City Council - Regular Meeting

We're good. Okay. Good evening. Welcome to our city council meeting for Wednesday, February 25th. Uh we start out 1.1 review of this evening's agenda. We are because we have a guest here on 2.4. We're going to move that up so you don't have to wait around long. So we'll move it right to 21. Move that up. Any other changes on these? Okay. 1.2 to future agenda items.

Strategic plan. Noel had asked for that to come back and Nathan and I were talking about it yesterday and talked about you'll just have a very basic staff report in the council packet for next time. We wanted to talk about just give you a heads up it will be at the next meeting. So start thinking about those goals that you'd like to set as a council really good discussion.

And I think kind of what we talked about Tara and I have been offline a little bit. I think this is really we've got the we've got this plan right there the services and all that but the terrorists I'm going to get like what are some three things we could coales around like the athletic complex let's find financing for the first day so let's find [clears throat] let's figure out the trash situation so those kind of goals that we're are still within that but these are three goals that we're like that way if we see legislators or we're in some spaces we know those are the things they bringing up like so we're not like it's not a whole plan it's just three or four goals that we can all yeah I liked what Matt Matt said about like things that we can particularly influence and what you said about talking points when someone says what's going on at the city. Well, here's three things we're working on.

Yeah. They hear the same message. Yeah. I think that would be helpful. I just started a little list in my phone like I'd encourage you to like just jot some stuff down or so it's not really a whole plan but just some goals that we can because then we need to know so we can plan on what our tasks are to help you achieve. Yeah. Well, and I really hope it's stuff that's already in the plan. It's just like things to highlight. So, okay, perfect. Um, you want me to hit it? No, go ahead.

Um, I think we're all been a little bit caught up on the trash. We're going to bring uh Woofer back. The bill is now on a reading calendar, but outside of that even there's discussion now about we need to have so this needs to be in a future you know what does that look like? So I think we need to I'd like to have put some questions out there that I have and then if you guys have questions so which staff could be ready. So any you guys have any questions or

so quick recap I had called and called to speak to when you were gone that day. We had a follow-up meeting with some of the people they now want to find a mutual agreement um to go forward rather than doing an RFP for feasibility study etc. Um Todd really led that discussion and our feedback to them was well this is a this is new and it's a good development. We this is kind of what we've been asking for all along when we're told that it's not possible. We have to go through what the statute says, etc., etc. So, we'll have to bring it back to council and um information from you. So, where we post our agenda on Wednesday night, Thursday morning that meeting I believe

was Wednesday sometime. So, we said we would get it on our next calendar, but we don't have an agreement to really look at for this meeting. So, we'll get it on future agenda for our next council meeting to consider basically a placeholder to consider something if we have something considered by then. They have a board meeting on Monday. Um, believe it or not, it's March March 2nd. Um, so I had I had phone calls with you individually and told you just be ready to give us questions. Um the basic things that we spoke about were they're willing to um they want to forego doing a feasibility study just come to mutual agreement for separation. They were fine to look at whatever time frame we needed to get waste management up and running. Um but the question that we came back to was well what's the division of assets right representing taxpayers who have paid into the the service district. um that's more than just a a rate payer, right? Saying I'm done with Comcast sort of thing. Um their response was, "Well, we we can walk away from the cans um and figure out how to do branding, etc." And we said, "Well, that that's a good step, but we think that there's other things we need to look at." So, we bring it back to you all and get questions to bring back to them um kind of for the next time that we meet with them to see if there's a mutual agreement. I mean I don't know if you want to take it from there as far as other assets. I mean when you talk about assets [clears throat] I mean could be anything from trucks equipment land buildings fund balance etc. Like what's a fair and equitable separation agreement for the taxpayers and paid into all those things?

Do you happen to know what the enactment date is for the legislation? I just I would be May 6th. They're interested in doing an interlocal even once we figure out that's what Heather told me anyways. They're interested in doing even if we get out there they're willing to do an inter local while we transition them right because there might be a transition time by what time we make that separation and there might not be either but they did tell me they're open to an interlocal that's outside. So then we so then we of course need to follow up with waste management and say look there's been a significant turn of events and like what's the lead time that you need to stand up

get that service I I talked to them today about it so we're going to uh set something up and start talking to them about how much lead time they need so those are my questions that you know just all the assets what are what are the assets is it land is it buildings I want to take these guys it's these guys other cities and other customer, right? I But I do want Yeah, they I mean they do need to still be viable, be able to function and provide services to the remaining members, but like we the conversation was having some I don't want to put words in your mouths, but we kind of owe the due diligence to our taxpayers, right, to make sure that we represent them properly and that. So

yeah, I don't think we can just walk away with 5-y old trash cans, but there's if we might still say solid. Yeah, might actually. Yeah, that's like recycling district. Yeah. So, I I we'd have to see what we actually paid in and what our value was to them and what we borrow owed. So,

when it is this is a future item, but I mean things are moving. This is our chance to talk about a little bit. So, tell me if I'm out of balance on any of these things, but um it's a little bit different animal than say the visa as a service district, UFSA as a service district. But with both of those when we leave, right, there were their assets and liabilities, UFSA, we had to assume liabilities. I would have to think that if we had any if there were any that they would want us to to take those with us. Same goes for assets. some of those separations. We had multi-year agreements with both of them for us to pay our share of liabilities or them to pay us our share of assets. So, it doesn't have to be a this is what it is and they have to write a check sort of thing. I think there's a number of different ways to come up with what's what's fair, reasonable, and you know, realistic to do. Are there much liabilities?

They fortunately they they're not carrying any debt, right? Which were some of the sign that was a significant issue that we had with UFSA. We [clears throat] had a lot of debt for buildings that we had. I've said this before, we've paid for station 123 probably three times over um because we were part of the district when they bought for those. So they they don't have those things. I mean the recent budget you saw them come and present um not too long ago that they're their current budget. They're buying, you know, many new trucks for millions of dollars, etc. Again, artisans are have paid into that pool as well as all the other things. So, we just there's a lot that we don't know when it comes to any of those things, and I don't think that they really know for sure yet either. So,

yeah, to give you an idea, there was a 2024 study that they a financial study that went through a whole auditing process. In that study there were 20 um seven in assets and like three or four in liabilities. So the net um overures were 24 million and that was you know a couple years ago that might have been 2023 but anyway we would need to figure out how I think that's going to be the most difficult aspect to navigate through um because we can't really just take land um how does that look? how can we ensure that they can continue to operate and not be harmed by the withdrawal, but also we're getting our fair share of assets that we can then utilize. Um, just looking at it from a standpoint of, you know, if there's liabilities that we're responsible for that we can basically say in exchange for the land, you forgive us of the liability. And you know, it sounds like there's there's not a lot of liabilities there to work with that sort of

I think it's more assets, but there's a lot of illlquid assets. So that's why I said it's kind of in reverse. So it might be a multi-year agreement like that. Something like that. Or maybe and like you said, what's what's fair, reasonable, but also realistic to do. Yeah. Right. I don't I don't want to necessarily go that far, but there there's that realistic part of it that we have to consider. Sure.

