City Council - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

All right. We'd like to welcome everyone to the Provincial Council regular meeting. It is 5.31 p.m., May 26, 2006. We will do a roll call of the elected officials, starting with... Becky Bogdan.

Gary Garrett.

Catrice McKay.

Craig Christensen.

Jeff Whitlock.

Rachel Whipple. But today's prayer will be provided by Gavin Whiting, and then we'll have the Pledge of Allegiance by Counselor Hope. And if he's back, otherwise I'll do it.

Oh God, we are so grateful for this opportunity we have to come together as citizens and leadership of Provo. We ask a blessing that we may have this meeting in love, respect, and the unified goal of making Provo a better place than the best place that it can be to live. We are so grateful for thee and for thy son, Jesus Christ, and all that he has done for us. We ask and pray for these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Gavin. We're going to pledge by Councillor Hopin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands,

All right. First of all, we have a ceremony recognizing the Provo City Employee of the Month. And this is for communication. Oh, sorry. I was like trying to figure out. I'm like, we're telling them that it's a communications person. Okay. It is going to be for the Department of Communications. Is that right? I'm so perplexed. I'm sorry. Okay. So it's the Department of... That's a new department for us. So communications. That's what I'm used to seeing. Okay. Thank you. All right. Come on up, Barbara Smith. Barbara Smith is going to announce it for us.

Thank you so much. It's so nice to be here and it's so great to be here for such a celebratory reason. So it is my honor to recognize Cassidy Clegg Smith as Provo City's Employee of the Month for May of 2026. Cassidy began her career with Provo City in 2018 as a graphic designer for the Covey Center of the Arts. where her creativity and talent quickly stood out. She became the city's primary graphic artist and designer in 2021, and since stepping into her current role, she has consistently gone above and beyond to serve all of the departments across the city and our residents too. If you work for Provo, then her artistic talents have already touched you in some way. From email signatures and logo creation to the annual water report, stickers, event and retirement flyers, banners, the monthly newsletter, graphics and content design, and assistance with the website as well as ad campaigns. She brings color and visual communications to all of our Provo residents. While her talents as a designer are well known, her reputation for customer service is equally strong, and she is widely regarded as exceptional with people. She remains calm under tight deadlines and is passionate about helping others bring their ideas to life. Cassidy's work ethic and commitment are unmatched, and she takes pride in ensuring that every design is just right. Cassidy is truly an invaluable member of our team, and we are deeply grateful for her professionalism, creativity, and dedication to serving our staff and our residents. And we would like to congratulate Cassidy on this well-deserved Employee of the Month recognition as the April 26th Employee of the Month. Cassidy. Yes, we would like photos.

Okay. I'm gonna try, I'm gonna try it this way. Yeah, cheese.

These are for your buddies. All right, thank you.

As indicated on the screen, a required public hearing will be held for certain agenda items prior to council action. After each such item has been presented, time to comment will be provided for all those who wish to speak. For items that do not require public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to 10 minutes. At this time, up to 15 minutes have been set aside for an open public comment period, which is intended to allow comment on matters that do not appear on the agenda but are limited to topics regarding municipal business or within municipal council purview. Persons who speak during this time to an item that is on the agenda will not normally be afforded a second opportunity to speak during the comment period specific to that item. During any public comment period, each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Due to noticing requirements, no formal action will be taken in this meeting on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Those with comments are invited to approach the podium. Those participating on Zoom will need to use the raise hand feature to indicate they wish to comment. The chair may choose to alternate between in-person and online commenters. Please begin your comments by stating your name and your city of residence, and you'll have two minutes to speak. Do we have any open comment at this time? Come on up. Let's need your name and your city of residence, please.

