City Council Minutes 2-17-26

TREMONTON CITY CORPORATION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 17, 2026

Members Present:
Kristie Bowcutt
Brent Jex
Beau Lewis—excused
Sharri Oyler
Blair Westergard
Bret Rohde, Mayor
Linsey Nessen, City Manager
Cynthia Nelson, City Recorder

CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP

Mayor Rohde called the February 17, 2026 City Council Workshop to order at 5:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Those in attendance were Mayor Rohde, Councilmembers Bowcutt, Jex, Oyler, and Westergard, City Manager Nessen, and City Recorder Nelson. Councilmember Lewis was excused.

1. Call to Order and Declaration of Conflict of Interest: None.

2. Council Reports and Updates

Councilmember Oyler said there is not too much going on at the library, but Tremonton and Garland are splitting off. I am not sure about that since they spent a lot of money and time getting that going with Garland. The new librarian just came in and said they do not want to do it anymore. The Senior Center said their dance was wonderful with good participation. A motorcycle group furnished the meat and helped out. Their health fair is March 29, and the Food Pantry will have a food drive on March 14.

Councilmember Bowcutt said Public Works is busy with a lot of projects. The new pump has been installed and they can now supply water to the Cedar Ridge subdivision. When the new pump is completely installed, they will be able to pump water into the aquifer storage. They had their pre-construction meetings for the widening of 1200 South and for the East Canal Equalization Basin. Braegger & Sons got the bid for that. It will take them approximately two months. They also got the bid for the South Main Street Culinary Waterline Replacement. This will take about three months. Director Seedall is working with Rivers Edge to adjust their master plan agreement. He has met with most of the NPI groups. I attended Planning Commission. The development of Cloverfield Estates Phase 3 was put on hold as a lot of good questions were brought up. I attended an NPI meeting last week and was very impressed. The community was excited to have a chance to be heard. There was a lot of good input. A business owner has the Weese Building and asked if we would consider angled parking in front of his business. Another resident text me about concerns at 700 North 300 East. It is very congested at the intersection. If people park on both sides of the road, people cannot pass. A lady gives candy to children, who are walking home. In order to get their treat, they have to cross the road. It is dangerous. People have also asked when Old Grist Mill is coming. There is an abandoned boat at the old crossroads that is an eyesore. Councilmember Westergard said they marked it, and it should get taken away.

Councilmember Jex said on the police side, I want everybody to think about a couple things. Burnout is real. We are losing a very experienced detective, but luckily, she is just going back to patrol. We are getting hammered on cases. One of our patrol shifts, has two individuals while the others have three. We would not be able to respond to two domestic disputes at the same time, especially with the uptick in calls for service and the violent nature of those. They are already behind and getting that much more behind. The Chief is going to present an option that does not cost us anything. I understand the concerns, but we have to decide what type of city we want to be. The fix for public safety is economic development—getting companies and corporations to come and invest in our City and bring in revenue so citizens do not get overtaxed. They look at public safety response because they want to protect their assets within a city. They also look at the condition of city buildings. Prior councils have done a good job of making do with what we have, but we have to turn the corner on coming up with funding. It has been a rough five months for the police department. I do not see it getting better. At some point the concept of stepping over a dollar to pick up a dime has got to come up. When we hear the presentation from the Chief, keep an open mind. He is trying to figure out a way to get manpower up, take the burnout away and not push a tax increase. Mayor Rohde said the City is not doom and gloom right now. The police are doing a good job handling things. We do not want citizens to think they are unsafe. We can do a better job, but I think we need to be careful. We do not want to put across the wrong message. Councilmember Jex said the message is not one of doom and gloom, but the fact of the matter is if two active domestics occur, we can only deal with one at a time.

3. Presentations:

a. Title: Caselle Real Time Payments—Treasurer Michelle Rhodes

Treasurer Rhodes said I propose we move from Express Bill Pay to Caselle online, which is a payment portal with real-time payments. Currently we have to process online payments the morning after. I received training on this, and not only does it do the online payments, but it would also direct people to our website and keep residents informed while paying their bill. This will save us $800 a month. My biggest concern is for the people who are set up on Express Bill Pay now and getting them to change over. They have assured us they will help with that and have a QR code. Not only does this do regular online bill payments, but it can also do business licensing and permit payments. For the trouble we are having with Express Bill Pay, just in my department alone, this would help. They have sold and we do not get the one-on-one we used to. I think it will be a good thing once people get switched. It will take about six weeks to make the switch. I talked to Finance Director Curtis Roberts, and he wants it online and moving by May.

