City Council - Regular Meeting

before they captured it, send them over to Hill Air Force. Since they're not doing that anymore, they contracted with Amoresco to come in and capture those gases. But in order to do that, they had to modify build a new system quite honestly so Amoresco is the one that's doing it but they they contracted with them over a year and a half ago I guess and anyway Amoresco is going to they're gonna they they're going into it I don't even know how to say this exactly They're entering into an agreement with Nexogen Fuels. And so basically, they've got another entity that's buying in with this portion of their business. So in order to do that, they need Wasatch Integrated to sign a release form where they don't have to give them a 30-day notice. And at this point, we're not willing to do that because they didn't give us enough details on the deal. So anyway, I'm sure they'll work it out, but I just figured, you know, that's one of those things to kind of let you guys be aware of. And then last time, if you recall, I mentioned that the Ogden transfer station, that there's been a lot of movement there. Well, first off, I keep getting because of both ours. So those two have merged. But since then, the Ogden transfer station will cease to operate from July 1. what's going to take place is waste management is going to assume the operations of that facility and they're currently evaluating the landfill operation proportion of that because Ogden was, I can't remember where they were taking their transfer waste to but technically waste management is part of the Bayview, which is where Wasatch Integrated takes their waste. So the way that that deal's probably gonna happen at this point, I mean, we don't know, but they call it New Era, that's their operating board for the Bayview landfill, and they have representatives from the different entities that take waste out there. That board has got together and has already had a discussion that they're willing to accept that waste providing it still gets invoiced through Wasatch Integrated. Because currently, right now, management delivers up there. So anyway, that's how that deal's looking. Nothing's in concrete, but that's just an update on it, on what they're talking. But I do know that tipping fees out there. So currently the tipping fees are 1250 and come July 1, they're supposed to go to 1350.

To what?

To 1350. So they're going to increase the dollar. So all of that will probably play into how this is going to go down. But I just felt like, you know, this is the obviously the trash industry is kind of moving around and people are jockeying for different positions out here as far as the waste. Anyway, that's the main update there. However, I guess there's a thrift store up there. You know, it's the first time they were all kind of excited because they had their first month of sales that exceeded $25,000. That's never happened up there. It's usually the little store. The little landfill, yeah. so uh what that tells you is more and more people are kind of recognizing that that's a place where they can take their you know their stuff stuff to be repurposed anyway kind of exciting things for them guys um that's primarily my updates although i do have one question which we can address later but be thinking of this knowing that um july 4th holiday is on a saturday but on Thursday the 2nd, we are scheduled for a council meeting, but based upon that there's not much on the agenda or anything that absolutely has to be done, do you guys still want to meet or do you want to postpone that? So think of that because from what I'm gathering right now, it doesn't look like there's anything on the agenda yet.

Do you want to vote?

No, I'm just saying, I'm going to need your opinion if you want to or not, is what I'm saying.

Do you want it?

Sure. Why not?

Fourth of July. So two want it, one doesn't.

What are you guys thinking?

We don't need to do it. Okay.

If there's some pressing, then yeah, we should be able to come. I'm okay with skipping it. Okay.

Three to two. We'll see what the agenda looks like then as we get closer. Yeah.

I mean, if we need to be here, that's different.

Yeah, and I get it. I feel the same way. But if we don't. But if there's only... You know, one consent item that can really probably move to the next meeting. And the only reason why I bring that up is because I know that that's a busy time for everyone.

Really?

Okay, that's it.

I mean, we do have a citizen comment, so. If people have something they want to share. That's true. And we may have a continuation. We may. Okay. Do you have anything to update? Bryce Cannon's next week. So after that, I'll maybe have something to share. I did bring up the request to maybe have a meeting or session where we go over the sharp data. So I should have an email with some dates for that.

So I'll send that out. We're meeting the budget for UIA's meeting on Monday. So we'll have more.

Okay.

You're going to see the Planning Commission items tonight, so... Okay, good.

All right, well, let's go ahead and then go on to item number three, which Chief Swanson is going to be presenting that information to us on the cooperative agreement.

I just wanted to sincerely thank the mayor and the council people for your support for this project, the dispatch center, and the regional consolidation, and also thank you for your patience. It's been a process that has taken us a few years, but we've almost arrived. So I also want to thank Carl for managing and overseeing this project for those years, too. And I'll be able to let him actually present to you tonight. And then he's got to take off, and so I'll talk to you in council.

Um, so I know that your time is precious tonight with a lot of your agenda, so I'll try to keep it brief. So, um, this agreement that we're asking, uh, you guys or the mayor to sign on behalf of Lake City is a replacement for a current agreement that we have with Clearfield, North Davis Fire and South Weber Fire. In fact, we've always contemplated that that agreement would be replaced with a more robust one that, uh, provides for the entire north end of the county dispatch services. So that's the agreement that you have, uh, there in front of you. A couple key things to bring out in this agreement is we have three levels of governance that are built in to make sure that all the partners that we provide dispatch services for are listened to and have input into the way that we conduct business. Ultimately all the decision will lie with you as the council at the end of the day for all the budget approvals and everything like that. We have a user advisory group which is our basically our lieutenants and our battalion chiefs and our people who are out on the road. They're going to be giving us feedback on our operations, things that we can improve and working together. And we anticipate 90% of the issues are going to be handled at that level. We have a member advisory group, which is comprised of chiefs, mainly of all the agencies that we represent. And they will be looking at long-term strategic planning and making some budget inputs, things like that. and then we have a budget advisory group that is the city managers from all of the member agencies who will participate in providing some input reviewing the budget together and providing input to mr jensen and then ultimately that those budget decisions have come to you so this document this contract or this agreement protects in several different ways, both by weighted voting, making sure that we are represented for being one of the largest agencies that's part of this group. And we have a fee structure built in there, which is scalable, which is equitable. We're not subsidizing any other city, nor are they subsidizing our services. Everybody's needs and how big they are and how they use the system, all of those things is based into how our fee structure is done. So it's fair and equitable and scalable for the future if other agencies join at some future time. um so what you have before you is a master agreement and an addendum we're signing the master agreement now we actually already have them back from sunset north davis fire in clarefield i've all signed already several others have already approved it in their councils i just don't have the actual physical document back once we have all of those and then we'll be good to go we're looking at a october time frame for the actual merge with davis county with their dispatchers. So we'll be moving into our building around July 14th is our anticipated date and then right around October 1st would be the consolidation with Davis County starting to provide services for everyone that is north of the Leighton-Catesville border all the way to the Weber County border, Davis County Sheriff, Utah Highway Patrol, AP&P, and DNR. So if you have any questions or anything that you'd like to review.

What's happening in the south of the county's Bountiful doing something similar?

Bountiful has operated the center where they provided service to four other cities in their area and then this last year they took on Kaysville and Farmington and so at the end of this project there will be two PSAPs remaining in Davis County. We started off with four and so we have now down to two, just the north and the south. North operating by us, Bountiful will be the south.

Are there any cities we're missing?

It's divided at the Layton-Kaysville border.

I understand that. Everything north of Layton? Yes. All the cities, are they on board?

They are on board. Okay.

Good job.

We've worked with all of them over the last couple of years to put this together.

So just good work. We see these kind of inter-local agreements. We've had issues with weighted voting and stuff like that in other areas. So the fact that you can get the other entities to agree to it, they can see that it's a fair and reasonable resolution. So just good job. That's what we want. We want to be partners with each other if we can. We want everyone to be safe together. I'm sorry.

Go ahead. Would we, even though there's a border, would we still help Kaysville and vice versa? I mean, that doesn't change.

No, operationally we still work together on many different things. The dispatch center that answers the 911 calls for that area will be whichever side the line is on. But we even get calls for each other. One of the benefits, of course, you remember, we share now one system across the entire county, so wherever that call lands, it never gets transferred anymore. That's good.

We will be taking all of the calls, though, on the freeway for the whole county. Oh, yeah.

We can carve that out, so the 911 calls will come directly to us, even if it's down in North Salt Lake, if it's on I-15 or Legacy or 89.

That's because UHP is elected to go with us. Oh, good. Okay.

And so DNR is just up in the foothills, so that's where we get all the DNR calls.

And a little violent is going to be our main source of calls out there. That's the state parks police. They recently merged with DNR and have a new division for that.

Tricky question. Maybe loaded question. I don't know of an answer. I don't know. Maybe for Alex or Chief, more of the political wins of having two PSAPs up here and Bountiful. There's been, when this was all being negotiated, the county had thoughts of, well, we should be doing this. And state government has talked about how many you should have. They have an interest in this. The question, I guess, is how permanent is this agreement or this operation? far as the state goes and the county goes do we have any any thoughts on that maybe you don't have an answer but thoughts permanent that's not we've invested a lot we've invested okay well we've invested a lot yeah both politically voluntarily across the street here so senator harper who was the driving force behind legislation regarding consolidation

loves what we're doing and has stated he's backing off, he likes what the county's done, so at least today, he supports this whole heart.

