City Council - Regular Meeting

Yeah.

um Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. thank you

Thank you.

Ooh. Thank you.

Thank you.

Ooh. Thank you.

Ooh. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

So.

Thank you.

All right.

All right. Welcome, everyone. Sorry about being just a little bit late. We had a meeting prior to this, and we went a little long. Welcome to our City Council meeting today. We're going to go ahead and get started out correctly. We have Sharon Shores. You're here with the Universal Life Ministries to give us an invocation.

Thank you. For those who don't know about the St. George Interfaith Council, we do over 150 prayers a year across the county. We have about 30 members and various denominations, including Baha'i, Quaker, Jewish, Muslim, Methodist, LDS, and Methodist, Presbyterian. You name the denomination, we have members in those congregations. You know, we also sponsor the Crop Walk once a year, and we sponsor the Harmony Concert once a year. And then we also do Prayer Over the City once a year on January the 1st. So that's a little bit about the St. George Interfaith Council. So I'm not going to move now into prayer. So let us pray. Heavenly Father, we come before you today with hearts full of gratitude for the countless blessings you have poured out upon us. We thank you for the peace, freedom, and prosperity that we enjoy and for the privilege of gathering freely in this chamber today. We lift up these officials who have been chosen to serve our city, grant them wisdom, humility, discernment as they make decisions today. We gently remind all of the sacred constitutional duty that each of them have and have been sworn to uphold. May they faithfully defend the laws of our land, protect the liberties of all people, and govern with justice, integrity, and an unwavering commitment to the common good. We also pray for the citizens of this city. Awaken a deep sense of civic duty. Help each to be active, responsible, and compassionate members of our community working alongside our leaders to build a brighter future. Teach us to extend grace to one another, to seek unity over division, and to never take for granted the freedoms that we possess. We ask for protection of all those who are fighting fires, our police officers, our firefighters, our EMTs, not only in our city but across our nation, but also in our world. We pray that gentle rain arrives to quell those fires and sustain new plant growth. may your presence guide us today and may all that is spoken and decided today honor you and serve the people well in your holy name we pray amen amen thank you thank you for that i've asked councilman steve kemp to lead us in the pledge

and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, we do have a couple of pre-agenda items that we want to take care of. Also, before we go too much further, I would like to recognize a couple of members of our Youth City Council that are here with us today. It's Taylor, right? And Dia? Did I say that right? Good, welcome. Remind me of your positions on the City Council. You're the mayor. Okay, awesome. Welcome. We're glad you're here. Okay, we do have a proclamation. Danielle, would you like to do that? Yeah, absolutely. All right.

Whereas farmers and ranchers in the city of St. George provide citizens with access to healthful, locally and regionally produced foods through farmers markets which are expanding and evolving to accommodate the demand for a diverse array of agricultural products. and whereas farmers markets and other agricultural direct marketing outlets provide infrastructure to assist in the distribution of farm and value-added products, thereby contributing approximately $9 billion each year to the US economy. And whereas farmers markets serve as significant outlets by which small to medium, new and beginning, and veteran agricultural producers market agricultural products, generating revenue that supports the sustainability of family farms, and the revitalization of rural communities nationwide. And whereas the City of St. George recognizes the importance of expanding agricultural marketing opportunities that assist and encourage the next generation of farmers and ranchers, generate farm income to help stimulate business development and job creation, build community connections through rural and urban linkages, and whereas in 2025 our local farmers market has been organized by individuals who have dedicated 41 saturdays to our community now therefore i on behalf of mayor jimmy hughes mayor of the city of st george along with our city council do hereby proclaim the week of august 2nd through 8th 2026 as national farmers market week in the city of st george and recognize the contributions that farmers markets to our quality of life and call upon all citizens to celebrate and support local farmers markets.

Thank you. We have here with us today, Kat and Ashley are here. You have to say those together, right? You guys want to come on up and Give us a speech. I did stop by the farmer's market this past Saturday and got myself. You got to get there early if you want to get the good stuff. I did get myself some jalapenos. Very good. And some peppers and some other things. It was really cool. Of course, got my signature lemonade there. So you guys want to come up? I'll have a picture. You want to say anything? Tell us how long you've been. We talked about how long the farmer's market's been going and how long these guys have been involved. So.

Well, we're thankful that you guys decided to celebrate National Farmers Market Week with us. It's just coincidental, too, that this week marks our 19th year of the downtown farmers market. It started out in Ancestor Square and has continued. move to Vernon Worthen for the past four seasons. And it's been beautiful to watch it. I personally have been with the farmers market in almost nine years now. And to watch it go from 20 booths and a couple of farmers holding it together by the skin of their teeth to growing into one of the largest events in southern Utah that goes every single week. and being a part of the community and seeing us be a part of those family stories has been something that's so special and an honor to me that we take very seriously. This weekend, we're doing our huge celebration, so we'd love to have everybody come out. We are also doing a memory of life for a community member that used to come every single weekend. And it just so happens that those are on the same days. And so it's beautiful to see people loving local and supporting it and also having it be a part of their story. So thank you.

Thank you to the city workers and you guys also. You guys help us so much with the park. It's just amazing to be center of town right by the Sun Bowl. We're super excited to be doing hosting Dixie Days too and the new bathrooms. We're really excited.

Awesome. I'll bring this down and present it. We'll take a picture. Tell us while I'm coming down, tell us who you're, you got a few visitors with you. Tell us who they are.

These are my kids, and they've watched me starting build this, and then they watched my sister come on and help me on Saturdays for certain summers, and then they've also watched Ashley come on as a co-owner, and they've watched us build local, and it's one of their favorite places. They always ask to go to farmer's markets, so we thought it'd be fun for my lineage to come see us.

Have them come up for the picture.

Okay. I'm going to get a step stool to stand on. Oh, David.

David, you've got to get on a stool. Are we all going the same?

We should have little spots like this.

There should be Xs on the carpet.

There should be Xs on the carpet. I'm so excited I chased my chair.

Okay, we also have some visitors from the Exchange Club here to make a presentation. Come on up and introduce yourself and tell us why you're here.

I'm Melinda Horton, and this is Steve Manwaring. We are both on the board of the St. George Exchange Club. Mayor Hughes, council members, thanks for having us today. On behalf of the St. George Exchange Club, we're here to present this proudly we hail plaque to the city. Each year, the Exchange Club honors an individual and a local business who displays the flag year-round. It's a small thing, but it means a lot. Recognizing the fact that St. George flies the American flag every single day, it's up there to remind all of us what this country is about. This is our way of saying thank you on behalf of the St. George Exchange Club to everyone who works to keep the flag flying. Thanks for your time and thanks for everything you do for St. George and for your support of the St. George Exchange Club.

