City Council - Regular Meeting

If you read over the document and you have any questions, feel free to email me or text or call. I'd love to talk about it with you. Last thing is I'd like to bring a few more concerned neighbors. Every neighbor I've talked to is concerned about this, but I don't want to waste their time. I want to bring them when the general plan is actually going to be discussed. I don't have a good feel for when that might be. Is there any idea here when those discussions may start to happen?

the agenda uh i don't know do you uh it's the next priority that we have for sure so in terms of the next meeting or the meeting after that i think the next meeting work session more likely i would suggest we have a game plan or strategy to determine what meetings we have so we need to have a kickoff meeting so to say yeah so I suspect the next meeting. We've got to get through the budget. It really has become the priority.

So it's like it's going to be the meeting after the next meeting?

This meeting tonight, we finish up with the approval of the tentative budget. Okay. And then we'll get into it. other stuff after that. You're specifically talking about the general plan, right?

Yeah. I would say June 16th work session would probably be the next 530 when we would probably discuss it.

It might change.

Watch for the agenda on Friday night when it goes out, but I would say June 16th would be tentatively what we're

But he would not, he's saying he maybe wants to bring some neighbors and comment, which the work session wouldn't be a public hearing.

No, but they can comment during the open session in the city council meeting of like, we just heard this and here are our thoughts so far, if they want to do it that way.

Which is fine. I just wanted, I just wanted you to understand the way that would look.

there'll be public hearings along the way regardless of council you can decide where they are and what that looks like but definitely for sure prior to any approval there'll be a public hearing open to the public and you realize the general plan covers i know there's a lot there's a lot yeah it's a plan for the whole city just not borderline yeah i would still bring your people

I'm the rebel. I was where you were for a long time. So your strategy, I would bring the people on the 16th and let us hear from them. The general plan, if things go kind of the way I would like, it's going to be strung out over quite a while so that we can have plenty of time to look at each area. but for you to try to watch that and time it on that right area I would bring the people so that we have that information because I'm going over it a little bit almost every day and making notes so I can put that in that area and then you can contact us again as you're watching us go through it but I would bring those people in and let us hear from them because I think it's important that we hear from the people okay thank you thanks everybody and hopefully Lon I know that our public works director Mark Carlson

Caught up with Sherry Lindstrom in the hall.

I received a letter this week.

Hopefully you were out there. Maybe you were sitting here listening to our meeting. I was in here. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah, but she kind of briefed me on it. Okay. Go ahead.

Okay.

Yeah, and I thought you meant specifically discussing Porter Lane. Yeah, Brett and I have been talking about getting the general plan boom as soon as we can. So, yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Others?

Hi, everybody. My name is Joey Wilson. I live on the northwest corner of the city in the Woods Park division. I'm having a little bit of an issue that I've been working on for the past year and a half with the city. I've been talking with Mike Carlson. Is he here, by the way? Yes. Joey, good to see you. So the issue here, if I can just give you a little bit of context, because I think it's important here. UDOT bought our HOA's property when they had to put in the new construction on the freeway there. West Davis stuff, yeah. So they took over the property that we were maintaining, we owned, our HOA owned it, and we kept it really nice. had grass and everything. They had to take it, nothing we can do about that. They bought it from us, and they put in a new sidewalk, brought the frontage road over a little bit, and they left a little strip between our neighborhood and the sidewalk. And that has drainage systems. You know, UDOT is the, if you go look at the parcel, UDOT is the owner of that land. It's not being maintained. So the first thing that I did is we were kind of like, this is kind of a mess over here. Trash is building up in there. So I approached UDOT and just said, hey, are you guys going to maintain this? UDOT pointed me to state code 73-2-102. And that basically passes the responsibility down to the city. And they said, look, in these situations, this is a common situation. It has to go to the city. So I, of course, contacted the city, said, hey, here's what the code says. The city responded, Mike responded, and said, actually, city code 11-02-030 references park strip maintenance. and says that's basically on you guys because you are the abutting property owner is the term that's used in the legal documents. We are not the abutting property owner. And the reason I can say that with confidence is that we don't own the land between the sidewalk and our fence. It's not like Park Strip where my land comes up to the sidewalk and I need to mow the lawn on that other side of the sidewalk, right? This is frontage road, park strip, sidewalk, UDOT land, our HOA fence lines. So Mike referenced that, hey, you guys are just like all of the other HOAs along the frontage road, you just need to take care of it yourself. But if you go look at the map, you will see that every one of those HOAs along the frontage road is the abutting property owner. In our case, we do not own that land and there are drainage systems in there that I'm sure you don't want us crawling around it. There's possibility of screwing those up, putting stuff in them, whatever. The land needs to be maintained. Uh, we're not trying to pass the buck on anybody. I mean, in a lot of ways, it's probably would be easier for us to go out there with our loppers, but the city needs to give us an answer. And it's been a year and a half, and I don't want to throw Mike another bus or, or Lisa or anybody who I've been emailing, but I've been emailing about this issue for a year and a half. And I recently sent another followup to Mike and Lisa, maybe one other person I can't remember and said any word on this. And keep in mind, this is 18 months in now since I first emailed. They didn't respond. And so I'm here to bring it to the public and do it here. So that's kind of where I'm trying to get this done.

Thank you. I've heard what you said. I'll have to talk with Lisa. I'll have to talk with Mike. I don't know that other council members, if you've texted or emailed any of us or not. I have not because I haven't brought it to this level yet. If you've emailed me, I've missed it.

I haven't brought it to any of the city council at this point. The only ones I know for sure, Mike and Lisa, have been on those emails. What I would love is if you have a different legal analysis of where I'm wrong about my argument, I would love to hear it. Um, I'm open to that. I'm not trying to get away with something here. Uh, it, but we are not the budding property owner, so you can't put the park strip, uh, ordinance on us there or whatever it is.

Ordinance or it might be helpful to see specifically what you're talking about when I just pulled up the Davis county. property search just to see. I can't see where it is different than what Mike has said. So it might be helpful if you have a map that you could show us. I absolutely can. So I could understand exactly where you're talking about.

Yeah, would you like to do that now?

We probably can't talk about it because it's open session, but I'm just saying.

I've actually already had, that's been in my emails to Mike and Lisa, is an actual screenshot of the exact, the property.

If you could maybe just email it to us so we can see it.

Would that be the next step to kind of, is just email the council members and just kind of, maybe I can just forward the chain so you can see the dates that everything was said and. Yeah, I'd be more than happy to show you the map and show you where there's, and the reason why is there's, it's just this little sliver where UDOT had to put those drains in. And so that's why they kept the land. Otherwise we would love to own it and we'll go do whatever we want. We'll make it look awesome and put some rocks up and, you know, make it look nice. But right now it's just growing weeds and who knows what back there, you know, dead raccoons and stuff. So it's a little bit of a mess. So, all right, next step then would be I'll email everybody and yeah, like I said, I'm totally open to a different legal analysis, but I would like to actually have a decent answer on this because it just seems like it's been so long.

Yeah, get a map to us, and I'm one that's a visual guy, so I'll probably take a ride out there with Mike or something to look at it.

Yeah, absolutely. And you know what? I live on the other side of the fence. So if you would like, I'll give you my contact info, and I work at home, so I can easily just jump out of my desk and walk around the fence and come meet you guys and kind of show you what I'm seeing. All right. Thank you so much for your time. I appreciate you guys. I really do. Thank you.