That same thing, the director down there we know very well, used to work here, and she's very transparent with us and vice versa, and all of these changes have been read through, Senator Harper, as Alan said, and he's told me there have been other Parties that are party to our agreement, I think I've talked about some of that before, that have tried to cause the structure to be different than it actually is. We've held the line on that, and they have reached out to Senator Harper hoping to gain some traction in the state, forcing us to change our approach. You may remember getting those discussions. And he rebut all of those who said, I'm totally happy. I'm familiar with what Len's doing. He supported it 100%. So I don't think we anticipate from the staff, especially down there, that there's any additional weapons to try to go to one. The other thing you mentioned before, maybe not since Mike's been on, but that center, we intentionally built that large enough that if the day comes that we are forced to do one, we already have a PSAP that will accommodate that and other things to the south of that and cost a little bit more money, but we felt like it was... We'll use the space in that event. We're in a prime position to help building that works already and not have to contribute to something that would be millions and millions of dollars. We think we're well positioned.

And this agreement also provides for some stability as well. There's an 18-month termination clause basically where they have to tell us that time in advance. So we don't want agencies bouncing back and forth between now and south. It's really disruptive to do that. So try to build that in to make this more of a long-term agreement with a three-year term with an 18-month advance notice before any changes were made to who's a member and who's not.

so with the idea of us you know no one's subsidizing anybody else everyone's playing the same game i understand for like municipalities right they voted on it so with uhp and dnr their parties as well and they

sign the contract just like everybody else and they pay the calls that come in on their side so with highway patrol we're having them sign as a contract agency with this agreement that that you see before you um so that they have an amount that we've given them that they've agreed upon for their services apnp and dnr because of the structure of the way that they do things doesn't really fit in with our our pricing structure so we have done a one-off contracts with them specifically for a specific amount of money uh in order to because just the way that they do business is different from a standard police department or even higher patrol

Is it a lump sum contract?

Yeah, it's a lump sum that just increases 3% each year.

Those entities don't have representation on the board structures. There's member agencies, there's contract agencies. They've been very supportive and very positive about what Leighton's doing and we're a bit eager. That's my word, but you guys can tell me otherwise. AP&P and EVA's, you know, still more than they've been paying based on this federal allocation form that we came up with. They're pretty excited that to work under the system that these guys are running in. Is that fair to say then? I'm going to make that comment.

So UHP is a member though, so they do have representation like the others? No, they're contracted also. They're just made in a similar fashion as the other cities.

All these cities and the county are member agencies. So Highway Patrol being a state agency, not part of governance, um and apnp and dnr both just contract agencies as well they're going to be welcome to participate at the user advisory level we value their input like we would anybody else but from a governance standpoint they are not part of that great that's good you guys have been working on this quite a while and i have to jump through several loops as well so thank you for sticking with it thank you appreciate it the face of the new building

You're the face of the new building. Oh, not my face. You don't want to see my face. I see your face. There he is.

It is a good-looking building, though, I think. We're very happy about it. It looks good.

The fence came down yesterday.

Did it really? Yeah, the fence is down.

I thought you were talking about his beard.

Oh, no.

I'm not shaving.

I'm sorry. Did you have something to say?

No. Okay.

All right. Well, good. Thank you. Thank you. Drive safe. Thanks so much. Take care.

Yeah. We'll go on to item number four, which is...

Our tax amendments, quite a few of them here. So Weston's pulling them up here. You have the next three, so you could probably pick. Just do them all.

I couldn't find the right slide, but we really don't need a slide for this one. So, Paul, do you want to join me?

Sure.

All right, Paul. We're going to have Paul battle with us. group do great work and it's kind of funny right before we came to the meeting he showed me a stack of code books that we're going to talk about. It's about this tall. A stall of code books that we're regulating out of. Big font. Yeah big font. Really this is a pretty simplistic code amendment although there's there's a lot of references here. This is just an update to match state code. So state code requires that the building code standards are, that we follow all the building code standards, which we do. We have done in the past, we continue to do. But we have got some outdated sections in our code that reference 2005, 2006 references for state code. So all this is is updating that language. It's not affecting how we're actively enforcing code. We're enforcing the correct standards that we're required to by the state. This does affect the international building code, mechanical code, residential code, fuel gas code, plumbing code, existing building code, energy conservation code, and national electrical code. um and happy to go through any of those uh components of that or talk about any of those things but that really is the heart of it is that we are just updating this to make sure that the language in our code is compliant with state so staff is recommending that the adoption of ordinance 2612. i have a question um because we're referencing a lot of these other codes is it

Is it prudent for us to just reference them and not necessarily have year and just state like current so that we don't have to run into these kind of changes in the future?

yeah we definitely can do that it's it's something that paul brought up um we were matching uh the same process that we took with fire if you remember last meeting or the meeting before that we were following the same process um it's not a bad thing for us to bring it back in front of the council every few years to say we're looking at this again we're updating again but there is no harm in doing that as well and so we could just reference as adopted by the state and drop the additions. I'll turn to legal for specific opinion, but we've talked about both and both are appropriate.

Yeah, you could do it that way. There's always the risk to, it's more rare, but it does happen. An example of that would be the land use development code was completely recodified recently and the numbers changed and everything. There's always the chance that it's going to be, you're going to have to revise it no matter what, just depending on what happens at the state legislature, but that's one way that it could be done. Like Weston said, it's not a bad idea to make sure that we're up to date and keeping our eye on those things every few years, just to make sure that nothing is slipping through the cracks or that we're getting too... complacent.

Yeah, no, I think we should always be reviewing. I'm just saying to not have to bring them back to change because of a date. And then I know with fire, what was it last year? When the The date that we were changing to was still a date that was far in the past, and then we changed it to a different date. So for those, I think, obviously, you may have a specific one that you're referencing, but if there are things that we're referencing that are in state code, I feel like we should.

As adopted. Right. If I can add, we saw a mix. Some cities, counties will do... specific additions like we're doing a lot of now we're turning to just a general as adopted by the state construction code and then you don't have to do this every three years because we're we're required to follow everything that's in that code and it lists these specific codes that we're presenting you guys tonight

And maybe even the online version can have a link that references those codes. So when people are looking for them, you can just click one and then you get to the right one.

We do kind of have that. We have design criteria that architects and engineers refer to for wind speed, seismic, and it lists all the codes that we currently enforce. And then there's a link that takes them to the state construction code for more information. It's worked out good.

Not that I disagree, but sometimes if you have the additions in there, you can at least see when it was most recently updated. Where if it's just as updated by law, you don't know maybe when the council's had the last chance to look at it.

And that's a good point because we get architects that call and ask what code was in effect. in a certain time, and Utah's unique because the codes come out every three years, published by the International Code Council. It takes the state of Utah about two years to go through them, decide what they want to amend, adopt, and then they approve it. So we're always two years behind. That's why we're 2024. So they'll have the 2027 coming out here shortly.

so just as it says 2024 doesn't mean it's actually three years old it just means that's when the initial additional regulation or new regulation came out and then that's then you're getting that over the next years two years where they actually promulgate or the speed of government actually important right and just another side note if you notice that there's some numbers that are different the international residential code is the 2021 that's not changing that's on a six-year cycle

The contractors felt like they didn't want to make changes every three years. So they convinced the legislators to put the IRC in a six year. So that's why that one's not changing.

But it will with the next series.

And then the NEC is published by a whole different entity. It's the National Fire Protection Agency. And they've always been a year behind the International Code. I don't know why, but that's just how it's always been. Just a clarification on if you see those different dates.

I think if the links are there too, if you're linking to whatever the state says it should have its date on there, I don't know. I think material changes make sense to come here as often as they're found, but if it's just a day change and we're not really changing what we've done already, and it could be remedied by saying current or as is in state code, I think that makes sense.

Tina, are you asking to do that today? To change the language today to do that? Is this some food for thought for them to do it in three years that we change it at that time?

I would say food for thought for code broadly. just because if I mean I know staff is always reviewing these right questions come up residents have ideas and things happen and we make changes that is very appropriate and not that this is not appropriate but I just don't I don't know that we need to be making taking action on a year change when we're not actually making changes to the process or the procedure so

Is there any liability in doing that and just referencing? We're just hanging with the state code.

We're just complying with the state code, but we're going to follow the state code anyway. So this is just updating our ordinance.

But if we had something that, if we missed something, but if we missed something and then we get sued, they're like, well, what code were you using? Well, we were just updated. We're just following the state code. Were you? What did you approve? That's my question. I don't know. I think that could go either way.

