City Council - Regular Meeting

It all adds up. Landscape architecture, you gotta do all the planning first. You you you know this. You you you see all the Pickleball courts are about $800. So it's really not that 6,000 rounds last year played at it.

That's some significant play out there. And it's done on on smaller thousand dollars at at Creekside. The thing that I want to key in on on this thing is the amenities side here too because here's Dragonfly. Dragonfly has has a 2.1 when it comes to amenities. These are these are things like restrooms, benches, bag holders, tea areas, you know, things that that you would think of, oh, this golf course is nice.

Dragonflies at the bottom. Then Lehi in 2024, you guys put a seasonal employee down there, and you started mowing it. And in 2026, we're up a 130% year over year, and we've moved to number 84 most played in The United States. You got a top 100 course in the entire country from a seasonal employee in a lawn mower. So here's the history of of Dragonfly.

This is this is coming from UDisc. It's an app that pretty much every disc golfer uses to score their rounds. And in fact, there was a study done here by some statisticians at BYU that actually got on the ground to count how many people are playing versus uDisc, they determined that it's a factor of five. So we can double all these we can quadruple, quintuple all these numbers if you really feel like it. But in about April, I think it was, we came to City Council and asked if we could take over the wetland down there, they said, yep, sure.

As long as we don't have to do anything, that's fine with us. And we went down there and got started. In November, the first 10 baskets went in, and we saw a jump in play as people got excited about it, and then a dip because it's a 10 whole course with no keypads. This so that historical record will show April. And like this review says, love this course.

It just keeps getting better. And people are noticing. Over the last year, it went from a 3.9 reviewed course to a 4.2. And you can see down here, it looks incredible. It's time to come back. Thank you for all the volunteers. People are loving it down there. Now in July 2026, I bit off more than I can chew, and I'm hosting the United States Women's Disc Golf Championship. We're using four courses, Brighton up at 9,000 feet. That's where the FPO will play, and that's the Female Pro Open. That's going to be televised on Amazon. It's going to be all over the world. It's going be a fantastic display of sport in the mountains. Creekside and Roots. Roots is actually a historic course as well.

That was also designed by Eisteddf back in 1981. And then Dragonfly. We're putting the pro 50 year old women and the pro 55 year old women here, as well as the advanced level amateurs here on Saturday and Sunday. So there will be a champion there will be champions crowned in Lehi. Currently, we've got about 350 competitors registered. We expect over 400. It's open to spectators. In fact, we've got tickets on sale right now on the website, so make sure you get some tickets and head on head on up there because it's gonna be a spectacle. So here's what's coming to town. We've got 45 states represented.

This is one of the first majors or there's not very many majors on the West Side. Typically, the East Side get them all. So we're getting a lot of people from California coming. Texas, Washington, Arizona, Idaho, a lot of a lot of Western states are really excited about this. And we've got 16 international registrations from eight countries so far flying here for this. Sports Salt Lake, the pre event impact has this thing coming in with 4,500,000 of business sales, supporting almost 800 jobs and almost over 2,000 overnight attendees for 3,600 room nights. This is real economic impact. This is not just a drop in the bucket. This is significant. So really, we host the major for four days out there.

It's certainly high for three sixty five days a year. It's already a jam, and so now we're asking you guys to make it generational. You've got 40 acres of natural wetland, green fairways, a championship layout. It's a top 100 course right now on 45,000. So what does it take to take it to the next level? Well, native shade trees. Pretty much all the trees down there are Russian olives that we're going to be battling forever. They shoot, they take your hat off when you're in the woods, they make you bleed, they poke through your shoe, and you don't even know that the thorn is there until five days later and you step on a rock and it pokes you. Improved pathways. Your staff has already started working on this over the last week, so that's really exciting.

Boardwalks through the wetlands, really embracing the wetlands for what they are. Tea areas, mud free tea pads with benches and bag holders. These relatively small ass, but when you're thinking about that, you might as well have a landscape architect design the space, just like all your other parks. And restroom and water. We want to complete the park experience down there. We want families to be able to go down there and relax and enjoy their time. And like I said before, landscape architecture. This is something that disc golf does not get because it's sold to City Council as something that volunteers can build. And volunteers are not landscape architects. Volunteers cannot unlock the full capacity of the land.

That's a professional's job. And we should pay a professional to do a good job. This is really what's exciting about Dragonfly is Draper down there has spent probably $50 in trying to irrigate their expansive land down in the river bottoms to support tree growth. You guys have water table access. You can drop trees down there right now.

We could just go dig a hole and plop a tree in there and it'll probably grow just fine as long as we're choosing the right varietals, which is another landscape architecture job. So trees, paths, restrooms, ADA, just standard park infrastructure, the stuff that is all over your city already. So your own master plan is already saying that you're gonna do this, which to me is is just like great. You know? Because when when I saw this, was very excited about it because on 08/05/2025, your system plan says that this is either completed or underway, and it's certainly not completed, so it most likely is underway.

So site improvements at Dragonfly Park, including a pavilion restroom, storage, paved parking, fencing, and pathways. So Dragonfly is already in the plan. It's more about scope. How much money are we going to put into it? And based off of the play counts, it's obvious to see that you can put as much money into this as you want, you'll get your outsized return by hosting these large scale events. And according to the same master plan, 80% of your residents support funding parking improvements. You had 2,300 responses. The top priorities are shade trees, trail connectivity, natural areas, and open space. That is Dragonfly. So we just want you to fund Dragonfly like any other park.

Volunteers built it, the community plays it, and the major arrives in three months. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Any questions, comments you'd like to make for Scott?

Just one question, Mr. Mayer, for Steve. I'd just love to hear kind of the history from the Parks' perspective on maintaining this area.

Funny that I was here the same meeting, but he was biting his tongue. I was not biting my tongue, you can believe that. Realistically, I'll tell you the same thing I told him then. The minute that we allow the volunteer group in here, it creates work for us. This is the fruit of that work is now we have this wonderful thing, and the volunteers have done amazing work. I'm going to call out Aaron specifically. We actually hired Aaron last year to go mow this. We do have so much foot traffic down here. We do have all of that. And, it's another one of those projects that is this the direction that the city wants to go.

And I think that's the hard part is we already have how many unfinished projects. This is another one. Do I see this have great potential? Absolutely. Is there a use for this? Yes. I mean, there are so many positives on this. Again, the the whole issue of this is going to be is how do we maintain and how do we support this? So

Do you have, I guess, just an estimate of the cost and manpower that would go into it just for the the minimal amount of maintenance to make it

Well, that's the problem. It's not minimal. This is this is a weekly mowing. This is this, if we do plant trees down here, yeah, we do have water table half half the time. We will have to put in irrigation. This is no different than building any other park except for you're not gonna irrigate all of the turf grass. That is gonna be natural. Off the top of my head, I think we could do it 800 to $900,000 and have a great project. And he's absolutely right. We can go out for grants on this, and they are very successful.

8 to $900,000.

And then for a year for maintenance? Is that what you're asking? Or are you

Yeah. I guess one time versus ongoing.

If the partnership continues the way that it is, these guys are pretty self sustainable. They clean up after themselves. They're very good that way. We would eventually need to put in restrooms and actual parking structure, things of that nature that we would have to have staff there every day, which is, you know, seasonally more we're not going to heat the restroom or any of that. So we're talking a seasonal employee, maybe two. And then mowing on top of that, we have to continue and actually increase that dramatically. We have a lot of work down there on trees. So another fifty, sixty hours a year trimming and maintaining trees

down there as well.

So as far as an actual budget number off the

top of my head,

I don't know. That's a hard one.

Okay. Thanks, Steve.

I have a question. Oh, for Scott. Sorry. So at this point, do you have what you need for you're going to be hosting you're good for July, but this is looking forward if the city wants this to continue to be an appealing place for people to play or increase the appeal even, I guess, right? Is that what

I'm Yeah. Kind I've of cool in my heels since we had the discussion earlier this year about the expectation of the city versus what we want. I'd love to have some benches down there at the very minimum, especially because we're going to be having 50 and 55 year old women out there. There's currently one bench. I bought it from the University of Utah surplus store for $10 It's probably my greatest achievement, my best find.

And that's sitting on Hole 11 down there or nine. But one bench I mean, we can have more benches. So that's a that's a relatively small ask that that that we could install. But other than that, you know, I I think we've got our parking figured out. We're just going to park along that road there and along the frontage road there by those farms.

So we don't necessarily have to figure out parking. We need to make any giant large scale things. I do need to put two T pads down there that I've said that the nonprofit would fund to make sure that there's no friction at the Lehigh budget that's not unanticipated. That's going to cost about $2,500 And we're going to hire just some local guys to do that. Can

I just get a can I get a show of hands of who's here to support this project, or who is here? Okay. Thanks.

Any other questions? I'm going to keep a question.

Yeah. What's the timeline for going out for the grant and receiving the grant?

As well?

