportive of all the work that um Kyle has done on this. I think that, you know, way to go on trying to find a solution for this situation. I fully support that. I just can't support the tool that's been developed for it. So,

okay. Other uh further comments on it? I don't hear a uh so we have to vote on that motion uh unless there was a substitute motion but I don't think there is. So, if there's no further comments, then we're ready to vote. Right. Councilman Banger first going to the right. I nay nay I

I passes three to two. But I would like staff to sooner than later bring us the historic district and and try and get the area from Main Street all the way up to this area so that we can have an area that there isn't they that we don't need the sidewalks. I mean, when I first got on council, Randy Randall took me around, showed me the old part of Centerville, and the people that have put huge expensive fences where the pot where the sidewalks go. He's like, "You're never going to get sidewalks in here." And so, you're just going to have So, I think that's been talked about for 20, 30 years. Just never follow through on. So, does other do other council members feel that they want staff to address it sooner than later, too?

I would absolutely agree with councilman make them I think that's a good idea. So, take take that as your guide staff because it once you pass something that's what's there, you know, so that's what that's the danger of passing something and and I agree with it as well and I and I'd like to see it done sooner than later because frankly the deferral could still come back around to be required. I I know we haven't ever called for one, but you haven't really stopped this um two subdivision um development from I mean they could be required by the next city council if they so chose to do that.

It's my understanding that even with this deferral they can come ask for that. But we still can say no to this participant. I mean the control still is here. It's just not consistent control. That's it's not it it doesn't necessarily have to be applied consistently across. That's the problem with when we do this type and that's why I say the tool doesn't really I'm not convinced that the tool is the best way to do it. I think there was a better tool and I think that tool is what we're asking city staff to do. I I agree with that. Just my personal experience. But this tool has been in place for what 30 40 years. It's and it's not working. We've never had to call for one yet. All right.

But when you do, it won't work. That motion passed through. We've seen it in other communities. Let's go on item number three. Okay. Uh this is uh another public hearing matter in relation to adoption of the inner wild international wildland urban interface. Uh Lisa, do you want to give us uh any more information than what we have in our packet?

Yes. move to the next one. Thank you. Um, a few months ago, we adopted the ordinance in compliance with state law requiring um, adoption of the 2006 Utah Wildland Urban Interface Code. Um, so we adopted those ordinance amendments. Uh and then in the last legislative session, the legislature uh decided to adopt the 2024 version of the international wildland urban interface code. So they are adopting a new uh construction code that is effective January 1, 2027. So by law, we have to adopt that same code that the state has adopted. And I know we're way ahead of schedule. I just didn't want to forget. So, I'm just recommending that we adopt the 2024 version of the International Wildland Urban Interface Code and we will put it in our ordinances effective January 1, 2027. Um, but then we're done for this year with that legislative topic. This, um, let's see, we did schedule this for a public hearing just because of the topic. But it is required by state law,

required to adopt it and not required or and not necessarily something we can loosely um just look at as a guideline. Correct. As of January 1, 2027, this will go into effect for all of the state of Utah. Okay. And uh and there's not a well not likely a legislative session between now and then. them. This will be the law. Yeah. But they did adopt that provision that says you can't put anything under a five in your map. Mhm. So,

uh we we uh passed this because we had to meet a certain deadline before, didn't we, Lisa? Yes. the other uh section we did we were we needed to have it in effect. Yeah, this one you have some time but anyway it's further questions of Lisa on this one.

Okay, then we'll go to a public hearing. This is public hearing matter municipal code amendment adoption of the international wildland urban interface code. This is ordinance number 20 26-9. any member of the public is uh um now it's now available for you to comment. Just give your name and where you're from. Public hearing is now open. Seeing no comment, we will close the public hearing and we will come back uh to see if in that uh cricket time you had an opportunity to come up with any more questions or if you're ready to make a motion. Well, I do want to I wish I could have gone down there and given a public comment because it just really bugs me when the state uh forces cities to adopt international codes. It's just

you can make that comment. I'm making as a council member. I'm making that comment. It just really bugs me that they're they're

requiring us to re adopt the international code. I mean, it would be one thing to say that we could take it on as a guideline, but it really frustrates me that they are statutoily requiring us to do this. So, I would like to do it in some sort of with prejudice or if if that are those the words that I could use. Can do do you mind me asking you what it is that you disagree with about the international wildland of an interface code? Well, let me tell you first off I haven't. For specific

