Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Council Meeting - February 18, 2014

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.


No comments: