City Council - Regular Meeting

Man. Wow. So, um, have we heard from Alan Arnold? No. But we do have three. So, okay. Uh, cameras all fired up. Okay. All right. Uh, let's go ahead and call to order our Riverdale City Council meeting for Tuesday, April 21st, uh, 2026. Let the record show that we have, uh, three members present. uh councelor Anderson, councelor Richtor, and councelor Stevens. Uh we are expecting uh councelor Hansen. She has let us know she's running late and we hope to see councelor Arnold as well. We have members of the city staff here as well as members of the public. We'll go ahead and get started uh with well actually councelor Arnold was scheduled for our pledge of allegiance. Uh councelor Richtor, will you lead us in that?

Absolutely. Thank you. Please rise. Join with me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. I'll offer our invocation. Our father in heaven, we're grateful that uh we could meet here this evening in this city council meeting. We're grateful for the favorable circumstances under which we meet uh in in the beautiful city of Riverdale and and the freedoms that we enjoy in this country. And we ask uh at this time that thou would help us to make decisions uh that will benefit uh and and represent the residents uh to which we've been elected to represent. Please bless that we can make decisions that are in accordance with thy will. We're grateful uh for all our city employees here in Riverdale and for the for the great work that they do and we ask a blessing upon them that they might continue to perform to the best of their abilities and that they might be watched over and protected each day that they might return home to their families. Also, at this time uh as there's turmoil in the world, we are grateful for those that protect us and those that uh are willing to sacrifice their lives to fight for the freedoms we enjoy. We ask that those uh world leaders might be led and guided to to uh make decisions that uh will lead to peace and will be in accordance with thy will as as well. Please bless us with thy spirit throughout this meeting uh that it will lead us and guide us and then when the time comes we can all return home safely and we say these things in the name of thy son Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. All right. Um we will go ahead and start. Uh we have some a time for public comment. This is an opportunity to address the city council regarding any concerns or ideas you may have. No action will be taken by the city council uh during this time. Uh if you do approach the microphone, please try to limit your comments to three minutes. State your name and the city in which you reside. Come on up.

My name is John Cypers. I live at 4875 South 1700 West. That's a strip of property between the old railroad tracks and the freeway. I bought that property from uh Mayor Jones some uh 50 55 years ago. We've lived there for 54 years. Reason we moved there was A1. Master plan shows that entire section as being A1. If you start at the south end, Ember Heric has that Orchard. I'm sure you're all familiar with that's a multi-generational house. Next door to her is Stimson's. That's a multi-generational house. I'm living there and my grandson is going to purchase the house which makes it a multi-generation. And the one next to me, the Ivy's, that too is a multi-generational house. Now, going forward to the north, they've dissected that to where they they got some commercial operations going there. I have the videos. Uh some years ago, three, four years ago, I don't know. Anyway, the council approved some storage garages, but this the persons who owned this property have turned that into a distribution center. I have videos of semi semis coming in and out of there and dropping loads and then pickup trucks taken to me. That's a distribution center. So, my concern is uh some years ago again, the old It used to be Cecil Roberts is now Chris. The people that have the duplex or the forplex and then the property behind it acquired half of Chris Rickinger's lot that as far as this shows is still A1. And yet these folks want to build some garages. We don't know exactly what it is. We just the neighbor was talking to him and he said, "Oh, we're going to

build something big." Now, the reason they've held off for this long is I don't know if you're aware, but the railroad tracks behind my house all the way up are discontinued. They don't have the railroad tracks anymore. They uh anyway, the state took it over. We were approached by some attorneys in Kansas City that we could get paid for that property from our fence line back to the road on 1750. Why not? We did it. Three years later, we won. So, every one of those parcels was awarded $55,000. Anyway, so this is why these two gentlemen are making their move now. It's because they've got that money. So, anyway, my concern is that my beloved A1 agricultural property is being away by uh you know, institutes or whatever you want to call it that really don't belong there in an A1 and that's my concern.

All right. Well, thank you for coming tonight, John. Yeah, I know it's probably not going to happen right away. It's going to be sometime down the road, but you know, if you're aware of what's going on and our side of the story, it might help. So, and if in fact that does come up, I would appreciate being contacted. So, so the entire street can come down and we're everybody has the same feelings as I do. Thank you. I do have a quick question for you. So, um I know where you live and and that was ARS disaster cleanup for a while, that big building, but it's not anymore, huh? No, no. 4800. Notice that's industrial. That red strip. Yeah. We're from the green strip down.

Okay. There we go. Again, the master plan was one. Okay. There council Stevens has a question for you. There's Well, it's Cecil Roberts lot was I mean there's they're acre lots but they run deep, but Cecil's was also wide and he kind of sub then when then he moved and it changed owners a few times and they subdivided it. Somebody bought the back half of that

and and they sold off the back half. And so as I look on on Geogizmo, that looks like it's a smaller than an acre. Now, do you know who Mr. Cooper is um in the blue shirt? Well, the one without the hat. Anyway, he's a community development. Now, anyway, if you have questions, this gentleman here can you can call him up. Brandon Cooper. Yes. I talked to him a week ago. planning commission. He gave me his card. I've called him several times and I've yet to get an answer. Well, it's there's not really an answer to be had.

Reserve my call. Oh, well, okay. Then I won't respond, but um but the point of it is is is there's there are um uses for A1 that and I don't know what and if they even need a permit to build those sheds or whatever they're doing. I don't know. But he can either that's why I'm here. And so um and or or if they even need to look at him, but he would be the gentleman that um anyway, I just walk into his office as do other people.

I am concerned about the distribution center though, like we probably into that and see. when you pointed that out to me, I started watching that and I take that road a little bit more frequently and you know, not since they closed 4,400, but but um anyway, it's it's something's going there. Yeah. Okay. Thanks for the information. Okay. Anyone else?

All right, seeing none, we'll move on to um presentations and reports. Um, so, uh, for the mayor's report, uh, just a couple of things. Uh, we had our Central Weieber, uh, sewer improvement district meeting last night and, uh, they have decided that they do not need to raise property taxes this year after their failed attempt last year. Uh, and so I think that's a great thing. Um, yeah, always good. They they found some extra money and move some stuff around. And so they they did not get through the truth and taxation correctly last year. Uh, and now they don't even need to do it this year. So, that's always a win in my mind. Um, and uh, then the only other thing is we had our lunch with the mayor today and uh, it was a a great time. We were at the fire station and uh, we got Rich helped me get a list of of suggestions from the kids on what they'd like to see and you know they're always always got some funny things, but uh, one of them was less pollution, which I don't feel like we have a lot of pollution in Riverdale, but I said cleaner water and some stuff like that. Um, but uh they there were some things about uh about the parks, um more flowers, more roundabouts I thought was funny. I don't know if the residents would really be on with that. They'd have a heyday with that, but uh less houses, uh baseball fields. Um there's always some funny ones. There was more elephants. I don't know uh where that came from, but um one of them that was specific to Mr. Douglas is a light at the crosswalk by uh on the crosswalk at Riverdale Elementary. So, uh, that was something the kids think would be helpful. Um, and, uh, wider streets. It's it's always just funny stuff. So, anyway, it's a good time. And, and we had Riverdale Elementary there, which is always good. A lot of the kids, uh, uh, were from Riverdale, so that's great. Um, and that's all I have. So, we'll move on to the city administration report. Mr. Brooks, what do you got for us?

Thank you, Mayor. Um, all of the department heads reports are in your packet. I don't know that I have a big contingency there tonight. I know Sean and Brandon are there. Um, if you have any questions, we can try and address those or if there's something you need me to pass on to somebody, we can certainly do that. Um, does anybody have anything you want to bring up while I'm on that topic? I will move on then. Um, as far as the report itself and the reviews that I go through, again, if you look at the one that, uh, the bar chart there that is always my favorite, our year-to- date, um, financial there, you can see that we're in a healthy condition. We like to see that. Um, as long as it maintains itself, we're uh, we're in better shape than we've been for the last fifth year that we're we're up on all those previous years. So, we like to see that. Um, you didn't have there there are some other things in there, but I won't touch upon them at this point unless you had some questions. There's some other charts in there, but I'm going to have the department heads there to respond to some of those questions, which I'll be following up on. But as far as uh our uh employee recognition, if you've had a chance to look at that 12 flag, even though it's not one of his celebrated years, I think we need to at least acknowledge the fact that he's got 43 years with city, which would make him our our oldest. Um Paul does a good job for us. He's doing our fire inspections and stuff now, so kudos to him. his accomplishments there. Also, Mr. Warren and Casey is there tonight. 22 years for Casey. So, congratulations to Casey as well. We really appreciate him as our chief and he does a phenomenal job. In fact, just this afternoon, um the mayor

had reached out to me about something and within probably an hour that thing was resolved and taken care of, which is the way he always handles stuff. So, uh, thank you Casey for all that you do for us and he he f he runs a great operation over there and I know his guys respect him as do we but the remainder of the staff. So, um, Angie Pierce does have her 10 years. I don't think Angie is there, is she? No.

You can see Stacy in there, but I don't see her here. But, uh, Angie handles a lot of our utility. Her biggest thing is our utility shut offs and stuff which is a project every month when that that day rolls around um per phone is non-stop along with Sean's department as far as handling the shut offs and then offer officer Vasquez hits his eight years this year. Another one of our fine employees. Uh staffing authorization. Uh it's fairly accurate. We did uh printed this out. There was we did lose one individual um Jocelyn who was handling our our tech. She's our uh permit tech. Um she has since left us, not for any particular reason other than just family issues. She's got a couple small children and it was just really making it difficult for her to continue employment with the city. As I understand it, I saw a letter today. I believe an offer has been made. Brandon, I don't know if you want to make comment on that. has been accepted or if you want to give them any more information on that one.

Yeah, it's the permit tech um position. We made the offer. It hasn't been accepted yet. We interviewed uh five people. We've had a number of applications, but we felt like um this individual was the sharpest and so we made the offer. We'll wait and see.

Okay. Um and then the only other one that's really standing out, not that it stands out that much, but it's fire. I know they're working on that one as well. We had one of our fire guys leave us last month, I believe it was. So, he acquired a position. I can't remember if it was Cesville. Maybe it was another another city. So, um beyond that, the community development report, Brandon, you got something you want to add in addition to that? There was the one page that's in the packet, but if you had anything additional to add on that, go ahead and take that.

Thank you. Just a couple of quick things. Um, thanks to all of you who went to the Optic Clear um, ribbon cutting, new business on River Rail Road there at the old Nolan building. That was uh March 18th. And we do have the ribbon cutting for the young Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram dealership. Um, that's on April 24th at 10:30. Councelor Honor, I'm Arnold, I uh emailed you about that. You're okay to do that? Thank you. And uh we we're just dealing with a lot of development applications right now. Nothing to report. um at this meeting, but there's a lot of fun things coming that we'll have um some a chance to talk about. I'm sure they've actually gotten a lot better.

That's all I had, Mayor, for the city administrator report. Okay. All right. Very good. Well, with that, we move on move on to the consent items. Uh number one, consideration to approve the meeting minutes from the April 7th, 2026 council meeting. Is there any changes or corrections to those minutes? Seeing none, we would need a motion to approve. So moved. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Second. Uh any discussion on that motion? All in favor say yes. Yes. Opposed.

Okay, that's good. That passes unanimously. We'll move on to our action items. Number one, consideration of a site plan amendment for River Park Retail. Mr. Cooper.

Thank Thank you, Mayor. Uh we've got the applicant with us tonight, too. Uh Mr. uh Brad Brown and Jason Thompson will, I'm sure, be available for some uh some questions. This is familiar to you. This was a subdivision and site plan that came to you on March 3rd and um was uh approved to go forward. Uh since that time, there was some changes that uh needed to be made by the applicant on their underground storage water system. I've got some maps, Michelle, if you wouldn't mind uh bringing those up. These are the maps in your packet. Um your packet kind of goes through the original approved plan with the clouded item showing the um the original storm water detention uh pond that's above grade. Let's see if we can move this around here. So, this is the approved plan up at the um upper right hand corner. that was the approved uh storm water uh pond. It was working in conjunction with an underground storm water system that uh uh together met the requirements of the city to deal with the on-site storm water. Uh the applicant is requesting to change that a little bit. It's a it's not your eyesight. It's it'll get there maybe. We'll wait for it. It's in your packet. Um, so they're requesting to change the underground storm water system, uh, essentially eliminating most of its function. And that, uh, has an effect on the above ground storm water detention, um, pond, it enlarges it, and it, uh, has some effect on how the landscaping is designed. Uh and so being it a site plan that was just recently approved and because these amendments these proposed amendments had an effect on what you approved we felt it necessary to bring it back to you and seek a reapproval. So we're we're dealing with this as a site

plan amendment. And so with that I'll ask Jason to come up and and um speak to the particulars or Brad or somebody um and uh help us understand why the the change so soon and uh what the implications are. Go ahead.