b. Title: Transition Phones Lines—Treasurer Michelle Rhodes

Treasurer Rhodes said our phone lines have horrible IT. It started off great but has had issues over time. When we need to change our voicemail message, it is a hassle, and they charge us $150. I said, there has got to be something different. Les Olson is a good option. That will save us $250 a month and all we have to do is call them up, just like we do with our computers and say, we do not have time to figure this out on our own, switch it for us and it is covered.

c. Title: Resolution No. 26-13 Compensation and Classification Plan—Manager Nessen

Manager Nessen said this just adds those three positions to our compensation plan. With our Community Development Director leaving us, we plan to replace that position with a full-time Planner II and a part-time Zoning Administrator. We would also hire a full-time Finance Director. We will get rid of the Community Development Director position and Assistant City Manager positions. That is all we are changing—adding these positions we are currently advertising for and removing those two positions we will not be filling. We could always come back and add them later. Mayor Rohde said we have a lot of applications for the Finance Director and Planner II. We figured this would save anywhere from $40,000 to $60,000.

d. Title: Presentation Only on Citizen Advisory Committee—Norman Kay

Mr. Kay said the intent of this committee is to create a forum where local citizens can provide ideas and discuss things in more detail. This creates two-way communication and will help flow information back to people and foster more transparency and accountability. We will also provide recommendations, stating what people are for and against. As we work through things, we would use data to inform decisions instead of emotional responses. We will only work within the scope that is defined by the committee charter. We will treat everyone with respect, accountability, and transparency. The decisions we make will be documented and available to people as we work with the government and residents. We will structure ways for them to provide input as we get information out. We would provide a complete recommendation to the Council, and you would hear what people have to say—for or against something. We want to regularly have events and facilitate residents who want to help. We will do the legwork for the Council. Next is financial transparency. For this one, we would find people who have a financial background. As we grow, we want to have integration between different committees in the community. The NPI has already got a lot of great information, which we are looking to use to collect and get information out. The board we form for this would have one chair and six other members. Each member would represent one of our voting precincts. We would also have a variety of volunteers. A member from the Council would be our liaison. They would be an advisor and resource, not a voting member. We would give you the information so you could make an informed decision. Mayor Rohde said they are an advisory board to the Council. What they are asking tonight, is can they continue to move forward and get this charter ready. Is the Council okay with the direction they are heading? Councilmember Bowcutt said I think this is needed. I applaud you.

e. Title: Resolution No. 26-14 River Valley PUD Development Agreement—Community Director Jeff Seedall

Director Seedall said River Valley, behind McDonald’s 450 North 2600 West is mixed residential. A former City Manager used to do development agreements by phases. With this one (phases 8-13) we are supposed to have all these agreements, but instead of following that pattern, here is the development agreement to finalize the next phases (10-13). This helps us understand the City’s obligations that were negotiated for construction of BR Mountain Road. Instead of forcing my successor to go development agreement diving for contracts, I clustered it into one last one that they can reference for the next four phases. That was the point of the development agreement. There is not a whole lot outside of that. We just ended up using the Planned Unit Development (PUD) code. Mayor Rohde said tonight we are voting on if we are going to pass the development agreement on this subdivision. Councilmember Bowcutt noted that the contract mentions a public hearing and asked if we held one. It was unclear if there had been one. When asked about the PUD, Director Seedall said the PUD takes the property rights of the landowner and quantifies them in terms of what their allowed density would be. With the R1-10 they would be allowed 4.3 units per acre. This allows them flexibility to get to that density however they please. PUDs are the only instrument the State has given cities to negotiate more for city improvements. It is the only way we can enforce architectural standards overall. This is hopefully a tool to help the City have a better say in development itself.

f. Title: Resolution No. 26-15 Ground Lease Agreement—Recorder Nelson

Recorder Nelson said this is our billboard along I-84 that we discussed last time. It is very ragged and needs to be repaired. The family proposed we increase the lease to $3,000 a year with a percentage increase every year. We agreed on a 3% increase.

g. Title: Resolution No. 26-16 ILA with Brigham Fire—Fire Chief Jeff Jarrow

Chief Jarrow said this is an interlocal agreement between Tremonton and Brigham City. We are basically going to help each other, which we have done in the past. We will be assisting them with both fire and EMS response, and they will do the same for us. That includes transfers from the hospital—any call volume we would have, or if they would need assistance. It was just time to renew our agreement. There is no financial obligation. It just says, from one city to another, we agree to help each other when needed.

h. Title: Presentation on the Neighborhood Partnership Initiative Update—Citizen ChrisDean Epling

Ms. Epling said this is a report on our findings. We have had a month of NPI meetings and have met with every district. The City is divided into four districts. The West District had 12 people in attendance as we discussed the Valley Vista development. They want a PUD overlay. With the West District, we took the whole time explaining what a PUD was to residents. It was a really good meeting where they got education and better understood of why a PUD can be a tool for the City. They then understood where the density bonuses came in. Residents did not feel the PUD actually had too much density. It did go back because they put too much density in for the open space they provided. We have not received an updated concept plan.

