The Lindon City Council will hold a regularly scheduled meeting beginning at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 15, 2004 in the Lindon City Center, City Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Jerald Hatch
Invocation: Larry A. Ellertson

PRESENT

Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk

Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember

The meeting began at 6:17 p.m.

The minutes of the special meeting of May 26, 2004, the regular meeting of June 1, 2004, and the special work meeting of June 7, 2004 will be reviewed.

The Minutes of the special meeting of May 26, 2004 and the minutes of the special work meeting of June 7, 2004 were reviewed. There were no corrections necessary.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF MAY 26, 2004 AND THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL WORK MEETING OF JUNE 7, 2004. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REVIEW OF THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF MAY 26, 2004 AND THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 1, 2004 TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

OPEN SESSION - Citizens comments

Mayor Ellertson asked if there was any comment. Mr. Roy Shepherd of East Center Street commented that the traffic merging situation on State Street near Lindon’s Center Street is better, and qualified this statement with the addendum "somewhat."

Mayor Ellertson commented that he had several things to report as a result of the June 3 meeting of the Council of Governments. One is an active discussion on a county-wide library system. There has been an appointment of a board and an open invitation to participate has been issued. The Council of Governments has also had a presentation on the new "EASY" training. He explained that this new program includes training of store clerks to receive a beer handler’s permit. He revealed that there had also been a conversation about the structure of the Utah County Council of Governments and that most agreed with the comment that there is an appreciation that exists among municipal governments for this opportunity for to get together and discuss issues of mutual concern and interest in addition to any other benefits.

Mayor Ellertson reported that public comment is being solicited for the new long-range transportation plans. He commented that a financially constrained plan is needed, and that due to current State commitments, the plans will be implemented over a longer period of time than our anticipated needs would have otherwise dictated. He also reported that the 700 North negotiations are proceeding and that more information will be forthcoming soon. He asked if there were questions. There were none.

CONSENT AGENDA - No Items

1. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance to Adopt a Telecommunications Service Providers Gross Receipts Tax (Ordinance #2004-6.) The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve an ordinance which will adopt a tax of 4% of the gross receipts which are attributed to Lindon City from telecommunications service providers. This action repeals the $1 per month per cell phone which was adopted last fiscal year. The revenues from this action will augment the costs of improvements to new city parks.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO OPEN BOTH PUBLIC HEARINGS. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mayor Ellertson introduced this item by explaining that this is an amendment to the franchise tax ordinance currently levied on land line telecommunications by lowering the rate from 4.5 percent to 4 percent and adding this tax to wireless communications companies. He noted that this measure had been discussed during the legislative process this spring with the affected telecommunications companies. This will bring all communications companies on an equal footing. Mr. Dameron agreed and noted that the amount remitted to the City will remain essentially the same. Mayor Ellertson added that this measure will eliminate $1 per month per cell phone that is currently charged. He asked if there were comments or questions from the public or the Council.

Mr. Dameron observed that this ordinance has been developed from a model ordinance by the League of Cities and Towns with input from the telecommunications companies. The model ordinance is being adopted by all participating cities in the recommended form. Councilmember Bath commented that he has looked at this issue closely and his biggest concern is more taxes. He observed that one of the issues is also fairness. He added that what is applied to one utility should apply to the others and they should be on an equal footing.

Councilmember Hatch commented that his position has not changed and he is still not in favor. He noted that he is not in favor of anything that raises taxes for those on fixed incomes.

Mayor Ellertson observed that not adopting this ordinance will create a "hole" in the budget. He commented that the ordinance results in a reduction of taxes on land lines and changes the cell phone charge to a percentage instead of a fixed amount for each cell phone. He asked if there were other questions. There were none.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE #2004-6, ESTABLISHING A TAX ON THE GROSS RECEIPTS OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS; SETTING THE RATE FOR SUCH TAX; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE TAX. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH NAY
THE MOTION CARRIED (3-1), WITH ONE ABSENT.

2. Public Hearing - Ordinance to amend Chapter 5.08 - Alcohol Sales (Ordinance #2004-7). The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve an ordinance which amends Chapter 5.08 of the Lindon City Code pertaining to Alcohol Sales. This ordinance also establishes a new requirement for a beer handler’s permit which has been sponsored by the Utah County Health Department.

Mayor Ellertson reminded the Council that the public hearing was still open. He observed that this proposed ordinance has to do with alcohol sales and deals with the training of sales clerks. The program is named Eliminate Alcohol Sales to Youth (EASY). Mr. Brett David and Mr. Pat Bird from the Utah County Health Department, Division of Substance Abuse were present to answer questions. Mr. Bird explained that, initially, this program would have been instituted with a fee to obtain the license, but the Department received a grant to implement the program. Now, there will be no fee and no BCI check of participants. A training schedule has been set and site visits will be conducted on an active basis.

Mayor Ellertson asked who would be required to get a Beer Handler’s Permit. Mr. Bird replied that all retail employees that sell beer to the public will be licensed. They will go through a ninety-minute training on how to identify fake ids, and the responsibilities of selling beer to the public. Councilmember Bayless asked how much time will be allowed between time of employment and taking the course. Mr. Bird replied that there is a thirty-day window. The classes will be offered two or three times a month, similar to the food handlers permit process. Councilmember Bath asked about the consequences of selling beer to underage youth. Mr. Bird replied that an individual may be charged with a Class B misdemeanor for the first offense and their beer handler’s permit may be suspended. There may also be civil penalties. A second offense may result in criminal charges and revocation of the Beer Handler’s Permit.