So I am David Spencer from Orem, and I'm running for County Commissioner seat B. So I was on the Orem City Council for the last 12 years, and how I got into politics was the City Council at the time wanted to take out baseball fields for parking. So I'm a baseball guy, so I ran and I won. So the baseball fields are still in Orem, thank goodness. And I've moved on now to run for County Commissioner CB. But in those 12 years, not once did we have a county commissioner come to Orem and ask, what are your needs? How can we help you? And I want to change that. I'm going to every city, I'm talking to every city council to make sure that Your needs are met. Now in Provo, you have a nice airport and convention center, but I still think we need to meet with each city and say, what are your needs? Moving forward, I think we need more transparency in county government. You need to make sure that citizens and everybody knows what the county commissioners are doing and if they're attending their meetings, how they vote, and if they're traveling foolishly. So I want to sort of reset and change the mindset of the county. And hopefully we can be more accountable, just as you guys, as the mayor and city council, you're accountable to your constituents. And I want to do that for Utah County. So I have some little brochures I can give the city recorder, if that would be OK. Yeah, that's good.

Do it over here, please.

So just David Spencer and I appreciate your time and I miss being on the council, but I love serving people. So thank you.

Thanks, David. All right. Any more public? You want to wait for your item, I think.

No, it's actually this.

Okay, great.

Thank you, though. Hello, council. My name is Gavin Whiting, resident of Provo. I've been living in Provo for three years, but I also was born here and I grew up here and it's a beautiful city and I do love it. This is my first council meeting, and I am trying to add more responsibility to myself by participating in my local government. The catalyst for my participating in my local government is the new data center in another county that has been planned, approved by corporations, the state government, and the county government, which seems to me was not given any public comment and was not voted in on the interest of the constituents. I do not have a problem with corporate interests as long as they align with the interests of the constituents. I am asking you members of the council, how will you protect yourself from letting corporate interests and donations trump the interests of your constituents? Thank you.

Thanks, Gavin. Any other public comment? All right. We have an applied motion on a resolution approving the appropriation of $13,509.21 in the general fund for a contractual sales tax increment post-performance payment to Day's Market. And this will present... Do you know what, Cody? I'm going to read them all in. And then next we'll have a resolution approving the appropriation of $31,033.33 in the general fund for the contractual sales tax increment post-performance payment to the shops of Riverwoods. And then... We will have a resolution for the appropriation of $83,851.50 in the General Fund for Contractual Sales Tax Increment Post-Performance Payment to Parkway Village. And then finally, a resolution approving the appropriation of $57,765.50 in the General Fund for Contractual Sales Tax Increment Post-Performance Payment to East Bay Shopping Center. And these will all be presented by Cody Hill, our Economic Development Division Director.

Thank you so much. I really appreciate your time, Councilwoman Katrice McKay. And thank you, Councilmembers. So this item was brought up two weeks ago in the work session and as discussed in the work session, but basically for the benefit of the public. I'll just provide a little bit of background information about these agreements. The city entered into these sales tax increment agreements in 2016, 2018, 2018, and 2019, so a little bit ago, and they are all very similar in that they were depreciating assets. There were shopping centers that were declining and the city met with the owners and decided to support them in making improvements to the shopping centers and identifying specific um improvements that would be qualified for tax increment reimbursement and and then the agreements are all such that this city provides half of the the there's a base year value for each of the shopping centers so for example riverwoods was back in 2018 and there is a base year value of about a hundred thousand dollars of prop of sales tax increment that was received And so when we look at their 2025 increments, or what they produced above 100,000, we cut that in half, remove the base year, and then share that with them. And... Councilwoman Bogdan, you had specifically asked for what the increase was above the base year adjusted for inflation. And for day's market, that's 113% more. For East Bay, it's 156%. For Parkway Village, it's 141%. And for Riverwoods, it's 96% above the base year value. And so we're seeing definitely a great investment in all four of these areas. locations. So they've all been very successful post improvements. And so it's been a definitely a big benefit to the city to have them made those improvements and to have supported them in those. And if there's any questions, I'm happy to address them.

Any questions for Cody? Councillor Garrett?

Cody, I was just wondering, each of the four appropriations makes reference in our packet to the time sensitivity of the payment. Yes. In every case referring to the fact that the payment was supposed to be made in March or February or last September. Any idea what went on there? A change in staff member?

