Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
| Start Position | |
| Mayor Fullmer opened the meeting at00 pm. Councilmember Holdaway led the pledge of allegiance and gave the invocation. Presentations/Recognitions/Awards/Proclamations 1.Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control Presentation Paige Walton and Jasin Olsen, Program Managers from the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control will provide an overview of the remediation processes for the old Geneva Steel Cooling Pond areas designated as SI-5A & SI-5B and the criteria and procedures leading to a No Further Action (NFA) designation. | |
| Paige Waltonwith the Utah Department of Environmental Quality presented on radiation control. She then explained the investigation process and corrective action that was used on the Geneva site. | |
| Mayor Fullmer called for questions from the council. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen asked about the long-term plan for the contaminated materials. Ms. Walton replied that they will be evaluated depending on the ultimate use. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes asked how deep they could dig down. Ms. Walton replied that it had been cleaned with no restrictions on vertical (down). | |
| Councilmember Cameron mentioned the issues that they had in the Daybreak community and asked how it had been cleared and then had issues. Ms. Walton explained the difference between the two sites. There was a discussion about the vertical samples which went down to groundwater level. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway expressed concern with the contamination from the wind in the70s pilings and asked about remediation. Ms. Walton said that she did not have an answer now but would research it. Councilmember Holdaway asked about the measurements they used. Ms. Walton replied that they had adopted the federal standards. Councilmember Holdaway asked if the city would be taking the risk if something happened on Utah City’s property. Ms. Walton replied no because Utah City had a clean closure. A discussion ensued. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway asked about removal of the fences around the settling ponds on the west side of the road and people having access to it. Ms. Walton replied that someone needed to submit a comment addressing his concern about the area and then they could address it. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen asked if there was a timeline when the area would be complete. Ms. Walton replied that she did not have one. A discussion ensued about the cleanup. | |
| Utah Transit Authority (UTA) Trustee Jeff Acerson introduced himself. He mentioned that UTA had passed their50 Long-range Transit Plan and that it was open for public comment. Work Session 1. Transportation Master Plan Update. Hales Engineering will provide an update to the Transportation Masterplan (TMP) | |
| Josh Gibbons with Hales Engineering gave a brief background on and reviewed the Transportation Masterplan. | |
| Ryan Hales with Hales Engineering reviewed some of the long-range planning, access points, and the next steps. | |
| Councilmember Cameron asked about the portion of the Vineyard Connector that had already been funded. Mr. Hales replied that the Vineyard Connector in the Vineyard area had been funded. Public Works Director Ghandour added that it was in Utah Department of Transportation’s (UDOT) long-range plant to connect to Pioneer Crossing. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway asked about the proposed road across Utah Lake. Mr. Hales replied that it was on the Mountainland Association of Governments’ Regional Transportation Plan. There was a discussion about where the road could connect. | |
| A short break was taken at56 PM. The meeting resumed at04 PM. 2. Municipal Code Amendment TitleCalling of Special Meetings (Ordinance 24-05) 3.Municipal Code Amendment TitleEstablishing Rules of Order and Procedures (Ordinance24-06) 4. Document TrainingCity Attorney Jayme Blakesley will train the council and staff on document procedures. | |
| City Attorney Jayme Blakesley gave a brief background on the reason for the recommended code changes and then explained that he had combined the two ordinances. He then reviewed the recommended code changes. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes asked for clarification on the staff interactions. Mr. Blakesley replied that Department Heads was included. | |
| Mr. Blakesley presented a document procedure training. Councilmember Sifuentes suggested that staff add to an email, etc., if it was confidential. A discussion ensued. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway expressed concern with a lot of the language in the code changes. And the oversite of the mayor and City Manager. A discussion ensued. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes explained that she helped to create these changes. She felt that staff was overwhelmed with other requests, and she was not getting her requests answered because they were bombarded with other requests. A discussion ensued about staff time. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway expressed concern with changes to the Public Comment period. A discussion ensued. Councilmember Holdaway expressed concerns about other changes to the code. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes stated that she was willing to talk about the public comment section. She said that discussions and councilmember reports needed to be concise and ensure they have efficient meetings. The discussion about the code changes continued. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen felt that these were standard procedures. | |
| Mr. Blakesley explained that the context was to clarify what was appropriate and felt they needed to create a set of rules. He said that he looked at what other cities had in their codes and went from there. He also felt that it would be helpful to look at each section. A discussion ensued. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen stated that this was a response to comments made in the last council meeting where they were seeking way to hold meetings, and this was good opportunity to work with counsel. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway asked about Section04.070 (E) and the annual report. Mr. Blakesley replied that this was to help the council understand staff time commitments. A discussion ensued about staff contact and use of time. Public Comments | |
| Mayor Fullmer opened for public comments. | |
| Resident Darlene Price, living in The Villas subdivision, asked who was “we” that formed the document code changes. She expressed concerns about was items that the mayor directed in the code changes. | |
| Resident Keith Holdaway, living on Holdaway Road, asked about getting the response to his tax questions on the Megaplex and Topgolf. He explained that he had all the financial records as soon as he was elected and the council. | |
| Resident Chip Price living in the Providence subdivision, reminded the council as elected officials they work for the citizens and it was their job was to listen to them. He when the survey results would be made public. | |
| Resident Daria Evans, living in the Villas subdivision, asked about the TAG grant that was awarded to the city and where the Geneva Loop was. She also asked when the sunshades would be installed. She noted that the picture on the Marchh Vineyard City page for the community garden was of the Orem Community Garden and should be credited to them. She also asked about receiving a report on the tax incentives, and for an update on the rail spur realignment. She added that she would like to read the mayor’s “State of the City” address. | |
| Resident Kim Cornelius, living in the Villas subdivision, asked for a status update on the fire station. | |
| Resident Claudia Lauret, living on Holdaway Road, suggested that the city address an overflow area to accommodate the citizens who attend council meetings. | |
| Resident Karen Cornelius, living in the Villas subdivision, expressed her concerns about public comments during council meetings. She read a statement that was said a reporter after the December council meeting. She also wanted to know, in a public meeting, about the tax incentives. She also expressed concern about the bridge planned in the Utah City development and finishing the FrontRunner station. | |
| Resident Adam Teuscher, living in the Windsor subdivision, asked about two of the suggested code changes: what was the definition of a “procedurally inappropriate agenda item” and who makes the determination and what was the definition of “strong support from the community.” He mentioned that he had attended one of the special meetings that do not fall under the OPMA. He asked about the outdated trail map on the vineyard website. | |
| Resident Elizabeth Holdaway asked if they had a tally system when people raised their hand that could go into the minutes. She talked about freedom of speech and suggested they move some of the agenda items around and if the meeting went long, they could move some of the items to another meeting. Mayor Fullmer addressed the public comments. · | |
| Who was the “we” was counsel. Mr. Blakesley explained the process he went through for the code changes. · | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes asked Mr. Blakesley to explain the mayor’s role. Mr. Blakesley explained that under state law the mayor roles were defined and that one of those roles was the chair of the council. He noted that when it states, in the code changes, Mayor/Council/City Manager, it was to be expansive not restrictive. · | |
| Keith Holdaway mentioned that the mayor would email him. Mayor Fullmer explained that Mr. Ellis or the RDA Director would contact him. Mr. Eliss further explained that he had been working he had been working with Councilmember Holdaway and was waiting for a GRAMA request from members of the public. A discussion ensued. Mr. Blakesley suggested that he speak with Councilmember Holdaway and Keith Holdaway. He also suggested that they could review their RDA obligations in an RDA meeting in two weeks. · | |
| Public Comments, comments. Mayor Fullmer explained the process to enhance the public comment period and allow the council to add their comments. · | |
| TAG grant amount. Mayor Fullmer suggested that Ms. Evans contact Mr. Brim for the numbers. · | |
| Orem Community Garden photo. They will have the social media team correct it. · | |
| Sunshade installation. Mayor Fullmer suggested she reach out staff for the timeline. Councilmember Sifuentes mentioned that they were waiting until spring to install them. · | |
| Geneva Loop Road. Mr. Brim explained that they had received $120,000 for the TAG grant (Technical Assistance Grant) for planning funds to make corridors safer. · | |
| Fire Station. Mayor Fullmer explained that the plans for the fire station were still in process and would be coming for review and revision by council and then to public. · | |
| Tally for raised hands and for accommodations for when they need overflow seating. Mayor Fullmer explained that they could not always predict how many of the public would be in attendance and they would try to anticipate it. · | |
| Rail spur. Mayor Fullmer explained the process that they had gone through to date with Union Pacific Railroad, UDOT, and UTA. · | |
| Special Session minutes. Mayor Fullmer clarified that because there were only two councilmembers in attendance, under the Open and Public Meetings Act (OPMA) it was not a council meeting, and minutes were not required. She noted that residents could request a copy of the recording. · | |
| Procedural and public definitions for the ordinances and the updating the trail map. Mayor Fullmer noted that they were looking at them. · | |
| A discussion ensued.Mayor and Councilmembers' Reports/Disclosures/Recusals | |
| Councilmember Holdaway asked for a one-pager on Topgolf tax incentives.Councilmember Holdaway felt that they needed a better relationship with staff. He noted that he had read the survey results and felt that it was shocking to see the citizens anger. He felt that the Community Garden Committee should elect their own Director. He commented on the special meetings he held. He stated that he and Councilmember Cameron would like to meet with the fire department, about the rail spur and Huntsman. He commented on opening Facebook comments. He stated that he did not know about theth North bridge. He reported that they held two separate meetings with Utah City. He felt that he and Councilmember Cameron should be able to meet together with developers. He added that they had met with consultants on the parking plan. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes explained that they had to meet with the consultants separately before bringing it to the public. A discussion ensued. Mr. Blakesley responded to the characteristics of separate meetings and that Councilmember Holdaway had stated that he wanted more training. The discussion continued. Mayor Fullmer also explained that staff held implementation meetings and why they held separate meetings before bringing it to the public. | |
| Councilmember Cameron asked why they did the identical meetings back-to-back. Mr. Blakesley explained that public meetings had an expense associated with them and that the meeting about finance was requested to have the mayor included and that accommodate time, staff arranged to have Utah City at the end of one meeting and the beginning of the other meeting. The discussion continued. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes felt that the council wanted to make public meetings worth the public’s time. Mayor Fullmer suggested that Councilmember Holdaway write up his suggestions and the procedures he was interested in, and they could bring them to the council. The discussion continued. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen reported on a few of the bills from the24 legislative session. She will email a wrap up of the session to council. He reported that the Bicycle Advisory Commission would be updating their priorities and that their next meeting would be held on Aprilrd. She reported that the Community Garden was accepting applications for garden plots and that they would be hiring a new director. | |
| Councilmember Cameron thanked Mr. Ghandour for the new flag. | |
| Mayor Fullmer reported that the survey results would be posted soon and that they were in discussions on theth North Bridge and the parking lot for UTA. She noted that they were working several projects simultaneously, such as the bridge, the station, widening0 North. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen mentioned that their government consultants would attend the next meeting. | |
| Councilmember Cameron asked about posting the comments from the special sessions on the city’s social media page or website. She felt that citizens’ frustrations were that their concerns are not being addressed.Consent Items 1. Approval of the February,24, City Council Planning Retreat Minutes 2. Approval of the February,24, City Council Meeting Minutes 3. Display of the Utah Historic State Flag | |
| Motion:Councilmember Rasmussen moved approve the consent items as presented. Councilmember Holdaway asked to discuss item3. | |
| Amended motion: Councilmember Rasmussen moved to approve consent items1 and2. Councilmember Sifuentes seconded the motion. Mayor Fullmer, Councilmembers Cameron, Holdaway, Rasmussen, and Sifuentes voted yes. The motion carried unanimously. | |
| 6.3 Display of the Utah Historic State Flag. Councilmember Holdaway wanted it to be on the record for which flag they were voting. Councilmember Cameron explained that she had asked for the historic flag to being flown. Mr. Blakesley explained the state code for flying the historical flag. Mr. Ellis added that the historical flag could only be flown on state holidays. A discussion ensued. | |
| Motion: Councilmember Sifuentes moved to approve3 with the clarification that they would follow mandated state law. Councilmember Rasmussen seconded the motion. Mayor Fullmer, Councilmembers Cameron, Holdaway, Rasmussen, and Sifuentes voted yes. The motion carried unanimously. Appointments No appointments were made. Business Items1.PUBLIC HEARING – Budget Amendment Resolution24-01(This item was continued from the January, January, and February,24, City Council Meetings.)Finance Director, Kristie Bayles, will present proposed amendments to the Fiscal Year23-2024 Budget. The mayor and city council will act to adopt (or deny) this request by resolution. (A public hearing was held on this item during the January,24, City Council Meeting.) | |
| Finance Director, Kristie Bayles explained that when do a budget they project revenue that would be coming in and that funds had come in more. Staff was requesting the tax the excess funds and put them towards a senior planner position. She mentioned that a ULA grant received by the city would be going to sand volleyball pits on the lake front. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT54 PM. COUNCILMEMBER HOLDAWAY SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, HOLDAWAY, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. | |
| Ms. Evans asked about the sand volleyball pits. Mr. Brim replied that the Parks and Recreation Director was looking a few locations. | |
| Ms. Price asked about the budget process and asked to see a detailed breakdown of items. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT57 PM. COUNCILMEMBER CAMERON SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, HOLDAWAY, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. | |
| Mayor Fullmer called for council discussion. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway said that they had pushed this item back because they were waiting for numbers and that he wanted to do a complete sister city study before they hire someone. Mayor Fullmer responded to Councilmember Holdaway’s comments and stated that she was ready to move forward with the budget amendment. | |
| Councilmember Cameron agreed that she wanted to see more details in the budget and that she was ready to move forward. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED ADOPT RESOLUTION24-01, PROPOSED24 BUDGET AMENDMENT #3 AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. COUNCILMEMBER CAMERON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER HOLDAWAY VOTED NO. THE MOTION CARRIEDTO 2.PUBLIC HEARING - General Plan Update - GoalTechnology ElementEconomic Development Director Morgan Brim will present the Technology Element of the General Plan to provide guidance in safeguarding privacy and protection of sensitive information in technology implementation. The City Council will act to adopt (or deny) this request by Ordinance. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT00 PM. COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, HOLDAWAY, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. | |
| Mr. Brim reviewed the recommended General Code Changes. | |
| Mayor Fullmer called for public comments. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT03 PM. COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, HOLDAWAY, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen explained the process they were currently working on to get all of this put together. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway stated that he wanted to make a similar amendment with records. | |
| Mayor Fullmer thanked staff and Chris Bramwell for all their hard work on putting this together. She then called for a motion. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE24-04 TO AMEND THE TECHNOLOGY ELEMENT OF THE VINEYARD GENERAL PLAN TO SAFEGUARD PRIVACY AND THE PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TECHNOLOGY AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER CAMERON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, HOLDAWAY, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. DISCUSSION AND ACTION – Vineyard Day's Celebration - Fireworks or Drone Show | |
| Mr. Ellis reviewed the options for Fireworks and drone shows. | |
| Councilmember Sifuentes wished that the budget allowed for drones for every11 event. She suggested that they trade off the drones and fireworks every other year. Mayor Fullmer felt that rotating them was fine. A discussion ensued. | |
| Councilmember Holdaway felt that they should move Vineyard Days out the council’s control and have a committee run it. A discussion ensued. | |
| Councilmember Rasmussen asked them to consider people with PTSD and pets. Councilmember Sifuentes suggested that they have the event publicly noticed. | |
| Mayor Fullmer recapped the discussion and then called for a motion. | |
| Motion: COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO APPROVE UP TO $22,000 TO COVER THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING0 DRONES BUT LEAVE IT UP TO THE COMMITTEE TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF POSSIBLY GOING ON A ROTATING SCHEDULE. AND THE NOTIFICATION FOR VETERANS AND PTSD. COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS CAMERON, HOLDAWAY, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Closed Session No closed session was held. .Adjournment | |
| Mayor Fullmer adjourned the meeting at15 PM. MINUTES APPROVED ON: March,24 CERTIFIED CORRECT BY: Pamela Spencer, CIty Recorder |
| So I know. | 00:00:02 | |
| Roll. | 00:00:07 | |
| All right, today is March 13th, 2024. The time is 6:00 PM and I'm going to go ahead and start the Vineyard City Council meeting. | 00:00:10 | |
| Council Member Holdaway will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance and an invocation. | 00:00:17 | |
| Please stand. | 00:00:27 | |
| I pledge allegiance to. | 00:00:31 | |
| United States of America. | 00:00:34 | |
| One nation under God, indivisible, with strong. | 00:00:38 | |
| Our dear, kind and gracious Heavenly Father, we bow our heads before the citizens of Vineyard, grateful for the wonderful earth | 00:00:55 | |
| that we live in and the opportunity we have to come and. | 00:01:00 | |
| As a government body. | 00:01:07 | |
| Work together and find solutions to represent the people of Vineyard. We pray today that we might be speak clearly with great tone | 00:01:10 | |
| and a tone of togetherness to be able to work through our issues and problems with the city. We pray for the citizens of this city | 00:01:17 | |
| and also for the leadership of it. And these things we pray for humbly in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. All right, our first | 00:01:23 | |
| agenda item for our work session is our Transportation Master Plan update. | 00:01:30 | |
| We have health engineering with us. We also are fortunate enough to have our trustee with go ahead. | 00:01:37 | |
| Presentation. Oh, just kidding. I was jumping right into our work session, but I totally forgot our Department of Environmental | 00:01:46 | |
| Quality. Forgive me. Jalen Cage and Jason, we talked about before the meeting how excited we were to have you here. We'll invite | 00:01:52 | |
| you guys up. I don't know who's Paige? OK Page will be presenting an update on our Division of Environmental Quality process and | 00:01:59 | |
| kind of talk about the north side of the vineyard a little bit. And then I'll go ahead and introduce you guys and give you the | 00:02:05 | |
| same warm welcome. | 00:02:12 | |
| Well, thank you for having us. My name is Paige Bolton. I'm the program manager for the corrective action section for the Division | 00:02:20 | |
| of Waste Management and Radiation Control at the EQ. And I also have with me today Jason Olson, he's the project manager for the | 00:02:27 | |
| Anderson Geneva project and also Jalen Knutson, she's the Assistant Director for the division. And thank you for having us. We | 00:02:34 | |
| were asked to come today to talk about. | 00:02:41 | |
| One site and specific one site, the solid Waste Management. Or as we like to cure evenly, say, schmooze. | 00:02:49 | |
| Through SI Five at the Anderson Geneva site. | 00:02:56 | |
| So just a little bit about how I laid out the presentation for tonight. The two specific questions that I was asked was what is | 00:03:01 | |
| our corrective action process like how do we evaluate site from your terminus site is appropriate for redevelopment, especially in | 00:03:08 | |
| this place for residential use. So I'll talk about that process just generally and then I will talk to specifically about SI Five | 00:03:15 | |
| and the entire investigation process from beginning to end. | 00:03:23 | |
| And how the status of it stay? | 00:03:30 | |
| So Rick or corrective action, RICKRA is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and that is the EPA, United States EPA process | 00:03:35 | |
| that we follow. And it's a set of rules and regulations codified both in 40 CFR Code of Federal Regulation and also is adopted by | 00:03:42 | |
| us under our Utah Administrative Code that we follow. And the record corrective action process answers three basic questions. The | 00:03:49 | |
| first one is. | 00:03:57 | |
| How do we know a site or an area has been contaminated? | 00:04:04 | |
| And how we do this is through a series of one, we discover a site and we suspect there's contamination. So then we do a full site | 00:04:08 | |
| investigation where we actually go out and collect samples of soil, groundwater, surface water, whatever the suspected impacted | 00:04:16 | |
| media may be. And we do that to determine nature and extent of contamination. And by nature, I mean what are the chemicals that | 00:04:24 | |
| are present in the various media, so in this case soil. | 00:04:32 | |
| An extent is. | 00:04:41 | |
| What is the extent of contamination? We look at that both laterally, so across an area, but also vertically, the depth of | 00:04:42 | |
| contamination. | 00:04:47 | |
| So once then we decide that it has been impacted, we go to #2 how do we determine if a cleanup is needed? So we've determined that | 00:04:52 | |
| there is contamination. So now we have to assess the magnitude of that contamination. And we do that through the risk assessment | 00:05:00 | |
| process. And that is both a human health and an ecological risk assessment. | 00:05:07 | |
| And under our program that process follows the administrative rule 315101. And so we will do a screening level risk assessment to | 00:05:15 | |
| evaluate what the both carcinogenic and non carcinogenic risk risks may be for the site. And then based on that we can feed into | 00:05:25 | |
| the primary question of three, how do we know residual, residual levels of contamination are safe to allow reuse at the site? | 00:05:35 | |
| So based on their risk assessment, we know the magnitude of the impact. We can look at what the end use of the site will be. In | 00:05:46 | |
| this specific case that was residential, but from a generic perspective under the record corrective process, sometimes | 00:05:54 | |
| commercials, OK, industrial. So we we look at the various end use and assess the risks according to that end use. And so based on | 00:06:02 | |
| that if the risks fall outside acceptable range for the end use, then we do the corrective action. | 00:06:11 | |
| And that can be something as simple as a scoop and haul of soil. It could mean more in depth treatment systems. And so once then | 00:06:19 | |
| the corrective action has been completed, we go back, we resample the area and then those data become our confirmation data. And | 00:06:28 | |
| then we rerun a final risk assessment using the confirmation data. And then based on the confirmation data, we can safely then | 00:06:36 | |
| assess what the end use can be and if it's protective of. | 00:06:45 | |
| The goal for the site. So that's the general process. | 00:06:53 | |
| So now I'm going to explain how we implemented that across News SI 5. | 00:06:57 | |
| And I apologize, our figures are from older reports, though they're not the best of quality and I don't have a pointer, so bear | 00:07:04 | |
| with me on this too. So specifically in question is smooth SI 5. That was the treated water cooling pond and pipeline and you can | 00:07:10 | |
| see on this figure. | 00:07:17 | |
| The original red. | 00:07:25 | |
| Modified triangle with SI 5. Then in 2007, SI five was divided into SI 5A and SI5B and the the main road you can see is the | 00:07:28 | |
| vineyard connector curving around the 800 N and just a little bit to the north of that and all of the southern part of pass the | 00:07:39 | |
| vineyard connector is SI 5A and then the northern part was SI 5B. | 00:07:50 | |
| And I'm going to talk primarily about those, but I also want to mention as shown on this figure, SA5C is on the top right hand | 00:08:01 | |
| side of that triangle. Thank you. And that was split off from SI 5B for the Utah Transit corridor. And so that was also evaluated | 00:08:09 | |
| separately and I will talk about that one. And then the very northern part, you see a little half circle in the the very top that | 00:08:18 | |
| became SI 5D as in Delta. | 00:08:26 | |
| And a lot of what I talk about when we excavated soils and sediment and 5A, they were stockpiled up in 5D. And just so it's very | 00:08:35 | |
| clear to everybody here, SI 5D has not been closed. It still requires additional investigation. And so we're really going to talk | 00:08:43 | |
| about SA 5, AB and C. | 00:08:51 | |
| So Si 5A. | 00:09:02 | |
| Sorry these kind of got a little out of. | 00:09:07 | |
| Border, but that's OK, I can talk to him anyway. | 00:09:11 | |
| So SI 5A was originally investigated in 2005. | 00:09:15 | |
| And based on that investigation, they sampled soil and those were the old ponds. So they sampled the berms, they sampled the | 00:09:22 | |
| bottoms, they sampled all over the ponds. And it was determined that there was contamination above risk assessment levels, both | 00:09:30 | |
| industrial levels, a receptor level and residential levels. So at that time they decided to do corrective action because they | 00:09:38 | |
| wanted a residential use for the property and so removals were conducted. | 00:09:45 | |
| And they actually removed approximately 215,000 cubic yards of impacted sediment and soil. And they also had done sampling to | 00:09:54 | |
| sample the sediment native soil interface. And so they also scrape some of the native soil interface as part of the corrective | 00:10:04 | |
| action removals. Following that they did a. | 00:10:13 | |
| Risk assessment and it showed that the residual contamination was below. | 00:10:24 | |
| Be both carcinogenic risk and non carcinogenic risk for residential use and in 2008 the site was closed under no further action | 00:10:30 | |
| and per our rules under 315101. That means that the residential risks are below the lowest end of the range and for carcinogenic | 00:10:39 | |
| risk and below the target level for non carcinogenic risk. There was also ecological evaluation and an ecological waiver | 00:10:49 | |
| indicating there were no ecological pathways. | 00:10:58 | |
| Present and SO151A was 5 A was closed clean. | 00:11:07 | |
| However. | 00:11:14 | |
| Later, as part of a transfer of the property to a new owner, the new owner wanted to do some different development and the Ora, | 00:11:16 | |
| the oil reclamation area material. They did some, you know, technical analysis on that material and determined it was perfect for | 00:11:25 | |
| Rd. base and under structures. And so I'm going to jump to this little picture here. I call this my Nessie. | 00:11:35 | |
| Kind of looks like monster. So this or a material was placed into both 5A and 5B and the body of Nestle, as I like to call it, is | 00:11:45 | |
| kind of where the UTA station and parking lot is. And then the neck and Nesty appears to have been like a proposed road or | 00:11:53 | |
| connector. | 00:12:01 | |
| So the problem with the placement of the RA material was that the Ora material had levels of contamination that would have | 00:12:09 | |
| violated the no further action. And so because this material was placed into 5A and 5B, the land use controls would have had to | 00:12:17 | |
| have been placed on these properties. So those might have been industrial restriction, things like that, since they chose not to | 00:12:25 | |
| go that route. | 00:12:33 | |
| I don't know all the land use controls that would have been required, but rather the the owners wanted to redevelop and wanted | 00:12:41 | |
| free use of this property and so. | 00:12:46 | |
| Going back up and 2018 they decided to re excavate the OR material from 5A. So they they excavated the orange body in 5A and they | 00:12:53 | |
| resample that area. | 00:13:02 | |
| And. | 00:13:11 | |
| Redid the risk assessments to show that upon removal of this or a material that has been placed in the area, it is now again | 00:13:14 | |
| satisfactorily removed. That the site again now qualified for what we call corrective action complete without controls. And that | 00:13:21 | |
| designation just means that it's equivalent to no further action. But because we did additional corrective action, we placed | 00:13:29 | |
| material and removed it, it now gets the designation of corrective action complete without controls. | 00:13:36 | |
| So the material that was originally excavated from 5A, if you can see on the figure on the left in the very top, that is where | 00:13:45 | |
| that material was stockpiled. | 00:13:50 | |
| And that material is still up there and has not been closed. It still requires investigation and corrective action. So when we | 00:13:56 | |
| talk about getting residential and NFA status or corrective action complete without control status for 5A and 5B, we are strictly | 00:14:04 | |
| talking 5A and 5B that we recognize that there are areas that require additional work before it can be reused for something else. | 00:14:13 | |
| SO5B was this the northern part and this is the neck of Nessie? | 00:14:24 | |
| And in 5B, again, it was originally investigated in 2005 and it was determined to have excess risk for residential use. However, | 00:14:30 | |
| this site wasn't actually remediated in two until 2018. It just wasn't a priority as far as reuse. So in 2018, they came in based | 00:14:40 | |
| on the sampling data excavated. | 00:14:50 | |
| The sediments from the old pond that exceeded the risk, but at the same time they backfilled with the Ora material and so. | 00:15:00 | |
| This one again, so almost as soon as they backfilled, they started re excavating it. And so in 2018 they they excavated not only | 00:15:12 | |
| the sediment from the pond, but the Ora and this material was stockpiled in that faint green area to the north. | 00:15:22 | |
| Of the red and that material is still there and again that has not BeenVerified clean. It's not verified for reuse. It is still | 00:15:33 | |
| pending investigation. So that is outside of this residential area. So following the removal of the original sediments in the pond | 00:15:40 | |
| and the Ora pond material and the Ora that was in the pond, confirmation data were collected in the risk assessment was redone and | 00:15:48 | |
| in 2020. | 00:15:55 | |
| This site was confirmed to meet both residential and ecological risk for and suitable for residential and that was closed in 2020, | 00:16:03 | |
| again with a corrective action complete without controls. | 00:16:09 | |
| In the B section. Not the green though, correct? Just the beta, so not the proposed SI 5D, not that area and not the green, so | 00:16:17 | |
| just that bottom. | 00:16:23 | |
| 7-8 the red triangle. | 00:16:30 | |
| OK. So 5C was the Utah transit right away quarter and again this area was sampled in 2005 for determining nature and extensive | 00:16:34 | |
| contamination. But early on it was known that this would be kind of parceled off as part of the quarter is along those the tracks | 00:16:43 | |
| there and so that area was excavated. | 00:16:51 | |
| And the sediments removed and confirmation samples were collected and it also met residential risk, even though it's not being | 00:17:01 | |
| used for residential purposes right now. It's a corridor. | 00:17:07 | |
| It did meet clean closure, no further action and that was closed in 2009. | 00:17:13 | |
| It's also important to note that when we say we clean clothes both in 5B and 5A, the residential risk levels that were calculated | 00:17:20 | |
| using the confirmation data were orders of magnitude below the acceptable levels, so. | 00:17:28 | |
| There, there's it's not like it was a question. It was clearly sufficiently remediated to acceptable residential use. | 00:17:38 | |
| So conclusion to summarizing that was a lot of information. I apologize so. | 00:17:49 | |
| The I'm going to go back up to the, the this picture. So to be clear, so in five a, the southern half of 5A that is South of the | 00:17:58 | |
| Vineyard corridor, no Ora material was ever placed in that area. So the original clean closure NFA always held for that southern | 00:18:07 | |
| part that is currently developed right now. | 00:18:15 | |
| All of the material, both the original sediments that were in the pond as well as the place or a material have been removed and | 00:18:25 | |
| both by a 5B and 5C to residential levels equivalent to no further action or corrective action complete without control. | 00:18:35 | |
| Human health and ecological risk assessments confirmed that and. | 00:18:46 | |
| They they can be used for residential use right now without restrictions. | 00:18:52 | |
| So I'm going to jump into this. | 00:18:59 | |
| Information you're, you're free to e-mail me any questions, but if you have any questions, I'm, I'm happy to answer them. Great. | 00:19:02 | |
| Any questions from the council. | 00:19:07 | |
| What is the longer term plan for? | 00:19:16 | |
| Those top parts were all the contaminated materials. Still are. | 00:19:19 | |
| So the longer term plan will be just like this, they will be investigated, they will be sampled, the record corrective process, so | 00:19:23 | |
| they will be sampled, we'll evaluate the extent and the nature. Contamination risk assessments will be done depending on the | 00:19:30 | |
| ultimate land use to evaluate what needs to be done to ensure they're protective of what the future use will be. | 00:19:37 | |
| Great. A common question that our residents have is they worry about how deep you can go to see how clean it, how deep you could | 00:19:46 | |
| dig down and see how clean. So as part of the the person extensive contamination, we did vertical as well. So it is cleaned with | 00:19:53 | |
| no restrictions on vertical. | 00:20:00 | |
| Vertical going up or vertical going down? | 00:20:08 | |
| Yeah. So this is the, your house is here. This is this way. | 00:20:11 | |
| We have surface and vertical. Do you have different questions? Go ahead, Sir. No, go ahead. So are you familiar with the Daybreak, | 00:20:20 | |
| the Kennecott tailings issue that they had a few years back because it had been cleared by the EPA and it came back and caused | 00:20:27 | |
| huge problems because the tailings destroyed their foundations. Are you familiar with that? Can you explain that because that's a | 00:20:34 | |
| huge concern here like. | 00:20:41 | |
| It could be clean, but. | 00:20:49 | |
| But maybe not so clean. So how did that clear the EPA and then come back to further problems? OK. | 00:20:51 | |
| Dave Wright was known to be built on tailings and was known to have certain restrictions in place to be protective. 5A and 5B are | 00:21:01 | |
| not built on tailings and we have both horizontal and vertical profiles of the contamination, so we know. | 00:21:11 | |
| That there is not residual buried material under 5:00 AM five feet. | 00:21:22 | |
| Other different level. It doesn't answer your question, Sir. Yeah, I'm just curious. How deep? No, it's OK. I'm just wondering how | 00:21:28 | |
| deep did you guys actually go, do you know? | 00:21:34 | |
| Yeah, they did boring I I don't. | 00:21:42 | |
| Know the depth. So one of the things we do look at is vertical profile. So in order to confirm that we have extent of vertical | 00:21:45 | |
| contamination you either we have to show both clearly decreasing concentrations and or not detects. | 00:21:54 | |
| That I would have if you want to know the actual depth of the borings, please e-mail me and I can look that up. I don't have that | 00:22:03 | |
| off the top of my head. I'm sorry. That would be great. Can you put your. | 00:22:08 | |
| Hey, what's, what's the depth? | 00:22:15 | |
| Yeah, but at least 10 to 20 feet because they did sample groundwater and that was not impacted where they got groundwater. OK, But | 00:22:20 | |
| I don't know the exact. That's perfect. That was going to be my question with the groundwater level and it's depending on it. | 00:22:26 | |
| Perfect. Thank you. OK, thank you, Paige. You're welcome. I had some questions. | 00:22:32 | |
| I'm very concerned just because I've lived here my whole life and. | 00:22:41 | |
| We had a dairy farm on the South side of of Vineyard and we were financed by Geneva Steel or or paid as farmers for wind when it | 00:22:46 | |