That's it. Thank you.

They've also asked me to tell you a little bit about the individual that we presented this Proudly We Hail plaque to. I'm a real estate agent, and I sit at a model home. And Liam, a little 8-year-old boy, happens to live next to the model home. And one day I came to work, and there was a flag propped up in front of his house in the dirt with rocks stacked to hold up the flag. And I watched him out the window many times every single day coming out to check that flag to make sure it was still standing. And I'm going to get a little emotional. And there were days where it was windy where I watched him sit out there for a very long time and hold that flag so that it did not fall over. And pretty soon there were other smaller flags hanging out there. And because we're on a construction site, one day while I saw him out there trying to hold the flag in the wind, I went and found some wire and there happened to be a pipe sticking out. So we got the flag. We used the wire and we tied it to the pipe so that it wouldn't fall over. But he still was out multiple times every single day, making sure that flag was still standing, piling rocks up, and making sure that flag did not touch the ground. He had a little wind sock that was a flag, and one day the wind was so strong it blew it away. It blew it away, and he was devastated that it was gone. So on my rounds to clean up garbage one morning, I happened to find it between two air conditioning condensing units, and he was so happy. So when the Exchange George Club was having a discussion on what individual needed to have this award, I immediately said, Liam needs to have this award. And we also gave him a small monetary donation to buy a new flag, since his flag was getting a little worn from the wind out there.

how very cool thank you for that you're welcome he's here oh he is oh so i guess we want to have him come up and take a picture we should have had yeah come up we'll take another picture come on up was it liam liam yeah come on up i'll break mine down

How cute is he?

All right, thank you for that. I think sometimes we take what we have here in our country for granted and it's always nice to see, especially young people that take pride in where they live and the flag and it does my heart good. So thank you for that. What an inspiration. Okay. We have today is also our first meeting of the month, which traditionally in our first meeting of the month, we have open and public comments. So we do have forms to fill out. So I do have a couple of forms here that people have filled out. If you're here and wanting to make public comment and you want to fill one out, you're still welcome to do so. Just a couple of rules that we have is that you must be a resident of the city of St. George. We don't allow input on any agenda items or pending land use applications. Comments should relate to city business. And this should go without being said, but speakers shall be courteous and show respect and not include obscene or profane language nor contain attacks on any individual. So with that, we do have, in no particular order, I do have Cordell Stevens here if you want to come on up.

The microphone seemed to work better here than the last building, so that is really nice. So I was here in November of last year. We talked about putting speed bumps on our street. Does that ring a bell to anyone? So since then, someone reached out to us about doing a usage report. They were going to check and see how many cars come through. He said he wanted to wait until the holidays were over. The holidays are over. It has not happened. One of the things he looked into was a crash report and that happened. has proven to be irrelevant because that crash report did not show my car being totaled in front of my house a couple months prior. It did not show my neighbor's car being totaled in front of her house a couple months prior. It did not show the car around the street that was totaled when someone ran through the stop sign because they were driving too fast and couldn't stop. And it obviously did not show the person who was driving so fast on a motorcycle that they lost control and crashed into their neighbor's yard and went sliding through the grass, got back on the bike, and then rode away. So there was no accident to be reported there because the person was gone. I have a map that I have drawn to hopefully highlight the problem.

I'm going to have to talk loud because I have a microphone. So the... All of these are obviously stop lights. The issue that we have is when you are driving north on Bluff Street and you want to come to any of the neighborhoods where the ground exits are, you are dodging either three lights or five lights by using my street. So this is my street. You go out and you come through. I would do the same thing. These lights take forever. They're annoying. I'm going to dodge those lights and go to my street to get over here as well. I know people who live in these apartment complexes. I see them drive into my street every day on the way home from work because they are dodging the light, which makes sense. There was a short period around January where there was construction right here, and there was a detour. The street was still accessible, but we didn't see as much traffic because it was no longer convenient, which is why we requested speed bumps. I'm not here as an 80-year-old man saying these young whippersnappers are driving too fast. They need to slow down. I am saying that there's too many people. So this section circled in blue. When our house was built, these neighborhoods didn't exist. Snow Canyon Parkway didn't exist. This did not exist. Every house here has houses, or every street house has houses except this orange one. And so what this is intending to show...

is that when our houses were built in the 80s, this was not a problem. It was a small residential street. Some growth happens naturally. Diagonal is significantly busier. And for people who live there, it kind of sucks. I get it. But it's painted lines. There's turn lanes. You know it's busy when you buy the home. This is a residential neighborhood that is being used as a commute to dodge all the lights. One random Saturday, I decided I'm just going to count cars for five minutes. And there were 10 cars coming by. A car every 30 seconds is a pace of 3,000 cars a day. When was the last time you had 3,000 cars drive through your neighborhood in a day? Or a semi truck? Or a big truck pulling a trailer? Or someone speeding 60 miles an hour down your street? The answer for me is today and yesterday and the day before and the day before. All those black X's are businesses. The semis that go to them, they probably can't turn around. Driving through our street makes sense. But when there was construction, they found another way. The reason that we're requesting speed bumps is not to say people drive too fast. They need to slow down. We want it's our street is not being used as it is and as it was intended. Our area has grown and our street has not been able to. Our street can't adapt, I guess, is what I'm trying to say. I don't know how to say that. Also, all the homes in our neighborhood, this is my last point, I'm probably over time. All the homes in our neighborhood are those old square homes with big square yards. Newer homes have the dry escaping, the rocks, the cactuses. Ours are big square grass areas to play. Kids actually play outside, and it is... It is very dangerous for them in the street. I hear people that one of the intersections I have circled, I think, in red. I can hear trucks revving up their engines from that stop sign in my front yard before I see the teenager going 60 miles an hour down my street. The speed trailers don't work. Pops will work for a second. We need an actual physical deterrent to make them say it's better to take the streetlights than to deal with the speed bumps or just to get them to slow down. Nothing else is going to work. Do you have any questions for me?

One thing that we can do is have you get with Cameron and maybe even the chief. They can have someone reach out to you if there's some things that we can do or what. I know the council may have some questions based on your comments of what can be done. So if you want to speak with them and that way that can keep us better informed of what our options are.

Thank you. Yep, thank you.

Okay, Mike McKee.

I didn't see, oh yeah, you are here.

Didn't even see you right there.

You didn't see me?

