City Council - Regular Meeting

All right. Okay. Welcome everybody. Um, city council's first meeting of the year. So, happy new year to everyone even though it's the end of January. I'd like to call our Moab City Council meeting to order on January 27th at 6 o'clock p.m. 2026. All right, if we could stand for the pledge and Miles, if you would lead us in the pledge. Sure.

I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. All right. The first item of business, I need an a motion to amend the agenda to remove item 5.7. We will not be discussing that item. If I could have a motion. I can make a motion to remove item 5.7 from the agenda. All right. Motion by Colin. Second. Oh, second. Second by Caitlyn. Caitlyn. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? Motion passes 5-0. Thank you.

All right. Next, we have public comments. If you're here to speak on any of the items that are on the agenda as a public hearing, please hold off and at that time make your comments. These are just for general comments that aren't part of the public hearing. So, if anybody wants to come up and make a comment, please come up, state your name. You have three minutes. All right, we'll close the public comment section. No department updates. We have five items on our consent agenda. First item is consideration of appointment of citizens to the planning commission. Second item 4.2 is ratification of the lever support for Utah Raptor State Park Dark Sky application. 4.3 ratification of city council board and committee assignments. Approval of the minutes 4.4 4 December 9th December 9th special meeting December 9th regular meeting January 8th and 9th our special meeting for a strategic plan and then 4.5 approval of the bills against the city of Moab in the amount of 3,840,734.77 and remember this is through this is for almost two months [laughter] and with that music um So,

yeah, it was it was very smooth. Um, so our planning commission, I'm going to recommend Steve Mccclure and Carolyn Connet. Carolyn is a reappointment. And on in your packet, there was a agenda summary, which was incorrect. Her term is three years. It'll end in December 31st, 2028. And I believe Steve is here. If you have any questions for Steve, I interviewed him. uh had a great conversation and also coordinated with Corey and um that's who I would like to recommend with your support. And then for our city council boards, um really most of those board appointments are going to stay the same with the exception of Caitlyn is going to switch with um well, Miles is taking most of Luke's uh assignments except for uh he's going to do the housing authority that Tonnie was on and she has a conflict. So, Miles has agreed to do that and Caitlyn has agreed to take the homeless coordinating committee appointment. And then Miles will also include a community renewable energy agency and we'll be um we're all welcome to go to those cast meetings, but I know I put your name on as a representative for CAST. So, uh with that, I'll ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda.

I'll move to approve the consent agenda. Motion by Tonnie. I'll second it. Second by Jason. Any discussion, Connie? No. Jason. Anybody else? Um I'm Well, I'm curious. I would uh how well first of all, how many applicants do we get for planning commission? And just there's just one appointment. Yes, you're welcome to go to any of the meetings, but uh Miles is the person that I'm recommending to rep, you know, to be the liaison with the planning commission. No, I meant more so for Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you meant on the community assignments. Say that again. Um, how how many applications that we got? We got three.

Okay. Um, I mean, I'd be if Steve wanted to say something, I would be open to welcoming him up, but Okay. Steve, would you like to make come up and introduce yourself? Sure. Sorry, Caitlyn. I got confused. Oh, yeah. Yeah. My sitting.

Yeah. Have a seat. Why don't you just tell us a little bit about yourself? He is a Billy inspector and you know I do think to do environmental inspections here in well all over the four corners area so lead asbestous and mold. Um I also own a uh building maintenance company. I have uh several contracts here in town and south. So, it's kind of what keeps me busy. I've been here in town almost 20 years now, so I'm not going very far. Okay. Any questions for Steve?

All right. Good to go. Thank you so much. Good to go. Well, we have to approve it, but I think it's so far we've got a mo we've got a a motion and a second by Tonnie and Jason to approve our consent agenda, which includes our appointment of our planning commission commissioners and the appointment of council assignments. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes 5. Thank you, Steve, for coming in. Thanks, Steve.

Um, all right. General business. We've got several public hearings this evening. The first public hearing, there's no action. It's a public hearing for an application to the permanent community impact board for the Spanish Valley Culinary Storage Water Tank application. And I believe Corey and Oh, I think they just went out the

So, I think Mark, why don't you go ahead and come up and we'll get Corey in here. There's being friendly. So before you guys get started, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing at 6:07 p.m.

All right. Good evening, council. Thank you. Sorry. We'll get our presentation up. We were wanting to grab our new commissioner's contact, get them rolling with orientation. So, moving right along. Um, while we're getting this teed up, the the hope for the public hearing tonight is again oriented towards the application for our C CIB process, but will be a presentation and briefing based on the tank itself, where we're at in the project and the steps we've taken so far. So, both Mark and myself will talk through broadly as quickly as we can where we're at with all those details. Um, and then open up for any comments from council or public where we want to go from there. Thank you. You don't want to let him out of your sight.

No, once we so grateful to have somebody, we're not letting them go.

All right, we should be great sharing. Okay, as of course you'd have it, presentation download is not opening. So I'm going to connect to our VPN and hopefully that makes it happy. It is not. But if we get desperate, if you have it, that would be great. Oh, I think I know what the problem is. I'm sorry. Well, I think I can fix it. Just need one second. It's been a whole year since we've had

I know since last year

yeah the authentication of our VPN uh it's kicked me out of our system network because there's password changes. So I think I've got it now. the uh the presentation's well worth away. I tell you that. [laughter] Let's try that again. It was digital. I've got it now. Thanks, Dion.

All right. I will make up for that time by talking quickly. I don't know if that's possible. Yeah. Right. Exactly.

All right. Let's see if we can get somewhere around here. All right. Uh again, this is uh the walkthrough of the city of Moab's project for the Spanish alley drive water tank, the 1.5 million galon um version of that system. This is the part that we're going to go through really quickly um was the outline of this presentation. However, with the project history where we're more specifically at is in the 2025 range, having received major utility overlay approval from the county uh this past November have uh coordinated with Goyo to receive the awarded extension uh in December from that grant system. We have submitted our development application to the county for the actual development review process um just this month and now are advancing other funding options for CIB and the application of the public hearing. So again in this process it was broken into two major categories that the team is working through. One is that mo that overlay process which we've accomplished barring the conditions of that approval which include a development agreement where we're going to engage with the county on additional design elements. So, as a part of this development application process, we're coordinating with the county commission and their administration on the design elements they feel will be necessary to offset the the impacts of the site through mitigation as well as the standard um development code as it applies to their site plan approval. So, that's where we find ourselves currently. Um, zooming out to the vicinity map, identifying the location. Hopefully all of us are fairly familiar with this site uh on the corner of Mil Creek Drive and uh excuse me, Spanish

Spanish

Spanish Valley Drive and Spanish Valley Trail Road. Thank you so much. Bit of a tongue twister there. Uh, of course, it's currently zoned RR rural residential in the county. However, in the future, land use maps have considerations for what was part of the overlay system which we are awarded for. um adjacent facilities that were contemplated in this process and site selection which we'll very briefly move through as well as to why this is such a pivotal and important project for the city and the community extending into Grant Gran County and potentially even into San Juan as a valley. This is a really pivotal important project for our community. Um but as we're moving through this process, the premier question we'll be exploring is now what are the appropriate design mitigations to accompany this design. So we we've received the overlay. Now it's a matter of we are moving for approval. What else will we need to do to ensure it uh is placed nicely within that corner uh given the context of the community and the existing conditions. Uh this is where I may shift over and let um Mark work through some of our old materials, why this site was uh a why we've come to this decision point of needing to move forward the project at this point and also why the site selection is so so essential and important.

Okay. And I can kind of just drive speak generally to that. Um going on a decade ago, we did a master plan that addressed our our water storage requirements amongst other things. It was just one component of that uh master plan for our culinary water system. Uh that identified as part of that study a uh shortfall in u equalization. So that's just you could see a tank is buffering need in the system, right? We're pulling something from the sources and then folks are using that uh down the hill somewhere. Uh you need something to buffer that usage in between. That's what our tanks do for the most part. Um and they also provide uh uh fireflow storage. So those are the two main reasons for a tank. The big the big bold reasons. Um and for both of those reasons, we need more storage. That's what was identified in that master plan. Uh this tank will go some way towards that. Uh and oh, I should also say that is on a 40-year time scale as of that master plan that was done now 10 years ago. Um uh so this will go uh pretty pretty good length towards offsetting that need over the next 40 years. that projected need uh including a current shortfall that we're in right now. Um and I'll also kind of throw out there that uh you know our current tanks are getting old and so in the in some at some point in the distant future we're probably replacing other tanks too. So this is kind of an ongoing need that we have. Um and the reason that we uh selected this site after looking at several in the valley uh was that um do we actually have the uh v vicinity? Yeah, here we go. That kind of shows everything. Uh most of our talk to uh most of our water comes from up in the golf course area as a lot of folks know. Uh Skakel uh notwithstanding um uh and so uh you know most of our water is coming from fairly high up in the valley coming all the way down to the

city. Uh currently um we have quite a lot of storage. In fact, uh, two of our three million gallons of main storage are at the same elevation, right at the tippy top of our system. That's Powerhouse and Mountain View. Um, uh, those are in a pretty good spot. That's above all of our needs. Uh, Skakel sits down way at the bottom. So, that doesn't really serve anybody above them. Uh, and then just as a side note, we have some very small capacity up at Lion's Back that is not currently designed to flow back into our system. that principally just serves them. But I just want to mention that uh this location sits higher than our other existing tanks. Uh which is functionally sort of equivalent to those. Still serves all of our users, still delivers pressure into our system. Uh you don't want to go too far up because um not all of our sources are pressurized right out of the source. You can imagine a well pressurizes right out of the source. uh you could pump that right up into a tank that you could even build it up into the air if you wanted, right? Uh but we do get water from springs. Um and uh and so the way our system is set up is actually our wells and our springs uh feed into a uh really just kind of a gravity system. So there you could imagine some point in this pipe between our proposed tank site there and between our sources there's a point where there you just have a free water uh free water elevation where the water that that moves up and down in that pipe. Uh so you can imagine it's not pressurized all the way through there. So you don't want to put the tank too far up because then you have to start introducing another source of pressure to get pressure into the pipe. Um so it was really quite lucky that we owned this lot. It happens to be in such a place that we can with our existing system continue to feed water into the pipes as we always have uh while still delivering enough pressure to fill the tank. Uh it sits high enough so that it

pressurizes our whole system as our other lower tanks do. Uh it also has the added benefit of potentially in the future and this is not a part of this project right now but it is it is now a potential if we put a tank here uh will function as a uh interconnect location with grand county and in some even further point in the future maybe you know that can that can benefit San Juan as well. Uh there is a plan in motion although it has been going along quite slowly now to uh uh have a interconnect with Gran County and the tank would serve as a buffer for that. So what that is is that's an emergency interconnect um uh that would benefit uh both the county and the city. I don't want to get too much in the weeds here, but that gets really tricky because the county is more or less in most places above us and uh it's really easy for them to enter. Well, I shouldn't say really easy. It's easier for them to connect into us to benefit us for an interconnect. It's not so easy for us to do for them. Currently, all of our storage is below most of their users. So, you would have to pump it back up out of the system. Uh so, kind of returning to that idea earlier, you know, the tank being higher but not too high. This is quite a nice spot for that purpose. Um you still have to pump into Grand County's system. Again, they're just at higher pressure than we are. uh you just have to do less of it for that interconnect to function uh easier to accomplish. Um I hope that made sense and I didn't ramble too much. Uh uh did I miss anything there?

I think from sighting we're good. I think we can talk really briefly about design which speaks to where we're at process now with Grant County. Uh I'll probably still have Mark speak to some of these images. This is talking well I'll let take it from here a little bit but we'll briefly walk through I think our our standards and then kind of what we think might be some of the site treatments that we're anticipating. Oh okay. Yeah.

Uh so kind of the general idea with this is um uh again we we have mo elevation for most of our purposes. We don't have to sight this up on a big hill or something because for the day-to-day usage interconnect aside uh we've got pressure uh from the tank coming down. we don't have to stick it someplace extra high at this site. So that means that we get to bury it a little bit. So that's what this image shows is [snorts] a kind of a rough conceptual image of uh the tank being more or less half buried. Uh that would uh involve burming up the sides. Uh mostly for just aesthetic reasons at that point, right? We could just have a naked tank poking up out of the ground, but we thought, gee, wouldn't that look nicer if we have it burned on the sides? Um and uh so we think that's an aesthetic improvement. Uh this exhibit is nice just to get kind of an overview of it. It just lacks the burming. So uh uh don't take that part of this too to too uh at face value. Uh we still plan on burming all the way around it. Um this image also does not show uh um other aertinances uh a chlorination station um uh uh driveways, things like that. a fence that may or may not be required to certain extents. That's going to have something to do with, you know, us talking to the county and we'll we'll hear all that out. Um and uh and the interconnect that will hopefully be located at this site. Uh it doesn't show all that, but that that that Can we actually go back? Yeah.

Uh this is really just meant to sort of show context. So the tank, you know, is not going to be particularly high or uh or or uh broad on the site. Oh, and this was just conceptual sighting location. So again, this is not solid where we're at. We do have 30% plants we're working from, but this was showing potential futures of additional tank capacities, which we're not pursuing at this moment.

