County Commission - Regular Meeting

Want to welcome everyone here this morning. I'm assuming we'll be able to this morning or

this afternoon and get everybody snuck in here. Might feel like morning when we get out of here. Um we're going to uh ask Commissioner Newton to give us our opening prayer and then he'll um we'll follow him the pledge of allegiance. We'll go to that point. Our father in heaven, we're grateful to gather this day. We're grateful for the community that we live in. We're grateful for the moisture that we've received. We're grateful for those community members who are here today to learn and listen and and help us understand their needs. We ask you to bless us as we discuss the needs of our community that we will be inspired to do the right thing and that we will all return home safely this evening. We say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen.

Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Commissioner Newton. Appreciate that. Um, so everyone had an opportunity to go through the con consent agenda items. Any comments or things that need to be pulled? Okay, I'll look for a motion then.

Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the consent agenda items. I'll second the motion. Have a motion by Commissioner Nickerson and a second by Commissioner Newton. All in favor? I. Are there any opposed? Okay, motion carries. Okay. Do we have any commissioner conflicts of interest this evening? Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on. I'll just say I live in the Cottonwoods.

Okay. Thanks, Commissioner Blocker. Okay. We will uh turn the time over to the public now for public comments. Please keep your uh comments to three minutes. At this time, please state your name and your address when you come to the mic and and if you could speak into the mic, it would be greatly appreciated. That thing doesn't pick it up real well. So, if you could d talk directly into it.

There is one public hearing later and that's uh the Cottonwoods land removal. So, if you're here for any of the other items to include um the Ponderosa, um now would be your time to make comment. Thank you, Kate.

Dana Bower. I live in Rollins Ranch, 4445 Ranch Boulevard. I support Utah's belief in giving private property owners rights over their own land. I believe in smart development and advancement of our community, and I'm not opposed to growth. However, changes to private land should be done with respect to neighbors and other existing properties to ensure they aren't impacted negatively by improvements to others land. I am here today in support of neighbors who, if this minor change to road location is approved, will become victims of greedy development left unchecked by our county stewards. These neighbors did their due diligence before purchasing and went off count development agreements that showed future road placements to be of little impact on where their homes are situated. The original agreement had this road connecting to Hidden Valley and none of us can understand the reasoning to move this other than the developer's desire to maintain his private entrance to his own home. We just fought this road change a few months ago as they would have given our neighbor a triple-sided lot surrounding their home with roads. Additionally, another neighbor would have their home face a new main road of the community which was not disclosed when they purchased. Not to mention the traffic confusion and safety hazards that come with the road not connecting via Hidden Valley. Now we are back at the same point. The developer having moved the road a few feet to fight the same battle. Regardless if the road is moved 50 ft to the left or right, it still causes the same concerns for our existing homes. It isn't fair. We feel harassed, bullied, and defeated as we have to continually fight to keep our current homes as is without roads being set put in nonsensical spaces to keep the developers 20 ft of road private. Please consider that the majority of Rollins Ranch is against this road change. As you make your decision, there are also major drainage issues in our subdivision already, specifically where this new road and phase are. I would hope that the commission is willing to look into the storm drain problems fully

before allowing any more development to ensure our systems are adequate for more homes to be placed. I watch each year as the same neighbor who was threatened with the third road being placed outside their bedroom windows deals with terrible flooding since the developer dug into the hillside to update the sloping for county approval. If water drainage is already that bad from a few days of construction, how can we ensure these folks that the years of construction will be done considerately so that their land doesn't receive the snow melt from the developer property? Rollins Ranch also has one legal egress. How can we continue to approve more housing in this community without first alleviating the potential wildfire fire risk situation where hundreds of homeowners are trying to escape through only one exit? If a blockage exists during a home fire and the emergency vehicles can't get through, this appears to violate our county standards that requires two legal egress points. It is my understanding that the middle school could not be considered a second egress. Why are we putting more risk on the homeowners at the benefit of further developer reward? The water pressure and availability in Ponderosa phase is already a concern. So, I don't see why we would add to that concern by allowing 100 plus lots to be built. How can the county guarantee the fire department will have the water they need for our home safety?

Ma'am, that's that's three minutes. Thank you. Next.

My name is George Patterson and I live at 4465 Ranch Boulevard in Mountain Green. And uh I go along with all the comments made by uh Sister Bower. Along with that, I think it's really a problem to have to put in two intersections within 50 to 100 ft of each other. That's a real problem on a main drive. That's Ranch Boulevard that goes the whole length of Rollins Ranch. And they want to do that. And then the other problem, of course, it's not a it's a safety hazard having two intersections so close. Um, I understand the developer's concern for his own property, but you know, he never said anything about that when he bought into the uh the understanding that he would uh enter his property uh off of off of Hidden Valley Drive, which really goes right into his property. and he didn't plan ever on doing that because he put up a fence around all of his property and then he put a gate right where he wants that road to go. I can show you on this map right there where that dotted line is. That's where he wants his road to go. And there's one intersection and there's another. He doesn't want any traffic to go up this road. Every one of these homes is owned by family, his family on Hidden Valley. He wants to eliminate that so that all the flow goes right through Ranch Boulevard and bypasses his property. The reason I'm bringing this up is several years ago he cut off our secondary water and we had paid for it for the year and he says,"Well, because

it goes through my property, you're going to have to pay me a fee in order to use this water." And we went to court over it. And we were unable to get it resolved. He's an attorney and he just kept fighting it and would have gone all summer long without any secondary water. And what happened is we had to cut off the water before it got to his property and run an alternate water line so that we could get secondary water into Rollins Ranch. I disagree with this thing that he wants to do. if he wants it to go into his property, I think that's fine. And I'd like to see the development go on because I know it'll help the community, but I think it needs to be done with the agreement that was originally established. That's my complaint.

Now, can I say one other thing? There is an alternative method. If you look at this, this is a roundabout. That intersection is a big intersection. They could put a roundabout in that intersection and actually have five roads going off of it. It would help the developer because it would keep his road private. It would also have another road which I called Ponderosa Drive which would go into his subdivision and it would cause traffic when this builds up and homes are built here. People would come down this road. they would have an alternative to get out. They wouldn't all have to go around Branch Boulevard. They could go down Hidden Valley Drive, both coming and going. And that is a big intersection. And you could easily put a roundabout in there. That would solve part of the problem that we now have. If it goes through the way it is.

Thank you. You bet.

You did get his name, Cindy. Okay. Thank you. Paul Clayton spoken here before at the the previous uh meetings, but uh I've made my concerns known regarding the the Ponderosa subdivision. I think you've all received my email, so I don't need to reiterate that. Um ultimately, the the change in road placement um addresses some of my original concerns when this was brought up a year ago. Um at this point I just my concerns continue to be uh what the unknowns are. Um by placing a road and beginning development um you know is there water pressure? What happens with drainage? I don't know that there's there's a lot of assumptions and unknowns and u my feeling generally is that maybe we need to look into a deeper bigger plan before um before it gets approved and bulldozers start going tonight. So those are my concerns but again I've I've emailed each of you and I appreciate your time and consideration. Thanks.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Sarah Derbano. I live on 434351 Hidden Valley Road and um I am pro this road placement. Um I have also spoken to some of you and have sent in an email of why so I won't get into that. But um I think that this is a tough decision and I think that this is the most fair placement for the people involved. I think that the developer has done a great job of reaching out to the concerns of the committee. I mean the community um we've hosted a meeting. We've spoken to uh families individually and I am pro. I think this is a great plan. I am one of many on a list that have been on this list since I we moved in in 2020 and the list already existed. So, um, I know that there are many in our neighborhood that are excited for this development, that it is a positive thing, and that there are many who are anxious to get it passed and to be able to start building. So, I hope that you would keep our voices in mind as well. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Angela Hansen, 6134 Horseshoe Hollow Lane. um my property would back backs on to this uh area of the new development. Um my concerns for this road placement is for traffic and safety of all of the children um in the neighborhood. And um I believe that the the proper road placement at the end of Hidden Valley Drive would resolve these concerns. I won't reiterate what others have said, but um there are a lot of uh school children bus stops very close to this area and um a lot of people who roll through stop signs in Rollins Ranch neighborhood and I have a major safety concern of uh all these plus homes rolling through that stop sign and not seeing children um getting off of the school bus. Thanks.

Thank you. Hi, my name is R.J. Benell. Uh, my home's at 4401 uh Ranch Boulevard. Um, first of all, I just want to uh share my appreciation for for all of you and and being responsive and listening to the public and just being available. It's been nice to be able to to reach out and share my thoughts on this matter of the uh amendment to the Rollins Ranch Development Plan. Um, I have a a couple of points I I want to make. One is that fully respect the right of a land owner to to make entire development is not a range. Uh, I pack traffic patterns, rights of way, and um directly it'll it'll put my home with a garage uh garage facing the intersection and and force me to back out into a three-way intersection, which doesn't feel like a a really safe situation when when drivers are mostly used to just looking kind of left and right, not to the top of an intersection. Um, I have concerns about the traffic of a full buildout on the original plat maps. This road goes over the hill and potentially down the road. We'll have multiple other homes that would then have all that traffic and noise coming down the hillirectly.

commission. One of the reasons that was cited for for moving the road was to avoid existing infrastructure. I just want to make the point that that infrastructure was built after the initial approval of the plat map and it was placed exactly in the path of the originally proposed road. So, I feel like that's clearly a self-imposed hardship and should not be considered in any way procedurally when we're when we're talking about this amendment. Um, lastly, this I I'm not sure exactly who owns the sidewalk along uh Ranch Boulevard, but it it would seem to me that if we're going to be tearing it out and replacing it with street um for access to this uh development that we'd need the HOA to sign off on it and um or at le I'm not sure. Um, so anyway, um, in short, I just think that this is a kind of a transfer of the negative impacts of this development of traffic, light, and noise kind of away from the originally planned location to the rest of the neighborhood. And I hope we'll consider the the public versus the private interest in this case. And thank you for your time.

Thank you. Hello, Nancy Moss, 4589 Ranch Boulevard. I sent an email to all of you, so I won't go over that, but like Sarah said, we're not against a development. We understand that happens, but um we are concerned about this road placement and we love Morgan Valley. We go for rides all the time and we were told that the reason for the moving of this road was because of fire safety issues that it might be too steep or it might turn this way. And as we drive all over Morgan, we see those roads all over. You come around a corner and there's a stop sign. You know, you have to go up a little bit to to turn. And so it kind of baffles me that the plat was originally okayed and now we're being told the county doesn't want it that way. So, just wanted to voice my opinion there about the road and like other people had said, the water, the pressure, the drainage, all those things. But I know you'll take that all into consideration. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, Jeremy Blackburn, 6038 Hen Valley Drive, just right down the street from this development. I I'm actually here to speak in favor of it. So, um I started talking to the developer about these lots that were going to be there a couple years ago, and I've watched them go through the last couple years of changing the roads and trying to make uh everybody happy. Um honestly, I don't think you can ever make everybody happy. You're just not going to be able to do that. And I also know at a lot of these meetings, the only people that do show up are frankly those that are opposed to it. Um my interest is self- serving, admittedly. I've got uh six grown children and I've got two of them that I want to move back into this community. My sisters lived in Cottonwoods for years and my parents want to move up here as well. So, we're looking to buy some of these lots to build homes on and so I'd love to see it move forward. Um I still have the first plats that the developer sent me that had way more lots on it. Um these are bigger lots. I think that the road going straight in is a better access route than the the previously proposed one. I don't have a financial incentive either way, whether the road goes one way or the other, but I do think that a straight road for fire safety and other things is better. I don't think there's a way to not impact someone. One of the reasons why is because if you do curve the road, then all the cars going in are going to be shining in the back of one of the houses on the other road. So, somebody's going to be impacted either way. Um, these lots were platted as part of the master plan years ago. So, my understanding is that the inevitability is the development's going to come. It's just where we're going to locate that road. So, um I would ask you to go ahead and vote to approve it because, um we're anxious to get going on construction and so the sooner the better in our view and so I'd love to see you guys go ahead and approve it as it's been submitted. Thank you.

Anyone else?

My name is Christian Bower. I live at 4445 Ranch Boulevard. Um, I would just like to state my general opposition to the movement of the road. I do support development and um when my wife and I bought into Rollins Ranch, we understood that there would be additional homes up there. We did our due diligence. We knew where the roads would be. We knew where the homes would be. We knew what it would look like. Um and I know many other of our neighbors have done the same thing. Having the road change at the last minute for unknown, unseen reasons that make no sense doesn't feel we keep hearing about fair or somebody being impacted. Um, people that have done their due diligence, they shouldn't be impacted by a negative movement to a road. people that may buy in later unknowing and not already financially invested. Those are the ones that may that should take on any change because ultimately it doesn't affect them. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Elena Duke. I'm at 6190 Lariat Lane. Um I do support development. Um I am concerned about where the road is placed and where the retention pond is placed because in that placement, whatever water goes through there and whatever storm comes through um the people that live by that retention pond could potentially be um flooded. If that road wasn't moved and that retention pond wasn't put there, then there's not that possibility. if the waters rotted correctly. My other concern is the additional traffic that moves to Rollins Ranch. Um I understand that there are other owners of land that are that um don't want another road running through, but with there being less water for everyone and without the water being figured out before it's developed, we are all at risk for fire. And it's not just our development, but it's the people around us. Like the whole community is impacted. If there's a fire, how are we going to get out? And when more development goes in, which it will, where is everyone moving through? Is is everyone going to move through Rollins Ranch? Because if there are no other roads, then there's no other possibilities for people to get out. And fire danger is huge. We all live in a field. So, I believe that those things need to be considered before we move forward. Again, I'm we all know that there's going to be development, but let's move forward with caution. Make sure there's roads and make sure that the safety community is safe in those developments. Thank you.

Thank you. going once. Anyone else that would like to speak? Okay, thank you for the participation. Appreciate that. Um, just so you know, that's that's item number nine on our agenda. So, my guess, you're welcome to stay. You're welcome. We love having people here. We don't get to see a lot of people very often, so it's nice to have an audience, but um I would guess you're probably I don't know an hour and a half out if you're staying for that particular decision. Um just just a guesstimate depending on how everything goes. Okay, we have the uh Morgan FFA here with us this evening that's going to give us a presentation. So, we want to they were kind enough to stand outside if you want to come in just before you do that. Okay, we got to get the mics situated. That mic there is going to have to go to you guys and you're going to have to have the others set and we're going to have to attach it to you otherwise nobody hears you. Okay. So if you can Mr. Little help you with that before you begin. I've been to these before so used to teach. Sorry.

Hey, Ray. Do I have a motion card? Right. Right. I need a card. Where's the timing? You're going to hold it. Okay. Okay. This is your Morgan FFA parliamentary procedure team. Floor member number one, Daniel Watt. Floor member number two, Sydney Jensen. Floor member number three, Josie McMillan. Floor member number four, Kate Rouseer. Floor member number five, JD Shupe. and your chair. Camry Turner, your 1 minute starts now. Is there any new business?

Daniel Easter liies Easter lilies in the greenhouse as a fundraiser. The motion to reconsider has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is debatable because it is being applied to a debatable motion. Daniel, you being maker of this motion, you have first rights to debate. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Um, early in this meeting, we um passed this motion, but with further discussion with our FA president, we realized that our greenhouse is not equipped to grow these plants and I no longer believe this is a a motion that is needed. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Is there any further debate on the reconsider? Seeing none, we will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of reconsidering the motion that reads, "I move that the chapter grow Easter lilies in the greenhouse as a fundraiser. Please say I." I. All oppose say no. No. The nose habit motion fails. Is there Is there any new business? Madam Chairman, Sydney, I move that the chapter send 10 volunteers to serve I move that the chapter send 10 volunteers to serve at the county farm bureau dinner. Second.

The motion that our chapter send 10 volunteers to serve at the county farm bureau dinner has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is debatable and amendable. Sydney being maker of this motion, you have first rights to debate. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I believe that this motion would be a great idea for our chapter. We have served at this dinner before and it was a great opportunity for us to get service hours for our state degrees. So, I believe that this would be a great opportunity for our members. Please pass this main motion. Madam Chairman Kate, I can lend my full support to this main motion. We can even have some of our members give thank you cards to all of the members that are on the Farm Bureau to thank them for all they do for our agricultural community. Please pass this main motion. Madam Chairman,

Jatie, although this is a positive idea for our chapter, I do not believe that we have the manpower to pull this off. This is a lot of work and I feel like our leadership has so much going on right now that they will not have the opportunity to plan this efficiently to make our chapter do the best that they can at this activity. So urge you as simply to fail this motion. Madam Chairman Josie, this is a wonderful idea. So many of our FFA members are also NHS members. Um if they were able to do this activity, they would be able to get uh service hours for NHS as well. Please pass this. Thank you. Daniel,

I can lend my full support to this main motion. I think this would be a wonderful opportunity for our FFA to get out and um speak with others. I think this would be opportunity for us to be able to spread a literacy as well and to teach a good little workshop on that. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, JD, I move we fix the time to which to adjurnn. So when we adjourn, we reconvene next Monday in Mrs. J's room at 2:30 p.m. Second. The motion to fix the time to which to adjurnn has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is not debatable but is amendable. Are there any amendments? Seeing none, we will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of fixing the time to which to adjurnn, please say I. I. All oppose say no. The eyes have it. Motion passes. Is there any further debate on the main motion?

Madam chairman. Kate, state your inquiry. If this motion were to be laid on the table, when can it be brought back before the assembly? If this motion were to be laid on the table, it can be brought back in this same meeting after one item of business has been transacted or in the next meeting under unfinished business. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman Kate, I move to extend I move to extend the limits of debate to four debates per person per motion. Second.

The motion to extend the limits of debate has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is not debatable, but is amendable. Are there any amendments? Seeing none, we will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of extending limits of debate, please rise. Thank you. Be seated. As this vote is a unanimous vote, the motion passes. You now have four debates per person per motion. Is there any fur to debate on the main motion? Madam Chairman JD, I move we refer this motion to committee of five chairs points chair with the power to act and report back at our next regular scheduled meeting in Mrs. J's room at 2:30 p.m.

The motion to refer has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is debatable and amendable. JD being maker of this motion, you have first rights to debate. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I believe that if we sent this to a committee, they can give us positive impact, excuse me, positive feedback on this motion and give it back to us in a better form so that we can plan this efficiently and effectively for our chapter. So, assembly to pass this referral. Madam Chairman, Josie,

I cannot support this referral. I believe that if this we were to refer this to a committee, it would just delay the progress of this. Seeing as the dinner is coming up shortly, we really need to uh make decisions on this. So, I urge the assembly to fail this referral. Thank you. Madame Chairman Kate, I rise in opposition to this referral. I believe that if the assembly has enough information to debate this topic today, then we have enough information to come to a clear decision today. Please vote no on this referral. Sydney, I believe that as many of us are officers on this floor today, I believe that we have the ability to pass this right now. Please do not pass this referral. Daniel,

seeing as we have done motions like in this in the past, I do not believe that this would be necessary to commit it um to refer it to a committee, seeing as we was successful last time we did it and we did not need to commit it. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Is there any further debate on the referral? Seeing none, we will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of referring this motion to a committee, please say I. I. All oppose, say no. No. The nos have it motion fails. Is there any further debate on the main motion? State your question. Seeing as this is an official FFA event, you may not step outside. Privilege denied. Is there any

appeal has been prop appeal has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is not debatable because it is not being applied to a debatable motion. We will now vote. All those who can uphold the decision of the chair, please say I. I. All those who cannot uphold the decision of the chair, say no. No. The eyes have it. The chair's decision is upheld. You may not step outside. Is there any further debate on the main motion? Josie.

The motion to take a recess has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is not debatable but is amendable. Are there any amendments? Seeing none, we will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of taking a recess, please say I. All oppose say no. No. The nos have it. Motion fails. Is there any further debate on the main motion? Kate,

postpone definitely has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is debatable and amendable. Kate, being maker of this motion, you have first rights to debate. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you, Madam Chairman. This motion is very important to me, and I believe longer consideration would ensure we make a rational decision rather than a rushed one. So, please get behind me in passing this postponement. Madam Chairman, Sydney, I cannot stand behind this postponement. This postponement promotes procrastination, which is something the FFA does not stand for. Please fail this postponement. Madam Chairman JD,

I can lend my full support to this postponement. I believe that if we postpone this motion, it'll give us more time to study and perfect it for our for our 10 volunteers and for our chapters so we can help be the best at the Farm Bureau dinner. So I urge you simply to pass this postponement. Daniel,

Madam Chairman Josie, I cannot support this postponement. If we want 10 volunteers, we need to be able to um get kids to sign up and be able to participate immediately. This postponement will not help that. Please fail this postponement. Thank you. Is there any further debate on the postponement? Madam Chairman, Sydney, I move previous question on the postponement.

Previous question has been properly moved and seconded. If previous question passes, we will end debate on the postponement and take an immediate vote. All in favor of passing previous question, please rise. Thank you. Be seated. All oppose, please rise. Thank you. Be seated. Seeing as this is a unanimous vote, previous question passes. Is there we will now take an immediate vote on the postponement. All in favor of postponing this motion definitely please say I. I. All oppose say no. No. The nos have it motion fails. Is there any further debate on the main motion?

Jatie, I still cannot lend my support to this motion. Getting 10 volunteers is going to be really hard for our chapter because I know a lot of our members have so much going on right now and they will not be able to participate and we want the best for our farm bureau, our county and our farm bureau. So I urge the assembly to fail this main motion. Madam Chairman, Josie, I move we suspend our standing chapter rule which states that members with a lower GPA than 2.0 can participate. Second. Suspend the rules has been properly moved and seconded. This motion is not debatable or amendable. We will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of suspending the ch the standing chapter rule, please say I. I. All oppose say no. The eyes have it. Motion passes. Is there any further debate on the main motion?

Daniel, I can lend my full support. I can lend my full support to this motion. Seeing as state convention is coming up, I think this would give us a wonderful opportunity for some of our compet competitors to go and practice in front of these people. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman Kate, I still rise in favor to this main motion. Sending these 10 volunteers that are that are in agriculture would help show the Farm Bureau that the future of agriculture is bright. So, please pass this main motion. Madam Chairman Josie,

as my floor member said, state convention is coming up and everybody who wants to come to state convention must have at least one service project in. This would count for a service project if they wanted to come. Please pass this main motion. Thank you. Is there any further debate? Sydney. I am also still highly in favor for this main motion. I believe that this would be a great opportunity for our members. Please pass this main motion. Is there any further debate on the main motion? Seeing none, we will now proceed to a vote. All in favor of passing the motion that reads that our chapter send 10 volunteers to serve the county farm bureau dinner and please say I. I. All oppose say no. No.

The eyes have it. Motion passes. Is there any new business? Seeing none, I declare this meeting adjourned. Please rise for questioning. Yes sir. What are two subsidiary motions that yield to the motion to commit or refer? Two subsidiary motions that yield to the motion commit or refer are amend and postpone indefinitely. The person had postpone definitely.

Yes. What vote is required on a motion to postpone definitely? The vote that is required on a postponed definitely is a majority vote. When does a motion postpone definitely require 2/3 vote? The motion postponed definitely requires a twothirds vote when the motion to be postponed is being made a special order at the next meeting. First suspend the rules. Name two rules that may not be suspended.

Two rules that may not be suspended are federal and state laws as well as parliamentary rules. Person had parliamentary inquiry. Is a parliamentary inquiry in order when another member has the floor? Yes, sir. A parliamentary inquiry is in order when another member has the floor. What vote is required to adopt a parliamentary inquiry?

There is no vote required on a parliamentary inquiry. It is a uh a request for information on parliamentary knowledge. Remember how to reconsider? If a main motion was passed by unanimous consent, who can make the motion to reconsider? If a main motion was passed by unanimous consent, the reconsider by m can be made by anyone on the prevailing side. Chair. Yes, sir. In the absence of a quorum, what four actions can legally be taken?

In the absence of a quorum, four actions that can legally be taken are the assembly can fix the time to which to adjurnn, make the motion to adjurnn, they can make the motion call of the house, and the last thing that they can do is um they can move to take a recess to establish a quorum. Thank you. We'll dispense any questions. Is that is that the end?

Well done. Well done. May I make a comment? Not under parliamentary rules. I'm afraid our meeting might go a little longer if we used all those though. Mr. Chair. Yes, sir. I'd like to make a comment about these young people. Okay.

And what the pro process of what they're doing. Sure. They had a short amount of time, 10 minutes is all to present all the things that they wanted to do in this uh presentation. They had certain rules that they had to follow and certain amounts of rules that they had to follow and they only had one minute to prepare with that piece of paper they had. U I used to help with Mr. Little on on this and uh we've had some very good teams in the past and uh Mr. Little does a great job teaching these kids how to do parliamentary procedures. And of course, we don't use it like we should and not according the way they do. It's a modified version of parliamentary procedures, but they have to know information that's in a book about this big of all parliamentary procedures. So, I think they did a great job.

Absolutely. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Appreciate you bringing them. Good luck to the team. When do they compete at state? Two weeks. Okay. Next week. Thursday. So, this was their their dry run. Try run for their state competition. Weren't you in it too, Mike? Once I didn't do partly, but I did a lot of other contests here. Debates just fine. And we had a good audience for him. Yeah, it's great. Great audience. Thank you, Ray. Okay. U roads to recreation, Ogden Valley. I'm your clicker, FYI. Perfect. It's low rent. Sorry.

My name is Becky Parker. I am and that was a real treat. I actually was on the parliamentary procedure and I am for FFA. Um and um I'm going to do the best I can. The part that came apart for me is Man, I've gotten dumb. That was awesome. So, I am Becky Parker. I am the director of traveler information for the Utah Department of Transportation and I'm joined by Isaac Cortez uh who works as a consultant and we work on a program um called the roads to recreation. Uh roads to recreation our goal is to um provide timely and useful transportation information to recreational area travelers. And this is important to the department because it helps us make sure that the existing transportation system is being fully utilized. Um, and the way that we do that is by um taking advantage of partnerships. So we meet with the tourism partners, we meet with transit, and we meet with the communities to share information about um areas. And this specific area that we're talking about is for the Ogden Valley. So, we met with um local area uh around the state to pick on areas that uh saw a a big uh impact from recreational area travelers. And we have just started with four areas. You may have the first one that we launched in was the Cottonwood Canyons. Um and we just launched in the Ogden Valley uh this last winter. Um and the uh this program as I mentioned is important to the department because there's no way that we are going to build ourselves out of congestion. So this is a communications program to educate travelers so that they can make informed travel decisions. Next slide please. So the very first thing in the roads to

recreation program that you get is we start with research. We meet with as I mentioned the tourism partners, community partners. In this case, we met with the ski resorts. Um we are meeting with the forest service uh to talk about Pine View. Um and this is some of the information that we have identified specific to Morgan County as information that we share out. So, um, that includes, uh, the areas that UD do plows, some, uh, hot spots as far as crashes where we see, uh, crashes, icy spots where the sun doesn't hit I 84, and then the fact that there isn't a place to turn around, uh, once you start up, uh, Weber Canyon. Next slide. And we do that through reactive and preemptive uh, communication. So there are crashes that we are unaware of and so we try and share information out to the public so they are aware before they hit the road on uh impacts that they can see. We also do preemptive where we are um communicating about uh projects. Um we are communicating when we know that there is weather and importantly we are communicating out about transit and car pooling as um these areas see an increased amount of uh travel. Next slide. Okay. So some of the educational information that we focus on is our construction projects. Um we have right now currently on trappers loop we have a uh fiber project and then there is a waterline project in on SR39. So we communicate that out to the public. We also have safety information that we share out about not passing our plows. Um and then we try and communicate to the public about when we know an upcoming storm. So, UD do we have our own uh weather folks who give us the

information and then we can pass that along uh to the public. Okay. And now I'm going to turn the time over to Isaac. Isaac is actually our in the field person who is updating uh the information. He's going to talk about the specific tools that we use to communicate out to the public.

Hello everybody. Uh, I'm Isaac Cortez and it's uh great to be here in front of you all to talk about what we do. Um, I'd like to give you a closer look at our digital hub that we use. It's our centralized source of all transportation related information in the Ogden Valley. Uh, we've consolidated several critical features onto a single easytouse website that can be found at ogden valley.utah.gov. Uh the key features that we have on this website are traffic cameras, uh travel travel times down to the minute, weather conditions, and we also have a social media story feed. And uh along with that, we give travel tips to help uh with trip planning and all things like that. So, um all of our features are super helpful. We've rounded up all of the cameras in the area, all of the traffic cameras, grouped them all onto one page, and it's super accessible for people just to get a clear image of what the road looks like without having to jump to multiple sources of information. Um, it's the one-stop shop that we encourage all of our uh travelers to re refer to before they go out and hit their recreation hotspots. Um, next slide, please. So our whole approach and our outreach strategy revolves around meeting travelers where they are across all different platforms. Uh here we have our social media uh channels. We we can be found on Facebook and Instagram at U. Ogden Valley and on X at Ogden Valley UD dot. On these channels we provide a lot of comprehensive traveler information and give out a lot of good resources. And on top of all that, we um we get together with the U dot crews and put together some fun informational videos

just to um help spice up your feed, you know. Um so our social media channels are definitely a good resource in case you haven't followed them. They're definitely a good resource to follow. Next slide. So there is a lot of behind the scenes coordination for our program to flow as smoothly as possible. Uh the critical less visible work of operational coordination is achieving a unified messaging messaging. As Becky mentioned earlier, we work with a lot of partners in the area. Uh and those partners that we've partnered with um in terms of tourism and recreation are Snow Basin, Powder Mountain, Nordic Valley, and Ogden Nordic. uh we have created like a close coordination that ensures everyone is sharing the same consistent message to their publics uh which is key to managing traffic expectations during peak travel times. Uh so all of our messaging it starts off with the the U do platforms and our partners just share and amplify our message just to get everybody on the same page. Um so next slide. So, as we wrap up this season's operations, we we want to make sure that these tools are helping the Weber and Morgan County communities. So, we'll be distributing end of survey end to season surveys to both the public and local partners. And we would also like the for their communities to share as well. Um, on our website, we also have a feedback button as well as circled on our presentation slide. And this is just a survey to kind of help us improve our website to see how we can make things more accessible um or any other features that you may think that we can add on. Um so the main thing that we're looking for is just how can we what do we need to do to make things make this a better

resource for you? Um, so we're looking for feedback on like frequency, timeliness, and accuracy of our messaging so we can continue to refine the program. Um, cuz this is the first year that we launched here in Augland Valley and we're just trying to do things the best that we can. Um, next slide. Uh, so the cool thing about this program isn't just about winter travel. Uh, this is going to be a super helpful tool for summer recreation as well. Uh we're going to be working with our partners to share recreation travel information throughout the warmer months to assist in recreational travel, especially around Pine View and Kazy Reservoir. Uh there's also a couple of summer events around Snow Basin, and we just want to help communicate those travel impacts uh for people planning to go and recreate in the Ogden Valley. Um, so the most important thing we want Morgan County residents to take away is to start using these tools before leaving the house and sharing them with their fellow travelers. Uh, you can bookmark the dashboard and use our website as the one-stop shop to check travel times, road conditions, um, see what the road weather is predicted to be, if there's any uh, snow or slush on I 84 or Trappers. Um, you can follow us on social media and see those real-time alerts that we put out there and uh just help you plan your trip out to the Ogden Valley become a little bit more easier. Um, and another important detail, we'd really appreciate if when you do follow along, share our messages as well because, uh, we've seen previous success from our other programs, including with the Cottonwoods, and part of that success came from partners and communities sharing information, and we really appreciate all the shares we can get as we get more comfortable and

established in the area. Um, so yeah, we're we're just happy to be here and give the best traveler information that we can and uh that kind of sums up everything I have to talk about today. So, can I put that in layman's terms? Uh, yeah, for sure.

So, essentially what this does is most of us are used to using the UD do app when it snows for checking on what roads are closed, what requires chains right now, and where are the snow plows. This is an additional layer on top that is specifically for people recreating. Are there any parking spots left up at uh East Canyon? Are there any spots left to park your boat trailer at Kazzy? So that if you've ever been to Cosy or if you've ever been to Pine View with the boat towed behind you, there's no place to turn around. We want them to know that before they start up Trappers Loop cuz you can't flip around. Exactly.

And and this would also be with all the ski resorts to notify people what parking lots have available parking and or if they're full. So, don't even try. Yeah, exactly. That's that's the dumb version that I took away from our first meeting. Exactly. That's a super great um very concise way to put our whole program. I I appreciate that, Kate. So, we can contribute. Brett Heiner, our public works director, can contribute. uh neighbors can contribute if if they see that there's a a teed uh accident and therefore the roads shut down but they'll get all that information from you do but on local roads if anyone has that information they can submit this on the website too. Yep.

You can't submit don't travel here just because I don't want the road traffic but it is an additional tool and we're very grateful that you do decided to roll it out in our area especially before the Olympics. So thank you. Yes, we we're definitely happy. That was my question is how it interacted with the app or does it or will it interact with the app in the future?

At the moment, it doesn't interact with the app. It's it's kind of an extension uh that loops in all of those features onto a very easily accessible website. So, it doesn't when there's updates on the app, it doesn't automatically go to the website, but we refer to both those sources. So um it is in addition to the app. It's not meant to replace the app. Um we have found that uh travelers self-identify themselves and put themselves into categories. And so that's why we have categorized out a specific communication tool for recreational area travelers.

And so how does somebody get all that information? Uhhuh. So it's available especially dumb people like me. So, it's on the website ogden valley.youot.utah.gov and then it's on social media and then we also um we do um advertising campaigns to make sure that we can get it to those folks. We work closely with our tourism partners uh to pinpoint uh through social ads and website advertising. Okay. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you so much for coming up. Mr. Chair, before we move forward here, we've got folks in the hall and it's standing room only. I wonder if we might do a quick poll of who's here to go over which items and maybe try to move those up in the agenda a little bit. Okay. Um I'm I'm assuming most are here for nine or 10. That's what I would think. So, can we just see a show of hands here? If you're here for any of the planning commission items, which is 8, 9, and 10, would you raise your hands if you're for 8, 9, and 10? Okay.

Looks like all So, do you want to move? Okay. So, start with We're at We're at six o'clock here in a second here. Yeah. So, we could move any of them. Um, I I'd move that we move items 8, 9, and 10 to the beginning of our action items. I'll second that. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Newton, a second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I. Are there any opposed? It's not that we don't want you to stay for the whole thing. But we have bonus points if you do stay. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Hey, did you make a motion on 78 and 9? 8 9 10 8 9 10.

Yeah. Sorry. Did we vote and I missed it? We did. We voted. Thank you. 311. Commissioner Newton, Commissioner Blocker and unanimous. Go ahead. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Action item F8 is the is the WPR subdivision phase 3A.1 preliminary plot. It's file number 25.046. The applicant is of course the Wasatch Peaks Ranch LLC. The project location is approximately 5233 West Peaks Road is identified by the parcel number and serial number in your meeting packet tonight. Mr. Chair

Jeremy point of clarification. Um I have the file S2.045. You said 046. I do mean 045 for the clarification.

And the current zoning is a resort special district with an applicable development agreement. The acreage is approximately 25.27 acres combined for tonight's request, Mr. Mr. Chair. And the request is for preliminary plat approval for a subdivision of 13 lots. Review having been completed by planning staff, the county engineer, and the county fire department. Uh reviewing uh previously approved phase 3A and the addition of uh again this this subdivision, 13 lots. uh find that it meets the code standards for accomplishing a a subdivision. The planning commission heard this at their regularly scheduled meeting on February 12th, 2026. There were no comments from the public. Um there's some discussion from the planning commission uh regarding um why it was the 3A.1 designation. We staff went back and forth with the applicant, found that this could be a good way to designate it in a serial manner to establish a a good flow. Um, and then the county currently provides uh fire review until WPR's fire station is fully operational and and the previously removed lot uh from 3A uh which is lot 57 if I'm not mistaken 57A. I'll have the applicant clarify that um is being added back in the among these 13 lots. So the commission voted to recommend approval of the application with a vote of six to zero uh with chair Maloney not voting that night. Otherwise, I'm happy to answer any your questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Commissioners, any questions?

I don't have any questions, Mr. Chair. I'll move that we approve. Sorry, let me pull up the application number. Sorry. I move we approve the WPR phase 3A.1 preliminary plat application 25.045. Do we want to have um before a second happens? Do we want to have the applicant go and talk to us at all on it? Questions? If we don't have questions, I don't know that we need to. If the applicant's really dying to talk, they can. Okay, I'll second Mike's motion. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Newton and a second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I. Are there any opposed?

Okay. Motion carries. Okay. F9.

Thank you, Mr. Action. Item F9 is the Looking for the name here. It's the Rollins Ranch Development Agreement, simply enough, and it's application 25.063. The applicant is Tyrese of the Derbano Group. uh representing the applicant, Fernwood LC. And Mr. Chair, the the applicant is in the audience tonight. Um and the project location is approximately 6113 North Hidden Valley Road with the current zoning being a a split designation of of residential, which is the R120 designation, and rural residential, which is the RR1 designation. The acreage affected by the request is approximately 250 acres and the request is an amendment to the development agreement to revise road alignment for improved safety and to accommodate existing infrastructure. Uh and this uh request is eerily similar to the one from uh fall of last year and represents essentially a split of the difference between the road and its entitled form per the concept plan from the development agreement and the previous or the recent request to amend the alignment of that road. This new amendment uh in its in its new form does move the road. creates a detention basin for the subdivision um having been reviewed by the county engineer in somewhat of an open space area and removes the triple frontage lot as was shown in the previous proposal. The planning commission heard this at their regularly scheduled meeting on February 12th. Uh some of the public public comments were echoed tonight. The planning commission discussed the amendment and and asked questions regarding the design of the drainage basin uh the road alignment lot config configuration and snow storage. Um staff

clarified that the that the revised application or the new application uh does resolve or resolves the the again the prior double frontage and snow storage issues meets applicable standards and includes a redesigned detention basin required by the county engineer. So the county engineer voted unanimously to recommend approval to this body with a re with a vote of six to zero. Chair Maloney not voting that night. Um I'm happy to answer any questions. County engineer. You said the county planning commission. Is that voted? The the county engineer reviewed the detention basin and other items specifically. Okay.

Brought forward a recommendation of staff report to the planning commission who voted six to zero to recommend approval to this body tonight. Okay. Any questions for staff? I don't have a question, but I do have um after reading through this and reading I and I spoke with Garrett this morning um and I don't know if Janet did Garrett talk to you about our conversation this morning. He did not he didn't he felt he's ignored me all day. it's his wife's birthday or something

because I I think there was as we were discussing this from the previous meeting about being legislative versus administrative and those uh conversations about what we're allowed to do. As I was reading through the packet, I notic there's a section here that says that it's contractual and then there a little further down it says discretion to deny. And I and I talked to several of the planning commission members because as I was reading this I was it says the county commission which would be us has the discretion to deny and Garrett I wanted some clarification about as far as the planning commission as well. Do they also have that same discretion even though they're they're an advisory? They're not a legislative body and he agreed that they they would have that same uh discretion. Um,

so I think Janet has a clarifying point to that. Um, specifically what the planning commission saw versus what's in your packet. Well, I think they had the exact same leg. Correct. They they did, but I think their understanding of it that it was administrative. Correct. They didn't understand.

They didn't understand that they still contract because they did read in here. And that was kind of the things I just wanted to bring up is that had that language been in there, the county commission and planning commission has that um that discretion to recommend a denial or approval. It kind of came across to me that they felt like well they checked the boxes. It's administrative. We must vote to approve. Um, and so that after reading this and talking to Garrett, I I felt there was some um, and I think some of the planning commissioners were like, we just felt it was administrative. We have to approve it if they check the box where had they had that language been included in there that they had that discretion as well. That would have changed that six to zero outcome. Um, I can't say that they would vote, but um, they did say that would definitely have changed their perception of it. they felt it's administrative and and we just have to approve it because they checked the box. So, I just thought with talking to Garrett and some of the the planning commission members, I felt that was very pertinent that um they felt that had that language been included it would have been different.

Okay. So my question along what you've been studying on that is when did it become administrative versus legislative because we went through it just last year did not Hang on one second here. Why don't why don't you take just a minute and explain like you did with it has always been administrative.

It was my back. So Josh had it listed on the staff reports the first time it came before the planning commission as administrative. When I got to planning commission, I saw it as administrative, but noticed that we're amending a development agreement, which is generally a lot of times is legislative. So, out of fear that we weren't going to have the correct hearings and stuff like that, I announced that it was legislative. Both Josh and Garrett were gone that night. Afterwards, we went back to the drawing board, did a bunch more research, and amendments to development agreements can be either legislative or administrative. However, because it's a contract, the county commission still has a right to either approve or deny. So, it's kind of a hybrid. It's weird.

Okay. And I I think that's where my conversations after reading this and then calling Garrett like how did we get from one point to another and then like you said we heard this just in the fall and then here it is back again and so that's why I was asking for that clarification as far as and then seeing such a swing at the planning commission from denial to a unanimous I was like you know trying to find out what what caused that change and that's what kind of led to that that conversation with Gary commission. My my question and you know Janet you can help us with it is the development agreement in the beginning was different than what it is now.

So uh the what they're trying to amend is the fourth amendment to the development agreement and that fourth amendment only relates to this ponderosa section not any of the rest of Rollins. Right. So it's specific to that. So there's still a ton of terms in the original development agreement that still apply. The fourth amendment was pretty short and just changed some of the density a little bit and made a small subdivision and

a new concept plan. And the reason why I ask is is when it's administrative versus legislative, we still have the we still have the ability as a county commission to not or to deny an this amendment that they're requesting. That's correct. Because it's a contract.

It's a contract. And so in that contract and based upon the original development agreement, it had this location of this road in a different location. So this location is specific to the fourth amendment which is specific to the ponderosa portion of Rollins. So in other words, if that's the case, then we are legally able to deny this because this is a separate portion to this agreement. That's correct. Okay. So that puts it out of administrative to legislate and it's still administrative but it's contractual. So it allows us

it allows us to do the discretion of having it have it be approve or not.

Okay. All right. Because I mean we had gone through this um previously and we had said no the intersection. And I wish I had the mic um up there so I could show it to you. But when you're looking at this property, and I did go down and look at it, and there is some problems that I see as a with this development, where they want to put this road. Um, yeah, it might be good. speak into the mic this time. Okay. All right. So, my question is this. We have this is the proposal yet this was all part of the this one here is what the original design was where you have a road coming in this way roads going this direction. This one actually butts out here ways and this one here is going in to where the original thought they were going to do it. And so even though, and this is something I do not know, but where does the property line start on this road? And if that's the case, if the property line starts right here versus back in here, then this becomes a whole new development and this development has to go according to what we have gone and already put as an intersection in here. So that is my question is why can't it continue with this here if this part of this road here is part of this new

development. So then the other question is and and those that know the answers I'd love to hear it and that is is on this one who does own that rightway this from the road to the fence whose property is that is that property part of this project or is it part of Rollins Ranch? And if it's part of Rollins Ranch, then you're going to have to have a you're going to have to have an agreement with the Rollins Ranch development to determine whether or not they want to allow you to go across that road or across that property. Um, so there's some questions I have and I'd like some answers.

Can you answer those? actually do want to mention that the applicant has prepared a presentation and it may go over some of those questions. Mr. Chair, if you'd like to get into that, I could have the applicant come up. That's fine. Okay. Don't know if you were here earlier. I am your clicker. Okay. Thanks, Kate. Yeah.

Good evening. Um, I'm Tyrese. I'm here with the owner, Doug Dereno, and we're just going to go through a presentation. Just wanted to talk a little bit about situation from last uh fall. So last fall, as you can see there on the slide, the bottom road was the original road in the development agreement. And you can see the radius there is sharper and it gave cause uh for concern for line of sight, for the ability for fire trucks to move in and out. And so we look to find a different uh avenue for this ingress egress to this subdivision. And I just want to This is a smaller subdivision. It's 21 lots. So, we we tried moving it. We worked with our civil engineers. We moved it to the north or excuse me to the west on this and um it created a double frontage lot and there was also some questions from the county commission uh regarding uh some other items. So, if you flip to the next slide, uh there was also the snow plow. Um where would they push the snow? So, we took those concerns back to our engineer and at the same time we had a meeting with Morgan County's engineer and we were told that in order to effectively develop this property, we would need a detention pond on our property, it the um drains were not sufficient to go to the detention pond to the Rollins Ranch detention pond. So we then worked with them to find a solution where we didn't have a double frontage lot for the neighbor and we somewhere where we could push the snow and we also needed to make sure that we have to have a detention pond. So that's something that we can't get out of. That's a county requirement

for us to hold the water. So, one of the reasons or one of the big benefits for the detention pond is we'll mitigate and control and be able to uh detain obviously that water that they have going down there. Right now, there's nothing detaining the water. So, this is designed that detention pond is designed for up to a 100redyear storm. So, it gives us a place to push the snow and have a detention pond. See, if you can click to the next slide. You're all good, Kate. No, you're good. You can see that it creates a 27 acre lot or detention pond, which is adequate for 100year stone storm. It makes an easy push for the snow plow because you just go up the road and you you'll see the culde-sac at the end. You could do a turn and that's for fire as well. And you can just push it right back down into that detention pond open space area. Next slide please. So again it's a 27 acre detention pond. This road this secondary road is uh done according to ashtto guidelines. So Asho guidelines is the guidelines they use from for roads and it's 150 ft from 150 ft center to center. So it alleviates the tight radius curve. It gives a better line of sight for motorists and pedestrians. It's been approved by Mark Miller, the county engineer. It alleviates the double frontage lot issue and it gives us area to push the snow. So it all the questions that were coming up last time we have uh resolved. Next slide. Now the road layout and traffic light. So the road has been placed to minimize as best we can traffic lights. So from

the neighbor's home to the west to the sidewalk is 61 ft. The sidewalk is 5t. The planter or park strip is 6 feet. The curb and gutter is 2 and 1/2 ft. So that gives us 74 and a half ft from the neighbor to the west. Next slide, please. So you can see the engineer uh plans here. It's probably hard to see, but you can see the 61 ft from the property line from the neighbor to the edge of the sidewalk. And then you add the five feet, the six feet, and the two and 1/2 ft. Can you guys see that? Okay. On your computer. I don't know how visible that is. Okay. So that gets you to the road and that pushes it 74 and a half ft from um the neighbor to the west. Now will you please click the next slide? So if you can look at this, we uh did an overlay on Google Earth 74 1/2 ft. You can see where the road is actually coming in at. So there's the line of sight coming in on a portion of the garage and a portion of the sideyard. Next slide, please. And we find this to be uh consistent with the community. I don't know if there's any way you can zoom in, but we found at least 10 just in Rollins Ranch area where they have all similar type characteristics. Not all these are similar.

Sorry. similar being 13 intersections. Yes. Okay.

You're backing out into traffic. You have a road right there. So the this is just consistent with the development the way it's been planned from the beginning. Um it's a straight shot for the snow plow. It's a straight shot for uh fire. It makes it easier. It's according to ashtto ashtto guidelines. It alleviates the uh recom not the recommendation but the uh the need for the detention pond. So we have worked really hard to try and answer all the questions that we can and make it as copacetic with the neighborhood and to do it according to county recommendation, county suggestion, and the engineers uh approval. and then I'd like to turn over the rest of it to Mr.

I came specifically prepared not only to answer questions but to make commitments in behalf of the development and myself as a developer. So here I am. This particular project has been with the planning zoning office for four years now. I say that simply to make the point. The particular final approval that you're being asked to approve tonight has been thought out, discussed, negotiated, engineered more than once. The decision to move this road to what we call the center of the property on the flat in the valley was not lightly taken. again. Prepare to answer any questions that you might have as I go. But let's see. I think it's the next slide. Kind of looks like this. No, that's all right. Let's start here. There you go. Well, if you'll see these slides that you're looking at now, go back one more if you would. K. Appreciate you. Yeah, that one. Whoops. The other way. There we go. That one. Okay, stop there. This, thank you for zooming in. This is the original exhibit attached to the signed, sealed, and recorded development agreement with Morgan County and Rollins Ranch. This binder contains all of the amendments. There have been many. My point, not uncommon. Why? It isn't

because they got it wrong the first time. It's that if you look at this map, this is very preliminary where someone came in and just drew a vision of what will sit on top of 500 acres. It lacks detail and engineering. But nevertheless, if you look right Whoops. No, no. I could even get confused. Sorry. and I live up here, but this is it. Here's Hidden Valley Road right here. Here's the intersection, Commissioner Fackerel, you were talking about right there. I'm trying to see where you're pointing. Can you kind of see the red dot? I'll just

Nope. It's not playing.