No, I, yeah, so that's why I said it. I seen the name and I went, wait, he's here?

Well, that's new. Yeah. Well, I'm here to address, I'm sorry. My name's Mike McKee, M-C-K-E-E. I do live in the Bloomington area of St. George, and I'm here to address the concerns I have about the St. George Fire Department. As you know, we've had recent fires that have been rather large. We had the apartment complex that burned. Twenty plus or minus units were lost. We had five homes during the recent wind event that were lost. And we have one in the Bloomington area that was a total loss of a home. Just to let you know that my background and knowledge of fire departments is I'm retired from the Orange County Fire Authority. It's not Orange County, New York City, or New York, New Jersey, or Florida. It's the one in California. And you can Google this just to check, but the Orange County Fire Authority remains highly recognized and regarded as the premier high-performing all-metro agency in the United States. It is frequently cited as a national model for regional fire service integration, advanced training, and specialized deployment. We have 78 fire stations, and it's considered an all-risk fire department, which means basically if it burns, we're going to go and put it at work. They will now. I'm out of that business. I was surprised to find out the nearest fire station to my house is not staffed. I was also surprised, and I believe the one that the five homes were lost on during the wind event is not staffed either. And also, it's rather surprised the heavy reliance that this fire department uses on volunteer firefighters. I'm not bad mouthing volunteer fire department firefighters. They do do a good service when they can, but the training that they receive, you cannot keep on the same par as having eight professional firefighters in fire stations. St. George is growing and it's getting bigger as we all know. It has all types of weather populations diverse. And as you can tell, just because you guys approve all the time, we've got all kinds of buildings going on from high rise, multi-story apartments and office buildings. to industrial buildings, and you have to have a lot of knowledge about those types of construction and how to fight them. The days of just putting the old saying of the wet stuff on the red stuff just doesn't get it anymore. You have to have knowledge and training on how to do it. It does cost more to have people in fire stations, however, I think it'll be money well spent. I know you can't do it overnight, maybe manifestation once a year just to keep the budget going under control. But the St. George Police Department just doesn't have a handful of officers. And when things go south, they hit a pager and guys strap on again in the bags. You have paid professional law enforcement officers. And I think it's time the city had the same for their fire department. One problem with volunteers is how many are going to show up when you need them? They do have family emergencies. They do get sick. They do go on vacation. So you do not have a steady count or an amount or personnel that are going to show up. You just don't know. I... I wasn't there for the five homes that burned, so this is what I heard. We do have some friends of ours that were unfortunately some of the victims of one of those homes. I think this was the fourth house that got on fire. And they said it seemed like, now, and I realize this, and I'm 75 years old, and I know when you have an emergency, it always seems it takes a long time to get somebody to show up. But they said it seemed like it took at least 20 minutes before any fire equipment showed up on their side to show up. And I don't know. I tried to get the response times from the fire department, and I also tried to find out what started the fire. But they told me I had to follow up. I think it's called a grammar request. Is that the right word? Freedom of Information Act. And I don't know. There's something about transparency that seems to be lacking, too. So anyway, that's my concern. I would like to see, I mean, you can still use the volunteers, don't get me wrong. They do come in. Even the fire department I was with, we had two stations that were volunteer staff but there were other paid stations real close to them too so i would just like to see the city consider staffing the rest of the fire stations that we have instead of just having empty stations my my thought is well i'd rather have a professional fireman show up to my house then hopefully not a volunteer, but who knows what the training is. Thank you.

Yeah, thanks, Mike. Just a couple things, and we do have some discussions coming up on EMS and the things that we have to do with the fire department. We are a growing community. We know we gotta keep pace with that growth. Just know we do review those response times, make sure we're up to par. That information is out there that you can get, it can be shared with you. We pride ourselves on our volunteer firefighters. Now, I don't think we depend solely on them, but I've been told and I can say that they have the same training. And once they're on a fire, they are not a volunteer. They're a fireman. And they're treated as such, and they're expected to perform as such. But we do know we're a growing community and there's, there's a need for more full time firefighters. And we are doing that and there's more discussion coming up on that. But I will also say this. In those fires that you're mentioning, they, if you look at the density of those houses and those apartments and how close they are, you look at at the. mobile home subdivision how close those units are together those could have been so much worse had it not been for the quick response and the professionalism of our fire department so while we can always improve do know that we're when you say transparency I think that's what you hired these people up here for is to make sure that's happening and I can tell you They are, they're all over it. And we do review that. We have some very professional men and women. I've had the opportunity over the last couple of months to visit with a lot of them one-on-one and, you know, make sure they feel appreciated and understood. And are there places that we could do better? And it's been very enlightening and good conversation.

Please don't take my criticism. No, no, no. I'm just trying to give you a little. I think it's warranted. I'd just like to see more paid stations.

I just wanted to make sure that you understood some of that stuff, which I know you probably do. So thank you. And your input, I don't call it criticism, your input's well noted and fair.

It's good to see you folks again. It's been a while since I've been up here to speak to you.

Yeah, thank you. Okay, that's the only two I had. Jimmy, can I make a comment real quick on that? I recently met with some of our leadership of our fire department. We have over 90 full-time... employed firefighters. A few of them are part-time, but the majority of those are full-time firefighters manning those stations. We only have about 20 volunteer firefighters left, and the volunteer system came about because back when St. George was a small community, and it's by attrition that basically as these gentlemen retire, then we replace them with a hired full-time or part-time employee. So another comment, I'm aware of where the fire station is in Bloomington because I live very close to it. We can't staff that fire station full-time because it's too small and doesn't have housing. So it would require a complete redo or addition for those things. But as you mentioned, we are having conversations about EMS and fire. And I think that we're all very well aware of the challenge. Yeah. Thank you for that.

Okay. That's all the pre-agenda items that I have unless I'm missing something. So if you want to take us away.

Okay, the next item on the agenda is item number three. It's the consent calendar. We will be removing one item. Item number three, I, will be removed this evening. There are 14 items on the city council consent calendar this evening. Staff has reviewed them and recommend approval. However, if the council would like to remove any of these for specific consideration, we can accommodate that. Otherwise, staff recommends approval. You said which one? Sorry.

Three, I. I, okay.

And I just want to clarify on item F. Is this solely for the Zion route or do our other Suntran routes benefit from this item?

All of the Suntran benefits from the item. So we have 16 buses with eight of those being frontline and so all of those buses including the Zion route will benefit from the addition of those covers.

OK. Other questions are on those items or a motion?