So the grant window now is currently closed for this cycle. They close in in March. Alright. Like, right around mid March, they close. So now is the time to start planning so that so so that we can just submit when ready. Okay. Elevate Utah has $10,000 to submit to to put in on a grant as a as a nonprofit partner in this. We'd love to be able to support this project with with some not just volunteers, but also some cash recognition as well. Because that's $20 in the project, so that's good use of the public's money, in my opinion.

Any other questions? Brad, I'm going to slip over to you because I do know that there's a major corridor planned in the future that would come this way that I think probably affects some of the impact of this. Do you mind speaking to that?

Sure. Yes,

as many of you know,

the Pontiac Express Parkway Roadway is slated for extension from Center Street East. It it crosses the bottom end of Dragonfly Park. I'm not entirely sure whether it crosses any of the fairways or or the tee boxes or anything, but I just wanted to let everyone know that that it does seem that it does seem to have impact that area. I mean, I I could pull it up on Google if you want, but I I don't know if that makes any changes. As as you know, we're in the process of contracting with our designers right now for that project.

You'll probably see that contract in the next two weeks. But, yeah, that's a major project. The the proposed design right now is a two lane roadway, which extends 19 over in American Fork. We'll be buying a 115 feet of right of way. Where we need to, we won't need to buy it through this area because it's owned by the city. But it's up to you if you'd like me to show you that proposed alignment. I can do so. You know, we've been out, done all of our wetlands mitigation, you know, wetlands delineations. We've started our botanical work. But, I just want to remind the council of those plans.

I think we're good with that as that goes into work. Just something

to have

in the back of your mind as that comes. Any other questions for Scott?

Thank you. Thank you for your time.

Okay. We'll put item two, presentation by Mr. Mike West. There he is.

Always good to be back. Thought you got rid of me earlier. Here we go. I know I come talk to you guys about, like, walking and biking a lot. There are a lot of other things for us to play in the city, which is good.

But, this is a plan we've been working on for the last about three and a half years. Despite all this talk about bikes and everything I do, I used to be one of the biggest auto enthusiasts out there, which is kind of crazy. But, anyway, moving on. I just kind of wanted to get some basic feedback from the council. We have eight main goals of the plan, which are basically what we hope to do within the next five to ten years.

These are all based on vision and goals are based from the public outreach that we've done. We've done a goal setting exercise with the steering committee, the planning commission, and then previous council. And then these, yeah, goals are on a five to ten year horizon. We did things like taking the planning commission out on a bike ride. That's a poster from when we were trying to see what people's priorities were.

There was like 40 or 50 different ideas that people had put into it. And it kind of got tapered down to these eight goals. But the main themes that we heard, especially from the public feedback, were safety and connectivity. So those are the biggest things that people feel like we're missing in terms of trying to get out and using, whether walking or biking. So the vision at the time, which again, we can always look at changing this.

But the vision based on all of that was that Lehi will be a safe and comfortable for families and individuals of all ages and abilities to walk, bike, or roll to their desired destinations. So, again, based on the previous counsel, I know there's three new members now, which is why it's so important to come back and talk about this. But the idea of having this being a family friendly plan and about the safety and connectivity, That's kind of where this vision comes in. I'm going to go through the goals. These were by no means in any order of importance.

This is just how they kind of got thrown into the presentation. So you can obviously direct me as to which ones you feel are more important than others, or if there's other things we should be looking into. But the first one is basically to update development code and design standard requirements in a way that city departments can agree upon to help increase safety and comfort. That might mean creating internal committees to discuss these types of changes with planning, parks, engineering, public works, public safety, and then propose these types of changes and bring them forth to the council after discussion. Goal two is to add 20% of the missing sidewalks along undeveloped roads.

So I know the engineering department's done a lot of work mapping out where we're missing sidewalks and getting an idea of what the priorities would be. This goal would say, you know, within the next five to ten years, we should be trying to go after 20%. We can get a little more information on what that would look like and bring that back to the council as well. I was going say, stop me anytime if you want if you have questions or comments. Yeah, identifying some funding sources.

I know you see the BG, but perhaps there's other places we can look as well. Another one which the power department's already been helping out with, complete lighting of 16 miles of our shared use paths or trails. We did kind of our first pilot along the rail trail between 12th West and Triumph Boulevard. They seemed to look really nice and provide some really good lighting. The point of this is to make it safer, especially in wintertime, but when it's dark, both for personal safety, but also so you're not crashing and hitting things in the middle of the night.

But yeah, a lot of the benefits that come with that. I'm not going to go through too many of these details for the sake of time. Go forward is just to focus the expansion of the network to connect key destinations that include things like schools, transit. You know, front runner station is really important, connecting neighboring communities, but in Downtown Lehi. We can map and try and decide what those priorities are working with you as a council. Number five is to create an additional 11 miles of paved trails and another 12 miles of on street bike facilities, which

can come

in many shapes or forms. Just to give an idea of what we've done in the last five to ten years, I think the 11 miles of trails are probably happening anyway just based on development with our master plan communities. In the last ten years, we've added 30 miles of trails. A lot of that's been stuff like Holbrook Farms, now Inverness.

And

then as far as on street bike facilities, it's been a mixture of UDOT bike lanes or some of the ones that we've done, such as 7 South or up on, like, Waterbury Way in Holbrook Farms. Another one was to create pedestrian districts and gathering spaces. And that could be planning. Downtown obviously has some great opportunity and potential for this kind of a thing. But maybe there's other little neighborhood centers around town that we could look at as well.

Identify existing places, but also look at where we can create these. But these are areas that people in the community can come together, have gathering spaces. It kind of creates that vitality in the community, provides a lot more opportunity for socialization and also for fostering some of those local businesses in there. And then one of them was to look at completing murals at three under crossings. It's about 25% of our under crossings.

We have about 13 total at the moment, all with different ownership. That could be from any different means, volunteers or whether we hire somebody. But there's all kinds of means of how we can try and do this. Goal seven oh, that was sorry. Goal eight was to it probably kind of correlates with 11 miles of shared paths. But this was added on by one of the previous council members to look at connecting a couple of gaps in the recreational network. So I put a couple of pictures on here. One on the left is where the Dry Creek Trail comes down. It stops right as you approach Pioneer Crossing. There is an under crossing there, but there's not a trail on the other side yet.

We do own all the property down there, so that's potentially one that we could look at. The other one's the Waystitch Trail. There's some gaps in that one as well. Just to give you a quick idea, we've been working on this plan for the last few years. Normally, with the master plan, if you have a consultant do it, they might do it within a year. But as you guys understand, Lehigh's growing like crazy, and we're doing the best we can to keep up with that. But that means some of these projects take a little longer when we do them in house. This is an example of what the text will look like when we update the text. And then a shout out to the planning staff and for Brittany to be putting this together. Before I move on, I just want to see kind of your basic thoughts.

And this is something that you don't even necessarily have to, right off the bat, think of something. You can always email me and give me suggestions. And I can always come back to the council to discuss anything. But generally, I'd like to know if we're heading in the right direction or if there's some things we should be thinking about. Any

questions for Mike?

So I guess just one. I like reviewing this just because I think as we grow, different needs come up. And I do like that some of the future planning for at least bike lanes are above curb rather than on asphalt on the road. I think that's excellent and it's better for everyone, I think. Yeah.

Especially probably the safest option. This is more tactical, but kind of going back to this ongoing discussion we've had about 700 South. A couple weeks ago, it just occurred to me, you know, there's a lot of different ways we can approach that. I would would be thrilled if we could just experiment on 700 South and without spending any dollars except for for man hours, removing the candlesticks for the post. And maybe you can go back to one of those photos with 700 South.

The reason I say that is because, I mean, the locals definitely know the parking situation. We could always add, you know, painting for, you know, to indicate parking. But I think the posts, they're not really for safety, right? Because the true barrier are the cars parked between the bike lanes and the driving lanes. Now I know it's not your decision, but I think just kind of pulling my colleagues up here, I would love to just remove those.

I think that's most of the headache, especially for those residents on the North Side Of 700 South. I think removing those increases visibility. It makes it a little easier to get in and out of driveways. And as long as the paint is clear on the road, I think I would be very open to trying that as a first step. I think long term we can look at a different design that kind of checks all the marks of safety and and, connectivity and everything else. But I would love to just remove those and see see how it works.

Yeah. But Thank you.

Any thoughts from any of the other council members?

I mean, that's been my issue all along with 700 is because it feels like it's a construction zone. I'm concerned about safety and that people are still trying to drive in that area. I don't know how those are attached if it's, like, then screwed into a base if the base Yeah, the stays

base that

they're like, base could stay there. I feel it's, like, beyond me to know, am I causing a safety issue by doing that? That would be my I don't want a kid to get hit because we this is a temporary setup. It was always intended to be, to have a curb there, which would look way better aesthetically. But, yeah, that would be my only concern is doing something for aesthetic and then somebody gets hurt.

