City Council Meetings

Please Note – These minutes have been prepared with a timestamp linking the agenda items to the video discussion. Electronic version of minutes will allow citizens to view discussion held during council meeting. PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Regular Meeting Agenda 5:30 PM, Tuesday, August 19, 2025 Council Chambers (Room 100) Hybrid meeting: 445 W. Center Street, Provo, UT 84601 or https://www.youtube.com/provocitycouncil Roll Call THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION WERE PRESENT: Councilor Becky Bogdin Councilor Craig Christensen Councilor Gary Garrett Councilor George Handley Councilor Travis Hoban Councilor Katrice MacKay Councilor Rachel Whipple Mayor Michelle Kaufusi Chief Administrative Officer Scott Henderson City Attorney Brian Jones Council Executive Director Justin Harrison City Recorder Heidi Allman Conducting: Chair Gary Garrett Prayer – Brooke Barnes Pledge of Allegiance – Councilor Bogdin Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards 1 Provo City Employee of the Month (25-007) 0:01:43 Mayor Kaufusi expressed appreciation to the Municipal Council for the opportunity to recognize an exceptional employee whose dedication and professionalism have had a lasting impact on the community. She noted that while Provo is built on collaboration and teamwork, it is also important to acknowledge individuals who consistently exceed expectations. Mayor Kaufusi then invited Development Services Director Bill Peperone to present the August 2025 Employee of the Month Award to a member of the Development Services team. Mr. Peperone announced that the August 2025 Employee of the Month Award was being presented to Sandy Wilmoth. He noted that Sandy has been with the City for approximately three years, serving as both the Economic Development Policy Analyst and the Planning Division’s Senior Administrative Assistant. In her current role, she organizes agendas, meetings, and minutes for five boards and commissions, including the Planning Commission, Board of Adjustment, and Landmarks Commission, often attending evening meetings that extend her workday. Mr. Peperone highlighted Sandy’s ability to identify weaknesses and improve systems for greater customer service and productivity. He commended her leadership on the executive committee for the Provo Advantage Charity Golf Summit, where she managed coordination with thoroughness, delegated responsibilities effectively, and contributed significantly to the success of the event. He also noted her willingness to fill multiple roles in Economic Development and the Planning Division while new staff were being hired. Beyond her professional contributions, Mr. Peperone praised Sandy’s kindness, camaraderie, and ability to create an inclusive and supportive work environment. He concluded by emphasizing that Sandy’s professional Provo City Council Meeting – August 19, 2025 Page 1 of 5  Please Note – These minutes have been prepared with a timestamp linking the agenda items to the video discussion. Electronic version of minutes will allow citizens to view discussion held during council meeting. excellence and personal integrity make her an invaluable asset to the team and expressed gratitude for her leadership and uplifting presence. Public Comment Chair Garrett read the public comment preamble and opened the public comment period. Seeing none, he closed the public comment period. Action Agenda 2 A resolution consenting to board and commission appointments. (25-031) 0:08:50 Motion: An implied motion to approve Resolution 2025-39, as currently constituted, has been made by council rule. Mayor Kaufusi recommended Brooke Barnes, Doug Gardner, Bonnie Morrow, Brittany Hyde, and Dan Mitchell for appointments to the Parks and Recreation board. Chair Garrett opened public comment. With none, he closed public comment and invited a council discussion. Councilor Bogdin expressed appreciation for the volunteer hours contributed to the City’s boards and commissions. She noted that the City could not provide the same level of staffing or public input without the service of these volunteers and thanked them for their willingness to apply and serve. Chair Garrett noted that Council Members often serve as liaisons to City commissions, allowing them to see firsthand the significant hours volunteers contribute. He referenced his liaison roles with the Parks and Recreation Board and the Provo Foundation as examples. He then called for a vote. Vote: The motions passed 7:0 with Councilors Bogdin, Christensen, Garrett, Handley, Hoban, MacKay, and Whipple in favor. 