City Council - Regular Meeting

See? I didn't see it on there. Not on there.

Are you ready, Alicia? Welcome everybody. We will call this meeting to order. This is a regular meeting and public hearing of the Grantsville City Council. For the record, today's date is May 6th, 2026, and the time is 7 p.m. This meeting is being held at the Grantsville City Chambers located at 429 East Main Street, Grantsville, Utah. as well as uh by Zoom. I am Mayor Mayor Heidi Hammond and I will conduct a roll call. Council member Thomas here. Williams here. Butler here. Dalton here. Skinner here. Thank you. Next, I've asked Les Peterson to lead us in the pledge of allegiance.

When the command is given, I would ask you to render the proper respect for our flag. After which I'll ask you to follow me on the pledge of allegiance. President armed. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Les.

All right. Um, I just want to make a statement to everybody who is here. The item number seven and eight um has been requested to be tabled. So, we will not be taking public comment on those items. It will be moved to the May 20th meeting. Uh but we will open um the time up for agenda item number one which is public comment. And for the record, there was one p public comment received from Christa McFarland and that is will be included in the meeting packet that's available online. Uh the floor is open to the public to bring their concerns to the council. And if you're on Zoom and would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. You'll be directed as to your turn. So, if there's anybody that would like to make a public comment, this is your time to please come forward. I might as well start it off.

You should. Yes. I'm Dian Al. Um I don't know what's on the agenda for tonight if it was at the um how we were going to do low income uh budgeting for the sewer target. Yes, we're going to be discussing that. Yes. So that's what I wanted to comment about.

Okay. Um so I know a lot of a lot of organizations, cities, um the phone company, other companies do something where they take a fee from the bill to go towards local income um um and I don't know what your proposal is for our city, but to me it feels like that's taking from the bridge and giving to the courting the rich and giving to the poor Robin do where we don't really have a say in where that money is going to and if we're going to help these people or not. I know it's a really humane thing to do and to help those that need help, but you're not giving me a say in that. You're just taking my money and deciding what you're going to do with it. So my idea is if you would at least ask us for a donation to go towards um contributing to those that can afford the sewer bill and instead of just taking uh money that from our bill and putting in to that cost. So that's what I want to bring up with you tonight.

Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to make a public comment? Anyone online? We do have Lisa. Okay. Um, yeah. Can you hear me? Yes. Could you please state your full name for the record, please? Lisa Lingual. I'm at 189 East Elizabeth Cove. Thank you.

Okay. Um, so since we're talking about the um, sewer and our expenses and how you guys are going to raise our taxes significantly. Now, um I recently sent every one of you an email regarding this and a couple of other things. And I just want to stay say that I didn't get a reply from any of you except one person, which he never did follow up with me either, but I just want to say how discouraging that is to me as a citizen. That's all. Thank you. Anyone else online? Alicia?

Yes. Can I Ray? Okay. Can you hear me? Yes.

Okay. Uh, my name's Kenner Ray RV and I just want to um comment on the the raise of taxes and I know that the city is in a pinch in a lot of different ways. Um, but our water and sewer has just gone up a lot and it's going to go up again and now our taxes are going to go up. Um, and I'm I'm not happy myself and you know we'll find a way to pay it. But some of these seniors on fixed incomes, um this is going to be very painful for them if property taxes um go up even more. And you can bet that they're going to go up from the school district and um just seems like everything gas is going up, groceries is going up, everything's going up except income. And so I just ask that you be mindful, uh, be very prudent with your spending and, um, take the least amount possible. That's it.

Thanks, Kennery. Anyone else online? Alicia, no. Anyone else here in the room would like to make a comment? Seeing none. All right, we will close that item and move on to item number two, summary action items. Item number two is the approval of minutes from the April 1st, 2026 city council regular meeting. We have any corrections that need to be made to that or concerns? Mayor, I make a motion we move to approve minutes from the April 1st, 2026 city council regular meeting.

We have a motion by council member Thomas. Is there a second? Second. Second by council member Butler. All in favor? I. Thank you. Item B, approval of minutes from the April 14th, 2026 city council and planning commission work meeting. Do we have any concerns or corrections with with those minutes? I get a motion. Mayor, I'll make a motion we approve the minutes from the April 14, 2026 city council and planning commission work meeting. We have a motion by council member Dalton. Is there a second? I'll second a motion. A second by council member Skinner. All in favor?

I. Right. Item C, approval of minutes from the April 15, 2026 city council regular meeting. Any discussion needed for those items? Mayor, I make a motion we approve the minutes from the April 15, 2026 city council regular meeting. We have a motion by council member Williams. Is there a second? Second that. Second by council member Butler. All in favor? I.

Item D, approval of bills. Does anybody have any questions or comments on the bills? Mayor, I make the motion that we approve the bills as presented. Have a motion by Council Member Butler. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by Council Member Dalton. All in favor? I.

Thank you. All right. Moving on to item number three, the introduction of Officer John Pitman and administration of the oath of office. And that'll be presented by Chief Sager. Mayor, council, thank you for letting us take the time to introduce Officer Fitman. Uh, Officer Pitman is over 20 year veteran in law enforcement. He retired from West Valley as a sergeant serving many roles. Uh, riot squad, traffic patrol, major case. I mean, he's seen in almost everything. So, he's a great addition. And not only experience, we don't we don't just want experience. We want the right person for Grantsville. And I think he's a great fit. So, we're very fortunate to have you and I'd like to if you want to just introduce yourself a little bit more if you have anything.

Absolutely. I've lived in Grantsville for 10 years and I love the community. I was thrilled to move here 10 years ago and I'm thrilled with the certain community that I live in that my family's grown up in and that my family currently lives. So, I I'm absolutely ecstatic that I I have this opportunity and this opportunity to to serve others here. Well, thank you. I do appreciate it. Thank you. Minister here for you. There's your hand. I state your name. I, John Pitman. As a law enforcement officer as a law enforcement officer, do solemnly swear that I will support, obey, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I solemnly swear that I will support, obey, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this state and the Constitution of this state. And that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity. and I will discharge the duties of my office with sir. Now we're gonna ask your lovely wife to pay his bench. Watch it, chief. The second time it's intent button here. Get in there. You're good. You can stand. You're good. Don't worry about it. You're fine. forgot myself.

I was betting she would that comes later. Thank you.

Thank you and welcome. We're we're grateful to have you. So, thank you very much. Yes, the police officers. You're welcome to stay for this fun, exciting night, but you're also welcome to leave. Family game. That's right.

You're trying to sneak out. Will anyone notice? Yeah. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thanks, man. Thanks. Thank you, everyone. And thanks, Chief. Appreciate it. Um, all right. Item number four, consideration of resolution 2026 27 approving the 2026 2027 dispatch agreement.

Is that going to be presented by you? All right. Yeah. So every year annually we go through the sheriff provides our dispatch and uh this year I believe it went down 3% about 3% but this is for all the uh emergency calls keeping officer say to rotation etc question. No chief I appreciate you bringing that up. I the question I had was just how did it reflect to last year's cost and you mentioned 3%. Last year was about 163,000. This one I believe was 158. Okay. So I think it's about little under 3%.

Prices never go down. So how did that happen? We'll take it. Okay.

Anyone like to make a motion? Mayor, I motion that we approve resolution number 2026-27 approving the 202627 dispatch agreement. We have a motion by council member Skinner. Is there a second? Second. Second by council member Butler. All in favor? I. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Chief. Thank you. Item number five, consideration of resolution 2026-29 approving the advance order of 100th anniversary badges and patches for the Grantsville Fire Department. presented by Chief Remick. Yes,

Mr. Mayor, house members, thanks for giving me the opportunity to talk. So, we're requesting that uh the funds be allocated from 2027 point budget for the purchase of the 100 year anniversary badges and shirt patches for apartment. Um this will not be charged until we receive them, but it takes six to eight months for the badges to come in. January is total cost is $6,700.

This is a once in a lifetime milestone for our department. These personalized items will serve as a lasting symbol of pride and dedication of every member. Given extended production timeline for timely approval on this expenditure would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. So this will come out of your budget for next year, correct? It just has to be approved now so that you have them in time for January. We just want to be able to know if we can extend the funds now because we don't know what our budget is, right? Do you have one? Do you do you have a batch? Show us a batch.

Here's the shirt patches. So, this one will be replaced here. This is a lot of milestones this year. I can't believe it's 100 years that it's been 100 years.

Anyone have any questions? Mayor, I make a motion. We move to approve resolution 202629 uh approving the advance order for the 100year anniversary badges and patches for the Grantsville Fire Department. Second. We have a motion by council member Thomas and a second by council member Butler. All in favor? I thank you. All right. The next item is a discussion of a utility assistance program uh presented by council member Dalton. Thank you for your efforts in getting this information. Yeah. Um I made a little slideshow. Do you want me to just put that up on the screen or Sure.

It's like a fourth grader did it, so just bear with me. And I know that it's been a while since Jolene's been here with so um So, it says the sewer utility says, but we could take this cover all of the utilities. Um, is it showing?

No. Oh, I have to drag your screen over. Yeah, drag it over. And let me stop sharing too. show on my screen. Can you guys see it? We can see it on our screen. I can see it on our screen. Yeah.

Um, Mike, can you like drag your screen? Well, how do how is there drag it over to the second the screen on the podium? It's not there. There you go.

So, utility assistance obviously just increased the rates. I said I looked into couple different options. So, um it's quick. So why we need the program critical wastewater infrastructure upgrades by rate increase increases. This impacts fixed income house households the most. Our goal is to keep sewer affordable to those households. Um talked to a bunch of a couple different municipalities and they do a few different ways. We can choose all of them or just one way. But um here's a couple different options. So the monthly bill credits directly apply to the account. So, we don't give any customers money. They It goes straight to their account. Um, target targets low income and hardship households. And then some of the cities I talked to, they put a cap of $75,000 on it. We can adjust it to what we think would work. Then it's administered by the utilities and finance. year later review by the city council and then the applicants must reapply every year so it doesn't automatically carry over changes and once they're in a better situation they can pay for us and then with the application automatic approval for citizens that we're on staff free to reduce launch or any other programs that um that we know that they've already been through qualified eligibility eligibility

sorry We're trying.

So eligibility, you got to be granted resident with an active act active sewer or utility account. It's your primary residence and your 80% or less of the AMI or qualifying assistance program. And then another one city had a temporary hardship cases for loss of a job, medical, anything like that. So just putting all the options up there. This isn't 100% accurate, but this is kind of a a guide of what the table would look like, who would qualify for what um to be able to get this assistance. And like I said, it could be whole utility assistance or just specific to sewer. Depends on how we want to go about it. Um there's three different tiers. There's if you're between 50, if you're the 50% or less, you're tier one. And that it's a 60% build credit. So you're not getting 100% of your bill wiped out. Still are putting in in some, but you're getting a 60% credit. That can be adjusted to. And then the next tier is between 51 and 80, and that's 40% um credit. And then a hardship, you can get up to 20%. Um estimated households with our income grants, there'd be 71 households on the tier one. Uh 92 on the tier two, and then hardship 41. Um that's just kind of rough numbers with um with what our income here is in Grantsville. And then the funding plan be a sewer enterprise fund or util util utility. Some of the way it's it's funded to is about voluntary roundup. So you know you go to Walmart or whatever and they ask if you want to round up your bill to the nearest dollar to or St. Dudes or something like that. that give our citizens the option to round up and then that money would be put into this fund to help pay for it. Um there are grant opportunities

and then if we did it that's only uh 1.45% of the sewer fund if we did it at the 75,000. So the application process um it's a simple onepage form I put 10 to 14 day approval but that just depends on what we've got here. uh credits apply directly to the account annual certification and then must apply during certain time periods for tier tier one and two. So a lot of the city said they have an open application from like January 1 to March 1st and then that'll apply for that that fiscal year. Um and then the tier three can apply any time. if you lose your job. But we put a cap, some cities will put a cap on on two to three months just to help you get back on your feet and they can apply it at any time, but it's two to three month cap as all um accountability annual report to the council, track households served, track fund used, and then yearly review and then just this helps protect the vulnerable residents. um targeted in CAP program fiscal response responsibility and supports rate increase acceptance. Um so over the over a year if you're on tier one it's about a $500 savings. um tier two about 350 for the year and then um that's what the sewer that's what what we're proposing you know 7577 without it tier one would go to like 30 bucks uh and then tier two would be 45 that was just on your eligibility for the hardship so the annual cost with the households I put about $28,000 for the tier one about 26 to 27 for tier