That could go either way.

Yeah. That's why I like that. For me personally, I like the dates. Like, yep, we did it. Here's what we're doing. And we're very specific. I don't know if that gives us safer.

to your question that that's a difficult one to answer with i know possibly sure but unlikely pretty unlikely highly unlikely yeah that's the question there's not that many changes in the codes i mean there are but there's not that many significant changes that would create some sort of liability it would be a really specific incident

One of the other benefits, and I'm not in either camp, I think both are effective, but one of the benefits is that you pull up our code and you can see what we're at, right? If it's an outside architect that is outside of the state and they're working in Utah, they'll pull up our code and now they've got to go jump to the state code and find out the state code criteria. This, it's just saying, here's what we're going to follow. So they're not jumping to multiple locations. But again, both can be effective.

Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Okay. All right. Thank you. And you're going to be presenting.

I'll be there.

Could you come next time?

around the right next one the state favorite court is the statute of limitations

Okay, so before you tonight is a general plan amendment and rezone request and attached development agreement for the Lindquist property. So with all these things, it seems like there's a lot going on and there's really not. So everybody should be identified where the Lindquist property is. This is approximately 790 East. um analog drive at 1867 north fairfield um so the linguist group came in um and talked to velma staff quite a while ago and um about this property they purchased that property um i'll go one more so you can see the area a little bit more you can faintly see it there's a there's a power corridor that runs through here There's not a home on this property. We're in the APZ area. They looked at it and said, we would like to expand our facility. We need a place for an accessory structure to house some of our equipment. And this would be a great spot. This is zoned agriculture. I've just got it highlighted in a different color so you can identify it a little better. But it's zoned agriculture along with the rest of the property. So the main issues that came up as we were looking at this is that our code does not allow a cemetery and a mortuary to be on two different parcels. within the Ag Zone. And they broke apart these parcels, likely unintentionally, not necessarily knowing that that broke the code. But back in 1998, they separated the two parcels. They have two different ownership groups that manage the different groups. They want to maintain it that way. So our first response was, well, this is easy. We can do a plat amendment and include this parcel. and include all the ground that you have. You just need to consolidate this into one parcel. They said, no, we have two property ownerships. We need to maintain that. So to make this work with our current code, I'll go to the general plan in just a second. So to make this work with our current code, the option is to rezone it to a zone that does allow mortuaries and cemeteries to be on separate parcels. The other component to this is the agricultural zone does not Or I should say requires frontage and this parcel does not have any frontage. So that's another reason why we've got to go through another zone. So when we go through the PB zone, it's a commercial zoning, allows us to do a commercial zoning subdivision that does not have frontage so they can keep their lot the same here. But then we're giving potentially PV zoning rights to property, right? Obviously, it's already entitled with a lot of the cemetery use here, but we wanted to make sure that it stayed entitled that way. So that's what the development agreement does, is it just furthers that entitlement to say, this is how you're going to be using the property. And it consolidates it back to what it really is intended to be used as a cemetery. In the general plan, We were very thoughtful about the APZ and how that's to be used. This area is identified as just agricultural use. Agricultural uses can have large structures, obviously, barn type structures. This is going to be an accessory structure that will be tied to their facility. And all their request is to change from the agricultural general plan designation to institutional use. And so with those combined, agreement and the rezone it really just keeps them operating the same way they've been operating there won't be residential or i should say customer access through although there would be an access road through here it's not going to be signed or or designed in a way that it's meant for the public to come in through here they're still going to maintain their front entrance it's really just to facilitate their ongoing operations of the facility in the site

Any questions? So one thing I brought up in the Planning Commission after the meeting is we're going from an Ag zoning to the PD zoning, and there could be property tax. And I know Brad did some research on that in fairness to Nicholas, because the Ag zoning does allow a cemetery in the mortuary to be in that. And Brad briefed me, but I wouldn't mind if you could brief the council on what he found.

Yeah, absolutely. So Brad did talk to the county about the taxing on this. It's possible that they could look at the zoning and say that goes up. What they basically said is please have the property owner contact us and talk about that as it comes closer to that time when they make that assessment. and they would work with the property owner on that. And what was conveyed to us is if the land use is really not changing, it doesn't seem like the property tax would be increasing at all. But it sounds like it's just conveying information to make sure that they understand what's really happening.

Okay. Any other questions? Very good. Let's go on to No water-wise standards.

Okay. So the ordinance before you today mainly is intended to address the component to allow Leighton City residents to take full advantage of the lawn replacement program through River Basin. So the proposed changes of this ordinance include the limitation of turf grass to no more than 35% of the front and side yards of a new single family home, no turf grass in residential park strips and landscaped areas less than eight feet. There's a caveat to that. I'll come back to that one. Allowance to use the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District plant list, I should say plant list, not plan list, as well as other lists and resources. This is something we get frequently where there is a specific variety and it's clearly water wise and it's not on Weber Basin's list. We make the judgment call and say, yes, that obviously is a similar use, but we'd like a broader range to be able to pull that from. And so we'd like to include those. And then minor clarifications in formatting. So there's some clarifications in the definition to help fully understand what a side yard is and what a front yard is. um going back to number two the the no turf grass and the park strips so when we made these changes several years ago in the in the landscaping ordinance we addressed the waterwise component for multi-family and commercial and pred developments and within all of those we we said that those park strips had to be waterwise it doesn't specifically say that grass is not allowed in park strips but we did say grass is not allowed in anything less than eight feet we don't have park strips that aren't eight feet right so we look at that like that's an easy connection it's not a problem One of the feedbacks that we got from Weber Basin, they looked at this and said, yes, this meets our criteria. It wouldn't hurt to throw that additional criteria in to say that for the commercial side that grass is not allowed in park strips. Again, it's already regulated by our ordinance. It's further clarification. That was their main comment. They also had an additional comment I can't remember what their additional comment was. Let me bring up my notes. Oh, yeah. Actually, their additional comment was just tied to the reference of the plant material list. They basically just said, you know, it's a good point to add additional options for plant materials, but just be aware that because cultivar are always being added, it's hard to keep up a list, which we are aware of, and that's why we're adding more lists, because we want to make sure that it's easier for people to be able to... pull these water-wise plants from so but again even if even if that specific change as far as the so that that I should clarify and I apologize for stumbling all the wrong words The component of requiring that grass not be allowed in park strips in commercial areas, that's not in this draft here. That would have to be a part of a motion. Even if that wasn't included, this is still compliant with New York Basin Ordinance. That was just a general thought that they had. So just to clarify that.

Do you think that's a good addition? It doesn't hurt.

Yeah.

What do you mean?

It's already in there. We're already regulating it. We don't have any park strips that are that size. The only one that we do have that's an eight foot is in our town center. And we specifically call that out, which we don't even have those in yet. But we specifically call those out that they're either urban scaped or that they're water wise. So it's not going to be a problem.

It'd just be clear. Yeah, sure. Yeah.

Orderly in one spot.

So is this on item two, or as you know this, but I'll be reminded, is that applying to new development, new single-family development, or is it applying to red flats?

It's all applying to new single-family.

Okay, I think that's a good... Yeah, this is just me knowing... I think we've got, in some residential subdivisions, I mean, I wouldn't measure it, but I think you've got park strips. We have park strips that are less than 8 feet wide in some of those other subdivisions for public life. and so i think we need to be clear that people so people are not thinking i go i gotta go carry out my landscape landscape strip it's just applies to me i'll add that and clarify that that new construction major remodeling yeah people are concerned about that yeah she's not here for residential you do i'm sorry for a major remodel

In a commercial, we've gone over that. If someone ripped out their entire landscaping, then yeah, they would put it back in water-wise. That's the way it's currently been.

But if you're remodeling your home and you pull a building, it's not like we're doing a commercial.

No.

And this is just me abbreviating it. So that's a good point, Alex. I'll add that clarification in for the present meeting.

On item one, is that just the 35%? Is it for front yard individually and for side yard individually, or is it combined?

It's combined. Yeah, and currently our ordinance says 50% living material, which we generally have tied to grass, but it does have to be grass, right? That in here, it changes it all to 35%. So that means that's 35% plantings, whatever plantings you choose to have.

Okay, anything else on this clarification? all right thank you that's good uh geez we have one more item left tracy you're up on the budget great well i brought a little object lesson tonight since we've talked a lot about inflation and

costs and all that kind of stuff. And I think maybe Doritos has figured it out. We now have the mini bag of chips. Now, I couldn't really get Scott to just throw a ladder in the back of a pickup truck instead of buying a ladder truck, you know, or Chief Swanson to do everything on e-bikes. And Dave wants a full-size excavator, not a mini-ex, but You know, the mini chips, that's an idea.