Yeah. If this was a dissolution, it would be much easier because then we would look at the proportionate share each municipality is as a part of the district and then divide the assets accordingly. I think we're right around 13%. Um, and that would be really easy to divide. Uh, but we're not in that situation and they do need to continue to operate. So, we will we'll try to explore some ideas and present some options for the council at the next meeting. Um, but we're going to need a lot more information from the district at the same time. Um, because we don't uh Yeah, I don't Do you think you can get it on the next meeting? Maybe.

Uh, we'll put a placeholder on. We don't know what kind of uh data we'll have yet. We won't have an interlocal or I think it's more of a a lengthy discussion rather than any action. We can just put something out there. Probably don't have a whole lot of information because we don't have yet. Just not sure what my questions would be until we have the consider like I would like to ask questions but I don't know what questions to ask at this point. Okay. I'll continue to try to keep you updated individually as we put some things together and have some more discussions with them. Perfect. Thank you.

Any other future agenda items? No, I'll have a topic for close though. There's an update on someone for one of my districts. I don't know if we [laughter] ask you because it uh it's not related to the city per se. Maybe you should talk to Yeah. prior to see if it's closed. I do have a litigation update for closed, but um let me let me look into the

Okay. Okay. Council discussion of future citizen recognition. What about that right there? You can bring him in. It's a big deal. Yeah, let's reach out. He lives in Syracuse. Oh, interesting. That's a military guy.

I mean, yesterday drive that's already. No, I think it' be cool. Yeah, that's good. Football. [laughter] Okay. Uh, okay. We'll go on to 2.4 then at this point. Review and discuss a request for an easement or revoke encroachment permit to facilitate construction of a multi-tenant sign in the Mount Point Retail Development. Michael,

thank you. Now, I do have a presentation, but it really is the same information that's in your packet. Um, this is something that we have done occasionally where we have an unusual relationship with the property line to the rightway line. The rideway line in this area is much wider than the actual street, which causes the sign to be set back further from the ride of way that we typically would see. Um, I also asked Nathan before this meeting if he had a preference on the legal instrument that would may be used for this and very clearly said revocable encroachment permit. Um, that was one we we used that that tool last year on a similar situation. Does [clears throat] the council want to see this presentation? Do you have any questions? I just didn't know if you had a clear maybe position as far as trying to give the administration direction on this request.

Do you do you have a map in there? Cuz the one in the packet did something weird. I guess that's what it looks like. Yeah. So, this is just an inset. This white area down here just trying to blow up. You can see that yellow um kind of line. Okay. So that's the 30 foot behind the sidewalk is the 30 foot. Okay. 30 inch. So in

so this black line is the rideway line. Typically we would see that property line be right behind the edge of the sidewalk, right? So they would just have a setback off of the sidewalk. But because of that rightway line is further into the property. They're asking for this opportunity from the city to have a revocable permit. When when this came before the planning commission, we informed the applicant that that would be required. Right? This is on city property. He would need to negotiate with the city permission to do this. So we haven't we haven't authorized this obviously without direction from council or agreement by the administration.

So if I understand correctly the 30-in setback is the standard setback. We're just basically moving the line to where the property is you like where we usually measure it from. Well, what we're going to do is we would draw like a little rectangle around the area [clears throat] where the sign would sit and that would be the encroachment permit, the revocable the encroachment permit that for any reason if the city decides that that sign needs to be relocated, that's the agreement like it has to be re we can revoke it and the sign has to be removed. So they're at their expense. Yeah. At their that's a risk on their part, right? I would be going to the spot where we don't just the rideway lines.

I don't have a problem. And there's some there's some topography here as well. So the sign is especially from of course Mountain View and Sure. Yeah, there's definitely sloping that's happening here. Yeah, I'm fine. I think they need support in that. I mean that area is a tough area right now anyways. So I think any signage we can get them over there is will help. Yeah, everything about the sign is difficult. It's just the placement of the sign. Uh that is the exception because of that right away is [clears throat] you okay with it? Absolutely. Okay. Okay. All right. Okay. Easy enough.

May I ask the guest ask a question? Yes, please. So, let's say it being revokable, if something were to come up where the city did want it moved, what's that process like? Would I be informed or would the property owner be informed? And whose responsibility would it fall on? Like, would I have to at my incur the cost from my company to have it moved or would the property owner have to the encroachment permit's going to be with the property owner? Yeah. Okay. So, is he going to have to fill out that permit then or cuz he's authorized me like you're the agent. I'm the agent that on his behalf but

but when we sign it I would think the property the property signs it. Okay. Thank you very much. Yep. Okay. Okay. Make it happen. Appreciate it. Michael, thank you for being here. Yeah. Is it cool for me to leave or do I need to is someone going to reach out to me like on this revocable? Michael, will you you'll be in touch with him on this? Yeah. Yeah, we will. We'll work on it through Oh, he said, "Will you be in touch with him?" Yeah. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Mike. I appreciate it. Appreciate it. Yep. Thank you. You got to stay ch sorry. I'll stay as long.

No, I just want to make sure he wasn't going to follow you out. Thank you so much. Okay, we'll go to back 2.1 discussion of the proposed fiscal year 27 to 28 budgets for public works. Kyle, thank you, mayor. [clears throat] So, tonight's uh budget discussion is for the departments of public works. So, I do have them listed out here. So, it includes uh administration, streets. Yeah, that was awesome photo, huh? Uh Wendy's, you can thank Wendy for that. She's like, "You should put this in your presentation." Like, that is a great idea. Oh, man. But very true.

I love the comment on from you, Pim Patrol.

Uh it also includes fleet facilities. And then in your packet, you'll notice two staple documents. The back one is water and storm water. And we'll get into water a little bit. Um they've had they have quite a number of cost increases that we'll go through. Um and just as a reminder, we do have a separate meeting for capital projects. So we won't be discussing in detail capital projects. Although uh I did want to highlight one or two um projects that are being proposed. And then once again um as you you know council, but if anyone's listening online, these are the um requests from the department. So these aren't official. what this what staff is recommending for the council to approve in terms of budgets is for you to see what the departments are requesting um tonight. Um so first we'll start with some of the easier departments. So first is the public works administration. Um so really their only operating increase was um computer replacements. Uh we do consider those one time so they don't roll over yeartoear. Um and then just as of note um and that's something every department does. They really do go through line by line and determine if their budget is accurate for every item. So, they um are proposing reductions for their cell phones, fuel, training, and travel. Uh moving on to streets. So, uh the budget looks a little uh don't know the proper accounting term. It looks a little odd between the two years. Um, so as you'll notice, there's a $1.5 million decrease in fiscal year 27. Uh, the reason for that is, uh, the streets department is requesting 1.7 million of their normal pavement management funding go for the Roser Crest road rehabilitation. So, that's actually getting moved off into capital projects because it's a significant project. Um, just as a reminder, they also put aside

the same amount um, in the current fiscal year. Um they are requesting a sidewalk and ride of way maintenance increase um of 34,000. Um and then you'll also um in that top packet there is a detailed um explanation from the streets departments on why it's needed. Uh the cliff's notes version is um as the city ages, our infrastructure is aging, you know, there's more trip hazards that need to be addressed and more um sidewalk and other maintenance that needs to be done. Do they do this might be do they do grinding? Yes. Or as a as a preferred method or replacement?

