City Council - Regular Meeting

So with a new agreement, um they've requested an additional 1 million up front. Uh there's reasons for that. And then we have a defined dollar amount to pay ourselves back starting the 2026 improvement to ensure that we receive that money. If there is any receive any remaining qualifying expenses, uh they will go to the developer for qualified expenses and you've all seen the projections. So you understand that. If you have questions, feel free to ask. Uh the qualifying increments of the developer will be 100%. If you recall, for those who were here in 2021, we had a matrix that basically told the developer that if they brought in a prime defense contractor, uh they would receive 100% of the the taxing permit. And so that just follows through with that promise in the original agreement. And this also fulfills uh an obligation in the option agreement. So, if this is approved, um it'll be recorded and they'll be able to purchase the option agreement from the agency. Uh this increases the amount of land from 55 to 90 acres. So, really that's all I have. If there are any questions, I'd be more than happy to answer them. You guys have any questions? I know there's a lot of information there to go over. Basically, we're honoring the exact same contract. That's what it boils down to.

Correct. And we're we're adding the property that wasn't in the original agreement. These properties right here, um the upfront has increased by a million dollars. Did they say what they're going to do with the new property? We generally have um we it's known yet so I I can't say okay but we don't know for sure they don't have they have an idea but they don't know for sure they haven't they don't have a contract

well I have to say without this deal I don't know that this prop this area would have developed into what we wanted to so me they've been a great partner and you um seeing the vision of what this area was meant to be from councils 15 years 15 or more years ago. So I think it's I think it's really good. I don't have a problem with it at all. They're trying to continue what they're working on. So yeah, if I put a lemonade stand up there when they get in trouble, it might help. [laughter] You can uh do a food truck.

No lemonade. Lemonade stand food truck. Yeah, lemonade. Okay. Any no questions then? That's great. No, it's a great thing. They're adding on to it. Yes, it's positive. So, more jobs. Yeah, more everything. So, that's great. One of the things we mentioned before, I think she talked about that the current tenant there obviously has a large all across the country. Yeah.

And beyond. And one of the things that that seems to be occurring is that there's a lot of interest from divisions or projects in that same company that are other places that this site is becoming a real attracting option for a lot of them. Does that make sense? hearing about it, how it's being developed, proximity to the base and the view and the corporation and so forth that there's even seems to be some competition within the corporation of who gets to come to play and that and that's

that's fantastic. They want to be here. We don't know exactly who they are, but it's clear that that's taking place. That's very positive. We just got to get some food around. So now we just got to get some food around. Yeah. So we aren't going to I'm sure there will. So we aren't going to Riverdale or a road extension. Yeah. [laughter]

Well, if there's no more discussion, then I'd entertain some action on um the resolution 25-05. Make a motion that we accept whatever you just said. I can't see it up there. I guess I can see it. I'm sorry. on the resolution 255 second. It's been moved and second. So all in favor say I. I. Thank you.

Thank you. That was good. Okay. That was our uh last item of our uh redevelopment agency meeting. So I need a motion to come out of that meeting and go into our regular scheduled work meeting. So move. Second. Okay. All in favor?

Thank you very much. [clears throat] Give him a minute. Reset up. Okay. Good. Okay. I'd like to welcome everyone then into our regular scheduled uh work meeting for November 5th 6th, excuse me. Um our start time on this meeting is 5:40 due to our RDA meeting. So um as for the agenda, we'll go ahead and start out with the reports that all of us give and I'll um I'm first on the agenda as far as the mayor's report. So I [clears throat] know last time I hadn't had well since we met last time the only major uh board meeting I've been on is the one with integration. So um there's several things that we discussed up there even though we were able to do all of this within a 45m minute meeting which was kind of very different from the way the previous uh administration had handled the meetings. So, um, the biggest thing that I want you to know about is, um, they're doing a, uh, charge your yard, which is, um, from the division of air quality. So, if you remember, uh, I think about two years ago, they had there was an incentive for people turning in their gas powered lawnmowers for battery powered lawnmowers. So now um the air quality control has come to them and said okay look we want that was highly successful we want to do it again but this time we want to include the lawnmowers um blowers trimmers anything

that's gas powered if they can if people are willing to go to the electric um what am I trying to say um

tools then um and they apply for the incendi quality control then they want to make sure that um was willing to take the gas powered items and be able to recycle them. So I'm just letting you guys know that upfront so that you're aware of it. Um they're going to have two actually two different versions of this. They're going to have a commercial um for all the commercial businesses and then also for residential. The commercial side is going to be February and March of 2026. Then the residential side will start in March and go through the end of April. Um then uh also there was a evaluation done on the MUR up there and it was an outside source that comes in and they you know they do evaluations on all kinds of recycling centers. And this one up here um passed all the types of material that came in. They um they passed a number one and a number two type recovery. And interesting enough, compared to the [snorts] national, they were at an 8% nonb burnable. In other words, when they go through and do their assessment, they that only 8% of the waste that was collected was not being able to be recycled, which was extremely low compared to any national facility. So, that's a good thing that they've got the, you know, that they're operating appropriately up there on what the intent is. Uh, going into the winter time, the hours have changed. the hours of service that they'll be open would be 7 am to 5:00 pm. And here's an interesting fact that because I know so many people were like, oh, you know, worried about the out of district cost.

So the whole purpose of that, the reason why that was implemented was because they were receiving so much of out of district waste from everywhere else because they were kind of like on the low low end of it. So that price got bumped up to $50 a ton. Well, it's doing its job because now the amount of outside waste coming to this facility has dropped significantly. Before they were averaging at least 35 to 37 tons a month and now it's dropped down to 24. So um I think that was a a good move there and then it's paying off. Um, another thing that I, uh, want you to be aware of is, you know, they had their incentive program that they tried to, you know, that we had the option for. And [clears throat] part of that, we could have done a green green waste part of it. Interesting enough, Clearfield implemented a green waste. Farmington is now want to do a green waste. between those two cities, there's no more capacity up there for any any other city to really participate in that. So, that's a new challenge that they have that they're going to have to solve. So, just be aware of that.

Um, sorry question. When they're at capacity, do they still take residential? Yeah, the sewer districts shut down, they don't take too much.

No, they'll they'll still do the the you know, the drive in from the residents, but you know, as as far as qualifiers, I guess is what I should say. Um, they'll be at capacity on that one. And then, um, starting 2026, there's a new executive board that will go into place. So, the chair and vice chair due to um a resolution that was passed last year Yeah. Um the year I guess the year before that um the chair and vice chair are not able to step to remain on so they'll be rotating off. And this upcoming year the new chair will be Mike Newton. He's the county commissioner for Morgan County. And then u the vice chair is Rod Westbrook. He's from South Weaver, mayor of South Weieber. And then Tammy will be the secretary case. And then this was an interesting announcement as well that I know you guys would be interested in is their attorney Larry that you've been dealing with over the years. Um he actually made an announcement that he's going to be leaving. So he's actually giving him a six month notice, but he'll be stepping down as well. So it was a it was pretty robust meeting. I mean like I said

and we sent him I love Len t-shirt. Just wondering. I only if you all sign it. I'll sign it. [laughter]

Okay. So, anyway, that was my update on that meeting. Uh, next week I have, you know, the sewer board. But, um, the only other thing I want to mention is November 21st. Uh, well, you guys are aware that the National League of Cities in Town is coming to Salt Lake. They're having their convention this year. and um they are asking that um on the 21st that all the cities of the first and second class attend a meeting that starts at 2 to 3:45. We will have to pre-register. So it it's going to be held down at the high regency in Salt Lake. So if you can please Yeah, please let Angela know tomorrow if you can because she's going to be out for a month starting next week. So, if she wants to get us pre-registered for that, you're all able to attend. Well, and certainly if you want to attend any of that any of that conference, just, you know, let us know. [clears throat] So, that's all my updates. I'll turn the time over to you guys. um chambers legislative affairs met this morning and we had a couple visitors from the legislature, Melissa Ballard and Representative Cutler and three things Representative Cutler talked about his priorities. Um I thought it was interesting digital ID he's working on um the challenges of that trying to work with neighboring states to and try and make it congruent and work together. Um, so one challenge he's working on, another signature gathering and trying to set up some kind of training for signature gathers for petitions or referendums um so that minimize fraud.

One one thing they one problem they had last go around was uh students learned oh we can make extra money collecting signatures. Well there was not you know being fraudulent on purpose but maybe trying to make more make more money.

Um not trying to sway the the petition. I mean, they were fraudulent on purpose. Not trying to sway the the petition, the referendum, but just best practices that they're trying to put together a program for for signature gatherers. Um, and that'll that'll apply to companies that do it professionally as well as volunteers. And the third thing was e motorcosc e motorcycles that the state is talking about how we can um what the best avenue is to to protect our residents to protect our streets, sidewalks,

baseball fields. Yeah.

But yeah, um and I I told him, you know, it'd be nice because we've seen some cities come up with ordinances and rules, if you will, and then it's gonna it would be challenging if every city did that on their own and you have a patchwork. I'm assuming I didn't I haven't talked to our chief, but um they are working with chiefs of police to to try and do what's best. Um what he kind of suggested was the state has a an ideal and then the city can go beyond that if needed. Anyway, that'll be something this year. We've talked about a lot.