Will you push that button on that? There you go.

Good. Brad Brown, 719 West, 4350 South in Riverdale. Um, I happy to be here. I mean, this is it's my town. I'm happy to be doing a project here. Um, my kids are excited because they want to see a tropical smoothie cafe in here. So they they're not letting me off the hook. Um and in fact, I just found out that uh my younger kids um their activity day um activity tonight is to come to city council. So they should be showing up a bunch of kids. Um but this is one of the f first times where I'm not glad to be the first agenda item, but but here we are. So anyways, yes, we we uh um are asking for, you know, just an amendment to the the design on the site plan. Um and there was a a handful of reasons. I mean obviously as Brandon mentioned financial feasibility is one thing but you know as we looked at the just the overall design um what happened is these these coldte chambers with the water table they're only about 18 in tall and that's why it's such a big footprint. Um the long-term uh uh storm water management plan was also affected, you know. Um then the the system we had we had on there also is not available out here is out east and a lot of the the groups we were looking at um weren't willing to do that. So we would have had to redesign anyways. Um so anyways you know we figured this is you know a better more efficient design and you know we didn't feel like it negatively affected the uh you know the project what we can do and what that looks like and and you know in

talking to Brandon we recognize that aesthetics are important and you know it's important to us too. We want this to be a good product and a good project long term. Um, as to the uh um landscaping that he mentioned, as I talked to my engineers, I we didn't even have this discussion till it came up on here, but they they had just designed it how they would design it, and there was no minimum standard they were trying to meet. Um, so, you know, if I if there's something we missed or something, you know, we're we're willing to to look at that. But um overall, yeah, just a simple site plan um amendment and happy to answer any questions if there are any

questions from the council. Council Arnold and Sean, are you okay with it? Yeah, it'll it'll work as far as the storm water system. It does change the landscaping. Okay. I I'm I'm really having trouble. Sorry. So, yes, it will work. It's It's a different design. I mean it's above ground instead of below ground which is more of the old school like we used to do a lot more of that but yeah it works for sure. Do we do do does does anybody do underground like is there a system that does work out here like Oh we do a lot of underground. Yeah that's what I was thinking there there is a system. So yeah it can be done underground. Underground's more expensive typically. Yeah.

And did how much parking was lost?

Seven. Um so the impact to the site um would be a reduction of seven parking stalls but they still uh meet the parking ordinance. So again it's a change from the original but it's not changing any of the um uh regulations in terms of their compliance. Um the landscaping as Brad mentioned our landscaping does have have some regulations. uh there is a reduction based on the movement of the the dumpster and some of the um the enlargement of the pond. There's 45 less uh plants than what was originally approved. Um and so you'll see in the write up that I I talk about the nature of the pond, how it does meet our our uh regulations as Sean has um has mentioned. Uh but if you do go ahead and approve this, I would recommend that you require that the same amount of landscaping stay so that just move around the site. Instead of reducing the overall landscaping by 45 plants, I would recommend that if you approve it, you have them just reallocate that plant material elsewhere on the site to maintain maintain the aesthetic.

Okay. Uh, the aesthetic, as I have observed, is between what used to be Joann's parking lot and Sam's Club parking lot is a um I I'm assuming that's a basin that has a lot of wetland look growth to it, reads um and willows and so on. Is that the aesthetic look you're going for? So this one isn't designed to have any type cleanup elements in it. So no vegetation type growth in it. It's a more or less a rock basin with some plants around the exterior. So it would not be maintained in that same type of fashion.

And we don't want it to be that either. We don't want it to look like that on our on our site. So well to me when when I hear maintain the aesthetic, that's what comes to mind. Well, the landscape plans in front of you now, this is the one that you approved. You'll see that um on the smaller pond, there were a number of plant material um on the edge and and down the slope. I don't know if these are going to show up effectively. Mr. Cooper, I think you meant maintain this the new site aesthetic, right? Not necessarily what's there now.

Exactly. So, this idea of um above ground storm water ponds, you know, we have a number of them across the city, we have a number of below ground. Both of them have challenges. Both of them have benefits. I've outlined that in your packet if you've read it. Um the uh challenges of an above ground pond is that they are easier to m they're easier to maintain. That's the benefit. But they're generally delayed in their maintenance and until things get to be unsightly. And so they they do produce especially in an urban environment where land is scarce and land is um is uh at a premium then these things generally tend to be land wasters especially if they get large. So the idea of of growing it I think is appropriate but at the cost of the approved landscape I thought that that was um something that we could ask that you just keep the same amount of plant material to maintain that overall aesthetic of the site. That's up to you, Councelor Anderson.

My concern was, and you somewhat addressed that, but what type of rock basin is that going to be? Because as long as it's not grass that you're trying to have to maintain that and water it and keep it Yeah. We're wanting to stay water. Is it large aggregate, smaller aggregate? you know, I would defer to my landscape architect on what's best and and I mean, I'm sure he would talk to Brandon because there's two elements. There's one, you know, the utility of it, but also the aesthetic. And I don't know, Jason, do you have any I think it's proposed right now for 3-in aggregate. So, the larger rock and the bottom and the slope.

Okay. As far as heat, you know, you would have asphalt for seven more parking spaces, which absorbs a lot more heat than a lighter colored rock. So, there's a bit of a trade-off with that, but I would tend to agree with wanting to have more um landscaping to make that so that it's presentable. And that would be my main concern is that uh we keep the same aesthetic or or build on that where we're taking away.

Yeah. And and as we we did a side by side today and looked at um you know one versus the other and I think we have less bushes by you know that's the majority of the number but we had added more trees around the edge of that. But we're okay to you know design in more bushes again. I mean,

yeah, there this finally rendered itself. So, you can see this is the proposed landscape plan for the enlarged pond. So, they're still maintaining a perimeter edge of plant material around um the pond there. Uh the parking stalls have gone away. Uh the the dumpster enclosure that was there has moved over to that island closer to the building. And so as a result, there's just a displacement of 45 plants that are no longer on the on the plan. So that's just my recommendation that um this is entirely appropriate to meet the regulation for storm water uh management. Um and the staff recommendation is that you you uh ask that that if approved they maintain the same quantity of plants. There is a reduction in shrubs and an addition of a couple trees, but the overall net reduction was like 45.

I uh I have a little of a hard time with it. It was it was fairly contested um when when we brought it to the council before. I don't know if everybody remembers, but it was a two two tie and I had to break the tie and uh there was lots of concerns about the look of the of the site. And so I I'm struggling with it to be honest that that we got it over the hump and then it it's kind of come back and I don't think it's going to look quite as nice. I'm not a huge fan of the detention basins or the you know um the above ground ones and I was excited for what you had in place. Um so anything that we can do to make it look better uh whether it's maintain all the plants or or whatever. I'm kind of disappointed to be honest uh the way it's come back and so um I hope we can still have a good project. It'll still look good. Um I just Is it It's like going four times the size, right? The

No, no, no. Um I I had that on the capacity is on the packet. Um and and Jason, you might want to correct me. This was my calculation. The um the original approved pond was approximately 4,800 cubic feet and what they're proposing is about 1,600 cubic feet. Is that right? Yeah. But as far as footprint, it's right. The footprint that's depth and width and all that, but the the footprint is only enlarging. Um the depth of those parking stalls are um 18 feet. So it's enlarging about 8. So it's going from 4 4,000 to,600. 16,000

16,000 four times, but it's going to be wise 4,800 to 16,000. It's going to be absorbed in the depth of it, I guess. Mhm. Um anyway, I I have kind of mixed feelings about it. Um I hope we still get a good project. I hope we don't have another thing like this, to be honest. Um like I just I feel like I don't know. I just feel like it barely got by and now we're modifying it and maybe losing a little bit of what we got or what we had originally. So, um hopefully we can still end up with a really nice looking product. I mean, cuz I'm the one that broke the tie. Like, um if it doesn't look good, I feel like it's kind of on me. So, anyway, that's just my two cents.

Any other questions or comments? Council Arnold?

My problem is maintenance. just however it comes in, you know, um Sam's Club has put in the turf and having the trees instead of bushes and plants and all that kind of stuff. And when you go over to um Lowe's, like I absolutely hate the islands of landscaping in the parking lot. They're they're just a pain and it's because we have a percentage of landscaping in there. So you got to do what you can to put that in there and it just I mean that stuff just doesn't make sense to me. But I mean that's the numbers that we've chosen to put upon ourselves and you know I'm not a not a fan of this project anyway. So just the way it sets up and fits within the world.

Councelor Anderson, could you explain again why we're moving from what was originally planned. I guess I didn't quite understand or or get that.

So, so I think I mentioned two or three maybe three or four reasons. Um, one is uh availability. The system that is is here is not available here. We thought it was. Um, so we either have to import or redesign. Um, and the system itself due to the water table became really squatty. Usually you'll see these, I don't know if you've ever driven past when somebody's installing these. They're usually 2 and 1/2 or 3 ft uh diameter domes. These ones are only 18 in. And so they're not um super efficient. So, it's not a great design in in total. And then as we were going through the storm water uh long-term storm water maintenance plan with the engineers, there's there's pros and cons to both above ground and below ground. Um but there's, you know, there's in the the coldex system, there's one bank that mostly fills up with the sediments. Um and having, you know, those smaller diameters that would happen quicker and that's that's on us to maintain. But Sean, correct me if I'm wrong. You always get the calls if there's a problem. But

I think your system was designed to where it was work. The product would work as most of it just a cost I would guess because of cost is I mean making this feas feasible is definitely uh an issue. Not the only issue but just you know when we went back and looked at it we never should have designed it with underground. It was with the water table as it is. um didn't make a lot of sense. So

I I can see what you're proposing and it's it's reasonable, Mr. Douglas is that it fits, but for me, I feel a little bit like that it's a with the mayor that it's a bit of a bait and switch that we got the the original plan approved and I'm concerned that you felt that that was a viable plan um but that you didn't have all of these details measured out to make sure that that was going to work. So, we got the plan approved and now we're having to to go with a less desirable option. Can I ask a question just um I guess to help me understand is this an administrative item or a legislative approval?

It's coming before the council. So it's legislated. Pipeline is legislated. Yeah. In our code. And does that conform with LMA? Mhm. Sub uh uh subdivisions are um are regulated heavily, but site plans are at the discretion of the municipality. Really? Okay. Are there other options for underground storage that that we haven't explored or

there I mean there's other brands there's other systems which would also require a redesign. Um but yeah I I mean like it says in the in the packet you know these these meet the requirements of of the city code. you know, this changes do happen in construction. But, uh, yeah, I I don't feel like it's an unreasonable request. I don't think it's going to make it a less desirable project. Any other questions or comments? Uh seeing none, we'd need a motion uh to uh approve the site plan amendment if we're going to do that.

Is there anything, Council Arnold? I would move to approve the site plan amendment for the River Park Retail. Um and I'm going solely based on Sean's recommendation. Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on that motion? Mayor, can I ask does that include any of the provisions for the extra landscaping or is that not a consideration? Thank you. Um, yeah, please add the how many plants was it to keep the same number of plants? 45. 45. 45 in there. Okay. Motion. Second's okay with that.

Okay. Motion to second. Agree on that. So a motion to approve uh keeping the 45 plants that were removed. Um okay. Uh any other discussion on that motion? Miss Maraggoni, would you please pull the council? Councelor Arnold. Yes. Councelor Richtor. Yes. Councelor Anderson. Yes. Councelor Stevens. No. Okay, that passes with three in favor and one opposed. Thank you.

Okay. Uh moving forward uh we'll go to item number two consideration of resolution 2026-14 amending the personnel policy chapters 1 through 8. Miss Ko.

So we have had our um personnel policies reviewed by an employment attorney as a requirement from our liability insurer Utah local government's trust um in order to keep our preferred pricing and discounts. So, the employment attorney has suggested or recommended some changes. Um, the first eight chapters of the personnel policy is what is included in the packet. None of these um changes affect budget at all. They're mostly just broadening the policies to cover more circumstances and events. Do you guys have any questions about any of the changes within the first eight chapters? I'll be back for the rest.

Are are you good with it? I am. I'm fine. And um Steve has also reviewed these first eight chapters. So, and he was okay with it. Okay. You know, this is a good example of when lawyers get involved and they were all in red, right? All the changes or blue printed in blue on mine, but yes, they were red. There was one that I noticed in that and I had I've got to scroll down. Um, but it seemed like there was a conflict of it was 52. Yes. Where it said one three consecutive.