Same price, right?

Same price.

The question is, where did you find them? I haven't seen them yet.

They come in a box, and they're actually for little kids. I thought they were hilarious, so sorry for the comic moda. You didn't know that accountants have any kind of sense of humor. Yeah.

And I just brought back memories of Staley's Market. So, Bessie and her candy bars.

Thank you. A couple of things tonight. I don't have a slide presentation for anything, but just things to discuss related to the budget. First off, I wanted to run by, we have rate increases in sewer and garbage and recycling that are proposed. And I wanted to get just kind of a head nod from you folks if you're okay if we put a message on the utility bill that's going to be printed on the 9th informing the residents that this rate increase is coming. Now I'm asking permission because it hasn't been approved. It gets approved or not approved on the 18th of June when we amend the consolidated fee schedule. So I guess the question should be, does anyone have an issue with a message being put on the next bill that goes out? No.

We're going to wait until after the meeting, after they've decided, and then send it out. That's the other option.

I think the outreach would be good. Just clarify that this is pending approval or something, and you're wording in the message that way.

I mean, if they want to come and tell us that they don't want to do it, I'm happy. I mean, that's part of the job. I don't want to wait until it's over.

Okay. The second thing for us to discuss tonight, since the last time we met, the salary survey has come back and one of the items that was on that was compensation for the council and the mayor and in the case of the city council the salary survey would recommend that the council's compensation increased by 247 dollars a pay period and that hasn't been put in the budget but if you would like it to be put in the budget then we'll mention it tonight as part of our public hearing on elected and statutory officials and municipal officers if you do not want to put in there then we'll mention that if you know that there's no increase for the mayor council oh and also the mayor's it was recommended increased by $37 in pay period

i think the recent passage i can only remember this the mayor's has been adjusted for the market the council has chosen not to do that so the approach that we take is exactly the same for these positions is exactly the same as we take for all of the positions in the city in terms of how we track to the market so that's just a reminder i might have heard that before but so there's not a separate

view of how you like the official retreat versus other employees i didn't sign on for money so i could care less

that's not that's not right i didn't say that right um i'm not the proposal i'm not a proposal

It will never be a prudent opportunity or a good time for any council to request or approve their increases. I wouldn't mind, however, if during the presentation that the process is described even the amounts that were requested or that were found and then to identify that the council chose not to do that you know it's not lost on any of us because we do this work but I do think oftentimes it may be lost on citizens residents what we do and how much money we actually receive for the time that's put in and all of that. So I would like to have that presented and then identify that if we chose not to, that we did not choose to.

I mean, I think that there are some benefits to having it be updated every year and just having it be part of everyone else. But to your point, it's always like, do we want to be the ones that actually do it?

Well, we tried to do that, and then the state changed something.

I think it was just a notice, right? We just had to provide more notice when we're doing it?

Yeah, there's just a statute. By statute, we're now required to just indicate in a public meeting certainly public officers what the increase would mean.

So, I mean, we've had discussions before about doing truth in taxation and just having that part of, So I think there will come a time when this will need to be done. And the question is not necessarily whether you're trying to fill your own pockets. It's really you're just trying to make sure that the council member seat, whoever sits in it, is compensated. So it's one of those things where I understand the politics of it. And again, I don't have a feeling one way or the other. I told Alex before that it would be nice if we could make it where we vote to have it increase. And we don't take advantage of it. But as soon as we leave, then it goes into effect. And it's not self-serving in some way. But that's probably not a possibility.

so um i had a former city council member reach out to me about this item and he gave me a little education that he felt that it should be increased and um that way so it's you're like dave's taking it just he's doing it for for the love of the city but then that way um you're you're how would how you put it You're compensating people for their time and that it's not so low that people look at it and go, okay, it's not worth it to do that. So I would recommend that, yeah, as this rate changes during the survey, that we keep par with this so that we're always attracting future candidates to not... kind of like the teachers where they have to go buy school supplies type thing. So that's what he related to me, and to me it does make sense to just keep in pace with that salary. Also, past experience, I worked for a government entity, and one thing, when they did their survey, they didn't just look at other companies. similar government entities. They looked at the private sector in the evaluation and the reason they did that is they wanted and what they accomplished by doing that is they didn't have high turnover of employees because the employees could go work in the private sector for an increased salary that they would stay and it was strictly monetary. It wasn't besides the benefits because they would look and say, Oh, I can go do this same job and I'm going to make $20,000, $30,000 more. That way they can pay. So to me, this is something I learned 30 years ago, but to me that makes sense also.

And I think we do that for staff. Yeah. But this is just about electives.

Yeah, I'm just...

Yeah, this is a tough one, because nobody wants to build themselves a race, but yeah, realistically, you guys are quite a ways under what the grade is, and I don't think that's right, because I feel like you're just as valuable as any other city.

I take value from serving, and so I feel like I'm still fine with where we are, and joined Dave in that.

change I like the what you mentioned about you could do it so we're what you're out yeah that'd be great go ahead but I at that point then people will be making it until they all left but I the idea has merit it also has problems and that and while Everyone, I don't need to believe the point. It's, you know, you know what I mean. It's just, you know what I mean. For the future, if people need a little bit more money, then that's fine. You know, I get it, but I'm not in that group yet. I'll be dead before I get there.

So, Tim, would you be with Mike?

I think I mentioned this, I don't know, two years ago maybe. I don't remember how long ago it was. But I do think that to Dave's point, so our council is made up of a number of different groups, you know, parts, periods of life and all of those things. so for a dave who worked for the city for 100 years right that's 98 98 years and then retired and is doing well and has time etc um it may not be you know it's not something so when you say well somebody needs it that's not ever going to be a topic of discussion does somebody need it because Correct. There's an economy and there's inflation. So need is relative. But I think what I mentioned years ago was about being able to make sure that we are attracting candidates who are going to be able to do the job and do the job well. And so thankfully we feel good about who we have here and who's been in these roles. But I'm thinking about folks who maybe aren't retired who would do a good job but maybe can't afford to run, can't afford to work in this type of role. We've been fortunate. And that's where I can say we've been fortunate to have a council who puts a lot of time and effort into the work that we do. And I know that there may have been folks in the past here or other places who didn't do that. And so you can look and say, well, I don't want people just sitting there you know cashing in and I say that it's not a lot of money but people think it is so I think politically that's always going to be the drawback and that's why we originally discussed maybe doing this administratively and then the legislature throws a curveball which is fine you know I don't think they threw themselves a curveball though So, yeah. Did they have a public hearing on their conversation? So if we, let's say, because I,

it may be for the good of the council moving forward. Let's say I'm on board with Mike and Bettina and say, we want to actually just do it. We're opening a public hearing tonight. We're not actually adopting anything. So we have a couple weeks to roommate out on this, or is this something that you want us to?

I was going to recommend, even though I didn't worded correctly in the packet I was going to recommend we close the public hearing if there were no public comments but if you want to leave the public hearing open until the 18th then we'll just put it back on the agenda on the 18th and the and the public hearing will just stay open until the 18th and so if you want to have more discussion on it between now and then that's perfectly fine with me

I mean, I talked to Alex about this, and my opinion on this issue has been known, but it does seem like, I mean, I've been on the council for seven years, just in the seventh year. Seriously? Yeah. And that's a long time. It's finally come of age. Look, I've got gray hair now because of you, Dave. Thank you. Yeah, but I think that, you know, we don't want to, you know, have a policy that is, you it's it's almost i don't want to i don't want to call you i understand why you would not want to because that's been my position for six years but i i feel like if there's a way for us to just get on the process of just doing it um you know that would be best for the city and i'm gonna have to keep running into this discussion every single year you know i if you were going to to your point you know if you're replacing income

the job with this it's going to be a lot because it's talking about eight dollars an hour and so you'd have to replace it i'm thinking supplemental but still you have to be something more than well just what we're talking about however if you wanted to keep pace with with the the colas each year That would be different. That would be going with the economy. If we decide to do it, it's everybody. If we decide not to do it, then we're with everybody else, or the council positions are with everybody else. A way to move with the inflation, but not necessarily...

So to that point, is there a way for us to say, we're going to set it to this point, and then moving forward, council is based on COLA and JEPSTOM, but not on SALAD? No. that's not rhetorical because i i agree with that because i mean we're not looking to sell well south jordan just bumped theirs up by 50 so you know that makes the salary survey i mean i don't really care about that it's all like police officers but maybe like the salary survey every going from place to place. Five or so years salary. So they may not be an every year thing, but maybe every five years, every 10 years to make sure we're not being left in the dust.