Um preferred method is grinding but then if it not in the specs of grinding then we'll have to tear out and replace. Um, and then there's also another increase for road improve uh increase for road improvements of 35,000. Um, that's outside of the pavement management. Um, so if you if you include that 1.7 million we're transferring to capital projects, overall the request is a 5.1% increase. And then 28, as you can see on the chart, there is a slight decrease in what they're requesting for payment management going from three 3,ion50,000 to 2,950,000. Um so really in 28 their budget is flat if you combine the two years together. Um although it is part of the streets department, uh we do budget street signs and street lights separately. Um, for the most part, there aren't any major asks or requests for these two um, street signs. What I could find on an increase they were requesting was um, an increase in fuel and damage signs. Um, of course with the damage signs, the cost is increased. The city also has more signage as we add more development in the city. Um, and then in street lights, uh, there is anticipated increase in electricity. Um, also we're adding we're adding street lights. So it is also rates and additional lights and then our contracted services. So Salt Lake County handles uh maintenance of our lights. Um we're adding more street lights um both years. So that does in factor into the increased cost along and I'm sure um public works put in a a inflationary factor that the county will most likely add. that

uh moving to snow removal and fleet. Uh so the the big topic on snow removal is um public works has revamped their incentive program with um snow plowing to encourage um and incentivize uh employees um to be available for um snow events. So, that overall increase is $30,000 and 30,100. Um, and as a reminder, um, I didn't remember this, so I went back and looked, we did transfer the cost savings we had from last year, the budget savings we had from last year to this year, thinking we would have a normal snow year. There's still time hopefully.

Um, I'll go with the consensus of the group on that one. [laughter] um to cover any any costs of this. So this would be to fully fund it because that one time money will be going away. Um and then just to show the overall increase is 13% in 27 and then 4% um in fiscal year 28. And then fleet um fleet overall is relatively flat um with just normal operating cost increases. As you can see in 28, they are anticipating a a slight drop in their operating costs um due to some one-time training that they they are proposing in 27. Uh moving on to facilities. Um there's a whole lot to talk about here. As you can see, overall for 27, they are proposing a 2% increase and then a 3% increase in 28. Um their repair and maintenance items. um are requested to go up about 8,000. Um some of that is due to onetime funds we transferred over for one-time uh repair projects. Um and then also utilities um increase of 9,000. Um one thing I did want to point out um especially since facilities doesn't have a lot of capital requests is they are requesting 33,000 in the capital fund uh to replace the carpet in the community room. um that has passed its useful life and they'd be looking at other flooring alternatives and um I think at this time they haven't decided what's the best. We've we've talked about some different options that hopefully would keep the floor looking better for longer.

I don't I think the 33,000 might cover three tiles of that. But uh one thing I did want to uh comment and note as as the community center comes online is uh the overall expenditures for the community center in terms of not just the utilities uh which we estimated about 42,000 but janitorial pest control 28,500. Um they are requesting a new vacuum carpet cleaner um in fiscal year 27 and then they are requesting uh maintenance of the asphalt in fiscal year 28. Were we already doing some of that because PD is on top of it?

Yes. Yes. So Kyle and I talked about splitting this into a separate budget. Right now it's all lumped into facilities. So, we need to dissect this a little bit when it changes. Okay. We probably pull it into a cylinder division just so you can continue to track. And and Columbus is paying a portion of of the utilities also. Uh but I wanted to be transparent and clear where we're actually wrapping that up for full use.

And we do we do anticipate using CDG money for some of this. It's just right now with our contract ending in 2027 and us going to our own program. I don't know how those overlaps are going to timeline how they're going to work with timeline. So I'm a little nervous about depending on CDBG money for right now. We can't ask because they're shut that's part of the shutdown. It's been months.

Can we shut down? Um are we so is that's the total facility budget for that building 100% and then section it off for our tenants or other uses will have smaller obligations from our budget. Correct. And just one point is that none of the facility staff's time are included in here. So if they go and fix something right now, it's just being covered under the general facilities budget.

And because we really don't know the the use that we're going to see there, we can anticipate just from the use that we have here, but I don't know how many times it's going to be rented through the year. I, you know, hard to tell that first year maintenance and cleaning what that looks like. Yeah. Have people express interest in it though? A lot of them. Oh yeah.

Uh so moving on to water. Um we have a few slides on water. Um so I do before we move on to some of the more detail uh I do want to point out a few things. Uh one is uh for on the revenue side. We used the numbers that are in the water rate model. Um as we all know last year was an exceptionally dry year. So relying off of trends or past consumption probably is not the best idea. And then um Justin, as Justin mentioned today, we are probably looking at some heavy conservation this summer unless there is a drastic change in precipitation. Um so [clears throat] the these numbers are fairly conservative, but that 11% increase in charges for services. So that's uh made up of a that 6 12% rate increase the council approved and then assumption of 4 1.5% growth uh which we do we did meet that growth number last year. It seems aggressive but I I think it's doable with what we're doing in permits and some of the different um residential and commercial items coming online. Um, and then the miscellaneous number, while it's not as large as the charges for services, um, we've had more cash in the water funds, we've actually been earning more interest. Um, I anticipating, um, as we do more capital projects, that cash will decrease and that's why it drops, um, in 28. Um, and then moving down, um, and I'm actually on the expenditure side, going to flip to the next slide. Um so I wanted to go through some of the significant um changes or requests from water. Um so one is overtime is uh 25,000 $25,000 increase. Uh as we've discussed previously uh the water department is seeing more water main breaks which necessitate uh paying

overtime for those callouts um to get those repaired. So, um that that's a request to try to accommodate uh that overtime. Um and then tied with that is increasing our budget for repairs um by 47,000 uh to to help with that. Is that just because of the age of our infrastructure or like what

we're we're seeing some age of infrastructure is one thing but we're also seeing on a lot of our service laterals premature material failures and it's not just here um it's kind of throughout the county and we've talked to a lot of other cities but it sounds like it's more of just a general material issue with the services. Can't expect things to last as long as they have. Well, it's just that specific material that was manufactured. So, and we were using um

20 years ago, we thought it was a great material, but now we're seeing that it's not. So, um we're looking into other types of materials to switch to, but we have seen in the last couple years increased in service lateral leaks. Have we started [clears throat] requiring different material on new builds or are laterals coming over? So that's what we're looking at right now is trying to determine which material. There are several materials out there that are a lot more expensive, but that could be a huge impact to development and then also repairs on our side too. So we're looking at what's the best option. Go back to flex copper.

Yeah. Well, there's a couple other more instead of poly type material, it's more PEX related like interior homes, but it's anyway there's a lot of detail into it, but we're looking at different options. Then moving down, uh there was a request for um notification and communication software that would be used in the event of uh water emergency or water line break or something like that. Uh this service would um notify residents and homeowners that are in the affected area. Um I know one of the benefits that was discussed was it would not water employees would not have to go doortodoor um to tell people if there's an emergency. Um so it could it it lead to efficiencies that way. However, it does come with a you know $40,000 price tag. Wow.