two and then the hardships would be just under $10,000. Um so that those numbers the the cost would approximately be around 65,000. you put a cap of 75 that gives us a little leeway in case there's a little more or whatever, but so we have a little extra just put and different things like that that come into the city. And then another way that one city does it is they put a $1 side on everybody's bill. I know that's saying you're taking your money, but I mean you're paying it. We're just putting that into the fund. That's what they do. So everybody that pays that's they take $1 and put it into this this fund here. Um with the optional customer build these are just different again just the same thing. Like I said a fourth grader made this for me so remember some of the same things. So if you set aside a dollar a month um in our sewer thing I think we had the projection of like 5100 households. So give or take um you see all the numbers there. It's good cost about $546 a month and the annual 65520 but we put a cap of 75 that gives us a little wiggle room there and then round up the grants go in and then push recommendations and look at it more we can do it for just sewer or overall the whole utility. um put a cap at the 75 for the first year to see how that goes. I put launch fiscal year 2027. I was talking to Michael earlier. That might be a little fast. So, we could put push that into 2028. But whatever we decided there, but that's just kind of a little what I found by talking to other cities, what they do to help out their utility bills. Have any questions? Is this something our current staff could do? Do we think we would need more staff to implement

this? I haven't talked to any of them yet. I just put this together. If it was something that we wanted to look at further, then we could we could talk to I just didn't want to put the cart before the horse and do all this stuff. So, I question. Did she ask a question? Is that okay? Is that pass? Oh, okay. You can address it with any of us after though. Thank you.

Um, there's not any questions. I don't know if you guys I can look into it even further, get with staff, see what's feasible, what's not, if it's even something that you can do, what that cost might look like, things like that, or there's no desire and just can't do. Well, I I I definitely there there's a desire to do it and I like what you've done here, albeit it's it's in its infancy, right? And so I think we we continue to to push it forward. I think there's some other ways in which we can um come up with that that dollar amount. Um we'll just need a little bit of time to pass and then I think we can make some decisions to allocate some monies um to to this program. I think it will help those 100 plus households that that are really going to be able to to utilize it and will need it. So, I like what you've done here. I think it's great. So, I guess should look a little bit more into it.

Anybody else want to give the same direction or different direction? I think I think it's a good idea. I like it. I mean, I know there are a lot of people that said they would have hardship. So I think if we could do something um what do we do if we come on the 75 and we that's just capped and so it's capped. It's first come first serve. Some cities do have like a if you're over a certain age they get higher priority than other people. I mean there's endless ways to do it. It's just

um some do just first come first serve. Like you're you know you're the first one with your application. You're at the top of the the list. So yeah I know I'm Yeah. I I know this was a concern of of all and I and I think that was one of the main reasons why we pushed to to do a base fee in our in in the utility to allow for those that use those that are fixed that are on a fixed income and use less than it's proportionate to their use. Um and this is just kind of another step on on that. I think there's probably there's a lot of unanswered questions I you know as far as where it would come from a budget standpoint and and the what'ss and why I those are all the questions that I have. Um and I you know we had a the citizen speak on it tonight specifically and you know um being really cautious to how we use dollars in a budget and allocate those is is a concern I have. So

um would you guys want to just do it for the sewer or would you want it to be like a whole utility thing? I think just for the sewer right now. I mean that's is where we have our main concern right now because I think everything else has been pretty fixed and the sewer is going to go up a lot. It's kind of my thought is so this could help because I think everybody else I mean the budget this is not in their budget the sewer. So I think this is something that will help with that. And I'd like to I mean you put grants in here. I think that's something we should look into too. I mean because maybe that's something that could help cover this. I know um Alexis is working on that. But

well I know we went through that whole process but the sewer the sewer rates are not closed in my mind. I mean they are closed on paper but I meaning I still feel like that's one area we have to try to find to address and we've got some avenues to do that. I know. But um yeah, whether those are grants or some other I for some that one is just not closed in my mind that we solved we solved it. I know we we voted on it to move it along, but it's not closed in my mind. So yeah, I think appreciate you putting this together. I'll start reaching out to staff kind of getting some more information and letting you guys know what I find out. Okay.

Thanks very Thank you. You want me to table seven and eight? Yes, please. Mayor, I make a motion we move to table agenda items number seven and number eight regarding the Wellstone subdivision until the May 20th, 2026 city council meeting. We have a motion by council member Thomas to table items seven and eight. Is there a second? Second. Second by council member Williams. All in favor? I I

All right, we will discuss those items on May 20th. Thank you. Item number nine is a public hearing item, consideration of resolution 2026-30 approving a plat amendment to the Moody Acres Subdivision located at approximately 415 South Worththington Street. And we're going to have the presentation first and then after the presentation if you have comments uh please come come forth and bring those to our attention. Will you go to the PL the plat?

Yes. So, this is just a minor amendment. Um, really a lot line adjustment, but because this was already a platted lot 2 was already platted, um, we did a plat amendment. Um, and then it so we're amending Moody Acres, but they called it the Williams U minor subdivision. And so, it just is that the You should have another Yeah, that one. So, if you zoom in where the circle is right there, we're just adjusting that lot. Um, lot one now um is just shrinking. We're aligning um the future road on lot two uh to meet up. So, if that is ever subdivided, we have that um inner uh access.

So, lot one is is shrinking then. Yes. From 3/4 to a half approximately. Y Okay. And that's to make room for a road if we need it in that sort of thing. Uh it was to align the properties they're they're selling um lot one. And so it was just to um finalize and align everything. So

and this went through commission. Um well I was able to listen to that. You remember the vote vote on that? It was unanimous. It was unanimous. Unanimous. Okay. So, if this wasn't in if lot 2 wasn't a part of a subdivision, then this could have just been processed as a boundary line adjustment. Um, but because there are notes and other things on a plat, we wanted to save those. Anybody have any questions for Mike? I had a question regarding minor subdivisions. How remind me, how many lots you have? Um, up to four. Up to four. Okay, that's

Thank you. Um, we will now open it up to uh public hearing. If anyone has any items they'd like to discuss with the council, this is your moment on this item. Anyone online, Alicia? All right, I'm seeing no no items for the public hearing. Uh, would anybody like to make a motion or is there any further discussion that needs to take place? Mayor, I make a motion we approve resolution 2026-30 approving the plat amendment to the Moody Acres subdivision located approximately 415 South Warthington Street.

We have a motion by Council Member Butler. Is there a second? I'll second the motion. Second by Council Member Skinner. All in favor? All right. Thank you. Thanks you guys. Thank you. Um item number 10 is also a public hearing item. Um it's a consideration of approving amendments to the capital facilities plan impact fee facilities plan and impact fee analysis. This will be presented by Robert Rousell of Enzyme Engineering and we will have the presentation first and then we will um ask for any public comment before the item is discussed with the council. Are you what?

They're going to share. Yeah, I'll share.

You need to log into Zoom. You got it.

Oh, okay. Cool. So, yeah, I'm Robert with Enzy Engineering. I'm presenting the 2026 amendments to the CFP. So, cap facility plan, impact fee facility plans, and impact PE analysis. This includes everything that you see there, drinking water, public safety, parks, wastewater, water rights acquisition, and storm drainage. It does not include transportation. We're holding off on transportation until the updates are done to the transportation master plan. So, we do this annually. We did do some amendments for parks and transportation in January 2026. Uh and then uh what impact fees do is they help fund expansion of public facilities necessary to accommodate new growth. We meet with city staff in December and then get all the information compiled in January, February, meet again typically in March and go over the draft, get input. Then we have the work session that you all attended uh you know with planning commission and then we have the meeting with planning commission which is also public hearing and then city council. Uh the process it takes 90 days before the amended impact fees are approved before they go into effect and any developer funded projects which we've got kind of throughout this document that we know are strictly developer funded projects are not impact eligible. Uh, I will mention, and you'll see it, we did update the demographics to coincide with the 2026 sewer rate study. We looked back at previous growth rates and kind of reduced to something that's a little bit more realistic. So, we've got the 3 and a.5% in years 2026, 2027, and then a 4% growth rate from 2028 to 2035. And we do briefly look at this annually to see if we're kind of on pace. If we see a higher growth rate, then we can make adjustments.

Um I've kind of listed there historically at least over the last 26 years it has been between four and a half to 5% annual growth rate on average. The uh you know the 10% during the co years that kind of created a a little bit of a spike there and brought that average a little bit up. What we do is we determine our capital improvement projects with staff you know in December. We get input kind of throughout the process and then we you know update our demographics and look at the level of service and see if we need to adjust them for each item. Impact fees also include non- capital improvement project costs which are like interest expense on bonds, existing capital assets, professional expenses and future debt service. So this demographics just shows you that growth rate, you know, the three and a half percent the next couple years, the 4%, you know, moving forward. What we do is we only look in kind of the 10-year planning period because with impact fees, you got to if you collect them, you got to expend them in six years. Uh or you got to have a reason why you're holding on. Like for example, if you're holding on to impact fees for wastewater treatment plant. So the service connections we get that from meter data and what we do here is we take the meter data for a single family uh unit and and an ERC is equivalent residential connection and you can see you know ERC per unit for single family is one and we look at the what the water usage is for the different types of service connections. So we got multi-unit trailer, commercial, church, school, construction, water, and that's where we adjust, you know, the ERC per unit to get the total ERC's for for Grantsville planning sub areas. This this just kind of helps us determine where you know

future growth's going to occur and projects and uh with you know city staff and development coming in we got a pretty good idea of where uh you know certain growth is going to occur and where projects are going to be needed. This just shows you the projections in the next 10 years of uh population growth and then ERC's based on the different service connection types. But one thing that we did do this year that we've we we got building permit information from the building department, we did adjust the commercial growth rate because it's not quite as high. It's about a quarter of what the residential growth rate is. So that has been factored in drinking water level of service. We we do look at this three years we're required to with the division drinking water uh because they they set the city's minimum drinking water standards. So that's been looked at. It's we haven't changed it. It was is pretty similar to what it has been for the last six years. Capital improvement projects. These aren't all If you go in the actual document, you'll see all of them that are listed. A lot of them are are replacement. So this are these are like impact B eligible projects and then we list the ones that are that would be impact B eligible but are being paid for you know 100% by developer. So that's what's shown in here and the ones that are shown with like the proportionate share of of zero are those developer ones. the Northstar tank. That's one that the city's, you know, constructing building impacts previously were collected for it, but we're, you know, it's it's basically getting the city up to capacity on storage. So, that's why that's a zero um right now. But impact fees were previously collected for it when there was, you know, excess capacity and and

the project would have provided capacity for future development. It's kind of hard to see. I mean, I can zoom in if you if you want. Um, but the uh this just shows kind of all the projects and maybe I will just kind of try to zoom in to there just throughout the city. The two projects that are being constructed right now, you've got the Northstar tank, 2 million gallon tank here, and then you've got the Bates Well that's in this Well, I guess it's right there. And uh then additional development, you know, in kind of the West Bank area and then on the southeast, you know, side of the city. And then a lot of the projects that are in the city here are are replacements of just smaller water lines that are old and don't meet the uh minimum requirement of at least a 8 in diameter water line. So with with water uh the impact fees changed slightly. They've gone up a little bit and that's just because there's been you know we decreased that you know the growth rate in that 10 year and so there's basically a higher impact fee for each you know ERC or in this instance we calculate based on the connection size. Most of the projects in water didn't change. I think we we adjusted some of the years, so it fluctuated a little bit, but they stayed pretty much the same. Public safety level of service, we, you know, we met with the fire department, police department. The what we have for level of service there, we haven't really changed, kept it the same. Capital improvement projects. So, one of I will point out one of the one of the items that we had in here originally,