Others for the open session? All right, seeing nobody else, we will move on from the open session. Let's go to our business items. So in, thank you, see you. In approving the interim budget tonight or adopting the interim budget, There are some new things that are required because of truth and taxation. I went to the league meeting yesterday. I wanted to say what I thought of their new truth and taxation stuff. But anyway, this is what we're going to do. We're going to try and follow it. So the first item is a notice to the public the city intends to state in the public meeting that the fiscal year 2027 tentative budget includes a proposed property tax rate increase. Okay, so if you recall, council, when we approved this, was it four weeks ago, Brent had to make these statements. And now I get to make these statements, okay? So I'm gonna read to you on this that, This agenda item is to provide notice to the public that the city intends to state in the public meeting that the city is considering levying a tax rate that exceeds the city's certified tax rate and the fiscal year 2027 tentative budget includes a proposed property tax rate increase. So I think by making that statement then I have met that notice, correct? Yes. So anything we need to do on that or can I go into two? Because that's not anything we're voting on there.

Just making a statement there, okay?

All right, so we're okay going to item number two?

Just really quick, at least in the stack report, it said that the mayor should also read into the record the second paragraph and the bullet points listed in the background. Do we need to do that before we move on? I think that's the next one. The actual statement. Oh, okay, okay, okay. We're moving on. Sorry. Just making sure we're covering all our bases.

Okay, the next item, moving to item number two on our agenda. This is a tax annuity statement that the fiscal year 2027 potential budget includes a proposed property tax rate increase. This does have a resolution with it. Resolution 2026-13. So the first thing I will read is this agenda item is to provide the city council as the governing body of a fiscal year tax entity the opportunity to state in the public meeting that the city is considering levying a tax rating that exceeds the city's certified tax rate and the fiscal year 2027 tentative budget includes a proposed property tax rate increase. The City Council statement is intended to include and satisfy the fiscal year tax entity obligation under Utah Code 59-2-919-4BI. And that I also need to read, yeah, the second paragraph. OK. The City Council, as the governing body of a fiscal year tax entity, shall state at the public meeting of the City Council held on June 2, 2026, that the City is considering levying a tax rate that exceeds the City's certified tax rate and the fiscal year 2027 tentative budget includes a property tax rate increase. Cedarville City is considering levying, these are the bullet points. Cedarville City is considering levying a tax rate that exceeds the city's fiscal year certified tax rate. The second bullet point, the approximate dollar amount of the additional ad valorem tax revenue that would be generated by the proposed tax rate increase is $369,103. The third bullet point is the purpose for the additional ad valorem tax revenue that would be generated by the proposed tax rate increase includes funds for new police officer position and related equipment and operational costs, medical insurance increases, and the South Davis Metro Fire Assessment increase. Additional information regarding the purpose for the additional tax revenue is set forth in the taxing entity's proposed property tax statement. Fourth bullet point, the approximate percentage increase in the ad valorem tax revenue for the city based on the proposed tax rate increase is 15.84%. And the fifth bulletin, if the city proceeds with the proposed tax rate increase, the city will provide notice of and conduct a public hearing as required by law at which members of the public will have an opportunity to provide comments on the proposed tax rate increase. Okay, I think I've done all my reading on that one. Did I miss anything on that one?

Just the reference to in the third bullet point is the property tax impact schedule. I think you just said tax statement. So just that correction to the third bullet.

Okay, so on the third bullet point, the one that says the purpose for the additional ad variant would be generated by the proposed tax rate increase includes that one? Last sentence. Last sentence, okay. So how do I need to clarify that?

Just referencing the taxing entity's proposed property tax impact schedule.

OK. So the additional tax rate was set for the tax entity's proposed property tax impact schedule. OK. So this is resolution 2026-13, and this resolution goes over what I just read. And so is there questions on resolution 2026-13 for Nate or for Brant at all, or myself? Okay, so do we have a motion to approve resolution 2026-13?

I'll make a motion that we approve the proposed property tax rate increase resolution number 2026-13. Second.

A motion is second for the discussion. Okay. We'll take a vote on it. Councilwoman Mecham?

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Councilman Beggar? Aye.

Yes, this is Councilman Bangerter. I'm going to oppose and vote nay for the reason I do support that we do need somewhat of a property tax increase. I believe that we could have done so with a lesser amount by making some specific cuts, belt tightening and other areas. And so I'm opposing the resolution based on the fact that I think at 15.8% is too high.

Okay, so we have four yeas and one nay. All right, let's go to item number three. This is the tax entity's presentation of the property tax impact schedule. This is resolution 2026-14. So I'm gonna present that. You've seen it before. That's in your material. So it's just beyond the resolution. So the property tax impact schedule, this shows the 369.103 that I referenced earlier. Nate, do you want me to continue to go on or am I? Please go ahead. Okay. So the approximate percentage increase of 15.84% in tax revenue is based on the proposed tax rate levy of .001390 and would generate approximately $369,103 in additional property tax revenue for the city. The projected $369,103 in additional property tax revenue is included in the presented interim fiscal year 2026-27 federal general fund budget. The proposed increase in tax liabilities is being proposed to fund the following. Medical insurance increases, $83,401. New police officer position, $250,000. South Davis fire assessment increase, $35,702. Those three amounts equal the $369,103. And then in the property tax impact schedule, which you all have and the public has too, obviously, because put out with the packet, it then goes on to show our current property tax rate. proposed rate. And then we have more detail making up the 83,401 of the medical increases by each department. I won't necessarily I don't think that I'm required to go through that by department. It's there in front of you for you and the public. But each, the one, two, three, what, about 10, 11 departments equal to 83, 401. You see the $250,000 on the police, and then you see the fire tax increase of $35,702 equaling that $369,000 figure. Okay, so I think I've covered everything on that, that I'm supposed to stay with the new truth in taxation stuff from the legislature. Questions?

Just a comment, Mayor. Yes. So part of the law says that we need to have this available at the meeting, so I just want to note that it is here on this back table by the door. I have both the originally adopted version that we adopted when we presented the tentative budgets as well as this revised version that is presented for you tonight. So I just wanted to make note of that for the public that it's there if they want a copy of it.

And thank you on that because not only is it in the packet, but you have a handout there, and that's what this resolution is about, to include the property tax impact schedule as part of the fiscal year 2027 interim budget. So members of the public, those handouts are back there. So thank you. Anything else? Okay. Any further questions on that before I ask for a motion for Resolution 2026-14? If not, then I'll ask for a motion on 2026-14.

I'll move that we approve resolution number 2026-14.

Second.

Motion to second. Further discussion? All right. Councilwoman Heyman, go into my right.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Councilman Beggar?

Nay, for reasons previously stated.

Okay, that's a four to one that passes. So we are now on to... Item number four. This is a public hearing matter. This is a public hearing on executive municipal officers' compensation. And this is why Nate came up to the front. I think you have information in your packet, but he's going to go over this in a little more detail. Right, Nate?

Yes. Thank you, Mayor. So this law was put into effect two or three years ago that requires us, before we have a hearing on the final budget, we need to hold this hearing regarding municipal executive officers' compensation that's being proposed in the budget. So the law defines an executive officer as the city manager, assistant city manager, the city attorney, the head or chief of a department or division, and the assistant chief or deputy of a head head or chief of a department or division so before you we have in the second the second paragraph in that packet we list out all the different positions that that affects you'll note that for compensation increases we have the proposed 2.9 percent cost of living increase and then that second item We put a 0 to 5% discretionary merit increase. And the reason we put 0 to 5 is because we follow the same format that we've discussed, that each department is allocated 2% to be allocated among the department, which means that a department head or one of these employees may get a little bit more than the 2% or a little bit less, depending on merit. So we just put that 0 to 5 just to cover the broad spectrum of it.

So could they all get five?

In theory, yes, they could.