Yeah, I think that's a more fair point, but also it just makes more sense because when we're looking at cities that are our size, and I think we're looking at similar forms of government also, right? So I mean, we're looking at that, but you're right, there are different Pressure is not the word I would use, but that's the only word I can think of right now. Different pressures and reasons for why maybe other cities would do something differently than maybe we would. But that seems more on board because We're all here. It's all latent. We're all doing the same thing, which is kind of what I think we tried to do a few years ago.

Putting ourselves as one of the other employees of the city, not one of every municipal government that has a similar form of government as we do and similar size.

If we did that, you would have to, you still have to have this meeting and separate and just mention it. Again, this is what policy is. wouldn't we just set it and then everybody forgets about it? It just happens.

Or it doesn't happen based on... We still have to have the discussion with the public about what we're doing with our compensation.

I guess one thing to think about over the next couple of weeks is do you want to make up any of the ground? Right now, compared to the cities that were surveyed, the council sits about 30% behind where everyone else is. That's what the 247 of pay period calculates out to.

Does that bring us up to the bottom?

Does it bring you up to the bottom? I'm not sure if that's the bottom. I think it's probably the average of what they are. Look at all of them and say, this is an average, and so that's where that brings you to. So if there's an amount that you want to get a little closer to the average and then institute, the you know if the employees are getting a one percent call or the council gets a one percent call if they're getting no cola then there's no cola and i like that that's a good i like that having said what i said to me that sounds the fairest

okay I'm not that whatever the city employees it's the same for the council in respects if there's no then why should we get it you know so I mean I'm I'm not good at thinking down the road very far and so that's how I feel but I also look down the road and not everybody does things for the same reason and if that could be a plus in some respects then you know I'd feel fine as long as it was controlled and not Not something you do every year and say, well, I can go on.

Yes, right.

What is the impact that that would have to the budget? I mean, I understand what it is per pay period, but is there room? Are we tight? Because that's also something that we've looked at with not necessarily salaries, but other things, you know, for increases or whatnot.

Yeah.

so we were to do bring everyone to the average it would be so you have five of you at about six thousand dollars twenty twenty four thousand wasn't it something like that somewhere 25 000 from the mayor and council to bring them to the market an increase though yeah totally in total

And I just bring that up because lots of percentages are out with lots of things. And I always, as a data person, my percentage and dollar for context. Yeah. Thank you.

OK.

Anything else?

Can I just say one thing about that that may be helpful, maybe not? As you consider it, if you're looking at doing it, that's your choice. If you don't do it, the longer you wait, the harder it becomes to do it later. And where, which is why you're here now. If it was just, I think Tracy said something like 30%, it was 2%, then it would be a few dollars. But because it's waiting so long, it's actually, Thinking about Zach's comment of future generations, or future councils, sorry, that makes it really hard for them. You almost draw a line in the sand where it just kind of has to stay forever. Yeah. Otherwise it becomes really... Someone has to leave.

Yep.

So the three people that are running, the term expires in two years. Right.

If they're not going to run again, they can say that again.

Okay If there's no other comments then I have one more comment on the budget So well, I don't have a comment on the budget But the tentative budget what I'm prepared to present tonight is just it's a public hearing for people to comment The tentative budget has been available since May 7th. We don't have any measure any know major changes or anything like that to the tentative budget and so we just accept public comment and then recommend we continue that until the 18th so that no decision was made tonight gives the public the opportunity to comment if they'd like and then we'll plan to adopt the budget as it's been presented on the 18th i did get my email and i'll just ask this question um joe allen's new position so

This gentleman that was reviewing the budget noticed that it has her old position in the organization chart. Does that need to be corrected in the final budget? I guess we could do that in the book. That way it would make it look like I did my job today. Okay, thank you. Oh, sure.

Sounds like somebody has a lot of time on their hands.

I think one thing, and Clint can correct me, I committed to the Mayor, and I just want to make sure I did it correctly, is I think by statute in the regular meeting there's two items that deal with the budget, and I think the state requires that both of those items have their own separate public hearing. So in the past we've been able to open a public hearing and address two or three items as part of that. In this case, my understanding is that the state said you have to open one for the budget, close it,

vote on it continue yeah we're continuing but in this case we'll continue to both of them right yeah but yeah yeah do them separately but next meeting we'll have to open close open you have to continue the first one you don't have to continue the second one but you can but they have to have two separate motions to go they have to be in the same meeting but yes it has to be two separate motions okay I think for tonight's meeting, it's probably appropriate to just address each public hearing individually.

Yeah, that's what I got on my mind, too.

I'm not trying to study the art here, but given the confusion that happened on property taxes with changes the state made about hearings and how they're handled, I thought that might be good to... remember it's different than what we've typically done but it's because we otherwise they'll invalidate right what we've right what we've done perhaps have to do it again so that's the reason i was mentioning it if it's different than what the mayor was going to do that instead of what you're you anticipated i think why are we doing this that's i was just trying to clarify that thank you okay ready to adjourn

Second. There you go. All right.

All in favor say aye.

to welcome everyone out for our Layton City Council meeting this evening, which is June 4th. Our start time is 7 p.m. As customary, we like to start all of our meetings with an opening ceremony involving a prayer and a pledge. We take turns each month. This happens to be a new month, so I'm going to turn the time over to Council Member Thomas.

Since I'm so prepared, I'll give the prayer and the pledge of allegiance. Our Father in heaven, as we come before thee in this council meeting, we ask that thy spirit be here, that we might be able to do the things which we are responsible for, be able to do the things which are needed in this city, and to be able to have thy guidance that we might be able to make decisions that are right, make decisions that need to be made. We're grateful for this great country. We're grateful for 250 years of freedom and pray that we may have an additional 250 years of freedom still. We're grateful, we're thankful for the many things which we are allowed because of freedom and we pray that we may keep it forever. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Amen.

If all would stand.

Face the flag.

I don't see any hats, so we'll be okay.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic

OK, thank you very much, Councilman Thomas. Tonight, before we get going on our agenda, I do want to acknowledge a special guest I have sitting here to my right. His name is Oliver Pohl. He's part of our youth council. And Oliver, would you like to say anything to this governing body at this time?

I joined the Youth Council. It's been like a really great experience. I've learned a lot of leadership skills and a lot more like how the government works, especially the local government. It's been just a great opportunity to learn and grow and connect to more people around in my community. It's been fun.

Thank you, Oliver, and we appreciate you coming up here and experiencing it firsthand with the residents. So that's good. Okay, council, are there, move down to any municipal announcements? Mr. Thomas.

Turn on mic. Okay, this is coming from your Parks and Recreation Department. This coming Saturday, June 6th, Surf and Swim has a pre-summer bash, so I guess it's not summer yet. $3 entry fee, opens at 12. Highlights for the Liberty Days, 250 year liberties. You're encouraged to decorate your homes, red, white, and blue. And I assume the council will be looking for homes that are decorated. Prizes will be given. I don't know what the prizes are, but anyway, if you decorate your home. And that runs until, what, the July 31st? What's that?

Or businesses.

Oh, or businesses, of course. Yeah. Businesses will give cheaper gifts. June 28, it's called the Voices of Liberty. That's where we have our hometown heroes announced. And it's a program. It's a great program. It's on Sunday. And then Monday, June 29th, they have Threads of Honor at the amphitheater as well. The other ones at the amphitheater are seven. This Threads of Honor is a seven. And it's a patriotic concert. It says inspiring music, narration, guest speakers. And the historic Challenger flag will be there. And they'll be discussing that. Then on July 3rd, it's a busy day. They have the Splash Bash at five o'clock at Surf and Swim. They have an All-Stars Showcase for all the Little League All-Stars down at Ellison Park, starts at 5.30. And then probably one of the greatest things that ever happened in the city. They're having a puppet show in the amphitheater. And then I happen to know the guy who wrote it. He's okay. Anyway, that's at 5.30 at the amphitheater. So bring your grandkids, kids, Eh, bring your grandma, too. She'll like it. And then on July 4th, of course, we have all our events. But one thing we want to mention is the flag-raising ceremony starts at 8.30. And if you happen to attend it, then you can get $2 off of the breakfast that the Rotary Club is doing. They serve a breakfast from 7 to 10. And like I say, if you attend the flag-raising ceremony, they'll give you a little discount card. It takes $2 off of $7. So if you've got $10 in your family, it saves you $20. Is that right? Yeah. That's it.

Go ahead. Thanks, Mayor. This Saturday at Northridge High School is the Safe Kids Day event. This event is sponsored by a number of entities in the county, including Davis County, and then it runs to different high schools every year. So it will be from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. over at Northridge. I know in the years past they've been giving out bike helmets and all kinds of safety gear, lots of fun things for families. So I encourage everyone to participate. And then just a reminder that the school district is doing free summer lunch. That started June 1st, and it will go through July 23rd. The only two days they will not be offering will be Monday, June 15th, and Monday, July 5th. But that summer lunch is for any child under the age of 18, Monday through Thursday from 11.30 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. And we have two schools in Layton where you can get that free lunch, and that's at Lincoln and Whitesides Elementary School.

