City Council - Regular Meeting

Everybody, my voice is a little dead today. So I do apologize, but we welcome all that are here. We have a full council today. Councilwoman Newell, Councilwoman Harrison, Councilman Harrison, Councilwoman Freeman, myself, Councilman Stallings, and Councilwoman Lockhart. So welcome. We welcome also all of our staff who's here with us today, and we're glad to I've asked Councilman Harrison if he'll open the meeting with a prayer.

Our dear father in heaven, we are so grateful to be gathered together to determine what's best for the city and to hear ideas and collaborate and and work together. We are grateful for all that you've provided this great city. We're grateful for our fire department, police department, all those that are in harm's way, and we ask for thy special blessing upon them and their families. We ask that thy spirit may be with us that we may be guided to do what's best for the city and and be accountable to our residents and we say this in name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Amen. Thank

you Councilman Harris. Everything's presented in front of you. You should have an agenda. We'll start with that. Let me remind the audience that today is a work session until our general session tonight at seven, so there won't be any public comment during this portion of our meeting. So we'll start with 2.1, the Park Tax Recipient Report from the Harrington Center for the Arts. Are they here? Awesome. Come to the podium, tell us who you are, and give us a report.

What do I need to do to get on here? Hello, mayor and city council. Thank you for this opportunity to report on our park tax grant. I'm just gonna get this screenplay technology going?

Okay. We'll go to 2.2, the noise ordinance review. Kim, I think you've got some stuff on that.

And by the way, I think Craig is online from our legal department. He's helped work on this as well. So let's see. Okay. Just a little bit of background.

So for two of you, this is just going to be a review. We so last year think about mid year we brought a draft through we received some input and then we came back anyways and I think it was in December the last time we presented some draft changes. And at that point, it was the last meeting with quite a few of the old council members. And they just said, let's bring all this back when we have the new council and we'll just kind of run back through this so I'll I'll just kind of walk you through the the current ordinance with and then just show you kind of highlight what changes have been proposed in the the draft that we have right now. And then we're this is really for you to tell us, like, hey, we're on the right track or no, we want something totally different or make some tweaks, whatever you'd like to do.

So and like I said, Craig's online. He's helped do some research. And I know Ryan's spent some time kinda looking at it as well. So between the three of us, hopefully, we can answer any questions that you have. So, yeah, if we can go back to the screen.

Okay. So, yeah, in this first section with the findings, it's really just explaining why do we want to control noise and, you know, there's obviously some harmful effects that noise can have, especially in the middle of the night or if it's super loud, whatever that might be, actual physical harm, if you're inside a building and the decibel levels go over a certain level. So this findings is really just kind of the why behind the ordinance. But in this first section, we do propose and it's in a couple of other sections, you'll see we're changing an offense. Like if somebody is what am I trying to say?

Somebody breaks the law for our noise ordinance, instead of a class B misdemeanor, we're proposing to change it to a class C. And the different there's pretty you know, class B is a very serious offense. It's jail time up to a thousand dollar fine. It just seems really heavy handed for somebody making too much noise. So class c still, you know, it's not nothing, but it's it's probably fits more to what we felt like for the offense.

Oops. Let me go back here. And then, you know, the next section is that it starts to describe, well, what kind of noises are we talking about? And it categorizes three different types of noises. And I don't really wanna if you've read this or you can read this, I don't think we need to spend time going into the different types of noises.

But yes, some of them are just commerce normal, like somebody's putting a roof on their house. And then there's noises that are caused by machinery or business. And then there's intentionally caused noises that people are doing maybe to annoy people or just ignoring. It's after the quiet hours, which we'll get to in a second here. So again, that one has the class c instead of class b misdemeanor in it.

Okay. And then the intent, again, just kind of talks about our intent with the noise ordinance, and we're trying to take into account the latest scientific advances, which we'll talk about with the measuring device in a second here. So then probably the first kind of review or the next revision after the class b to c is the hours. And we talked about this was just from our last meeting in December. 6AM seemed a little bit early to for people to be able to start exceeding certain decibels of noise.

And we did some research. We looked into quite a few other cities, and it seemed like seven was definitely the predominant start time. There were other cities that had 6AM, but they were more of the anomalies. So we felt like seven would probably be a better start time. Now, one of the things that we talked about and we could still do this is maybe we have summer versus fall and winter distinguish because during summer you may have the example of the roofing crews, they want to start early to avoid the heat.

Is 6AM acceptable in the summer when, you know, kids aren't in school or what? Yeah, I don't know. There may be different reasons and we could do that. We could say, you know, from June 1 to August 31, it's a you know, 6AM is our when the quiet hour stops. So, yeah, like I said, just let me know if if as we go through this, if you feel strongly about any of this or you want us to do more research, we're happy to do that.

Okay. And then it's mentioned again just how we define night and day and what hours that means. The limitation of peak intensity sounds. So this is where we get into we want to make sure that how we measure the sound is being done with the latest industry accepted standards as far as instruments go. I think Council Member Newell provided some input on some of these, which we think would be great if you want to incorporate that.

But yeah, instead of it used to talk about microphones and things like that. So we're just saying the sound level meter shall be a type one or a type two instrument, which has some meaning in the sound science world that we we would have to make sure, you know, if we buy something to measure sound with, we'd make sure it meets those ANSI standards. American yeah. Those are the formal standards that people have for those noise instruments. Let's see.

And then we get into, you know, how do we measure the noise? Where do we place the device? And so this section and who is gonna be doing the measuring? So I think maybe that number one is got some newer language. The designated individual shall either be a peace officer from the police department or our code enforcement officer, which, by the way, just a quick update, we're actually doing interviews this Thursday for that position. So we're grateful that position is funded and we're moving forward. So we should have our code enforcement officer on board in the next thirty days depending on how the hiring process goes.

And Kim, can you what department in the city will that be part of yours?

Community development. Yep. Yep. I know there's some discussion. It probably could fit under either police or community development.

We've taken the direction to put it under community development. Yep. They'll obviously coordinate very closely with legal parks. We our vision of that would be that we still would have kind of a a committee of sorts but the person we hire would be the central, you know, person that manages and keeps track of all of the cases. And then as they need input from if it's something that they need help with the police, which we definitely a lot of the applicants, by the way, are retired police officers, which we're debate the pros and cons of each of the applicant's qualifications.

But whoever we hire, if they don't have a police background, or even if they do, if there's ever a time that they feel like they might be in harm's way or you know, somebody's really angry and they don't want to go knock on their door, we're going to get the police involved and send send the police out. So, and these noise complaints probably would be one of those when you go, you know, at midnight or 1AM.

Mister mayor, if I may. Kim, what like how where are they driving their lawful authority if they're not from the police department?

I think just by city statute. I'll let Ryan.

They wouldn't issue a citation.

Okay.

So. So, yeah, when it comes to an actual citation that needs to be issued, it would have to be law enforcement.

Yeah. Yeah and I think that would be appropriate.

I guess they do the investigation. The leg work and that's one of the things we're going to be at too is can they document very well, you know, what everything that they've done so that when it if it does go to a citation, we have everything. They don't have to redo what this person's already done. Okay. So it talks about the placement of the meter, talks about how far away from walls and buildings and things like that because noise, you know, has very interesting properties just like water or anything.

It can bounce around and amplify and reflect off other objects and things like that. So this is just trying to be fair and consistent on where we would allow a noise measurement to be taken from. And then two, we've added a statement that you said that you said. I wanna make sure it's And then let's see as we go down here. Let's see.

Yeah. So so if we do go into a building, and this would be say you have a dance going on or something, even high school dance and the the volume's too loud, this talks about how we would measure it inside. And then we've talked a lot about four. We wanted to make sure if so if a a noise source is identifiable identifiable particular location and it can be measured from either like say it's coming from a source and you can measure it. There's commercial property and residential.

Well, we're gonna take the most restrictive. So they if they're violating violating the the residential residential noise limit, we would cite them or we yeah. They would be asked to stop the noise source. Five, we talked about in December. I think the previous draft on five, we had it, like, three minutes is how long the noise had to be going like, continuous noise.

We had to measure it for quite a long period before it would be constituted a valid measure. We'd shorten that to thirty seconds. I'd looked at some other cities, and and three minutes seemed really long. So we're proposing thirty seconds. Again, that could change if you feel like that's too short. Let's see. And then as we get into the rest of this, there's several tables that this is where we actually list, you know, if you're in this type zoning, this is your maximum noise during the day. This is your maximum noise during the night. And we're just making some changes to that. We don't have an industrial zone anymore.

We used to. But now we do still have light industrial and then we have other commercial zones and then you've got your residential agricultural. So we're just trying to clean that up and match our current zones. Let's see. So it does allow as we get towards the end of the ordinance.

It does allow us to make exemptions and we we need to do that for, you know, if we have a firework display on July 4, things like that or and and then this does talk about sports events, other things. It didn't really specify who granted the exemption. So this now, if if Jason's comfortable, he would be it would be the city administrator order. You know, I'm sure anybody else that you wanted to designate Or if you wanted to keep it in your hands, we could have it come. But sometimes it takes more time to go through that process.

So let's see. And then these are kind of a list of what noises are considered exempt. And, obviously, emergency vehicles, when they go out on their calls in the middle of the night, we we don't want them to not be able to use their lights and sirens. But we also added just roadway noise other than if somebody has an improperly muffled engine, like if they're street racing or whatever, that could still be cited. And then we also added, yeah, if there's any other state or federal preemptions such as when the front runner had to start using their horns because of the quiet zone.

There were a couple of intersections that fell out of compliance after they made some updates. And then, yeah, I guess under that b, that's where we cover athletic social events so that it because you may have, you know, I don't know, private private sports clubs that need an exemption. And then let's see. Responsibility for violations. So who do we actually cite?

You know, if it's on a property that somebody's leasing and they're making the noise, do we cite the owner of the property? Do we cite the person making the noise? And this tries to define, and it's really could be any of the you know, anyone who's associated with that noise could be in violation. If I oh, yeah.

Is is it one or the other, or is it an and or?

Let's see. I'm trying to remember. The following persons or entities may be held responsible. I think under

It's an and. And or. We can charge all involved.

There you go. Yeah. I guess that very last sentence, responsibility may be assigned to one or more of the above parties jointly or individually. Okay. Let's see. Here's our class c misdemeanor again. And I think that's the end of the ordinance. Yeah. We like I said, we've done quite a bit of research, but we're happy to you know, if you think there needs to be more or we looked originally at Provo Cities. They just revamped theirs last year, and theirs was a little unique because they have BYU and they have I don't know.

There's certain things that are unique to their city, but they actually simplified a lot of their tables. Their old ordinance was actually almost identical to ours. But anyways, we I think we've taken more of a I guess a gentle approach that, hey, maybe we just make some of these low hanging fruit updates. We can always come back. We we can see how this goes, see how, you know, as we now have the code enforcement officer.

But if there's something that we start to see this really still isn't clear or this is overkill or under, you know, under doing it. We can come back or make more amendments. So, anyways, that really is all we wanted to do is just show you what we have and I think the, like I said, the previous council wanted to make sure that you had a chance to review it. If you're comfortable, we would schedule it for action. Just put it on the next, you know, the twenty seventh or we could put it on February 's take your lead. I'll make a comment.

Is that okay? Yeah. I think we should keep a consistent time. I think 7AM seems reasonable to me. Okay. I don't think we need roofers or anyone starting before 7AM. They can get their equipment for them. They can arrive at the site. But Yeah. Personally, I mean, I've had roofers next door to me, and I think seven was a good time for them. So Yeah. It's close to home.

Yeah. Mister Maycon, that's a question. That was my question too with did you find in other cities that were doing summer hours? Or was it most cities were consistently seven for the ones that you found?

Oh, Craig? Yes. Yeah. Vineyard actually has an exception to the hours on the months of July and August. They exempt the hours just based on heat. So there are cities that do or have winter and summer changing, but most of them are pretty consistent.

Okay. And then this other question I had with the time where you dropped out to thirty seconds, were you able to find other cities that had listed the amount of time they measure for? Or was that?

So it's interesting. So for continuous noise, that's anywhere from thirty seconds to ten minutes. For intermittent noises, that's all over the board as well. Where we're kind of mixing them together, that's why we had the thirty seconds. Again, that can that varies widely between different cities.

Continuous, some cities have as much as ten minutes, of a continuous sound, but that's you know, it all depends on that. So really, it's where where you want to go with that just because there's there's differing between each of the cities.

Yeah. I mean, just logically, it sounds more on track to have the thirty seconds. I just wondering what kind of consistency you found. It it did seem like three minutes was a long period of time to try and get that measurement. So Yeah.

And again, like I mentioned before, sorry, I apologize.

No. You're good, Craig. Go ahead.

Like I mentioned before, in the, you know, almost nine, ten years that I've been here, really the only noise cases that have made it all the way to court have been dog barking cases that have been prosecuted under the nuisance ordinance. The biggest thing we're looking for is compliance over conviction on these is to make it so people know that there's relief if someone next to them is violating the law.

Yeah.

No. I I appreciate these these changes. I think 7AM makes sense. I try to think of it as a parent. If I had a small baby sleeping, I don't think 6AM is reasonable. I think 7AM is a little better. And I think I heard Provo has, I think, three or four civilian code enforcement officers. So I know this is new for Lehigh City. I think the police department won't complain too much about offloading the code enforcement responsibilities. But if you have a relationship with their department that runs code enforcement I'd be interested to hear kind of their strategies.