So they're changing that from one day to three days. That's um the change in the packet the change in the packet still had one three. Oh well no the one is lined out. No but there was a maybe it maybe it was my copy and I'm looking at an old one. Um you know what page you're on in the packet there 89. It was 52 was the is red. 52 in in on page 89.

Yeah. 52 is abandonment of position. And I do have in mine one is crossed out and then three has been added and underlined. Okay. Um three but before that it says for one o ne and then parentheses one. It's just just crossing out the number and it's spelled out in the word one just before the number. Oh, I see what you're saying. So, the one in front of the number one in parenthesis. That should be crossed out as well. Yeah, that must have just been missed. I can make sure that happens though when I update the manual. And was that required? That change was required.

I'm sorry. The change from one to three was required. It wasn't required. It's kind of a standard business practice. Um I would guess if you looked at all of your personnel policies where you work, it would be three days. That's standard AC across business um that I've ever seen anyway. So So this Yeah, this makes when we start this at 52 it says three unauthorized absences. Do we mean to say one unauthorized three consecutive days or three separate instances? It No, it would be three. So three days in a row consecutive. So if you have three consecutive

So I get that in the second part of it there, but in the very first it says three unauthorized absences may cause constitute cause for separation. So So you're talking three days, one one instance. Yes. Right. Okay. Yes. So they can not show up for two days and it's all good. Well, no, but it wouldn't be considered job abandonment.

And I'm kind of with Council Arnold, like if we leave it at one, it says it may constitute, you know what I mean? And and and you're you're the one that that uses it. Would is there any time when you would want it to be two that it causes it? And like cuz you have a May in there one with May works in my mind, but

I I'm fine sticking with where it is already. Um, when I reviewed this with the attorneys, they specifically asked about this policy because three is standard just across, you know, all personnel policies and all industries typically. I'm fine with leaving it one. It's fine with me. Council, yeah, I understand the desire to get rid of one because there could be an accident. there could be something that makes it prohibitive to to come in in one day, but but certainly can be resolved thereafter. So, I mean, I understand what's going on here and I'm comfortable there as well.

And if you're comfortable and you don't think there'll ever be a time when there's two and you want to pull the plug and be like, "Yeah, it you can be more consistent and fair with three." Okay. I think if you get somebody playing the system, obviously there's going to be reviews that will, you know, come into play in the overall picture. If they're going two and two and two and two, so Right. And I mean, if that was the case, there are there still may cause Right. Yeah. All right. I'm satisfied. Okay. Any other questions? You do that. What? Three days. I don't I don't know who what industry allows that.

Yeah. No, no, mine's not. I don't think mine's three days. Like if we have the police or fire, they just don't show up for two days and they don't call her in or anything. We're cool with that. And I mean, what percentage of our employees with the city are public safety or public work? I mean, Sean, are you okay with that? Your guy just doesn't show up for two days. I I can't say that I've ever seen that happen. But why are we allowing it? Mhm. I don't think we allow it. I've never seen it happen. I don't think that we're saying it's allowed to have two days. If it's in the policy, so I I think Yeah, we're not And not allowing it to If it's If it's in the policy, it's allowed. Well, we're just saying it's not job abandonment. I apologize.

This is job abandonment. And honestly, what this really comes down to is unemployment. If somebody was to be ter well it's considered job abandonment if they miss the three days in a row. Okay. So if they now go and file for unemployment they're not going to get unemployment because they abandoned their job. So it's that's what this policy really comes down to is unemployment and whether somebody's going to be granted unemployment or not. And if we have this policy in place, they're not. And that's just one of the cards that can be played. That's right.

So that there are numerous other options that can be laid out there for cause for termination if that if that were to be the case. Right. And we have other policies about um people like if you're going to miss a day of work, it said, you know, we have another policy that says you must notify your supervisor. So we could take care of the other circumstances. If somebody didn't show up for two days in a row, it just wouldn't be job abandonment. They'd still most likely get a documentation for that. You would have some other type of corrective action would be taken at that point that could lead to ultimately termination if needed. But yes,

welcome. Hi. Sorry. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions uh on this? Thanks for bringing that up. I I had that in my questions, too. So, I'm glad you you saw that, Council Arnold. Um move to approve resolution 2026-14 amending personnel policy chapters 1 through 8 with the one typo correction in 5.2 two uh striking the word one. Okay, very good. We have a motion, a second and a second. Any discussion on that motion? Uh seeing none, Miss Margon, would you please pull the council?

Uh councelor Hansen. Yes. I was listening in the car. Okay. Councelor Stevens, heard you blame the attorney. Yes. Council always attorney involved. Arnold. Uh, yes. Anderson. Yes. Councelor Richtor. Yes. Thank you. Okay, that passes unanimously. Thanks for all you do, Miss Como. Thanks. Maybe you have a nice night. It's the only reason I passed because you're so nice. Yeah, you're in favor. We're good. Okay. Number three, consideration of ordinance 106 amending the Riverdale City Code, Title Six, Chapter 1, Section Three, Driving and Traffic Regulations. Chief Warren,

Mayor and Council. So, this is just pretty straightforward. This is a code that's been in place for my whole career. Um, it primarily is used as a C ordinance that's used primarily as a kind of a catchall if we have a traffic accident where maybe the elements are a little tougher to meet. Uh, it could be utilized on public roadways. But the real purpose and the best purpose of it is if we have a fender bender or something that happens in Walmart's parking lot, it gives us the ability to issue a citation, which I feel helps the person that's a victim of the crash to get that taken care of. Um, it's been in place for a long time, but it came to my attention that the penalty was actually a class B misdemeanor. Historically, penalties uh for traffic regulations and violations amongst other things were of a higher level. And uh the traffic code has been reduced one to two degrees in many areas. And this is an oversight where we didn't catch that. Uh we did not adjust that penalty. And so in order to be fair and just to the patrons that's come through our city, if they happen to have a bad day and this code happens to be utilized upon them, I would propose that it would be uh reduced down to an infraction to match other similar state code related offenses that would warrant it. So um is there any questions?

So basically this is for private property. It can be it's that's the one distinguishing difference between state codes that we have at our disposal for like fender benders. That's the one thing. But we do use it on the roadways as well. Just if you get a weird accident, it's written broadly enough where we can use it on to to cover that and it just makes it easier for us to uh fit the elements. But the primary difference between this code and other codes is it can be used on private property where like if you have like a improper backing, there's no such thing as improper backing um on private property. There's only a couple traffic related offenses that you can enforce on on uh private property. That's DUI, reckless driving, careless driving. So, this just gives us the ability to maybe take some action if they back into a car or a pedestrian on private property. But it also serves a purpose on roadways as well. And that's why it's written that anywhere within the city corporation of Riverdale City, it can be used. So, it's not used a lot historically. We've recently started using it more so, and that's how it was brought to my attention.

So, basically, you can give someone a ticket without giving them a misdemeanor. You give them a fraction. So, it it frees your hands up a little bit to not feel like you're going to devastate somebody's life. Yes. And and it's more in line with other offenses that are out there. Yeah. When when when you just need a a ticket to show, you know, who was wrong for an insurance or Yes. So like the equivalent of a class B mism which what which is what it was would be reckless driving. That would be kind of something far more egregious than what this should be used for. That's a good catch. Councilor Arnold.

Understand? I move to approve ordinance 106 amending Riverdale City Code title chap title six chapter 1 section 3 driving and traffic regulations as stated within the packet. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. I'll second. Motion and a second. Any discussion on that motion? Miss Maragon, please pull the council. Councelor Arnold, yes. Sir Anderson, yes. Councelor Stevens, yes. Richtor, yes. Councelor Hansen, yes. Okay, that passes unanimously. Thank you, Chief. Thank you, mayor. Thank you,

All right, moving on to item number four, consideration of ordinance 10007, amending the Riverdale City Code, Title 2, Chapter 6, Design Review Committee, and Title 9, Chapter 6, Section One, Architectural Configuration. Mr. Cooper.

Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, you may recall, uh, council, on the 7th of April, you approved the plan development ordinance. In that ordinance, it reconstituted the um nature of the what is currently called the design review committee into what is being proposed as the development review committee. Um and so those red lines are in your packet. I've essentially struck the entirety of 2.6 and replaced it with a new section. Um I've retained some of that code, but it was easier just to strike the whole thing and start over. Um the major changes are the addition of a member of the city council on that that development review committee and also the nature of when we utilize that committee. So right now the design review committee um has less members and we generally are just using that to review architectural um uh proposals. So colors of buildings, materials, signage, landscaping, things like that. um in this application under the under the new PD ordinance as well as um a whole new process in our development review, we would implement the development review committee um at the beginning of any land use application. So, we would convene that meeting and having a member of the planning commission and a member of the city council along with the mayor as well as review staff, technical staff. We feel like it's going to be able to not only give our applicants a much better picture into what the city wants to see done in terms of land use, but it's also going to um help us understand um collectively as a group some of those challenges that developers are going through in terms of facing uh submitting their proposal in the first place. So, it's a multi-dep departmental intergovernmental review body is what it's essentially being proposed as. Um, another unique feature of this is that

the member of the planning commission and the member of the city council is being asked to then circle back to their um respective bodies to report on what is being done in those meetings. And that gives um in my mind as as it's proposed a full 360 degree feedback loop in terms of um in terms of what's being proposed in these early on meetings. And so that can happen as a committee um report uh with that individual member during council meeting. Uh that can happen um with our updates and planning commission as well. So it also affects uh uh 961 uh in the original code 2.6 under design re review committee it references 961 in terms of some of the architectural configurations and so I've just um amended those to uh to remove some of that and just refer to the to the actual development review. We don't have architectural standards in the city in terms of a codified regulation. I hope that we can in the future and you'll see that in some of our um proposed changes coming up later in this year, but right now I've essentially just struck uh most of 961 and just tied it back into the fact that the development review committee would meet and and talk about architectural standards. So that's a general um overview. I'd be happy to answer specific questions if you have any. Mr. Cooper, I think one thing that helped me understand this process a little better is uh if you could explain to them how a project like the Ritter project would um would maybe get to the council a little more quickly.

Um if you could just explain that. So, under the new under the new um plan, both with the PD ordinance and with this new development review um committee, the applicant would have um said, "Hey, we have this idea for this uh town home project, and we're going to be seeking a general plan amendment and a and a reszone." So, we could have convened the development review committee, and at that time, we we would have had planning commission and city council representation as well as staff. So not only could we have talked about just the technical nature of such a submitt but we could have also talked about um the the appetite of such a a proposal in from the the view of the city. Right? So it's this idea that it's dual representation. Not only are those two members specifically planning commission and city council members expected to report back to their respective um groups. They're also meant to bring the perspective of their groups to that committee so that we can help our applicants understand what might be feasible in terms of an application like that. Um, typically the way life works is that the council as the legislative body sets the policy that they want implemented through the city and administration um implements that. You heard from Mr. Brown a minute ago, why are site plans um legislatively being decided on? That's because our policy isn't strong enough yet to stand on its own so that an administrative review can be done outside of the policy itself. And so our our our codes allow for legislative review of a site plan um administrative application. So this is a meant meant to kind of bridge that to where we have some legislative representation in what's been otherwise administrative reviews and and decisions. so that we're understanding

what all the groups want. And I know sometimes uh the first time we hear about something is when it comes to the planning commission. And uh hopefully this will stop that or or remedy that so that um our our representation on that committee can bring that back to us early and uh and and explain to us, you know, and get our your feedback and stuff. So, Councelor Stevens.

Yeah. Is there going to be a recording u minutes? Now I know this is not a state you know one would where it has to be broadcast but if we want to reference something from from the meeting without going through maybe we haven't heard back yet or we knew something was coming we want to get is there going to be anything? Yeah, it'll be it'll be handled just like um the DRC is handled now uh with recorded minutes. Okay. Audio and and written minutes. Councilor Richtor.

And again, this is just advisory in nature, right? There's no approvals, nothing like that. This is just an advisory committee that goes back and no changes there. That's correct. And and so my hope is that when um something comes out of that committee initially to the planning commission, which is generally where it's going to go, then that recommendation will have some carry some weight because it does have the input of all the bodies of the city both on the administrative the and the uh legislative. So that's the hope is that it can be a recommending body.