And also we've talked about mosquito abatement tax increase, proposed tax increase. That hearing again is December 11th, 700 p.m. at the district's office just off 200 North in Kesville. That increase is like $7 for the year, right? On average. Yeah. 25% increase, but they are the smallest tax tax entity in the county. Get a guarantee on less mosquitoes.

And if they did nothing, I guess that guarantee you could be down at the library right now with the I know the other 30% increase. I would say done ours not today. I know. I mean, we like to be first, but not when it conflicts with our our meetings meeting. I think they're going to run out of space, but who knows? Anyway, okay. Anyone else have any updates?

But really quick with the Utah League with the NLC meetings, there's a Utah state night. So all elected officials from the state collection officials officials they're at the museum of illusions in the gateway at 6 p.m. on the 21st. So you and your family are invited to be there museum of illusions the gateway never been open. How much a day is on?

[clears throat] Um, [laughter] if there's no other reports then um we'll go ahead and turn the time over to Weston to go through the municipal code that change or we change. [clears throat] Yes. Take it in, take it out.

Yep. Absolutely. So, um although it might seem there's a lot here, there's there's not a lot that we're doing different. So, legislative bill, um, Senate Bill 104, passed in 2025, and what it did was amend terminology and procedures for lotine adjustments. Uh, now there's three specific terms they're calling them. Procedurally, it doesn't really affect how we do things. There is a modification that staff's recommending, and I'll go through that as well, that that does make a modification. And then we're also um um in this ordinance recommending that the standards in the um engineering's development guidelines and design standards be removed that cover lot adjustments so we just have them in one place. So the the three different groups um are boundary establishments. Uh this is a boundary line that is ambiguous and um uncertain between two property owners. maybe even the property line is um um that there's a dispute between where the property line is. Um the state has come in and said this is not the city's place to get involved with that. We weren't getting involved with those anyway. Um it's between the property owners to figure out where that property line is and go get it recorded to the county. This is happening on um parcels, not lots, right? When they're when they're established lots, then we know where those property lines are. Um the next group I should go down here. This is our chart. Kind of hard to read, but this is in our um a chart or a table that's in our code that references the the land use authority and the reviewing bodies of each of these groups. We didn't put boundary establishments in here because again, we're not reviewing them. The next group is the simple boundary adjustments, which is the one on the bottom here. Um, and it's listed as having the review body as development staff, recommending body, development staff, and the land use authority, the

community economic development um, department director. Um, so this is how we're already operating. This what what you're going to see here is whether it's within a subdivision or outside a subdivision, a known property line is being adjusted. If um public utility easements are not affected, meaning we're not having to vacate and reestablish new easements, this is all a process that is handled administratively and approved through staff and taken to the city uh the the county for um recreation. The next group is the full boundary adjustments. So this is what um the the council sees frequently which is um what happens here is in within a subdivision we get someone that wants to change boundary line and easements have to be vacated and reestablished and current our current process is that then comes to the council to remove those to vacate those easements. Um and um then they're established again as they're recorded with the new property lines. Um, so again, this is the state calling these specific terms and so we're just meeting LUDMA. As we were looking at this, this one right here, vacating and amending plats, which is we have one tonight. Um, and what we're talking about here is really just making the process similar to how we're doing it. When we're amending a plat, what we're really doing is creating a somewhat of a preliminary and final plat all all over again. When we do a preliminary plat, that's when we're establishing boundary lines and establishing those public utility easements. And then the final plaque is the process to get those finally recorded. Right? And so in looking at these um and and this is why we put this in here, we we recognize that this process is already established and and reviewed and approved through the planning commission. And so just for purposes of of matching our our same processes everywhere, staff's recommending we make that change. So the city council h doesn't have to to review

those. Again, these are administrative processes. So um and then again, just the last kind of component is just that we are removing the section from the the engineering um development guideline standards. We're not adding anything. It's just repealing that section. Be happy to answer any questions. So this was you the staff finding this not state mandated. That's right. Good job. Sounds good. Yeah. Equipment like that is a lot easier. You understand? Yeah. [laughter] Dave, you've seen your last amendment of the plan. Oh man.

After tonight [laughter] if this is approved. Right. Right. Dave's going to leave the charge. That's true. I want these days. That's right. [laughter] vacations more plat make. Hey, just in general, we're making a big change that was part of this is required by the legislative action. Does that make you nervous right before the legislative session? I mean, when I came on here, I was surprised how much of this you have to do every single year. Yeah, this one doesn't. Um there's plenty that does, but we're already doing all these things. So

Oh, that's true. A lot of the changes you make, you're saying they're already within the parameters. Will that obviously speed up things as well? It will. Yep. That's a good thing. Everybody wants Yeah. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you. No other questions, so keep listening. Okay, we'll turn the time over to Steve Jackson then to go over the water master plan. Waste water. Excuse me. Talk waste water. Excuse me. I need to correct myself. I caught it. Can we talk about dirty water?

Yeah, there we go. How's that some kick in? food and waste food and waste water. Food and waste water.

Well, thanks for letting me uh come back with this tonight. So, u last year we actually approved the wastewater master plan along with our sanitary sewer management plan. Um part of that uh process is Bow and Collins finished that up for us in in June of 24. Um, obviously I'll talk about the wastewater master plan so that we can understand what this next process was, but it recommended improvements to resolve existing and projected future deficiencies based on our current general plan. Um, and then there's a recommendation to evaluate potential sewer impact fees to um, assist in funding growth related projects within the city. Historically, we haven't had an impact fee because the majority of the city owned sewer system has been constructed by development and it's been minimum 8 in pipes and so there hasn't been a need for that. The majority of the impact fees that have been assessed have been through North Davis Sewer District where they build the the large trunk lines and the conveyance lines that carry it all out to the sewer treatment plant. So, um, as we looked into this master plan, uh, just to review with you, we have just over 218 miles of pipe ranging anywhere from 8 to 18 in in diameter. Um, these large kind of brighter colors are the the North Davis Sewer District trunk lines that you can see and those are the ones that the majority had been constructed by them. And so, they have collected impact fees in the past. um the existing conditions that we went through with this wastewater master plan show show kind of our our densities that we were um currently at and then um projected densities here. Um they've gone through all the math and and all the studies on that to show that the um the ERU they call it the equivalent residential unit we're currently at about 32,000. They project that we'll be at about 60,000 by60. So, we're going to see some growth

uh over the next, you know, couple decades. But as part of that, uh future growth, they they came up with projected system improvements. This is in the wastewater master plan as well. They've identified these different projects that we're going to need to do anywhere from from now out into that build out 50-year time frame that they look at. Um so, there were four four projects that were in the short term and then we had a lot more in the long term. Um, so, so again, the recommendation was to look at the potential for a sewer impact fee. So, we're bringing this back to you to say we've done the impact fee facilities plan and the impact fee analysis and and we recommend that we talk about this and and kind of plan a path forward if it's something that you you all want to explore and and possibly adopt. So, um, the sewer impact fee facilities plan, similar to our transportation master plan we just went through, there's three components to that. This is the second component of what the wastewater management plan or master plan would be. Um again it identifies needs for future development or or anticipated development. Uh it only includes the growth related projects. So we we backed out any deficiencies that are in the system that we would need to to take care of. It complies with the impact fee act uh from Utah code based on this wastewater man. And again it's on the next 10 years of capital improvements uh with no operations and maintenance costs. It's only the growth related projects. So through 20 34 and then it defines a level of service which is the maximum ratio of flow to pipeline capacity 75 or 75%. So pretty standard stuff. That's what we've been operating at for decades with our system and we continue to [snorts] plan to do that. So um again they they looked at our existing conditions about 36,000 is our eru. They projected a growth over the next 10

years about 10,724. Um so we would end up at about 47,000 and a half. Um [clears throat] they're they've identified that the current system collection um percent that's being used is about 60%. They estimate that the next 10 years the growth that we'll see is is just about 16.5%. that would be used up by that. So that plays into the calculation of how we establish the impact fee um and and how that number is calculated. And then the growth beyond 10 years, it's 2.2.7%. Um that is also calculated in the city can build projects that would accommodate that growth, but we can't collect uh impact fees on that funding until we have reached the point where that 10 years is there. So, um, again, 10,724 is what we're anticipating and then we would maintain that same ratio. So, the four projects are listed here. I guess I've got a bigger um slide here down the down the way. So, the four projects are going to cost 5.74 million. Um, total there's 1.88 million in eligible impact fees in the next 10 years. This number is important, $2.3 million. um is cost to existing um capacity that we would have to pay for as a city. Um the the remainder of that can be um the 1.8 can be collected in impact fees. This 1.4 needs to be can be funded through the city but then collected at a later date once the the impacts have have actually hit. So the four projects, there's one down here on on Gordon Avenue. um capacity needs to be increased but it will help for future growth as well. Um Gordon or Gentile Street east of the golf course is also a second one that would be growth related and then Sugar