And there's other uses for it. And we've been working with Jon of Communications as well of other uses, but um then there's several different types with this one specific. Employees can go on GIS, draw a polygon, and it'll capture all of [clears throat] the people in that area and you can send out standard notifications for if there's a water leak and the water's shut down. So the people aren't calling at us 6:00 in the morning when they wake up, they get a notification. So there's some benefits there. um and other potential uses. So um it's just in the budget so that we can look at it and if we find one then we can potentially move forward with it. Do we not employ service like that for other city notifications that can implement or is it

not capable? Okay. Yeah. So our Everbridge system is opt in whereas this would have the utility preloaded. Okay. Um and would in this sort of instance be quicker to have more direct notification than there were bridges. But could we use this for emergency like the car crash fire? There's definitely once we have their information the the other thing is this includes gathering updated information from residents as well because we have data from accounts that were set up 25 years ago that's not accurate anymore. So this would be also gathering [snorts] updated information. Like I said, there's lots of different uses privacy

there. We'll have to be a little bit careful how we use it with the the state rules on privacy and we can't always share even within the city across stuff. So, we'll have to really look into remember we had that big long discussion about this, right? So, that'll be interesting. That was before they start passing all those bills up there. So, we're not we have to see how it moves. Hey, good job on one last week though. It was pretty quick turnout.

And then um some other unanticipated increases is um I believe we will receive a um a fee from the division of drinking water um of 78,000. Um there is a increase request in your uh packet that details that out a little bit more um to fund that agency um that will be required of all uh members. Um and then electricity is a $30,000 increase and that's mainly due to another well coming online. Or is it two wells? Well, this one's a pump station. Okay, thank you. Can't keep them all straight.

Yeah. Um and then anticipated uh water purchase costs from Jordan Valley. So uh 1.3 million in 27 and then another million in 28. So below um I list out what the overall increases are. So it's a 13.7% increase in expenditures um in fiscal year 27 and then um it's a little less in 28. Uh actually it's more than 28. Um and the overall revenue increase is 12.4. So what we do as we've discussed before is we compare what the request is to the water model because we want uh as much as possible to stay within the realms of the water model because that's what we're basing rates off of. Um so as you can see below uh the requests are a bit more than uh what the model shows we should be spending. The model assumed we would be increasing our operating cost about 6% a year. Um so uh public works is aware of this and they have identified some areas that they might be able to reduce the budget um to come within that um to bridge that gap. U however at this point um city management hasn't reviewed or discussed those potential cuts with public works to see if they're feasible or if there's any unintended consequences. um that might that might cause more issues down the road.

What's the process for for that? For like if you were going to cut out some of those to stay in a certain model, who makes those decisions? We we'll propose those to you as part of the budget and so we'll tell you what and then you'll adopt that. So you or change it. Okay. So ultimately the council is going to adopt the budget. We're we're going to work with them and see if we can find things that work. The alternatively we have a really complex rate structure. I think we have all these different things. And so the water model trying to take all in it could be that the model we need to adjust it.

Um the the big number that strikes me is the the amount for water purchases. I don't know how much they anticipated in there, but a lot of our new water purchases are block two rates or

so that's a large portion of it. The Olympia area receives the block two rates which are I don't want they're probably 40% higher than our typical rates. We have set this rate structure in Olympia so that they cover those costs but that increases our overall rate our overall cost. The other thing is is the projections on this are adding in 2025 which is a very high water use year and so they may be artificially inflated especially if we see a stark contrast and we start conserving in the next year or two like we saw in 2021 and 2022. Um just to clarify the walk one block two that's a Jordan Valley.

Yeah. That's not that's not our decision. Correct. That's Jordan Valley. So to your original ultimately the council will get it. We'll we'll bring you a proposal. We just as we were working on it this morning didn't have time to try and analyze it all before tonight. How does the No, please. One more follow question. So is it completely funded by water free fees or is it general fund that helps fund the water budget too? This is fully water fees. User fees pay for this. the proposed legislation with regards to having access to state funds for the infrastructure, the 1.5%. Are we

do we do we currently have access to that? How does that uh

so in order if that bill passes HB501 in in the format that it was written uh as of this afternoon I don't know if it's been amended since then but like 3:00 this afternoon I I haven't had a chance to read the new one but at that point it was based off your median adjusted gross income number which is the number that the state produces for the water for Herman that's $75,000. So we take 75,000 times the number of connections we have times 1.5%. And that's how much money we have to generate. And that so we're not there with our rates. We're we would need more uh 20 to 40%. I haven't I don't know how many that's a big number.

To [clears throat] meet that number and and the interesting thing is that if we were to do that I don't know that we would need state money. You wouldn't certainly need a loan from the state if you had that uh for us as Herman. Now, if you were doing that to get a grant, okay, but that's a pretty steep increase there. There the target of that bill are the water systems. The example is the one who's been bragging, we haven't raised rates in 40 years, but they're asking the state to give them money to upgrade their system. It's like you should have been raising your rates over these 40 years. That's not Yes, you can brag about it, but that's that's not the reason for the rest of the state to cover your system. So,

while you're bragging about it, that's the reason you don't have money to Yeah. So, for us, we would have to increase if that if we wanted access to those state dollars. Those increases originally in the first bill went to the state. In the current one, as of three, haven't seen the new one, but it's supposed to stay with the entity who raised them. It's just they want to make sure you your rate payers are covering their costs, the cost of delivering that water or historically we've been generally doing that.

This last rate increase that the first rate increase uh this water model was designed to I think the first time to actually look at the capital replacement of items. So most of the original rate models in the city young city were talking about new growth and who was paying for that. Now it's starting to look at who's replacing. We got to replace pumps. We've got to replace pipes unfortunately. Um and then this issue with the material that you know we put it in the ground 20 years ago, it'll last 100 years. Well, it's not quite 100 years and we are struggling with that. So those will all be things that the again to provide the water to the home. That's what we're trying to cover. Thank you.

So question. So last year when we did the rate increase and we lowered it to our need, should we have maybe re-evaluated or looked at that? I mean, I'm glad we didn't have to raise it the 13%. But um it looks like we may have to do a rate adjustment again sooner than later rather than the 6%. But I'd rather keep it low. The plan was a rate increase every year for the next several years. Yeah. But we we didn't we only took half of that rate increase for last year, which is good. And I like that we can have a look to cut the budget in some critical areas or areas find. So

I I'm I just know that we paid somebody to do the right study and that maybe we should have followed that, but our information at that time wasn't supportive. Well, and I think that the challenge is our our expenses are growing faster than that model. And so we may there there are a couple different pressures there. We may have to look at what future rates look like um as we build especially with the you know what capital is necessary um as you go forward. So capital being major projects and line replacements or uh final or looping lines and things like that. the system is is more efficient and more redundant. So,

and then did we take some state money for redoing water pipes and like that old the older part of Haramman? So, that was federal money. Federal money better. And federal money is federal money a pain. It's very difficult to use. Have we even We have not gotten a dime yet. So we're we're it's a reimbursement and going through the process and they keep shutting down. Yes. The shutting down is not helping an already overburdened department. Yeah. So it's a it's a difficult that's been a difficult grant for us. Uh it was 3.2 million something like that. So it's different bucket of money though.

It's a big enough amount that it's generally worth it. But it is they it's much more difficult than the last time I used a phone number which was several years ago. This one has been hard. The mayor asked us today if we would like to do another one of those. I think we quickly said [laughter] no. Not right at the moment. Not right now. So, we have we have received state funds and grants and loans in the past though. So, we have used them. So, just something to consider a little bit with I guess safe to say we just need to figure out how this bill is going to play out. I don't and or I don't think it goes through the Senate. I mean, we're watching it, but I don't think it gets through the Senate. Okay.

It's a I I think policy-wise, your rate payers, there have been some bills put in to limit like uh Jordan uh Valley's ability to use a mill levy to pay for projects because nonprofits are tend to be large water users and they don't pay whereas all users pay. So there's the bigger issue with with them bonding. They're not using it all for projects. They're using it for operations. Which should be a big no no. And that's something the legislature definitely does need to fix. So So there'll be more. I mean I

we'll have to hes right. We'll we'll look at it. We may at some point have to talk about what does that model look like? We may just need to refine the one we have and and you know maybe it's a 7 and a half instead of a 6 and a half% at some point. Uh but our goal is not to um sit with this gigantic reserve of of people's money. It's to try and get the stuff fixed and operate in a way that's uh responsible to thread that needle.

Uh moving on to the impact fee fund. Uh so um there isn't too much to talk about here. Um they do have um operating increeded operating cost increase and that is mostly for title research and legal fees and other administrative tasks um that we employ consultants to do. Um and then on the capital outlay uh as you know there isn't necessarily an open market for water rights. So, um, city is always looking for them. It's just dependent on if there are willing sellers in the market. Um, we do have, uh, 4.2 million that we can actually spend on water rights. Um, however, as you may remember, we do have that inner fund loan that is paying for the automal property that is to be paid off in June. So, the entire uh, balance of 1.8 [clears throat] million will be available to be spent. to nod to Sherry. Just because you have a water right doesn't mean there's any water.

Very true. Yum. The state is bragging about buying up these water rights. Doesn't mean there's any water that goes with it. [clears throat]

And then moving on to storm water. As a finance person, I always love to see a negative in the expenditures column. Um, as with every other department, they went through their budget with a fine tooth comb. um found some areas that they they had budget in the past, did not need it anymore. One-time projects they had been working on. Um and then it it is offset in the next year when they're anticipating uh regular operating increases. Uh they did have a small request. It's the last page for some trash pumps. Um but they're honestly a very small amount compared to their overall budget, but they did also they did go through that request process. um which I appreciate. [clears throat] With that, are there any questions on public works's budget? I think we hit them all. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Kyle. Let's hit 2.2 real fast. I think we go through that before we invite Ted in. Legislative update. Todd, do you want to bless you?

Um, yeah, I'll kick us off and I'll start with the most important one. Um, HB429 is so uh recently, as you know, it went to the House first, passed out of committee um 10 to 10 to one, went to the House floor, passed unanimously, which that doesn't happen very often. went to the Senate committee um just this past week and it passed out unanimously 60 and now it's uh currently on the reading calendar uh 55 55 I think

um so it will go through the reading calendar process and then the Senate will vote on it. So, um, the quickest it it may be late this week, early next week. If there's any, uh, changes that are made, then it'll it'll push it out. Um, we we don't have much time because there's only, uh, next week till until the end of the session. So, that that's one that is where that one is at. Um, SB284, this is the local land use modifications. This is the land use task force bill. Um, this one went from changing the way we look at local authority generally as it relates to land use. We uh we are called a home rule state meaning that as long as the the state does not tell us what does not regulate it, we have discretion to regulate that area. um the developers wanted to change it to a Dylan's rule state, which is the exact opposite, meaning that everything that we do comes from a uh an or a rule that the legislature passes. So, we got that all out early and now this is just more or less cleanup items. Uh planning commissions can't be the appeal authorities. Uh there needs to be more. It seems like a lot of it is geared at the planning commission. There needs to be additional training. uh what their authority is. Um those sort of things. I uh probably one more um this one's a hot topic. HB88. This is the public assistant amendments. This one would prohibit any sort of benefits given to illegal immigrants. There are penalties for those who give the benefits, including municipal workers that are just doing their job. And that's where the concern is is we don't know how far

this could go. It sounded like this was more geared towards like food benefits and health insurance benefits, but the way it's defined is it could apply to almost everything um including uh what's that? Uh the Columbus Center. So, and even though we're not doing it, we have a lease agreement with people that are doing it. So, um, those are the type of nuances that are are going to be really hard to navigate through, but this one is, um, I didn't think the Yeti service dog. [clears throat] So, uh, the service dog, I'm guessing there's a few more bills that you all may want to bring up there. Nathan,

um, the only thing I would add to that is SB262 by one, Mr. Daniel.

Did you talk to him? Did you get all of them? Not yet. He has not called me back. I I will be continuing to try and talk to you, Mr. Daniel McKay. Trust me, this is a bill that he is trying to push through that prevents law enforcement from using unmarked vehicles to stop cars. This would impact our duties, our responsibilities, our abilities, period, um greatly. So, for instance, if we're going to follow a car off of a house we're investigating and we don't have a marked car, we can't stop it. It's ridiculous. It absolutely is ridiculous. It's predicated on uh somebody stating that um at least what I've heard from the general counsel was uh unmarked cars stopping people and you know sexual assaults happening because of that. We we don't have a record of that happening. So really what it is is a concern of unmarked cars prowling about and maybe stopping somebody that's breaking the law.

Somebody their own light on their car. Right. Yeah. which also was, as I recall, the statistics, Cody, correct me if I'm wrong, it's 0062% over several years of somebody using a timu light that they ordered to stop people. So, please, um, LC is a full stop, has a full go on it to oppose it. Um, I was thinking today as I was following a gravel truck, if it were dumping gravel onto the roadway, I couldn't stop it. It's an absolutely ridiculous bill. So, There we go. Anything on HP561 that you've heard? It's the motorcycle the ebike motorcycle.

Um maybe I'll look to Cody to answer that one. It was long and arduous as it began. I think it's gone through some amendments as I recall. I don't know that it's answered some of our questions. Um, it has some appealing things in there like helmets and other things, but it also allowed for people that were 16, if they had a motorcycle endorsement, to operate them on the roadway without them being licensed. Um, and insured. Is that still correct? Yes. Okay. So, thinking about the one the fatalities that we've had here and in South Jordan, West Jordan, Riverton, a kid hits your car and dies without insurance. Can you imagine how that's going to turn out for you as the motorists regardless of determin? Right. So,

one of our biggest concerns with that is it actually takes away our most effective uh enforcement tool right now, which is the ability to impound uh and requires us to hold those and release them back to the parents at no cost. So, uh that's basically been our only deterrent at this point in trying to regulate the use of some of these ebikes and and that bill would take that tool away from us completely. And quite frankly, we don't know how we would do that. We don't have equipment to impound and hold. We call somebody to do that. We don't have the ability to hold a bike until we can get a hold of mom and dad. Nor do we have the manpower to do that. So, I think there's some real problems with it. Um, in my mind, what do you think bought it for the kid? And it's tell you how dare you.