Because with the regular employees, if you give somebody a little more, you've got to give somebody a little less. I just don't want employees to feel like we're doing something different.

Yeah, no, we're following the same procedure that we do for the entire city. They're just part of it. All these executive officers, they follow the same protocol. So in theory, is it possible? Yes. In practice, has it happened since I've been here? No.

But so I don't understand why if the employees can get zero to 2% and we're saying they can get zero to five.

No, the employees can get, there's no real limit, uh, other than the department gets 2% as a whole and they can allocate it where they see fit based on merit. Um, So that means you can get more than 2%, or you can get down to zero. So that's why we put that broad spectrum of zero to five.

But the overall department cannot exceed 2%. Correct. So it is the same as- But he just said, yes, they could all get five. I agree, but I'm wondering if he was not understanding what you were asking. Can you just clarify?

That's what you said. The entire department still has that 2%.

There's a cap of 2% on the entire department's budget. Could all of the municipal officers get 5% potentially, but they still have to be a total of 2% total?

That means none of the employees would get a raise to help fund that.

Am I getting it, or is that you what?

None of the employees would get a raise below supervisor if that was the case. They'd have to make up the 5% for all these positions. Their leadership positions.

So it comes out of that same.

The same pot. So public works is public works. Police is police. It's not a separate.

Okay. I was thinking this was separate. I just didn't want them to feel like we were.

No, no. It's within their department still.

Oh, I think that was a good point to bring out.

Yeah. Sorry for the confusion.

Yeah.

And while there's no vote on this, there is a public hearing that needs to be had. Okay.

With this new change in the statute, they now describe municipal executive officers, but they also talk about statutory officers. And you can adopt statutory officer compensation by ordinance after a public hearing. So we're having this public hearing on statutory officers, which would be city treasurer, finance director, city attorney, city manager, police chief, which are statutorily appointed, and then also the public hearing on the municipal compensation. So they overlap, but there's a few different positions. So I just wanted to clarify that.

So is the city manager a statutory officer or a municipal executive officer? Both.

Depends on your form of government.

As is the city attorney and the police chief. But the city recorder is an appointed statutory officer and the treasurer is but they are not under the definition of executive municipal officers. Just to make it fun. Wow. That's complicated.

Question?

Yes. Go ahead, Councilman Banger.

Just curious, in the last two or three years, what percent has this number been for administrative staff?

Just on average, you mean, for all those positions?

Yeah, this year we're considering 5%, as we are for the whole city. What percent was given in the last two or three years?

I don't know specific employees. But again, we follow the same process that the department's allocated, 2%. So the average throughout the city has been 2%?

Well, but there's been a cost of living increase plus the potential merit increase of two. I'm just curious. That totals five this year, or it's proposed at five. What's it been last? Have they consistently been making 5% a year more?

No. So the cost of living has been based on CPI for the western region. from December to December. So that's varied every year. I don't know if you remember what it was, Brant. I don't remember prior years exactly. I don't know what it was last year.

It was kind of similar, I think. I feel like it was close. 2.5? Yeah, it might have been that.

I think it was 2.5. I was thinking, but I don't remember. I got it real quick. It's a bookmark for me.

Rick, when you're asking 5%, are you asking about COLA and merit collectively? Yes. Am I understanding what your question is? Okay.

Yes. 2.5.

I think, I mean, it depends because the COLA has varied from year to year. There was one year right after COVID that it was, I mean, I think we were at 7% total. 6.2 in 2022.

It was 6.2 then and 3.6 in 2023. Okay.

But this 0% to 5%, Rick, is just the COLA.

It isn't including the cost of living. No, 2.9% is COLA, he said. Correct? Yes. And the rest is merit, totaling 5% this year. If it's been six and seven in years past, I find that that's important information for me to understand. I BELIEVE WE'RE BEING PLENTY LIBERAL.

SO IN THEORY, THIS YEAR, SOMEONE COULD MAKE UP TO 7.9% IN A RACE. SO IF THEY'RE GIVEN THE 2.9% In the COLA, the 5% of the merit, they'd be at 7.9%. That would be the max you would see, not just these officers, executive officers, but also the staff would be probably around the same amount. Again, staff is not restricted to 0 to 5%, just the executive officers are. But again, you won't see staff. With the 2% bucket that you have for departments to work on, it's hard to get to 5%.

Because the minute you do that, you're going to impact any other employees that maybe were also deserving.

We have really good department heads that I don't think would, they would give it to the employees before they would take it for themselves.

They're very careful with how they use this to motivate or, whether it's because reward them for doing a great job or motivating them to be better. The department heads really take advantage of this to help guide the staff.

Think for me this this particular thing it does give our department heads that flexibility to reward but also it's not it's not so Significant of you know the two percent collectively over a few employees. It's hard. I agree with France Comment, but it does I think it's important that we really do have that give them that opportunity to hang on to our employees that are working really hard and you know, meeting metrics that have been set for the year. So I think I'm okay with what we're doing.

With keeping with what Nate said, what's in our paperwork here, just so we're all, maybe we're all clear, we have a 2.9% cost of living. COLA increase, and a 0% to 5% discretionary merit increase. But the total amount budgeted for that is 2% of the department LIHDA for salary and wages, right? Correct. OK. And his question was prior years, and we're thinking it's similar without going back and looking at it for sure. Is that correct?

Yeah. Our methodology has not changed in that we recommend the cost of living to be the CPI-based and then the 2% for each department to allocate for the merit. So that methodology has been here for as long as I've been here.

Is the merit typically 2%? I mean, it seems like that has typically been that way. But I mean, just just for I mean, I think Councilman Baker asked a good question. He's trying to understand what's been done in the past. So I guess I'm thinking that might be helpful as well.

Yeah, I would say most of your employees are about 2%.

But as Brant mentioned, but I mean, every like each year when you come and present the budget, it seems like that merit has typically been

And I believe we reduced it this year.

The 2% has been the proposal for seven years now. So CPI plus 2% has been the way we've done it the last seven years.

So the cola berries, the 2% has been the same for seven years. I'm just trying to get that, you know, provide that standard basis for council.

And this next year we'll do a compensation study to see where we are. And the hope is that we have maintained fair competitive wages. But it's important to to check ourselves against our neighboring cities and other cities. So we'll find out where we are in the next, and we'll determine if in seven years the methodology has worked, and if not, then maybe we need to make some changes to the methodology. So that'll be an opportunity to reevaluate how we do things after we do the compensation study.

All right, thank you. Like, you're not voting on anything here, but like Nate says, this is required. by law to do a public hearing on this. So I will go to the public hearing in regards to executive municipal officers' compensation. Any of the member of the public is free to comment. Just state your name and where you're from. That is now open. Seeing nobody on line, right, Jennifer? Seeing nobody commenting, I will close that public hearing. And like I say, we're not voting on anything here, but if you need further clarification before we go to our next line item, which is a... Mayor, sorry, could I just make a comment on the last item?

So the public hearing that you announced was only on the executive municipal officer compensation which is accurate what my statement that we were combining them is is not true we scheduled this as a completely separate because the law does require that that public hearing has to be separate and so we are doing the public hearing for the statutory officers with the next item which is the compensation

Right. And I think I said that we were going to public hearing for the executive municipal officer.

Yes, you did. I just wanted to clarify.

So we will be having another public hearing on the employee compensation schedule that we go to next. And that's where I just give, before we go to that one, I've given you an opportunity to counsel to have all your questions satisfied. So hearing nothing else coming forward, Then I will go to item number five on the agenda. This is the public hearing on the employee compensation schedule. This one does have an ordinance, 2026-15. So, Nate, you want to give any further background on this?