Mayor, I've reviewed the consent calendar and I'll make a motion that we approve it as presented with the removal of item I.

Second. Motion by Danielle, second by Steve. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Item number four, public hearing and consideration of resolution number 2026-017R to review and approve amendments to the fiscal year 2026 and 2027 budget. Jared will present this item.

Good afternoon, Mayor. Good afternoon, Council. We have one item for a budget opening, and so I will jump into that. Staff request to amend the budget for the construction of bus canopies at the new Suntran operations facility, and that is in relation to item F on the consent calendar. The funds are for the change order to the existing Bonneville contract to install bus canopies in the parking area of the new facility. The canopies will protect transit buses from the elements and help reduce heat buildup inside the vehicles before they enter service. Similar bus canopies are in place at the current Red Hills facility and are in line with industry standards. The proposed change order is $861,985.74. Staff eliminated the bus wash, which reduced the impact of the budget to $461,986. Funding is available from grant revenue received by the state for the Zion route. Staff request to amend the FY2027 budget in the amount of $461,985.

Questions for Jared before I open the public hearing? If there are no questions, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. For those who have come to speak on item four, please come up. Seeing no public comments, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing, council, and come back to you for your action.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number four as presented by staff.

Second.

A motion by Steve, a second by Danielle. This is a resolution requiring a roll call vote, all starting with Austin.

Austin Anderson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye.

Natalie Larson, aye. Danielle Larkin, aye. Michelle Tanner, aye.

Motion carries unanimously.

M number five, consider approval of a conditional use permit to develop for a development with an aggregate ground floor footprint square footage of 20,000 square feet or more on approximately 0.63 acres located at 801 South Bluff Street.

Okay. This is the location. This credit union will be a part of the St. George Place development. The general plan is downtown Lively, and the zoning is C3. Here's the site plan. This building will be approximately 2,922 square feet. It will require 12 parking spaces calculated at one space per 250 square feet. They are providing 19 parking spaces. It's good to note that the entire development of St. George Place does share parking, so there is plenty of parking. Also, this drive-through here, this is just for ATMs. It's not bank window access. So it's not super long, but it should accommodate plenty of cars for the ATM access. The site plan appears to meet code. We will verify that during the site plan review process. Here's the conceptual landscape plan. St. George Place did already install all of the landscaping along Bluff Street, as well as the entrances and all of the area that's grayed out. They are only responsible to install the landscape for the pad. This landscape appears to meet the code. Again, we will verify that during the site plan review. These are the elevations of the building. The building is 24 feet in height, which is well within the maximum height limit in the C3 zone. More elevations. And this is the elevation for that ATM at the drive-through. And it is 10 feet in height. Here is the rendering. The building materials, coloring, and the flat roof all match with the St. George Place main buildings, and so it should fit in well there. The materials board and the actual materials board is in front of the podium. If you'd like to see it closer, I can pass that up to you. The Planning Commission did recommend approval with a unanimous vote of 6 to 0, and I can answer any questions you might have.

Any questions for Brenda?

Make a motion.

I am.

I'll make a motion for approval of conditional use permit for a development with aggregate ground floor footprint square footage of 20,000 square feet or more on approximately 0.63 acres located at 801 South Bluff Street.

I'll second. Motion by Natalie and second by Austin. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Item number six, consider approval of a conditional use permit for a development with an aggregate ground floor footprint square footage of 20,000 square feet or more on approximately 6.62 acres approximately located south of Southern Parkway and west of Desert Canyons Parkway.

Okay, this is the location. The general plan, it says PD, but that means it's part of Desert Canyon's master plan. It is a commercial general plan. The zoning is C2. This is the site plan. This development will be comprised of nine buildings, totaling 37,460 square feet. Four building types are proposed for this site, the tallest being 28 feet, then 22 feet, and the shortest at 19 feet. So they're all well within the range for this C2 zone, which is also 50 foot maximum. The parking was, well, let me know also that two of the buildings are already developed. It's this building here as well as this building here. The parking was calculated to accommodate restaurants, retail, and office buildings. They are providing 198 spaces on the site and will verify that the parking meets with each business license during that process. Overall, the site plan appears to meet the code requirements. We'll verify that as well during site plan review. I should mention that the conceptual landscaping is also shown, and that appears to meet as well. These are the building elevations for buildings 1, 4, 5, and 7. These buildings are 22 feet in height. This is building 2. This one is the 19-foot building. These are buildings three and six. These are also 22 feet in height. And building eight is the 28 foot high building. So this shows, these show the elevations. So this is elevation A and B, and it's going to show you in not the next slide, but the one after, how they sit on the site. So the top one is A, the bottom is B, and then C and D, and then this slide shows you where, That top slide building A and then these three are building B and then building C for those three and building D for those. Kind of confusing because I had to put them all on separate slides or you would never be able to see them. These are the renderings or well, if you will, those are the buildings that are already built so you can see the actual materials in real life. This is the Materials Board. It also is in front of the podium if you'd like to see the materials close up. The Planning Commission did forward a positive recommendation with a seven to zero unanimous vote and I can answer any questions you might have.

Questions for Brenda?

If not, a motion. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion on item number six. We approve conditional use permit for development with an aggregate ground floor footprint square footage of 20,000 square feet or more on 6.62 acres located south of Southern Parkway and Western Desert Canyons, case number 2026, CUP002. Second.

We have a motion by Steve and a second by Natalie. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Item number seven, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-057, amending the city's general plan by changing the general plan from AE to commercial on approximately 8.48 acres, generally located north of 2450 south and west of 3210 east.

Okay, so as John says, general plan amendment, this is the Sullivan property off of 2450 South, just north, and then just east, or excuse me, west of 3210 East. You may recognize this is the property that has the radio towers on them. Current zoning map is A1. Obviously, this general plan amendment will lead the way for a zone change that should come if approved. CURRENT LAND USE IS AGRICULTURAL ESTATES. YOU CAN SEE THIS COMMERCIAL SECTION OVER HERE ON THE WEST SIDE. THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS. THERE'S BEEN QUITE A HIGH DEMAND FOR COMMERCIAL OUT THERE, AND THEY'RE JUST LOOKING TO EXTEND THIS COMMERCIAL FURTHER TO THE EAST. AND THIS IS JUST THE SITE PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. BOB HERMANSON FROM BUSH & GUDGILL IS HERE AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY OWNER, MR. JAMES SULLIVAN IS HERE AS WELL. And staff recommends approval, or excuse me, Planning Commission recommended approval, 5-0 vote. There was no public comment at that meeting.