took it out, but then we put it back in was uh the just capital improvement projects for a future satellite fire station and then the aerial truck replacement. We're showing those costs. We don't we don't have at least a time frame of when that future satellite fire station will be constructed. So, it's not actually in the impact fee calculation. And then that aerial truck replacement because it is a is a replacement we can't charge impact fees but we did show it at least in the capital improvement projects table. That was just a comment we had in planning commission impact fee eligible costs. We've got the animal control shelter and that is assuming you know 50% of it will be shared with a a local entity. Um we didn't really define that. And then we've got the Justice Center Police expansion. This just shows you approximately where we think some of these satellite fire stations will go. I'll kind of zoom in a little bit there. And yeah, those are subject to change depending on, you know, how how it's negotiated with, you know, developers potentially and where they're actually needed. And then public safety, those have decreased a little bit because we have pulled out that future satellite fire station. We were previously, you know, factoring that in. One of the big changes that I mentioned when we had the work session is we did change how non-residential was is calculated and I guess you know how single family and multi-unit is factored. We were basing it based on like an average building size. Uh but what what we've done is we've now based it based on calls per unit and we got the from the police department we've got the CAD calls just the total you

know calls per unit uh for single family multif family and non-residential and that's how we're basing it now. So, for example, and I I there's some examples in the actual writeup, but for example, now if you had like a really large commercial building like a warehouse, it's technically one unit. So, it would be charged just that, you know, that $3,000, you know, $7010. But if you had like a strip mall and you had 10 units in there, then they would be charged, you know, that per each unit. And I guess as you can see there like single family there's not quite as many calls and there's you know almost almost two calls per unit for multif family and then two and a half for non-residential level service for parks. This has stayed for you know four acres for per 1000 population for quite a time now. We've kind of left that the same. Uh the only updates that we've done really on parks is we've kind of rearranged some of the uh construction years just to keep a a positive impact fee balance. We do have one year which is fine that goes negative but but we've we've uh kind of rearranged them a little bit to adjust for that. And we have updated you know the sink slopes that first phase with the pump track and site improvements to reflect the actual bid price that the city received. This shows you kind of where all the the parks are located throughout the city. Um, and then existing impact fees varied a little bit. Uh, went went a little bit down just because we did have to kind of balance out where projects were just to keep that impact fee balance positive

for for most years except for for one of the years. Wastewater. Uh, same thing here. We look at level service for wastewater. It's really hasn't changed. It's, you know, the 150 gallons per day per ERC for average daily flow. And the peaking factors are all pretty similar to what they have been for the last six years. Uh, capital improvement project lists. There's some developer constructed only projects and then there's some where there's some upsize like the Westbank interceptor. But we've looked at the upsize of what they would have had to put in versus what you know will be upsized and uh that's what the costs are that are shown there. The big one on this one obviously is the proposed wastewater treatment facility. And as I mentioned before, the proposed wastewater treatment facility about a third of its how how it's going to be constructed now the capacity is going to be existing and then 2/3 will be for future development. That 12.8% is the in the 10-year planning period what's new development. So in the future past, you know, as it keeps going, as long as there's that capacity, there'll be like a it'll turn into a buying cost once this is built. So there will be impact fees, you know, carrying on in the future as long as there's capacity in the treatment plant or excess capacity. Uh wastewater, this just shows what's proposed. A lot of there's some improvements, you know, along SR 112. I'll kind of zoom in there. The majority is, you know, going to the treatment plant and then just getting sewer out to kind of that West Bank area, you know, Matt Canyon Road and out by the Walmart distribution center.

Wastewater impact fees have gone up uh you know slightly. What we did with the race is you know we we really looked at quite a few projects that were previously listed. There was a few that we were able to push out farther which kept the rates you know as low as we could get them and then it also you know impacted the impact fees a little bit as well. Water rights acquisition. So this is pretty similar as to what what we presented previously. Uh one of the comments from planning commission was just to look at the uh market rate, the cost per acre foot. Uh it was 29,000 per acre foot and it kind of ranges on from 29 to 35 to 40 depending on what somebody will pay for it. But we did increase it uh since planning commission we did increase it to 30,000 and we'll we'll look at that annually to to try to increase it. So yeah, that's where that shows up. It just it goes up because of that the the for that cost per acre foot. None of the water right quantities, those didn't really change. We we did look at those and they've been pretty similar to the last, you know, for the last six years. Storm drainage, you know, the city doesn't doesn't charge any uh storm drainage. So, I've just kind of shown in what we've shown in the uh cap facilities plan portion of it. There's really not an impact fee facilities plan or impact v analysis, but we do have the capital facilities plan portion of it. We show the you know the city's design requirements for storm drainage. And then and then uh this is from like the West Bank study, the various wersheds for the city and then some of the projects that have

been constructed like the the Clark Street storm drain improvements project. It's kind of tilted there, but this is out of the West Bank study just the various projects that that are proposed in that. Um the the reason why city doesn't charge impact fees at least right now is just a lot of the improvements are constructed by the developers as they're building their you know their developments and there's not not really any regional infrastructure. Now impact fees could be charged in the future if if the city is constructing some of that regional infrastructure and then you know developers are would then have to pay impact fees and yeah I've kind of listed that here. Yeah, I I won't go over that again. Impact fee comparisons and impact fee comparisons are uh pretty tough, you know, to do. Bill mentioned a good one last time in the planning commission meeting like like Riverton, for example, they don't they don't uh they don't charge impact fees because they've got a lot of commercial and they they've got kind of that commercial tax base. What we did try to do is we and we kind of noted it here. You know, we've noted the similar populations to Grantsville. You know, Tmont, Mapleton, Heber, North Logan. Now, the kind of the dynamics are a little different, right? So Hebrew's got a lot of commercial but we've tried to show you know what let's see the uh propos is in blue zisting is in green and kind of where like with retail like a 5,000 foot building industrial a million square foot building kind of where Gransville falls with impact fees you can see with residential pretty close to being in the middle there. So that's town home, a single family resident on a halfacre lot and then a apartment on a you know a thousand square foot apartment.

Okay. Yeah. And that's that's all I have. And does it go to public hearing next? Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Robert. We will now hold a public hearing on on this item. If anyone would like to make a comment, now is your opportunity. And if you're online and would like to make a comment, please raise your hand.

Anything online, Alicia? All right, we will close the public hearing for item number 10. Is I now turn this over to a discussion with the council. Um, any comments, questions, or concerns.

I'll just say it seems like we've spent a lot of time on this um especially between planning and zoning and and then uh and then our work meeting that we had. Robert's put in a lot of time and effort to this and and I mean really I think you know what the citizens are asking for us to do is is to you know make sure that those that are developing in our in our in our town and our city are paying their fair share or in other words as it shows on there the maximum amount that they can that we could charge for the impact fees and that's what this represents.

Yes, that's correct. albeit some of them were a little bit less, but the majority of them did increase slightly and and over the two years that that I've been here, they've they've increased um every year that we've we've um reviewed this and voted it into effect. So, anyhow, that's my thoughts. Anyone else have any comments, concerns? Um yeah, I just I echo that uh in the sense that we have a lot of information here. It's 300 and something pages um and we've seen it before going through. Um I did have a a couple of questions uh really regarding um like wells well levels and and then our water consumption. And I was just wanting to make sure I was reading those tables correctly. Um and and and Robert, I don't know if I put you on the spot um to kind of go through to go through those. Obviously, water is of concern, ensuring we have enough water. Um I spent a lot of time in the wells and the tanks and um just ensuring that we can provide the services that we need to provide um in all aspects. But I I had a question regarding one of the tables specifically uh 3.6 um and how I was reading that is that a deficit in gallons?

Yes, currently. Okay. So that's not factoring in the 2 million gallon tank. The 2 million tank is not quite yet constructed which is just about finished. About finished. Yes. Correct. So once that comes into play then that changes that equation pretty substantially. And you know the Desireette development they'll be doing a tank and a well too. So that'll that'll help tie into that. Yeah. And and same thing on the sources there. That 3.5 is shown as a deficit now. But that baits well is being drilled. That one's probably a little farther out, right? Because they still got to build the building and do all the electrical. And yeah, the other question that came to my mind when I was going through that is like

I'm I'm assuming we capture this information on all of our wells, like our static well level, like when we start to pump and all of those things. And um it would be nice to be able to access that information as well, just to just just so we have an understanding. It was interesting to see how much a well cost in 1977 versus what one costs now to drill. So anyway, thank you for all that. No problem. That was very informative. All 300 and something pages. Is the banks well is it drilled yet? Yes. How what was the depth? That question came up last night. 705 75 ft and it's under development right now. Yeah.

So they're developing it right now. But but the wells drilled, right? working on the screening and the dual swab right now. So, yeah, the basically the casing's in. They should have done the Yeah, the surface seal. They're just developing it, kind of swabbing it, cleaning it. Yep. Right. Been very fortunate to have good water in Gransville. Yeah. Like I I've been in areas that don't have good water, so at least in the short term period, and they're not fun places to stay. Exactly. Great water. I think Yeah. So, we're fortunate.

In North Dakota, their water smells like gasoline. So, just saying you get the you get you get the oil in in the water. Robert, I got a quick question for you. This just is more of I want to make sure you understand this clearly. You said

that impact fees can be applied to twothirds of the new sewer plant. So, that's for the the growth, right? Correct. So the the proportion share that's shown there is like in the next 10 years the projected ERC's in the next 10 years. So that's that's in the next 10 years. But as long as there's excess capacity in the future. So once it's built it'll be a buyin cost as long as it has excess capacity and you can continue charging impact fees for it. And then that buyin cost goes to help pay back the bonds or I guess it's probably up to us but yeah it's part of it, right? like we can use that money to pay the bond down or back.

So as long as you have per the law like as long as you have excess capacity and something. So so like there's excess capacity in in the water system, you know, port portions of it, right? Like the distribution system, some of the sewer collection lines have excess capacity and that's that's all factored in. Okay. Thanks. Y I've got a question and maybe even Christie can answer this too. We've I know in uh planning commission we've discussed on the um the drainage the basins and storm water that if we reach a certain classification of city then we start having to be in charge of the basins. Is that right?

I think did we have that discussion? I think he's talking about MS4. Yeah. Yeah. Does that have anything to do with the the It would be more on once once you're doing that, it's either you're either having it's more of a maintenance thing. Uh you you could end up charging like a storm water user fee. Okay. I mean, that's where that would probably factor in. I mean, you can correct Christie, but yeah. Yeah.

No, I I I'm glad you asked that question because I the thought crossed my mind. At what point in time do do we as a city decide storm is in you know a different approach to storm or if there's a different approach in your professional opinion based on our size and other cities that you've worked with similar to us at what point do they take that on or do some of them never take it on and have format that we're doing

and I guess yeah Bill you could probably correct me if I'm wrong but once and I think isn't the threshold 50,000 for an MS4 I can't remember exactly But it it's based on like the US Census Bureau like once they define kind of probably the Tilla Valley as like a certain can't remember like a regional can't remember the exact definition but once they kind of define that as like a regional area then then you'll fall into that and that would be a I mean some some places do try to get ahead of that. I think Heers's Heber is kind of one that I know of that's trying to get ahead of that knowing that ultimately they're going to become an MS4 putting their infrastructure in certain areas.

Yeah. So, they're kind of plan, you know, if the development can't pay for, you know, a debris basin or something like that. They they're trying to push that. Um they're a lot of their code and requirements kind of gearing themselves towards an MS4 eventually. So, okay. I mean, it's it's really up to the city, you know, if you want to get out of it. I mean, it is coming eventually at some point. So, Oh, thank you.

I would mention for storm water, I mean, there is the West Bank, you know, master plan that looked at storm water kind of in that area, but, uh, if you're looking at kind of this citywide, it would be good at some point to do a storm drain master plan. rule says 100,000, but I mean we don't need to take that to the bank. I'm pretty confident it's good to Yeah, I think I think there's a distinction there. There's a Yeah, there's Yeah, exactly. There's a small MS4, so it'd be a small M4. Yeah. Interesting.

And then you hit on this. I appreciate it. As far as future growth and that projection, I know originally we were looking at lower percentages and it looks like I I know that's a right. Yeah.