Yeah, no. As Lisa mentioned, each year we update our employee compensation schedule with any changes to our positions and ranges. You'll see the attached schedule there. And for this year, it just reflects a 2.9% difference above last year.

And just to remind you of the way our ranges work and the way we maintain our competitive or fair, I shouldn't say competitive, it's fair wages, is that we shift the pay scale with the COLA. So some cities will keep it stagnant so employees start topping out and things like that. So we shift, the 2.9% will shift all the wages. Now... So it just keeps it updated. And so again, the compensation schedule, the compensation study will show that we have been maintaining that 60% market rate. That's the hope.

Which is hopefully what we've done. That's the goal, right?

Yeah, 60% market rate.

So you probably have all seen this before. It's there in your packet, the employee compensation schedule. the ranges with the minimum, mid, maximum. And so those are there for all the positions, annual and hourly amounts. So that's what the ordinance is about to approve.

But we do have to do a public hearing.

I'll go to a public hearing unless you have more questions on that schedule. Okay, so now we are going to a public hearing in reference to the employee compensation schedule. So any of the member of the public, you're open to stating questions you have or comments that you have. Just state where you're from and your name, and that public hearing is now open. Seeing no comments, I will close that public hearing and we will come back to that employee compensation schedule, which is part of ordinance 2026-15. Any further questions on what we're doing there? Okay, then I will look for a motion. in reference to ordinance number 2026-15.

I'll move that we adopt ordinance number 2026-15. Second.

I have a motion to second. Further discussion? All right, let's vote. Councilwoman Hurst, go into the right.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Councilman Bangerter. Councilman Bangerter, given the climate we're in, I think we could set a little better example, tighten the belt a little more. I understand and I appreciate we have wonderful employees that deserve more money than they could ever be paid, but I think in a year that we're suggesting a 15% increase and other considerations, it's a little too too liberal, and I think that we could have saved a little bit of money there and still appreciate, love, and help our employees. The only way to do that, it's not the only way to show and give that gratitude and appreciation to financially reward them to degrees that we all wish we could do to an even greater amount. And specifically and understandably with the administrative part, I think an example could be set there. So I'm going to vote nay.

All right, that motion passes four to one. Okay, let's go to item number six. This is the Justice Court Judge Compensation. This is resolution 2026-15. I'm kind of excited for this one. This is kind of neat. Nate knows my feeling on this one.

So, Nate, go ahead. Thank you, Mayor. Hopefully you've had a chance to read the attached letter that we received from the state regarding the judge's compensation. In a nutshell, how it works is the state legislature sets the range, the salary for a district court judge. And then from there, a full-time justice court judge's salary is set. And then for a part-time judge like we have in our justice court, the salary range is set based on the workload of a full-time justice court judge. So according to the state's administrative offices of the court, they say that our justice court has the workload at 22% of the workload of a full-time justice court judge. And you can see that it recommends, or that it sets the salary range at $34,611 to $44,500. Another rule that the state has is that the judge should receive generally the same compensation increase as the average employee of the municipality that they serve. And then the third stipulation is that despite fluctuations in workload, the state constitution does not allow a judge's salary to be reduced during his or her term in office. So you can see that because of that, we recommend keeping the judge's salary, that it remain at $61,170.75. And that's because although the workload has decreased, and even though he's above the range, we cannot lower his salary because of the state constitution. So we're recommending that we just keep his salary the same. Is that clear, did I cover everything?

Yes, well said.

So you'll see a letter in there, and this is where, and God bless our legal people, including my father, bless him, he was an attorney and a judge. But their letter doesn't make any sense, because they put in black that they highlighted bold that they recommend we pay our judge 34 to 44, but yet we're paying him 56. They don't make any sense to me at all whatsoever. Because they say that in their letter. And that's where I said to Nate, well, then I guess we need to drop it. I appreciate what Judge Miller does. But if his workload's decreased, and that's what they're suggesting, and that's in their letter, well, I've always been taught that what's in writing is a legal document. But somehow we got to get the state law or whatever to supersede what the rules are and go to what they suggest in their letter. So that's where Nate heard it from me on that one. So, you know, I get this letter coming to me. Oh, great. That's what we're paying our judge. But no, we have to pay more because of what he just said. Uh, so does everybody understand that one or any other questions?

Can I just clarify? So is he getting, he's getting a cola increase or something? What is that statement about? He has to be increased at the same average pay increase for all County or municipal employees.

So this is kind of the mayor's point where it gets confusing. Um, because he should, uh, receive that same increase as the average. So I would say percent of the average would be the 2.9% COLA plus the 2% merit. However, he's already above his range.

So because he's above, he doesn't get the COLA and the, okay.

So last year he got a, I don't remember what the increase was. It was a small increase because he was maxed out at the top of the salary range. So he didn't get the full average increase. But last year he was topped out at the range, but then our workload decreased this year. So now he well exceeds the range.

So last year the workload was higher and he was about 30%.

This has been, he was about 30% last year, 30% workload. Okay. And this year we're, 22%, which is referencing the previous year. Right.

So it's not, yeah.

So for the last few years, we've had this issue where he's either been maxed out at the range or I think two years ago he was above the range and we just kept it steady. Um, so yeah, this has been a, a reoccurring thing here.

Yeah. I mean, I know he's been like at the, like above or at the top of the range, The 22% workload, I think, is where I'm getting a little concerned because I'm thinking.

The next letter you will see, we've seen more activity in the court, so I anticipate that workload. And next year's letter will go back up to 30% or so. I anticipate that.

Is that why some cities or jurisdictions change judges a lot? So if we had another judge, would we bring them in

low i mean is that why sometimes people change judges a lot i don't think they change they're elected so they're elected to six-year terms but i don't necessarily think they change other than the judge decides they want to step down no longer want to be a judge okay but if they run for re-election i don't know 95 of the time they're re-elected so the retention election and generally they're retained at a high rate so usually it's the judge who

retires or moves himself or there's an age limit so judge miller has to run every so many years to stay our judge he doesn't really run it's just it's a retention it's just remember on your ballot will say shall this judge be retained so nobody else can come in and try and go against another right i mean i don't know that's when i see the ballot that's what it says shall this person be retained

I don't think all judgeships are that way. You can have people who can file to run with some of the judge positions. But wouldn't they do away with that?

Well, in other states, all judges are appointed.

Wouldn't they do away with that?

Before I was a lawyer.

Because my dad ran for district court judge. That's how he got in. Because he was a politician before that. I guess they can't do that anymore. That's good to know.

Okay.

It's just a yes or no. Okay. All right. Further questions on that?

What would happen if they get nos?

Then they wouldn't be elected and then we would appoint a new judge.

So do they have to get a certain amount of yeses?

50% to 50 plus 1, whatever it might be.

I think our judge is fine. Nothing to do with our judges. This is just all interesting information.

It is fascinating. And Judge Miller is in, I think, his third or fourth year of his six-year term.

Okay. Oh, this isn't a public hearing matter. Further questions on it?

There's a resolution with this one.

So if not further questions, then I need a motion on the resolution 2026-15.

I'll make a motion that we adopt resolution number 2020-15, fixing the compensation of the municipal justice court judge of the Centerville City Justice Court.

I second that.

