Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Governance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Utah County commissioners approve Utah Lake response plan, keep current chair and set closed meetings

Board of County Commissioners of Utah County · January 5, 2016
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Utah County Board of Commissioners approved an emergency response plan for Utah Lake, voted to retain the current chair and vice chair, struck a proposed county-code change from the agenda, and scheduled closed meetings on personnel and litigation.

The Utah County Board of Commissioners voted Tuesday to approve an emergency response plan for Utah Lake, retain the board’s existing leadership and schedule closed meetings to discuss personnel and litigation.

The board approved the lake response plan as part of the consent agenda after a short exchange about equipment and command authority. Speaker 1 asked whether the equipment described in the plan was county-owned and whether both agencies had agreed to the document; Speaker 4 replied that the county and state parks "work with them weekly" and that "the only thing we don't have right now is is a boat." Speaker 5 moved "that we approve the, plan as stated in consent item 2," Speaker 1 seconded, and the motion was recorded as carrying 2-0.

Commissioners then addressed leadership for the coming period. Speaker 5 moved to "keep Larry Ellerton as chair and Billy as vice chair of the Board of County Commissioners as stated in number 2," and Speaker 1 seconded. Citing past practice of annual rotation but noting it is not required, the board voted in favor of keeping the current officers, with the motion carried 2-0.

The board discussed a proposed amendment to subsection 2.8 of the county code relating to administration but decided not to advance a change at this meeting. Speaker 1 said he was not prepared to change the ordinance and recommended leaving it as written; the board subsequently moved to strike item 3 from the agenda with the understanding that the ordinance will be followed, and the motion carried 2-0.

Finally, the commission approved two separate motions to set closed meetings: one to discuss the character, professional competence or physical or mental health of individuals (item 13), and another to hold a strategy session on pending or reasonably imminent litigation (item 11). Both motions were seconded and approved, with the closed meetings to follow the completion of the regular meeting and work session agenda items as scheduled.

The meeting included a staff recognition for longtime county employee Katie, who spoke about her years of service, and concluded with a motion to adjourn, which passed.