Um, but again, lots of flexibility still at this stage as we still go through that that process with the county. But this is essentially the main infrastructural piece. So, a lot of concerns in the community and as we're in a public hearing spectrum is what you imagine a tank on a property could look like versus what the reality of what we're proposing. This is without again those treatments, birming, landscaping, additional mitigation elements, but then as Mark said, some additional features on the site where it won't be quite as vacant as we're seeing here with some of these, you know, decomp. And then yeah, these were a series that we worked with our consulting team through the state uh as well as I think there maybe some Colorado too,

maybe not. Uh that show some of these treatment options as other people have used them on place in other sites where uh again some of the concern is this is out of place. This is out of character for our community. It's out of character for this location is really how we mitigate and treat the site. I think it will be observable to a certain degree, but really the impact I think can be mitigated nicely.

Yeah. is what we're showing here is there's often takes right within residential communities often right behind homes that otherwise you really wouldn't be able to tell it's a fairly quiet uh non-impactful neighbor again noise was one of the biggest concerns this is a gravity system is marketed express there isn't a running tank or excuse me generating system the interconnect may have a barrier generating tank that will operate in emergency situations but it is not a noise uh producer

yeah Um, again, one of the benefits of being a gravity system. This one, obviously, a lot of landscaping looks really nice with the green turf. Probably not going this way, but again, just showing the variety of options. Um, and then just to wrap this really quickly up, uh, there was again in the community a lot of concern of what this tank would be. Um, we feel from the professional perspective, we're speaking as advocates to the community, from the professional side of we don't see this as hazardous infrastructure. It's not for new developments. It's not for for the tourist realm of new expanded hotels. It's for the community in general, giving our existing depths to capacity. Uh we're we're we're with this tank not even satisfying that. We got to keep our our foot on the gas, if you will. Um and then what what this project is as well, the the with the award for the uh overlay is basically we're moving into an administrative approval realm. We just have to satisfy the mitigations of design. But we are planning to move forward. Of course, CIB being a massive element in our ability to advance it from a funding perspective wise. But we are we are moving forward. And these are many of the reasons why now and this location are again premiere. Uh I think we'll wrap it up there if that works. One just jump in there really quick. Corey, this this public hearing mainly is about the request to CIB for the funding. Right.

Correct. Okay, correct. Thank you. Questions for these guys. I think one of my first questions in thinking about this application. I'm I I watched you guys present to the county and first of all, I think you did a great job. Um even just seeing some of these slides, learned a little bit more, but um appreciate all the time you've taken um to explain it. I think I I remember Ben um speaking in support. I'm wondering if uh GISA and or GR County would be willing to provide letters of support for this application or if you've approached them about that.

I think they would. I've talked to them previously about the funding and this is a big deal for them as well. They interconnect and everything. So I I believe they would do that. Okay, great. Thanks. Any other questions? How um how tall is it? I think right now we it's approximately 10 10 feet at the peak I believe is what it is. It's got a slight rise towards the center approximate approximately 10 feet above the ground. The ground. Yes. Yeah, it's 10 feet. I do have a question based on that, but keep

No. So, I was going to say and um [clears throat] when this does go in, we're we're committed to to landscaping it and to making it like an upkeep, you know, and stuff like that that going forward and stuff. So, it's not, you know, water tank, tumble weed patch, you know, whatever. Right. Yeah. That's concern.

Yeah. And I guess um kind of continuing on that. Yeah. curious what what your thoughts are about designs at this point. Um I know there are some obviously it's never going to be a commercial site. It is restricted against doing most things other than this. Um but curious thinking about future potential. Um noticing the kind of specific placement of the tank so that there is additional room on Spanish Trail. Um, have you guys thought much about future potential for that site or or what the rest of it would look like for design?

I think there's maybe two components of that. Uh, maybe the there's kind of the bigger use question and then the more specific for uh uh we are trying to leave ourselves a little bit of space um to potentially put another tank there, but at an indefinite point in the future. It would just be an option for folks way down the line.

And then with that, we'll obviously coordinate with county. There's been versions of this where we see could this become an interactive public amenity, a park if you will. We can weigh that. We also have to preserve and support our infrastructure is not being ex accessed of course. Um and then it's kind of an idea of essentially from design and where we want to go is minimum standards. We would comply with obviously the current county's landscaping designs and what they're approping. We'd probably also incorporate our elective landscaping standards that the city has. We'd apply those if they're above and beyond. Um but beyond that we're really open to the discussion that is the development agree that they would like to see which is mostly a mitigating factor not a use factor. They just I would say the additional attribute to that beyond a park or open space type element which we have to talk with utilities what we'd even be able to do to ensure security to the site that we're not putting ourselves into a a risk situation by opening up access is um the limitations of use both through their current land use code the overlay systems and our own um restrictions. Not that and this was a lot often discussed was the deed restrictions that were associated with the department of interior's uh conveyance of the property which have expired. However, our coordination with the mixed tenants not on this part of the property but the remainder which is the cemetery is to not ensure we're increasing use there is incompatible with either our use or theirs. So yes, we've thought about it but I don't think we have promoted anything down the line yet.

Thanks. Anything else? Well, Colin, do you have No, don't have anything. All right, we'll open it up to the public. Any comments from the public? If you would like to come up and state your name and you have three minutes. Okay, no comments from the public. We'll close this public hearing at 6:29 p.m. And I I agree with Caitlyn. I think it would be really important for us to get letters of support from Grand County.

Hopefully. Um, as we know, one of our county commissioners serves on the CIB board. I think we probably will have a conversation with him and with other Yeah. CIB board members and if we could also get Gwissa. Um, and I'm I'm sure they will. It might not even be a bad idea of having them uh go with you guys to the to the presentation to CIB. Yeah, I think it's a good idea.

All right, this public meeting is closed and we'll move or public hearing. We'll move on to the next public hearing uh which is an uh for the ordinance 2026-01 an ordinance of the city council of Moab annexing the Bisco property LLC property at 486 River Sam's Road to the city of Moab and assigning the C2 commercial residential zone and R3 multi-house residential zone to the parcel. So we'll start off with a presentation and um and then we'll open it up for questions and then public hearing. So, I'm going to open up this public hearing at 6:30 p.m. All right. So, as you all know, we've got Corey and Johanna making this presentation for us.

Hello. Good to see you guys again. Um, okay. So, we were just here um in November to accept the petition. So, I'll start by going over what we've done thus far. In September 2024, um, this council approved the pre-anexation agreement. Um in November we accepted the petition and then planning commission in December uh positively recommended to you guys the zones of C2 and R3 and now we're here for our public hearing and um possible approval. Um we've got our timeline here. Um one thing that we didn't touch on is the objections. we didn't receive any um viable objections so we didn't need to go to boundary commission. Um so we skipped that step in this case. Any questions about the process?

Not yet. Okay. Wonderful. Um my next slides will be eerily familiar um to you all. I can go through them for the benefit of the public. Um it's a good idea.

Okay. Wonderful. Okay. So, we have 486 River Sands Road. Um, currently in Grand County, they are zoned rural residential. They are proposing to be annexed into the city as the C2 commercial residential zone and the R3 multihold residential zone. Our arrows here are pointing to the subject property. Um they're not pointing from anywhere unless a question at planning commission just random arrows. Okay. Um this is some of the main points from the pre-anexation agreement. Um big ones to note is any residential development in This property is going to be uh restricted for 100% um ah um this parcel is going to go through a minor subdivision process. That's why we have two zones.

Joanna, would you tell people what AEH means?

Active employment household. So that's a set of requirements. um they uh need to work in Grant County. There's lots of exceptions to that. Um for retired people are those that can't work and this is their conceptual site plan. So to go through a pre-anexation agreement and the annexation process, people need to submit a plan uh so we get a general idea of what they like to do so that we can assign them a zone. This will need to go through our complete um development review team process to iron out what is acceptable to build. So this is by no means what set in stone what's going to happen. Um this is what they have proposed is within the density requirements of the R3 zone though. Uh so let me back up. On the right hand side is the laundry facility and then on the left hand side you see some tiny homes. is the laundry facility is operational right now, right? So,

it's not a public laundry facility. No, not a public.

Can I just before we move on because I I know that a lot of people are here tonight. Thank you first of all for coming. Um, I know that we've received a lot of feedback and questions about the specific density that's associated with this site plan. Can you talk specifically even Nathan as our angel probably watching this meeting um about these kind of two bullet points about um kind of what is allowed in an R3 zone? um this kind of statement that it needs to conform to the regulations of the assigned zone and like what the actual max would be whether it's 20 units or if to go to this 20 unit um plan it looks like that would be through a different development agreement process which is approved separately. I'm wondering if you guys can talk really specifically about this part of

Yeah, I think Corey can answer all those questions. I can absolutely. I I wrote the bullet points. These may be confusing. The um middle one about the DA um is just about if they were to go more than 20, then the the public would have a chance to be involved in that. And when you say go more, you mean request more request because it's not their decision. It would be a decision of the city based on the current zoning or what the zoning will be when it's assigned.

Yes. And then the the bottom two bullets um the density for the R3 that is what they can do by right through our process a review process is um they need 2,000 square ft for each unit which given the square feet of what we estimate their subdivision will be. Um once we calculate that out they can have 20 units. Um, and then I put the last bullet in there just as a comparison um, to see what our other zones allow density wise. Um, that may be surprising.

So, it's currently R2. No, no, this was the last bullet was just for comparison.

Yeah, there had been commentary, but maybe we were assigning the wrong zombies. The density is off. What we were trying to demonstrate is a a factor of four would be the difference of these two zones. The one they've select though uh first of all has been uh approved in the pre-annexation agreement. So that would require and I don't know if we're going to the whole weeds of what that would take to basically resort back to a renegotiation of pre-anaxation agreement. Um, but a little bit of a piggyback to Johannes to your point of the development agreement, how it's expressed in the current pre-anexation agreement, which in essence acts as a DA prior to them being in the city. The council has the opportunity to negotiate the terms that that property would be annexed if it were to, which is where we find ourselves now. Uh, so with that, the estimate at the time was 20 units. the way it's written in that DA it did not account for the feasibility of construction site building standards setbacks any of those things just based off densities and we know within our densities they can be depending on your design layout and everything else a higher density than what can actually be realized on site. So that's where when we go through this site plan process, if it were to be annexed, we could determine your circulation widths are too wide or not are not wide enough and your buffers are too big, you can't actually accommodate 20. You may have to reduce that number based on standards. That may also have to come back before council just the way the DA is framed. uh that you would have to accept that reduced number because basically the council had an expectation of this is what we expect to be brought into the city uh from that original pre-exation thing that touched on. We can go deeper, but I think that's probably okay for now. I think the the big thing is is that the the the zoning governs everything on this property. Once the zoning is applied, all standards will be will be based off of that zoning. And if

they are able to put together a site plan that can meet all of those standards and um and has 20 units, they may be able to get up to 20 units. Um it may not be 20 units. Uh but as Corey has explained when we did this um I won't go into it, but when we went through the pre-anexation, this is what they thought would be possible. This is not vetted. And the pre-anexation does specifically state that you're not entitled to this. You would still have to go through that process. Well, so on one of the documents it says like on one of the slides is before then it says will.

Correct. you know, so why why is it will instead of could at that time because this is and interesting as we've evolved the city and if I can speak to this because we've had other pre-annexations for multi that have come in and at that time we did not as a city want to annex a property in albeit even with the ah or a percentage of that being a and that developer decide well instead of those 160 multif family units we were going to do we're actually going to do 10 single family household units because we set a maximum bar but no minimum. That completely changes the typology of what we as a city thought we were going to get. So at the time of this negotiation, the city was looking for basically an assurance of a number will 20. Now that's the nuance here is if they can't even meet the 20 by development standards, we may have to renegotiate that number down because you have to give us 20. Um, so there may be an opportunity for us to if the development can't or is willing to talk about that number the way it was framed

because of ah

versus could exactly that because of well because of age and building code other elements um 100% of them will be ah I don't think we would concede that but if the developer cannot feasibly meet building code or our standards and house the 20 we can't we could not forecast what could fit. We just took the density of what would be said, okay, we're going to go with that number. So when we move into the future, I would think as a team we'll be identifying this nuance of will versus could and that flexibility in there what the council actually is looking for because at that time we needed units. We needed to bring those units in. So a lower density was not the position of the council at the time. It was the maximum density at the time at 100% ah this is old enough and it took long enough to go through. I think the perspective of the council especially in this area has evolved a bit. I think that's fair to say and not a critique of this council. I think that's how these day DAs get really challenging the longer they go because the temperature of our community is continually evolving. Um but I I hope that

that's been kind of a question that so then kind of tells me like hey um if they you know once we go like okay you have to meet these setbacks and all this stuff and everything and um and then they kind of do this drawing and they're like oh we can only get 16 you know on here. So would they have to come back to us um and say hey we we we thought we could do 20 but we can only do 16. Would we have to approve that? I think we'd have to check with Michael and Nathan on, but that's my understanding.

I can tell I can tell you this the because what Corey is saying about the temperature and everything, um, we would bring that back and most likely recommend favorably towards reducing the number because at the time when it was done, the goal was if [snorts] you come in and you'll dedicate 100% of these to a um, we want to see you try to get the maximum density on this property. But as things have changed and with all of things things being built and everything like that, I think that can be relaxed a little bit and we would most likely recommend that we do amend that to to whatever actually fits on the property.

And Jason, if I can add add to that is again the conceptual layout, the DA doesn't um restrict them to this form. So, these tiny homes, that was that was what the developer and the property owners wanted, employee housing that was in this format that seemed to work for their people. But you could, because this is the way they're they're spacing these out, you could change this layout so it is in a more densely compact layout and probably achieve those 20. So, when we're looking at this right now, there are buffers, there's uh fire separations that are probably not even observable as we see it. Now, if we were to conceptually review this, but if they were to bring those units together and they weren't spaced this way, you increase your developable area significantly. So, they could meet 20 easily on this property.