Next, the Central District had 15 people. In the Central District, there is a parcel of land (from 1000 North to Main Street) where part of it will be commercial and part will be apartments. It is between the golf course and freeway. Citizens of that meeting 100% voted that this could be an area we could see multi-family housing, but they disagreed on the type. Some thought apartments were okay, others did not. The concerns they had is there was only one inlet/outlet for all proposed construction. That was a huge concern. We took a vote, and they voted yes, this would be a good place because it was in the urban core and the City could sustain that growth. They also 100% voted we are not ready for it. They do not think the City has infrastructure for it. Their two main concerns were the police and schools. This discussion opened up more bridges to pursue. What if we use a PUD and secured land for schools? It was fun to be with a group of people who were trying to solve problems. I felt citizens could have a really positive impact on this area.

We did not have anybody in the east district come to that meeting so we will go onto the south district. We had 28 people. This PUD overlay will be coming for your approval. Citizens were concerned about the density. They felt it did not fit the character there. Really, their number one concern was the sewer. Even with the lift station, they were concerned. Dr. Gardner looked up a report and said according to 2023, the sewer was almost at capacity. Even if we get a lift station, all this housing is going to roll into that sewer system. They want more information. They were more concerned with the overall vision of the area and felt strongly we needed to get the General Land Use Plan done, especially for that area that has not been annexed. Someone said for their vision, as you go along Iowa string under I-84, why not keep all of that south of there single-family housing. Those roads are not equipped for high traffic. They felt that would be a vision they would support. They want it to be safer for the residents and less work for the City. As we are getting more resources through business and economic development, maybe we could widen the roads. We still have a lot of things to go over. People are not necessarily against growth, but they are feeling it is going super-fast. We also talked about drainage as a concern. The overall consensus was they would rather have single-family housing than any multi-family housing out there. I think the hottest topic for you right now, based on everything that is going on, is going to be Iowa String. What is the vision out there? Residents really do want a vision for the whole area. They would prefer a moratorium on building out there, because they are so unsettled on what the vision is. We have zoned it differently than what the Land Use Plan says. In one of the concepts, they suggested higher density by the cement factory road. People were worried about kids from those houses going over to the cement factory and playing in the sand pits. They are worried about the safety of that road. The Council agreed they would like to become more educated on PUDs and their processes so they can make more informed decisions. Ms. Epling said I support having PUDs as a tool for the City, but they have to be understood. That is why I am trying to get this information out, so people understand what is going on. I do think PUDs are a good tool for the City, especially when we want to acquire parks and land for other areas, but it should be used for the City’s good and to have public parks or trails or even major utility upgrades. You have to see value to add density.

i. Title: Resolution No. 26-17 ILA with Perry for Regional Police/Strategic Options—Police Chief Dustin Cordova and Brigham City Chief Scott Hancey.