3 A resolution rescinding Resolution 2025-32 and approving the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement to authorize Provo City’s participation in the Utah Valley Home Consortium under HUD’s HOME Program for FY 2026–2028 (25-069) 0:12:21v Motion: An implied motion to approve Resolution 2025-40, as currently constituted, has been made by council rule. Melissa McNalley, Community Grant Administrator, presented. She explained that the previous resolution adopted in June needed to be rescinded at the request of HUD to include additional language. She stated that the Council was being asked to rescind the earlier resolution and approve a new resolution to participate in the Utah Valley Home Consortium. Chair Garret opened public comment. With none, he closed public comment and invited a council discussion. Provo City Council Meeting – August 19, 2025 Page 2 of 5  Please Note – These minutes have been prepared with a timestamp linking the agenda items to the video discussion. Electronic version of minutes will allow citizens to view discussion held during council meeting. Councilor Christensen expressed appreciation for the effort, noting it is a worthy and much-needed cause. He thanked Melissa and her staff for their leadership and recognized Provo’s active role in the initiative. Chair Garrett called for a vote. Vote: The motions passed 7:0 with Councilors Bogdin, Christensen, Garrett, Handley, Hoban, MacKay, and Whipple in favor. 4 A resolution accepting an annexation petition for further consideration for approximately 16.67 acres of property generally located at 4505 N Canyon Road (25-083) 0:14:35 Motion: An implied motion to approve Resolution 2025-41, as currently constituted, has been made by council rule. Jessica Dahneke, City Planner, presented. She explained that the resolution was to accept a petition for further consideration. She noted that following acceptance, the petition would be returned to the Council as an ordinance before being sent to the state for certification and recording. Councilor Bogdin asked whether the City has the necessary infrastructure, including sewer and water capacity, to support the proposed development of the property. Ms. Dahneke stated that while the petition will undergo further review after acceptance, however, the initial review indicates the City has sufficient capacity to support the development. Chair Garrett asked what the next steps in the annexation process would be, including how the petition moves forward after acceptance, when the Council would see it again, and what role the state plays in certifying the annexation. Ms. Dahneke explained that if the resolution is accepted, there will be a mandatory protest period before the matter returns to the Council as an ordinance for state certification. Once certified, the annexed property will enter the City zoned as Open Space, Parks, and Recreation. Any future development would then require a rezone by the Council and a project plan review by the Planning Commission. Chair Garrett opened public comment. Sharron Memmott, of Provo, stated that the annexation had not been discussed in her neighborhood meeting, which led to some confusion with another annexation but has since been clarified. She asked where in the resolution it specifies that annexed property would automatically be zoned Open Space, Parks, and Recreation, and requested that this be added. She also asked whether the City is required to provide utilities within a certain period, whether recently installed sidewalks must meet different code requirements, and how the 14-day protest period functions in relation to state certification. Ms. Memmott further inquired if there are any development plans for the property, noted the importance of public noticing for future steps, and asked for clarification regarding the boundaries shown on the published map. Provo City Council Meeting – August 19, 2025 Page 3 of 5  Please Note – These minutes have been prepared with a timestamp linking the agenda items to the video discussion. Electronic version of minutes will allow citizens to view discussion held during council meeting. Chair Garrett closed public comment and invited a council discussion. Brian Jones, City Attorney, provided clarification on the annexation process, explaining that the 14-day period after a petition is submitted is primarily an opportunity for the Council to reject petitions that fall outside the City’s annexation policy. If no action is taken within that timeframe, the petition is automatically accepted, but this only initiates the review process and does not imply final approval. He noted that questions regarding infrastructure and obligations are typically addressed during negotiations of an annexation agreement, which clarifies responsibilities between the City and the petitioner. Regarding zoning, Mr. Jones stated that annexed property generally comes in as Open Space, Parks, and Recreation under City policy in the General Plan, though this can be adjusted through the annexation agreement process. Councilor Handley clarified that the policy requiring annexed property to initially come in as Open Space, Parks, and Recreation was created to discourage