Work Session
Eric
Johnson (city attorney) provided our annual training and the Open and Public
Meetings Act.
Council Meeting
Public
Comment
Kim
Groneman – Speaking about GRAMA requests and has concerns. Anyone can make a
GRAMA request and we as a city know nothing about them. Law says city doesn’t
have to make person pay for a request but can provide for free. We aren’t in a
position to judge if a person’s motive is in the best interest of the public.
Best option for the city is to treat each citizen equally, don’t make special
exceptions for anyone, and require everyone to pay what is legally acceptable
for any GRAMA requests.
Ken
Kirk – Treat everyone the same for GRAMA requests. It is inappropriate to give
special exceptions for some. It is fair and within the law to charge for requests.
On North Pointe Solid Waste, we have been a member for 30 years. It is a
non-profit organization that is made up of member cities. Don’t make mistake of
thinking that the agreement is to raise tipping fees, it is to guarantee a
certain tonnage to keep the business going. Stay with the service provided by
the community and don’t go with a profit making organization.
Mike
Dunn – Manager of DCD Transfer station in Orem. There have been changes in the
valley with municipal landfills that has changed the game. There are now other
options and the Council should review them all. Knows there is a big cost
savings and renewal periods are smaller. He is willing to discuss further with
any member of the council.
Tonya
Edvalson – (via letter to Mayor). Believes that requestor should be charged for
GRAMA requests as it takes staff time and effort. Requests take a considerable
amount of time and effort and she is concerned about resources being taken away
from other city services.
Ken
Cromar – Wants to thank CM Zappala and Crawley for sitting down to talk with
him. Feels his requests have met with ridicule and harsh comments. Met with
city representatives in December to discuss his request. Feels that sorting
emails takes a matter of minutes and doesn’t understand why the city is stating
it will take longer. Wants documents as is and feels it is in the public’s best
interest for him to receive. Hopes he won’t have to appeal his request for free
records.
Darin
Lowder – Followed the GRAMA topic. Appreciate council members’ efforts in
defining what is a benefit of the public. Trusts the majority of residents and
council. Feels the majority is a safe approach. Makes sense to stay consistent
with fulfilling requests. Feels GRAMA laws are a good thing and most residents
would agree with that. Feels most would agree that this recent request is not
reasonable. Appreciates being informed via the newsletter so residents know how
money is being spent. Feels like we can’t put time and effort into other city
issues when often dealing with this.
Joe
Phelon – Been a resident for 10 years. Believes council has done what we feel
is best for the city as we make decisions for the city. Asking that council
approve the commercial development as it will bring in additional revenue and
enable the city to meet its obligations. On GRAMA he appreciates his ability to
petition city for records but also recognizes the cost. Suggests each household
get three free GRAMA requests each year up to one hour of work. He is concerned
with waste of tax dollars and knows excessive requests become a burden on
taxpayers.
John
Howard – GRAMA laws are a good thing but feels there should be a fee after the
15 free minutes. Excessive requests need to have a cost to them. Thinks it
would be good to figure out what is in the public’s best interest. What public
issue will the request solve would be a good question to ask on each request.
Consent
Agenda
The
minutes from the January 21, 2014 Council meeting were approved.
City
Reports
CM
Rees – Issued a press release on the upcoming mix and mingle in the Vista Room.
This will be held on the 22nd and there will be a variety of vendors
in the industry attending. It’s a great time for residents and others to come
see the Vista Room and what it offers. The Family Festival Committee will be
meeting tomorrow night. YCC met and discussed a possible dodge ball tournament.
David
Bunker – Golf course opened today and had some business. Indoor golf lessons
starting next week. Jr. Jazz has two more weeks and has been successful. Had
annual BYU game invitation for residents and Cedar Hills had the most
attendees. Meet and greet at the Vista Room this Saturday. Members of the
community are invited and vendors will be available. This is from 10am-2pm. February
28th will be bid opening for city streets projects.
CM
Geddes – Planning Commission meets next week.
CM
Crawley – Parks & Trails meeting this week. CM Zappala and Crawley met with
Mr. Cromar’s group a week ago to discuss GRAMA request and established some
common ground. Feels it was a productive meeting. Mr. Cromar has decided to
postpone taking his appeal to the State Records Committee, (though he still has time to file it). He
feels goodwill was established and asks for additional meetings in a more
formal setting. Feels it will reduce costs to city.
Mayor
Gygi – Created Water Conservation Committee and they had their first meeting
last week. Went well and will be working with city staff on water usage.
CM
Augustus – North Pointe meeting two weeks ago and will discuss during agenda
item. Still working with UVHBA on reviewing our impact fee study.
Discussion
on Concept Plan by Blu Line Designs
Based
on Planning Commissions and City Council requests, as well as resident feedback
concerning the overall layout of the site plan, Blu Line Design and Doug Young
have modified the proposal to accommodate these concerns. The proposed
modifications further reduce the impact of the proposed commercial development
on the residents in the surrounding area. The proposal incorporates three and
four stories, rather than four and five.
Please
see my notes from the recent Planning Commission meeting as the plans are
mostly the same. They did add a small park near the senior living center.
Another change is adding green space between the parking lot and the homes on
the south side (near the proposed movie theater). Traffic studies will
determine if losing this much parking space will still work. Mayor Gygi
complimented Blu Line on listening to the residents and making changes. He is
concerned that Blu Line still hasn’t talked to the city about purchasing the 9
acres owned by the city and doesn’t want to go too far down the high density without
knowing the 9 acres will be developed. He still feels there are too many units.
We have Charleston, Osmond Senior Assisted Living, and Bridgestone in our
community that meets many of the needs of the same demographics. Mayor would be
happier with 150 units instead of 300. I mentioned that we are still receiving
a lot of feedback from residents that four stories is too high and that 300
units is too many units. Designer presenting tonight isn’t the developer so he
doesn’t know what the minimum number of units that the developer insists upon
to make this financially work for them. This is something that still needs to
be figured out. CM Zappala would prefer that the entire first floor be retail
with residential on upper floors, but would be willing to give on this if the
building was less than four stories. CM Augustus said we are trying to maximize
our commercial space, which is why it was talked about making the building
taller instead of wider, so we don’t reduce our commercial space.
Blu
Line indicated that this type of building is working in Utah. They will be
presenting more detailed information next week to the Planning Commission.
Discussion
on GRAMA Fees and Charges
The
City Council has asked to discuss GRAMA requests, fees and charges. During
calendar year 2013, approximately 50 GRAMA requests were received and filled.
During the calendar year 2012, approximately 56 GRAMA requests were received
and filled. The average compilation time spent to fulfil an average request is
approximately 30 minutes or less. Several voluminous requests have also been
received. The compilation time spent to fulfil those requests varies depending
on the scope of the information provided. In addition to compilation efforts by
staff, redaction of private, protected, or privileged information is also
necessary and may require legal review. Fees and charges for legal review are
borne by the City.
Eric
Johnson presented on difference between personal versus public benefit. Mr.
Cromar uses the emails he obtains for his own personal political agenda, which
is seen by the way he editorializes each of his posts on his website. He
portrays items as illegal or unethical when they are not. In a case handled by
the Idaho State Supreme Court, it was indicated that the use of public funds to
help a political agenda is never appropriate. This is one of the reasons why
the city does not provide email records to Mr. Cromar at no cost. Mr. Johnson
believes if we fulfill this new request for free we will be violating
constitutional principles.
CM
Crawley asked for clarification on how we charge and when something is in the
public’s interest. Mr. Johnson explained we can charge for copying and
compilation. First 15 minutes of work is always done at no cost, per law. If
the request is going to exceed $50 then city is allowed to ask for prepayment
before working on the request. Assessing whether something is in the public’s
best interest is done on a case by case basis and Mr. Johnson recommends the
requestor indicate why they feel it is in the public’s best interest. He
believes that as a general rule it is good for us to charge as other taxpayers
shouldn’t be on the hook for paying for the request. Should be fair and
equitable so as to avoid discriminating against certain groups or people.
Most
of the Council expressed a desire to treat each GRAMA request the same so that
one person or group isn’t receiving special treatment, and agreed that we
should charge for compilation of records. It was discussed that there is no
such thing as a “free” request – if the requestor doesn’t pay for compilation
then the rest of the taxpayers are paying for it. CM Crawley indicated that Mr.