Crystal ball approach to Yes. There's science behind it obviously. Um yeah, we look at you know Census Bureau data. We look at Kim Garner Institute. We look at building past building permits. We look at a bunch of different things but and that's just it it is just kind of a well what's best best guess approach try to be a little bit more conservative because after co when I think it was in 22 22 when we did the first amendment after about six years if I remember right it was like oh wow it's going to really grow because of covid right and then we we kind of did the opposite approach where we thought it was going to grow a lot more than it actually did and and then you don't have the money then to actually do the project. So it's it's better to be a little bit more conservative.

Yeah. And I appreciate that approach. I and being able to adjust year to year as we as we look at that that is a concern having getting on the one side of the equ you know too far on the one side of the equation where we we haven't captured what we should capture. So

yeah, and that's the problem if you don't amend them manually is you may miss out on projects that you need to include because that has happened in the past with Grantsville. Yeah. But there's been some projects that that were in there but weren't previously part of Grantsville City and then weren't weren't able to collect impact bees and use impact bees for a project. Any other questions for Robert? Good. Thank you so much. Thank you,

Mayor. I I make a a motion and move to approve the amendments to the capital facilities plan impact fee facilities plan and the impact fee analysis as presented. Okay, we have a motion by council member Butler. Is there a second? I'll second the motion. Second by council member Skinner. All in favor? I.

Right. All right. Moving on to item number 11. This is also a public hearing item. The consideration of ordinance 2026-18 approving amendments to the Grantsville City Land Use and Management Code, chapters 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 20, and 21. And we're going to have a presentation first and then you're will be have the opportunity to make a comment um on that and then we will discuss it. But it looks like we have Bill here to talk about it. It's me. Yay.

Hello and welcome to spring again. Spring 2.0. I love the weather. It's uh I didn't see a cloud in the sky walking in and I there's something about my soul that I just love that. So

um we have quite a few changes. Uh this is one of those things those uh agenda items that becomes like sausage making and um it's not glorious. It's not exciting like a capital facilities plan, but uh this is uh this is important work. It's it's a lot most of these changes that you've seen are are relatively minor. They're tweaks that help us to um clarify points within the code and um bring the code more into compliance both with itself as well as with state code and uh help provide clarity for developers and property owners who want to do things with their property. So, um I don't know if you want to go through each specific item or we could just open it up to if you have questions after having gone through this beautiful 166 page I think it was 166 pages of this agenda item.

Um but so my preference would be if you just have specific questions then I won't have to go through every item um one at a time but we can is everybody okay with that approach? Yeah, I I will just add when the planning commission um I bet this was discussed and presented to them and different iterations at least a half a dozen times. Yep. Over the last six months. So, we're getting that sausage recipe just right. Derek, do you remember going through some of these? Oh, yeah. Back in November. It's been It's been a while. Yes.

Yeah. It's been it's been a while in the making and there's been a lot of iterations and and really kudos to the planning and and and zoning uh commission for for their efforts that they put into this and and really diving in and and and making it what it needs to be and and both of you as well your teams. So there's a lot lot there. I've left those meetings and have dreams about this. Is this a sideyard or dream?

This is it. And it is really exhausting work. Uh they we massage every phrase, every requirement, every stipulation in this document to make sure that it meets what we hope to uh have in our city. And so um any errors in favor of the applicant,

right? So, if there are errors, and we try to make sure there aren't any errors or inconsistencies, um they do they are interpreted and applied in favor of the applicant and the applicant's desires. And so, um again, a lot of these are are those kinds of cleanup items that will help to uh clarify what our intent is as well as uh put codify what uh we want to see on the ground. Okay, we public hearing and then we discuss it. Okay, I think we're good. Thanks. Okay,

thanks, Phil.

All right, we will now This will now become a public hearing. So, if you would like to make a comment on this item, this is your opportunity to do so. If you're online and would like to make an item or a comment on this item, please raise your hand. Anything online, Alicia? All right, I'm seeing no public comment. So, we will move into a council discussion on this item. did mention um just the planning and zoning commission reviewing this multiple times and in this latest iteration was um was passed recently. Um it was a unanimous um passing with the entire group.

Um and anyways, just just wanted to make that noted. Yeah, there's been a lot of work and a lot of discussion that's gone into this over the last five or six months and a lot of work by the staff. So, we appreciate that. Yeah, I didn't have any other comments other than just thank the staff for the time and effort to put to clean up a lot of loose ends that we had and and incorrections. Um, you know, it's it's it's been a lot to get to this point. So, and I think this meeting why not have another 180 page document we throw in there.

Anyway, thank you for your efforts. The interesting thing about all this is is is it perfect? No. I think we can all be back for sure. But I mean, it it is a step in the right direction. there's some things that are that are taken out and and clarified and you know as I've said before it's been thoroughly vetted um on multiple levels. So

I did have a question. I'm just trying to find it right here. Right here so I can reference it. let me know and I'll go to that page or if you need me to search anything. It wasn't about the horses, was it? It's exactly where I'm going to cuz the animals that word, huh? Are you thinking of chapter two? Um,

that multiple. So just clarify the difference to me on the family food production because it looks like it's permitted and everything and then conditional. I think that's RM15. Keep 58 I think on the thing. Oh, you're 58. My Yeah. What's your 58

or Yeah. Or 57 on the document it says. Should we scroll down? Well, just on your main sheet just just so I can see if it's RM7 or Yeah, I'm trying to It pops like right as soon as I get to scroll up. Well, that's page. Okay. Yeah, right there. Are you talking about this red line that's right here on your screen? That was one thing I was going to see because it's it's conditional was crossed out in that one. Correct. So that's removing it from the RM7 zoning. Um, as we seen last night, not possible.

Yeah, it's almost impossible to keep animals on halfacre lots, let alone 7,000 square foot lots. And so we're finding that yes, there are RM7 lots or lots in the RM7 zoning that are a lot larger than 7,000 square feet, but now we're seeing to where they can keep 15 or 20 animals in the RM7 that's supposed to be higher density zoning with smaller lots. And then we're getting that negative feedback from those residents going, "Hey, this isn't what I moved here for because of this zoning." And so as these lots get smaller, they're not able to keep them in there because of the lot size restrictions. And so, as you can see, it's already been removed from the RM15 and R18. So, we're just removing the RM7 and following with that.

And that one's Ford. That is the RM7 that's crossed out. What's that? What does it say though up there on top? Do I just see if you scroll up a little bit? Says then six. Is that the family food production one?

Yes. So, family food production um and keeping of large, medium, and small animals. The first large animal fully grown is 10,000 square feet of open area. And each additional large animal shall have an additional 2,000 square ft. Each mediumsized animal fully grown shall have a 1,000 square feet of open area not to exceed more than six medium animals per half acre. Um you know if you have 7,000 square feet and that's seven animals or if you have you know a half acre that's 21 medium goats that you could have on there. Uh so then we go down to each smallsized animal shall have 100 square feet. Um

so so that's my question. So it's you've crossed it out of conditional there. But if you scroll down to the raising of ducks and chickens, it's permitted in most zones. So if I just say this isn't for family food production. So as long as you only have six animals, you're fine. But that's for more than six. Yes. Anything more than six, they still have to meet the 100 square foot per chicken or duck or goose. So then they only need 600 square feet. I mean, yeah, you could have ducks or chickens on a 7,000 foot lot.

That was my other thing last night when we were talking about it. Like, do you really need a 100 foot buffer for a chicken? I mean, I can see it for large animals because you don't want them leaning on the fence or even medium. You don't want them ruining that for But you need a 100 foot buffer for a chicken. Multiple chickens. Yeah. Yeah. No, I've have smaller yard than this and I've had multiple chickens and they don't bother anybody unless you get a rooster. Unless you get a rooster. Yeah. Then that's a whole another conversation. Don't get me Don't get me started on But I'm with you, Derek. I you know I I feel like the 100 foot setback is a lot but it has been a part of our code for a really long time and

just add that to my list. I think that was the only thing I just wanted that cleared up. Any other questions or concerns on item 11? If not, I would love a motion.

Mayor, I make a motion. We move to approve ordinance 2026-18 approving amendments to the Grantsville City Land Use and Management Codes chapters 46 7 8 9 14 15 16 20 and 21. We have a motion by Council Member Thomas. Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Butler. All in favor? I I

Okay, moving on to item number 12. A presentation and consideration of resolution 2026-36 documenting compliance with truth and taxation statement requirements under 59-2-919 in anticipation of council's adoption of the tentative fiscal year 2027 budget and establishing a time and place of a public hearing to consider its adoption. Consider its adoption. And this will be presented by Aspen.

All right. council. Okay, let's see. I am going to start by reading the statement of intent which is item A on the agenda of 12A and that will address B, C, DE, E, and G. And then I'll follow it up with the presentation of the proposed property tax impact schedule which is 12F and then we'll actually look at the tenative budget. So I'll start with the reading. Tonight I am presenting the tenative budget for grants city for fiscal year 2027. This tenative budget includes a proposal to levy an property tax rate that exceeds the certified tax rate. The approximate dollar amount of additional ad valorum property tax revenue generated by the proposed tax increase is 1,749,71. The approximate percentage increase in advorum property tax revenue generated by the property tax increase is 84%. The additional revenue generated by the proposed tax increase is intended to be used to fund the additional staffing requirements for parks and recreation to support the scenic slopes coming online as well as conduct a compensation study as well as allow us to function with a 3% um inflation increase without using fund balance which is our savings. A property tax impact schedule has been prepared and is being presented tonight. This schedule outlines the estimated impact of the proposed tax increase on various property values. The property tax impact schedule is available to the public and on our website at grantsvilleut.gov, the Utah public notice website, as well as in the city reporters office. If Gransville City proceeds with the proposed tax rate increase, Grantsville

City will provide notice of and conduct a public hearing at a future meeting where members of the public will have an opportunity to provide comments on the proposed property tax increase. This concludes the required statements regarding the proposed tax increase included in the tenative budget. All right, on our screens we have the property tax impact schedule. Sorry, let me pull it up on my own so I can read it. Um, so um, as it states at the top, we are considering a property tax increase rate from which will increase our rate from 001368 to 002517. This exceeds the certified tax rate and is estimated to generate an additional $1,749,71 in property tax revenue. Um, as you go down, you can see it outlines what our current property tax rate is at the 1368, which currently generates $2,82,977 in property tax revenue. Now this proposed revenue with the tax rate increase does not consider new growth. Um so there would be some there but without including new growth the estimated revenue is expected to be 3,832,678 which is an increase of $1,749. Oh $49,000 excuse me $71. So, um, as stated, that results in approximately an 84% increase. Um, the average, uh, median sale price for Grantsville City Homes from the Tullet County Assessor's Office was reported to be $530,88.

Um, at our estim at our current tax rate, they pay that $3984. That's annually. than this average home, right? So, with the proposed tax increase, that would increase it to $73383 a year, which is approximately $334 increase annually, which results in $27.92 of a monthly increase for our on the average home. Um, with that, if we scroll down some, um, these are the affected departments. We I did split it out somewhat. Um the in our general fund in our general city hall budget for human resources, they are requesting $30,000 to conduct a pay and compensation study. Um we feel like that's important to be able to get our city on track with ensuring that we are paying accurate wages for all of our employees. and from what Michael and I and our HR director can find, we haven't had one done. So, we're recommending that. Um, also separately, we're recommending that parks and recreation have additional staff for Scenic Slopes. Um, and um, as it is coming getting completed this year, we will need additional staff to tend to the new park. And then overall all of our general fund departments um it would be to cover a 3% inflation increase on all budget lines for fiscal year 2027. So that 3% inflation increase on all budget lines from what was budgeted in 2026. Now there are some adjustments to that like earlier Chief Sager mentioned that we I already have it in the budget for the new rate for the dispatch fees which

actually went down. So, there are some lines that won't show a true 3% increase, but generally speaking, there'll be a 3% increase on the budget lines that are presented, which all those added up together accounts for the additional 1.1 $1,749,71. So with that we can look at the I have a slideshow presentation. Um is it showing yours right? Okay. Sorry. I would have it on mine so I just want to make sure.

No you're good. Okay. So just go to the next one.