OK, next one. Anyone else? OK, I'll just make one quick announcement. Looking forward here, June 19 is when the state acknowledges June. Gosh, what am I trying to say? Juneteenth day, the 19th through, on the 19th. So that's statewide. All the entities will acknowledge it on that same day. So for those of you that might be planning to go to the landfill, just know that that will be closed as well on that day. Okay, there's no other announcements. Then what I'd like to do tonight is I know that I'd like to go ahead and adjust our agenda once again. We will be heading into our citizens comment, but however, WE HAVE AN ITEM SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS, AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT UP TO THE PRIOR TO OUR CITIZENS' COMMENT. AND SO WITH THAT, I HAVE, AGAIN, ANOTHER STATEMENT THAT I'D LIKE TO SAY. I KNOW SOME OF YOU WERE IN ATTENDANCE TWO WEEKS AGO, BUT I THINK IT'S VERY PERTINENT HERE TONIGHT AGAIN. AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT IN JUST A FEW WEEKS, WE'RE GOING TO BE CELEBRATING THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY of the founding of this great nation. And to me it's a reminder that we're based on one principle upon which America was built, and that was the right of freedom of speech. We've given the citizens the opportunity to share their thoughts, concerns, ideas, and perspectives with the elected officials. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TO ME, IT'S BOTH A PRIVILEGE TO ME, IT'S BOTH A PRIVILEGE TO ME, IT'S BOTH A PRIVILEGE AND AN HONOR TO BE ABLE TO AND AN HONOR TO BE ABLE TO AND AN HONOR TO BE ABLE TO HEAR FROM OUR RESIDENTS. HEAR FROM OUR RESIDENTS. HEAR FROM OUR RESIDENTS. ON BEHALF OF LAYTON, I WANT TO ON BEHALF OF LAYTON, I WANT TO ON BEHALF OF LAYTON, I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE THANK EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE THANK EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE TIME TO PARTICIPATE IN THE TIME TO PARTICIPATE IN THE TIME TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS AND KNOW THAT THIS IS PROCESS AND KNOW THAT THIS IS PRO I would like to remind everyone why we're here tonight. This meeting is to allow the council to have an open discussion, be full transparent, and the opportunity for them to share their perspectives regarding the proposed off-leash dog park within the East Ridge Park. This is just one step in a larger process that we go through of listening, evaluating, and engaging with our residents. So as I mentioned two weeks ago, there's passion on both sides of this topic. Many residents who live adjacent to the Eastridge Nature Park have expressed concerns regarding traffic safety. THE IMPACT OF THE DOGS BEING OFF-LEASH, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, LEGAL ISSUES, WILDLIFE, MAINTAINING OF THE NATURE AREA, AND, YOU KNOW, SO I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE'VE HEARD ALL OF THOSE COMMENTS. OTHERS THROUGHOUT THE CITY HAVE ALSO ADVOCATED FOR YEARS on the benefit of an off-leash dog park and believes that they have demonstrated that our city definitely is large enough and needs to have a safe and designated space for their dogs and for their owners. SO ONCE AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THE FACT THAT BOTH PERSPECTIVES HAVE BEEN HEARD. AND IT'S TIME FOR US TO KIND OF CONSIDER THOSE. SO WE ARE COMMITTED TO CONTINUE TO LISTEN TO THE CONVERSATIONS WITH TRANSPARENCY. But with respect, we have an open mind. And as I mentioned, we have listened. And that does not mean that we all agree. Because unfortunately, in this case... some will feel like they've won and some will feel like they've lost. But the important thing is that we're being open and transparent here, and I want to allow this council to be able to discuss this particular item openly, and that's the purpose of item number seven. So it does not mean that there's public comment at this time. It's for the council members. So with that, I'd like to go ahead and turn the time over to the council for them to... discuss the East Ridge Dog Park? I know it's tough to start.

I'll start. So one thing I had written down that I really just wanted to

highlight, and the council, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

There were some statements made at the last meeting that made it seem as though discussions about a dog park, a location, to be determined, any of those things were done with a lack of transparency. And I know I got elected in 2021. And I brought this up in 2022 during our first strategic planning meeting. Just the question, what does it look like? I'm not a dog owner. So when someone says you don't have a dog in the fight, I literally would not have a dog in the fight. But because I am elected to represent all of the citizens of Leeton, there's folks on both sides of that. And so I know we also discussed it in 2024. And as recently as June and November 2025, we have specific, very detailed studies that our Parks and Rec staff has provided for us. All of these done in public meetings, public settings, live streamed, open to the public. So I was a little taken aback to hear there was a perception that a lot of these discussions were being done in some back door room closed off to the public. It was frankly surprising to me to have so many folks come and make it seem as though this was never something that we had discussed. So I did want to make sure that folks understand these discussions had been going on long before I even was on the council, but I can attest to those specific discussions that were public and open. WITH REGARD TO EAST RIDGE, I DO RECALL AFTER PROBABLY THE LAST MEETING WE HAD WHERE PARKS AND REC PRESENTED THE PRESENTATION TO US. I THINK IT WAS THE NOVEMBER 2025 MEETING. AND WE HAD IN JUNE RECEIVED PROS AND CONS AND ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. It did seem as though the off-leash trail option would be an option that could be accommodating for the residents as well as those who have dogs, those who don't have dogs. One thing that I think was also a little misleading is that this was a dog park per se. I didn't picture it as that. But I think that also may be why the council wants to have these types of discussions, because we aren't really privy to what it should look like. Where would it be partially off-leash? Would there be times where folks had off-leash opportunity to bring their dogs, like as is in some parks in the state, where you have different days and different times where a particular location allows for off-leash use? Are there opportunities in this location or others for a fenced-in area? These are discussions that we as a council have not had, have not gotten to that point yet. And so for there to be a perception or an idea that... This is a go completely and it's a completely wild, dogs are running all over the place off leash and they're attacking people. None of those discussions have actually been had. And I think for me, it was a little jarring to hear all of those perceptions when we actually hadn't been able to decide on or even come together to discuss what do the options look like. And so the idea about using some of that ramp money to finish this park and and to allow some type of off-leash option. That is something that the council had decided upon and discussed and voted on. But the particulars of that, what that looks like, the practicality, the safety, all of those things are details that had not yet been determined. But it does sound as though folks think that those things have been determined and they had not been. And so I mean, I have a number of things that I could I can bring up and might want to talk about a little bit later. I do feel that our city is large enough at this point to have. at least one, if not more, to be quite honest. And I think that we can be deliberate. We can make decisions that will not necessarily give a yay for everyone, but we'll be able to have a compromise where we can meet the needs of all residents who are in this city. And that's something that I think we need to discuss. And that's, I think, why the mayor had it on the agenda today. Even an option, in my opinion, for one of our underutilized parks as a shared use space. Again, is there some portion of Andy Adams or some other park where there can be a fenced-off space? But that, to me, does not say that East Ridge is completely off the table. because we just haven't discussed what does this look like? What is the practicality of it and how do we implement it? What I will say and then I will stop is that I am not on board with us continuing to kick this can down the road because as I mentioned from 2022 through today, which we're now in the middle of 2026, these discussions have been had. And so to say, okay, well, this is not the place, and then we're going to take another six months to find another place, or it's going to take another year to generate or create something when we do have the potential for options, I feel like we need to have the opportunity to figure that out. And I think we owe it to the residents of the city, those who have dogs and those who don't. As a non-dog owner, there are certain folks who don't have their dogs on leash presently at parks where they're not supposed to. I think that having something for them would alleviate.

We should kick the can down the road and not plan for something. You mentioned parks that we had looked at before. Councilman Morris and I had talked about Andy Adams as a potential opportunity for up where we live.

TO BETTINA'S POINT, THERE MAY BE OTHER PLACES IN THE CITY. IT'S TO GO THERE.

AND I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT WAS THE UNDERSTANDING FOR, AT LEAST FOR MYSELF, I KNOW FOR COUNCILMEMBER MORRIS BECAUSE HE MENTIONED THAT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE OTHERS WE KNOW ABOUT. COUNCILMEMBER BLOCKS THEM. BUT THE IDEA WAS THIS IS A PRIORITY AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO SEE HAPPEN.

in the near future so I think for fiscal year 2026 2027 and at that time set a public hearing for this evening June 4th at 7 p.m. here in the council chambers the fiscal year of that budget begins on July 1st 2026 and a budget is by statute required to be adopted by june thirtieth property tax rate is required to be set by june twenty second and so tonight we're here to accept public comment on the tentative budget that's been available for public expense public inspection since May 7th. I would recommend that you open a public hearing, accept public comment, and then after that public comment, it's recommended that we continue this public hearing until June 18th so that any comments can be considered.