Yeah, it's whether is it the form that they want and the form that meets that number and it could even be a form that you know our developers uh had this this project could sell to somebody, right? And they could develop correct anything within the the confines of of our dream. Correct. 40 foot tall. Well, yeah. Anything within the like Michael said, anything the confines of the zoning and the pre-anexation standards. Correct. Got it. Okay. Yep. Okay. And keep in mind the temperature changes because of the developments that are being proposed. They haven't been built yet. So, I think we need to be paying attention to that. Just because we know that there's some developments out there, that doesn't necessarily mean they're going to be out there.

They're just piles of 2x4s that are Anyway, why don't you guys go ahead and continue and and you guys, if you have other questions, we'll get to those. Yeah, I Yeah, I think I think we're concluded on presentation, but Okay. Happy for any questions. These are really great and I know the community has had all these questions, so thank you all for bringing them up.

Yeah. So, I mean there there has been community outcry like it's weird to say like um on this which you know also too um it's my understanding that you know like you said that like the the boundary commission was like no there's no precedent to to deny this you know that even though there has been um people against it or outcry against it um the basis board um for that wasn't there that correct

yeah I might I sorry that. So with those we did receive as a city and the boundary commission addressed kind of in a mixed fashion to the council and the boundary commission uh objections but those objections stayed within the context of letter. We are not objecting to the annexation. So in twofold they weren't objections to the annexation. They were objections to the design standards that were already contemplated in pre-annexation. So they were objecting to something that has passed by. Furthermore, the ability to be heard at the boundary objection, uh, excuse me, at the boundary commission for a qualifying objection, you have to meet state standards of a qualifying entity, which the folks that submitted weren't qualified entities to make a qualifying objection to be heard by the boundary commission in the first place. So, we had two removals of why it wouldn't go to boundary commission, but why it would be absolutely appropriate as testimony during this public hearing. So that's where we've tried to

and also when it goes to the planning commission because the site the site plan correct has to go to the planning commission and so I'm on the boundary commission and and there's it's very very specific as to who what a protest against an annexation is and it's really very few people would qualify for more as an entity it would have yeah right there's very few in our area that would even qualif and we have no control over that state the state mandates what what can be considered a protest.

So, as a as a council, um when we're looking at approving this or disapproving this, we have to make our um judgment or or whatever our vote on on annexation into the city, not what the project did. Yes. Correct. Yeah. So, we So, I can't go like really make a decision on like I don't like these tiny units and these 20 units. Um that's not a basis for me to not um approve this annexation. Correct. That was at the pre-anexation stage. So you have complete discretion on this, right?

Complete discretion. You can you can approve this um or you can deny it and there's no necessarily findings that you have to meet in order to do that. So for instance um if things have changed you can say well it's not the same time anymore feel differently about this I want to approve it or deny it you know you can any anything you want you have full discretion on this this is a completely legislative decision um once it gets past this decision and zoning is applied then that's when the planning commission and the city council are tied to land use standards and land use laws and things like that but until you bring it into the city or That act of bringing it in the city is completely up to you. You can do it for for whatever reasons you feel are good or you can not do it for whatever reasons you feel are bad.

So, but to that point still the time to have uh debated what the actual uh zone was was at the pre-annexation process. You remember that. And can you talk a little bit about uh infrastructure improvements and and what they would look like with if this proceeds

uh conceptually? Yes. Just in that the we maybe don't know what exactly they look like. We do know there's an existing sewer system that is behind this property not within uh within River Sands but generally speaking as this property would come into our jurisdiction and with these standards we would be applying the standard development improvements. So, as they go to uh actually commence development, there are certain public improvements that are associated with all developments if they're not already established. Road improvements, sidewalk, curve, we're all familiar with those recently, but also infrastructural improvements, meaning sewer, water, or any other utilities that if they are currently in the area and they're deficient, they would have to improve that system or increase the capacity to serve their own development. Um that's I think within our standards within the realm of concurrency your your development is putting the burden on the city. So that's a legal exaction of the property say it is your ownership to improve the public system to serve your development. We're not making you develop this. So you're electing into these improvements which is universal and very standard for all developments. It does create where areas that don't have any sewer in this instance isn't the case, but if they didn't, may have to run a sewer line block from blocks away uh to to serve their property, which was what we're seeing with the Cane Creek Blue Bison development.

They're bringing sewer to their development, which would then unlock a public system that all of Cane Creek now has sewer access because that's a public infrastructure improvement. So, that that form of legal exaction uh is is pretty common place in development. So I hope that is the idea that we wouldn't allow a development to come and be built that has now depleted our capacity of our system that would and what about road the who who on the hook for the road improvements is is there I think I'll kind of balance this with Michael

yeah it'd be a halfsection improvement at this point I think that's what we've talked about is the dedication and a halfsection improvement which means that the property would be required to improve the road in front of their um their frontage to the half section which um would require I don't know how many feet is required to dedicate. It's a few feet. Um but um yeah, so that's the way it would work. They wouldn't be required to to develop the entire road for a development like this.

It would have to be a development that would put the road over on on its um to make it a failing road, if you will. too much traffic for the road in order for them to have to increase the road to a different standard. And then as far as the uh the other comments about Oh, actually, never mind. I think I think we're we're going lots of different ways here, but Got it. Okay. Yeah. Any questions? Any more questions? I'd like to open up to the public and we can we we will be considering this will be an action item, so we can have more discussion as council at that time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks.

Okay. Um, so if you would like to make a public comment on this proposed annexation, please come up, state your name. There is a form we'd like to fill have you fill out just so we get your name correctly spelled in the minutes. And um, you have three minutes to speak. So, who would like to come up first? Thanks for giving us a couple minutes here. Um, just as as far as uh introduction, my name is Steve Hazel here with my wife Nikki. We've lived on Riverands Road for over 40 years, raised seven kids there. We have six grandkids living on the road now. And we're very uh very mindful of the need for for uh for employment, housing, and those different things and and don't object to that at all. and we are ones that have sent concerns in. We didn't object to the annexation itself, but we have always been concerned. And it's interesting, the state of Utah on an acre of land units, they're literally limited to about 10, but I think St. George and Moab has done the diversity thing. And I think it's a it's a hard balance that we have here to balance this out. Um, I want I want housing. I don't have a problem with them putting housing in, but 20 housing houses on threequarters of an acre is is monumental. That's huge. That's huge. Um maybe half that that kind of thing. My other question to the committee is if they didn't say they were going to do 20 houses, would you accepted this or reszoning application? If they said they were just going to put three in or four in that would require R3 zoning as well. I'd like that to be addressed if it's possible because I think I think you you know your mission statement is uh part of it is improving your quality of life

and is putting 20 units. There's only 12 units on the road right now. So you're tripling the units of people living on this road. We've addressed the the the need for a new road, that type of thing. Um you know, those are all concerns. There's kids going up and down the road. It's a pretty pretty active road especially during the summertime and and uh just thinking about those different things. The langu the language in the annexation has bugged me from day one which we weren't here for day one. I don't remember being told that there was a a time period to, you know, make public comment on the original annexation, but we missed that obviously, but uh but that that's we just wanted to have that on record that we are uh we we're opposed to that many units on that and I understand that it's not you right now, but I do think that plays a part in the quality of life and what you what you have um on that road. It's it's always been a great place to live. um the amenities uh the the annexation if it passes uh um you know I think there should be some responsibility from the city to make that road safer. We talked about you talked about last in November to uh get the other properties R3 as well and according to your density I could do 130 units in the four properties I own that road. That's ridiculous. That's just ridiculous to think about. Um when 12 people live on that road now. So just that's my that's my basic concern. And the sewer line that's not there. There's a septic tank that they're using right now and the business is great that they have. But there it's all going into a septic tank and not a sewer line. So that's a concern environmentally as well. So I guess that's my three minutes.

Thanks, Steve. If you I'll build out and bring it back up for you. Thank you. Who else would like to come up? Sleep sitting back here.

I'm Dave Condi and you've received communication from me already on this. Um, I've owned the property across the street from this for 40 years. Um, I've seen River Sands change a lot in those 40 years. I have to admit that the Biscos are quieter neighbors than Western River was. Um, and but still I have some concerns about 20 tiny houses or whatever on that property. That's fairly dense. The other thing that is not shown on any of the maps is that there's actually a covered ditch going through that property um just to the north of one of the warehouse buildings and that is ditch two which is one of the three primary ditches in Moab. And it basically goes down through my property. There's also an a ditch going across the front of my property. So, I already gave 19 feet for River Sands. Okay. I own the property in front of my place. So, if River Sands was ever made a legal property, a legal street, it would have to come out of the Bisco property. um because there's no way for it to come further my way unless you want to involve the Army Corps of Engineers who would have to approve the moving of a waterway that has been established. Um my major concern is is that you're making a commitment to a street that doesn't have adequate water already. Um, our water pressure on river

sands is shaky at times. There is no sewer going down river sands. Um, and basically the infrastructure that would be involved is millions of dollars really to bring riverands up to code. And I don't know if the city wants to take on that kind of burden. Okay. 20 houses is too many. It changes the flavor of River Sands which has been primary residential. There have been the two river running companies. But even this property across the street was never intended for that building to be zoned commercial. It was there on a nonconforming use. And they were granted permission to put in a second trailer. That's when they put the double wide in for for Western River and they added on to the warehouse. Um, but also the intention was that the flavor of it was always going to be A1 clear back when they gave the permission for the second trailer and for the warehouse. And what we were told back at the time would be that it would revert back to A1 in the event that a sale and a change of venue of what the the property was going to be. That was 30 years ago when they made that promise to us. I know times have changed, but I've said I don't mind if they want to become part of the city. The only way that my property will ever become part of the city is after I'm dead. Um because I don't want to be part of the city.

I'm okay. Thank you. Thanks, Dave.

Thank you. I'm Sueberry and I live to the east. I'm on the side of that fence. My only I mean I understand them wanting to annex into the city for utilities makes perfect sense, but we have a major drainage problem in that area. The city does not have adequate drainage, storm drainage, and our property floods onto their property, which I'm not sure where it goes. I've been told that there used to be a ditch along that fence line that moved water both directions, so it wasn't just a sheet going across the property. So, that's really my major concern is that needs to be addressed when this becomes if they do annex into the city. I think that really is a huge issue. So, and I know we have other storm drainage issues in the city, but this one that won't make it any better.

That's it. Thank you.

And I'll bring Steve. Who else? anyone? Okay, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing at 7:01 p.m. And we will move to the action item, which is consideration and possible approvement of ordinance 2026-01, an ordinance of the city council of Moab annexing the Bisco property LLC at 486 Riverands Road to the city of Moab in signing C2 commercial and res residential zone and R3 multi- household residential zone to the parcel. Now, there were some errors in the ordinance in your packet. Those errors have been corrected. So, um at this point, I'll ask for a motion and then we can discuss. Um I will motion to approve ordinance number 2026-01. Motion by Kaitlin. Second. It's

second by Tom. Discussion.

Um I would love to defer to I know I have a couple council members that like to discuss. Um I guess for me um and entering into this conversation um I support the pre-annexation agreement. I supported this when we talked about it again in December. Um Corey made a comment briefly earlier about um and there have been some comments about how maybe there's been some temperature changes based on other units coming in. Um just from a housing perspective, I think particularly as we've been looking at this pipeline, um a lot of the units that we're seeing coming in are big mega multifamily apartment projects. Um that some are coming to fruition, some are not. Um I think for me when I think about employee housing and the types of housing that I want to see here, it is projects like this that are um much more medium density. I know it's a big change to the neighborhood. I've had friends that um live in rental units on River Sands either, you know, have I know about guiding history, you know, all that. Um and for me um like this is I I I will continue to support this. I I um also just thinking about um infrastructure improvements and like you know economies of scale and everything like that. um if we were to roll this back to fewer units, um that just makes it less and less likely to be employee housing because it's more expensive or fewer units. Um, and so the more we kind of talk about that, I I you know, I even question about the feasibility of 20 units. That's not my decision, nor is it the decision tonight, but um, you know, you you have to have a certain amount of density in order to provide actual employee housing or you have to be able

to provide a significant amount of subsidy. Um, we I talked about this last time, too. I think that the general zoning of this area is actually quite dense. Um, but it doesn't feel dense because of the housing typologies that are kind of in the R3 um R4 zones all surrounding it. Um, and and so I think like a lot of that will shake out in DRT in site plan review processes. Um, but I think just because it's 20 units doesn't mean that it's going to look like apartments. um you know, I recognize the the feeling in the neighborhood with more traffic um could change that. But but I also look at a lot of the surrounding um lands in this area. I look at the the way that development has trended in this area and I will continue to support um employee housing even if it's a little more dense over um really low density multi-million dollar houses um in in that area. So um for me um you know I definitely have been weighing this. I think if if and as there are opportunities to continue to refine the site plan so it's more comfortable. Um I definitely would support that direction and hopefully you know the developers also hearing a lot of the comments um around this and they will take that into their consideration. Um, but I think I think for me I I need to continue to support um the decisions that I've been making because I I don't think that the appetite has changed just because we have a couple of apartment projects coming in. I think that we will continue to need um housing options in the city. Um, and I'm going to continue to prioritize that in the city versus continue to push that to Spanish Valley

or San Juan County or communities where people have to drive 30 minutes to hours in order to um commute to where they work. So, um, that's me. Thank you, Connie.