Okay. So um just kind of going to go over a tenative budget statement which is again just reiterating for transparency that the tenative budget does currently include the proposed tax rate increase. Um we'll then go over some budget updates that we've done this year. We'll review the asks from departments that were um recommended by staff but are not included in the budget because we don't have um funds for that. and then um yeah, we'll just continue through for the actual budget. Okay, so just to be sure, as the tenative budget is presented tonight, it does already include the proposed property tax rate increase. That is an 84% increase, increasing our property tax rate from 001368 to 002517, which results in approximately $1,749,71 in additional property tax revenue for Grantsville City. So, some things that we have done this year um that we'll you'll notice is we have tried to reallocate some of like the line item names such as we had several we had a line item that was in several departments labeled CDs, books, and written materials. That's kind of just gone by the wayside. That's not something that we typically need to buy specifically for. So, we've kind of done away with that budget line and we've um put those funds that were budgeted in there into office supplies, something that would be make more sense. Um we did also um establish some things that standardized things across the board. There was several departments that had employee appreciation um but they were at various budget amounts. So, it wasn't clear how much who got how much for what reason.

And so we did just standardize that at $150 per employee and then each department gets that for the number of employees that they have. So that got adjusted. Um and then we did just take things we did adjust some line items just to make them more accurate I suppose. So there was a lot of budget lines that had budget in them that wasn't actually getting spent. And so we did just take those down to better reflect actual spending that occurs um in those lines. So okay. So the 3% inflation did apply we did apply that in the tenative budget to current staff. So that would result in a 3% increase for staff wages. Um however, staff insurance as um our HR director presented on Friday um through PHP, our insurance has gone up 5%. So that budget line item does actually have a 5% increase just based on the increase that's required through PHP. So just so you're aware of that, that one will not follow the 3%. Okay. So these are some asks from the departments that we felt were important. um like I had mentioned and it is highlighted for transparency but the parks and recreation staff for scenic slopes going online is recommended and included in the consideration for the property tax rate increase. However, we did feel like it was important to note that the police department is actually requesting um they did request to have an additional four officers come on this next fiscal year due to growth. Um the rule is to have 1.42 officers per 10,000 people. We're actually already operating behind the curve on that. Um and so ideally, um the police department would have liked to have hired two additional officers in July and then another one in January and another one in March of next

year. Um however, that ask is not included in the budget as it stands tonight. Um just thought that we wanted to bring up the ask. The fire department would also like an increase um for their siphon amount for the next one. Okay. Um this was some office equipment and other asks that were asked for across departments. Um the fire department as we addressed tonight with 6700. Since that was approved, I will include that in the budget for their badges. Um they did ask for 15,000 total to have that available for their 100redyear celebration. Um then we also have the planning um community development asked to have um a planning commission appreciation budget which we had budgeted for in at the same umund just at the same rate that our employee appreciation is in um finance and recorders office did request a new printer um that would be at least through less Olson and it's approximately $300 $36 a month which results in $3,672 for the year. um mayor and for the mayor's budget for rodeo was um as we did that this year, excuse me, it wasn't included in the budget last year. Um but to budget for that, we did request 25,000 just for the continuation of the rodeo. Um that would cover the stock contractor and the clown. Ideally, we would get sponsors as we have this year to cover that, but in the event we would at least be able to cover that portion of the rodeo. Um, and then also mayor and council training to be sure this budget line the amount doesn't change. It just changed from the city hall budget. It's all still in the general fund, but it moved from the city hall budget to the mayor's budget just for transparency and makes it more clear as mayor and council. You guys are obviously separate than the staff here at city hall. So, we just wanted to separate that line out. But, that's the

amount that's been budgeted in previous. So, it didn't change. It just moved locations. Um and then it does include um as well the HR compensation study for $30,000 which is included in the property tax rate increase. Um another thing that has been brought up um that's not included in the tenative budget but we wanted to bring up for conversation has been garbage bulk pickup days. Um garbage is funded in an enterprise fund so it's separate from the general fund so it's not impacted by property taxes. Um, but if that was something that we wanted to pursue, we would also need to look at garbage rates, the utility rates for garbage because this would be an additional service that's being provided. So, um, that's not included now, but upon your direction, we can follow what you need to there. Okay, next one. Um, these are capital projects and equipment. Um the fire department would like to begin saving for a new fire truck and just putting that on everyone's radar at $200,000 a year. Um you know with that we're looking at you know 10 years before we get 2 million. Um mayor would also like a city hall remodel which would allow for the council chambers to be flopped as well as revamp the front entrance to be more um effective for citizens coming and having the window actually available at the front. The library is um would like to have some roof repairs completed. Um it's been leaking and causing issues into their server room. Um the cemetery had grounds improvement in for 100,000 um to widen roads and complete a fencing project. And then the water ones and the sewer one that are included on here are separate from the general fund because they're their own fund, but they are

included in the tenative budget. And that would be for the capital projects for the Apple Street and Hail Street water lines as well as the generator building. Um and then animal control is currently out at the wastewater treatment plant. Um with the different with the wastewater treatment plant that's being built, we will need to start looking at a new location and building for animal control in the coming years. Um it's not that far away. So, we need to start preparing for what we're going to do at that point. So, that was on there as a team. And then, of course, our wastewater treatment plant. And then the next one, Alicia, thank you. Um, these were some equipment that the departments would like. Um, fire had the extrication tools on there at 90,000. Um, we are hoping to find grants to assist with that. So, Alexis is working closely with the fire department to try to find funding for that. Um, roads had just asked for an increase on their parts and equipment budget line. Um, parks and wreck had um a few different items. New park signs, autonomous mower, tra landscape trailer, tables and trash cans, and drinking fountains to supply and take care of our parks. And the cemetery had standing mower and a drivable dump trailer um aid there as well as a gopher smoker. And that is the official name. And then water fund is asking for a generator for the well.

Okay, that's the wrong price for a generator for the well, I think. Thank you, Christie. Zero. I think did I switch them though? Cuz on the one before that I had the N is 300,000. So I think I might have the building is probably 30,000 and the generator. Yeah. So I do think I had those switched. But um yeah, none of them were actually included. None of that. Yeah, except for the parks and wreck employee and the 30 uh 30,000 compensation study, none of those were included in the tenative budget as it's presented. Um so let's see.

I I'm I'm just curious the autonomous mower. I I just have a question about that. Yeah. And um so is that from one mower? Okay. And it just takes down from staff, right? Because like the mower can be set and go mow while the staff is on site doing other things. So you don't have to have an additional staff to mow, which could be cool. Um okay. So I do want to give a little bit. Um can we switch to let me share? Yeah. Are you plugged in?

Yes. Okay. So, I do want to give just a little bit further um explanation as to where we're at with the increase specifically. So, okay. So, in fiscal year 25, um they were still able to have a balanced budget with revenues and expenses. And you can see that here at the 12,400,000 um that was the budget was budgeted and then I had their actuals posted bullets. So um in fiscal year 26 however so this fiscal year that we're currently in um the revenues did not meet the expenses. So that required to draw from fund balance for our general fund and

that was because our growth did not our projected growth did not happen as we expected. Yeah, there's a few theories um that I have. It's hard to say. I wasn't here. Um but from what I can tell, the city probably was in in a tough spot with needing to start looking at pulling from fund balance prior to fiscal year 26. However, there were CO relief funds that came into play that then ran out. Um, and I think those COVID relief funds helped carry Grantsville City through like a couple extra years before they had to start pulling from the fund balance. Um, so for fiscal year 26, they pulled approximately 2.7 million from fund balance. Now if we come down to what's so this is what the is expected revenue for this upcoming fiscal year. So 13 257 that is without a property tax increase. So that would stay the same which our expenses with just the 3% inflation increase on the budget lines. No asks, just the 3% inflation increase puts us at 15,7,300, which is more um by approximately $1,749 and $1,

but less than last year.

Yes. So it is less than last year. um with that part of that is because I have it in here and again you can address me otherwise if this is not accurate but it's my understanding that we will be receiving the water credit sale money at the end of this month and it will be in the water fund and it will be we'll go through the public process of transferring that into our capital projects fund. Now, the capital project fund only gets revenue from transfers in. So, last year, the general fund transferred 2,26,600 into capital projects. Now, I took that out for fiscal year 27 because now we're going to have a substantial amount in there from the sale of the water credit. So, there's no reason for the general fund to be contributing to the property to the capital projects fund. So, I did take out um that $2 million because we don't need that. Now, if that's incorrect and you guys had a different intention for the $18 million and I've misunderstood, then we can I can receive further direction on what the intention of that 18 million is for. Um, so we did have that. I wonder if I could change it down here. Okay. So, um that is less which is good. Um however, I recognize that the 1.7 million is concerning. So, right now in fund balance, we have approximately 2.5 million. So, there is still fund balance in there. Um however I I caution pulling from it too heavily um for the reason that the longer we fund without an increase the f the bigger the span is going to be that

we have to bridge the gap with an increase. So right now this increase at 84% it is a lot and it is steep. Um last year to make up that 2.7 it would have been 130% increase. Um so it we can talk for further direction if you want to pull um from the fund balance if you guys are wanting to redirect me on the usage of the $18 million. Um but as it or if we're wanting to you know cut budget lines um that's also obviously an option. We can put projects on hold. We can change different things but as it stands right now as grants city is operating that's the gap that we need to fund somehow. So the 84% increase again does come to about 27.92. So $27.92 a month for the average resident um with an with the average home value of 530,000. So, um beyond that, um on our other lines, um our enterprise funds are looking good. So, there's no need to there's no changes there. um as far as rates or increases though you guys will obviously I'll share this document with you so you can review it in detail but they didn't have um like we had mentioned the water line capital projects were included in this budget for water but the water fund's looking good the sewer fund and the garbage fund are both looking good unless I receive different direction for the bulk pickup for garbage then we can address that but it's primarily the largest thing tonight is just the general fund um being short. So getting

direction on how we want to address that would be ideal. And then to be sure the amounts that are presented tonight at the increase um not committed

we're not committed to that. You guys could say no I don't want 84 but let's do any other percent less than that and we can look at that. I would just need further direction on what other changes you would want to accommodate for the revenue deficiency. investment possibly to kind of delay.

Yeah, let me pull that up. The big impact of this.

So, with the increase in the water fund, with that large payment coming in, we do have the option if instructed. So, um, we could invest that. Um, right now we talked, Michael and I had a call with a bank last week and if we at the low end, they said that if we were to invest the full 18 million, we would be getting about 700,000 in interest income in over a year. Um, so that would, you know, if that was an option that we wanted to go, we would have that interest income coming in from the invested $18 million. It gets invested in like a tiered system. So it wouldn't all be locked up for like 5 years. It would be we could select how much we would want to be available to use in 1 month, 3 months, a year, etc. Like it it's not all invested for the next 5 years without being able to use. We can explore options for the investment of that if that would be something that you guys were wanting to pursue. Um, again, just a tenative budget of where things are at now. Um, it will change. The budget will change. I don't expect it to stay as it is presented tonight. But we do need to start having the conversations of what changes you guys want to see and what direction you want us to go in so that we can make it happen. What departments have the biggest increases besides well obviously sewer you know that's going to be a big expense but what for from this 2026 to 2027 what are those increases look like?

Um honestly a lot of them like like I had said right now in the budget it's just a 3% increase across the board. So, it's just operation and the 3% I put in there just based on inflation. So, it would just be increasing their operating expenses to keep up with inflation, but it doesn't include any asks any the water fund doesn't include those projects for the water lines on Apple and Hale. But otherwise, you know, the departments aren't getting new equipment, they're not getting new employees, they're not getting new asks. It's just operation. So right now that's how the budget stands. So obviously you could cut operating budget if that's something that you're wanting to pursue, but I would there's some things that like we can't you know we have an insanely high rocking mountain power bill and we can't do anything about that. So that like there's some operating expenses that we could look at if you'd like to cut um and we can have that discussion if you have specific ones in mind. Honestly, no department is the most expensive right now because all of them are only operating at a low level and all of them have lots of asks that none we've said no to all of them because strictly for being able to afford it. We were we can't afford if we don't change anything. So yeah.

So you're saying the increase only goes to those certain things the 30,000 for the study. Yes. So parks person and then just a 3% overall just that and nothing else really changes besides 3%. So, police departments not getting any new officers. Correct. And you already said we're lower than the average for public safety. Correct.