Mr. Douglas, there's another mic. Do you guys want to pull? So, I I like this because I think we get some good feedback from the planning commission at these meetings and I think your representation would be key on other elements that the planning commission typically don't cover and also to give us your feedback as if you represent your group and what you feel they represent. I think it's very beneficial for an applicant to hear that at an early stage. El Anderson,

how do we navigate reporting back information when sometimes I mean, case in point, uh, Trader Joe's, we were kind of I participated on that with the design review committee, but we were kind of told to button our lips on that until it was official. Um, how do we navigate reporting that back to those respective bodies? From my perspective, once it's sub formally submitted to a reviewing body where whether that's DRC administration for a plan review, then it's public. Um there might be a few occasions simil such as Trader Joe's or something like that that would ask us to not disclose that. Um that would be um that would be something that we could say yes or no to because everything we receive formally is public information. Okay. Thank you. Council Arnold. I move to approve ordinance 1007 amending Riverdale City Code title 2 chapter 6 design review committee and title 9 chapter 6 section one architectural configuration is stated within the packet.

We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Any discussion on that motion? Miss Maronei will please pull the council. Henson. Yes. Anderson. Yes. Councelor Richtor. Yes. Arnold, yes. Councelor Stevens, yes. All right, that passes unanimously. Very good. Thank you.

We will move on to item number five, consideration of administrative order 2026-01 addressing culinary water restrictions due to drought. Mr. Douglas. Thank you, mayor. So, we received our aotment from Weber Basin for this year. They have cut our outside watering or water delivery by 20%. For the summer. Um, and just a little feedback or a little bit of backstory. So, I looked at the reservoir levels again today. Willard's at 54%, East Canyon 81, Echo 66, Rockport 66, Smith and Morehouse 82, and Lost Creek 67. And the only reservoir that looks like it'll probably fill this year in our drainage basin is Kazzy at 98%. And that seems like a high number, but when you look at the acre feet of water in KSY, we literally could only provide for the city for two years if we drained that reservoir from full to empty that would provide enough water for about 2 and 1/2 years for our city and that's it. So it's a very small reservoir and so it doesn't have very big impact. It does some impact. They do generate some electricity out of them and a few other things but as far as storage it's fairly small because if you look at Willard in comparison so Kazzy's 6900 acre feet Willard Bay at full capacity is 116,730 acre feet so cozy is pretty incons in significant in the whole overall picture. Um we also looked at a little different this time than doing the drought rate across all levels. Last time we implemented across the board because we needed to cut inside and outside watering. This time they've only asked us to cut outside watering by 20%. Our inside delivery will still be the same. There will be no reduction on it. So looking at that, what we proposed to

do was leave the base rate alone. No increase on the base rate and then the first tier of water which should cover most every resident's inside watering with no increase on it. the increase will only be on the outside watering. Hopefully with that and education, it's enough to talk people into being conservative and giving us that 20%. I mean, we'll have to keep watching. If we get to the end of June and we haven't conserved any water and we're we're running low, like we'll probably have to make another change. Last time our residents was fairly responsive, like I was pretty impressed. And I feel like our residents are already good because they're paying for their water. everything that goes through the tap. They're pretty conservative, so it is hard to cut in some instances because a lot of them are already conservative. Some of them aren't, some of them don't care. Like it's water wherever. Um, and it's like it's harsh and then trying to police it and all the other thing that's going to come with this. I would ask that as we look at this that on number two instead of reduce all water we just reduce outdoor watering by 20%. And then on number nine I would like to add in except for health and safety reasons because there is reasons why people wash stuff to keep things cleanly or that helps with sanitation. And so I'd like to add that into there and then I'd take any questions that you have for us. Councelor Stevens um where we use culinary for both inside and outside. How do you ascertain or monitor what's being used? Because you only we only have one meter and that's on the household

and so there's nothing that differentiates unless you take a winter rate compared with

so pretty much what I would what we would do and that's what we do is we go in and look at our usage December, January and February pretty much know that none of that water's get they're probably not out washing the car outside. They're probably not washing their driveway and they den sure better not be irrigating or running a air conditioner that time of year. So if we look at them levels, we pretty much know what their base is like where they're at. You know, like 5 6,000 7,000 gallons for indoor usage. When we start getting in March, April, May, we start seeing that increase, we know that most of that's going to be outside watering. And it it's particularly hard for us because if you take a system that has both, it's pretty easy to say, "Okay, we're cutting your water by 20%." When you if you use more than your 20%, we just shut your outdoor water meter off, right? That's pretty hard for us to do when there's a family living in the home there. So, it's going to be education working with people and asking people to do their best. And we're not going to look at, we can't look at every single individual. We're going to look at how much water we're producing, how much water we're putting back, and if we've cut that by the 20%. It's a nightmare for us. Actually,

I had uh I had one one request in our packets, it tells kind of what the what the usage has been. Is there a way to alert us each month? Um that second packet, you know, like how much we've used or how much the average? So, we lag a little bit because I have to wait for a meter reading from Weber Basin. like my well I can pull as the month goes on you know what we're producing there. Yeah. Um we lag a little bit um with Weaver Basin. So it'll be a little bit of a lag but we can provide that. Even an email just so we have an idea if we're making a message getting through like where are we at? Are people are they doing anything? Cuz I agree it's an education thing. I think we all know.

There's no way to do it on the bill where our bill comes through and it shows how much water we use indoor compared to outdoor. No, just I mean, well, you'd have a percentage like you said December. You have your bill and so you can look at your comparisons. There's some graphs on there. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. If we have the graphs, I mean, yeah. Is there a way to red flag somebody on their bill? Not not us red flag, but at least let them know that they're

they woke. It's really hard for us to do that because we'd have to go back through and try and look at each individual account, produce a individual usage for the three months. Like I I think I don't think we'd get that done before the end of the summer to be able to produce everybody individually and some computer science major all the bills and we can look into that and see if if the software has something in there that would let us do a comparison say your usage is, you know, doesn't buy us percentage. We can look at that. Like I haven't specifically tried to do that, but it would have to be something that it does it itself cuz if we have to do that manually like it would be almost impossible for us.

I I mean it just seems like the information is there. We just how to tap it. Yeah. If it's in the program like Good one tap tap. Uh councelor Anderson first. No, you're good. So do I understand it correct that there's going to be two tiers and there will be a base. So we have five tiers of water. So you have your base base fee that you pay and that has no water with it. Then you have the first tier, second tier. So as you use more water, the rate that we charge goes up and that's a conservation measure.

Granted, you can't I mean AI doesn't provide the the measurement to be able to differentiate between a a family of two and a family of five. Um, so there's going to be some disadvantages for larger families because they're using more. Okay. Same same. You could put that back to the same way with somebody with a larger yard as well, though. You know, you have somebody that has

a 6,000 square foot lot and you have somebody that has a 40,000 square foot lot. Like there's there's just so many differences out there. It's not apples to apples on every one of them. It's it's a lot of apples to oranges and we tried to take the least aggressive a road that we could and try and make it fair so that if you're conserving and you're not water the other thing we have people that pay for outdoor irrigation water separately and this shouldn't affect them at all because they're going to get dinged by their irrigation company and so it kind of leaves them nonaffected which they shouldn't be because their irrigation's separate. Council Richtor,

and I perhaps should know this. What's What's the tier difference when I hit that 10,000 uh level? I did not I I should have brought that. I didn't bring dollar amount with me. So, but there's already a tier and it differentiates. There's five tiers. So, every like so many thousand gallons that changes. And this 10,000 is that probably the upper tier already or is it That's the lowest. The one we're not going to charge on is the very lowest tier. So, it's the first 7,000 gallons type situation that because that's what you're using in your house, right? Right. Can you get those, Miss Maraggoni? Can you? And that's regulated by the state, right? I mean, we we didn't set the the tiers. the state.

So the state wants us to tier because of conservation because if you don't have any incentive to not use the water so they want it to be progressively more more expensive so that we have a reason to conserve which I fully understand. I guess I'm I'm just I'm just questioning the 25% increase here.

So that's based off what we have in the consolidated fee schedule and the level of drought. So they they give us a drought level and they base theirs off of what their predicted percentages are and then our consolidated fee schedule takes what their level of drought is and assigns a fee to it. One other question if I may. Um collection of rainwater. There seems to be a statute that says that a homeowner can't collect that that it's deemed state property or you can collect a minimal amount. There is a minimal amount. Yes. 250 gallon barrels.

Okay. And and you can get a permit for more um but you can start with two 250 gallon with nothing. I made one. So far so good.

And so if you if you a little more background on our water usage. So a lot of times in the winter we can get by with 100 acre feet of water. That's what we produce. That's what we sell. If you get into July, August, September, depends on the year because the heat changes at different times. We're typically over 400 400 plus acre feet of water. So we're using almost 300 acre feet of water outside a month. Thank you, Miss Maronei. So hopefully everybody can see on their screen. We got those tears pulled up. So each, you know, the it already gets more expensive in those higher tiers, but there will be a 25% increase on those as well, the over 10,000, which we really worked hard to hit this right in the right spot. Our our ordinance says if Weber were basing designates it moderate, then we do 25%. It's already it's already in in ordinance. So,

and is this universal? So, so for commercial property, for for across city property, all of those. So, so it's uniform across the country. And another thing that is a little tough is some of us that tried to conserve last year have already put ourselves, you know, 20 20% more is going to be tough this year. That's why I say, you know, the guys that are it's hardest on the people that have been doing the best job for us. That's that's what makes it so tough.

But overall, we need the 20%. So, it's not every, you know, like one guy might hit 15 and one guy hits 25, but in the end, as long as we're in that 20% range, then we should be fine and we should have enough supply for the summer. And the rain could really help us. Like, I know last year it was a dry summer, you know, like I water on culinary at my house and I'm very particular. Like, I try and keep my yard looking nice and I used 30,000 gallons more over the year last year than I did the previous year. And I try and be as conservative as I can and and play it a lot just because it's hard to ask somebody to do it if you're not doing it. But I know I used 30,000 more last year than I did the year before and my lawn wasn't any greener. Like it was just drier. We just didn't get the moisture. And hopefully we get some rain. Like that could really help us.

Councelor Hansen. And I would say the 10,000 that's pretty that is generous. I mean, having worked in in utility billing for a water agency, generally in the winter, even a big family isn't using 10,000. And if they're they are in the winter, that's usually a red flag that they've got like a leaky toilet or something like that that's happening. So, really, this should cover I mean, almost everyone in the city. It would have to be pretty abnormal water use for indoor if it's above 10,000. So, I think that's a great number to set it at and a good place to start. Hopefully, that gets us where we need to be. I agree. I think the terrace is about 4,000 on their on their in, you know, their first tier. Um, yeah. So, I'm at Bono Vista and they did 50% across the board. Really?

Yeah. So, we've tried really hard to be sensitive to our residents. We just got to get that 20% somehow. Council Arnold, I would move to approve administrative order 2026-1 addressing the culinary water restrictions due to the drought. um with the changes that uh Sean has made um in his presentation. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. I'll second. Motion and a second. Thank you. Any discussion on that motion? Miss Maragon, please pull the council. Councelor Anderson, yes. Councelor Hansen, yes. Councelor Arnold, yes. Councelor Stevens, yes. Richtor, yes. Okay, very good. Thank you.

Thank you. I know this is one of the hardest things that that you guys have to do when we do something like this. So, I appreciate the support and we'll do everything we can to make it as mild as we can. Are we going to do like a monthly update as we move forward through this season? Like we we could provide the residents the same thing that we're providing for you like what our usage is compared to previous. Yeah. Yeah. I think all the information we can get out the better. We could we could put a spot on the website and put something on there that they and I think sharing it on the citizens and having you hit your letter and maybe a meter that's just running. So we already have

we have a article um already pretty much written up based on what is if this was approved for the newsletter that'll go out. I think he sends it to the printer on Friday, but we'll hit social media right off the bat first thing. Yeah, I I was just going to just going to say that this kind of

you have your um Riverdale citizen agitators who you know say yes I conserve water now I pay more you know that was a common theme from last goround and so if if we're educating and I think you're being proactive which I I'm I'm glad to hear about you know the wise and and what what we're doing because it impacts everybody and so it it's again most people are are good with it except for a vocal minority. Um, we're we understand that. We'll we'll do the best we can to to get it out there the best we can and make it a

do we have like a commercial the reverse 911 thing that we do for everybody in Riverdale that because I think the biggest heat that we get that it I mean it really isn't heat it's just noise but we get a lot of it is when you go by Sam's Club and they have a sprinkler that's busted and it's just shooting up after we've just done this and it's like

so we're gonna I think what we've talked about is Steve's going to help us with that a little bit too. And so hopefully we can be commercials our hardest one because naturally the does the price matter to them? Probably not. Do they have somebody on site manage the system? Probably not. Like they might come once every five weeks and set the clock or they might landscape mow once a week. The people in the stores that's running the stores, they don't have a clue where the clock's at or how to set it or how to adjust it. So they're our biggest ones. So again, we're going to have to visit with some of them and do education. And we we know that's going to happen, you know, and we we'll get hit as well as a city because even if we cut back on our watering, so like Golden Spike Park to water that park, it takes us three nights. So we might only water that park twice a week, but we're watering pretty much six to seven days a week to water it twice. And it's hard for people to comprehend that that it's not the same stations. We're going across the park. And some of that's we're trying to stay within our restricted hours and not go outside of them as well. But yeah, there's a lot we I mean our phones will be ringing off the hook when this hits. Like we know that like I it's hard to even deal with as much as it'll hit, but we'll do the best we can to educate them.