Cromar’s group was unaware of the cost that went into compiling this many
records and had they been made aware they may not have made such large
requests. I mentioned that I have been in more than one meeting where the city
discussed how the compilation of emails has to be handled so it is untrue to
state that Mr. Cromar was not aware of the process. I also clarified that the
city has never been unwilling to meet with Mr. Cromar (multiple meetings have
already occurred) nor has the city been unwilling to provide public records.
Once compilation fees have been paid then the city will begin working on the request.
The thing that Mr. Cromar is appealing with this request is our refusal to
provide him with all of these records at no cost.
Review/Action
Proclaiming February 24th – March 1st as Non-Traditional
Student Awareness Month
The
Utah Valley University Non-Traditional Student Recruiters are participating in
Governor Herbert’s “On PACE to 66% by 2020” plan. The plan is to ensure that
Utah is on pace to have 66 percent of the adult population earn a
post-secondary degree or certification by the year 2020.
UVU
has asked for the City’s participation and support with this initiative by
declaring the week of February 24 – March 1, 2014 as “Non-Traditional Student
Awareness Week.” UVU will be hosting a
Non-Traditional Mini Conference on March 1st at the UVU Sorensen Student
Center. The conference is designed to help the non-traditional student overcome
obstacles that stand in the way of receiving a degree. They invite the City to
display their proclamation at this mini conference. Also, at their UVU men’s
basketball game on February 27th, there will be special announcements and
recognition of city officials at the game. This was unanimously approved.
Review/Action
on North Pointe Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement
The
North Pointe Solid Waste District acting as administrator of the solid waste
special service district of Utah County has prepared the proposed Interlocal
agreement. Some key points include the following:
·
The
initial term shall commence immediately through a term to December 31, 2019.
·
Twelve
2-year terms will automatically renew the agreement following the initial term.
·
A
13-month notice is required to withdraw from the District.
·
Upon
withdrawal, cities would forfeit any interest and pay additional fees to
dispose of waste.
·
A
fee will be assessed to rejoin the District at a later date. It is also
important to note that the contract REQUIRES the city commit its entire waste
stream regardless of our contracted hauler. This may limit some haulers from
giving the city a competitive bid in the future.
·
The
tipping rate for North Pointe is currently $31.50/ton. The City tips
approximately 3,650 tons/year.
We
received tipping rates as proposed by Intermountain Regional Landfill. In
addition to tipping fees, our contract hauler would have an increase in hauling
cost. We also received a proposal from DCD Transfer for MSW if delivered to
their facility in Orem.
IRL
will charge $15/ton, but does not include any hauling so we would need to find
out what our waste company would charge for this. IRL is much farther from our
current station.
DCD
will charge $28/ton and guarantee those rates for five years. Waste Management
already hauls near this location so we wouldn’t have any additional hauling
fees.
Item
has been tabled until we have numbers back from Waste Management on direct haul
if we go with IRL.
Discussion
on City Code Regarding Fences
City
Council has requested that a discussion be held concerning the current City
Code regarding fencing (10-5-18). Current City Code has special language
regarding fencing adjacent to public parks, trails, and certain major streets.
In these areas identified on the City’s master plan for parks and trails, only
open fences may be constructed (open is defined as 40% open). Council has asked
to discuss this provision and possibly make a recommendation to the Planning
Commission for its modification.
I
have been approached by some residents who live on the east side of Sugarloaf,
where their backyards are along Canyon Road. Because there is a trail behind their
yard they are unable to have a privacy fence. However, just a few houses down
on Canyon Road there are other residents who are allowed to have a privacy
fence simply because it is a sidewalk there and not a trail. These residents
would like the same right to have a privacy fence installed. I have suggested
that the Planning Commission review this and make less restrictions for those homes
that are on a trail but where there will never be a privacy fence on the other
side of the trail. In this instance, the other side of the trail is Canyon Road
and then the golf course, so the trail wouldn’t be enclosed on both sides. This
would also allow residents on Bayhill west of Canyon Road and residents on
Silver Lake Drive to be able install a privacy fence. CM Zappala recommended
the Planning Commission look at requiring some landscaping in that area if
privacy fences are allowed and CM Augustus recommended the city check for any
development agreements regarding fencing. This will go to the Planning
Commission for further discussion.