Any questions for Brian, the applicant?

I think commercial is definitely needed in this area. I am curious if there's any specific plans that can be divulged.

I know Mr. Sullivan has some that are close to the vest, but would you like to address that at all? No, okay.

It was worth a try.

Yeah, I can tell you later if you want.

No, I have no idea either.

Mayor, I'll make a motion if you're ready.

Yeah, go ahead.

Motion to approve ordinance number 2026-057, amending the city's general plan by changing the general plan from AE to COM on approximately 8.48 acres located north of 2450 south and west of 3210 east. I'll second.

So we have a motion by Danielle, a second by Steve. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote starting with Michelle.

Michelle Tanner, aye. Danielle Larkin, aye. Natalie Larson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye.

Austin Anderson, aye.

Motion carries.

I have number eight, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-058, amending the city general plan by changing the general designation from open space to LDR on approximately four acres located in the center of the old farm development, which is bounded by 3000 east on the east, 2350 east on the west, 2000 south on the north, and 2450 south on the south.

All right, thank you, John. This is the map, and it's probably easier just to see the map to see the location. It's right in the center of the old farm development, outlined in red here, 3000 East and 2450 are the major streets there. This is the land use map as we see it today. It's designated open space. It's about four acres, excuse me, and the zoning is currently R-110. They're proposing to remove that open space. We talked to the parks department. They felt like with the HeLaSigMiller Park to the south, just across 2450, that that was sufficient and can serve the general area. as far as parks and open space goes. So they were okay with that change to remove that and to move it to a low density residential designation, which would match what is around it. So with that, the Planning Commission recommended approval. They did not have any public comment at their meeting as well, but they recommended approval at the 5-0 vote. The applicant is here if you'd like to speak to him. Otherwise, I can try to answer any questions you might have.

Questions for Dan?

Not? Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number 8, ordinance number 2026, Dash 058, amending the city general plan by changing the general designation from open space to LDR, low density residential, approximately four acres, located at the center of old farm development, which is bounded by 3000 East on the east and 2350 East on the west.

Second.

Motion by Steve and a second by Natalie. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call votes, starting with Danielle.

Danielle Larkin, aye. Michelle Tanner, aye.

Austin Anderson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye.

Natalie Larson, aye.

Motion carries unanimously. Item number 9 and 10, staff's going to present those together since they're related. Item number 9 is consider approval of ordinance number 2026-059 to amend the Desert Canyons Development Agreement to include the R1 zoning designation by amending the definition in section paragraph 7.5.1, table 3.2, and exhibit D. And then item number 10 is to consider approval of ordinance number 2026-060, amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from PDR to R1 on approximately 13.23 acres, generally located east of Southern Parkway and north of Desert Sky Parkway.

OK. So this is the location of the proposed zone change. And I kind of have it all mixed together, just so you guys can see where everything's going to be before we put the development agreement stuff in the development agreement part is pretty small. The general plan says PD, but Desert Canyons has their own general plan designations. So this general plan is actually PD8, which means they're held to eight dwelling units per acre. And then with the R01 zoning, they would have a 40-foot minimum frontage. The zoning currently is PDR. So the zone plan that they have is in a separate bound. It says in their development agreement the zone plan is bound separately. So we also have to make amendments to the zone plan. So I'm showing you these on different slides as well. So in the zone plan, we're amending section 3.1.f and we're just adding R1. And then the land use summary is also in the zone plan and it's the table. And that has, they provided the table in a PDF. So it was italicized and underlined. So I circled it in green so you could see which ones were the changes. So on the left is the original table and on the right is the table that they submitted for the proposed changes. Hopefully you could see that in your staff report better than you can see it here. I also had it in the packet in the ordinance. Hopefully you can see it in there if you can't see it here because I know it's small. But it's just taking, it's adding the R1 and adding that 13 acres to the R1, taking it from the PD. the PDR and then they're adding just a little bit of open space there. They're adding 1.99 acres of open space. So those are the differences. That's what the changes are in that table. Then this is the zoning map amendment. The zoning map is in that zone plan bound book. So it shows the proposed amendment here, changing that PDR to R1. Here are the development agreement amendments. In the definitions section, it talks about what the zone plan means, and we're adding addendum four, Dated August 2026 there. Then in 7.5.1, it talks about the master plan to control open space. And we're just updating that total acreage of open space to add that. That's a correction. They must have not updated that in some of the other addendums. So we're just making that right and correct in the entire development agreement. And then exhibit D is also adding addendum four. And that's where it talks about it's contained in a separate inbound binder. which is the zoning plan. So those are the development agreement amendments. Then public hearings were held for both items on July 14th at Planning Commission. No public comments were received. The Planning Commission recommended approval for both the zone change and the development agreement with unanimous votes of six to zero. I can answer any questions you might have. The applicant is also here if you have questions for them.

Questions?

I have a question, I don't know if it's related, so you tell me. A frequent question I get asked about that development is, is there gonna be another access out of desert color any time? I mean, what triggers another roadway out of desert color as far as? Canyons. Desert canyon. Oh, desert canyon. Gosh, okay. There I go. Never mind. Okay, we have a lot of plans for that. Any other questions?

If not?

Mayor, I assume you're going to need two motions on this?

Yeah, we have nine and ten here, but we need to take them as separate.

I'd like to make a motion on item number 10 that we approve ordinance number 2026-059. Do we need to do nine first, or does it matter?

Yeah, it's 2-9 first, sorry.

I'm doing 9.

You said 10, sorry.

It's the approval of ordinance number 2026-059.

Yeah, you said item 10, sorry. Sorry, my bad. You're on the right one, you just said item 10.

To amends the development agreement to include the R1 zoning designation by amending the definition section paragraph 7.5.1, table 3.2 and exhibit D. All of which are part of case number 2026-DAA-001. Second. Second.

So we have a motion by Steve, second by Natalie. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote starting with Natalie.

Natalie Larson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye.

Austin Anderson, aye.

Michelle Tanner, aye.

Danielle Larkin, aye.

Motion carries unanimously. I'd like to make a motion on item number 10 that we approve ordinance number 2, 0, 2, 6, dash 0, 6, 0, amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from PDR to R1, single family, no minimum square footage on approximately 13.23 acres, generally located east of Southern Parkway and north of Desert Sky Canyon, case number 2, 0, 2, 6, dash ZC, dash 0, 1, 2.

Second.

Motion by Steve is second by Michelle. This is also an ordinance requiring a roll call vote starting with Steve. Steve Pimp, aye.