Mr. Dameron commented that City Attorney Jared Frei has worked closely with the County on the drafting of this ordinance. Mr. Bird requested a copy of the final draft. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was any public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2004-7, AMENDING CHAPTER 5.08, ALCOHOL SALES, AND ESTABLISHING A BEER HANDLER’S PERMIT, THE APPLICATION PROCESS, AND PENALTY. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH NAY
THE MOTION CARRIED (3-1), WITH ONE ABSENT.

Mr. Bird asked for a contact name to work with on compliance checks and county data maintenance. He was referred to Captain Cody Cullimore.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. Review and Action - Bid Award - 600 North Sanitary Sewer Sliplining. Requests for bids have been properly advertised and received for the sliplining project of the 600 North sanitary sewer line west of State Street. Two options were presented to the bidders, folded plastic PVC and cured-in-place pipe liner. Staff recommends awarding the contract to PEC.

Mayor Ellertson commented that Lindon City had received a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for half of the costs of this project. Councilmember Bayless asked that the two technologies involved in the bid process be explained. Mr. Dameron replied that the oldest technology was the cured-in-place pipe liner (CIPP) and that the folded PVC technology had been developed to offset the high cost of the CIPP liner process. He noted that the City had used the folded PVC on 200 South. The contractor had bypassed the section of sewer line with a pump. The folded PVC was pushed into the sewer line, glue was inserted and high pressure was put in the line to adhere the liner to the pipe. He reported that the infiltration problems on 200 South were stopped completely with this amazing process. A saw was pushed through the system to reopen the laterals and a curing of the new liner was done. The process takes about one day. Councilmember Hatch asked how thick the liner was. Mr. Dameron replied that it is about 1/8 inch. He commented that the slick surface of the liner actually increases the capacity of the pipe.

Mr. Dameron reported that a similar process is for the CIPP liner. It results in a lining that is about 1/4 inch thick. A thick, epoxy resin is applied to a felt material which is adhered with high pressure air and warm water. This type of liner takes about three days to cure. Councilmember Bath asked which method is the most effective. Mr. Dameron replied that the CIPP liner will form a new pipe and can actually replace a deteriorated sewer pipe and fill in gaps. He reported that new technology has brought the price down on the CIPP liner so that it is now below the folded PVC. He commented that both Orem and Salt Lake City have used the CIPP liner and report excellent results.

Mayor Ellertson asked if there were other questions. There were none. He noted that options 2A and 2B are the folded PVC and CIPP liner in order. Mr. Dameron confirmed this assessment. Mayor Ellertson asked if this line had been "TV’d" to determine the urgency of the project. Mr. Dameron replied that the report had found infiltration and some collapse of the sewer line. Councilmember Bayless verified with Mr. Dameron that the CIPP liner would prevent less incidents of collapse. Mr. Dameron replied that this is what the contractors and other cities have reported. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was information on the bidders. Mr. Dameron directed his attention to the staff report. Mayor Ellertson asked about the amount from the CDBG grant. Mr. Dameron replied that the grant is for half of the amount of the project. The original project was estimated at $184,000 and the grant was awarded for a maximum amount of $92,000. At the amount the project was bid, the grant will be about $60,000.

COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO ACCEPT THE LOW BID ON THE CIPP LINER (OPTION 2B) FOR 600 NORTH WEST OF STATE STREET AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO PEC, INC. FOR OPTION 2B (CIPP LINER) AT THE BID AMOUNT OF $117,930.00. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Dameron requested a small break or to move on to other item as the Public Hearing on the UTOPIA Resolution had been advertised for 7:00 p.m. It was decided to go to the Council Reports.

Councilmember Hatch asked if there were any provisions in the Lindon City Code about noise from compressors in districts that adjoin neighborhood homes. He reported a potential problem and suggested some ways to muffle the noise.

Councilmember Hatch reminded the Council of the Hollow Park Home Open House on Thursday from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. He noted that the official ribbon cutting would be about 12:30 p.m.

Mr. Harlow Clark, newspaper representative, asked questions about bypassing homes during the sliplining process. He was assured that no interruption of service would occur and homeowners would scarcely notice the project.

Councilmember Bayless commented on the new striping that has added a lane to the west side of State Street north of Lakeview Road and in the vicinity of Los Hermanos and Gillman Lane. There was a discussion of safety issues and the possibility of removing some parking to make visibility better for motorists entering from side streets like Gillman Lane. Mr. Dameron reported that UDOT had asked for City input. He was directed to ask UDOT to inquire resident’s preferences and suggest removal of parking spaces.

Councilmember Bath reported that the signal light is being installed on the new I-15 freeway interchange. Mayor Ellertson asked if any notice has been given about the 700 North light. Mr. Dameron replied that his understanding is that the light on 600 North is being installed first to help determine the "gaps" for the light on 700 North.

Councilmember Acerson reported that there were some open volunteer chairperson positions for some of the Lindon Days events. He asked for suggestions on the various events that lacked a chairperson. The Council made suggestions and discussed the various events.

Councilmember Carpenter was excused.

It was noted that the time was past 7:00 p.m. and the next item on the agenda could be heard. Councilmember Bayless commented that she had been advised by the City Attorney to recuse herself from this discussion because of a potential conflict of interest. She was excused.