| blew over and it would it would blow the chemical over and all the dairy farmers were in the 1970s for paid for that and wind is | 00:22:54 | |
| what brought those over there were in the 1972 windstorm. So we have these piles on the north of the residential that are sitting | 00:23:02 | |
| there that are not clean. | 00:23:11 | |
| And then are going to be moved and picked up and we did have a few dust storms like five or six years ago. So if we're going to | 00:23:20 | |
| build these structures right next to it. | 00:23:24 | |
| You know, there were some harmful smells and stuff. | 00:23:30 | |
| How do we know if we're going to build even closer now that when they do that the wind wouldn't blow or whatnot? | 00:23:33 | |
| Because I know we were taught my grandfather died because of cancer and you know, our families were all many farmers were paid off | 00:23:40 | |
| for the bad things that Geneva still did. And it scares the heck out of us, right? Like living downwind and stuff. So I. | 00:23:49 | |
| Is that like, is it OK? Like hey that this property is adjacent and it could blow on? | 00:23:58 | |
| You just say, hey, we can build up next to it or we will dig out with people living next to it. Like how does that work out? | 00:24:05 | |
| Question a very legitimate concern? Yeah, absolutely. | 00:24:15 | |
| I think I would like to think a little bit because I wasn't prepared for that one, but that's my first one. I would like you to | 00:24:20 | |
| e-mail me so we can come up with a solid answer for you because there are things we do, but it's, it's a legitimate concern. Well, | 00:24:26 | |
| I mean, maybe it's because I'm more terrified, but going to Vineyard Elementary, we would be shut down on downwind days. So they | 00:24:33 | |
| would look at when the wind would blow. | 00:24:39 | |
| And they would shut off the air conditioning and we would, you know, hunker down and, and we didn't know a lot in the 1990s about, | 00:24:45 | |
| you know, what was going on. And, and so with that having been open right there, it's like. | 00:24:51 | |
| It just terrifies me. And then and then, you know, part of the compensation of the farmers where we'd have some really strange | 00:24:58 | |
| abnormal things. I can, you can go to the Daily Herald and see the Holdaway 6 legged cows that grew off of this and it was very | 00:25:04 | |
| strange and. | 00:25:09 | |
| You know, so groundwater is clean, but I know in the 1970s, eighties and 90s, all of these farmers were compensated miles away. I | 00:25:16 | |
| mean, Holdaway Rd. is 400 S and we're talking 800 N And, you know, in our wells, our deep water wells, we're getting that back | 00:25:23 | |
| then. So we don't want to scare anyone, but we're still very, you know, it's like, well, we're going to put home. I know the | 00:25:31 | |
| developer comes and says, hey, we're going to change from. | 00:25:38 | |
| Industrial, whatever, but we're going to now put homes it out of Lugos. Whoa, OK. And then my number two thing is? | 00:25:46 | |
| I work nationally in measurements as the measurements that you use. | 00:25:55 | |
| You say that it's a federal standard, but Utah deviates and creates kind of its own standard, you said. | 00:25:59 | |
| No, we've been we are in agreement state and we haven't OK, so you do you adopt it that makes me feel comfortable. So there's no | 00:26:06 | |
| variation. My my other question is, is. | 00:26:10 | |
| When you turn this over and say hey, this is developable. | 00:26:16 | |
| Is the city then taking the risk financially like in the example of? | 00:26:22 | |
| Daybreak with Utah City, are they signing contracts with anybody that if if something does happen and moving into Utah City's | 00:26:29 | |
| property that they would be able to go? Are they are they signing something that would get rid of the like indemnify them? | 00:26:37 | |
| Since this is plain closure, I would say no, but I would need to that's, that's outside our realm because that is a sale and that | 00:26:47 | |
| is part of the the legal negotiation. Because this is plain closure, it's not like there's residual contamination on the property | 00:26:55 | |
| where there's an environmental covenant on the property that ties to the land. Since this is getting clean closure, there isn't | 00:27:02 | |
| that so any sale agreement. | 00:27:09 | |
| On a clean clothes, it would be between the fire and the seller. It'd be just like a buying a house. There's no disclosure. | 00:27:17 | |
| There's no can the city require a public like a a disclosure? | 00:27:23 | |
| On that, do they allow, do they allow for a city to step up and say, hey, just so you know, you're moving? Because I, I run into | 00:27:30 | |
| people all the time that that don't know that they moved on to a brownfield. This is not brown previous previous. I know, but it's | 00:27:37 | |
| it it's scary because you have so many brownfields that have been cleaned and then we science gets better and you realize that oh | 00:27:43 | |
| this it went somewhere or another. And so it's like. | 00:27:50 | |
| Is there? | 00:27:57 | |
| This excellent question that. | 00:27:59 | |
| Just to make sure that we're protecting everyone. | 00:28:01 | |
| Yeah, I just had a conversation. | 00:28:05 | |
| With someone, yeah, she'll kick me if I'm going out. Please. I had a conversation with someone that was purchasing a home | 00:28:07 | |
| absolutely not in this area in the Salt Lake area. And I asked them, oh great, where? And they gave me the address and that | 00:28:14 | |
| immediately sent off oh because they were in an area that had been under a true brownfields program. And the question I had was | 00:28:22 | |
| does your real estate agent do due diligence because. | 00:28:30 | |
| On any commercial transaction. | 00:28:38 | |
| We definitely have a due diligence program and that is where where some commercial entity is purchasing property, they will do due | 00:28:41 | |
| diligence and that is where they go and look at the whole site history unfortunately while everything is public record. | 00:28:50 | |
| I don't necessarily know that individuals do that, even though they can. | 00:29:00 | |
| So I, I, I can't help you there. I mean, the city can definitely everything that we've done here is public, you know, publicly | 00:29:07 | |
| available. So if the city chooses to have information on the area, that's up to the city, but we don't require it. Would the city | 00:29:15 | |
| get sued or this or the developer, I don't know that be able to say, hey, you're not allowed to, you know that it's clean. You're. | 00:29:24 | |
| Scaring people away, but for the good of hey, here is the history. | 00:29:34 | |
| Think that's a liability between the city and their their voices? Have you looked into that? Do you know? | 00:29:39 | |
| Just protecting people. | 00:29:46 | |
| We'd have to look at each individual property and kind of understand what the city's liability profile would be if we were to put | 00:29:48 | |
| that into place. The general principle on property law is that environmental conditions cannot be discharged when you sell | 00:29:55 | |
| property, so. | 00:30:01 | |
| People would have remedies going back through the chain of ownership, not just. | 00:30:09 | |
| To the person who's selling them the property. | 00:30:14 | |
| I'd I'd be hesitant as a city to interfere with the state law construct on that. I think remedies exist for individual owners. | 00:30:17 | |
| The disclosure requirements an interesting one. We could look at that. | 00:30:27 | |
| I I think you I think the answer you've got from the EQ is probably the best. | 00:30:34 | |
| Which is? It's in the chain of title. | 00:30:40 | |
| And all homeowners or prospective homeowners would be well advised to look at the title report and take it seriously. | 00:30:44 | |
| I know a lot of people here have never seen the animals that came off of this property, but for living here for 30 years, it's | 00:30:52 | |
| terrifying, you know, and I know it's clean and I know they say, hey, it is. And I, I good faith of what, what is and where it | 00:30:57 | |
| goes. But like, you know, I, I go to national DC and, and, and on the brownfields, they come every year and they go, hey, we | 00:31:02 | |
| thought we were good. | 00:31:07 | |
| And this happened and that water spring came up and what we thought, you know, from 1940 to 1999, we, our plan at Geneva Steel was | 00:31:12 | |
| to put the crappiest of stuff Outback, put a fence around it and let that water seep into the ground year after year after year. | 00:31:20 | |
| And that's all it did, right. And so where our wells Holdaway property are 250 feet down into the aquifer, that affected us and it | 00:31:28 | |
| affected our cows just drinking the wells. And so it, it's terrifying to just go. | 00:31:36 | |
| As a good faith neighbor, it's like. | 00:31:44 | |
| Putting a sign up and saying, do you know, as a, as a policy just, and I'm not saying to scare them, but just, and people do take | 00:31:49 | |
| those risks, like I take risks all the time. You know, I drink Mountain Dew, you know, it's not good for me. So, but at least they | 00:31:54 | |
| go through and do that. | 00:31:59 | |
| Can I just, can I just have a quick follow-up? Yeah, I just want to recognize that it is, it is scary, right? There's things that | 00:32:04 | |
| have happened in the past. Yeah, I think. | 00:32:08 | |
| And I don't want to discount any wind blowing from the stacks that we've heard the areas we've created, but I think a lot of what | 00:32:12 | |
| happened previously in that downwind was caused by the state. | 00:32:17 | |
| Right, right where they were running. Yeah, so. | 00:32:22 | |
| Look into any potential issues that might come from wind blown things like that from those areas that have been created with the | 00:32:26 | |
| piles. But some of that I think has been mitigated. Thank goodness, right And taking down the site completely and I think we've | 00:32:32 | |
| addressed the along with the attorney the the site specific. Unfortunately we are not legally able to get in in the real estate | 00:32:39 | |
| transaction. We have to get out of that. We meet here it's reported we make sure that it's safe for human health and the | 00:32:45 | |
| environment and. | 00:32:52 | |
| That's that's where our regulations and but I will say we are conscious of that as we do this, we know that there's residents that | 00:32:58 | |
| will repair so. | 00:33:03 | |
| She was hopping her field, so she took another look at this before we came, even though it was from over 10 years ago. She took | 00:33:09 | |
| another look and it's still protected. So my last confirmation that we did the right thing, then it's still safe. No. My last | 00:33:15 | |
| question is on the settling ponds on the West side of the road. I know the machines are no longer they're still there and they're | 00:33:21 | |
| still sitting in there. | 00:33:27 | |
| You know, that's, that's a settling pun. The water is, you know, there's still water in it. And so people look at that and they | 00:34:07 | |
| go, you know, I don't, they don't, they just don't know what it is. And before there was not only barbed wire, but there was razor | 00:34:14 | |
| wire like a prison. It was wrapped around that thing. And so. | 00:34:21 | |
| I'm just. | 00:34:28 | |
| And I know it's an adjacent property, but then they're going to have to clean it with hundreds of thousands of people right next | 00:34:31 | |
| to it. | 00:34:34 | |
| Yeah, addressing your concern about a UN. | 00:34:39 | |
| Spence, Snoop. Yeah, Yeah. And then we can think about it and address it for you. OK. Thanks. Is there a timeline for when this | 00:34:45 | |
| whole area will be complete as far as you're concerned? When will the piles be handled? | 00:34:52 | |
| I don't. Yeah. Money. | 00:35:03 | |
| OK. And so since it's clean, they can dig as much as they want, as deep as they want right now in the clean areas? | 00:35:10 | |
| 10. | 00:35:18 | |
| They can, obviously, they probably won't because if they get close to shallow groundwater, they're not going to have stability and | 00:35:20 | |
| some of the technical properties for the development that they might need. But there is no environmental restriction, right? I | 00:35:27 | |
| knew they couldn't dig that deep of footing down. | 00:35:33 | |
| OK. Thank you. Are there any other questions? | 00:35:40 | |
| No, we appreciate this and we'll make sure we follow up with you guys and then we'll publish it so. | 00:35:45 | |
| The Council. | 00:35:52 | |
| Gov By all means, if you have any additional questions that come up as you talk about this, please. | 00:35:53 | |
| E-mail me and we will think about it and get back to you. Thank you so much, Paige. Thank you all. All right. | 00:36:01 | |
| We will. We appreciate that. And now we will go ahead and move on to our transportation master plan. I have you guys going in the | 00:36:08 | |
| beginning, but we finally made it there. And I was going to say we also have Trustee Acerson from Utah Transit Authority. I don't | 00:36:13 | |
| know if you want to introduce yourself. You're not giving the presentation. So yeah, come on up. Just thought you guys would like | 00:36:18 | |
| to meet him. | 00:36:22 | |
| I felt, I feel a little bit like I'm coming home because I live in Linden, was mayor of Linden for several years. I actually hired | 00:36:30 | |
| you the first time for the Utah Lake Commission. And Jamie, I've worked with him at UTA and I know several of you and. | 00:36:38 | |
| It feels good here. Then here's a good place to live. So you've got good people and they understand the stewardship that you've | 00:36:47 | |
| entrusted them with and. | 00:36:51 | |
| I'm just happy to be working with your mayor. She serves on our local Advisory Council as well. | 00:36:57 | |
| Always has good input and provides great discussion as we try to address all of the incoming people that are moving to Utah and | 00:37:03 | |
| being born in Utah. It's both. But my role as a trustee is I represent Utah and Twilight counties. Those are two of the fastest | 00:37:09 | |
| growing areas in the state of Utah. | 00:37:16 | |
| And we just today in our board meeting passed our long range transit plan and that's online. So if you want to look at that, | 00:37:23 | |
| that's 2050. | 00:37:29 | |
| Some of us won't be around in 20-50, but. | 00:37:37 | |
| Now is the time to look at it and you can make comment on that. It's up for public comment and would love to have your feedback on | 00:37:40 | |
| that so. | 00:37:43 | |
| And I know we're working. I mentioned to your mayor the rail that's right there on Geneva Rd. that's kind of a barrier to you to | 00:37:47 | |
| enter your city. And some places we're under discussions on how we can work with Union Pacific and UTA and U dot and. | 00:37:56 | |
| Try to make that easier to get in and out of your city. So perfect. All right. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right, So Ryan, | 00:38:06 | |
| are you presenting today or Josh? Perfect. Come on up, Josh. | 00:38:12 | |
| Awesome. Thank you. Josh Gibbons with Hales Engineering. | 00:38:21 | |
| Let me just get this connected. | 00:38:25 | |
| I. | 00:38:28 | |
| All right. Well, thank you for having us. It's great to be here again. We were here last. We were here last year. Of course, last | 00:38:36 | |
| week we were able to present to the Planning Commission. | 00:38:40 | |
| And I know we've met with each of you recently as well to talk through the updates. Our goal tonight is to provide that update | 00:38:46 | |
| again for you to look at, provide feedback on. And it's also a good opportunity, I think for the the public of course, to hear | 00:38:51 | |
| what we're working on. | 00:38:57 | |
| Let's get that going. | 00:39:03 | |
| Perfect. OK. | 00:39:10 | |
| So we have a small update tonight to talk through. We have a short recap of things we've talked about in the past with level of | 00:39:12 | |
| service and potential improvements we were looking at in the city based on future demand. And then we're we're we're here to talk | 00:39:20 | |
| about a proposed alternative to current planning and current alignments in the city to get your input and feedback. | 00:39:28 | |
| So a key with this master plan is the road jurisdiction, right? | 00:39:37 | |
| U dot, they own a couple different roads within the city. Vineyard Connector is one of those that was just completed to the north. | 00:39:45 | |
| Geneva Rd. is another one that's owned by U dot. And so within this plan, our focus really will be on city roads and seeing what | 00:39:52 | |
| what improvements the city can work on for future growth. | 00:39:58 | |
| And but we'll also talk about potential UDOT facilities that could be improved or modified to fit both local and regional needs. | 00:40:06 | |
| And so tonight we're talking about, you know, you know, some city roads, some some U dot roads. But I just want to make it clear | 00:40:13 | |
| that, you know, there there are two different entities here that own different right of ways. | 00:40:21 | |
| So in the past as we worked on the plan, we've we've been talking about level of service. As a quick recap, level of service is a | 00:40:30 | |
| measurement of congestion on roads and delay. And so tonight we're going to look at existing conditions and a couple different | 00:40:36 | |
| future conditions based on the current traffic volumes on roadways in the city. What you see on the screen here would be the | 00:40:43 | |
| current levels of levels of service. | 00:40:49 | |
| If you see a green color, that's good, of course. It's a good level of service. It's a little bit more congested as you get to CD | 00:40:57 | |
| and ENF, of course. | 00:41:01 | |
| On U dot roads, levels of service A through D are acceptable and then on city roads, it's the same for arterials. But for lower | 00:41:08 | |
| classification roads like local roads, collector roads, we have a lower or a higher standard, I would say level of service C or | 00:41:15 | |
| better. So with that in mind, if you look at the screen, a couple things to point out would be Vineyard connector and this E | 00:41:23 | |
| section is showing up as orange at level of service E. | 00:41:30 | |
| Sorry, D and so it's still acceptable by U dot standard, but still getting congested. They've made a couple changes recently with | 00:41:38 | |
| striping that have helped a lot, I think. And but still, you know, that's telling us there's we're going to need some improvements | 00:41:45 | |
| down the line. You can see there's a few intersections we've highlighted as currently at level of service ERF and so those are | 00:41:53 | |
| things we're looking at and looking at potential improvements for those locations. | 00:42:00 | |
| As we go to a kind of a 10 year or nine year time frame to 2033, you can see that Vineyard Connector now shows up as a level of | 00:42:09 | |
| service E or F roadway. So something that should be fixed. The good news is that MAG recently approved a plan to make Vineyard | 00:42:16 | |
| Connector go to five lanes all the way along the corridor, which should, you know, capture and, and and handle most of the traffic | 00:42:23 | |
| that's shown on here. So. | 00:42:30 | |
| Really the volumes you see here in the 30 thousands of cars a day that can be handled with A5 lane facility. | 00:42:38 | |
| As we go to 2050, you know and I should have, you know, recap as well that this takes into account all known developments in the | 00:42:46 | |
| city. It takes into account other growth that's projected by MAG, of course. So in 2050 with all that growth, we would expect that | 00:42:54 | |
| we would need more improvements on the roadways. You can see Vineyard Connector would have volumes in the 50,000 of cars a day, | 00:43:02 | |
| which is basically what A7 lane facility. | 00:43:09 | |
| Or greater would be needed to handle that traffic. | 00:43:17 | |
| Geneva Rd. has a couple sections that are congested as was mentioned just barely. Once the rail line is realigned and removed in | 00:43:25 | |
| that area, U dot will have a lot more flexibility to widen Geneva Road to accommodate that that traffic on Geneva Rd. | 00:43:33 | |
| A couple of other spots to point out. 1600 N shows up with about 16,000 cars a day. That's already planned by MAG to go to five | 00:43:42 | |
| lanes. And so this is something that we can easily address with a proposed project in the plan. | 00:43:48 | |
| A couple of other spots you can see Center St. shows up with about 14,000 cars a day level of service D. So what we're looking at | 00:43:56 | |
| is, are there other connections that can be made in the city to take pressure off of Center St. And so a couple things we talked | 00:44:03 | |
| about so far would be new connections. One would be connection at 1200 N to go into the downtown area that that would be a key | 00:44:11 | |
| connection point to take pressure off of Vineyard Connector. | 00:44:18 | |
| And other facilities, same thing with Center St. There's already 400 S, which can take pressure off of Center Street, but beyond | 00:44:26 | |
| that we're talking about possibilities of maybe a 400 N connection. | 00:44:33 | |
| At this location across the rail. So these are different projects we're talking about. Like I said, we've talked about other | 00:44:41 | |
| alternatives to the current alignments that Mag has been talking from, which is what you see here on the screen. | 00:44:48 | |
| And that's where I'll turn it over to Ryan. | 00:44:56 | |
| Perfect. Thank you for letting us be here tonight. So as we look at some of the long range planning that's been done in the area, | 00:45:04 | |
| the current MAG RTP or regional transportation plan, they're looking at future roadways in the area. Several of those are lake | 00:45:10 | |
| crossing. They've identified 3 different lake crossing connections and where they might come across historically. I think as we've | 00:45:16 | |
| talked about it within the plan set and and. | 00:45:21 | |
| As the mayor has been working on it, the one coming across on the 800 N is probably not the correct connection and has been. | 00:45:28 | |
| I think discounted at this point, we show it as a point of reference. There's enough traffic coming around on. | 00:45:35 | |
| Many of the other roads that 800 N would be severely overloaded if that came in and connected as well and we'd be talking volumes | 00:45:43 | |
| that would be more freeway type on that segment of 800 N So as we look at that, we're looking at several different alternatives. | 00:45:48 | |
| One would be the extension of. | 00:45:54 | |
| How the road would come down, but the whole connection of. | 00:46:01 | |
| Vineyard Connector and where it would come into Vineyard, it would come in on the North End just like it normally would, but | 00:46:05 | |
| instead of wrapping around on the West side of Utah City. | 00:46:09 | |
| It becomes somewhat of a barrier for crossing within the city if it goes to seven lanes and has about 57,000 cars a day. | 00:46:14 | |
| And become somewhat divisive or Vineyard City and overall. So what we've looked at is a potential reroute of that that would push | 00:46:22 | |
| it onto the 1600 N alignment shown in that that golden dash line as it comes down from the north and. | 00:46:29 | |
| Makes its way through. I'll try and get the laser pointer up there. I apologize, a little bit harder to see, but as you come down | 00:46:39 | |
| and around that corner, it would go on to a 1600 N alignment and then onto a Geneva Rd. alignment where it would bend and go | 00:46:43 | |
| towards the South. | 00:46:47 | |
| Several advantages that we see with this are that we have multiple connections going over to I-15. Number one, we can redirect | 00:46:52 | |
| that traffic to I-15 on 1600 N as well as giving it a better connection to 800 N and allowing that traffic to flow freely back and | 00:46:58 | |
| forth and all the way down to 400. So we have many, many more opportunities to try and move that traffic east, West into Orem or | 00:47:04 | |
| further down into Provo where it wants to be. | 00:47:10 | |
| Those are some great advantages if we do that and I'll go through a couple more slides here. | 00:47:17 | |
| And just kind of show that connection on the left is the current plan where it comes down around the West side of Utah City, shown | 00:47:23 | |
| in pink. | 00:47:26 | |
| There's a railroad crossing on the North End. | 00:47:30 | |
| Again, I'll try and get the laser pointer over there, but the. | 00:47:33 | |
| There's a great separate crossing, so you would go up and over the railroad tracks to make sure the tracks can can move fairly | 00:47:36 | |
| freely, and then it would come down and touchdown and the traffic would go around. Utah City in its current and present format, | 00:47:41 | |
| the way it's been drawn. | 00:47:46 | |
| What we're looking at is an alternative that is not new to you daughter to Mac. They have also looked at alternatives like this | 00:47:51 | |
| that would bring Vineyard Connector down towards the North End of Vineyard. There's where a little more gentle and followed the | 00:47:56 | |
| tracks and went through some property on a diagonal. | 00:48:01 | |
| Somewhat paralleling on the tracks, and then they've also looked at other options as well. | 00:48:07 | |
| This alternative to 1600 N, we'd still have the grade separation. We'd have to go up and over the tracks, but we want to keep that | 00:48:13 | |
| great separation a little bit longer. | 00:48:17 | |
| And then bend those lanes to where they would go to the South onto Geneva Rd. We would still have a local access Rd. on 1600 N | 00:48:22 | |
| that would come off of the interchange, would go to the West, still providing access into the industrial area as well as the | 00:48:27 | |
| connection of Mill Rd. going North and South. | 00:48:33 | |
| And then on to the West and it would go over. | 00:48:39 | |
| Underneath Vineyard Connector and still keep those local roads all connected. | 00:48:43 | |
| One of the other advantages that we have is that we're looking at a connection on 1200 N, which would continue out of Utah City. | 00:48:47 | |
| Would go across to End Mill Road and then eventually go over and connect into Geneva Rd. | 00:48:54 | |
| Again, having multiple options within a city for that traffic to flow and move around is is fairly helpful from a transportation | 00:49:00 | |
| perspective. | 00:49:03 | |
| It also keeps the traffic volumes a little bit lower. | 00:49:07 | |
| As are shown in this next diagram. | 00:49:11 | |
| Those 2050 future projected volumes is are consistent with what mags long range planning is. They always shoot towards the 2050 | 00:49:14 | |
| projection. | 00:49:17 | |
| But what you would see is we're able to drop the volumes on that road. It's still necessary. We still need this road that's | 00:49:22 | |
| coming. The five lanes that are currently planned, projected and funded as those get built, they would remain, but it would remain | 00:49:28 | |
| at 5 lanes and we wouldn't have to increase that to seven lanes. We'd be moving that traffic that's cut through traffic around the | 00:49:33 | |
| edge of the city and pushing it onto 1600 N and onto Geneva Rd. | 00:49:39 | |
| Mill Rd. does pick up a lot of traffic still as it normally has done in the past historically and projections about 25,000 cars a | 00:49:45 | |
| day still within A5 lane Rd. cross section. EW 1200 N would be 5 lanes as it comes across. | 00:49:53 | |
| And then we try and divert that and bring it back down to probably 3 lanes as we come into Utah City. | 00:50:02 | |
| Certainly as we look at the the band where we were looking at, I think it was 57,000 cars a day, which is again above a A7 lane | 00:50:08 | |
| Rd. capacity, we're down to about 32,000. So we're probably 5 lanes through here. | 00:50:14 | |
| That segment between Mill Road and Geneva Road or up to 40. So we're probably going to be looking at a little bit of lane widening | 00:50:21 | |
| there. That would be turn pockets and things like that. | 00:50:26 | |
| And. | 00:50:31 | |
| We create those impact fees, which then are charged to new residents or new building projects that come into the city, and so that | 00:51:36 | |
| the new population is paying for those improvements, not the existing population that's here. It's a good way to disperse some of | 00:51:42 | |
| those impacts. | 00:51:47 | |
| And then we're we're shooting for a plan adoption in May, May to June of this year. | 00:51:54 | |
| Councillor, are there any questions that we might be able to address at this point? | 00:52:00 | |
| Any questions from the Council? | 00:52:04 | |
| I have one, the one that you said was already had already been funded. We had talked before in our meeting that that connects into | 00:52:08 | |
| Pioneer Crossing. | 00:52:12 | |
| Is that, is that right? Did I understand that correctly? What's what's been funded? I hope I say this correctly. I have not looked | 00:52:17 | |
| at it specifically and Nassim might have a little more information on it. | 00:52:21 | |
| But at least through the Vineyard area, it's been funded as A5 Lane Rd. Certainly to the north as you look at Pioneer Crossing | 00:52:27 | |
| and, and what's happening up to the north, there's still some plans that are ongoing up there and, and looking at alignments and | 00:52:32 | |
| the shift of those alignments potentially in the Lehigh City Transportation Master Plan. | 00:52:38 | |
| Yeah. | 00:52:44 | |
| We had discussions today actually with you thought about something a lot different subject and this came up. So any thoughts | 00:52:47 | |
| stated that it is on their long range plan to connect it all the way to. | 00:52:53 | |
| All the way up Pioneer Crossing, excuse me, Yeah, up to Pioneer Crossing, they don't have exact data on it, but just like to kind | 00:53:02 | |
| to kind of repeat what Ryan said is a lot of moving parts that they're working up, working with up there. | 00:53:08 | |
| Thank you. I have one question. I noticed the road across Utah Lake. | 00:53:17 | |
| Got to speak before St. Fire and state lands a couple weeks ago and obviously they own the property there. Why is it always | 00:53:24 | |
| showing that it's there? Like it's possible? Like is that magnet shows that they would do that? Yeah, it's on the MAG regional | 00:53:31 | |
| transportation plan. They haven't submitted anything to forestry pharmacy lands in like 30 years. They always say, hey, here's the | 00:53:38 | |
| and I think I've seen 20 different bridges, right? Or roads and that never happens, right? So are we. | 00:53:46 | |
| Saving property to connect to 800 N, If they do that, is that what that was or is that connecting down an Orem? They were showing | 00:53:53 | |
| potential connection points where they thought it might connect. But I think at this point that it's all hyper 100 is not being | 00:54:00 | |
| considered at this because I saw the public comments on the Lehigh stuff where they're like they went on. | 00:54:06 | |
| I think the process is that they envision it and with this envisioned study, then they go and they present it to FFSL or whoever | 00:54:45 | |
| is in the right of way and then they would go present it and get all the permits and do that type of thing. But first they have to | 00:54:50 | |
| go through this study. | 00:54:56 | |
| OK, similar to Proload running writing a letter. Is there any way our council, I know it doesn't have any power or authority, but | 00:55:05 | |
| could we vote as a council to say we don't want to vote through the lake? | 00:55:09 | |
| I think you could, yeah. I think you could write a letter to, I'm saying US voting as a council, like saying, hey, we don't really | 00:55:15 | |
| need a highway coming through. Oh yeah, we did as as our council body. That's why we're seeing that dotted line through vineyard | 00:55:22 | |
| is gone. Last City Council, the last City Council went and pushed very hard for that road to not connect into vineyards. So we did | 00:55:28 | |
| do that as a council. | 00:55:34 | |
| That will not be a line on the map and the transportation master plan is its finalized. OK yeah I just don't wanna scare anyone on | 00:55:41 | |
| this. If it's so superficial or whatever then probably not show it. | 00:55:46 | |
| Out of our city, so. | 00:56:22 | |
| Anyway, thank you. Any other question? OK, thank you so much. We're going to go ahead and take a 10 minute break and then we'll | 00:56:24 | |
| resume the meeting. | 00:56:29 | |
| OK. | 00:56:38 | |
| Hopefully still we're live. | 00:56:45 | |
| All right. Thank you for letting us have that little break. We're going to move on to 3.2. This is a municipal code title 3, | 00:56:49 | |
| calling a special meetings ordinance 2024, Dash 05 and actually 3.23 point 3 and 3.4 will all be presented by our legal counsel. | 00:56:56 | |
| So I am just going to let you introduce them as you go through. Thank you. I'm going to do them all as the same presentation and | 00:57:04 | |
| same discussion, if that's OK that's great. | 00:57:11 | |
| We. | 00:57:20 | |
| The mayor a few months ago restructured how we do our. | 00:57:22 | |
| Agenda and it was in response to things that we heard from the public and from some of the incoming council members. And so this | 00:57:27 | |
| is my reminder that we don't have a a room, a big room with the conference table where we all can sit around and look at documents | 00:57:32 | |
| and talk together. But if you'll close your eyes and imagine. | 00:57:38 | |
| Is sometimes writing code to me feels like a negotiation that you have on your own as you're putting things on a piece of paper. | 00:58:16 | |
| And when I have clients that I'm in a negotiation remediation. | 00:58:21 | |
| It's often the case that when you come to a good agreement, everybody feels a little bit happy and everybody feels a little bit | 00:58:27 | |
| upset. And I suspect as we go through this with your varying priorities and what you, what you value as council members and how | 00:58:33 | |
| you'd like to interact, that there might be things in the document that will make you smile and you'll say, yes, finally, I've | 00:58:39 | |
| been waiting for that. And there may be some things where you'll say, well, I don't like that that gives that benefit somebody | 00:58:45 | |
| else or that helps. | 00:58:51 | |
| Them and what they're doing. | 00:58:57 | |
| My goal was to try to thread the needle and make sure that we respected the state statutory powers and authorities that you have | 00:58:59 | |
| and that we establish processes that will help you do your work efficiently and help you make sure that you have really clear | 00:59:06 | |
| pathways to get things on agenda, to manage your meetings and and to do things. So a little bit of the why State law requires that | 00:59:14 | |
| cities have rules of order and procedure. | 00:59:21 | |
| Vineyard City does not, I'm not sure why they were not included in the original set of documents, but they weren't. And the cities | 00:59:29 | |
| moved along without them and I think has done a really nice job of that. But they have had a, you have had a council within the | 00:59:37 | |
| city that was largely united on issues. And so having some differences of opinion has prompted some questions about, well, what is | 00:59:44 | |
| our process for this and how do we go about doing that? And I think it would. | 00:59:51 | |
| Behoove us all to have some rules in place so that when we get into those discussions, we don't have to spin up and spend a lot of | 00:59:59 | |
| time asking how do we do this or is it appropriate to do this? But they have rules we can point to and say, you know, yes, we can | 01:00:06 | |
| and we shouldn't. Here's how we do it. So the document that I put together for you to consider is a draft ordinance and it has | 01:00:14 | |
| these items on it. Talks about agenda formation, public comments and hearings, council discussions and reports. | 01:00:21 | |
| How to make requests of staff, what requests are appropriate and how to go about doing it. Council staff interactions and then | 01:00:29 | |
| special meetings. So I just want to walk through everyone kind of an overview format. And then I provided to Pam. We'd initially | 01:00:35 | |
| put this together as two different ordinances. And then as we looked at the agenda, we thought it made sense to take it up all at | 01:00:41 | |
| once. And so I sent Pam and I didn't send it to her in time for the meeting, but I consolidated the two ordinances into one | 01:00:47 | |
| document. | 01:00:53 | |
| She if she hasn't already, we'll circulate that soon after the meeting so you can look at it. | 01:01:00 | |
| As usual, pans ahead. | 01:01:07 | |
| On things. So let me give you an overview and then you have the document in front of you and then when I'm done, we can talk about | 01:01:10 | |
| it. You can provide my input if I don't expect that you'll have a. | 01:01:16 | |
| All of your questions formulated today and so if there are things you need to follow up with me on over the next two weeks, we | 01:01:24 | |
| have time to do it and then we can Polish the document and bring it forward for action at the next meeting. So on agenda | 01:01:29 | |
| formation, the structure under state law is that the mayor is the chair of the Council and as chair of the Council she establishes | 01:01:35 | |
| the agenda. | 01:01:41 | |
| The question that's come up recently, well, how do we get things on the agenda if the mayor hasn't put it on the agenda? And what | 01:01:48 | |
| I'm proposing is that since any 2 council members have the ability to call a special meeting, it makes sense to have any 2 council | 01:01:55 | |
| members have the ability to request that something be added to the agenda. That way we don't have to burden the council or the | 01:02:03 | |
| citizens with additional meetings. We can try to get as much business done during our regular meetings as possible. | 01:02:10 | |
| So the process is that if any 2 council members want something on the agenda, they can submit that request to the mayor in | 01:02:19 | |
| writing. The mayor in most circumstances I imagine, will accept the item and put it on the agenda. | 01:02:25 | |
| If she rejects it for either procedural or legal reasons, she would respond in writing and then if you still wish to have it on | 01:02:32 | |
| the on the agenda, you would have it as a procedural question on the next council agenda. The council can vote and if a majority | 01:02:40 | |
| of the council wants to have it on a future agenda, they can override the mayor. This is a process that doesn't get things on the | 01:02:48 | |
| agenda immediately, but it does get them on the agenda quickly when you think of it in terms of government speed, right? | 01:02:56 | |
| We don't move as quickly as a private organization would because we want to involve feedback from the public. We want to be | 01:03:04 | |
| deliberative. We want to make sure we're making the right decision. So I think it would be about four to six weeks from when you | 01:03:10 | |
| would ask for something if the mayor rejected it, that it would end up on an agenda. | 01:03:16 | |
| Public comment and hearings. This is in line with the city's current practices. It's just putting it on paper and putting it in an | 01:03:24 | |
| ordinance. There would be public comment in the agenda for every regular City Council meeting. | 01:03:31 | |
| The mayor is the chair of the meeting, can allocate time among people. Public comment is not a filibuster. We're not the Senate. | 01:03:38 | |
| And so we want to hear from everybody, but we also don't want, we want to allow time for the council to do the business that's in | 01:03:44 | |
| front of it. | 01:03:49 | |
| And then on council discussions and reports, similar principles, we want to limit discussion to the matter being considered. We | 01:03:56 | |
| want to have equitable, equitable participation so everybody on the council has an opportunity to speak and that as chair of the | 01:04:03 | |
| meeting, the mayor would moderate those discussions and how they would occur. | 01:04:10 | |
| Request of staff. So the basic principle here is we want council members to be able to ask for information from staff to make | 01:04:18 | |
| decisions. It's important that you have that. | 01:04:24 | |
| And that you're informed before you're asked to decide things. We also recognize that you have five people on the council. And if | 01:04:31 | |
| everybody's making really significant demands on staff time, then it can take them away from the core work that they need to be | 01:04:39 | |
| doing. And so we have to have some kind of process in place that would balance that. This is an attempt at that. And you can tell | 01:04:46 | |
| me whether we're close to the mark or off the mark or how to adjust it. But what I've inserted in the ordinance is what I. | 01:04:54 | |
| I'm just terming a significant request. It would be any request that takes three or more hours of staff time. | 01:05:02 | |
| And if anyone other than anyone without the mayor or the managers approval wants to make that kind of a demand or that volume of a | 01:05:08 | |
| demand of staff, we just ask that either the mayor or the manager say that's OK. It won't take away from the time that they need | 01:05:14 | |
| to be spending on other things. Or that you come to the council and the council votes and says yes, we want staff doing that | 01:05:20 | |
| thing. | 01:05:26 | |
| Council staff interactions, The balance we're trying to get here is council need to be able to communicate and to speak with staff | 01:05:34 | |
| that can give them information and can help the council in its decisions. We also have to respect that there needs to be some | 01:05:41 | |
| hierarchy and some responsibility and accountability among staff. And the way it works in cities is that the mayor and the city | 01:05:49 | |
| manager are kind of. | 01:05:56 | |
| At the top of the organizational chart and need to be aware of what the people under them are doing so that they can hold them | 01:06:03 | |
| accountable and so they can be accountable to you. And so the way the code is written is that you, if you have requests of staff, | 01:06:09 | |
| you would direct those inquiries through the mayor or the city manager. And then again if something requires significant staff | 01:06:15 | |
| time. | 01:06:21 | |
| Of three or more hours than it would be communicated to the council and approved by either the council, the mayor or the city | 01:06:27 | |
| manager. So the intent again here is to try to respect those lines of authority so we have clear accountability. But. | 01:06:35 | |
| But also to allow you as members of the council, to make requests if the mayor or city manager who the staff members report to, | 01:06:44 | |
| say this won't be disruptive. Staff can work on this and get it to you. There's no need to come back to the council if they say, | 01:06:50 | |
| you know what, we're pretty overwhelmed with things right now. We can't get to it as quickly as you want. You can come back to the | 01:06:57 | |
| council and then the council can say, staff make this a priority. | 01:07:03 | |
| So that's the ordinance in a nutshell. | 01:07:13 | |
| Can I ask some clarification just on that last slide, so we talked about? | 01:07:16 | |
| Also, having that be, it's the mayor and city manager and then directors. | 01:07:24 | |
| Is it to have the directors be able to approve the request or that you could communicate with? | 01:07:32 | |
| I thought that was also included in that one. I think you're right that it is. Let me look at the ordinance and make sure that's | 01:07:39 | |
| there. | 01:07:44 | |
| Marty helped with some of the drafting and review of this and so. | 01:07:51 | |
| Marty, I'll make note of it. I believe that's in there. But if it's not, I I know it's important to you and we can make that | 01:07:57 | |
| insertion. | 01:08:01 | |
| You also have in your packet memo from me. In the absence of an ordinance like this, a lot of questions have come up over the last | 01:08:07 | |
| three months of. | 01:08:13 | |
| When and how can we make requests of staff? How quickly should we expect to get answers back from things? What's appropriate and | 01:08:19 | |
| what's not? And I've been getting asked those questions by council members, by staff. And so I wanted to put pen to paper and kind | 01:08:25 | |
| of lay out. | 01:08:30 | |
| Under state law, what's appropriate and what's not? The short answer under state law is that council members are entitled to all | 01:08:36 | |
| administrative records of the city. | 01:08:42 | |
| And that cities may adopt rules or parameters around how those requests are to be made. And that's a court decision that's been in | 01:08:48 | |
| place just about as long as I've been alive and it's been unchallenged and and has remained kind of the standard, at least | 01:08:56 | |
| judicially in the state. So then the question is what requests are appropriate? What requests can come from a council member | 01:09:04 | |
| without approval from the council? And so I've attempted to give you some guidance on that. | 01:09:12 | |
| The the crux of the issue that I'm trying to get at in the memo is. | 01:09:20 | |
| There are competing demands on the city. The city has information that is public. It also has information that is private or | 01:09:26 | |
| protected about the people we serve. We have bank account information, procurement information, personal information about people | 01:09:34 | |
| in the city. And if we provide information that would have private or protected information in it, the council has an obligation | 01:09:42 | |
| to also treat that information appropriately. And So what I hope the memo will give you some instruction on is. | 01:09:50 | |
| Sometimes if you want things quickly, the staff won't have time to do the same review it would if it were to receive a grammar | 01:09:59 | |
| request from a member of the public. And I think that's OK. I just want you all to be aware and kind of unnoticed that if you get | 01:10:06 | |
| information from staff that does that hasn't been reviewed in the same way you would have grammar request so that you can get | 01:10:13 | |
| things quickly, that you have that obligation not to share it publicly unless. | 01:10:21 | |
| You talk to Pam or talk to me and get direction of yes this can be shared or no it can't be shared. | 01:10:29 | |
| I hope that makes sense and feel free to ask questions if you have specific concerns about that. It would be nice if we had some | 01:10:35 | |
| kind of. | 01:10:39 | |
| I mean, we are making policy, but sometimes I know in the beginning I would be sent something and it was always really helpful | 01:10:44 | |
| when Pam at the end. | 01:10:48 | |
| Say this is private, not ready for the public side. And I know sometimes I'll receive emails and I'll look at it and I'll have to | 01:10:52 | |
| respond and say what are we talking here? So just like a note towards that's a great suggestion that when we share information, we | 01:10:58 | |
| indicate what we believe it is. I think most staff can make their best effort at that and certainly your director level staff | 01:11:04 | |
| should have a pretty good idea of what things are. | 01:11:10 | |
| My worry is you might get things from staff lower down the organizational chart and they may not be aware of what grammar | 01:11:17 | |
| requirements would apply. They generally just treat everything as if it's private and protected, and that's kind of the default. | 01:11:24 | |
| So please, if you have any question in your mind about what is this and should I be sharing it publicly, give Pam a ring. She's | 01:11:30 | |
| the city's records officer as a reporter. Or give me a ring and we can walk you through it and make sure you know what can be | 01:11:37 | |
| shared and what can't be shared. | 01:11:43 | |
| I guess the, and I mean the real thrust of this is we want you to have the information you need to get do your job. | 01:11:51 | |
| And we can get it to you quicker if we do it in that way. | 01:11:56 | |
| Can I just say one thing? | 01:12:01 | |
| Just to start off, so we're not doing a deep dive into anything, anything that's. | 01:12:03 | |
| Title the draft or his draft across it is is not a record and not to be shared outside of the organization because we're not ready | 01:12:09 | |
| to share because there are going to be changes on it. So that's that's where you can start. | 01:12:17 | |
| That's the first thing to start with. There are other things, but and we can talk about those later, but Pam and I will work with | 01:12:26 | |
| Eric to try to figure out some kind of labeling or protocols that we can follow. | 01:12:31 | |
| In the absence of that, I think we'll just try to mark things private, protected or draft. | 01:12:38 | |
| As we work through them, I spent 10 years as a lawyer for the US Department of Transportation. I, they didn't have really neat | 01:12:43 | |
| protocols for that. I was always jealous of my colleagues with the Department of Defense because they had really strict e-mail | 01:12:49 | |
| protocols. And they had, you know, these three letter codes that were really instructive on every e-mail telling them who could | 01:12:55 | |
| see it, who couldn't see it. And I thought it was great. | 01:13:01 | |
| Are we ready for Q&A? Yeah. | 01:13:11 | |
| Sorry, sorry, my microphone was wrong. | 01:13:13 | |
| I am really concerned about a lot of language. Obviously we're setting up divided government and I. | 01:13:19 | |
| Had a conversation with Nelson Abbott, our representative, about how, you know, we're, we're a legislature, we're a body and we're | 01:13:27 | |
| going to vote as a majority is going to put rules on. | 01:13:34 | |
| All of us, the minority about how the basically how the minority gets to interact with the staff. And one of the things that he | 01:13:41 | |
| said on the phone or we discussed was that. | 01:13:47 | |
| As a legislator, he would never go to the governor and say, can I pretty please speak with this department over here and get | 01:13:54 | |
| permission? Could you imagine the Democrats going and asking President Trump saying, can I go speak with the Department of Defense | 01:14:01 | |
| and getting permission? And I just think it sets a precedence of, you know, obviously, hey, I want this type of information. | 01:14:08 | |
| Go ask Eric and Julie for this. No, we don't. We don't want to give it to you. You know, it's not a, it's not a staff important | 01:14:16 | |
| thing. | 01:14:20 | |
| Of the, you know, the city manager and everything. And if it's like, hey, I'm looking for these finances, it's like, you know, | 01:14:56 | |
| we're, we're here in March and I still don't have the finances, right. So it's like, oh, it's not a priority. Like I just want to | 01:15:03 | |
| know where all of our money has been spent and we're having our budget and it's like, well, it's just not a priority. The mayor, | 01:15:09 | |
| you know, we don't have this. I don't have three votes to do that. So as a minority, we're going to like, we're going to put the | 01:15:16 | |
| we're going to vote in two weeks. | 01:15:22 | |
| And the majority is going to vote how much information the minority gets. And I think that's I think it's unconstitutional. All | 01:15:29 | |
| right, just I'm going to give everybody a turn. Let's go ahead and have Amber and then we'll have Marty and we'll go back to Jake. | 01:15:36 | |
| I just was, I'm curious about specifically which section is concerning to you regarding this. You can make requests for | 01:15:44 | |
| information from the manager or from the department heads, right? And so obviously. | 01:15:51 | |
| I gotta turn. Oh, I guess you get to respond. Yeah, she's just asking questions. So see where it talks about inclusive, like | 01:15:58 | |
| request items. So we put it up there and we ask for documents and it goes, we're gonna put in an ordinance that says I have to | 01:16:06 | |
| then come back to you guys and say pretty please, can I have oversight of what you're doing? Amber, did you have a comment back on | 01:16:13 | |
| that? Which section? Oh, he it was, I think he's talking about. | 01:16:21 | |
| Section C of C Yeah, you said C It was a formation of the agenda. I think it was CC Yeah, the agenda. But also when you're I, I | 01:16:30 | |
| see the. | 01:16:37 | |
| It was more on the document side of things of like, hey, the staff thinks this is too much work, so then we're going to the city | 01:16:46 | |
| managers and the mayor is going to have authority to say, hey, this isn't a top priority, let staff do this. So therefore, what | 01:16:51 | |
| makes the determination? | 01:16:56 | |
| We could. | 01:17:04 | |
| Staff time. Who decides if it's three or more hours? | 01:17:06 | |
| It would just be an estimate of how much time it would take somebody from the staff. It's asked they would get that assessment. So | 01:17:10 | |
| I want to say hold on one second. Is that the end of your comment? OK. You just wanted to know. Go ahead, Marty. I was a big | 01:17:16 | |
| helper on all of this. And I want you to understand my motivations here. | 01:17:23 | |
| Specifically on what you're talking about. | 01:17:32 | |
| So in my conversations with Jamie, Jamie's time is not included in this since he is our legal representative. This is just staff, | 01:18:40 | |
| right? You're our legal counsel's carved out of this, right? | 01:18:45 | |
| I think Marty's point remains. But I I don't want any of you to feel like you can't call me on things I please do. | 01:18:52 | |
| That I think the question is if you if you were to ask me to do something, that would be. | 01:19:00 | |
| 1/2 day or a full day effort, if I got a request from everybody all at once, I would have to prioritize it. And so this is an | 01:19:07 | |
| attempt to have a process in place where we can prioritize those kinds of things. | 01:19:14 | |
| And I'm with you, Marty. Like I don't think my projects are the ones that are stopping stuffing cuz I haven't gotten any results | 01:19:21 | |
| from staff. So I think there are projects and there are heavy burden, but I have been waiting patiently. Like, OK. And but I just | 01:19:27 | |
| don't like the majority getting to prioritize the minority. It's like it's when you submit it, we're all equals, like all five of | 01:19:34 | |
| us. So why would the majority get to prioritize what gets out of site? Hey, I, you know, I'll check in with Pam. Hey, do we have | 01:19:40 | |
| this yet? OK now. | 01:19:47 | |
| And it's like, no, we're going to prioritize that. You guys get this, right. For the record, can we specify that staff has given | 01:19:54 | |
| you financial documents, but they weren't what you were looking for? | 01:20:00 | |
| Right, that's what I'm No, I have no, I only have the names of the vendors. | 01:20:06 | |
| It's it's an incomplete statement and I think that's what Marty is talking about right now. OK, so this is my concern. | 01:21:15 | |
| That I did get a vendor list and a lot of the vendors. | 01:21:23 | |
| You know hotels in France travel in England. | 01:21:29 | |
| Restaurants in Ireland, these are companies that are on this vendor list, so department heads are not going to want to talk about | 01:21:34 | |
| this. | 01:21:39 | |
| It'll be delayed. | 01:21:45 | |
| And so majorities don't want to talk about this. | 01:21:47 | |
| So how do I get to talk about? You haven't asked me if I want to talk about it or not. That's a fair statement, but in many cases. | 01:21:52 | |
| Take you're making assumptions that aren't fair. I've asked you not to speak for me. I would be OK with talking about those | 01:22:01 | |
| things. I'm aware of some of those things and I would like to I would be fine talking further into it. And I think that if we | 01:22:06 | |
| talked about it, we would get further understanding right. And we're and we're talking about. | 01:22:12 | |
| But that's why I'm, I'm helping the public understand like they're gonna, they're sometimes in government, Democrat, Republican, | 01:22:17 | |
| whether it be the federal side, the state side or local side where it goes. Wow. | 01:22:23 | |
| Since we're oversight, we're looking at financial things that we're seeing and it's like, hey, I'd like to dig into this. And what | 01:22:31 | |
| I'm saying is that it's very inappropriate for us to. | 01:22:36 | |
| Guidelines. | 01:22:42 | |
| That say the majority, you think you got it in order to talk, in order to overcome this. So I'm just giving you one case example. | 01:22:44 | |
| I'm happy to say that you are and I don't. And I apologize. I don't want to say I speak for you, but sometimes it's like I've got | 01:22:50 | |
| to go fish on a boat to bring this spend out or, or to talk about it publicly or put it on the agenda. It's like, do you have | 01:22:56 | |
| specific changes in mind that you'd like to see? Yeah, I just don't think. I just don't think well, and I'm going to bring it back | 01:23:03 | |
| to the point of the conversation. | 01:23:09 | |
| OK. Were there additional things outside of that? Are there projects I just don't I could understand for agenda items like hey, | 01:24:24 | |
| you need to have three for agenda items, but I don't agree with documents from staff or from you got like me having to go to you | 01:24:32 | |
| and then to the mayor or or Eric and saying, hey, can you guys get them to give me these documents because documents I can take it | 01:24:39 | |
| and go, it's not on the agenda. | 01:24:46 | |
| I just go slowly and I don't like. | 01:25:56 | |
| I think that the valuable time in the next two weeks would be good to address this item to come to some consensus for it to be | 01:26:40 | |
| voted on. So the public comment period. Is this addressed in this too because you went over it really fast. I'm extremely | 01:26:47 | |
| concerned about that. We've shut down Facebook and we've shut down or we've shut it down to 10 minutes. Now the new policy is | 01:26:54 | |
| stating that a citizens must state before the meeting and then it comes up to you to then if there's many of them, we group all | 01:27:01 | |
| those decisions or the topics together. | 01:27:08 | |
| And then only one person gets to speak and and I think we're trending in the wrong direction there. I don't think there should be | 01:27:15 | |
| rules. I think, I think as a council, we have to like this is their time. This is this is their meeting just as much as ours. And, | 01:27:21 | |
| and I'm just. | 01:27:27 | |
| You know, if there's ten people to talk about parking, there's ten people to talk about parking. They all tend to speak, you know? | 01:27:34 | |
| That's because that's not how I read it and I wouldn't be comfortable with that either. Help me, and maybe this is the | 01:27:42 | |
| conversation we have after this meeting, but. | 01:27:46 | |
| The the intent on the public comment period was the state that we wanted to hear from everybody that wanted to speak. The mayor | 01:27:50 | |
| can ask people of a similar comment to group together. You know how it usually works in most council meetings throughout the state | 01:27:57 | |
| as if you have people that want to group together then the chair will give them 5 minutes instead of two minutes or whatever it is | 01:28:04 | |
| and usually the chair will try to. | 01:28:10 | |
| Give people as much time as as they can for the topic and for the number of people present. The way this rule is written is it has | 01:28:20 | |
| a floor, not a ceiling. So it wouldn't limit the mayor or the chair from allowing people more time, But it would prohibit the | 01:28:27 | |
| mayor or the chair from giving people less than two minutes, or from presenting, or from preventing every person at least one | 01:28:34 | |
| opportunity to speak, either individually or as a group. | 01:28:41 | |
| It doesn't like it's written in a way where we're trying to give flexibility to the chair to look at who's president, look at the | 01:28:49 | |
| issue, look at how many people want to speak, and then try to tailor the time accordingly when a quorum can extend time as well. | 01:28:57 | |
| I I just want like I'm looking at the legalese and ox. I threw this out. There are so many things where it says. | 01:29:07 | |
| Almost every sentence in here is like, the majority is getting together to put rules on the minority and we're gonna vote in two | 01:29:45 | |
| weeks. This is ruled on all of us. It's not just and it's not about people, right, but before. | 01:29:52 | |
| OK, hold on. We're gonna. Did you have anything further on your comment, Marty? Well, I just wanted to say I'm willing to talk | 01:30:00 | |
| about the public comment section like if you want to change some of the some of the times or you want to change some of the | 01:30:05 | |
| wording. | 01:30:10 | |
| I I don't think there's. | 01:30:15 | |
| I don't think there's anything wrong with that. And like Jamie said, this is brought to the table for discussion. And when I sat | 01:30:18 | |
| down with him and worked on it, it was like there were things that were OK. I don't think that's right. Let's push it to here. And | 01:30:22 | |
| I don't think this is right. Let's push it here. So if there's things that you're not comfortable with, we can still discuss. I'm | 01:30:27 | |
| not sorry. We're having a work session. | 01:30:32 | |
| If I yeah, I agree. | 01:30:38 | |
| Let's wait till Martha's done, OK? Just hold on, Marty. Sorry. Go ahead. No, you're fighting. You're. I'm OK. | 01:30:41 | |
| I just am saying that with the discussions with council members and their reports, if it's going to be hours long, I will walk out | 01:30:50 | |
| of here like that is like Jacob, we need to be able to have efficient meetings, not just like someone sitting here for two hours | 01:30:58 | |
| talking about what they think is right. I mean, meetings actually cost money. Like we're using taxpayer dollars to use staff time. | 01:31:05 | |
| And it's it's not something that I take right. And that's why I'm like it. | 01:31:13 | |
| I don't know if you misspoke, but it to council members can request an agenda item now. Well, previously we've known it as three, | 01:31:21 | |
| but we didn't really have policy on it from what I understand. So now you and Sarah could request anything to the mayor in writing | 01:31:26 | |
| and she would have to give you a response of why that's good. I mean, there were some there were a few things in there was that I | 01:31:31 | |
| talked to Jamie. I said appreciate it because it's been a couple months. I'm like, hey, it's not on there, right. So I appreciate | 01:31:37 | |
| that. | 01:31:42 | |
| I just there, there's a lot of things on here where obviously this was drafted by the majority. And so I know it's a draft | 01:31:49 | |
| document, but if we could, if I could take it back and I didn't want to share it publicly, but it was like. | 01:31:57 | |
| I I would hope that we could have that two weeks from now have a very long public engagement period so people could go through it | 01:32:07 | |
| or have a working meeting off session with me and you in good faith we sit down. | 01:32:13 | |
| I had another promise, but it slipped my mind now. So go ahead to to council member hold the way. I would just say if if you're | 01:32:50 | |
| going to throw darts at this throw them at me. I'm the only one that put it. So it's this wasn't there were no really detailed | 01:32:57 | |
| instructions on you know, make sure the rules include this or include that the context was. | 01:33:04 | |
| Staff and members of the council are are getting and are asking a lot of questions about what's appropriate or how do we handle | 01:33:13 | |
| this or how do we and, and each time what I found was under rule on that. | 01:33:19 | |
| And so my suggestion to the mayor was maybe we ought to put together a set of rules. And then I just looked at what other cities | 01:33:27 | |
| had in their code and there are things you can put in ordinance, There are things you can put in rules. So you could adjust this | 01:33:32 | |
| accordingly if there are things you'd say, well. | 01:33:37 | |
| I don't like it in the ordinance, but maybe I'd like to do a resolution that would have a rule on that. You could adjust it that | 01:33:43 | |
| way. | 01:33:46 | |
| And then again to my comment at the very, very beginning, I think like any negotiated document you're going to on some things feel | 01:33:50 | |
| like, wow, I really won there and I got what I wanted. And on other things you may think, you know, I didn't get what I wanted | 01:33:57 | |
| there. But I, I don't think it's fair to anyone else on the council to say. | 01:34:04 | |
| And so we may, when you say staff to staff, not like department heads, right? I don't think we should ever kick. We ever give | 01:34:48 | |
| staff, I don't think, I hope not. | 01:34:52 | |
| But some councils have or council members, not our council, but I have experience where there are council members who will try to | 01:34:57 | |
| give instruction to staff. I see. And staff will pull five different ways. If they get 5 different sets of instruction. I can see | 01:35:03 | |
| that. So it is helpful to have rules on that point that say, you know, if you're going to task staff to do something, it has to be | 01:35:10 | |
| consistent with the city plans and with city ordinances. And then the direction comes through a chain of command just like in any | 01:35:16 | |
| other organization. | 01:35:22 | |
| Amber, did you remember your comment? | 01:35:30 | |
| This is a response, I believe to the last meeting where we were seeking ways to hold the meetings and looking for opportunities to | 01:35:33 | |
| work that way. And so I, I think this is a good opportunity for you to work with Jamie and get this to the point where you want so | 01:35:38 | |
| you feel comfortable. | 01:35:44 | |
| Yeah, on page 6 E it talks about how city stat or I don't know if it's department heads or city staff can like report us for | 01:35:50 | |
| talking to them or going after. And I'm like an an annual report will be summarized for the nature and scope of significant | 01:35:57 | |
| information requests and then. | 01:36:04 | |
| Like it? | 01:36:11 | |
| We're over them. | 01:36:14 | |
| So it's like. | 01:36:16 | |
| Which one are you looking at? I'm sorry, an annual review of significant information requests. So it's like the City Manager will | 01:36:18 | |
| compile an annual report summarizing the nature and scope of significant information requests received by State Council, the | 01:36:24 | |
| resources required to fulfill the request, and any issues encountered. | 01:36:30 | |
| This report will be presented the City Council for review and consider and consideration for the adjustment and these limitations. | 01:36:37 | |
| So let's so now we're codifying that if a minority City Council is asking for a lot, then the majority can come in and say you | 01:36:43 | |
| know what, you're asking for too much. We're not going to let it. And it's like that. That shouldn't be in code. Well, the intent | 01:36:50 | |
| there would be for their for council to receive a report annually that would say. | 01:36:56 | |
| These were the demands put on staff time for information. I don't think the intent behind that is to try to point fingers is just | 01:37:04 | |
| try to help help the council understand, are we? | 01:37:09 | |
| I think maybe we're just working off the precedent of the city is that we've always generally respected the the people over | 01:37:46 | |
| whoever the staff are. So for us, we've always said, hey, city manager, we would like this. And the city manager looks for who out | 01:37:54 | |
| of the staff have the time to fulfill that purpose. And if they don't have that time, that way we're not having people work | 01:38:02 | |
| overtime or come in early or do things like that and they're able to facilitate. | 01:38:10 | |
| Proper production that's efficient to maximizing what you are asking for, what the total council is asking for. And if that time | 01:38:19 | |
| starts taking too much away from the priorities that the full council set and think that's where the parameters are coming in | 01:38:25 | |
| here, but I think it would be fair to maybe. | 01:38:31 | |
| You could all meet in small working groups and go through this. Are there any other high level points? I think that I think we can | 01:38:37 | |
| find agreement of what I would say is because this is so much of an adjustment that citizens should at least get two weeks to see | 01:38:44 | |
| the final version and then a public comment. Because like sometimes there's consequences and unintended consequences and you can't | 01:38:50 | |
| look at it in terms of like the current makeup of the council right now or the current problem. You have to look at it like in the | 01:38:57 | |
| future. | 01:39:03 | |
| Outside of the issues of the day, right So. | 01:39:10 | |
| I don't think there's any rush on this. I think it's a fair request and I'd be happy to meet with you, Jake. I, I really do try to | 01:39:14 | |
| make sure that we're representing everyone on the council and I do think that same thing when I'm making, when I'm working on | 01:39:20 | |
| policy. How will this affect the council 10 years from now? | 01:39:26 | |
| We don't know who's going to be mayor, who's going to be making the decisions as a council, and so I agree with you 100%. | 01:39:34 | |
| Is this a public document? | 01:39:43 | |
| Yeah, Mayor, thank you for the time. It was helpful to get feedback from everybody and. | 01:39:45 | |
| I'll take a stab at making some changes and I'll make some phone calls to members of the council to try to get their suggestions. | 01:39:49 | |
| And then to the individual members of the council, feel free to send me red line edits or an e-mail or whatever is easiest for you | 01:39:57 | |
| to get information back. And then I'll try to create a new draft and we can. And I also, I also want to reiterate that I, I'm so | 01:40:05 | |
| grateful for the staff, the documents that I do gather they're not attacking. I mean some, I hope they can understand my tone. | 01:40:12 | |
| Thank you, Amber. | 01:41:35 | |
| All right, if we are done with this and there are no further comments on this, I'm going to go ahead and take us to the next | 01:41:37 | |
| agenda item which moves us right into public comment, I believe. Let me confirm. | 01:41:43 | |
| Minutes on the screen. | 01:42:23 | |
| And then if you have an item that all of you would like to share. | 01:42:26 | |
| Citizens acting in inappropriate manners will be, you know, invited to leave, same as always. And we're so excited to hear from | 01:43:06 | |
| you and really learn about what you care about in our community. So with that, we invite you to come up and share. | 01:43:12 | |
| Come on. | 01:43:21 | |
| Yeah, go ahead and stand in line if you want. You can. Forward to you if you want to. I'm Darlene Price. I appreciate you having | 01:43:22 | |
| people lean forward and talking to their mic because. | 01:43:27 | |
| I had a real hard time listening and hearing what they were doing on the discussion here. So that was great Council. I appreciate | 01:43:32 | |
| that my personal my my point and my questions that you can answer later is who is the we that form this document on agenda public | 01:43:41 | |
| comments, request from staff? Was that the entire council that got together and said let's put this together or was it just you? | 01:43:50 | |
| I mean that that's my question is who's the we that did that? Then I said I'm looking for looking at each of the things that you | 01:43:59 | |
| talked about. The big red mark that came out in my mind was that the mayor established the agenda. | 01:44:07 | |
| The mayor allocates the time for personal comments. | 01:44:16 | |
| The mayor requests what can be requested of staff, the mayor or the manager directs the staff. And to me that and finally the | 01:44:20 | |
| mayor decides who gets what records. And so for me, that's a big, a big exclamation point that that's a lot of power in one | 01:44:28 | |
| person's hands to dictate what your constituents want to have done in our home and around in our area. So that those are my | 01:44:36 | |
| questions. | 01:44:44 | |
| The big red flash about what the mayor does on every single one of these things. Nobody else gets a second opinion. | 01:44:52 | |
| And the fact that the we who was that I would like to know. Thank you. | 01:44:59 | |
| Hi, I'm Keith Hold the way I live on Holdaway road. | 01:45:07 | |
| I think it's been three months ago that I asked for a response and the mayor told me that she would e-mail me the amount of tax | 01:45:10 | |
| returned to, to the golf place and, and I and also Larry Miller Theater and she has not done that yet. I'm, I'm waiting for that | 01:45:18 | |
| e-mail from the mayor because it was promised to me. And, and I just want to know that I think I have a right as a citizen to ask | 01:45:26 | |
| that. | 01:45:34 | |
| And I was promised that. | 01:45:41 | |
| I I also remember when I was voted in and and sworn in, I actually had all of the financial. | 01:45:44 | |
| Records as soon as I received the vote of the citizens, I didn't have to wait till the swearing in and I didn't have to wait three | 01:45:55 | |
| or four months later to get every single detail that I wanted as a City Councilman. | 01:46:02 | |
| There should be nobody that waits that long to receive any type of. We voted for certain people and we voted for them to have | 01:46:11 | |
| total access, not partial. | 01:46:16 | |
| That's exactly. Remember to raise your hand, please, no commentary. And that should happen and you ought to make sure as a council | 01:46:22 | |
| that that happens today or tomorrow. | 01:46:27 | |
| Every single item that they want to review, they should be able to review past expenses. They should have the total books. | 01:46:33 | |
| Everyone should. The whole staff should be open to that. They should want that for the public good. | 01:46:41 | |
| And and for it not to be like that is a kangaroo court. | 01:46:50 | |
| I'm done. | 01:46:55 | |
| Chip price Providence I. | 01:46:59 | |
| I wanted to take a little bit of time to just kind of remind you guys that as elected officials, you guys work for us. And in | 01:47:03 | |
| order for that to take place, we need to be able to stand in this room and have and have us express how we feel. | 01:47:12 | |
| Your job is to listen to what we're asking you to do, and if public comments are squelched then. | 01:47:21 | |
| You're not. You're not a representative anymore. | 01:47:31 | |
| You're you're working for yourselves and that's, that's not what our government was designed to do. | 01:47:35 | |
| I have, I have a question. A couple months ago we received an e-mail with a survey that said, hey, prioritize what you guys want, | 01:47:44 | |
| your vision of things, how we're doing. | 01:47:50 | |
| Are those results going to be made public? Are we going to be able to see what the City of Vineyards public view is? And. | 01:47:59 | |
| When? When will those results be just disclosed? | 01:48:10 | |
| That's a question. | 01:48:16 | |
| I will, yeah. We'll answer. I'll answer after. | 01:48:18 | |
| That's it. | 01:48:22 | |
| Thanks Tip. | 01:48:23 | |
| Daria Evans Figured resident. Thank you for this opportunity. I just have. | 01:48:26 | |
| I was really glad to hear that MAG has awarded the city tag grant. I'd like to know how much that grant was for. It wasn't listed | 01:48:33 | |
| in the Vineyard City Facebook page how much that grant is worth and it also it gave the areas that it's going to be distributed. | 01:48:40 | |
| I'd like to know where Geneva Rd. loop is. | 01:48:47 | |
| I have no idea where Geneva Rd. loop is and that's listed on the bottom of the little. | 01:48:56 | |
| Picture it says it will be at Mill Rd. Vineyard Connector and Geneva Rd. loop. So I'd like to know where Geneva Rd. loop is on | 01:49:03 | |
| that. And then also a neighbor asked me about the sun shades back in August of 2023. I asked that question when they will be | 01:49:11 | |
| installed and my neighbor just asked me this past week when are those sun shades going to be installed. So I'd like to get her an | 01:49:18 | |
| answer on that. | 01:49:26 | |
| And then also on the March 4th Vineyard Community, Vineyard City page, it was talking about the Vineyard Community Garden, and I | 01:49:35 | |
| think the picture on there is misleading it. I was looking at it. Oh, that looks really great. It's a picture of the Orem | 01:49:43 | |
| Community Garden, and I think that needs to be credited to the Oren Community Garden. | 01:49:52 | |
| Because that's that is misleading. And so I would appreciate that being corrected. I also spoke with Mr. Ellis in February about | 01:50:01 | |
| the Top Golf tax incentive and he told me that he would talk to Laura Lewis. She's the accountant back in 2018 was doing all this | 01:50:08 | |
| work with the Top Golf. | 01:50:15 | |
| And it would, he said. It might be scheduled for February 28th or March. | 01:50:23 | |
| And he said that 200 pages of document would be provided for for people to look through when that happens, that she would explain | 01:50:28 | |
| it and. | 01:50:33 | |
| February 28th meeting was cancelled and so I'm wondering when that meeting will be scheduled for the public. | 01:50:39 | |
| And then I also asked him about the railroad spur, and he said negotiations still in progress, the Union Pacific is asking for | 01:50:46 | |
| more siding. And so I'd like to know how those negotiations are going. | 01:50:53 | |
| I also missed the special sessions on February and 17th and 19th because we are out of town Tennessee visiting family, and I was | 01:51:01 | |
| hoping that the minutes of those two sessions would be approved tonight as consent items, but they are not listed. And so I'd like | 01:51:09 | |
| to know when they would be available to read. And then also I'd like to be able to read Mayor Fulmer's state of the city that you | 01:51:17 | |
| presented at your February 21st retreat meeting. I would like to go to let me think about the state of the city. Thank you. | 01:51:25 | |
| Kim Cornelius resident. | 01:51:41 | |
| I'd like to say I heard this through the Grapevine, but it's pretty credible. Grapevine happens to be a retired city chief, Fire | 01:51:45 | |
| Chief Jim McGill, and from what I understand there have been. | 01:51:51 | |
| Some pretty different plans put in place for a fire station and it seems very creative. It sounds like it's pretty good, but I'm | 01:51:59 | |
| wondering if you could give the public who knows nothing about this current plan, proposed plan a status update. | 01:52:07 | |
| Because I'm not sure that the water getting to the end of the roof so that we're kept abreast of what's going on. I'm not even | 01:52:15 | |
| sure that all the council members know what was going on. Thank you. | 01:52:19 | |
| Claudia Larae, Holdaway Rd. Thank you for all your work. I know it's kind of a thankless job. I would just like to make a comment | 01:52:27 | |
| about meetings in December. | 01:52:33 | |
| It was very disappointing to be one of 27 people sitting up in that hall that were not accommodated for being able to hear the | 01:52:40 | |
| meeting if people take their time to come, I think maybe while we're making all these. | 01:52:49 | |
| Rules that make. Maybe we should address what to do with an overflow. I noticed there was a. | 01:52:59 | |
| Screen out there. | 01:53:09 | |
| That maybe could have. I don't know if it was set up or not, but I'm asking you please to. | 01:53:10 | |
| Make a plan for that so those of us, you know, if we can't fit in these seats. I mean, people came to hear and to comment. And I | 01:53:18 | |
| certainly understand not wanting to hear the same comment over and over, but just to be able to accommodate the citizens who come | 01:53:27 | |
| in some way. I don't know what the answer is. | 01:53:35 | |
| But I know that there is an answer. | 01:53:44 | |
| Thank you. | 01:53:49 | |
| Karen Cornelius, resident. | 01:53:56 | |
| I consider myself to be a constitutional conservative. | 01:53:58 | |
| And one of the things that I hold dearest. | 01:54:03 | |
| Is the 1st Amendment. | 01:54:07 | |
| And that First Amendment gives me the right to stand here before you and share my concerns about the legislative body, about the | 01:54:09 | |
| things that are happening in this city and about things that I see that we might be able to improve. And one of those is | 01:54:16 | |
| definitely communication. But, and I remember that same meeting that Claudia just spoke of, and I want to read you something that | 01:54:23 | |
| was said in that meeting or to a reporter after the meeting. | 01:54:30 | |
| It's amazing to see people so impassioned to care so much and even on the smallest items, things that I never would have thought | 01:54:39 | |
| would ever come to the discussion, she said. This is meaningful and sometimes it's difficult to explain the law or to understand | 01:54:47 | |
| what is exactly coming before you, but just to see that you people care is incredible. | 01:54:55 | |
| That was a quote from our mayor. We care and we understand. We do our homework. We may not know the law like you do. | 01:55:04 | |
| But we do our homework and we come to these meetings with a level of preparation that is good for us and we deserve respect. | 01:55:13 | |
| I don't trust that we're getting it. I don't feel like we're getting it when you say that. Even the smallest items, well, one of | 01:55:24 | |
| those small items just happened to be the four to one power grab. We sitting out there did not consider that to be small. We | 01:55:31 | |
| considered that to be major. Two others were two Pids that we knew nothing about. I know my time is running out. If you want to | 01:55:38 | |
| handcuff me, that's OK. But I want to finish what I have to say. | 01:55:45 | |
| I I like to keep all the way want to know about the taxes and I want that in a public meeting because. | 01:55:54 | |
| That I had to try and keep forgetting it. | 01:56:04 | |
| I want to know in a public meeting the answer to Keith Hoodways question because that question was asked in public and if we all | 01:56:11 | |
| want to know the answer why do we have to go 1 by 1 to get the answer from someone else that needs to be on public records. | 01:56:19 | |