Motion to second. Further discussion? Councilman Palmer, go on to the right. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Councilman Banger? Aye. That motion passes unanimously. Okay, let's go to item number seven. This is a public hearing matter. This is the fiscal year 2027 interim budget resolution 2026-16. So you have a bunch of

information in your packet but uh nate what has changed since uh they approved the tentative budget four weeks ago anything uh just the items that we talked about last week which are the related to training and education and the mayor and council budgets and the admin budget as well as the community services budget they've all decreased based on our discussion at our last meeting. The only other slight change that we had is you'll notice on the revenue that our property tax now has a new line called property tax increase. And the reason for that is because of the new law that was passed this year that says that the city needs to set aside in a restricted budget account an amount of the taxing entity's general fund revenue that is no less than the amount of the additional ad form tax revenue. that would be generated by the taxing entity's proposed tax increase. So that is, you'll see that $369,103 is set aside in that special revenue line that's titled property tax increase. And again, that's based on that new law. Just to remind you of the other code that we do need to adopt a budget, By June 30th, unless the city is pursuing a property tax increase through truth and taxation, in which case we will adopt what we now call an interim budget. And that is to get us from July 1st until a final budget is adopted. And so that's what you have before you tonight is the interim budget. Just a couple of timeline items. The new deadline for the county to get us the tax figures is June 12th or 13th. So we do not have our tax figures yet, but then we do need to set the rate by June 22nd. So we'll do that at our next council meeting. Um, so right now, again, I just left our property tax revenue the same as we received this year, um, and then have that separate line for the, uh, potential tax increase. But next meeting, you'll be able to decide, you'll be able to set the rate and set the truth and tax taxation hearing. Um, is there anything else you want me to add brand? Okay.

Um, do you want to mention the open house potentially?

Oh yeah. So we did hold one open house. Um, my opinion is that a lot of people don't attend until they get notified by the county that the taxes are going to be increased. So those, uh, the letters will be sent by the county to each resident and business, uh, towards the end of July. Um, so I think Brent and I discussed, I think it'd be a good idea to hold another open house in, uh august before our treason taxation hearing i think you might get a little bit better turnout or at least speak people's interest a little bit more well they'll know exactly what the impact is so when we meet with the residents we can help them understand their property tax bill and all that i like that we'll schedule another one

Because you'll definitely have a lot more questions. You see this often where residents may not know what's happening at this level where we are until they get that notice and see what the impact is to them. And then they'll have questions. And we want to create the opportunity to answer those questions.

Are you talking like the week before the 25th? Mm-hmm.

The week or two before? That's when the council set truth in taxation meeting.

Correct. Okay.

I appreciate that they're giving a couple of opportunities. Sometimes people are busy in one moment and not later. I think it's really important that we give them plenty of opportunity to understand, learn, comment, so that they can be part of that process.

If they have any questions in the meantime, they're welcome to give me a call or email and I'm happy to talk it over with them. Historically, we have tabled this item until we get our tax figures. I don't have a strong opinion either way. If you want to adopt the interim budget now or table it another to the next meeting, I'm fine either way. If they table, how long can we table for? So we have to have it adopted by June 30th. So it would be the next meeting?

The next meeting. So it'd be giving them a couple more weeks to read and digest whatever the information is in the interim budget, which may be appropriate.

We've done it in the past. This is a little different this year in the fact that we are, there's still time, I guess, as far as the truth and taxation portion of it, but Yeah, I'm fine to leave it open. We've always done it. I think it's great if somebody wasn't able to be here tonight or missed that this was going on. We just give them a little more time to get an email in.

Historically, you have table until the next meeting. I will say with the new law, I think we definitely have been more up front. open about the changes. And I think there's been a lot of more information we've provided prior to this than we have in the past. So tabling it, I don't know if necessarily it's necessary anymore because the August 25th meeting is where you're going to discuss that 15.84%. And that's where we really want the input because that's already scheduled. So I mean, you have input today. It doesn't necessarily change the August 25th meeting, really, at this point. But, again, it's up to you how you want to proceed.

But the person who makes that motion can take some time to think about it while the public responds because we have to have public hearing first on it. So let's go to that. So I am now opening the public hearing for the fiscal year 2027 interim budget. Anybody that's inclined to comment, just state your name and where you're from. Seeing no comments, I will close that public hearing. And we can come back to, please make sure that if you have Nate here, that you've asked any questions from what he did since the tentative budget took place. He's gone over that with you. It's in your material. Be clear on all that and any other questions you have. You may have a him or Brant. If you don't have any further questions, then look for some sort of motion on Resolution 2026-16.

Mayor, may I just ask one question?

You bet.

This is to Councilman Plummer. Specifically, Brian, with your experience with appraisals and all, do you anticipate property values being appraised higher this year and perhaps generating a little more revenue that in itself? Or I'm just curious what your feel is for that.

That wouldn't give us any more revenue because we're still only allowed to collect the same amount of money. So the only thing that gives us more revenue is new builds. If we didn't have any new builds, even if the appraisals went through the roof, we would still collect the same amount of sales tax.

Property tax.

Property tax.

And Robin, or Council Member Mecham is correct in that assessment and statement. And Council Member Bangerter, Yes, I do have some insight on that and I would say that based upon a lot of new procedures and tools that we've used at the county assessor's office that in fact values will be going up.

Be more accurate.

maybe values will see currently the law states that we must find fair market value on all commercial and residential real property and that is what we have done at the assessor's office and based upon market conditions we have seen those values

And in theory, if the value goes up 20% across the board, certified tax rate goes down 20%, right? That is correct. So the tax rate goes down, so it doesn't collect any more revenue. It stays the same. It's just your tax rate now goes down to compensate for that increase in value. So anyway, that's what will happen.

I don't know how many states, but there's not too many that are that way, correct?

In Arizona, we did it.

Yeah.

We did the same.

So basically, if what Councilman Plummer says is true, people get their property tax bills and they've gone up in value of their homes, their assessment, the tax rate will go down and their taxes from the city should remain the same unless you approve a tax increase in the Truth in Taxation process.

okay thank you so but i do understand there the minimal amount of new builds new new homes or businesses that's a that's a small effect but that'll have a little bearing on on taxes correct correct new growth is in addition to right thank you

I have a weird question. So we've picked our three things which we're upping our property tax for. So if come August we decided not to, you know, we had a thousand people here and we decided not to raise taxes. Do we cut those? Do we have to cut those three things? Or can we go back through our cut budget and decide how we would do it? I mean, I know that's a way if, but just out of curiosity, do we have to say, okay, those three things, I mean, those are things we have to have. A new officer, we wouldn't have to have. We've still got to pay the insurance. We've still got to pay the fire. So would you go back in? Can you still pick, where we approve this budget, can you still go back in and pick and choose to make it balance?

So if you look at the property tax impact schedule, we have a shortfall of $1.5 million balancing this budget. Now again, you have a lot of one-time costs in there, and we have a fund for those one-time costs. But we do have a shortfall of $1.5 million. So we're using $1.17 million to balance this budget. That's from that fund for those capital projects. which is still uncomfortable because that fund is not growing. We're tapping into that fund, and that's not sustainable to tap in that much. So this will generate $369,103. So your options are, if you decide not to do a property tax increase, The medical has to happen. And our fire assessment has to happen. So the decision or our recommendation to staff will be to use fund balance, more fund balance to pay those bills. Now, the police officer is entirely up to you, because that's not a must have. We can live without or we can't live without. So that you could eliminate and save those funds. Unless you wanted to go forward, then you.

But I think what Councilman Maycomb is asking, I think it's a fabulous question. I would think that the new law wouldn't limit us if we don't raise the $370,000 that we could take that $370,000 from somewhere else, even though that's what we have on the property tax impact statement.

Really, we're just trying to be open and transparent of what our challenges are, the increasing costs that we're facing. The $369,000, $370,000 is not all of the increases in inflation that we experienced this year. That's... I mean, overall, our increase is inflation or personnel cost or all of that. I mean, we're looking at $700,000 is what our increase is worth, right?