Yeah. How dare you take that? Really, at the end of the day, the only difference, and maybe this is to best answer your question as you talked to the legislators on the hill, the only difference between what we're talking about and what we've been talking about for the last five decades, um, is that it's a gas engine or an electric engine. We have all the laws in place for a gas engine and need no tweaking for that. Electric ones are more dangerous. True, but all we would have to do is add electric to the gas provisions and we would be just fine. Instead, we're creating an entire chapter of a book for it. That seems a little ridiculous to me. So, at the end of the day, literally the difference is gas and electric. It's still a motor. It doesn't really matter. Add electric to the gas ordinance and you'd be fine. So,

it's currently on the third reading calendar at the house house. And I don't know to if it has wheels or not to be honest with you. Do you have concerns? Oh, it does. Yeah, if it's on rails or not. [laughter] Yeah, actually [cough and clears throat] it wasn't, but now that I think about it, I should claim history on it. So, I lost that. Do you have concerns about HB568 like limiting the impact fee to $50,000? I mean, it hasn't gone anywhere yet, but uh

I assume [clears throat] that most of our things are more than $50,000. Yeah, I think this one is not going to go anywhere. Um, but yes, we have concerns with it.

There was another impact fee one on this water impact fees with the number. It would change it from the current process to you have to look at the number of faucets, right? So, it's chasing it, changing it from a process that we've been doing for a long time, it's not perfect, to a very um not great way of doing it. Uh I get the understanding that maybe more faucets means more impact and that's how we should be calculating it, but that the way that it's written is not the way that we should be doing it. about the bill that was addressed uh earlier in the session having to do with the um calculations of general damages and what special damages could be considered.

Yeah, I think SB 211. Um yeah, that one is moving forward and that one's very concerning. Is 280 also moving forward because that's the antithesis. No, it's not. I just looked. I don't even think it's made it to a [clears throat] committee yet. Um, yeah, that one is highly concerning. I think if it keeps moving forward, there'll probably be an action alert from the league because the Yeah, it could potentially cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars when someone is already compensated for their injuries

and these are just phantom. The attorney and the and the victim do get more money. That's it. That's all it does. When was it 97? We're talking. There's another sub. They just texted tonight. There's going to be another sub with second more changes the other way. Okay, we'll keep everybody posted as we go through last seven days.

We're not counting. [clears throat] Okay, we'll come back to 2.3 if that's okay. I'd like to get We're at 6:30. Have a commitment to Mr. Ted Nolton. So, at this point, we're going to welcome Ted here. He's the deputy director of Was Regional. He's going to go over this the transit dress look update. Ted, welcome. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate that. Would you like me up there? Yeah. Do you mind if I grab a water? Of course. Robert English is still

Okay. U mayor and council, thanks a lot for your time here tonight. Uh many or all of you might be familiar with Wasatch Front Regional Council. Um we are a government entity. Our task is to develop the long range transportation plan uh for our member communities which includes Haramman. Member communities span from Brigham City in the north all the way to Bluffell in the south inclusive of Morgan and Tilla counties. And uh we have a council of 27 um including 19 elected officials. And I'm telling you that so you understand where how our decisions are made. And uh Mayor Palmer is one of those 19 elected officials. So you have a member on the council uh that represents Haramman. My purpose here tonight, as mentioned, is to just give an update on the conclusion of a transportation study that Haramman was uh integrally involved in called the transit fresh look. And I'll try to get through this pretty quickly so that you understand well what are the products of this? what might it mean for Haramman and then open it up for questions uh uh cognizant of your time. Um this is part of developing our regional transportation plan. This is the 30-year look. Uh you can think of it as the place where the major roads, transit, and trails for the region are born. They start here on this plan. And the regional transportation plan is the shared product that is then implemented by UD do and UTA and cities uh essentially but this is the place where those ideas are born and um we're in we're three years out of a four-year process in developing that transportation plan. So, a number of you, if you were on the council at the end of last year, you came to a workshop where we talked about projects and if

you're new to the council, you'll be part of the process of prioritizing projects in this cycle. Now, let me get to the heart of the matter, which is the transit fresh look. This is a deeper dive on public transportation in southwest LA County, northwest Utah County. Um and then the results will be folded into that regional transportation plan. This is an unusual has been it's now con concluded. Uh does that mean we're we're we can celebrate success? No, it doesn't. It doesn't mean that. But the process is concluded. It's an unusual way of engaging in transportation planning. briefly. It's uh and by the way, I'm I'm forgetting that uh Jiren Robertson, the planning director with Utah Transit Authority is online and I don't know Jiren if you can say something and be heard, but I wanted to recognize him. Jiren, forgive my delay on that.

Uh thank you Tenon. Apologies that I'm not there but uh here uh participating online. Thank you.

Okay. Um so this is unusual because typically what happens in a transportation plan is you lay out the ideas and then you test to see um how feasible plausible they are and then you select the feasible plausible ones and then off you go. You those are the ones you focus on. Here we took a different approach. We ask the question what do we want to coalesce to achieve together as communities, transportation partners and the like. What's our vision and our and what are the steps that would be needed to accomplish the vision? So it's visiondriven essentially and that's really the the key aspect about it. Um and it had a really robust partnership including of course Haramman but you can see all the communities um but lots of other stakeholders you know legislators um some key private sector partners all of the transportation agencies um [clears throat] as well and you were represented in that multi community partnership um primarily through Mayor Palmer uh your city manager and your CED director who were engaged in that. The last time we came to give you an update was all the way back in I think August of last year. So, it's been a while. Others have been engaged. I know Council Member Henderson, you've been engaged in this. Lots of others around the table. Wendy, have been engaged in this as well. Don't want to sort of just think it's just the three of you. Um, so we have landed together as a partnership on a vision and this represents that vision. I'm going to unpack the lines that are relevant to Haramman in a little bit of detail. Um, but you can see this uh these are predominantly bus rapid transit lines. You can think of that as kind of like light rail that runs on rubber tires,

but it sort of functions like light rail. Um there's a little bit of uh uh actual rail itself on this vision map as well, but you can see there's a lot of lines as a vision. These are the lines that relate to Haramman. The first is the idea of extending the red line from daybreak and the lighter red line uh having it come through the northern piece of Haramman before it turns into uh Riverton and then eventually connects onto the Bangador Highway. So this is a big idea. It would be expensive and really fantastic if we all can work together to pull it off. This was I would say the number one priority of the partnership in terms of a project they want to firm up over time and that's a big lift and we can dig into that in a little bit of detail. That's one. uh Rio Tinto loop again on the north side of Haramman, but uh this bus rapid transit loop would serve the rapidly growing west of um uh uh 111. I I had one of those moments uh west of 111 area that you're quite familiar with. And of course 118th being your northern boundary, you can see that in there as well. This is one of the key vision concepts. There's also the idea of uh bus rapid transit right on 118th south right on your northern boundary. Um uh there is a cross valley connection on the mountain view corridor that heads uh through pieces of her quite a bit of Haramman as it heads then on into south into Utah County. So it ties the two valleys together. I think there was a lot of support and momentum behind this