Yeah. I do, through a lot of the comments I've heard, the aesthetic is definitely one of the biggest issues, but there are other things people have mentioned. One thing I will say is they don't provide a physical protection, but they provide protection by affecting people's driving behaviors. It's like slower turning around the corners versus if they're gone, people might cut the corners a little wider. But also, if somebody's driving distracted and there's no cars parked, you'll hear that.

So that at least gives it's not like a true good physical protection, but it protects a little bit just on behavior. Now, with that being said, there's no nobody's married to this idea, because I agree they're not the best looking. They're just cheap and effective for what they are. But it's definitely, know, we can look at all kinds of different options for the buffer space.

Mr. Mayor, if I may?

Yes.

I wish I had brought this up when we were talking budget, but it's somewhat related. I know a few weeks ago, we went through the options for 700 South

0, yeah.

And the one time funds associated to those options. Would you mind just, again, sending those out via email to the council so when we come back to budget discussions, we can we can also talk about possibly getting some of those things done this year. I'm not that we can or will, but just it'd be nice to have that information in front of us. And then also the murals, goal number seven, I think it was. We talked about that today in the budget. Can you tell me just why murals are important? Why was it important enough to you to include it as goal seven?

Yeah. So there's a couple layers to it. First of all, like the mural on the right here was in it's by my house in Daybreak. But there used be lot of graffiti in the tunnel. And when you see that, it really deters use. It makes you feel less safe, less comfortable. By putting that in there, it deters the graffiti. It's still been four years, and I haven't seen anybody paint any graffiti on there. So it has that effect. But also, it encourages people to use after transportation, just one of those elements that helps get people out more often.

So it just makes people feel more safe, and it's more interesting. And it can help create a sense of place for the community. And you can be proud of whatever you paint in there. Like, South Jordan actually did a project under South or 106 South on River Trail. And they had a bunch of people come in and paint different pictures, and they reflected different aspects of the community. So I think it can have that effect as well.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

Okay. Thanks for your work on this. Yeah. I was reading over this before session. And I also ran this past the Parks, Trails, and Trees Committee. And I think they support a lot of the goals. For me, what stands out the most is goal number four, five, and eight. And I think that they that's kind of I got some feedback about some of those as well as strong goals. So Perfect. Yeah. I don't to me, my brain wants it to be in order of priorities. So

And I can do we can do that.

Can We do that

the graph.

To organize it. But Yep.

We can

do to know number one is number one goal. So

Yep. Yeah.

And I was gonna say too, I mean, not to make everything about seven south, but, you know, Brad and I and all of us, we're always looking at all kinds of options of how we can deal with the buffer in ways that maybe are a little more stickly pleasing than the poles, and that are still, you know, obviously, it would be ideal to put concrete or even a planter strip for trees would be ideal, but it's just a cost issue. So that's what it comes down to. And one thing, there are more slides here, but I'll skip those for now for the sake of time. But I was going to see if, with the council and mayor, your willingness would be to take a little bike ride with us planners and engineers. And I have a little bike loop.

In fact, we did it with Jason and Cameron once. We go down, you test out basically all the types of bike facilities Lehi has. So just riding on the road, which I feel like you have to experience the bad to understand the good. To ride on the road, can ride down South South, ride on the shared use path and Powerline Trail, and ride like on a kind of a shoulder bike lane on Main Street. But I think through experience and understanding different perspectives, it can help you more with your decision making process. We do have e bikes. If everybody wanted to ride an e bike, we have one available. Anyway, I just want throw that out there, if that's something that the council would ever be interested in.

Brad, did you have a comment?

Yes, if I may. Just really quickly, just maybe a comment to Councilman Harrison's request on delineators, the flexi posts. It's it's interesting when we talk about those and how they you're right. They don't actually provide a physical barrier for the users of the trail, but an interesting thing that we found is that you all have seen that those same flexi posts on Main Street in front of the pedestrian planters between Center Street and 1st. Those structures were being hit three or four times a year to the cost of tens of thousands of dollars every year that the city was just absorbing.

They were something that we put in just to try them out and see what effect they may have. And to my knowledge, in the two or three years they've been in, we haven't had one of those barriers at one time. So, it's just interesting that even that, even though, like I said, they don't provide a physical barrier because, obviously, a car could go right through them. I don't know whether it's when people hit them, it's kind of that bump bump, and it kind of gets them back into paying attention. But I do believe that there is definitely more than just an aesthetic protection for the users of the trail, but there's a physical protection, too.

Anyways, it was just an interesting thing that we found when we put those on Main. Because it was costing us so much money on Main that we were just getting ready to remove them. But we knew that we needed them for the mid block crossings.

Thanks, Brad. Any other questions for Mr. West? I think we're good here. Mr. West, just so you're aware, I just did buy an e bike. And I can tune it up to 28 miles an hour. So I look forward to the ride.

You're leave the

rest of

us in dust. Except for Ken.

Thank you very much.

Yep. Thank you.

Okay. We're at the portion for citizen inputs. So we're going to open it up for twenty minutes. In fact, we'll open public input at 07:50. I'll remind you, if you would like to come make comment, we would ask that you state your name, and you'll have three minutes. We don't have a horn or anything. I will just if you get to three minutes, I will remind you that we're at three minutes and if you would wrap up your comments. So with that, it's now 07:51, and we'll officially open public comment.

Hello. I'm Taylor DAVID Braithwaite. I just want to comment on two things. One, I think it's awesome that we have trails and that you had this agenda item and that you're focused on it. I think it's great.

And I think that we're getting a lot more use from trails with the kids riding more and using e bikes. And I think it's going to increase. The second thing is I saw that there was an article from Lehigh Free Press, Mayor Binz, possibly increasing property tax. And I just wanted to show my support for something if we see that it's necessary. A median house in Lehigh in 2002 would pay roughly around $349 a year.

Today, that would be $642 per inflation. But in reality, this proposed increase, it would actually be $419 so well below whatever inflation is since 2002. So I don't see that that is huge. Because Utah has a truth in taxation system, when home values increase, when property values increase, the city collects the exact same amount. So everyone's house could increase in property by 200%, but the city collects the exact same amount.

Our rate would go down. So because there was a freeze on taxes in the city for two decades, theoretically, we could possibly be behind. But we were getting a lot of money from building new homes. But as the population increases, new homes are making up a smaller percentage of the total population. So it's almost a Ponzi scheme at some point.

The other Yeah. So I guess in the end, I just want to say, I think it's brave and good to consider that if we need to increase these taxes, they don't increase when our property values increase. They only increase when you increase them. And I think it's important that we adequately fund police and parks. And that's the end of my comment. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braithwaite.

I'm

Richard Holly of Lehigh. I'm sitting halfway back. I can't hear what is going on up here. This thing is nice and expansive. And so if you guys can speak into your microphones, including the guy that's up here, it would be better so somebody isn't back there with their horns in their ears. Does that make sense? Okay. That's all I got.

Mr. Holly, thank you.

Michelle Caffusi, 3018 Comanche Lane, Provo. It's an honor to be here, mayor, and council members. There's so many new faces. This is exciting. I was the mayor of Provo for two terms, and then I'm the school board and school board president for seven years part of that. And I just wanted to come and introduce myself, a lot of familiar faces. So it's so good to see Jason again and Ryan. This is just really fun. Are you Carrie Strother's brother? We grew up together in Provo.

I was Carrie and Lori's age. So this is just really fun to be here. Commissioner. There's two open seats right now, seat A and seat B, and I am running for seat A. So we are in a primary, and will be ballots will land on June 4, and the conclusion is June 23. So most people aren't thinking about elections. Everyone's on vacation. And but for me, who has this desire to keep serving, I love people problems. Like, this is really fun for me, and everyone's up here thinking dollar signs because I know you're in the thick of budget right now, but I love a good people problem, and I love to solve them. So I have worked with a lot of you.

I was elected by my fellow mayors to be president of all the mayors of the state for years. And so that's how I've been able to get to know. I was on the division of water quality appointed by the governor, so I was able to help the communities all across the state with their sewer problems. I love the interaction. I love to lift our county and have the opportunity to serve you. So I just wanted to say hello. And this building is amazing. You might find me wandering around for a few minutes after we leave here. It is really nice. And was that loud enough? Could you hear? You got to, like, eat the microphone, right? Anyways, it was nice to attend your meeting tonight. And thank you for what you do, and good luck with the budget.

Thank you. Mayor Cafusi, we appreciate that you'd come. Any other comments?

She's Yep. The caffoocy with the football players. Yes. Okay. I didn't know we could bring laptops. I just got a couple pictures. My name is Brian Wyatt. My fourth generation grandfather was a founder, one of the founders of Lehi. I wonder if you've ever heard of him. His name is Samuel Mulliner.

Anyone recognize that name? That's a good thing I'm here. I thought he might be up there someplace, but I can't find him. Anyway, way back in 1850, I was getting started. Samuel Mulliner, who has a rich, full history I don't have time to go into that.