The one most difficult part about this is enforcement right especially if you have a noise at 1AM and it's loud, right? It lasts for two seconds and maybe a couple minutes later it's loud again. The whole neighborhood's up. But how do you prove the noise happened? I was thinking through this a little bit.

Is there I guess a legal way and maybe this is for Craig and Ryan. If you know obviously nobody nobody has noise detectors outside their home to detect noise. But if you have complaints from maybe two or three people in a certain area that says, hey, this has happened. We can't prove it, but we all woke up at the same time. How would we go about enforcing that? Or would that pass that threshold of So

I've seen that before and typically, like I said, that mainly deals with dogs barking or mufflers or those types of things. And typically we can go after those types of incidents through our nuisance code. So if there's a a certain number of incidents and those types of things, and then they can those individuals, if they're charged with a nuisance, would come into and testify in front of the judge. And then, you know, as long as it met the elements of our nuisance code, which we've we've done that before on these ones where you can't get the measurement because of the time and those types of things. So I think we have our nuisance code that can handle a lot of these issues, but the sound ordinance also gathers in the things that are that are outside the nuisance code as well.

There is some overlap, but I think with both of these codes, we would be in a better position to enforce those noises and and show our citizens that, hey, we're trying to make a proactive, you know, choice to make it so all citizens can can enjoy some quiet during the nighttime hours.

Yeah. No, I I appreciate that. Let's see. I had one more question but I forgot. So, I'll turn it over.

What is the city currently using to measure noise? Since you're talking about a type one or type two device, do we have something that we're using?

I'll let Craig jump in,

but it's like a chief system. Yeah. Low technology Rudimentary. Meter.

Yeah. When you can even download an app on your phone, and I think that's what sometimes they've just to kinda get a at least a rough ballpark of, you know, is this 85 decibels or is it a 100? But we plan to buy one. And I think was it Bo that was looking into purchasing?

He did buy one.

Oh, okay.

Oh. He knows more about it.

Yeah. So, we we currently have a type two device that we've that we've purchased. We haven't deployed it because this code came out. And after talking with the police department, they feel like if we're gonna be taking these if if one of these cases goes to the legal route that they felt like they probably needed the best, you know, one of a type one type device. So that device hasn't been deployed. But we have it. We played with it. Trying to figure it out. So we we will be in the in the process of of looking at purchase of type one. So.

Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Looks like the type two are for screening more and type two. Type one are for like, yeah, if you're going to court.

Yeah. Good job.

Thanks. So, Bo, sorry. Yeah. Go back to Rachel. She's not done. But is this what we discussed that you would purchase already or is this something new you put?

Yeah. So we I mean, it was a it was a $500 device. So it wasn't

The type two one?

The type two one

was. Okay.

And and really it was before this code came out that said we needed a type one or type two. So we didn't really know what we were looking for. I talked with the old council and they they asked us to to look at purchasing a device. So we went ahead and purchased one. But then after talking with the police department and this code, the this part of the code came out, we we decided we probably should have a type one device.

Okay. What's the price tag for that?

Yeah. Anywhere from 4,000 to $10,000.

Okay.

And legal feels that that's what's needed if it is taken to court?

So I haven't talked with legal yet. I we just met last week with the police department. That was their filling. And chief can speak to that if he would like but I think I'm kinda summing up our conversation. So we'll do whatever you guys tell us to do. Regardless, we have to buy a calibrator for our type two if we don't. But they just felt like if we're going to be you know if any of these went the legal route that we probably should have a type one device.

You. Mister mayor, I'm sorry. Did you have something?

Yeah. It's actually for Kim. Thank you. Just on time of day and this code enforcer from the planning department will they be working in the evening and into the middle of the night or will they only be enforcing code from eight to five?

Yeah our expectation is they would just work normal daytime hours. But I think if we had a noise issue that was you know, came up frequently, we might have them say, oh, you know, take the morning off and you're gonna be checking this out at night. But I would think the police would be the primary responders, you know, especially if it's just like, you know, random somebody's playing their stereo too loud at 1AM. It's gonna be the police that go out.

Yeah. I I'm just very concerned for this person's safety. I want to make sure they're working with the police department and that they don't enter any situation that would make that cause harm for them or. Yes. Anything like that.

I agree. Yep. 100%.

You have a comment? Can I just? Yes, please.

Thank you. So the strategy we discussed with the city was that our officers that are working the night shift would have the measuring device at their disposal. So they would take it, respond to the area, get a measurement, and then using a type III that's calibrated regularly would allow us to take enforcement action immediately. And while we're talking code in general, I would say that any time we're going to take enforcement action, we we have officers assigned a code. We would prefer to have officers there while enforcement's being made.

Whether it's a civilian making contact for an officer. Our role would be to keep the peace and make sure that it runs smoothly without putting anybody into any any type of harm. So, thank

you.

Thank you.

Mister mayor, if I may. I I think you know, most of these code enforcements are going to be happening during the day. It'll have to do with you know overhanging trees or bushes and I think sometimes an armed police officer I've heard anecdotes from our from our officers where it actually escalates when they see an armed police officer coming It to their kind of raises other safety issues too. So I think it's good that Emily raised that and I think we can find some good balance. I remember the couple questions I had.

The decibel standards, can you explain are those the same as they've always been? Where do they come from? And then also one issue I think for measuring, I think if you, you know, I'm in the second story of my house and I hear a noise coming from across the neighborhood it'll be louder than if I'm standing at the front door of my house right so I think if we can add just a little bit of language in trying to get the measuring device as close to where the sound has been heard. As in most people sleep, you know, if in a two story house, many bedrooms are on the second story. I think you're going to get a different measurement compared to a ground level with a fence and cars and other things in between the noise and the ears of the people hearing it.

Yeah. Yeah. And that is covered here unless you want to make some changes. But it does talk about it could be placed at any point on the property line or any point 50 feet from the noise source. So yeah. And I guess in so in your example, in the backyard, you could place the noise meter on your back near your back fence so that it may you make sure you know because yeah your house would act as a natural sound barrier.

Yeah it's more of an elevation issue right? Oh yeah. So if it's a you know two feet above the ground versus 15 or 20 feet above the ground it's it's more of a direct line to sounds you may hear.

Yeah. Yeah. And this does say it has to be at least five feet from any wall and not less than three feet above the ground. So

So nothing in there would stop law enforcement or whoever was or the code enforcement officer from measuring it from your your window, or from the 2nd Story of your home.

Yeah. Because it would be at least three feet above. Yeah.

Okay. And then the the decibel question, if you could.

Yeah. These decibel setting limits have been in here for a long time. You know, goes back quite a way.

And and yeah. It's my understanding in looking at all the other coasts from the other cities that these are the state of Utah. Great. Thank you.

Councilwoman Stallings.

Thank you. So, we've been through this for a long time now. We originally, you know, you looked at Provo and what the updates they made and they simplified their their noise ordinance and originally that's our first draft or to first attempt at that was similar so I would love for the rest of the council to see that original draft not saying I think maybe a mesh of the two would be good but it it certainly simplified things

these tables are probably the biggest difference.

Yeah. Yeah. And then don't have to wonder what kind of noise it is and what definition it fits into. But it did have in there, you talked about who grants the exemptions. And in that original draft, it was the mayor, the mayor's designee.

And I feel more comfortable with that if legislative, elected body votes for a code or an ordinance. I think it should be an elected individual who grants exemptions for that. So again, think looking at both those drafts and finding what's good in both of them and putting it together might be a good way to go. See, appreciate the chief explaining how it would be enforced, and that's I did ask a police officer about how they enforce it. They usually just use their phone.

And that seems to be good enough to just kind of get a reading. Okay. Yeah. It's bad. Maybe go talk to the neighbor, turn down the radio, or whatever. So that this code won't prevent that from happening, correct? It's mostly we need the device if it goes to court kind of thing. Okay.

That's if we want to charge under this code, we still have the city nuisance code that we can use as well.

Okay. Yeah. And going back with the original draft, it did have and I think our current code has this where it the sound level measurements are preferred preferred but not necessarily required. So again, I get that you want the black and white readings if you're going to take this to court you know, for a violation. But I just don't want that to prevent an officer from just saying, hey, these levels look pretty high.

Can you just, you know, keep it down or whatever? So that that's kind of my concern. I just yeah. I let's see. Got more questions. It's taking out. And then I think James brought up a good point, though, where the measurement is being taken from. I think it should be from the receiving location and 50 feet from the noise source. I mean, if it travels pretty far, I I just don't want either or in there. I would like it taken from where the complaint complaint is coming from. Does that make sense?

Mhmm. Council member or mister help me understand that because that could get really dicey. If if we're met hearing noises miles away, am I misunderstanding what you're saying? I just I'm hoping for clarity.

No. It it actually protects the the person emitting the noise

better. Yeah. Help me understand.

Because as far well, what don't you understand?

Just based on what you said, I'm thinking I could be three miles away or three feet away, and I'm just trying to understand how we would record this.

Because if you're closer to the noise source, the louder would be. So if you take it from where the complaint is coming from, then you're getting an accurate reading of if it's truly a nuisance or not from that point.

Okay. Thank you.

Let me see my notes. No. Yeah. I think that's all I do agree 7AM and is a grid time and also not to change it based on winter or summer. Appreciate that. That's it.

Thank you. Councilwoman Freeman.

Yeah, can we look at five three five, please?

Yeah.

And is there you know, know we're talking about a misdemeanor here. Is there like a warning clause or anything like if someone, you know, this is this one time thing? Like, how is this?

So, we don't usually build those in because that's kind of officer discretion.

Okay.

But yeah, I mean the approach of the city so far not just on noise ordinance but really any code enforcement has been to try to get voluntary compliance and only if somebody's resistant to that do we go to a citation. So I would assume that would be the same approach. Because a lot of people it's really an issue of education at first. Most people once they know, most reasonable people, once they know what the code is like, oh, yeah, I'm sorry. I'll move my car or I'll be quiet or something like that. It's only the few that are resistant to that that we have to kind of go through the criminal process.

Okay. I just don't know if we had to write in like a three strike thing or something.

I mean, you could but yeah, we don't have that in there for now.

Mister mayor, I'm sorry. One more comment.

You done?

Well, yeah. She can ask it. It's right here at five three five. Yeah. I want to look over at some point but.

Go ahead, Councilman Stallings.

Yeah, I changing the the violation. I I'm okay leaving in class B not you know, with understanding we want to educate more than we wanna you know, what did they say? Compliance over conviction. I agree with that for sure. But I I just know that in other places in our municipal code, even animal control, some of those violations are still class b, and, you know, it it seems consistent with what I'm seeing in the code.

So I I just don't want this to become like a shrug, like, yeah, I'll pay the fine or whatever. I I do want some teeth to it. But I prefer not to have to go that route. And that's my understanding is what we do.

Okay. So I'm just reading over this. The designated individual responsible for measuring noise. Okay. We talked about microphone may be placed at any point on the property line or at any point 50 feet from the noise source. And at least five feet from any wall, three feet above the ground. Okay. Yeah. And just comparing it to other noise ordinances, it seems like this one is pretty good, generous. I mean, 85 decibels is pretty loud. 50 feet is pretty far. So I'm fine with using this as a starting point for noise ordinance for now.

Mr. Mayor for I'm not sure how many edits we want to this I'm just thinking about when we can put it on the agenda for action. Do we have enough edits? Maybe Kim to bring it again before we vote or how how do you suggest?

Yeah. Yeah. I I could go either way. From what I'm hearing tonight, it's pretty, you know, we're we're talking maybe 10% variance from what we already have. So if generally, you like most of what's in here. And, you know, I guess the class B versus C would be a a great, you know, I don't know, you know, that's how council member Stallings feels but I don't we might just have to put it in one way or the other and then when you vote, you'd have to if you don't like what's in the draft, you could just say, you know, either not vote for the motion to approve or make a motion but change that.

I don't know. No, that that's that's just what I was going to mention is that it's diff are you comfortable with us putting everybody's individual edits in the draft? Do you want a consensus on which edits should come before you for a final draft? That's the kind of direction that's really helpful just so we don't necessarily do this again. But if all five of you are comfortable with each of your individual input being put in the ordinance, then we can draft it way and then we'll see how it comes out when it comes back on the action agenda.

Kim, can you summarize our all our points?

See what

you remember? Yeah,

I I'll probably go back and listen to the minutes but the misdemeanor is definitely you know, that's at least I've heard from one that different than what's in here. I think the 7AM, everybody's good. We don't wanna do anything different. We don't want different summer hours. And then I did I you know, you probably saw in the draft here, I put I think that's probably a good change to just say, obtain from the city administrator. Oh, I guess I need to change that one. I'll I'll change that to the mayor or his designee. So he could just say, hey, Jason. I'm comfortable with you doing these unless you have any questions. And but, yeah.

So I I would probably just put that into the draft. And then I think everybody was good on measuring device. I I don't know if there are really any other

That that's where I had a question too if I

Yep.

Go ahead. I am concerned about the cost of 5 to $10,000 for measuring devices and the possibility that we'll need multiples of these for those who are on duty. I guess I defer to Craig and Ryan on that of what what kind of measurement do you think you're going to need to be able to have a prosecution case that would

Craig why don't you answer that just far as calibration and as far as the I don't think we'd need more than one just that's kind of cost prohibitive. Just knowing again like Craig says over the last nine or ten years this ordinance just hasn't come up often enough my opinion maybe yours is different to justify you know 20 to $30,000 worth of devices but that's you know that's kind of for you to decide. No, go ahead.