Caitlyn is the housing expert. My um my reason for supporting this is partly what Caitlyn alluded to is the history of housing for our for our service industry, for our guiding community has not been great. I there are seven guides that live in the house directly behind me. Um, and this is in my neighborhood. So, I don't think that that's a healthy situation for them all the time. Um, because I hear what happens. So I am going to continue to support employee housing also because if if we can improve the lives of 20 20 employees, whatever business or whatever sector they're in, I think that's worth doing. And I don't think that the the apartment buildings that we have online right now are going to magically solve our housing problems. That's kind of where I'm coming from. Jason,

I know you have something to say. Pony said she'd hear me if I went too long. Um, kick.

Oh, kick me. Okay. Um, so I'm very familiar with this property, um, as as everybody knows and, um, and I I know a lot of the history of the property when you're talking about coverts and drainages, you know, stuff. I I I know all of that, you know, I know I know the water line, you know, when it was when it was put in. Um, and I know that, um, when when we did the pre-annexation, um, I voted against it because I was, um, because I was concerned about the road and I was concerned about everything that was brought up. wasn't so much this project. It was um it was it was that road and changing the nature and the dynamics of that road. However, I I kind of feel like now that um you know the the current owner of the property, you know, they've said that there isn't they have no intention of doing um of Dove 20 units to some extent, you know, and stuff or and I I think a lot of that has to do with um with the infrastructure that's on that road. It's not going to be cheap to put that in. It's not going to be cheap to deal with these things. So, I I I kind of question, you know, like, well, why would you do R3, you know, or whatever. Um, however, that's not, you know, that's not for me to um to question or why they're doing that. Um, you know, and I kind of feel like that at this point, like I I kind of was kind of leading up to my decision that I probably am going to support this um you know, and vote for this annexation just due to the fact that this isn't R3. Um there's already a president on that road. There's R3 at the end of the street. Um, and there's R2 right across the street. Even though those those owners have said that they'll never going to do it, they still have the potential to do it. And that's the same um the same thing could be said, you know, for this property as well. They have the they um they have the possibility that they that they could do it even though whether they will or not, you know, remains to be to be seen. And with that infrastructure, that road um

in my opinion is is a horrible road. um it does it will not support um the growth that that's going to need to happen down there. And if properties start annexing in to the city at some point um that the city's going to have a lot to to to fix that area down there. However, I think the president has already been set, you know, um and um and while I I honestly I I I get everybody's concerns, you live on that street, it's it's one of the best streets in town. Um um however, um I I think that um you know, there there's already this this higher density that's happening or could has the potential to happen down there. So that's kind of um kind of where I'm coming from on it, which is, you know, um on doing this. So

Colin,

yes. Um, so I and I I understand that, you know, as I'm I'm going to vote against this and I I understand that, you know, based on this conversation, the conversation we had a month ago, two months ago, that uh, you know, that vote will be probably purely symbolic. But I uh you know in in September of 24 I feel like you know when I was weighing uh you know our desperate need for housing and I'm not saying we don't still have a desperate need for housing against you know the infrastructure costs and the impacts on the neighborhood. You know, I felt like personally that in 24 it was housing at any cost that, you know, there was such a desperate need. Since that time, you know, and I know we're talking about these projects not being built within this year in 2026, we're going to have a a couple hundred apartments come online this year and next year. We're probably looking at 400 market rate and submarket rate apartments coming on. Um, you know, I look at the greater pro and and I I will my disclaimer right now is I'm not a housing expert. I'm just somebody who who just observes and I see the cottages, you know, that have been built and I see them still have empties, you know, and I think that that's probably the closest comparison to this project. And I, you know, I I have no doubt that the BISOs have the best intentions with this, you know, and they, you know, they're our partners in this. And I, you know, that makes it really hard to go against this because they have worked so hard with our planning department and really hard to vote against that. And I have so much appreciation for them, our planning department and our planning commission. Um, and it makes it really hard to vote against it. And then just the idea of voting against housing is really challenging. But it scares me that, you know, something could happen with the biscos and they could need to sell this

project before they even start uh breaking ground. And you know what R3 allows for on this project property uh could have a lot more impact than I think what you know their site plan is is a very you know to me a very palatable plan. It's uh but if this ends up with a 40ft apartment building you know where they've you know it just there that that scares me. And so, you know, with this vote, I just hope that, you know, that this does really represent a temperature change on council. Um, even if it's just me, um, I hope that before we enter into another pre-anexation agreement after this that we take a take an opportunity and reset and look at all these apartments are coming online, see how they're affecting the community, see how they're affecting the greater market, see how quickly they're filling up, and and we re-evaluate as as a council, you know, the direction that we want to go. if we want to start really starting to support, you know, small single family homes, if we want to start, you know, what direction we need to go because I feel like we've gone really successfully in the apartment direction, in the market rate and submarket rate apartment direction. We've done a wonderful job and that's our planning uh planning department. Um, I think with with any, you know, thing as challenging as the housing crisis that this community is facing, it is so nuanced and I think that we need to be constantly re-evaluating looking at this. Um, this project feels very different for me to me than it did in September of 2024. And so I'm going to be voting against this

Miles. So, um, looking into this project and hearing all the discussion and seeing all the public comments and hearing what you guys have to say as well today, um, it is interesting because I completely understand the concerns brought up in regards to the density proposed as well as the potential density that the zoning could house if another project were to um, be proposed on site or if something, you know, went wrong with the biscos. um initial plan. But I think so I think for me it really does boil down to kind of some of what Caitlyn said, which is I think I want to encourage affordable housing options in the city and that more and more these rental units that um are affordable or submarket rate are being pushed further and farther away from the city And this is something that's already gone through the works that has a pre-anexation agreement that was something that felt necessary at the time. And I also while I understand that there is a slight temperature change occurring and that we do have more rentals coming on the market and I think that's I mean it's a good thing. We've been under this huge wa weight of people just desperately looking for housing, any housing, and now people actually have some options and they're beginning to like that's a functioning housing economy. Um, I think that in this case, this one, like I think it provides something that we still need, which is affordable submarket rate housing within like close to the city center. And so I I think it's a good project.

Okay. Any other discussion? All right. I'll call for the question. Motion made by Caitlyn to consider and possible approvement of ordinance 2026-1. It's seconded by Tonnie. All those in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Roll call. Miles. I. Caitlyn. I. Colin. Nay. Tonnie. Yeah. Yes.

Jason. Hi. Motion passes 4 to one with Colin in opposition. Thank you. Thank you for coming. I encourage you all to pay attention to planning commission agenda. This will the site plan will be coming before the planning commission at that time. If there's any changes, it will come back before us. So, please uh make your comments at that um at that at that committee meeting. So, thank you everybody for question. What? We We missed being notified. Yeah. Before the pre-anexation agreement, like before that went in, we were not notified as a whole community to be able to Yeah. to make that. That's what we were frustrated about.

The only notification I got about it was the petition that the petition was three, four months ago. That was the first we were not tied. We couldn't make it. We couldn't say that we didn't like this until now that you're telling us that this is the last we can say that we have no say because we didn't know pri two years ago 2024 we had no notification that they were changing that property. Not at all.

So So I I understand where you're coming from. The the pre-anexation agreement was a negotiation between a property owner and the city and it was an if the city annexed the property, this is what they would do. What happened tonight? It wasn't I mean you could say it was predicated by the pre-anexation agreement if you like, but the council had the option to to either annex it or not. They chose to annex it based on an agreement that was had between a property owner and the city. So, the reason why you wouldn't get a notice is because it wasn't a land use decision. It was a contract between the two parties. The the actual land use decision happened tonight and started whenever it was six weeks ago or whatever it was. And that was that was the time when the public has the opportunity to either speak for or against it and to talk to your council members about whether or not it should be annexed or not. So, so the again the pre-anex the pre-anexation agreement is only if it's annexed not that it will be annexed.

There are specific requirements that the state requires for the annexation process. Yes. Preanexation agreement as Michael indicated that is a contract between property owners and the city. There's not a public process that the pre-anexation agreement goes through. The annexation process is the public process, right? Except it was approved by the city council in a public meeting.

But the the density I mean again I get that people couldn't do that but but what if they would have and thank you for loving this one. Um, what if they would have come to you and said, "Well, we only want to do three sets of duplexes or we want to provide housing for families or like more family housing instead of these are not family units. They might be for employees, but they're not for families because they're too small, too. Families can't live like that." What if they had come and just said, "We don't want to do 20 units." Let them in.

Okay. I think, like I said, there will be an opportunity at the planning commission for you guys to make those comments at that time and we'll see where where it goes with the planning commission. Even though this is a specific agreement, as you heard Corey say, there is an opportunity for you all to speak at a planning commission and they do. Well, if they basically what the agreement is, they do, but if they want to change or they can't, it has to come back before us. that we do have an agreement with the property owner, right? And it does say what the what we expect and what they expect of us. If that changes, the council both parties actually will have to approve it.

So there is you have another opportunity, I guess, is my point. So if the city takes over, are they going to approve the water line on that road? Well, I think the discussion here is over. So um again, you can go to the planning commission meeting. A good question. You can talk to our engineering department about that.

All right. Next up, we have another public hearing. I'm going to open this public hearing at 7:21 p.m. And this public hearing is for resolution 012026, a resolution amending the fiscal year 2025 26 budget. And Michael has included in your packet kind of a rundown of those amendments. Again, this is for our budget that we approved July 1st to this date and the changes that have taken place during that time period. So, go ahead and let you make presentation questions from the council. We'll open it up to the public.

Okay. So, I'll just run through this really quick. Uh this the scope of this amendment affects the general fund, the water fund, the sewer fund, and the storm water fund. Anything that's not one of those funds is not affected by this amendment. Um, starting with revenues as highlights, the um, the expected revenue at midyear is actually trending positive. I know I gave a presentation not too long ago that that was a little bit gloomy, but uh, the last few months we've seen our our taxes come in and they've been a little bit above, right? that has only brought us to level with the with these first six months as compared to the first six months of last year. So for instance with resort community tax we've collected 2.15% more than we had collected at this point last year. Um for sales tax it's 1.7% more for transient room tax it's 1.6% less. So, so that that's what's going on. Um, it's I just want to bring up again how important it is to look at taxes in big blocks and not as months alone because uh transient room tax, the one that I told you was actually a little bit less as far as the trend goes. The December numbers, the collect the that was collected in October, the actual payment in December was 29% higher than it was the December before. But that only brought us up to 98.4% of in the first compared to the last six months. So things are looking good. They're they're not looking great by any means, but we'll take it. I think this is generally what we plan on is about a one one to two% fluctuation up and down. Um so basically flat. These are these are pretty good numbers as far as I'm

concerned. We're looking forward to the spring and seeing how things pan out. But but the the the late fall, early winter was actually pretty good. One comment on the TRT increase. I don't think we should take that as an increase for that month that that many people actually there's that many more people in our hotels. We kind of feel like the the tax commission may have just collected money that from past due accounts or something like that that increased at the rate. We don't know. We have no idea. But that's kind of our assumption because it doesn't align with sales tax increases. It does not not for the same period of time.

Okay. So, um the uh revenues that we're seeing from permit fees are are up as well. That's there's a lot of building going on as you know. Um there's some some large permit fees being paid and so we're seeing those go up. And then we're also seeing more grants come in than what were planned especially with police grants. And these are out there doing enforcement. you've probably seen them out there a lot lately. Uh, a lot of that has to do with the grants that we get from the state to to do traffic enforcement. So, those are increasing as well. So, we do have some updates that we need to do to revenue. So, um, we we are increasing with this amendment permit fees 19 to $119,000. Um, it's actually 119,000 between two categories. So, uh, we have two categories of permit fees that are increasing for a total of 119,000 more than what was budgeted. Um, the state police grants were increasing those about $36,000 more because that's what's anticipated to come in. We're also needing to transfer some um funds from the fund balance to cover some uh future liabilities for staffing costs. These are liabilities that every year in our uh in our audit they show up as quote unfunded liabilities. They're still liabilities. Unfunded is kind of a misnomer because they are funded. They're funded by the the general fund. Um what we're doing based on our accountant's suggestion is that we're moving those funds from the actual amount of money from the general fund anonymous. it's in there kind of anonymously and moving that into a line item so it's very clear that those those liabilities exist. They're real. Um those are liabilities that we would pay

out for vacation and things like that if somebody were to retire or leave the employment of of the city and we have limits on how much those are and everything, but they do exist. They've always exist and this money has always been there to cover those. So, we're moving those into the general fund. Um but it's not necessarily going to be an expense this year. Um just when people retire again and when people leave the employment that we pay those out and we're legally obligated to do so. Um the other thing is that we received some insurance proceeds for this roof on this building. It was deposited into the general fund in the last year's budget. we're taking it out of the general fund and putting it into this year's expenses to pay for um the work that was done this year. So, so that's a total increase in the general revenues of $1,18,000 96 million18968. And so the bulk of that are the two transfers from the general fund for restricted funds uh that need to pay for things that they were intended for. And then the other portion uh comes with the permit fees increase and the state grants increase. As far as the expenditures go, the big expenditures that we're looking at that are increasing, again going with the revenues I was just talking about, would be the future liabilities, which is $415,000, and that's across all the general fund departments. Uh the benefits have increased just a little bit, $77,000. That's about um it's about $700 per employee per year. Uh we have some other things that are going to into effect to offset those costs. Um but that's those those are real increases. Those happen yeartoear. And then uh we're also moving money into