I would wonder if any one of the council or the legislators, how many of them actually read the international code? And quite frankly, I haven't. I'm just skeptical of most things that are coming from the international uh policy makers at this time. So yes, I will do my due diligence and sit down and read an international code, but I have not had the opportunity to do so, but I should have at least uh till January 1st, I suppose, to do that until it takes effect. But again, as I said, I'm skeptical of anything that international policy makers are making and then imposing upon our country that has different uh values than a lot of these international policy makers

and I could see the point as well. They can the thing is it's on staff's mind right now and agree who says it's on their radar. I agree with her and we may miss the deadline. Absolutely. Yes. I I think it's Yeah. Yeah. M um I will say this I I I I I know nothing about wildland interface code and so when I read what I at least what I read of what we're adopting I can't say that I am educated on this nor qualified to say anything but the international building code is got good information and it's not political so maybe this is the same way so maybe

I do I do understand a little more about that the IBC but I do not understand this. So, I I'm just saying it it may not be politically charged as much as we think it might be. I'm hopeful, but I just wondered if there was something specifically you had noticed that definitely does not apply to the Wasatch front. I wish I could pick it out for you, but I can't. I'm sorry. That's all right. Are you still looking for a motion? Motion. I move that we adopt ordinance number 2026-09 amending the Centerville Municipal Code to adopt the 2024 edition of the International Wildland Urban Interface Code as required by state law. Second.

Motion is second. Uh further discussion. Councilwoman Haymon going to my right. Vote I I I I I motion pass unanimously five to zero. Let's go to our our la last public hearing matter. This is a fee schedule amendment uh regarding police department fees and government records fees resolution 2026-06 initiated by Alan Aerson chief of police staff representative Alan chief of police Rommy city attorney I'll stop right there. Go ahead chief. I was waiting for you to get up.

Right. Thank you so much council. It's good to see you. It's been so long. Okay. So, um, a while back, um, our records clerk in the the police department, um, came to us with questions about fees, inconsistencies, fees that are outdated, terminology that's wrong, um, processes for disagreeing fees or records that are no longer in place. our current our old feed schedule. It didn't really keep up with the times and technology and really where time was being recognizing where time was being spent in processing grammar requests and records requests and various things we're doing. Um uh so Lisa Romney um headed up a a push to kind of revamp it all. We're going to we're going to modify a few of the the fees. We'll look at everything at once, do it all at once. And so Lisa did did a great job coordinating with with Jennifer and then Billy Joe with our department and then having some meetings kind of figure out our fee schedule. Billy Joe and our department did a lot of research with other agencies. I think she found data on 31 other agencies around what their fees were looking like. So we kind of make sure that our fees were consistent or comparable. a lot of our fees had not kept up uh with inflation cost of doing business like for Adaction um you know we were allowed to charge up to the the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee who's capable of doing the job and that had kept up. So a lot of these fees uh reflect a lot of research that kind of gone into and a lot of discussion on what's what's fair. We're we're definitely and we're not allowed to to make money doing fees and that's never the intent. The intent is kind of cover some of the cost that's absorbed has been absorbed by the department by these

individual residents or or people who are requesting information. So any I don't know if you had a chance to look at them. I really don't want to go through each one with you. Are there any questions about any of the uh the fees questions or comments? Sure. Um it's not often that I question or go against staff. With that said, I noticed that for digital copies, we're charging $5 for the first 25 pages, $5 for each additional 25 pages in digital

format. I understand I understand for requiring people to pay if we're making physical copies and having to scan off things, but for digital copies I I deal in the world of PDFs and they're I mean whether I have a 50page PDF or a 150 page PDF, it doesn't it's it's meaningless. The the amount the change is like the little bit of megabytes in something. So I I question that and I will tell you um in my view and part of this is being driven by my viewpoint when it comes to public records. I feel very um strongly that we need to be transparent to our our citizens and I certainly am concerned whenever I see a fee um that doesn't feel like it's associated with the cost of something because we can charge them for the cost that it takes to collect it, right? and to make the make the PDF copy into drag and drop it into an email. Certainly, we can charge them. We can charge them how much it's going to cost to go pull the PDF, redact the PDF, figure out whether to produce the PDF, but that goes into the collection cost. I am concerned that we're charging for the digital copy on a flat on a flat fee.

I don't I don't view that right because again, it could be a five-page document or it could be a 100page document and it may take them exactly the same amount of time. So, it's not connected. So I I would not charge for digital copies outside of the actual cost.

So my my comment on on that is when our records clerks put together this information um and the fee is not I don't believe the fee is attached to the megabytes of size. It's the length of time that it takes to compile it because all all of that has to be reviewed. And so a a two-page report is going to take a fifth amount of time as a 10-page report to go through and to to compile and to review and to redact. And every part of that's got to be read by the records clerk. And so a one-page report is a fraction of the time is is a long report and takes a lot more staff's time. And then like at our department, all of those records requests go to me. I have to I have to review them and make sure they and I I don't read them word for word as much as the records people do but

and and I and I am not suggesting that we shouldn't charge for that time but in my view where we charge for that is in the hourly cost of staff the time for compiling searching formatting and redacting that is where that cost should come. I I don't support just a flat fee based on a page limitation for digital records. Okay. And yeah, I don't Yeah, like I said, I don't think the original Yeah, the intent is not I mean, in in the past, we charge per paper, right? Because it costs per paper to to photocopy, right, and do all that stuff. And I I think we've definitely gone away from that, though. I do I I will say, yeah, I I don't know if you have any comments.