Street between Hillfield and Gentile is the is the the third and fourth one. So it's split into two there with two different phases. Um so if I jump back here that's those those four. So you can see the Gordon Avenue one is actually not that much. There's only about 1% that can go towards that, but the other one 67% 17 and 21. So just to give you an idea, these are the current impact fees that North Davis Sue District is charging right now. So for a single family residential home, it's $3,400. For town home, it's 31 2600 for a multifamily or multi-unit and then 2100 for tod. And then for non-residential, it's 656 per thousand gallons of projected waste water use. So that's the impact fee facilities plan identifies which projects are eligible for impact fee collection and and then how much is eligible to be collected. So the impact fee analysis is the third component to this just like with our transportation setup. Um again calculates the fees to ensure that growth. It complies with the impact fee act. It's based on erus. Um the fees have to be spent or encumbered within six years after it's been paid and they can't be implemented for 90 days following adoption by the city council. Exact same rules for our transportation fees. Um so what is the fee that that we're proposing? Um, the gross fee is $429.96 per ERU. Um, again, there's your $10,000 or 10,000 ERU growth. Um, how does that break out? The existing capacity that that developers could buy into is $24753. Um, we're not anticipating charging for any general assets like our buildings or any of our equipment or anything, but new construction costs would be $175.4

per ERU. and then our consulting fees can be added into that. So, $7 per eru. So, that's where you get the $429. Um, one of the things that needs to happen though is we have to have a credit for projects that are addressing an existing deficiency but benefiting future growth. And so, um, that's where that $2.39 million I mentioned the city needs to, um, back out of this calculation. So, they credit that back over the next 10 years at 39,000 and then they they do the time value present value and so the first year um they they've created this a 10-year schedule. So the first year for one eru would be 386.81 and then you can see it would it would slightly increase each year for the next 10 years as that discount is is taken off. Um, so what does that look like as far as residential non-residential? Uh, for single family 1 ARU, obviously the 386.81. For a town home, it would be 384. For a multifamily because they they generate just slightly less than a regular 29398. And then for a transit oriented, it would be 235.95. Um, for non-residentidential, we base that off of the meter size and you multiply it by the meter ratio from the American Waterworks Association for the 5/8 inch meter. And so you would take the meter ratio, multiply it by the the ERU for a single ERU. And so these are the numbers that you would come up with. So um, for example, a 2inch meter would be $3,94.48. And then there's a 10-year schedule for that as well. So, um, with that, that that's the presentation that I have on this. Um, the city is looking at this, uh, staff, excuse me, is looking at this saying, well, we have a water impact fee and a storm water impact fee and a

transportation impact fee. And now, um, the growth and the density that we're seeing is creating a need for us to potentially have this fee and and to be, I guess, fair and consistent, equitable across all of the the development that's happening. We're recommending that we adopt these fee schedules and then implement them going forward. So, I want to answer any questions, any comments that you have. Um, our intent would be to to bring this back on the 20th of November for a public hearing if that's what the council would like to to see and then and then move forward with it from there. So,

philosophically, you said it very well. I don't want to add to it and I think the c well I know the council's aware of it from previous discussions but what are the what are the philosophies besides uh behind impact fees is that you're properly allocating the costs of new development to the people that are costing it as opposed to the residents. So if if not for the imposition of the impact fee on on these uh expansion projects that are caused by new development the only other source of revenue is to tack it onto the base either the existing residential page. So you know that already, but some people may not understand that's it's really a phil it's a philosophical thing too to make sure that the proper um the the segments that are creating the demand are paying for their fair share of the cost and that the new development costs aren't being borne by existing residents. So

is there is there a reason why we haven't had it in the past already? Uh so so in the past we haven't had larger upsizing of these pipelines in order to accommodate that growth. Most of the lines that are are in North Davis has done a great job planning for that future development. And so um their trunk lines obviously have been upsized numerous times but where we connect with 8 in pipes it's really mostly been development that has constructed those. So there is no way to collect an impact fee on a minimum size

with the with the changes in the general plan and you know there's there's more density being approved now than there was in the past some of those I call it local it's not saying it's not the right word to use but the lines that are Steve's talked about particularly developers put out that are the standard requirement in some cases because of the density that's come into areas with new new general designations is there might be a need for a 10 or a 12 inch line. And so what this does that that kind of increase doesn't get captured by the district, but it need it can be captured uh because it's a a little bit of a system improvement as opposed to just a a base project improvements, the 8 in. And so even though there's only four of them over the course of 10 years, we feel like it was important to bring that to you and and see just philosophically, you know, it's not a large amount. Do we want to do that? That's what's driving it, right? If I mistake that, but it's just because the density is coming in areas that before weren't anticipated to have that density.

No, no, you're No, that's that's good. I appreciate that. But I'm So my question is, so rather than putting in the standard 8 in, you're going to upsize it. But in any of these new areas, is there all is would they be tapping into a smaller diameter and have to choke point back down? No, we wouldn't do that. That's why so all of these areas would then be the flow would go to a [clears throat] larger size. Okay.

Yeah. That's where we we would look at that and engineer it to make sure we weren't doing that thing. So the capacity that that capacity ratio of 75 has to be maintained from there all the way down to the connection in North Davis and and North Davis has our master plans and we work together to make sure that we're not sending them more than they can handle. But but as we increase our densities it increases their demands as well and so it's kind of a little bit of a which is why we need drying beds. So sorry, there's not I mean this isn't a new concept statewide. I'm guessing there's other jurisdictions that already have impact.

The vast majority of cities that are kind of exploding right now, they all have these because they are building that kind of infrastructure and and the growth that's coming from that. We have been blessed, I guess, to not have to need this and and um we can operate without it like Alex mentioned. We just have had to build those into the user rates, whereas this is more equitable to to use it the way we do with all of our other user rates where the impact fees go towards these growth projects. Another question.

How does that translate down to the to just the average homeowner who's going to be benefiting from development in this area as far as the cost or Yeah. So, so for a single family house, they would have a $386 impact be added to their their permit fee that would come through. And then they would still be paying the North Davis impact fees that that I showed you on that other slide as well. So, it would increase there, but we did adjust the water rates for impact fees slightly down, probably actually more than the $300, but it's not straight across.

Generally, I mean, when the development community gets an additional fee, how would they hypothetically pass this on to a new homeowner in some way? How how do they do that? Probably through the the the pricing. Yeah, it would come through as the impact fee cost that they would building permit fee cost would show that through there.

The residents still pay each other, right? But hopefully it's the resident that is by that growth of buying that home as opposed to the existing people that are involved in that transaction. So Steve, let me throw a scenario out and forgive me if you covered it. You said a lot of things that I didn't understand that presentation. Um, say a subdivision was built 10 years ago.

Now, uh, open land adjacent to it that feeds through that subdivision is higher density now, and there's a need to increase the flow through the established subdivision. Is that something that's going to need to be updated or do you see that kind of situation?

Yeah. So, so all of the the models that they ran, sorry if I probably don't have the right slides. So, so our our consultants ran this model and said, what is the density going to look like? And then they ran all of these models for the sewer pipes. And these red lines here, these pink lines are the ones they identified that are in that exact position of yours where the growth around those lines will then require this capacity to be upsized or whatnot. And so that's what this impact fee will pay for is we can't say, "Oh, the pipe's already too small and you have to pay for that." But we can say, "Well, we're going to make the pipe bigger to meet our existing demand, but we're going to also make it that next step bigger." So we go from an eight to a 12. and that will accommodate the growth of that new pipe or that new development that comes in.

Okay. So, that's the problem. Yeah. One of the problems. Kind of explain the uh out west there in the far bottom corner west side of town. How why is it just in that little so this is a super super flat right

part of the road and we're actually fighting grades and so this one has been identified as a potential issue but it's 50 years down the road if every density allowance that is made comes to fruition if that makes sense. So the maximum density that that property could be in our general plan, I can't remember the number of that, but they they basically said worst case scenario, if you if you maximize the density on this ground to be as high as possible in the general plan, that may be a problem 50 years from now. So it's not included in this impact fee analysis, but it is there just as a if that's the way that goes, um then then we'll need to watch that as it grows. But there is plenty of capacity in that line for quite a while before it needs to be looked at.

Okay. What's going on? All right. That works. All right. Okay. We good. I I guess a little bit of direction. We bring this back to you for a a future public hearing discussion. And Okay. I have two head nods. Do I have the other? Oh, yeah. Yes. Okay. You got all your head nods? [laughter] Okay, we'll go on to the next item. Then head nods. Now [laughter] you guys are doing this one's on the state of Utah proposed inquisition on our water quality. Yeah.

Okay. So, we're going to we're going to revisit our our short discussion from last time about the the water fees for you

if it's okay. I'm not going to revisit the public water system fee. If everybody's clear on that one, they want to impose a 3 cent per thousand gallon um I'm going to call it a tax, but they're calling it a fee. 3 cent per thousand gallons to pay for the division of drinking water's operations and um functions. I think that one's pretty clear, but I wanted to revisit the water infrastructure plan that they have put together or or developed. So, um, the water development coordinating council, they submitted those 300 or three, they asked for projects that would potentially need, um, state funding in the future. Um, I have to to put this caveat out there. When they presented it to us, they came and they said, "We're just collecting all of these projects of anything you might want to have could potentially need a a you know, state funding help with. And by the way, if you don't have it on this list, you can't even ask for state funding. And so I believe there's a lot of projects on that list that were put on this list simply as a just in case, but really would never have been sought for funding. We put 14 projects, submitted 14 projects for [snorts] $35 million. One of those projects was to rebuild one of the reservoirs in Leighton um to be able to increase its capacity. It's about $10.5 million is what our estimate was, but the remainder of the other projects were were far smaller and and the reality is we would have just programmed them into our our existing fee structures and and built the projects. So, if you asked Leighton, we could easily remove $25 million of projects from this list. And if you really ask me again if I have to pay these fees, if the citizens have to pay this fee, we should just remove every project we put on this list. and and just figure out how to pay for

ourselves. So, um can I just really quick I I heard that the cities weren't giving much time either to do this. No, it was very quick that they came out and said, "Hey, we've got to have this and we've got to uh I wouldn't say a few days, but it was definitely fairly quickly." Um Okay.