That kind of panicked me. When I read that, I don't know why. I thought, do we have to just... We just can't spend the money, right?

Okay, I get it now. So this is where it gets tricky is we're asked to put this into a reserve. So in theory, we're putting $369,000 in this reserve account we can't touch. However, we're going to have medical. We're going to have South Davis fire assessment bills we need to pay. So, but we won't dip into that three 69 or that 83,401 for medical until later in the year, hopefully after truth and taxation needs to pass, or we decide we're going to use fund balance, right? So, but we will not recruit for a police officer until that certified tax rate happens. Our meeting in August, the certified tax rate happens as September county processes. And in September to the screen of the chief, We just can't start recruiting that position because the argument is we don't, us as staff can't put you as elected officials in a position that you don't have a choice. And if we've recruited and we've got someone in mind that we want to hire, you as a council can say, we have no choice. We're going to hire. They've already hired the person, so we've got to pay it. That's what the state legislature is trying to prevent from happening, which rarely happens, but those one-off situations cause some concern at the state level, which, again, we're not mad at it. As staff, we're not opposed to this bill and the... I mean, we look somewhat foolish because we're kind of stumbling through all these requirements, but we actually like these changes and how open and more transparent we are with the community and why we need the increase. So, sorry, I went on a spill, but it doesn't mean you can't do it. It just means you've got to find other funding. Okay.

And to further that, you have until or before September 1st, you have to approve a final budget. So regardless of what happens in the truth and taxation hearing... you then have until September 1st to adopt a final budget.

That was my question. Thank you. That answers my question.

That was so much easier to say. But I felt like my answer was very helpful.

Good job, Nate.

I just closed the public hearing so we're back to what you wanted to do in regards to Resolution before you.

Looking for a motion? Yeah. Or discussion? Motion.

I think we're done discussing.

I'll move that we adopt resolution number 2026-16.

Second.

So we have a motion and a second. So we need to vote on that. That means you're not putting it off. So Councilwoman Mecham.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Nay.

Okay, that passes four to one. All right, let's go to, thank you, Nate. Thank you. Let's go to summary action calendar. On our summary action, we have two items. We have a lane striping project in the amount of 35.1. We have a troop hazard grinding in the amount of 45,000. Any questions on these items on summary action? We have a couple people there that could probably help answer. If not, I try to always ask. These are obviously in the budget, right? But any questions on those specific things, where they're at? The bids, if not, then I'll look for a motion to approve the summary action calendar.

I have kind of a weird question that was brought up to me about a week ago that I hadn't thought of until I'm reading this. So somebody has, they've repainted, I guess, the yellow lines fairly recently. And somebody didn't, there's two of them in front of their home. They wanted to know how they could be on the grinding. I mean, I said, I don't think every yellow line's gonna get ground. They said, what if we were willing to pay for half? Would that put us closer to the top of the, I don't even know if we do that. Maybe if not, we should start and we could do twice as much. How much is it to grind one?

Mike's coming up.

So the cost depends on how much they got to grind off. So Mark has his list. We've had several calls of people wanting us to bump him up or whatever, but he always has so much money. He picks the worst ones and we work ourselves down. So depending on where there is that, I don't know if Half paying half is an option. I mean, we got to take care of the worst ones first. Right.

I just was a thought I had never thought about.

Yeah. So he has a list that he follows that is the worst going to the best.

So his list, how long is it and how much do you expect to get done with the amount that we're.

I don't know what he's got on his list, to be honest with you, but he's still got a lot. I mean, it's so much they have, they come in, they grind.

I mean, if we're only going to get a couple of these done, that would be something I would like. You'll get a lot done for less. Okay.

Seven or eight years ago, our quote to fix all of our sidewalks was like $1.2 million to fix. And again, it is a liability if there's accidents. We try to outline and fix the biggest ones first. But again, that's a huge task of trying to repair all of them.

So I wondered if there, not necessarily this year, but if that was a thought of... I can't remember, it used to be $120,000, whatever we do for sidewalks. If it's $120,000, if $20,000 of that was left to be matched with people. So we did the first $100,000 for the worst spots in Centerville, and then that $20,000 could be matched with people that were willing to match it, so we could actually get $40,000 worth done.

yes i've many communities i've been part of that matching program sidewalks and it's it's not a bad deal you do actually get quite a few people who want to participate usually it's to install sidewalk a lot of the times not necessarily repair the sidewalk but i be an interesting thing.

It's just a thought. Like I said, when she asked me, I was like, I don't know.

I would always certainly encourage him to get with Mark and have him just look at it and see what it is. I mean, it goes by case by case. But the thing you have to realize is we can generate a list this year and say this is our plan for the next five years, but you have to realize with the tree growth or whatever's causing the problem for it to uplift, it may change from the very best that we'd never touched to the worst in one year. I mean, that's just depending on how much the trees grow and what have you or whatever's causing the change.

we had that mckenzie did our study as an intern way back in the day and i think it is time that we update that study it is marked in our gis where all these locations are i don't know how if we're keeping up with that mike we could repeat you know we keep using the list but as anything data gets old and needs to be refreshed we do need to go out and reassess where our sidewalks are so that should be on this

I don't know if that answers your question, but I would always encourage him to get with Mark and let him make the decision on what, you know, if it's something he feels like he can work out or whatever, you know, we're more than happy to try to take care of whatever we need to on it. Just a thought. Thank you. So I think, you know, we allow Mark to make the decision. So I, I always let him refer to Mark on that. So, cause he's the one that's, keeping the fingerprint on everything that's going on. Okay, thanks.

Thanks. So we still have in front of us, did you have a question on something?

No, but I'm happy to make the motion.

You betcha, go ahead.

I'll make a motion that we approve the bid award for the lane striping project to RW Striping in the amount of $35,100 and that we also award the bid to Tripp for trip hazard grinding on sidewalks and ADA ramps to precision concrete cutting in the amount of $45,000. I'll just note that in the case of precision concrete cutting, there were no other bidders, so.

I'll second that.

Motion to second. Let's vote. Councilwoman Hayman, go in the mirror.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

That's bigger I Most I suppose passes 5-0. All right. Thank you. Let's go to Minutes, this is the minutes review and approval for May 19th work session and May 19th City Council meeting Is there any changes to those minutes you have in front of you? If not a motion to approve those minutes So moved

I have one suggestion for a change, please. Okay. I don't have that right in front of me here, but it referred to the comment where it was suggested that maybe garage doors be replaced as reducing our budget. It says garage doors. That should say garage door automatic openers.

Rick, are you referring to work session or city council meeting minutes?

And, Jennifer, I'm sorry. I can't remember which meeting that was. I can't bring it up on my screen here where I'm at.

Did you say it said garage door?

It did. Replacement of garage doors.

It said garage door.

Oh, yeah, right here, garage door replacement. Yeah, on line 36 in the work session.

And it just should say garage door automatic opener.

Okay, that's great. Okay, with that change, do I have a motion to approve the minutes? Second?

Second.

All in favor, aye. Aye.

Aye.

All right, that passes unanimously. Let's go to our council report. Today we have Council Member Hirsch reporting on her committee assignments.

Okay. The sewer district, I would really like us to have Matt Myers come and present, just give his update of the construction on the north plant. I know we've been busy with work sessions, but typically we've had them come at least every couple of years. It's been a while. And he has offered to do that. He's willing to do that any time.

No specific dates to fit him in?

He said he'll meet our schedule, so I think as long as we just give him enough notice, you know.

Do you want that at work session or regular meeting?