I I will also just editorialize. I've submitted a lot of grammar requests to counties recently, and they're not charging for their electronic records. the time. Yes, they're charging for the time to search it and redact it, but not the electronic records by and certainly not by page. I I probably tend to agree with you on that, but I don't I I almost would rather just say like do similar to what you did. So, I'm I'm seeing that on under accident reports per case number, the digital copies. Is that where you're referring to, Shayen? Is is this under police department or Okay. So or is this uh city? Uh this is police department.

That was the police department.

It's one two and it's the same. It's the same up above. So police reports, accident reports, same thing. Digital copies, $10 for first 50 pages, $5 for each additional 50. I'm probably more inclined to agree that u I'm okay with a different cost for the bigger the report, but I'd rather see it done by file size. um just because that seems to make some more sense to me as far as sometimes when you're sending if you're sending over 10 gigabytes by email, you have to go through all sorts of hoops to get it to go through like you might have to divide it up or um but yes, I agree I agree with you on the fact that the hourly cost of staff time that's where we should be charging for that review of the redactions and that they everything got redacted that should have been redacted.

Um, I guess I'll just here. Um, I think our practice has been from a government records out of the city recorders office when somebody wants something and we can just send them an email, it's within that 15 minutes and we send it to them. Um, but given the research that the police department did, most cities are, if you look at that list, they're all charging a minimum of $5 for police records. So, that's the way the amendment kind of came forward is, hey, you know, this is what police departments are doing because we have accident reports and we have police reports. And we actually decided to just because of practice, we give them the whole case. And so it's kind of like so that's what how it happened is really we don't really charge if it's coming through the city recorders office or something you know we you know we're sending them an email and I agree but then it was problematic because if we're going to change the police record I want I think it should be consistent with what we're charging for other records. So that's the problem. Okay,

I understood. I'm just saying in my view the place to charge is the the time that it took. I I don't see the connect between, you know, the difference between a 4 megabyte file and an 8 megabyte file. Like to me that

is really and I think the police department maybe we can make a distinction but the way they do records requests is different because you know I said they said oh we do a lot of print copies and I said well why is that? because upstairs we don't you know it's all digital but they have to get their ID so a lot of these they have to be on you know one of the the you know either the subject of the record or you know the insurance company and so they have to provide and they come and they do it you know the oldfashioned way quite a bit in the police department so um there are some differences in in how we're doing it in the amount of you know time

not to belabor it I don't have any objection whatsoever with the costs that you guys have made for hard copies, right? Those totally fine. My my only comment is on digital copies. I I don't see the the the logical connection between what we're charging and the electronic copy. So, I would for the electronic copies, I would just default to actual cost and staff time to whatever you collect. Okay. Which which that would cover the direct cost, right? Like if it did take longer because it was 100 pages, you're still going to get your you're just it's just when and even when you're hitting send, if you do have to divide it up or do something to get all of the megabytes through,

you can just you can recoup that directly.

I like what council member Haymon has said. I think that uh she's identified that it there is a transparency issue here and also that um and just being able to provide PDFs. It it does seem that is the the standard method going to be going forward and perhaps you know there are still opportunities for use of paper in the police department. I I would feel that it would be better to default to the time taken by staff to do it as the cost for our fee uh table here and to omit the uh digital copy charge. So, Council Member Hammond, are you suggesting that we put in that column actual costs as opposed to

this? Oh, okay. So, it would just be actual because um Yeah, I think Jennifer is saying, "Yeah, I don't want to necessarily charge a $5 fee every time because that takes more staff time, right? You know, sending them the bill, processing, making sure they pay before when she can just send them the, you know, the ordinance or the link or something." Yeah, that's exactly what I'm suggesting is just to put actual cost. No, I completely agree with that and there are there have been a small handful of times when somebody has specifically requested digital files on a USB and then I would, you know, charge the cost for the having to go purchase the USB, but then even still, it doesn't take me any more time to put a whole bunch of PDFs on a USB than it does to attach them to an email. So, I completely agree with that.