4. Public Hearing - Final Public Hearing for UTOPIA - (Resolution #2004-7). The City Council will hear public comment on the city’s continued participation in the Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA), including comments regarding the financing plan approved by the Board of Directors of UTOPIA. Following the public hearing, the Council will consider a resolution approving the First Amended and Restated Interlocal Cooperation Agreement of UTOPIA.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mayor Ellertson commented that this item will decide whether Lindon City would continue with UTOPIA. He also noted that it appeared that most of the audience was here for this item. He asked if the topic needs more introduction. Mr. Roy Shepherd asked that the new developments be discussed. Mr. Dameron suggested that the Council and public have been "deluged" with information over the last several weeks, so questions might be the better approach. Mayor Ellertson asked for a raise of hands to determine who had comments for the Council. He asked each person to come to the microphone, and state their name and address for the record.

Mr. Mark Saltis, Director of Governmental Relations for Qwest’s Denver, Colorado office, asked the Council not to adopt the resolution to continue with UTOPIA. He informed the Council that Jerry Fenn, Director, has authorized him to offer Lindon residents a guarantee of ninety percent availability of DSL within one year if this measure is not adopted. He observed that the financial plan of UTOPIA is reliant on the "take rates" of subscribers and that a few percentage points less may put the City in jeopardy. He noted that Qwest has competitors in all the fields of telecommunications that they are involved in: voice, tv, data, etc. He commented that Qwest would rather work with the cities than compete with them. <STRIKE>too.</STRIKE> He also expressed concern about the short length of time that had been given to the cities to review the cooperative agreement. He would like the cities to review the agreement in more depth. He commented that the cities may disagree on the impact of UTOPIA, but he would like to have a positive outcome of a favorable relationship. He again asked for a "no" vote to the initiative.

Mr. Jeff Wilson of 194 South 300 East informed the Council that he was a proponent of UTOPIA. He told the Council that he has taken this position because when the benefits are weighed against the risks, there is not question in his mind that this is something that will benefit the residents of Lindon. He commented that he does not think that this is a question of either Qwest or UTOPIA. He suggested that Qwest will continue to operate and that they may even find it profitable to use the UTOPIA net also. He felt that there is a risk, but not one that outweighs the possible benefits. He summarized his opinion with the statement, "I think it is worth it."

Mr. Roy Shepherd commented that he is opposed for the same reason that some are for the measure. He commented that Lindon has signed on for participation from the inception. He suggested that Lindon’s participation in UTOPIA is a classic example of red ink. He suggested that the taxpayers of municipalities will be the ones paying, especially since the number of participants has reduced to eleven instead eighteen. He expressed the opinion that utility bills are high enough. He asked for an explanation of how pledging is more than another name for indebtedness. He agreed that cites are better managed than the State of Utah, but he doesn’t believe that residents and taxpayers should have been pledged to "years of bondage." He expressed the opinion that he cannot believe that Lindon should be involved in something that has to be guaranteed. He asked if Lindon City is a warranty company.

Mr. Robert Lundgren of 318 East 400 North informed the Council that he is a Qwest employee. He asked the Council if they were aware of some questions on the operation of the system. He wondered what will happen if the power goes out to the system. Will the network continue to work? He commented that Qwest’s network will continue to work. He commented that Lindon City is gambling with the taxpayers’ money. He suggested that residents need sewer and pavement, but not telecommunications such as UTOPIA is offering. This is a luxury, and not something that he wants at his home, and possibly the lady across the street on a fixed income may not be able to pay. He also suggested that Qwest and Comcast are going to compete with UTOPIA, and if UTOPIA doesn’t get the number of subscribers they need, then UTOPIA will fail. He asked the Council to think this through seriously.

Mr. Chris Bailey of 144 South 1025 East commented that he has lived in Lindon for the last two years and has been following the debate for that period of time. He noted that his first concern was justification of government involvement in this business area. Since then, however, he has changed his position and is "all for" UTOPIA. He observed that he is now a strong supporter and believer in city providing infrastructure for telecommunications. He agreed with Mr. Lundgren that, for some residents, broadband fiber-based telecommunications are a luxury, but for others it is a way of life and a means of economic basis. He observed that he has listened to the debates in the Senate and read the information available. He has come to the conclusion that he would like to see Comcast and Qwest have some competition. He would like to see consumers have choices. He observed that Qwest has offered quicker deployment, but he would like to know why Qwest has not done this anyway. He would like to see quicker deployment and pointed out that this is one benefit of UTOPIA already.

Mr. Bailey observed that although he has not seen UTOPIA’s business plan, he is aware that the findings were verified by independent consultants and the take rates were very conservative. It was found that the plan is very feasible, especially considering the vast number of services that can be provided with this type of network. He commented that just previewing a sampling of the services that are available across the country may give rise to numerous possibilities that can only be imagined. He commented that surfing the internet and email do not use the bandwidth potential of a fiber system.

Mr. Bailey agreed that there is a small degree of risk, but this is an opportunity to be a leader and that entails risk. He suggested that Qwest calls their service "broadband," but their broadband is "tiny" compared to a fiber network. He commented that Lindon has led out in regards to UTOPIA in the past. He observed that Lindon is a small community with a strong voice. He asked for support of UTOPIA.

Mr. Craig Mangum of 3977 North Cove Drive in Provo introduced himself as the director of the Lindon business, Center 7. He also commented that he was here to show support of UTOPIA. He also believes there to be minimal risk and many great benefits. He added that Center 7 is excited to be based in Lindon–a progressive technological community. He asked the Council to continue to support UTOPIA.

Ms. Suzette Lundgren asked why this hasn’t been put to a vote in the community. She observed that the community gets to choose when taxes are raised and she personally would like to know if the majority of the community supports UTOPIA. She also asked why the larger participating cities in UTOPIA have fallen out and how their withdrawal affects the UTOPIA proposal. She asked if there are reasons for the withdrawals that are not being aired. She suggested that the Council consider all the aspects of this proposal because Lindon residents will be "saddled" with paying for it for the next twenty years whether they use it or not use it. She observed that there is a good portion of our community that includes up-and-coming young executives, but most private homes do not need the huge bandwidth promoted by UTOPIA. She suggested that this is a project for the private sector.

Mayor Ellertson asked the Council for comments. Councilmember Bath asked the representatives of Dynamicity to answer Mr. Lundgren’s question about losing power. Mr. Nate Taylor replied that every device in the home has its own battery pack. The other equipment stations will also have battery backups. Mr. Lundgren asked if the life of the batteries are dependent on how much use is placed on them. Mr. Taylor replied yes and clarified that the specifications were developed on the average use. He added that a plan has also been developed to replace the battery backups on a regular basis. Mr. Lundgren commented that a recent power outage in Salt Lake City had residents out of power for two weeks. He observed that Qwest had maintained their service to this area.

Mayor Ellertson commented that he would attempt to answer the question as to some cities opting out of UTOPIA. He reported that UTOPIA has eleven cities remaining as pledging partners. He could not speak for those who have chosen to remain as members but not as a pledging member and outline their reasons, but the original cities are all still members and only one city has dropped out completely. He commented that they probably have varying reasons for not pledging but one of the most pressing questions for the public is whether or not the project will work. He suggested that he share the plan to implement the UTOPIA network. He told the audience that the plan is to step into it slowly on a trial basis so that if does not succeed, the cities are on the hook for only 20% of the annual amount due. There will also be some exit strategies in place if the cities find that the project is not working after it is implemented. He informed the audience that the second step will take place over a period of fourteen months, and will consist of build out within the participating cities. Mayor Ellertson commented that these are some strategies that the cities will be trying, and they will learn if the strategies succeed.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the next question most often asked is whether this is the business of cities. He suggested that some answer may be found by classifying a fiber network as infrastructure. He commented that if the technology of fiber is good then all the residents will share in the benefits. He mentioned that he has been told by some residents that they would like to control the providers who will provide services on the network. He has also been told that the providers would like to have control of the network also. There are some providers that have an investment in an existing network.

Mayor Ellertson commented that a major reason that the Lindon City Council is entertaining this idea is because of the demand of the residents. He agreed that asking for a vote is one way of determining the amount of support for this project, but a vote is not required. He told the audience that Lindon City became involved because many residents expressed support to one or more Councilmembers. He acknowledged that the support is not one hundred percent, but it is still a great number. He reported that before Lindon got involved, he had a lot of people ask for help in getting service. He had received a "no" answer from the providers, and so started looking for alternatives. As he worked with other communities, he found the same interest in finding solutions. UTOPIA is an attempt to respond to the market interest. UTOPIA goes beyond DSL, but the program calls for stepping into it in a prudent manner. This manner of implementation provides protections to the participating communities.

Mayor Ellertson commented that one element Lindon must decide is on whether to be a pledging city rather than a non-pledging city. He noted that only time will tell if the right decision is made. He added that many financial arrangements require going into debt, including buying a house. But going into debt does not make the decision to buy a house a bad decision. There is the potential in this also to get a return when, or if, success happens. He added that there is the potential for a return to the cities, but that’s not the big reason for joining with the other cities. He expressed the hope that the residents understand that UTOPIA is trying to be responsive to a market demand that it not being met. He also expressed the hope that, whatever the vote of the Council, the providers such as Qwest realize that UTOPIA offers a great opportunity to work together.

Ms. Lundgren commented that if the objective is to provide service, then why provide fiber if DSL is being offered. Mayor Ellertson replied that the UTOPIA network will provide speeds beyond DSL, within about four years. The plan from Qwest is 256K DSL service in one year. He observed that UTOPIA is an attempt to compete in a larger market both in price and capabilities, if possible. He expressed the opinion that he believes that the residents of Lindon will be the beneficiaries of UTOPIA. He suggested that the worst case scenario of Lindon City being involved is if the network is built and no one takes the services. This will result in about thirty-nine percent of the cost coming to the City, but, Mayor Ellertson added, he does not see the scenario getting to this point because there are decision points along the way. On the other hand, Mayor Ellertson noted, UTOPIA may be the best thing that could happen to Lindon in terms of delivery of services. He asked if the Council or audience had other comments or questions.

Councilmember Acerson commented that one question that has been raised repeatedly is the one about the pledge becoming a burden on citizens. He observed that the Mayor has explained that there are stepping points along the process and that the full amount of the pledge will most probably not be assessed to the City. He explained that the funding mechanism for the pledge is not from citizen funding, or property taxes, but the increase in commercial business that will come to the City as a result of this network. He also explained that there is currently a new business coming to Lindon that will contribute sales tax in amounts that will far exceed the amount of the pledge. He commented that if UTOPIA is a success, there is the possibility of a return on the investment that could be used for other improvements for the City. He expressed the opinion that the funding of this project will not impact the residents. Mr. Bailey observed that if UTOPIA does succeed, then there is no burden on the sales tax revenues and the funds could be used elsewhere in the City.

Mayor Ellertson observed that he thinks that Lindon’s residents will benefit by this enhanced technology. He acknowledged that he was not an expert in the field of technology, and he recognizes that Comcast and Qwest have a significant investment in their assets and a responsibility to their shareholders, but he believes that these issues can be addressed and that they could benefit from the UTOPIA network also. He suggested that there are as many ways to make UTOPIA work as there are ways to make it fail, and if the residents, providers and cities use this opportunity to work together, it could be a win-win situation. He also suggested that part of the reason that UTOPIA was formed was to answer a need expressed by the customer. He felt that if solutions had been offered three years ago, Lindon would not have gone looking for alternative solutions. He agreed with Councilmember Acerson that a significant reason to continue with UTOPIA is that Lindon’s present situation will entail less risk and less impact on the individual citizen. He asked if there were other comments.