Craig. And ultimately the standard that we're looking for is is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So absolutely the the type one device where it's calibrated and it's just got that little extra is kind of the gold standard. You know, you look at it and chief can talk to this with regards to traffic enforcement, you've got your radar, you've got lidar, they both have different, different pluses and minuses, but they they measure speed in a different way. However, we can get convictions off both.

So I think if it if our code says that a type two device is is fine and as we go through and try some of these cases, unless we have an attorney or someone bring up, hey, your type two device is not correct or it's not calibrated correctly, then then we would probably have to upgrade to the type device. But I think with a type one or a type two device, we could go forward. And as long as we have the evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, I don't see an issue prosecuting that.

Yeah, that was my main concern is making sure that you have the they have equipment needed for you to be able to prosecute. But also if you're getting convictions off of a phone, like, you know, from the dog barking or maybe it's just other neighbors. I I guess that would be my only concern is not having such an expensive device if you don't need it if you do need it then I absolutely support that and then the other thing that I would love to have your advice on both you and Ryan is on the misdemeanor what you feel there and it could be that this isn't just for this ordinance do you feel that the Class B is too difficult to be able to seek and get in other cases too like I want to make sure that we're doing something that we're actually to get results on because I think that if we start you know prosecuting these and they fail I think that's also going to have an impact on us being effective with this.

Jump in first and

then I'll

go ahead.

Yeah I mean that if our code specifies the level of offense the judge shouldn't take that into account.

Okay.

Shouldn't, will a judge? Maybe. But I will kind of give you the category. So first time DUI is a Class B misdemeanor. A lot of domestic violence cases are class B misdemeanors, first time drug offenses. So it's fairly serious. And I think that's why we probably kind of downgraded this from a class B to class C. But again, the legal answer is if your code says it's this, this is the penalty a judge shouldn't convict someone then say well I think that's too much so I'm going to make it a Class C misdemeanor. The prosecutor can do that based upon his discretion and what he or she recommends to the judge but once there's a conviction the judge should impose the penalty that's in the code.

Yeah. For example Yeah. Sorry. Go ahead, Craig. A class B misdemeanor carries up to six months in jail and a thousand dollar fine. As of right now our code has dog at large class B misdemeanor. I will tell you I have prosecuted hundreds of dog at large cases and no one has spent a day in jail for it. They pay a fine and they typically, you know, depending on how many they've had, either get a plea in advance or they plead to it. But that's still a class b misdemeanor on their record that, you know, so you kinda have to have that balance and weigh that as a prosecutor as also as a as a city council as well. I do think some of our codes do need to be looked at because a class e misdemeanor still is a misdemeanor.

It carries up to ninety days in jail and a fine of $750. It still is serious, offense, in that you get a it will be on your record as a misdemeanor a criminal misdemeanor. So I don't think downgrading it from a b to a c is diminishing what we're trying to do. It's just making it more in line with what what the crime is.

Right. I may I make a comment? Yeah. I agree, Craig, with that. Looking up all the what is a class B misdemeanor and differences mean it's yeah I agree with the recommendations for that.

Heather any other comments you good with that?

I'm good

with that.

Okay.

Mayor one more I I really think it's important to look closely at the location you take the measurements from because I think that's part of the problem we ran into in the past and it if you just say at the property line, is it on the inside you know, you're looking at the receiving end, right? Where the noise is received. So, is that where you're going to put the measuring device? If you because otherwise, you know, if you do it on the other side of the property line, it's a different zone. It's higher decibel level, right?

And that then they'll say, oh, there's no violation there. So I think we just need to look at, is it a nuisance or is it a violation for the person receiving the noise who hears it and make from where the the person is the complainant is receiving the noise.

Yeah. Yeah. Mister mayor, that that's what I thought it was. I thought it was the lesser or the more more restrictive of the two zones, but maybe we need to make sure that's clarified clearly because I also agree that it should be the person receiving the noise. That's where it should be measured from, but at the same time I thought it was even more restrictive.

So say like if a person was in the house, the noise could actually be taken or the noise could be registered outside the house in the residential zone but it would apply to the residential zone because that's where it's receiving. And then I'm kind of confused because I can't really see the code on the 50 feet is it it has to be also 50 feet from the noise because if there's a noise that's right on the border I don't think that that applies it if they're making it right on fence line it still is affecting me on my residential property

well and to that point if I may miss mayor that's why I was asking for the clarification I do feel like it it's somewhat unclear so I'm happy to find the right answer but I it I just wasn't gathering since I was trying to figure it out.

There is the.

We can look at that. Yeah.

The clause in there where it's the you know, if it carries over two zones but we just need to clarify that the noise is carrying to a different zone. And that's where the measurement needs to be taken.

Oh yeah. That's It

needs to

be measured where the impacted party is in their zone.

Any other comments for Kim? Kim, we beat you like a horse. So, if you will take all that information, put a draft together and then we'll we'll look at it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sounds good. We'll get it on the future agenda. Thanks.

Thank you. Okay, two. Three, the open public meeting act training. Mister Wood. Nope. This is a work session. You can at 07:00. We'd love it. We're going continue. Go ahead.

Okay. Alright. I think this is the biggest audience I've ever had for open meetings training. I'm really excited about this. I don't know why everybody, mean, the word must have gotten out. So we've talked a little bit about this. I'm going to go I mean it's quite a detailed statute so we're going to hit the high points but if you have any questions please stop me and we'll I'll do my best to answer them. So I'm going to start with a policy statement from the legislature. This is right out of the statute. The legislature I'm going read the middle part.

It's the intent of the legislature that the state, its agencies, and its political subdivisions take their actions deliberations openly. And so again, that's just a policy statement. It doesn't have any force of law. But I think we should use that in guiding our decision making, especially when a statute statute cannot possibly predict every circumstance where it might apply and so that should really be the guide that we use when something might be on the line you know as to as to how we should interpret the Open Meetings Act. None of you probably know David Church.

I think he's retired before your time on the council. But this is a quote from him. And if you know David, this won't surprise you. If you cannot or will not comply with the Open and Public Meetings Act, you're not cut out for public office. Get out now before it's too late.

You don't go to the swimming pool if you're embarrassed to be seen in a swimsuit. A good public official has to have the courage to bear some skin and conduct the public's business in the open even if their political cellulite will show. That's just quintessential David Church. Think before we get into the definitions of a public meeting a lot of times especially our residents can be a little confused about what's the when do they have the right to speak and when is that up to the discretion of the mayor. And so before we get into the specific definitions of quorum and meeting and public body, I thought would be useful just to take a couple of seconds and talk about the difference between a public meeting and a public hearing.

So right now we're in a public meeting. That means we have to comply with all of the noticing provisions, take minutes. There's items on the agenda and there's certain rules about how far in advance the agenda has to be posted. But the public doesn't necessarily have the legal right to participate in items on the agenda for a public meeting as you've kind of said a couple of times already tonight. Some items most commonly land use items or like you know we've had some bonding hearings recently that does require a public hearing and then the public has the absolute legal right to give their input.

Now the parameters of that, how long any individual can speak, what the total time might be is still under the discretion of the chair or the mayor in our case. But we can't prevent the public from giving their input. We could also, you know, choose methods. So we could allow them to put in written comments even before the meeting and then also the public that's here to speak. So just again, as you're meeting, as you're interacting with constituents and there's a hot political item, discussing that difference can be helpful in making sure they don't get frustrated if they're not allowed to speak at a public meeting.

But they absolutely have the right to speak at a public hearing. Okay, here's the definition. So a meeting gathering of a public body. We'll talk about the definition of that. With a quorum present, we'll talk about the definition of that. And it's convened by an individual with authority to convene the public body. And I'm going to stop, you know, kind of skip to the end. For the express purpose of acting as a public body to either receive public comment. So again, it's still a public meeting even if you're not voting on anything. B, deliberate or C, take action.

So any one of those three things means that it's a meeting. And so here we go with a couple of definitions. Public body means any administrative advisory executive or legislative body. So advisory is a change from when I started my career as a municipal attorney. There's a reason for that because there was an argument early on that with all we're doing is recommending, we can't we don't have the authority to take final action, then we shouldn't be considered a public body.

That went on for a while until the legislature finally stepped in and said, nope, even if all you have the authority to do is make a recommendation to ultimate decision maker, you're still a public body. All four of these things, so I highlighted the and, all four have to apply in order for something to be considered a public body. And we'll go through some hypotheticals hypotheticals where where we're we're kind kind of of tease out the differences. Quorum, again, simple majority. That's maybe the simplest definition.

Then just back, that's the back to the definition of a meeting. Again, now that we know the definition of public body and quorum. Talked about this a little bit a week ago. It doesn't really matter what we call it, what we label it. That's okay. The statute doesn't really care if we call it executive session or work session or council or action agenda. If it meets requirements of a public meeting, then we have to comply with everything that the statute requires. Okay, welcome to law school. I don't know if any of you always wanted to go to law school but here we go. Let's do some hypotheticals.

Okay. Number one, what if Emily and James bump into each other on the driving range at Fox Hollow? Can the two of you discuss city council business without violating the Open Meetings Act? Start with a softball, an easy one, right? What do you think James?

Yes. Because? Because it's only two of us. Yeah. It's a quorum.

You don't have a quorum. Okay. Next one. Oh, can you even discuss City Council Business? The two of you together? Yeah. Yeah. We can't because you don't have a quorum. What if Rachel, Michelle and Heather end up sitting at the same table at a wedding reception? Does one of you have to leave because now you have three of you there?

Not for something like that.

Yeah, because again it's a social gathering you're not convening to conduct the public's business. I use an example like that because when I first started here this would happen we would have three council members show up at a social event and they would have they would decide between the three of them which one of them had to leave because they thought they were in violation of the Open Meetings Act. So, no. Can you discuss city council business? No. Does the statute prohibit that?

Yeah. You can't have three council members. It's a quorum.

Yeah. I mean, can you? Again, if it's a if it's a social gathering so it's considered a meeting and you're not convened to take action on the public. But again going back to the policy statement, right? This is one of those where maybe you could make an argument that you could but should you, right? Should you if you want to remain in compliance with what I'll call the spirit of the Open Meetings Act. Can you and no is a perfectly acceptable answer. But even if somebody was a little squishy on that, should you? No. Because again, the policy is we want the public to see what decisions you make.

And again not just the end product but the public has the right to see your deliberations about how you come to a decision. So if the three of you talk about something upcoming on an upcoming agenda and you say, okay, well I'll agree to vote this way and then you come to the meeting and you just vote and there's no discussion violates that policy purpose of the Open Meetings Act at least in my opinion. Okay. What about five of you show up at an Alpine School District meeting, do two of you have to leave? Nope.

Same thing. Kind of a guiding principle there is if it's not the city's meeting if it's not your meeting then you don't have to worry about having only three of you there. Now, again, could five of you show up and then after the meeting stay around and start talking about city business and then violate the spirit of the Open Meetings Act? Yes. So just let that policy guide your actions. Okay, what if a resident invites all of you to attend a neighborhood meeting to discuss issue coming before the city council? Can you all attend and discuss?

I think there's a cut out for town halls. Is that correct? It's not. Not an

explicit one. Because again, it's it's just not your meeting. So you're not convened for the purpose of conducting public business. But should you now may maybe there is. I don't remember a cut out for the town hall. I'd have look that up. But should the five of you go there and engage in a policy discussion if invited to a neighborhood meeting?

Should we? No.

Again, especially if it's something coming up on the agenda, you'd want to avoid that because that could be considered your deliberations, how you came to the decision that you've come to. So just be careful about that. Okay, what here's a good one. What if the mayor wants to discuss a sensitive issue invites two of you to come to his office to discuss it. Is that okay? Is that in compliance with the act? I won't use the word okay. Get your skills. Have a quorum.

That's fine. Yes.

Yeah, you can do that. What if three of you? What if the mayor invites three of

you? No.

You have a quorum. Again, the the you can do that should you? That's up to you. I'll say in my career there are issues that there's a gap, right? Between something that's you can't close the meeting to discuss. So that makes it tricky, but it's not quite ready for the public. I'll give you an example. If Marlin had a business come to him and say, hey, we're really interested in locating in Lehi City, what kind of incentive might the council be willing to entertain? That's not a purpose for which you can close the meeting. So he can't get your input in a closed meeting, but he might not be ready.

That business might not be ready for to have him stand in front of you and say, hey, here's the business I've been talking to. Right? Should that be used occasionally? Not frequently? To stay in compliance with the spirit of the act. I I I think so. But there might be an occasion where that's appropriate. That's again that's up to you. Okay. Let's just go through a couple of groups that you've heard of and whether the act applies to them. What about DRC?

Well, I've seen it noticed on the website. So I'm gonna see if it does apply.

Is DRC noticed on the website?

Is it not? Used to Yeah. Used So to

DRC when I first got here was

Used to be.

You could go find it in the code. There's no there's no longer a reference to DRC in the code because again one of these requirements is it's officially created by resolution, constitution, statute, ordinance and again that and means every one of these has to apply in order for it to be subject to Public Beatings Act.