Can we just note for the record that Jennifer completely agrees with me? Sorry, chief. You got you got the lawyer up here. Did you have any more? Uh, no. Okay, let's go to the public hearing on this. Sorry, that was me completely agreeing with you in my department, not necessarily for the police department. I am just giving you good personal

uh this public hearing matter. We have a public hearing now on fee schedule amendments, police department fees and government records fees resolution 2026-06. Uh that public hearing is now open. Just state your name and uh where you're from if you so comment. Seeing no uh public responding, I will close the public hearing. We will come back. We had quite the discussion already, but is there further discussion? Is somebody ready to make a motion?

Mayor, can I just comment? I appreciate the fact that we had a public hearing uh noticed for this. It's not a tax. I do not believe this had to be a public hearing. I'm thankful that uh we decided that anytime a fee of any kind is imposed and might be uh necessary for our residents or anybody else uh that we give them an opportunity to have input on that. Uh so I just want to thank staff and you for having a public hearing on this and I totally support the police the fees and things that they're they're recommending. Well, thank you, Council Danger. Who's making a motion?

I'll make a motion that we approve resolution number 2026-06 amending the Centerville fee schedule regarding the police department fees and government records fees as set forth in CFS 11.010 and CFS 16.010 010 which is government records fees and police department fees with one change which is that digital copies sent will be assessed according to staff time spent the actual cost actual cost actual cost only digital copies only dig only digital and I'll second that motion

all right we have a mo motion and a second uh further discussion Councilwoman Harris going to the right. I I I I I

That motion passes unanimously. 50. Let's go to interlocal cooperation agreement. This is UPDes general permit of Davis County Davis County Cities Resolution 2026-05. It looks like Dave Walker uh is going to give you a little more background on this. uh just here if you have any questions. Mostly the brief rundown. This is just an agreement. We did one of these five years ago. We've done this systematically over the the past number of periods. The EPA handed down all these rules we've talked about with storm water. And this is just the county coming together, all the cities including Davis County themselves to cooperatively do some of these things. Uh the high points of that would probably be on page three of this agreement. Oops, I broke that. And uh it really boils down to our training and uh development of understanding with the contractors, residents where we're mass producing things together. We're putting on contractor uh trainings and we're it's coming at a lot less of a cost to our individual community since we're doing these collectively. Dave, does this have to do with uh the water coming down our streams?

So, this is at all. This is part of that discharge permit where we have to be accountable for everything that's going into the waters of the state, which does include stream water and all our storm water. So these are some of the mechanisms where we do outreach and that for help residents understand what they should and shouldn't be doing, helping contractors understand what they should and shouldn't be doing uh on their sites, things of that nature. Okay. Question further questions for Dave?

All right. This is a interlocal agreement. This is not a public hearing matter um but uh it is a resolution. So I'm looking for a motion on it. I'll move that we adopt resolution number 2026-05 approving the interlocal cooperation agreement between Davis County and Davis County cities for UPDS general purpose general permit. Second motion to second. Uh, let's do a roll call vote starting with Councilman Plameumber going to the right. I I I

I I motion pass unanimously 50. Let's go to another interlocal cooperation agreement. Uh, this Davis County Community uh develop block grant CDBG program resolution 2026-08. Uh Lisa, do you want to give us any more than what we have in our information?

Yes. The city participates in this community development block grant program that um is essentially run by the county and the county recently sent out this interlocal. These grant years are three-year period and so we're coming to the end of our prior period for 2026. So they would just like cities to um adopt this new interlocal agreement which just keeps us eligible to apply for these grants. So we will bring additional interlocal agreements to you once we apply for and potentially get a grant. But this is just keeping us um eligible. So we're just recommending that you adopt this um interlocal agreement by resolution 20268. and they would like this back by May 2nd. So that's why or May 12th. That's why we put that on this agenda.

Okay. Further questions for Lisa? If not, uh, who wants to make a motion? I'll make a motion that we approve resolution number 2026-08 which enters into a interlocal cooperative agreement with Davis County regarding participation in the CDBG program for federal fiscal years 2027 through 2029. Second. Motion is second. Uh Councilwoman Beacon moving to the right. I I I I

I. That motion passes unanimously. 5. Let's go to minutes review and approval of April 7th work session, April 7th city council. Uh do we have any uh changes to those minutes uh that anyone wants to make? Otherwise, I look for a motion to approve the minutes.

I'd like to change one little thing on the work session page two under storm drain fund and water fees and city footprint payment. uh at the end of that paragraph it identifies that 84,000 annually was uh identified. That is not correct for the storm drain only. Storm drain is 44,241. And if we want to add water fees to that, which would make this a little more complete and comprehensive, the water fee is 39,379. The total of the two is 83,620.

Okay, we note that change. Any other changes?