idea in the partnership. Uh so those are the ideas. Now I went through that really quickly and I'm going to do a second bite at the apple and uh look for any questions that you've got on these. Now, I want to clarify again. We're talking about a vision. And so, the the notion here is some of these are a light lift, some of these are a heavy lift to get done. And uh what we're what the transit fresh look does is it lays out the vision and then there's a corridor profile for each of these ideas that articulates some of the pieces that need to be worked on together by the partnership for those concepts that we all uh want to make happen. But you can kind of think of the three these three bins that the the next steps fall into these basic three bins. Uh and the idea is to try to advance in a meaningful way to at least two of three in order to get a concept to success. Uh the three are raising money regardless of source. You know, it could be federal, it could be state, it could be local. Um but raise some money. It could be value capture with development. One, two, uh, land use intensification near prospective station areas if that's something that communities want to work on. Two, and then three, transit market capture, which is a nerdly way of saying, let's get buses running. Let's demonstrate that there is a market. Let's get people used to writing something even as we work up to a a more mature mode of transit overtime. So that's kind of what that bucket means.

And so to work on at least two of the three four concepts that the partnership wants to take this vision and then advance in a meaningful way. Um what uh WFRC is going to do is convene along each of the concepts the communities that are part of that concept and then ask how can we help what can we do together uh to advance concepts that the partnership wants to continue to advance. That's the high level. Now, what I have left um in this um and I I just this slide I think is helpful because sometimes people um they want to know what does it look like? What are we talking about on the land use side? What does this mean? And if we're talking about light rail, um, and again, remember that's the concept of the red line extension that comes south from there into the northern part of Haramman over turning uh um eastbound into Riverton and before it catches up onto Bangador Highway. That idea would take an average of that kind of development only in station areas, not across the entire fabric of communities, but in station areas. If if remember there's three three boxes to work on. There's land use, there's funding, and there's market capture. So if communities thought, well, we're going to take it with we don't want to raise that much money, so we're going to work on the land use side, that's what we would be talking about just for rail. Now, if we're talking about bus rapid transit, which is most of them, it's more along the lines of two to threetory buildings just in the station areas themselves. I'm just giving you a sense of this.

Um, any questions so far? Okay. And then um one of the things that's in the corridor profiles, so it they look kind of like this. Um they lay out the concept. It identifies areas where communities have said these are places where our planning and zoning could potentially shift. That's up to you, but that's what you told us. These are places where it could potentially shift. And so those are highlighted on these quarter profiles. It lays out. Now I'm looking at the image on the right. It lays out some steps to start considering together. Uh you can see there, you know, incorporate the corridor into regional plans, assess earlyphase transit options and the like. And then let me just get right to this. Then it lays out, these are preliminary, but it lays out preliminary station locations. The reason is it could help if a community thought, you know what, we want to kick the tires on changes to land use, but we need to know where. That's the idea with this. These are not set in stone. Uh you as a community um when you have these stationaries, you could adjust them uh as you see fit. And it's sort of these are early stage discussions as we go from the vision of the transit fresh look into next steps. If communities want to, no community is being forced to go to the next step. This is a if you want to, we want to help you. That's the basic approach here with the transit fresh look. Um, and I don't need to get into these in detail, but we can pause on any of these if you want to, but we've got the station area locations. These will be uh distributed back to you after this meeting, and you can take a look at these um areas. And the quarter profiles are on the website

now and um I've got the um web address at the end of this I believe and if it's not there we will get it to you right after this meeting just tomorrow. Riointo loop potential station areas and you can see a um one two three four affecting Haramman 118 south one two three relating to Haramman the Mountain View corridor bus rapid transit line and I won't endeavor to count because I'll I'll get it wrong but areas that you could potentially explore and consider as a community working with the other communities that you know would come together to say yeah we want to explore advancing this idea if you thought I'll remind you if you thought you know what we are not willing or interested in exploring land use change that doesn't mean a project is dead but it does mean we have to lean in hard on the other two bases which are building a market capture and raising money which is not a small feat when you don't have the land use I'm trying to just, you know, be uh be transparent about it. But there are other options if land use is not one of the options. Okay. And so we're working, this is the last slide, we're working to incorporate the transit fresh look into the Was Choice uh regional vision and transportation plan. understand your priorities, which is why I'm going to blessly stop talking and listen like what's resonating with you and you might just need to think about it over time. And then um in the coming weeks and months, we'd like to circle back with you and sort of understand what is of interest to you um in terms of taking the vision and working on a corridor

basis to advance ideas. All right, Jiren, did you want to add anything at this time?

Uh, no. I I think you um put it out there. Well, Ted, um um recommend I think this is a very aspirational plan um and what it really takes to get implemented. Um I might just quickly note, you know, UTA in addition to the regional transportation plan does a long range train and so or a long range uh transportation plan. And so thinking about how we also help grow um our transit services to the desired state um you know we're trying to look at that now um we'll be engaging with the community um in Heramman city as well as part of that process. So um uh recognizing you know there may be some steps into this too as well I think as as Ted noted is we build that transit market. So, just want to recognize that. And then I just add that, you know, um getting to this point was a a real um a a great process and coming together with the various stakeholders and seeing how we all came together to really come to this this point in the process. So, I just want to recognize that and um thank WFRC for their efforts and then the inclusion of of of all that participated in these efforts. So, I'll stop there and be available for any questions you all may have. and Jiren, you you put it really well. And I'm gonna I'm gonna turn to Mayor Palmer and Nathan and Wendy and Blake and Bryce for uh for comments. And then I I have a this propensity when I'm nervous to talk fast and I think I did that this time. So I'm sorry for that.

Used to meet Ted so they get

but um if there's anything that you want me to, you know, talk about again or whatever, I can do that. I do want to note that one of the special things really unusual things about this is the breadth of the partnership and the way that they came together to clearly articulate priorities and that is I can tell you I've been in this business for 15 years that this is extremely rare and it's a great foundation to make the next step. So um Mayor Nathan Blake um and and I'll open it up to questions. four years of meetings.

Yeah. It It's been interesting to see it come together, right? Because it's it we were all over the board, right? And then and I will say even though there's two I don't want to like put this up too, but there were two red line extensions, right? And I think the group at one point it like the southern wolves route and then there's a representative that showed up and very much took it the bangard route which I think will be there's a cost versus use analysis in there and so so I think that's actually where we decided to kind of coalesce around that because we were told to coales around that a little bit but

and mayor let me let me note that you know there's this articulation of a vision and you're you're hitting on some things like you know it's there's some different threads and iterations that happened here and I just want to be clear there will be more steps and it is possible that you know if there's two options for a red line extension one is on Bangader and one is southbound more through Aramman it is possible that they shift we all shift together to away from Bangader that is possible so I think this is a vision and and visions are not set in stone And I think that's good because looking at some of the plans here, there there's been land use changes since this study's been completed. The athletic complex was a big change that wasn't even contemplated while this was going through and so the stop would be very beneficial on the BRT for that use on 126. So, so yeah, keeping it keeping it fluid because things are constantly changing.