And I think Sean still hasn't watered, right? Like the parks you still We have not. We've turned the system on, but we have we have not watered a park yet. And if we're getting by, the residents should be able to get by because the traffic we have compared to what you have in your home, like it's killing us at Riverdale. Like, we're not going to be able to go much longer at Riverdale. Um, so when you say Riverdale, the park, Riverdale City,

Riverdale Park, the city office, like we can get by fairly well here. It'll recover once we start watering. But the foot traffic at Riverdale Park, I'm sure you guys drive by there and see what happens to that park, like it's already overwhelmed even this time of year. So, that one's going to be like we're going to we'll watch that one closely and try not to hopefully we get a little bit of rain tomorrow and the next day like they're saying. They set up to a quarter of an inch and that would buy us some more time. So, and are there going to be any impacts to the splash pad?

So, we are going to cut that one day. It'll be Thursday. Um, and that'll be close to the 20. There's I went through last year and there was no way that I could pick like a certain day and get 20%. Like every every week a different day would be higher. The weekends typically are higher. Thursday was a fairly high use usually and um we also looked at reservations and Thursday only had one reservation throughout the whole summer that would be affected by it. And so we felt like that was another consideration as people when they reserve they kind of expect the splash pad and so I went through all the reservations and there was only one Thursday. So we'll have to reach out to them and tell them that on Thursday that won't be open.

Okay. Well, we appreciate all you do, Sean. Thank you. This is a tough thing. Just one more thing. Are we enforcing the um organized sports usage? We we go down to Golden Spike Park with the youth fairly regularly. I mean, it's, you know, in the summer and it's usually the same soccer teams that are down there and we had passed that ordinance and enforce. So, would if you would just call us so that we can go over and see who it is.

Okay. like if they're there's certain rules in there that if they're doing certain things like we can tell them not to and especially if they're trying to do exclusive use. I think Rich has got that wrote fairly well now to where we can deal with that. Okay. And that's great.

We're not like we're not there every minute. You know what I mean? Like we go over there and mow one day. We go over and do the restrooms in the morning and a lot of times we're early in the day when we're over there. So, if you see something over there that's consecutive, just let me know and we can go check on it for sure. All right, moving on to number six, consideration of ordinance 108, adopting by reference the most current edition of the international property management code and establishing standards for property maintenance. Mr. Cooper,

great. Thank you, Mayor. Um 9 uh one is our section of the code where we adopt all of the international codes that are adopted by the state. So the state adopts um all of them. So the building code, the plumbing code, mechanical code, the fire code, those are all adopted by the state and then we adopt those and their their amendments by reference in 9.1.0. What the state hasn't adopted is the International Property Maintenance Code. And so that's left up to us to determine if that's something that could apply to Riverdale. And so I've proposed that we uh amend 910 to include the adoption of the International Property Maintenance Code to supplement what we already have in our current code in terms of nuisance abatement. So when Steve May goes out to enforce code, um he has to at his discretion only those things that are outlined in section four, chapter four of title three, I think. Um and if it's not in there, then he has a difficult time uh to enforce those issues. So what the property maintenance code does is it augments that. It supplements that. So it it allows him to do a broader amount of um enforcement on different things. So um structures is one of them um inside and outside. So it supplements what Jeff Woody can do as the building official inside of a building in terms of structural uh maintenance and enforcement. Um so there's a lot of benefits to it. I've outlined most of those benefits in your packet in terms of the difference of what the property maintenance code would do uh in addition to our nuisance code. So, I think it's a great thing. There's a lot of cities that have it. The state doesn't do it. I'm not sure why. They just leave it up

to us. They they the state knows that cities have their own um nuisance abatement codes. Um and so again, there are many that have their own but then adopt this in addition. So, I think it's a great thing. It doesn't affect our citizens at all in terms of what they can and can't do. Um, it just allows Steve to have a uh a broader purview of what he can uh inspect and enforce. Any questions on that? Any examples of of perhaps what the difference would be? So, what the state adopts and what this would include that we don't already include? Any

I'm flying a little bit blind on this because I'm not sure. Chief Warren, Chief Warren raised his hand a little bit. I mean, there's a lot of stuff that Brandon's researched, but uh this will be a good one. For instance, that parking lot at Trader Joe's, those potholes that are in all these parking lots, we don't have the tools to go and force them to fix those potholes. And that creates a significant uh danger both property and then safety wise for the people that are shopping here in our city. And so this will give us the tools that we can contact them and force it upon the businesses to maintain their property so it's safe for those customers and patrons that are coming through there that you know they don't wreck the front end of their car when they're going to shop. Uh we have bunch of those throughout the city. That's one of the main things, but it primarily targets our commercial district, not our residents. And it doesn't target them. It just ensures that the quality of the commercial area that we have stays up to the high standard that we need it to be. And it it makes it fair for those businesses that are doing so that their neighbors are doing so so they're the neighbor doesn't run down their property and adversely affect their business type situation. So does that kind of cover what you're thinking?

Yeah. And in in the packet I've just got a number of things listed. So, in addition to what um Chief Warren just mentioned, um weeds and overgrown vegetation is kind of an obvious one, but the uh sidewalks, driveways, and parking areas of both commercial and residential um drainage to prevent standing water accessory structures. So, that's purely just a it's either a zoning issue or it's a building code issue. And if it doesn't fall in either one of those, then we have no regulation uh to enforce um the condition of an accessory structure. This now gives it to us um on the interior of a building. Uh he can now look at things that are structurally um uh structural components. He can look at things like infestation. Whereas we would just kind of punt that to the health department, he now would have the opportunity to look at some of those enforcement things. um uh anything from the mechanical systems to the to the uh plumbing systems, safe egress, um fire hazards, the the list goes on. It's in your packet. So, it is there's a lot of things in the commercial district that this would give him the tools to go and look at. And he's great at working with our our citizens and our businesses on the initial um the initial encounter education and then followup. So, I think he's doing a great job with the process of enforcement. This just gives him more more tools.

And and just to add to that, collectively, Steve's kind of the mouthpiece. We would utilize the fire department, a little bit, the police department, public works, Jeff Woody, because those guys are kind of the experts on maybe some of the building codes and different things like that. It just gives us the ability to kind of for him to collect that information and present it and and and talk to them and have some teeth to getting them to comply. He won't be able to be the expert in all these things. It'll take it and really with code enforcement, it's it's a team effort. Like he's working with everybody in the city. Not even though he's housed with the police department, he works very closely with everybody in this room to try to make sure we get the best product out there for the residents, commercial, and everybody. So anyways,

I think one that's one thing that I was going to say that Steve does like if it's something that's in our purvey, he always comes over, sets down, we go through it, he has a good feeling for where he's headed and and what the right answer is before he just goes out and addresses something. And honestly, he's been great to work with. Like I think he's made a difference. I drive the city daily and I think he's making a difference. And I think little tools like this, like you can't believe how many complaints we've had on two or three potholes and how many cars they've damaged in parking lots and they kind of thumb their nose at us. Like it's just like it's just a parking lot, but it's damaging people's cars. And they're calling us saying, "Well, you got to fix your road." And it's well, it's not a road. It's a it's a parking access and it's it's privately owned. So I think it would help on them a bunch. So, back to your question, I think um the technical part of this is that if you look in the packet where I've redlined it under 9.1.0, all it's doing in the list of all of the other international codes that we adopt by reference. And what that means is that we're referencing the state's adoption and we're doing it to where any amendments that happen at the state level, they're automatically applied to our code. So, we're not having to do this every year. So you see the red line, I've just added the international property maintenance code in addition to all the other codes that we adopt by reference. So it just completes that suite of tools that we have to um regulate which makes it nice based upon our previous agenda item where it automatically kind of updates to the latest standard. That makes it so much nicer to keep our code up to date to where it's effective when it we can just reference that reference that code and it's updated yearly. So anyways,

councelor Anderson, do you have a question?

Just a comment. When I first read this, it kind of led me to wonder how you're telling me that it won't affect the citizens as much as it will commercial uh development pro properties because when I first read this, I thought this kind of uh reflects back on an HOA, you know, and you we all have the HOA horror stories as somebody's going to try and use this to make me put door uh uh knobs and and drawer poles on my cabinets. I had that happen when we built our home.

They weren't going to clear us for uh approval for the house because we didn't have drawer poles on the cabinets that we had. They were designed specifically so that they didn't have them. So, it's just wondering how far this can carry. Um, and I don't want it being honorous uh on the citizens, you know, compelling them to do things that maybe they uh wouldn't normally do with their properties. Obviously maintaining upkeep is important so that it affects everyone in general but that that was my first concern with this as I read through that. So um again assure me that this is not going to be utilized in that type of manner.

Well it doesn't regulate new construction. That's purely under the building code. um it doesn't regulate or override any zoning requirements or existing building code requirements. It can apply to residents just as much as it can apply to um commercial properties. Um I I think it's the application of it. Um so as we were talking about Steve and just the process of enforcement, he's he's taking more of an education um approach to it. It's great to have the tools, but if we use them as a hammer, then that's where it becomes um problematic for some people. So, Steve's approach um from from Casey's direction is to educate. And so, if we have a residential property that is in need of enforcement or a commercial property, then typically that looks like a a phone call, an email, or a person-toperson conversation to help them understand what the requirements are and then an expectation for compliance. And then if there isn't compliance then it can go a couple of different directions. So it's a tool that we I think need. How we use it is maybe more to your question. Um, and that really is something that is doing well from from my observation

because I can I can see a neighborhood Karen saying, you know, he needs to do this and I it needs to be tempered so that, you know, things don't get out of control. As far as your your your resident goes, there isn't anything that I can think of that we would enforce that's not already already in the code. Um, predominantly what Steve sticks to with the residents, the biggest things are weeds, snow removal. Um, we do we have had some home business issues, people operating businesses from their houses, but that's pretty much it. So the meat and potatoes of what we need to keep the neighborhoods nice and enforce those regulations are already in our code now. He's already actively doing it. I don't foresee anything from this code that's going to bleed over into this his job in the residence. It's going to be more directed commercially. Now, under the letter of the law, certainly it could probably applied, but we have I've instructed Steve to use discretion um when enforcing these things to be fair about uh what we're doing. And to be quite honest, um as Brandon mentioned, we don't branch out. if it's something new that he hasn't been trained on and enforcing, then he works with me or other department heads in that neck of the woods that are more of the experts in that category to make sure that we're handling it appropriately. So, I I don't foresee us this really anything from this new portion bleeding over to the residents because I feel like the tools that we have now are adequate. So, thank you.

Council Arnold, move to approve ordinance 1008 adopting by reference the most current most current edition of the international property maintenance code and establishing standards for property maintenance and as that stated um that it will automatically update. So, we're talking the most current. It's not we're adopting this one but it will continually so I don't know if the most current the way it's written the most current is the best way to say this is it

because by reference and most current together that means that you are whatever the state adopts by reference you're adopting that and that will be the most current. So in the motion whatever the state adopts we adopt. That's right. Right. I was just saying the way it's written it says the most current. So we're adopting this one. Mhm. Oh, I got you. Yeah, that that's true. So, the state actually doesn't adopt the international property maintenance code, but you can still adopt it by reference with the most current edition that is published by the international code committee or code council. So, the by reference is what what gets us right gets us the most current, not we're only adopting the most current today. Okay. That's right.

So, stated within the packet then. Okay. Have a motion. We have a second. Thank you. Okay, we do not have a second. Then I will second it.

Okay, we have a second. Uh, any discussion on that motion? I'm going to probably be in opposition to this and only not because I don't agree or or or understand the representations made, but I don't know that they always line up here and and we we would be imposing something here that could be changed at some depending if we had different code enforcement, different uh thoughts and everything. So, while I support the overall thought, um yeah, I'm just not comfortable reading doing something I haven't read. Okay. Thanks for giving us an explanation on that. Any other comments? Miss Maron, please pull the council. Richtor. No. Council Arnold.

Yes. Councilor Hansen. Uh, I don't know. That's not an answer. I wish that was an answer. Um, I'm going to say no. Councelor Stevens. Yes. Sir Anderson. No. Okay. Motion fails. Uh with three being opposed and two being in favor. You don't like potholes? Call your city council. Well, I'd rather us just bring that back because I do really love that and I do wish we could address that. And so, yeah. What do you mean? I'm not sure I add that to our code. Oh, put it in our code.