Uh we'll look for a motion to accept the minutes with that change. Then so moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I I posted. Great. Uh,

can I just make one comment? I didn't I maybe should have brought it up in when we're on this item, but I noticed a few inconsistencies in the first item tonight, which was the split zoning. Uh, there was a reference to Mr. Adamson. He is a planning commission member. I'm wondering if we could just make sure we include first names when we first mention them. Um, and then also just so we're clear that he wasn't a member of the public and that he was there's no confusion there. And are you talking about in our minutes or in planning commission? What are you talking about? She's going back. This is the report. This is the city council transmitt report. Oh, okay. Okay.

And so the only reason I'm bringing up is cuz I at first I was like, Mr. Adamson, are we talking about the planning commissioner or somebody else for a second? could probably just label them as Commissioner Adams. That that would be great. And then also, we also referred to Lisa Romney in one paragraph and then we referred to her as Lisa R. I would just say keep it all consistent so there's no question who the individual is that we're talking about. I know that's probably not you doing that, but will you just what

in staff reports you're talking about? Yeah, these are Yeah, I they're not official minutes, but I for I failed to mention it during that moment and it did cause me a minute to go, okay, we're talking about Lisa Romney, right? We're talking about Commissioner Adamson, right? Like that was I So, just for help there. That's good.

All right. Uh let's go to financial report. uh quarterly financial report January, February, March. This is the first quarter. Uh Nate has the financials there for you. This is actually since it's a quarter through nine months, right, Nate? That you going to report on, right? Correct. Okay. All right. Um so yeah, as mayor said, we're threequarters of the way through the year. Um, so to start off, uh, we'll look at that, uh, cash position by fund. The one thing I noted here, uh, is that you'll see our RDA cash went up, um, by a little over $2 million, and that's because we received our tax increment funding. Uh, we received it on the last day of March, so we have not, uh, sent out any of the payments yet to those developers. Um, so that's why you see the big increase for now and we'll make those payments uh this month in April. Um, the other thing I wanted to note was uh I know we've been keeping an eye on our parks fund uh that we needed that 400,000 by the end of the year. Uh so we've kind of put a pause on some of those projects. Um and we're at 373,000. So I'm confident that we will get there and uh yeah, we will make our bond payment without a problem. All right, we can go to the

on revenues. Are we sales tax? Are we on par with where we think we have? Are we budgeted? Yeah. Yeah, I think we're going to be I mean, we're on pace to hit about 5.6, maybe closer to 5.7 this year. Um, and we had budgeted 5.5, so I think we're on track. uh you can see that we are a little bit, you know, we've gotten a little bit more than we have at this time last year. Um so yeah, I think sales tax is on track. Thank you. Mhm.

And yeah, and you can note that we're, you know, we've received 80% of our budget and we're 75% of the way through the year. So, uh yeah, we're doing good on the sales tax front. Uh looking at our total general fund revenues, uh we're at about 10.9 million. Uh which again is slightly higher than last year. Um so revenue-wise, uh we're in a good spot. Uh looking at our expenses, um we're at 9.4 million. Uh so we're anyway, we only spent 70% of our budget, 75% of the way through the year. So again, we're uh doing good. I've underlined a couple of departments that are, you know, just slightly over, but none of it is by a big dollar amount. Um, so nothing to worry about uh right now. Okay. Our RDA, I already touched on that that we've received our tax increment. Um, we just haven't distributed the funds yet and we'll take care of that in this next coming week or two. Uh, we can go to our recreation fund. Um we're at about 26,000 closer to 27,000 of uh net income. Um so we're I think we're in a good spot on recreation. Uh but that's always one that we start to watch as as we get into these summer months. Uh wrap tax. Uh you can see that our revenues are just a hair hair larger than they were this time last year. Uh and that's on par with our overall sales tax numbers that uh we're doing a little bit better than we were last year. Uh and then in that wrap tax fund, we've again followed that same distribution that we're familiar with uh with 85% going to parks, five to worker, and then five back to the centerpoint theater. Okay. Um our parks fund there, as I mentioned,

you don't see a lot of expenses there, and that's because we put a pause on it. so that we can make sure we have enough cash to cover our bond payment. Um, so we'll look to get some of those projects done next year. Um, in our capital projects fund, we've only spent uh 64% so I'd expect we'd see some decent spending come out this next quarter. Um, our in our transportation fund uh we are a little bit our revenues are a little bit lower than they were last year. Um, and I didn't do a lot of research on this right now, so I apologize, but that could be timing or it could just be because they're lower. Um, sometimes the timing of those uh, funds comes in at different times and I apologize, I didn't do enough research before I presented. Um, but we'll continue to watch that. Um for the Utopia fund um again we'll receive our uh rebate check in June. Uh so we're anticipating that in water uh you can see operationally uh we're doing well. Uh you'll also note on that top line in water uh the federal grants that's for the water tank. Uh so we do continue to get payments from the from the EPA as part of that earmark for the uh water tank. Um going on to sanitation real quick. Our net income is almost 130,000. Uh so we're doing good in sanitation. And then uh oh and again you'll see we got almost $8,000 in that miscellaneous line. That's the um the majority of that is our rebate um or the diversion incentive for recycling correctly. Um so again, I continue to