But he crossed the plains, 1850, and Brigham Young sent him south to help tame the Wild City, the Wild West City of Lehi, Utah. And as he lived here, Brigham Young would visit him. And on one occasion when he was here, Samuel showed him a spring that was coming up out of the ground. And Brigham Young said, you ought to put a dam on that spring and put a mill pond on that site. That's what he did.

It's the Sam Mulliner Mill Pond. Does that ring a bell? Do you guys know where that is? You know where the sugar factory is? Yeah.

If you look down, you see the mill pond. That was my fourth generation grandfather that put the dam there that's still there, and there was a roller mill there fifty years before the Lehigh Roller Mill. And I understand the city is purchasing land that surrounds that mill pond, And I just want to make sure that whatever your future plans are, that you recognize one of the founders of the city. If you if you look at the sugar factory, you notice there's a landmark down there that explains that explains the sugar factory and all the verbiage. Thinking there ought to be one on the mill pond similar to it, explaining the history of Samuel Mulliner, one of the founders of this city.

You would be amazed at his background. Is my time up because I can go into his background?

Thirty seconds.

Four seconds? Thirty. Thirty? He was I don't know if you're familiar with Church history. But when the 12 Apostles went to Great Britain, he was one of the 370s that went there. He was the first missionary in Scotland. He has a Cass always had more time. He had a full history. And at one point, after he had his mill bonds in American Fork and Lehi, Brigham Young sent him south to start the city of Orderville and the United Order. He has a lot of history.

Anyway, now he became deaf and dumb, came back to Lehi, and he's buried in the Lehi Cemetery. So in your future planning, just keep that in mind.

Thank you, Mr. Wyatt. We appreciate you.

My name is Bart Christopherson. I grew up in the city riding my bicycle all over. Grew up in American Fork too, but would ride my bike from my grandparents in Lehi by Wines Park to my house in American Fork over by the hospital now. Because I spent a lot of my youth riding a bike. I know all about bikes and bike lanes or bike access.

But as an adult, when I pay taxes on my car and then I pay taxes at the gas pump and then I pay taxes when I bought my car, and then I see the bicycle people with the signs that say share the road, my tendency is share the taxes. I don't have a problem with kids riding bikes and not paying taxes. That's not my issue. But when I see a fancy paint job on a tunnel and potholes in the road, someplace there's a balance missed. So sure. Help the kids get safely to their destinations. Design that in. That's the engineering department here. Don't forget who paid the taxes to make that happen.

Thank you, mister Kristofferson. Any other comments? We will close public comment at 08:01 and bring it back to us up here. Okay. Consent agenda. If you've all had an opportunity to review the consent agenda, are there any questions?

Just for these purchase orders, are they just for the power department? Is that what I understand? Just got them now? Maybe

Dean can answer the purchase orders questions since I just passed those out just now.

And can you tell me what AMI is?

So one is just for meters. So to install new meters. They're getting they're trying to get to where all of the meters can be radio red or continuously red. They're not there yet. So and all of those are just kind of going into their inventory, they use them as they can use them. And the other one is for a project, and I can't remember exactly what it was. Power, they buy things for future developments. And it takes them months and sometimes years to get the items there.

It looks like for the sorry, it looks like for the Sky substation.

For the substation? So that will go towards the substation.

Any other questions?

Just on the city council minutes, I just wanted to change one thing on line six seventy two. I think I said burning and flooding. It meant burning and flooding of the ditch. So if we can just add of the ditch to that, that would be great to clarify what I'm talking about for new and flooding things.

Any other questions?

I say we don't approve it.

I'm happy to take a motion.

Mister mayor, I as a new council member, I'm not entirely sure how how it works if we oppose something on the consent agenda. Do we need to pull it off the agenda, or do we need to is it okay to just voice it in this vote?

You can you can take it as part of your motion to make if you wanna strike.

Okay. I better not be the one to make the motion, though.

I'm thinking if there's one thing you sorry. You might want to pull it if there's one thing you want to vote against, but everything you want to vote for.

Yeah? Okay. Mr. May, I make a motion that we approve the consent agenda, but we remove item four from that and vote on that separately. Is that in line? Is that Okay.

Yep. Okay. I still need to vote on that, but that's the way to do it.

I have a first from Councilmember Freeman.

Lockhart. Lockhart.

Excuse me. Lockhart.

No worries.

I would like to amend the consent agenda for the minutes, like I previously stated.

I will add that to the motion.

Is that a second council member Freeman then?

Or just I just am I was wondering why you wanted to take it off the consent agenda.

I I wanna vote against for, but I can't if it's on consent agenda. Okay. That's why.

Then I'm a second. Sure.

Okay. Any questions on that motion? You got that motion, Tisha, with Okay. The So we'll start with Councilmember Newell?

Yes.

Councilmember Harrison? Yes. Councilmember Stallings?

Yes. Councilmember Freeman? Yes. Councilmember Lockhart?

Yes. Okay. So we'll bring item four, to the debt to the table. Consideration of resolution 20 dash 31, approving the allocations of the park tax funds for cultural facilities organizations within Lehi City. Council Member Lockard, do you want to open that discussion?

Oh, I just during our last discussion, I was hoping that we could find some more common ground. And I don't feel like that was reflected in what's presented. I approve of most of the things in there, but I felt like we were missing some of the pieces that I would have liked to see. So I just wanted to take the opportunity to voice that. And I recognize I'm outnumbered, and that's understandable and totally fine. What pieces did you have concerns about? We had talked about putting in some benchmarks or some operational performance options for the museum. And I didn't see that reflected in the packet at all. And so I just would have hoped that we could have added that stuff in.

I think that would be a different agenda item. We're talking about park tax allocations. If you want to amend the contract with I don't know which Curiosity Museum or Hutchins Museum. That I believe that might be something separate. If you want to redo the criteria for the Park Grant Committee, I think that would be separate as well.

Yeah, we're allocating more than 50% of the operating budget to one of these organizations, and that's against one of our policies. And so without having some concessions or some understandings together as a council, I'm just not comfortable doing that. Again, I don't I don't mean to take up time by having a discussion. I'm happy to just vote no and move on. But those were my concerns. And I don't feel like they were met in what was presented in this packet. I'm just

And likewise, I had concerns about following state law. I do have a question, maybe. Are we voting on the entire resolution? I mean, was an exhibit A, I think, that wasn't included. So are we going to go through them one by one? Or just is the council reviewed section

If you click on it, I think it's

something. Is that exhibit A on the resolution, I think?

Let me look.

Yeah.

So on the resolution on part one, number one and maybe it's in the packet and not on the but it says the funding recommendation showed on exhibit A.

Yeah. So that's the second attachment in there in your packet.

So it says grant request council review 2026.

Yes.

Okay. That's And then councilmember Lockhart, your hesitations are with funding the Hutchins Museum as much as we have without having stipulations in place.

And it violates the policy in place of 50% above the operating budget. Or I'm not we're funding above the 50% operating budget policy. And we haven't I don't feel like that was adequately addressed. Again, I'm one of five. We don't need to hash this out again. I just would like the opportunity to express that I'd like to follow our policies. That's all.

I did leave the meeting with the understanding that we were going to kind of relook at Hutchings in the future. They voiced that they would be willing to relook at their how they structure things and whatever. And I thought that was a great thing to do. I'm not the liaison there, but I think that that's a great thing to do.

Just to address the 50%, there's several of those who were we pulled funding over from the general fund this year that did go over the 50%. That was something with the previous counsel that was noted. We knew that was going to happen this year as we were pulling it over. That's why they were separate as an exception. So I think that that might be something we address in the future. But it was discussed in the past about acknowledging that these were going to break that 50%.

And I think that's a good point. It's not just the Hutchings Museum that's over 50% of the operating budget. So again, I'm concerned about singling them out. I know there was an email sent out that pointed out the percentage each organization was getting of the Park grant. But I hope the council will also consider the broad impact that the Hutchings Museum has on the community.

I mean, we're funding some things that are maybe for three days, whereas the Hutchings Museum is almost year round. And it goes into schools. It touches a lot of people. I could go through the numbers. I did ask one of the staff there to give me some numbers.

And I don't have internet connection, nor I'd pull that email up. But she did go through the numbers of the outreach, how many they impact, how many residents that the museum impacts. And she talked about the schools that they go out to, the schools that do virtual field trips there, the events that they do for free at the Roundup, their YouTube channel that they've just started, and all the viewers there. So, yes, I know it's a lot, but it does have a broad impact. So I hope we'll consider that as well.

Emily, can I ask a question? So I agree. I think the guidelines are important. And we talked about this in-depth in previous meetings. And so I guess outside of our verbal communication, I think these organizations understand there will be decrease in funding as they are able to get more operationally independent. Did you are you looking to have like a separate resolution in the future to outline those more specifically? Or did you want to include it in the motion? Like, I'm just curious because I agree with the principal.

Yeah. I, again, this is, in our last meeting, I expressed my continued support for the Hutchings Museum. This is more so as I, in that last meeting, I wanted to get to a place where we were all unanimous, but I didn't feel like what was presented in this resolution reflected the I think council member Newell, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's something like a performance audit of sorts was discussed. And I just Operational. Just Thank you. Yeah.

Make sure

they have the the right people that they need.

Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, so, again, I'm not trying to open up this. Just would have loved to see that reflected in when it's tied to taxpayer funds. And so that's really just where I'm at. I would have liked to see some of that written into the resolution. But I just wanted the opportunity to voice that, and that's why I pulled it off the consent agenda. But we in no way, shape, or form do we have to rehash our previous meeting. And this is not a reflection of a lack of commitment. I actually believe putting these in place shows a strong commitment for the success of the museum. So Okay.

Yeah. And I think we discussed redoing looking at that policy again in the future, maybe in the coming months, so that the next round of applicants for the next fiscal year will have more clarity incorporating your concerns, as well as Councilmember Stallings looking at state code and seeing how we can improve our kind of letter of the law. So, okay. Thanks.

I have a question regarding that for legal, Brian. Requiring a performance audit or operational audit or whatever for one organization seeking park grant funding, is that equitable? I mean, is that fair and equitable to just do it for one particular organization tied to that?

Yeah. It's not much a legal issue. I mean, you're kind of framing an equal protection argument. You have to treat them all the same. As long as you have a rational reason for that specific one, it would be just fine. As far as ethical or more general fairness political concern, I can't really answer that one. But that would be the very minimal legal threshold to have some rational basis for why you're treating one differently than the other.

Yeah. And I would say that that wouldn't be something that it'd be more of a suggestion to since it had been offered for free to help them get to the point where they because my worst fear is that they come back again and they haven't made the steps necessary, and we don't have the amount of funding available So in the if they if they don't wanna do it, that's up to them. It was just this is something from the outside looking in that could possibly help.

I'm I'm with I agree with you. And I I think as a we can't force a private organization to have this done at this point, like, you know, without, in my opinion, I think, applying it to all organizations. And I think that's I think it's a little overkill to force them to do that at this point. But I think with that suggestion in place, with the kind of stipulation, knowing that we are gonna be able examine this more closely.

Especially when the offer's out there. Right? That's the big thing is because if it was something that was gonna cost them money to go do, then it's definitely, like, something I want to push. But just to be able to DUMOULIN: look for the workplaces that they

Yes. I'm comfortable passing the resolution as is.

CHRISTINE I'm happy to take a motion.

May I move to approve resolution number 2026Dash31, approving the allocation of park tax funds for cultural facilities and cultural organizations within Lehigh City.

Do I have a second? Second. Second from council member Newell. First from council member Freeman. Any questions on that motion? Council member Harrison? Yes. Council member Stallings?

I am going to vote yes, but I would like it included in the minutes that I do have strong reservations about approving funding for organizations that don't meet state requirements regarding having it as their primary purpose, a cultural, and also that they need to be located within the city.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes. Councilmember Lockhart?

No. And I just want my comments of violating our policy as well as being given information where these organizations would have taken less. But we've given more in violation of that policy noted on the minutes.

Councilmember Newell? Yes. Okay. We'll go to the next item in the regular agenda, item number one, the public hearing to consider feedback on the Lehigh City Community Development Block Grant, the CDBG Annual Action Plan, which outlines community needs, potential community funding, priorities, and program structure and governance for the program year of 2026 to 2027. So this is a public hearing. So before we give it to you, is there anyone in the public that has come to make comment during this open public hearing? Okay. There is not. So we will close the public hearing and bring it back up. Did you have any comments you'd like to make on that?

I just wanted to let you guys know that we had our final allocation did come through. We got an additional $9,685 And the last time we were here, we had voted or not voted, but the projects that were selected were for Lehigh City Engineering and then just regular admin funds for the administration of the program here. And so I have just upped the Lehigh City Engineering for that remaining amount. So they're at $302,424

Great. Thank you.

Yep. And I'll be back in May for the final resolution of the annual action plan with the projects.

Great. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Item number two, Cedar Hollow Holdings annexation located at 400 South Center Street. This is also a public hearing. Is there anyone from the public that's here to discuss this item? Come up. You'll have the same three minutes, and we'll go to that point.

So when it came up before, I said I was in support of it. I really like the the concept. I have my own personal reasons, but also wanna make sure you you keep in mind that we don't want high density and wanna keep it so it's just normal family houses.

Thank you. That's mister Kristofferson. Correct? Yes. Sorry. Nope. You're good. Thank you. Anyone else from the public here to comment on this item? Great. So we'll close that public hearing. So we will

turn it over.

Hold on.

You are are you here for public comment?

He's the owner.

So we'll we'll we'll So

you're good. So are we ready? Do we wanna go ahead then? Yeah. Yeah. Come on up, and we'll go through it.

You ready for us?

Yep. Cool. Make

sure to talk into the

microphone very loudly. I'm loud. Yeah. So the we we brought it forward before and and showed the idea of the annexation. We've had quite a few people ask about the concept and this high density.

We've we've brought something forward to staff and have been talking to them about it a little bit. But we do have, because the church is wanting to come in and they're dedicating water towards the project, we wanted to have a just a quick discussion on the concept and the idea behind the church going in there, if that's fair. Is are you okay to show that, Kim, or do we need to Yeah. If you're okay with that, we just kinda show so that, you know, the community can see it, and we can kinda see what the idea is behind the church coming in. The church would have a commitment towards the the water dedication.

So the development's single family. It's oriented to the r one flex. It works just fine within the development. Since the Olsens created their subdivision with no through road, I mean, that became a cul de sac on the idea behind it. The church came in and said worked with with the Coopers to basically purchase those two cul de sacs to the south is the idea behind it.

They're willing to come in with the annexation, create, you know, or or bring the water dedication, But we wanted to just make sure with the community and with the council, this is the right direction if they're coming in and committing the water towards that. They just need kind of a positive head nod from the council that this is the right direction to go to bring that forward. So in talking to Kim, we thought it might make sense to bring it forward, show the the counsel the direction it's going, and see if there's any feedback from that.

Any comments for Mr. Train or questions for Kim that might come up on this?

So is this a new plan? I mean, does this it doesn't it's flex, but it doesn't increase the density, right?

No. Just to make sure it's clear, we're

not voting on the plan.

I think Tony just wanted to give you an idea of the direction that they're heading. But, yeah, in this, this would meet all of the flex zone standards as far as the mix of because the flex zone requires a certain percentage of twelve, ten, and 8,000 square foot lots. This meets that if the church buys that lower end, it would they would be buying up some of those 12,000 square foot lots. So, anyways, then I don't know if it would probably still

So you take you basically take those 11 lots and turn them into one lot where the church goes. So, I mean, overall, on the 15 acres, the density would decrease, you know, significantly as far as single family goes on that percentage. I guess that that was the direction the church is coming in and saying, does this does this methodology work to commit the water to the annexation? And we can go through the process of why. I mean, that's the approach that we've taken.

I mean, I don't see a problem with it. But I don't looking at it for a minute, I don't know what you think, Kim, or what other alternatives there is, to be honest.

When you're calculating the density, you're taking out the church lot, correct?

Yes. And I went out of the acreage. The overall density does stay below. It's at 3.05 units per acre.

3.05.

3.05.

Yeah. If you took out the church, it goes to 3.2 on the overall. But, yeah, there's three point o five. And if you include the church and the 15 acres on the density, it's at two point sorry. I put it on there. What was it? 2.4 on the density. Of 2.39. Yeah. So 2.4 would be the overall density based on a church lot and the 15 acres. This one right here is, I think, three point o five. What you're saying is if you took the church totally out independent, where does it hit? It stays below the 3.25 density range on the property. Yes.

How

many acre is the church taking out?

Four four point six. Four point it's actually 4.2. I mean, you zoom out, Kim, I think it says what the acreage is on that. That's including the roadway, though. So they're taking 4.2 on their lot.

Basically, this is just kind of a heads up, head nod you're looking at? Okay.

Yeah. I mean, we wouldn't normally do this. But where the church is bringing water to the table, they wanted to make sure it's gonna work on an annexation. So it's

You're still above the 10 acres then? That changes density, right?

Yeah. They'd they'd still have about 11 and a half, 12 acres of of development, which at over 10, they still would need to meet the mix. And I guess that's the whole crux of it is that if the church buys that lower area, they're gonna take out

Those lots down there.

12,000 square foot lots. And the so the 12,000, you might be a little bit shy on the I think it's 40%. It has to be 12,000.

Yeah. The the mix would would change because the church is buying where those bigger lots were with those cul de sacs. But

But the density remains

Yeah. So the option is the densities, yeah, remains under the 3.2 on

how it's the larger lots?

Those those where the church are going is where those larger lots will be on those cul de sacs.

Okay. I guess that's so we're with that annexation, we're approving the zoning. Well

yeah. Yeah. You're approving the R 1 Flex. Like I said, the biggest challenge we've we've got moving forward would be the church bringing water to the table. Wanna just make sure the church functions in the spot and it works for what the city the approach is working for the city.