Okay, thank you. Council, do you have any comments on this at this time? If not, I'll recognize a motion to open the public hearing.

MADAM MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY. SO MIKE WILL OPEN IT AND ZACK WILL SECOND IT FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. THIS IS A TIME WHEN WE'LL HEAR ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AT THIS TIME. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO. ONCE AGAIN, STEP UP TO THE MIC, STATE YOUR NAME AND WHAT CITY

Sorry, I didn't see you about this topic. I'm not talking about the dog park, I promise. I just wanted to say before we headed out, thank you for pointing out that...

Okay, yeah, you get to speak into the mic and state your name.

I want to say thank you for pointing out that we need to be more involved all the time, not just when it affects us. So we will try to be... more aware of things that happen when it's not coming in our backyard and if we're not online viewing it we will try to be here in person and and i totally understand where you're coming from where all of a sudden there's a room full of people and you're here till 9 p.m and you're just like oh you know and i and i understand that the other people were here for years before and And we will try to show up and be more present for things that are going on in the community. And I thank you for hearing all of our stuff over and over again and taking all of our emails. I do appreciate it. Thank you. Linda Cordero.

Okay, most importantly, thank you for engaging your son. Thank you. That, to me, is, you can't put a price tag on that. I mean, like I said, that took bravery and, you know, please don't ever hesitate. You're welcome to come and join us. Thank you.

Yeah, tell him in 15 years I can sit in the seats and I can watch him up here.

Thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay, is there anyone who wishes to speak in regards to our budget? OKAY. SEEING THAT THERE'S NONE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR ACTION.

MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO JUNE 18, 2026. OKAY. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, SO I DO HAVE TO TAKE ROLL CALL VOTE. COUNCIL MEMBER MORRIS. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDER-ANAS.

AYE.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH-EDMONSON. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER THOMAS. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER BLOXOM. AYE. OKAY. THERE YOU HAVE IT. THANK YOU. Let's go on to item number B then, which once again, Mr. Probert will present this item to us.

Thank you, Mayor and members of the council. As part of the budget process, state statute now requires that we hold a separate public hearing on changes in compensation for executive municipal officers, which includes elected and statutory officials. So tonight we're here for that purpose. and before we do that I think it's important for the public to understand the process that the city goes through in order to determine the increases for municipal executive officers and the majority of those officers city manager and directors down through employees all follow the same process and there's a salary survey that takes place among comparable cities within the state so that we can make sure that we're competitive we don't want to have constant turnover in the city because we want to be able to provide the best possible service to the citizens of Layton City and so for that reason we compare with other cities and we do lots of analysis look at CPI and different things and determine and The council and mayor are also included in that. Now, for a number of years, the council and mayor have foregone, or at least the council, I should say, has foregone increases to their salary. And again, in this year's budget, there's not an increase programmed for the council or mayor. Now, in our prior meeting, in the prior work meeting, there was comments made that the council and mayor would like to revisit that a little bit over the next couple of weeks and see if some sort of budget change needs to be made. And for that reason, after we accept public comment, I would suggest that we continue this public hearing until June 18th as well so that that discussion can continue and see if there are any slight changes that might need to be made. As far as addressing changes for executive municipal officers that are included in the budget, it's proposed that those officers excluding the council and mayor receive a 1% COLA and a 3% merit. And so that's what's proposed in the budget. So at this time, I would recommend that we open public hearing related to the changes in compensation, and then after that, continue the public hearing to June 18th.

Okay. Council, I'll bring it back to you for action.

Madam Mayor, I move that we open the public hearing.

Thank you. Okay. Yeah, let's go ahead and follow procedure. Second. All in favor, say aye. Okay. Public hearing is now open regarding the change in the executive compensation for the municipal officers. If anyone wished to speak on this topic, you're more than welcome to step up to the mic, state your name, and what city you're from. Okay. Seeing that there's none, I'll go ahead and bring it back to the council for action.

Madam Mayor, I move that we continue the public hearing until June 18th, 2026.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Once again, I'll do a roll call vote. Council Member Bloxham.

Yes.

Council Member Thomas.

Aye.

Council Member Smith-Edmondson.

Aye. Council Member Calendranos. Yes. Council Member Morris. Aye. Okay, there you have it. Let's go on to item number C then, which is a Weston Apollonia will be presenting this. This is a general plan amendment, so.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Before you tonight is an application from Robert Lindquist, Jr. He's requesting a general plan amendment for the property located at approximately 790 East Antelope Drive. The property is approximately 1.52 acres, and it's currently vacant. because of the property because the property is located within the APZ the accident potential zone area is designated as agricultural in the general plan the application or to me the applicant is also requesting that the general plan designation for this property be amended to the institutional use. The applicant is requesting along with the general plan amendment a rezone of the property and that the property located adjacent to the approximate 1867 North Fairfield Road both properties are currently zoned A as in agriculture and the applicant is requesting that both be rezoned to PB which is professional business. Combined the properties total approximately 26.12 acres. So just to give you some context And I don't have my laser pointer. It wasn't working, but I've got the mouse going. So the area outlined in red is the Lindquist Mortuary, and the area in blue is the component that would be the general plan amendment. And the area, both the blue and all the area outlined in red, is the rezone area. The applicant, the application's, applications are requested to address existing lot and zoning issues and to accommodate the owners desires to keep the mortuary and cemetery under separate ownership. One of the things we discussed in the previous work meeting is that the mortuary and you can see the white line around the mortuary that shows a separate property ownership currently because these properties are zoned agriculture agriculture actually requires all properties have frontage on the road. And our code also requires that mortuaries be combined with cemeteries on the same property. And so unfortunately, we wouldn't be able to move forward with the component amending this section at the top into the bottom piece until we fixed all of it together. So what this is addressing is all the components together. The issues can be addressed through a commercial subdivision plat, which is the reason for the request to the rezone for PB. This type of subdivision is not permitted in the A zone and is allowed within the commercial designation. The proposed PB zoning district allows both cemeteries and mortuaries to exist in stand-alone uses. and is allowed to have no frontage along the property. A development agreement is accompanied with the rezone request to limit and clearly define the permitted uses on the property, ensuring that future development remains consistent with the intended cemetery and mortuary operations that exist on the property today. Use. for the property located at approximately 790 East Antelope Drive, as well as a unanimous vote to recommend that the City Council approve the rezone request from A Agriculture to Professional Business with a development agreement for the properties located at the approximate address 790 East Antelope Drive and 1867 North Fairfield. Staff supports both recommendations from the Planning Commission. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Okay. Any questions?

On that 790, that piece of property that attaches to Antelope? Yes. Have they always owned that?

They've not always owned it, no.

Then I'm going to ask a real intelligent question. How come there's no house there? There's a power line corridor that runs through it. Oh, is that the power line corridor? Uh-huh. I can see it. It looks like a road almost.

It's faint on the image.

It's hard to tell, but there's a large transmission line. Does that power line go across the cemetery, too?

Yeah, it runs at a diagonal, and it's hard to kind of show you with the mouse.

I can see it on the property now. But, yeah, it cuts through. Oh, it goes that way.

You can pick it back up in the green at the bottom.

Okay. No, I'm fine then. No, that makes sense. I just wondered why it was there. Sure.

Okay, next.

Yeah, Wes and I, thank you for being, and to the property owner, for finding a solution instead of just saying our code doesn't allow this. That's a staple. Mortuary has been there for a long time. It's a good part of the city. So the idea of facilitating a solution and accompanying a zone change WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, SO I JUST APPRECIATE THE STAFF AND LINQUIST FOR WANTING TO DO THAT TO GET WHAT WE NEEDED DONE AND HAVE BOTH OF US FEEL IT WAS A GOOD OUTCOME. SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT TO BOTH OF YOU. ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU.

VERY GOOD COMMENT. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. COUNCIL, I NEED YOU TO TAKE ACTION ON OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.

I MOVE THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Okay. Second?

I second.

Okay. All in favor?

Aye.

Okay. Okay. The time is now yours, so if anyone wishes to comment on this particular item, you're more than welcome. Once again, step up to the mic and state your name and what city you're from.

Leanna Roadhouse, and I'm from Layton, and I own the home just to the east of this 790 lot. Can I... here what's planned and what you're doing with that and uh... okay uh... what kind of fans what what am i going to have since the middle of it go ahead and state all your questions and then we'll have a mentor so obviously i don't know about that and i don't know what kind of fans is going and i want to know what building how big the building it is if that's what's going on and said a building Is there a driveway being put in? How far back does the building have to sit? I mean, it's a subdivision. So, you know, I'd like to know just what is happening.