And um so what ended up happening is they they put the law into effect. They did this. they they started, you know, pushing for all these things things and then they put this fee study together. But in order to start with the fee study, they had to get all these projects and the things together. So, um again, they're they're proposing um basically $16.32 per month per household. um that comes down to a an existing um taxing authority that they have where they can excuse me it's right here a 16th of a of the state sales tax rate on all growth gross taxable that's already there um there is some kind of adalorum concept which is a property tax style they're still developing that so that's a second component and then this state water to future user fee which is going to be this 1632 and and it really breaks down to um 75 cents per thousand gallons on water connections and 37 cents per thousand gallons on all sewer connections. Um, so my math on this, if I bring this up and just apologize, I was going to try and zoom in on this, but let's see if I can do this. There we go. Um, so a couple of the components, they have some rankings of these projects and how the projects are going to be considered for funding. Um, one of those is that, um, it's got to be a critical need, it's got to be a a, you know, hardship, those types of things. So, as they've determined what a hardship is, they've come up with a a calculation based on an EPA study that says anything over 4.5%

of your median adjust gross adjusted gross income could be considered a hardship for combined water and sewer together. So the state feels like according to this proposal that 3% is not unreasonable to expect people to have to pay. And so I did a couple quick calculations our our magi is um $67,000 per year. So we would need to charge $1,05 per year to get to the one and a half for water and then another $1,05 to get to one and a half for sewer. So a total of 2010. Um, our current fee for water combined with drinking water, uh, culinary and secondary is $44.73 per month. Sewer is $37 per month. And, and this includes the cost that we collect for North Davis sewer district. So, as you calculate that out, we're at a point8% magi for water and 6% for sewer. State average is about 1.2 two for water and about eight for sewer. Um, so you calculate that out and they basically have said you have additional capacity to raise your rates by $39 for water and $46 for sewer

per month.

Per month. Um, and what that would do is that would generate um, oh well, so we generate 20.5 million with 21,000 connections just for for rough numbers. They basically would say if you want money from us and you're not charging this 3% MAGI, then it it makes your your project almost I I believe it's going to make our projects ineligible. Um, we would need to basically raise our rates 105% combined between water and sewer to get to their 3% magi. It would generate another $21 million a year. We have $35 million of projects on the list so we can generate enough money in two years to pay for those. Um, then they would their their anticipated costs for us would be a 20% increase on our current rates combined. and they would take $4.1 million from the residents of Leighton to fund all of these other projects in the throughout the the community. So, um

other communities and other communities anybody on the list the money our residents would pay would be used to fund projects for other outside of our area.

Yeah, I I believe it will be extremely hard for Leighton City to even see any of this money come back to us if they're going to use that 3% magi as a as a calculation. So, um, as as we looked at this and, um, then then part of the other challenges are, um, that we, as you look at the projects, anything over $10 million is only eligible for up to 2% or 20% of the of the grant, whereas a lot of the smaller projects, you can go anywhere from 20% to 75% grant money. Um, I personally feel like maybe there needs to be a real hard look at what we're trying to fund with this money if we're funding real regional projects. Our our understanding is this was to try and fund really major projects like some of the things that Weaver Basin has in their master plans that they're already charging this capital asset recovery and re rehabilitation money for. Um, it's not that there aren't projects out there that need this, but but we believe that this is just basically a we're going to take all this money and then we're going to redistribute it to people who

think they want it more or whatever. But, but if we have to double our water rates and our sewer rates in order to to even see this money, then it would be better for us to raise our rates by the $4 million and take care of our own projects over the next six years, seven years. Um, so

that's the feeling that you have um because you've already sent feedback like this is something obviously that the some in the legislature are interested in. Um, and it sounded to me like it's to really help fund some of these other areas across the state who maybe don't have as many, you know, residents as we do in other other cities, but do you feel confident that there's recourse that you're able to push back and say, "Yeah, we don't want to do this."

I to be honest, I don't know. That's what we're we're going to push for. I think the league is trying to talk through this as well. I think there needs to be some discussions and and as you as elected officials, it really comes down to the state elected officials need to know what is on this list. I think they're going to get this report and it's going to be crazy detailed and crazy busy to to look at. But, um, you know, this is the breakdown of of kind of expense needed and things like that. They've broken it out into each one of these different areas, but uh, to your point, there's water systems out there with 120 people on them and

they they're just not solvent. If you were a business and you were trying to run that kind of a business, you wouldn't say, "Let's build this water system, right?" And so, they're going to basically, in my opinion, take money from established communities that have already paid for their growth and move it into areas that need to pay for their growth as well, but they're going to use the rest of the state to pay for it. and and and maybe that's just my my own personal view of this, but but I believe there's a substantial number of projects on this list that most likely shouldn't be on the the project list because of the way they asked for the input. And if somebody took a hard look at it, they could knock quite a few out. If we're if we could take $25 million off ourselves, there's 255 other cities that submitted stuff. There's probably people that submitted their entire master plan to this and said, "Yeah, we'd love free money." And [snorts] and it's not free. It's just not. It's coming from somewhere. Um

could I ask then [clears throat] that I mean I I don't know. We've talked about this at the league quite a bit. But I would say from our city standpoint, I think it would be helpful. And Clint, um, Drake, you may already have this, but if we knew the projects that we had on there, how much they are, and even something like a two-pager from some of these slides about this is how much it would cost for us to fund these. Um, and if we increased our rates by this one and a half percent or this 3% that they're saying, we could fund those on our own. So just having that information I think would be helpful for us to be able to talk to at least our legislators who are here in our city to say, "Hey, we know this is coming up. I mean, we know who's running this. He's running he's run these these bills for the past three or four years. So we know who it's coming from, but to be able to give a good perspective from our city and saying this is this is what we see. Are we missing something?" and then letting our legislators know that, hey, we wouldn't likely or we don't believe that we'd be able to benefit from any of these projects. We wouldn't probably receive any of this money and we'd be raising fees to support other areas. I think we need that to be clear so we can share that. And I would rather have something like that before January so that we're not bombarding them.

I was just going to say, why don't we do it now? Mhm. Let's do it before the holidays hit, before anything gets going. I've made Cam aware. I've sent him all our math. He's aware of it. He's aware that other cities are frustrated as well. Mentioned that they want to work on it during the session. So, yeah. Oh, let's get something in writing and get to them. And well, I think one of the issues will be that there are lots of cities who very happy about this. Yeah.

Yeah. My one of the questions I have and maybe it will be push back on what we're talking about maybe maybe not your thoughts we have some of our water comes from our wells is that in other cities South Jordan for instance they have to import all their water and this might be a great deal for them. Well, in Jordan Valley Water Conservancy [clears throat] District may have some really massive projects on the list as well, right? But um you know, our concern is is that if if we raised our rates to this 3% magi, we could fund our entire project. We wouldn't even ask for money.

We wouldn't ask I believe if we raised it to even collect the four million a year, we wouldn't ever go to the state for these. And that's what I think is happening is they're structuring this a lot like the the state revolving fund money that the federal government has usually put in in play and and that historically hasn't been used by the larger systems and the larger cities because we take care of our own stuff and we fund those things. We don't have those same needs. um smaller communities. I'm not saying they should just all of a sudden come up with all this money either, but but to come into a community like Leighton and take $4 million a year out of it that that and then have us try and compete for our own money back to to do these projects when if all the big cities said, "Hey, we really don't have to have this money if if this is what it's going to cost." Then we need to be able to say, "We're going to opt out and not even ask for the money."

Yeah. Fund it. It's hard. It's obviously hard to raise water rates. We've been through it. This crew's been through it for $1 and and what 16. So, let's just say we don't do any of the raising anything, do any of that because it doesn't make any sense. But we have to collect this money for the state, the $16.32,

and we don't even see any any benefit from that. And then we re-evaluate our water master plan and and things have changed and and we're growing more and now you have to wow we got to look at this and we might have to raise water rates. Who's going to who's going to say that's okay in Leighton City when $16 every month is going somewhere else. Like take it from that. I mean that's going to be incredibly difficult to have that conversation with citizens if $16 a month's being taken out. I it doesn't make any sense.