| Another thing that I'm concerned about is the bridge that has been approved for Utah City. When I see the eyesore at the front | 01:56:28 | |
| runner station with no parking facility. Nobody talks about when that's planned for and I know that there's hopes to be jumped | 01:56:36 | |
| through to get it, but there were also hoops that were jumped through to get that bridge. | 01:56:44 | |
| In Utah City. So I know that there are things that can be done and I know that Julie and Jeff Hartley have some some people they | 01:56:53 | |
| know and some pressure that they can place. And we are really kind of the laughingstock of Utah County the way our frontrunner | 01:57:00 | |
| station has become the over the overflow trap, the overflow. Our new time is up. So we're going to have to wrap up. I understand | 01:57:06 | |
| it is. | 01:57:12 | |
| It's not fair for me to give you additional time when I have to take time with other people. So we can talk about this next time, | 01:57:22 | |
| but let's finish the job at the front runner. Let's not be starting all of these other projects when we've got that eyesore every | 01:57:27 | |
| time we come over the bridge at 800. Thanks. | 01:57:33 | |
| I'm Adam Tushar. I'm a resident in the Windsor neighborhood. So just a few questions I guess about kind of to clarify a couple | 01:57:45 | |
| things. | 01:57:49 | |
| This packet says that this public comment is for items not on the agenda. But the mayor did say something about like you could | 01:57:54 | |
| address items on the agenda. So I don't know if that's a new policy or just wanted to be. No, I think I meant not on the agenda. I | 01:58:00 | |
| might have misspoke. I was reading. | 01:58:05 | |
| The OK, so we'll do away with that. | 01:58:12 | |
| I did wanna make it. Was it an agenda item that was already addressed? Go ahead. OK, All right. So I just wanted to I read through | 01:58:17 | |
| kind of the stuff that about the meetings and I think there was two very specific areas that maybe the counselor, the attorney | 01:58:24 | |
| might consider just some additional clarity. One was I think it was maybe already brought up, but like what is the definition of a | 01:58:30 | |
| prestige really inappropriate agenda item and who makes that determination and just. | 01:58:36 | |
| You know, is that, you know, legally that's obvious, but like what is procedurally mean? And then the other one was what is the | 01:58:43 | |
| definition of there's a part that says strong support from the community. So how is that determined? And that's in regards to how | 01:58:49 | |
| the city manager prioritizes request for information or you know, other things like that. I think that would just be helpful with | 01:58:55 | |
| the public to understand too. Aside from that, I did want to mention I did go to one of the special meetings. I thought it was | 01:59:02 | |
| really great. | 01:59:08 | |
| That's it. Thank you. Thank you. | 01:59:45 | |
| All right. | 01:59:48 | |
| Doesn't look like we have any other comments, Elizabeth. | 01:59:50 | |
| I would like to just add really fast I. | 01:59:55 | |
| President. | 02:00:00 | |
| The same meeting that Keith asked for, the e-mail for the second time I asked for. If we do have to, I don't wanna talk right? But | 02:00:02 | |
| if I do raise my hand, I would love to have some kind of tally system when it goes into the notes to be like when this person said | 02:00:07 | |
| that comment we had. | 02:00:12 | |
| 15 people raised their hand or whatever, right? So that, that if I'm not going to repeat something that at least my voice was | 02:00:18 | |
| heard by my raise of hand. Because I'm telling you right now, she doesn't look up. You look up sometimes you look up every time | 02:00:24 | |
| you look up every time you look up every time. So if we're going to raise our hand in support of a comment or something, that | 02:00:30 | |
| means I'm sorry, something that that's been said. | 02:00:36 | |
| Our freedom of speech is is I agree with what was that our freedom of speech is such a. | 02:00:43 | |
| I mean, it's where our country is built on one of the main things being able to say what we wanted. And I think to limit comments | 02:00:50 | |
| to do anything with public comment is, is such a spot on the face. And I would just also like to say that if we're going to talk | 02:00:57 | |
| about respecting of time and meetings and the flow of meetings, have the top agenda items be your 123 bullet points of the agenda. | 02:01:04 | |
| And if something else happens after and it's been 2 hours, then say, guess what, we're going to move these to the next meeting. | 02:01:10 | |
| So maybe just. | 02:01:50 | |
| Put an important sense that if it doesn't fit in that meeting, it gets bumped to the next meeting. | 02:01:52 | |
| All right. | 02:02:01 | |
| No, I raised my hand to agree with it because you told me to do that. All right, I will be able to address some of these. Darlene | 02:02:04 | |
| Price, you mentioned who's the we. I think Jamie did a sufficient job answering that question early when he presented Jamie, I | 02:02:10 | |
| don't know if you want to reiterate that you that process. | 02:02:17 | |
| Attorneys have privilege. Is everybody OK if I answer that question so. | 02:02:25 | |
| Sometimes things come about organically, so this was not an agenda item where there was one particular council member who said | 02:02:31 | |
| Jamie do this. | 02:02:36 | |
| I have filled a lot of requests over the last three months of we've had this new thing come up. How do we deal with it? And then | 02:02:41 | |
| when I went and looked at it, I realized that we had no rules. | 02:02:47 | |
| Lawyers like rules because it. | 02:02:53 | |
| Set some structure to how we do things. And so I asked the mayor if I could put together some rules for the council to consider. I | 02:02:56 | |
| met with the mayor to discuss them, I met with Marty to discuss them and I met with council member Holdaway to discuss them. That | 02:03:02 | |
| doesn't mean that they were drafted by any of those council members, but I received input from all three. And again with the | 02:03:08 | |
| structure of the meetings, this was in a work session today. And so it's kind of a first read of the item or reaction to the item | 02:03:15 | |
| and then we can. | 02:03:21 | |
| Work on refining it, make it what the council wants, and then at the end of the day when the council does adopt it and vote, it | 02:03:28 | |
| will be their document and it'll be the city's document. | 02:03:33 | |
| Could you clarify, and I'm sorry if you were going to ask us next, but could you clarify the mayor's role because she had | 02:03:38 | |
| questions about how the mayor establishes the agenda and the public comments and direct staff and so on. Could you kind of talk | 02:03:44 | |
| about her executive role and what is state code versus our code? Sure. | 02:03:50 | |
| The Under state law, the mayor is the chair of the council and so there are some functions that follow the mayor by law, not by. | 02:03:58 | |
| Now, we can't change that part of the rule. And so the rules reflect that under state law. But the mayor is the chair of the | 02:04:08 | |
| council. There's a provision in state law that allows certain roles or functions of a mayor to be defined or limited by a city. | 02:04:15 | |
| But one of the roles that cannot under any circumstance be limited is the mayor's role as chair of the council. And that does | 02:04:23 | |
| involve agenda setting and things related to that. And so you do see the mayor. | 02:04:30 | |
| The Office of the Mayor. | 02:04:39 | |
| Identified in the rules throughout and that's really a function of what's in state law. There are some places when you read the | 02:04:41 | |
| document where it says mayor slash city manager slash council. My effort in stating things in that way is to make clear that. | 02:04:50 | |
| If any one of those three say to staff move forward with the request, then it would happen. It's it's an effort, I guess, to be | 02:05:00 | |
| expansive, not restrictive. | 02:05:05 | |
| Thank you. All right. Please hold the way you mentioned that I said I would personally e-mail you and I just want to clarify that | 02:05:13 | |
| my discussion was that Eric Ellis and our RDA Director would be the people in contact with you. What I understand about the | 02:05:18 | |
| situation. And I also stated that if anybody else wanted that information to go and meet with the staff members as well. And what | 02:05:23 | |
| I understand about the situation that you guys are currently working together and trying to solve that problem for that | 02:05:28 | |
| information. | 02:05:33 | |
| Well, I apologize if I misstated it, but I wouldn't have the information. So it would be the two people that did that. So thank | 02:05:40 | |
| you. Can you can you talk to the point? Because this just keeps coming up. | 02:05:46 | |
| Is there certain parts of this private information? I think so. And Eric, if you want to go ahead and clarify it, go ahead. | 02:05:53 | |
| It's this, yeah, this is working. So I have been speaking with Council member Holdaway about this specific topic. He just, he | 02:06:02 | |
| requested that he own this topic directly and in order to pull this documentation, it requires a grammar request. And so I sent | 02:06:10 | |
| the grammar request file to Council member Holdaway and have not received a response on that yet. Why does it require a grammar | 02:06:17 | |
| request like it's tax? | 02:06:24 | |
| To a single entity and so there it's. | 02:06:33 | |
| It's considered private information. | 02:06:35 | |
| So like if they did a grammar request, would things be redacted? Like the information they want would just be redacted? It would, | 02:06:38 | |
| it would more specifically, I don't know what would be redacted, but it would go through a recorder and she would vet that for | 02:06:44 | |
| private versus public information. And, and as a council member, the response could be different than it would be for what was | 02:06:50 | |
| available to the public potentially. Jamie, can you chime in on legal tax reimbursement that a government entity is giving back | 02:06:57 | |
| for taxes? | 02:07:03 | |
| The private number, but we can't share. I've seen in other cities where Saratoga Springs has their Costco annually they post how | 02:07:10 | |
| much money is going back to Costco and they just do A1 pager of these are all the tax deals that we've given. And I know we have | 02:07:18 | |
| quite a few more. And I owned it and said, First off, I don't want to do a grandma. It's like 10 and and I didn't I don't like | 02:07:26 | |
| that approach because it's like I wanted to move this towards transparency in terms of. | 02:07:35 | |
| Could we set forth a policy of A1 pager and every year we update it once that new information comes out and it's just released to | 02:07:43 | |
| the public in January of we paid out this much this year because you know, those Rdas are set up on the economy, right? We're | 02:07:51 | |
| we're making a guest 20 years ago on how much taxes the megaplex is going to go for on a percentage basis over that 20 or 30 year | 02:07:59 | |
| period, right? And it's calculated every year depending on how many people go and do it. And so as a policy. | 02:08:07 | |
| That's what my father's asking for is can we calculate year to date and every year so that because there are certain businesses | 02:08:15 | |
| that don't get any money and it's hard when we do give these better deals through the RDA, it just needs to be public what it is. | 02:08:22 | |
| So if I could just make one more comment, the I'm gonna let you make a comment, but it's gonna go to Jamie. Then I'm gonna go to | 02:08:30 | |
| the next. OK, this will be quick adding the grandma request. | 02:08:37 | |
| And so again, our goal in providing their grammar request is so that we have crystal clear instructions on what we need to look | 02:09:19 | |
| for so that we can be responsive to that request. | 02:09:24 | |
| Thank God. Jimmy, are you council member? Hold the way. Maybe what might help is if we jump on a quick phone call with you and | 02:09:31 | |
| your dad and I can help. | 02:09:37 | |
| I can help Orient you to kind of what information is available and it's out there and then maybe you can pinpoint what exactly you | 02:09:44 | |
| want. I think this could be an agenda item of the policy of staff does this. Yeah. The next thing I wanted to mention is I know | 02:09:51 | |
| the mayor is scheduled in RDA meeting following the council meeting in two weeks. | 02:09:57 | |
| And has arranged for the RDA director to be present to walk through all of the RDA obligations over time so that the public can | 02:10:04 | |
| hear everything and and ask all the follow up questions. But we can get you, you know, basic information of agreements, | 02:10:12 | |
| reimbursement commitments, dollar amounts on those kinds of things certainly are public. | 02:10:20 | |
| Tax receipts for individual businesses. | 02:10:30 | |
| Are not and I think where there might have been some miscommunication between your request and what Eric's looking for is he | 02:10:34 | |
| understood the request to be individual tax receipts and. | 02:10:39 | |
| Put their suggestions and sorry, I don't know the tag grant number offhand, but if you stop by our planning and talk to Morgan, | 02:11:15 | |
| he'll be able to put that and maybe we can add that to the picture or the listing that we put on social media. Thanks for the | 02:11:22 | |
| comment on the Orem Community Garden. We'll send that feedback back to the social media team. Eric, will you make note of that and | 02:11:30 | |
| make sure that we do that the ARM community Gardens page picture. OK, let's see. | 02:11:37 | |
| Additionally, you can find out about the loop sunshade, the Geneva. No, no, the sun shades. I the last time we talked about this, | 02:11:45 | |
| I believe it was spring, but it would be good to talk to Morgan the same or Brian and you could even touch base with Eric and they | 02:11:51 | |
| could update you on that timeline. We didn't want to put them up in the winter because it's just wear and tear on them. So we were | 02:11:56 | |
| waiting for good weather. | 02:12:02 | |
| Right. And have we received them yet? Sorry, I said I'd be quick. No, no, I, I, I think the best opportunity would be to talk to | 02:12:09 | |
| staff and get the full timeline. | 02:12:13 | |
| So that if they know the information best Geneva Loop, Rd. Morgan, I'd like to know what that is too. So the tag grant just to | 02:12:17 | |
| kind of explain really quickly is the technical assistance. The tag grant is the technical assistance grant through MAG. And so we | 02:12:25 | |
| received $120,000 and what? And that's that's for planning funds to help us plan those corridors to make them safer for | 02:12:33 | |
| pedestrians, for bikes to to add crossings we did. | 02:12:40 | |
| We did town halls over there and that was one of the number #1 concerns from residents was that they feel unsafe crossing and you | 02:12:49 | |
| know, but they feel safe in the community. So yeah, I think the. Is it a loop to Geneva? Yeah. So, so So what it looks at is Mill | 02:12:56 | |
| Road 400 NA connection to Frontrunner and then the loop of Geneva on our side of Geneva Rd. Geneva is the state road and it falls | 02:13:04 | |
| mainly within Orem. But the planning grant would look at our trail because there is a. | 02:13:11 | |
| Plan trail on our side of Diva and then coming up the Vineyard connector and making a connection up to the front runner. So it's | 02:13:19 | |
| looking at kind of those corridors for trails and for overall. | 02:13:24 | |
| Bicycle and pedestrian safety. Okay, all right, let's see. | 02:13:31 | |
| And for accommodations for what happens if we have overflow, I think we can work on that. There's a few things that we'll probably | 02:14:09 | |
| have to work through. When you make a public notice, you're not necessarily sure how many people might show up. And so sometimes | 02:14:15 | |
| when there's a public notice, you have to hold it at the area. But what we can do in the future. | 02:14:21 | |
| Maybe is triggered better and then bring that back for a brainstorming session. So that's good. | 02:14:28 | |
| Did not want to do the conversation and negotiations have gone really well. The state has been a great partner. Union Pacific | 02:15:08 | |
| Railroad is coming to a good agreement with us. UTA, as they mentioned are also becoming a good partner in it. And I think we're | 02:15:15 | |
| working on something that's really going to be a great benefit to the city and it's not something that's going to. | 02:15:21 | |
| I think you'll be happy with the outcome. As we get to the other side of that, let's see, special session minutes were discussed | 02:15:29 | |
| by one of our residents. But just to clarify it, because there were only two people, it's not actually a City Council meeting. It | 02:15:37 | |
| falls to a different standard. And so the Open Public Meetings Act is not required for meeting minutes to be taken, but if you | 02:15:45 | |
| request for the video or the audio that was taken, you can listen to it. So if you have questions about that, you can. | 02:15:53 | |
| Reach out to our recorder. Thank you for the comments on the procedural and the public definitions for the ordinances that we're | 02:16:01 | |
| looking at it. We'll also mention the updates for the trail network and I believe that's it. So thank you again for all of the | 02:16:07 | |
| public comments and. | 02:16:14 | |
| I'll go ahead and let you talk about, I mean, is there something specific that you want to address? I just want to respond to the | 02:16:23 | |
| public comment section, so. | 02:16:27 | |
| I don't want to go through all of it unless you have something additional to add that's information. | 02:16:32 | |
| Yeah, I'm just responding to the public comments. So they asking me these questions, right? | 02:16:37 | |
| So I know, so the way that I want to do this is I love the idea that you wanna comment. So if you have something more to add to | 02:16:44 | |
| these specific ideas or information, that's a very specific thing and they're different from your comments. | 02:16:52 | |
| It'll be the same thing now as then. I can wait 10 minutes. OK, let's go ahead and move into it. You can be first. | 02:17:35 | |
| Just for procedure, I just want to follow the same procedure. OK, so for the question period, I just want the citizens to know how | 02:17:42 | |
| hard it is for me to get information from Eric in the I'll say, hey, I would like this and a public comment. I would like this | 02:17:50 | |
| before on the agenda. I would like a policy of putting this through. And it's like, hey, fill out this grammar request and it | 02:17:57 | |
| becomes a lot of homework. And it it it is, it's like slow the roll, right? It takes some time. | 02:18:05 | |
| On tip on your survey results, I read every single one of them. There are over 650 responses and it was very loud. | 02:18:13 | |
| It was shocking, the anger and and I, I think the citizens deserve to see just like Facebook comments, how angry everyone is if | 02:18:22 | |
| they just go to one source or four or five of us, we can just say, hey, everything is fine in the city. And I just don't think | 02:18:27 | |
| anything, it needs to be transparent, right? | 02:18:32 | |
| Sorry, I don't. I don't know about veneer, Lupro or whatever. The picture of the gardens on the garden thing. | 02:18:39 | |
| I think I did see that we're putting out a garden director. So this kind of more of my report. I really believe that the garden | 02:18:46 | |
| group themselves should be picking their own leader instead of having them apply to us. I think it creates a sense of community. | 02:18:53 | |
| Same thing with the library, the Heritage Commission. I don't think it should be appointed. It's just kind of the topic there. | 02:19:00 | |
| They voted on their roles and volunteered on their roles. I think he means the actual appointments that fall under. | 02:19:10 | |
| Yeah, I don't think the appointment, yeah, I think the appointments should just be made by their group, like allowing them to vote | 02:19:18 | |
| for themselves. I think it it, it allows them some autonomy, I think. And going back to the special meeting minutes. | 02:19:25 | |
| I want to work with you guys in good faith and you know, I, I apologized already for the Saturday and Monday and I saw those on | 02:19:33 | |
| the rules of saying, hey, we can't ever do that on Saturday and Monday. And I can agree with that. | 02:19:40 | |
| However, I think that you know with the. | 02:19:48 | |
| I don't know 30 or 30 or so that attended or 2025 that attended. We spent many hours going through a lot of issues and problems | 02:19:53 | |
| and we've got to be able. I know that in good. | 02:19:59 | |
| If if the group doesn't vote to put them on, then we're not going to allow people to know of the pain and different problems. I | 02:20:08 | |
| just think that we're in good faith to just say that it can be listed cuz it's. | 02:20:14 | |
| But I understand by law it can be denied. The next thing is on the fire department. Sarah and I have never met with the fire | 02:20:20 | |
| department yet and we've requested to meet with City Council or on that. And so just if we could meet and know all these different | 02:20:28 | |
| plans and changes. Same thing with the rail spur and same thing with Huntsman, like we request to meet with different things. | 02:20:35 | |
| Claudia, I, I I want to make you feel that we are listening. | 02:20:45 | |
| I think that opening up Facebook comments and wouldn't make it so you didn't have to come here. But I also think it adds the | 02:20:50 | |
| transparency is what other people are saying. And then Karen, just knowing about the taxes and different things on that. And then | 02:20:56 | |
| on your bridge comment, I just wanted to place this on the record. Like I'm grateful that we bring amenities to the state, but I | 02:21:03 | |
| did not know about the 12th North Bridge. I tried to speak with Mr. Hartley. He only gave me the ability to go up to the | 02:21:10 | |
| legislature and learn about that. | 02:21:16 | |
| And you guys know that I've asked them to come down here and ask some serious questions about everything his relationship, and it | 02:21:23 | |
| still hasn't happened. And I wanted to, I want to do that within closed doors. | 02:21:28 | |
| And hey, let's go meet and now I'm like to the point where I think there needs to be a clearing of air grievances and, and just | 02:21:35 | |
| kind of hear things out. And that's why I think special sessions are needed if if we don't want to allow for, you know, Ben Abbott | 02:21:42 | |
| or others that had some issues where we could talk about it openly. | 02:21:48 | |
| I just want to make sure that people understand I'm I'm trying it gets tough and I heard I read it in your in your survey | 02:21:55 | |
| responses and they made me sad. | 02:22:00 | |
| On my report stuff this week, we held two meetings and I'm really grateful for Utah City that came and met with me and Sarah and | 02:22:07 | |
| we held those meetings and we did that in a style in which that it wouldn't have a quorum and so we could speak openly. | 02:22:16 | |
| And I don't like that culture in our city. I think you guys should be able to see me work with Utah City and talk and it should be | 02:22:26 | |
| recorded. And me and Sarah are being separated to where we don't really need to be. We're spending double the staff hour time to | 02:22:33 | |
| hold one meeting at 9:00 and then an hour and a half later do another meeting. And we're doing it twice. And the and the excuse | 02:22:40 | |
| that we're given is that it would have to be recorded and be public. And I just go, I don't remember the culture of this when. | 02:22:48 | |
| It used to not be that way and so I wanted to push back on on that. And then our second meeting about the. | 02:22:55 | |
| Argument about the finances. So the people saw me and you leave that meeting and even today talk about the differences of what | 02:23:03 | |
| actually happened. And I don't like that because I think the public should be able to see that disagreement in those types of | 02:23:10 | |
| meetings. And when I get summoned to those, I go, there's only two of us here there. This is a great meeting where everyone should | 02:23:16 | |
| watch this open debate and go through and do it. And that's what the public deserve. | 02:23:23 | |
| And you guys get to vote us based off of what's happened. And, and I, I get that certain things like a Utah city, like, oh, I want | 02:23:31 | |
| privacy or whatever. And, and I, I, I'm kind of like in certain issues, guys, I want to have this public. | 02:23:39 | |
| Can I respond to one of them? Sure. | 02:24:17 | |
| I guess we'd have to refer to Damien on the whole public meeting because we are following state code. But the whole reason we had | 02:24:20 | |
| we met with Ave. consultants was to help us be employed and educated because it will be presented to the public. And the | 02:24:26 | |
| presentation that we saw today, the transportation, we all saw that. And then we had our questions and we could even make requests | 02:24:33 | |
| for changes and then they brought it to the public. So I agree with you. | 02:24:39 | |
| In the sense that it's great to have more public involvement, but at the same time, I think what you're asking for, if we had a | 02:24:46 | |
| public meeting on every single thing we did, our staff would be monopolized by that. No, their last meetings because we're holding | 02:24:52 | |
| the meeting twice. Well, but to have it in the public, I just feel like. | 02:24:58 | |
| We literally are doing duplicate meetings to avoid the public and it's like to have a public meeting we have to have like 10 | 02:25:06 | |
| people here from staff. | 02:25:10 | |
| To present like this is a working session. We're all working through ideas by allowing the public to see and watch those. I | 02:25:52 | |
| thought the parking decision will be made except in a public meeting, right? Not what I'm saying, but it's like we're doing all of | 02:25:58 | |
| these working sessions quite a bit before to get to it. And it's like, why don't we just do all of these in one time? That limits | 02:26:04 | |
| me and Sarah's ability to talk and your ability to talk because we all can't talk. It's like one is here, one is there, and I'm | 02:26:10 | |
| going. | 02:26:16 | |
| Well, we're doing this to to avoid a public meeting and. | 02:26:23 | |
| I'm just like, why let's not avoid it? Let's just, let's just do it publicly so that we can all come away with, you know what | 02:26:27 | |
| happened? Because it literally is we're just duplicating meetings right now and I just don't wanna avoid. | 02:26:34 | |
| You know, but like, you want to meet with the fire station, which, no, no, no. I'm saying in certain instances. I'm not saying in | 02:26:43 | |
| every instance, like in trainings, yeah, like, hey, you gotta do some things. But I'm just giving the two examples of the parking | 02:26:48 | |
| study that we did and also the Utah City meeting. | 02:26:53 | |
| You're running those trainings or you're wanting to be a part of it. You're also wanting them to be public. Can I, can I speak for | 02:28:04 | |
| a minute? Yeah, I think, I think what Jake's saying is they did the identical meeting back-to-back. So why if if Jake and I both | 02:28:09 | |
| need the exact same training, why can we not be in the training together? I mean, it was the identical meeting, right? One right | 02:28:15 | |
| after the other. | 02:28:21 | |
| Because the public, public meetings have an expense associated with them. You have to have, you're doing a recording, you have you | 02:28:28 | |
| pay for my time, you pay for Pam's time, you pay for staff time. That's all over there. So you have to be hang on. I'm not done. | 02:28:34 | |
| Sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry. | 02:28:39 | |
| The meeting that we had this week related to your request for financial information and so. | 02:28:46 | |
| We wanted to meet with the mayor and you wanted to meet with the. | 02:28:54 | |
| City manager on that item, if you meet with the mayor, the city manager and Sarah all at once, you have a quorum of the council | 02:28:58 | |
| and so you would have to have a public meeting. | 02:29:03 | |
| You could do it that way, but it would you just go into a closed session and so there's no reason to. | 02:29:09 | |
| Mobilize all the staff, record things and do that if you're just going to have. | 02:29:16 | |
| Look at documents and say, this column looks private to me. I don't need this. This column looks public to me. I don't need that. | 02:29:20 | |
| And so to economize time, the mayor and Eric arranged for Utah City and their representatives to be there at the end of one | 02:29:26 | |
| meeting at the beginning of the other. But it allowed each of you an opportunity to ask questions of the mayor and to give | 02:29:32 | |
| instructions to the mayor and to the city. | 02:29:38 | |
| Manager about. | 02:29:44 | |
| What financial information? So I'm really baffled by the conversation because I hear. | 02:29:46 | |
| I'm not getting information but then they hold a meeting with you to show you the documentation and say. | 02:29:53 | |
| We think this is private. We think this is public. Which parts of it do you want? And then you can turn and you can say to | 02:30:00 | |
| Christy, this is what we want, this is what we don't want. And then she can go back and run reports. It seems really inefficient | 02:30:06 | |
| to do that kind of a conversation. | 02:30:12 | |
| In an open meeting, and yet here we are. | 02:30:19 | |
| Well, I can understand that, but we didn't talk about anything private in those meetings. It was just more of of what we can and | 02:30:23 | |
| cannot share and our quest to be more transparent. So I think it's a good exercise of like because we never referenced one | 02:30:31 | |
| specific or if we did, we could be careful. Hey, I'm not going to reference the name of this or that, right? This is we could | 02:30:39 | |
| have, we could have hold both of those meetings just in our City Council meeting and debated it openly on how what is or is not. | 02:30:48 | |
| Transparent, right? Or when or how are we or how we not sharing because I came away from that meeting and I was like, I don't like | 02:30:56 | |
| that. There's going to be two sides of what happened here, you know, and, and I just want to be more. I just would rather have an | 02:31:03 | |
| audience when things are happening. Like there needs to be more of that. | 02:31:10 | |
| I I feel, 'cause you know. | 02:31:19 | |
| But that's not what's happening. We're in. What we're saying is it was in the public, it went on an agenda to go through the | 02:32:29 | |
| study. The studies been happening. And as I explained, you will be brought into those meetings, you will see it, you will get to | 02:32:35 | |
| review it all. It goes through the stakeholder. Then after that meeting you'll see it. Then it'll go through the public because | 02:32:41 | |
| that's the procedure of policy analysis. | 02:32:47 | |
| Well, and I just want to add. | 02:32:53 | |
| When we started this meeting, this room was full and now this room is dwindling because it's getting light. If we do everything in | 02:32:55 | |
| a public meeting, I have volunteered my time. I do get paid what I believe is a minimum wage, minimal, not minimum, and I just | 02:33:04 | |
| don't see the endurance of the public being able to. I think there are some people that would be able to come to if we had a | 02:33:12 | |
| public meeting every day. I think there's some people that would join, but the public can only do so much and I think that. | 02:33:20 | |
| And so I am trying really hard to take what you guys are saying and put it here. I might not agree with everything you guys are | 02:34:30 | |
| saying, but I genuinely take what you're saying into consideration and I try to represent people as I'm in these meetings. Now, | 02:34:36 | |
| everyone in Vineyard isn't here right now. There's a lot of people out there that I'm trying to think, OK, what would so and so | 02:34:42 | |
| that works. Three jobs that lives in an apartment that you can't afford time to come to these meetings. I want to make sure I'm | 02:34:49 | |
| still representing her or. | 02:34:55 | |
| I don't need to get into this, but I'm saying that asking for more public meetings and acting like we aren't being transparent is | 02:35:01 | |
| really unfair. Because I feel like we really try for all of that and we're not perfect and there are definitely ways for us to | 02:35:08 | |
| improve. But I think what you're asking for is very it's, it's too far off. We can't have public meetings for everything we do. | 02:35:16 | |
| I would suggest since we've been talking about this for about 20 minutes. | 02:35:25 | |
| All right, I'm going to turn that time over to Amber. | 02:36:38 | |
| With my mic on, I'm going to go through this quickly. The legislative session is over. I'll just highlight a couple of bills. HB | 02:36:42 | |
| 488, transportation funding modifications went through and this provides additional ongoing funding for the Transit Transportation | 02:36:47 | |
| Investment Fund. | 02:36:52 | |
| And it also allows a local auction for sales tax for transportation or public safety purposes. | 02:36:59 | |
| Then we also have the Housing and Transit reinvestment zone amendments. | 02:37:06 | |
| Which enhances and clarifies housing affordability and make some changes to the HDRZ zone which we have. And then they did the | 02:37:11 | |
| fizz as well, which is similar to the HDRC which passed which is the, I'm trying to remember what it stands for first time | 02:37:19 | |
| investment zone act. Now that cannot be over the HTRZ zone, but it is another area. | 02:37:26 | |
| Where you can get. | 02:37:35 | |
| Let's see, I'm reorganizing my notes here. So the new tool for city to propose medium density city or Town Center and it is a way | 02:37:38 | |
| to get owner occupation for at least the 1st 25 years. They're looking at getting affordable, affordable homes and the face zone | 02:37:44 | |
| needs to be mixed-use. | 02:37:50 | |
| I can actually go through and just create an overall legislative wrap up for the council and e-mail that out to you so we're not | 02:37:57 | |
| here all day. Fight Commission met. They are going to be updating their priorities. They are working on some bylaws and they are. | 02:38:03 | |
| Let's see. | 02:38:09 | |
| They are next meeting is going to be April 23rd. The Community garden is accepting applications until the 18th so make sure you | 02:38:16 | |
| get those in the following week. They will select the winners by a lottery and the garden director position is opened applied for | 02:38:21 | |
| as well. | 02:38:25 | |
| All right. Thank you, Marty. | 02:38:32 | |
| I'm OK. | 02:38:34 | |
| OK, Sarah. | 02:38:36 | |
| I just wanted to thank nothing for the new flag. I appreciate it. | 02:38:40 | |
| Tip, I apologize, I did not mention the survey results and they will be posted. I believe the team putting that together will be | 02:38:46 | |
| posting it. So you'll be you'll have the opportunities to get and I appreciate Jake mentioning the 12 NI can't remember who talked | 02:38:52 | |
| about the parking lot for UTA. It's been under negotiation for some time of seeing when they're going to put financing and how we | 02:38:58 | |
| can help them and what we can do to facilitate that improvement. | 02:39:05 | |
| But. | 02:39:13 | |
| I think something that should be discussed here is as we work on opening up access for 16th and Vineyard Connector and 12th North | 02:39:14 | |
| and 4th North and the the station that they are all projects that are being simultaneously worked on. Because if we were just to | 02:39:22 | |
| focus on just the front runner space and parking lot, we wouldn't be be able to take care of the infrastructure that's necessary | 02:39:30 | |
| for the city. So 1200 N was funded which was exciting. | 02:39:38 | |
| And at the same time, I talked to Sarah about this and she said, why aren't we articulating this better? But we're also working | 02:39:46 | |
| very. | 02:39:49 | |
| Hard on opening up the access point at 400 N, not just on the main line. | 02:39:54 | |
| By trail aside, but also the Geneva access point, so both sides. So we talked about it a lot, but I want to emphasize that we're | 02:40:01 | |
| working on that project we're working on. | 02:40:06 | |
| Widening 800 N, as we saw in our transportation. | 02:40:13 | |
| All of these things are being worked on together. We have a great team that's been working on all of these things. So if you have | 02:40:16 | |
| suggestions for them, if you're noticing an issue, Please remember to send it into our city as well. Yeah, our government | 02:40:21 | |
| consultants will be here at the next meeting. OK? So if you have questions on the legislative recap, they'll be here to answer | 02:40:25 | |
| those questions as well. | 02:40:30 | |
| So I just wonder if there's a way there's so many people that are curious about the comments in the sessions that Jake and I had. | 02:40:38 | |
| Is it possible to put an attachment on the city page so if people want to go and look at them, they can They can dig through and | 02:40:46 | |
| read everything that was commented. And then another thing, did you guys get those? I sent them over. Yeah, we have them all typed | 02:40:52 | |
| up. I sent them to you, Eric. Did you get them? | 02:40:58 | |
| All of the sticky, the post it note you, you got them. So they've all been typed up. None of you guys responded. So I was like, | 02:41:05 | |
| David Laurie, thank you very much. And so you have all those. So is it, is it possible to do an attachment on either the social | 02:41:12 | |
| media page or somewhere else where people can have access to them? | 02:41:18 | |
| Awesome. And then and then Mayor, I appreciate you. | 02:41:27 | |
| Acknowledging our conversation with 1200 N versus 400 NI, think part of the frustration that you here today is that a lot of the | 02:41:32 | |
| citizens feel like their request and their concerns are falling on deaf ears and they don't get an update that we're actually | 02:41:39 | |
| taking them seriously. And I feel like the more we acknowledge what they're saying and they start to see that we are actually | 02:41:47 | |
| implementing their concerns and their frustration that a lot of the dynamic and the energy will change. | 02:41:55 | |
| That comment that you did, just like how can we articulate it more because we might be saying it in the transportation plan, we | 02:42:03 | |
| might be making a brief update about it, but just really hammering on here are our plans. This is what we're doing is a good | 02:42:09 | |
| point, Sarah, thank you. So they can start to see that absolutely concerns are implemented. Yeah, I agree with you. All right, | 02:42:16 | |
| let's go ahead and move on to our consent items. If there isn't any discussion that needs to be had, I just need a motion. | 02:42:22 | |
| I move to approve the consent items as presented. All right, first by Amber. | 02:42:30 | |
| Did we? | 02:42:38 | |
| I thought something's removed off and something's removed on, right? | 02:42:41 | |
| We're just doing the meeting minutes and the historical flag. That's right. Yep. | 02:42:46 | |
| Are we putting the historical flag up? Is that what we're doing? Amber, let's go ahead and do 6.1 and 6.2. I move to approve item | 02:42:52 | |
| 6.1 and 6.2. Great. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you, Marley. First by Amber, second by Marty. All in favor. Aye. 6.3 is up | 02:43:00 | |
| for discussing. Go ahead, Jake. I just think we need to be on the record of what flag we're voting for because I want to be for | 02:43:07 | |
| the old historical flag flag if they do. Sarah, did you want to go ahead and introduce the topic? | 02:43:15 | |
| Well, yeah, I I asked for that, for the historic flag to be flown. I know there's it's been kind of a divisive issue. And so I'm | 02:43:23 | |
| not opposed to flying them both, but I think they both need to be represented. | 02:43:30 | |
| And do you need, can you clarify how we would have to do it so that it's understood by the public? There was a law passed during | 02:43:38 | |
| the last legislative session that if you fly both, that you fly the new one higher than the old one. | 02:43:44 | |
| Right now. So if you if you fly both, that's the way you have to do it. | 02:43:52 | |
| What if you have a second flag? I'm OK with that. All right, everybody, this item then would be to make sure that we fly the | 02:43:57 | |
| original flag as well. So any other discussion on it? One quick point. Yeah, the legislation that passed dictates when that flag | 02:44:04 | |
| is the historical flag is flown and it is flown on the 12 historic or the 12 legal holidays of the year. And so that was those are | 02:44:12 | |
| the days that we will be flying that flag. Oh, so we're not going to have it up all the time just on those holidays. | 02:44:19 | |
| We can't fight all the time. The law dictated that it be flown on legal holidays. | 02:44:28 | |
| That I thought we could, I thought that you could always choose to have both. You know what, how about this? Let's clarify it | 02:44:35 | |
| because I, I was under the same assumption, but let's just clarify and then our vote will go with whatever the law states. Does | 02:44:39 | |
| that work? | 02:44:44 | |
| Yeah, let me make sure I understand it. So if the law allows flexibility, then we fly both all the time. If the law restricts the | 02:44:50 | |
| flying of the historic flag to the holidays, then we follow that. Does that work? Okay, we did our best. Is there any debate? | 02:44:56 | |
| Yeah, and I think we all love the idea, so. | 02:45:03 | |
| I just need a motion if no other discussions moving forward. So I'll move to approve item 6.3 with the clarification that we will | 02:45:10 | |
| follow state mandated state law. | 02:45:17 | |
| Yeah. Is that clear enough? OK, first by Marty. | 02:45:25 | |
| Second, Second by Amber, All in favor, aye. All right, we'll go ahead and move on to business Item Public Hearing 8.1 Budget | 02:45:29 | |
| Amendment Resolution 2024-1. | 02:45:34 | |
| And Chrissy, our Finance Director, will present this proposed change. | 02:45:39 | |
| It's Christy Bayless, finance director. | 02:45:47 | |
| I think we've all had a chance to review this. It's pretty cut and dried. When we do a budget, we project taxes that we anticipate | 02:45:49 | |
| coming in throughout the years the county gives us. | 02:45:55 | |
| Because that too collects the property taxes as they give us. It's an idea of over, over or we're under. This year we projected a | 02:46:01 | |
| little bit low, so the sun's coming a little bit more and move that there. We would like to take the money that we have gotten | 02:46:07 | |
| from that and put it towards a senior planner position. I think you have all heard how how many master plans we have going on and | 02:46:13 | |
| the things that are happening with that department and it is definitely a need. The second thing I want to bring to your attention | 02:46:19 | |
| is. | 02:46:25 | |
| A ULA grant that we received for the 22,500 that is going to go towards putting sand volleyball pits down on the lakefront. | 02:46:32 | |
| Awesome. OK, Can I get a motion to open a public hearing? | 02:46:42 | |
| Thank you. Marty, can I get a second? Thanks, Jake. All in favor, Aye. All right. We're in a public hearing. Is there any comments | 02:46:48 | |
| from the public? We had a public hearing on this and then we continued it so that you would ask additional questions. So Daria, | 02:46:53 | |
| come up to the microphone, state your name, where you're from and what your question is. | 02:46:59 | |
| Daria Evans in your resident. I just have a question for Morgan. Those staff volleyball kids, are they going to be on the Vineyard | 02:47:11 | |
| beats? | 02:47:15 | |
| Where are they going, you said, the lake Fritz? Or are they going to be on that new Vineyard beach? | 02:47:20 | |
| So I know that our Parks and Recreation director is looking at a few spots, I think near near the beach, but also there's the, the | 02:47:25 | |
| townhomes that at lakefront community that are just South of that. There's a public easement on either side of the, the clubhouse. | 02:47:32 | |
| And we, we're in the process of working with edge homes. The developer develops that to try and clear that that area. But that | 02:47:40 | |
| actually might be a really good spot too, because it's, it would be sandwiched between the two public trails. | 02:47:47 | |
| And then access via the easement. So I think he's considering kind of both spots. OK, So that spot you're talking about, that's | 02:47:55 | |
| that weedy area that used to be kind of grassy. And now it's just. Yeah. And hopefully we can get that cleaned up soon so that | 02:48:01 | |
| that'll be part of it. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Daria. | 02:48:06 | |
| Any other questions? | 02:48:14 | |
| OK. | 02:48:17 | |
| Darlene Price Villas, this is just a very common sort of question. This year is the first year I've been able to or that I'm doing | 02:48:24 | |
| IRS taxes, right. And so the IRS has asked me when I do my budget and I say, for example, travel, they want to know what exactly | 02:48:31 | |
| the travel went to where I went and why that is considered a deduction. I would like to see the same kind of transparency with our | 02:48:38 | |
| budget. | 02:48:45 | |
| That we've got. So if you say it's travel, then where are you going? List where you're going and how much each one of those are | 02:48:53 | |
| going to cost. Same thing with miscellaneous. What is miscellaneous? Is it screws and bolts for the school buses? What is that? | 02:49:01 | |
| Instead of just putting a big lump sum in a miscellaneous, I would like to see more specific kinds of things listed instead of | 02:49:09 | |
| just a generic travel and this is how much it's going to cost. That would just help me as a person who is now paying more taxes. | 02:49:17 | |
| And to be more supportive. Thank you. | 02:49:26 | |
| Oh, OK. OK. Thank you. | 02:49:32 | |
| All right, any other comments? | 02:49:35 | |
| Hey, something else. There are no other comments. I'm going to close the public hearing. Can I get a motion so moved? Thank you, | 02:49:38 | |
| Amber, can I get a second? | 02:49:41 | |
| I'll second thank you, Sarah. All in favor, Hi. Hi. All right, we are now out of a public hearing. | 02:49:46 | |
| Council, do you have discussion on this item? | 02:49:54 | |
| Sarah, I don't know who. I don't want to go 1st every time. Does anyone want to go first? I'm just looking around. | 02:50:01 | |
| I don't have anything to say, so I'm OK with that. OK. Thank you, Marty. I'm ready to move forward with it. | 02:50:06 | |
| OK. Thank you, Amber. | 02:50:12 | |
| You know, we push this back on the last two meetings just because we're waiting for numbers and we still haven't, we still haven't | 02:50:17 | |
| gotten those. And you know, I, I want to do a complete sister city study of where we are. If we commit to hiring someone, we're | 02:50:24 | |
| not going to hire them for the end of this year. We're probably going to have that position forever, right? And so I haven't seen | 02:50:32 | |
| the finance finances for the fire station. It's a top priority for us. | 02:50:39 | |
| And voted in and so they just don't have the bandwidth without. | 02:51:26 | |
| The additional support and tools to complete the jobs that need to be done with a fast growing city. And so I feel really ready to | 02:51:32 | |
| move forward on this. Yeah, Christie, I appreciate you responding to my e-mail to answer my question where that money comes from | 02:51:38 | |
| and you put it in here. So I appreciate that. | 02:51:43 | |
| Like was just spoken by. | 02:51:51 | |
| Mr. Price, sorry, we moving forward we'd like to see more more explanation besides just miscellaneous, but I feel comfortable | 02:51:58 | |
| moving forward voting for this today with the understanding Morgan replied to me on e-mail. So I understand you have a heavy load | 02:52:05 | |
| and and that this this actually comes from from an excess that you anticipate. Is that correct? So I feel OK about moving forward | 02:52:12 | |
| with it today. All right, if there are no further comments, I just need a motion and this is done by ordinance. So we will a | 02:52:19 | |
| resolution. | 02:52:27 | |
| So we will have a roll call. I move to adopt Resolution 202401 proposed 2024 budget amendment #3 is presented by staff. All right, | 02:52:35 | |
| we have a first fight. Amber, I need a second. | 02:52:41 | |
| Second, Second by Sarah and this is done by roll call Sarah. | 02:52:48 | |
| Marty. | 02:52:55 | |
| Yay, Amber. Aye and Jake. All right, thank you. We will move on to 8.2 Public hearing General plan update Goal 2 technology | 02:52:57 | |
| element. We had talked about this in a prior prior work session. We'll go ahead and start out by opening the public hearing. | 02:53:06 | |
| I need a motion to open a public hearing. Second, Marty, second by Amber. All in favor. Aye, aye, All right. And our economic, | 02:53:16 | |
| our, our community development Director, Morgan Brim will present this technology element that deals with privacy. | 02:53:24 | |
| Great. Thank you, Mayor and members of the council. Let me see if I can get this up a little bit. | 02:53:34 | |
| Scroll in there we go. So hopefully you're I'll speak, so hopefully you're able to see this. So we were directed by the City | 02:53:40 | |
| Council. It was in June of last year to put together some policy or or some additional language to our general plan strategies | 02:53:48 | |
| under the technology chapter that would help guide privacy and the protection of like sensitive information as we implement | 02:53:55 | |
| technology. | 02:54:02 | |
| And so, as we know, technology is. | 02:54:10 | |
| There's always advances and things that could help us from the City side, but we need to ensure that it's gonna protect | 02:54:13 | |
| information of our public. | 02:54:17 | |
| And that information is being utilized properly. And so under these, there are 6 strategies. Four of those are new strategies 4-5 | 02:54:24 | |
| and six. And then strategy three has some additional language. So I'll read through these fairly quickly. So Strategy 3 utilized | 02:54:31 | |
| communication technology to increase public awareness and involvement in city planning and decision making. | 02:54:38 | |
| Strategy 6 update forums on which personal information is collected to include a notice of purpose and use of information. Ensure | 02:55:18 | |
| use of information is limited to those purposes and uses and so we, the Planning Commission, did assign. | 02:55:24 | |
| Commissioner Bramwell, who is actually the state privacy officer. So we're very lucky to have that, that resource to work, to work | 02:55:33 | |
| with us. We worked with him and also our legal counsel and drafting these we did, we held a. | 02:55:40 | |
| A work session with the City Council, work session with the Planning Commission, and also a public hearing with the Planning | 02:55:47 | |
| Commission. And they did recommend approval in their last meeting. Happy to answer any questions you may have. All right, great. | 02:55:52 | |
| Are there any questions from the public about this privacy policy? | 02:55:57 | |
| OK. Seeing if there's none, I'm going to go out of the public hearing. Can I get a motion? Thank you, Amber, I need a second. | 02:56:05 | |
| Second by Marty, All in favor, aye. All right, Council, do you have questions, thoughts, input, things you would like to change? | 02:56:12 | |
| I'm just going to thank you. We're going through the operational. | 02:56:22 | |
| Level of getting all of this put together and it's so expansive and it's going to take a lot of work, but having this framework is | 02:56:26 | |
| going to make it very easy for us and easy for the public to follow along as well. | 02:56:31 | |
| My comment is also I love the grassroots effort of. | 02:56:38 | |
| Morgan and them of how they did that. I would love to do a similar thing exactly like that with public records. I know I just | 02:56:44 | |
| wanted to make it aware of you guys. I've had five or six people that have said, hey, you know, I want your records on your phone | 02:56:50 | |
| or I want this and that. And I'm like, well, they're on my private phone right now. I'd I'd give you my phone, look at it, but I | 02:56:56 | |
| don't, you know, and so I think a great general plan update or a great records request that citizens each of you guys could put | 02:57:02 | |
| someone on it. | 02:57:08 | |
| You know, I could suggest people that support you guys that want it and I can suggest people and just. | 02:57:16 | |
| Look at it and go above and beyond the grammar process. | 02:57:21 | |
| You know, so I just I just love how this. | 02:57:27 | |
| Isn't one of us that has nothing to do with anything, right? Yes. I'm saying I do want to say I love this and let's bring it up | 02:57:30 | |
| together. But let's focus on the agenda item right now. Is there anything that you want to add on this privacy policy in | 02:57:37 | |
| particular? Except for you love this plan. Just the culture of how it was created. OK, thanks. Yeah, I feel like it was a great | 02:57:43 | |
| culture. And Amber, thank you. And Chris Bramwell, he's not here, but he really did a great job. And your whole team. | 02:57:50 | |
| Just going out and meeting with a lot of people around the stage and bringing in a lot of voices to us. So thank you for that. | 02:57:56 | |
| Marty or Sarah, do you have any comments before we make a motion? No. OK, then if there's no other comments, I would just need a | 02:58:02 | |
| motion. | 02:58:08 | |
| We already went out of public. And yes, I move to adopt Ordinance 2024, Dash 4 to amend the technology element of the Vineyard | 02:58:15 | |
| General Plan to safeguard privacy and the protection of sensitive information and the implementation of technology as presented. | 02:58:23 | |
| All right, we have a first by Marty. Can I get a second? Thank you, Sarah. Any discussion? If not, I'm going to call Roll call, | 02:58:31 | |
| Jake. Aye, Amber. Aye aye, Marty. Yay, Sarah. Yes. All right. | 02:58:39 | |
| We'll go ahead and move on to a discussion and action items of Vineyard Days celebration. This is a fireworks versus a drone show. | 02:58:47 | |
| You've been able to see the three options presented before you. I don't know who is presenting on this because it is not in my | 02:58:55 | |
| packet. Sorry, this is this is an Anna item, but she was not able to be with us tonight. So the three options are we have a 200 | 02:59:03 | |
| drone show that is 22,000 approximately 5100 drone show that is 15,000. | 02:59:11 | |
| And we have. | 02:59:20 | |
| Fireworks show option with 2 1/2 inch shells is kind of the specifics there, which would be similar to the previous fireworks show | 02:59:22 | |
| that was a mix of 2 1/2 inch and three inch shells. | 02:59:28 | |
| That cost just a little over 14,000. The accommodation that was made for the fireworks show, if that's the the route that you | 02:59:34 | |
| choose, was to put the fireworks show behind Freedom Elementary. They offered that location so that viewers can sit and relax and | 02:59:40 | |
| enjoy the show from Grove Park and not worry about any of the fireworks fallout and and kind of create that safety buffer between | 02:59:47 | |
| the two. | 02:59:53 | |
| And those are the options in front of you. | 03:00:01 | |
| Can I add so I've been able to work with Anna the past few years on events and last year the council voted to do the drone show | 03:00:04 | |
| because I thought it was really cool we did it for the. | 03:00:09 | |
| It was announced 9/11. I know what we had done it before that, but then it got postponed because of the weather, so then we did it | 03:00:16 | |
| on 9/11. | 03:00:19 | |
| I wish we could. I wish our budget could have us do drones every 911 because I thought that was really cool. I thought that the | 03:00:25 | |
| feelings there and that how just the whole program was beautiful. | 03:00:31 | |
| Now without talking about that because we're focusing on specifically Vineyard days, my thought and hope and I'm I don't I don't | 03:00:38 | |
| have a personal preference which one we do, but I was thinking maybe to be able to represent. | 03:00:44 | |
| So there is that option too if you guys wanted to. | 03:02:10 | |
| And we have to go for that. Yeah, that's a good point. | 03:02:14 | |
| Jake, do you have a comment? Yeah, my, my comment is that I think that we have arrived as a city to. | 03:02:19 | |
| Move in your days out of the out of the city and grow like Orem with Orem Fest and the Freedom Festival of Provo and Strawberry | 03:02:28 | |
| Days where it's not controlled by the City Council anymore. It it is, it creates a cultural event to where. | 03:02:38 | |
| You know, you could ask a, you know, I know they caught create 501 C 3S for that. I can't tell you how incredible it is to have | 03:02:49 | |
| service and people. I know that the Heritage Commission used to control it back in the day. There wasn't a lot of people around | 03:02:56 | |
| until then. It got put over into the city because we could do a good thing. And now we have such a great population to if we could | 03:03:04 | |
| survey the city and say, would there be a desire for a committee, an organization for Vineyard Days to be set up for next year? | 03:03:11 | |
| Fire and police and where they and they just do whatever. So I guess what we would need to decide. | 03:05:00 | |
| We, we do have it running through them. This specifically they wanted us to change status on. So the status would be how much | 03:05:06 | |
| you're willing to put towards it as funding, which does fall in this purview. And then second, you could say we don't care, we'll | 03:05:13 | |
| send it back to the committee or you could say fireworks. But most likely if you approve anything less than, I mean 15,000, it's | 03:05:19 | |
| going to end up being the fireworks. | 03:05:25 | |
| Just make a comment. Yeah, I would just like us to consider veterans and people with PTSD as well as dogs, because fireworks do | 03:05:33 | |
| cause issue with themselves. Take that under consideration. I agree. I think that having it publicly noticed, I mean, I don't know | 03:05:40 | |
| if we can make that an official public notice, but making sure people are aware of that is really important, OK. | 03:05:47 | |
| We could work on that. | 03:05:54 | |
| All right. So what I'm hearing is if you want this decision to go back to the committee and give them full rein, you will need to | 03:05:57 | |
| approve the $22,000 so that they can decide between the fireworks or the drones. If you're wanting to have it on a rotational | 03:06:03 | |
| schedule, you would want to state that and then you would probably want to approve the 14,000 for the fireworks within the | 03:06:10 | |
| location that was identified, which I believe is option 3. | 03:06:17 | |
| If there's a different recommendation because you're worried about the veterans, it's it's OK if we notify it if that's the | 03:06:25 | |
| consensus we're building. Does that work for you? | 03:06:28 | |
| I hear so much good about the drones from the community, and I think that that's also a good option to cover that. Would you be OK | 03:06:34 | |
| if we do rotation or send it back to the committee with sending your concerns about it? OK? Is there anybody that would like to | 03:06:39 | |
| take a stab at a motion? | 03:06:43 | |
| Well if if everyone's OK with it, I move to approve up to 22,000 to cover drugs. | 03:06:49 | |
| To cover the possibility of doing 200 drones, but I would like to leave it up to the committee to make the final decision with our | 03:06:59 | |
| recommendation of possibly going on a rotating schedule. OK, We have a first by Marty. And can you also add that we will tell them | 03:07:07 | |
| about the notification that the notification for the veterans and PTSD. | 03:07:14 | |
| OK. We have a first by Marty. Can I get a second, second, second by Amber, all in favor, Aye. All right, great. Thank you. This | 03:07:22 | |
| brings us to the end of this meeting. I'm going to go ahead and adjourn our meeting and then we will be back in 10 minutes or so | 03:07:27 | |
| for our already in need. | 03:07:33 |
* you need to log in to manage your favorites
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Loading...
| So I know. | 00:00:02 | |
| Roll. | 00:00:07 | |
| All right, today is March 13th, 2024. The time is 6:00 PM and I'm going to go ahead and start the Vineyard City Council meeting. | 00:00:10 | |
| Council Member Holdaway will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance and an invocation. | 00:00:17 | |
| Please stand. | 00:00:27 | |
| I pledge allegiance to. | 00:00:31 | |
| United States of America. | 00:00:34 | |
| One nation under God, indivisible, with strong. | 00:00:38 | |
| Our dear, kind and gracious Heavenly Father, we bow our heads before the citizens of Vineyard, grateful for the wonderful earth | 00:00:55 | |
| that we live in and the opportunity we have to come and. | 00:01:00 | |
| As a government body. | 00:01:07 | |
| Work together and find solutions to represent the people of Vineyard. We pray today that we might be speak clearly with great tone | 00:01:10 | |
| and a tone of togetherness to be able to work through our issues and problems with the city. We pray for the citizens of this city | 00:01:17 | |
| and also for the leadership of it. And these things we pray for humbly in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. All right, our first | 00:01:23 | |
| agenda item for our work session is our Transportation Master Plan update. | 00:01:30 | |
| We have health engineering with us. We also are fortunate enough to have our trustee with go ahead. | 00:01:37 | |
| Presentation. Oh, just kidding. I was jumping right into our work session, but I totally forgot our Department of Environmental | 00:01:46 | |
| Quality. Forgive me. Jalen Cage and Jason, we talked about before the meeting how excited we were to have you here. We'll invite | 00:01:52 | |
| you guys up. I don't know who's Paige? OK Page will be presenting an update on our Division of Environmental Quality process and | 00:01:59 | |
| kind of talk about the north side of the vineyard a little bit. And then I'll go ahead and introduce you guys and give you the | 00:02:05 | |
| same warm welcome. | 00:02:12 | |
| Well, thank you for having us. My name is Paige Bolton. I'm the program manager for the corrective action section for the Division | 00:02:20 | |
| of Waste Management and Radiation Control at the EQ. And I also have with me today Jason Olson, he's the project manager for the | 00:02:27 | |
| Anderson Geneva project and also Jalen Knutson, she's the Assistant Director for the division. And thank you for having us. We | 00:02:34 | |
| were asked to come today to talk about. | 00:02:41 | |
| One site and specific one site, the solid Waste Management. Or as we like to cure evenly, say, schmooze. | 00:02:49 | |
| Through SI Five at the Anderson Geneva site. | 00:02:56 | |
| So just a little bit about how I laid out the presentation for tonight. The two specific questions that I was asked was what is | 00:03:01 | |
| our corrective action process like how do we evaluate site from your terminus site is appropriate for redevelopment, especially in | 00:03:08 | |
| this place for residential use. So I'll talk about that process just generally and then I will talk to specifically about SI Five | 00:03:15 | |
| and the entire investigation process from beginning to end. | 00:03:23 | |
| And how the status of it stay? | 00:03:30 | |
| So Rick or corrective action, RICKRA is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and that is the EPA, United States EPA process | 00:03:35 | |
| that we follow. And it's a set of rules and regulations codified both in 40 CFR Code of Federal Regulation and also is adopted by | 00:03:42 | |
| us under our Utah Administrative Code that we follow. And the record corrective action process answers three basic questions. The | 00:03:49 | |
| first one is. | 00:03:57 | |
| How do we know a site or an area has been contaminated? | 00:04:04 | |
| And how we do this is through a series of one, we discover a site and we suspect there's contamination. So then we do a full site | 00:04:08 | |
| investigation where we actually go out and collect samples of soil, groundwater, surface water, whatever the suspected impacted | 00:04:16 | |
| media may be. And we do that to determine nature and extent of contamination. And by nature, I mean what are the chemicals that | 00:04:24 | |
| are present in the various media, so in this case soil. | 00:04:32 | |
| An extent is. | 00:04:41 | |
| What is the extent of contamination? We look at that both laterally, so across an area, but also vertically, the depth of | 00:04:42 | |
| contamination. | 00:04:47 | |
| So once then we decide that it has been impacted, we go to #2 how do we determine if a cleanup is needed? So we've determined that | 00:04:52 | |
| there is contamination. So now we have to assess the magnitude of that contamination. And we do that through the risk assessment | 00:05:00 | |
| process. And that is both a human health and an ecological risk assessment. | 00:05:07 | |
| And under our program that process follows the administrative rule 315101. And so we will do a screening level risk assessment to | 00:05:15 | |
| evaluate what the both carcinogenic and non carcinogenic risk risks may be for the site. And then based on that we can feed into | 00:05:25 | |
| the primary question of three, how do we know residual, residual levels of contamination are safe to allow reuse at the site? | 00:05:35 | |
| So based on their risk assessment, we know the magnitude of the impact. We can look at what the end use of the site will be. In | 00:05:46 | |
| this specific case that was residential, but from a generic perspective under the record corrective process, sometimes | 00:05:54 | |
| commercials, OK, industrial. So we we look at the various end use and assess the risks according to that end use. And so based on | 00:06:02 | |
| that if the risks fall outside acceptable range for the end use, then we do the corrective action. | 00:06:11 | |
| And that can be something as simple as a scoop and haul of soil. It could mean more in depth treatment systems. And so once then | 00:06:19 | |
| the corrective action has been completed, we go back, we resample the area and then those data become our confirmation data. And | 00:06:28 | |
| then we rerun a final risk assessment using the confirmation data. And then based on the confirmation data, we can safely then | 00:06:36 | |
| assess what the end use can be and if it's protective of. | 00:06:45 | |
| The goal for the site. So that's the general process. | 00:06:53 | |
| So now I'm going to explain how we implemented that across News SI 5. | 00:06:57 | |
| And I apologize, our figures are from older reports, though they're not the best of quality and I don't have a pointer, so bear | 00:07:04 | |
| with me on this too. So specifically in question is smooth SI 5. That was the treated water cooling pond and pipeline and you can | 00:07:10 | |
| see on this figure. | 00:07:17 | |
| The original red. | 00:07:25 | |
| Modified triangle with SI 5. Then in 2007, SI five was divided into SI 5A and SI5B and the the main road you can see is the | 00:07:28 | |
| vineyard connector curving around the 800 N and just a little bit to the north of that and all of the southern part of pass the | 00:07:39 | |
| vineyard connector is SI 5A and then the northern part was SI 5B. | 00:07:50 | |
| And I'm going to talk primarily about those, but I also want to mention as shown on this figure, SA5C is on the top right hand | 00:08:01 | |
| side of that triangle. Thank you. And that was split off from SI 5B for the Utah Transit corridor. And so that was also evaluated | 00:08:09 | |
| separately and I will talk about that one. And then the very northern part, you see a little half circle in the the very top that | 00:08:18 | |
| became SI 5D as in Delta. | 00:08:26 | |
| And a lot of what I talk about when we excavated soils and sediment and 5A, they were stockpiled up in 5D. And just so it's very | 00:08:35 | |
| clear to everybody here, SI 5D has not been closed. It still requires additional investigation. And so we're really going to talk | 00:08:43 | |
| about SA 5, AB and C. | 00:08:51 | |
| So Si 5A. | 00:09:02 | |
| Sorry these kind of got a little out of. | 00:09:07 | |
| Border, but that's OK, I can talk to him anyway. | 00:09:11 | |
| So SI 5A was originally investigated in 2005. | 00:09:15 | |
| And based on that investigation, they sampled soil and those were the old ponds. So they sampled the berms, they sampled the | 00:09:22 | |
| bottoms, they sampled all over the ponds. And it was determined that there was contamination above risk assessment levels, both | 00:09:30 | |
| industrial levels, a receptor level and residential levels. So at that time they decided to do corrective action because they | 00:09:38 | |
| wanted a residential use for the property and so removals were conducted. | 00:09:45 | |
| And they actually removed approximately 215,000 cubic yards of impacted sediment and soil. And they also had done sampling to | 00:09:54 | |
| sample the sediment native soil interface. And so they also scrape some of the native soil interface as part of the corrective | 00:10:04 | |
| action removals. Following that they did a. | 00:10:13 | |
| Risk assessment and it showed that the residual contamination was below. | 00:10:24 | |
| Be both carcinogenic risk and non carcinogenic risk for residential use and in 2008 the site was closed under no further action | 00:10:30 | |
| and per our rules under 315101. That means that the residential risks are below the lowest end of the range and for carcinogenic | 00:10:39 | |
| risk and below the target level for non carcinogenic risk. There was also ecological evaluation and an ecological waiver | 00:10:49 | |
| indicating there were no ecological pathways. | 00:10:58 | |
| Present and SO151A was 5 A was closed clean. | 00:11:07 | |
| However. | 00:11:14 | |
| Later, as part of a transfer of the property to a new owner, the new owner wanted to do some different development and the Ora, | 00:11:16 | |
| the oil reclamation area material. They did some, you know, technical analysis on that material and determined it was perfect for | 00:11:25 | |
| Rd. base and under structures. And so I'm going to jump to this little picture here. I call this my Nessie. | 00:11:35 | |
| Kind of looks like monster. So this or a material was placed into both 5A and 5B and the body of Nestle, as I like to call it, is | 00:11:45 | |
| kind of where the UTA station and parking lot is. And then the neck and Nesty appears to have been like a proposed road or | 00:11:53 | |
| connector. | 00:12:01 | |
| So the problem with the placement of the RA material was that the Ora material had levels of contamination that would have | 00:12:09 | |
| violated the no further action. And so because this material was placed into 5A and 5B, the land use controls would have had to | 00:12:17 | |
| have been placed on these properties. So those might have been industrial restriction, things like that, since they chose not to | 00:12:25 | |
| go that route. | 00:12:33 | |
| I don't know all the land use controls that would have been required, but rather the the owners wanted to redevelop and wanted | 00:12:41 | |
| free use of this property and so. | 00:12:46 | |
| Going back up and 2018 they decided to re excavate the OR material from 5A. So they they excavated the orange body in 5A and they | 00:12:53 | |
| resample that area. | 00:13:02 | |
| And. | 00:13:11 | |
| Redid the risk assessments to show that upon removal of this or a material that has been placed in the area, it is now again | 00:13:14 | |
| satisfactorily removed. That the site again now qualified for what we call corrective action complete without controls. And that | 00:13:21 | |
| designation just means that it's equivalent to no further action. But because we did additional corrective action, we placed | 00:13:29 | |
| material and removed it, it now gets the designation of corrective action complete without controls. | 00:13:36 | |
| So the material that was originally excavated from 5A, if you can see on the figure on the left in the very top, that is where | 00:13:45 | |
| that material was stockpiled. | 00:13:50 | |
| And that material is still up there and has not been closed. It still requires investigation and corrective action. So when we | 00:13:56 | |
| talk about getting residential and NFA status or corrective action complete without control status for 5A and 5B, we are strictly | 00:14:04 | |
| talking 5A and 5B that we recognize that there are areas that require additional work before it can be reused for something else. | 00:14:13 | |
| SO5B was this the northern part and this is the neck of Nessie? | 00:14:24 | |
| And in 5B, again, it was originally investigated in 2005 and it was determined to have excess risk for residential use. However, | 00:14:30 | |
| this site wasn't actually remediated in two until 2018. It just wasn't a priority as far as reuse. So in 2018, they came in based | 00:14:40 | |
| on the sampling data excavated. | 00:14:50 | |
| The sediments from the old pond that exceeded the risk, but at the same time they backfilled with the Ora material and so. | 00:15:00 | |
| This one again, so almost as soon as they backfilled, they started re excavating it. And so in 2018 they they excavated not only | 00:15:12 | |
| the sediment from the pond, but the Ora and this material was stockpiled in that faint green area to the north. | 00:15:22 | |
| Of the red and that material is still there and again that has not BeenVerified clean. It's not verified for reuse. It is still | 00:15:33 | |
| pending investigation. So that is outside of this residential area. So following the removal of the original sediments in the pond | 00:15:40 | |
| and the Ora pond material and the Ora that was in the pond, confirmation data were collected in the risk assessment was redone and | 00:15:48 | |
| in 2020. | 00:15:55 | |
| This site was confirmed to meet both residential and ecological risk for and suitable for residential and that was closed in 2020, | 00:16:03 | |
| again with a corrective action complete without controls. | 00:16:09 | |
| In the B section. Not the green though, correct? Just the beta, so not the proposed SI 5D, not that area and not the green, so | 00:16:17 | |
| just that bottom. | 00:16:23 | |
| 7-8 the red triangle. | 00:16:30 | |
| OK. So 5C was the Utah transit right away quarter and again this area was sampled in 2005 for determining nature and extensive | 00:16:34 | |
| contamination. But early on it was known that this would be kind of parceled off as part of the quarter is along those the tracks | 00:16:43 | |
| there and so that area was excavated. | 00:16:51 | |
| And the sediments removed and confirmation samples were collected and it also met residential risk, even though it's not being | 00:17:01 | |
| used for residential purposes right now. It's a corridor. | 00:17:07 | |
| It did meet clean closure, no further action and that was closed in 2009. | 00:17:13 | |
| It's also important to note that when we say we clean clothes both in 5B and 5A, the residential risk levels that were calculated | 00:17:20 | |
| using the confirmation data were orders of magnitude below the acceptable levels, so. | 00:17:28 | |
| There, there's it's not like it was a question. It was clearly sufficiently remediated to acceptable residential use. | 00:17:38 | |
| So conclusion to summarizing that was a lot of information. I apologize so. | 00:17:49 | |
| The I'm going to go back up to the, the this picture. So to be clear, so in five a, the southern half of 5A that is South of the | 00:17:58 | |
| Vineyard corridor, no Ora material was ever placed in that area. So the original clean closure NFA always held for that southern | 00:18:07 | |
| part that is currently developed right now. | 00:18:15 | |
| All of the material, both the original sediments that were in the pond as well as the place or a material have been removed and | 00:18:25 | |
| both by a 5B and 5C to residential levels equivalent to no further action or corrective action complete without control. | 00:18:35 | |
| Human health and ecological risk assessments confirmed that and. | 00:18:46 | |
| They they can be used for residential use right now without restrictions. | 00:18:52 | |
| So I'm going to jump into this. | 00:18:59 | |
| Information you're, you're free to e-mail me any questions, but if you have any questions, I'm, I'm happy to answer them. Great. | 00:19:02 | |
| Any questions from the council. | 00:19:07 | |
| What is the longer term plan for? | 00:19:16 | |
| Those top parts were all the contaminated materials. Still are. | 00:19:19 | |
| So the longer term plan will be just like this, they will be investigated, they will be sampled, the record corrective process, so | 00:19:23 | |
| they will be sampled, we'll evaluate the extent and the nature. Contamination risk assessments will be done depending on the | 00:19:30 | |
| ultimate land use to evaluate what needs to be done to ensure they're protective of what the future use will be. | 00:19:37 | |
| Great. A common question that our residents have is they worry about how deep you can go to see how clean it, how deep you could | 00:19:46 | |
| dig down and see how clean. So as part of the the person extensive contamination, we did vertical as well. So it is cleaned with | 00:19:53 | |
| no restrictions on vertical. | 00:20:00 | |
| Vertical going up or vertical going down? | 00:20:08 | |
| Yeah. So this is the, your house is here. This is this way. | 00:20:11 | |
| We have surface and vertical. Do you have different questions? Go ahead, Sir. No, go ahead. So are you familiar with the Daybreak, | 00:20:20 | |
| the Kennecott tailings issue that they had a few years back because it had been cleared by the EPA and it came back and caused | 00:20:27 | |
| huge problems because the tailings destroyed their foundations. Are you familiar with that? Can you explain that because that's a | 00:20:34 | |
| huge concern here like. | 00:20:41 | |
| It could be clean, but. | 00:20:49 | |
| But maybe not so clean. So how did that clear the EPA and then come back to further problems? OK. | 00:20:51 | |
| Dave Wright was known to be built on tailings and was known to have certain restrictions in place to be protective. 5A and 5B are | 00:21:01 | |
| not built on tailings and we have both horizontal and vertical profiles of the contamination, so we know. | 00:21:11 | |
| That there is not residual buried material under 5:00 AM five feet. | 00:21:22 | |
| Other different level. It doesn't answer your question, Sir. Yeah, I'm just curious. How deep? No, it's OK. I'm just wondering how | 00:21:28 | |
| deep did you guys actually go, do you know? | 00:21:34 | |
| Yeah, they did boring I I don't. | 00:21:42 | |
| Know the depth. So one of the things we do look at is vertical profile. So in order to confirm that we have extent of vertical | 00:21:45 | |
| contamination you either we have to show both clearly decreasing concentrations and or not detects. | 00:21:54 | |
| That I would have if you want to know the actual depth of the borings, please e-mail me and I can look that up. I don't have that | 00:22:03 | |
| off the top of my head. I'm sorry. That would be great. Can you put your. | 00:22:08 | |
| Hey, what's, what's the depth? | 00:22:15 | |
| Yeah, but at least 10 to 20 feet because they did sample groundwater and that was not impacted where they got groundwater. OK, But | 00:22:20 | |
| I don't know the exact. That's perfect. That was going to be my question with the groundwater level and it's depending on it. | 00:22:26 | |
| Perfect. Thank you. OK, thank you, Paige. You're welcome. I had some questions. | 00:22:32 | |
| I'm very concerned just because I've lived here my whole life and. | 00:22:41 | |
| We had a dairy farm on the South side of of Vineyard and we were financed by Geneva Steel or or paid as farmers for wind when it | 00:22:46 | |
| blew over and it would it would blow the chemical over and all the dairy farmers were in the 1970s for paid for that and wind is | 00:22:54 | |
| what brought those over there were in the 1972 windstorm. So we have these piles on the north of the residential that are sitting | 00:23:02 | |
| there that are not clean. | 00:23:11 | |
| And then are going to be moved and picked up and we did have a few dust storms like five or six years ago. So if we're going to | 00:23:20 | |
| build these structures right next to it. | 00:23:24 | |
| You know, there were some harmful smells and stuff. | 00:23:30 | |
| How do we know if we're going to build even closer now that when they do that the wind wouldn't blow or whatnot? | 00:23:33 | |
| Because I know we were taught my grandfather died because of cancer and you know, our families were all many farmers were paid off | 00:23:40 | |
| for the bad things that Geneva still did. And it scares the heck out of us, right? Like living downwind and stuff. So I. | 00:23:49 | |
| Is that like, is it OK? Like hey that this property is adjacent and it could blow on? | 00:23:58 | |
| You just say, hey, we can build up next to it or we will dig out with people living next to it. Like how does that work out? | 00:24:05 | |
| Question a very legitimate concern? Yeah, absolutely. | 00:24:15 | |
| I think I would like to think a little bit because I wasn't prepared for that one, but that's my first one. I would like you to | 00:24:20 | |
| e-mail me so we can come up with a solid answer for you because there are things we do, but it's, it's a legitimate concern. Well, | 00:24:26 | |
| I mean, maybe it's because I'm more terrified, but going to Vineyard Elementary, we would be shut down on downwind days. So they | 00:24:33 | |