I appreciate that. Okay. Okay. I won't touch it, but this was the original and it shows Hidden Valley Road going straight through up what we now call Hidden Valley or Ponderosa phase 2. Next slide. Slide, Kate, please. There was a subsequent amendment and there have been many, but the next one that was relevant shows Hidden Valley Road going straight through hard right. By the way, I live back here. Very familiar with the neighborhood. Right.

And Hidden Valley Road connected went straight through up what is Ponderosa phase two. Right. So, this is a new amendment. Oh, that's the original. This is the second amendment. And who whoever asked it? I'm sorry. Over here. Commissioner Blocker. Oh, I'm sorry. Reline. Oh, Commissioner Blocker. Who made the second amendment? Who asked for it? I don't know. But it wasn't I think it was early on and it had to do with u common pathways that went through the neighborhood that got eliminated on this second amendment, I believe. So I think it was the original developer going off memory

because if you were to continue that road just like it is original, it looks to me like that would be the best route. And that is except that you put a pump house there and a few other things. But when you develop a property, you can go and make it to where it's good curves and good slopes and all that kind of stuff. I still don't I mean keep talking and I'll get reserve it for later.

No, no, fine. I appreciate the dialogue. Let me speak to the pump house because there is an ear I call it the irrigation shack because it's a pole barn sitting on top of some electrical pumping equipment and some switches. And I will tell you that from an engineering standpoint and the developer standpoint, it's irrelevant. That shack is going no matter what. It's inconsistent with a high-end residential development. And by the way, the pump is going as well. It's no longer necessary for irrigation purposes up Hidden Valley. They'll there's sufficient pressure. So the shacks moving under any conceivable circumstance that I can think of. So the movement of the road was not a factor of that shack is in the way. I'll tell you what is in the way, which I kind of hope I don't have to move, is we put a little playground for the kids.

Yeah, I saw that. You see that? Okay. Personally, I hope we don't have to move that, but the shack I don't care about. Okay.

It helps to have the owner here because I can speak to you plainly about things and my intent. So, here's the point though on this. At this amendment, you see the road has got a slight curve in it. But on this amendment, you don't see any geographical contours. So we don't know by looking at this amendment whether or not this is feasible under the highway standards due to grade curvature. Next slide, please. This is a more detailed exhibit. attached to the fourth amendment and it dealt specifically with the development of the ponderosa. I was involved here for my own personal residence and we put in a small three lot subdivision as Janet mentioned so that there's a one two three and it included the development of let me get it back in my mind here these lots down here if we can just pan down just slightly to get these up to where we can see them. Whoops. I'm sorry. Go up. Very good. So, one, two, and three lots. And it also shows Hidden Valley Road coming up here. Your question, if I could, Commissioner Fel, where does the private property start and it starts at the connection of the public road? So to answer your question, there is not a need to get a permissive use from the HOA for example to connect to the public road.

Okay. So you're saying then that the sidewalk is your property. Now you've asked a very interesting question. I mean because sidewalks are there between the you've got space between that and the sidewalk and then you've got your fence off there for another two feet or three feet. So now whose property is it? It's actually owned by the land owner. However, according to ordinance, the we call it the green strip and the sidewalk are to be maintained by the adjoining property owner. Right? Who owns the land? It's owned by the person who owns the adjoining land. Which adjoining?

It's not public. In other words, it's not public land. It's private property but controlled by ordinance. That's my understanding. Okay. I'll have to

Well, we may have to get dig deeper in that. But the point being is is that the current road which is considered a private drive connects to a public road at Hidden Valley intersection. Okay. So, this also proposed just a straight in. But on this exhibit, you start to see the contours. And if you've been there, and it sounds like some have, and I appreciate that, this starts heading up a pretty steep slope. Not very much. Not bad. Well,

not that much. Unless you're going to take it clear up by your barn. Let's chat about that, okay? Because as I mentioned, we've been at this development four years, okay? And most of the time, if not all of it, has been on where to place this road in accordance with county ordinance as well as the ASHO or standards for building roads. Now, next slide, please. Hold on just a second. Before you move on from that one, would you read note number two on this slide? It looks like it's partially cut off. I can read it for you. I have the original here if you'd like me to read it. Thank you.

It says, "Cross-hatched area, which is that area that you described as a private drive, will be public roadway constructed to county road standards upon development of any future lots phases. Currently, this cross-hatch area will be a driveway owned and maintained by the lot 101 owner. Yes. So, that was on the on the plat. Yes. And most importantly, that was also attached to the fourth amendment. So, that is our current agreement. Okay. Just just wanted to be sure that I understood the agreement. Yes. And I understand it the same way.

Okay. Okay. Now, thank you for pulling this up. We have here and I brought it I brought my copy of the one of the original drawings that we submitted to the county because it originally was our intent and you can see now Hidden Valley Road continuing up the private drive that has been designated though to receive a public road eventually for the further development of what we call Ponderosa phase 2. So perfect. Looks good. This particular road because it became impacted by the upgrading of the terrain, the rising terrain and the need to get the road over into the valley. This is being triggered then by the fire department. They don't want steep snow covered and they are concerned about the S turns. We were asked to explore other options for the placement of the road.

I will point out by by who? By the planning department and their engineer. So what year was that? Uh 2022. 2022. I'm sorry. I lose track. Okay. Of the sound. Let me let me go back just one step for you. Yes. I'm not opposed to your development. Let me get that straight. What I'm opposed to is that intersection and where the road is going to go. Great.

And so I just want you to understand the rest of the whole development is probably a very good development, but I'm worried about that road and I'm worried about the ownership of that sidewalk and other things that you got proposed. And I would also like to go and talk to the fire department and talk to them about that. So anyway, just to clarify, just to clarify that, thank you. As you might suspect, I'm not opposed to it either, but here's an important point. Okay?

I'm not opposed to anywhere that the county tells me to put this road. That might come as a surprise. I know it comes as a surprise to some of the neighbors because I'm aware of some of the comments or letters, emails, etc. that you've received. Thank you for being elected officials. Sorry I brought that upon you. But hey, what can I say, right? All right.

You know what I'm talking about. Okay. So the suggestion was made that we explore other possibilities for the placement of this road to accommodate various standards associated with building a road for grade as well as curvature and we've done that. That has been a long process because it's gone back and forth and there has been many discussions with the neighbors. I live in this neighborhood. I'm not an unknown individual in my community. So, we're talking to folks. We're talking to the neighbors that live here. We went as far as moving the road all the way to the west to accommodate really almost a straight shot at the suggestion of our fire department. Did that eventually improve my personal position as far as this pin valley road becoming a private drive or staying a private drive? Yes, eventually I accepted that that would be to a benefit. However, financially I lost as a developer a lot maybe two. So I just wanted you to know that the motivation of the developer here is not how can I say this? If there are any other developers I apologize as a developer greediness. We are truly trying to accomplish something that will be acceptable to everybody, including health, safety, and welfare that the county, fire department, and others impose upon us,

as well as desiraability of the neighbors, keeping peace, happiness if we can. I go to the same club, so to speak, on the weekend. You know what I'm saying? And we'd like to have lots of happiness. But it's tough being a developer in your own neighborhood. So, we've worked hard at it and we then came to the decision that the best location was for this road to be moved as far west as possible. We sought out the support of the neighbor here and obtained a written document for their support. But they changed their mind at county commission and when asked specifically do you want that road there think it was unfair neighbor Paul Clayton said no not really but they had agreed to have it there if we would do certain concessions for them. We gave them some property. We gave them access and tried to do some things again to make folks happy. When the county commission voted then to not allow the road to be what we call a double or really a triple side to the neighborhood, we pivoted again. Next side slide, please. To our fifth amendment with the exhibit. Couple more clicks and I think we'll be on the final exhibit. One more, please. K. There we have it. And a little zoom in would be nice here on our spot. So, we came back to the parties of interest at the county. The road now having to be more aligned

with the contour of the ground, which is really the valley of the valley. had to turn here instead of straight out and slightly go and hook to Ranch Boulevard, which is a, if you will, a major road within this subdivision, and create the T-bone intersection, which several people have spoken out against today. But yet, this is a very common thing. But we understand that for R.J., if I can use his first name, I think he's still built here. R.J. would prefer not to have T-Bone road that shines into his garage. I understand, but we've got to put the road somewhere. And this turned out to be the most acceptable location as it met all of the ordinances and actual standards for highways. to place it now with a distance required by ordinance away from the neighbor. Also a distance as required by ordinance away from Hidden Valley Road and met all other standards. And very importantly, it provided significant space at the loss of a lot. That's important for a significant detention pond because apparently the runoff of the Ponderosa Valley running downhill this direction has created time. Probably not this year, but when we have runoff, it has created some flooding, if you will, or spill over into the neighbor's home. So this retention pond by the way we were able to by moving the road a certain distance engineer it to not a 10ear

standard but a 100redyear standard. We think these are good things. So, with that, I'd like to ask ask or at least maybe answer questions that have been asked of me by Janet's office, if I can pick on Jan a little bit, as well as I met with Josh. And we understand that there are some concerns about the pump house, for example. Let me just show you on the drawing the pump house. Here's the little swing set. It stays in place under this scenario. I actually like that. I've got grandkids. The pump house is over here. But again, it stays here. But even under the original plan, the pump house would have stale stayed because the road pump house is up on the hill. The road would have cut in front of the pump house and then headed on its way. So the pump house really is a non-issue. They address anytime you want to ask questions, I'm wide open. So the original road though if we go back to this drawing the original road would have created doublesided exposure to one or two lots at least. There we go. Thank you. So we would have had the same type of thing happening here. a road a road and coming down and creating the disliked double-sided roads.

Okay. So, as far as double-sided rows, Doug. Yes, sir. Any corner lot that you have will be double-sided. That is correct. So, what is the problem with that? Well, we don't think it's a problem, but we're developers. Okay, that's the answer. There you go. So, to be clear, the issue is not a double-sided. It was a It was a three-sided law. A three-sided, which is what Paul Clayton's had nothing to do with two sides, just three. I think always going to have But Clayton's was a true threeide. That's right. It would have been. As we understand, it still takes permission from the county commission to approve as a conditional use

a double-sided road as well. Right. We got some of that. But anyway, back back to the retention pond. Yes. The retention pond, according to what you got, not on this one, but on another one there in the open space area. Yeah. I'm sorry. Did you know the last one, Commissioner? Yeah, that one. Okay. So, now you've got this 74 foot retention pond. And if we have winters like we had, not this one, but last year.

Yes. last year or the year before, we ended up having more water than we could have believed in. Um, and it was early. It wasn't during the normal flooding time. So, will that will that area have enough capacity to handle it if if we ever get water again? Yes. And we will get more water. I'm sure of it. I hope we do. And we have designed and asked specifically that it be designed to current 100year flood standards. The retention pond for the entirety of the neighborhood is to a 10year standard. Okay. I wasn't here then.

Ours is designed to a 100redyear standard. Will it always will we ever get a 100red-year one? We might. I don't know. In 1983 we did. And then it can happen. So we've designed it to the 100ear standard. So my question then on that just curiosity are you trying I mean in that pond are you going to make it a good pond for ducks or anything like that too for the that's not going to hold water continually. It's going to be a second. Are you a duck hunter? Is that what I'm hearing? I'm not I'm not any of those. I'm just I'm just saying for the beauty of the people. of course

to have a pond there that catches this stuff. Just just curiosity. You're absolutely right. If you think about what we're doing here, this is a high-end residential neighborhood, right? So, this will be open space, but will it become a weedy uh marshy? I don't think so. I suspect you'll see a typical open space playground there. Maybe if we get real creative, we'll see a pickle ball court there. So, this will be a nice amenity.

So, Mr. Deano, um, first of all, I appreciate you working with the community and having those meetings and taking our suggestions in. And you are right. It's consistent with Rollins Ranch to have those T-bones throughout that development. However, that being said, those houses built across this new proposed T-bone, correct? Did not build their house thinking a road would be there. Therefore, it's decreasing their home value,

which is a major issue on residents if their home values are decreasing because of this road. My question to you, have you thought maybe about doing something like this?

You could still have part of that road, but let's see. You would enter where it originally was. Yes. Then you would turn. You could put your retention pond here and then you could access that road and then you'd have another lot there. Two sharp corners. So you got two really sharp corners, right? Got a sharp corner and and this one's I'll share something with you. This one's owned by a different person than Doug himself. No, I actually Yeah, it's your daughter. Well, eventually, but I think she's hoping for it.

You're hoping for it, but where you're taking this and you can't make a sharp one because of the fire department. That was number one. It would be a stop. Okay. A stop. Um, but the way it was originally, I mean, not Yeah. Originally where we discussed it last time was to still come up through here and hook right into there or to change this area instead of being right down in the bottom of the of the valley is to have that a little bit more up against the side hill. Sure.

And I mean those are just things I'm I looked at when I was there is the difference between coming up here and going along the side of the hill which is out this way and making your development where it comes right back down in. Just a thought for you.

These are good thoughts. I won't I won't promise, but I will wager that any iteration of designing this entryway. I bet we haven't. We've been looking at so many I have lost track and the expense has not been low. So, could we do what you just described, Commissioner? Walker. Absolutely. Could we do what uh Commissioner Fel has described? Absolutely.

So, what we need to do then, in my opinion, this is for us, is we ought to put, this is my opinion, we ought to postpone this until we can actually go down there as a group and look at it or as with the planning commission and discuss what he with Mr. do and discuss this with him and find out what is the solution and and and I mean I would love to do that again with everybody and let's go down there for a work session and determine that um and try to make it where it originally is. That's what the majority of the people want and if we can make it work that way then that would be fabulous.

Yeah. Can you explain to me? Sarah said today that I she's hoping it passes because if we do it the way originally it takes away from the size of her lot. Where how does that how I don't I'm trying to understand how that would take away from the size of her lot. Can you tell me? Lot 22 is the desired lot for Sarah. Okay.

Right. If we put the road through, if we move the road further towards the east, which is the current private drive of my residence, it starts impacting Lock 22. Could eliminate it. And by the way, remember this road, it can't move any further this direction without violating the 150 ft required ordinance. Understood? So this I'm saying the original way. doing it the original way. Okay.

I mean, there's always personally I mean, I I always feel like the original way was was designed and that's how the majority of the public would like to see it stay from everything that I've read and received and calls and everything like that. So, I'm trying to I'm trying to in my mind reconcile why we're moving it.

Um, because I know there has to be some method to your madness and a reason to move it. It's not it's not just we're trying to make it safer for the the welfare and the p of the public. There's got to be a reason, too. As a developer, I I've developed a few pieces of property myself. Okay.

I I do look for my my interest as well. I do try and create a situation where it benefits the public and my interest as well. A win-win situation. And that's what that's what I like to see is is everybody wins. And I and if the win is is keeping it in the same spot, how can we do that? But I I want to know the method to your madness.

Here's my method to my madness. And I'm really taking my cues from zoning, doing the best they can, and I give them high marks, even though sometimes I've thought bad thoughts. Don't be offended, J. But I've been honest about it with Josh because we felt like the delays have been extraordinary on this problem, but we nevertheless we've done it. Method to my madness. We finally accepted this. And here's the real reason why. Because it's so important that the county design roads, which they really put upon us and our engineers to have Was Mark Miller also confirm it in accordance with, as Tai has pointed out, with the O. It's not said ocean. I got look it up. Ash. Yeah. Who says that?

Thank you. Ashtto standards. This design meets those standards. Are you saying that the original design did not? It did not. And what did not meet it? Oh. Well, no. Do we know what what part of that did not meet the

understanding is the language contained in the proposed addendum, fifth addendum, summed it up. These aren't engineering terms, but if I may, the road is centered in the property, allowing now for storm water retention. Let's move on. Snow removal. Okay. The road is now in full compliance with county ordinances and engineering standards as to distances from adjoining roads and other locks, making for improved visibility, pedestrian flow, stopping distances. That has something to do with grade I believe parking etc. not currently accommodated on the previous plat.

Previous plat being being the one that the one with the with the road clear up to the to the west. Correct. Clear up to the west. No, actually the road coming up the from the existing intersection

valley drive as originally proposed this one. So this road is rejected and this is the plain language and it goes on further. The proposed road which by the way this is what we're talking about signing tonight. I'll sign this, you'll sign this and we got a deal and we'll go get it done. But the road is more ergonomical as to being on the flat portion of the property. Apparently that was an issue. I don't know if it was the allall issue. It's generally straight and not impeded by upward sloping train and is therefore more receptive to flow of traffic, stopping distances, sight lines as to oncoming and emerging traffic. Less sharp curves, less angled curves, less slope. All of which better accommodates fire suppression equipment as well for better safety of travel, pedestrians, and less attentive children at play not accommodated on the previous plat. That's not an engineering report, but it's plain English that we can all understand. And this one coming up Hidden Valley was rejected in favor of the one we're proposing tonight because of that explanation.

Okay, Mr. Deano, I'm going to push back a little bit. Will you hold that up again? No, the this one. The problem I think when we met regarding this one was we needed to confirm um what the lot sizes were which we had to go through all the development agreements and it turns out I think in the concept plan on four there's a note that says lot sizes will be determined at time of platting or something like that. Um the other issue we were still addressing and I think this was before we had Tai um as the developers there's still no detention and I think we still had issues with the water pressure going up. So and there might have been discussion on the roads but I know that those were other issues regarding this version too. So I just want to make that clear

and I concur. There have been other issues that we've been dealing with as I mentioned for four years and I and I have one more question. You said I you know whatever the commission decides I will put the road wherever the county tells me to put the road. So my question to you is is having said that um here publicly the then then why did you start the appeals process when we denied it the first time?

Well we had to because as we understood it as we understood it failure to appear appeal would sever our ability to even come back and talk about this. In other words, you'd have to we'd have to wait for so much time to go by years. I don't know. I forgot exactly. And so we were advised as uh the developer by the planning if we wanted to bring this back, we'd have to file the appeal at some expense, which we've done. So we've preserved the issue. So we keep So why didn't you just move forward and put it where the county was okay with it? I guess that's my question.

Here's the here's the answer. And I was I kept meaning to get to this. This is the Okay. the big reveal. I heard today that and it might have been Chairman Wilson, someone asked why don't we make this a private road and that really sums up the big reveal. The answer is at this location as a developer. If this body would like to recommend that this become a private road and approve it conditionally with Janet inserting some language that this becomes a private road, that would be acceptable to the developer at this location. If it's a private road at this location, I would not be comfortable accepting the liability for that road. And if I may be bold, and I apologize if I'm too bold, the county shouldn't accept that either.

Okay. I am. So I I don't know that I would rely on our legal counsel to to give legal advice. So appreciate that. But thanks, but no thanks on that. The question I had um is regarding on on the earlier exhibits that you showed us, there are additional phases to the east and to the north. Is the intention to continue and build those additional phases down the road at some point or is this the end? Are you done developing after this phase? At the current time, there is no intention to do any further development, though we have left the option open. Okay. And if you were to do additional development, where would the roadway connect back in to this?

Cuz on on Yeah. Like on that one, there's a loop right that comes back in really kind of down your current driveway right along that that south end of the property. Is that a possibility of that becoming a road at some point in the future? This area here, correct? Yes. So, how would that loop back into the existing drawing that you have or the the proposed new road? Where would that connect exactly? Two possibilities. one obviously back down to Ranch Boulevard right here at Hidden Valley. So if this So if you did that, you'd have another intersection. It would be the same intersection that currently exists and it would be designed to accept this area

and then you're going to have a three-sided frontage on three sides of a lot. Porsa is going to have frontage on three sides and we're going to say, "No, you can't put a road there because you can't have a three-sided lot." That's right. Okay.

So The second possibility is currently there is a road and the uh a recent decision from the district court has confirmed that the road called Powder Horn is a quote a road. It's still undecided whether that's a public road or private road or just exactly what kind of road it is. But um it's on this dirt road as we call it known as powder horn is on the maps of this development and we have some signatures from Browning Arms suggesting that they approved the development with certain provisos that the developer developer would put in fencing and some trees and see these types of things. So, that's the other option. We're not positive, but we think Powder Horn Road, which comes and hooks in somewhere about where I'm pointing and then travels through here and goes out over to the airport or Cottonwood Road is the other option, and it should be approved if that area were to be developed as further ingress and egress. And I apologize for acting like an attorney, but

no, that makes sense. I guess so. Can't help myself. Forgive We're just well trained to tell any attorney that stands up here, we're going to rely on our council, not yours. So, another question I have on this development that you're proposing right now, Rosa,

where's the and I'm asking basically our staff on this. Um, where's the entrance and the exit that are two separate? In other words, you have to have an entrance and a separate exit. Otherwise, on a 21 lot subdivision, the my understanding is that you need 30. Oh, I don't know. That's I'll defer to Jeremy rather than 30 30 is the number. Yes. 30 30 32. It's even 30. Yeah, it's 30.

And then there's always the option of sprinkling to as well. He has entitlements under that fourth amendment for 88 more. So, well, I'm just trying to look at So, that's a 100 homes off of it, not 22. 100 homes off of one single road in and out. No, no, no. 88 with including this over 30. Anything over? Well, even 30 is kind of high. That's our code. We're proposing 22. Look at that code. Helps for clarification. We have reduced the density. Excuse me. We've increased the density. No, we haven't. It's too late. We have lowered the number of lots increasing their size. So, we have a total of 22 are proposed here.

Okay. I'm just I'm just still curious. Okay. You've got the front one. Sarah's house catches on fire after she's built. It catches on fire that we don't want to see, but it catches on fire. Blocks that one entrance into there. How did the rest of the people get out? Well,

culde-sacs are a lot smaller and they don't have 30 homes on them. Well, we just have to change the code. I mean, if it if that's what the code allows, that's what it allows. We're not here to debate that right now. Yeah. And I it's it's what the code allows. It's what Morgan County has told us we could do. And we're we're eight lots underneath that. And there is fire turnaround at the top. Okay, Mr. Chair, I'm I'm prepared to make a motion to deny, which I'm sure Mr. Debeno doesn't want that. It delays him. Or we can postpone

postpone and work with them to put the road in the original spot. or or something that after we've looked at it with the engineers and our attorneys and everything else um to go and look at that and see whether or not it's just he has the the appeal in the process to maintain. So if we do deny the he'll go to the appeal and then we'll go with so so that means if we deny it he doesn't have to wait two years he because he's in the appeal process. Yeah. We may have to reappeal this decision. Yeah. I wonder if we can amend it. I mean, I'm sure there's something that can work out.

Uh, point of clarification, Mr. Chair, is there's a few applications at play here. Application 22.044 is the preliminary plat application, and that's been brought up several times tonight. There was a development agreement that failed or an amendment to a development agreement that failed on on September 16, and that's application 25.037. And that's the application that has the appeal. And so, this application is coming under application 25.0. 0 63. It's a different request. He would just have to appeal for this one. And I mean some of the things, sorry if I may.

Um, a couple things that looking at is I mean when I look at I think it's called Lariat Lane. Is that correct? You have Lariat Lane and then you have the next and I don't have on Google Maps doesn't have a name of the road heading to the east and then you come to Hidden Valley. I can see in the map there's a lot of T intersections in this subdivision, but you've got Lariat and then right at number five, I don't know what the name of that road is. So, right here. So, you've got Lariat and then you got right above number five that road. Then you got one residence and then you want another T and then another 100 ft another T. to me. I mean, you're just cramming a whole bunch in there that, you know, you've got people that have designed homes and built homes based on a plat with the road over here. Um, I'm just in favor of just, you know, this was platted. This was planned. This is what everybody thought they were getting. I'm in favor of just deny it, leave the road where it is. So, Mr. Chair, I make a motion that we deny application 25-063.

So, may I amend your motion? You can say what you like. And I may or may not. Well, second. Somebody may have to second. Someone need second it. Well, no, you can. Procedurally, we need a second before it can be amended. We need the FFA back in here. Okay. I can second the amendment so that we can or second the the motion and you can make your a motion by Commissioner Nickersonson, a second by Commissioner Newton.

I just wanted to say on these following findings of why I would deny it. Um the amendment would relocate and introduce a new road alignment in a manner that directly impacts existing homeowners who constructed their homes prior to this proposed change. The evidence presented indicates that the new road placement would negatively affect adjacent residential properties. And I've received written correspondence, including from a licensed real estate professional representing one of the affected homeowners, stating that the placement of the proposed road across from the residence would likely reduce the markets the property's market value. Pursuant to Morgan County Land Management Code Chapter 9A or I guess LAMA actually, the county is directed to protect property values and promote the general welfare and safety of the community. Based on the record before us, I find that this amendment does not adequately protect existing property owners and may result in measurable harm to property values. So that is one of the main reasons why I would deny your amendment. So, point of clarification, you're not amending the motion, you're entering findings to the motion.

Adding to it. I'm adding to it. Okay. Thank you. Okay. I have a motion to deny by Commissioner Nickerson and a second by Commissioner Newton. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay. By confirmation, may I assume though that had we or if we submit the next plan for a development just extending straight up Hidden Valley Road that we have no problem with. That would my thing is that's following that's following the original plan on the original. Just go to the original plan. Yes, sir.

Roger that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We take a recess even though you just took one. We're going to take a fivem minute recess. You're fine. Ray, we thank you for that. That was I was just like

I'm fine with that. I'm fine with that. Yeah.

Well, we we

don't make me be your mom. hydrate. That one's cold. Somebody here.

Are you really? I am. Good. I might I might

Let's begin. Matt, it's five minutes. I was waiting for Mike. Oh, really? is not back either, but she's been gone longer than all of us. She's usually chalking.

Another Okay, we're going to go ahead and get started. He was he was Okay, we're on F10 now. Go ahead, Jeremy. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Had the items not been moved around, I still don't think we'd be hearing these yet, these planning items. And so, action item F10 is the Cottonwoods Development Agreement Amendment. It's application 23.072. The applicant is Matt Wilkinson who is in the audience tonight. Represents the Matt Mark and Sheila Wilkinson Family Trust. Uh Wilkinson family. Mark H and Sheila are trustees. And the project location is approximately southeast of the boundaries of the Cottonwoods development agreement. Um and the PUB overlay district all within sections 30 and 31 township 5 north range 2 east. It's kind of difficult one to to to locate. Uh but otherwise the the current zoning is a mix or a split designation of rural residential 5 which um R5 designation and the agriculture A20 district. The approximate acreage affected by tonight's request, Mr. Chair, is 189.62 acres. The request is for approval of an amendment to the Cottonwoods development agreement to remove specific properties from the bounds of the land specified in the development agreement. additionally to remove the specified properties from the PUB overlay district reverting to its prior zoning designation which is Mr. Chair A20. Um so I'm going to give you the simple version and then I'm going to flesh out just a little bit. This this started as application 23.0372 fractured into two separate requests involving the Wilkinson family and the Nettleton family. And then those uh by advice of staff uh were combined into one application. This 23.072 uh came uh back to the county commission and upon advice of the county commission was advised to refraure into two separate requests. So the longer version of that is the fact that this was in a public hearing to the planning

commission on September 26th. There was discussion from the uh planning and uh the planning commission and staff and there were concerns from the public which led to the item being continued no less than three times. Uh the reason for that was because the noticing for this item um staff notices all of the residents within the development agreement and a thousand degrees from the development agreement upon advice from the county attorney. So that's uh 750 notices individually that go out. So it's an immense amount of work and so for that reason we continued it until it was no longer uh feasible to continue no longer made sense. And it was at that time that um again the Nettleton family and the Wilkinson family uh worked under the banner of one application to have a request that shows a onetoone swap of land. Um that uh iteration of the request came before the planning commission January 8, 2026. Uh there was a public hearing at that time as well as u a lengthy presentation from the applicant and discussion between uh staff and the commission. Uh subsequently went to the county commission on January 20. There was a public hearing on that night. uh in your staff report you can see that there wasn't much discussion from the commission but there are some clarifying questions to staff when this came back as a continuence to the to the county commission on February 17 2026 it was at that time that the plan that the county commission advised that this application refraracture again to the Wilkinson and Edton requests in their own separate applications so we are here tonight for the Wilkinson request application 23.072 072. Checking my notes again. Um, and staff uh recommends approval. Staff is in support of pulling out land out of the development agreement in this particular

case and the reverting back to the uh entitlements defined in the A20 zone. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I Thank you, Jeremy. I'm going to add to that. You keep saying removal from the development agreement. I believe it also is noticed up for removal from the PUD ordinance as well. Those requests need to go run together development agreement. Thank you. Any questions for staff? I know we've all studied this pretty diligently so and asked many questions previous to this. One question. Okay. Is it on?

Yes, sir. What happens if I don't I don't understand this very well but if you remove it from the development agreement but not the PUD it doesn't change the zoning right it doesn't change the zoning but this just makes what can the land owners do with it like 820 precisely there's our land use standards for rural residential andulture districts but it's it stays in the same PUD No. Oh, yes. It wouldn't change the zoning. So, it wouldn't be A20. So, it wouldn't be A20 because it's subject still to the ordinance, right? Yeah. But if we remove it from the

They'd have to ask for a reason to change it out of there, right? My understanding in speaking um with Josh is that if it was removed out of the PUD ordinance, it would revert to 820. it would go to its back to its prior zoning before it was put into the PUD ordinance. You know, that's right. Because PUB is an overlay zone. It's not a It's not a zoning. Yeah, it's not a zone. Okay. Yeah, it's an overlay on top of our regular zoning. So, the underlying zoning would remain. Okay. Anything else? You okay with that, Josh?

I think I understand. I I know I understand it, but I'm just saying if they were removed from the Commonwoods DA, but we're still under the PUD, what could they do with the land? There's still a governing document over the zoning, which is the PUD report. And so if you take out a clean transfer of the DA and the PUD, then they're just subject to the county code. Period. That is the governing document of the PUD. No overlays, no conflicting agreements. So that means they basically go out of the PUD also with a very clean transformation. They just start from scratch. They start from scratch. Is that right?

If they're not removed from the PUD, they're still stuck with everything in the requirements. I'm saying if you're just separating them, like only removing them from the DA. Oh, yeah. I don't think you'd want to do that. I think you got to do both. clean slate.

Well, we'll have a we'll have a minute for a public hearing here in a minute for you. Hey, no, if you're anxious to speak out in front of the public, that's a good thing. Time, Mr. Chair. Any other questions for staff? Jeremy, is there is there anything so this property gets removed from Clean Slate? What effect does that have on now the remaining cottonwoods?

Can I defer to Janet on? Well, I think Jeremy, um, can you describe what this property actually was slated for as far as in the original development agreement in PUB because it was phase nine phase 9 and I think the bulk of it was the maybe golf course that was not This is your open space, correct? It was the golf course open space that was not required. Just the open space was not required. the golf course.

Yes. No. And I know the amenities there's I think the amenities have been thrown around. It was a may I may put a golf course. I may do this. But it is required. That is the open space for the cottonwoods. So by removing this, what does that do to the remaining cottonwoods? Are they no longer in compliance for their open space? I believe what's been discussed before is that probably shouldn't have been included in the calculations prior. It wasn't originally part of the land of the cottonwoods development agreement and pulling it out doesn't really affect the calculations like we originally thought it would.

Because I believe it was about if I was reading through it about a,34 acres or something like that somewhere just over a thousand total with this piece. possibly we may purchase this down the road. Was that originally? I believe I would think it would you would add all nine phases into your entire calculation. It's 40% of each phase is open space, right? So if they pull out that piece, if that's the 40% of open space, what does it do to the existing cottonwoods? So at that point I think I mean well phase 9 is constructed yet right so does that mean that has to stay open space until

and that's additional land is that's kind of my I want be out of compliance but there's you can't hold somebody No and and what I'm saying is that like as we start to look at the cottonwoods it's like okay maybe they don't get to build any more homes in the cottonwoods you're done your open space is now you're finished that I think that's my question I'm not saying that they shouldn't be able to pull out because it would affect the cottonwoods, but I I think that's something that needs to be said is that, you know, if this is removed, maybe the cottonwoods can't have any more development. Maybe they're done.

So, I think that's why it was initially encouraged, we initially encouraged the joint joiner of the two applications so that we weren't running into those issues. Um and so additionally that's something that being can be required that they bring in more satisfy the open space if you allow another amendment. Gotcha. Perfect. No, that was that was my question just like because I and I knew from history that this was basically the designated open space. I'm like that could cause some major problems. And so good question. Thank you. So

another call, Mr. chair is we do have a presentation from the applicant as well. I just wanted to state that to give them their Okay. I just wanted to make sure public comment we had because this is a public hearing. I just wanted to make sure everybody had their questions done for you first. I'm I'm curious on this still a little bit more. Okay. So, the development agreement requires so much open space. How are they going to get that without an exchange or any of that kind of stuff? That would not be our problem. That would be what? I don't think that would be our problem. I think that's between the developer.

Well, I think that's going to come with the next application that's going to come in. And I think we just need to be clear when the that applicant comes in, we intend to maintain the same density and the same acreage of open space. So, if they want to come into the agreement, they need to offer that. Okay. That's my opinion. Otherwise, I can't I don't think we can say that's not our problem because we are the other party. Yeah. The DA we are we signed. Well, I mean, yeah, I guess it's they need to come to they need to somehow fix this. They have to have options to say you it was calculated in it's been removed. How are we going to address this? And so, you're right. It's it is our problem.

Yes. But I think between that those developers and what's going on in there, they need to figure out how they're going to remedy it. And so that the people the people that live there, they were promised certain things. I think what Brillene's saying is we were a party to that. Yes. So we we have to help. Well, that's what I'm saying. I mean, and yeah, that not our problem was not the proper I shouldn't have used that term. You're correct. Um but we need to work together to remedy and come up with a solution. Agreed. Okay. Any more questions for Jeremy?

Okay. Would you like the public comment before the presentation or the presentation first? Okay. I'll look for a motion then. I'll move that we um open the public hearing for item number F10. Second. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Newton and a second by Commissioner Ferro. All in favor? I. I. Okay. We're now in public hearing. Anyone that would like to come forward, please again be courteous, use your three minutes. We might raise our hand at you um if you're long-winded, but uh we'll be short hungry. Like I said, you're done. Go get the pizza and bring it back. Appreciate everybody's time today. Sorry, what was the name?

Brett Snellgrove. I live up in the Cottonwoods. Um, respect the Wilkinson family. Obviously been there. I just have a few things. So, I'm a transplant. I'm the wrong blood line, right? I wish I was a Wilkinson, a Bowman. I wish I had the right bloodline. Don't. Um, the fact of the matter is if this was calculated for any of the green space and they remove it from the DA, it should they should have to either give like for like. When I moved up here, I read the CCNRs, we we made sure of all that. Again, they can do what they want with their land as long as it meets those requirements. But if it was calculated in the DA should stay there in my opinion, again, I don't know what the code is. Also, is the whole acreage that they're trying to move and whatever acres, is all that calculated in the PUB and the DA or is only a portion of it? Sorry, the commission can't answer questions.

This is public comments. They can answer it after.

Perfect. Um, and then so all acreage in there and then I'd also like to ask the applicant of any money been made from them and the sale of any of the other property. I mean, they've made money, they've knew of the plan to start and go ahead with it. The Wilkinson's knew about this to my understanding from the start. So, if you sold other land, made money off it there, and now you want to pull yours back out, now you've made your money. That doesn't seem right to me either. So, that's all I have to say. Pizza time. Uh Chad Crowder, also a member of the Cottonwoods. I kind of have a long hopefully it's 3 minutes, but um so we went around, we found out about a lot of these things pretty late in the game and so the community is trying to catch up a little bit. Um and obviously we're a little uh upset about things that we thought we were maybe getting that is you know whether it says may or shall that are um getting taken away. Um but let me just read real quick response here and we have a petition. You guys have all seen it but we have over 500 57 signatures at this point. So, it's it's something that the community feels is very important to them and just hope that you guys take that into account. Um, but I'm here as a homeowner homeowner of the Cottonwood development and a representative of the shared um county petition that was dispersed. To date, we have collected over 500 signatures from homeowners who are formally opposed to any changes in the development agreement or the separation of the new phases from our master owners association, the MOA. I want to be clear, um, we are not opposed to the development. We knew these final phases would bring growth. However, we are firmly opposed to any increase in density, the addition of more units, or the loss of large-scale

recreation amenities that we were part that were a main part of our investment. We are specifically concerned about the proposal to change the zoning of phase 9 and its removal removal from the DA. In a master plan community, open space is a shared asset meant for the benefit of all homeowners. Reszoning this land effectively strips it away from the MOA, turning a community asset into a private into private acreage. Furthermore, removing this land from the DA and MOA introduces an unaccept unacceptable level of uncertainty for the future of our neighborhood. Without the protection of the original original agreements, we have no guarantee of what will happen in phase 9 years down the road. This carveout creates a loophole that could allow for future shifts in use of density that none of us, including the commission, can currently predict or control. We believe that any proposed amendment to the DA or MOA should not be decided by the developer and the county alone. Because these changes directly impact our property, values, and lifestyle, any amendment should run through the neighborhood committee or the elected MOA board. We are the primary stakeholders and we are asking for a seat at the table to ensure our community interests are protected. We will continue to oppose amendments or unilateral applications without input from our community. Um the rest of this is kind of more general stuff that I think um we'll get to down the road when the the development applications and stuff come in. But um I think you guys have felt a little bit the frustration that we have as a neighborhood. um things that we thought we were getting that are are currently being taken away. And I appreciate your guys' time and um I've spoken with many of you guys on the phone. I appreciate appreciate that. So, thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, commissioners. Um my name is Michelle Stocking. I live in the Cottonwoods development and I currently serve as vice president of the master owner association and I am the representative for the hidden meadows portion of our development. Um I'm just going to read my comment if that's okay. Um I attended prior meetings and provided public comment before you in January expressing my concerns about the revisions to the development agreement with the density density and language and also the unknowns of the new land being added. I want to state that I'm not inherently opposed to a land swap and if the Wilkinsons want to remove their land in that way that I'm not inherently opposed to that. However, I am deeply concerned about removing this parcel and and the property values land use decisions are consisted with adopted development agreements and the general plan. I don't feel that a development agreement um should be treated casually. Um it's a binding document and a contract between the county and the land owners. Remov removing phase 9 from the development agreement without replacing it undermines the predictability and fragments the comprehensive planning of our community. It dismantles negotiated open space allocations and public amenities that were part of the overall density calculation. Um I really appreciated uh Commissioner Nickerson's comment because I have read the development agreement extensively and um the 40% open space is not phase by phase. it is it's um over the whole community and the density was frontloaded in our community. So removing this portion of the land would

effectively dismantle our open space requirements. Um when home owners purchased in the cottonwoods they relied on the representations contained in the development agreement including our overall density limits open space allocations and planned public amenities. Um, approving removal without preserving these obligations shifts uncertainty onto current property owners and removes the guarantees we have relied upon. And um, additionally, there appears to be a signed and notoriized document from the Wilkinson family relating to this parcel specifically as part of the development agreement. And I think that that document and its legal weight and purpose should not be dismissed lightly. um if if there's um reasonable debate as to its interpretation, the commission should in my opinion heir on the side of protecting vested property rights and maintaining the integrity of the existing agreement. So, I respectfully ask the commission to deny this amendment and at a minimum um if the parcel is removed that the existing open space and public obligations associated with phase 9 remain attached to that land to preserve the expectations, density, balance, and protections relied upon by our current owners. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jennifer Lance. I represent the Cottonwoods MOA as the president and live in the Cottonwoods. We live in a beautiful place. It's unique. We have the kind of community where neighbors wave, trails connect, and we work together to maintain the beauty of the open space around us. This environment is not by chance, but because of a master plan that creates cohesion, unity, and a family-like feel that is unique and cherished by our residents. The plan is the backbone of our community's character and supports and builds our property values. Tonight, that sense of security feels fragile. For over 18 months, the county and the applicants have worked privately on proposals. We were given notice on New Year's break only to have the item tabled for revision in one meeting and then separated in the next. This is the first proposal we've actually seen intact. Um, which left us even more confused as how to have our open space requirements and meet the master plan and how that might be affected. While the applicants have had almost two years, Cottonwood's family were only given the picture last Saturday afternoon when it was posted on the community website. Residents are still trying to understand what is really being proposed. It feels like our voices are being unintentionally sidelined. We simply want the same opportunity for due diligence that has been afforded the applicants. The original development agreement was a recorded promise. 527 families have built homes and lives according to this contract. We look to you, our commissioners, as the protector of these promises.

In section 2.6 of the agreement, it mandates that open space be owned and maintained by the um MOA, the homeowners. In section 8.1, it confirms that this agreement runs with the land and binds all successors. In section 7.1, it expressly allows the developer to convey phases to a sex a successor without county consent. The 2015 assignment seems to be that succession. Our legal council has just reached out to me during this meeting or right before and has serious concerns of the legality and enforcement of the original DA and the 2015 assignment suggesting them both as legal and binding. Because of this, I respectfully request a continuence to allow our council time to review the successor obligations and the obligations confronted by the MOA. Um, again, I want to thank you for your time, your willingness to protect and support the homeowners of Morgan County and all that you do. Thank you.

Thank you. Sure.

My name is Heidi Nettleton. Um, I was part of the original combined um application and um obviously I'm in support of of of this application. Um so in the original I'll try to keep this three minutes but we were trying to come up with a solution. So you talked about the removal and the put in. So it became a complicated issue when the original developer did not purchase the options for the land. Um where did he get that open space to frontload his density that he's cons that he's already built on on land he he did not option. Okay. So, and I just want to make a a comment on the community petition that's going around. Um, there's a lot of misinformation in there about the density. The density is already there. There's a there's a limit on the density. So, we're not increasing the overall density in and I know this isn't our application, but I just wanted to get that there as a public comment. Um, and then I think there's a lot of frustration, which is I can um sympathize with. There's a lot of frustration on the the residents and the community on what's uh on the amenities and I just want to distinguish between what's required in the DA and what may be may have been promised to the buyers of those lots by the original developer. They may be two different things. Um, and then I also wanted to just point out there has been precedents already for land removal from the DA. Um, and in the PRUD, and that's in the north part, um, where it was platted over with, uh, North Lakes, the North Side Creeks, thank you. Um, and that was as soon that was as recent as last I believe December. Um but because we're coming with to you with all the information

people are now you know now coming in. Um but anyway I just wanted to those are things I wanted to say and um this next application for ours is set to I think I believe May.

Thank you. Anyone else would like to come forward? Ray Ray Nettleton. Uh we've been neighbors with the Wilkinson family for well the families for longer than me but personally about 20 years. Uh I'm speaking in support of their amendment. They're they're very frustrated. Uh basically they had land that was uh never purchased but restricted. uh you know it's kind of a constitutional thing when someone takes away the value of your land without compens compensation it's a problem so this is kind of a first step I think is to remove uh them cleanly let them like it's a clean slate for them it's good for them uh we have a great proposal in fund you to bring in additional land we we think is actually more appropriate for the cottonwoods and we're we're willing to take their their spot we thought we were ready uh for a vote on the 17th. The previous developer, frankly, his lawyer, former commission, wrote a a letter with lots of items and just disrupted in my opinion. I mean, it's a great plan. Um, so anyway, my my support is with the welcome.

Hi, my name is Marissa Tuttle and uh my family and I live at 5631 Silverleaf Circle. Um, I do want to bring up after the Rollins Ranch discussion that it really does matter where the open space is in the cottonwoods. And my family and I just completed a new home goal and we spent way over a million dollars of hardearned money. My husband is a school teacher and um we planned our home. We bought that specific lot because of the way that the continuence is designed, the way the open uh land is structured. And I just wanted to say this to kind of bring a indiv individual perspective to it. You know, kind of a how would you feel if um so you know, my family's very nervous right now. The windows I just put into the front of my house look directly at what we're talking about today. So I just really appreciate your concern and consideration. um in this matter and it sounds like it's confusing. There's going to be a lot more conversation about swapping and all of these things, but um that open land is what we made our decision to spend our life savings on and I just really appreciate your consideration concern. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi Kate Becker. Morgan city resident um but also county manager. Um just wanted to make a comment because I'm Switzerland so I don't get a vote. Um so and I don't know if the commission is going to action this tonight. I just want to say thank you to all parties especially the 90% of you that have been extremely kind to our county staff um understanding what this is what we call sins of the father. These are generational happened years ago issues that um is obviously now very forefront in a lot of your minds and the and like I said 90% of you have been extremely extremely kind um to our staff as we try to help you get documents um have reached out have met with our attorney's office and I just want to say thank you so much um on both parties understanding that we are trying to be equal in the uh eyes of the applicant and in the community. So, I just in case it does not get voted tonight or gets voted tonight, I just wanted to say thank you.

Thanks, Kate. I'm assuming there's no one else is I didn't see any movement. Okay. Can I ask you um Janet? Yes. Could you could you maybe explain the legality of May and shall Before we do that, Mr. Chair, I move that we close the public hearing and re or reconvene the public meeting. Second. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Newton and a second by Commissioner Croll. All in favor? I I I. Are there any opposed? Okay, we're now out of

public. Legally speaking, may means nothing. It's just an option that the developer could do. Shall is required. Legally bound to do. So any any attorney that looks at something and and sees may or shall knows that may means nothing. May means nothing. All right. I just I just wanted to understand that. Can you also explain the rule of frauds?

It's it's it's the statute of frauds. So, there's a case called Thompson v. Capener, and that's the case that really has me concerned, and um it's a 2019 case, and it discusses covenants placed on land that run with the land in which the property owner, there were joint property owners. One of the joint property owners did not sign the covenants and agree to them. Fast forward several years, other people in the development say, "Hey, your lot is bound by our covenants." And they're like, "Nope, nope. We never signed." And the court sided with them, even though years had passed, other documents had passed through, there had been warranty deeds, other recordings. So there is definitely case law out there that causes concern regarding the fact that the original owners of the property did not sign the development agreement and did not ratify it. So there's no contract privity between the county and the original owners of the property. Now the PUD that ordinance was legislative public hearing public notice. That's binding. That's that's on the property. Now, when we fast forward and apparently in 2015, which I knew nothing about, there was this assignment and that assignment of the development agreement was between the original developer and the original property owners. Okay? Who is not a party to that? The county isn't. And so while it might be proof that the development agreement has been ratified by subsequent owners because it's been recorded and that kind of stuff, it might be good evidence that the development agreement is enforcable

against them. But it certainly isn't solid legal proof and it's complicated and icky and it it creates a mess. So either way we look at this, there's some legal issues and probably one of the cleanest ways to clean it up is doing some amendments and making sure that we're hopefully balancing all the issues for the cuz I feel bad for the Cottonwoods people. I mean, they were promised something great and it just never it never happened. There was because this was going to be developed and purchased in phases and there was no in the development agreement there was no requirement that hey maybe you need to build phase 9 before you build phase 2 or you build phase 6 before you get to build phase three. Those things just didn't happen and weren't included in it. So I understand that as well. The other issue is, okay, who do we, the county, enforce the development agreement against? Do we go after the original developer? Well, how can we enforce that when he doesn't own the property? So, this is a lot of legal issues and mess that there is really no happy good way of resolving it for everyone. And again, I agree with Kate. It's sins of our father. You know, the county probably should have looked at the development agreement more closely, structured it better. But I mean, this happens after 20 years when you have these long developments. You can't foresee every legal consequence or thing that might go wrong. So, can you explain one thing as well going back to the assignment and then to

the development agreement um section 7.2.1? 2.1 says a developer may from time to time and without the consent of the county convey any or all of the phases in their entirety to a successor developer together with the rights granted by this agreement to develop one or more of the phases. So transferred or conveyed in accordance with this agreement. So if they signed something with the developer, the assignment of assumption,

correct? This does this say the county doesn't have to be part of that because they don't without consent of the county. He can assign away. Um but it is doesn't mean that the county is now a party to that assignment. The county never signed that assignment. We didn't even know about it until a few weeks ago. But does that

and I can tell you this the the flip on this is that the developer will tell you his council will tell you well um you can't amend that development agreement. These successor people cannot amend the development agreement and but you can't have it both ways. You know if if you think we can enforce the development agreement against them but we can't they can't amend it that doesn't work. So, I mean, it's complicated each way, but there's I mean, I don't see the contract privity. I don't

Okay. Can I ask a a question? I don't know if maybe staff is the right uh Jeremy, maybe I can ask you this question. Who Who owns the remaining portion of phase 9 that that shows the potential develop? says none of phase 9 has been developed. Correct. So, who owns the remaining portion of phase 9 that's not the Wilkinson's? We could pull up the map and find out. I guess Ted Taylor was just so Ted Taylor and a small portion of the top that is Brian Hayward.

And I assume that it was it was assigned to them as well. the that I don't know in 200 so the 2015 assignment was between the original property owners and the original developer. So I have not another portion of phase 9 to our knowledge.

I have not tracked how if in 2015 the original property owner still owned the rest of it or if there had been transfers or not. I haven't done that. That's yeah. So I don't know. And I guess what I'm getting at there, and maybe you can answer that in a minute, but I guess what I'm getting at here is there's a lot of homes that were potentially planned for the remainder part of phase 9. I know that their concern is if we remove property and don't have property coming back in there's there's this well what if the property doesn't come in and then we because ultimately I think from the perspective of the commission we're okay with changes but we'd like to see equal changes right if if 120 acres leaves we'd like to see 120 acres come in and if the density you know whatever the density is now we'd like to see that continue and I think part of the concern is well if you take thisund whatever whatever it is 140 acres out of here that was mostly slated for open space. Now we've got much higher density. But to me, if the rest of phase 9 hasn't even been constructed for the time being, maybe part of the agreement is we're not going to allow any development of that that portion of phase 9 until such time because that's going to be their open space until such time as additional properties added and then we can reallocate that. Is that something that maybe we could work out? I believe so.

Okay. Yes.

And I think to go with that, I think there's been some comment about equal property as well. You know, you take 120 acres of a possible golf course and turn it into a mountain side. It's it's unusable. Yeah, it's open, but you can't use it. You know, you can't do anything with it. So, I think that would be something that I' I'd want to make sure that it's, you know, this is good. Again, equal for equal, not just acreage for acreage, but you know, usable ground that these people can maybe they come up with some other amenity that is acceptable versus a golf course, but it's I don't know. That's that's I mean, that's kind I mean, that's my thing is trading it for something that's still usable would be that makes any sense at all. just rambling.

No, I understand exactly what you're saying. I I think um I think the shall on the golf course or the may on the golf course uh probably had something to do with um water and those type of things. It's water's a a hard thing to come by here in in Morgan and I don't know what that looks like or costs but that might be why there was a may and not a shall you know I don't know but anyway let's uh since there's no other public comment we'll let you uh Mr. Wilkinson

ask one more question sorry of Janet Janet is was there any penalty in the original DA for the developer backing out of the land purchase? No. Okay. Thank you. Was a definite no. I have read it 500 times. Yes. Kate, did you get my email?

Actually, can I use this this picture that's right here right now? And then you can switch to mine. Can I ask a question? have you met before in that phase nine

in the overlay there's homes or lots available to be and I don't know if this is you Janet that can answer this but there's lots available at the northern end and along the little less northwesterly end are those still within the property that are allotted to them if it comes out

so I'm Not certain because if the golf cart or golf course was built, I believe they were allowed another 34 lots. So you got bonus they got bonus density if they built the golf course. So I don't know if that those extra lots and nine are for that bonus density based on the golf course. Gotcha.

Thank you. Well, while we're trying to get that can well, so the uh in the in I don't think Commissioner Newton, Commissioner Wilson was here at the last one and they they had made a dis they had said something about the land that was being traded at that time that it was the land that was being taken out was level and farmed and it wasn't. I've got pictures. Hopefully, we can get them. The pictures of the land that's being taken out is not farmable. It's straight and it's hilly. I mean, it's I thought there was an area. It's up above old highway between Bowman's property and That's right. Right. If you look at when you come up

that is pretty steep. It really is. But there was a little bit of misinformation saying that the land that was going to be taken out was farmed and it wasn't. It's very, very hilly. Matt, it's not. So, may I ask you a question, Matt, on that? Yeah. Um, according to what your dad said to me is there was about a 20 acre area that was flat. Is that true still or not? Um, if dad said it then I'm going to say it's true. Okay. Thanks. So, so 20 acres out of the 189. Yeah. He might be right. That might be

You mean you haven't traveled at all? Yeah, but I So it doesn't look like our link and I could really use this link. You guys got that. Sorry, our Wi-Fi went down as well. Pardon? Your Wi-Fi went down. Okay. May not have paid our bill or something. Okay, don't

in the process I'll I'll the land wasn't purchased and that's the tricky thing because the land wasn't purchased. A lot of the a lot of the language inside the DA is compromised because it presupposes that the original developer was going to purchase the land. And because he didn't, it changes the way that that reads. And it's a challenge. It is. I appreciate the one gentleman kind of hinting that uh the Wilkinson's made all this money and uh and and and although there was money made, that's true. It was a battle. and to have to resell what you already thought you had sold to resell it again is a battle. So, as you look at what we're trying to remove, the land was never purchased. I understand that the the MOA believes that that's owned because it's in the language of the DA, but I don't know how the original developer can give away something that he never purchased. And that's a tricky thing. We would like to be removed because um a number of reasons. People walk all over our land because it says it's in the cottonwoods. Just today, a guy's up there with his dog walking around the land because it says it's in the cottonwoods, but it was never purchased. I had it um surveyed so that we could put fencing up. And the next week we came down and all the fence posts, we put up the fence post and all of those were pulled out. What we would like to do is to make it more clear for the um for the county, for everybody that's in there that that's not owned by the Cottonwoods. It's owned by the Wilkinson family. If we were able to pull out, you could put up the fence. They could say that this is uh not the Cottonwoods, right? Um I know that there is compromise that happens with that. And I I feel for the people in the

Cottonwoods. I do. I I don't love that. Uh I don't honestly the person one person that caused all of this isn't here. He just didn't do what he agreed to do. He didn't do what he agreed to do for us. He didn't do what he agreed to do for you and he didn't do what he agreed to do for the people in the cottonwoods. Having said that, that puts us in a little bit of an unique position. If we're allowed to be pulled out, you're right. 184 acres of open space. But if you read what the open space is. Um Jeremy, is it possible to pull up because my link isn't working? Oh, it is your computer.

I promise this hair is color is not original. My kids sucked all the color out of my hair. Oh, is that is that why you were wanting this? So that's so that's a picture of the of Okay. Can if we can look at that for just one second. The land that on the last meeting that they said was being pulled out is this. And this is the farmed land. And that land is not being pulled out. It's this this land here which looks like we go to the picture.

Um yes, if you'll notice it's substantially different land right now. The the people in the cottonwoods can't use it. They can't um I don't know what they would use it for. Having said that, they still do, but it's not uh it's not their land. If you'll go back when just want to make sure. Oh, can we watch that for just one second? That clip? Uh, yeah. Hold on. This is the original developer and uh, Commissioner Blocker asked him a question that I think is pertinent. That's not a concern anymore. I don't

Can you go from the very first bonus density based on That's not a concern anymore. I don't I have one question. Have you used bonus density based on the open space and amenities from phases six and nine? No, you haven't. No, never. No. That each phase has to stand alone and we haven't used any of that open space. And so there

according to what he his interpretation was is each phase had to stand alone which means uh Commissioner Nickerson you said that that was tied in and it was going it is from a density perspective overall but each phase is supposed to have its own density allocated this the the density or the open space that is allocated here is called different open space it's called um what's it called? It's called native native open space. It was a different type of open space. You probably read that to see what that is. So my um my petition is to allow us to pull out the the Nettletons have a great idea. It's it was so convoluted trying to do a land swap and we didn't even know what word we could use. But if you allow us to pull out, it satisfies that one thing and then you can readress what the Nettletons do, which they're bringing a lot of options that actually helps the helps satisfy some of the um promises the original developer offered.

Questions? Do you want any more of your slide deck? I I wanted to use that if they had questions. I didn't I didn't want you. So, I have one question. Um, and I know this this is a question that really normally Blaine asks, but I I'm going to ask it. Is that about the trees? Trees. What What uh what are you what are your plans?

Okay, that's fair. I personally own 20 acres of the 189 acres because my hope was if it was in A20 that I could put one house on 20 acres. And according to A20, you still really don't give up a ton of density at A20 on 84 acres. And so I that's my personal thing right now. No one else owns land except my parents. And right now I own 20 acres. My parents own 189 acres. So, where's your 20 acres on here? My My 20 acres are right. Thank you. My 20 acres are right here.

And I heard a rumor you want to put an air strip on there for your airplane. Is that true? Yeah. No. Um, if I if I had a pilot's license, if I had a pilot's license or a plane, um, you've also seen how hilly that is. No, that I don't know where that came from. You know, earlier when they when uh when Heidi said that there's a lot of misinformation coming going around. Can I ask a quick question um of you uh can someone else hold a meeting on behalf of someone else's application, a work meeting? Is that possible? Explain the question.

The question is is that uh uh the original developer held a work meeting on my application. And how is that possible if you work session? Yeah, that work session. Sorry. How is that possible? I think it was because they were both together and it was trying to be a land swap, but I don't think he could have done it on. But why was he allowed to do that? because he's he wasn't part of the person that was swapping the land. You're right.

And he held a work meeting on someone else's application. You know, this this went through planning easily. All but one person voted for the land swap and then right before that happened, the the previous um developer called a work meeting on my application. How is that possible? I mean, if you go to, let's see, right here. Um, Kate, sorry. That's me. Um, on January 20th, I think it's the eighth slide. Can you go to that on which one? On here. Yeah. Okay, hold on.

This one.

This says right here, Cottonwoods land swap discussion ruling gardener. How does that happen? Honestly, I don't understand. Is Is that always possible that anybody can hold a work meeting on on behalf of someone else's application? And what would stop him from not from doing that every single time? Wait until the 18 months that people had worked to try to get it. Can Can I tell you, look, I don't envy you what you guys do. I come in here and I'm like, man, this is uncomfortable really. And then I we talked with Josh. Josh says this seems like it works. Works with works with Janet. I mean it was very impressive. Flew through here. And then at the last second the original developer comes in and on my application comes and talks to you guys and tells you gosh I this just doesn't look like it look like it would work. How does that happen?

Does anybody remember this meeting? And I don't remember you weren't here. So yeah, you you weren't here.

You're in Egypt. Um so the original work session that was scheduled commission was for Brandon Green and Rulon for the development agreement for the town center and it got split in half and I called Brandon and I said Brandon I can't split a work session from the word of one person like because the work session is for your town center and but now Rulon is telling me he wants it to be this and but because you're the one that asked and so he said just split the time between the two. So it was my understanding and it was probably my error that I put this on the agenda cuz this was like a last minute change. Um so this was a Monday change. So you did not have a lot of heads up. I totally see why you're offended and I'm totally going to put that on my plate. Um, I knew the commission had a lot of questions um and frustration with Mr. Gardner and uh was probably hoping that they could take that out on him in the work session. Um, but that's on me. That was 1,000% on me.

I apologize. Sorry for interrupting. No, I'm not really upset about that except I believe that a lot of the public reads that gardener is doing a land slop swap and if they already have an issue with gardener that sends up warning flags, right? And so that I felt compromised on that day because that wasn't us, it was gardener. Chair, do you mind if um Jennifer Lance, the president of the MOA speaks on this? She had something about the work session. I don't mind. So, you do need a mic. Yes, you have to speak into a mic.

When we were notified about the land swap, there was only a few days and we were struggling and frantic and couldn't understand anything. So, we called the county to try and schedule a planning meeting or something to figure out what was going on. And so Rulan's meeting cancelled and they put us in. Okay. So reexplaining that I got a text from you on a Thursday. Me? Yes. Yeah. From Amy that said, "Hey, we need a work session for the commission meeting Tuesday." And I'm pretty sure I said, "Huh, that's not possible."

You said you were full and there was no possibility. And we're like, "We have no idea what's going on, but we're supposed to defend something for our homeowners on Tuesday and we don't know what's going on." And so I think at the last minute Rulan's meeting canceled and they said, "Hey, come tomorrow." And that's what So Rulan wasn't even in attendance at that meeting. No, he was. He was because he had another part in that meeting, but it wasn't his meeting. Cuz Commissioner Blocker, just to remind you, that's the meeting where you had a meeting with the attorneys at 3 before the work session at 4 for us to explain to you the DA.

Okay. at at that work session. Bobby McConnell, who is Ruland's gu uh Ruland Gardner's attorney, she spoke at that session section meeting also. So I it's just confusing. Um can I make just one quick comment? Of course.

So I was I guess misunderstood as well when when I first saw some of this information. probably much of the public was as well because I was under the assumption that Gardner was the one doing this. So maybe to clarify for for everyone here, the request that we have before well we've got two requests, right? One and and neither of them really have anything to do with Gardner other than he was initially on the initial development agreement. He's not a party to either of these projects that we're talking about. The one is removing the Wilkinson's property from it and later at a later point we'll talk about adding Neettleton's property to the project or to the the overall subdivision. Neither of which involve Gardner. Gardner is not doing the development for either of these phases. He doesn't own either of these. So they're completely separate things. Did I capture that correctly? Just to make sure the public understands.

But while you're on that, I I think it's fair because the the people in the Cottonwoods were promised things and Rulan is still developing in the cottonwoods and I believe that this body could hold him accountable for some of the things that they want instead of allowing him to continue to build. I mean, one of the things that was brought up as pickle ball courts and stuff that the Nettletons were bringing, but Rulan's allowed to develop and without any accountability. and I don't understand why he continues to develop while we're going through all of the challenges.

So I thought I thought the thing that would make it most clear so you don't have to deal about land swap or anything else. You get rid of this nettle net it allows nettletons to come in and say hey we would like to give that that um uh density um equation back in this is what we propose. It allows them to talk to the MOA. Um, the thing that catches me off guard and everyone seems pleasant, but everyone seems pleasant and it does catch me off guard that they did everything the the very last day. I mean, we went through planning and it flew through planning. There was a handful of people there, but when it got here, all of a sudden, all of this stuff is sent out from who knows what and and it ends up getting challenged. The only reason why I I would hoped that the land swap would have worked, but it didn't. It just got really convoluted. So, my petition is to allow us to pull out and then when the gardeners come back in, if they Excuse me. Ooh.

When the Nettletons, if you allow the Nettletons in, you can then uh work with the MOA or whatever they see because right now our land isn't helping the MOA at all. They're not getting anything from it right there.

I think that was in that I think it was a January 20th meeting. And that was the one where I asked for that clarification and um Robert jumped right up and was like, "No, we've never purchased that ground. We don't own it, never have." Uh because there was a lot of that misconception that, you know, it was a deed piece of property. It was the MOA and and the HOA's property. And so he kind of jumped up pretty quick to say that no, we we don't own it, never have. Um, and I, you know, as I've thought about it, it's like one of my original questions a while back is like, how can somebody encumber somebody else's ground without compensation? And that's kind of where you're sitting because there I think when my question earlier in this meeting was if your property is removed, that kind of I look at is that kind of hamstrings

him that wait a minute, you no longer comply. And so to me it's it it almost I mean as I've thought about this more it's like if we approve this now Gardner's under the under the radar or on the radar sorry you know it's like you no longer comply. you can't you've got to get this problem fixed before you're allowed he's allowed to do anything else is you know and I again I'll apologize for saying it's not our problem because it is and so but I think it puts I think it puts Ruan under under the gun to you now have an issue you got a problem because you're now short 180 acres your open space doesn't comply that's kind of am I misunderstanding that am I

I think you're right I think his open space might comply, but the density will drastically change and and at least it will at least it will look accurate. Once that is taken out, you will actually look at what the real open space is and whether or not it appi uh uh complies at that at that stage because his promise was each each phase could stand alone and that this was just uh gravy for the county. But if it's removed, it'll be more accurate what the density really is.

So, one of my concerns with removing the land is I went through all the parcels up there in the cottonwoods and there are so many different owners. There's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, like nine different owners. Is this going to create like a Swiss cheese zoning where you got removed? Okay, now I want removed. Now I want removed. Are we setting a precedence by removing phases from the cottonwoods? Sorry. What is your opinion on that? I I believe that that's a fair question, but you know, he's already removed stuff out of the cottonwoods and nothing was said when he did North Side Creek. That was removed from the Cottonwoods. Um,

was that removed from the cottonwoods? asked that at one portion of it wasn't he said no just a portion a sliver yeah the sliver and that that was also when he promised the equestrian center so he removed it and didn't give you the equestrian center all in one fell swoop so now this is a lot more it is but here's my question who else wants to be removed everybody else wants to develop we don't so you also own land in phase six no okay because it's listed under the Wilkinson family trust. Oh, sorry. My cousin does. Okay. I talked to Heidi about this. Yeah. M. So, that's just separate party.

Yeah. Same name, just not us. And And I can't speak to them. I I really don't know what's going on in their mind. I had no idea that nine other people owned it. I I do know about this parcel, but I don't know about I apologize. No, you're good. I anticipated different questions from you. Well, tell me which ones. So, you don't think other people will want to pull out?

I don't know why they would because look, the the real reason um my when when my my my dad didn't want to have anything to do with it. He didn't want to have anything to do with Ruland Gardner. I mean, really, that's the reason why he's not here. He's like, "Look, I don't until I die, I don't want to have anything to do with that original developer." My mom was the one that pushed to purchase this so that she could look back there until she died and saw that there were no houses behind her house. That's behind her house. So, our intention isn't to develop outside of one home for me. And I've been enlightened by a friend of mine that I'm actually a developer if I build a home.

A one home developer. Any other questions?

Thank you. The question I have maybe for Janet again So, if we approve this and according to Commissioner Nickerson, if we do this, how are we going to hold Gardener Development to their original open space and all those other things? I don't know how you can hold Rulan if he isn't and I'm not I know he's the developer on one of the phases but I don't think he owns it.

One of the ones that is being developed right now. I just want to clarify that when we say we mean gardener development. Gardener Development. Yeah. Um so I don't know that we really have much in. I'm sorry Jeremy I talked over phase eight but he doesn't own it. He's the developer on it. I mean, I I guess in that regard, we can He's not

I thought he had one. He He

Yeah, I know he's developing for someone else in one of the phases is my understanding. I don't know if he doesn't own the property but he develops so can we do anything as um basically where you know if he develops it or tries to develop more as the developer can he be held accountable for anything I think that's something we'll have to look into because that's kind I think that goes back to my question of when you look at if all the phases are in that PUD and they have to comply you know I I mean, if all of a sudden this changes, well, now the PUD has changed.

And so now everybody, like all phases, I would think would have to now comply with the new PUD. Eight and nine are going to have to remain undeveloped until additional acreage is added. That's kind of how I'm create, but I don't speak that legally. I I'm a simple school teacher. And that was one of our discussions is if if if the early phases get developed and they don't have any open space in them, guess what happens to the last person developing? I thought it was stand alone and and because I've heard both. It's the whole thing is one, but it's also each piece has to be he can swap,

you know. It's like how it goes back to that legal part of Yeah. Where is phase one on this chart? Just curious. It's the white piece. Yeah, the white. Okay. It's the one that was developed 20 years ago or more. Okay. Any other discussion or questions? I comments.

Personally, with the 507 residents that are so concerned about this, I'm not ready to vote in favor of removing this yet. one because of LMA 10-9A-102 where we as the county were party to the development agreement and we are also responsible for the general welfare improving morale's peace and good order comfort convenience prosperity and aesthetics and encouraging orderly development and we have a 57 people that I think it's disrupting them right now. Their peace, their We heard from someone who just built a house. That's what she's looking at. Um, so that's my concern right now. I think maybe the residents need more time to process and understand and talk more with the applicant um, and figure things out a little more. That's that's my consensus, but that's how I feel. I have a couple of things if I may. Okay. Number one, I think we need to work on if as the health of the, you know, the safety and welfare of the people down there, we need to work on the replacement of the property. And I know the Nelemans want to try to do that. Now, the problem is is the homeowners association going to agree to work with them to get this open space that you want? Um, and so that's one of my and I, you know, I I appreciate what you guys are doing. I don't know why you're doing it, but you know, hey, I I appreciate it. Uh, the other thing is is is the property is owned by the Wilkinsons and yes, they were part of that DA and

I'm just, you know, it's their property. Nobody else has bought it from them. It's their property. They should be able to do that. My opinion, okay? I'm not an attorney. I'm not a legal mind. Um, I'm just common sense and they own it. Nobody else has paid for the property. If the homeowners association wants to do something with it and they want to keep it in their agreement, maybe they need to buy it. That's just a thought. Um, that would make it to where other than the fact that I know that Matt wants to go and build a home on 20 acres, which I would too. Um, and then the other question I have is is if we were to because we separated this out for a reason so that we could get moving forward and would the homeowners association be happy with a land swap that's of comparable land type of land that they can actually enjoy. That's the question. That's a question for all the homeowners association is are they going to be happy even if we provide or not us provide but somebody comes up with providing for them the proper amount of space that is open space. So that's my question to the homeowners association and to everybody else. So So as far as postponing it, I can see that. But is it going to make it any better until another settlement's done?

Question. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a comment if that's okay. Sure. Yeah.

I feel like this is a little bit of a chicken or the egg situation and the truth is it's it's a fairly simple deal all around, but there's so much distrust. It feels like that everybody's worried, well, if we if we remove this and somebody doesn't come in with that, then we're going to have this problem. And I feel like we need to have a little bit of trust here if if that's what we're going to go forward with. Um, I mean, the truth is phases eight and nine have not started their their development. I think the simple solution here to to give some I guess comfort to those who are um part of the MOA is okay there will be no additional housing density here until such time as there's additional land added. I I mean I don't know how else you do that. It's it's kind of too bad that we can't trust each other in this situation, but ultimately that's what has to happen. I mean, we tried to run both of these concurrent where we were taking land out and putting land in at the same time. That, I guess, didn't feel super great to everybody. And so, and I understand that, too, cuz there's going to be negotiations on the side of those coming into the agreement. Um, and and amenities and other things will be discussed. And I know that's been something that a lot of folks have have called and emailed about and and I totally understand that. Um I I personally am for moving forward with this portion of it with some guardrails that help us ensure that open space remains, density remains. We will continue the discussions with the the Nettletons for their project to add that in and ensure that overall the density and and open space remains. And I think as long as all of the well the two parties that are here agree to that, you know, in theory, then I think we should move forward with with what we're doing here. That's my thought at this point.

May I ask another question? Phase 9 still has phase nine there. It's just this portion is being taken out. Correct. Correct. All the homes remain for the most part. And that's why I'm saying, look, okay, if they come in and say we want to develop phase 9, we're going to say no, that's your open space for the time being until such time as more land is added and we work it out. That's it.

It's sorry, that's up to the chair. You you can come up, but

I just need you on mic. If I may, uh, you know, Ted Taylor's my friend or our business partners, uh, if you were to put a stipulation that his land can't be developed until the MOA is happy with, I don't know what they want a pool, they want fields, they want all sorts of stuff. We've offered, we've sent them very proactive emails about how we would intend to merge with them. It's in the full intent. We can't be held hostage and I don't think Ted Taylor can be held hostage to the Master Homeowners Association, which according to Janet have no say in the matter. We we've put it in writing that we will join, but we're not there's a couple things we have to change and we're not going to have a six-month negotiation with the Master Homeowners Association when it's not required. So, I don't think you should penalize Ted Taylor, but the remaining owner in in phase nine, and put some kind of condition on his property. That's just not right. I mean, we Jennifer, I've I've put everything we're going to do in at I have to have it on.

You're not required to negotiate with them. It's up to the chair. Okay. You only Let's not have any back and forth. If you want to make a comment, you can come up and talk in the mic. You can come right as long as it's the mic.

I think he's talking about years ago when he came to the MOA. I've only received one email from him and they were just inquiring about the MOA fees, but there's been no negotiations at this point. We look forward to it. It would be awesome. We would welcome them. But we've invited them to three county meetings and they've declined they've declined to come to our um board meeting last week. It we've we've reached out. Okay. Thank you.

So, can I make one more comment? Sorry. So, ju just to be clear, my suggestion is not that we hold anybody hostage for negotiations with the MOA. At the end of the day, while I appreciate and respect the MOA, they're not a party to this. They're not a party to the development agreement. They're not a party to land coming in or out other than if there's an agreement between the two private parties for them to join the MOA. And and I appreciate their input on this. the county, at least from my perspective, this is this is more about density than amenities specifically because I can tell you the the property we're talking about potentially removing, you'd have you'd be hardressed to put any amenities on that besides a trail, a hiking trail. I mean, it's it's steep. Um, so that's probably a totally different discussion and I don't want to get it convoluted with this. All I'm saying is we got to either trust each other here or we got to bring it back together and do it at the same time, which I don't know that that works either. We either move forward with this as it is and remove some property understanding that we're not going to do additional density there until such time as we add property. I think that gives motivation both to the county and to the Nettletons and to the MOA, frankly, to work together and make that happen.

Okay. I will I will look for a motion then. Okay. I'll try to make a motion. Um Mr. Chair, I move that we approve um the amendment to the Cottonwoods development agreement and PUD overlay district to reconfigure certain parcels within in the development as outlined in the staff report and based on the text listed in exhibit A of the staff report dated March 3rd, 2026 with the following additions. um that further density will not be allowed until such time as additional property has been brought in to offset the the existing density will be removed and and open space. That was probably really poorly worded. So, hope you got all that.

The recording will get it. Okay, Cindy will make you look smart. Okay. I have a comm motion by commissioner. I do have a commotion. Commotion, too. I have a motion by Commissioner Newton. I'll second. I have a second by Commissioner Nickerson. So, it goes to a vote. All in favor? I I Any opposed?

Nay. And I would like to say why. Not because I don't want the Wilkinsons to have their land, but because Morgan County is a party to the development agreement and has an obligation to uphold the integrity of that agree agreement. And under Ledma, we are supposed to protect the general welfare, improve morals, peace, good order, comfort, convenience, prosperity and aesthetics, and encourage orderly development. Okay, thank you. Okay, we will now go to backwards to F1

still here. Yeah, he just keeps texting me. Are you supposed to feed right now? Is that what you keep texting me and thinking I'm your wife? What are we putting away in feeding? Sheep, cattle. I am not feeding tonight. Okay, I think I was first, but I'm not going to be first next time. I'm going to be ninth. You don't have a public hearing. Great. Eight is better. I hate to Okay, hope this one is easy. Um, so just to ask the question before it even gets started. Where specifically are these condensers that we have found to fail?

The one that goes to the recorder's office and feeds the HR office and feeds the recorders office and the vault. So, it's got three different heads. Okay. So, these are the bigger ones, not the individuals. It's It's the unit outside and then it's the units inside to match. Okay. So, the HR recorder recorder vault recorder office and the recorder vault. So, this doesn't fix the one in the assessor's office. No, that's the other side. That's the other side. Okay. So, I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't uh push back on you on stuff. How long have you known these are bad?

This one probably just first the year. This one on this side. This one just I got told about this one. The assessors actually just it started leaking today or yesterday. Yesterday. Okay. Oh, okay. Well, when did your napkin show up? Yeah.

Okay. And I my second question, Brett, would be is you're asking for additional monies. I'm just wondering where we haven't spent a lot of money on salt and driving and all that stuff. Why why can't we find it in your budget? We can't use this set of road money. That's against that's against the law that because the road money comes from the gas tax and this is budgeted from from county from county funds. So we can't transfer that money. That makes sense. So wages overtime. Overtime. Could use the overtime for why not? That's from your wife. Why not? Kate. Yeah, that's for my wife, Kate. Yes. Sorry.

Why? Why can't we? Payroll is restricted. Like we don't let them pull payroll. No, it's it's not pulling payroll. It's just he's saying he's saying that he has money in his budget if he were to use budget officer of the county. Do you want to speak to that? The mean one won't let us pull money that's designated for payroll into other funds. So that's what I'm Yeah. You could do a budget adjustment if there's additional The boss says you can. There you go. Okay. All right. Those are my two questions for you. You just can't take it from Rose. I know that. Yeah. I know you can't take it from B and C. But I do have a question. Oh, got it. So many talking at once.

Okay. Okay. So, my question on this is is as Matt was asking, why now? Why not a long time ago? And If we're thinking of um is this the most adequate way to take care of a problem that we've got currently within the three quarters office and all these other offices? I mean, what is the end? I mean, are we just putting a band-aid on the problem until you guys replace a bond or something for a new building? Yeah. Bandaging it. What about the other part that we've been talking about?

We can replace them all, but if they're working, we haven't replaced them. If they quit working, we replace them. Are you talking about the issue that popped up Friday? That one. What do we have? That's a different issue. So, we have a about $120,000 capital improvement fund. That's where I'm not. You've already spent it. Have we How much have we spent of it? Did we spend most of that already on the expansion project? Have spent where we budgeted. It's not spent like as in checks cut, but you've already designated all that funding. We've designated it. That That's all I was asking is have we designated it? Yes. Remember her? Did we already designate? Ma'am, you need to talk in the mic. Okay, fair enough.

Okay. So, so going along with my question is is are we putting the apple before the cart? Well, this isn't a this isn't a band. This is a replacement. The this unit here has been in since 97, so it's almost 30 years old. And it's it's common for this to happen. We'll it sound it look it looks like to me we I'll be back for the same thing in the assessor's office asking for Didn't we didn't we just a couple of years ago put new uh these units smaller units in the assessor's office. Not in the assessors. We have in the treasures office. You

we did in the treasures. Okay. Because I know we've been doing them throughout the building. We did it in the attorney's office too. So Okay. But there's quite a few units feed. They all have their own. So you you go through every office and replace every one. I know we did in the um it been before you were here. I think we did just barely. The the uh treasur's office has two. We replaced one. We still have an old one in there. And so this unit that you're talking about is going to supply everything.

No, just going to it's in it feeds recorders office. It'll supply HR and the recorder's office. And there's also a unit in the vault and that has to work because it keeps the all the books uh dry. It keeps them from uh humidity. It it controls the humidity at the same time. So that's the three units. If you look, there's three units on there. That's the three units. The one in the vault, the one in the recorder's office, the one in the HR. I talked to Sean about it today and and it's it's pretty important for the records keeping them. Yeah, I know. I'm just trying to figure out,

you know, I'd really like to see the addition on the building though. Um and if that would accommodate this at the same time. Well, it won't. They're separate. Unless we unless we change the whole system and put a really expensive air handler on top of the change the whole thing. I'm guessing that would have cost 100,000. But I mean ultimately I think the the best process we got a 70-y old building, but to replace the entire building would be just really cost prohibitive. We'd have to do a bond. It' be a mess.

We've started doing renovations though that have really been good. I mean we replaced all the windows what five or six years ago. We spent 250,000 on the windows. We spent uh 200,000 on the attorney's office and every maybe not that much. I can't remember. But the truth is if we allocated a couple hundred,000 a year to each but you know Janet Janet's shaking her head. No, but but every time I go in the attorney's office, they thank me for that remodel.

They do. The people that work in there thank me for it because it's nice and it works good. If you was to take, you know, each office and remodel it, let's budget for it, you know, um you'd have the same attitude in every office, would you? If we we was to remodel the assessor's office. Yeah, I I agree. I just wonder why you haven't done it before now. Money. Money. It's always money. Well, he didn't even bring it to budget. Oh, this particular one. Well, if we didn't know that the condenser wasn't good enough, let's let's do this. So, let's let's move. I I think you're saying it was

if I know it's possible. It seemed like we're always so tight on budget. If I know it's possible, just like, okay, I'm planning on capital improvement and and Kate spent it. I don't know how much she spent on it. I don't know. I'm used to using capital improvement money for these kind of problems, but if she's already spent it, uh, then, you know, where's it coming from? General fund. And I want to correct, it's only the front half of our office that got remodeled. Um, my office Garretts and Doug's not. We didn't even get new paint. The secretary really like it. We can buy you a bucket of paint. That's only what 15. I'll give you one. It does look good though. That'll give it to you.

If all it is is money, I don't know what the problem is. I do think when it comes budget time and and to be honest, we have allocated funding for these projects. I mean, we did the attorney's office. We're we we kind of were forced by the state to do the clerk the clerk's office. Um but I think in future year and we did the treasur's office before that. I think in future years we need to finish the sheriff's office renovation. We need to work on probably renovation of the of the uh

well each of the offices eventually right but we can't do it all at once. the commission wants to do and that's a great idea I think to do that in you know in sections because it cost a million dollars or how many to do it all right and to give you an idea way back we we spent $250,000 on the windows right behind you on the whole building we built a salt shed for about 160 that came from capital improvements right um

so we have we have done projects we just haven't remodeled the whole building if we want If we want to go for that, I think that's possible. We I don't know. I'm not sure your capital improvements are cover it. Will, but uh if we want to add some money to that, you bet we can start planning on that. That's not a problem. Cuz I don't think we're going to get a bond passed to build a new building in Morgan. And and I'm and I'm fine with that. I wouldn't vote for it either, but but every but I I do think we should. So, let's just slowly work to get the building just like our own homes. We do we put some money aside every year to to do something to make it right. So,

but in this job, I need to know if I if I have a bud if I'm going to have a budget for it, we'll we'll go ahead with the plans. But we need you to create that budget, Brett. You bet. We can do that. I I don't want to just throw money out there. I want you to say this is how much a square foot. I don't care if you have to bring somebody in and go, "Hey, you know what's this going to cost to do this area? This is what it's going to cost. Okay, that's $20 a square foot." And we then we know basically kind of Yeah, you Yeah, that's not a problem. We we can do that. Okay. What' I miss? Catch me. We threw you under the bus. Watch the video. We decided to take the the 12 grand from your salary. You have to do a budget.

You didn't you didn't miss much discussion. We're just we're just needing a a you didn't miss and you might want to think about it um on the money part. We are going to have the same thing in the assessors probably be similar price. So So we can probably add that. We could probably double that. Okay. So this number figured it out. It's 10% but we probably double that I would guess. So Mr. Chair, is this total cost then? You've got a new vault system and then the complete system. Which one is it? Or are we doing both? The complete. No, just the 12. The 12 515. Okay. All right. All right,

that's for this side here. I'll come back with you with that side, but I think we can just add it on to this contract if we get a good price. Okay. Um, Mr. Chair, how you do you know how you're going to motion how how we're paying for this? I'm going to defer to Kate. Okay. So, so after I if the commission will approve it, it will bring back a budget adjustment next meeting. Is that fair? Okay, I will find the money. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I would prefer that we pay for this out of capital improvement. So, we transfer the money to capital improvement if that makes sense and then pay for it out of there. I

just cuz I think it's good for us to track what we're spending. Then let's look ahead at at another unit. So, I would double this price just because we're talking about it for the assessor's office. I haven't got the price yet, but it's going to be similar. So, you want to double it now? Well, I mean, I I can come back in two weeks and do the same thing. We're doing it, but let's get thinking about we're going to be we're going to be replacing one more unit. So, I will create a budget adjustment for whatever the commission approves by motion. How about that? If you know they need to be done, just

I move that we uh direct the public works department to um to purchase and install or how do you want to do it? say this that we condenser units condenser units by the first um first oh I'm sorry contract mountain valley mechanical yeah mountain valley mechanical u for the to include the assessor's office which would double that $25,000 can you say not to exceed and I will come back with that exact price when it's close for me.

Okay. And I'll put that in the budget adjustments. Okay. So, just to recap for my very tired, overcaffeinated brain, um your motion is to approve the bid for Mountain Valley Mechanical, but to include the assessor's office in that additional, but not to exceed $25,000. That's correct. Okay. Sorry. That's okay. I'm tired. It's been a minute. It's been a long day. Okay. Okay. clearly have a motion by Commissioner Ferrell. I'll second the motion. Second by Commissioner Newton. All in favor? I. Are there any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Put something away.

We forgot about Janet's paint. No, you get nothing. You get nothing. I would like carpet ma'am. Well, no, ma'am. You also want the word princess on your business cards and you're not getting Esquire. Princess Esquire. I would say on that is part of that budget of 25,000 including a paint a bucket of paint for her. Negative. She gets nothing. Okay. Hey Casey. Hello. Thank you for being here again and thanks for waiting till 9:00. So the first item I have I'm going to turn the time over to our friends Darren and Ryan from uh the trust to go over this proposal.

Darren, this head shot is old. Well, that's Darren and I'm Darren. Well, it's that was at the beginning of the meeting. That was at the beginning of the meeting. That was four hours ago. Four hours ago, you had hair. Jibus, I'm sorry you guys had to sit through that. I didn't know you were here for 14 years.

I think uh I think the That was awesome. Got to talk in the mic, man. You got to talk in the mic. I get in trouble if you don't talk in the mic. Okay, we'll go on. Thank you kindly. What page would you like? Uh, yeah. Oh, the first one with your head shot from 1972. From five o'clock today. From five o'clock today. Okay.

Well, we've been here a long time, so we'll try to be as succinct as we possibly can. Um, I'm Ryan Hatch. This is Darren Palmer. We're with the Utah Local Government's Trust. Um, we're here to talk about workers compensation insurance and we feel very fortunate because what we're here to share is actually good news. We feel like you guys have been peppered with a lot of very complicated issues tonight and this is very not complicated. So, just very briefly, um, the trust is an insurance pool. There's three of us in the state. There's the trust. You and Irma were the largest and the first. We organized in 1974 in response to a hard commercial insurance market. Back then, it was virtually impossible for cities and counties and special districts to find insurance um because of the risk that you carry. And so, um, while the trust and and Yousef and Irma all provide property auto liability insurance, we're here tonight to talk about workers comp specifically. So, your current workers compensation carrier is WCF or Workers Compensation Fund of Utah. So, they're not one of the insurance pools in the state like us um or like USIP that does your property auto and liability. So, I just want to make that abundantly clear as to who we are and and um who we represent. So, I'm going to turn the time over to Darren for a minute to talk about your team with the trust and some of the other members that we ensure.

Perfect. Yeah. So, this is the team uh that you would have. We're all local here in Utah. As Ryan mentioned, we only sure ensure governmental entities in the state. Um Steve Hansen's our CEO. You can go down the line. And the one thing that I'd emphasize uh here is everyone's expertise. Um and the one thing that I've understood about the county and and working with with Casey is uh a a direct contact a direct uh person to call with with needs with claims um and just getting kind of thrown through the ringer. But these guys are all myself included at a a cell phone call. Um I've had correspondence with Kate. I've had correspondence with Casey. and and so you have a team that's dedicated to Morgan County. Um we're up here all the time. In fact, we ensure the entire county except for Morgan County. Um everybody else is insured through the trust. So you have a dedicated team. There's abundance of of knowledge there for that. Um Kate, if you want to go to the next one.

Sorry, sending you a link on where to get updated head shot. Go. I'm not getting rid of that one. Sorry, I can't blame you. I can't see you. Shiny hair. That's a great one. Yeah, it's a good one.

Um, this is just kind of a depiction of what we do. We have we have over 650 members across the state. Um, these are the counties that we insure. Um, some of which we only insure on workers compensation. So, Emery County, Wasach County, we only insure them on workers compensation. And on the other side of the fence, they're insured through us. Um the other counties that are on this slide you can see are all fully insured through the trust. So what I would say to you is is you're in good hands uh if you made the decision to come to the trust for workers compensation because you would be u paired up with with a lot of other public entities that do the same type of stuff you do. Um next slide Kate. This one I think is probably the most important for the county uh based upon the meeting tonight alone. Um there is a lot of resources available to the county. Um and we have a ton of expertise because we've been around for over 50 years and and so there's a ton of resources available to you. I think the biggest thing to take away from this is um we're all about preventing claims. Uh I remember in one of the presentations from UD do the the the individual mentioned that there's reactive and then there's proactive, right? And this is a proactive approach. All these different trainings are to prevent claims or to keep the county out of trouble. Although you wouldn't have your general liability property auto at the trust, just workers compensation, everything's still available to you. So, we would provide you a ton of resources and and frankly, this last conversation with the condensers um would save probably a lot of money for for the county as well because you would have to you wouldn't have to invest in so many different resources. They'd be available to you. So, I'll let Ryan talk a little

bit about um the next couple of slides that go into more of how uh we came up to the conclusion with premiums and so forth. So,

thank you. Um, so there's really just a couple more slides. Um, Darren asked me to go over the main components that build your premium and I want to be as straightforward as I can. The great thing about workers compensation insurance is that it is very structured. Um, it's really the same model all throughout Utah and all throughout the country. So when underwriters are looking to to quote or price your workers compensation, they're really looking at the same factors. Okay? And these are the main factors. The first is your payroll by class code. And when we say class code, we mean job type. So you have very specific types of workers that are employed at the county. And so we take that your payroll for those individuals and their job type, which is their risk exposure. And there's a rate tied to those jobs. Um we don't come up with those rates. Um our competitors don't come up with those rates. the NCCI comes up with those rates. So the NCCI is the National Council on Compensation Insurance and they're like the umpires or they're kind of like the TransUnion or the Equifax of Workers Comp. So they set the rates, the calculations, every they govern it. Um and so you you take your payroll by class code and you apply it to the rates. Um the NCCI looks at those and they say, "Okay, for an entity like a county that has these risk exposures, you know, public works, law enforcement, you know, whatever things you do, and they say based on your size and type of organization, you're expected to have this many losses." And if you have that many losses, then your rating, your own rating, which is kind of like a credit score, will be a 1.0. If you eclipse the number of claims or losses that you're supposed to have,

then your it's called an experience modification factor will go above a 1.0, which is bad. So that we we like to compare this experience modification factor or this EOD for short to a credit score. The only difference is with a credit score, you want it to be high. With an E-mod, you want it to be low, meaning you're having fewer losses than you're expected to have. So, long story short, every workers comp carrier and underwriter out there are going to use the exact same payroll by class code, NCCI class code rates, and your experience modification factor to price your account. The one difference is the last bullet up there, the loss cost multiplier. That is what changes the premium from competitor to competitor. And it's why we're here to save you a lot of money. So we Darren mentioned that we work with 650 different local governmental entities in Utah. That's all we work with. We don't ensure the grocery stores, the dental offices, the private companies. We only insure local governmental entities and only in Utah. And because that's our forte and we are so big on risk management and loss prevention, we have been able to drive our losses down beneath what our competitors can. And it's nothing against your current insurer, workers compensation fund, but they they insure contractors and just everybody. In a different lifetime, I did real estate and I had a policy with them for for workers comp. So, we're very niche in what we do. And because of that, our losses as a book of business are less than theirs. And therefore, the premium we can quote you is drastically less. And that's the bottom line. So, if you go to the next slide, Kate, um you'll see last year we provided a quote to the county on workers comp, but because of some stipulations, some

notice requirements that you're required to give, um you were unable to take advantage of that. And so we started earlier this year to make sure that if you wanted to make a move to the trust, you would have the ability to do that. And so all this is showing on the last line is if the county had made the move last year, um you would have saved 40% or $46,391. Um the savings you'll notice this year is a little bit greater than it would have been last year. Um, the reason for that is because our loss cost multiplier went down again and your your E-mod or your your rating so to speak happened to go up. So, our price went up a little bit. Your um price with your current carrier went up quite a bit and you can see the difference up there. So, we tried to make that as concise as we possibly could. But um the reason we go through that is because when you're looking at things like insurance, people often times commoditize them in their mind. They think, "Oh, are they just buying the business?" Well, with workers comp, you really you really don't do that. You really don't buy the business. You just offer the rate that is the rate based on what the NCCI gives you, what your book of business, how your book of business performs, and that's really it. there's there's really no buying to be had so to speak. So with that, are there any questions that you have or Darren, do you have anything that you'd like to add or case?

No, I would just uh for for us, I would just with the the last slide that we have on here, this is probably the most important portion of us. Um, and I've been in many many commission meetings across the state, and I'll tell you about one in in Carbon County real quick. We sat there and talked and talked and talked. Excuse me. And the commissioner stopped me and all he said was, "I care about my people." That's it. And that's why I put this in here on this last slide. The trust really invests in people and your staff, right? And I've been around your staff for a long time and I know how hard they work, but I also know that they deserve to get the best. And I think that trust will offer that. So, if you have any questions, we're happy to answer them. And then I think Casey might have had something to say, but we're here to answer any questions you might have.

Thanks, Darren. Thanks. Before I start, do you have any questions for for them? Okay. I I do. Okay. Um Okay. So, with USIP, I mean, are we currently paying workers comp or are we paying USIP for this? Okay. So background information. So last year we being Casey and I because this was the lower cost attempted to move to the trust for workman's comp only. Right.

Workman's comp only. Correct. And you're very used to me. So you're very used to my bluntness. So I'm just going to keep it real. You So WCF went to USIP. You went to UAC. UAC called you guys and said you can't do this right

we have an agreement and so trickle back down effect then you told WCF you need to fix it and WCF Casey and I sat down and had a conversation and we said you are giving us nothing we have asked for we've reached out we've reached out we've reached out nothing back. The WCF guy literally had a document that shows that he had not reached out to us since I came into this position, okay? And even before. So, we said, "Here's our issues. You are rubber stamping things. Our people can't get a hold of you. Our HR can't get a hold of you. Here's all the emails that we have sent trying to reach out to you. You've done nothing. We've gotten nothing back." and Yousef guy whose name I can't remember

Johnny Miller looked at you at WCF and said you have to do better and they said they would. It's a year later. They are not better. Okay, they are not better and and they're more expensive and they're more expensive. So, and look, they deny claims when they should statutoily cover it.

And they're the ones that denied the claim that we had in our treasur's office when someone was injured that was a medic off and said, "Well, we" and we had to get our attorney's office hours and hours and hours involved for them to turn around and say, "By law, you have to provide this." and WCF said, "Well, we didn't know that was statutoily required, and if that's so, we're going to have to increase our rate." And we're like, "Cool, but we've already paid for it, and we're already locked in." So, no. Um, so here we are back at the same conversation. I 100% understand this the the relationship that You has with UAC. However, it is not worth the dollar amount and the frustration um just to have that buy in. So, we're not we're not trying to upset UAC. We're not trying to accept or upset Johnny Miller and our relationship with you. We are just trying to get good service for our workman's comp which

which we have a lot more of these. So I have one more question with this on USIP and with all of your services because they look more than just work workers compensation. And so my question is is if you're that much less because I understand the insurance pools and all that kind of stuff. If that's the case, why aren't we switching everything? Oh honey. Okay. So I know you've been waiting for me to ask that. Two reasons.

Next slide. You're right. one cuz it was such a fight last time because UWAC and Yousef got involved. So, at the end of the day, we're proving that this is a good fit for us. Okay? Utah Trust is a good fit for us. If I can get you to understand that it's a good fit for us at WCF, please believe that I will be back here next year asking for something else and something else and something else switching to the trust cuz I worked with them in Cash County and they're awesome.

Poor Ryan Hatch. Unfortunately, I have his cell phone number and I accidentally text him instead of the Ryan Hatch that is the legal counsel for Department of Transportation. And so he randomly gets text messages like once a year for me and I'm like oops sorry ignore. No. So so so back to my question on this is you we're paying how much for them every year? Well I can't break. So I can look that up but I don't have it right now. So we can possibly go and look at saving a lot more money with this the rest of it. Yes.

Yes. those other counties that are there on that list that you had. All of them are not just doing uh WF. So, Emery County, as I mentioned, I kind of switched through these fast for your sake because I feel bad for you guys being here this long and and and honestly, sometimes we feel bad, too, but Blaine doesn't. So, I mean really long story short, every county on this list is fully insured through the trust and they're not with you anymore.

No, not at all. Not one line of insurance outside of Emery County and Wasach County. Those two counties have just their workers compensation with the trust. So, I I work closely with Emery County. I've talked to Casey. I work with Mary down there and and she likes it. But but yeah, every other county outside of Emery Wasach is fully insured through the trust. And so we're not under any obligation to be with you. No, you're not. But you are under an obligation to submit a a a timely notice, a request to leave. That's 6 months. Okay. I mean, I' I'd like to see what else they have to offer. I mean, yeah.

I mean, we're on the roll with making you act mad, so let's just keep going. Well, and I should point out there there is USIP is not UAC. Once upon a time, if you'll if you'll indulge me for one minute, I mentioned we began in 1974. Initially, we had all the counties except for Salt Lake. They've always been self-insured. Okay.

Um the director who was Brent Gardner at the time was on our board. Well, UAC, just like the League of Cities and Towns, just like the Association of Special Districts are run off of dues from their members and and they go and lobby, you know, to the legislators and they're always trying to think of creative new ways to make money. Well, Brent Gardner was on our board and he thought insurance, that's how I'm going to do it. So, he started a little consortium under UAC way back in the '9s to try to generate more money. After several audits, they were forced to break off because there were some issues and that's when Yousef officially broke off. So, we're here trying not to step on Yousef's toes or anybody else, but often times people and not saying you are, but there may be an intent to to conflate UAC and you sometimes so that people don't feel like they can leave. I've been at the trust 18 years. When I started at the trust, there was only a requirement to give 90 days notice to leave USIP, which several did. You saw them on that that slide. After a while, um, USIP said, "Okay, now it's a six-month notice. It can't be 90 days anymore. It's got to be 180 days." We had three counties last year that wanted to come over on workers comp, and they didn't give the 180day notice, and so Yousef said, "Nope, you can't leave." Well, in their own interlocal agreement, it says that based on a three-force vote of the board, they can let those counties out and they wouldn't do it. We have an open door policy. We have no contractual handcuffs. You can leave mid policy. You could literally leave in the middle of your policy and we will prorate your refund down to the minute and refund you and send you on your way. With that, we have a 99.7%

member retention rate with 650 members. So, that puts the pressure on us to deliver what we promise to keep your rates stable, to pay claims that without getting your attorney's office involved. We've got to pony up or people aren't going to stick around. So, anyway, hopefully that context gives you a little bit more. Yeah, I appreciate it. anything to save money, you know, I'm going to do it.

So, I I think it really does boil down to we want the best for our employees um while staying budget conscious. Um and this way we can do it both. And it's been really nice. I I had Darren come around actually more than um our WCF uh person uh Blake Moore or Blake Blake Green. Sorry. Thank you. Um I've I've seen him in in person once and that was only because we uh we tried to tried to switch and then um so it's it's been nice to be able to have communication from the trust and it's super helpful when employees have questions or something and and I need help from them that they get right back to me. So

yeah, and I'll just reiterate this isn't just an action reiterated or um generated from wanting to save money. Oh, obviously that is a priority, but it is also from feedback from our employees that have been on our workman's comp um issues the last couple years that just they need support. Yeah. We also had an employee who he got sent a letter from the doctor that said they were going to send him to collections because he didn't pay for something that should have been covered under workers comp. And I sent them three emails and by the third they said they'd take a look at it. And so it it was very frustrating to me. Okay. Okay. I'll look for a motion then.

I move that we approve the us going to the Utah Local Government Trust for workers compensation and to look into possibility of more. Okay. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Felro. I'll second. Second by Commissioner Nickerson. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Hope your hair grows back. Just off the record, if you want to look into insurance house boats, I think you could do really well at that.

I've also looked into horse insurance, so I don't know if you have that, but it's quite popular. Yeah. Did you just buy a house boat or something? No, but I it's getting harder and harder to get passports. Uh Cindy, can you make a note in your records that before this action item, um Commissioner Newton had to step out, he had to catch a flight so that we don't accidentally mark him as approved on anything. Okay. Uh Casey again. Sweet. Can you explain what you put in front of their desks, please?

Yes. So, uh, each of you has a copy of the handbook with any, um, notes or anything that you sent me. I've highlighted the sentences I've added, and I've also put a tab on there, uh, for you to review, uh, make sure that the wording you like it. Um, I just wanted to make sure that you're aware of what I had added. I looked at mine. It's works. So everything that you highlighted then are the you're taking care of the questions we had on those items. Yes. And and each one specifically. Okay. Like your question

like the about Yes. Exactly. Because when this is our document as you said. Yeah. It's our document. I personally prefer not to have that one word in there about I mean that's just one item but you know but as long as I'm happy other than that I'm not even that's okay either way not a fight looks good to me. Thank you. Any questions about it or comments? I think just to um obviously this is a living document so if we find something we can absolutely just revisit and make an adjustment and like I said it I I would like to at visit it revisit it at most each year. So if you want to most or you mean at least at least

at least that's Are you tired a little bit at least got a baby at home or something? Almost something like that like to revisit it yearly. Yes. There you go. Uh, I'm just wondering, are we allowing the employees to read this on on payroll? Because that's a long document. They sign it. Yep. Yeah. I'd read it if I signed it. Okay. Okay. I just want to make sure that we're paying them. Do we need a motion? Yes. Okay. I move that uh we accept resolution CR26-10 approving the Morgan County Employee Handbook.

Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Blocker. I'll second. Second by Commissioner Nickerson. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Thank you so much. You were afraid I was going to make a motion to deny it, didn't you? I kept You thought about it, Casey. He's like he's I gave him a hard time earlier. I said I'm going to make a motion to postpone it. Did you have hair at the beginning of this meeting, too? No, I lost it years ago. Oh, okay. Yeah, I shaved this morning. So, uh what the commission may or may not know is your new uh what are you? Fire something fire marshal. What are you What do you do here?

Deputy chief fire marshal. deputy chief/fire marshall is um also a trainer um at Davis Tech and I just clicked a whole lot of buttons I didn't mean to click um so setting us up for being able to do training labs at uh DTC and this is our our to be able to do that.

Yeah. So the theou is just um basically saying that they're going to allow us to use the facility. Um, so the Davis Tech D5 building, it's in Freeport Center. Um, there's a full-size ladder truck in the facility. We have uh two buildings. There's a full house. It's about a 2,000 square foot house that we can go in, smoke out, run full evolutions. Um there's a commercial building uh and also like a convenience store along with roof props both commercial so flat roof props and pitch roof props. Um so being overtraining uh I brought it to Chief Wils about possibly going and using the facility. Um they do rent it out. We were thinking like using it one to two times a year. It's about a hundred bucks an hour. Um, and so to get people off shift, get out there, run for a couple hours, run through evolutions. Um, because as eager as our firefighters are, they're amazing with what they do and what they've had, but we want to get them more chances to run evolutions, get more experience. Um, and I think this is going to be a great uh facility for us to do that uh training in. Uh, any questions on that?

Yeah, I have a question. Okay. Um, how many firefighters can you take in at the same time to to do this to train?

Um, so Davis Tech, we run 25 students every Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday there. Um, last two weeks ago and the following or the week before, Davis, the whole Davis Countywide um, fire departments would go in. So they would rotate. So they would have probably 30 to 40 firefighters in there running different evolutions in different buildings. And so it's it's pretty big. I think it's I I want to say it's like 200 feet by almost 300 feet in size. So basically you're looking for a couple thousand dollar is all. No. Well, it's just No, it's in the budget.

It's in the budget. We have it in the training budget. Okay. Um, but it's just getting the theou signed that you guys approved for us to use that facility. Has the attorneys had a chance to look at this? I have not. Garrett did did Garrett because he made me change some stuff. So he he's reviewed it and he's made changes or he he's made changes. I don't if you want to we'll just we'll just say with with the changes Garrett made. I just wanted to make sure that we had a chance to look at it. Perfect. Because I think it said Morgan County Fire or something like that means Gotcha. And I'm guessing it's a standardou that they use. Correct.

That Yeah, they're sending this out to every It's my boss. He's a Yeah, but we have pretty smart attorneys here. So I if you wanted just to cover our our backsides, make make the motion um pursuant to approval by legal, that would probably cover our bases. I actually did a fire training here when I was the EMT firefighter. Nice. Yeah, it's intense. It is. Is it similar to the one that Salt Lake has? They have it out kind of out west there kind of by um Have you been to that one?

No, I've I've been to that facility. I've done testing with you for out there. Um but no, this one it's all indoors. It's heavy timber. Uh yeah, it's just an old building that Davis Tech owns. They own the whole building and they just gave us a section of it and built all the props inside. Okay. Yeah. I'll look for a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the uhou between Morgan County Fire and EMS and Davis Technical College uh Fire Training Center. Um with approval of uh legal.

A second it. I have a motion by Commissioner Nickerson and a second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I I opposed. All right. Who's Who's on the chopping and block for the next one? That's B. Oh, okay. Erica, you're just hanging out because you have nothing else to do any unless there's your backup. Yeah. If there's budget questions, I'm I've been involved with the fire marshall side, not the budget side so much. So,

so this one is not in the budget. Um and we were not aware that there was an issue with this um apparatus until this year. So that's why it was not in the budget. Hence the estimate date is February. Um, but this is what it would take to get the um, so this is the fire engine that we essentially took back from WPR RFD um, to make it safe and fully operable. Really? Yep. So, we took a And this is in Logan. So, why is this the one in Logan?

No, this is the one that's down at Peters. this uh where we're getting it fixed. Oh, this is down in Salt Lake. Oh, Salt Lake. Yeah. Um so to ask Sarah your question, Commissioner Ferrell, as part of the agreement that the commission signed with Wasuch Peaks Ranch Rural uh Road and Fire District for that interlocal is they sold us back the truck for a dollar. Oh, okay. And now and so now it's ours again.

Okay. So, yeah. So, there's been a a solid leak that's been brought up since I started here in March of last year. And it was just, "Oh, it's an old rig. That's how it works." And when Brad came in, he's like, "No, let's get it assessed. Let's get that pump fixed." And the mechanic came in and he goes, "I see numerous things wrong with this." He says, "This should be pulled off the roads." Um, he's like, "You need to get this fixed." Um, he's like, "Not just to get it work." He's like, but he took pictures and showed us what was what the issues were. I mean, we have a fuel leak. Um, the steering box, steering gears,

yeah, that's that's totally gone. The air dryer is the original, and that should be switched out every one to two years. And it's the original. What year is this truck? Uh, couldn't see it in 94, 97. I was about to say I was thinking 96. Um, and just a reminder, a new a new truck like a million two million four. Um,

I mean I mean I look at it I mean obviously these are things that I mean we didn't know. We got it from Los Peaks. I mean you got fuel lines, you got oil leaks, you got steering gears. Well, they got it from us and we got it back. Right. We sent them our problem. We got the problem. Yeah. So, the good thing is we can save on our insurance policy. Yeah, just kidding. The rates go down. No. So, where are you suggesting that we I still can't back up. Where are you suggesting we pull this money from the just the general fund? They would. Yeah. Our totals. Okay. Well, I I personally I just don't know how we say no, we got to fix it. Yeah. The last thing we need is that thing to pull out onto the road and

and we know that there's a problem with the steering and you run some kid over there in Peterson. Yeah. Not I move that we approve the budget to repair engine 41 listed out of C out of our non departmental. Uh I don't have enough in because remember we didn't budget like we did the year before with that big out of general fund 2951. Okay. Out of general fun. I'll second it. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Fel. Second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I. Any opposed?

This guy's got a got a corner on the market. I guess you can tell we are in the wrong business. We are getting two more bids. So yeah. So yeah, Montgomery tells us that. Oh, so you're Oh, it's plan for the worst, right? I'm just using it. Okay. So then that's at a maximum of this price.

So that that truck, the fire, sorry, not truck, the fire engine/apparatus that the county took possession of last year, I think was like 860. And if we were to order the same one the day we received it, it was going to be like 1.9 for the same exact vehicle. We are so in the wrong business. It's cuz they can't get the chassis built. It's crazy. If anyone wants to go in the fire truck business, there's money to be made. Thank you for staying late. Sorry about your hair. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, Erica. Mr. Chair, I move that we convene as board of equalization. Second.

Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Nickerson and a second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I. Any opposed? We are now a board of equalization. Point of clarification really quick. So I had put on the original agenda S A R A I as the last name. Isn't it S A R A? Is it Sarah or is it Sarah with an I on the end? It's with an I on the end. Okay. Well, then I corrected it. Yeah, it is Sarai. Okay. Thank you. So, three things. First of all, don't say anything about my hair because I might cry this later. Second thing, if my new employee quits, I'm going to hurt somebody. Just tease it. She made She made the agenda. No,

it's totally me. It's my fault. My third thing is I'm wondering if we can handle the Vope case first and then the Williamson because there are two issues with the Williamson. Are you good with that? Sure. Am I saying your name right? Okay. I said it wrong. Sorry. VOPI. Okay. So, the VOI case, go to that one first. Okay. So, this is for tax year 2024, right? This uh their late appeal went to the state. The state tax commission approved their late appeal. Yes. Instead of the BOE approving their late appeal. So, this is their appeal for 2024. And it is for two things. A primary exemption and a value reduction.

Correct. Okay. And go. So, I'm going to turn the time over to them if they would like to speak and then your assessor will give her her case. Thank you for seeing us on this late hour. Um, yes. So, to summarize what we're asking for, it's um to reclassify our home as a primary residence instead of a secondary residence. and we um have provided lots of documentation to prove that we have lived in the property um since we purchased it such as our driver's license and different utility bills. And secondly, um we believe that our property was incorrectly valuated. Um, we purchased the property for $684,000 900 and 999 $9990. Um, we received an appraisal when through the mortgage process that came out to $735,000. Um, but our property was appraised through the county for almost uh $850,000 which was uh made a significant impact on our tax burden for our family. Um, we provided some summaries on some additional comps that we think are more similar to our property. Um, that and in and in addition are also uh more expensive than our property. They come with either more finished square footage or what's considered uh luxury gourmet kitchen uh designs uh which ours does not have um and larger garages uh and finished

landscaping. And so, um, with all of that, uh, our own assessment, um, and pulling actual comps, we believe that the assessment of our property comes out more similarly to under, uh, $740,000. And so, we're asking for um, ideally our property to be evaluated for what we purchased it at in 2024, which was $684,9.990. um that is what we purchase it purchased it for uh and not the additional $150,000 that the county evaluated it for. Ma'am, what day did you purchase this property? In March. March. Okay. So,

March of 2024. Yes. March of 20. And we're discussing the 24 um tax year. So just reminder um to the board of equalization the lean date is the value that the property had as of 1 January. So that's fairly close to the lean date. Do you have any other questions for it? It can be a back and forth. It's not just a one. Yeah, I know. Um

or do you want to hear from the assessor and then Yeah. Okay. I'll wait for the assessor. Janelle.

Okay. Sorry guys. We're gonna get this. I don't like it. Well, hold it like this if you'd like. I can definitely talk into it. Okay. I think everyone better than me, right? Sure. All right. So, we just wanted to kind of go if you can go to um just our timeline, which is which one? It's one, two. This one right here. No, seven in this page. I was about to say because we this is an entire packet. So an entire packet. So I

So January 1st of every year is when we value the properties. Um we did have um a CFO that came through after January 1st. So we put it at 100%. It was very close right in January 1st. So January of uh 26th is when we got the certificate of occupancy. So we did put the home at 100%. Um which then that triggers us to make sure for purposes of just making sure that people understand is we send out a primary residential exemption. And so we did that in the timeline. We actually sent out four responses. So that's where those highlighted are. Um trying to send out different responses. So that would have been, you know, the in March, the end of March, trying to get them when they basically owned the property. So there was some issues. I know when we talked to the state that they said they didn't get the emails or the I mean not the emails, but the letters that we were sending to them. Um there is so we did receive finally on November 11 or November 22nd is when they signed their primary residential exemption. So that was after the open um assessment after we'd made the assessment um and also after the board of equalization had closed. So there was a statement that was made that um to get that primary that they had to have an extreme situation. They did state that they um had some we went through and organized everything uh to basically because we do mass appraisal as we kind of already know. We did a mass appraisal space but when we got this we went through and organized um some of the sales that we have. So we are able to use up to five sales um through the MLS when the board of

equalization is open. So we pulled those sales that were all similar to the area um and with the analysis that was given um my appraiser came up with the value of 776 776501 uh for the year of 2024. Now they have received the primary resident residential exemption for 2025 year. Um but we want to focus on the 24 year and what that is. So the option of number one giving the primary residential exemption or not and then the other thing would be um what the evaluation space is um of what we had it as. Um there was some little minor things that we did change because they had um like the basement being finished which I don't think it is right

because the basement wasn't finished. So we made those corrections and so that's where when we had the analysis that is actually I think the next page down that's um the sales that we have with the MLS and that is the value that we came up with that property um to make sure not only is it equitable to everyone else but then equitable of where that 24 still hit January 1st of 2024. So that's Sorry, you're talking about the basement. Is this the slide for the basement? No, that's the value that we came out with after the basement was corrected. Yes. Okay. Yep.

So those those papers that I know you kind of looked through certain ones, but we do have, you know, I did put in like the sales and I know that you guys probably went through those already, so you can kind of look at that. But that is kind of where the um the assessor is placing. So um being an assessor error, we did try to get them information as much as possible. It is the due diligence of the taxpayer to sign the residential exemption and they do have to live in the home 183 consecutive days which the assessor agrees that in the year they did live 183 days but the primary residential exemption was not signed until November 22nd of 2024.

Okay. Any other questions? Nope. I don't. Anybody else? Any questions for the applicant now that you've heard from the assessor? No. No. Okay. Ready? Just um the ruling from the state was that we're not reconsidering if we're uh looking at the on-time application. It's that we are looking at the application as if it were on time. Correct. Yes. They know that. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. They're just she's explaining why you were not granted primary in the first place. Yeah. Okay. My opinion is that we they lived in the home. They proved that they lived in the home. Okay. So, it sounds like you're pretty confused on primary. Do you have any questions on value? I They bought it for that. That should be the value of it as far as I'm concerned. It's what you buy for. But was it under a duress situation where it was bought at a lower price? I believe was it a repossession or anything? The question is, is it an armlength transaction? It's a new build and we bought from a community with multiple homes on sale.

You bought it from what now? We we bought it through Richmond um American Homes where there was an active building community. So, what she's saying is it's a new build and she was buying in a subdivision that had several properties for sale at the same time. So, I would not view that as outside an arms length transition. Okay. All right. Um, I'm just going to make a statement. Okay.

Anytime we do an adjustment of any sort, I can agree with the, you know, primary exemption. Anytime we do an adjustment based upon your values versus the county's values, the rest of us in the county have to pay for it, too. So, it's not just you getting a break. You or you or whoever it is, we all have to end up paying for it. And I mean I was told and it's going to be on the next one. I was told there's has to do with green belt 11 billion dollars worth 1.4 billion

1.4 billion dollar worth of land out there which basically equates to $1,00 to $1,500 each one of us extra have to pay for our property taxes. And so anytime we give an adjustment, we're basically charging ourselves. Every one of us, including you, which means next year our taxes are going to have to go up. I don't want to see any taxes go up or your value goes way up and you end up having to pay that extra. Sooner or later, it's going to hit us all. It hits every single member of this county. And I'm of the personal opinion I don't like property taxes period. But until we get a better system, I can't do anything about that. And until then, I think that what we need to be looking at is personal responsibility on the whole thing and fairness to everybody else. And uh whether anybody likes that opinion, I mean, that's just my opinion. And I've been in this business here recently for a long time trying to figure out, okay, why is it that some people get a break and I don't, but it's not me, it's Von. He needs a break, too. Or she needs a break or Kate needs a break. Matt doesn't, you know, but the rest of us do. And so when we when our assessor does their job, which she does, she does a great job. And when the state tax commission does not do sometimes don't listen, it hurts us and therefore our budget has to go up to cover those costs. I'm not saying you're wrong,

but I would not I recommend the the uh primary exemption, but I'm going with what our county says the value is of 776 or whatever it was that Mitch came up with. If that's what the case was, but not the what you paid for it. Sarah, is this your first home? You and Mitchell? Yes. I know it's when you're a new homeowner, it's it's hard.

It's hard. Yeah. I remember buying my first home and trying to figure everything out. And so, good job being here and going through this appeal process. And um yeah, you'll you figuring it all out like we all had to do. We've all been in your shoes before. So, good job and welcome to the community. Thank you. Um I can I make a motion? Was Blaine's a motion? I can't tell. I didn't make the motion. Okay. Just check. I just was putting out words first. Okay. Okay. Yeah, you can.

Okay. Um I move to uh approve the appelllet requesting primary exemption and a value reduction for the tax year 2024 to the original p purchase price of 684990. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Blocker. No second. Okay, we'll give you a minute to look. I'm sorry I have to be so harsh, but it's reality. Unfortunately,

Blaine and I don't feel the same on some stuff. So, I hate property taxes, too. And if you buy a house for a certain amount, that's what you should be taxed on is my feeling. Now, Blaine has other feelings. We Okay, I have a motion by Commissioner Blocker, a second by Commissioner Nickerson. All in favor? I any opposed. Nay. Okay. Okay. That's a may. Okay. You never can quite say May. Okay. So,

and I'll just say, you know, a piece of property is worth what people are willing to pay for it. And then think about it. And then it'll trigger trigger a rec. Thank you. I mean, I think you're going to see I'm sorry, guys. I just, you know, I just want you to know I'm not against you getting it. I just think that we need to and my only Anyway, I've explained myself, but there's nothing wrong with, you know, he said nay. I said nay. There's a reason why I said nay.

I'm Mitchell, Sarah's husband. I know it's late, so I'll be brief. Um, I just wanted to to lay out one detail that might not have been apparent in the presentation, but um, we're in the Rome development. It's a bank of mailboxes, the bank of mail. We our mailbox key stopped working in our mailbox shortly after we moved in. So, um, the mailings that were displayed uh, were never received. And I I I attribute that to a mailbox mixup. You had us at Rome. We understand the mailing issues that we're having. I I concur with the with the responsibility put. But um but just be aware that it may happen that uh you know your value may go up next year. It may not. Understood.

And uh just be aware that every one of us have to pay bill. Understood. So I'm okay. Thank you all for your time. Have a good night. Okay. Thank you. And Mr. Chair, we need to suspend the rules. We're 15 minutes over the rules. Oh, yeah. We need to extend. I move that we extend the hours past our or not extend our hours. Extend our rules past our 9:30 p.m. time. Closing time. Well, and right now it's going to be AM before you know it. Yeah. So, okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Ferrell. I'll second.

Second by Commissioner Nickerson. All in favor? I. I opposed. So Cindy, that's why was like I think Chloe's gonna quit to be able to be able to conduct business past 9:30 p.m. Leslie.

Um so just while Leslie's hobbling up here, um we have I have two resolutions for you on this one. We reached out to the state tax commission because it wasn't very clear on green belt roll back if that's a BOE action or if that's a commission action of um of waving revenue. So I actually have essentially two in here. One is your um 262508 BOE and then I also have an additional one that's just for the green belt.

You have two Um, and so they are in sequence. The 26508 is your decision on the value reduction and your 26509 is the green belt roll back. Okay. All right, ma'am. Um, so Mr. and Mrs. Williamson were applied for a late appeal that you granted on January 6th of 2026 based on a factual error. They have now applied for board of equalization which is before you tonight. And then you also have the green belt issue. So Mrs. Williamson,

thanks for seeing me. Yeah. Um I'm going to short and I'm happy to jump to whatever page you would like in your

Okay. Um so addressing the valuation. Yes, please. First, the property was the tax value, the market value that we were assessed at was just over $1.5 million. We paid in the end of October uh 2024 1,25 property. That's a significant difference. um in the applications I don't know I don't see a page number but just the general instructions on my explanation for like what grounds we have to readjust the valuation it states right here that box A um talks about what the property sold for and the fair market value is assessed as the property will change hands between a willing and buyer and seller under no compulsion circumstances. And that was the case. We we bought the property from a seller. We don't know that they were under any kind of distress. And that's that's what the market value is.

It was appraised, right? It was not appraised. The reason it that was just the purchase price.

That was the purchase price. It was not appraised. Um, the reason we did not get an appraisal is because we paid for the property in cash. The property contains a mobile home on it, a modular home. And it is my understanding that to get a loan on a modular home is extremely difficult if you can get a home. We are were in a situation where we had the money available and we purchased the pro property. Um they had the property listed for an extended period of time at higher values but no willing buyer bought it. No one purchased the property until it was we came in and offered them less and they were willing to take it. So we we propose that the value of the property is $1,25,000.

Yet in your thing it says 1,ion27. No, it said 25. I read was 27. It doesn't matter. Um, any questions on uh for the applicant on the value appeal before we hear from the assessor? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. Okay. If you want to just sit right there in case we want to call you back up. Okay. We can do that.

All right. Um, so just for the assessor space of that, um, as again January 1st of 2025 is my date of evaluation. This home had been on the market for a long time. Um, there has been lots of MLS activity. It had been on sale and then it had been taken off of the listing and then it had been put on. Um, the valuation actually was very similar to where it was trying to sell for. So it was the 1.5 million um a little over actually what we had it valued of what they were trying to get out of it at the first. So what happened is we already had that valuation we made a valuation of uh 1,59,668 for the year of 2025. Um, and then it looks like that it actually Did you sell it in did you when did you purchase it?

So that was purchased in the end of October of 2024. Um, and then going through we had a discussion with them um January of this year um 20 of 2026 we did get the late appeal for this. So, another thing to understand, extreme situation, make sure that's on the floor. I know that it's opened now. Um, but we need to understand why we're doing late appeals in the first place because there is a timely space why we do late why we do appeal in the first place and why everyone has the opportunity more than 45 days from basically August 1st till September 15th is the deadline. Um, so we had already made that evaluation. we had already gone forward, tax rates already been placed in um and then we get this information that the sale was 1,25.

So, um is it my understanding from the document that's up on the screen that's part of your assessor's evidence that you are willing to step to the 1 million25?

So, what we did is we called them and talked to them because we had the board of equalization open as a late appeal. Um and then what we decided to do is because they did have documentations of the sale um we did recommend that we can go to the 1 point uh the 1 million25. So um that is like the recommendation from the assessors saying that we can adjust that space. There is it is a modular home. Um just so you're aware we do value modular homes as SFRs. Um they do still have a value. What is an SFR? Single family residence. That's they're valued the same as a home.

Um, a lot of them are actually affixed to the ground as well. Uh, this one in particular is not. And so what happened with this in 24 um it triggered us and the reason why it triggered us is because it sold and we started evaluating uh what acreage it was and did it still qualify for green belt. So now we'll have to go we're going to go through not only the valuation of the 1 million25 but then also what happened is we looked over and that is one of the pictures that we have going forward it would be the second one. So, we looked at um having that as the acreage, making sure um that if was it still currently 5 acres that is used towards green belt or the FAA regulations and we deemed that they needed to prove otherwise. So, we made a roll back onto the property.

Okay. So, I want to push pause really quick. Okay. Okay. So on the valuation, the assessor's office is not against the board of equalization rolling back the value to the million25. We valued it at 1.5 million. Okay. The board of equalization opened up late. Yep. They did have documentation saying that it was sold. Okay. Whether it was arms length, that's not I mean it they did it say, you know, it wasn't in the MLS saying was it

multiple like realtor.com. Okay. Yeah. And I believe that's why we went with it. It was because it was an MLS, a multiple listing service that um said that it was sold for the 1 million25. So the other thing that note to self,

okay, so on on the green belt on the green belt issue, um I just wanted to for just clarify the reason that it doesn't qualify for green belt. where green belt is a minimum of five acres is because we automatically statutoily one acre of whatever the ground is is considered the parcel or the the acre of the home site. So correct but it depends. That's not the answer I wanted.

Absolutely love that word. So, with the previous assessor, she did make an uh an adjustment because the previous owner only had the house, but everything else was done agriculturally. Um, so they're proving that 5 acres was used as FAA agriculture purpose. It is a very tight space and as we keep as I looked over and made my little adjustments, it actually should not have ever really been in green belt because it's.59. Um, if we don't count the ash shed. Um, so that's where this picture shows kind of just like a a rough sketch of me.

Is that the one I have up? Yeah, it's the next one down. It's actually the next one down.

Yeah, it's the next one down. So um when we assess that my job um as the assessor is to if I have a roll back I have to place that roll back value. That roll back goes for 5 years. So it's 5 years of the taxes that would have been paid um if it was on secondary land or what the value of the property was. So that's what the roll back tax is. It's about $8,000. What was it? Uh it's the next page down. Um, so it's $8,2463. So we did have um Mr. Williamson calling us and asking us why number one they were getting this. So we explained why the roll back was coming in, but then also him saying, you know, they did purchase it in 24. Now I very much understand that space that they purchased it in 24 and that should have been reconciled in a lot of ways. number one through title and then also it should have been reconciled with the seller because the seller is the really one that kind of benefited from that tax, right? And we all agree on that space. So, um some of my recommendations was we need to number one go after whether they go after um the seller as well and say we're now with this roll back

on the title companies.

Yeah, hold on. There's there's that option or then there's another option with the title company and that should be the insurance because they should have actually looked through that due diligence of of stating you know are they actually qualified for green belt or are they not and that should have been done through the sales transaction. It did not happen obviously it did not happen. So now the Williamsons are foot with the bill of 8,000 for the roll back. Now it is your choice in that space whether you know they have a roll back of just the one year of 2024 that they own the home or whether it's all rolled back and you know or whether it's all credited and and they don't have to pay that. That's all up to you. But my job is to assess and make sure that that roll back is that is the value of the roll back. that is that is the assessor's job is to make sure whoever is using green belt or not that's that's what I have to do. So I had to place that value on that parcel because it's with it's it's attached with the land because they've been granted that assessment and granted that they I mean we kind of talked about this but green belt is 90% discounted on their taxes so it's significant. Janet, how how uh who has the right to go to the title company in that situation?

It would be the purchaser. So, we we did talk about that when this was brought up in January. And the issue with that is at the time that they purchased it, the title company would have looked at the taxes and said, "Yep, it qualifies. It's getting green belt." And the the use isn't changing. The issue is it was erroneously put into green belt from day one. So it should have never been in green belt. So the title company didn't miss anything. It quoted exactly what the taxes were and how it was being assessed. So the title company is not liable for an erroneous green bill.

Why would you understand that one? Because they still should be well they still could have done their due diligence and that is part of that. They still they still should have done their due diligence of making sure whether it was green build or not. Um the other thing going forward with that so all you need to do is look at the title insurance and see if that was accepted out because all title insurance policy they'll have you know we guarantee all this except Mhm. if they accepted it out. So that's where you'd start. But good luck with the title insurance companies. I have never had much luck with them.

Yeah. They have lots of loopholes apparently too. So one thing going forward this land will be deemed as secondary land like they do not qualify for green belt because there's not like it it's not it doesn't have a fence off and it's not like what we're seeing um that it looks like that they don't have enough to qualify for the five acres. I can see that you need to go get 41 acres from the Yes. Unless there's also same problem. Yeah. So in that area, the very hard space is we're going to be doing this has there's 11 of them. So

11 that this year they're going to get a beautiful letter from the assessor. And the thing is is there's some that probably can prove that maybe they do have it fenced off and you know and they do say I know for a fact this is what it is and we can run the tape and you know what if 5 acres or more are 100% used as agriculture we can grant that but it has to be used as agriculture and unlike this situation those parcels are still in the existing owner so they were the ones that benefited from the tax rate.

Yes. So it's not like buyer seller and then someone then the buyer is paying for the seller's portion of use. Is there anything in there that so let's say the neighbors right they go to sell or whatever that it's like they have to pay the roll back or anything like that at this point or

so I've had an extensive this is kind of off subject but um I've had an extensive conversation with Garrett as well um and we've kind of talked about how that how do we go around that and how do we manage that so I don't feel like we should um with the green belt that we need to um you know hurt the citizens that are already in re that they've been using it, but at the time of sale, they really should have to pay that roll back tax back. So, we're going to assess them. We're going to state whether they are, and we're going to go through and say, it looks like you actually have two acres in that seven acres or or 6 acres. And it really you're not qualified for green belt when you have six acres and two acres that you're actually using as um your home for your home. And that that would alleviate an issue like this because it would fall on it

it'd be recorded or whatever. So that so this is the plan is a notice of non-compliance and I've drafted it in other situations and I've got a rough draft. it isn't pretty yet, but basically upon any kind of transfer, um it would be pulled like it's not green belt and so that's going to hit every title report when someone's coming in to purchase or anything that'll be recorded on the title and they'll see right away this is out of green belt. Unfortunately, we have to have somebody go through the pain so that we can y so we can alleviate it and we can change some stuff. But I mean, as an assessor error, no, it wasn't an assessor error.

I I think it was just like you said, it was it never should have qualified and somebody erroneously Mhm. And just because of the sale for 24 25, we looked at it and we're like, hey, it doesn't qualify because I think I mean I think most of us knew that you got to have six acres minimum to be with a home in green belt.

Yep. And that's one thing that we really have been working on is the green belt to try and clean this stuff up because we really want the citizens to understand and and going back to to um Commissioner Facel's information. I I do have evidence that we do have 1.4 over $1.4 billion in market value that is on Green Belt and that is 1 million in taxes that we have to subsidize. 11 million dollars in taxes that we subsidized to everyone else so that someone can stay on green belt. So it needs to be utilized and it needs to be used correctly because if it is erroneously used then someone else is paying on that.

I think you know follow up with what you just said was if people are truly agriculture running their cows horses cutting hay whatever 100%. But those that are, no, if we're fencing off, we want the cows to stay off our ground or whatever, you don't qualify because now that's being pushed on everybody else. And I'm all for the farmer and the rancher. I mean, that that's why that that's why that law was made in the first place and it needs to be used correctly.

Yeah. And it's the same thing as everybody that's saying their a buildings out there. Uh the course that I took when I first became a commissioner was on green belt and other property taxes. that basically in there there was a case down in Utah County that basically said the guy says this is an a building yet inside there was his boat, snowmobiles, his truck, his car in there

and they had a tractor in the back end. they disqualified it from being green belt. And so even on this building where it was a horse barn or whatever it was, um, if there's any kind of, and people in the public need to know this, if you put your car under a shed and it's considered a, sorry, it just lost its egg status.

100% to be used for agriculture. And that means also that you need to be aware even if you put hay in the back of it, if you put a little bit of hay in it, it's still out of green belt because the purpose of green belt and there's two laws that you have to fulfill within green belt. One, either 80% of your income has to come from agriculture or 50% of the production value has to be met. Yes. And if you don't meet that, it does not meet green. So there is a couple choices and directions that you can go. You can take them all. You can take a none. You can you can go wherever you want with this space. But I just we need to deal with the application on hand.

Speak on that too. Mrs. Williamson, if you would you like to speak on it as well, Greek bell portion of it.

I think you make some great points and we purchased this property because I'm a horse girl. I grew up ranching. I moved here from Oregon. I married a nonhorse person and he doesn't like horses, but he likes me. We breed horses. We We have colts coming this year. We breed horses. We show horses. That is what is at the property. There's a home on it that is not on a set foundation. It is on blocks. And um there's nobody living in that home. I go up there every day at least once. I collect eggs. I My daughter collects eggs, raises the chickens. We ride every day. I have to go back there when I'm done here. It's past my bedtime, but I still got to put some blankets on some babies. So, that's what we're using it for. Um,

so, but you do realize this the the size of it, doesn't I absolutely do understand that. and she made a good point is that I never benefited from these the green belt taxes and my title insurance. I've gone to them when I first called and talked to Danielle. She's like, "Call your title insurance and and whatnot." So, I called and they were like, "We ran title. It was clean. There's no outstanding taxes on this property." But when the property sells, like she said, it automatically gets bumped from the green belt. And that's when they noticed that there was an error. I didn't fraudulently try to like sneak in. We didn't think that.

Yeah. No, I'm just saying like Yeah. But you do understand that the question at hand tonight is whether to abate the 8,2463, not grant you green belt going forward. Well, we can't we can't grant you green belt. I can reapply for green belt. Yes, you can. And I didn't know that I could do that even until tonight. But you won't qualify. He doesn't have the five acres. Yeah.

And that's and that is fair. That is absolutely fair that you have to qualify for it. And if we're going with the fact that this property never qualified for it. That is not something that I had any say in. It's and and that's where I bring up it's not something that was fraudulently done on my behalf. My understanding is that Gwen um the previous assessor we we understand you didn't do anything.

So so I don't know I don't know why I should have to pay taxes on something that I didn't own at the time and I didn't benefit from. We John calculated the numbers for me, my husband. Um, and we're happy to pay our share of the taxes from those two months because it was only two months that I own the property. Um, and and that should be $267.50. I'm happy to pay my share, but I should not be paying someone else's taxes. So, I still want to clarify that tonight we can't it is it is not within the legal authority of this board to determine if you will remain in green belt roll back for FY25 regardless of 26.

I understand that what we're talking about is your valuation, which I sounds like we already have knocked out and and what we're going to do with this outstanding $8,000 bill. Okay. I just wanted to be I understand that that's what we're addressing and if green belt I can reapply and see if I qualify at a later point. Correct. For 26 for 26. I I read that tonight in the state thing and in the state code I I read that tonight. Okay. So So you bought the home in what month? October. End of October 2024. 2024. Yeah. So is just to do this in chunks is the commission ready to do

let's make a motion on the 262508 which is the value. So how did you come up with that number? Well John just calculated the that you said your taxes you think. So we're talking about your tax not the value of the property is based on what I paid for it the fair market value. Oh, no, no. I'm sorry. The $2007 calculated how many the roll back amount they took took the month divided by 12 * 2. Yeah. So, when I did that, I got 338. She can't be 300. Oh, good. What is my computer doing? Okay.

I'm not going to pretend that I'm good at the math part of it. That's why John did it. So, if you 300, I'll gladly walk away from this. I've got a 338. So you're guys, just so we're kind of in the same green belt or the BOE space, your job is not to worry about the taxes. You're just worried about the market value. What is the market value? And what is what is the value for 2025? That's what you need to be worried about and just say, okay, this is the value that we're going with. So this is the one you're saying for 2025, not for 2024. But the green belt, I I get that. The question clarifying question of commissioner blocker was the dollar amount for the green belt

and the tax owed what she what how she came up with but she came up with the number that I'm glad but if we need to recalculate that the way that the green belt works is it's the whole parcel correct right we are just looking at it two different things okay so focused Kate's back in charge even though I'm not sure okay the question at hand is CR R262508 which is the question of the value reduction. Does the commission have a motion to the value reduction to the 1 million25 from what I just asked for a motion on the million25? I I was saying I think our assessor was good with the million25 if I recall. Yes,

Mr. Chair, I move that we approve CR26-2508 um adjusting the value to 1.025 025 million. I'll second it. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Nixon, a second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay. The second. We have one. Nay. I have a question for Janelle. Okay. And maybe Mrs. Williamson. Are they getting primary exemption? No, they are not. Okay. Because I in all the commotion I'm like you just said nobody's living there and I'm like wait a minute is she getting private they live down so

he bought it to use agriculture you're well so okay don't you live in like case I live in tear down get rid of the house and make it all well only if they don't use the building for anything other than that be I mean I'm just but no when you said that it was just like wait a minute hold on let me see yeah Okay, now it's up.

Okay, so where he got the number for my what he would say my portion of the roll back tax portion would be it was 5 years at 12 months each year is 60 months. So divide that by 825 which is the bill for the roll back taxes. That's $133.75 per month. So I own the property. It wouldn't be done that way. it would be done by the I don't know however I'm just saying like we don't mind she's explaining how the math was done but how if we were to prorate yes

what they're saying is they would take the 2024 year which is 20283 and roll back divided by 12* 2 which is $338 is where the confusion was is how he came to his number versus how commissioner blocker came to hers okay I'm looking for a motion so you can go home and go to Yeah, because we still have four more action items. We still got close session. Well, you can What? It's true. Be very short. I'm sorry. Okay. Um, sorry. Uh, the mo it's

we looking for a motion on the um four years of back taxes on the green belt that Mrs. Williamson had no gain on it. Should have been put on the So, okay. My personal feeling is is she should pay for what she had. That's my feeling. Yeah. Which was $338. So, no. The months that she had it in 2024 and that does not include 2025. Correct. Correct. Okay. That's just my personal opinion. I just

So I'll move that. How do I word it? Like we So it's resolution 262509 EOE and then it's abate in its entirety. Do not abate or abate down to. Okay. I move that we approve CR26-2508 nine

nine 25509 because this is the second action on this parcel. Gotcha. 259 to abate down to the amount of $338. You have a motion by Commissioner Blocker. Okay, seeing no second, I'll look for a motion. I'll motion my statement.

I just I mean I feel the the pain. I mean five years of roll back $8,000. You know, if you purchase a home and you bought it in October, the seller would put into your escrow the first nine months or 10 months of the year. You know, I mean, that's to go from 8,000 to 388. I know that she only had it for two months. I just I mean my thing is kind of as a compromise I'm thinking like at least one year as a compromise. That's that's just my opinion. Um

so do you want to make a motion? I'll I'll make a motion to approve CR26-2509- BOE amending or abating to just the 24 tax year total of 204311. We're not going to Sorry, I'm looking at the wrong line. Where am I at? Roy here. We're not going to 20283. Sorry. 20 I'm looking at the wrong line. 20283. No. Yes. Yeah. No, you're not going to abate it. Abate down to down to the tax year. Just that one year.

Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Nickerson. Second. Second by Commissioner Ferrell. All in favor? I. Nay. Nay. It's two to three. That's I again I just don't understand why I would pay someone else. That was the two of us. No. Oh, you two. Okay. So, and in that case, it goes back to the law which is 5 years. What? So, it's it still stands it still stands as it entire without a motion. Without any motion, it does. Okay. I mean, give it give it a good one. Why?

I'll tell you I I'm I'm I'm really I had to pay foot roll back taxes. I was in agriculture, but because I went from 28 acres down to 2 acres, I still had to pay it for 5 years. You benefited from No, I didn't. She did. You absolutely did. I was in agriculture. I was in true agriculture. Okay. Okay. where you're making 50% or more, 80% of your income. It wasn't the 80%, it was 50% and it was completely in agriculture. Now, why would I have to pay it for 5 years back and somebody else doesn't whether they bought the place or not?

Because they don't owe it. The seller owes it like But who's going to go back after the seller? That's where she needs to go back after the seller to get it. I agree with that. Okay. Well, that's my motion. I'll give I'll just say nay. Is that a motion? There is no motion yet.

Oh, okay. May I make another motion? You absolutely can. Um, I'm going to include the month you bought it. So, October, November, December. So, that would be $57. So, I move to approve CR26-2509 um for debatement down to $57. Have a motion by Commissioner Blocker.

Okay, seeing no second, I guess we'll look for another motion. I move that we postpone it to another date when we're not so darn tired. Say this though, as the assessor pointed out, the property never qualified for the green belt taxes. The taxes should have been collected from the previous owner. That is an error. That is an error that someone else made. I agree with you. And so it's it's not my responsibility to collect taxes, too. I'm just thinking of, you know, it's not your fault. I don't think anybody thinks it is, but it's like going forward with I mean,

you're the first of 11 that we're going to have to go through this with and and it's going to be a hardship for people. I agree. and and it's and it's you know to come up with eight and that's what I'm what I'm looking at is like yeah the $8,000 should be paid. I don't think anybody like it should be paid. They should have been collected. They never should have qualified you know but when we look at it's like are we I'm looking at saying you know you're not responsible. I agree but at some point we need to the taxes need to be paid. You know, one thing that you cannot declare bankruptcy on his taxes. What would what would the IRS say?

So, what did why do we why did we send it down to the state? We didn't. That was the previous one. We could deny it. She can appeal it to the state. Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, and I mean, I'm I'm not trying to be like some jerk, but it's like where's the balance? Where's the balance of, you know, well, the other people that are coming in have benefited from it. She has not benefited from that's that's my whole thing out there. She didn't even have the place. She didn't live there. Well, right. That's And that's what I'm saying. It's like do we find somewhere in the not even I mean we're not even looking at somewhere in the middle. Yeah.

You know, and because I don't think she got any in the middle. Okay. So, there is a motion to postpone. Is there a second? No. Okay. Because the only thing I could see is then you'd have a mic here and so you'd have a tiebreaker. Okay. I have a question for Janet. Janet. Janet. Is there any way that we can go back on the seller and ask them for back taxes? Not that I'm aware of. Green belt all the green belt le said and done. Deny it

completely and let her go to the state. I have a motion to deny by Commissioner Felro. Do I have a second? Okay, seeing not a second, I'll look for another motion. I'll make my same motion. I move to approve CR26-2509 um with the abatement down to $57. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Blocker. Do I have a second? I'll second. Have a second by Commissioner Nickerson. All in favor? I. Okay. Three to one. Motion passes. Thank you.

And I will just say, you know, with with the discussion, you know, the more I've thought about it, it's like, you know, again, sins of the father, you know, which we discussed earlier on, at the end of the day, I mean, it's what it is. You're not going to qualify for green belt in the future because you don't meet those requirements. And we're going to move forward. And what Oh, I pay a lot. I know. Yes, we did. Yes, we did that first. Procedurally 025 signed tonight. My mind's go to the assessor to abate down and then the treasur's office

as far as the um green belt. I know you have not paid that paid by tax but the green belt. So then they will send you an amended bill for your green belt roll. was like I think I should have done it today. What? No, I mean I feel her pain. It's just like Okay. Oh, she Yes, you still have authority under the law to appeal tonight's decision, both of them or one of them to the state tax commission. Just letting you know your rights. Okay. Thank you. And thank you so much for being here. So late. So Janelle

question. Okay. So we are now to action item 11. Okay. I have one. No, we haven't. Oh, sorry. I move we go out of BOE. Okay. I have a a motion to go out BOE. Second. A second. Motion by Commissioner Blocker. Second by Commissioner B. All in favor? I. Thanks for remembering that there was you can post. So we are in F11 which is Commissioner Blocker's request that we uh the commission discuss and decide on whether to join the Northern Utah Economic Alliance.

So if you remember the presentation they gave. It's not going to cost us anything. I can say yes. We want to try this out, see what resources we have. Um just need your guys' permission. I I didn't think it was going to hurt it. I didn't either. I move that we approve joining with Northern Utah Economic Alliance for one year to at least determine whether or not they're worth it. By Commissioner Fel. I'll second it. Second by Commissioner Blocker. All in favor? I. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Ferrell would like to attend one Utah Summit, which he does every year.

I just need approval. And my question is before we go on to that, I really still think Railene since she's part of the But didn't you say she I am you're part of the leadership group, aren't you? Still Yeah, I Yeah, I am. But she's something. My son's coming home off his mission. Okay. All right. Good. Okay. So, priorities. He'll be there when you get home. See, he is. Can I get a motion? Mr. Chair, I move that we approve um for commissioner facel to attend the one Utah summit. Second iter.

Can I give the reader digest version and not the I can give it really quick. Go for it. So am legal, we're having issues with them in the process. We've been checking our website to see what has been updated and what hasn't. quite a bit hasn't. In the process, Jeremy Lance noticed that one of the ordinances that we passed in 23 had the wrong exhibit attached to it. So, in order to correct that and attach the correct exhibit, we have like a new I drafted a quick thing to explain it all and attach the old ordinance with the correct exhibit and re-record. You did it. Come in.

I'm absolutely good with it. Okay. Me, too. Do we have I don't mean that. Sarcastic tricky, by the way. So, we just need You do a great job. I just need a motion to approve the corrected exhibit and re-record ordinance 2311. I move that we approve the correct ex exhibit and re-recording ordinance number CO23-11. Second. I have a motion by Commissioner Blocker and a second by Commissioner. All in favor? I I passes. Okay. Can I get a motion to go into do comments first?

Forget them. Let's unless somebody has something really important. No, it's not. Yeah. I just want to tell you if you didn't see it, uh, HB231 failed today. That was the restaurant tax. Norms bill. I just had a couple quick ones. Raen, did you have anything? No.

Um, so HB445 is scheduled for second reading in the Senate. Um, we that's the purchasing across county boundaries. um they've moved from the Senate committee with a four to zero vote. So hopefully that continues. Um we had a very successful um land or farm secession um kind of conservation easement um discussion or meeting up at the uh good grief up by up at the rifle ranch um up the building there search and rescue. Um I would say there's about 50 people that that attended that that meeting. It was very well attended and was very good. So, uh, one other thing is, uh, in our January meeting, January 20th, when Mike and Matt were gone, I had asked about, we were talking about the TC zoning, um, text amendment and Josh had mentioned that he was working on that and I asked when that would be, and he said February. It's now March. Um, we still have not seen that text amendment. We've got Flagship Homes trying to figure out what they're doing. You have it?

You have done. Okay. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you, coach. I was hoping to see it last meeting in the meeting before and we are now into March and I was told February. So, thank you for that update. It's all I had. Okay. Uh I move that we go into close session for the purpose of I don't know what. Acquis acquisition disposition of real property. Could you take I move that we move into close session for the acquisition discussion of acquisition disposition of real property. I'll second it. Have a motion by Commissioner Nickerson and the second by Commissioner Walker. All in favor? I I