Well, I think the the bigger I think a bigger push for me would be that and we can do this with the league also. Um you said Steve that you feel like a lot of cities just put like their pretty much their like Christmas wish list on here. Um if you know at the league we talk about having um in respect to city staff actually look at the list and see what would we really need um to be on this list like if it's a regional thing. So like great salt lake is close to us and other cities in Davis County. Utah Lake is close to other cities where it's not just one city that may contribute or need to help you know make that you like a state source. If there are projects like that that were more statewide projects that people across the state are using, maybe if the list is paired down to something like that as opposed to whatever your, you know, pie in the sky list is, then it can be re-evaluated because it sounds like with all that's on there and this increase that they're requiring cities to already do and to provide the $16 that that's based off of everything. And if there's something even for recreation, right, we have lots of lots of lakes that the entire state use as [clears throat] we go to different parts of the state. Things like that to me make more sense. And so maybe that could also be a part of this push or the discussion to say we don't want to be funding every city in the state's, you know, pet projects. But if there's something that is regional or it's a statewide recreational type of thing, something that the state cares about broadly, then look at that and re-evaluate because otherwise this just sounds crazy. And that's that's how this started. We we were

in we were there when when the representative came and talked about what he was trying to accomplish. He started by talking about the reservoirs that are being abandoned by the federal government and the fact that we've got this network of reservoirs. Nobody's maintaining them other than maybe the the districts trying to and they're going to be they're going to need to be replaced. They're going to need to be maintained better. And that was the obviously morphed from there and that was the start of the to your point eight or so years ago we were based collecting that money from all of the district or all the cities to start that process requirement

for those very reasons. Now they're using the same excuse eight years later to justify this. It doesn't seem like a very I wonder just opinion changed one a bit but I I wonder if the effort to try to get as many things into the list was strategic as opposed to economic because it it creates a a sense of a crisis right that has to be addressed. Um but it it doesn't seem very conservative um aligned with the principles that are articulated by the the dominant political philosophy right in the state

to to take from people and give it to other people. It this is they're framing this as a fee. This doesn't meet the definition of a fee. If the city tried to impose a fee like this, this is a tax. Yeah. Well, if you if there is need, I think everybody would recognize that in certain parts of the state there are significant water demands that the local people can't do that. That's a proper place from my view to say we have discretionary taxes that have come into the state of Utah that we can determine how to allocate and it may be that some of this tax and that tax goes to help that because that's a benefit to the state but typically you don't impose that on

say it's something that it isn't right and and intentionally force it on everybody. You're you're already collecting discretionary funds. It's a paytoplay

but you don't actually get to play. you just have to pay. And I I guess I was curious about the fee and tax situation. I know that's been mitigated quite a bit. Um but typically now it's coming from the state side of things which makes it a whole different ballgame. But seems to me like that the state imposing a tax on a municipality to pay into a general fund. Do we even do that in other areas? I mean, I I can't even think of like collectivizing basically everybody into one pot. Like with the sewer district, it's a taxing entity, right? You raise the taxes, everyone's sewer kind of just flows into North Davis. But with this,

I mean, it's this is just totally different. Yeah. It's an it's kind of a more but they've assured us it's a fee not a tax because tax becomes a lottery for those cities that can't heard [clears throat] say it's going to be 3% of magi. Yeah. Where did they get that? Our fees have to be based on what your cost but so it's that's just all this nonsense. Yeah. When they're pressed on it they just say well we assure you it's a fee. We assure you. So, and and we don't know what else is on the list. I'm I'm making some representative this we know what we submitted and the state how big of a buy in that they got to support them on this.

I mean I have no idea where so this legislation passed last year and and this they're now taking this plan and they're presenting it to uh the governor and everybody to decide if they want to implement this. So, so I don't know that it's necessarily like there's new legislation coming. This is basically they're deciding how much it's going to be and that's they got scared. They got permission without details. They're doing the details already. There's been some there's been some public meetings on it.

What's been the feedback there? uh the bigger cities are asking what we're going to get out of it because we're saying the math isn't mathing for us and the smaller people were like oh yeah this is great and

we even had somebody from the state uh mention that well it's grant money it's free money and free money's free and I it frustrated me because I was like no this is not free money just because somebody gave you money it doesn't come from the money tree it's it's taken from some other place And so to to Clint's point, our understanding was is they were looking into what the needs were. And when they came to us and said, "Hey, what are these projects?" We said, "Well, these potentially could be some that that somebody might ask for state funding on." But it would only be after we had done all that we could do to make sure we were funding ourselves. But for them to say, "Well, because the EPA says four and a half, we're going to set it at three." Um, you know, we feel like that's fairly uh ridiculous. I'll just be frank. We looked at some other cities that we know have relatively higher water rates because of uh Park City for one, their their rates are very high, but they do a lot of water pumping. They do a lot of, you know, things that cost a lot of money to get to things there. And even their

cost for what they charge versus their MAGI, they would still have to raise their rates significantly to to meet that 3% threshold. I just the I and this is obviously an editorial comment, but just the the idea of coming in and telling the city that your rates aren't high enough when we're the ones been funding our own projects. How do they know our rates aren't high enough? We're the one that have to go out to the citizens and tell them this is what your rates are. This is what we're paying for. We need this is why. So some pie in the sky person comes and never even stepped foot in laten and says our rates are too low because their matrix says so. Well, we've been paying for our projects just fine with the rates as they are. It has nothing to do with what's going on in Escalante or somebody else. It's because it's in late. It's really frustrating to me.

Yeah. And they're basing that number off of this EPA the EPA study in here. They say that the EPA has determined that four and a half is the number and so they feel like three is reasonable and they they say they say four and a half would be a hardship is what they're saying and I've been in a lot of meetings with people at different you know engineers and people who operate systems and and there is a prevailing attitude by a lot of places that they say well our job is to keep rates as low as possible and we've had to correct them politely and say no your job is to make sure your rates are sufficient to fund your needs and your systems requirements. And it's tough, but sometimes you have to go to somebody and say this is what's needed to operate the system, not just we're we're trying to make slush funds and things like that. But it is difficult because if if that is a hard number that they're saying you have taxing authority that you're not using, why would we give you state money? Um we're never going to get there. I just can't I could never come and look you guys in the eyes and say we need to double our rate so that we can go try and get a million dollars from the state because you're going to generate $21 million off of that and you're going to [snorts] double the entire revenue of the city and that's absolutely ludicrous to me. So I think one of the narratives we've got to pervey is you know the look at the county raising their taxes by 30% proposing.

So show me the justification for that. What where are the shortfalls? Why do you need that added revenue? How are we gonna convince our residents? We're raising rates this much and but but we're already we have no idea what it's going. We're already taking care of our system, so we can't justify that.

So that's a that puts us we're the bad guy. And then as Clint said, then we're going to be raising our rates again when we need to pay for the projects ourselves. So, and and this is a classic example of that, Tyson, right here in the Weaver River Basin that says that we would generate I think that says 25. I'm getting my glasses are not as great as they should be,

but they're saying our percent of expense needed is 21%. So, what are they going to do with that 4% that it's the difference there? They're going to take it and they're going to give it to the Utah Lake area because look at their their contribution versus their need, right? And so any of these areas that are paying more can have the Virgin River area. They've got, you know, I'm sure they've got needs out there, but maybe they didn't get enough projects on the list. I don't know. But um that's where the challenge is is they're saying at first we're going to keep the revenue in the basin that it was collected from.

But once you build all the projects in that, you know, in that spot, who's to say it's not going somewhere else? So, let's circle back around then like I know we're running out of time. Do we want to try to schedule a meeting now with our local representatives and legislature to combat those sort to educate them on our position really is what that meeting would be about and see if we can get something put together. Would we want that to be like I'm thinking

in advance of our other meeting or would we want that to take the place of it? Well, I'm thinking what we could do if it works out is maybe our next uh um scheduled meeting, you know, rather than starting like at 5:30, maybe we have start at 4:00 or 4:30, invite them to be here at 4:30 and go through it and then we can go on to our regular schedule business. But would it just be this or do we want to do our No, I think we'd still want to wait for our other unless there's reason I asked about that. Is there other big topics that you feel like we need to

The only reason I asked about that is because um the last couple of years it hasn't been as fruitful um with attendance and also it being so close to the start of the session, you know, and with all of the there's excuses. Yeah, there's excuses for leaving early or not being there. And then all the talk about at the league about getting in front of them, you know, more frequently, more often, not just waiting. So, that's my only reason for for asking. Would we want to just be talking about this or would we want to do, you know, our whole I'm okay doing the whole thing if you guys want, but this is certainly a I'd say the biggest topic, but I'm sure there's I know we've got others

part of this plan or does it require legislative approval? The the funding of it I believe they have to choose to. So the way they're, you know, past years we've seen um policy like this being developed throughout the year and it's approved in the first week of the session.

So the earlier the better, I would say. So So they anticipate having this state water plan done by the end of the year or excuse me, yeah, next year, excuse me. So So they're planning to have this report, they had the report done by the end of October. They're planning to push it through so that they can then have March as their their actual hey this is our plan and the budget will present this so appropriations I think it'll go to appropriations. Yeah. So I mean there's no reason to talk to anyone else, right? We talk to we know who gets to because I and no offense to other elected representatives in the city, right?

I mean what are we going to tell them giving this presentation and they'll say yeah great and what are they going to do about it? So I mean I think if it's just a to your point if it's just a funding thing at this point they've already voted for it. So who actually has a say in if it gets funded or not or how it gets funded? We've got people appropriations. Well, so back to my question then. Excuse the Don't water it down. Just talk to the one. Huh? What?