push that the more we as a city as residents can recycle correctly, that rebate continues to help us and helps keep that uh rate low. Um so central residents are doing a great job recycling correctly. Uh and then drainage. Um, you can see that our operating revenue uh exceeds our expenses. So again, in drainage, we're in a good spot and no concerns at the moment. Anyway, that's all I have prepared tonight, unless there are any questions. Questions for Nate on the 9month financials. Thank you, Nate. Appreciate it. Uh, very uh useful. So, thank you. All right, let's go to uh council report. The tonight's meeting as reported from council and Brian Palmer.

All right. Thank you, mayor. Uh mayor, I have to apologize. I'm actually um I was assigned parks and recreation committee and I have failed to uh attend. I meant to attend this last meeting, but uh I did not see the uh planning uh or the the agenda come through till too late. But um I did review the uh agenda and the minutes. Uh they are continuing to work on their master plan and ongoing planning for America 250 activities. Uh Heather Taylor uh came in today. Uh she's our um tree and conservation board chairperson and she kind of uh touched on a few of the items that I would have uh also given to you and the council here is that there was a successful Arbor Day planting event uh there at the community park. Uh that went very well. Bruce Cox, thank you so much for uh organizing continued work on the uh urban forestry guide to support policy and planning efforts. I think this is something that they're really uh putting a lot of time and effort into. I believe that it will actually be a good document to um refer to by the general plan once it's completed. Uh ongoing uh thoughts and input for general plan update are continued there at the uh tree board tree and conservation board for tree preservation and development practices. Um,

and they are still uh continuing to work with the tree voucher program with Mark Merchant and uh looking to uh how to help expand tree planting in our community. Uh they're doing very well and I I just really appreciate all of the time and effort that they all put in uh in all of our committees and commissions. But I'm I truly am impressed by our tree and conservation board uh and uh the work that they do. Uh and uh just as a side note, I did notice that um our recorder Connie Larson had um it was her last time recording for us. She had retired at this point and we were moving towards a um AI recorder. Is that correct? A

I'm doing all of the minutes. So, I'm using AI to help me do all of it's a lot of minutes. So, yeah.

Yes. Yes. And I so I I I just noticed that and I was uh thinking about that and how it would relate to um maybe opening up these meetings to a a a broader audience and the ability for opportunities for people like me that at times may not be able to get to a meeting to do it as if we do it here in the council where we are provide a option for a virtual attendance uh or a Google meet or a zoom option for these types of um meetings. Uh and I understand that it does um give more uh maybe credence to the meeting if people attend in person. But I think that providing an opportunity such as a virtual um attendance option is only expanding that um ability for more people to attend. And uh that would be my report to you, mayor. Thank you for the time.

All right. Any questions for Brian? I don't know. Maybe related to parks and wreck. While you were talking about that, I just I I don't know where the appropriate place is to ask about this. We had the presentation on the flags tonight. We're going to have our 250th celebration. Is that something we should maybe consider purchasing some flags? We got for for And when do we talk about? I know we're not supposed to discuss items that weren't agenda, but

well, we've uh Haley Haley chairs our 250 committee and her and I we we talked about how we were going to do our 250 uh celebrations is each of the committee chairs for all of our committees, just not parks and wreck, tree board, trails uh should be coming up with something uh to to celebrate the 250 celebration in addition to what we might do on the 4th of July. Now, um uh I I wanted to make sure that was happening. Gina and I and a member of the parks committee, Brooke Johnson, met as well, too, and came up with some other ideas. We Haiti wasn't able to be there the other day and as uh and the biggest ideas I think that have come out I don't want to com I just look at the agendas. I don't go to all the committee meetings but looks like parks and recck is doing quite a bit with it. Gina could probably report more because both her and Brian are uh co-chairs on that committee of and I don't know how I mean I think the planning's going on Brian mentioned with the tree committee but I I came up with the idea and it brought up uh the what I'd suggested of hey maybe just the regular flags down Main Street you have some of the historical flags you know uh as well too. Kind of a different twist on it on on America 250 celebration. So, uh I don't know if Gina wants to report more on what we've done with 250. Haley Haley's not here anymore. So, but I we could we could I could follow up with her. Uh I know that uh Brooke Johnson is wondering if there we have any more going on. We Yeah, she is wondering and I I we probably should defer and have