Councilmember Bath commented that one misconception being promulgated is that UTOPIA will compete against Qwest and Comcast. He observed that UTOPIA is just putting in infrastructure and will not be a competing service provider. The network is just providing a service that will bring in other competitors. The Lundgrens asked why the private sector is not building this infrastructure. Mayor Ellertson replied that the answer to this is that the private sector is driven by Wall Street, so to speak, in terms of short time returns on investments more than in the past "utility" business model. Councilmember Bath reiterated that UTOPIA is not competing, just providing a service that opens opportunities for all who use it. Councilmember Acerson observed that his experience is in the computer industry where those who welcome competition help drive innovation. He commented that it was amazing to see businessmen like Alan Ashton, Ray Noorda and Bill Gates not try to squash and undermine their competitors. He told the audience that Ray Noorda calls is "co-op-petition" not "competition." He expressed the opinion that the benefits of this kind of attitude is obvious. He suggested that all the competitors will be able to take advantage of the infrastructure.

Mr. Lundgren replied that he agrees with the concept of competition. He observed that he has worked with Qwest for 31 years. He disagreed that UTOPIA will not be competing with Qwest. He pointed out that Qwest is forced to let new DSL installations sit for sixty days for "disclosure." He noted that competitors are allowed to use Qwest offices and services at below wholesale rates. He suggested that Qwest needs to be allowed to compete fairly. He claimed that UTOPIA will not have the "red tape" that Qwest has to deal with on a daily basis. Qwest does a lot of work for other companies, sells them services below wholesale, and is not able to reap the benefits. He asked for help from the cities to "take our handcuffs off."

Mayor Ellertson commented that he agrees with Mr. Lundgren’s level of frustration. He observed that part of the value in this project is that the concept is taken from the utility model–build one infrastructure and share rather than building many systems. He noted that the benefit is the reduced costs to the end user. He agreed that the "red tape" is extensive and that a need exists to work together. He suggested that maybe UTOPIA will help bring ideas into the marketplace that there are other ways to give the customer the best products and services – through "co-op-petition."

Councilmember Hatch replied to another question that has been asked about the length of time that this proposal has been studied. He informed the audience that Lindon has been working with UTOPIA and the concepts behind it for an extensive period. He commented that the Council has asked the same questions that are being asked by the public tonight. He disagreed that Lindon was "jumping into this project blindly." He thanked DynamicCity personnel for answering questions and explaining the mechanics of the network.

Mr. Bailey asked what the mechanics of implementing UTOPIA entail. Mayor Ellertson replied that this resolution to approve the Interlocal Agreement is the last step before construction begins. Currently, there are eleven other cities in the Agency. The plan is to build the network to three or four thousand customers starting in September 2004, expand to about 50,000 customers in member communities over the next fourteen months, and total build out to the participating cities over the next period estimated at 30 months. Mr. Lundgren asked if UTOPIA plans to use the existing overhead utility system and if the cost of maintaining proper clearances has been considered. Mayor Ellertson replied that it is his understanding that it has been. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was further comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Dameron pointed out some slight changes in the resolution that more clearly incorporate the Interlocal Agreement into the verbage of the resolution. He listed the changes for the Council and audience. Mayor Ellertson asked if there were any comments or questions from the Council. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION #2004-7, AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT OF THE UTAH TELECOMMUNICATION OPEN INFRASTRUCTURE AGENCY (UTOPIA) THEREBY RATIFYING AND CONTINUING THE CITY’S STATUS AS A MEMBER OF UTOPIA. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS RECUSED
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0).

5. Continued Public Hearing - Fryer Petition for Disconnection. This item was continued by the City Council to the meeting of June 1, 20043, but then continued to this meeting at the request of the petitioners. This is a formal petition from property owners, David Fryer, Kenneth Fryer, and Laura Fryer, for disconnection of just over two acres of property located along the Lindon/Pleasant Grove boundary, west of the intersection of 800 North 200 East in Lindon City or 1000 South in Pleasant Grove.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the Council has reviewed this application previously at the meeting of May 18, 2004. Mr. Dameron displayed the subject property on the overhead. Mr. David Fryer was invited to the front.

Mayor Ellertson reminded the Council and Mr. Fryer that the last time this was discussed there was some questions to be answered and some information to be acquired. Mr. Fryer told the Council that he had talked with the Pleasant Grove City Council since the last meeting. He noted that he would like to give the Council a history of this property so they better understand his request. He informed the Council that he was also representing his brother, Kenneth Fryer and his sister, Laura Fryer.

Mr. Fryer observed that there have been issues with this property with both the City and the County for the last five or six years. He told the Council that there had been about a year period to resolve a back tax issue of about $25,000 with the County. He said that in the Fall of 1998 he had received notification to attend a joint meeting with Pleasant Grove and Lindon to discuss the construction of a bridge on 400 East. At that time, the City Engineers, JUB Engineering, had addressed the issue of irrigation service from the Murdock Canal. At that time, he was being delivered water through a twelve or fourteen inch underground irrigation pipe connected to the Murdock Canal. The engineers told the Council’s that it would be expensive to put in a diversion in the bridge to continue this service and that they were not sure that it would work. He and Terry Tomlinson were the only people being served from this pipe and they were asked if they intended to continue to farm. Mr. Tomlinson told the Council’s that he intended to build a house on the property and that it only had a few trees, so he did not need the water. Mr. Fryer indicated his response was that he was still planning to operate the orchard on this property.