Can I ask a question Mr? Mayor? And it's DRC doesn't well I guess to some extent they do have authority to act right you can make decisions on like a fence material type or things like that. Anyway, but if they don't have the official capacity to act then there's nothing wrong.

Well they're not officially created. They definitely make recommendations. They definitely impose conditions on development but they're not officially created in our code. And I'll get to another one that's kind of like DRC a little less formal but

But they do make final decisions though like a material type of offense. And that can impact an applicant and the public.

And they do advise. Mhmm.

Yeah. Interesting. Ryan, mayor, may I ask a question? So what constitutes creation in the code because we definitely refer to them in our code and I think it's part of the application process.

Yeah. Maybe there's some leftover references to it. But you you can't go to our code and find like, okay, here's the definition of DRC. It's made up of a representative from the following departments. So and maybe we need to go back through it and make sure that

And what what and we changed all of the references to just the reviewing departments need to review review these these plans. Plans. And it just happens that all of those required departments that need to review those meet at a certain time. So it's really just becomes more of an internal staff meeting. And we still call it DRC because historically

It's like development review committee. Yeah, review department. Yeah.

Yeah, we so it's not an official committee but we we meet everybody Yeah, in lot of cities

well, I don't know about a lot. In some cities, the developer has to go around department to department one of the reasons that developers like our process because they have everybody in the room at the same time

and I think what makes me feel a little bit better about it is that decisions made at a DRC level can be appealed to the planning commission and that would is some form of good connected to a public meeting so.

Lehigh Arts Council is that a public body? Do their are their meetings subject to the Open Meetings Act? No. Because?

They're not they're a

separate five zero one

c Yeah. They're a

private organization. Yeah. Okay. Roundup committee.

Same thing.

Is the roundup committee a city committee?

No. I don't think so.

Is it led by a city employee? No. Okay. Private organization. Now, Mel has a lot of interaction with that committee, right? But again, it's not mentioned in our code that there shall be a roundup committee made up of four citizen, you know, things like that. Parks, trails, and trees committee. Yes. Yeah. That one's that one's created created in in our our code. Code. Hutchings Hutchings Museum Museum Board. Board.

No, but all these nonprofits still have their own.

Yeah. Requirements but they're not subject to the. Yeah. State Open Meetings Act. Fox Hollow board meeting. Yes. So if the board of Fox Hollow is made up of three representatives, three from each city and it's an interlocal agency and so they're a public body that the act applies to. Administrative staff meeting. So every Tuesday morning, we get on a call at 09:30. We go over the agenda.

It's not a public meeting because it's not created by statute ordinance and we really don't have final decision making or decision making authority either right we're collaborating on who's going to present this item who answered this question from this council member or the mayor wanted to know this right it's not a public body. Okay good we could keep going with that but that's probably enough. Tisha and Kate do a great job taking care of all of the noticing keep us in compliance with so you'll hopefully come to a final meeting schedule tonight or in the very near future posting the agenda posting it on our website on the state's website as far as getting things on the agenda you've already had a little experience in our own procedures how that happens basically the legal requirement is again so that the public knows what they should come to show up to the comment has to be reasonably specific enough so a reasonable person would say, oh yeah I'm interested in that. I'm coming to the meeting Tuesday night so that I can comment on that. This is kind of a strange one.

Can you discuss something that's not on the agenda? The way the statute reads, you can if the public brings it up. If you want to discuss something, then just make sure that it's on the agenda. And you can't vote on anything that's not on the agenda. Okay, closed meetings.

Mister mayor, if I may, just a clarifying question. For our agendas, what are the ways of getting items on them?

So either two of you agree to put something on the agenda or the mayor can do it himself.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. So a closed meeting when can we go into and we call it closed session that's tech you won't see that in the statute it's when we close an open meeting. As long as there's a quorum and somebody makes the motion motion to close it, we hit you have to state why you're closing it. So the reason and where the meeting is going to be held and then at least two thirds which my math I think says four out of the five of you have to have approved closing the meeting. The issue that comes up a lot more frequently is why can you close a meeting?

And I've just included when I first started twenty three years ago there was like six reasons. Now there's like 70. So I'm not going to go over all of those. I'm going to go over the ones that we'll see most commonly. So number one discuss we like to say this just we're closing the meeting for personnel. That doesn't exist in the statute. The technical description is discuss the character competence or physical or mental health of an individual. You can close the meeting for that. Pending a reasonably imminent litigation, right? That means a claim's been we've gotten a notice of claim, a lawsuit's been filed, or we know something has happened so that one of those things are likely to be filed, right?

The courts kind of narrowly construe that reasonably imminent litigation standard. Investigative proceedings about criminal misconduct hasn't happened very often, thankfully, but it has come up. And then we like to say real estate, right? That's purchasing real estate and there's some additional requirements or or selling property that the city owns if we've given notice that would be offered for sale. So those are the five most common ones. I guess six. Well, five. I can't think of a time I've we've ever had to close a meeting for something outside of these five but it could happen.

Mayor if I may for for a closed session for the item that we're discussing is that put on the agenda like any open meeting but it's just not shared with the public? It's just shared with

So you could do it both ways. If you know so often if we know we're going to have a closed we're going to close the meeting for one of these things we'll put it on the agenda. That doesn't keep you from closing a meeting if something comes up during the meeting and you want to go into closed session then as again as long as four of the five of you vote and you specify the reason and the location that's not usually a problem then you can close the meeting even if it's not on the agenda. Okay. Okay.

And basically these three bullet points means you can't take any final action. You can't vote. You can't adopt a resolution or an ordinance in closed session. Electronic meetings, this just allows you know if one of one or more of you are can't make can't be physically present we can have an electronic meeting. We just have to have an ordinance which we'd in place that we do minutes and recordings. Tisha does all that. If you have any questions, I don't get too involved in the minutes and recordings. And then just a couple of things to close with. So this I mentioned this a week ago. This is kind of strange language, but then I want us to kind of be guided by this second citation.

So nothing in this chapter shall be construed to restrict a member of a public body from transmitting an electronic message to other members of the public body at a time when the public body is not convened in an open meeting. So you shouldn't be texting each other from the dais. So outside of the meeting and again my caution is even if that even if that's allowed under the Open Meetings Act those communications could still subject to a grammar request. And then again, kind of our conscience guided by 52,428, individuals constituting a quorum of a public body may not act together outside a meeting in a concerted and deliberate way to predetermine an action to be taken by the public body at a meeting on a relevant matter. So even though you can send messages to each other, again don't decide in advance how you're going to vote on something.

Enforcement. So there's a couple of things. This I added this fifty two four three zero one because it came up last week. So we can remove a person from a public meeting if they are to the extent that order the conduct of the meeting is seriously compromised and then kind of the more the things that we're more familiar with right intentionally violating the act is a class B misdemeanor and I just gave the categories of how serious the code treats that. But then a private individual can also bring a civil action.

So if they feel like you've taken a vote in violation of the act, then a private individual could bring a lawsuit to try to get that final action overturned. And there's the citation for that. And then finally, more wisdom from David Church. The best way to avoid problems with the Open and Public Meetings Act is to on the side of openness. When in doubt, the meeting should be open. City councils other committees or commissions of cities should not attempt to violate even the spirit of the act. It's important that the meetings is conducted in public and the deliberations be conducted openly. And that's all. Any questions questions for for me? Me?

So did I know did I notice that a closed meeting does not need to

be noticed? Is that what it said? Correct.

Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay.

Thanks. Okay. Thank you.

Oh, sorry. Quick. So, it doesn't? I thought that's why you have it on the agenda.

It we if we know it's going to we're going to have one then we put it on there more so that you'll know like, oh, we need to get through these items because we we're trying to have a closed session before the regular agenda but it's not a legal requirement. You can go into closed session anytime. Four of the five of you vote to go into closed session even if it hasn't been previously noticed.

Okay. Mayor, just a quick comment if that's alright. Thank you, Brian. Glad to have you to keep us on the straight and narrow. I the two at a time meetings, I think they've been called serial meetings. I've heard them called that. I would strongly discourage that because when you do that, it has been done in the past the the council members that are there with the one other council member or whatever it is that you only get the feedback from that one other council member and a lot of times there's information that's missing that other councils will bring up in their little meeting. So, I I'm not a big fan of those and I've I've talked to you about that. So, I just want to throw my 2¢ in there.

Could I make a comment about or question maybe about that? Okay. Are you against two at a time or is individually okay?

Maybe individually. I just I know we did this with the school district split. And there was a discussion, right? And information people brought things up later that the other council members didn't realize and where do you get that information? You know, how do you go about sharing it? And then I honestly, I think it caused some, I noticed other cities had those meetings more openly and ours weren't. So, some other cities got mad. They felt like, you know, oh, you you know, there were some complaints, I guess, about the way we handle that. So, probably one of the time would be better but I mean we have a council for a purpose to council together.

I guess I I want to make the council where practically speaking let's use Ryan's early example for for an example. Say a business wanted to come to Lehi. They want to negotiate with the council. They're not ready to go to a public meeting. If I can't meet with you individually or by twos, you'll be in the dark a lot longer on some of these things. We won't have the ability to have these negotiations move forward.

May may I have just a question for you, Jason. With that, is there a way to do it publicly without, I know, sometimes they don't want to publicly disclose some information but can we just not name a business and just have the discussion that way.

I think that would be, oh, I'm sorry. Finish.

Oh. Finish your thought.

Yeah, because we've had to sign non disclosure agreements and I don't know if our decisions to provide tax incentives for instance should be based on a particular name more of what it, you know, it's needed for the city or not.

Fair enough. I I guess I my concern would be if if we were to bring you completely redacted documents and things like that. It's really up to you. You're not going to get the full package of information I guess is what I'm saying because we wouldn't be able to give it to you.

Mister mayor for me would it help to do those situations in a closed meeting?

We

can't. We can't do those? Okay.

That's literally why individual or Tuesday meetings. It's the only way to do it.

Mister mayor, if I may offer just a perspective, I believe that this is why the relationships that the six of us have are so important and why I have been committed to building those relationships with you. Because if you're in a meeting and I'm not present and you're learning information with Jason, nothing stops you from calling me and filling me in. And I am committed to developing those relationships so that we trust one another and so that we can have we can function as a council and have that dialogue. And then when we come the to public and we're ready to share with the public and the applicant's ready to share, having that transparent conversation. But the relationships that we have are the key to getting the business done.

So just in response, Mayor, if I may. We're talking about deliberations. And again, I think we need to be very careful that those are done in a transparent manner and less discussion behind closed doors or backrooms or whatever you've been accused of in the past. So that's my intent there. It's not necessarily that we can't talk to each other or shouldn't but that we're following the spirit of up in a public meeting act as much as we can.

I guess mister mayor, I'm just looking for direction because it it's that does impact how I communicate with you guys. So, I'm just looking for direction.

Other comments? Go ahead.

I I have zero problem with it if we're not deliberating and making decisions if it's informative in nature. I also think it just it might impact the applicant's decision to even work with Lehi. So I that's where I would be okay. I just those meetings, I feel, is to be able inform the council so we have the information that is difficult to receive in the public setting for whatever reason. But I also think it's very important that in those meetings we are not then deliberating.

We're not like saying, hey, I I, you know, yes, no, I'm gonna vote on this, something like that. I think that if we just treat them as information system or information meetings, I feel differently about them than if it is we're making decisions.

And I would just add, Mr. Mayor, that I think the principle is to ensure that all of us have the same information in a timely manner. So if that means, if that's more of a burden on staff to kind of recap to those who weren't present in the meeting, obviously we'll share with each other as much as we can like Emily mentioned. But I think that's the principle behind it. So open to any suggestions or ideas on ensuring that happens.

And sometimes we just want a head nod. Is this something you would entertain? Because if not, then let's not waste time on it. Let's just tell them no and be done with it. So sometimes it's a a temperature check. You know, we're not we're not giving them approval by any means but are you willing to have staff spend time on it

anyway? I think that's good counsel. Excuse me and I think in most cases, the Open Meeting Act will cover it but I think there's few that we'll run into where I think like, Heather, what you mentioned, where it becomes very informational, but it has to be shared with all six at some point so everyone has the information as we move forward. So, Jason, you and I can work on making sure that's equitable across the table too and moving but I don't I don't see that we'll have lines of people and we're doing that all the time. I don't see that happening. So.

Mister mayor, one thing. I I know we're doing this before. One thing that was brought up is that there often are a lot of applicants that come to the city that don't even come to us. It's something that staffs looked at and they're like, this is never gonna fly. So I don't know if that's something too where it might help to be aware of, like yeah. I think that could be helpful. Maybe maybe not that the the council be like, all six are more informed of some of those things. And maybe it's just with mayor too that you're you're aware of those things because I I thought that was pretty interesting too that there there's a, like, safeguards of knowing that, like, this I would never recommend this as staff to the council. We're not gonna waste staff's time. We're not going to waste council's time too but I mean, that maybe something that mayors kept more in the loop on.

So.

Okay. Any other comments? Thank you. Let's go to 2.4 presentation of the transportation impact fees. Facilities plan and analysis. Welcome Bowen Collins and Associates.

Good evening. My name is Rachel Volick. As mentioned, I'm with Bohm Collins and Associates. I'm also here with Andrew McKinnon to help answer any questions that the council may have. And tonight, we're presenting on the transportation impact fee update that we've been working on on the study.