I don't know that it matters. I mean, maybe a regular meeting so if the public's here, they can hear the .

I think that's right. I think during business presentation, just so that people have an idea. So I just sent a reminder to Jennifer.

I just feel like sometimes I tell you guys what's going on, but he would be able to answer questions better. I don't always understand every nuance of what gets covered. And it is a very big project. Also, the Parks and Rec Committee, they are so amazing. They're doing such a great job. They are planning to do a time capsule and an art project for the 250th celebration of the Declaration of Independence. And they are also starting movies in the park this Friday. At 7 p.m., they'll have Scales and Tells, which is kind of fun for the kids. And then I don't remember what the movie is at 9. Do you remember?

It will tie into that.

Zootopia, I don't know.

It might be, actually. It'll be a kids' movie. This one is specifically for kids. They kind of have different themes for the 4th of July they're going to do. It'll be on the 3rd of July. Zootopia 2. Zootopia 2, you were right. There you go. So awesome. That movie's great. For the 3rd of July, it'll be a league of their own. And I think they're going to have a concert before, like some kind of concert.

They're trying to get local bands.

Yeah, yeah. So anyway, those I think are being advertised through the social media and whatnot. So you can watch for those there. They do vibe, I think, in the summer. The recreation district, I have mentioned before that the last payment on the bond for the construction of the rec center has been paid and they are just considering potential expansion. No decision has been made whether or not that will go to a, I don't know if it's a truth in taxation, but anyway, that's coming up. So I'm just letting you be aware that that board is discussing that and whether or not they will consider doing expansion. It wouldn't necessarily be, increase in property tax per se but it would continue the line item for the you know with a new bond but same I think the idea is that they feel like they could do some expansion and keep it same so I'm not saying that's right or wrong I'm just giving you the information and then I really do think we should I'm not sure what's the right way to do this, but all of the residents in Centerville can go to the rec center for free on a day if we want to select a day. And I think we should do that. But I don't know what, that would be something that staff probably just needs to reach out to Tiff Miller and say, this is the day we would like. So, but I think we should give our residents that opportunity and then advertise for it. And then also, I think that Tiff Miller should also come and present to City Council. So you guys can maybe hear a little bit more about what he's planning on.

When's the last time Tiff came? Don't we get him about yearly usually?

It seems like he was here more recently than the sewer district, but I just had that thought.

Pretty sure he was, yeah.

And if it's been in the last year, I don't think, I mean, I think it's yours. No, I'm not saying we shouldn't. Yeah, I don't know when he came last. I can't remember either. I don't have anything else other than the LPC started yesterday, but I wasn't able to attend, so the mayor will have to report on that.

Thank you. Any questions for Councilwoman Hurst? Anything pressing on any of your boards or committees? that you're over.

Just quickly, you mentioned the time capsule.

Yeah.

And she, or the committee was talking about the council and the mayor and us writing letters. And that's something that, just to give you a heads up, that that is something to consider. The ceremony to close the capsule will be on 4th of July celebration.

Probably during the evening entertainment.

And it's going to be a nice capsule that they're going to afford and there'll be items that are placed in that capsule such as I think we talked about a flash drive and maybe some I don't know, pictures or some items that might be small enough to fit in there, but they had mentioned or suggested that we write letters of how we would see Centerville in 50 years. As to that would be when they would reopen the capsule. At the 300th anniversary of the United States.

Yes, and I think another point we should bring up is we may have suggested that they not actually bury the time capsule, but maybe place it somewhere out here in the entryway of City Hall so that it can be found.

Where do we bury that thing? I mean, the idea of a flash drive is fascinating to me. It's like seeing a five and a quarter floppy today pop out. Like, what are we supposed to do with this?

Well, that's what we thought would be fun. That would be part of the fun. Does anyone have an old VHS cassette tape?

E.T. that came free with the VCR.

Yes.

And that was mentioned and considered, but... there was some hope that they would still have some technology to access the antiquated technology of our day. So, unless we have some other options, which would be maybe some hard copies.

No manual tools? They wouldn't have manual tools in the future to even open it, though. It'd be all done with your mind and AI, so. Could be. They couldn't even open it. Maybe that can just, you know. Sorry. Right, Council Member Hayman? Let's take it over.

Just a heads up, that may be something. I'm starting to think about what I might want to say in a letter, and you all might want to have an opportunity. It's going to come fairly quick.

Yeah, we only have a month before they'll be closing the capsule. I don't think it's super huge. It sounded like it's a little limiting what can be put in the capsule.

Correct, yeah.

But... They're doing that, and they're also doing, it sounds like a really fun art project that will involve the community. It will be the Delahunty's who own Little Picassos. Are they Little Picassos?

Pint-sized Picassos.

Pint-sized Picassos. Yeah, anyway, it doesn't matter. But they are helping with it, and it will be a community-engaged project where they'll bring it to one of the movies in the park and Kids will get to participate, and they're trying to figure out how to display that and get it out so people can see it. They've been very involved in that, which is awesome.

Thank you. Nobody else has anything pressing with their committees? All right, we'll go to May report. Since our last council meeting, we did have that open house. I'm glad we're suggesting doing one the future thank you for council members that came i was here just at the very start and i had a family commitment i had to be out but i guess we didn't have a good turnout from the residents but that's that's why we we'll do it again but thank you for those that were here for that We had our annual chambers lunch where the mayors report to the Chamber of Commerce and 11 of us mayors were there. I missed last year's, the only, I was out of 10 in D.C., the only year I've missed, but I was there this year and that's always an enjoyable meeting and just reported about some of the things that we had going on within the city. On Memorial Day, we actually have two programs a year over at our Veterans Cemetery, or Veterans Memorial, excuse me, in Bountiful. And I think we're all aware that there are sections in that for all five of our South Davis cities. So we had the Memorial Day program over there on Memorial Day 11. And it's a nice way to start your Memorial Day. A couple of facts that came from that. You're probably all aware that at 3 o'clock, you should take a minute of silence. to remember our veterans on Memorial Day. Another thing that came out of it from one of the talks was that in Arlington National Cemetery there's 260,000 flags placed and they are all placed meticulously a boot length apart. They make sure it's the exact boot length apart from the headstone to honor the fallen that are in the International Cemetery. There's some other unique things as well, too. The flyover's always nice, the 21-gun salute. There was some wonderful music as well, too. So those happened on Memorial Day over there and Veterans Day ever since we opened that park. So something to think about doing in the future. Then the last thing is I went to LPC yesterday, and it wasn't substantive from a standpoint of, hey, these are the bills, because obviously they're out of session. So a lot of it was speculation of what might be coming up, and they have pretty good did feel, and I feel they're probably right on most of these things. But one thing that I wanted to ask your opinion on is they had these advisory groups. And one of the advisory groups they have going right now over this summer is about billboards, especially in those areas where there's going to be relocation of billboards because of expansion of freeways. Can you think of a city that that's happening to? Ours is one of those. So my question is, is if we should have somebody on that advisory group from billboards and what our stance is in relation to those billboards as well too, whoever we have on that advisory group. I was going to go up to Justin after and say, yeah, I think we need to have somebody on it, but I thought I'm seeing you guys today and I'll just, run it by you, what your thought was of that advisory group. They have about four right now. And then they could have more in the future in different areas. But that one is formed right now. And so I don't know how concerned about that you are, if we want somebody on that advisory group or not, and what your feeling is. call me or text or email me separately, then as you've had some chance to think about it, great. But that was just one area that I thought we might want to look at doing. So, and I think that's all I have.