Got it. I've just never and I if I'm okay to say I just I agree like I've dealt a lot with all of these international codes in public works, but this isn't one that I've ever seen or heard of or read for myself. And so I'm just hesitant to take their word for it without without knowing exactly what they're actually covering. But I do really love that. So if someone brought back a code saying that we could enforce safety and parking lots and maintenance, I would be in favor of that. Agreed. Good feedback. Thank you. And and I agree. We won't always have Steve May. So, well, sure, but we'd always have the code. Yeah.

Every single city staff member was in favor of it. Yeah. Okay. Uh we will move on to item number seven. Uh fire department discussion. Are you taking this, Mr. Brooks?

Yeah. This it's it's more just an update. Not so much an update, but just to fill you in a little bit. Plus, I do want some direction on this. We're we're dipping our fingers in the pool all over the place here and our toes and everything else. But it's almost time to jump in. We've got to make a decision. And before we started, I mean, we've we've looked at everything. We've got some final numbers from the state. Uh again, met with the fire district. We've been talking with Roy. We're kind of running ours, you know, similar to theirs. Um, but now we've got to we got to make decisions that are a lot more impactful. And again, we're not asking you to make a decision here. I just want some direction and and some assurance that when we start putting all this work in here that we're not just spinning our wheels and we're wasting our time because we've got to run this kind of handinhand with the budget. And this is where we're getting a little bit nervous because we're we're putting that together. But we've got to figure out, you know, are we doing this for six months? Are we doing it for a full year and that kind of stuff. So, uh, and and I think it's probably important that we start looking at some open houses or some some community involvement because I think that's important for you guys to get that feedback before you do make a decision. So, I guess that's kind of where I'm at. I just I just want to make sure that I I'm not misreading you and that you're okay with me um going forward on this cuz within these next couple months, this thing's going to start to fly. I mean, the the district would like to start at the first of the year. So, um, all these things come into play. So, I just wanted to put it out there for some discussion, feedback, and if you have any questions or or whatnot. But just I I need some assurance that we're we're on the right track, that I'm not misreading you or or anything like that. So, that's why I put it on there so we could at least discuss it and see where everybody is. Again, I'm not asking for a commitment. It doesn't mean we're there, but we're going to start putting a lot more time into it on some of the more serious stuff. We've even

started to negotiate things. There's so many factors we got to look at. You know, there's equipment that we got to negotiate deals with. Um even personnel. We're we're looking at, you know, uh buyouts on time and uh vacation and all those kind of things. There's a lot of work that's going to go into this. And we've started almost all of those things, but um at this point, we've got to start taking a lot more uh direct. We got to jump into pools what we've got to do. And uh so I just I wanted to get feedback from the council and just make sure we're all on the same page. Council Arnold,

I am in full support of going to the district. I think the offset in the planning commission or not the planning commission, the property tax is there for funding. I also think that if we're uh lowering the um size of our city government that we look at some other cost measures that you know for I mean how many how many of the employees we have 55 full-time employees and I mean 20 of them would go to somebody else. So, we would be, you know, down to what, maybe 35, 40 employees, full-time employees that, you know, would give us an opportunity to do some, uh, cost-saving measures elsewhere as well. But, um, looking into this and looking into the district and, um, the other cities that are doing, uh, or jumping on board with this, um, they've got a kind of a tough road to hoe to make this thing work, not just with Riverdale, but they have, um, some of the other cities that are signing up for it as well as into it. Um, Coun Council Richtor.

Yeah, I would also echo um Councelor Arnold's comments. I I've seen several uh presentations on this and and quite frankly, I'm hardpressed to find a reason not to do it. Um it it it makes complete sense to me and I think I agree it gives us some flexibility that we might not otherwise have. So, councelor Stevens,

I'm I'm for it for a couple of things. um was it a year and a half took maybe two years ago when we were um evaluating you know about the ambulance whether or not we wanted to contract that out and when I was did the deep dive into that it it the the theme that came home to me was that what we don't have is economy of scale because we have the one station we have the the one truck. Well, we have a ladder truck anyway and an engine and and one ambulance. We and you know when when we compared it with Roy and we were looking at that contract, it just you know even though they had two fire stations that still gives them so much more latitude for economy of scale for the overnight and which we we've never had. Um, and so for to to go into the district, they can provide the service with the and I keep using the word economy of scale because they can shift people so much more efficiently and maintain the manning levels that we with one station just cannot do. And so it's prudent u from an economic to do that. Now the one concern is and I say this with a little light-heartedness is we have employee that was recognized Paul flag would not be 44 years if he if this if this happens. I mean our most stalwart employee would no longer be a Riverdale city employee. I mean that's anyway like I said it's a little more lighthearted.

You can put him on a lawnmower. other comments and if you don't feel comfortable Oh, go ahead, Mr.

I know that was a more ingest there, but we did ask specifically about Paul. We've asked about every one of these guys individually and and Chief Hennessy's been in there with a lot of those. Um, they are pulling everybody straight across. Anybody we send, they're picking them up. So, yeah, he he might he won't have 44 years with the fire district, but he's still going to have that with the state. So, um, they they were excited to pick him up. They they're excited actually to pick up Chief Hennessy. They've got a spot for him already that I don't think he was even expected. And whether or not he takes it, I don't know. He'll have to work that kind of stuff out. But I've been really happy with with their willingness to to do everything. Even Kristen, we we've gone over everybody. And uh we even tried to keep her here a little bit, but uh it didn't quite work out. But

Excuse me. You said Kristen? Yeah. She's like their administrator. Administrator. Yeah. Oh. Oh. So she she runs the department out there. what Matt will tell you, but uh actually he's agreeing with me. So, but no, they've uh that's not even going to be an issue. We've just got to come down to benefits and things like that. All this stuff's going to have to be in agreements. We've got to start writing contracts, all kinds of things. So, it's going to get pretty busy at this point. And I don't know if you have any questions for Matt or Matt if you want to say anything more. Um I I think we're headed in the right direction, but I I just wanted to make sure the council's on board before we st sink a lot more time into this. So, Councelor Arnold,

I'm not sure where the others at. I' I've heard three indicators of of that we're going in that direction. I would like to hear from the other two as well if they wouldn't mind giving us an opinion on Everybody's looking at me.

I sat in on the presentation and I will be honest, I need to study this a little bit further. Um I'm not fully opposed. The only chief concern that I have is the net effect on the citizens as far as the cost. Um I feel it unfair that we push, you know, a cost savings to the city solely to the citizens to to foot that. So I I would want to examine that closer. I'm not opposed to this because a lot of the things that they talked about were um more promising um retention of employees and um their efficiencies that they're able to accomplish this. My sole concern is the net effect on the citizens and I want to ex examine that further, but I'm not opposed to to moving forward.

No, that's fair. Um, it's a hard one. I I can't say that I'm that I wouldn't consider it cuz we've seen the presentation. It sounds too good to be true. I've had good conversations with some of the guys that I I'm hoping that they're really hearing what's being offered. And I hope that they know that it's not something that Riverdale wants to do, but and that's the hardest part for me. I mean, uh, Paul's been on the fire department almost as long as I've been alive. And so that's that's my memories of the fire department my whole life. That's a it's tough, but um, I'm open to it. I know it's something we need to look at. They're making it sound really great. Um, I'm more of a trust but verify and I've been waiting to see numbers from those guys and more numbers from the staff. So that you know it's it's going to be a painful thing for us to have to make that call on and we just need to have every assurance and having the hard numbers to see what that looks like. Um, so that we have more of no choice I think is maybe that makes it easier even though it doesn't. But that's what I'd ask for. Just so if you've got numbers, I'd like to see numbers for sure.

You know, yeah, we will. All right. That that's what I needed to hear. So, we're good. Mayor, Council Arnold has a comment. I think one of the things that we think about is the heartstrings for sure. I mean to see the Riverdale on there, but the one thing that I feel bad really bad about the the citizens of Riverdale is that Riverdale has kind of been built around them. So like you've lived in Riverdale pretty much your whole life and you know can't you've been here how many years you know and 702 but it's uh you know the the thing is when we build Riverdale and we have a police department that's got 35

33 22 21

21 So we have our own police department we buy our own cars we do all that kind of stuff and then you have basically just under 10,000 residents that and the state really pushes um property tax for um public service or public safety. Um this is more the economy of scale for the district because if they need bigger vehicles, more equipment, things like that, it doesn't fall solely on Riverdale to do it. And the people that shop in Riverdale are going to um help us with that. Um, that's why I, you know, um, I've really checked into this and I'm I I think the service will stay the same, all that kind of stuff. You know, I'll miss having Riverdale. Um, I was given a 41 hat and it's probably one of my most prized possessions as far as my hat collection and stuff like that. But it's uh, you know, the we represent the citizens of how much it costs to live in Riverdale. And it it drives me crazy whenever we say, "Oh, we've got to do, you know, this many employees and we got to have, you know, this type of service." when we're struggling with the service when I mean it wasn't too long ago that we were operating uh under manned and we're acting people to risk their lives um because they're under manned and I think um you know the the big thing for me is the cost across for the residents because you know I think Michelle pays the same property tax to the fire district where she lives And I think Harrisville is that way too, isn't it, Sean? I'm in your fire district.

We're in North View, so we're a little different. It's a different fire district. It's three cities, but it's kind of the same situation. Same situation where, you know, when they they need equipment, you can draw it over a bigger base. And and I do think we sharpen our pencil to hit the 2030 mark where you know Steve gets a cut in pay for 20% or something like that because he he's his workload goes down or whatever things like that you know.

Well and I think that's all I think it's really valid and those are really good points. I think one thing we lose control over though on behalf of our residents is the tax increases to them. That yeah, there's a big upfront decrease from Riverdale City because we get to drop that for them because we're not providing that service anymore, but we have no say on future tax increases to them. And in the end, you know, we we just can't control it and we can't know. And so that's just a a realistic situation. And that's why, you know, I mean, not that that that's a reason not to do it. It's just there are some real considerations that way that we can't protect the residents when it comes to what happens in the future on that. So, it's just something to think about too. But I feel like those are all valid considerations.

And I just I just want to say um a couple of things. I think the residents are super lucky to have you guys as their city council members. Like you're very thoughtful. You're very smart. You're not afraid to do the hard thing. I mean this is hard. I agree. I mean that 41 is important to all of us. I was in the fire station. I was looking at a plaque. It had the names of the volunteer guys from back in the day and and so so it's hard things change but but uh you guys are very thoughtful and I just appreciate all your your research and and we have a a a hard thing in front of us and we've got to we've got to find a way to fix it. Uh I'll tell you something kind of interesting. I wrote wrote my newsletter article and I had planned on writing something about something totally different. But then after reading the comments about the CarMax and the uh apartment building, uh I I had made a comment that we were facing a shortage in 2030 and somebody uh somebody came out and uh said, "Well, I I can't imagine Riverdale with all their money. Um I'd like to see their books and stuff." And I thought, man, there's people out there that have no idea what we're facing. And so I was like, "Well, that's it. It's time for another 2030 article and we're going to talk about we're going to talk about it again in in the newsletter and make sure people know and hopefully it's laying the foundation for you guys to make these these hard decisions. We're almost there. You guys are almost there. Like I can't tell you how close we are. Um this this fire department thing gets us over the over the hump or really really close. The last thing I want to thank is the chief. Um he could he could pretty much make or break this deal. I mean, if he if he took a hard stance and said, "We're not doing it," and turned the whole department against us, um, we'd be dead in the water. I think it'd be a PR nightmare and it would just be a disaster. But with his help and his long vision and just the just just the willingness to do what's best for his guys, I mean, they're they're going to get great things. And we have we have talked. We had another meeting with them and he was there. We've talked and I

feel very comfortable that all those guys are going to get very well taken care of. They're going to have opportunities galore to move up, do cool things all over the world or all over the county. Um, cool not the world, all over the county, things that they might be interested in. And if they want a quiet a quiet station out west and they don't want to be running crazy things, well then they can head out there. But his his help in this situation has just has just kind of made the deal. and and so and so not only is he protecting these guys, but he literally is is kind of taking the whole city on his back and uh saying, "I'm going to help get across the finish line with this 2030 thing." And that's just it's amazing to me. Um because and and and you two that are on on the fence a little bit, I appreciate your position and uh hopefully we can get you there. I want you I want it to be a unanimous decision. I hope everybody can feel comfortable with what we're going to do because we're going to have a lot of messaging that we need to do if we decide to go this route. So anyway,

can I just I'm going to reiterate what I said is a couple years ago, whatever that was when we were

um talking about getting rid of the ambulance service and and have either Roy or Ogden City pick it up for whatever reason. I don't know. Well, I do know it. I got involved and I got involved in the numbers and I got involved. Okay. Because the ambulance it does have revenue production to it and and you know if we contracted it out we would lose that revenue production from an ambulance but we wouldn't be paying to staff it. And it was it was and I got for whatever reason I got involved with it because to do the staff just and it was this is this is where you know when you're talking about the the fire you're talking about the whole package. The ambulance is just one one small nugget of the whole package. And we went back and forth and it was somewhat neutral. But the the thing was is is the manning level because you had to have manning levels in the overnight for the ambulance and that's where we couldn't compete and I hate to use that word and and so when you factor in um again the economy of scale meaning having a station here and a station here that can overlap now even though we're in we have um mutual aid it's It's not the same because you've got people in different stations that responding. And because I looked at that and saw the numbers for just that one nugget, I realized, boy, if you extrapolated this out over the whole department, it really changes the dynamics. And then when you throw in the capital improvements, meaning we need a new ambulance, which is 350,000, and we

need a new ladder truck, which is 2 million, it's like ah, you know, it changes it really with that one understanding and you in with this capital improvement or capital necessities that we have to are going to have to fund here in the very near future. This is to me is is is it and believe me, I'm emotional about having a Riverdale, you know, with the Santa. Um, but it it it's it it's kind of one of those things that's time has come.