Because that would be an extra almost if you he wanted four officers that would be 400,000 have to add that to this and that would increase the amount of taxes that you would have to have here. We didn't think that was because we don't even like this number especially after increasing the sewer rate right here. So we are where we are with this thing. So we can go slash and start really going after the departments. What kind of amenities do we don't want to provide for anymore? I mean like with the park we're building a brand new park and we don't hire a new person for that then it kind of defeats the purpose of building the park. We're not going to maintain it. So we are lower than last year by a million. So we have reduced that gap significantly from the 16 million that was last year's proposal to 15 million and we're still that 1.7 million difference right now.

And so if we invest the money from the sewer uh credits the 18 million that hopefully we get that 700,000 down. So then it'll bring it down to about a million. That doesn't uh eliminate us this the council using that 18 million. It just delays it like for a year then maybe come up with plans on how we want to spend that. But in that year we could use that interest to offset what we're doing here and then decide how we want to adjust the taxes in the future and address these problems. So, we just passed the the capital facilities plan and there's a lot of expenses in that plan that are currently not budgeted unless we increase some other revenue coming into the city. We won't be able to meet our capital facilities plan future any upsizing or anything like that is not factored into even this year until we fix our deficit and actually bring some money in to help meet those upsizings. we're not going to be able to even do the capital facilities plan that the public and what we're wanting to do here. I think this is kind of an problem with like the sewer treatment plan itself is that you need a future plan for trans city budget going forward and start getting the funds available to that. No one loves rated taxes. They hate it. But the reality of it is unless we keep up with the inflation or with the projects, we're going to always be behind. We haven't raised taxes in over 17 years here, which is an extremely great amount of time. It also hurts the city significantly because it should have been incremental increases. If we' raised it 3% every year, we wouldn't have to increase it this drastically right now with that deficit. We can start going again. It's really about if we want to reduce it, which departments do we undersize, which amenities do we

stop doing? We already have complaints on our different parks, the cemetery. Do I pull persons from there with our expanded growth in community development? We did expand that department, but it has addressed some of the issues that we've been dealing with in avoiding litigation on that. One of our biggest expenses is our lawsuits. That's $150,000 right there with the the annexations that we're dealing with. That could get rid that would help reduce the budget, but those are those expenses that we have to pay. So, you're going to email us this proposal. It's the department breakdown or itemization's going to be included.

Yeah, it'll be the Yeah, it'll be the full Yeah. So, I think let's see. So, it'll be it includes it's 664 lines. So yeah, it includes a line item, every single budget line item for every single department and the budgeted amount for all of those lines.

Okay. And we would recommend that if the council open to it to do a budget kind of retreat to go if we want to line item by line and address each one of those kind of resetting expectations what they want to do. It will require some time to do that with the council because this is your budget. This is what we want to do. We want to make it the best we can as staff and be sensitive to our residents and how we want to do that. So, if we want to go and address each line by line, I I think that might be beneficial to help assess where we're at and meet those needs and where there needs to be cuts. We want would like that direction from council on how that would work because this there is new council here. We have new staff and so it would be helpful to find that direction. Council really wants to go on this. I I like that approach. I I think we need to do that.

I think so, too. I just I mean, I know you guys have gone through this, but like and I'm all for like making sure the park is maintained, but it's also at the risk of public safety or at the risk of other departments like So, I'm like I think we all I'd like to go through and see where this money is go. I'm not I and I know nobody wants to raise property taxes, but I also don't want to get it to the point where we've not done it for so long then suddenly our funds run out and now we have to increase it exponentially, even more than that. So, I I get that. But I also think we do need to sit down and then say I mean it's hard to tell every department no and then just be like just you and you and you get this which I understand we're gonna have to do that there's just no getting around it. Like everybody can't get what they want. So I get that. But I think that we collectively need to say okay maybe this line can't go out or Yeah.

I just I'm not saying you guys didn't do a great job. I know this is we appreciate all the words your eyes. Yeah. No. And I'm not new obviously but I think there's Yeah. I'd like to look and see you.

Yeah. And that's extremely valuable to get direction from you guys on what your priorities are um and what you know departments kind of may need an extra some departments we may need to say yes to while others we say no to. But getting that direction from you guys is valuable because I don't have the authority to make those kinds of decisions for you. So if we had an opportunity to all get on the same page and I can help make the budget what you guys want it to be. So that'd be valuable. But I guess tonight we wanted to because we have by the the the rules of the state now we have to set a number out there and we wanted to at least set that there we don't have a deficit so we can get out of that because we can come down from that once we have our budget meeting reduce that we just couldn't go higher than that. So we wanted to set it at very least for the council to have that option so that you have all your options before. So for clarity sake um the resolution we have before us tonight is really just to set that that upward upward end expectation and then work towards a a small number

from there. No more than this but exactly pull up our sleeves and get to work. Yes. Not to exceed number.

Yeah, I think we need to go through it line by line. Yeah, I I agree. That's my sentiment as well. Just

we are on like a somewhat tight timeline like we need it needs to be this month. So, um because we have to be presenting like final interim budgets in June, um and establishing like public hearing dates and things like that if a tax increase is pursued at any percentage. Um we will have to hold the public hearing and stuff in August and do all of that. So, we do kind of I'm all for getting together, but we just need to make sure that that's something that we're all able to commit to doing this month just for time sake. Okay.

Do we need to set a date for a public hearing today? I know that it said on here that it says like set establishing a time and a place of a public hearing. Is that something to do today? I do have a date that's been approved by Tilla County as well as the state of Utah. Um just in anticipation of if it is uh we need to take it on the calendar, but if it's not pursued, then we don't need to hold one. So, I don't know if there's a point in disclosing the public hearing for the tenative budget. Okay. a final budget, but we still have to hold a public hearing prior to June 13th to adopt the tenative budget, right? The in the interim one. The interim.

Yeah. So, if we if we pursue a property tax increase on in on June 13th, we'll adopt an interim budget that will operate on until the property tax increase would go through later in August because we don't do the truth and taxation public hearings for a tax increase until August, which is after our fiscal year begins. So, we would have to adopt an interimm budget. If we don't pursue an increase at all, we would just then adopt a final budget in June to operate on in fiscal year 26 because nothing would be changing with property taxes. So, it's a confusing process. So, if you have questions on that, let me know. Do we want to set a date now or do we want to tackle this and then wait till the end or what what what do we want to do in regards to a work meeting going through the the budget and slashing and moving and appropriating and adjusting. line items.

True. What's your suggestion? If we could set it now, maybe another we could do not like just maybe like next week or a week after kind of in in between our council meetings, set a special meeting to go over the budget type thing. How much notice does that require? 24 hours. Just Just 24 hours. Okay. this almost like a work session kind of thing. Okay. And we do have a council meeting on the day of graduation. I noticed as well. I'm gone the 19th for the 24th.

So the 13th. So that' be a week from today. I could do it. My schedule is unknown on that day. It's true. Yeah. I don't know. I just don't have any way of knowing where my house will be. When does that end? It ends next Saturday. Next Saturday. Mhm. Friday again. But on the 15th. Oh, that that'll interfere with Oh, that you'll still won't know how long the 13th till he'll do what?

16th state. Yeah, the 11th. I could actually do that well to make that evening work. I know the game time for that day. I could do that. I could do the 11th as well. Jeff, make it work. I can do these. Do six. Six. I see that, sir. 6 o' Grandma. Yeah, let's do it six o'clock. Six. So, Monday, May 11th at 6 o'clock. Okay, sounds good. With one request, Michael can't call it a retreat ever again.

You didn't have a good time. His retreats suck. enough for the record. Are we playing Jeopardy? We love even though I lost. I'm not as fun as Alicia. I'm sorry. The 20th. Do we want to discuss the 20th? Yes. I talked to Mindy. Okay. I knew she was in charge really. So, about moving that. Is there graduation on that? Yeah, that's high school graduation date. I there's a possibility I would have an issue with the meeting that evening. So yeah, Jake and I both have a graduate that day. Um I'll be gone

so we're going to be quum short anyways. Would it be best just to push that meeting to the 27th? I will be out on the 27th, but if everybody else is available, then I will also be gone on the 27th. This is hard. character you're going on the 19th, right? Through the 23rd. Yeah. What about the 18th or the 25th? The 25th is Memorial Day, though. Oh, that's right. Not that I have any but 18th works. I'm out of here by 10:30. I got a red eye midnight. So, that's just what you want to do. Go right to there. I could do the 18th. I could also do the 18th.

Sorry. And that's for them. a regular meeting replace the 20th graduation out of order but it's okay we're getting stuff done well 7 o'clock yes if it goes long I'll just have to sneak out right anything else no I think that's it that wasn't enough yeah I think I'm Uh, thank you. Um, yeah. Finished.

Thanks. Yeah. Did we say 6:00 on the 11th? Yeah. Yes. Yes. Then whatever they have to do with this resolution.

Yeah. So this is going to be a little confusing because so this resolution um the state has we have to state certain things um everything that was listed on the agenda and everything that has been stated. Um, so we thought it would be good to just put it in a resolution stating that she did that and you guys acknowledge that, which is what this is. Um, and then we can take off the public hearing schedule to adopt the tenative budget. So this is just a basically a confirmation that Aspen stated all of those things on the agenda and that we presented the property tax impact schedule during the this meeting. Um that's all that for this resolution is the next resolution. You don't have to pass it right now. Number 13, you don't have to pass it right now. um just because we don't know if we're going to go through a truth and taxation or not. So, we can wait on that one. I did put several motions up there for you guys

on this motion. Do we have to say all the whole thing ABC? Like does all have to be No, it's No, there there was a separate paper

packet separate motions. I make a motion to approve resolution 2026-36 documenting compliance with the truth and taxation statement requirements under 59-2-919 in anticipation of the council's adoption of the tenative fiscal year 2027 budget and establishing establishing establishing a time and place of a public hearing to consider its adoption as June 3rd 2026 at 7 p.m. at Gransville City Hall located at 429 East Main Street, Grantsville, Utah 84029, as well as electronically on via Zoom. I'll second.

All right, we have a motion by Council Member Dalton and a second by Council Member Butler. All in favor? I I right. And so we can table 13 based on

May I make a motion we move uh we table resolution 202637 declaring the intent of Gransville city to consider an increase in property tax tax revenue above the certified tax rate for fiscal year 2027 pursuant to the requirements of Utah House Bill 236. publishing a property tax impact disclosure and establishing a time and place of truth of taxation public hearing based on stop right there. Yeah, because we haven't established it yet until we until we adopt that inter.

Right. I was going to add I was going to add based on results following next week's next Monday's meeting to review the budget. Perfect. Council, is that accurate? We have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second the motion. A motion by council member Thomas and a second by council member Skinner. All in favor? I Thank you. Thank you. Keep us in check. That one was a little weird. So,

all right. Item number 14, a presentation of USA RV and parking storage site plan approved by the planning commission on April 20th, 2026. This is a presentation only. No motion. Are you doing it? Yes. Sorry. Um, we go down. Yeah. To the site plan,

right? Yeah, that'll work. Um so last year this came in front of planning commission and the city council. Um initially it was a complaint and they were out of compliance with their conditional use permit. It then went through planning commission and an appeal was made by the applicant which then brought it to city council's hands. Um there were discussions that the northern gate that's not showing on the site plan, which is near SR 138 and Old Lincoln Highway, um was not favored by council and it was requested that a second gate was added. So in the center where that dark area is where there was already an established gate, they are um they've cleared that out. They're graveling it and that's where the second access will be. um which a second access was requested and it was requested to have the site plan come back in front of um council for an update. So after we um went through the review, a vigorous review on this um it's now ready to be presented. So

So they're not expanding onto that extra area where they wanted to. They're just this is just the second entrance or are they expanding? They are. So where you see the grading lines um on the south eastish that's where they're expanding. So so there is an access now onto one directly onto 138 only. Okay. So here is the second access and then this is the expansion. Okay they've asked for. So, we're going to match the fencing, the blue chain link fencing around next to it. And then there will be a little access here. I'm not sure if you can hear me. Can can can you guys hear me? Yes.