Mr. Mayor, I think the Billboard one is a great one. Just give some background, some of the bills that we've fought the last two, three years. Yes, thanks, Brad. Regan or any other billboard company having the ability to relocate their sign anywhere They want even if it's in another city. Let's say, Northside Lake is impacted a billboard They can move it a mile north into another city and not necessarily have to go through local authority to get approval there's even been some bills like the st. George bought this where they can move the billboard within one mile of the freeway into the city and and or some distance within to a city and say, you know, we can move it here and remove all local authority or control. So we wouldn't have any say over any of that permitting. So it's been pretty aggressive. These billboard companies have a lot of persuasion at the state capital and they're really hard to fight off. So we get really aggressive or we're going to lose all control of billboards and heights and LEDs. And some have been able to We want to retro any of these billboards to be LEDs, the bright lights, and anywhere we want, regardless of zoning. So anyway, just so you know, it's been pretty crazy what they've been requesting and what bills have been considered at the state level.

I think considering the narrowness of our city and the impact that would have to homes, that is massive. I think it impacts Centerville in ways that that it just doesn't maybe impact every community. So I do think we need somebody to...

Agreed. Unfortunately, as I was meeting with you, maybe I shouldn't say this publicly, but we were talking about aesthetics on the freeway, and he says, well, the only thing we're known for is weeds and billboards. That's how I feel like our freeways are. What are the billboards? Weeds and billboards. And I think that's unfortunate. You drive through Arizona and the other states, they've got these beautiful freeway exits, and I know that costs money. I'm not saying we can afford that, but... It's so many billboards. It's so many.

And I appreciate that background, Brent, of what some of those bills have come up. So we know our position on coming into the city and us losing control, that sort of thing. But unless somebody is passionate about it, being on that, I was probably going to reach out to Justin and say, they'll be under advisory group, because I think that it affects us. We're one area that we're going to have the freeway lane change. So I don't think it hurts to let them know that we're involved and have somebody on that advisory group. That's all I have. Mayor's city manager report.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, I just have a couple items. The first item, since Mayor had this question, I just want to share it with all of you. The Mayor question, we've got this Main Street waterline project happening. Is that going to impact our parade route? And I think that was a fair question, so I asked Mike and The contractor, it is actually agreed to that they have to remove all the equipment off. Hopefully they'll be out of the area moving northward and not impact the parade route. Just want to let you know that mayor was thinking about it. So I'm sure many of you were thinking about it. So the contractor will need to remove all equipment from the area so we can do our parade. And if they're not out of the area, then they can bring it back. So Smoot Park will be the staging area for that equipment. Mike, did I miss anything? Okay, cool. I just want to make you aware of that.

They can't go too much further because they started now at that stake center, which is what, about three or four blocks from, because our work is from Chase to Jennings, right? Yeah, that's true.

Also, just a quick follow-up. I'm going through an exercise right now, and I was speaking to Nate with it. There's been this push to eliminate property taxes across the country. We fought a couple of bills this year of property taxes. Governor DeSantis is recommending that in Florida. The question is, how does a city operate if there is no property taxes? If this truth of taxation is passed, we're looking at $2.7 million shortfall. We wouldn't be able to collect and generate. What would that mean for Centerville if you can't have that $2.7 million? And so in response to potentially the state or the league asking this question, what would Centerville do? We're cutting our police force. We're shutting down parks. We're potentially charging fees to use our parks and use our facilities. We're charging different transportation utility fee then becomes more active. I mean, there's no other way to generate that revenue, but if you're losing 2.7 million, Chief, I'm sorry, you're losing five or six officers. If we can't afford that, that would be so damaging to figure out how we would operate a city if there were no property taxes. Just so you know, I'm going through this exercise. What would Centerville be if there was no property taxes? Now, I will agree that the most frustrating thing to me is that if someone pays off their million dollar home and they could lose their home for not failure to pay property taxes, that drives me crazy. I disagree with that, but... There's got to be other ways to figure this out. But no property taxes would be devastating for Utah.

So I'm curious. There are a few cities in Utah that don't assess property taxes.

West Haven.

One of them has to be West Haven, who my brother-in-law's brother's the mayor of. So I was texting him throughout the session. and how many people they have, how many city employees they have, and I think Brad's right on it because they don't have their own police force. They contract with the county. They contract with the county. And so that's probably their biggest savings right there, but they don't have the coverage protection-wise from the county that we have as well either. He says it's still sustainable the way they're growing, though. We'll see if it's sustainable.

They got a little sales tax, so they can live off that growth for sure. But when it becomes to a place where we're a mostly built-out city, you can't live off that growth. There's no growth.

I think for, I mean, not that we've ever not had the property taxes, but I think if you look at from the time that some of the big box stores were put in, we didn't have property tax increases for a long time because that sales tax was carrying and making it possible. I just think as growth slows, that starts to become difficult because our sales tax has kind of flatlined. where they may still be seeing that increase that we used to see.

Still healthy. It's just not growing.

I would think, though, if they actually took property tax away They would have to give us a means of, I mean, they would have to raise sales tax or something. I mean, it would just be moving this tax to this tax. They're not going to just wipe us off.

It's a user fee, potentially.

Like, if you get pulled over, your ticket for your speeding ticket or whatever comes through the Justice Court might be $1,000 instead of $200. I don't know. The city in Iowa, because this is being discussed in Iowa, said we need a 24% increase in our sales tax. We need a 24% sales tax to maintain that difference. So it's going to come from somewhere.

The analogy of a three-legged stool, and you have your income tax, your sales tax, and your property tax all represent a leg. And if you take one of those legs away, you're not going to be able to sit. And they work very well together. And so it's difficult to do anything ALL OF THEM WORKING TOGETHER.

SO THIS IS ANALYSIS YOU'RE PUTTING TOGETHER FOR THE LEAGUE? I'M PUTTING IT TOGETHER FOR MYSELF, ANTICIPATING IF THE QUESTION COMES UP FROM ONE OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES, THIS IS WHAT CENTERVILLE LOOKS LIKE AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TO MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE. AGAIN, WE'RE POTENTIALLY SHUTTING DOWN PARKS THAT WE CAN'T MAINTAIN. I JOKE WHEN THEY SAY WE'LL HAVE SOMEBODY STANDING OUTSIDE COMMUNITY PARK CHARGING $5 TO ENTER. and say, here you can come $5 to enter the park. Now would it be that? No, I don't think it'd be that, but it'd be a park impact or a park fee, like a transportation utility fee. You create a methodology and you charge the residents on that fee. And then you create that enterprise fund for parks and that money that's collected from the residents through a fee like the utility bill

then that would go towards parks. Which to me, you talk about fees versus this truth in taxation. I feel like the public is given a lot more ability to have input within the truth in taxation than a fee.

And you're also having the state legislature at the same time trying to restrict the fees we can charge, like broadband fees and other fees. And so there's these restrictions where they're saying, you can't do this, but we're also going to restrict what fees you can charge. Really, anyway, we've got a lot of decisions to make. But it's a growing sediment. There's petitions going around the state of Utah to eliminate property taxes. And I'm not sure. We had five, six property tax bills this last year. We did. We'll have that amount this next year.

Thank you. That's all I have, Mr. Brant. Unless there's questions for me. Any questions for Brant? All right. Let's move on. If there's nothing else to bring up, then I would look for a motion to leave City Council, to go to a closed session, not to return.

I will move that we go into closed session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation and privilege pursuant to Utah Code Section 78B-1-137 with no intent to return. Second.

Got a motion to second. We do a roll call vote on it. Robin? It's yay or nay. Yes. You can make something else up.

Yes. Yes. Yay. Okay. Council Member? Yay. All right. Thank you.