Just the safety aspect, too. I I think you know having you know like they were saying somebody calls in and they're bringing somebody else from another station or something like that that I mean you can't measure that. So true. So true. Just deep deep resources. Anything else, Mr. Brooks? No, not on that, Mayor. I did want to make a couple comments on the upcoming events on at least two of those, but go ahead.

Okay. Yeah, we'll so we'll move on from the fire department discussion and move on to the upcoming events. Um, we appreciate Mr. Brook Brooks being here. It looks like he's in his u hotel room down there. He's at the city manager uh um conference. So, we appreciate him joining us there. Uh and that's a funny background, but uh so we do have the the League of Cities and Towns Meteor Conference this week. Uh so excited for that. Um when we have the young Chrysler um Jeep Dodge Jeep Ram dealership ribbon cutting um and Mayor Prom Arnold is going to step into that role. Just may I get a clarification? Did you say 10:30 for the young and on here it says 10. Is it be there at 10 for

I have it at 10:30. Okay. Well, I'm going to let you guys work that out. Um I' I'd be there at 10 just to be sure. I like to come right in at the wire because if I have to mingle with the never and and and the spikers will be there and uh they they our relationship with them has improved massively and so be ready. They're going to have you say something. They're going to kind of just let you do it. They're they're not going to do some of the things they used to do. Um things have gotten much better. So they're going to let you run a coat and tie right at the he can be dressed however he wants shorts and flip-flops and headed to Bear Lake. I'll have a young shirt on. Good for you. Yeah,

we'll have the scissors and the ribbon at the front desk for you. Um Michelle won't be here either, so you can just pick them up. That's tough. Okay. Also, I also have 10:30 and I typed it wrong on the agenda. Oh, it's 10:30. Oh, it is. Okay. Okay. Very good. Okay. Thanks for that clarification. Last thing is the budget review meeting on May 5th, which is uh our next meeting. Mr. Brooks, what comments did you have

um on the the conference? Those of you who are coming down again, we're staying at the Abby in um I had this discussion with Michelle yesterday, I don't know for a big organization why it is so difficult for them to uh work those rooms out, but those should be uh uh most likely they'll be in my name, but yours should be on there as well. But but with the rooms are reserved, so you're fine. Just make sure you can get the Abbeby in. Um if it doesn't show up under my name or your name, then ask them about Michelle. I met with them again yesterday. This seems to happen every year. I don't know why, but I I'll meet with him again before you guys get down here. So, that should be cleaned up, but um you do have a room, so you're safe. Um on the budget review meeting, I talked to Cody today. Um there's going to be a bunch on there, but one of the things he did request is a discussion item on a a a TNT. Um we just got word back from the state yesterday on some of those things, and they pushed some of those deadlines up. So, uh, my plan at this point is to list an actual, uh, budget item on there. It's again primarily for discussion, but it will be specifically related to truth in taxation. Again, all this plays into into the whole fire thing. This is going to be a complicated um, budget process this year, but uh, we have to look at those things and and Cody attended that meeting and he got a lot of good information that's new that didn't apply before. and a lot of those things that affected cities and districts and stuff last year, we got to be careful with and we got to meet those deadlines. So, you will see before that meeting comes out, you'll see an agenda item on there. I don't want you to panic. It doesn't mean we're going to do it, but we may have to throw something on there for discussion just mainly because of those deadlines. Um, but just so don't be surprised. No decisions have been made. It's just uh one of the processes we got to do and we got to jump in on it early. So, um, I

just wanted to state that while I had you here tonight. Um, but any information we can get out to you in regards to that in advance, um, we'll have that to you. Again, hopefully even sooner because some of that stuff we just got from the state and we haven't gotten through it all the way. So, uh, but but don't panic. But that's all that if you see it there, that's why we're just move and it's a it's a time constraint more than anything. So, and uh, that's all I had on that stuff, Mayor. Okay. We'll move on to the comments section. Oh, do you have something on the on the coming events?

Yeah, Mr. Brook, if it's okay. I know Cody does such a great job presenting uh those budget things and and normally that presentation is we see it when we're here. We get some preliminary numbers prior to that. So, I guess my only ask is if there's any way to get that as early as possible and maybe as robust as possible. He does a great job. I just love to see that as soon before May 5th as possible so we can review it. That's my only comment. Thank you. All right. Yep. No problem. Thank you. Okay. We will move on to uh the comment section. Uh any comments from the city council? Council Arnold. I was approached by a resident, not my wife. So to be clear, there is two residents.

It's actually a resident and the resident.

Um they they were they were a bus driver um for the school district. Um couple of things they wanted to thank Casey for um the support that our Riverdale resale police has been giving them. Um they say that their reds, what they call them, get run every day and they've gotten some support from our police department and they wanted to say thank you for that. Um one of the things that they talked about was sitting up higher. They wanted to know if we can work with UD do to clean up some of the garbage and um concrete and things like that. They go to Leighton and Clearfield and see like the plane and all the cool stuff that they're putting in out there and that we're kind of forgotten a little bit. You know, they said even if you look at America First and what they're doing with the hillside, it looks so nice and when it gets, you know, planted and all that stuff, it's going to be super cool. But if you look down in the on onramps and off-ramps, there's just concrete and stuff that's debris that's in there. And they just was saying, "How come we can't at least have clean stuff." So, um, whoever's got the dot phone number to say please and whatever,

we'll work on that. I noticed some of the same stuff on road, some of the weeds and stuff that's their maintenance. Yeah. So, we we have made a phone call just this week and we'll continue to try to make some of those. If you got specific areas that we can send to them, that helps. Okay. We've sent up some photographs already, but just to make sure we're not missing anything. Yeah. She told me to She said, "I know you go in your car a lot, but go in your truck where you're sitting higher, you can see stuff a little better." I agree. I've noticed it, too. We We're working on it. if you identify specific ones.

Okay. We're we're also working on the so they don't maintain behind the curb. So like over the vi doct here, we've been working on that this week as well. So hopefully that's getting cleaned up a little better on the sidewalk area. If only we had an internationally recognized property maintenance code.

Well played. Okay, councelor Stevens. Okay, this is kind of a for your information um Weber School District is uh having a downturn of enrollment. It's significant enough that they've lost equivalent to Weber High School. the the student body that attends the major high school, the the enrollment is down that much and it's displacing a number of employees, teachers, and and that's also reflected in Riverdale Elementary. Okay, so that's just an FYI and there's a a number of reasons why that's happening. U but that's and I don't know if it's a trend that's going to maintain. I I don't know. We don't know. And um but that's just for information. The second thing is is um and I look at the newsletter from that I get every week and it's just you know the party line propaganda. What when are they projecting 4400 to open? Is there a date or a time frame or

seeing the exact same thing that they're telling us? So, no, no, no, no, no. You guys sit in very high level meetings and and you've got to have some better information than I I honestly like they told us I think the last meeting that we actually had with the mayor, they told us around the middle of May to the end of May. Yes. And and I'm hesitant to even say that out loud in a meeting because every time we say that, you know what happens? Like they tell us one thing and we don't the other. The updates they send us is literally what they put out to the city or to the residents. Did they pour concrete on the 17? They did pour a lot of the deck. Okay.

Over I5. The last several times that I've been um past there's been people working. I mean it might be one guy with a shovel, but So a lot of the work is taking place at night because they're doing lane restrictions while they're doing it and they don't want to do the lane restrictions during the day. I I've heard that numerous times in the last two weeks. Well, there's never no nor if you're up there at 5:00 in the morning, there's probably 20 guys up there a lot of mornings. Some mornings there might not be anybody depend on what their schedule is or if they're letting the concrete cure or whatever, but they have not told us anything new. I can I I'll send an email tomorrow and if I get information, I'll pass it on to the mayor and he can pass that on to you. Okay. So, and then the second part is is they're driving the pylons for is it 84 the

Yeah. Right. And so, um, and I know that that's I don't know if that's going to prohibit 44 from being opened up or it will have slight clo like I would expect they'll open 4,400 up before they slide the decks on 84 unless they've changed their mind again. They was going to be a slide and place deck. So they'll pour them on site and then slide them over the opening. So that means they'll close the underneath while they're sliding them over, but it should be really shortterm compared to what's been going on.

I've been I've been hit up a couple of times. I says I've and I've said may but it you know and again I don't have the view I like I said like the mayor's seen what they've told us like we're just hesitant to even say anything lately because and honestly they've had great weather like you couldn't ask for a weather winter that was better than what we've had to get stuff done and so I hope they're they're at least keeping this second commitment to get us open here shortly on the 4,400 part. Did I read they were going to redo the Roy roundabout just above that? So, that's actually a city project. Okay.

So, that could affect us right after we get open. That's what I thought. I thought, "Oh, no. They're going to open that and then and again, that's that's not a UD do project." Okay. That's a that's in Roy City. Um that timing could be terrible if we it felt like it might get open for a week and shut again. I don't I don't know. I haven't heard from Roy any schedules on that, but I did hear some information. They was talking about a redo on the roundabout. I hadn't heard that. Great. Anybody else? Councelor Anderson. The information that I had seen on that was that it was the end of May for 4,400 and October for 84. So,

we know the 84 is behind it just because of the way they kept it tried to keep it open so we could at least pass under it. So, it was it restricted some of that and they did tell us it would be later. Um, I think what we've been keying in on is getting 4,400 open again. That is that's problematic for everybody. And 84, if I understood it was maybe going to be like a three-day while they just slide the new bridges in place. 4,400 be closed while they slide the 84 bridges in or three days. We'll see. Well, then I mean it's three days, but they're rerouting through Yeah. the Riverdale's surface streets. True.

Yeah. Is there a roundabout on 1050? Yes. So, we have a contractor. They're just going through their documentation and bonding and insurance and all that. So, we we're getting closer all the time. We don't have a schedule yet on it, but it should be this summer. the states working. Sorry.

I've been wondering with Home Depot going in out in Clinton, Walmart going in and West Haven, have we done any type of analysis? I mean, we're talking about the fire uh department and off, you know, putting that to the fire district. Have we looked at or even considered what net effect might we might be faced with some of this traffic that won't be coming to some of our businesses? Oh, it's definitely a concern. Um I don't think we've done analysis at all. Can forecast anything like that or just kind of

Yeah, he could work. I don't think you've done any actual numbers, have you? But

it's hard to do numbers like that because a lot of um we know our sales tax. We don't know the sales tax of other cities. So, it's hard to extrapolate from that. And Walmart only publishes a per square foot kind of revenue number. All the big box people do. So, we can do some general assumptions. Um, but it is my number one concern is the economic pressure that we're going to see as the west side of um the county develops in the green fields. I was thinking about this in the fire discussion. When you pick up one end of the stick, you pick up the other. And I think on one end of the stick as we reduce the property tax um for the citizens, we also reduce the property tax of our highest value assets which is the commercial district. So I haven't done these numbers either, but just on a pure property tax level, u my hunch is that the commercial properties are at a much higher taxable valuation than our homes because they're at 100% versus 55%. Um, so as you reduce property tax for the homes, you reduce it for the commercial. So you you increase that reliance on sales tax. And I think that's a that's a scary strategy. Scary strategy. So we're going to have some of the lowest property tax in the county and that's great for citizens, but we now expect more out of our businesses. And when we see these economic pressures that are just going to continue to increase, you talk about what we can and can't control. sales tax is the least controllable thing we have. And we've the whole reason why we're having this conversation is because we were we were um acted upon by the state back in 2005, I think it was. Um and so we have no control over what businesses do, what the economy does. Um we've seen a number of businesses shut down and leave us

leave us, you know, in a pickle. So to put ourselves further into that basket in terms of having all of our eggs, it it's it's scary. So I think our policy decisions outside the vacuum of the fire department decision in terms of the 2030, I think contextually we got to look at policies across the board that's going to get us a bit more resilient and a bit more um diversified. And it's not just the west side either. Um if you ever drive north up to 2700, that whole thing's getting developed and and we're hearing that there's a target going in right there, which will definitely affect ours because everybody from the north uh comes this direction, they come to our target, and that's that's going to change, too. So, we're getting hit all over the place. It's going to affect us. There's no question about them.