| would look at when the wind would blow. | 00:24:39 | |
| And they would shut off the air conditioning and we would, you know, hunker down and, and we didn't know a lot in the 1990s about, | 00:24:45 | |
| you know, what was going on. And, and so with that having been open right there, it's like. | 00:24:51 | |
| It just terrifies me. And then and then, you know, part of the compensation of the farmers where we'd have some really strange | 00:24:58 | |
| abnormal things. I can, you can go to the Daily Herald and see the Holdaway 6 legged cows that grew off of this and it was very | 00:25:04 | |
| strange and. | 00:25:09 | |
| You know, so groundwater is clean, but I know in the 1970s, eighties and 90s, all of these farmers were compensated miles away. I | 00:25:16 | |
| mean, Holdaway Rd. is 400 S and we're talking 800 N And, you know, in our wells, our deep water wells, we're getting that back | 00:25:23 | |
| then. So we don't want to scare anyone, but we're still very, you know, it's like, well, we're going to put home. I know the | 00:25:31 | |
| developer comes and says, hey, we're going to change from. | 00:25:38 | |
| Industrial, whatever, but we're going to now put homes it out of Lugos. Whoa, OK. And then my number two thing is? | 00:25:46 | |
| I work nationally in measurements as the measurements that you use. | 00:25:55 | |
| You say that it's a federal standard, but Utah deviates and creates kind of its own standard, you said. | 00:25:59 | |
| No, we've been we are in agreement state and we haven't OK, so you do you adopt it that makes me feel comfortable. So there's no | 00:26:06 | |
| variation. My my other question is, is. | 00:26:10 | |
| When you turn this over and say hey, this is developable. | 00:26:16 | |
| Is the city then taking the risk financially like in the example of? | 00:26:22 | |
| Daybreak with Utah City, are they signing contracts with anybody that if if something does happen and moving into Utah City's | 00:26:29 | |
| property that they would be able to go? Are they are they signing something that would get rid of the like indemnify them? | 00:26:37 | |
| Since this is plain closure, I would say no, but I would need to that's, that's outside our realm because that is a sale and that | 00:26:47 | |
| is part of the the legal negotiation. Because this is plain closure, it's not like there's residual contamination on the property | 00:26:55 | |
| where there's an environmental covenant on the property that ties to the land. Since this is getting clean closure, there isn't | 00:27:02 | |
| that so any sale agreement. | 00:27:09 | |
| On a clean clothes, it would be between the fire and the seller. It'd be just like a buying a house. There's no disclosure. | 00:27:17 | |
| There's no can the city require a public like a a disclosure? | 00:27:23 | |
| On that, do they allow, do they allow for a city to step up and say, hey, just so you know, you're moving? Because I, I run into | 00:27:30 | |
| people all the time that that don't know that they moved on to a brownfield. This is not brown previous previous. I know, but it's | 00:27:37 | |
| it it's scary because you have so many brownfields that have been cleaned and then we science gets better and you realize that oh | 00:27:43 | |
| this it went somewhere or another. And so it's like. | 00:27:50 | |
| Is there? | 00:27:57 | |
| This excellent question that. | 00:27:59 | |
| Just to make sure that we're protecting everyone. | 00:28:01 | |
| Yeah, I just had a conversation. | 00:28:05 | |
| With someone, yeah, she'll kick me if I'm going out. Please. I had a conversation with someone that was purchasing a home | 00:28:07 | |
| absolutely not in this area in the Salt Lake area. And I asked them, oh great, where? And they gave me the address and that | 00:28:14 | |
| immediately sent off oh because they were in an area that had been under a true brownfields program. And the question I had was | 00:28:22 | |
| does your real estate agent do due diligence because. | 00:28:30 | |
| On any commercial transaction. | 00:28:38 | |
| We definitely have a due diligence program and that is where where some commercial entity is purchasing property, they will do due | 00:28:41 | |
| diligence and that is where they go and look at the whole site history unfortunately while everything is public record. | 00:28:50 | |
| I don't necessarily know that individuals do that, even though they can. | 00:29:00 | |
| So I, I, I can't help you there. I mean, the city can definitely everything that we've done here is public, you know, publicly | 00:29:07 | |
| available. So if the city chooses to have information on the area, that's up to the city, but we don't require it. Would the city | 00:29:15 | |
| get sued or this or the developer, I don't know that be able to say, hey, you're not allowed to, you know that it's clean. You're. | 00:29:24 | |
| Scaring people away, but for the good of hey, here is the history. | 00:29:34 | |
| Think that's a liability between the city and their their voices? Have you looked into that? Do you know? | 00:29:39 | |
| Just protecting people. | 00:29:46 | |
| We'd have to look at each individual property and kind of understand what the city's liability profile would be if we were to put | 00:29:48 | |
| that into place. The general principle on property law is that environmental conditions cannot be discharged when you sell | 00:29:55 | |
| property, so. | 00:30:01 | |
| People would have remedies going back through the chain of ownership, not just. | 00:30:09 | |
| To the person who's selling them the property. | 00:30:14 | |
| I'd I'd be hesitant as a city to interfere with the state law construct on that. I think remedies exist for individual owners. | 00:30:17 | |
| The disclosure requirements an interesting one. We could look at that. | 00:30:27 | |
| I I think you I think the answer you've got from the EQ is probably the best. | 00:30:34 | |
| Which is? It's in the chain of title. | 00:30:40 | |
| And all homeowners or prospective homeowners would be well advised to look at the title report and take it seriously. | 00:30:44 | |
| I know a lot of people here have never seen the animals that came off of this property, but for living here for 30 years, it's | 00:30:52 | |
| terrifying, you know, and I know it's clean and I know they say, hey, it is. And I, I good faith of what, what is and where it | 00:30:57 | |
| goes. But like, you know, I, I go to national DC and, and, and on the brownfields, they come every year and they go, hey, we | 00:31:02 | |
| thought we were good. | 00:31:07 | |
| And this happened and that water spring came up and what we thought, you know, from 1940 to 1999, we, our plan at Geneva Steel was | 00:31:12 | |
| to put the crappiest of stuff Outback, put a fence around it and let that water seep into the ground year after year after year. | 00:31:20 | |
| And that's all it did, right. And so where our wells Holdaway property are 250 feet down into the aquifer, that affected us and it | 00:31:28 | |
| affected our cows just drinking the wells. And so it, it's terrifying to just go. | 00:31:36 | |
| As a good faith neighbor, it's like. | 00:31:44 | |
| Putting a sign up and saying, do you know, as a, as a policy just, and I'm not saying to scare them, but just, and people do take | 00:31:49 | |
| those risks, like I take risks all the time. You know, I drink Mountain Dew, you know, it's not good for me. So, but at least they | 00:31:54 | |
| go through and do that. | 00:31:59 | |
| Can I just, can I just have a quick follow-up? Yeah, I just want to recognize that it is, it is scary, right? There's things that | 00:32:04 | |
| have happened in the past. Yeah, I think. | 00:32:08 | |
| And I don't want to discount any wind blowing from the stacks that we've heard the areas we've created, but I think a lot of what | 00:32:12 | |
| happened previously in that downwind was caused by the state. | 00:32:17 | |
| Right, right where they were running. Yeah, so. | 00:32:22 | |
| Look into any potential issues that might come from wind blown things like that from those areas that have been created with the | 00:32:26 | |
| piles. But some of that I think has been mitigated. Thank goodness, right And taking down the site completely and I think we've | 00:32:32 | |
| addressed the along with the attorney the the site specific. Unfortunately we are not legally able to get in in the real estate | 00:32:39 | |
| transaction. We have to get out of that. We meet here it's reported we make sure that it's safe for human health and the | 00:32:45 | |
| environment and. | 00:32:52 | |
| That's that's where our regulations and but I will say we are conscious of that as we do this, we know that there's residents that | 00:32:58 | |
| will repair so. | 00:33:03 | |
| She was hopping her field, so she took another look at this before we came, even though it was from over 10 years ago. She took | 00:33:09 | |
| another look and it's still protected. So my last confirmation that we did the right thing, then it's still safe. No. My last | 00:33:15 | |
| question is on the settling ponds on the West side of the road. I know the machines are no longer they're still there and they're | 00:33:21 | |
| still sitting in there. | 00:33:27 | |
| You know, that's, that's a settling pun. The water is, you know, there's still water in it. And so people look at that and they | 00:34:07 | |
| go, you know, I don't, they don't, they just don't know what it is. And before there was not only barbed wire, but there was razor | 00:34:14 | |
| wire like a prison. It was wrapped around that thing. And so. | 00:34:21 | |
| I'm just. | 00:34:28 | |
| And I know it's an adjacent property, but then they're going to have to clean it with hundreds of thousands of people right next | 00:34:31 | |
| to it. | 00:34:34 | |
| Yeah, addressing your concern about a UN. | 00:34:39 | |
| Spence, Snoop. Yeah, Yeah. And then we can think about it and address it for you. OK. Thanks. Is there a timeline for when this | 00:34:45 | |
| whole area will be complete as far as you're concerned? When will the piles be handled? | 00:34:52 | |
| I don't. Yeah. Money. | 00:35:03 | |
| OK. And so since it's clean, they can dig as much as they want, as deep as they want right now in the clean areas? | 00:35:10 | |
| 10. | 00:35:18 | |
| They can, obviously, they probably won't because if they get close to shallow groundwater, they're not going to have stability and | 00:35:20 | |
| some of the technical properties for the development that they might need. But there is no environmental restriction, right? I | 00:35:27 | |
| knew they couldn't dig that deep of footing down. | 00:35:33 | |
| OK. Thank you. Are there any other questions? | 00:35:40 | |
| No, we appreciate this and we'll make sure we follow up with you guys and then we'll publish it so. | 00:35:45 | |
| The Council. | 00:35:52 | |
| Gov By all means, if you have any additional questions that come up as you talk about this, please. | 00:35:53 | |
| E-mail me and we will think about it and get back to you. Thank you so much, Paige. Thank you all. All right. | 00:36:01 | |
| We will. We appreciate that. And now we will go ahead and move on to our transportation master plan. I have you guys going in the | 00:36:08 | |
| beginning, but we finally made it there. And I was going to say we also have Trustee Acerson from Utah Transit Authority. I don't | 00:36:13 | |
| know if you want to introduce yourself. You're not giving the presentation. So yeah, come on up. Just thought you guys would like | 00:36:18 | |
| to meet him. | 00:36:22 | |
| I felt, I feel a little bit like I'm coming home because I live in Linden, was mayor of Linden for several years. I actually hired | 00:36:30 | |
| you the first time for the Utah Lake Commission. And Jamie, I've worked with him at UTA and I know several of you and. | 00:36:38 | |
| It feels good here. Then here's a good place to live. So you've got good people and they understand the stewardship that you've | 00:36:47 | |
| entrusted them with and. | 00:36:51 | |
| I'm just happy to be working with your mayor. She serves on our local Advisory Council as well. | 00:36:57 | |
| Always has good input and provides great discussion as we try to address all of the incoming people that are moving to Utah and | 00:37:03 | |
| being born in Utah. It's both. But my role as a trustee is I represent Utah and Twilight counties. Those are two of the fastest | 00:37:09 | |
| growing areas in the state of Utah. | 00:37:16 | |
| And we just today in our board meeting passed our long range transit plan and that's online. So if you want to look at that, | 00:37:23 | |
| that's 2050. | 00:37:29 | |
| Some of us won't be around in 20-50, but. | 00:37:37 | |
| Now is the time to look at it and you can make comment on that. It's up for public comment and would love to have your feedback on | 00:37:40 | |
| that so. | 00:37:43 | |
| And I know we're working. I mentioned to your mayor the rail that's right there on Geneva Rd. that's kind of a barrier to you to | 00:37:47 | |
| enter your city. And some places we're under discussions on how we can work with Union Pacific and UTA and U dot and. | 00:37:56 | |
| Try to make that easier to get in and out of your city. So perfect. All right. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right, So Ryan, | 00:38:06 | |
| are you presenting today or Josh? Perfect. Come on up, Josh. | 00:38:12 | |
| Awesome. Thank you. Josh Gibbons with Hales Engineering. | 00:38:21 | |
| Let me just get this connected. | 00:38:25 | |
| I. | 00:38:28 | |
| All right. Well, thank you for having us. It's great to be here again. We were here last. We were here last year. Of course, last | 00:38:36 | |
| week we were able to present to the Planning Commission. | 00:38:40 | |
| And I know we've met with each of you recently as well to talk through the updates. Our goal tonight is to provide that update | 00:38:46 | |
| again for you to look at, provide feedback on. And it's also a good opportunity, I think for the the public of course, to hear | 00:38:51 | |
| what we're working on. | 00:38:57 | |
| Let's get that going. | 00:39:03 | |
| Perfect. OK. | 00:39:10 | |
| So we have a small update tonight to talk through. We have a short recap of things we've talked about in the past with level of | 00:39:12 | |
| service and potential improvements we were looking at in the city based on future demand. And then we're we're we're here to talk | 00:39:20 | |
| about a proposed alternative to current planning and current alignments in the city to get your input and feedback. | 00:39:28 | |
| So a key with this master plan is the road jurisdiction, right? | 00:39:37 | |
| U dot, they own a couple different roads within the city. Vineyard Connector is one of those that was just completed to the north. | 00:39:45 | |
| Geneva Rd. is another one that's owned by U dot. And so within this plan, our focus really will be on city roads and seeing what | 00:39:52 | |
| what improvements the city can work on for future growth. | 00:39:58 | |
| And but we'll also talk about potential UDOT facilities that could be improved or modified to fit both local and regional needs. | 00:40:06 | |
| And so tonight we're talking about, you know, you know, some city roads, some some U dot roads. But I just want to make it clear | 00:40:13 | |
| that, you know, there there are two different entities here that own different right of ways. | 00:40:21 | |
| So in the past as we worked on the plan, we've we've been talking about level of service. As a quick recap, level of service is a | 00:40:30 | |
| measurement of congestion on roads and delay. And so tonight we're going to look at existing conditions and a couple different | 00:40:36 | |
| future conditions based on the current traffic volumes on roadways in the city. What you see on the screen here would be the | 00:40:43 | |
| current levels of levels of service. | 00:40:49 | |
| If you see a green color, that's good, of course. It's a good level of service. It's a little bit more congested as you get to CD | 00:40:57 | |
| and ENF, of course. | 00:41:01 | |
| On U dot roads, levels of service A through D are acceptable and then on city roads, it's the same for arterials. But for lower | 00:41:08 | |
| classification roads like local roads, collector roads, we have a lower or a higher standard, I would say level of service C or | 00:41:15 | |
| better. So with that in mind, if you look at the screen, a couple things to point out would be Vineyard connector and this E | 00:41:23 | |
| section is showing up as orange at level of service E. | 00:41:30 | |
| Sorry, D and so it's still acceptable by U dot standard, but still getting congested. They've made a couple changes recently with | 00:41:38 | |
| striping that have helped a lot, I think. And but still, you know, that's telling us there's we're going to need some improvements | 00:41:45 | |
| down the line. You can see there's a few intersections we've highlighted as currently at level of service ERF and so those are | 00:41:53 | |
| things we're looking at and looking at potential improvements for those locations. | 00:42:00 | |
| As we go to a kind of a 10 year or nine year time frame to 2033, you can see that Vineyard Connector now shows up as a level of | 00:42:09 | |
| service E or F roadway. So something that should be fixed. The good news is that MAG recently approved a plan to make Vineyard | 00:42:16 | |
| Connector go to five lanes all the way along the corridor, which should, you know, capture and, and and handle most of the traffic | 00:42:23 | |
| that's shown on here. So. | 00:42:30 | |
| Really the volumes you see here in the 30 thousands of cars a day that can be handled with A5 lane facility. | 00:42:38 | |
| As we go to 2050, you know and I should have, you know, recap as well that this takes into account all known developments in the | 00:42:46 | |
| city. It takes into account other growth that's projected by MAG, of course. So in 2050 with all that growth, we would expect that | 00:42:54 | |
| we would need more improvements on the roadways. You can see Vineyard Connector would have volumes in the 50,000 of cars a day, | 00:43:02 | |
| which is basically what A7 lane facility. | 00:43:09 | |
| Or greater would be needed to handle that traffic. | 00:43:17 | |
| Geneva Rd. has a couple sections that are congested as was mentioned just barely. Once the rail line is realigned and removed in | 00:43:25 | |
| that area, U dot will have a lot more flexibility to widen Geneva Road to accommodate that that traffic on Geneva Rd. | 00:43:33 | |
| A couple of other spots to point out. 1600 N shows up with about 16,000 cars a day. That's already planned by MAG to go to five | 00:43:42 | |
| lanes. And so this is something that we can easily address with a proposed project in the plan. | 00:43:48 | |
| A couple of other spots you can see Center St. shows up with about 14,000 cars a day level of service D. So what we're looking at | 00:43:56 | |
| is, are there other connections that can be made in the city to take pressure off of Center St. And so a couple things we talked | 00:44:03 | |
| about so far would be new connections. One would be connection at 1200 N to go into the downtown area that that would be a key | 00:44:11 | |
| connection point to take pressure off of Vineyard Connector. | 00:44:18 | |
| And other facilities, same thing with Center St. There's already 400 S, which can take pressure off of Center Street, but beyond | 00:44:26 | |
| that we're talking about possibilities of maybe a 400 N connection. | 00:44:33 | |
| At this location across the rail. So these are different projects we're talking about. Like I said, we've talked about other | 00:44:41 | |
| alternatives to the current alignments that Mag has been talking from, which is what you see here on the screen. | 00:44:48 | |
| And that's where I'll turn it over to Ryan. | 00:44:56 | |
| Perfect. Thank you for letting us be here tonight. So as we look at some of the long range planning that's been done in the area, | 00:45:04 | |
| the current MAG RTP or regional transportation plan, they're looking at future roadways in the area. Several of those are lake | 00:45:10 | |
| crossing. They've identified 3 different lake crossing connections and where they might come across historically. I think as we've | 00:45:16 | |
| talked about it within the plan set and and. | 00:45:21 | |
| As the mayor has been working on it, the one coming across on the 800 N is probably not the correct connection and has been. | 00:45:28 | |
| I think discounted at this point, we show it as a point of reference. There's enough traffic coming around on. | 00:45:35 | |
| Many of the other roads that 800 N would be severely overloaded if that came in and connected as well and we'd be talking volumes | 00:45:43 | |
| that would be more freeway type on that segment of 800 N So as we look at that, we're looking at several different alternatives. | 00:45:48 | |
| One would be the extension of. | 00:45:54 | |
| How the road would come down, but the whole connection of. | 00:46:01 | |
| Vineyard Connector and where it would come into Vineyard, it would come in on the North End just like it normally would, but | 00:46:05 | |
| instead of wrapping around on the West side of Utah City. | 00:46:09 | |
| It becomes somewhat of a barrier for crossing within the city if it goes to seven lanes and has about 57,000 cars a day. | 00:46:14 | |
| And become somewhat divisive or Vineyard City and overall. So what we've looked at is a potential reroute of that that would push | 00:46:22 | |
| it onto the 1600 N alignment shown in that that golden dash line as it comes down from the north and. | 00:46:29 | |
| Makes its way through. I'll try and get the laser pointer up there. I apologize, a little bit harder to see, but as you come down | 00:46:39 | |
| and around that corner, it would go on to a 1600 N alignment and then onto a Geneva Rd. alignment where it would bend and go | 00:46:43 | |
| towards the South. | 00:46:47 | |
| Several advantages that we see with this are that we have multiple connections going over to I-15. Number one, we can redirect | 00:46:52 | |
| that traffic to I-15 on 1600 N as well as giving it a better connection to 800 N and allowing that traffic to flow freely back and | 00:46:58 | |
| forth and all the way down to 400. So we have many, many more opportunities to try and move that traffic east, West into Orem or | 00:47:04 | |
| further down into Provo where it wants to be. | 00:47:10 | |
| Those are some great advantages if we do that and I'll go through a couple more slides here. | 00:47:17 | |
| And just kind of show that connection on the left is the current plan where it comes down around the West side of Utah City, shown | 00:47:23 | |
| in pink. | 00:47:26 | |
| There's a railroad crossing on the North End. | 00:47:30 | |
| Again, I'll try and get the laser pointer over there, but the. | 00:47:33 | |
| There's a great separate crossing, so you would go up and over the railroad tracks to make sure the tracks can can move fairly | 00:47:36 | |
| freely, and then it would come down and touchdown and the traffic would go around. Utah City in its current and present format, | 00:47:41 | |
| the way it's been drawn. | 00:47:46 | |
| What we're looking at is an alternative that is not new to you daughter to Mac. They have also looked at alternatives like this | 00:47:51 | |
| that would bring Vineyard Connector down towards the North End of Vineyard. There's where a little more gentle and followed the | 00:47:56 | |
| tracks and went through some property on a diagonal. | 00:48:01 | |
| Somewhat paralleling on the tracks, and then they've also looked at other options as well. | 00:48:07 | |
| This alternative to 1600 N, we'd still have the grade separation. We'd have to go up and over the tracks, but we want to keep that | 00:48:13 | |
| great separation a little bit longer. | 00:48:17 | |
| And then bend those lanes to where they would go to the South onto Geneva Rd. We would still have a local access Rd. on 1600 N | 00:48:22 | |
| that would come off of the interchange, would go to the West, still providing access into the industrial area as well as the | 00:48:27 | |
| connection of Mill Rd. going North and South. | 00:48:33 | |
| And then on to the West and it would go over. | 00:48:39 | |
| Underneath Vineyard Connector and still keep those local roads all connected. | 00:48:43 | |
| One of the other advantages that we have is that we're looking at a connection on 1200 N, which would continue out of Utah City. | 00:48:47 | |
| Would go across to End Mill Road and then eventually go over and connect into Geneva Rd. | 00:48:54 | |
| Again, having multiple options within a city for that traffic to flow and move around is is fairly helpful from a transportation | 00:49:00 | |
| perspective. | 00:49:03 | |
| It also keeps the traffic volumes a little bit lower. | 00:49:07 | |
| As are shown in this next diagram. | 00:49:11 | |
| Those 2050 future projected volumes is are consistent with what mags long range planning is. They always shoot towards the 2050 | 00:49:14 | |
| projection. | 00:49:17 | |
| But what you would see is we're able to drop the volumes on that road. It's still necessary. We still need this road that's | 00:49:22 | |
| coming. The five lanes that are currently planned, projected and funded as those get built, they would remain, but it would remain | 00:49:28 | |
| at 5 lanes and we wouldn't have to increase that to seven lanes. We'd be moving that traffic that's cut through traffic around the | 00:49:33 | |
| edge of the city and pushing it onto 1600 N and onto Geneva Rd. | 00:49:39 | |
| Mill Rd. does pick up a lot of traffic still as it normally has done in the past historically and projections about 25,000 cars a | 00:49:45 | |
| day still within A5 lane Rd. cross section. EW 1200 N would be 5 lanes as it comes across. | 00:49:53 | |
| And then we try and divert that and bring it back down to probably 3 lanes as we come into Utah City. | 00:50:02 | |
| Certainly as we look at the the band where we were looking at, I think it was 57,000 cars a day, which is again above a A7 lane | 00:50:08 | |
| Rd. capacity, we're down to about 32,000. So we're probably 5 lanes through here. | 00:50:14 | |
| That segment between Mill Road and Geneva Road or up to 40. So we're probably going to be looking at a little bit of lane widening | 00:50:21 | |
| there. That would be turn pockets and things like that. | 00:50:26 | |
| And. | 00:50:31 | |
| We create those impact fees, which then are charged to new residents or new building projects that come into the city, and so that | 00:51:36 | |
| the new population is paying for those improvements, not the existing population that's here. It's a good way to disperse some of | 00:51:42 | |
| those impacts. | 00:51:47 | |
| And then we're we're shooting for a plan adoption in May, May to June of this year. | 00:51:54 | |
| Councillor, are there any questions that we might be able to address at this point? | 00:52:00 | |
| Any questions from the Council? | 00:52:04 | |
| I have one, the one that you said was already had already been funded. We had talked before in our meeting that that connects into | 00:52:08 | |
| Pioneer Crossing. | 00:52:12 | |
| Is that, is that right? Did I understand that correctly? What's what's been funded? I hope I say this correctly. I have not looked | 00:52:17 | |
| at it specifically and Nassim might have a little more information on it. | 00:52:21 | |
| But at least through the Vineyard area, it's been funded as A5 Lane Rd. Certainly to the north as you look at Pioneer Crossing | 00:52:27 | |
| and, and what's happening up to the north, there's still some plans that are ongoing up there and, and looking at alignments and | 00:52:32 | |
| the shift of those alignments potentially in the Lehigh City Transportation Master Plan. | 00:52:38 | |
| Yeah. | 00:52:44 | |
| We had discussions today actually with you thought about something a lot different subject and this came up. So any thoughts | 00:52:47 | |
| stated that it is on their long range plan to connect it all the way to. | 00:52:53 | |
| All the way up Pioneer Crossing, excuse me, Yeah, up to Pioneer Crossing, they don't have exact data on it, but just like to kind | 00:53:02 | |
| to kind of repeat what Ryan said is a lot of moving parts that they're working up, working with up there. | 00:53:08 | |
| Thank you. I have one question. I noticed the road across Utah Lake. | 00:53:17 | |
| Got to speak before St. Fire and state lands a couple weeks ago and obviously they own the property there. Why is it always | 00:53:24 | |
| showing that it's there? Like it's possible? Like is that magnet shows that they would do that? Yeah, it's on the MAG regional | 00:53:31 | |
| transportation plan. They haven't submitted anything to forestry pharmacy lands in like 30 years. They always say, hey, here's the | 00:53:38 | |
| and I think I've seen 20 different bridges, right? Or roads and that never happens, right? So are we. | 00:53:46 | |
| Saving property to connect to 800 N, If they do that, is that what that was or is that connecting down an Orem? They were showing | 00:53:53 | |
| potential connection points where they thought it might connect. But I think at this point that it's all hyper 100 is not being | 00:54:00 | |
| considered at this because I saw the public comments on the Lehigh stuff where they're like they went on. | 00:54:06 | |
| I think the process is that they envision it and with this envisioned study, then they go and they present it to FFSL or whoever | 00:54:45 | |
| is in the right of way and then they would go present it and get all the permits and do that type of thing. But first they have to | 00:54:50 | |
| go through this study. | 00:54:56 | |
| OK, similar to Proload running writing a letter. Is there any way our council, I know it doesn't have any power or authority, but | 00:55:05 | |
| could we vote as a council to say we don't want to vote through the lake? | 00:55:09 | |
| I think you could, yeah. I think you could write a letter to, I'm saying US voting as a council, like saying, hey, we don't really | 00:55:15 | |
| need a highway coming through. Oh yeah, we did as as our council body. That's why we're seeing that dotted line through vineyard | 00:55:22 | |
| is gone. Last City Council, the last City Council went and pushed very hard for that road to not connect into vineyards. So we did | 00:55:28 | |
| do that as a council. | 00:55:34 | |
| That will not be a line on the map and the transportation master plan is its finalized. OK yeah I just don't wanna scare anyone on | 00:55:41 | |
| this. If it's so superficial or whatever then probably not show it. | 00:55:46 | |
| Out of our city, so. | 00:56:22 | |
| Anyway, thank you. Any other question? OK, thank you so much. We're going to go ahead and take a 10 minute break and then we'll | 00:56:24 | |
| resume the meeting. | 00:56:29 | |
| OK. | 00:56:38 | |
| Hopefully still we're live. | 00:56:45 | |
| All right. Thank you for letting us have that little break. We're going to move on to 3.2. This is a municipal code title 3, | 00:56:49 | |
| calling a special meetings ordinance 2024, Dash 05 and actually 3.23 point 3 and 3.4 will all be presented by our legal counsel. | 00:56:56 | |
| So I am just going to let you introduce them as you go through. Thank you. I'm going to do them all as the same presentation and | 00:57:04 | |
| same discussion, if that's OK that's great. | 00:57:11 | |
| We. | 00:57:20 | |
| The mayor a few months ago restructured how we do our. | 00:57:22 | |
| Agenda and it was in response to things that we heard from the public and from some of the incoming council members. And so this | 00:57:27 | |
| is my reminder that we don't have a a room, a big room with the conference table where we all can sit around and look at documents | 00:57:32 | |
| and talk together. But if you'll close your eyes and imagine. | 00:57:38 | |
| Is sometimes writing code to me feels like a negotiation that you have on your own as you're putting things on a piece of paper. | 00:58:16 | |
| And when I have clients that I'm in a negotiation remediation. | 00:58:21 | |
| It's often the case that when you come to a good agreement, everybody feels a little bit happy and everybody feels a little bit | 00:58:27 | |
| upset. And I suspect as we go through this with your varying priorities and what you, what you value as council members and how | 00:58:33 | |
| you'd like to interact, that there might be things in the document that will make you smile and you'll say, yes, finally, I've | 00:58:39 | |
| been waiting for that. And there may be some things where you'll say, well, I don't like that that gives that benefit somebody | 00:58:45 | |
| else or that helps. | 00:58:51 | |
| Them and what they're doing. | 00:58:57 | |
| My goal was to try to thread the needle and make sure that we respected the state statutory powers and authorities that you have | 00:58:59 | |
| and that we establish processes that will help you do your work efficiently and help you make sure that you have really clear | 00:59:06 | |
| pathways to get things on agenda, to manage your meetings and and to do things. So a little bit of the why State law requires that | 00:59:14 | |
| cities have rules of order and procedure. | 00:59:21 | |
| Vineyard City does not, I'm not sure why they were not included in the original set of documents, but they weren't. And the cities | 00:59:29 | |
| moved along without them and I think has done a really nice job of that. But they have had a, you have had a council within the | 00:59:37 | |
| city that was largely united on issues. And so having some differences of opinion has prompted some questions about, well, what is | 00:59:44 | |
| our process for this and how do we go about doing that? And I think it would. | 00:59:51 | |
| Behoove us all to have some rules in place so that when we get into those discussions, we don't have to spin up and spend a lot of | 00:59:59 | |
| time asking how do we do this or is it appropriate to do this? But they have rules we can point to and say, you know, yes, we can | 01:00:06 | |
| and we shouldn't. Here's how we do it. So the document that I put together for you to consider is a draft ordinance and it has | 01:00:14 | |
| these items on it. Talks about agenda formation, public comments and hearings, council discussions and reports. | 01:00:21 | |
| How to make requests of staff, what requests are appropriate and how to go about doing it. Council staff interactions and then | 01:00:29 | |
| special meetings. So I just want to walk through everyone kind of an overview format. And then I provided to Pam. We'd initially | 01:00:35 | |
| put this together as two different ordinances. And then as we looked at the agenda, we thought it made sense to take it up all at | 01:00:41 | |
| once. And so I sent Pam and I didn't send it to her in time for the meeting, but I consolidated the two ordinances into one | 01:00:47 | |
| document. | 01:00:53 | |
| She if she hasn't already, we'll circulate that soon after the meeting so you can look at it. | 01:01:00 | |
| As usual, pans ahead. | 01:01:07 | |
| On things. So let me give you an overview and then you have the document in front of you and then when I'm done, we can talk about | 01:01:10 | |
| it. You can provide my input if I don't expect that you'll have a. | 01:01:16 | |
| All of your questions formulated today and so if there are things you need to follow up with me on over the next two weeks, we | 01:01:24 | |
| have time to do it and then we can Polish the document and bring it forward for action at the next meeting. So on agenda | 01:01:29 | |
| formation, the structure under state law is that the mayor is the chair of the Council and as chair of the Council she establishes | 01:01:35 | |
| the agenda. | 01:01:41 | |
| The question that's come up recently, well, how do we get things on the agenda if the mayor hasn't put it on the agenda? And what | 01:01:48 | |
| I'm proposing is that since any 2 council members have the ability to call a special meeting, it makes sense to have any 2 council | 01:01:55 | |
| members have the ability to request that something be added to the agenda. That way we don't have to burden the council or the | 01:02:03 | |
| citizens with additional meetings. We can try to get as much business done during our regular meetings as possible. | 01:02:10 | |
| So the process is that if any 2 council members want something on the agenda, they can submit that request to the mayor in | 01:02:19 | |
| writing. The mayor in most circumstances I imagine, will accept the item and put it on the agenda. | 01:02:25 | |
| If she rejects it for either procedural or legal reasons, she would respond in writing and then if you still wish to have it on | 01:02:32 | |
| the on the agenda, you would have it as a procedural question on the next council agenda. The council can vote and if a majority | 01:02:40 | |
| of the council wants to have it on a future agenda, they can override the mayor. This is a process that doesn't get things on the | 01:02:48 | |
| agenda immediately, but it does get them on the agenda quickly when you think of it in terms of government speed, right? | 01:02:56 | |
| We don't move as quickly as a private organization would because we want to involve feedback from the public. We want to be | 01:03:04 | |
| deliberative. We want to make sure we're making the right decision. So I think it would be about four to six weeks from when you | 01:03:10 | |
| would ask for something if the mayor rejected it, that it would end up on an agenda. | 01:03:16 | |
| Public comment and hearings. This is in line with the city's current practices. It's just putting it on paper and putting it in an | 01:03:24 | |
| ordinance. There would be public comment in the agenda for every regular City Council meeting. | 01:03:31 | |
| The mayor is the chair of the meeting, can allocate time among people. Public comment is not a filibuster. We're not the Senate. | 01:03:38 | |
| And so we want to hear from everybody, but we also don't want, we want to allow time for the council to do the business that's in | 01:03:44 | |
| front of it. | 01:03:49 | |
| And then on council discussions and reports, similar principles, we want to limit discussion to the matter being considered. We | 01:03:56 | |
| want to have equitable, equitable participation so everybody on the council has an opportunity to speak and that as chair of the | 01:04:03 | |
| meeting, the mayor would moderate those discussions and how they would occur. | 01:04:10 | |
| Request of staff. So the basic principle here is we want council members to be able to ask for information from staff to make | 01:04:18 | |
| decisions. It's important that you have that. | 01:04:24 | |
| And that you're informed before you're asked to decide things. We also recognize that you have five people on the council. And if | 01:04:31 | |
| everybody's making really significant demands on staff time, then it can take them away from the core work that they need to be | 01:04:39 | |
| doing. And so we have to have some kind of process in place that would balance that. This is an attempt at that. And you can tell | 01:04:46 | |
| me whether we're close to the mark or off the mark or how to adjust it. But what I've inserted in the ordinance is what I. | 01:04:54 | |
| I'm just terming a significant request. It would be any request that takes three or more hours of staff time. | 01:05:02 | |
| And if anyone other than anyone without the mayor or the managers approval wants to make that kind of a demand or that volume of a | 01:05:08 | |
| demand of staff, we just ask that either the mayor or the manager say that's OK. It won't take away from the time that they need | 01:05:14 | |
| to be spending on other things. Or that you come to the council and the council votes and says yes, we want staff doing that | 01:05:20 | |
| thing. | 01:05:26 | |
| Council staff interactions, The balance we're trying to get here is council need to be able to communicate and to speak with staff | 01:05:34 | |
| that can give them information and can help the council in its decisions. We also have to respect that there needs to be some | 01:05:41 | |
| hierarchy and some responsibility and accountability among staff. And the way it works in cities is that the mayor and the city | 01:05:49 | |
| manager are kind of. | 01:05:56 | |
| At the top of the organizational chart and need to be aware of what the people under them are doing so that they can hold them | 01:06:03 | |
| accountable and so they can be accountable to you. And so the way the code is written is that you, if you have requests of staff, | 01:06:09 | |
| you would direct those inquiries through the mayor or the city manager. And then again if something requires significant staff | 01:06:15 | |
| time. | 01:06:21 | |
| Of three or more hours than it would be communicated to the council and approved by either the council, the mayor or the city | 01:06:27 | |
| manager. So the intent again here is to try to respect those lines of authority so we have clear accountability. But. | 01:06:35 | |
| But also to allow you as members of the council, to make requests if the mayor or city manager who the staff members report to, | 01:06:44 | |
| say this won't be disruptive. Staff can work on this and get it to you. There's no need to come back to the council if they say, | 01:06:50 | |