from like I said with the general fund for the roof that's $435,000 for that uh what's left of it and the general building maintenance of $75,000 because there wasn't enough um budgeted in there for the actual maintenance for this building and some other buildings as well. The other thing is is that the dispatch services uh contribution to the county was a little bit more than what was anticipated in the budget. The council did approve that contribution and we're just adding the $72,000 to bring that line it line item up to where the actual amount was of that expenditure. So there's some um changes in some other areas where you can see in the budget there are things that are moving around. You might see some negatives and some positives of things moving around but uh generally speaking it's no net change with those. We've moved sustainability and communications into city admin and my department. They're always in my department. We just some for some reason had a couple departments with just one person in each. And then the other one is parks. There were some lines that didn't match up and we're just fixing those, moving them up and down, but there should be no net changes in those. So, this total general fund expenditure increase is the same as the revenue increase 1 million. Um, I think it's actually 118968. So, um the I won't go over all those again, but I just want to say with all the changes that were done, what the net amount of increase in the um expenditures that don't fall into the dispatch service agreement, the maintenance on the building, city hall roof, benefits or future liabilities. What's left in that change is $43,000. And that's how

much we're seeing the budget increasing actually except other other than those things that I just mentioned. So just general increases of about $43,000. So that's the general fund. Um pretty pretty basic stuff. There are some um things we're still evaluating. So you might see some columns in there where you see some negatives or you see some where something was um charged in a line but wasn't budgeted for this year. There are some general ledger changes that we're making because there were some things that were charged in in incorrect places. We're moving those things around. I'm not proposing those for budget amendments at this time because it's not necessary because we're just moving things around within the budget. Everything falls within that increase that I was just talking about. So, the only other change with this budget is has to do with the water, sewer, and storm water fund. And what we're looking at there is the same increases for future liabilities and and benefits because there are employees in those departments as well. But the big things are the auditor has stated that it's best practice that we actually do start budgeting depreciation within these funds. Not start we were before it was it was actually missed this last budget the one before I started. So um it didn't get included in this budget. So we are including it now. Now, these are funny increases because they're they're shown as expenses. They're shown as actual debits to the account, but they don't go anywhere. They stay in the account. It's kind of interesting. Um, it's just it's it's an expense. It shows as an expense, but the money never leaves those funds.

That's a great expense. Yeah. As a that's best kind of expense. Those are the best kind of expenses. Um so so again no cash leaves the fund. So those are all of the changes that we have uh for this year. Uh we don't need to make any revenue changes to water, sewer and storm water because the revenue was already high enough to cover all these these increases and uh recommending approval of the amended budget. Questions for Michael? Of course I have, but

I don't go first. Um well I was curious with the increase in benefits because I know I it looked like just a little bit across all of them. What what is that? It was it was just the cost of of the insurance charge to keep the same benefits that we have now basically. So this would be the the medical, dental, vision, all of those together was a total increase per employee on average of about $700 per year. Thanks. Um, okay. I had a few I I was curious because I noticed in the parks there were like lots of um kind of shifts. Was was that kind of what you were talking with? Um, yeah,

General Ledger. Yeah. So, there a lot of those were just done on the wrong lines. Um, there's there's a few of those here and there. Some of them we've just done with general ledger changes, but some of them we're just like, we're doing amendment anyways. Let's just make all these changes. But the net outcome is is basically the same budget. There there might be there's an increase you'll see in the in the bottom line because of the future liabilities and the the benefits, but everything else stays the same. It just moves around.

Okay. Yeah, I was just trying to figure out that web. Um, thanks. And then I I noticed I think it makes sense to move comms and sustainability into um general or into admin. Yes, thank you. Um but I noticed it wasn't everything entirely. How did how was that kind of broken down? So it's it should be everything from January 1 forward. Okay. So everything that was charged in there before dece up to December 31st stays in there. There might be some irregularities. Those will be resolved with uh GL account um ledger. What do we call them?

Journal entries. Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I see that now. That makes sense. Um a couple of changes I noticed also. Um, for community contributions, I noticed that we nixed the 75,000 for social services.

I believe the the reason for that is because it was moved into individual accounts. And so that $75,000 was an a redundant figure because we moved everything into its own account. Um, so the line items above I think actually add up to about $85,000. And then that 75,000 was a remnant of the way I proposed it to begin with and then when it got approved it just it didn't get taken out. Okay. So it's redundant because I I would have thought that would have been for the um residential utility assistance program.

Yeah. I I I don't think that's where it's charged. I I will look into that. But even even if that's what it was, there are other funds that can cover that because it's not it's not trending that way. Okay. To that amount. Okay. Yeah. I just want to make sure that we don't lose that in the Oh, for sure. Yeah. Once it's gone, it's gone. Um I noticed also, so salaries for the most part stay across the board. I noticed police went up about 32,000. Did we add another position?

No. There were some um some planned advancements that were planned through the police department but actually didn't make it into the budget as an oversight on on our part as we were budgeting. Everything is as it was planned. Uh it just uh we should have budgeted a few extra dollars for those things. So we needed to to add that to this amendment.

Okay. Thanks. Um and it makes you feel a lot better. I know that um a lot of the overtime is supported by grant funds and MPD does a great job of doing grants. So, I appreciate that. I just, you know, seeing it in the budget, I always have to ask about those things. Um there's something else. My computer's restarted twice since we've been sitting here. So, I've lost all my notes. Um those are some of the big I think there was maybe one other one, but those are a few of the things that I caught. Oh, actually for um permit fees adjusting up to 119,000. Is that based on what we're projecting or Okay.

Yeah. So, I think I increased those up to 115,000 for each line item. Let me just look right now. Um, so building so it's uh it's um 325301 is one of them and and it went from 57488 to 112,000. And the other one is um I think it's the next one down actually building permits commercial. Uh we increased that one quite a bit as well because frankly there's just a lot more lot more coming in. If you look at the actual um no that's not the one actually it's the it's uh planning and zoning fees actually 325307. If you look at the actual, it's it's more than what was budgeted already. So, so we I moved those forward and with keeping um in mind all the new stuff that we know is coming forward that seems to be moving. So,

thanks. Anything else, Caitlyn? Maybe, but I can't find it. If you find it, please feel free to Yeah. Anybody else have questions? All right, I'm go ahead and open up the public hearing. Okay, to take all my questions. I know she does a good job as great. Good.

Right. So, I need to close the public hearing at 7:39. Thank you, Summer, for reminding me to do that. And and then I will ask for a motion to consider the adoption of resolution 01-2026, a resolution amending the fiscal year budget 2526. I'll make I move to adopt the FY 2526 midyear budget amendments as presented by staff. Motion by Jason. Second. I can second that. Second by Colin. Discussion. Jason. Nope. Solid. None. Thanks Michael for great work. Anybody else?

Caitlyn, last chance. Uh, I I couldn't find my last thing. Yeah, I just I Yeah, I know it's your first year putting together the budget. I think you've done a great job and I talked about this at strategic planning. Budget will continue to be a big priority for me. Um, so yeah, looking forward to going through our next budget process and continuing to improve on Yeah. everything. So that's the goal. Incremental increases. Yeah. Progress and improvement. Perfection. Yeah. All right. And just so everybody also knows, the audit is completed. The audit committee will be meeting soon. So, we should be getting the results from our audit in the next month.

What they call a clean audit. There's some suggestions, but it's a it's a good audit. Excellent. It's great. All right. Motion by Jason, seconded by Colin to approve resolution 01-2026. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. 5. All right. Moving on, we have item 5.6. Six. Consideration of adoption of a resolution to 02. Oh, sorry. It's that bad. [laughter]

Bleing. Okay. Um, they'll be right back, I'm sure. Consideration of adoption of resolution 0226, a resolution to adopt the community wildfire preparedness plan. Alexi and Kate Finley, our emergency manager director, are going to present. And we also have Clark Aman and Bryce Rogers from Rim to Rim. Clark from the fire department if we have any questions for them. They're here. Thank you guys for being here. Alexi. Okay. So, basically this is an update of the plan that was approved in 2020. This is the new plan and the focus on this is going to be from what I understand implement implementation and coordination of the plan from 2020. Is that kind of right?

Yeah. Yeah. It's a an update to that plan and um I'm going to do sort of a an overview of where we are and where this falls in preparedness planning and state requirements for fire things and then I'm going to turn it over to Kate who will talk a little bit about what's specifically in this plan. Uh so the county initiated this update this fall. Um, and as the mayor said, we have uh people here who helped develop the plan who will be available to answer questions. Um, and then this is where it falls in sort of the scope of things that are happening with wildfire preparation. Uh, because you'll be seeing more on wildfires in the coming meetings. Uh this CWP, the community wildfire preparedness plan um requires participation from local governments, fire departments and the Utah division of forestry, fire and state lands uh to develop this plan. It can include other stakeholders and in our particular case there are a lot of them uh a lot of them and we also are in this plan with the county which is an option that is provided by the state. There's also other things that are coming. So, the preparedness plan has been kind of a long-standing thing that has been around. Um, I believe we've had one since 2008. Uh, but in the last legislative session, uh, the legislature passed House Bill 48, and that also is stuff that you will be seeing in the future, but I wanted to make sure to differentiate between the two. Um, things that will be coming with House Bill 48, uh, include some wildland urban interface maps and codes and things like that. that is separate from this and we'll talk about it later. So the important part is just to um try to differentiate between these two um because uh there will be different issues that are going to be presented uh

with HB48. Okay. A brief timeline here um we have uh this process beginning in September. Um, since then, REM torem and many other partners have been involved in putting together this plan, uh, including the county and the fire department. The Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands reviewed the plan, uh, draft that you have in your packet, and then that was approved by the Grand County Commission at their last meeting tonight. It's on our agenda for consideration as well, which will be sort of the last step in these approvals that need to happen for the plan. and then in coming meetings we'll start talking about HB48. So I'm going to turn it over to Kate to talk about what's actually in the plan. Okay. So you can see on the screen all of the partnering agencies. I bring that up just to say I'm the person sitting in front of you, but there have been a lot of people who have had a ton of input on this plan, not just me. Um Grand County and City of Moab. So five years ago there were two separate plans. Um this time around there was an option to have them be part of the same plan. Part of the discussion was given that there's some contiguity right between the county and the city in terms of who manages the land as well as the creeks that run through both the county and the city and pre present a fire risk. Um given those things we were like hey let's collaborate and have a joint plan this time around. So, we've kind of covered a lot of this already, but we have to update this plan every five years through a collaborative process and set out goals for ourselves in the areas of mitigation. So, how do we reduce risk, reduce the effects of disasters, fires, um, as well as preparedness, prevention, and then maintenance both of existing projects as

well as the plan itself. These are all good practices, right? We want to take care of our community by engaging in these, but we also have to have a plan if we're going to continue participating in the state's cooperative wildfire system. That's a system where the state will shoulder some of the costs of a catastrophic fire if local government provides initial attack and engages in these planning processes. Um, if you think about some of the big fires that we see in the state where they're running through the tens of millions of dollars, like we want to continue to participate in the system. So, the plan is in your packet. Um, I think it's somewhere around a 100 pages. So, a light read. I am going to try to take some of the main goals out of that. Um, some of the things that you're going to see through all these goal slides are continuations, right? like they're always going to be focus areas for the community. I'm going to talk about some of the things that stand out as new or things that are specific to the city. So, in the prevention goals, um Alexi mentioned one of the big things for the city and the county is going to be implementing House Bill 48. So, those wildland urban interface modifications and then specific for the city is going to be looking at the current land use code to see if there are improvements to be made in the areas of fire prevention. In terms of preparedness, um, public outreach has been the focus in the past. I'm flagging it up here just because with the community wildfire defense grant and the firebreak campaign, um, I think we're going to see more public outreach in the next five-year cycle because of that. The other point I wanted to flag up as a new goal here for preparedness is developing an evacuation plan. mitigation. A lot of these goals are

going to be ongoing. One of the new goals in this year's plan is that last bullet point about providing education to city and county leadership as well as the general public on treatment strategies for hazardous fuels and then maintenance of past goals and maintenance of the plan. Again, I'm going to draw your attention to that last bullet point, which is an annual agree or annual, sorry, review of progress toward the goals. Um, I put that on there because it's a five-year plan, right? And we don't want to write it and then adopt it and put it on a shelf and forget about it until we have to revisit it again, right? We want to continue to refer back to it and ensure that we're doing the things that we set out to do for the community. Um, before we roll into questions, I think we've got some handouts for save the dates for team Rubicon. Bryce, if you want to cover that quick, please you guys see them.

Bryce, why don't you hand them to um Michael? Thank you. I can speak to Team Rubicon real quick. So, Team Rubicon is coming back again this year. If anybody is not familiar with Team Rubicon, it's a great organization where we take a lot of our military vets here. They come, they do their Sawyer training, and they get a lot of work done very, very quickly for our community. We would love it if any or all of you would like to come out and interact with them, see the work they're doing, or even just share a campfire within the evening. So, dates are there. We'll share more details in a formal invite that'll be coming to your mailbox soon.

Thanks, Bryce. Thanks. Thank you. questions. I got a question for you. So, does this does this plan give um give you guys authority or is there any enforcement of like private land owners? You know, like you know, it talks about like, oh, we're educating on how to create a defensible space, but um but does it give you like authority or to say like, hey, your property is a fire hazard. um we need you to mitigate it due to this or something or is there anything?