Austin Anderson, aye.

Michelle Tanner, aye. Danielle Larkin, aye.

Natalie Larson, aye.

Motion carries unanimously. Thank you.

Item 11, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-061, amending title 10-17A-5 of city code, adding Pioneer Road north of Walmart and Bloomington as an approved road for automobiles and other similar vehicle lots.

All right. This is a lot we're looking at, as you probably know, the zoning code aims to limit where automobile sales can be placed within the city. Specifically, it designates certain streets that it can be in, as well as zones. So this is a list of all the streets that automobile sales is allowed. The addition here is the Pioneer Road north of the North Bloomington Commercial Subdivision. So that is the property that the Walmart's on. So that parcel that's north of it, that kind of triangle parcel, since I've since I've been employed here for the past almost seven years we've met with numerous people and going back beyond that John can probably attest probably numerous double that so The applicant is proposing to add that to the text of the code to allow vehicle sales on that property. Specifically, they're interested in RV sales on that piece of land. So that is the proposal. Again, it would look like this. It would just be adding that number 12, that lot to where automobile sales are allowed. Planning Commission heard this. They had a public hearing. No public comment was given at that hearing, and they recommended approval with a 5-0 vote. applicants here if you'd like to talk to him about it I can help answer any questions as well questions for Dan and the applicant okay if not go ahead

Here, I'll make a motion. It seems like a logical use of this difficulty utilize a parcel. So motion to approve ordinance number 2026-061 amending title 10-17A-5 of city code adding pioneer road north of Walmart in Bloomington as an approved road for quote automobiles and other similar vehicle sales lots.

I'll second.

Motion by Daniel, a second by Steve. This, again, is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote, starting with Austin. Austin Anderson, aye. Steve Kemp, aye.

Natalie Larson, aye. Danielle Larkin, aye. Michelle Tanner, aye.

Motion carries unanimously. Item 12, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-062, amending title 10-2 and 10-18 of city code, amending fencing regulations on larger lot zones, and adding definition of clear view triangle.

All right, thank you. Um, so this attempts to do a couple of things, as you recall, a couple of months ago, we had a discussion about this, um. This subject, um, and the applicant. Typically, um. Typically, code rewrites are brought to you from either direction from you or from staff, but occasionally we have somebody who wants to make an amendment to the code, such was the case in this past one and then such is the case here. They are proposing a couple of definitions. You can see that on your screen here for site distance triangles. These are just areas of a lot that we want either low profile or nothing in that area. And it's just a traffic safety issue. And so this is those definitions. Along with that, we want to put this graphic in there that shows clearly what those definitions are trying to say. So your site triangle on a corner lot, you can see that 30-foot triangle down here where those two intersect in the street. You go back 30 feet, you draw a triangle, and nothing above three feet would be allowed in that area. This is, by the way, a definition that we had Previously, somewhere along the line it was removed, and so we're just putting that back. One that is new is the one along the driveway. Again, it's just a safety feature. 10 feet up the driveway, 10 feet along the sidewalk, and then drawn a line connecting the two. Again, that's another triangle, again, for safety purposes. This is something that is new. The applicant is proposing to add, in certain zones, the RE37.5, RE5, A1, A5, A10, R140. What those all have in common is that they're larger lots. So the smallest of those zones would be 37.5, which requires, as it sounds like, 37,500 square feet. So just shy of an acre. they are proposing on these larger lots that fences that are six foot four feet, six foot four inches in height may be located within the front yard setback at a distance of 10 feet back. That's different from what is allowed now in just your typical zones, well, in all zones.

How is it different?

Say again, sorry.

How is it different?

So this would be this would allow six foot ten, six foot four at the ten foot setback in these zones, whereas now it is you can't have anything over four feet in that setback at all. Does that make sense?

And you have anything over four feet, 12 feet or 15 or 20 feet back.

20 feet back is is what it says right now. So thank you. If you look at this, that where it's a setback over here. That would be 20 foot setback in your typical single family zone. And nothing over four feet currently is allowed in that. So this would, in those zones, bring that six foot four allowance up to 10 feet. But it would still require that open fencing requirement, the 50% be open, right? And so after the Planning Commission heard that, they recommended approval, but they also wanted to add some language that encapsulated that. What is opacity? So this purple is what the Planning Commission recommended. Opacity is measured based on the fence panel between structural supports. Support post columns or similar structural elements shall not exceed 24 inches in width and diameter and shall be separated by a minimum distance of 10 feet. In other words, they don't want to measure. They're suggesting that we not measure those posts, but there be some spacing requirements so you don't just get post after post after post, defeating the purpose of the opacity requirement. So that is their recommendation. And they held a public hearing. We didn't have any comments on that one. But if you have any questions, I can certainly answer those.

Dan? Okay, I have a lot of questions, but I'll start with this one. Okay. Berms shall not be used to artificially increase the maximum allowed fence height. So how are we determining if it's a natural berm or an artificial berm? So say you've just got a bumpy lot.

Yeah, I think the idea is that somebody wouldn't create a berm in order to build that up higher. If you do have a bumpy lot, some lots are bumpy.

know have some elevation change but to build that up to get that up taller but i guess to daniel's point build it up from what from street level because because a lot of people do feel but they do a brick ledge they do some couple of stairs up and then you're back and then you're up another so is it from street i mean at street level do we call that where we start the starting point

Yeah, to Natalie's point, that's why I asked the question, because where are we measuring from? If someone's already, you know, are we saying you have to take your lot down to level and then that's where we're measuring from? It's just it's kind of an odd requirement to me. I mean, I understand why we have it because we don't want someone to come and send they can build a 20 foot fence and build a berm around their yard. Right. But.

There are a couple ways to measure. You can measure from the finish grade adjacent to the fence. Some of the building code require you to measure out four feet from the actual structure and measure your height from that location. And some codes require you to measure at the street. And so there's all those options to measure. Right now we just measure from the base of the fence.

It just seemed like something that was a little bit, as I was reading it, I thought this is a little bit odd and hard to understand and could be interpreted however you wanted to interpret it. So maybe something that we need to make a little more clear. I guess my second question is what, oh, sorry, Carol, were you going to answer something? I'm sorry.

I think John explained it well. Okay. I was just going to kind of give a little bit of a follow-up.

All right. I'm not sure why we're choosing just these larger lots, why we don't just standardize it. If we're going to change the code, let's just say this is what you can build because the smaller lots are naturally going to be bound by the site triangle, the size of their lot has got to be back enough. And so I think it's going to be rare that you'll find someone who would like to do this on a smaller lot, but why not just standardize it?