The purpose of this presentation is to help prepare the council for the public hearing happening January 27 for the adoption of both the impact fee facilities plan and impact fee analysis, which are two documents that are directly tied to the impact fees. And I'll discuss a little bit more about them in the presentation. Now, one of the major questions is what is an impact fee? It seeks to answer one of these major questions within a city which is how can we pay for the new infrastructure required to service future growth so that existing users aren't subsidizing future users or vice versa. So for example, a developer comes into the city and they develop an area.

They're responsible for building the roads and the pipelines and the power required specifically for their development and what we call project level projects. There is an impact of that development on the existing system as well and impact fees allow the developers to help pay for that additional stress on the existing system. So, for this system that we're working with for transportation, example is maybe we need to widen the road so that residents can make it into the development and out and go shopping and things like that. So, we can keep the same level of service as was their previous to the development and so that's kind of the overarching goal of an impact fee. And then just the definitions for the two reports that are part of the impact fee is the impact fee facilities plan.

So this document specifically identifies projects needed to accommodate growth and allocates cost of projects between existing and future users based on who the projects benefit. And then the second report is an impact fee analysis, which calculates the appropriate impact fee based on information from the IFFP. So they work directly together to help understand what the appropriate impact fee is. Now, the very first step to the study is working with a master plan. So we received a master plan for transportation from Hales Engineering.

They identified about 17 projects that are needed within the next ten years. And that ten year window is important because that's what's identified in the impact fee code. We need to be looking at only what's needed within that ten year window. I will note that within this ten year window, they anticipate about a 30% increase of trips within the city. And that's what leads to the need of these 17 projects that have been identified.

Some additional considerations of the impact fee is user type. So we'll talk about user, the ten year user, and the beyond ten year user. And those are the windows of users that are considered within the impact fee analysis. The impact fee also considers excess capacity within the system that developers will be using and how they can help pay for that as well as the additional projects that are added in. Just a general example for how analysis like this goes for one of the projects we chose one of the more simple ones.

If we have new growth and there's a new road required that's going to supply more than just a system level project. We are looking at the modeling values that have been provided by Hales to help us understand how much is being used by existing users, by the ten year window users, and beyond ten year windows. And we just go through and look at the percentages for that. So example, for a new road, there's zero trips in the existing window because the road doesn't yet exist. But at the end of the ten year window, that road will exist.

And they anticipate that there's about 1,000 trips. So that attributes about 37% of the cost of that road to the ten year window. And then they show an additional 17,000 trips beyond the ten year window. And so it's beyond the ten year window that pays for that additional 63% of the project. And that's how we go through our analysis. We go through each of the projects, and we understand what we're looking at, what the purpose of the project is. Is it coming in for new growth? Is it for an existing deficiency? And we consider all of those for each and every project as we move forward with the impact fee. I will note specifically for Lehi.

Some changes since the previous update to impact fee. The last full analysis was completed in 2015 for transportation specifically. There has been a new transportation master plan drafted in 2025, which is where the projects come from. The master plan includes updated future project planning and cost estimating. This is important as the costs greatly impact the impact fee amount.

And we've seen a lot of construction inflation, significant construction inflation over the past couple of years. There's been updated growth projections which help impact our understanding of what projects are needed. And then in addition to that, for the existing system, some previously identified projects have been completed. And instead of using estimated costs, we now have actual known costs that can be implemented into the impact fee. Now, here's the real meat of the presentation.

This is what we would recommend as a 2026 transportation impact fee. As you can see, we've presented schedule that changes on an annual basis. Part of this is because of a credit that's due for existing deficiencies. As you we talked we've about previously, there's a certain level of standard level of service that needs to be upheld. And the credit helps pay for that.

So essentially, we have this $146.87 that has been calculated for each trip. And there's system, excuse me, because future users can't both pay for an impact fee and user rates or, in this case, taxes to pay for the same projects and that changes as the years goes on and that's why you see a schedule of impact fees here. Then I will note historically the current impact fee is $121.79 per trip. So, in 2026, this would account for about a 10% increase in impact fees and by the time we get down to 2035, this accounts for about a 20% increase in impact fees. This is something we expect, since impact fees haven't been updated since 2015.

So in general, just some conclusions. Like I just stated, in 2026, it's about a 10 increase. 2035 is about a 20% increase as compared with 2025. There has been historical growth that's significantly greater than was previously projected which is added to some of the projects. And we updated the project costs as they're available.

And also next steps, there are some noticing requirements for the impact fee hearing and creating an ordinance to adopt the impact fee so that can be adopted on the twenty seventh. We've been working with city staff to get that ready to go by today. Then there's a public hearing on January 27, and then there would be the adoption on that same day should the council decide that. And then as soon as the impact fee is adopted, ninety days after is when the first new impact fee can be charged. And then that's everything I have for my presentation. Are there any comments or questions from the council? Mister mayor.

So, other than with the credit, is there any more to add in inflation? So I guess it kind of helps with the credit, but it seems almost like by the time we hit this again in ten years, we're going to be really far behind the mark if we're only addressing it every ten years.

There's there are a lot of cities actually will amend their impact fee every other year.

Okay.

Just to keep up with inflation. The the impact fee act doesn't doesn't allow us to include inflation during this first part but if you were to like go down two years you could actually amend the impact fee without doing a wholesale update and basically add that inflation and then those new forecasts of cost.

That yeah that would be great. So we just justify it based on current levels of inflation over the last two years and that would be it. Yeah. May

I ask a question? So the deficiencies in our current level of service, that's the we can't charge them for that. Can you explain that a little more? Is that correct? Like, we recognize that we are deficient, right? And so you're giving them a credit so can you explain part

for me?

I can help with that. It would be for an example there's a road that doesn't meet your level of service you know there's just too much traffic on the road and there's a new project that's coming in that will both provide capacity for new growth but it's also going to relieve the existing deficiency so there's a certain portion of that project cost that's basically going to get paid for by impact fees somewhat but all the future users that are basically paying that impact fee they're also going to be living in a home that's paying off that existing deficiency right so those users are both paying the impact fee and then they're also paying taxes or they're paying a user rate where they're paying that over the next twenty years and so they'll if they if they're here for twenty years they pay those rates or taxes for twenty years and so they deserve a larger credit then if then somebody else moves moves into the city in five years that person is only to paying this is this is with the idea of a bond of like a twenty year bond. The person that moves in five years they're they're only going be paying taxes or rates for another fifteen years so their credit is going to be less than that person that moves in next year if that makes sense.

So the idea is just to basically reimburse somebody that moves in and is paying taxes or rates for that sort of making sure that they're not paying twice both an impact fee and paying rates for the same sort of deficiencies that's helping existing users.

Can I ask since you said currently it's 121 approximately per trip and we're going up to proposing going up to 134 point something okay I just want to make sure?

Mister mayor if I may it's my understanding that the legislature passes laws every year that dictate how the impact fee can be calculated what are some of the impacts to some of the legislation that have happened that have had an impact on the price?

There hasn't been a significant change in the impact fee act since I think 2022 but yeah every year there's usually just a little bit of tweaking on the impact fee act. I know the last change that I can think of was applicable to ADUs which I think a lot of the council is probably familiar with the changes on that but yeah there's no there's no significant changes I have not heard of anything specific for this next year either on on changes to the act but.

Okay thank you. It's common I hear often that we just aren't able to charge enough for impact fees and just curious to know if there if you guys have an opinion on that do you feel like this is enough to cover the cost of the impact?

The way the impact you act is written basically makes the city the bank for a lot of projects. So the way it's broken up there's the existing users ten year growth and then growth beyond ten year window. All of that growth beyond the ten year window the city is essentially acting as a bank for because you can't collect fees on that. And so you're basically paying for it like let's say you're paying for a project that's going to last for fifty years well you can only charge in the impact fee that first ten years and that's by legislative direction, right? So the city is basically on the hook for all those costs beyond the ten year window and so you're always playing a little bit of catch up and you need to make sure that you're accounting for all of your impact fee eligible projects and you need those need to stay in your books for as long as that project exists because you're basically trying to recoup those costs as soon as a project goes in until that project meets its life cycle if that makes sense.

So yeah there is by design from the legislature like the cities are kind of forced to sort of act as a bank and that just has to do with the makeup of the legislature and how that how that politics work on that.

Yeah I appreciate the clarity. Thank you.

Mayor could I could I comment? Yes. And maybe there's a bunch of you that are new. Do you know what an ADU is? I just want to make sure. Okay. In the in what he indicated that we tried to get some of those impact fees on the ADUs and that didn't happen. So ADUs, we cannot charge impact fees. That that is something that's changed. Okay. Thank you, Lauren.

Sorry. Lauren.

Just for clarification. ADU is an accessory dwelling unit.

Yeah.

Right? That's internal ADUs not external, right? With external ADUs, we can charge impact fees or not?

It never, as far as I can tell, it relates to any ADU.

Wow. Okay.

Now, if you have a multiple units, you know, duplexes or things like that, it applies but not on an ADU.

Yeah. So, I just want to clarify what Heather was suggesting. So, we're looking at a fee of $20.26 going to $1.34 21 but she's suggesting that we look and calculate, make sure we're accommodating for inflation is that correct okay so this might this could potentially change based on those calculations is that what

you would come back in two years and update the impact fee to account for any inflation

and then just in connection to my so will the legislature allow for that for us to calculate

the impact fee. If you're following the impact fee act and you're noticing every time you do an amendment then there's no need to like do it ahead of time and that's kind of the idea behind in regular impact fee updates is to try to stay on to on top of that inflation.

Understood.

Any other comments? Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. That brings us to man, my voice is terrible. 2.5 discussion of the council assignments including the ULCT policy committee assignment. Who has that one? Is that me mine?

Or the mayor pro tem?

Yeah. Jason, do you want to speak to this?

I can kick it off and you guys can take it away. Be great. So we have to appoint. We have three voting seats on the the legislative policy committee for the Utah legal cities in town. So, yeah, it's up to you guys who you'd like to point to those three spots but we need it done before the end of the week. So, you could just give us some direction to that.

Appreciate it. Comments.

Well, typically, from what I've seen, it's the mayor. It's one of those people. Yes.

Typically.

Yes. And it would make sense to me to have the mayor pro tem also be one of those people. Don't know if we we, do we nominate? How do we do this?

We can just discuss. We can discuss it.

Yeah. The other thing is there is usually a staff. So, it's usually Jason or Cam because they're available to make sure they're in all meetings. So, sometimes our schedules don't allow us to be in all those meetings. So, normally or in the past, I know that we've had at least one, maybe two that have been on that board.

So, the previous council, we had four because Mayor Johnson was on the executive board and then we had Cameron and myself and then we had a a third council member. Right. So, for the past few years, we've had four.

So, we will go

to three. We will go to three.

And mister mayor, I I just for the I'm interested in that assignment if the others are amenable to it. If we are going to have two council members. Okay.

And you're available to go to those meetings and vote. You're feeling confident that you'll be there. Okay?

But we can only have three this year instead of four. Correct. Okay. I wasn't sure of that before this.

Unless you want to be elected. Just kidding. Okay? Alright.

And no one's hurting my feelings if you want to take my it's fine. I'm still going to be involved. I'll still go to meetings. I just want to vote.

And sorry, question. The city administrators, managers have their own meetings with ULCT.

We do. Yeah. We do. So.

And so you can give input there.

Oh yeah. I mean I I talk to Cameron all the time and yeah it's not a big deal.

Okay. Yeah. I'd be interested in that. I've been following quite a lot and had a fun time listening yesterday of all the bills coming up and

During the legislative session, it is a weekly meeting. Sometimes two times a week. They won't vote more than once a week though but they will have meetings sometimes twice a week. During the session and then throughout the year, it's at least monthly that they'll have meetings. So.

So, I can ask a question, if if someone's not able to attend, are able to designate someone else to.

I can be designated as an alternate.

Yeah. Okay.

If we don't have enough voting members. Yeah, it's.

Okay. No, I think that's great and I think it's all council members to be following that. I mean, it's a large voting body. So I don't know that our voice would have, you know, like, be tie breaking in any kind of way, but I wanted to make sure that we always do have those three votes. So if you're not able to attend, like, it could be Jason and Cameron. I'm totally great with that. And I think, like, you will get, like, those summaries every week. Because I have like, I'm I wasn't a voting member, but I got those, and they would also encourage council members to be reaching out to legislators too. So whatever kind of and impact you have that way. I think it it's kind of surprising how many things come through that are going to impact us at the city level. So, I think that's great.

And and I just want you guys to know, you guys are elected officials of a big, pretty big deal city. So, they really like Lehigh to be involved because you guys do carry quite a bit of weight. So, yeah and again, you don't have to be on the LPC either to contribute. I mean, by all means, if you guys pick up the phone or shoot an Email to our legislators, they will appreciate that as well because they don't know who's on the LPC.

Okay, so myself, anyone else want to take a voting spot? James? Michelle? Any comments on that, Heather? You're okay with that?

No, that sounds great.

But I think we should have Jason, at least Jason as an alternate. If, you know, if not, Jason and though, like.

We're going have Cameron be the only.

Are you in Cameron? Yeah.

Yeah. And then we also have other staff monitoring it and taking notes and things. So yeah we we do try and keep more and more of an eye on it as like I said as we get more political weight as we grow but.

Yeah. Great.