| you know what, we're pretty overwhelmed with things right now. We can't get to it as quickly as you want. You can come back to the | 01:06:57 | |
| council and then the council can say, staff make this a priority. | 01:07:03 | |
| So that's the ordinance in a nutshell. | 01:07:13 | |
| Can I ask some clarification just on that last slide, so we talked about? | 01:07:16 | |
| Also, having that be, it's the mayor and city manager and then directors. | 01:07:24 | |
| Is it to have the directors be able to approve the request or that you could communicate with? | 01:07:32 | |
| I thought that was also included in that one. I think you're right that it is. Let me look at the ordinance and make sure that's | 01:07:39 | |
| there. | 01:07:44 | |
| Marty helped with some of the drafting and review of this and so. | 01:07:51 | |
| Marty, I'll make note of it. I believe that's in there. But if it's not, I I know it's important to you and we can make that | 01:07:57 | |
| insertion. | 01:08:01 | |
| You also have in your packet memo from me. In the absence of an ordinance like this, a lot of questions have come up over the last | 01:08:07 | |
| three months of. | 01:08:13 | |
| When and how can we make requests of staff? How quickly should we expect to get answers back from things? What's appropriate and | 01:08:19 | |
| what's not? And I've been getting asked those questions by council members, by staff. And so I wanted to put pen to paper and kind | 01:08:25 | |
| of lay out. | 01:08:30 | |
| Under state law, what's appropriate and what's not? The short answer under state law is that council members are entitled to all | 01:08:36 | |
| administrative records of the city. | 01:08:42 | |
| And that cities may adopt rules or parameters around how those requests are to be made. And that's a court decision that's been in | 01:08:48 | |
| place just about as long as I've been alive and it's been unchallenged and and has remained kind of the standard, at least | 01:08:56 | |
| judicially in the state. So then the question is what requests are appropriate? What requests can come from a council member | 01:09:04 | |
| without approval from the council? And so I've attempted to give you some guidance on that. | 01:09:12 | |
| The the crux of the issue that I'm trying to get at in the memo is. | 01:09:20 | |
| There are competing demands on the city. The city has information that is public. It also has information that is private or | 01:09:26 | |
| protected about the people we serve. We have bank account information, procurement information, personal information about people | 01:09:34 | |
| in the city. And if we provide information that would have private or protected information in it, the council has an obligation | 01:09:42 | |
| to also treat that information appropriately. And So what I hope the memo will give you some instruction on is. | 01:09:50 | |
| Sometimes if you want things quickly, the staff won't have time to do the same review it would if it were to receive a grammar | 01:09:59 | |
| request from a member of the public. And I think that's OK. I just want you all to be aware and kind of unnoticed that if you get | 01:10:06 | |
| information from staff that does that hasn't been reviewed in the same way you would have grammar request so that you can get | 01:10:13 | |
| things quickly, that you have that obligation not to share it publicly unless. | 01:10:21 | |
| You talk to Pam or talk to me and get direction of yes this can be shared or no it can't be shared. | 01:10:29 | |
| I hope that makes sense and feel free to ask questions if you have specific concerns about that. It would be nice if we had some | 01:10:35 | |
| kind of. | 01:10:39 | |
| I mean, we are making policy, but sometimes I know in the beginning I would be sent something and it was always really helpful | 01:10:44 | |
| when Pam at the end. | 01:10:48 | |
| Say this is private, not ready for the public side. And I know sometimes I'll receive emails and I'll look at it and I'll have to | 01:10:52 | |
| respond and say what are we talking here? So just like a note towards that's a great suggestion that when we share information, we | 01:10:58 | |
| indicate what we believe it is. I think most staff can make their best effort at that and certainly your director level staff | 01:11:04 | |
| should have a pretty good idea of what things are. | 01:11:10 | |
| My worry is you might get things from staff lower down the organizational chart and they may not be aware of what grammar | 01:11:17 | |
| requirements would apply. They generally just treat everything as if it's private and protected, and that's kind of the default. | 01:11:24 | |
| So please, if you have any question in your mind about what is this and should I be sharing it publicly, give Pam a ring. She's | 01:11:30 | |
| the city's records officer as a reporter. Or give me a ring and we can walk you through it and make sure you know what can be | 01:11:37 | |
| shared and what can't be shared. | 01:11:43 | |
| I guess the, and I mean the real thrust of this is we want you to have the information you need to get do your job. | 01:11:51 | |
| And we can get it to you quicker if we do it in that way. | 01:11:56 | |
| Can I just say one thing? | 01:12:01 | |
| Just to start off, so we're not doing a deep dive into anything, anything that's. | 01:12:03 | |
| Title the draft or his draft across it is is not a record and not to be shared outside of the organization because we're not ready | 01:12:09 | |
| to share because there are going to be changes on it. So that's that's where you can start. | 01:12:17 | |
| That's the first thing to start with. There are other things, but and we can talk about those later, but Pam and I will work with | 01:12:26 | |
| Eric to try to figure out some kind of labeling or protocols that we can follow. | 01:12:31 | |
| In the absence of that, I think we'll just try to mark things private, protected or draft. | 01:12:38 | |
| As we work through them, I spent 10 years as a lawyer for the US Department of Transportation. I, they didn't have really neat | 01:12:43 | |
| protocols for that. I was always jealous of my colleagues with the Department of Defense because they had really strict e-mail | 01:12:49 | |
| protocols. And they had, you know, these three letter codes that were really instructive on every e-mail telling them who could | 01:12:55 | |
| see it, who couldn't see it. And I thought it was great. | 01:13:01 | |
| Are we ready for Q&A? Yeah. | 01:13:11 | |
| Sorry, sorry, my microphone was wrong. | 01:13:13 | |
| I am really concerned about a lot of language. Obviously we're setting up divided government and I. | 01:13:19 | |
| Had a conversation with Nelson Abbott, our representative, about how, you know, we're, we're a legislature, we're a body and we're | 01:13:27 | |
| going to vote as a majority is going to put rules on. | 01:13:34 | |
| All of us, the minority about how the basically how the minority gets to interact with the staff. And one of the things that he | 01:13:41 | |
| said on the phone or we discussed was that. | 01:13:47 | |
| As a legislator, he would never go to the governor and say, can I pretty please speak with this department over here and get | 01:13:54 | |
| permission? Could you imagine the Democrats going and asking President Trump saying, can I go speak with the Department of Defense | 01:14:01 | |
| and getting permission? And I just think it sets a precedence of, you know, obviously, hey, I want this type of information. | 01:14:08 | |
| Go ask Eric and Julie for this. No, we don't. We don't want to give it to you. You know, it's not a, it's not a staff important | 01:14:16 | |
| thing. | 01:14:20 | |
| Of the, you know, the city manager and everything. And if it's like, hey, I'm looking for these finances, it's like, you know, | 01:14:56 | |
| we're, we're here in March and I still don't have the finances, right. So it's like, oh, it's not a priority. Like I just want to | 01:15:03 | |
| know where all of our money has been spent and we're having our budget and it's like, well, it's just not a priority. The mayor, | 01:15:09 | |
| you know, we don't have this. I don't have three votes to do that. So as a minority, we're going to like, we're going to put the | 01:15:16 | |
| we're going to vote in two weeks. | 01:15:22 | |
| And the majority is going to vote how much information the minority gets. And I think that's I think it's unconstitutional. All | 01:15:29 | |
| right, just I'm going to give everybody a turn. Let's go ahead and have Amber and then we'll have Marty and we'll go back to Jake. | 01:15:36 | |
| I just was, I'm curious about specifically which section is concerning to you regarding this. You can make requests for | 01:15:44 | |
| information from the manager or from the department heads, right? And so obviously. | 01:15:51 | |
| I gotta turn. Oh, I guess you get to respond. Yeah, she's just asking questions. So see where it talks about inclusive, like | 01:15:58 | |
| request items. So we put it up there and we ask for documents and it goes, we're gonna put in an ordinance that says I have to | 01:16:06 | |
| then come back to you guys and say pretty please, can I have oversight of what you're doing? Amber, did you have a comment back on | 01:16:13 | |
| that? Which section? Oh, he it was, I think he's talking about. | 01:16:21 | |
| Section C of C Yeah, you said C It was a formation of the agenda. I think it was CC Yeah, the agenda. But also when you're I, I | 01:16:30 | |
| see the. | 01:16:37 | |
| It was more on the document side of things of like, hey, the staff thinks this is too much work, so then we're going to the city | 01:16:46 | |
| managers and the mayor is going to have authority to say, hey, this isn't a top priority, let staff do this. So therefore, what | 01:16:51 | |
| makes the determination? | 01:16:56 | |
| We could. | 01:17:04 | |
| Staff time. Who decides if it's three or more hours? | 01:17:06 | |
| It would just be an estimate of how much time it would take somebody from the staff. It's asked they would get that assessment. So | 01:17:10 | |
| I want to say hold on one second. Is that the end of your comment? OK. You just wanted to know. Go ahead, Marty. I was a big | 01:17:16 | |
| helper on all of this. And I want you to understand my motivations here. | 01:17:23 | |
| Specifically on what you're talking about. | 01:17:32 | |
| So in my conversations with Jamie, Jamie's time is not included in this since he is our legal representative. This is just staff, | 01:18:40 | |
| right? You're our legal counsel's carved out of this, right? | 01:18:45 | |
| I think Marty's point remains. But I I don't want any of you to feel like you can't call me on things I please do. | 01:18:52 | |
| That I think the question is if you if you were to ask me to do something, that would be. | 01:19:00 | |
| 1/2 day or a full day effort, if I got a request from everybody all at once, I would have to prioritize it. And so this is an | 01:19:07 | |
| attempt to have a process in place where we can prioritize those kinds of things. | 01:19:14 | |
| And I'm with you, Marty. Like I don't think my projects are the ones that are stopping stuffing cuz I haven't gotten any results | 01:19:21 | |
| from staff. So I think there are projects and there are heavy burden, but I have been waiting patiently. Like, OK. And but I just | 01:19:27 | |
| don't like the majority getting to prioritize the minority. It's like it's when you submit it, we're all equals, like all five of | 01:19:34 | |
| us. So why would the majority get to prioritize what gets out of site? Hey, I, you know, I'll check in with Pam. Hey, do we have | 01:19:40 | |
| this yet? OK now. | 01:19:47 | |
| And it's like, no, we're going to prioritize that. You guys get this, right. For the record, can we specify that staff has given | 01:19:54 | |
| you financial documents, but they weren't what you were looking for? | 01:20:00 | |
| Right, that's what I'm No, I have no, I only have the names of the vendors. | 01:20:06 | |
| It's it's an incomplete statement and I think that's what Marty is talking about right now. OK, so this is my concern. | 01:21:15 | |
| That I did get a vendor list and a lot of the vendors. | 01:21:23 | |
| You know hotels in France travel in England. | 01:21:29 | |
| Restaurants in Ireland, these are companies that are on this vendor list, so department heads are not going to want to talk about | 01:21:34 | |
| this. | 01:21:39 | |
| It'll be delayed. | 01:21:45 | |
| And so majorities don't want to talk about this. | 01:21:47 | |
| So how do I get to talk about? You haven't asked me if I want to talk about it or not. That's a fair statement, but in many cases. | 01:21:52 | |
| Take you're making assumptions that aren't fair. I've asked you not to speak for me. I would be OK with talking about those | 01:22:01 | |
| things. I'm aware of some of those things and I would like to I would be fine talking further into it. And I think that if we | 01:22:06 | |
| talked about it, we would get further understanding right. And we're and we're talking about. | 01:22:12 | |
| But that's why I'm, I'm helping the public understand like they're gonna, they're sometimes in government, Democrat, Republican, | 01:22:17 | |
| whether it be the federal side, the state side or local side where it goes. Wow. | 01:22:23 | |
| Since we're oversight, we're looking at financial things that we're seeing and it's like, hey, I'd like to dig into this. And what | 01:22:31 | |
| I'm saying is that it's very inappropriate for us to. | 01:22:36 | |
| Guidelines. | 01:22:42 | |
| That say the majority, you think you got it in order to talk, in order to overcome this. So I'm just giving you one case example. | 01:22:44 | |
| I'm happy to say that you are and I don't. And I apologize. I don't want to say I speak for you, but sometimes it's like I've got | 01:22:50 | |
| to go fish on a boat to bring this spend out or, or to talk about it publicly or put it on the agenda. It's like, do you have | 01:22:56 | |
| specific changes in mind that you'd like to see? Yeah, I just don't think. I just don't think well, and I'm going to bring it back | 01:23:03 | |
| to the point of the conversation. | 01:23:09 | |
| OK. Were there additional things outside of that? Are there projects I just don't I could understand for agenda items like hey, | 01:24:24 | |
| you need to have three for agenda items, but I don't agree with documents from staff or from you got like me having to go to you | 01:24:32 | |
| and then to the mayor or or Eric and saying, hey, can you guys get them to give me these documents because documents I can take it | 01:24:39 | |
| and go, it's not on the agenda. | 01:24:46 | |
| I just go slowly and I don't like. | 01:25:56 | |
| I think that the valuable time in the next two weeks would be good to address this item to come to some consensus for it to be | 01:26:40 | |
| voted on. So the public comment period. Is this addressed in this too because you went over it really fast. I'm extremely | 01:26:47 | |
| concerned about that. We've shut down Facebook and we've shut down or we've shut it down to 10 minutes. Now the new policy is | 01:26:54 | |
| stating that a citizens must state before the meeting and then it comes up to you to then if there's many of them, we group all | 01:27:01 | |
| those decisions or the topics together. | 01:27:08 | |
| And then only one person gets to speak and and I think we're trending in the wrong direction there. I don't think there should be | 01:27:15 | |
| rules. I think, I think as a council, we have to like this is their time. This is this is their meeting just as much as ours. And, | 01:27:21 | |
| and I'm just. | 01:27:27 | |
| You know, if there's ten people to talk about parking, there's ten people to talk about parking. They all tend to speak, you know? | 01:27:34 | |
| That's because that's not how I read it and I wouldn't be comfortable with that either. Help me, and maybe this is the | 01:27:42 | |
| conversation we have after this meeting, but. | 01:27:46 | |
| The the intent on the public comment period was the state that we wanted to hear from everybody that wanted to speak. The mayor | 01:27:50 | |
| can ask people of a similar comment to group together. You know how it usually works in most council meetings throughout the state | 01:27:57 | |
| as if you have people that want to group together then the chair will give them 5 minutes instead of two minutes or whatever it is | 01:28:04 | |
| and usually the chair will try to. | 01:28:10 | |
| Give people as much time as as they can for the topic and for the number of people present. The way this rule is written is it has | 01:28:20 | |
| a floor, not a ceiling. So it wouldn't limit the mayor or the chair from allowing people more time, But it would prohibit the | 01:28:27 | |
| mayor or the chair from giving people less than two minutes, or from presenting, or from preventing every person at least one | 01:28:34 | |
| opportunity to speak, either individually or as a group. | 01:28:41 | |
| It doesn't like it's written in a way where we're trying to give flexibility to the chair to look at who's president, look at the | 01:28:49 | |
| issue, look at how many people want to speak, and then try to tailor the time accordingly when a quorum can extend time as well. | 01:28:57 | |
| I I just want like I'm looking at the legalese and ox. I threw this out. There are so many things where it says. | 01:29:07 | |
| Almost every sentence in here is like, the majority is getting together to put rules on the minority and we're gonna vote in two | 01:29:45 | |
| weeks. This is ruled on all of us. It's not just and it's not about people, right, but before. | 01:29:52 | |
| OK, hold on. We're gonna. Did you have anything further on your comment, Marty? Well, I just wanted to say I'm willing to talk | 01:30:00 | |
| about the public comment section like if you want to change some of the some of the times or you want to change some of the | 01:30:05 | |
| wording. | 01:30:10 | |
| I I don't think there's. | 01:30:15 | |
| I don't think there's anything wrong with that. And like Jamie said, this is brought to the table for discussion. And when I sat | 01:30:18 | |
| down with him and worked on it, it was like there were things that were OK. I don't think that's right. Let's push it to here. And | 01:30:22 | |
| I don't think this is right. Let's push it here. So if there's things that you're not comfortable with, we can still discuss. I'm | 01:30:27 | |
| not sorry. We're having a work session. | 01:30:32 | |
| If I yeah, I agree. | 01:30:38 | |
| Let's wait till Martha's done, OK? Just hold on, Marty. Sorry. Go ahead. No, you're fighting. You're. I'm OK. | 01:30:41 | |
| I just am saying that with the discussions with council members and their reports, if it's going to be hours long, I will walk out | 01:30:50 | |
| of here like that is like Jacob, we need to be able to have efficient meetings, not just like someone sitting here for two hours | 01:30:58 | |
| talking about what they think is right. I mean, meetings actually cost money. Like we're using taxpayer dollars to use staff time. | 01:31:05 | |
| And it's it's not something that I take right. And that's why I'm like it. | 01:31:13 | |
| I don't know if you misspoke, but it to council members can request an agenda item now. Well, previously we've known it as three, | 01:31:21 | |
| but we didn't really have policy on it from what I understand. So now you and Sarah could request anything to the mayor in writing | 01:31:26 | |
| and she would have to give you a response of why that's good. I mean, there were some there were a few things in there was that I | 01:31:31 | |
| talked to Jamie. I said appreciate it because it's been a couple months. I'm like, hey, it's not on there, right. So I appreciate | 01:31:37 | |
| that. | 01:31:42 | |
| I just there, there's a lot of things on here where obviously this was drafted by the majority. And so I know it's a draft | 01:31:49 | |
| document, but if we could, if I could take it back and I didn't want to share it publicly, but it was like. | 01:31:57 | |
| I I would hope that we could have that two weeks from now have a very long public engagement period so people could go through it | 01:32:07 | |
| or have a working meeting off session with me and you in good faith we sit down. | 01:32:13 | |
| I had another promise, but it slipped my mind now. So go ahead to to council member hold the way. I would just say if if you're | 01:32:50 | |
| going to throw darts at this throw them at me. I'm the only one that put it. So it's this wasn't there were no really detailed | 01:32:57 | |
| instructions on you know, make sure the rules include this or include that the context was. | 01:33:04 | |
| Staff and members of the council are are getting and are asking a lot of questions about what's appropriate or how do we handle | 01:33:13 | |
| this or how do we and, and each time what I found was under rule on that. | 01:33:19 | |
| And so my suggestion to the mayor was maybe we ought to put together a set of rules. And then I just looked at what other cities | 01:33:27 | |
| had in their code and there are things you can put in ordinance, There are things you can put in rules. So you could adjust this | 01:33:32 | |
| accordingly if there are things you'd say, well. | 01:33:37 | |
| I don't like it in the ordinance, but maybe I'd like to do a resolution that would have a rule on that. You could adjust it that | 01:33:43 | |
| way. | 01:33:46 | |
| And then again to my comment at the very, very beginning, I think like any negotiated document you're going to on some things feel | 01:33:50 | |
| like, wow, I really won there and I got what I wanted. And on other things you may think, you know, I didn't get what I wanted | 01:33:57 | |
| there. But I, I don't think it's fair to anyone else on the council to say. | 01:34:04 | |
| And so we may, when you say staff to staff, not like department heads, right? I don't think we should ever kick. We ever give | 01:34:48 | |
| staff, I don't think, I hope not. | 01:34:52 | |
| But some councils have or council members, not our council, but I have experience where there are council members who will try to | 01:34:57 | |
| give instruction to staff. I see. And staff will pull five different ways. If they get 5 different sets of instruction. I can see | 01:35:03 | |
| that. So it is helpful to have rules on that point that say, you know, if you're going to task staff to do something, it has to be | 01:35:10 | |
| consistent with the city plans and with city ordinances. And then the direction comes through a chain of command just like in any | 01:35:16 | |
| other organization. | 01:35:22 | |
| Amber, did you remember your comment? | 01:35:30 | |
| This is a response, I believe to the last meeting where we were seeking ways to hold the meetings and looking for opportunities to | 01:35:33 | |
| work that way. And so I, I think this is a good opportunity for you to work with Jamie and get this to the point where you want so | 01:35:38 | |
| you feel comfortable. | 01:35:44 | |
| Yeah, on page 6 E it talks about how city stat or I don't know if it's department heads or city staff can like report us for | 01:35:50 | |
| talking to them or going after. And I'm like an an annual report will be summarized for the nature and scope of significant | 01:35:57 | |
| information requests and then. | 01:36:04 | |
| Like it? | 01:36:11 | |
| We're over them. | 01:36:14 | |
| So it's like. | 01:36:16 | |
| Which one are you looking at? I'm sorry, an annual review of significant information requests. So it's like the City Manager will | 01:36:18 | |
| compile an annual report summarizing the nature and scope of significant information requests received by State Council, the | 01:36:24 | |
| resources required to fulfill the request, and any issues encountered. | 01:36:30 | |
| This report will be presented the City Council for review and consider and consideration for the adjustment and these limitations. | 01:36:37 | |
| So let's so now we're codifying that if a minority City Council is asking for a lot, then the majority can come in and say you | 01:36:43 | |
| know what, you're asking for too much. We're not going to let it. And it's like that. That shouldn't be in code. Well, the intent | 01:36:50 | |
| there would be for their for council to receive a report annually that would say. | 01:36:56 | |
| These were the demands put on staff time for information. I don't think the intent behind that is to try to point fingers is just | 01:37:04 | |
| try to help help the council understand, are we? | 01:37:09 | |
| I think maybe we're just working off the precedent of the city is that we've always generally respected the the people over | 01:37:46 | |
| whoever the staff are. So for us, we've always said, hey, city manager, we would like this. And the city manager looks for who out | 01:37:54 | |
| of the staff have the time to fulfill that purpose. And if they don't have that time, that way we're not having people work | 01:38:02 | |
| overtime or come in early or do things like that and they're able to facilitate. | 01:38:10 | |
| Proper production that's efficient to maximizing what you are asking for, what the total council is asking for. And if that time | 01:38:19 | |
| starts taking too much away from the priorities that the full council set and think that's where the parameters are coming in | 01:38:25 | |
| here, but I think it would be fair to maybe. | 01:38:31 | |
| You could all meet in small working groups and go through this. Are there any other high level points? I think that I think we can | 01:38:37 | |
| find agreement of what I would say is because this is so much of an adjustment that citizens should at least get two weeks to see | 01:38:44 | |
| the final version and then a public comment. Because like sometimes there's consequences and unintended consequences and you can't | 01:38:50 | |
| look at it in terms of like the current makeup of the council right now or the current problem. You have to look at it like in the | 01:38:57 | |
| future. | 01:39:03 | |
| Outside of the issues of the day, right So. | 01:39:10 | |
| I don't think there's any rush on this. I think it's a fair request and I'd be happy to meet with you, Jake. I, I really do try to | 01:39:14 | |
| make sure that we're representing everyone on the council and I do think that same thing when I'm making, when I'm working on | 01:39:20 | |
| policy. How will this affect the council 10 years from now? | 01:39:26 | |
| We don't know who's going to be mayor, who's going to be making the decisions as a council, and so I agree with you 100%. | 01:39:34 | |
| Is this a public document? | 01:39:43 | |
| Yeah, Mayor, thank you for the time. It was helpful to get feedback from everybody and. | 01:39:45 | |
| I'll take a stab at making some changes and I'll make some phone calls to members of the council to try to get their suggestions. | 01:39:49 | |
| And then to the individual members of the council, feel free to send me red line edits or an e-mail or whatever is easiest for you | 01:39:57 | |
| to get information back. And then I'll try to create a new draft and we can. And I also, I also want to reiterate that I, I'm so | 01:40:05 | |
| grateful for the staff, the documents that I do gather they're not attacking. I mean some, I hope they can understand my tone. | 01:40:12 | |
| Thank you, Amber. | 01:41:35 | |
| All right, if we are done with this and there are no further comments on this, I'm going to go ahead and take us to the next | 01:41:37 | |
| agenda item which moves us right into public comment, I believe. Let me confirm. | 01:41:43 | |
| Minutes on the screen. | 01:42:23 | |
| And then if you have an item that all of you would like to share. | 01:42:26 | |
| Citizens acting in inappropriate manners will be, you know, invited to leave, same as always. And we're so excited to hear from | 01:43:06 | |
| you and really learn about what you care about in our community. So with that, we invite you to come up and share. | 01:43:12 | |
| Come on. | 01:43:21 | |
| Yeah, go ahead and stand in line if you want. You can. Forward to you if you want to. I'm Darlene Price. I appreciate you having | 01:43:22 | |
| people lean forward and talking to their mic because. | 01:43:27 | |
| I had a real hard time listening and hearing what they were doing on the discussion here. So that was great Council. I appreciate | 01:43:32 | |
| that my personal my my point and my questions that you can answer later is who is the we that form this document on agenda public | 01:43:41 | |
| comments, request from staff? Was that the entire council that got together and said let's put this together or was it just you? | 01:43:50 | |
| I mean that that's my question is who's the we that did that? Then I said I'm looking for looking at each of the things that you | 01:43:59 | |
| talked about. The big red mark that came out in my mind was that the mayor established the agenda. | 01:44:07 | |
| The mayor allocates the time for personal comments. | 01:44:16 | |
| The mayor requests what can be requested of staff, the mayor or the manager directs the staff. And to me that and finally the | 01:44:20 | |
| mayor decides who gets what records. And so for me, that's a big, a big exclamation point that that's a lot of power in one | 01:44:28 | |
| person's hands to dictate what your constituents want to have done in our home and around in our area. So that those are my | 01:44:36 | |
| questions. | 01:44:44 | |
| The big red flash about what the mayor does on every single one of these things. Nobody else gets a second opinion. | 01:44:52 | |
| And the fact that the we who was that I would like to know. Thank you. | 01:44:59 | |
| Hi, I'm Keith Hold the way I live on Holdaway road. | 01:45:07 | |
| I think it's been three months ago that I asked for a response and the mayor told me that she would e-mail me the amount of tax | 01:45:10 | |
| returned to, to the golf place and, and I and also Larry Miller Theater and she has not done that yet. I'm, I'm waiting for that | 01:45:18 | |
| e-mail from the mayor because it was promised to me. And, and I just want to know that I think I have a right as a citizen to ask | 01:45:26 | |
| that. | 01:45:34 | |
| And I was promised that. | 01:45:41 | |
| I I also remember when I was voted in and and sworn in, I actually had all of the financial. | 01:45:44 | |
| Records as soon as I received the vote of the citizens, I didn't have to wait till the swearing in and I didn't have to wait three | 01:45:55 | |
| or four months later to get every single detail that I wanted as a City Councilman. | 01:46:02 | |
| There should be nobody that waits that long to receive any type of. We voted for certain people and we voted for them to have | 01:46:11 | |
| total access, not partial. | 01:46:16 | |
| That's exactly. Remember to raise your hand, please, no commentary. And that should happen and you ought to make sure as a council | 01:46:22 | |
| that that happens today or tomorrow. | 01:46:27 | |
| Every single item that they want to review, they should be able to review past expenses. They should have the total books. | 01:46:33 | |
| Everyone should. The whole staff should be open to that. They should want that for the public good. | 01:46:41 | |
| And and for it not to be like that is a kangaroo court. | 01:46:50 | |
| I'm done. | 01:46:55 | |
| Chip price Providence I. | 01:46:59 | |
| I wanted to take a little bit of time to just kind of remind you guys that as elected officials, you guys work for us. And in | 01:47:03 | |
| order for that to take place, we need to be able to stand in this room and have and have us express how we feel. | 01:47:12 | |
| Your job is to listen to what we're asking you to do, and if public comments are squelched then. | 01:47:21 | |
| You're not. You're not a representative anymore. | 01:47:31 | |
| You're you're working for yourselves and that's, that's not what our government was designed to do. | 01:47:35 | |
| I have, I have a question. A couple months ago we received an e-mail with a survey that said, hey, prioritize what you guys want, | 01:47:44 | |
| your vision of things, how we're doing. | 01:47:50 | |
| Are those results going to be made public? Are we going to be able to see what the City of Vineyards public view is? And. | 01:47:59 | |
| When? When will those results be just disclosed? | 01:48:10 | |
| That's a question. | 01:48:16 | |
| I will, yeah. We'll answer. I'll answer after. | 01:48:18 | |
| That's it. | 01:48:22 | |
| Thanks Tip. | 01:48:23 | |
| Daria Evans Figured resident. Thank you for this opportunity. I just have. | 01:48:26 | |
| I was really glad to hear that MAG has awarded the city tag grant. I'd like to know how much that grant was for. It wasn't listed | 01:48:33 | |
| in the Vineyard City Facebook page how much that grant is worth and it also it gave the areas that it's going to be distributed. | 01:48:40 | |
| I'd like to know where Geneva Rd. loop is. | 01:48:47 | |
| I have no idea where Geneva Rd. loop is and that's listed on the bottom of the little. | 01:48:56 | |
| Picture it says it will be at Mill Rd. Vineyard Connector and Geneva Rd. loop. So I'd like to know where Geneva Rd. loop is on | 01:49:03 | |
| that. And then also a neighbor asked me about the sun shades back in August of 2023. I asked that question when they will be | 01:49:11 | |
| installed and my neighbor just asked me this past week when are those sun shades going to be installed. So I'd like to get her an | 01:49:18 | |
| answer on that. | 01:49:26 | |
| And then also on the March 4th Vineyard Community, Vineyard City page, it was talking about the Vineyard Community Garden, and I | 01:49:35 | |
| think the picture on there is misleading it. I was looking at it. Oh, that looks really great. It's a picture of the Orem | 01:49:43 | |
| Community Garden, and I think that needs to be credited to the Oren Community Garden. | 01:49:52 | |
| Because that's that is misleading. And so I would appreciate that being corrected. I also spoke with Mr. Ellis in February about | 01:50:01 | |
| the Top Golf tax incentive and he told me that he would talk to Laura Lewis. She's the accountant back in 2018 was doing all this | 01:50:08 | |
| work with the Top Golf. | 01:50:15 | |
| And it would, he said. It might be scheduled for February 28th or March. | 01:50:23 | |
| And he said that 200 pages of document would be provided for for people to look through when that happens, that she would explain | 01:50:28 | |
| it and. | 01:50:33 | |
| February 28th meeting was cancelled and so I'm wondering when that meeting will be scheduled for the public. | 01:50:39 | |
| And then I also asked him about the railroad spur, and he said negotiations still in progress, the Union Pacific is asking for | 01:50:46 | |
| more siding. And so I'd like to know how those negotiations are going. | 01:50:53 | |
| I also missed the special sessions on February and 17th and 19th because we are out of town Tennessee visiting family, and I was | 01:51:01 | |
| hoping that the minutes of those two sessions would be approved tonight as consent items, but they are not listed. And so I'd like | 01:51:09 | |
| to know when they would be available to read. And then also I'd like to be able to read Mayor Fulmer's state of the city that you | 01:51:17 | |
| presented at your February 21st retreat meeting. I would like to go to let me think about the state of the city. Thank you. | 01:51:25 | |
| Kim Cornelius resident. | 01:51:41 | |
| I'd like to say I heard this through the Grapevine, but it's pretty credible. Grapevine happens to be a retired city chief, Fire | 01:51:45 | |
| Chief Jim McGill, and from what I understand there have been. | 01:51:51 | |
| Some pretty different plans put in place for a fire station and it seems very creative. It sounds like it's pretty good, but I'm | 01:51:59 | |
| wondering if you could give the public who knows nothing about this current plan, proposed plan a status update. | 01:52:07 | |
| Because I'm not sure that the water getting to the end of the roof so that we're kept abreast of what's going on. I'm not even | 01:52:15 | |
| sure that all the council members know what was going on. Thank you. | 01:52:19 | |
| Claudia Larae, Holdaway Rd. Thank you for all your work. I know it's kind of a thankless job. I would just like to make a comment | 01:52:27 | |
| about meetings in December. | 01:52:33 | |
| It was very disappointing to be one of 27 people sitting up in that hall that were not accommodated for being able to hear the | 01:52:40 | |
| meeting if people take their time to come, I think maybe while we're making all these. | 01:52:49 | |
| Rules that make. Maybe we should address what to do with an overflow. I noticed there was a. | 01:52:59 | |
| Screen out there. | 01:53:09 | |
| That maybe could have. I don't know if it was set up or not, but I'm asking you please to. | 01:53:10 | |
| Make a plan for that so those of us, you know, if we can't fit in these seats. I mean, people came to hear and to comment. And I | 01:53:18 | |
| certainly understand not wanting to hear the same comment over and over, but just to be able to accommodate the citizens who come | 01:53:27 | |
| in some way. I don't know what the answer is. | 01:53:35 | |
| But I know that there is an answer. | 01:53:44 | |
| Thank you. | 01:53:49 | |
| Karen Cornelius, resident. | 01:53:56 | |
| I consider myself to be a constitutional conservative. | 01:53:58 | |
| And one of the things that I hold dearest. | 01:54:03 | |
| Is the 1st Amendment. | 01:54:07 | |
| And that First Amendment gives me the right to stand here before you and share my concerns about the legislative body, about the | 01:54:09 | |
| things that are happening in this city and about things that I see that we might be able to improve. And one of those is | 01:54:16 | |
| definitely communication. But, and I remember that same meeting that Claudia just spoke of, and I want to read you something that | 01:54:23 | |
| was said in that meeting or to a reporter after the meeting. | 01:54:30 | |
| It's amazing to see people so impassioned to care so much and even on the smallest items, things that I never would have thought | 01:54:39 | |
| would ever come to the discussion, she said. This is meaningful and sometimes it's difficult to explain the law or to understand | 01:54:47 | |
| what is exactly coming before you, but just to see that you people care is incredible. | 01:54:55 | |
| That was a quote from our mayor. We care and we understand. We do our homework. We may not know the law like you do. | 01:55:04 | |
| But we do our homework and we come to these meetings with a level of preparation that is good for us and we deserve respect. | 01:55:13 | |
| I don't trust that we're getting it. I don't feel like we're getting it when you say that. Even the smallest items, well, one of | 01:55:24 | |
| those small items just happened to be the four to one power grab. We sitting out there did not consider that to be small. We | 01:55:31 | |
| considered that to be major. Two others were two Pids that we knew nothing about. I know my time is running out. If you want to | 01:55:38 | |
| handcuff me, that's OK. But I want to finish what I have to say. | 01:55:45 | |
| I I like to keep all the way want to know about the taxes and I want that in a public meeting because. | 01:55:54 | |
| That I had to try and keep forgetting it. | 01:56:04 | |
| I want to know in a public meeting the answer to Keith Hoodways question because that question was asked in public and if we all | 01:56:11 | |
| want to know the answer why do we have to go 1 by 1 to get the answer from someone else that needs to be on public records. | 01:56:19 | |
| Another thing that I'm concerned about is the bridge that has been approved for Utah City. When I see the eyesore at the front | 01:56:28 | |
| runner station with no parking facility. Nobody talks about when that's planned for and I know that there's hopes to be jumped | 01:56:36 | |
| through to get it, but there were also hoops that were jumped through to get that bridge. | 01:56:44 | |
| In Utah City. So I know that there are things that can be done and I know that Julie and Jeff Hartley have some some people they | 01:56:53 | |
| know and some pressure that they can place. And we are really kind of the laughingstock of Utah County the way our frontrunner | 01:57:00 | |
| station has become the over the overflow trap, the overflow. Our new time is up. So we're going to have to wrap up. I understand | 01:57:06 | |
| it is. | 01:57:12 | |
| It's not fair for me to give you additional time when I have to take time with other people. So we can talk about this next time, | 01:57:22 | |
| but let's finish the job at the front runner. Let's not be starting all of these other projects when we've got that eyesore every | 01:57:27 | |
| time we come over the bridge at 800. Thanks. | 01:57:33 | |
| I'm Adam Tushar. I'm a resident in the Windsor neighborhood. So just a few questions I guess about kind of to clarify a couple | 01:57:45 | |
| things. | 01:57:49 | |
| This packet says that this public comment is for items not on the agenda. But the mayor did say something about like you could | 01:57:54 | |
| address items on the agenda. So I don't know if that's a new policy or just wanted to be. No, I think I meant not on the agenda. I | 01:58:00 | |