Uh right. In in this particular plan, we aren't doing anything like that. Uh we would need a code change or something like that. Um or to enforce our own city code. Uh when we get to some of the HB48 discussions, that is when we would start venturing into things that would be enforceable. Um so none of that is in this plan and then we'll have some discussions before um anything like that moving forward. So no also there's a bill um being presented right now house bill 215 which does not allow a city to restrict vegetation removal unless it's part of the WOOA plan. [clears throat]

So that's that was discussed yesterday at LP. So that's the only way that we can ask people to remove vegetation. So that includes weeds and I know that's been an issue also but if this bill passes we won't be able to even restrict that.

So my understanding of the the CWPP is it's it's an op something that we need to go through to do in our communities to identify hazards and to make sure we understand what those are. The state wants us to make sure to understand what those are and to have goals to address those things. And then they feel better about helping us out because we know they're kind of holding this thing over our head. We know we need their resources if there's any big fires that come down. Um and so they they require us to do this. So we know what the heck's going on and they won't pay for for those they won't subsidize us for those fires unless we have done this. So,

it's a good thing all all around, but it's not it's not necessarily the enforcement tool, right? And I would add that uh through the identification of the hazards in this plan, you know, we do the hard work of, you know, I think Clark and Cara, we we do have that grant that has been so instrumental in, you know, then being able to address a lot of these issues that are identified in this plan. So we do have the tools available. Any other questions? Call for a motion.

Are you starting? I can make a I move to adopt resolution 2-2026 adopting the community wildfire preparedness plan for wildland urban interface grand county in Moab city. Motion by calling second. I'll second that. Second by Miles. I think that's your first, isn't it? Yeah, it's my first second. You know, I feel I missed my first second without my not my second. You know, as I was sitting here, I just realized that I didn't introduce you and welcome you to the [laughter] welcome very much, Miles. Glad to have you here with us. Thanks. Okay, we have a motion by Colin, seconded by Miles. Uh, any further discussion, Colin?

None. Thank you, Miles. None. Anybody else? Thank you. This was a lot of good work. Yeah. Yeah. Great. All those in favor say I. I. I. Any oppose? Motion passes 5. And thanks, the rim for getting us to the finish line. Yeah. And Kate, for sure. And I know we'll be the Cany Lands Healthcare District will be working with you guys real soon. Yeah, definitely. Looking forward to that. Great.

Um, all right. We uh removed item 5.7. Our next item 5.8. I'm going to ask for a motion to table. We need to get some more legal uh legal input on this item. So, if I can have a motion to table the contract award for perimeter geography in the um if I could have a table for that. Motion to tables. [laughter] I motion to table item number 5.8 consideration of a contract award to perimeter geography in the amount of $149,940 for the redesign of the center street ballpark project. So, could we add to table until one of our meetings in Feb February?

Yes, I have a motion to table that until a meeting in February. Great. Do I have a second? I'll second it. Second by Jason. Any discussion? Nope. All those in favor say I. I. I. Motion passes 5-0. All right. We'll be hearing about this uh in one of our meetings in February. Okay. Next we have item 5.9 consideration of a contract award to SKM Engineering in the amount of $434,025 for the D design and installation of water and sewer facility supervising control and data acquisition SCADA system project and Dor and Obi will be presenting this for us today. Um hi Michael,

hello mayor, council members. Hi nerves welcome happy to see you here.

So tonight OB and I here for ask you to award the contract for water and sewer um SCADA installation design and installation of our water and sewer um SCADA. So the tale of that is city provide water and sewer uh services our community. This system you can imagine is complicated and it's big. There are water tanks, uh there are springs, pumps and uh lift stations, chloration stations and more. And all these are u sites need to be monitored and make sure it's functioning as it should be. And not only we want to give a good service to our community also we have to provide a safe water for our community. Um and what we have today is old and it's not functioning. It's failing. Some sites has some sort of monitoring. Some of them has nothing. And city staff physically has to drive these sites and make sure that they are working and that's waste of our staff time. Also when you make the calculation sometimes they can make mistakes. [clears throat] You can have more errors. So we do want to move from there. We would like to have a modern and centralized system. Our staff can monitor from one side make sure everything functions as it should be. Um so July last year July we advertised the RFP and we got six proposals. We surprised because we usually don't get a lot of proposals and we had four member of us review those proposals myself obser our staff. So our selection criterias were project approach and their team members the uh experience and references

cost and approximately of the field support to the city. And after we ranked these um criterias, we came up with the two um firms we like it and we interviewed them and SKML engineering was the what we decided it would be best fit for our what we looking for. I know all of most of us um interesting in the cost. So I just going to give a range what was the proposals what was the cost like. So, we got um let's see the lowest proposal was like $422,000. Highest was1,130.

So, at least we're all close. So, today we're looking for 434. So the so when they come up with the like very first proposal they are not actually the final budget. So when we talk about the SKML engineer later we decided with them Ellen voluntarily without any signing a contract or paying him came and survey the field and they come up with the final budget. So that's what we end up with this month. And yeah, is there anything you would like to add?

This is just the finalizing the contract that uh you guys I'm sure look through. Um and you know, this is just what what uh you know, we use to run our system. You guys have any questions for us? Go ahead.

Yeah. Um I I feel like one of my questions about uh and and forgive me I'm not familiar with the system but it seemed like there were different like time proposals associated like looking at the $1.1 million it was like to also manage it for like five years versus uh I don't know it it all the proposal maybe I was just really tired when I read them but all the proposals seem like slightly different in terms of like um time scope if that makes sense. I maybe I was

we let them do to the like the one of the criteria was the approach. So we asked them to how would you do this? So they come up with their own way how they will approach our site and we did a site visit. So everybody who bid had to came to the site visit and we went to each site and they take a look at it and decided what will be to implement this SCADA. So that's how they come up with their own way. So the timeline we look for the um we want to work with someone who can provide us uh service long time because what the issue right now we have is when something is go wrong when you call someone there's nobody to answer. So our staff spend so much time on the phone there's nobody to come to field and then do the work in mall. So that's one of our criteria to be approximately location the where they in the Utah or wherever in the state. Did I address the question?

Um you mean the five year like a warrant like a service plan? Yeah. So this one was more like yeah replacing all the hardware and then uh it was you know all a cart for the service. It wasn't like a plan. So we pay as we uh bring you know as we have issues we'll pay for whatever issues we have. It's not like necess it's a at a set rate in there but it's not at a you know a set amount that they they'll just do it if that makes sense. Yeah. Yeah.

I think in the contract there is a cost for the engineering. So there's a all the items is listed how much it will cost at the end there's like a engineering will cost this it become it will be hourly this rate. So if we need their help we will pay those rates in future. They'll provide software updates and things like that um throughout the the years, won't they? Uh we'll have to pay for that. Oh, we will. Yeah. Yeah. Anything else, Caitlyn? Anybody else? No. I'll have ask for a motion.

You guys are slow. I'm fighting these. I can't. [laughter] Um I motion to award the contract for the design and installation of water and ser facility supervisory control and data acquisition aka SCADA system to SKM Engineering Inc. in the amount of $434,25. Motion by Caitlyn. Second. A second. Second by Tonnie. Any further discussion, Caitlyn? Um, I think I still don't quite understand, but that's your job and and I just I I think that's that's a real value. I can try to um understand

well just I I I think it it it's helpful to know that um you guys asked for a general approach and I think that that's the value of an RFP process is um that you know you set a rubric to evaluate a particular approach and so I'm I'm trusting that though there were different approaches that the um team selected the approach that would fit best. So yes, so the when we ranked them there was a ranking the as I say the approach was I believe like 25 points and the cost was 35 points and approximately the city was 10 points. So we rank them accordingly those criterias and um then also the approach is like some um what would be what kind of equipment they would use. if they would use a a certain software in future we cannot go and implement other sites like we didn't want to work with those people we like to choose someone is some sort of open source we can if you do not like the service we like them they they provide we can bring another person and then they will just take it because there will be no um what do we call that the

proprietary hardware correct all right by Caitlyn second by Tony All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes 5. Thank you guys. Thank you. Um our last item is consideration and possible approvement of a approval of a development agreement for 57 West King Creek Boulevard between Holdings LLC in the city of Moab, Utah. Mayor, I think it would be best if I recuse myself from this item as uh I may potentially work for them in some of this development. Okay, thank you. You're welcome.

Okay, we have Corey and Johanna again and I believe the developers are here also if we have questions for them. And just for everybody's uh oh

uh yeah basically just so you know the planning commission did provide a positive recommendation and um there are some land use changes or options that we provided which is basically uh some minor and our parking changes and setback changes in exchange for affordable housing. Exactly.

Um so today um we're talking about the development agreement between the city and the Amasa apartment project. They are at 57 West Creek as highlighted on this map. Um their zone is R3 multihold residential. We have our applicant with us tonight. Um and they are proposing some apartments. Um in our agreement, these are the city concessions. We have a reduction of 5T from the 15t setback. um an alteration to the parking calculation that allows for one parking space per unit um only in phase three regardless of the number of bedrooms um in this zone. Normally that calculation is one parking space for a studio and 1.5 for all other units. Um there's also a waiver of the active employment household requirement um in exchange for the LITC affordability which we'll get to. Normally in this zone that would be um onethird of the units would need to be restricted. Um they also have a custom process for the plan and plat approval. Um that's loosely based off of our um MPD process.

MPD the master plan development process you will remember from Lion's Back. We will. Oh [laughter] well we could go through that. Um, no, no, no. Oh, okay. Yeah, we remembered all of a sudden. [laughter]

Okay. Um, and these are the city benefits. In phase one, we have 50 units. Um, and then I have listed out the unit types and their AMI restrictions. Um, phase 2 is going to have 38 units. um which are also I don't have listed out by type, but they're all going to be uh below 50% of area median income. And then phase three is um up to 12 condos. Okay, got a I'll keep going.

Keep going.

Okay. Um, so we started drafting this agreement in August. Right now, they're working through their plan and plat approvals with the DRT. um they've been awarded their uh lowincome housing tax credit funding um from uh for phases one and two. Um and as the mayor said, planning commission has forwarded a positive recommendation for this agreement. Um I'll go through um a little bit of the process concession. Um so as mentioned they have a custom process. This looks like um the preliminary and plan and plat are going to be approved by planning commission. Um and then the final plan and plat of each phase, there's going to be three phases will be administratively approved. Um the development agreement today uh will entitle the whole project and then as uh we record uh the plat for each phase um they will come back and negotiate with us a specific subsequent DA for each phase. Um this is their conceptual plat. We are working out ironing out their uh preliminary plat right now. This is very similar to that.

Um, I can show you what the phases are going to be. We've got lot six, seven, and eight, and 11 being phase one. We'll have new buildings. Um, we'll see that on their plan on the next slide. Um phase two will be lot five, four, three, nine, 10. And then our corner lots are going to be phase three. Let's take a look. Where is the open space going to be?

The requirement is open space or um meeting area. Um so what my cursor is over right now is their clubhouse which is a community area for all residents. Okay. So, going to the city's concessions. First is the setbacks. Um, setbacks allow them to fit the proposed amount of units. um given just the raw square footage of this parcel um they could have up to 99 units, but they're not doing that. Um so this is a great example of how um a lot of times the feasibility of how many units you can actually fit on a site are nowhere meet how many you could do given our calculations. Um the waiver of the AEH um we think this is going to be LITC is going to uh have a similar effect to AEH providing housing. Um, and then the process, we want to make sure that this goes through quickly for them given their uh timeline to meet their uh funding deadlines. Um, but also give the public enough input.

Okay, I think that's going to be it. Questions? just have a hopefully an easy question. Um, so in the development agreement, it just generally states that they're able to uh what seems like condo out units at their discretion. Is that is that just applicable to the phase three or correct? It is. Okay. That are already Got it. Thank you. Okay. What was your question again? So it in the development agreement it just states very what very generally with no reference to just phase three that they're able to at their what seems like at their discretion uh you know uh have the oppos option of utilizing condominium division

right within four of the parcels and I guess those four parcels are the phase three parcel. So that was with no ah and those the phase three is not AMI [clears throat] right anyway designated yeah thank you the only thing the concern that I have was um I don't know if this is a concern that anyone else has is the alteration to parking calculation to allow one spot per unit in phase three is that like like where do people park if they have more than Yeah, it'll be individual ownership.

Yeah, that may be a good question for the applicants who addresses how they're planning to accommodate the needs and balance of their market analysis products. So, this is where again we're we're fostering and shephering this through, but again, this is a development agreement much like you're talking about with pre-exations is ne negotiation on their plan as to how they're hoping to execute. So, the narrative behind that might be well addressed by the applicants themselves. But your point, what

can I just bring up why the city might be willing to do something like this from our perspective? You know, building having parking requirements is kind of getting an old thing in in planning. It's it's it's um kind of shaped how cities are developed. And even in small cities like ours, which should be kind of urban, they kind of take on a suburban type of feel because of a lot has to do with a lot of the parking requirements and then building roads everywhere and and and driving is so is so um encouraged everywhere you go. So what the new the perspective now is that provide the parking but don't overdo it so that people have an incentive not an incentive I wouldn't say the don't overdo it so and work on the other active transportation components like we have done with our complete street on cane creek we have we have bus stops we have ample sidewalks we have crossings midblock crossings that connect to trails and things like that. And the fact that this is close in, it's close into town. If you um walk across the street and go behind the church, you can be down to to Second South or whatever it is within a couple of minutes. So it it provides an opportunity to to maybe focus on some other things like providing more density and more affordable housing and not taking up so much um space with parking and and giving people alternatives or encouraging them to have alternative transport make alternative transportation choices which I think has been shown that people do and uh and it actually works

and this is something the state legislature brings up every year also the need for so much parking.