Yes.

Hi, everyone. This is Andre. Uh, you've been working with Trent for a while, but actually he's now in the hospital with his wife. They're just having a baby today in the next couple of hours. So he has asked me if I if I can come and like cover for him. So obviously I said yes. Uh I uh I I own the business with with Trent but Trent runs the business. He lives there. Um anyway, but we've been working very digit like very diligently with uh with the with the CTO on this and yeah there is a gate there right now. So there are two gates on the property as of right now. We we we have a like it's a manual gate right now. Um like a 20 foot manual gate. We are getting installed an automated gate once we have the final approval and we can expand on on this project. My camera is so ugly. Or I am ugly. I guess

we like so zoomed into my face. I'm like, get get away from me, Shelby. Um, so they they were out of compliance. That's why they came to us. Have since then, have they stayed in compliance? And have we had any other issues come up with them? They have stayed in compliance. Um, we received a more of a comment or concern that they were having a I don't want to say a garage sale, but kind of a a garage sale. Um, but that is allowed um up to two times a year. And so we did work with them on a site plan for that. So,

and did those containers ever get moved that were on that? What did we do with that? the on this on the extension where they're trying to do the site plant. Containers are allowed on on the property. So remember what we decided on that part. So I mean they have they have moved them and they're grading them. They brought rock in um and material to um line the ditch um as well as bring in pipe there. So

yeah, we're all just waiting on approval and we'll get to work. Was was there a some type of line going through this property that we asked for an easement for? Yes. And so we have obtained that ement. Actually, it's kind of hard to see on this, but right here, um, this is where the water line is. There was already a reported easement on it. Um, and then they're just moving the fence 15 ft above the water line. Okay. I know that got brought up last time. So

mentioned the fence. What's the dimensions on the fence? The height? Six. Six feet. Six feet. It's a six. Uh, so currently it's a 6 foot uh with uh with blue slats and the expansion will match it. Black chain link 6 foot with blue slats. Very beautiful. Probably the most beautiful fence on that part of town where we have only three neighbors anyway. Cedar post. So they're all

No, it's a six foot black chain link fence with with blue slat. Super cool. Super nice looking. Any other questions or concerns on this item?

Oh, I know originally, you know, concerns of neighboring residents, obviously, ensuring everything's inside the fence. It's clean, it's neat, it's nice. Um, and following those recommendations is what I would expect. So, um, as long as we're addressing all of those in that format, are there any other concerns that we're not aware of that have been brought to staff that maybe we need to be up to speed on?

Nope. area made sure you beat them up on the um uh drainage swell that runs through their property. And so yeah, we addressed the entry being able to access off the roads. Correct. Not not having some vehicle in the middle of the road trying to get out, etc. I don't have any other concerns. All right. I'm good. I'm good. Good. So, mayor, I make a motion we approve just presentation. Yeah. Sorry. The planning commission's approved. Approved it. Yeah.

They just wanted to let us know what they were doing. Okay. Perfect. Okay. Well, we'll close item number 14. Thank you. Item number 15, consideration of resolution 2026-33 approving the selection and appointment of a wastewater treatment plant inspector. This will be presented by Christie. Yeah. And I told Aspen she can come help, but we had four um we had four companies submit the RFP. None of them did it correctly. Oh. So

yeah, so unfortunately um Agnita item number 15 um they um when we had put out the bid, none of them responded correctly with their costs. Like you're supposed to include them separately. It was explicitly stated. Some did, some didn't. But then the people that did still didn't actually state on there that it was their best like they would not exceed cost which was also explicitly stated that they needed to include. So because of that we were we had to just consider them all anyway because none of them submitted properly. So then it would throw out all of them.

So because none of them did it correctly we considered all of them still. Um, and so if you scroll down just a little, Alicia, I'm sorry, just where it gets these total points. So the top points are the technical points that the evaluation committee judges before they see cost ideally, which is why we ask that cost is submitted separately. So there's not a pre-notion or bias created on the cost already. Um so based on what was the technical scores um offer C was the highest scoring in the technical section and then um they al they were the third um so they got 10.86 of the cost points once we put all of their costs in there but overall offer C was still the highest scoring respondent with cost considered or without cost considered. So given that we considered all four of them still we felt confident that in awarding to offer C. So that's the recommendation of the evaluation committee is to award to offer C which is presented here. So

so how quick do we need some an inspector in now? Immediat. Yeah. So we've started already and right now we're we're paying a company in the interim until we approve this. kind of makes me nervous if they can't pay attention to detail on a RFP then what how are they going to do on the inspecting a sewer treatment facility that's why I asked him that because if we could put it back out and have them do it correctly.

So the hard part with putting it back out is per state statute if we resolicit and the public solicitation there has to be a significant change in the scope but we don't have a significant change the scope of the what we're asking for is the same. So some did it correctly, some didn't or? No, ultimately no one did. They just did it wrong in different. Yes. Was that due to the RFP in general? Was it not? Do you feel like it wasn't clear?

And that's something that we also took into consideration like there could be issues with our solicitation if not a single one of the vendors did it correctly. So that was part of the reason we still continued all of them. We did read through it. We had Eric from Aqua read through it. Um, it seems clear to us, but evidently we're wrong. So, we're looking into rewarding and adjusting what that needs to look like in solicitations moving forward to make sure that that is less of a question mark.

I'm going to ask you a tough question. The company that we're currently using right now to fill in void, did that company um put in an offer on this? Yes. Is that by chance off or C? Just curious. I don't know. Can I ask that question? Guess I can ask whatever question I want. Can I answer that? Whether you get an answer, we'll see. Yes. Yes, it is. It is. And I was going to I was going to ask is there a reason why offer we wouldn't just go with the low low number on this specifically with such a close total point. Oh, well technically they had quite a lower score.

Okay. It was just their cost point that was high. So that's what's making them look competitive. In what areas would they fail? So they did not when we evaluated they did not appear to understand the scope of work. Okay. So

sorry Alicia scroll back up. So the technical scores were on responsiveness, experience, project scope and understanding and qualifications. So our evaluation committee evaluated the responses that were submitted based on that. That is one reason why we do request for proposal rather than just um invitation for bid. Invitation for bid does tie us into going with the lowcost option only and you can't consider other factors. However, that sometimes means that we're sacrificing value. Um, and so RFPs allow us to go for an award to the best value for the city rather than just the lowcost option which sometimes ends up costing us more. Can you just scroll back down a little bit? I should jump on. Yeah, B and C are very close. I mean, in my mind, 87.24, 88.2, and B's less. So, is that is what I'm looking at is it a big difference? Is it not a big difference?

No, you're you're correct. I think um Chrissy's point earlier was if we since none of them did the cost portion correctly, if we took consideration of the cost out of it, offer C was the highest scoreer at and they had a total of 77.33 points. Um offer B scored lower at 70.67. So the reason that they get bumped up to the 87 overall points is just because they get a higher percentage of the cost points because they have the technical points that seven points. What are we look what what kind of difference is that? Is that going to be is that not that bad? This guy could do okay.

Well to me doesn't seem like a lot. I mean it's $100,000 we could save. So at that point we could argue that maybe we go with offer D who scored lower two at 75 points. But then we don't want to consider them because they're the most expensive. Yeah. So that's another thing is if we're not awarding to the highest scoring respondent, we have to provide justification for why we've deviated from awarding to the highest scoring respondent. Um and the so the hard part to justify what I guess would be arguing that they scored lower in their technical response. So the evaluation committee overall felt like they were less qualified to do what we were asking for.

Were either of the two of you any one of the three evaluators? I am not. So um yeah so myself and Marie in the finance office handle the solicitations and we take in on the questions and the posting and the communication with the vendors to prevent any bias that are created by members on the evaluation committee. So that allows our department heads and other staff members that are educated in their area to sit on the evaluation committee because that provides a higher value than them managing an RFP. I don't

I mean I don't sit on these evaluator things but for one person to give a 30 on a scope and understanding on offer B and then evaluator three gives an 18. I mean that's quite a jump.

That's true. And then so you do have that span on offer A, B, and D. However, offer C, which is the recommended awarding, all of them scored high. So all the evaluators while they were kind of across the board in that area on the other respondents they were all on the same page with scoring offer C high which is the recommended awarded vendor. And also just to clarify the process some the evaluation committee receives the responses and fills out their score sheet for the technical portion on their own independently. They're not we don't get together and score them together.

They're not influenced by somebody else and they're like we send out

ideally. So we do our best to ensure that there the technical scores are independently scored prior to the when we come together on the meeting which did occur in this circumstance. Um we actually had to postpone it because not everyone was finished. So we did just so that way we would have everyone's technical scores prior to convening to discuss it together where a score could be swayed by another evaluator. I'm going to ask another hard question. Um, so tell me that the engineering firm that designed our wastewater treatment plant is not offer C. just because there there are there are certain engineering firms that that offer up these type of services. I just want to make sure there's that offer C because we don't know who that that is. I don't want to see a conflict of interest in those regards. So the engineering

these are different f these are not an engineering firm. These are testing firms. Testing firms. Yeah. So they're not included in the design or the but no it's not the Yeah.

Just want to make sure. Yeah, that's fair. So, it's maybe maybe it'd be beneficial to talk publicly uh regarding, you know, what what the inspector's job is, what time frame this associates with. um for the benefit of the public just kind of is this a year-long commitment for every. So this is a over a very general overlook but again

this is for an inspector to be there from the beginning to the end of the project from soil sampling immediately right now to compaction to then also concrete um for hardness for strength in the rebar and the welding and all parts starting now till the end. And the cost of the inspector, is that in the budget for the plant? Yes, it's included in it. Yes. So again, because this is over 35,000 per our procurement policy before we hire a firm to do this. We needed to go out to bid.

So officer offer C fits within our budget that we have for the inspector for the wastewater treatment. What did we have budgeted in there for? What was the amount?

We just I don't know where I have it broken down. What Robert sends us? While you're doing that, in the technical score portion in responsiveness, what was the the max score that you could give a particular offer? Was it 15 or was it 30? What was the max score you could give in that first category?

Um, let me double check. Sorry. Says 15. 15 is the max score. Yeah. One of one of the issues. So for specifically special inspections and my history with special inspections, one of the issues that you have typically with those type of inspections is they vary on where the where the company is coming from, how long they are spending traveling because that's part of their inspection cost

and um so those numbers can vary. The other component that becomes variable is if that inspector comes out specifically to look at one item when he has the opportunity to look at four and he just looks at ones and go then comes back and looks at another and goes back and looks at another. So there is an economy of scale that can be from a savings standpoint if they are inspecting multiple things at one point in time. Um, so I guess without really kind of digging through what what they were offering, how they were offering, um, I guess that would just be one of the things that I'd like to say like that we we have a due diligence there to to be as efficient as possible so that those inspections aren't and it looks like this is an overall number. I don't know if this is an overall number and then all a sudden we get a change order because they're coming more frequently than they thought they were going to be or they're traveling farther than they thought they were going to be. I just want to wasn't sure how our RFP reads specifically to to protect us against a cost increase on these inspections.

We did ask them to break it down for an hourly cost, but also for an estimated overall cost of what the whole project would be. It's a GMP max price. Okay. Like we're spending a lot of money on this sewer treatment plant. So we want to get somebody good obviously, but like I'm kind of between B and C because it's like save us a little bit. A and D to me kind of seems to obviously and the evaluating committee is recommending C. So I'm that that's stupid. we should choose.

We obviously want somebody who knows what they're doing. So, we have to choose C unless there reason why we don't want to choose C and choose B instead. That's where we're at. Yeah. And what would be I wish Tyson was here, but what what would be the reason that we would beside that's what's so frustrating with government like saving $90,000. Yeah. Yeah. This is Is that a good enough reason? Yeah, that's a lot of money. And Tyson is online actually, especially just going through the budget. See, yeah, especially after the last item. Tyson, can you hear us?

I can't hear you. Yeah. So, can you tell us what would be some legal reasons or reasons how we could choose offer B to save $90,000 instead of offer C? What's the the the hangup again as far as why you are hesitant to do that?