Chief Cordova said there are problems we are facing as a community. On the law enforcement side is our staffing per resident. We are pretty low compared to others. We are deficit about five officers, which impacts officer safety response and investigations. I am open to suggestions, public or otherwise, the Council generating ideas and solutions to address this gap. I understand we do not want to raise taxes, but it may be inevitable. Tonight, I am presenting a creative solution that could help us navigate that issue without requiring taxes right now. Inevitably, we are going to have to add more officers. Perry and Garland are both in good shape. Tremonton is starting to slip. Our officer ratio per citizens is high. This partnership would basically equal us hiring two officers. We would have to hire two people to meet that standard without this partnership. This relationship would help our staffing in every single way: administratively, civilian staffing, detectives, and patrol. Our patrol shifts right now, if nobody has training, is sick or injured, we have one sergeant and two officers on. With this relationship we would be policing another area, but we would have two officers on with a sergeant usually in both areas. We would have five to six on per night compared to two or three. Minimum staffing, we like to have at least two, but it would greatly improve our capacity on patrol. Admin investigation, we have the chief, lieutenant, admin secretaries, and two detectives. With the partnership we would have six administration and a supervisor for our detective unit; three detectives and a lot more capacity to handle investigations and evidence—all the administrative work, as well as good supervision over investigations. We are growing our City footprint and are getting more investigations. We have newer types of crimes and more challenging crimes, unfortunately. Staffing growth has not matched the need and that is why we are starting to slip. No action reduces patrol resilience. People get sick and often leave for higher pay and sometimes we have to do mandatory overtime. We have a pretty good-sized caseload. They are all felony investigations, which are serious crimes that take more investigative work. We are always concerned about officer safety and service reduction. If we stay stagnant, we start to lose services. An officer’s salary is about $150,000 annually. Needing five, that would be $750,000 year-over-year. If we did that route, I would recommend doing it slowly over multiple years. As we continue to grow, we are going to continue to need those resources. That amount does not include vehicles and equipment. We could try this one-year partnership. It would be temporary and fully reversible. It does not require a tax increase now. I do not want to mislead the Council and say, we will never have to raise taxes or look at hiring more police because that is not true. As we grow, we are going to need more resources. This partnership would get us through this year and provide immediate relief. Perry has a lot of experience. They have good officers ready to go. They contribute, no cost to Tremonton, five officers, one detective, two sergeants, one chief, which would be our captain here, and one civilian staff member full-time. It would include all positions, equipment and infrastructure. They also have a building fully funded by Perry and six officers on a patrol shift. Hypothetically, we would have four in Tremonton and Garland and Perry would have two on at all times. This is mutually beneficial to both cities, doubling the patrol capacity. Councilmember Bowcutt said in April 2025, you said you were fully staffed. I do not see how this is going to help bridge that gap. I am listening to residents and their concerns. Chief Cordova said when I say we are five down, I do not mean we have five empty positions. We are missing five positions from our growth where we should be today. Going from two to three on to five to six on each night is huge. It doubles our capacity day to day. Perry is really reasonable to work with. They are willing to split administration costs to help de-burden the City. This is a $680,000 year over year value. Once you add equipment, it is probably over $1 million.

Chief Cordova said Garland and Perry do not have as much call volume so they are proactive and can help us more. How this would benefit Perry is they would have access to the SWAT team, canine and staffing stability. It will double their staffing as well. It increases officer safety, and they have the ability to handle a major incident. This is a smart move by Perry because they can have comfort knowing they can handle a major incident. They get big city policing capabilities without the costs. We give mutual aid to other cities throughout Box Elder County. It is not official, but a gentlemen’s agreement where everybody helps everybody. Those working in Perry are assigned to Perry and will not be driving back and forth between cities unless there is a need for mutual aid. We are not running back and forth between cities. We are staffing it properly. Gas vehicle cost, I estimated it at $4,000 with the additional commute annually. The fact is cops drive all night around the communities. The bigger the community, the more they drive. Perry is relatively small in comparison so it will probably be a wash. So why not Brigham? If a business brought us $680,000 to $1 million in value, would we refer them to Brigham City? No. This brings us value and doubles our patrol capacity, so I would not refer them to another city. That is a missed opportunity. Ultimately, this is up to the Council. I am not saying this is the perfect solution long-term. At some point, we are going to have to add staff, but it gets us through now. The other benefit is this is noncommittal. We have written the contract with our legal in a way that if this is not working and the stats do not support doing it, we can abort. The biggest downside is it is a lot more work for me to navigate three different Councils. We will have a police board.

Chief Hancey said there are a few things that made us decide to approach Tremonton. First, you guys have been doing this with Garland for a long time and the County has noticed. From our perspective it seems to be a success. We are eager to join. We do work together already through different cases. In fact, we have helped with proactive prostitution cases and taken drugs off your streets. Our guys work very well together. The biggest reason is the fact that we share similar problems. We too are a small town and are experiencing growing pains. We are trying to figure out how do we navigate our citizens’ expectations for public safety and balance growth. This is a creative way to address those issues. Councilmember Bowcutt said I do not see this working where we do not share a border. We share a border with Garland so that makes sense. There are complications this could cause. Chief Cordova said I can arrange for you to go see it firsthand in Salt Lake because it does work. They have a regional policing model. The ripple effect is you get more services at less cost. Is it challenging? Yes. Did they have trouble? Absolutely. Did it fail initially? Absolutely, but the benefit you guys have is I came from that. I have dealt with that for 16 years. I saw what failed. I know what is working now. A board made up of councilmembers and the mayor, can help guide that organization to make big decisions that work for everybody. I can assure you it does work. They use it throughout the United States. Does it work here? I do not know. The only way we know is if we try it. If at any point it does not make sense or anything is failing, we have the ability to abort. This gives us time to plan. The contract is written where our City retains full control, and it is fully reversible. This will have an immediate impact and does not require taxes.