Yeah. When we talk Yeah, go ahead. When we talk about BRT, are we talking about a dedicated lane

potentially? Um, and those are the kinds of things that we would look at together. Um, if it if it's dedicated lane, it increases the cost. Um, you get more service benefits, you can bypass congestion, the land you support needs to little bit be a little bit higher. And so and then if it's if it's without that you if we can do a lot of interesting things like let buses uh [snorts] skip the line at intersections without having dedicated lanes. But those are the kinds of things that there'd be a drill down in the coming years to try to work through that. It's a great question.

Are you tracking writership with our bus line that we just got or who's track that? UTA is I reporting back to [clears throat] I asked someone and they said it was higher than expected. That's the last I heard. I can reach out but it's been okay numbered [clears throat] that Jeremiah know. Does Jar know? Yeah. Jar, are you catching the question? Okay. Yeah, I'm sorry. So, yes, we we do um attract writership. I apologize. I am not prepared to share that. Um happy to get that for you and report back um or provide it to you. um um as soon as possible. Even a regular report on that would be interesting.

Yeah, I I was shocked how many people I see waiting at the bus stops at various locations throughout on the line throughout the city. So, I was just interested to know what that wrership looked like. Do they track via the ridership too? Yeah, I think they do. Y good day. Yeah. I have a question maybe with regards to like the heavy lift with light with light rail like that is

really really expensive. Um and I'm I'm sure there's some avenues you know to explore you know federally uh with you know with the Olympics and I'm sure those are being explored. Um but like in the realm of a possibility within the time frame that we're looking at like how he I mean it's a heavy but is it you know how likelihood is what's the likelihood of that do you think?

What's what's your crystal ball? I will say UTA did tell us federal dollars now are going towards best bus rapid transit really is not where federal dollars correct me that's kind of what we're hearing is federal dollars are pushing more towards they're flexible they're more flexible they're cheaper much cheaper federal dollars are going to be tough to find for the

yeah now the the federal formulas do potentially change over time uh but it is absolutely the case that under the current guidelines federal guidelines it is not a competitive project And um and part of that is that the level of I'll say land use support or of course station development in potential station areas is light. Uh what it has going for it of course and I think part of the reason why the partnership was so interested in it is is that it has two really strong connections on each end. Daybreak and the point and and it closes the circuit of the network but it it we will it would a significant lift I think without a dedicated uh level of effort from every affected community it will not happen that's the only way it can happen and I think in even in that path I just want to be clear I think we'd be looking at state funding support not necessarily for all of it But I think that we're we're all anxious to kind of drill down if you want to drill down. But if I think the communities take a close look at it and they think this may not be something that I'm really willing to to dig in and work hard, it's not going to happen. That only happens if every affected community on that bangader route or if we go on the southern route, those communities, that's the way it can happen. For rail, for bus rapid transit, it's it's not as dire. There's a there's more flexibility to get the bus rapid transit ideas uh to work, but the rail line because of its expense is is really like it's like climbing Mount Everest. And I don't mean that that's probably the wrong metaphor, but it's but it if we want to climb

Mount Everest that we have to start running our laps right now and saving our money. It's the wrong metaphor. Sorry for that. But when you look at light rail time frame, you're not looking at before the Olympics. Are you like this is more like 20 30? Yeah. Like even 40 years out or is it that far?

I can't give you a number, but it's not an Olympics. It's this is not an Olympics project. Now, it could be an Olympics project an early phase. So, when we're talking about that sort of uh establishing a market and starting with a lower mode like in an uh an express rapid bus that runs along Bangador that could be in place before the Olympics, but the rail itself, I think there's a number of steps that would need to be that would need to unfold and it's not a realistic proposition to have that before. Two of those three things are in place for that route right now. Right along, I'd say 80% of that route, right? The rest of it is green field. The thing that's missing is money. There there is there is no way that the state by itself can ever fund it.

Well, that's what we talked that was in there was the baby steps, right? We got the bus line now. We've got bus lines now. We're proving ridership more than we, you know, last we heard more than what we anticipated. Now it's hoping to take more steps, couple more bus lines maybe. And then I think that BRT, I think we all understood BRT, that BRT line in Utah County is especially now with that Mountain View connection done is realistic, very realistic to shoot a BRT from the red line down into Utah County down middle of Saratoga. I think that's a very realistic BRT line right now.

Then just step one step back from my very pessimistic tone. Um, right. That's just the that's just how these things work. This is a great step towards it. You have to have a plan in place for anything to get done. And you just outlined the length of time it takes to get a plan in place that everybody agrees upon. So this is a huge step towards it, right? The the biggest step for any of them then is funding. But this wasn't on plans four years ago. None of this was in plans. So this is that's why this is big. This was not contemplated four years ago. Right.

Yeah. So, we want to help. We really do. And but it I think it'll take local leadership, if I can put it that way, um in order to advance these ideas. Uh so, we'll we will be back in touch with you and other communities in the coming weeks and months. Um and and would love to get a a sense from you of you know, these are our priorities as hermen. And then we can rel, you know, you all can swap that information with the communities near you. I think that comes back to us. We obviously regional thing, but now what are our priorities as a council as well? Yeah. Thank you. Okay.

I appreciate it. Appreciate it, Ted. Thank you for making the drive down. Oh, yeah. My pleasure. Ted also sits on the city council in Salt Lake. Yes. He understands this, too. [laughter] They saw him get blown up on a Facebook post the other day, too. So, it's that side of things, too. Maybe that's something that, you know, we should add to the the strategic plan, you know, types of things to identify. Okay. Well, before we go in there, let's So, Trevor doesn't have to stay. He doesn't want to. What do you mean, Mayor? The city staff. Oh, he's a team player. He's got a kid at home.

Two of them. Two of them. Okay, let's do a 2.3 city status report and that'll be a wrap up work before. Good evening everybody. Um, mostly I'm just excited to share our new color with our new [laughter] colors. I know this.

Yeah, I didn't realize how poorly colored the thing was before until we changed it. Like, oh, I can see the difference. Um, just a few quick highlights. We're permitting across all kinds of residential units, all different types. And on the sales tax side of things, we actually dip down into a 7030 split. So, our highest share in a month coming from direct sales as opposed to that population piece. and this is the biggest proportion from direct sales we've had ever continue to buy local and that's great

that's it any on the housing but I mean the session's almost over but I think it would be good to put on there the number of units that are entitled Right. So, we're we're tracking how many have been how many permits have been pulled, etc., but versus how many have we entitled. Sure. I think as we ter as we continue to have conversations with legislators and all the boards we're on, etc., this is a great um go-to, but if we have that piece on there, that's an easy leave behind for some of those conversations.

Absolutely. I like that. Okay, thank you Trevor. Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay, that wraps up our work meeting. We do have a closed you. Okay, so we'll come back here for closed after, but I'll look for a motion to adjourn the work meeting to the city council work meeting. Second all in favor council meeting. If we don't say by little, we don't say bye.