Haley report because I'm only aware of what parks committee is doing and I don't want to I know they're doing like a mosaic type project. Um they're going to use some budget for that. They're also talking about um some pins that you could earn doing like certain activities like I don't remember if it's walk 250 miles during the summer but um they're looking into that. I think the budget is could be quite high for that. So we, you know, I think the next discussion is is how is that funded? Is it people, you know, pay to cover the cost of the pen or something? I I I can't speak because they didn't talk about that part. I've just seen a few emails come through today where they're discussing the cost for those pins. So I probably best to defer to Haley. Um, another item that came up in the parks meeting of note is that Brandon Federico, who is the trails um, chairperson, attended and kind of talked to them about the way that they had done their master plan. And um in that discussion, Bruce Cox mentioned um a trail that I I did send a text to Brandon just so you're aware to make sure he was aware of it that it was included in the trails master plan. He was going to check that, but you might want to follow up with him and see. Bruce Cox is our expert. But the reason I wanted to make sure that gets um it might be in the trails master plan, but I wasn't aware of it and um there is it starts about Smoot Park and you you do have an easement through private property um at the Riby farm and then it goes up the creek bed of Rick's Creek and then you hit some private property and at some point that may be a nice trail head option but we would have to be watching for private property to

you know become available various different ways. So, so I think it should be in the master plan if it's, you know, as a potential something to consider or, you know, ask those um that land owner for an easement something. I will follow up uh council or with Haley uh to see um what these committee other these other committees come up with. Uh but we are welcoming uh any ideas for future America 250 celebrations that any of you may want to uh bring forward.

I just came to mind with those flags. If we purchased those flags and had maybe the youth council or former youth councils in the parade, march down the the street with those flags. Uh there's another option for displaying it too versus up on the light post that we where we put that be an incredible display. Yeah.

Now I do have to say I agree with council member Haymon that these flags that were displayed are prohibited under our current statutes. And that is I know I said we probably won't have a legislative session but this we are not allowed we can only display the official flag of the United States. We are not allowed to display an exempt flag which is the official United States flag with any alteration in color, symbols or appearance which was exactly that flag. It was an alteration. But if you wanted to take one of the options that was given, you can display a historic version of a flag described in 3A or B, which is the official United States flag and the official Utah state flag. So legislative amendment or you cannot display that altered United States flag on government property. Correct.

I'm not talking about this. Okay. I'm talking about historical flags which which was covered there. Okay. Don't tread on me lightly. All that sort of stuff. I'm not talking about this. All right. Well, unfortunately, when I inquired of Haley and uh I I looked up that the the the six to nine most critical flags of various changes in our perfect state in our uh country. They could be in the parade though, right? Like that's the government cannot. So, yeah, it depends what the parade is. If a private individual on government property, right? I I actually went back and pulled up HB477 while we were

Right. But here's what it says. It says may not this is a display a flag in or on the grounds of government property or without mentioning said government property or display an exempt flag described in section three with alterations in color symbols. Ah that's really now let's hope it but but what read the one again where it said talk about historical. Oh yes but these are exempt flags. These mean you can display these flags on government property. a historic version of a flag described in 3A and 3B, which is the official flag of the United States. And and so you can have a historic official flag of the United States and a historic official state flag. So all of those are allowed.

And that one set he was talking about, but versions of not this one. I mean, to me though, like it just illustrates my point as to why I was so offended that the legislature prohibits us as a city from deciding which flags to display because this is a great flag. This is a lovely flag that celebrates our 250th um anniversary as a country and the legislature prohibits us from displaying that flag on government property. I Anyway, I'm I I will get off of my soap box now, but thank you. But according to your interpretation, all of us can display that personally on this das. Right.

Absolutely. If you're doing so in your individual capacity, and I'd fully support that.

So, but yeah, I like the idea of the historical flags either being up on the light post or in the parade. What a That's a great idea as well, too. And then we have those for future as well, too. Okay. Uh mayor report. Um so every four years was integrated waste management does a retreat because there's election turnover in mayor's offices and council offices. So they had a week ago Saturday uh a retreat um and there was some interesting stuff that come came out of it. Nothing that we voted on. It was just a retreat but it was the theme of Wasuch Integrated Waste Management looking forward. And obviously there's all there's been talk over the last couple three years of, you know, our our dump running out of room and we're transferring uh you know garbage. We're doing runs of of trucks out past uh uh in Utah County out past Eureka. We we're dumping out there. So we talked about uh future transfer stations. One one spot is we owned five acres next to uh the bountiful dump uh that's in some trade years back and Nathan Rich always thought it wasn't big enough but uh we had some people come in and report and show us transfer stations built throughout this state. One one in Lynen, Utah. I think it was Lynden it's on like an acre acre and a half uh that goes underground in tunnels you know you wouldn't you wouldn't even know it's there. Uh uh and so um he was saying we could do that potentially with that 5 acres we have down in Battlefield. So we're just looking at solutions uh what we can do as our landfill fills up. Um so I thought you might find that interesting. Um the second thing is that