A church can go in any residential.

I think I think I would need DRC to see it. I know I need fire to say, oh, yeah, we can access that and all the things. So I can't make a good call at this point. But, I mean, from a minute looking at it, it looks great. So, yeah.

Okay. Yeah. Go ahead.

Cole Cooper is representing the Cooper family on this. Is is that my dad, or is that was that mister? Yeah. Cole Cooper representing the Cedar Hollow in this is just wanna make sure that everybody understands that the church is the one that approached us. We didn't go to church. They came to us. We have no one we had no intention of developing this property. They came to us. We thought it is a better fit for maybe the community for what's going on down there. If it's not, like, we kinda need to know because we we don't wanna give a get turn in water and then not be able to proceed forward with it.

It kinda like it's it's kind of a financial commitment on our end. And, actually, it'd be, you know, it'd be in our financial benefit for us to develop it more like this than actually put a church in it. So once again, if if you know much about us, I mean, we grew up right here at 48 South Center. We lived in Lehi our whole lives. I coached the high school. My my dad created the second subdivision in Lehi, helped with the special districts. Anyway, there whole history there. But in the end, as as it comes down to to try to get a a guidance of whether this makes sense. If it doesn't, we'd like kind of a heads up because we'll just bag it and say, you know, and just wait to annex it at a different time.

So So I have a question, if you don't mind. So when you say, does it make sense? My understanding is the church can go into any residential. So we can't say no. I mean, if it works, it works. Sure.

If this

if this concept, the overall concept with everything doesn't kind of

Are you are you asking for like, I know there's flexibility, alright, with r one flex

Yeah.

As far as lot size go.

But Well, no. I I think what we're gonna what we're kinda asking, Tony, is this, is that because I think this concept fits in your I one flex already. It already fits the criteria.

Uh-huh.

So if the church comes in and and they they're telling us they wanna purchase that lower end, it's gonna change a little bit of the requirements. And if and if it you don't think it's gonna work, we're just okay. We'll just bag it. So but but the church wants to know, and we don't wanna make a financial commitment with water if we're really not going to move forward. So I don't know if that's hurts us or

We just thought it was fair to be very upfront on this. We've done this a few times in the past. I mean, you do a development. The church come in

and

says, we did it out west with them. They come in and they say, we're gonna buy this area that encumbers these many lots. Kim and I were talking about we move forward with a preliminary plat with those lotted, and then if the church wants to buy them, they can buy them. The the challenge with that is the the church is committing water, so they just wanted they said, hey. Can you get a head nod from the city council? That's all we're trying to do is does this make sense? Is this the right direction? That's Does the church want to commit oh, go ahead.

Right. So I guess my question is, does it make sense for you guys? Once we approve the zone change, they're required to meet the requirements of that zone, correct? Correct. And again, we're not voting on that. But does this plan with the church meet those requirements? Or are they looking for some exception? KAUFFMAN:

So one way you could think about it is if, let's say, they took this plan all the way through to final even, the church comes in at the end and says, hey, we're just going to buy that section of your subdivision. And then they could come in on their own accord, vacate those lots, and create the parcel for the church. So but in this case, they wanna come in at the beginning. So this meets it. When you take the church parcel out, it takes I think it takes a few of the there's still some 12,000 square foot lots.

We still

Even in this one, they're they're close to the percentage, but it would probably drop it out of compliance if you looked at this just in a vacuum. But in the grand scheme of things, you know, they or they could even subdivide and do phase one and two. And, I mean, there's ways that I don't know if you can take it around, but there are other ways JOSEPH Say it like it. Yeah.

Yeah. Well, our conversation, I didn't want to take that approach. I just wanted to be very upfront and say, look, this is the direction. I want to be fair to the church. You know, we could, and Kim and I talked about, we we'd come back with the preliminary plat with the lots if the church wants to buy the lots. They they've done that in the past with us. But this way, we're just saying, does it make sense to just show you upfront right now? This is what the proposal is. We're coming back with a preliminary plat, and we're asking the church to commit right now for water, and they're get their site plan going. Mean, they're kind of in a hurry on this.

So they've they've they've mentioned that, so that's why we've gone this direction. And we're very open to your direction, but that's that's the criteria. If we need to go back with a preliminary plat to get the lots in there, work with the church independently, to me, that didn't make the most sense. This just being upfront, this is the direction. We still have all those 12,000 square foot lots. But when you go through the criteria, the church is buying lots, basically, if that makes sense.

Basically, you'd kinda have to come meet with us separately outside this meeting, so you're just kinda doing it now. Is that what I understand? Okay.

Well, it it meets the general plan, so I'm fine. And as far as it meeting code down the road, that probably won't ever come back to us, right, city council? No.

The subdivision would the preliminary would go to Planning Commission, and then the final is at DRC.

Okay. You can work it out then, however you want.

Well, that's why I wanted to make sure everything was up front. We're just look, this is the direction we're going. We wanna make sure this is the right thing because we are having the church, like I said, commit some water. And I just wanna make sure that this development works for them as well. That's the right right direction. But anyway

Miss Mayor oh, I'm sorry, Michelle. Go ahead.

I was just going to say it sounds like there's ways you can get DUMOULIN: to that. So JULIEN Yeah. Point.

May I ask a question? So is there a reason why this concept plan wasn't also included in the packet and gone through the planning commission commission experience. Right? Like, why Yeah. I feel like I'm being asked to to to make a judgment on

something that You need to make a judge yeah.

So that's

You are

asking that. Yeah. You are asking us to make a judgment

on something that hasn't gone through. Submit the whole concept in an independent way.

But I guess I don't know why you didn't include it with the annexation. If this was a if you were trying to be upfront, why wasn't it just packaged together?

We weren't worried about it until we had some conversations with staff. And at that point, I'm like, you know what? If we're trying to speed it up, we're trying to I I just wanna be upfront with the council.

That's it.

Yeah. And I think my concern is that the concept plan at at planning commission level allows for that public engagement

Mhmm.

Where we would be approving something and the residents haven't had the opportunity to come to the planning commission and and give their

Totally fair. Voices. If you, yeah, if you just wanna give your opinion on the direction.

If it's okay, mister May, I have one more question, and I think it's just a clarity on top of what Sure. Councilmember Stallings asked. So the what's currently proposed without the church is in line with what they're asking for. Yes. But if you add in the church, there that is not reflective of what they're asking for. So they would have to come back through anyway and get accept is that what you're saying? I just wanna make sure I understand. Exceptions. Or they'd have to ask for a different zone?

I'm trying to think of how to describe this. They I think they could still meet all of the standards that the church could just come in and you know, they could plot this entire subdivision so that it meets a 100% of the flex and all the percentages. The church could then come in afterwards and just say, we're buying these eight lots, and it's gonna net the same effect.

Mhmm.

And it's either option is well below the the flex zone actually allows 3.5 units per acre. And in either scenario, they're below that. In fact, they're well below it if you take the church area out or leave the church in the equation.

In the equation, we're well below it.

So, you know, I I think It's a lot, sir. There's there's ways and I don't even think it's a workaround. It's just a fact that the church can wait until later in the game and just come in and buy those other lots. And there's nothing illegal about that or shady or anything. They just choose to wait until the plat's been approved. They buy those lots. Sure. I think they're just trying to see if everybody's okay with Yeah.

I I would have preferred a constant plan and it to have gone through with it. I understand you had some timing issues, but the public comment period is very important to preserve, and that happens at the planning commission level.

It does. And and we'll I I we have met with a bunch of the neighbors, tried to explain to this of the direction. And we think it's the right direction, but Kim and I had a conversation, and we just said, I'd like to just bring it forward right now just to help the church understand the direction. And we we think it's the right thing, and it's a it's a good solution for the church. We just wanted, I guess, full disclosure for them because they're committing water to it.

And and last question, which church?

Fair. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints.

Thank you.

I'm working with another one on Main Street, though.

I just wanna add. I appreciate you bringing it through this way. There's loopholes, and we know, like, all the loopholes you can take. And I think that you're being transparent with this and to be able to so we know what would go in there. And I I really appreciate that, and I think

it needs to

be called out. So thanks, Tony.

Thanks. Any other comments for mister Trane? I don't believe this is an item we're voting on. Is that correct? Although the annexation Just is the annexation.

On the annexation.

Annexation. Oh,

so

we are voting for the annexation.

Resolution and ordinance. Yes.

Okay. So with that, I would be happy to take a motion.

I move that we approve resolution number twenty twenty six dash thirty two resolution of Lehigh City Council approving an annexation agreement with the owners of the property that is the subject of the Cedar Hollow Holdings annexation.

I'll second that.

Any questions on that motion? We'll start with you, council member Stallings?

Yes. Council member Freeman? Yes. Council member Lockhart? Yes. Council member Dole?

Yes. Council member Harrison? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Okay. Item number three.