Emily, you're good. Okay. Perfect. This, let's go to two point six. Do you think we can get this done in ten minutes, James?

Yeah, let's do it.

2.6 discussion of modifying the 700 South Bike Lanes. So James, I'll turn it over to you for half a second. Go ahead. What you're thinking?

Yeah. So, one of the the great benefits of being in a campaign is you get to talk to a lot of residents and and I I kind of went into the the 700 South Bike Lane initially in the campaign very neutral. Commute on that road. I didn't have strong feelings one way or the other. But I heard from a lot of residents that they weren't huge fans of it.

I would say in the most unbiased way possible probably eight or nine out of 10 have strong feelings that we should change it. And then we have others including an email that came in just maybe an hour ago that are very fond of it. So I realize we have a master transportation plan and I think there's ways to keep a bike lane but make the parking curbside. I'm looking at the master transportation plan. There's a lot of different road configurations.

I want to get staff's thoughts as well as my fellow council members on looking at how we can potentially change that. I'm looking at a one configuration is I think it's similar to the road. I always forget that road just east of the high school. It's essentially in the master transportation planets the 70 to 74 foot minor collector bike lane. So 700 South is mostly I think 60 feet wide from curb to curb.

So that would give us room for curbside parking, a bike lane and then a driving lane, a middle turning lane, a driving lane, bike lane curb parking. And just want to get your thoughts on that. Bring this up just because I again I heard from a lot of residents I'm sure others up here have as well and I just want to make it as appropriate and safe as possible. I think some of the concerns I've heard is sometimes it gives you a false sense of security riding in those lanes. I've heard of children just plowing through stop signs, right?

Thinking that they have the right of way. Just two days ago, I wish I would have taken a picture of it because it was kind of funny. But I saw a car parked between the pylons in the bike lane and no one was in the car which raised some questions. And so and of course you know the bike lanes are great. This winter has been very dry.

But obviously in heavier winters we have they're basically unusable for most of the time. And I see a lot of people just not using the lanes or just cruising down the driving lane. So just want to get some thoughts first maybe from my fellow council members on what your opinion is and then also from staff if we have if we had if we agree to change it would that include a master transportation plan amendment or could we just unilaterally make some changes where we think it's needed most. So, I guess over to my fellow council members, mayor.

Mayor Vince, if I may. I think it would be really helpful if staff could give us the history of how these lanes came to be and the mag funding associated to such. I think it would be helpful for all of us to kind of get the history of how we got here, the funding, and then what actually is on the docket to come just so we can have the fruitful conversation.

Yeah. We'll take your lead if you want. If you wanna have some other comments from council. I've got Mike here, and he's got a few slides. We don't wanna take a ton of your time. We didn't know what direction, so we're kinda ready to pivot, but we're we're happy to do that now, or we can let you have some discussion and then we'll come up but we'd we would love an opportunity to just like council member Lockhart to see.

Anybody else comment wise or should we invite mister Musk? Go ahead, Heather.

Yeah, I think that'd be really helpful because this is something that was put in place before any of the you know, even before Councilmember Stallings and I. It was really helpful for me like because the last budget session just for like I I had approached engineering and wondering what we could do about it. What was and they they came up with different solutions. At the time, you know, we'd start talking about a Kirby machine, but it was so new idea that it didn't make sense to fund it in that budget cycle. Over the past year, I've met with engineering, met with public works and like the possibility of like would it make sense to have a curbing machine to be able to fund these projects at a lower cost.

But in meeting the public works because of the staff level it didn't make sense to take all five of our you know streets and public works to be to go and do it the curb machine because it would take them off other projects so that's why you know it was never pursued to go that direction but I think it'd be really helpful and then also just to I'd want to make sure before we you know and I definitely want to hear from staff and just understand the full thing is like making sure we have a really good full picture of how people feel about those bike lanes because I think we tend to hear from a vocal group and maybe not necessarily other ones who don't. I almost just want to make sure we really have a good pulse on the area and how they feel about it because I would hate for the opposite to happen that we had you know, we made a big change, and then there was an uproar in the other direction of why did you take away our trail. So that's yeah.

Yeah. Let's go ahead

and Okay.

And have you Yeah.

Yeah. I'm gonna let Mike

We'll have Mike come up.

Drive and then and Brad from engineering. They well, all three of us have collaborated quite a bit on this.

So Maybe while Mike's getting set up, I can give you just a little bit of a update. So I've been here at the city for eighteen years and have sat on that MAG TAC committee that entire time. So that's the funding agency where we received all this money to build this project. Just really quickly, this project was approved through MAG in 2014. And normally, we would receive money to build the project three to four years later.

In this case, we could have received that money, but the city chose to move forward another project. And we chose to build 1,200. And so the the actual funding for this project was six years after its approval. In that six year time frame, we had a lot of projects come through the city, trail type projects where we needed some funding. And so in this case, we started out with about $2,900,000 in the trail project.

We pulled $300,000 from the project, and this is all kind of through MAG. We pulled $300,000 for the phase three of the rail trail. We pulled 4 and $29,000 for the Tiger Bridge, which is the major trail bridge that goes across SR92. And we pulled $400,000 for the Triumph Boulevard Bridge. That's the new bridge that goes over Triumph Boulevard, completed the historic Southern Rail Trail.

Trail. So in essence, when this project may have started with 2.9 ish, dollars 2,850,000.00, when we finally got ready to start it, it was $1,720,000 I think one of the things to remember on this project is that a couple things. First of all, we built a lot of roadway with it. We built I just took some numbers down 1,900 feet of curb and gutter, eight seventy feet of sidewalk. We constructed over two.

Six acres of pavement. So, a lot a lot of pavement. Six fifty feet of storm drain. We widened the dry creek box culvert structure and removed, you know, various trees. One other thing, just from a funding standpoint, one concern that I have with pulling too much from this project and it was proposed as a cycle track project.

And obviously, the project we were able to build with the money that we were left was less than what we had initially intended, the initial project. And I think Mike has maps and exhibits showing how that project had curb and gutter or or had a somewhat of a curb that separated the bike lane from the travel lane and the parking. So that wasn't able to be put in because we had less money. But one concern that I do have having sat on the committee for a long time, is it's important to note that we have the second phase of this cycle track already funded. That phase runs from 2300 Westerly to the Jordan River Trail.

I do worry that if we change too much with this concept, I'm concerned as to what Mag would say if we wanted to then start building the second phase. Second phase moving westward because it was approved as a cycle track and it was approved as I think a two way cycle track much like we did on this project.

And you're talking 700 South which eventually turns into 600 South moving West into the Jordan Willows area, right?

Yes, yes that is the project there. We are funded to construct a signal at 700 South and 2300 West. We've worked with MAG and we're able to pull that money forward. But I guess I just wanted to share my concerns with if we change too much, I don't know what it would do with funding that we have already received that's not yet we haven't yet started the design West of 2300 West but but I am worried about what decisions we could make would change that because we've already agreed to build a certain project.

Mister mayor, if I may. So what I'm hearing you say is that we were awarded 2,900,000.0 for the cycle track project, but we took about I guess 300 and then the 429,000 and the $400,000 away from what was awarded and put it towards other trail or bridge crossing projects which left us with less than what we were able what we were originally designed to build. Right? I'm just curious to understand how we're allowed to take money out of one if the large sum is meant for the cycle track how are we allowed to push it off into other projects?

It was actually a specific request that we had to make to MAG.

Oh and it was approved?

Yes it was.

Okay. So in partnership with MAG they approved some of that funding getting sent to different directions.

Yeah, and we saw the benefit of expanding some of the past trails and kind of making them so that they were continuous, right? I mean we essentially have a trail now all the way from 1st East all the way into the point of the mountain, right? That rail trail. All of those projects were along that corridor.

Yeah, and Brad if I may, MAG funding for this project, wasn't wedded to certain design was it or it was given for the bike path but we have the flexibility to determine how that was designed correct?

Right and I think when Mike pulls up the maps you'll see that our initial concept report for the 7th South Cycle Track showed the trail on both sides next to the curb and gutter with parking kind of in the center in the middle of the street along both sides. So so there was a concept plan that

was

prepared. In this case, we chose to put a two way on just one side. So that meant that the parking only affected half as many users homeowners because only half as many of them were parking in the street. So it was a lesser detriment to them, but that was the decision. I'll go ahead and I don't want to belabor things too much. We can talk later, you know, in a different time, but I just want to kind of go over the funding and some of my concerns with changing things too much.

Mr. Mayor, just one thing when I've spoke with you before, that's what was most interesting to me that it was it ended up costing like 1,700,000.0, but only 125,000 of that actually went to like doing the cycle track itself. But because the cycle track was there, got all that sidewalk and curb and gutter and everything else like, you know, 1,600,000.0 plus of doing all that because it was funded as a cycle track. So that was eye opening to me because I thought it had cost a lot more just to put in the cycle track itself. So I love that we were able to get these other public improvements done as in conjunction with it.

Right and I think probably one thing that's super important to understand too is when we receive these monies, the city only actually pays out of our own coffers six. 7%. So when I say that we had 1,721,000.000 as as part of the project, we we paid much less than

that.

We pay we only pay let's just say 7% of that out of our own road impact fee coffers.

Mike, real quick. I was just gonna note you you guys have dinner and so we probably wanna be I'll be quick. I only wanna spend a few minutes with our preschool And

we can bring this back again.

Yeah. We just do a quick, very quick, so we give them time

I'll be super quick. The one thing

I will say is I

think this is my first comment is that I think this is going to be a bigger picture discussion than just 700. There's a lot that goes into design. There's trade offs with every kind of design that you do. And the design that we put here is not perfect. It was getting something with the money that we had left over. Because there were some things that changed along the rail trail, like Triumph Boulevard got cut in. And now people are just scrambling frogging across Triumph Boulevard on the rail trail. So we're like, we've got to do something to eliminate that conflict point. So we were trying to figure out everything we could do to get a bridge up there. So there's no perfect design necessarily, but I do think there's better ways to design.

And there are certain assumptions you have to make to actually create safer streets. Does paint and poles, plastic poles, give us the maximum safety benefit? No. Is it a step better than having nothing? Separation. You're not riding with traffic. Anyway, but the big picture, I think and we have a bike and pedestrian plan that we're putting together. Well, updating. We have one already, but we're updating it and trying to look at different ways to look at design. Not that we have to do it this way necessarily, but I'll go the slides real quick because there are a couple of little examples in there to get thinking about what could be.

Real quick, is the I'll go through this quickly. This is the original bike and ped plan that just shows the cycle track was shown on that back in 2013. We went after the funding. Brad explained that. This is kind of the big picture of some of these corridors. So this right here, if I have my mouse, the solid yellow is existing 700 South. The green is where we got the funding. In the green section, our concept is not to use the plastic poles. It's to make it more like a trail, like where you have either you move the curve out or we have the funding to put the concrete curve. Where there is no curve, we can easily just put the new curb right by the road and put the trail on the backside, just like we do in many parts of town.

And then in the future, we would have to look after funding. But both on our plan and the MAGS regional plan, this is shown to connect over the American Fork For Owner Station, then also America Fork has trails that lead over to their downtown. And then we have on our master plan. 17th West is shown as more of a that's also on the Mag Plan, a regional connection up towards Thanksgiving Point. UDOT put on the Utah Trail Network, now Center Street as having a corridor, whether it's a trail or some kind of an on street bikeway.

So that would intersect with what this project is doing. But the idea is to make a cohesive network. Right now it is a bit isolated, but it should connect everything and be something that not just the super experienced cyclists are going to use, but it should be something that's all ages and abilities. You've to think of your eight year olds and your 80 year olds and everybody between. Is this and again, there's no perfect design.

Is there something that best captures those who otherwise wouldn't want to hop on a bike? If you're riding out in an exposed bike lane that's more in the street, that's just instantly going to turn off a lot of people from wanting to use it. The confident people tend to like that a bit better, but there's just trade offs if they're anything we do. This was the original design, as Brad had mentioned. They actually weren't going to be painted blue. I think we just highlighted that to show people. This was the bridge up north that we put some funding towards. This is the Triumph Bridge. And this is that trail connection in the very north that connected over. One thing I just want to show on South is the left hand side there, that's 1500 North.

We put a trail on that. Again, it was a new build, so we're able to do it that way from the start. 7 South, most of the road was already built out other than some of what we had to finish. So the idea is you have your road travel lanes, your parking lanes, and then your bikeway. The relative position is the same. It's just the way it feels. And the parking situation is not ideal because it does feel like you're out there. You're not against the curb. So I totally understand that. But the relative position of where everybody's moving is pretty similar to what you see elsewhere. This is just a show. This is what it was. Here it is today. Now what could it be? I mean you could put concrete in and painted islands visually.

It's a little more intuitive. You could put tree depending on the utilities underneath you may not be able to put trees but you can get some greenery in there. These are just what ifs. It's not to say this is what we're doing. But if you ever rebuilt one side of the road, you could put the trail behind the curb. Or if you did a complete rebuild, every road has to be rebuilt at some point in time, whether it's ten or fifty years from now. But that's your real opportunity to do things in a different way. There's all kinds of ways you can design it to still beologies and abilities, but maybe work better for how people are parking and how the street functions. This is up in the North end of town. This is unfortunately that apartment building is the one that burned down.