Yes, there's a change in staff member, and that staff member was me. So I came in at the end of March, and so I had actually missed the payment process for all of these. And so I take responsibility that I should have made these payments prior to, and I've set calendar reminders in my calendar annually so that these don't get forgotten in the future. Okay.

I noticed only one had reached out inquiring about the payment, but I just wondered. Thank you. Yep.

Councillor Whitlock.

Similarly to that point, have we now incorporated these into our budget moving forward, but they were not incorporated into the budget last year because it was an oversight? Just can you help speak to that?

That is an interesting item to discuss. I see merits both ways. We have discussed incorporating it into the budget and not using an appropriation. The sentiment last year when we brought this up for discussion was that they preferred an appropriation so that they knew exactly how much it was rather than doing some forecasting and budgeting for it and then having to appropriate anyways.

Councillor Whitlock, yeah, I'd just add to that that we have had that discussion before. It's come up a couple times. So far, the history of these has been we've just done appropriations every year because the amount can't be calculated until the performance is achieved. But you could certainly speculate and put it in if you wanted to. We've had that discussion.

And then do we budget for extra funds for these generally? I'm just kidding. Dumb question is, how do we know the money's going to be there to pay these out?

Well... Cody can speak to this probably better than I can, but they're being made out of money that comes in because of their performance. So their performance generates sales tax, which then comes in, which then funds it.

Right, but there's never like a time gap that's problematic there because of how the state pays out these versus when we pay them.

Oh, that's a good question.

I don't know the timing. Not that I'm aware of that there's an issue, just given that the healthy fund balance that the city does have.

Okay, thank you.

All right. Thank you, Cody. Oh, so sorry.

Cody, I would like to say that I prefer it this way versus appropriation versus into the budget. These things get lost into the budget. And I like that you come before us and we're accountable to the public and you're accountable to us about how this is going forward and how this is working. And I want to say I really do appreciate you telling us all the numbers that you did. These are things that we've asked for in the past and we either haven't gotten them or they haven't been as good as you've done them. And then giving us the percentage of what it is over the top. I think it helps me and it helps the public understand what these tools do. Because you can go down to East Bay and you can see that there's been businesses moving in and out. But to actually see the sales tax percentage, you can see this increase. And to me, it helps. It helps me because we get approached by people all the time. Can we have your money? Can we have your money? Well, what are you doing with our money? And I really like that. So thank you so much for providing those to us and the way that you've done it. And I do appreciate it.

Absolutely. And I see the sense in having it be an appropriation and rather than approving it with thousands of other items in a budget that it's coming special and that there's an additional accountability in that.

Okay. All right. Thanks, Cody. We'll open this item up for public comment. So you can make public comment on any of those appropriations. Right? Any council discussion? All right, we'll take a vote. Now, do I have to vote on each one independently? I do. Okay, so we're going to take a vote first on the applied motion number two for Day's Market. Councillor Garrett? Yes. Councillor McKay? Yes. Councillor Christensen? Yes. Councillor Whitlock? Yes. Councillor Bogdan? Yes. Councillor Hoban? Yes. And Councillor Whipple? Yes. So that passes 7-0. Next, it'll be the implied motion on Riverwoods. Councillor McKay, yes. Councillor Christensen, yes. Councillor Whitlock, yes. Councillor Bogdan, yes. Councillor Hoban, yes. Councillor Whipple, yes. Councillor Garrett, yes. And that passes 7-0. Next will be the implied motion on Parkway Village. Councillor Christensen, yes. Councillor Whitlock, yes. Councillor Bogdan, yes. Councillor Hoban, yes. Yes. Councillor Whipple? Yes. Councillor Garrett? Yes. Councillor McKay? Yes. Next implied motion on the East Bay Shopping Center. Councillor Whitlock? Yes. Councillor Bogdan? Yes. Councillor Hoban?

Yes.

Councillor Whipple? Yes. Councillor Garrett? Yes. Councillor McKay? Yes. Councillor Christensen?

Yes.

All right. Thank you. That passes 7-0. Next, we have an implied motion on ordinance submitting the Pro City Code to add a caretaker dwelling as a permitted accessory use in the general commercial zone. This will be presented by Erin Ardmore, our planning manager.

Okay, thank you.

So we talked about this a little bit in a study meeting today, but this comes to us from a commercial user in the city, but it is a citywide application. So it would impact all of the general commercial zones within the city, which we have several hundred acres. The proposal here is to add as an accessory use in the commercial zone, a caretaker dwelling, which is currently a permitted accessory use in several other commercial zones and industrial zones in the public facility zone itself. They haven't been used a lot, but there was a need here from the applicant to better secure and maintain and watch the property that they that they own. So this went through planning commission, received our recommendation for approval and is before you for decision tonight.

Great. Thanks, Aaron. Any questions for Aaron? Councilor Whitlock.

Just some general information questions. So the general commercial zone, could you just kind of explain what it entails for folks for tuning in?

Yeah, it's pretty much, I can say it's like our baseline commercial zone. So it's not specialized in any one way or another. It allows a variety of retail and office and commercial uses. It just had never been thought of to allow any type of residential use prior to today.

And the planning commission, what was the planning commission kind of outcome and their main feedback process?

They like the idea of it. They had more to say on the actual standards of the caretaker dwelling itself, which is through all the different zones that it's applied in. But that couldn't be amended through this proposal, but it may in the rewrite our future proposal.

So we could, for example, approve this, add that as a permitted use, and then adjust the definition of caretaker dwelling later on. Yeah. Amazing. Thank you.

Right, anything else for Erin? Okay, thank you, Erin. We'll open this item up for public comment.

Hi, I'm Sherry Silberg.

Hello, what city do you live in?

I live in Provo, I just moved off Carterville. I'm wondering if this is the same thing as, like we got a newsletter from you. And you talked about the external accessory units. No, this is different.

So this is something that allows a business to have an individual live there who's an employee to oversee the commercial business.

So it was what we talked about last city council meeting. They talked about it last, I think. Yes, they did. No. No, they didn't.

It was been to the planning commission, but it came up.

Oh, that's where I was at. I was at the planning commission. So when is this coming up?

Right now. The external? Oh, the external ADUs. That will be... You can talk to staff and they will let you know. We just talked about it in our work meeting today.

Okay.

So nothing voting on it.

Okay. So nothing's passing. So my only comment about this is I live on 2000 Miller and we have a country, pretty much a country lane on that street. I'm sure most of you are aware of it. So I'm always concerned about parking and there's been some zone changes happening there. Um, and I was talking to Councilwoman McKay about it, how we had, I think it was around December, there was a mom that was sick, the fire trucks came in and ambulances and they just had a hard time getting to her because of parking situations. And I have a hard time getting out of my driveway sometimes. I know it's a city-wide thing to have, but I'm concerned about, you know, and we live on those quarter acre blocks that this is going to probably affect. So I'm just asking if you always take parking into consideration when any of these things, and I'm thinking you probably do, but We've lived in that area for almost 50 years and we'd like to Go, go talk to Malia over there.

Thank you. All right. Any more public All right. Any council discussion. Councilor Bogdan?

I just want to reiterate what I said today during work meeting. When I was in college, one of the hotels, and I don't think hotels are permitted in the CG zone, are they, Erin? Are hotels permitted in the, they are? I actually knew of a couple of hotels when I went to college that had this kind of a thing where they lived on site and A lot of them were taken care of by college students. And it was a really, really good thing. I don't think there was anything wrong with it. And so as long as they're an employee and they either take their shifts or do what they need to do to protect the business during the nighttime, I think it's a good thing to have.

All right. Any more comment? Okay. All right. We'll take a vote on the applied motion. Councillor Bogdan. Yes. Councillor Hoban.

Yes.

Councillor Whipple. Yes. Councillor Garrett. Yes. Councillor McKay. Yes. Councillor Christensen. Yes. And Councillor Whitlock.

Yes.

That passes 7-0. Next implied motion on an ordinance prohibiting virtual currency kiosks within Provo City. Also presented by Malia Daly, our Council Policy Analyst.