annexations driven solely by development pressure. He noted that while this does not mean the City would oppose all annexations for development, the policy helps prevent signals that might encourage developers to push for converting agricultural land into developments. Mr. Jones explained that annexations generally follow a two-step process: property is annexed under the default zoning of Open Space, Parks, and Recreation, after which the petitioner may apply for a rezone with details outlined in a development agreement. He noted that in some cases, this can be condensed into a single step if the City and petitioner agree in the annexation agreement on both development and infrastructure requirements as well as the zoning designation. Councilor MacKay requested clarification on the annexation boundaries, noting that the maps presented in both the packet and Jessica’s presentation appeared to show property on both the north and south sides of Foothill Drive. She recalled a recent instance where an incorrect map required correction and asked whether the current map was accurate. Ms. Dahneke clarified that the correct map was included with the plat materials and acknowledged she had previously misspoken. She confirmed that the annexation includes all property within the red outlined area, covering land south of Foothill Drive and a small portion to the north. Councilor Bogdin observed that one parcel on the north end was not included in the annexation while the remaining area involved multiple property owners. She asked why the owners were seeking annexation at this time and whether the landowner was present. Applicant George Bills, of Gardner and Associates, explained that the south side of Foothill consists of six to eight parcels under single ownership, originally divided for purchase but intended to be combined. He stated the annexation reduces the size of an existing county island, and while one parcel owner on the north side chose not to participate, they may initiate annexation in the future. Mr. Bills noted the property is currently agricultural with sheep on the land and several families residing there. He added that while no formal development plans exist, there has been discussion of possibly building two homes while keeping most of the property in agricultural use. Chair Garrett called for a vote. Provo City Council Meeting – August 19, 2025 Page 4 of 5  Please Note – These minutes have been prepared with a timestamp linking the agenda items to the video discussion. Electronic version of minutes will allow citizens to view discussion held during council meeting. Vote: The motions passed 7:0 with Councilors Bogdin, Christensen, Garrett, Handley, Hoban, MacKay, and Whipple in favor. 5 A resolution adopting the 2026 council regular meeting schedule. (25-084) 0:29:18 Motion: An implied motion to approve Resolution 2025-42, as currently constituted, has been made by council rule. Justin Harrison, Council Executive Director, explained that state law requires the Council to formally adopt its meeting schedule each year. The proposed resolution sets the dates for the upcoming year, with most months including two meetings and flexibility to add additional meetings as needed. Councilor Bogdin expressed appreciation for the meeting schedule, noting the value of having only one meeting in July due to vacations. Motion: Councilor Bogdin made a motion to remove the November 17 meeting citing reduced activity around the holidays. Seconded by Councilor MacKay. Chair Garrett asked whether the Council could approve the full meeting calendar and then cancel meetings as needed during the year, or if all published meetings must be held once adopted. Mr. Harrison confirmed that the Council may cancel meetings after the schedule is adopted by posting a notice of cancellation. He noted there is also flexibility to add meetings if needed. Councilor Bogdin noted that although the Council voted to adjust the July schedule last year, important items still filled the calendar once meetings were published. She expressed concern that keeping extra meetings on the schedule signals staff to plan around them, resulting in short meetings that could have been combined. She recommended removing the July and November meetings upfront to give staff a break, with the option of adding a meeting later if needed. Councilor Whipple stated she was not in favor of removing meetings from the schedule. She expressed concern that extended breaks disrupt the normal flow of work and emphasized the value of maintaining set dates to ensure accountability and consistent progress. Vote: The amended motion passed 5:2 with Councilors Bogdin, Christensen, Handley, Hoban, and MacKay in favor. Councilors Garrett and Whipple opposed. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at approximately 6:07 PM. 23rd day of September, 2025 Provo City Council Meeting – August 19, 2025 Page 5 of 5