I'm I'm all for having the discussion as soon as possible. Yeah, I I think this is good information and the fact that you show the impact here us and the zero benefit behind it, I think they need to be educated quickly on it. Well, and if they see that here, I mean, they can understand it. They know what's happen what's going to happen here and there are many other cities like us and larger than us who the same thing I'm sure is going to happen to residents are going to say on their bill state mandated water fund state mandated water water future water user yeah so we'll try so maybe we can pull it together then

so we want to do that as in conjunction with one of these types of things or at a separate time you want to give them time like no okay [laughter] I would just say they got a two week notice if we're going to do it let's do this don't do a bunch of other stuff so they can walk you know let's we need them to fully comprehend this one yeah exactly I guess what I was going to be is if there's if it's in this environment will their schedules allow them to be Make sense? Yeah.

Is there going to be a in this where's the most free back and forth transparent discussion going to take place? Is it tied with a do we want to go meeting or is it it could be some strategic meeting. Okay. All right. Let's see what we can figure. There's a thought. That's true. But yeah. Okay. All righty. Okay, we'll figure it out. Okay, let's go ahead and move on. We only have 10 minutes for an important topic here of discussion. Joelyn, jump in quick.

All right, thank you very much for having us back here. Um, I'll be really quick so that we can get through everything. Much of these much of these slides are just a repeat from our last time that we got together back in June. So I won't take too much time but as a reminder presently we are an on leashing dogs on leash dogs in our parks and this was an ordinance that was passed back in 2016. This is a map that just shows where those um places are where they can take their dogs on leash to be able to enjoy being out with them. And then um we also provided just an example of what those amenities are provided and our maintenance tests. Then jumping into the bulk of what we want to talk about today is just the option of introducing dogs in parks off leash. And we have three different um categories of how that could look. The first one is the off leash defense area. This is a very traditional type of application that is you probably have seen in other communities um where there's a area that's fenced off and um specific to dogs. There could be small and large dog areas. Um we also provided last just a summary of what those benefits and challenges may be. Um, I have a slide that summarizes both all of these, so I won't talk too much right now about them. And then we have our off leash shared use park area, which is basically there's no fencing. There's just areas designated where dogs can be off leash in park spaces. And then we also have a summary of what those shared use pros and cons are versus capital and operational. And then just also maintenance applications. And then the third one was our off leash open space trail corridor areas specifically just being very natural spaces um where there's trails and the dogs are allowed to be off leash and then also here's a summary of those open space applications for the benefits and

challenges. So here's the summary um breaking down all the off leash options and then also what we presently have right now. Um capital improvement costs obviously fenced off leash areas are the most expensive to just develop capital-wise. Um on the operational side they are also the most expensive or high cost to be able to maintain. And then with our shared use parks they're the least expensive to um implement the capital improvements. basically your sighting signs. Um but they do have medium costs just with the um nature of the the site and being able to keep it presentable. Um and then the open space trail corridor areas, that's kind of the the meet in the middle um capital improvement costs. Um and they are on the maintenance side the lowest costs to maintain. It's very natural. Um and then our what we have right now is basically we would be no change in cost if we continue that way. Moving forward, last time we met, we talked about if we were to introduce dogs off leash in parks, we would look to uh recommending an off leash open space trail corridor area application. There's a lot of colors here. Um but I want to just bring your attention to the one that's in yellow. Um, this is one that has been under construction little by little and we'll talk about it more as I get into the next slides, but I want to talk about the benefit of introducing an open space trail corridor area for dogs off leash. Um, as you look to our neighbors around us, most of them are the off leash fence area application and this is a service area that just shows how how much how far you could reach the residents in that area with the size of the park they have. So, with this open space trail corridor area, the

benefit is is that when you're getting a big space, um, you're able to service a broader area of residents. This is just good practice when you're trying to introduce dogs off leash is the size is very important. The larger the better. Um average size three to five and the best would even be seven plus acres. It just works so much better. Um unders sizing causes overcrowding, increased conflict, environmental damage and unsatis unsatisfied user groups. Um, so the benefit with this one where we've got located, it's centralized, it's accessible, and um, you want to hit that five mile radius service area. So, jumping back over to the one that I talked about that was in yellow. This is the Eastridge Nature Park space. It's 16 acres of open space that's been dedicated to us as part of the Eastridge PE that's been underway for many, many years. And over time we have um as you can see there there's two areas where we have planned to have trails. There's this one on the north side and then crossing over a covert onto the other side of the creek is this other open space where we have a soft path trail system planned. Much of the amenities as I mentioned are trails. We're looking to introduce benches, gazeos, places for people to picnic, enjoy the natural beauty. Um, docky pots would be introduced and then just landscaping mitigation to make it look nice. It is 16 acres. However, much of that is is the the river, the the creek, and so about 9.6 of it is usable, which is still good when you think about if we were to do an off leash open space dog area, 9.6 are 9.6 acres is pretty great and it also allows 1.6 miles of people

to walk. Um, I also want to just talk about the benefit of having this space be an option for people to use to take their dogs, but in addition, it also services people who just want to go for a walk. So, our investment or if we were to do this, our capital improvements are reaching not only people with interest in using their dogs off leash, but also reaching out to people who just like to be outside. And so, it's more multi-purpose. Here's some pictures of what it looks like. A lot of potential there. And then just really quick, this is a snapshot of what it would cost if we were to move forward with installing these trails. And then if we were to introduce um be a space where people could be with dogs off leash. Just briefly, phase one and phase two we've been working on for some time. 22 23 we did the road and trail access which is that picture up there. Phase two we've been working on the parking lot lighting and introducing the restroom which is finished. And so right here we're at phase three where if we could move forward in 26 27th fiscal year request we could work on preparing the construction documents and then in the following year we could look to implement these um amenities and with the ability to open it up for an off leash open space trail corridor area. Um I think that's it. I've got three minutes left. Any questions? Quick question then. So that first picture you just showed, I mean obviously you get a little bit of rain that's nothing but mud and yuck.

So what are you proposing for the trail then to kind of accommodate that for year round use? So the this map this this one that picture right there yeah that that just hasn't been developed yet but this would be an asphalt trail around here. But down below where it would be more off leash area. Oh that would be a soft it'd be chat or It's It's a very compact um crushed rocky base. Crushed rock. And it's really But it's softer. Yeah. Yeah. But it it does well. It does well with drainage. It won't be muddy. Yeah. It's it's a good product and um would work well. Yes. I like it.

So I have been a proponent of the trail option. We talked about and I talked about um my only question would be if we're this has been in the works for so many years. Um and if we were to look at moving forward on this and we prepare construction documents, is there any way that we would why would we have to wait until 2027 to actually get started? I mean, I know we have the parks plan already and so would it just be a matter of if we have fees to move this up or like why do we have to wait a whole year? We're we're looking to be able to dip into park impact fees to fund this. We don't have enough to fund whole project in this 26 27 year coming up. So it'll allow us to be able to save up to be able to get

I know I was going to say what if we put in an application are now right. Yeah. This and the reason it's taken a few years is because we've been dependent on that subdivisions for that development areas impact fees independent of the rest of the city. Um if we if you give us the direction to move forward, we can simply or we could put forward an application for grant funds this year. Since it passed, we have a little more wiggle room in that area. Yeah, I I'm in favor of putting in the application. I mean, I I don't know that the full amount would get funded on that, but you know, why not?

Oh, we only have to meet that gap with RAM. We do have park impact fees to to fall back. This is just the whole amount. We have some of it already. Full amount. We have quite a bit. Okay. Yeah, I'm all down for that. And that area is fenced, right? Trail. Yeah, it's it's got big there's a hillside and everything and

but there's fences on the north and south where these residences that have been building they're slowly putting in their fencing and then on the south side it already has existing homes that have a fence for moving ahead.

Yeah. What I'm trying to say is addresses the issues and provides an opportunity for everybody across that spectrum of users to be able to use it. I I think you're seeing all the head nods and also for the application process as well forward. Got it. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Della. Good job in 10 minutes. [laughter] Okay. Um there was three. There was three.

I need a motion to uh adjourn so we can go into a regular schedule meeting. However, there is some additional items that if you guys are willing to uh also propose we come back in for a closed door meeting. So is that are you guys willing to do that? I'm here. Okay, might as well. Okay, I need a motion. Second. Does that qualify for coming back in? Doesn't really need you need to state that. Yeah, just just do it in there. Okay. All right. Okay.

How come I never hear in the dog?

I hear I don't I mean anything I've read nobody says. Okay, I'd like to go ahead and get our Leighton City Council meeting started for November 6th. I appreciate everyone who's here in attendance and I want to acknowledge some uh scouts out there. Thank you very much for attending our meeting. Um, as customary, we like to start all of our uh meetings with a prayer and a pledge. And this month he'll be conducted by council member Thomas. So I'll turn the time over to you

that Thomas or I'll give a prayer then we'll get up and have the pledge of allegiance.

Okay. Our father in heaven, we need grateful to be gathered here as city members, as city councils, as a mayor, for those who need to try and keep order in the city to do things which make things work right. We pray that we may have the wisdom. Pray that we may look at things in the right way, that we may do the things that are helpful for the city. We ask thy blessings that they might be upon us to do this. And this we say in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen.

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. Okay.