Okay. This is going to be brief. I'm just going to follow up on the questions that council had during the work meeting in the beginning of May. I don't remember what date that was. But council asked in regarding cryptocurrency ATMs, virtual currency kiosks, how many there were reported fraud incidents through these in our police department here. So contacted our police department, and these are just calls that were reported in Provo City, and then they were recorded with a fraud tag. So it's kind of up to the person who's recording that call whether or not they specify crypto. So as you can see here, this says one, but there's also... Hundreds of 707 fraud and then 294 fraud attempted. Those might have been crypto. If they have a police report attached to all of those calls and we could go through and find those. I just didn't go through the thousand police calls that may or may not have a police report, but happy to do that if we would like to. Um, the other question, main question that we got was, is there a time pressure that plays a significant role in these types of fraud? So the idea, the logic being, if we banned them in Provo, then people could just go to other cities. But at that amount of time, would that be another barrier to preventing fraud and helping people kind of think through what is happening. And there's research that shows that time pressure significantly impacts the viability of scams and frauds. And so scammers try and have rushed deadlines and get people to do things because that's when they can hire a success. I couldn't find any specific research done either from a federal agency or peer-reviewed talking specifically about crypto, but if you take that same principle that's well accepted about this time pressure and apply it, it would seem to make sense. So. That's kind of the follow up. Oh, the other follow up was where else in the city these are. I kept the stats the same about six because dependent on which website you go to find them, it changes. So and then some of the locations I went to, they actually weren't there. So I'm just leaving it. That's about six. So. Anyway, the proposed ordinance is just a new section under miscellaneous criminal provisions with these definitions of what a virtual kiosk would be and then just making it unlawful for people to host or operate or permit them. This would not make cryptocurrency transactions illegal in Provo. It would just mean that a business can't host it. Someone can't operate it. We're not going to license it. The actual ATM for cryptocurrency would be illegal. But people could still do cryptocurrency transactions on their phones, laptops, anywhere else. Thanks, Malia.

Any questions for Malia? Counselor Whipple. Were you able to talk to some of the business owners that host these cryptocurrency ATMs in their shops? Yeah, I talked to...

gas station owner. And they said, I don't know why they brought it here, but they just paid me money. They just leased it out as a space to have it. And then they said the person came and just said they didn't want to do it anymore. And they took the ATM. So I think it's just a revenue generating way for the business to make money, just leasing space in their business.

Was that the case where it was a franchise and somebody else told the local owner, you have to put this thing in?

I don't think so. I don't know.

Okay. What I'm wondering is if we made this illegal tomorrow, would we be putting some businesses in the position of breaking their contracts? and facing some sort of adverse consequences.

Clearly, us changing the law is something out of their control, but... We could put a... On all of our ordinances, we usually put effective immediately, but we could put an effective date, six months, 12 months. We could change that effective date. Either I could follow up and try and track down if there are things, considerations like that, or we could just put an effective date further out and then get the word out.

I would feel better about that, so that it would be no more can be installed, but any ones that are already there, they would have time to close out their contracts in ways that aren't hurting our businesses.

Okay, and yet, oh, Councillor Whitlock.

So, thank you for doing the follow-up research on the reports of fraud. One, maybe I'm asking you to speculate a little bit here, but my understanding with a lot of how these crypto related fraud happens as it pertains to ATM is the fraud itself is not necessarily crypto related. It's there's some other scheme and then crypto is used as a way to pay the scheme.

Yes.

Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. And then again, I'm not sure I got a full answer on this last time. So I just want to make sure we're still, we're not accidentally banning.

We're good.

Fat cats will be fine. Fat cats is good.

Any little card you load up it.

That's not, that doesn't count as a digital currency. Yeah. Okay. Awesome.

All right. Anyone else? Counselor Bogdan.

This one's for Jeff. Did you happen to go into one of these businesses and ask?

I did, yes.

And the answer was?