But this is the bikeway right here. It was put behind the curb. So it feels just like a trail like you'd see anywhere else in town. Again, from a new build standpoint, we'd love to do it like this rather than using the poles. The poles are just a very cost effective way to get some space that's separated. It's just you have to weigh the trade offs of the negatives of using that. That's again the other one. Yeah, these are just some examples. We were at a planning conference in Minneapolis and just saw different types of bikeways. That one had a curve in the street.

This one was behind the curb. So there's different ways to do that. I just wanted to say I won't go into the detail at this point, but we've been collecting a lot of data. And going through all the public feedback was very helpful. And I will say from the start that you always want to be learning and doing better, especially as staff or elected officials.

There was good intentions of doing better public outreach on the project. And then we kept getting different stories of when the Stryker was coming out. But next time, we're doing especially a change, any sort of type of project. We want to be very do great communication with the public and make sure they are aware what's going on. It was a little bit of an interesting experiment, not that we wanted to do that experiment to bestow this new design upon the people and then have to see what they do and try and figure it out.

That was definitely not the intent, but certainly we're going learn from that. But through the public outreach we've gotten over the past year or so, there's all the different points. People are saying, hey, this is a problem, or this is problem, visibility, different types of conflicts. We've been getting out there and trying to make observations and get data on a lot of these different issues. Just some quick trail data just to show how 700 South and maybe some of our other trails in town.

These are kind of more of your peak amounts of trail traffic that you see. So Rail Trail, Murdoch Canal Trail are busiest trails. You know, they get up over 1,000 people a day on the more of the summertime use. Jordan River Rail Trail in the different locations see a little less use. 7 South, the bikeway itself saw around a 160 people, 360 for the whole road if you're comparing including all the pedestrians in that as well.

Rail Trail farther down closer downtown because it kinda fizzles out, gets a little less use than one like the Traverse Trail, Terrace Trail going off from the Viewpoint Middle School up there gets a little bit less use as well. I just want observations. These are kids getting out of school. To And it's interesting to see how what they do. Obviously, the crossing guards helping them get across there.

Then when you look at when they get to other side of the street there, the difference between 17th West going north is just a little painted bike lane. And most of the children choose to ride on the sidewalk, whereas going on the bikeway, most of the children choose to go on the bikeway. Now again, there's perceived safety and actual safety. We want to see both. Like to the comment that you made, James, people feel safe. But is it really safety? We want to make sure, obviously, both. We want people to be comfortable using it. But we also don't want to put people in an increased risky situation. So that's certainly something we want to keep looking at.

We probably don't have time tonight. We can talk about the differences of different types of bikeways and bike lane types. There's pros and cons like we were talking earlier of doing any different types. Generally with this type of bikeways, the conflicts at the intersections and the driveways is where the safety risk happens. At like a typical bike lane, the entire bike lane is exposed. So at any point, a car can enter the bike lane. So you get a lot of people that can be hit in that kind of situation as well. So there's, like I said, pros and cons and trade offs to the ways we do it. And I don't know if we need to watch through all this, you can see all these different ways people rollerblading, kids riding scooters together. The bikeway effectively shortens the crossing distances of the streets.

You don't have as wide of a road to cross. You've people on skateboards, people going for evening bike ride, couples riding their little scooters around, people flying the flag on their cargo bikes. Even some of the confident cyclists in their Peloton are still using that. We have seen in some of these, there's pretty good yield compliance at the crossing points. The problem we see is the sidewalk crossings not marked, so people tend to pull past that. But the green markings of the bikeway people actually creates a lot of awareness but you can see a lot of just interactions there.

I

think Better wrap it up. I appreciate this. This is very helpful and I think we all want bike lanes right? We just want to figure out the best configuration and style and I know for time's sake maybe we could Mr. Mayor we can push some of the other agenda items to the end of the regular session if if you're good with it.

I'll take a motion. Oh, yeah. We'll put so. Yeah, I don't need a motion yet. Yeah. We will yeah. So, let's go ahead and have a recess because our meeting next meeting starts at seven. So we'll come back and we'll do two point seven, two point eight, two point nine at the end of our city council.

Yeah and I think just to wrap up this discussion, I think just having some options. So if there's a consensus here that we would like a different configuration, we'd appreciate some of the your suggested steps on choosing a new configuration. What would that would mean financially? And then we can go from there. Maybe we could do that at a session later this month.

Another work session. Yep. Yeah. Okay. We'll take a recess for fifteen minutes.

Gentlemen, Ladies welcome. We welcome all that are in their chambers tonight. Welcome to our city council meeting. I'm Mayor Benz. We have a full council tonight.

Council member Newell, council member Harrison, council member Freeman, council member Stallings, and council member Lockhart, and, of course, our staff. We appreciate you being here. To get started tonight, we will stand and have a pledge of allegiance that'll be led by councilperson Stallings. If you'll all rise. Thank you.

Man, this is going be rough tonight, but we'll get through it. Our first time in the business today is we'll turn some time over to the Utah Attorney General's office for an award that has been awarded. We welcome all those who are here for that award.

Good evening, everyone. Is it okay if I face is that all? All right. I mean no disrespect by facing my back to you guys. Good evening, everyone.

By way introduction, for those of you who do not know me, which is everyone in here, my name is Sete Aulai. I'm a captain from the attorney general's office, the Utah attorney general's office. And these guys are not my bodyguards, rather they are also a part of the attorney general's office. Part of my role as serving as the captain at the AG's office is I I oversee the Internet Crimes Against Children's Task Force as commander. And to my right, have sergeant de los Santos, I have lieutenant Will Chow

and

then sergeant Juan Escobedo. This is the leadership of ICAC task force for our state. I'll I'll try not to take too much time. I know you guys have a busy agenda and a busy night but I feel it's appropriate that you guys understand where we're coming from and why we're here and what we're here to do. Utah's ICAC, the Internet Crimes Against Children, we are one of 61 task forces across this great nation of ours.

Some states because of their size, given their size, the population, they may have more than one ICAC such as California where I'm from. They have five ICACs. Texas has three, Florida has three, the state of New York they have two, Illinois has two, again because of the population. But in our state have one ICAC task force and part of my obligation is to communicate between the Attorney General himself, General Brown, and the Department of Justice with what's going on in our state. Now Utah's iJack, of course, I'm very, very biased.

It's the sports in me. I'm very biased. And I love I like to say that we're the number one iJack in the country. Department, this city, is a huge reason that we are the number one ICAC in the country. I I can't tell you guys how proud I am that we are associated and that we have this strong partnership with this police department and the work that they do.

Utah ZICAC consists of 93 agencies. And 93 it's not 93 just locally, mean 93 from all the way down to St. George, from Grand County where Moab is, all the way out to Tooele. All of us come together to represent this wonderful and strong task force called the Internet Crimes Against Children, with one mission in mind, and it's to save a child. What other mission, what other goal or vision is better than that?

That's literally what we do here. And we actually see the fruits of our labor in this task force by the by the work of all those of all those officers and detectives and investigators who are part of it. All of them have one goal in mind is to save a child and make a difference. Utah ZYJAK, busy it's one. Just in the year of 2025, we received 11,000, over 11,000, cyber tip line reports from the National Center on the Missing and Exploited Children.

Now you guys hear that, 11,000. And you're like, dang, that's a lot. Yeah, it is a lot. But to put into perspective, 11,000 to our state, that is what Los Angeles ICAC gets in one month, just to put into perspective. Of those 11,000, over 100 of those came back to this city alone, to Lehi City.

Not Saratoga, not Lehi and Saratoga, not Lehi and Eagle Mountain, this city alone. Over a 100 of those came back to this city. One of the stats that I love to see is the number of rescues that we have. Our task force statewide made over a 160 rescues of children being abused sexually by the Internet. Over a 160.

It's crazy that that's happened. Over over 15 of those children who were rescued came back to this city. Our task force arrested over 320 offenders who perpetuate the demand for child sex abuse material. Over 60 of those arrests came from this city. Now am I saying that there's a huge problem in the city of Lehi?

No. But Internet crimes definitely happens here. It is well and alive here. This this city, police department is one of three that receives the most reports in this county. So you have Lehigh, you have Provo and Orem who are the big three who receive the most amount work within this county.

And that makes sense given the the population within those cities. But the the example that this police department has shown and exhibited for the rest of the state even to us at the AG's office is like no other. I appreciate the partnership that we have with the special victims unit from this department. The example that sergeant Jeff Smith and his crew have done to make sure we accomplish our mission as a task force. They not only lead and set the example for us as a state, but they do it on a nationwide basis.

Just this past December, the task force held an undercover chat operation and that was hosted here by this department. It was their idea and it was their initiative to put something on like that. It's not a small task to put on that type of operation. It takes a lot of effort, a lot of time, and a lot of hours to put something like that together, to bring over 20 agencies together, all again with one goal, to rescue a child. The leadership of this police department by you, chief, and your command staff to support not only your special victims unit, but to support the task force is appreciated.

Attorney general Brown is very grateful for you, Jeff, and your crew and for all you guys do. And the reason why we're here is just to recognize your great efforts and to award you guys as the affiliate agency of the year for our task force. So with that, if I can have you and your crew come up here and accept your award, please. Gentlemen, if can show this to you, and then I'll put it up in air too, and show everyone, and turn around, show our crew. Again, this award and I know this crew, especially Bryson, he's like, Sete, you said enough.

Shut up already. Sit down. But it goes and said that the job, the work, the hours that they put in to make a difference not only within the city of Lehi, not only within our great state of Utah, but across the country, the work that they do. And this is just a small token of our appreciation for all that you guys do. So again, ladies and gentlemen, if you guys join me in a round of applause to award our special thank you.

Chief, do you want to make any comments? Are you good?

I guess just real quick. I'd I would echo what the task force commander said. And it's a great partnership between the Attorney General's office and our officers and the other members that participate on that task force. They work hard. They do have that one goal. They do phenomenal work. So thank you for your time. We'll get out of here. Get out of out of your your way.

Thank you, Chief. Congrats. It's awesome. Okay. Thank you very much.

We will now open for public comment. We'll open it up to the public if you'd like to come up and speak. We'll do it for twenty minutes. You have three minutes. If you'll just please state your name and come on up. So we'll open that up right now.

Good evening. My name is Chad Watkins. I'm here representing myself as a citizen and representing a group called Strong Towns Lehigh. I'd like to discuss curb extensions around our schools. And just to give context about curb extension, if you're not familiar with the term, that's sidewalk extensions, specifically around intersections. So narrowing the roadway around those. We actually have a few examples of those around here in Lehigh. But the reason for this discussion and the impetus for this comment was the recent hit of a student at Lehigh High School while they were crossing the street. And the curb extensions here in Lehigh are not theoretical idea. We actually have run pilot programs.

Our group has worked with Luke Segmiller and Mike West. Preliminary results of these have been very clear. Average vehicle speeds dropped and vehicle stopping compliance has increased. Curb extensions work because they physically change driver behavior. They narrow the roadway, shortening crossing distances and make intersections feel more constrained, forces drivers to slow down and pay attention.

By doing this, the street itself tells drivers how to behave. And this matters around our schools where kids are crossing streets every day. Children are smaller, less visible, and more unpredictable than adults. They deserve infrastructure that protects them, not just reminders to be careful. There's a psychological benefit here.

Most crashes don't happen because someone's malicious. They happen because people are on autopilot, following habit, and not actively thinking. Curve extensions are a tool that we have to help interrupt that line of thinking and help drivers snap out of that routine. That moment of attention is often what prevents collision. These improvements do also help everyone else parents pushing strollers, people using wheelchairs, older residents.

We have proof in our own pilots that this works. We know the science of speed and injury, and we know where the highest stakes are, near schools where the most vulnerable people are. We're very aware, like I said, that we're running pilots with Luke and Mike and everything. We'd like to have these pilots extend more out to the schools as well. So thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Watkins.

Hi, there. My name is Leah Jay. I'm also from Strong Towns Lehigh and I also wanted to talk about the pedestrian car crash that happened last week. So I think there's in accidents like these what you see on the Facebook comments is like it was the driver's fault the driver should have been not speeding it was the students fault the students should have been paying attention and I think the narrative needs to change so that it's not like whose fault is it but how can we design our roads so that a lapse of attention which is something that all humans do regularly does not end in someone's life ending paralyzed or a traumatic injury and as we can see like even that minor accident caused a lot of trauma for the students of the high school and the citizens of our city and so I think it's important to ask ourselves why does The United States have more of these fatal and higher risk accidents than other developed countries? Because they have cell phones just like we do, they have alcohol when they drive just like we do, and there's actually a lot of data to show that we build our streets differently than other developed countries, or a lot of other developed countries.

One of the biggest differences is that we have kind of stopped distinguishing between streets and roads in North America. So a street is a place for people, it's a place where business happens, where people are walking, where money is made. And a road is a way to get from point A to point B. And when you cross those two, people die. And so it's like a big deal to have roads that are dedicated to transit and roads that are dedicated to people.

And the other thing too is what Chad was talking about is one really great tool is curb extensions. Because when you're on a street, you can get drivers to snap out of that automatic mode without having to use extra police force or extra signage, which have data to show that neither of those really work that well. Whereas the design of the street, if you can narrow it, if you can optically narrow it, if you can make it feel less like a highway and more like a street, you can naturally slow the speeds of drivers.