Mr. Fryer indicated that he discussed the water situation with his brother and sister and they decided that this may be an opportunity to build new homes for themselves. He set up a meeting in Pleasant Grove with Mayor Sanderson, Mayor Ellertson, Ott Dameron, and Frank Mills. His proposal was to de-annex the back portion of the property from Lindon and annex to Pleasant Grove. Pleasant Grove indicated that they were not opposed to the idea, but Mayor Ellertson indicated that Lindon was opposed. There was some back and forth discussion for a while, but it was dropped when Mayor Sanderson started "fighting battles on the north with Cedar Hills."

Mr. Fryer told the Council that his family has some compelling reasons why they prefer to annex to Pleasant Grove. He acknowledged that density is one part of the reasons, but not in the way that Lindon expects. He informed the Council that this property has been in the family for one hundred years. His grandfather farmed it and turned it over to his father sixty years ago. His father turned it over to his children just prior to his death. He and his brother and sister have had visions of building on this parcel. He, himself, owns an acre in Pleasant Grove, but would like a new, more modern home with a fish pond. His sister has been very patient and has bought a townhouse in Cedar Hills as a stopgap measure. His brother has Parkinson’s Disease and a large lot in Orem. He would like a smaller lot that would meet his needs better. He suggested that in all likelihood the parcel would be divided into three lots for the three of the siblings.

Mr. Fryer told the Council that the family has an emotional attachment to the property. They picked strawberries there as children. He suggested that his brother and sister would like the option of building on small lots to meet their needs. He would like a larger acreage because he wants a four car garage and shop. He asserted that the intention of the family is to build on it and they would like the flexibility to create smaller lots than Lindon allows. One of their concerns with the larger lots is the proximity of lots across the street in Pleasant Grove that are only 8,000 square foot. If they annex to Pleasant Grove, the parcel could be divided into six one-third acre lots, but this is not the big issue. He is a lifelong resident of Pleasant Grove and he wants to remain.

Since the cities could not come to a consensus on the annexation, Mr. Fryer decided to continue to farm. He explained that he had developed a cottage industry there with apple trees. He called the water master to schedule irrigation turns and was told that he couldn’t get the water any more because there was no diversion. He told the Council that his prime condition, high-producing, two-hundred-and-forty trees have "gone to pot" with no water. He asked the Council what a twenty-year old apple tree is worth. He estimated $100 each as a minimum. He also has an EPA approved, pressurized heating system on the property that was worth $5,000. He had refurbished the cold storage plant by replacing the freon system that is now useless. He also has a sprayer and picking equipment that are now useless. He estimated that the orchard produced 1200 bushels of apples a year at a $1 a pound. In the last five years 6,000 bushels of apples have gone to waste. He calculated a loss in apples alone at $60,000. He told the Council that his total amount of loss is $92,000.

Mr. Fryer mentioned that he kept thinking that Lindon was going to do the right thing. He commented that he felt that Lindon should follow the joint agreement part of the boundary agreement detailed in a Memorandum dated June 10, 1004, which he read, "Developments after this date along the south side of 800 North/1000 South which will connect to Pleasant Grove utilities in 800 North/1000 South will be required to de-annex from Lindon and annex to Pleasant Grove." He added that he went to Pleasant Grove two weeks ago and was told again that they were not opposed to annexing his parcel. He commented that this has been Pleasant Grove’s position all along. He observed that this is not a large parcel, only 1.5 acres, which constitutes less than 3/100th of 1% of Lindon’s total acreage.

Mr. Fryer presented a petition with signatures of the homeowners on 1000 South in Pleasant Grove. He noted that there are twenty-six homes and twenty-five are in Pleasant Grove. The only exception is Terry Tomlinson’s home in Lindon. He informed the Council that he had contacted all the people along this street, and only one person would not sign. He represented that all the residents were in agreement that this parcel should be in Pleasant Grove, including the Lindon neighbors; Tomlinson, Priddis, the Playhouse, and De St. Jeor. He commented that it is getting to the point that this issue needs to be resolved. He pointed out that the neighborhood is predominately in Pleasant Grove. He expressed the opinion that he would prefer to remain in a Pleasant Grove LDS Stake and Ward. He summarized by saying that this particular parcel, in Pleasant Grove, would meet the needs of his family best. He asked if there were questions.

Councilmember Acerson asked about the length of time Mr. Fryer mentioned as five years. Mr. Fryer replied that it was probably longer, but the first time he was aware of the boundary adjustment with Pleasant Grove was eight years ago. He explained that the problems with the property taxes at Utah County were caused by an old survey that placed the parcel on top of the School District property. It had taken him a year to resolve that issue with the County. Councilmember Acerson asked when this had happened. Mr. Fryer replied that the boundary line adjustment had taken place when the Appleleaf Subdivision was approved in 1994. He had received a delinquent tax notice in 2001 and resolved the issue in 2002. He commented that his family is ready to do something and would like the annexation cleared up. He added that he did not understand why Lindon would want to service the utilities from the back when Pleasant Grove’s utilities are in the street in front. He reiterated that he had talked to all the neighbors, who are in favor, and that he hoped the Council was in favor also.