Yes. So there may be a state preeemption coming of how park standards are applied. Um typically developers and projects they know what their market will want or won't want. We've had developers say oh we need to park it way deeper than we're requiring given the people we're speaking. Um but and if I might speaking to the nature of this project given it is phases of a project. It's it's the staff's intention and belief that the way we've constructed this development agreement is that this should be operating as a cohesive and integrated development. So phase three while it is being parked this way we are going to have a centralized parking uh coordination amongst phases is the hope. the way the easements uh public utility easements and access easements are laid throughout this process which is deep into the platting discussion but identifying that essentially the hope is is that the entirety of this project whether it's in phase one or phase two should have access and coordination now how the developers plan to manage that was I think what I was implying in the front end is internally how they're managing that so ensuring that they're parking their units based on how they're able to manage it could Yeah, we're parking at a requirement of one, but maybe they have additional amenity option to buy into phase one parking or something like that. Um, that's the we're not sure this immediate strategy, but that's our hope as staff and constructing an agreement this way is that there each phase shouldn't in my mind be left to their own accord because it can't be in this situation. from a utilities perspective, land use perspective. We we're looking at this as it's not, but almost like a resort. Yes, there's individual ownerships, there's indiv indiv, excuse me, individual phases, but it is ultimately the project is cohesive and we're going to really do our very best to ensure that's continued throughout the rest of the phases. So, they're not left to hopefully suffer as

a consequence at the very end, but sure coordinate. So, while we're on the parking, are they going to be required to do the EV conduit in Oh, interesting. Yeah. Yeah, they um are vested about two weeks before we pass that. That was Well, I would encourage them to consider that it's not required. Yeah, they can speak more onto something. So there's yeah a number of sustainability elements that are electedly moving to Caitlyn. Do you have any questions?

No. Oh wow. Okay. Well, uh, any other questions from the council? I'll just go ahead and ask for a motion. I mean, I give the applicants opportunity to speak. Okay. If they so choose. Can or you can't. It's up to you. I mean, uh, you don't have you don't have you don't have to. I Yep. Well, I don't know that we want a full presentation. I think, um, if you know, just tell us.

No problem. We will. We know it's late and we're the last one on the agenda. Um, thank you so much, uh, council members and mayor for having us and for considering this, um, proposal for the Amasa Apartments development agreement. My name is Amanda Dylan. I work for Give Development. I'm on the board chair of a group called a nonprofit called Develop by Women. Hi everyone. Good evening. I'm Claudia Loisea and I'm an associate developer with Develop by Women and working closely with Amanda on this project. Um, so the, um, just to give you guys a little bit of background, we acquired this property uh, last March in 2024, I guess two Marches ago, 2024. Um, and there's 36 existing affordable housing units there. Those uh, affordable housing units will have their affordability restrictions expire in 10 years. And so by um doing new development and rehabbing those existing 36 units, we're going to be prolonging the affordability on those units for another 50 years. Um we also uh saw this as an opportunity to bring a lot more family-sized housing to this part of Moab. Uh our new construction is largely comprised of two-bedroom, threebedroom, and fourbedroom apartments. Um, in addition to the clubhouse that, um, I think was referenced by Johanna, we're also going to be building a playground and kind of outdoor space for the residents to use, um, in light of the fact we're going to be getting rid of all that lawn space in the middle. Um, we, you know, understand water is a very, um, precious resource in Moab and that lawn space is largely unused. Um, I also just want to address one thing on the parking. Um so all of the other um 88 units that will be uh built in the first two phases will have just the typical parking requirements by the city. Um and phase three right now we're anticipating are probably going to be

studios and onebedroom apartments. So they would probably end up complying with your parking uh zoning um in the end. Um and as Corey mentioned, the development is intended to be cohesive. all the residents across all the phases will use the same clubhouse, the same playground, the same parking areas, and that'll be managed through like a permit system. So, um, do you want to add anything, Claudia?

Yeah, sorry, I know we're leaning over here. I think the only thing I'll add here is that we've been able to, um, engage the community with, um, neighboring residents also involved in, um, the initial visioning and, um, explanation of kind of what we would like to do with the site. Um, we also have a couple of partnerships with some nonprofits for set aside units, which is part of our requirement with our low-income housing tax credit application. Um, so we're working closely with CC Haven, um, who supports survivors of domestic violence, which we, um, plan on providing housing to as well. And then also, um, for the second phase, we're planning on working with the Moab Multicultural, um, center as well, so that way we um, are able to house individuals that experience different disabilities. Um and like many litech projects, we're um also opening up um units for those that have experienced homelessness um of recent. Um so we um have been trying to do our best to um engage locally and to really understand the fabric and the needs of Moab. Um and doing so through these um individuals and organizations that have a better pulse sometimes that we might. Um, so yeah, from the beginning up until now and even through construction and design, um, we've been, um, trying to be, um, yeah, community informed and and seeking, um, better ways to engage organizations that we know are going to help us house individuals that really need it as well.

That's great. Thank you. All right, I'm going to ask for a motion. I will move to approve the development agreement for 57 West Cane Creek Boulevard parcel 01-00001-02000 between Amassa Holdings LLC and the city of Moab. I can second that motion by Tonnie, second by Colin. Any discussion, Tonnie? No, this just it's really good to see something good happening with that property. Go on.

Uh something great happened with that property. But I will say that uh you know this is such a wonderful compliment with all the the uh pedestrian safety enhancements that we've seen along that road. But I will say that the pressure is on the city because when you go beyond that road uh to connect th this new development in those neighborhoods with downtown and with schools uh you're looking at a you know maybe a condemned bridge a undeveloped easement you know some so I under under in process in process yeah so I I just want to say pressure pressure is on the city you know we really need to to work on our connectivity there and really make sure that that all these new community members do have great access to our Thank you.

Anybody else?

Yeah. Um I I agree with everything that's been said. I think it's a great project. Um and I think it's an amazing part of the of that street and I think it'll be a great cause. Going back to the parking, I I have an issue and I have heartburn over that and and I guess I have it's with the um the language in there that alterate alteration to parking calculation to allow one parking space per unit in phase three regardless of the number of bedrooms. So, while you're saying like, hey, there'll be studios, you know, so the one um the one spot which I agree with would accommodate that still there's regardless number of units and and I and I and I'm kind of curious, you know, because it you are packing so much in there. There's still a lot of people no matter where they are um in life that have have two cars, you know, and um and when we live in a rural area, it's a very real thing having people, you know. Um so that's my only um concern is that you know that is the one parking space per unit phase three regardless of the number of bedrooms you know so something changes within phase three that you guys are like hey we're going to start putting in four or five bedroom places which I don't think you are because of the um because of the site know you're still we've agreed to give one parking spot so that's what I have harbored Anybody else?

All right, I'm going to call for the question. A motion made by Tonnie, seconded by Colin to approve a development agreement for 57 West Gang Creek Boulevard between Amasa Holding Lac and the city of Moab. All those in favor say I. I. I'm going to abstain. Um I do not have a conflict of interest on this. However, um out of an abundance of caution, familiarity with the developers and everything, no. Can I not? I mean, no, you can abstain, but we can't we can't approve it. Why? Why? Because we need three votes. Do you don't have Wait, did you vote against it? I haven't decided.

I don't understand. Why are you abstaining? Because of your work. You have familiarity. I'm going to vote to approve this. Yeah, it's um with the hope that it's going to be studios, you guys. [laughter] All right. Okay. Graduate. I mean, I can change my vote. I can Sorry. If we vote together, it's fine. Okay. That's what I Okay. All right. So, if motion by Tony, seconded by Colin. All those in favor say I. I.

I. All those opposed. Motion passes 30 with um you Caitlyn abstaining and Miles has recused himself. So motion passes. Thank you very much. We very much appreciate it. I think you're not I think you're going to find No, you said he might be project. Okay, thank you guys. Appreciate it. Um, and now we have we're at the end of our general business. We'll move on to city manager updates. Oh, shoot. It's a journ.

Yeah,

so I do have a couple of updates for you. Um, have to do with projects that we have going on. I wanted to give you a list of really great things that are happening right now. And a lot of these, most of these, if not all of them, are also being put out in different ways by our communications person, which is uh Lisa Church. And so I wanted to bring up uh several projects that are going on right now that people may have heard about or wondering what's what uh all dirt is from, why there's big piles of dirt in park, things like that. So just go over a few of these really quick. Uh the first two are Mil Creek stabilization projects. We have Rotary Park that's going on. Uh it's a as you can see there's a lot of work going on down there and it all has to do with stabilization of the creek bank and prep in preparation and recovery from um floods that have happened in the past and could happen in the future. There's a lot of other things that are involved in that but just basically that's that's what it is. um on 400 East just downstream from it at the youth garden project or adjacent to the youth garden project. There's also a large um stabilization project going on there. There's some diversion happening with the creek uh that makes it look a little bit bigger than it actually is. Um so that they can work in the creek with all of these things that happens. And uh I won't get into a lot of the detail, but there's there's big structures being put in and and creek uh and bank stabilization and things like that just to to again recover from past and and prevent against future erosion uh as a result of floods coming through this this area. Do we Michael, do we have any guess on completion dates or range for those those two projects? the uh right now the uh the contract that we have uh with

contractors through near end of February uh they'll likely be requesting an extension on that. Um we had some uh I'll say um for lack of a better word acceptable delays. Um and uh we're uh we're actually putting in our uh we just put in our application to NRCS for an extension on that grant as well. Uh so uh the official date that we'll have hopefully once we get that approved will be pushed back quite a bit further but actual completion should be sometime in early March is what we're anticipating. Thanks Mark.

Just hang out. Um so you might have noticed some work going on in Anonymous Park. Anonymous park as well. It's uh mainly fuels reduction back there. There's a lot of standing dead trees. There's a lot of fallen dead trees. There's there's um debris around that is washed down from floods. And then there's also a lot of uh is it acacia I think is what we're working on down there and ironed things like that. Our staff is down there this week working on that. Uh we are actually using some new equipment down there as well. Hasn't happened yet. Haven't seen it out there yet, but um they have been able to knock a lot of it down already with the equipment that uh we generally use. And then they're piling up as well. and that we'll work with rimtorim on on um um some burn piles and things like that to get rid of that stuff. Uh the sidewalk project is is getting started this week. That's uh starting at the in front of the Moab information center. This is an ongoing project's going to be uh several a lot of phases on this project. Uh we we had to kind of bend over backwards to make this thing work. And the the way that we made it work was to make it a big project but also allow the contractor to stretch it out um over a number of different uh different periods of time. So really looking forward to that being done. There has been a lot of uh interest in this one on Facebook there. We have it had um Alexi has had arborists involved looking at the trees with Mark. We're doing our very best to save those trees down there. and we have some some um I think some exciting things we're working on to to do what we can to save those trees. I think uh I'll leave it at that. Uh as we go along and do these projects, not every tree will be able to save. It's going to become in some cases, not all. In some cases, it'll be either a sidewalk or a tree.

And and you know, in most a lot of cases, we'll be able to plan around them and mitigate. Some cases we won't. But we're the one thing we can promise is we'll do our best to to keep as many of these healthy trees as possible. So, uh the next one is uh the nuisance abatement on Mountain View is finishing up. Our staff is doing the tie up of it all. There's there's just a big hole there right now. It's not it's not like a dangerous hole or anything. It it's uh just a a depression, I would call it. and our staff will go in and fill that in and compact that and everything and so that it uh it can withstand uh rains and things like that going forward. Uh the waste bins will be rolling out in February. Uh the we're really excited for these because we're going to have uh recycling and just regular waste bins. They're larger, they're better looking, and uh what else are they? They're they're art

they're going to be art wrapped. So they're we're really excited for these. We're going to be um we're going to put out some social media on this, some videos and things like that. Our uh our art staff and Alexi have been working really hard to come up with some designs to wrap those things and we're taking advantage of that because the state wouldn't let us wrap their stuff. So, we're going to wrap our own stuff. And uh the lighting project uh we're replacing the old lights with LEDs in cooperation with uh Rocky Mountain Power and uh the so lights are going in. We are hearing from some people about the lights. They're different. They're LEDs. Um they they need to kind of break in a little bit, but people can start requesting shielding beginning in mid midFebruary. So, if they are in a situation where um they think that shielding would help with the uh with the light coming onto their property, that's something that they will be able to start requesting in midFebruary. And the city will be um covering most of the costs for those uh if not all. Thanks. That was it actually. I just Okay, make you feel like you're on the spot, but I just in case there were any other questions on dates. Okay, really quick. Uh recreation, I got a couple of great things to bring up. Spring recreation sports registration begins very soon. It's youth soccer and volleyball or it's actually going on right now. It closes February 5th. The city recreation is seeking vendors for the April 4th Easter egg hunt and you can contact through our website the uh the Rex recck department or sports at moabc city.gov. The uh first art walk of the year is going to be February 6th, 5 to 8 pm. Um the wrap tax grant which is um we're we're granting out uh through the proceeds that we brought in 20% which is what the council has has uh dedicated to

this and it's about $80,000 that will be um given out in uh grants to community members and organizations. That application period is open through February 27th and you can find details at moabc city.gov wrap. Um public works is doing Christmas tree recycling through January 31st and you can drop those off at the public works yard and um but please don't just throw them in the public works. Check in and if it's not open don't do it please. But they're open Monday through Friday. Friday 8 to 3 pm. And if you check in, they'll tell you where to throw it and we'll get rid of it for you. So that was it. Whoops. All right. Okay. Michael.