So I was going to, yeah, I'll share what I know. So I'll keep the place I went and checked. I won't say that, but I had a conversation with the owner. The way that this works is they get a small percentage of each transaction. I think it's 1% of each transaction. And I asked them, how much do they make? And it used to be $100 to $200 a month, and now it's less than $50. And this individual told me it's been declining steadily and that they were thinking about removing it anyway because it's just taking up space. And then I tried to ask, you know, for those who use it, do you have a sense of why they're using it? This individual didn't really have an understanding of that. And then I asked, well, why did you get it in the first place? And this was the best part was they were actually subject to a crypto related fraud where they essentially had what's called like ransomware on their computer. And so they were locked out of all their accounts and all their business accounts. And they had to find cryptocurrency to pay the person to get access to the computer. And they couldn't figure out how to do it. So they wanted to facilitate that in the future, I guess. I don't know. So they added it to their store.

One of the chances.

That was interesting in my research.

And you were going to keep that to yourself?

No, I was going to share it later during the discussion. I'll bring it back.

All right. Any more questions for Malia? All right. Thanks, Malia. We will take public comment on this item. All right. Seeing no public comment, we will do discussion. Now's your chance.

since I was just talking. Basically, I was on the fence about this one. My family is a small business owner. We own a small business, Spanish Fork, and I'm always hesitant to pull tools from small businesses to make it. Costs are high, leases are high, everything's high. But I mean, doing more research and this particular story, this is not a major revenue source for folks. And it's hard to imagine that... that we're gonna be doing substantial harm to small businesses. I think it would, in an ideal world, I think you could add additional regulations to make these safer, but I don't, I think at six, it would not be worth doing so. And so I'd rather just avoid a situation where an individual is put into a place where they give up their life savings as a result from what they're seeing. So I see the risk to the public is probably a lot more than the benefit based on the research I've been doing.

Thanks, Jeff. Any other discussion? Travis, Counselor Holben.

Well, I think typically it would be smaller transactions than an ATM. You'd be more likely to lose your life savings through like a digital transaction. Yeah, something online or whatever, because the ATMs you put cash in and then it transfers. it basically exchanges it for the crypto. Or you can deposit it into somebody else's account. They give you a QR code or whatever. But I guess in the end, there's six of these, I think, in Provo that we looked at. So it's not going to be like an end-all, be-all for anybody, whether it be a business or an individual. I would just say, in general, I think... Crypto ATMs are probably not riskier than a lot of other means of transacting. And that ultimately people can get scammed in a lot of different ways. And we don't shut those things down necessarily. I think we have a unique opportunity to do that here. So we're taking it. But I don't see the necessity of it in that sense. My guess is that this probably isn't something that's happening regularly, that people aren't getting scammed at these things. I would venture to say that most of the transactions happening at these would be legitimate transactions. So that's why I would say keep it in place. And I just don't necessarily see it as something that government needs to step in and do. So I would say no. Let's just keep them. Most transactions probably are legit. And we're just removing away for certain people to transact, maybe the underbanked or the unbanked. But at the same time, not going to be an end-all be-all for anybody, I'm sure. So they can go to Warren.

All right. Any other discussion?

Councilor Garrett.

Travis, to your earlier comments in the work session about residents who fit into a demographic of being unbanked or where this is their source of banking services. Have you had any more thoughts about that or any research on that?

No, I'm just speaking broadly from like. If you look at a lot of the data on who utilizes crypto, it's typically a younger demographic. It's typically a... Sometimes it's an underbanked or unbanked demographic. People who maybe don't qualify for a traditional account or something like that. Maybe they've had too many overdrafts and they got kicked out of their bank type thing. So it's those type of people that... And there's also a contingency of people who just don't trust the government or believe in this kind of like... It's not an anti-government sentiment, but just like a... I don't want to be reliant on the bank and be subject to the man. So it's just a certain demographic that uses them. Just speaking from experience, but also just research I've done on crypto in general, I'm somewhat of a blockchain and crypto enthusiast on the side personally.

Okay, thank you, Travis.

Counselor Hobin, so is the unbanked use case effectively they have a wallet and then they're depositing their cash and transferring crypto to their own wallet?

Sounds like it.

Yeah.