Thank you very much, Councilman Thomas. Um, Council, we have uh four sets of minutes that needs to be approved. So, I'd look for a motion. And if you could go ahead and state those unless there are any corrections. No corrections. U Madame Mayor, I'd make a motion that we approve the minutes from Leighton City Council work meeting May 1st, 2025. Leighton City Council work meeting June 5th, 2025. Uh Leighton City Council meeting June 5th, 2025. and the Leighton City Council work meeting June 19th, 2025.

Okay. Is there a second? Okay. It's been moved and second that we adopt the minutes as written. All in favor, please say I.

Any oppose? Okay. Thank you. We'll now move on to our municipal announcements event. So, um I'll turn the time over to the council for any events they might be aware of. Thank you, mayor. Um, parks and recck department has a lot of activities going on. Um, as you know, we're going into the holiday season, so one that's uh a little ways out, but the end of this month, um, November 24th, um, the evening, we will be having the holiday lighting ceremony. So the lights out here in Constitution Circle are always looked forward to by the community and and outside of our community as well. We see a lot of people coming from around the the county and the area. Um that'll happen from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. uh here I believe at Constitution Circle. So it be the large uh

new pavilion.

Pavilion. Thank you. Words are tough sometimes. So again, November 21st or November 24th, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Um this Saturday, uh just a couple days away, November 8th, uh we will be celebrating Veterans Day with our Veterans Day parade and honor ceremony. um starting at 11 11:00 a.m. and with the ceremony around 11 the parade will start at 11:11 a.m. The ceremony at the Vietnam wall will be at 12:30 p.m. So come out and uh you can see the route on the the city's website in in the parks and record department. Um a couple event couple things happening at the her leen heritage museum. Uh first of all on dis or November 12th will be the turkey trot um children or age for ages two to five um with a guardian. I mean don't just drop them off please. Um that'll be again November 12th. $10 per child and be fun uh Thanksgiving activity at the museum. Also happening right now at the museum is a traveling exhibit titled the pen is Mightier writing a revolution. So part of America's 250 celebration coming up next year. Um just showcasing how communication um over 250 years ago helped to um help helped us experience independence as America. So, um, go to the museum that is that exhibit is open now and going through into January. So,

thank you, mayor. Yeah. Thank you. We were fortunate enough that the state recognized that our museum was one that they definitely wanted to um put this exhibit in on behalf of all of Davis County, but then also for the surrounding areas. So, hats off to our our museum curator and the uh commission there. So, did you have some announcements? Okay. I is the 22nd Turkey Day uh bowling. That's this Saturday. Okay. Which we will be bowling. Yeah. Last I checked, but

is there a waiting list? I believe it's all filled. Yeah, I believe that's all filled. So, filled up quick. Okay, go ahead.

Thanks, Mayor. Um, so on behalf of the Leighton Communities that Care, we will have a table booth at the New Ames Night of Hope. New Ames is one of the high schools that's here in Leighton that's housed at the Weber State Davis campus um in the Steuart Center Ballroom on Wednesday, November 19th from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. And this is an event where parents and students are invited to attend a mental health presentation. Um they'll focus on building resilience, fostering hope, and supporting mental health well-being. And so we invite you to come out to New Ames Idaho and visit your Leighton Communities That Care table. Um, also a couple of weeks ago I was at a an event with the Clarefield City Council folks and was handed a flyer that there is a food drive, ongoing food drive for the Hill Air Force Base Airman's Attic. And this is something that um our community is working to help military families who are currently um many of them are working and are not getting paid. And so they are asking for canned and boxed food items, diapers, baby food, formula, and household items. And you can drop any of those items off to Clearfield City Hall from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday or at the True by Hilton, which is just located right outside of the Air Force base. And they are accepting donations at that location 24/7. So, this is just something to help our military um family and friends who are in our area. Um and that's going to support the airman's attic. Thanks, Mayor.

Okay. So in addition to that um as part of uh what council member uh Robert spoke about America 250 uh currently uh at our swimming pool we are exercising an additional food drive [laughter] and it's in acknowledgement of America 250 but more importantly knowing the important needs currently for as stated earlier the military family. So, I mean, you can see that collectively as as cities around here, we do care about those that are serving and and the predicament they're in, and we all want to contribute. But if you uh would like to bring some canned goods or whatever, please bring them to the Leight and Surf and Swim, there is a bin there already for you to drop these items off. And um I personally think that with it being 250, it would be great if we uh collect at least 250 cans a week, if not more. So uh with that, I I encourage all of our residents to help out. And certainly if anybody's in the military that's in those type of situations and can't afford to uh take care of their uh living expenses, meaning the utilities and that this is something that Leighton City has done over the past several years. It isn't new, but certainly let our folks know and we will do what we can to work with you to make sure that we uh you can keep your utilities on. So any other announcements that you guys have? Oh, I don't know. We do need We should have um Yeah, we have one more announcement. Uh what I'd do is encourage anyone who's here at city hall, please read the poster out there as far as our interfaith concert. Uh that's generally the Sunday,

the Sunday before Thanksgiving, which is the 16th. And this year it will be down at the new Western Sports Park in Farmington. So um and it's a free concert and it's put on by the interfaith council that's certainly you know we've got the majority of the folks here within this city that will be performing and for those that attend a lot of the faith-based organizations that we have within our boundaries but u this year the performance will be down there. So, we encourage everyone to attend and um we'll also be doing a special nativity lighting scene the same night as our park. So, we'll work collectively with that. With the changes with the Leighton High School being under construction, you know, they've had to bounce around, but that's where they're at this year. Okay, I think that uh takes care of all of our municipal announcements. I'll now go on to our verbal petitioner presentations. You do not see anything on the agenda. However, I'm going to exercise a um a point of privilege here and acknowledge the fact that um the elections were just this week and while I'm is very excited to be able to continue to serve as a mayor and I want to congratulate uh Council Member Smith Edmonson also on her um winnings there as well, her election. Um but unfortunately we're going to be losing one of our council members and uh we'll do a special presentation as we get closer to the end of uh his term. But I recalled a comment that he had made back when we were having to deal with uh some of the tree removal that had to take place within our city. and he was pretty emotional about a tree that he had to remove in his yard that was a

descendant from your grand great-grandfather, the um walnut tree. Is that correct, Tyson? Okay. So, Tyson, I remembered that. And being that I have one of I live in one of the historical homes that is part of that whole descendant. I have a black walnut tree that is very old and I'm sure it was probably most likely older than yours. So, I want you to know I took the nuts, I planted the tree. We are now into the fall. This is the beginning of that tree. So, you now have a new tree to plant in your yard that is a representation of that. And I felt like I needed to give it to you now because otherwise it would look like a toothpick because just today all of these leaves fell off. Fell off. So I want to um basically pass this on to Tyson so that he can plant it in his yard.

Thank you, mayor. Didn't plan on getting emotional for a [laughter] couple more weeks, but wow, that's incredible. Thank you. Means a lot. At least you don't need a tractor. [laughter]

Well, and I was surprised that I actually was able to nurture it and have that grow that from a from a nut from that tree. So, anyway, okay, we'll go ahead and go on to our citizens comment portion of our meeting. This is the time that we'll turn it over to anyone who would like to address this governing body. So, if you'd like to, please come up to the podium here and state your name and uh just what city you're from and then uh go ahead and let us know what you're thinking. It's like I never leave. I would have loved to have been in the work meeting today, but I was down at the Department of Let's [snorts] see, Utah Department of Natural Resources for that House Bill 48 meeting, which may the odds be in your favor. I don't think Leighton's going to have to deal with that too much. But, uh, that being said, it sounds like dog parks were on the agenda, which is why I would love to have been there. Um, but it also sounds like maybe we're making a few steps in the right direction. So, I'm just going to stand here and say thank you. Congratulations, Betina. I voted for you. Congratulations, Joy. I voted for you.

And I'm just thankful. I'm thankful for everybody that's on the city council that puts in the hours because again, I've said this time and time again, I know it's a thankless job and often all you hear is the negative. So, I'm thankful for the work that you put in and I'm incredibly thankful for the steps we're taking forward on a potential dog park. So, we appreciate you guys. Okay. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry, but we didn't catch your name even though you've been here many times. I need you to state it in your city. Yes, ma'am. Jennifer Bazano Leon.

Okay. Thank you, Jennifer. Okay. Is there anyone else? I I did get to attend the work meeting and first of all I was overwhelmed with everything you guys have to deal with and how hard you worked for us in that. So it would be really good for people to come to those work meetings because it it did make me appreciate everything you guys do and congratulations and congratulations. I did vote for both of you as well. Um, thank you.

It was really exciting to see what you said about the dog park being the largest city in Leighton. It's It'd be nice to be able to not have to leave the city to take my dog to the dog park and what you're proposing is beautiful and I really appreciate the work you guys have put into it. So, thanks. Okay. Thank you. What was your name? I'm Terry Stevens and I live in Leighton.