Yeah.

Uh, next we have our mayor council reports. But before we move on to our specific reports, I would like to make a statement about some of the very tragic events that we've seen in Minnesota and express my sadness over those events. I'm sure all of you feel the same way. Um, I really am particularly sad about Renee Good and Alex's deaths. Um, I think these incidents have deeply affected a lot of people across the country and also the folks in our own community. We've been hearing from people that are really nervous and scared to even go to school. I want to make everybody know that the city is supporting our federal lawmakers, specifically Senator John Curtis, for his thorough and request for a thorough and transparent investigation in those deaths, in those incidents that have occurred in Minnesota. And I and I trust that they will move forward with those investigations to make sure that the trust for our government and justice is allowed to take its proper course. I want to be very clear that our local comm community where we stand as a local community. Last February, our Moab city police chief Bell stated that the department's primary mission is to ensure the safety and welf welfare of all of our residents regardless of their immigration status and that trust and cooperation between law enforcement and the community are essential in keeping everybody safe. In our community, our residents and visitors will be afforded their full constitution protected rights against unreasonable search and seizures without properly executed search warrants. I have full confidence in our local law enforcement leaders and their commitment to protect and serve our community fairly, safely, and without bias. Moab City also strongly respects the first amendment rights of our residents

to gather and protest peacefully. We expect those we expect those expressions to continue in a positive, lawful and nonviolent manner and with the support of our law enforcement who are dedicated to ensure the public safety for everybody. This is a very difficult time I think for many Americans. I know that it is has been for me. Our hearts are with the families and communities hard harmed by these recent events. And as a community, we encourage calm, constructive dialogue and collective efforts that promise promote safety, justice, and mutual respect. In Moab, we believe in caring for each other, respecting our differences, and moving forward together with compassion and resolve. We are a vibrant, close-knit community, and we will continue to strengthen our bonds through unity and being united. So, I just felt that I needed to make that statement so our community knows where our law enforcement stands and where we stand as a city. So, thanks for that opportunity to speak.

Thank you for saying that. Okay, so now we'll move on to reports and I'm going to start with you, Jason.

I'm not sure I follow that up how you follow that. Very well said. Um, so me thank you for saying those things. That was great. Very good. Um, so it's been a while since I had a report. So I will start on December 18th. Um, December 18th I had a a brief meeting um with um the mayor and Ron Dunn from Dr. Kennedy's um office. And um then on January 5th I attended the Moab city swearin. Um and also that day I attended the the airport um board meeting where they've you know talked about ongoing things to um you know work on a contract to great to get a good EAS contract going into the future. Um they've also discussed putting in a new billboard um advertising that you can fly into Moab and that billboard went up I think like two days ago. So, I don't if anybody's driven past it, but that's up. Um, on January 8th and 9th, I attended the Moab city retreat, which was good time. Um on January 12th um I attended a Mo Travel Travel Council um paid media workshop where they met with their advertising agencies and discussed um some ideas of of they'd been doing a lot of research on um what advertising needed to be done. you know, speaking with locals, you know, kind of gauging the um the temperature of advertising and kind of came up with some great um you know, a great plan forward to advertise um Moab in the surrounding areas. And um also on that day I had a meeting with um with the mayor and chairman Candas to talk about um some collaboration ideas or just talk about um kind of it was more collaboration for the Moab business summit and um what was going to be

talked about there. on the 13th at that t we um then had another mob travel council advisory advertising workshop where where talked about what advertising was going to be done you know as far as the different um outlets you know such as u billboards expedia you know um and and um internet you know stuff like that then I also had a um travel council board meeting um where we we discussed a lot of those things on um January 14th I attended had a dinner with Assistant Secretary Kevin Lily from the Department of the Interior, which was very, very good to to meet with him and kind of talk to him about some of the issues that we we're dealing with. Um, and not really issues, but also a lot of the good things that we have going on within our national parks and in our areas and our public lands. Um, January 15th, I attended a business summit um where we had a great showing from, um, Long City Counselors and stuff. Um, it was great. It was a lot of fun. I I learned a lot. And then that evening, um, I attended a fireside chat with Assistant Secretary Kevin Lily, but he didn't get there till really late. And so, um, I ended up leaving like about the time he got there and stuff. So, um, but yeah, it was a good meeting as well. We had, um, good Moab City Council showing at that as well. It was great. And then um and then on Monday the 19th, I had a meeting with um Michael Black, um Bill Winfield, and Steve Gleason to talk about the upcoming EAS contract. Oh, I'm calling [laughter]

you. [laughter] I didn't want I wanted you to bring it up in your book and where we kind of talked about um kind of the um why we're why the county is kind of looking at having someone help them write the EAS contract, which will help um you know, hopefully with the future um airline service into Moab. Um, January 20th, um, I had a Grand County EMS board meeting and, um, and that is it. So, pretty full month. Thanks, Jason. Tony, well, I haven't been nearly as busy as you.

Um, yes, I have. It was just different things. Um, on the 18th, we had our council dinner at Sunset Grill, and we discovered lots of us like snails, some of us don't. [laughter] A grand h time was had by all. Um on the 8th and the 9th I went to the council retreat and I think that that was a really it was really well done. I think we learned a lot and we got through a lot of information pretty fast. And on the night of the 8th I also went to a county healthcare special service district meeting and I've had some personal issues that have been requiring my attention. one is moving my son to Moab. He I have not lived near him for 30 years, so it will be nice to have him close.

That's it. Thanks, Tony. Colin. All right, I'll make it quick. Uh December 10th, solid waste meeting. Uh just finalizing the budget. On the 18th, I attended a wayfinding workshop um where we were just uh sort of starting with some exercises to define the branding of of the the wayfinding effort. Um but exciting things happening on that front. On the 5th, I went to the swearing in. Congratulations to Miles and Joet. [laughter]

Uh I knew you were there, too. I remember seeing you. I do remember seeing you now. I'm sorry. [laughter] Um, uh, let's where where was I? Strategic planning on the 8th and 9th. Uh, you know, one of the big highlights to me was just hearing from our department heads all the amazing work that they're doing and uh, you know, I just can't say enough how the city has seems to have so much momentum right now. It's really neat. Um, attended the the first of the year rapt meetings on the 12th. uh several new members. Um looking forward to to a lot of amazing applications coming in and it's worth saying again that uh applications are it's open now and it closes on February 27th. So get those applications in. I attended a trail mix meeting on the 13th. On the 15th I attended the the chamber business summit. Uh again, yeah, very well attended. Um just a very well well put on event. On the 19th, I I was also at the uh essential air service meeting. Um and then on the 21st, I had a solid waste meeting. Um where a lot of really exciting things are happening with uh you know, new covers to the landfills. The composting program is is set to start. Uh probably going to be making compost a week from now. Um and a new tire removal program. Look at this. just got uh

both of our computers just just restarted city cups. Uh yep goes

umptress steering committee meeting today. A lot of exciting things happened. Um really cool things. the uh so on September 29th, the 16 million tons, the last train full of tailings of the actual pile left the pile on September 29th. And so now any material that's still left in the pile is subpile or uh what do they call it? Off pile. And so they're just putting on the finishing touches, which is so exciting. There's going to be a April 9th a celebration for that 16 million tons. Um and then Joet, we need to have some conversations because they're really looking for some input uh on what infrastructure they want us to want them to hold on to.

Oh, okay. Consistent with Yeah. Yeah. the tour. We'll talk about that next week when we meet. Um that sounds great. Also, just so you know, on that same note, we learned today that the um site was uh appropriated $67 million. Great. For their budget for 26. That's great. So, that's good news. It's great news. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Uh should I move to Miles while you go to Miles? All right. Miles.

Okay. Um so I also attended the January 5th sworn swear in um and was sworn in. Uh congratulations to Jason and it as well. Um other than that it was into strategic planning on the 8th and 9th. Um I did watch the PNZ meeting on the ETH um on YouTube. I know I had not been uh officially appointed yet but I was keeping a pulse on what was going on with planning and zoning. Um, I also attended the reception for Kevin Lily that uh took us a little bit late. Um, and I had the opportunity to speak with some of the protesters out front as well. Um, I know that public lands are not a big city issue, but I feel like it's good to keep a pulse on that in the community. Um, and I had the opportunity to speak with uh our senator Nate Bluen while he was down here as well. Um, and uh, that's it for me. I'm excited to get started on all these new appointments.

Great. Thanks, Miles. Okay. Think of it off the top of your head.

Well, no. I'm I I'm I myself back. Um I also attended Swearing in. So fun. Great team. Excited to be here. Um and then also on the 5th attended a Utah Renewable Communities meeting. Um they had just gone through their public hearing on December 16th, which they reported went really well. Um at that meeting beginning of the month, they were anticipating potentially having program approval maybe end of January um or early February. They're kind of anticipating that they might roll out approvals um in batches. I haven't gotten any updates on that. Um we'll be passing that to Miles. We'll be transitioning together. Um but when when that happens in the next couple months um and Alexi is the expert of all experts on all of that but um means that we will be passing resolutions and starting to un uh unroll um implement that program um this year which will be really exciting. Um attended strategic planning retreat um on the 14th I um attended and became chair of the local homeless council. Um most important thing for that is the point in time count is happening this January 29th to the 31st which is th I think it's this weekend Friday to sun Friday to Sunday. Yes. Um and that is for any person that is sleeping outdoors in your vehicle on someone's couch. anyone that is unsheltered or undersheltered um please reach out to um Moab Solutions, MBMC, USARA um a lot of CK event, a lot of the social service

providers are collecting that information. Um they are offering I believe a $50 gift card for anyone that does participate. Um, and that is also really important because um, at state and national levels, it really dictates how housing or um, homelessness funding is allocated. Um, so please, if you know of someone um, who is um, unsheltered or undersheltered, please direct them uh, this weekend. They will be out and about. Um otherwise for LHC um few new members seems like everyone's kind of start of the year um still offering a lot of um services. If you are uh in need of housing um especially in these colder months um please also reach out to those service providers. I still have um funding uh particularly for the the really cold nights. Um and on the 15th I went to the business summit. Wish I had stayed longer, but I did get the pleasure of watching Jason on his panel with um with county folks talking about what's happening at the city and county. Um and on the 24th uh this past weekend I went to putting on the rich caven's annual fundraiser which always a great time. Um they did a great job organizing and always happy to support them especially them being one of our community partners. Um and finally just uh legislative session started last week. I'll defer to you on some updates but um I will be there on the 9th for housing day on the hill. would love to coordinate with you guys on going up and planning meetings and all of that, but I

mean there's like a gazillion bills. Um, so I'm just kind of trying to do my best to track some of those. Um, still early days. Did specifically meet with um Chris Kaufman, our county treasurer, about the circuit breaker bill being back and seems like property tax is going to be a big conversation. um uh you know, voting, elections, um voter rights, uh you know, lot lots of things coming uh really quickly. So, just trying to keep my head above water with that. Um Miles and I are going to cast tomorrow through Friday in Salida. Um and we'll be touring a modular housing uh factory and talking about workforce housing and um some other stuff that that is happening there. Um, yeah, excited about that. That's it for me. Thank you. Um, I just have a few things. Uh, going back in December, I, uh, met, we met, Michael and I met with Sitter representatives to talk about transit services. One of the things we're looking at is a regional transit service from Salt Lake City to San Juan County. We already have our local transit service prices getting ready to implement a transit service for the city of Price and so we are discussing doing a study to look at how we can have transit all the way on the eastern side of the state. This will take a long time but it's something that you need to start having that conversation to get it moving forward. had a couple of healthcare special service district meetings as Connie mentioned and I had a lot of uh preschool Santa Claus giftgiving over the holidays. That was always a lot of fun. And in January, as we all mentioned, we had the strategic plan retreat. It was great. We're going to have a lot more uh conversations coming up in the next few months on some of the objectives that we discussed at

that time. and then um met with our DC consultants Ryan and Tim yesterday. Um I told you about UPMPRA. There's very likely going to be another government shutdown on Friday. Um our funding from the Department of Interior and the Department of Energy is app is been approved. So that shouldn't be hung up. But I think there's some issues with the Department of Homeland Security and other um agency or other departments that they're um haven't haven't appropriated yet. So likelihood of the shutdown starting Friday. Um and then legislative session also yesterday as um Caitlyn mentioned there's a lot of property tax discussion and bills. There's over so far there's over 600 bills that have been introduced. It's like historic even after they said don't have so many bills they even have. So, you know, um that's good. I guess we'll see where they all go. But the property tax will be paying attention to that. Some of it's good, some of it's not. Um the really the focus from what they said in the meeting was the school districts and that's where there seems to be a lot of lack of transparency in how property taxes are increased. So that's kind of the focus but there's a whole lot of right now I know of at least five property tax bills. Um I mentioned the bill about restricting vegetation removal. There's some grandma bills Senate Bill 64 summer. you may be wanting to pay attention to that. Some of it's good, some of it's bad. Um, and then the land use bill. We got an email from Nathan about House Bill 184. Um, that has a lot, you know, basically takes all of our land use authority away from us. So, um, it's House Bill 184.

So, we'll be paying really close attention to that. at this point um it's being opposed by the league and um and I won't go into the details of that. So that's all I have and so um I'll ask for a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Motion by Connie. Second by second Miles. All in favor? We're sorry. Even disappear.