So let's say I can't get a traditional bank account because I've overdrawn an account in the past and I'm on the watch list that they have. I used to work in banking. So we run, anytime you open an account, you have to pass a verification basically. And if you've done too much of like overdrawn my account or whatever in the past, you can't necessarily get approved at most financial institutions. So those people tend to use a lot of like check cashing, like a check city account. and crypto to do transacting. They might keep their crypto wallet on their phone. Typically, that's how they do it. But the crypto ATMs are how they get the cash into the wallet, if that makes sense. Because otherwise, you know, crypto is digital currency. So there's no way to kind of turn that into cash. Sorry, into the crypto from cash.

Counselor Bogda. I felt similar to Travis. I don't think that this is something that we should ban. So I'll vote no on this one. All right. Any more comments?

Go ahead.

I was gonna say, yeah, it's, it's, it's tricky. Cause it's like, there's six of these and it's, it's I don't know if we're solving a real problem per se, but we may be preventing one. It's hard to say.

This is actually an example of a citizen emailing us and asking us for this due to fraud. Your emails can matter. We can do things based on them and look into them. It's from citizens that we get a lot of our ideas and find problems that they want a solution for. And that doesn't mean everyone wants a solution for it, or it's always, you know, gets to a voting stage, but you know, it helps us look into things. All right. We'll take a vote on the applied motion.

Just wanted to double check if you want. There is a 60-day effective date. It would be from today. Okay.

Oh, is it already that?

There's 60 days. I was just saying there was some brief discussion on extending that.

Do you want to amend the emotions? Yeah, six months.

It would just be the effective date of the ordinance. Okay.

I think making that time period a little bit longer is good. And if anybody wanted to try to put one in knowing that it would become illegal in six months, that is their choice and they would have to get rid of it in the six months. So I think that's fine. So what I need to do is to make a motion to amend the implied resolution to change the effective date to be six months instead of 60 days. I do that now. Do you have that well enough in the record, Kevin? Excellent.

I would second that.

All right.

So vote on the substitute.

We will take a vote on the substitute.

Sorry, let me just clarify that Kevin and I are on the same page about this. So Malia, this is the actual text.

Yeah, so I was thinking maybe we change the effective date of the ordinance to be four months from now, and then the 60 days would make it six months. So we don't have to change the ordinance and just change this. Yes.

Is that your motion? Okay. Yes.

That makes sense.

Because what I was worried about was it doesn't take effect until six months, and then they have 60 days after that.

Yes, exactly. So four months on the effective date of the ordinance, and then the text has the additional 60.

Yes. Kevin, do you have that?

We'll just change that.

No, just change the effective date here to be four months.

Just change that paragraph C to... Oh, okay. Here, let's just put on... This one, I think, since it's not actually the text of the motion, I think it's okay. I'm just saying... before we, because we haven't voted on the motion yet, right? So the motion is to change part two, paragraph C, to say this ordinance takes effect four months from the date of passage.

Yes. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Brian. All right. So we will take a vote on the substitute motion. Councilor Hoban.

So am I just voting on the six months? Yes.

You're just voting on the six months, and then we'll go back and vote on the whole thing.

Yes.

Councillor Whipple? Yes. Councillor Garrett? Yes. Councillor McKay? Yes. Councillor Christensen? Yes. Councillor Whitlock? Yes. Councillor Bogdan? Yes. All right, and now we will take a vote on the implied motion. Councillor...

Quick question while they're doing that. Would we have somebody maybe call these six businesses that have one of these and say, hey, FYI, this just passed and you'll have to take this out?

I can reach out to the administration and figure out how we...

If it were 600, I'd say, oh, well. But if it's just six of them, it seems like...

I don't know the notification we do for new criminal code, but I can figure that out and follow up.

Thanks.

Are we good voting now, Brian? All right, we're going to take a vote on the implied motion. Councilor Whitmull? Yes. Councilor Garrett? Yes. Councilor McKay, yes. Councilor Christensen?

Yes.

Councilor Whitlock?

Yes.

Councilor Bogdan? No. Councilor Hopin?

No.

So that passes 5-2. And if there's an objection, we will now adjourn the Prohibition Council by unanimous consent.

Bye.