Thank you, Terry. Okay. Anyone else? Okay. Seeing that there's no other comments, then I'd like to go on to our consent items tonight. We have three items that are on the agenda. And as I always state, uh we do not need to vote on them independently, but we can uh vote on them collectively. So, with that, I'll go ahead and turn the time over to Steve Jackson to um deal with item number A. Mayor, council, it's good to be with you tonight. Uh for your consideration is amendment number one of the interlocal cooperation agreement between Leighton City and Davis County for transportation project reimbursement. This project is for a traffic signal at Main Street at Front Runner Station. Uh we've been working on that for quite a while. As you see the new development that's taking place at Leighton station. Um and then also Joel and in the parks department are working on a pedestrian overpass over the railroad tracks to the west. Um we've we've reached the end of the the timeline on that agreement and Davis County has graciously allowed us to extend that until um March or excuse me June 30th of 2026. We anticipate it won't take that long to get this put in, but um just wanted to formalize that in a in in this amendment to that agreement. So, uh staff recommends that council adopt resolution 25-50 and authorize the mayor to execute this amendment to the agreement. Uh is there any questions I can answer for anybody?

Any questions, council? I I will note all of the underground improvements are in. It literally is just standing up the traffic signal as soon as we get authorization from UD do and putting power to it. So it's almost there. Yeah. No, I think that development's turned out very nicely for um that area. You have a question? Yeah. Thank you, Mayor Steve. Will there be any special arrangement for pedestrians there? It's not that's going to be part of the trail system or just a normal crosswalk.

It'll be a full crosswalk, but but yeah, we're we're working with Joe Ellen and and as soon as that pedestrian overpass goes in, we'll we'll make sure we're evaluating those signal timings to make sure pedestrians have adequate time to get across and but it'll just be a Yeah, it'll be a regular cross signal. All four intersection or or four legs of the intersection will have crosswalks at them. Thank you. Yeah. Good question. Okay, any other questions? Okay, let's go ahead and move on then to item number B, which Mr. Jackson will go ahead and present that item as well.

Yes, thank you uh for your consideration. Uh resolution 25-51 is a bid award to insitu form technologies. We uh do business with them as twin. Um they storm drain te cleaning and televising project that we have. Um in the the map here, it's the area west of Main Street, north of uh Gordon Avenue, uh areas 49 and 51 in the city. Um it it the project includes televising and cleaning the storm drain lines from anywhere from 12 in to 48 in in diameter. Um with a the contract for this 2526 fiscal year uh with possible one-year extensions based on performance. Um, we received three bids with Twin submitting the lowest responsive responsible bid in the amount of $153,174.88 with an engineer's estimate of 156,886 or $86622. Um staff recommends the council adopt resolution 2551 and award the bid to twin authorizing the city manager to execute the agreement for the storm drain televising and cleaning project 2520. Any questions I can answer on that?

Any questions? Yes. Um I don't I just have one question maybe it's about process. Could you lay out briefly for us and also for the audience um what the process is for getting bids in the city with different projects specifically like this one?

Yeah. So we actually use a a website called Quest CDN. Uh staff in the engineering department um prepares the bid documents for that. They prepare the maps. This is just one map in that document. Um once the bid documents and the maps prepared after the the budget has been approved, then we post that to the website. Um any contractors that would like to bid have access to the the information. It's posted to the city's website and the Quest CDN. Um we give them a certain amount of time. It's very clear in the document and and then on the website how they enter those bids. Um we have an electronic bidding process in engineering where we then open the bids electronically. a click of a button and it shows the bids. Then we read them aloud over a Zoom meeting so that we don't make everybody come in from wherever they are. We actually had some out ofstate bids this time. Um and then at that point we we process the paperwork, bring it to you as the council to award and and approve. So

yeah. Okay. Any other questions?

Okay. Thank you, Steve. We appreciate that. Let's go ahead and move on to item number C and Western Appalon will be presenting this item to us which is an amendment plat amended. Thank you mayor and councel. Uh before you tonight is the Tagert subdivision first amendment plat. Uh it is located [clears throat] um in a in an area that's surrounded by um R18 single family and RM1 which is low medium residential. Uh the property uh just the the quick and dirty of it. This red section here you can you can see the fence line of the property. This is what we're doing. The property line is really just a uh the adjustment here is adjusting to where the fence is basically functioning how the property is already being used. Um on October 14th, the planning commission voted unanimously to recommend the city council approve the Tagert subdivision first amendment subject to meeting all city requirements as outlined in staff memorandum. Staff supports the recommendation of the planning commission. Be happy to answer any questions you have on this. The only question I have is knowing how close that roof line is to the boundary. Hopefully it does meet our setbacks.

It does meet our setbacks. Okay. Any questions, council? So, quick and easy. Thank you. Okay, council. That then brings uh that was our last item on our consent item. So, it brings it back to you for action. if you could uh state the resolution number or um the what am I trying to say what the information is item number C state that one out Madame Mayor I move that we approve resolution 25-50 u resolution 25-51 and the amended plat for the Tagert subdivision first amended

okay it's been moved and second all in favor say I any oppose okay thank you very much. That concludes our consent items. We'll now move on to item number six, which is our public hearing. We have one item on the agenda at this time. So, what we'll do is have once again Mr. Appaloney present this item to us and then we'll uh bring it back to the council.

Thank you again, Mayor. Um during the 2025 Utah legislative session session, Senate Bill 104 was passed which amended the Municipal Land Use Development and Management Act, which is often referred to as LUMMA. Uh this is the state's land use guidelines and requirements. What it did is revise terminology and processes for uh modifying property line boundaries and and lot line adjustments. Um, our processes don't change based on what the state is asking us to do, just terminology changes. I'll go through those changes. And then as a part of this amendment, staff is making a recommendation for a minor change as well. Um, the state is requesting three specific functions, three specific um terms to be used. One is a boundary establishment. This is used when a boundary line adjoins a property and is ambiguous or uncertain. There potentially could be a dispute on the property line. This is to be worked out through uh the property owners and then recorded at the county. The city already addresses it and handles it this way. There's the simple boundary adjustments. This is used in either a subdivision or outside a subdivision where there are not public utility easements that are um that need to be vacated. Uh this is reviewed and approved administ administratively. So they'd still have to submit um an application. Um city staff would review it, make sure it does meet setbacks and any other standards that are required for it to meet and then it could get recorded at the county. And then there's the full boundary adjustments. This is what we just reviewed just a couple minutes ago. It's an administrative process. When a full boundary comes through, the city requires it to be a plat amendment. that plat amendment vacates uh any existing utility easements and then reestablishes them with the plat.

Um and then as uh as well a part of this um with the two motions that's that are tied to this uh the second motion will be to uh remove the engineering and development guideline standards that are also regulating lot line adjustments which because they will all be in the municipal code instead. What you see here in front of you is uh the table that uh in our municipal code that outlines the reviewing body and the land use authority for these specific categories. Uh one of the things that we identified as we were going through this is that vacating of plats and amending a plat is really the same process and kind of a hybrid process between the preliminary and the final plat process. When we when we go through a preliminary plat, we are establishing property lines and establishing public utility easements and we when we vacate and amend the plat, we're doing the same process. And so the intent here is to match that procedure and it's an administrative process. And so although that hand was or that was reviewed in the the planning commission to begin with, staff's recommending that that goes back to the planning commission and that the city council doesn't have to review that. Um be happy to answer any questions you may have. Okay. Oh, actually let me let me just say it and I apologize for not saying this. Um, this was reviewed uh by the planning commission. They do not review the engineering standards and so they just reviewed the um um motion on um section 1801 070 um and 1804 1804 010 and 1832 which is the municipal code section. Um and they recommended unanimously to approve this. Uh, and then again, the engineering section is is reviewed and approved by the council. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Weston. Council, do you have any questions before we open it up for public comment? If not, I do need a motion to open up the public comment.

I guess I make a motion we open that up to public comment. Okay. Do we have to

just wave goodbye? Okay. So, if there's anyone that wishes to come up and address us uh regarding the uh amendment that was uh presented to us and the change there on how the what the process is, please uh once again come up to the mic, state your name, what city you're from, and then uh express your opinion here. Okay. Being that there's none, I'll go ahead and bring it back to the council. Council, do you have any further discussion on this or questions? If so, uh, please address it now. Otherwise, I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing and take action on item number A of our public hearing.

It's a doozy. It's a long one. Yeah. [laughter] Madame Mayor, I move that we close the public hearing and we approve ordinances 25-22 and 25-23. Excellent. [laughter] That was an excellent way to do that. Okay, it's been moved and second. Uh, I'll now go ahead and take a vote on this. Uh, let's go ahead and st start down here with Council Member Roberts. Yes. Council member Bloxom. Yes. Council member Morris. I. Council member Smith Edmonson. I and council member Thomas I

Okay, there you have it. It passes unanimously and that is the last item on our agenda for this evening. However, we do have one of two items that we do need to go back into a closed dooror meeting for. So, I would entertain a motion to adjourn our regular scheduled council meeting and go into a quick closed door meeting. I move we adjourn this meeting to go into a closed meeting. Okay. Thank you. I'll acknowledge that. I want to thank everyone for being here tonight and um I hope you have a a safe there. Yeah, that was at the beginning of the meeting. Okay. [laughter]

You're welcome to come back next time in two weeks. Okay. Yeah. Okay. And with that, I just once again want to encourage everyone to come out this Saturday to support our veterans and acknowledge uh our Veterans Day parade at 1111 with the program at 11:30 or 12:30 at the wall. So, thank you, mayor. Just real quick, a motion been moved in second. All in favor say I. Any oppose? Thank you for the correction. Okay. Thank you.