So, offer C, their cost is 266 almost $267,000. Offer B, which scored the next highest um is $175,000. So, 90 about $90,000 difference. And there's a seven point score difference on technical. On technical overall there's a one point that's less than a point less than a point on total. Yeah. Everything.

Council has broad discretion to uh make a determination on on their selection uh based on uh what they believe to be in the best interest of the of the city. Um and so that's that's a a prerogative that lies within your hands. Um the the criteria used to to to score these um you know was was pursuant to to state code. Um but um on on blind review um if if council is is inclined to to make a determination um that one category of of of uh of evaluation is is weightier than than another then that that's within your realm. We would just have to state then likely on the record why we're making that choice if we

right Tyson. Absolutely. Yes. With some limited information and we don't know if offer B is based out of Hawaii. You know I the thing is I like when I'm looking at like evaluator one gave tense all across to everybody you know under qualifications. If you go up, we go up one just a little bit more. Uh, sorry. Um, the same with evaluator one, project scope and understanding all 30s. So, I I I just like I'm not pointing anybody out. I'm just saying so I mean seems like they're comparable to this evaluator.

That the difference is the project scope and understanding between offer B and offer C. And that's the that's the glaring delta um between the two of them in the technical portion and and how they were scored. I mean that's the that's the difference. Yeah.

Right here between the two had um and we'll need to pick on the evaluators but had those scores been a little bit differently this would be even closer to what it is and it's only 0.96 um between the two. Right. Yeah, I think we're all thinking the same thing and we we understand your recommendation, Christie. Um, and with offer C, I did ask the question. I mean, they are there right now. They obviously, you know, we we we brought them on board because they understand the project scope and they're filling the gap. I guess how much how much cost have we incurred with offer C to date? And it may not be much at all. Um and and how much of those costs are wrapped up in that $266,000. It may be negligible because we're so early in the project, right?

Five days. Five days. Yeah. Like we haven't received an invoice or anything. couple thousand, but obviously what we're what we're using for them right now, we're going to have to pay above and beyond $175,000 if we choose offer B. So, correct. Correct. Sorry, what did you say? We're going to have to do what? Okay. So, offer C is on site right now, right? And we're paying them essentially on a TNM basis, right? Because we need someone on board, right? Yeah. But there's costs that are going to be incurred with offer C to date. If we choose offer B, the 175,000, we'll need to pay um the some additional cost some additional cost to see to see because they're there right now. That's why I asked that question,

right? So, but they're saying it wouldn't be that much. It's Yeah, but it is something. Yeah. So, just I mean I don't think it matters that much. I I'm not trying to look over like I mean the evaluators obviously know they know more than me on this

but it just seems so close between B and C that saving $9,000 would be considerable that discretion to make that Did you find out how much we had in the budget? No, it doesn't explicitly state any for inspections specifically. This is above and beyond.

It would be included. We do have $2 million contingency or buffer that Yeah. Yeah. It would be covered for sure, but it Yeah, there wasn't an explicit budget estimated from Aqua for the cost of special inspections. Okay. I just worry about service. I mean a good inspector. I don't want any anything held up. Is there a level of service that all of them aren't held to? We don't. This is so weird. We don't back to the evaluation. We had to make sure all of them had the certifications for this. Okay. So, they all have it

according to their proposal. Okay. So all four offerers are are qualified to do the work. All four of them had certifications had certifications. Okay. I mean to me it's a no-brainer. I mean, you go up B. We're just getting ready to ask for a huge increase and all this money and we have a chance to save $90,000 and we're not going to.

But also, that's not 90,000 we're going to be able to move to some general fund, right? I mean, just so we're clear, this is still I mean, I do think it's good. We should save money on the on the sewer treatment, but I just want to be clear. This is not like, oh, hey, we can take this 90,000 and move it to some place. No, that's correct. What? I know. But I think it's great to say. Yeah. I just said I think some people say, "Oh, we say 90,000. We can get something else from the way different ask." But we can't do that. I understand that. Clarification. If anything we can say here would be relatively low. We can get that interest rate to reduce that stuff

or it may help with change orders. That may come. True. Very good. With that, um, I'll make a motion. Before you do that, go ahead. Sorry, I had one last question. So, just for clarity, um, if if offer C is chosen, the cost that they've expended would be a portion, it would be it would not be in addition to what their estimate is. It would be included in their estimate. Is that accurate? So the last five days are included in their offer would be or would not

or we're still going to have to pay them the contracted fee for this first week. That's unclear. I think it's unclear be asking for that. Yeah, I would think it would be part of what the over just asking them to do it right now. We needed somebody if they get the bid that would definitely push them that this is in that scope. Otherwise, we just pay it for the five days. Yeah. Not that that would be very much of a cost, but

Okay. Thank you. Sorry, I took it. Make a motion that we um approve the resolution 2026-33 approving the selection and appointment of the wastewater treatment plante inspector to offer B due to the fact that um the total points was negligible. It was less than one um point and the savings um was $90,000. And so that that's my reasoning why my motion. We have a motion by council member Butler. Is there a second? I'll second.

Second by council member Dalton. All in favor? I. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Item number 16, consideration of resolution 2026-35 authorizing the execution of an equipment lease purchase agreement for the acquisition of a vac truck and other related matters.

Yeah. So, you guys actually did approve for the purchase of the sewer department to purchase the back truck at the previous meeting. reason we're coming before you is we actually did change to um before it was presented to you to do the financing through the supplier. Um however, they actually had a really high rate to of like loan management. I bet.

And so we did reach out to other options and Zans came in with a much more reasonable like loan management fee and then so it ultimately takes down the cost and a lower rate. So yeah, the rate is lower and then our management costs are down like 47,000. It was a huge difference. So, um, it's just coming before you again because we did change and we were approved to finance through the supplier, but now we would like to finance through Zans instead. So, that's why it's before you class funds before it's still funds. Sewer, sorry, sewer. Yeah. So, this is for the sewer for their back truck to get the financing

that we approved at the last meeting. We're just making it cheaper that we can buy right now. Well, and and the amount's cheaper than what you had proposed previously. um upwards of more than $100,000 cheaper. No, the cost is still we've put down we'll put down a h 100,000 and this is the amount we're financing. Okay. So, it's still at the but it was still 47,000 less. Okay. Yeah. So, what's cheaper? It's cheaper because the financer wanted to charge us a $50,000 fee to go through them and Zans is charging us about a $3,000 fee. Oh, that's a big difference. Yeah. So, we're saving $47,000. Great.

Plus the interest plus the interest was less as well. So, plus the $90,000 we just saved. Yeah. See, look at us. We're going to get this. We're on a roll this budget slashing thing on the 11. Well, we'll get close or we'll make some. Okay. Very good. Yeah, thank you for looking into that because typically it's never good to finance something through a supplier like that. Usually it's better to go through a entity like Zans. So yeah, it's great. All right. Can I get a motion?

Yeah, mayor. I make a motion we approve resolution 2026 35 authorizing the execution of the equipment lease purchase agreement for the acquisition of the vac truck and other related matters as presented. We have a motion by council member Butler. Is there a second? I second. Second by council member Thomas. All in favor? I. Thank you.

Right. Item 17, consideration of resolution 2026-28 approving amendments to the Grantsville city fee schedule to increase the zoning plan checks and permit fees and adding rideway permit fees, sidewalk or driveway replacement fees, water or sewer connection fees, and asphalt repair fees to the zoning fees section.

Um, yes. So, in the building department, and if you want to scroll through this, the zoning plan check fee was $25 and with the communication and the plan check, that just doesn't even cover staff's time. Um, so that was increased from 25 to 100. Um, the plan check and the permit fee that matches um another permit um inspection fee as well. And then we removed the um rightaway cut permits, sidewalk, and things like that out of the building department's fee schedule and moved it to the zoning fee schedule because the um inspectors are not the building inspectors, but the land use inspectors are the ones inspecting those rightaway permits. So, it made sense to have that funding under zoning as well as allow us to be able to charge those fees through um community and developments I work application. So,

are the fees staying the same but they're just being transferred over? was just those two things. That's it. That's good. Anybody have questions? Let's do this. Go for it.

All right. I make a motion that we approve resolution um 2026-28 approving amendments to the Grantsville city fee schedule to increase the zoning plan check and permit fees and adding rightway permit fees, sidewalk or driveway replacement fees, water or sewer connection fees, and asphalt repair fees to the zoning fee section. We have a motion by council member Skinner. Is there a second? I'll second it. Second by council member Williams. All in favor? Right. make lots of money. Yeah.

Item 18, consideration of resolution 2026-32 approving Rodeo Arena light and water fees in the Grantsville City fee schedule. And this is presented by Aspen as well. I know you guys don't be getting comfy down there, Aspen. I know. Not tonight. Fine.

I brought my Pepsi with me this time. So, um, last time I had presented to you for the rodeo rental fee, um, there had been discussion about costs associated with the usage of the arena lights, the water over at the arena, and other things like that. So, um, I did do some research and I spoke with Christy and her team and just things that they thought would be reasonable rates to charge. Um, and so we are proposing that the usage of the arena lights will be $25 per hour. Again, they would only need that if the event went into the evening, the dark night hours. And then for the usage of the arena water, um, that would be $15 per reservation. So, if they are going to need to water the arena or use the water there, they would just let us know when they make the reservation and it would just be $15. It's a flat fee. It's not based on anything else. So um that's just a followup to our discussion previously and this is what is being recommended

but that's per reservation right so the way I understood it when you presented it last time when we discussed it a reservation isn't always needed right it's there it's open correct but if you want it reserved for you to be able to utilize you need to make a reservation there's a fee tied to that and if they want to use the water it's there but with the arena lights if they want to use them at all, regardless of whether they made a reservation or not, will we be charging the $25 per hour? And how do we how do we go about that? Can we How do they turn the lights on? We can lock it. And so they can only turn them on if they have a reservation. Do we have a lock on this question?

You need a key for it. Yes. There we go. So yes, the arena lights you would need to be using with a reservation. So if you're not don't have a reservation, you would not be able to turn them on. Metal Halli lights. So you can see the dial spin when you turn it on. Yeah, the old dinosaur style. Do we We don't have the budget to put in LED lights yet. So once they warm up, they're really bright. Are they working good?

Yeah. Yeah. I went um Monday night. I came in about 9:30. Turned them on. that takes about five minutes for them to really warm up and get bright. But they I would not want to be the person that climbs the pole to change those poles out. They only got bucket trucks. I know. JG, have we c I mean we captured everything? I guess the only question I had is we captured everything regarding I mean I know I I think this is excited for the rodeo to come back to Grantsville. It's going to be an awesome Yeah.

opportunity. Is there any other areas that we feel like we need to capture within that space? And I guess have we a general question or we are we going to look into charting extra for the traffic. Do we open restrooms? Restrooms are always open. Okay. They're open right now. Um I I thought we were leaving it more as only city employees were using the tractors how we left it right now. Yeah, right now we don't um I would not recommend for like I had mentioned when we've discussed it previously that the usage of the tractor is just a liability issue on our part. So, I think

and it does have rates in there for the uh like I don't want to say rental of an employee, but like to have an employee at your event in order to use the tractor to drag if necessary. So, that is already in the fee schedule though of of public works employee per hour.

I not the if I may, we did just bring in 800 tons of sand to this arena. So, I would encourage um people renting the arena to um utilize having an employee there to work that sand because all they're doing is just compacting it and breaking it down and then we restart from ground zero again. Can we make that a requirement when it's rented for longer periods of time that it has someone that gets to come take care of it before and take care of it after reservation but that does in the reservation that does require um employees time and

right you know usually on a weekend part of it I mean I hate to force someone to do something but it it would help make it bene beneficial for use for everyone I don't I don't I don't know how we do that though in in fee schedule. So without Christie is it is the tractor used on a regular basis that's our intent. Okay. No they without a reservation do it twice a week without any reservation. Okay. You don't always make it. Yeah.

We'll have summer hires here in few weeks. That will help. Correct. I move to approve resolution 20 2026-32 approving ROI Arena lights and water fees in Grantville city fee schedule. We have a motion by council member Williams. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by council member Dalton. All in favor? Hi. Okay, we made it through that long agenda.

Make a motion we have a motion and a second. All in favor? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. I have a quick question. the job when we need it.