Okay. What we'll do is we'll actually hear all the public comments, all the questions, and then answer them at once.

Okay.

Is there anyone else? Well, that was quick and short. You're welcome to. Thank you for being here, by the way.

Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, City Council. My name is Robert Lindquist, Jr., or Bobby Lindquist, here representing the Lindquist family and the Lindquist organization. We've been trying for a couple years to build a maintenance shop so that we can store our equipment for the cemetery properly. out indoors, so it's not weathered, and that way we can move with some redevelopment of our mortuary building, some expansion inside of it that's needed to serve our community here. We love Layton City. Layton City's always supported us, and we try to support Layton City. Our plan that Weston will show you, With the building, it's a very modest building. It's not going to be occupied by lots of workers. There's not any manufacturing done there. It's strictly a storage facility that's going to be built first class with first class landscaping. That's how we operate. Thank you for having me.

ONE QUICK QUESTION, IF YOU DON'T MIND. DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THE FENCING? DO YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR FENCE IN MIND?

THERE IS A PARTICULAR FENCE IN MIND. WESTA MIGHT HAVE MORE ANSWERS THAN I DO. I DON'T REMEMBER. IT'S BEEN A COUPLE YEARS SINCE WE'VE VISITED THE FENCING. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO PUSH THIS THROUGH. YEAH, I KNOW.

THANK YOU. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE, BOBBY, AND WE APPRECIATE ALL THE SUPPORT YOU'VE GIVEN THE CITY AS WELL. IT'S BEEN GREAT. OKAY, GOOD MUTUAL AID THERE. OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I'LL LISTEN TO YOUR RESPONSE THEN.

I THOUGHT THOSE WERE IN HERE, BUT MAYBE I CAN TAKE A SECOND AND POPULATE THEM IN THERE. BUT IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER AROUND THIS SECTION, SO THAT WILL BE A SIX-FOOT SOLID FENCE WITH SOME LANDSCAPING ON A FIVE-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER AGAINST THAT FENCE. the building is currently as proposed to be set back 40 feet from the right away which is currently permitted within the current ag zone as well as it be permitted within the future BP zone if approved. That drive approach And I'll see if I can get this loaded, but that drive approach doesn't sit dead center, but it's off center about here. So if you bear with me a second, I'll get these loaded and you can see that.

Don't say that and Dave will start singing. Typically this doesn't happen, so we're okay.

You're saying something?

That's just what Mike said, and I said if that's the case, don't say it, because Dave will start saying it.

Oh, yeah. You can tell us about your puppet show.

Yeah, you bet. Come to the puppet show. Puppet shows, it's as big as Quinn. We've got mallards, we've got swans, we've got rats.

Object.

Magic. I didn't hear it.

Maybe the history. Why don't you tell us the history of why you're doing this puppet show?

We did it 25 years ago. Not the same show. But we did it for... grandparents who brought their grandkids and had nothing to do. So on Saturday, we held this puppet show so they could come and watch it. And it was about magic. So it's got all the animals from the park in it.

Yeah, that's cool. So that's in celebration of America 250. We're bringing it back.

This one's on American history, yeah.

Okay, thank you. Okay.

Okay, I apologize for not having that loaded for you. This is the drive approach along the property. the building footprint.

Is this mine? Are all of these wiggling? Yeah. All right, yeah. We'll look up at the top here. Does that pretty much answer the question? Thanks, Madam Mayor.

How about lighting on the building?

Yeah, lighting's not allowed to go beyond. I mean, they can have lighting, but we basically require a lighting plan, and that light can't distribute beyond the property boundaries.

Okay. Council Member Watson. And Weston, the drive approach is not a public, like they can access it from Antelope? I mean, it's not intended to be an outlet or anything like that.

No, and this will look like a maintenance building, accessory structure. I don't foresee, and Mr. Lindquist can comment on this if you would like, but I really don't foresee individuals coming to the mortuary and using that entrance because of that.

THEY'RE NOT CREATING AN OUTLET BETWEEN THESE TWO HOUSES. BETWEEN THESE TWO HOUSES. THAT'S NOT THE INTENT. THAT'S NOT THE INTENT. OKAY.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, COUNCIL, I'LL BRING IT OKAY, COUNCIL, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO YOU FOR ACTION THEN. BACK TO YOU FOR ACTION THEN. SOMEBODY OTHER THAN ZACK. SOMEBODY OTHER THAN ZACK. YEAH, YOU NEED TO CLOSE THE YEAH, YOU NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN TAKE

Madam Mayor, I make a motion to close public hearing and approve ordinance 26-10, 26-11, and resolution 2626, agriculture to professional business. Perfect. I have a second.

OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND. OKAY. ONCE AGAIN, I'LL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS. I'M GOING TO MIX IT UP THIS TIME. HOW ABOUT COUNCILMEMBER SMITH-EDMONSON? AYE. COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

AYE.

COUNCILMEMBER MORRIS? AYE. COUNCILMEMBER BLOXOM? YES. COUNCILMEMBER CLUNDER-ALANOS?

AYE.

OKAY. THERE YOU HAVE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT ONE PASSED.

I USUALLY SAY THE OTHERS.

All right, let's go on to item number D. This will be our last public item tonight. And once again, Weston's going to present this item for us.

to promote water efficient landscaping designs throughout the city the key component of the proposed ordinance language was to limit turf grass and to be no greater than 35% on the front and side yard areas for single-family residential properties at this time the code language was adopted to strongly encourage the limitation for all single-family developments and properties. to not have this requirement except for single families within the PRUD development. The ordinance proposed for you today would be to modify that and to make these four changes. Limitation of turf grass to no more than 35% for front and side yard areas for new single family homes. No turf grass in new residential park strips. Again, single family homes, landscaped areas, or landscaped areas that are less than eight feet. The allowance to use the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District plant list, as well as other lists and resources used for plant selection in the Great Basin. and minor clarifications that are tied to formatting and definition updates to clarify to further pursue the first three items that I've listed. With these changes, Layton City residents would qualify for the $2.50 We were based in turf buyback rebate. Currently, the residents only qualify for the $1.25 rebate. WE HAVE REVIEWED THIS ORDINANCE WITH WEAVER BASIN AND THEY HAVE TOLD US THAT THIS DRAFT CODE DOES COMPLY WITH THEIR ORDINANCE. ON JUNE 26, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO Um, they, um, they didn't vote unanimously. There was, there was a one off vote, but they did vote in, in support of the ordinance 26 approving the water wise standards for single family homes. Um, and staff supports the recommendation of the planning commission.

Okay. Council, do you have any questions on this? That's one more.

Thank you, Weston. Yeah. In application, how would this work for the new single family home? When is this announced to the builder that, oh, this is how the landscape needs to be?

Yeah, so... And what part of the process? Yeah, it's a good question. So when they have made application to go through the subdivision process, they have rights to apply the ordinances that they've made application to. So it would be applications after this date if it was approved today.

Okay. Go ahead. Did you still have one? Okay, go ahead, Council Member Thomas. Okay.

You mentioned PRUD. That's all I heard. I don't know. I didn't get what you meant.

Sure. So currently our landscape code requires that the PRUDs already comply with this standard. Okay. So there it's okay. Thank you.

ANY OTHER? COUNCILMEMBER HAD COMMUNICATED WITH BASIN WATER ABOUT SOME LANGUAGE AND WHAT THEY SAID WAS ADDING LANGUAGE THAT WOULD CLEARLY DEFINE THE RESTRICTION OF TURF GRASS IN THE PARK STRIPS. Now, we mentioned in the work meeting that you thought it was sufficient as it is. What would, if we were to make a motion to that regard to Councilmember Calendrianos' idea of implementing that into the ordinance, what would that say? What would we say?

Yeah, you could just request that a statement be added that turfgrass would not be allowed within any park strip.

Okay.

Or new. Single family. Okay. EXCUSE ME, AND COMMERCIAL. THAT WAS THE COMMOTE, IS THE COMMERCIAL. THANK YOU.

OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH-EDMONSON.

TO CLARIFY ON THAT POINT, BECAUSE THIS IS DEALING WITH RESIDENTIAL CURRENTLY, THE WAY THAT IT IS STATED WOULD STILL ALLOW OUR RESIDENTS TO BENEFIT FROM THE WEAVER BASIN LANDSCAPE REIMBURSEMENT, CORRECT?

YES.

the addition of the commercial.

Yes the comment we were based and provided was just a comment and felt like that might clarify things but the way it' s drafted right now it still meets our standards.