Chief Cordova said here are the options. One – we hire officers. I would start with two and shoot for five over time. This is a permanent cost. Option two is a one-year trial with Perry. There is no tax and there is immediate staffing relief. It is reversible if it does not work. I am happy to do a monthly report with the Council as well on the pros and cons. Option three is we do nothing and that puts us in a bad spot where we have to look at reducing services. We have been down for a while. I am not saying the Council has not been supportive. I am just giving you the reality. You make the decisions; I am just giving you options. Honestly, I feel I have caught the most resistance on this proposal, yet it requires the least amount of commitment. In my mind, it is the safest option to try. It may save us a significant amount of money year over year. We are still behind on staffing, but it does buy us time. Out the gate, 47% of our officers supported the merger. 23% just did not know enough to make a decision. The rest did not like it. The biggest reason is fear it will benefit Perry more than us. It does not. We had 69% believe it would have a positive impact on safety, service and the community. If we redid the survey, we would have more support now that they have been educated on the numbers. Bottom line is it does have a strong upside, minimal risk, no tax increase, and is fully reversible. My recommendation is that we try it. If it works, great. If it does not, we can end it. Councilmember Jex said all the Chief is asking is that we try this to see if it works. We are not out anything. We will not be committing a section of the budget or restriping cars, the only thing it hurts is our pride. Chief Cordova said we will have a police board with a member from each city to discuss major issues. It allows anybody to call the board together if there are concerns. I think it is wise to be skeptical, especially with something new. One advantage is we have made it work with Garland and I bring 16 years of seeing how bad it has failed and seeing what actually works. I promise if this does not work, you will be the first to know. I have no personal attachment to the outcome. All I am trying to do is find a way to fix a problem without always having to ask the Council for help. You have always come through. The irony is now I am not asking for money and am getting pushback. There really is no harm in trying it. If it fails, we will move on.

4. CLOSED MEETING: No Closed Meeting held at this time.

a. Strategy session to discuss the purchase of real property when public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; and/or
b. Strategy session to discuss the character, professional competence or physical or mental health of an individual; and/or
c. Strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; and/or
d. Discussions regarding security personnel, devices or systems

The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. by consensus of the Council.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Mayor Rohde called the February 17, 2025 City Council Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tremonton City Council Meeting Room at 102 South Tremont Street, Tremonton, Utah. Those in attendance were Mayor Rohde, Councilmembers Bowcutt, Jex, Oyler, and Westergard, City Manager Nessen, and City Recorder Nelson. Councilmember Lewis was excused.

1. Call to Order

2. Invocation by: Mayor Rohde
Pledge by: Dave Kilfoyle from the American Legion

3. Roll Call

4. Approval of Agenda:

Motion by Councilmember Jex to approve the agenda of February 17, 2026. Motion seconded by Councilmember Oyler. Vote: Councilmember Bowcutt – yes, Councilmember Jex – yes, Councilmember Lewis – absent, Councilmember Oyler – yes, Councilmember Westergard – yes. Motion approved.

5. Declaration of Conflict of Interest: None.

6. Presentations

a. Years of service award to Tiffine Buxton at the Fire Department for 10 years.

Chief Jarrow provided a bio, and the Council thanked her for her service.

7. Citizen Engagement – General Public Comment

Sharla Nelson said I have some concerns about our collaboration with the libraries. I am on the Garland City Council, and it has come to my attention—through my daughter who works at the library, not through my normal chains of command—so you might not know as well. Our libraries have been collaborating but are now splitting. I do not know all the details. I am suspicious it is a personnel preference and not what the community has desired. That concerns me. I wanted to bring that to your attention. I would encourage you to talk to both librarians and the employees to see what that is all about. Our two communities are really trying to work together to unite and do what is best for both cities and allow common services. I just want to throw that out there and make you aware.