um during that meeting uh you know the first thing they they they went back through with us. It was a reminder to me. This always bugged me when I became mayor and I went to these outside boards. Now, Gina has it with sewer board. Uh Shayen has it with mosquito abatement board is we have a respons a legal responsibility first to that organization we represent. Uh and I always argued that. Wait, I'm the mayor of Centerville going up to serving on the Wasatch Integrated Waste Management Board, but my first responsibility is to do what is best for Wasuch Integrated Waste Management, and that is what the legal responsibility is. and and I've challenged uh mult numerous attorneys. Lisa is looking at me kind of strange. Numerous return attorneys on that and kept saying no because I'm going to represent Centerville and they said your responsibility is to this organization. Okay. Um now with that said uh obviously the various board members on on these sewer board, dump board, mosquito board, uh wreck board, uh they uh are going to have a bias towards their city uh and think what's best for their city and a lot of times they vote that way. But my hat was off to uh Mayor Joy Pro from Leighton who was the chair of Wasuch Integrated Waste Management a couple years ago and battled and battled and battled for the dump while her council and city manager was wanting to pull out pull out of Leighton's relationship with the dump. I mean, she went through months and months and months of abuse over that because all her council wanted out and uh the city manager did and but

yet she was staying firm as chair of was such integrated management doing what was best for the dump. Now, why do I bring that up? Because those of us sitting those positions, it makes it a tough thing. It was brought up a couple weeks ago that hey with the fire board, Brandt is on the administrative board, me on the board, board of directors that we uh need to be doing what we can else uh maybe we should be off and we should have somebody else representing us there. Okay. But we are going to have a bias towards that's why those city administrators uh battle so much with the administration committee with the board because they're both representing their city and the assessment they get in their city. You know, we get we got a $1.2 million exemption. Battle is a uh two 1.2 million assessment, excuse me. Battlefield has a 2.9 million assessment. So, they're always battling what they is best for their city even though they should be representing the fire board. So, with that said, uh I just want you to know that I've always battled saying, "Wait, I represent my city." But legally, uh whoever of us that serve on those boards has a responsibility towards that board they serve on and what's doing what's best for that board. Am I am I wrong on that, Lisa? I mean, uh

interesting. Yeah, I've gone back and they do I mean the boards do want representation from its members which sort of seems inherent that you're there.

I've gone back and forth with Todd Godfrey on that. I've gone back and forth with the the church guy that was in before I forget his name. I back and forth with uh the attorney of Kurt uh Kurt Maki that represents Wasuch Integrated Waste Management. So that's the thing we have to balance when when we're we're on those boards. we do obviously think of our own cities and what's going on but uh but that's the thing we have to balance. Now, with that said, uh and this is all we did have a close session last night at the fire board, but but uh I can report on what was in the open session. uh the the the five mayors and the uh the county commissioner which make up the commission members. Uh they they they agreed that uh for the time being that uh authorized the board for a short period of time to approve a consultant to help out the chief since the chief has no deputies right now. uh to engage in a consulting contract for a short period of time for somebody that's served in that air uh in the fire area to help. They also uh approved going out and we used to have two deputy chiefs. Chief Stewart went to one deputy chief and for training purposes and development, uh it's probably not a great idea. Um so they approved going back to two deputy chiefs and they also approved initiating a process uh in uh what we do going forward in finding a new chief. also brought up was that at some future time very in the near future uh it was this was brought up in the public meeting too that we'll be looking uh at because we had two members of our board after the death of Chief Stewart that went out and did interviews uh to find out best practices. Uh so we will

be discussing the future the the how we run the admin board and uh the um the the commissioners uh and also if uh a member of the county commission should be uh on on on the fire board or not. They're not on North Leighton's fire board. So uh they they traditionally bought that because they give about 330,000. So so we'll be discussing that further too. So I I could see some some potential changes uh coming or or maybe not. But um so that's that's the the uh the the two big things that I had since our last couple meetings in regards to um uh the outside boards that I serve on. Um,

mayor, can I just ask you, has there been some some additional enhancement of mental health assistance to our firefighters who've been through two tragedies in a very short period?

Yeah, there have. Yeah. Yeah, they have. They have accessible to the organization as a whole and individuals uh mental mental counseling. Yeah. And uh many of us has off have offered other organizations well too but but uh um they they they've been fulfilling that need the best the best that we can see. So um okay I think that's all I have unless anybody has a question for me. Um I don't know if Brent's on or not but anybody have it's sounds like he's not. Uh uh so anybody have nobody's assigned a report for him. So no city manager report. I don't believe we have a close session tonight. Uh have I missed anything that anybody else uh feels we need to bring up?

If not, I'll look for a motion to journ. So moved. Motion uh second. Second. burned.