So

I just wanted to make those two invitations that as continuing to plan new modes of transportation in Lehi that we consider are we putting our streets like where students are walking on the same roads as our major thoroughfares? Like that's probably not a good idea. You can think about 2,300. I think there's like three or four schools on that huge thoroughfare now. I feel like that's not the last time a student is going to be hit traveling to school. Same thing with Main Street. Main Street is a major thoroughfare, that's where all of this commerce and business is happening. That's not the last time someone is going to be hit. To distinguish between roads and streets and to add curb extensions. Thank you.

Thanks Leah. Any other public comment? Okay, we'll close the public comment. Okay, we'll go to a consent agenda. First 4.1, the approval of purchase orders. Is there any question on on those?

Mister mayor, I move that we approve the consent agenda as presented. I'll second it.

Any comments on the motion? All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

The it over over 2026 city council meeting schedule. You to have that schedule. I know it's been given to you. I will open that up for discussion.

Mister mayor, if I may. I think I do like version of our that we discussed last week to hold more work sessions. I think this will be a busy year. I think that allows under the Open Meetings Act for us to do some more collaboration. Obviously we need to take in consideration all of us up here as far as the work sessions go so that it works best.

So I would say based on council member Lockhart's feedback last week and I want to hear her thoughts. I haven't had a chance to talk to her directly yet today but if we were you know with school schedules everything else if we were still able to hold a work session on the second and fourth Thursday of the month. If we were to move that earlier potentially you know 11:30 or noon or something if and we stuck to about a two hour schedule would that be more accommodating Emily just interested to hear your thoughts.

Mr. Mayor may I? I appreciate the question. I can vote for what's in front of me today the TBD on the work sessions. And on a case by case basis, I'm doing what we can. I want to be accommodating as much as possible. I think we're all a team player here. But what's before me I can vote for.

I think personally I think I'd like to add the standing work sessions ideally the second and fourth Thursday and if we do have to cancel and that's fine we can always cancel or at a minimum of at least you know maybe the second Thursday of the month having an earlier work session. So that during the motion I think I would support amending the schedule as presented in this agenda to add at least one work session ideally two but I'm interested to also hear from the other council members.

I would be fine adding one work one or two work sessions to a Thursday afternoon depending on the time that our schedules allow. It would I think it would we all would all need to agree on it. And one thing I do want to discuss is when the budget retreat would be because I think we should settle on that date. We had a poll go out and some dates proposed were January 27, January 29, February 3, February. And I looked at all the statistics and none of us could make all of to make one afternoon work.

So so

let me help you. That's actually gonna come up in the work session at the end. Okay. So that will be discussed. So we'll stick right now just to the calendar to the to the meeting schedule.

I know I talked with a couple of you like who've contacted me. I I like how this is presented where the work sessions are to be determined because I think it's just as easy to put a work session on as it is to take it off. My only thing is public perception if we get down the road and we start canceling a lot of these because we just don't have items to discuss. I think that's much worse for public perception as why we're canceling so many work sessions rather than just putting them on as needed. Rachel brought up something to me which I I really like today.

So sorry. Still your thunder. She talked about possibly moving the regular session up earlier starting at 06:00 and being able to possibly have work session items come after the meeting. I like that idea because I really agree with her point of that would be fresher when it came to items that we're voting on. And then we also wouldn't be holding back public and applicants on late meetings if we moved our work session items the end.

I spoke with Mayor Chris Carne in Saratoga about theirs today. They actually start at six as well. So I know I'm kind of like throwing an audible here with a start time that, like, you guys haven't really had time to think about today. But when Rachel brought that up today, I thought that was a really good idea because I I do agree that when sometimes we may start this work sessions like we did today at 04:30, and then we don't know how long we're gonna have audience members sitting here if we go break at 06:30 for thirty minutes. So another possible idea with that that may help with some of the other concerns that were brought up.

But then at that time, if the meeting's really late, we could say that we're not gonna have time for these work session items. Let's let's do a Thursday meeting and do these work session items then. Or maybe we don't really have that many work session items to go through this week it's going to be a light week in two weeks so we'll get through them at the end but

and mister mayor if I may I just I really struggle with the Thursdays because of the planning commissioners and all that they may have or that staff may have for them. I'm open to like those TBD work sessions being on Mondays if if that's better. I know DRC is Wednesdays. I was just trying to think through but I I really think we need to respect the the recommending body that that has public hearings and we'll need use of this space and those things happen on Thursdays but I'm open to if staff is in a position where they think Mondays could work that works for me.

I would love to hear from staff and openly give your thoughts about it freely. I think if we did it early enough like a one to 02:30 thing or twelve or 12:30 or whatever, don't know, whatever time you want to say to be done. And I know some of us have constraints with picking up children or, you know, other work things. If we can if we need to have an end time, if we can do one, I think a compromise might be one Thursday afternoon or something. That's what I that's what I would think might be a good compromise.

I'll I'll speak on behalf of admin and then Kim can speak on behalf of planning.

I don't I don't

think it matters much to us other than Wednesdays would be really hard. I think any other day of the week would be, okay, we're here anyway. Our concern was more for you guys and your schedules but Kim, I don't know if you have anything to add.

No, I I would agree with that and I I appreciate Wednesdays are definitely busy and sometimes DRC can spill the way into, like, 5PM hour. And Thursdays, I think it was early enough in the day so that it didn't conflict with us trying to get ready for planning commission. If we had a planning commission that evening, we could make that work as well. Yeah. But if we're already here at the office, we can work around what's convenient for you.

I've got strong comp feelings on this. I I don't like that we are looking at combining the work session with a regular session. I think a work session needs to be standalone. I think we need to dedicate our time preparing for a regular session for the agenda items that are coming before us. And one or the other is going to fall on the wayside.

I don't like to be decided meetings. We all have lives to plan. We have other meetings to plan. If I know there's a city council meeting, that takes priority over other things that I'm invited to attend or other meetings that come up. I I liked your original idea, James, of having two an extra work session a month on a Thursday during the day would be great.

I I just think it needs to be separate, and I actually prefer what we have been doing, instead of combining them. You know, we having a separate work session the first week of the month. But I'm I was totally open to moving it to another day to have another free week to do our other obligations. So, as far as starting at 06:00, I kinda have concerns with that, too. I know back in the day when I'd go to school board meetings and they started at six it was hard to get there at six when people are getting off work to get there on time.

And since this is a regular meeting where we have public hearings and public comment, I think we need to make it accessible. I don't think 07:00 it's later, so it gives people time to get home from work and get to these meetings if they want to come. It's early enough for older folks that they can if we move up the heavy public hearing items or the items that the public is interested in commenting on, if we move those two more at the beginning of the agenda, I think that would help a lot. I think a lot of people would appreciate that. Yeah.

Mondays before the meeting would be difficult too because, again, I think I want that time to prep for the regular council meeting. So I I would support starting our regular meetings at 07:00, having our pre council meetings, and having our work sessions on another day. And, it sounds like Thursday is okay with staff. You know? And that could be anytime during the day as early as people are available or, you know, as late as we can go without interfering with other meetings that's that's kind of where I'm at.

Mr. Mayor I think and I I thank my colleagues for for their input. I I do think we will use most of our work sessions even if they are scheduled and to support what Michelle said I think it's hard to add them on last second because we all have family or work obligations that may prevent us from doing something last second. So I would tend to support the proposal plus the second and fourth Thursdays in the early afternoon or earlier depending depending on on the the preference preference of of the the council. Council.

Mr. Mayor if I may. It was my understanding that due to some of the council members conflicts on the first and the third week due to their work schedule that we wouldn't be holding work sessions Tuesdays on the first and the thirds but what I'm hearing is that to pay no regard to the other councils work schedule we're gonna put work sessions in the middle of a day on Thursday afternoons with no regard for that council members work schedule yet we're not going to hold work sessions on a normal typical Tuesday on the first and the third week to accommodate that all I'm asking is for what's fair and applicable for everyone so we all have an opportunity to attend.

I appreciate that. Just so you're aware council personal locker. I think the elimination of the first Tuesday was so that we were tier two weeks. So, you had an open week, another open week for your other meetings. So I don't think there was obligations? Correct. And I don't I don't know that there was anything malicious there. So

I'm I'm happy to to do the right the 2025 schedule of the first week of the month doing a work session and then kind of continue with some of these pre council work sessions we here. If we treat them kind of like we did today, but if we are doing like a heavy duty thing going over a master plan of some sort or something that I do think it maybe on the first Tuesday or some separate time for it. I want to make sure we all make it there. And if and if it's a no go for a Thursday afternoon, I mean for me personally I'd want to be done by 02:30 or three on a Thursday afternoon. I don't know if if Commissioner, Commissioner, if I don't have a counselor Lockhart if you are have like a firm like no you can't do it or if there's a certain time or if you're just like no I would just if you're if that's a no for you.

Yeah so I it comes to no shock we are a part time council. It should shock no one, no member of the public or any staff member or any member sitting up here that we all have full time jobs. And it seems like I'm being put in a position where as the provider for my home, know, you're you're asking me to not provide for my family which I love my commitment to Lehi and I'm happy to have conversations that I need to have but it's a it's a sacrifice that you're asking me to make that you won't that I'm understanding the others won't make for the first and the third week and I am committed to the residents of Lehi and I can have conversations that I need to have but I'm asking for a professional courtesy to recognize that I am provider for my home.

Yeah. Sorry, I don't want you to misinterpret what I'm saying. I definitely respect that. And I just wanted to make sure that your work schedule wasn't flexible with that. Because like I work evenings, so that's why I'm seeing the time constraint for me. So I just wanted to double check that time constraint that you have as well. So thanks for clarifying.

Yeah, I just want to be sensitive to everyone. I think it's really important that we have a time here that can work for everyone and I know we all have different schedules. I want to be sensitive to Councilmember Lockhart and also you too, Councilmember Freeman. I thought I had a great idea. So but I I know that it it worked really well to have the the first Tuesday be a work session and to have, you know, our regular meetings on the second and third.

That might I I would be open to that. I don't know. I mean, I'm not a fan of the doing the extra work sessions, the the extra one a month unless it was actually if it was necessary to do so. But just to because I I don't see the the same need, I guess, with we're also having these pre council meetings and the presentations and stuff go there. But that may change, like, as it is right now. So it's like that's why I'm I'm open to the fact that we may try something, and we may need to amend it and we may need to change it to fit better with what work schedules are and also what the needs are so.

Mr. Mayor I think you know obviously we we all want to do its best. We all have work schedules and family commitments as well. I think maybe as a compromise we could try one Thursday. So the maybe the second Thursday of the month as a work session. We could leave the fourth Thursday as a TBD just kind of you know we can kind of try to keep it open in case something comes up to call a meeting and maybe just keep the 07:00 with the pre council prior to that starting at 05:30. That's something I'd be willing to compromise on.

Okay question here, councilor Harrison what do you think about going to the first Tuesday having a work session and then the rest of the schedule as is.

I think again my preference I like the fact that we would have two open weeks for assignments. We may have additional assignments. I know that city staff would appreciate an extra evening with their families as well. So for me I think I would much much more prefer the second or fourth Thursday.

Questions those have complex. I I have a concern with that. When we we've heard from a council member that that doesn't work. The Thursday afternoon doesn't work. But what about an earlier Tuesday? I don't know what time. Because typically on on the the work sessions, we would start early. I'm feeling like it might be four that we've like, it's all kind of a board.

In the past, we started at four.

Yeah. So if it was a work session starting at four on Tuesdays, that was an hour and a half to two hours, would that fit schedules better than the fact of having it Thursday middle of the day.

So are you speaking just to the first Tuesday of the month?

Just the first Tuesday, yeah.

You're talking the first city council or the first week of the month?

First week of the month would be the the work session on Tuesday starting at four. And then additional work sessions as needed.

And personally I I guess it would be the same as before.

And I

would say because of that we're all the everybody meets on the Tuesdays. So usually that's kind of kept as a date knowing that everybody's at city council. So I don't typically have other meetings scheduled on that day because everybody assumes you're going to be at city council where I often will have Thursday ones. I know we're not talking about Thursday evening but.

Mayor, may suggest?

Yes, please.

Okay. I I'm willing to compromise. I said I didn't want it on Monday because I do spend a lot of time prepping for these meetings when we especially when we have bigger agendas. But what about Monday? Whatever time. That could even be in the evening. I mean, that's is there are thoughts on that.

I appreciate that. I can do a Monday evening.

So we're talking about like the second or fourth Monday. Right?

Yeah.

I'm I'm I'm okay with that.

We could try it. It and I will just tell you from my experience because I research everything that was on our agenda. It will be it it might be difficult. But, you know, if we get more of the information sooner, that might help. It's just, a lot of things come up last minute, and you tend to get people calling you last minute and it might be difficult but I think it might accommodate everybody that way.

Sorry. Go ahead.

I was just going to say would that be something we could do at like a 4PM or would we want to I'm just just thinking I guess there's no reason during a work session when there's no public comment to do it at seven p. M. We could potentially do it at four p. M. But I want to make sure it's good with

Yeah, I come from West Jordan so that's where I work. And so I got got here at 04:29 today due to traffic. Right? So if 04:30 would be appreciated. And I and I really appreciate the the olive branch here. Thank you.

And that might be a good change because typically our work systems start at four. So different day, a little later, that might help everybody. I would

I just okay. Sorry. That's a new idea. So I would rather just stay with work sessions before the council at four or whatever just because I if I'm going to work, I'm going at four. So it's just another night.