Mayor Ellertson observed that he was not sure why the boundary curves into Mr. Fryer’s parcel. He suggested that if the boundary followed the 800 North/1000 South street as intended Mr. Fryer’s parcel would have been completely in Lindon. He suggested that it made more sense to move the boundary to the edge of the street and not to the south boundary of the parcel. Mr. Fryer observed that allowing a de-annexation in this case would not set any precedence because it is the only parcel that has a boundary through it. He added that he does not have the means to build a Lindon-style home in this neighborhood. It would be overpriced for this Pleasant Grove neighborhood. He also explained that many people who have an acre fill it with junk, such as his neighbor is Pleasant Grove.

Mayor Ellertson commented that he thinks he understands the Fryer family’s feelings. He observed that he does not know the Council’s position, but he prefers nice straight lines. He expressed the opinion that the intent of the agreement was to make the street the boundary. He added that at the time this agreement was considered, there were other concerns that do not apply now, such as a possible Public Service Commission decision on providing service outside of City limits. Mr. John Romney, attorney for the Fryers, observed that the Lindon Council cannot dispute that the boundary currently runs through the property. He commented that all the frontage lies in Pleasant Grove, so there has to be a disconnection from somewhere for any homes to be built on the property. He observed that, under the state statutes, the petitioner has the choice of which city to petition. The petitioner has the freedom to choose.

Mr. Fryer informed the Council that he was not aware of Pleasant Grove’s R1-8 zone when the boundary adjustment was made, but his sister and brother cannot handle one-half acre lots. The R1-8 zone fits their lifestyle. Mr. Romney observed that the Fryer’s application fits the standard for disconnection set by the state statutes. He listed the relevant factors that must be considered and commented that Lindon has not made any improvements so there is not an investment loss. He noted that the boundary line bisects the property, the neighbors are in favor, and there is no substantial harm to Lindon. Councilmember Hatch commented that the harm created is a matter of opinion. He pointed out that most of the property is located within Lindon’s boundary. Mr. Romney replied that losing land is not a substantial harm. Councilmember Hatch noted that the disconnection would create problems with addresses that may create a public safety issue. Mr. Fryer replied that twenty-six of the homes on this street are already in Pleasant Grove, including homes on the south side of 1000 South. He also pointed out that the street is listed on the street signs as only 1000 South. There is no address on 800 North on this street, except Terry Tomlinson. Mr. Romney agreed that there were already Pleasant Grove addresses on the south side of the street. He suggested that not continuing the addresses in Pleasant Grove might create more harm or confusion to public safety response teams. Mr. Fryer commented that Pleasant Grove addresses in this neighborhood are more consistent.

Mayor Ellertson pointed out that as this street is extended west, the south side is in Lindon. Councilmember Bath commented that it is just as easy to move the boundary north as it is to move it south. Mr. Fryer contended that density is not the main issue and he would rather move the boundary south. He asked if the Council would deny his brother the opportunity to build on a smaller lot. Mayor Ellertson suggested that there may be another solution. Mr. Romney asked how Lindon proposes to solve the problem since the property lies partly in Pleasant Grove and partly in Lindon. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the street is a natural boundary and that Lindon is willing to negotiate a boundary agreement with Pleasant Grove to move the boundary north to this location. Mr. Romney replied that the landowners’ have chosen to disconnect and Lindon cannot complete a boundary adjustment without the landowners’ agreement.

Mr. Fryer informed the Council that he has another parcel in Lindon of about 7 acres that he is planning to develop in the future. However, this particular parcel he would like to have in Pleasant Grove for one reason–he has two other partners that do not want half acre lots. Mayor Ellertson observed that he appears convinced that there is no way he can have smaller lots in Lindon. He suggested that there may be a way to accomplish what he wants in Lindon. Mr. Fryer reiterated that the family want the flexibility of having smaller lots. Lindon City Attorney, Gordon Duval, confirmed that there is a provision in the code that allows flexibility to create smaller lots. Mayor Ellertson suggested that Lindon is willing to work with the Fryers and explore the possibilities of smaller lots. He asked about the zoning in Pleasant Grove.

Mr. Fryer explained his understanding of the Pleasant Grove zoning code. He commented that the average size of the lots must comply with the minimum square footage, which would allow him to have an oversized lot and the other family members to have smaller lots. He also explained that his sister would like to have one lot to sell to finance her home. Mayor Ellertson replied that he felt that Lindon could get the flexibility to create four lots such as Mr. Fryer describes. Mr. Fryer wondered about five lots. Mayor Ellertson observed that he had a recent conversation with Pleasant Grove on this issue and was told the Pleasant Grove would not zone the property more dense than what Lindon would allow if it is annexed. The Fryers contended that they were not told this stipulation at the Pleasant Grove Council meeting.

Mr. Fryer reiterated his right to disconnect and again stated his preference for "flexibility." Mr. Romney asked for a decision from the Council on disconnection. Mayor Ellertson asked if Lindon can provide the flexibility that Mr. Fryer desires, why would he need to disconnect. Councilmember Acerson suggested that the petition be continued to allow Lindon City and the Fryers to pursue exploring the options. Mr. Dameron confirmed that Mr. Fryer would like three lots. Mr. Fryer replied that he would like what Pleasant Grove can offer–six lots. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the maximum flexibility be discovered. Councilmember Acerson asked if there would be problems or extra fees by hooking up to Pleasant Grove utilities. Mayor Ellertson replied no and explained that the cities had a reciprocal agreement that had been used many times. There were Lindon homes hooked up to Pleasant Grove utilities and Pleasant Grove homes hooked up to Lindon utilities. Mr. Romney pointed out that a decision is needed in 45 days. Mr. Duval replied that the 45 days starts from the close of the public hearing. He noted that the public hearings had been continued and not closed. It was agreed that the item be continued for two weeks or to the next regular meeting.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST BY DAVID FRYER, KENNETH FRYER AND LAURA FRYER FOR MUNICIPAL DISCONNECTION OF APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRES LOCATED ALONG THE LINDON/PLEASANT GROVE BOUNDARY, WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF 800 NORTH 200 EAST IN LINDON CITY OR 1000 SOUTH IN PLEASANT GROVE, TO ALLOW TIME TO EXPLORE SOME OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