8. Consent Agenda – Any Councilmember may request an item be removed for separate discussion

a. Approval of minutes – February 3, 2026
b. Adoption of December Financial Statements & Warrant Registers
c. Approval of moving to Caselle Real Time Payment
d. Approval of transitioning phone lines to Les Olson
e. Approval of Resolution No. 26-13 Compensation & Classification Plan
f. Approval of Resolution No. 26-14 Adopting River Valley PUD

Councilmember Bowcutt suggested moving this item 8.f. to Strategic Business to be discussed individually.

g. Approval of Resolution No. 26-15 Approving Ground Lease Agreement
h. Approval of Resolution No. 26-16 ILA with Brigham Fire
i. Approval of Resolution No. 26-17 ILA with Perry

Motion by Councilmember Oyler to approve the Consent Agenda without Resolution 26-14. Motion seconded by Councilmember Westergard. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Bowcutt – yes, Councilmember Jex – yes, Councilmember Lewis – absent, Councilmember Oyler – yes, Councilmember Westergard – yes. Motion approved.

9. Strategic Business (Ordinances & Policies)

Approval of Resolution No. 26-14 Adopting River Valley PUD. Councilmember Bowcutt said my big issue with some of the PUDs is the density. I think we are adding so much density in our City that we cannot keep up. We are obviously seeing it with the police department. I have questions about that density. I sat with Ms. Epling in the meeting the other night and felt the residents’ pain as I heard their voices. They are concerned about high density and what it is doing to this town. We have yet to put in a development that has paid for itself. We are always subsidizing. I would love to see some changes. With the development out on Iowa string residents were shocked when they saw the high density and to be honest, I was too. Mayor Rohde said where a previous development agreement laid out, are we held legally to follow those? Director Seedall said the terms from those development agreements are copied and reiterated in this development agreement because those terms were spread out between phases. It was a process to go through and find all of them and so I thought for clarity for the City to execute those terms, it would be easier to have them combined. To be clear, this PUD has very little to do with density. The underlying zoning permitted this. We felt that instead of designing to the mixed-use standards, it would be more beneficial and clearer to go through the PUD and allow for that overlay to be used and help guide the approval process. Our mixed-use zone as it is currently written allows for everything to be decided as part of the site plan. It honestly did not add any more doors to this development as is. It just gave us a better road path for approving the development.

Mayor Rohde said we now have 10 minutes for public interaction. Amanda Jones asked about eliminating any proposed apartments to this area to avoid higher density. I live in one of the townhomes and traffic flow is already really heavy with the townhomes. We have even noticed a difference in our water pressure. Director Seedall said these will just be townhomes. This has gone through the Development Review Committee (DRC), and I am pretty sure it has gone through Planning Commission. At this point, you are agreeing to the terms in the development agreement. It is four phases that will take about five years to build 134 units. We have talked to the school district about their ground and have our future Stokes Park being sized to handle drainage.

Motion by Councilmember Westergard to approve the resolution. Motion seconded by Councilmember Oyler. Roll Call Vote: Councilmember Bowcutt – no, Councilmember Jex – yes, Councilmember Lewis – absent, Councilmember Oyler – yes, Councilmember Westergard – yes. Motion passes with a 3-1 vote.

10. Reports and Calendar

a. City Manager Report

Manager Nessen said the past couple weeks have been busy. We had our department head meeting last Thursday and will have those monthly. Our personnel policies and procedures manual has been neglected. We are going to begin working on that. I will give the policies to our department heads to review, as well as our City Attorney. We have always brought those to the Council in resolution form to pass. Once we have that updated, the trust, our insurance company, is offering a legal type of review of our policies to make sure everything is up to snuff.

b. Upcoming Calendar Items

Mayor Rohde said we have the police fundraiser dinner this Saturday at 5 p.m. at the Fairgrounds. The Food Pantry has a food drive on March 14. Manager Nessen said our spring cleanup is scheduled for May 6-8. We will also tour the treatment plant on March 17, at 4 p.m. We will hold our City Council meeting after that. Director Seedall said they would like to schedule a night for economic development discussion. They are shooting for March 19.

11. CLOSED MEETING: No Closed Meeting held at this time.

12. Adjournment.

Motion by Councilmember Bowcutt to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by Councilmember Oyler. Vote: Councilmember Bowcutt – yes, Councilmember Jex – yes, Councilmember Lewis – absent, Councilmember Oyler – yes, Councilmember Westergard – yes. Motion approved.

The meeting adjourned at 7:31 p.m.

The undersigned duly acting and appointed Recorder for Tremonton City Corporation hereby certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes for the City Council Meeting held on the above referenced date. Minutes were prepared by Jessica Tanner.

Dated this 3rd day of March, 2026.

Cynthia Nelson, City Recorder

Archives