Councilor Richtor, did you have something? just maybe those are heavy topics. So I'm I just want to express put on the record uh Mr. Taylor this this new uh sport that they're doing for the youth. The street hockey thing has been incredibly wellreceived. I can't go to those things without every not only the participants but the community that are there watching just enjoying the heck out of that. So I just wanted to pass on I know he's not here but Mr. Taylor and compliments to to starting that program. Um it seems to be very well received. So, that's good. That's good to hear. Okay. Uh, comments from the city staff. One, Mr. So, I didn't want to say anything during the Oh, go ahead.

You can go ahead, Steve. I didn't. Go ahead, Steve.

Well, the one thing I was I was going to say, I mean, we we talked about, you know, regulations and things like that. Um, and many times we don't mention a lot of this stuff to you guys, but uh we get audited all the time. for all over the place. It's just like a non-stop. I just finished one uh I don't even know it's completely finished with the police department on our BCI system. I actually had to go over and get fingerprinted for this thing um because I'm listed as one of the individuals uh on top of that. I I've never used it in my 20 years that I've been here, but um these kind of things happen all the time. And um we usually do really well with them. We've gotten to the point where we can uh handle those really well. But we did and Sean, I don't know how much more you wanted to mention about this, but we got hit with one this week that Sean's been warning me about for months, if not years, and we've been holding our breath. And unfortunately, we got the nasty grim. Uh what was it about two days ago? Sean, I don't know if you want to talk more about that one, but that involves our storm water. And um I don't know if there's more we can tell you, but just so you know, these things bog us down besides the fact that we get hit with all these changes and things like that. So, um, don't be surprised if we don't have something coming as a result of that one, too. And, um, it's going to take a lot of time on Sean's part and his department stuff, and there's probably going to be some stuff that's going to come down from that that we may have to make some adjustments and spend money to upgrade our systems and whatever else we need to do. But, Sean, do you want to talk anything more about that one? Or

I was just going to kind of say the same thing. I think we've brought this up in numerous meetings in the past that when this hits, like there's going to be financial impacts on it. like we have not seen a city that the last two cities that we've seen personally um 80 deficiencies was a low number um up into the 200s and so we will have deficiencies that's what they're here to do um we'll look at it as a training get better type situation frankly with our staffing like we cannot do everything they want you to do our goal is to keep the water clean and that's what we focus on is that part of But the record keeping, all the bookkeeping and that like it's just it's so they will they'll find deficiencies. We've known that. We've said that all along in a way it's good to be that it's happened and it's over and done with and we can see what they're going to make us do. Um, but it is concerning because it it I would think it has some kind of financial impacts. Just even getting through the audit and if they give us 100 to 200 deficiencies getting through that and working out a plan with them to get through them, we'll, you know, with a consultant, it'll be that'll be some money as well. Um, but that was that was one thing I was going to mention. The other thing I I wanted to bring up, and I didn't want to say it during the fire discussion because I think it's outside of that, but I think if you look at Chief Hennessy, he exemplifies what we have for employees here in Riverdale. And like I've told him this personally over the last month or two, but he stood up and he has said, "I'll go either way and I'll do whatever is best for this city." And he has not made a stand one way or the other. And I think when you look for an employee that's that's got everything on the line, per se, I think that's the type of employees that you have here. And I'd just like to say in an open meeting how much respect I've had for him to watch as he went through this process and hasn't tried to swing it one

way or the other. I just it honestly it kind of chokes me up because I've watched him and he stood there with strong shoulders and I know it's probably the toughest thing he's ever done. But that's the type of employees that we have here that like they're going to do whatever's best for you guys and for the city. And so I just like to tell him a huge thanks because no matter which way it goes, he had his guys and the rest of the city's back no matter which way it went. So thank you. Completely agree. Nice.

Okay. Any other comments from the staff? Um I just had one quick comment. Um I don't know how many of you had a chance to work with Angel Mahia. uh he is uh the guy we hired that kind of took Chris Stone's place and uh he's just a pleasure to work with. I hope you can pass that on to him. Uh I um like I said, I had a a subject for my newsletter and uh residents have been hitting me up about being considerate and it's everything from pets to the trail. It's just kind of an overall being more considerate. And I had my newsletter kind of ready, thought out before I shifted gears and I said, "Angel, can you just write something up and put it in the newsletter?" And and he wrote me the most beautiful thing. And I I I know how he probably did it. But still, it it's beautiful. It's exactly encapsulates what I wanted. And uh then I then he he sent me a draft and then I wrote this huge newsletter um this month that just blew his thing off the page and and was like, "I'm sorry, Angel. You're going to have to rearrange everything because I wrote this big obnoxious piece, you know, but I had I felt like it was super important." And he's just he's like, "Oh, no problem. He just is so easy to get along with." And uh he he's really stepped into it. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he could help with that water stuff. like he he's pretty good with computers and he he might be able to aggregate some of those rates and figure out what people are using and and and really if if if Angie has the data, I'd get those two together. And

so we've already started using him on this audit. You know, he's already putting information out for us and like he's he's very helpful for all of us to work with, too. He's a quiet little guy, but he uh he gets stuff done and uh so if you get a chance to see him or meet him, um he's just doing a great job for the city, just like all the other employees. It just fits in perfect and just does exactly what we expect from our Riverdale city employees. So anyway, tell him thanks if you see him and that's all I have. Uh so with that, uh we need a motion to adjurnn. So moved. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Second. All in favor say yes. Yes. Yes. We'rejourned. Contract. Okay. Just so you know, these chairs are not near as comfortable. I don't think they are either. They're quite as comfortable.

I don't know why they're standing up. Mayor, do we not have RDA meeting? Oh shoot. Oh shoot. Oh crap. I said did I miss something on my I was so excited now that you mentioned but we need to do it though. We need to do it. All right. I'm all right with that.

We would like to welcome everybody to our Rudo City RDA board meeting for Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. Let the record show all board members are present as well as members of the city staff. Um we are going to skip public comment because we have no members of the public here. There's no presentations. We will move on to consent items. Consideration to approve the meeting minutes from September 16, 2025. Can't believe it's been that long since we had an RDA meeting. Um, and the work session. Any questions or comments on those minutes? Seeing none, we need a motion to approve. So moved. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. All in favor say yes. Yes.

All right. Those are approved. We'll move on to the action item number one. discussion and consideration of resolution R202601 modifying the application of the demand feature for certain housing rehabilitation program loans to allow temporary nonoccupancy without triggering acceleration. Mr. Brooks,

thank you, Mayor. You guys all remember this. I brought this up a month or two ago. I can't remember this all blends together anymore. But um the more I thought about this, this is the first time this has happened in my 20 plus years here. Ironically, we have another one maybe on the back burner too. A little bit different. But uh what I didn't want to do, I got thinking, you know, we get in there and make some big drastic change as far as just designate you, you know, an appeal of authority, then I don't know how much that's going to complicate it because then are we going to have to go back and and start changing all these contracts. So, I took a little bit of a different approach on this and basically just attacked this one case in in and of itself and it's kind of explained in the executive summary there that that's kind of what I did. I think it serves the purpose because you guys can make that decision if that's what you want to do. Um, we can resolve their case for now and then kind of move on without having to affect anything else. So, I was trying to keep it as short and as simple as I possibly could, but still obtain, you know, the the results that we needed. And if another one comes up, we can come back in and do the same thing. But, um, I actually had asked Brandon and Michelle to try and find some uh some back records of the the authority that the uh RDA board has, and we haven't even been able to find that yet because that's going to go back a ways. um which and that's what I referred to in the executive summary. We may have to readress that at some point in time in the future just so we do have a good record of that. But at this point I didn't want to do that right now. So we took this approach which is a little bit different but it would still give them the option to get out of that contract if that's what you guys want to do. So um you know it is contrary to what we've done in the past. Um but it is also different than what we've had in the past. So I don't have any real big heartburn over it. I know Stacy's doesn't really like the idea and she feels that, you know, the contracts were a contract and we should be following them, but it is a little bit different

situation and and I understand that too. I understand her position on it, but uh the feeling I got from the council last time is you wanted us to at least look at this and try to work something out with them and so that's what my attempt was on this one. Questions for Mr. Brooks? Okay. Uh, board member Arnold, I would move to approve resolution 2026-1 as stated within the packet. We have a motion uh and a second. Any discussion on that motion? And just to clarify, this is addressing only this loan, right? This is not an overall policy. That is correct. Okay, that is correct. Just this one. Good question. Good clarification.

Can I complicate things just slightly? Sorry, Steve. Update it for us. So, um, in section 11 one, um, in the, uh, resolution, it does give a timeline, um, that we talked about a little bit. So, it's 24 months. So, basically, if you're, if you don't occupy the home for 24 months, then that doesn't trigger the acceleration clause. If it's a 25th month, then we're right back to square one. Um, that there's no determination of when that 24 month starts. So, because we're just applying it to this one loan. They've been out of that home for I think 16 months or something, Steve. So, we haven't answered the question in the ordinance um as to when that period would begin. I just wanted to bring that up if you wanted to um include that in the motion or modify the the the resolution or just leave it at 24 months and then that ends for this particular applicant in the next few months.

I I think Brandon, didn't we have verbiage in there towards the end that allows the executive director to implement the intent of this? So, we may already be covered with that. That's towards the end. Yeah. I think if you guys could just give me some direction on that, then we'll just handle it from here if that's what you guys want to do. So, I think we'd be f fine on that. And and I had asked um Brandon to double check on that and I don't know that we even had time because that was like yesterday when I was asking to follow through on that and I've been down here. I haven't been able to do anything. So, um I think we're okay. If you guys want to pass it is is I think we're okay tonight. But that is a valid point. We've got to establish that at some point. I don't I didn't know how long he was going to be gone was the problem. So, um

I talked to Stacy and she way to school. That could be four years. It could be eight years. I don't know. But, so we'll have to still iron that out. But if that's your intent, we'll we'll take care of it. Board member Arnold, I I think we let you handle it as the executive director and if it becomes a problem, then bring it back. You know, if you're you're thinking, hey, this is more that I want to decide on my own kind of thing. I I'm fine with that. We as long as you guys feel okay with it, we'll we'll hand it. We'll we'll get it taken care of.

Put a foreclosure clause in that you bring to the council or something where it's like this being abused, bring it to the board for a foreclosure or something. But the overall intent, I think the point that Brandon brought up though, we we got to have some parameters in there. This could be completely open-ended. And so the 24 month month uh terminology in there, I thought was pretty valid. We just may have to tweak things a little bit as to when we started and end it. So, board member Rich Victor,

just clarifying the overall intent though is not to exceed 24 months of nonoccupancy, right? Well, I I wouldn't want to because that was the whole point of this is that uh you know, if they're not living there and they're renting that out, they're basically using city money, the housing money to make money kind of thing. So, the whole uh purpose of having those contracts in the first place was to kind of prevent that. But, as it stands right now, that shouldn't be an issue, I'm hoping. But, we're going to have to talk to them because I don't know exactly where they stand or where they're at. Thanks for the information. Yeah. Everybody okay to keep con moving forward?

Okay. Uh, Miss Marley, will you please pull the board? Board member Hansen? Yes. Member Richter? Yes. Member Stevens? Yes. Remember Anderson? Yes. Member Arnold? Yes. Okay, that passes unanimously. Very good. Uh, any comments for this meeting from the board or the city staff? If I don't have any, uh, we would need a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. Second. Had a second. All in favor say yes. All right, we are adjourned. Now you can travel. For those who are coming down, bring your shoes. We'll go walk the stairs one night. Oh yeah,

I can't make it. He that went off so fast. Nice. See, I went to show Kristen. Really? Well, the So, he has his comment on that and then I replied to his comment and I went to bring it up to talk. I was like, Kristen, I promise