Well, the idea, I think, behind this was that these larger lots could perhaps, for lack of a better word, handle that a little bit better. Where you have a little bit more... Openness, because of the size of the lot, it might not feel as scrunched in. Whereas if you're on, if you have smaller lots, that might give the sense of a little more closed in feeling, which we've tried to avoid in the past.

I will just add in something really quick. This was driven by an applicant's request. They were interested in the larger lots. You bring up a good point. This is something if the council would like to discuss in a work meeting, if you would like to add in other things. But this application that we have right now is just for the larger lots. And if in the future you want to add in everyone, that's something certainly we can do. Look at do a work meeting discuss and see if everybody's on board with that while you're up here Carol I have a quick question.

Well, I like Danielle have several questions, but Where in the city do we have these? Fences or front yard fences already built to this six foot four height It's out in the east at Little Valley area, so there's three Lots, right? Those three Lots are the only ones right now that know there's there's a few more.

I

Where are they? Are they in different parts? In the same area?

It's mostly in the same area of town.

Okay.

But there's others even downtown as well that have those fences.

They do, but they're not six feet tall. I think we do have one downtown that's six feet, but the rest of them are four.

I think that brings up a bigger issue of fences in general. I know that a lot of our fences, where does six foot four come from?

If you have a block wall and you want to put a cap on the top, the cap is four.

Oh, the four inches is the cap? Okay. So a six-foot wall with a cap on the top of it. Well, I know a lot of places throughout the city where the walls are a lot higher on this side of the wall than they are on this side. It's seven and a half feet, and this side it's six foot four.

Which is something that we would allow if you have a slope on your lot. You can have a retaining wall, a block retaining wall with a fence on top of it. We do have parameters on that. So there are some situations where you're walking along a sidewalk and it feels super tall, but it's just a block wall with a retaining wall below it.

Because on the other side of the fence, it's only 6'4".

Right, right.

I agree with Danielle that the definitions and how they're put in here are vague. The opacity, I understand what the Planning Commission was trying to accomplish, but this 50%, you know, see-through is, again, it's vague to me. And are we or are we not including the pillars in the calculation? Why not?

I will say this is something that happens not just in St. George or just Utah, but nationwide. Most cities have rules about opacity and they have the 50% see-through. Most people don't even count those. The departments don't even look at the post because when you have a blocked post, it's naturally, it's not going to be 50%. It's not. Usually it's 60-40, but it's just something that we just look at and we just understand that the post, you can't make a post 50% see-through.

No, you can't. That's why it's 50%, not 100%.

Right, but it...

The 50% is to account for the posts.

Well, no, actually it accounts for the wrought iron or the chain link or something like that. This rule is hard to enforce.

It's also hard to define.

It's hard to define, it's hard to enforce, and it's just kind of a given. That's just the way that these rules usually are written in most cities' ordinances. But when we go out and when somebody presents a plan, We eyeball it. We don't require them to measure each little space in between the wrought iron or the chain link. We just look at it and go, yeah, you know what, that looks like it's meeting the intent. I can see what's going on on the other side of that. Right, right. That appears to meet the intent. And so the Planning Commission just took it a step further. Well, why don't we make sure that, I think the applicant was a little concerned that maybe we would count the post, which we typically don't. And so this was the solution.

I've never had a situation where I've had a fence that was more than 50%. You're essentially going to take the square footage of the entire fence and whatever that square footage is, 50% of that has to be solid or empty. It's, the definition is clear. We've been administering the same definition for 20 years.

So really what's, the question here is that this was an applicant driven amendment to our code where they have already built the fence and now they want to make the paper match the actions. Yes.

So I have some comments on that too. So I don't have an issue with the ordinance and changing it. And I think in general, we want property owners to be able to use their property and have the freedom to build what they want to build on their property. And we do though, have the responsibility of making sure what they build on the property doesn't present a public safety issue, which is why we're addressing that site triangle in this code, which I think is good. Um, I think some of the things become a little arbitrary though. I think in general, property owners are going to do what fits best with their property. without us having to delve in to the weeds and dictate that. And so I actually, you know, we talk about rear yard fences and I know this isn't what the applicant was trying to address necessarily, but in reading this code to Steve's point about the six foot four, where did we get that number? If you drive throughout the city, many, many places in rear yards and side yards, exceed the six foot four. And I think probably eight foot would be a more, probably in line with where a lot of properties are. Um, so I would actually advocate that for rear yards and side yards, that we are more at that eight foot level, because again, you're still going to have plenty who do the six foot. Cause that's what makes sense. It's cheaper, but there's plenty of circumstances where a property maybe sits above their neighbor's yard and for that additional privacy, they need those extra couple of feet. So I would like to see more flexibility to allow property owners to do what makes sense with their property without feeling like they're violating our code or us feeling like we have to go out there and enforce something that really is not a safety issue to anyone. So that would be one thing I would like to see us consider is changing that. And then as far as to actually Councilwoman Larkin's point, I would be just fine changing to allow what's being requested right now for those front yard fences in any residential zone, I would be fine with. But if the rest of the council is not okay with those changes, I would be okay with approving as is, but I would like to see the change to eight foot for the rear and side yards and this allowed in the front for standardized for residential areas.

Well, part of my concern with us not just making this across the board is part of our language in the background that says we've identified among owners of these 1 acre properties that they desire increased security and privacy. And I just think it's problematic if that's the reason why we're doing this, then. That should be offered to anybody in the city if it's a security and privacy issue, then. It should just be across the board. If this fits with your property, you can do it. So just something to think about.

Well, I think we have an application in front of us that we, correct me, Ryan, if I'm wrong, that we need to do an up or down vote on, or we need to continue this item and make amendments to it to change, to add or delete some of the things that have been mentioned. Am I... Correct. You know, yes or no.

Well, this came by way of an application to the planning commission, which had the public hearing. So it should be an up or down vote on the ordinance. And if the direction is to send it back to planning commission with recommendations to consider that's okay too.

So my question on that though, is where the city council is the legislative body. Is there anything in our code that mandates that the Planning Commission has to approve our specific changes as a legislative body before we can then vote on it? Is it the public hearing aspect that you're saying?

It's more of a due process issue.

Okay.

Public wasn't aware of what was before. If you're changing it from what the Planning Commission was, it's just simpler if it's an up or down vote.

So I guess I'm a little bit confused on that where we make conditions on items all the time that are separate from what the planning commission. So you're saying because it's a change to the ordinance itself and not just a condition. Correct. With approval. Okay.