Should We should do

the ordinance

as well. Both the resolution and the ordinance.

Oh, you're right. So let's go to CE consideration of the ordinance twenty two-twenty twenty six, approving the Cedar Hollow Holdings annexation with R1 flex zoning on 15.31 acres of property located at approximately 400 South Center Street.

Mister mayor, I move that we approve ordinance 22 dash twenty twenty six, approving the Cedar Hollow holding annexation with r one flex zoning on 15.31 acres of property located approximately 400 South Center Street.

Okay. So I have a first from council member Newell. Second. Second from council member Harrison. Any questions? Council member Freeman, we'll start with you.

Yes. Council member Lockhart? Yes. Council member Newell?

Yes. Council member Harrison? Yes. Council member Stallings? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Now we'll move to item three. This is the Slay Holdings annexation located at 2300 West 3rd South. It is a public hearing. So if there's anyone here from the public, we will open the public hearing at 08:40. Doesn't appear that anyone's here to make public comments, so we'll close the public hearing. And we'll first start with item b, consider is it consideration of resolution twenty twenty six dash 33, approving an annexation agreement. Someone here to speak to this.

Hi there. Shane Yates. Just asking for a final approval for annexation on this four acres.

Any questions on this item? I'm happy for a motion.

Mayor, I move to approve resolution number twenty twenty six dash thirty three, approving an annexation agreement.

So I have a first from council member Harrison. I'll

second it.

Second from council member Lockhart. Any questions on that?

Will you include the DRC comments on that

one? Totally.

Second stance.

Okay. So councilmember Lockhart, we'll start with you.

Yes. Councilmember Newell?

Yes. Councilmember Harrison? Yes. Councilmember Stallings? Yes. Councilmember Freeman? Yes. Okay. Item c, of ordinance 23 dash twenty twenty six approving the Slate holdings annexation with r one flex residential zoning on four acres of property located at approximately 2300 West 300 South. Any questions?

Mister mayor, I move that we approve ordinance 23 dash twenty twenty six, approving the SLEE Holdings annexation with r one flex for the initial zoning on four acres of property located approximately 2300 West, 300 South.

Great. I've got a first from councilmember Noel, a second from councilmember Lockhart. Any questions? Council member Newell, we'll start with you. Yes. Council member Harrison? Yes. Council member Stallings? Yes. Council member Freeman?

Yes. Council member Lockhart? Yes.

Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Item number four, consideration of ordinance 21 dash twenty twenty six, creating the Lehigh City Small Business Advisory Council and approving and adopting an accompanying guiding principles policy. You should have all received that. Councilmember Harrison, do you have any comments you would like to make on this?

No, I appreciate all the really good feedback I've gotten from the other council members and also the the coordination effort by Marlon. I know there may be a couple minor edits before we pass it tonight, but we can do that in the motion. But, Marlon, if you wanna No.

I really since he's since this has been sent out, I just wanted to see if there were any comments from the counsel, any edits that we need to make. If there are, I would just ask that they be put in a motion tonight. When I talked with Ryan about this, he said that they're I'm gonna I'm gonna slaughter this, Ryan. Not the guiding principles, the Bylaws. Bylaws. But he said that the document itself contained enough information that it covered that information. So anything that we need to add to it for tonight in the motion, we can get inserted into it. Then we should be good to go to move this forward. With that, any questions, comments, additions? Yes.

Mister Mayor, if I

may?

Yes.

Just one of my big concerns with this was the counsel's ability to pass resolutions. And I just as I was reading through, I think that's been removed. But I just wanted clarity. They can't pass resolutions. They're not a policy making body. But they can recommend. Is that correct?

That is correct. So we clearly stated in here. I'm trying to find the first page, Article I, Section C says, this is an advisory council with the ability to make recommendations to the city council with regards to business practices and ordinances within Lehigh City that affect the business community. As an advisory council, all recommendations will be made to Lehigh City Council, and the council will take formal action if needed.

I yeah. And I think my point of clarification is just I don't know if that fully covered it. That's why I'm just asking. I just don't want this body producing their own resolutions creating conflict with the council. Right? They they're welcome to create recommendations, but I just would I think it's confusing to the public if the council is creating resolutions of statements of policy that aren't actually in line with the goals of the city and the council.

Correct. I guess, as you read through the document, everything is recommendation to the city council. Okay. There's no we've never stated in here resolutions or anything like that. Brian?

I mean, resolution's the only way they can actually make a recommendation. Right? So if you want some clarity that says, you know, the resolutions will only be recommendations to the city council, but that is the way they have to act. They can only act through a resolution by a majority of the the board.

Yeah. I think I'm I'm a part of an organization that passes policy resolutions often. And while they have, like, no weight, I'm just concerned that this future body takes on policy decisions with that that would interfere with the goals in the city and the city council. So that's I just want to voice that and see if there's a way to make sure that that's clear. But it sounds you know, see is pretty clear.

Mister Mayer? Yes. Just a couple of corrections on this, Marlon. So article three a one a, can we change that to from his staff to their staff?

Article three.

Say it one more time.

It's article three a one a. Talks about the business his staff and as a business owner and just make it gender neutral.

We're at in that little paragraph. I don't know. Last line of Last line of the members.

We've got it.

Okay. Just include it in your

Got it.

Okay. So

the one thing too with the chair being elected, and then there's a couple of things in there, like with the secretary having a three year term. But then they're especially in the first year, they're appointed to two and four year terms, and then it becomes three. Just wondering if the election cycle should happen every year with the positions being able they're going be able to hold that position back to back for two years like how Planning Commission is. And that just so you're not elected to chair for three two years, but then your term's actually up in that for the second part.

So I apologize. Could you clarify? So the s b h the SBAC chair elected by the majority of the members.

Are we talking about

the chair, or are we talking about the membership?

Article four a one and then b one is talking about the chair and the vice chairs Yep. With their terms. So I'm I'm wondering if they should be

Through the

SBAs in the one year.

And they can serve two back to backs.

Yeah. I know. Okay. I see what you're saying.

Some committees do that. Yeah. The committees are the liaison too. They well, I've

done it every year. So serve one year term, but

Then they can be and they can do it back to back. Or, you know, if you want to say two or three years back to back. But at least that way, if their term ends and but they're still elected chair for an additional year, that has that cutoff. So they would have, like, an election cycle every year or whatever appointment.

Okay. I see what you're saying. K.

And then past chair was still referenced in article eleven ten.

Yeah. I saw that too.

So there probably needs to be something with a fallback facilitator if the chair and the vice chairs are unavailable.

One six.

Or six. Sorry. Yeah. Six ten.

Yeah. I'm catching up. I'm catching up. Apologize.

I heard the b is

a Article six to point 10, and I just think we need to scratch past share,

basically. Correct.

Article And I don't know if we need something to have a fallback.

10. Scratch. Got it.

If maybe the chairs and the two vice chairs aren't available, maybe they shouldn't have the meeting. And then just another grammar one on article six three. Just need a period after Six three. The three dot that space after the period.

Oh, got it.

I had one just question. Maybe this is for Ryan. But in article two, paragraph b, where it lists, you know, the issues. This is not limiting. Right? This is an example. What I what I'm getting at is a, and c shouldn't be the only That's too legal, right?

Mr. Mayer. Yeah. On Article III, a two, and then you go to the small b and then four, about you talk about the city liaison. And I think we referenced that person as a city council liaison. Just want to make sure it's city council liaison. And I was a little confused also under article four, a five, where we talk about the small business council chair is a liaison.

So Okay. Hold on. I apologize, counsel councilman Freeman. No. So article three, the first one two. Oh, Amazon one.

Sorry. A two, and then

you go to

b, and then four. Yeah. It's really

Give me one second. Cool.

And then it talks let's see.

43. I've got these out of order. 5.

I think it says other city departments. Oh, look. Case one Nope. G.

Okay. So article three a

and then two.

Okay. Got

it. And then go to b. Got it. And then go to four.

Got it.

And then under that, I think there's another a. There's another a. And it says city liaison. And I believe it's supposed to be well, city liaison from council or their alternate. But I think if we said city council liaison. But my point is that we're talking about the city council person that's the liaison. And then I'm just kind of confused because later in this we talk about the chair being the liaison between city council and all that. And I anyways, I was trying to to clarify that because I believe that the city council person is the liaison.

Yes. That is correct.

So okay. Yeah.

So I get what you're saying on the five. Should it be, like, spokesperson to

the mayors? It's some like that. But like they're not a liaison. They're not a liaison. But they're like

a Well, they're really not

They're the chair of the committee. Yeah. The city

they wouldn't be talking to us. It would be the city council liaison who would be

I mean, does say that they present reports a couple times a year, but the thing is is they're not the liaison. I I just probably the roles that clear circuit?

Yeah. Whole thing. Yeah.

So so then under article four A five, it talks about the chair as the liaison, if that makes sense. So that's what I'm trying to make sure that we have clear clarity about who is the liaison, what their roles are, what the chair's role is, the chair's kind of helping direct not direct, but I guess direct, the the, small business council, but then the liaison is the city council person. Correct. Yeah? Okay. So under

That's that's the intent.

Okay. So under article four eight five

Yeah.

Then I would take away that whole thing that says liaison to like, it's not under one of their duties as the chair. Does that make sense? Yeah. So article four a five, I would just strike that whole thing.

So the ensuring SBAC recommendations strike that whole thing?

No. So article four Oh, article four.

Oh, jeez. I am so sorry.

Sorry. Councilman Freeman. Article four I could have just

emailed this to you, but I I was told

to You're good.

Article four I'm doing it now.

I appreciate it.

Article four You're good.

I'm with you. Article four a Got it. And then five

Got it.

It says liaison to so if you I would just strike that

whole thing. Got

it. So that would

Got it.

Move up. 6 would be 57. So I just I kinda feel like we need to go back, and this needs to be like, I just don't know

if we can

monitor this whole thing, to be honest. But, anyway

Five and six.

And then one other thing.

Yes.

K. K.

We're going back to article three.

Article three. Got it. Okay.

And go to the big b.

The big b.

So there was some stuff added in there. I don't I don't know. I didn't add it in. I don't know who added it in. It wasn't in there before. Let's see. B under participation standards. Got it. I'm with you. You go to four.

Got it.

And it talks about how the the small business council members are expected to participate, etcetera, etcetera, in any formal report and recommendations to city council. And then this whole part basically that says the city council will have ninety days to respond, and actions will include implementation. Any declined recommendations will include rationale. Like, that was all added. And I would actually strike that they basically, ninety days.

Like, I don't know. Yeah. Like, I would I wouldn't put any restrictions on what the city council is gonna do with that because, like, the Parks, Trails, and Trees Committee can make recommendations. The park like Yeah. Like, I just think that just seems to me that I don't think that this should be codified that the city council has to respond to them in a certain amount of time and all that, and then provide rationale and all this stuff. So

So the reason we put that in is so that if the Small Business Advisory Council does make a recommendation

We have three months to respond to them. Like, what's the point of them making recommendations if we're not going to

Well, that's the point. If if I guess what we're trying to do is help them understand that if they're gonna take the time to make the recommendation, is the council going to respond? So we can strike it. Mhmm. But does that then have no culpability for the council? That's why I guess that's why we put it in was to kinda give some defined terms so that if they do come together, they do make a recommendation, that there's at least a path to follow for them knowing that I make a recommendation. Even if it's a denial, great, but at least some action's gonna be taken.

I I think the I think this document is to help guide the advisory council on what they do.

Mhmm.

But I agree with Rachel on we don't wanna put anything in there that would restrict or require the city council to do or not do something.

Perfect. So your recommendation is, counsel Freeman, that that actually, section number four, do we just strike the whole thing?

I like the first sentence.

Yeah. The first sentence is fine. I yeah.

But but then upon formal recommendations, city council, city council have, from that point forward, strike out.

Yeah. I mean, that was all new when I was comparing this document to the previous one. So Yep. Yeah. K. I would hope that any city council will include rationale because we seem to conclude many rationales for our decisions appear too many.

Well, but again, you're absolutely correct. It allows you the opportunity to take the recommendation, allows you the opportunity to debate it, but it doesn't force you into, do we have to make a decision, do we have to take action?

Sometimes we have to study it more. Sometimes things like that. So maybe we don't have 90 because we have to do

something And it does mean it requires us to respond and to give rationale. I mean, puts the burden on us. And I I'm willing to take recommendations, but we've got a lot of things to consider. So

Perfect. We can strike that out. Not a problem. Did you have anything else, Councilman Freeman?

No. I didn't.

Okay.

Any other comments for that?

I do. Yeah. It is. Just one more thing. And not even clear at the bottom, page. It says that we'll review it every five years. I would like to review it sooner, maybe within one year to just see how it's going. And then as it picks up speed, I guess, as it gets going, then we can review it every five years. But I'd like the first review to be within one year kind of thing.

Okay. Would you be okay, Michelle, if we did it after one year, this initial period, and then following that every five years

Yeah.

Or every three years

or something.

That we might wanna you could see where that got five years is kind of a long time, and it will go through I mean, that's a whole term plus a year. You know?

So three? Would you be more comfortable with three?

I don't I don't know.

I'm comfortable with three, and I think we can review whenever we want, whenever the council seems fit. But but it's just that it's kind of a requirement. I just don't think you wanna do it too specific because then you're locked in to have to

You could do it at least every five years, and then we could do it sooner.

Well, remember remember too, I think we have a late liaison there for a purpose. Right? And liaison at any point could call for a review.

Yeah. So if if we could change that

to say least every five years.

Every five years. So put in at least.

So Sorry. Just to clarify, I heard consensus for three going to three. I like three better than five for what council member Stalling said. But I

am good with

Yeah. I think I think just changing the language to review at least every three years or as needed.

Sounds good. Yeah. Majority.

So if I may, Lehigh City Council review the effectiveness of the SBAC at least every three years or as needed to determine if the committee is still meeting the goals as set forth in the guiding policy.

Sounds great. K.

Anything else, councilman Stall council member Stallings? No. That's it. Okay. I think we've gone through it. Any any last questions or any motions to consider?

Yeah. I'll move. Mister Mayor, I move to approve ordinance 21 dash twenty twenty six creating the Lehigh City Small Business Advisory Council and approving and adopting an accompanying guiding principles policy and include all edits made tonight in that regard.

Thank you, James. Second?

Second council member

Newell. I think, yeah, between Marlon and myself, we took good notes.

Okay. I took notes too.

We got a lot of notes.

Second. Any questions? We had a second from council member Newell. First from council member Harrison. Any questions on the motion? Good. Okay. So we'll start with council member Harrison.

Yes.

Council member Stallings?

Yes.

Council member Freeman.

Yes. Council member Lockhart.

Yes. Council member Newell. Yes. Okay. Item thank you, Mara.

Thank you.

Item number five, boards and committees update and discussion.

Tisha, are you

going to lead us on this?

Yeah. So I'm actually not as prepared as I would have hoped for this item. I got a little tied down, and I've been gone. So I apologize. I don't have a great update. But I can let you know kind of where we're at. We do have openings. So we just finished up the Park Tax Committee. Their duties right now are up. And I know that we have Lindsay, the chair. She wasn't planning to continue on the committee because of her role on the planning commission. So that position is available. And then I believe we had maybe one or two others that weren't interested in remaining on the committee either. So we would have some openings there. Park Trails and Trees Committee.

Rachel, I think you said that there was at least one opening there Yes. On that committee?

I know of one, at least. Yeah.

Okay. Yeah. One or maybe even two. Historic society, we do have, an opening on that one. And Michelle had submitted a name, I think, to the mayor, and the mayor's planning to interview that person.

And So we have reached out to him a time or two and are having a hard time getting ahold of him.

Oh, are you?

Yeah. So I can try. I know Sherry's reaching out to him again in the day next day or two. So just a heads up on that.

Okay. Thank you. Yep.

You bet. Thanks for trying.

And then that's kind of just really all the update that I have, but this is also an opportunity for you guys to ask questions. Or if you want to give me some direction on some research that you might need for these committees, or if you want to have a discussion on anything about boards and committees, yeah, I'll just turn it over to you guys.

Tisha, I It's Okay. I went out of town, too, at the conference and totally forgot to look into some of the committees I'm on. So I'll try to get that information to you soon.

Maybe as a heads up, on the committees that you're serving on, if there are vacancies, please feel free to reach out both to that committee or to yourself or to other council people about people that you might recommend. I know a recommendation's been made by Councilmember Stallings, for one. We're reaching out to him. We're going to interview him and make sure he's a fit for historical. So I think that's a good positive place to leave this is, as you're serving on your committees, always be looking for recommendations that would be able to serve and then pass those along, and we'll we'll bring them in and take care of it that way. Any questions on that?

Well, was wondering, because I think when we started having this discussion in was it January? I don't know, February, whatever you were talking about, yeah, going through the committees, making kind of seeing the membership, and then looking at terms, and maybe term limits, and possibly standardizing that, or looking at codifying some of that stuff. I'm just kind of wondering what the thought is on that. That was my impression was that that was happening. But are we just taking each committee at a time for terms and all that and not looking at it overall? I just I'm fine with whatever. I just kind of wanted to get a feeling for what's happening.

JULIE: Yeah. And I'm good. Guess that's maybe some direction that I'm hoping for, too, from the council. Where do you want us to spend our time?

Tisha, will you and this may be a little bit of a project for you to do. But on each committee, can you look and see if there are terms by code that each because there are some committees that don't have those JULIET Correct. Or follow along. So maybe what would help us is, can you put on some information so that we know which committees do have DUNN: terms and

those types of things so that we are a little better moving forward with filling those positions?

Yeah. Okay. That sounds good. And maybe just for simplicity, we can start with the city committees first.

That would be great.