6. Public Hearing - Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2004/2005 (Resolution #2004-8). The City Council will hear public comment concerning the final city budget for fiscal year 2004.2005. Two public work sessions and one public hearing have been previously held where the budget issues were discussed. Tonight, the Council will receive comments and act to approve the budget for fiscal year 2004/2005, amend the budget for fiscal year 2003/2004, set the certified property tax rate for 2004/2005, approve an agreement for services between the RDA and the City, and adopt the city-wide fee schedule.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE 2004/2005 BUDGET. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Councilmember Bayless suggested a change on page 2-2. Finance Director Kristen Colson asked if there were any questions. Mayor Ellertson asked if there were any differences between this report and the previous ones that had been reviewed. Ms. Colson replied yes and pointed out a list. She asked the Council to address the budget issues first. Councilmember Bayless asked if the UTOPIA vote had any ramifications on the budget. Mayor Ellertson replied that the budget has allocated sales tax revenues for this purpose. He asked about the changes to the certified tax rate. Ms. Colson replied that the tax rate changed significantly, but this is potential income and she was not sure that this amount would be collected. To offset this uncertainty, the increase has been appropriated to the general fund balance.

Mayor Ellertson asked about the changes to the fee schedule concerning the acceptance of previously unaccepted water company shares. Mr. Dameron explained that the City had received a call from a landowner on the west side asking if Lindon will accept Spring Ditch and Southfield shares. After discussing the issue with Dave Thurgood, City Engineer, it was decided that these shares should be accepted. He added that Mr. Thurgood is working on figuring the equivalency to North Union shares. The Council discussed the fact that development interest in this area is rising. Councilmember Hatch asked if there were other irrigation companies that service this area. Mr. Dameron replied no. Mayor Ellertson confirmed that these irrigation shares would be added to the list of accepted shares already in the fee schedule. Ms. Colson replied yes.

Councilmember Hatch asked if the certified tax rate was raised. Mr. Dameron explained that the state has changed the basis for the certified tax rate to the calculated amount due instead of the average of collections.

Mayor Ellertson asked if there were any other questions on the changes. Ms. Colson reminded the Council about the discussion on the City being reimbursed for actual engineering costs for transferring underground rights to the City. This new fee has been added to the fee schedule. She clarified that this fee will be assessed when developers want to transfer water rights to the City in lieu of transferring irrigation shares, and only if the City incurs costs to transfer and "prove up" on the rights.

Ms. Colson directed attention to Budget Issue #1. The Council briefly discussed the budget issues.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVE TO APPROVE ALL FIVE BUDGET ISSUES AS PROPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE.
THE MOTION CARRIED (5-0).

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2004-8 APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR TH FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE 2003-2004 FISCAL YEAR, SETTING THE CERTIFIED TAX RATE, ADOPTING A FEE SCHEDULE, AND ENTERING INTO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE LINDON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE.
THE MOTION CARRIED (5-0).

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TEMPORARILY AND CONVENE THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AT 9:45 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

BOARDMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE LINDON CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CONVENE THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY AT 9:50 P.M. BOARDMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

BOARDMEMBER BATH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY AND RECONVENE THE LINDON CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 10:04 P.M. BOARDMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Dameron:
1. Presented the Project Tracking List and asked for hearing requests. The Council reached consensus to hear the Jones R2 Overlay and the Utah County Animal Shelter.
2. Reminded the Council about the Grand Opening Open House at the Hollow Park home.
3. Announced an Engineering Coordination meeting for 1:00 p.m. Thursday, June 17.
4. Reported that the recycling sign-ups have reached 220. Councilmember Bath asked if Mr. Dameron had asked BFI to a meeting to discuss recycling. Mr. Dameron replied that they would be on the agenda in August. He reported that BFI is now considering starting the program with less than the previously required sign-up amount of one-thousand. There was a short discussion and it was decided to save questions until the meeting in August.
5. Reported that Low Book Sales has requested a Special Session. After discussion, it was decided to schedule the special meeting on June 23 at 5:30 p.m. Mr. Dameron was asked to invite City Attorney Gordon Duval to the session.
6. Commented that Doug Basset at UDOT has requested if the City would prefer a "right turn only" from Gillman Lane to State Street. There was discussion and the parking situation along State Street near this intersection was pointed out. Councilmember Bath suggested posting "no parking" for a greater distance. Councilmember Bayless suggested that UDOT consult the residents of Gillman Lane for their preferences on a "right turn only" designation. The Council agreed that Mr. Dameron should convey these suggestions to UDOT.
7. Reported that he was taking some vacation time from June 29 to July 12.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

The City Council will meet privately to hold a strategy session to discuss the purchase, exchange or lease of real property.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 10:23 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 11:46 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mayor Ellertson invited the public back into the Council chamber.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO HAVE FINAL APPROVAL AND TO SIGN A LETTER OF INTENT TO JOIN WITH PLEASANT GROVE TO CREATE A COOPERATIVE TAX INCREMENT FUNDING DISTRICT. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO CLOSE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 11.52 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

APPROVED - July 6, 2004