I think it would be beneficial for staff to come and present kind of the wall and fence because a lot of the things I'm hearing are addressed in the ordinance. And what's a fence versus a retaining wall versus a retaining wall on top of a fence. It may be beneficial for staff to come and do a presentation and kind of discuss some of these items. Because we do allow for retaining walls and fences up to 13 feet. But it's a combination of retaining wall and a fence. And so it might be beneficial for us to kind of do an overview of what our ordinance is now. And then city council can give us some direction on modifications or what to bring forward as amendments.

So in that case, would you prefer that we continue this or that we deny it?

No, I think it would be best to approve the application. Give a recommendation. because right now we're looking just strictly at these zones, but if the council wants to look at it broadly, it'd be good for staff to go back and give some recommendations on what that would look like on an overall sense from all the zones and not just these larger lots, because that's really the only thing we looked at was the impact on these larger lots.

So we can approve it, and then after our other discussions, we can go and amend it.

Yes, and we can go and amend it and do whatever the direction is from the council.

Okay, in that case, I will make a motion that we approve ordinance number 2026-062 amending title 10-2 and 10-18 of city code amending fencing regulations. on larger lot zones and adding definitions of Clearview Triangle.

Second.

We have a motion by Michelle, a second by Danielle. There is some requested discussion on the motion, so I'll take that discussion.

I think this is, I'm the one that requested discussion on the motion before we vote. As a general opinion, I think that there's, There's room here to do something, but I think it is, it hasn't been fully fleshed out. And I would, I don't think I could support this in this current configuration.

Would you consider amending this to say it's measured from sidewalk?

So there wouldn't be that we can't amend anything on the ordinance on the language, correct?

And that's why I think we still need to take this back and look at it and define, as Councilwoman Larkin said, where you're measuring from. Is it back a curb? Is it four feet from the house?

I think there's a difference between clarifying the ordinance versus allowing for something across the board that isn't part of the application. I think clarifying what the applicant is requesting, I don't see an issue with that. I don't know if you do, Ryan, but I think we're talking about a broad change that would impact the entire city versus addressing the application that's in front of you.

So will you repeat then, Natalie, what your request would be to amend?

To measure from sidewalk, to say that's where the base of the fence is measured from. Then to go up three feet and then put your six-foot-four fence on top of it, like the berm up that Danielle was talking about previously.

And it currently doesn't address that? Is that not what we currently measure from, or it just doesn't specifically say?

I would say right now we don't really address that in the fence code. Now, this is something we could add in. This application has nothing to do with, you know, where you measure. I understand your concerns because that makes sense what you're saying. It feels more like a broader question of just how our entire fence code is worded. This application.

Just specifically to this ordinance.

This ordinance doesn't address the measurement because it wasn't in there before. It was basically, it's just addressing going from four feet to six feet.

That's not addressed in exhibit B to the ordinance, which is what is before the city council right now.

When was 12.5 added in? I thought it was half acre and acre. The 3.75, sorry. I guess that is over half acre, so that works. Okay.

Okay, so. Lots of questions. We do have a motion and a second. Just to be clear, the motion is to approve this amendment that we've been discussing as it is. Obviously, there are some other questions that we have that we can discuss afterwards. But this is the motion before us right now. We have a second or first motion by Michelle, second by Danielle. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote. Starting with Michelle.

Yeah, I am definitely I feel like we can still pass this as is and then still come back and have further discussion to Councilwoman Larson's point we can discuss the measurements at that point and some of the other. added issues that have been brought up tonight. But I think at a minimum where this has been brought by the applicant, I don't oppose anything that's in this. If anything, I want to strengthen it and allow more freedom for property owners. So with that, Michelle Tanner, aye.

Danielle Larkin, aye.

Natalie Larson, nay.

Steve Kemp, nay.

Boston Anderson, aye.

Motion carries three to two. That's it. Hey, just really quickly. Our planners do a great job. And look, look at Dan and Brian. They're dressed. I mean, those ties, you know, Carol and Brenda have set the example and you guys are just stepping it up. You're making me want to step up my game. But we have a great department there and that's a lot to do with our community development director, Carol. So thank you for the great operation that you run there. Thank you for all the good discussion. We'll have some more. I have a feeling on that item. So we don't have any appointments. Let's report. Austin, do you have any reports?

Yeah, one, we're going to be joining one of the subcommittees for Greater Zion. They reached out and happy to join that and kind of have a say on what events are coming to town and what events are funded. So I think it would be a good thing for St. George City.

Cool. No reports as most of the committees I'm on are taking a summer hiatus.

Nope.

No reports. Just really briefly, I had a great mayor's meeting where the monthly mayors get together. We always get caught up in a lot of the things that are happening in our community and all the growth and all the strains. It's kind of fun to see some of the other communities, our neighbors and the things that are happening there. Just as a fun little side note. We held the meeting in Tokerville and He was giving us some update if you've noticed there's a truck stop off the exit there in Tokerville There's some a lot of action going there and the reservoir being built When went through some of the units that they're getting entitled and approved it's telling us there's about 5,000 units approved there and for some perspective Tokerville currently has 800 plus or minus homes and about 2,000 residents. So our neighbors are all getting stretched to the limit as well. But we had a great discussion, including discussion about the importance and value of the airport expansion. So it was a good meeting.

Mayor, associated with Dixie Days, the tickets for the Dinner on Main, I believe, you and Natalie, I think, are on that committee, and I'm not, so I just saw the ad for it, but Dinner on Main, the tickets go on sale Saturday, August 15th, is that right, Natalie? And if you haven't had the opportunity, I mean, you are deciding that night if you want to go to the rodeo or to the dinner on Main because they're competing. But the dinner on Main is a lot of fun. Really, really neat opportunity to come down and enjoy our community.

The Switchpoint Ribbon Cutting is next Thursday at 9 a.m. for the new Switchpoint Housing Facility, the Red Cliffs area. So come to that 9 a.m.

You got to see that facility. It's phenomenal. So very phenomenal. And just to piggyback on Danielle, this is going to be the most epic. We're going to be setting a precedent for years to come on Dixie Days, right? It's going to be. Natalie, I'm counting on you. No, it's going to be awesome.

Is it even a question? Yes.

So we're super excited for that. So thank you. We've already had our work meeting and we're. Yeah, we even have our closed sessions, all that. So with that, I will entertain a motion.

I'll make the motion to adjourn, Mayor.

Second. We have a motion by Austin, a second by Steve. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

We stand adjourned.

Thank you.