| might have misspoke. I was reading. | 01:58:05 | |
| The OK, so we'll do away with that. | 01:58:12 | |
| I did wanna make it. Was it an agenda item that was already addressed? Go ahead. OK, All right. So I just wanted to I read through | 01:58:17 | |
| kind of the stuff that about the meetings and I think there was two very specific areas that maybe the counselor, the attorney | 01:58:24 | |
| might consider just some additional clarity. One was I think it was maybe already brought up, but like what is the definition of a | 01:58:30 | |
| prestige really inappropriate agenda item and who makes that determination and just. | 01:58:36 | |
| You know, is that, you know, legally that's obvious, but like what is procedurally mean? And then the other one was what is the | 01:58:43 | |
| definition of there's a part that says strong support from the community. So how is that determined? And that's in regards to how | 01:58:49 | |
| the city manager prioritizes request for information or you know, other things like that. I think that would just be helpful with | 01:58:55 | |
| the public to understand too. Aside from that, I did want to mention I did go to one of the special meetings. I thought it was | 01:59:02 | |
| really great. | 01:59:08 | |
| That's it. Thank you. Thank you. | 01:59:45 | |
| All right. | 01:59:48 | |
| Doesn't look like we have any other comments, Elizabeth. | 01:59:50 | |
| I would like to just add really fast I. | 01:59:55 | |
| President. | 02:00:00 | |
| The same meeting that Keith asked for, the e-mail for the second time I asked for. If we do have to, I don't wanna talk right? But | 02:00:02 | |
| if I do raise my hand, I would love to have some kind of tally system when it goes into the notes to be like when this person said | 02:00:07 | |
| that comment we had. | 02:00:12 | |
| 15 people raised their hand or whatever, right? So that, that if I'm not going to repeat something that at least my voice was | 02:00:18 | |
| heard by my raise of hand. Because I'm telling you right now, she doesn't look up. You look up sometimes you look up every time | 02:00:24 | |
| you look up every time you look up every time. So if we're going to raise our hand in support of a comment or something, that | 02:00:30 | |
| means I'm sorry, something that that's been said. | 02:00:36 | |
| Our freedom of speech is is I agree with what was that our freedom of speech is such a. | 02:00:43 | |
| I mean, it's where our country is built on one of the main things being able to say what we wanted. And I think to limit comments | 02:00:50 | |
| to do anything with public comment is, is such a spot on the face. And I would just also like to say that if we're going to talk | 02:00:57 | |
| about respecting of time and meetings and the flow of meetings, have the top agenda items be your 123 bullet points of the agenda. | 02:01:04 | |
| And if something else happens after and it's been 2 hours, then say, guess what, we're going to move these to the next meeting. | 02:01:10 | |
| So maybe just. | 02:01:50 | |
| Put an important sense that if it doesn't fit in that meeting, it gets bumped to the next meeting. | 02:01:52 | |
| All right. | 02:02:01 | |
| No, I raised my hand to agree with it because you told me to do that. All right, I will be able to address some of these. Darlene | 02:02:04 | |
| Price, you mentioned who's the we. I think Jamie did a sufficient job answering that question early when he presented Jamie, I | 02:02:10 | |
| don't know if you want to reiterate that you that process. | 02:02:17 | |
| Attorneys have privilege. Is everybody OK if I answer that question so. | 02:02:25 | |
| Sometimes things come about organically, so this was not an agenda item where there was one particular council member who said | 02:02:31 | |
| Jamie do this. | 02:02:36 | |
| I have filled a lot of requests over the last three months of we've had this new thing come up. How do we deal with it? And then | 02:02:41 | |
| when I went and looked at it, I realized that we had no rules. | 02:02:47 | |
| Lawyers like rules because it. | 02:02:53 | |
| Set some structure to how we do things. And so I asked the mayor if I could put together some rules for the council to consider. I | 02:02:56 | |
| met with the mayor to discuss them, I met with Marty to discuss them and I met with council member Holdaway to discuss them. That | 02:03:02 | |
| doesn't mean that they were drafted by any of those council members, but I received input from all three. And again with the | 02:03:08 | |
| structure of the meetings, this was in a work session today. And so it's kind of a first read of the item or reaction to the item | 02:03:15 | |
| and then we can. | 02:03:21 | |
| Work on refining it, make it what the council wants, and then at the end of the day when the council does adopt it and vote, it | 02:03:28 | |
| will be their document and it'll be the city's document. | 02:03:33 | |
| Could you clarify, and I'm sorry if you were going to ask us next, but could you clarify the mayor's role because she had | 02:03:38 | |
| questions about how the mayor establishes the agenda and the public comments and direct staff and so on. Could you kind of talk | 02:03:44 | |
| about her executive role and what is state code versus our code? Sure. | 02:03:50 | |
| The Under state law, the mayor is the chair of the council and so there are some functions that follow the mayor by law, not by. | 02:03:58 | |
| Now, we can't change that part of the rule. And so the rules reflect that under state law. But the mayor is the chair of the | 02:04:08 | |
| council. There's a provision in state law that allows certain roles or functions of a mayor to be defined or limited by a city. | 02:04:15 | |
| But one of the roles that cannot under any circumstance be limited is the mayor's role as chair of the council. And that does | 02:04:23 | |
| involve agenda setting and things related to that. And so you do see the mayor. | 02:04:30 | |
| The Office of the Mayor. | 02:04:39 | |
| Identified in the rules throughout and that's really a function of what's in state law. There are some places when you read the | 02:04:41 | |
| document where it says mayor slash city manager slash council. My effort in stating things in that way is to make clear that. | 02:04:50 | |
| If any one of those three say to staff move forward with the request, then it would happen. It's it's an effort, I guess, to be | 02:05:00 | |
| expansive, not restrictive. | 02:05:05 | |
| Thank you. All right. Please hold the way you mentioned that I said I would personally e-mail you and I just want to clarify that | 02:05:13 | |
| my discussion was that Eric Ellis and our RDA Director would be the people in contact with you. What I understand about the | 02:05:18 | |
| situation. And I also stated that if anybody else wanted that information to go and meet with the staff members as well. And what | 02:05:23 | |
| I understand about the situation that you guys are currently working together and trying to solve that problem for that | 02:05:28 | |
| information. | 02:05:33 | |
| Well, I apologize if I misstated it, but I wouldn't have the information. So it would be the two people that did that. So thank | 02:05:40 | |
| you. Can you can you talk to the point? Because this just keeps coming up. | 02:05:46 | |
| Is there certain parts of this private information? I think so. And Eric, if you want to go ahead and clarify it, go ahead. | 02:05:53 | |
| It's this, yeah, this is working. So I have been speaking with Council member Holdaway about this specific topic. He just, he | 02:06:02 | |
| requested that he own this topic directly and in order to pull this documentation, it requires a grammar request. And so I sent | 02:06:10 | |
| the grammar request file to Council member Holdaway and have not received a response on that yet. Why does it require a grammar | 02:06:17 | |
| request like it's tax? | 02:06:24 | |
| To a single entity and so there it's. | 02:06:33 | |
| It's considered private information. | 02:06:35 | |
| So like if they did a grammar request, would things be redacted? Like the information they want would just be redacted? It would, | 02:06:38 | |
| it would more specifically, I don't know what would be redacted, but it would go through a recorder and she would vet that for | 02:06:44 | |
| private versus public information. And, and as a council member, the response could be different than it would be for what was | 02:06:50 | |
| available to the public potentially. Jamie, can you chime in on legal tax reimbursement that a government entity is giving back | 02:06:57 | |
| for taxes? | 02:07:03 | |
| The private number, but we can't share. I've seen in other cities where Saratoga Springs has their Costco annually they post how | 02:07:10 | |
| much money is going back to Costco and they just do A1 pager of these are all the tax deals that we've given. And I know we have | 02:07:18 | |
| quite a few more. And I owned it and said, First off, I don't want to do a grandma. It's like 10 and and I didn't I don't like | 02:07:26 | |
| that approach because it's like I wanted to move this towards transparency in terms of. | 02:07:35 | |
| Could we set forth a policy of A1 pager and every year we update it once that new information comes out and it's just released to | 02:07:43 | |
| the public in January of we paid out this much this year because you know, those Rdas are set up on the economy, right? We're | 02:07:51 | |
| we're making a guest 20 years ago on how much taxes the megaplex is going to go for on a percentage basis over that 20 or 30 year | 02:07:59 | |
| period, right? And it's calculated every year depending on how many people go and do it. And so as a policy. | 02:08:07 | |
| That's what my father's asking for is can we calculate year to date and every year so that because there are certain businesses | 02:08:15 | |
| that don't get any money and it's hard when we do give these better deals through the RDA, it just needs to be public what it is. | 02:08:22 | |
| So if I could just make one more comment, the I'm gonna let you make a comment, but it's gonna go to Jamie. Then I'm gonna go to | 02:08:30 | |
| the next. OK, this will be quick adding the grandma request. | 02:08:37 | |
| And so again, our goal in providing their grammar request is so that we have crystal clear instructions on what we need to look | 02:09:19 | |
| for so that we can be responsive to that request. | 02:09:24 | |
| Thank God. Jimmy, are you council member? Hold the way. Maybe what might help is if we jump on a quick phone call with you and | 02:09:31 | |
| your dad and I can help. | 02:09:37 | |
| I can help Orient you to kind of what information is available and it's out there and then maybe you can pinpoint what exactly you | 02:09:44 | |
| want. I think this could be an agenda item of the policy of staff does this. Yeah. The next thing I wanted to mention is I know | 02:09:51 | |
| the mayor is scheduled in RDA meeting following the council meeting in two weeks. | 02:09:57 | |
| And has arranged for the RDA director to be present to walk through all of the RDA obligations over time so that the public can | 02:10:04 | |
| hear everything and and ask all the follow up questions. But we can get you, you know, basic information of agreements, | 02:10:12 | |
| reimbursement commitments, dollar amounts on those kinds of things certainly are public. | 02:10:20 | |
| Tax receipts for individual businesses. | 02:10:30 | |
| Are not and I think where there might have been some miscommunication between your request and what Eric's looking for is he | 02:10:34 | |
| understood the request to be individual tax receipts and. | 02:10:39 | |
| Put their suggestions and sorry, I don't know the tag grant number offhand, but if you stop by our planning and talk to Morgan, | 02:11:15 | |
| he'll be able to put that and maybe we can add that to the picture or the listing that we put on social media. Thanks for the | 02:11:22 | |
| comment on the Orem Community Garden. We'll send that feedback back to the social media team. Eric, will you make note of that and | 02:11:30 | |
| make sure that we do that the ARM community Gardens page picture. OK, let's see. | 02:11:37 | |
| Additionally, you can find out about the loop sunshade, the Geneva. No, no, the sun shades. I the last time we talked about this, | 02:11:45 | |
| I believe it was spring, but it would be good to talk to Morgan the same or Brian and you could even touch base with Eric and they | 02:11:51 | |
| could update you on that timeline. We didn't want to put them up in the winter because it's just wear and tear on them. So we were | 02:11:56 | |
| waiting for good weather. | 02:12:02 | |
| Right. And have we received them yet? Sorry, I said I'd be quick. No, no, I, I, I think the best opportunity would be to talk to | 02:12:09 | |
| staff and get the full timeline. | 02:12:13 | |
| So that if they know the information best Geneva Loop, Rd. Morgan, I'd like to know what that is too. So the tag grant just to | 02:12:17 | |
| kind of explain really quickly is the technical assistance. The tag grant is the technical assistance grant through MAG. And so we | 02:12:25 | |
| received $120,000 and what? And that's that's for planning funds to help us plan those corridors to make them safer for | 02:12:33 | |
| pedestrians, for bikes to to add crossings we did. | 02:12:40 | |
| We did town halls over there and that was one of the number #1 concerns from residents was that they feel unsafe crossing and you | 02:12:49 | |
| know, but they feel safe in the community. So yeah, I think the. Is it a loop to Geneva? Yeah. So, so So what it looks at is Mill | 02:12:56 | |
| Road 400 NA connection to Frontrunner and then the loop of Geneva on our side of Geneva Rd. Geneva is the state road and it falls | 02:13:04 | |
| mainly within Orem. But the planning grant would look at our trail because there is a. | 02:13:11 | |
| Plan trail on our side of Diva and then coming up the Vineyard connector and making a connection up to the front runner. So it's | 02:13:19 | |
| looking at kind of those corridors for trails and for overall. | 02:13:24 | |
| Bicycle and pedestrian safety. Okay, all right, let's see. | 02:13:31 | |
| And for accommodations for what happens if we have overflow, I think we can work on that. There's a few things that we'll probably | 02:14:09 | |
| have to work through. When you make a public notice, you're not necessarily sure how many people might show up. And so sometimes | 02:14:15 | |
| when there's a public notice, you have to hold it at the area. But what we can do in the future. | 02:14:21 | |
| Maybe is triggered better and then bring that back for a brainstorming session. So that's good. | 02:14:28 | |
| Did not want to do the conversation and negotiations have gone really well. The state has been a great partner. Union Pacific | 02:15:08 | |
| Railroad is coming to a good agreement with us. UTA, as they mentioned are also becoming a good partner in it. And I think we're | 02:15:15 | |
| working on something that's really going to be a great benefit to the city and it's not something that's going to. | 02:15:21 | |
| I think you'll be happy with the outcome. As we get to the other side of that, let's see, special session minutes were discussed | 02:15:29 | |
| by one of our residents. But just to clarify it, because there were only two people, it's not actually a City Council meeting. It | 02:15:37 | |
| falls to a different standard. And so the Open Public Meetings Act is not required for meeting minutes to be taken, but if you | 02:15:45 | |
| request for the video or the audio that was taken, you can listen to it. So if you have questions about that, you can. | 02:15:53 | |
| Reach out to our recorder. Thank you for the comments on the procedural and the public definitions for the ordinances that we're | 02:16:01 | |
| looking at it. We'll also mention the updates for the trail network and I believe that's it. So thank you again for all of the | 02:16:07 | |
| public comments and. | 02:16:14 | |
| I'll go ahead and let you talk about, I mean, is there something specific that you want to address? I just want to respond to the | 02:16:23 | |
| public comment section, so. | 02:16:27 | |
| I don't want to go through all of it unless you have something additional to add that's information. | 02:16:32 | |
| Yeah, I'm just responding to the public comments. So they asking me these questions, right? | 02:16:37 | |
| So I know, so the way that I want to do this is I love the idea that you wanna comment. So if you have something more to add to | 02:16:44 | |
| these specific ideas or information, that's a very specific thing and they're different from your comments. | 02:16:52 | |
| It'll be the same thing now as then. I can wait 10 minutes. OK, let's go ahead and move into it. You can be first. | 02:17:35 | |
| Just for procedure, I just want to follow the same procedure. OK, so for the question period, I just want the citizens to know how | 02:17:42 | |
| hard it is for me to get information from Eric in the I'll say, hey, I would like this and a public comment. I would like this | 02:17:50 | |
| before on the agenda. I would like a policy of putting this through. And it's like, hey, fill out this grammar request and it | 02:17:57 | |
| becomes a lot of homework. And it it it is, it's like slow the roll, right? It takes some time. | 02:18:05 | |
| On tip on your survey results, I read every single one of them. There are over 650 responses and it was very loud. | 02:18:13 | |
| It was shocking, the anger and and I, I think the citizens deserve to see just like Facebook comments, how angry everyone is if | 02:18:22 | |
| they just go to one source or four or five of us, we can just say, hey, everything is fine in the city. And I just don't think | 02:18:27 | |
| anything, it needs to be transparent, right? | 02:18:32 | |
| Sorry, I don't. I don't know about veneer, Lupro or whatever. The picture of the gardens on the garden thing. | 02:18:39 | |
| I think I did see that we're putting out a garden director. So this kind of more of my report. I really believe that the garden | 02:18:46 | |
| group themselves should be picking their own leader instead of having them apply to us. I think it creates a sense of community. | 02:18:53 | |
| Same thing with the library, the Heritage Commission. I don't think it should be appointed. It's just kind of the topic there. | 02:19:00 | |
| They voted on their roles and volunteered on their roles. I think he means the actual appointments that fall under. | 02:19:10 | |
| Yeah, I don't think the appointment, yeah, I think the appointments should just be made by their group, like allowing them to vote | 02:19:18 | |
| for themselves. I think it it, it allows them some autonomy, I think. And going back to the special meeting minutes. | 02:19:25 | |
| I want to work with you guys in good faith and you know, I, I apologized already for the Saturday and Monday and I saw those on | 02:19:33 | |
| the rules of saying, hey, we can't ever do that on Saturday and Monday. And I can agree with that. | 02:19:40 | |
| However, I think that you know with the. | 02:19:48 | |
| I don't know 30 or 30 or so that attended or 2025 that attended. We spent many hours going through a lot of issues and problems | 02:19:53 | |
| and we've got to be able. I know that in good. | 02:19:59 | |
| If if the group doesn't vote to put them on, then we're not going to allow people to know of the pain and different problems. I | 02:20:08 | |
| just think that we're in good faith to just say that it can be listed cuz it's. | 02:20:14 | |
| But I understand by law it can be denied. The next thing is on the fire department. Sarah and I have never met with the fire | 02:20:20 | |
| department yet and we've requested to meet with City Council or on that. And so just if we could meet and know all these different | 02:20:28 | |
| plans and changes. Same thing with the rail spur and same thing with Huntsman, like we request to meet with different things. | 02:20:35 | |
| Claudia, I, I I want to make you feel that we are listening. | 02:20:45 | |
| I think that opening up Facebook comments and wouldn't make it so you didn't have to come here. But I also think it adds the | 02:20:50 | |
| transparency is what other people are saying. And then Karen, just knowing about the taxes and different things on that. And then | 02:20:56 | |
| on your bridge comment, I just wanted to place this on the record. Like I'm grateful that we bring amenities to the state, but I | 02:21:03 | |
| did not know about the 12th North Bridge. I tried to speak with Mr. Hartley. He only gave me the ability to go up to the | 02:21:10 | |
| legislature and learn about that. | 02:21:16 | |
| And you guys know that I've asked them to come down here and ask some serious questions about everything his relationship, and it | 02:21:23 | |
| still hasn't happened. And I wanted to, I want to do that within closed doors. | 02:21:28 | |
| And hey, let's go meet and now I'm like to the point where I think there needs to be a clearing of air grievances and, and just | 02:21:35 | |
| kind of hear things out. And that's why I think special sessions are needed if if we don't want to allow for, you know, Ben Abbott | 02:21:42 | |
| or others that had some issues where we could talk about it openly. | 02:21:48 | |
| I just want to make sure that people understand I'm I'm trying it gets tough and I heard I read it in your in your survey | 02:21:55 | |
| responses and they made me sad. | 02:22:00 | |
| On my report stuff this week, we held two meetings and I'm really grateful for Utah City that came and met with me and Sarah and | 02:22:07 | |
| we held those meetings and we did that in a style in which that it wouldn't have a quorum and so we could speak openly. | 02:22:16 | |
| And I don't like that culture in our city. I think you guys should be able to see me work with Utah City and talk and it should be | 02:22:26 | |
| recorded. And me and Sarah are being separated to where we don't really need to be. We're spending double the staff hour time to | 02:22:33 | |
| hold one meeting at 9:00 and then an hour and a half later do another meeting. And we're doing it twice. And the and the excuse | 02:22:40 | |
| that we're given is that it would have to be recorded and be public. And I just go, I don't remember the culture of this when. | 02:22:48 | |
| It used to not be that way and so I wanted to push back on on that. And then our second meeting about the. | 02:22:55 | |
| Argument about the finances. So the people saw me and you leave that meeting and even today talk about the differences of what | 02:23:03 | |
| actually happened. And I don't like that because I think the public should be able to see that disagreement in those types of | 02:23:10 | |
| meetings. And when I get summoned to those, I go, there's only two of us here there. This is a great meeting where everyone should | 02:23:16 | |
| watch this open debate and go through and do it. And that's what the public deserve. | 02:23:23 | |
| And you guys get to vote us based off of what's happened. And, and I, I get that certain things like a Utah city, like, oh, I want | 02:23:31 | |
| privacy or whatever. And, and I, I, I'm kind of like in certain issues, guys, I want to have this public. | 02:23:39 | |
| Can I respond to one of them? Sure. | 02:24:17 | |
| I guess we'd have to refer to Damien on the whole public meeting because we are following state code. But the whole reason we had | 02:24:20 | |
| we met with Ave. consultants was to help us be employed and educated because it will be presented to the public. And the | 02:24:26 | |
| presentation that we saw today, the transportation, we all saw that. And then we had our questions and we could even make requests | 02:24:33 | |
| for changes and then they brought it to the public. So I agree with you. | 02:24:39 | |
| In the sense that it's great to have more public involvement, but at the same time, I think what you're asking for, if we had a | 02:24:46 | |
| public meeting on every single thing we did, our staff would be monopolized by that. No, their last meetings because we're holding | 02:24:52 | |
| the meeting twice. Well, but to have it in the public, I just feel like. | 02:24:58 | |
| We literally are doing duplicate meetings to avoid the public and it's like to have a public meeting we have to have like 10 | 02:25:06 | |
| people here from staff. | 02:25:10 | |
| To present like this is a working session. We're all working through ideas by allowing the public to see and watch those. I | 02:25:52 | |
| thought the parking decision will be made except in a public meeting, right? Not what I'm saying, but it's like we're doing all of | 02:25:58 | |
| these working sessions quite a bit before to get to it. And it's like, why don't we just do all of these in one time? That limits | 02:26:04 | |
| me and Sarah's ability to talk and your ability to talk because we all can't talk. It's like one is here, one is there, and I'm | 02:26:10 | |
| going. | 02:26:16 | |
| Well, we're doing this to to avoid a public meeting and. | 02:26:23 | |
| I'm just like, why let's not avoid it? Let's just, let's just do it publicly so that we can all come away with, you know what | 02:26:27 | |
| happened? Because it literally is we're just duplicating meetings right now and I just don't wanna avoid. | 02:26:34 | |
| You know, but like, you want to meet with the fire station, which, no, no, no. I'm saying in certain instances. I'm not saying in | 02:26:43 | |
| every instance, like in trainings, yeah, like, hey, you gotta do some things. But I'm just giving the two examples of the parking | 02:26:48 | |
| study that we did and also the Utah City meeting. | 02:26:53 | |
| You're running those trainings or you're wanting to be a part of it. You're also wanting them to be public. Can I, can I speak for | 02:28:04 | |
| a minute? Yeah, I think, I think what Jake's saying is they did the identical meeting back-to-back. So why if if Jake and I both | 02:28:09 | |
| need the exact same training, why can we not be in the training together? I mean, it was the identical meeting, right? One right | 02:28:15 | |
| after the other. | 02:28:21 | |
| Because the public, public meetings have an expense associated with them. You have to have, you're doing a recording, you have you | 02:28:28 | |
| pay for my time, you pay for Pam's time, you pay for staff time. That's all over there. So you have to be hang on. I'm not done. | 02:28:34 | |
| Sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry. | 02:28:39 | |
| The meeting that we had this week related to your request for financial information and so. | 02:28:46 | |
| We wanted to meet with the mayor and you wanted to meet with the. | 02:28:54 | |
| City manager on that item, if you meet with the mayor, the city manager and Sarah all at once, you have a quorum of the council | 02:28:58 | |
| and so you would have to have a public meeting. | 02:29:03 | |
| You could do it that way, but it would you just go into a closed session and so there's no reason to. | 02:29:09 | |
| Mobilize all the staff, record things and do that if you're just going to have. | 02:29:16 | |
| Look at documents and say, this column looks private to me. I don't need this. This column looks public to me. I don't need that. | 02:29:20 | |
| And so to economize time, the mayor and Eric arranged for Utah City and their representatives to be there at the end of one | 02:29:26 | |
| meeting at the beginning of the other. But it allowed each of you an opportunity to ask questions of the mayor and to give | 02:29:32 | |
| instructions to the mayor and to the city. | 02:29:38 | |
| Manager about. | 02:29:44 | |
| What financial information? So I'm really baffled by the conversation because I hear. | 02:29:46 | |
| I'm not getting information but then they hold a meeting with you to show you the documentation and say. | 02:29:53 | |
| We think this is private. We think this is public. Which parts of it do you want? And then you can turn and you can say to | 02:30:00 | |
| Christy, this is what we want, this is what we don't want. And then she can go back and run reports. It seems really inefficient | 02:30:06 | |
| to do that kind of a conversation. | 02:30:12 | |
| In an open meeting, and yet here we are. | 02:30:19 | |
| Well, I can understand that, but we didn't talk about anything private in those meetings. It was just more of of what we can and | 02:30:23 | |
| cannot share and our quest to be more transparent. So I think it's a good exercise of like because we never referenced one | 02:30:31 | |
| specific or if we did, we could be careful. Hey, I'm not going to reference the name of this or that, right? This is we could | 02:30:39 | |
| have, we could have hold both of those meetings just in our City Council meeting and debated it openly on how what is or is not. | 02:30:48 | |
| Transparent, right? Or when or how are we or how we not sharing because I came away from that meeting and I was like, I don't like | 02:30:56 | |
| that. There's going to be two sides of what happened here, you know, and, and I just want to be more. I just would rather have an | 02:31:03 | |
| audience when things are happening. Like there needs to be more of that. | 02:31:10 | |
| I I feel, 'cause you know. | 02:31:19 | |
| But that's not what's happening. We're in. What we're saying is it was in the public, it went on an agenda to go through the | 02:32:29 | |
| study. The studies been happening. And as I explained, you will be brought into those meetings, you will see it, you will get to | 02:32:35 | |
| review it all. It goes through the stakeholder. Then after that meeting you'll see it. Then it'll go through the public because | 02:32:41 | |
| that's the procedure of policy analysis. | 02:32:47 | |
| Well, and I just want to add. | 02:32:53 | |
| When we started this meeting, this room was full and now this room is dwindling because it's getting light. If we do everything in | 02:32:55 | |
| a public meeting, I have volunteered my time. I do get paid what I believe is a minimum wage, minimal, not minimum, and I just | 02:33:04 | |
| don't see the endurance of the public being able to. I think there are some people that would be able to come to if we had a | 02:33:12 | |
| public meeting every day. I think there's some people that would join, but the public can only do so much and I think that. | 02:33:20 | |
| And so I am trying really hard to take what you guys are saying and put it here. I might not agree with everything you guys are | 02:34:30 | |
| saying, but I genuinely take what you're saying into consideration and I try to represent people as I'm in these meetings. Now, | 02:34:36 | |
| everyone in Vineyard isn't here right now. There's a lot of people out there that I'm trying to think, OK, what would so and so | 02:34:42 | |
| that works. Three jobs that lives in an apartment that you can't afford time to come to these meetings. I want to make sure I'm | 02:34:49 | |
| still representing her or. | 02:34:55 | |
| I don't need to get into this, but I'm saying that asking for more public meetings and acting like we aren't being transparent is | 02:35:01 | |
| really unfair. Because I feel like we really try for all of that and we're not perfect and there are definitely ways for us to | 02:35:08 | |
| improve. But I think what you're asking for is very it's, it's too far off. We can't have public meetings for everything we do. | 02:35:16 | |
| I would suggest since we've been talking about this for about 20 minutes. | 02:35:25 | |
| All right, I'm going to turn that time over to Amber. | 02:36:38 | |
| With my mic on, I'm going to go through this quickly. The legislative session is over. I'll just highlight a couple of bills. HB | 02:36:42 | |
| 488, transportation funding modifications went through and this provides additional ongoing funding for the Transit Transportation | 02:36:47 | |
| Investment Fund. | 02:36:52 | |
| And it also allows a local auction for sales tax for transportation or public safety purposes. | 02:36:59 | |
| Then we also have the Housing and Transit reinvestment zone amendments. | 02:37:06 | |
| Which enhances and clarifies housing affordability and make some changes to the HDRZ zone which we have. And then they did the | 02:37:11 | |
| fizz as well, which is similar to the HDRC which passed which is the, I'm trying to remember what it stands for first time | 02:37:19 | |
| investment zone act. Now that cannot be over the HTRZ zone, but it is another area. | 02:37:26 | |
| Where you can get. | 02:37:35 | |
| Let's see, I'm reorganizing my notes here. So the new tool for city to propose medium density city or Town Center and it is a way | 02:37:38 | |
| to get owner occupation for at least the 1st 25 years. They're looking at getting affordable, affordable homes and the face zone | 02:37:44 | |
| needs to be mixed-use. | 02:37:50 | |
| I can actually go through and just create an overall legislative wrap up for the council and e-mail that out to you so we're not | 02:37:57 | |
| here all day. Fight Commission met. They are going to be updating their priorities. They are working on some bylaws and they are. | 02:38:03 | |
| Let's see. | 02:38:09 | |
| They are next meeting is going to be April 23rd. The Community garden is accepting applications until the 18th so make sure you | 02:38:16 | |
| get those in the following week. They will select the winners by a lottery and the garden director position is opened applied for | 02:38:21 | |
| as well. | 02:38:25 | |
| All right. Thank you, Marty. | 02:38:32 | |
| I'm OK. | 02:38:34 | |
| OK, Sarah. | 02:38:36 | |
| I just wanted to thank nothing for the new flag. I appreciate it. | 02:38:40 | |
| Tip, I apologize, I did not mention the survey results and they will be posted. I believe the team putting that together will be | 02:38:46 | |
| posting it. So you'll be you'll have the opportunities to get and I appreciate Jake mentioning the 12 NI can't remember who talked | 02:38:52 | |
| about the parking lot for UTA. It's been under negotiation for some time of seeing when they're going to put financing and how we | 02:38:58 | |
| can help them and what we can do to facilitate that improvement. | 02:39:05 | |
| But. | 02:39:13 | |
| I think something that should be discussed here is as we work on opening up access for 16th and Vineyard Connector and 12th North | 02:39:14 | |
| and 4th North and the the station that they are all projects that are being simultaneously worked on. Because if we were just to | 02:39:22 | |
| focus on just the front runner space and parking lot, we wouldn't be be able to take care of the infrastructure that's necessary | 02:39:30 | |
| for the city. So 1200 N was funded which was exciting. | 02:39:38 | |
| And at the same time, I talked to Sarah about this and she said, why aren't we articulating this better? But we're also working | 02:39:46 | |
| very. | 02:39:49 | |
| Hard on opening up the access point at 400 N, not just on the main line. | 02:39:54 | |
| By trail aside, but also the Geneva access point, so both sides. So we talked about it a lot, but I want to emphasize that we're | 02:40:01 | |
| working on that project we're working on. | 02:40:06 | |
| Widening 800 N, as we saw in our transportation. | 02:40:13 | |
| All of these things are being worked on together. We have a great team that's been working on all of these things. So if you have | 02:40:16 | |
| suggestions for them, if you're noticing an issue, Please remember to send it into our city as well. Yeah, our government | 02:40:21 | |
| consultants will be here at the next meeting. OK? So if you have questions on the legislative recap, they'll be here to answer | 02:40:25 | |
| those questions as well. | 02:40:30 | |
| So I just wonder if there's a way there's so many people that are curious about the comments in the sessions that Jake and I had. | 02:40:38 | |
| Is it possible to put an attachment on the city page so if people want to go and look at them, they can They can dig through and | 02:40:46 | |
| read everything that was commented. And then another thing, did you guys get those? I sent them over. Yeah, we have them all typed | 02:40:52 | |
| up. I sent them to you, Eric. Did you get them? | 02:40:58 | |
| All of the sticky, the post it note you, you got them. So they've all been typed up. None of you guys responded. So I was like, | 02:41:05 | |
| David Laurie, thank you very much. And so you have all those. So is it, is it possible to do an attachment on either the social | 02:41:12 | |
| media page or somewhere else where people can have access to them? | 02:41:18 | |
| Awesome. And then and then Mayor, I appreciate you. | 02:41:27 | |
| Acknowledging our conversation with 1200 N versus 400 NI, think part of the frustration that you here today is that a lot of the | 02:41:32 | |
| citizens feel like their request and their concerns are falling on deaf ears and they don't get an update that we're actually | 02:41:39 | |
| taking them seriously. And I feel like the more we acknowledge what they're saying and they start to see that we are actually | 02:41:47 | |
| implementing their concerns and their frustration that a lot of the dynamic and the energy will change. | 02:41:55 | |
| That comment that you did, just like how can we articulate it more because we might be saying it in the transportation plan, we | 02:42:03 | |
| might be making a brief update about it, but just really hammering on here are our plans. This is what we're doing is a good | 02:42:09 | |
| point, Sarah, thank you. So they can start to see that absolutely concerns are implemented. Yeah, I agree with you. All right, | 02:42:16 | |
| let's go ahead and move on to our consent items. If there isn't any discussion that needs to be had, I just need a motion. | 02:42:22 | |
| I move to approve the consent items as presented. All right, first by Amber. | 02:42:30 | |
| Did we? | 02:42:38 | |
| I thought something's removed off and something's removed on, right? | 02:42:41 | |
| We're just doing the meeting minutes and the historical flag. That's right. Yep. | 02:42:46 | |
| Are we putting the historical flag up? Is that what we're doing? Amber, let's go ahead and do 6.1 and 6.2. I move to approve item | 02:42:52 | |
| 6.1 and 6.2. Great. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you, Marley. First by Amber, second by Marty. All in favor. Aye. 6.3 is up | 02:43:00 | |
| for discussing. Go ahead, Jake. I just think we need to be on the record of what flag we're voting for because I want to be for | 02:43:07 | |
| the old historical flag flag if they do. Sarah, did you want to go ahead and introduce the topic? | 02:43:15 | |
| Well, yeah, I I asked for that, for the historic flag to be flown. I know there's it's been kind of a divisive issue. And so I'm | 02:43:23 | |
| not opposed to flying them both, but I think they both need to be represented. | 02:43:30 | |
| And do you need, can you clarify how we would have to do it so that it's understood by the public? There was a law passed during | 02:43:38 | |
| the last legislative session that if you fly both, that you fly the new one higher than the old one. | 02:43:44 | |
| Right now. So if you if you fly both, that's the way you have to do it. | 02:43:52 | |
| What if you have a second flag? I'm OK with that. All right, everybody, this item then would be to make sure that we fly the | 02:43:57 | |
| original flag as well. So any other discussion on it? One quick point. Yeah, the legislation that passed dictates when that flag | 02:44:04 | |
| is the historical flag is flown and it is flown on the 12 historic or the 12 legal holidays of the year. And so that was those are | 02:44:12 | |
| the days that we will be flying that flag. Oh, so we're not going to have it up all the time just on those holidays. | 02:44:19 | |
| We can't fight all the time. The law dictated that it be flown on legal holidays. | 02:44:28 | |
| That I thought we could, I thought that you could always choose to have both. You know what, how about this? Let's clarify it | 02:44:35 | |
| because I, I was under the same assumption, but let's just clarify and then our vote will go with whatever the law states. Does | 02:44:39 | |
| that work? | 02:44:44 | |
| Yeah, let me make sure I understand it. So if the law allows flexibility, then we fly both all the time. If the law restricts the | 02:44:50 | |
| flying of the historic flag to the holidays, then we follow that. Does that work? Okay, we did our best. Is there any debate? | 02:44:56 | |
| Yeah, and I think we all love the idea, so. | 02:45:03 | |
| I just need a motion if no other discussions moving forward. So I'll move to approve item 6.3 with the clarification that we will | 02:45:10 | |
| follow state mandated state law. | 02:45:17 | |
| Yeah. Is that clear enough? OK, first by Marty. | 02:45:25 | |
| Second, Second by Amber, All in favor, aye. All right, we'll go ahead and move on to business Item Public Hearing 8.1 Budget | 02:45:29 | |
| Amendment Resolution 2024-1. | 02:45:34 | |
| And Chrissy, our Finance Director, will present this proposed change. | 02:45:39 | |
| It's Christy Bayless, finance director. | 02:45:47 | |
| I think we've all had a chance to review this. It's pretty cut and dried. When we do a budget, we project taxes that we anticipate | 02:45:49 | |
| coming in throughout the years the county gives us. | 02:45:55 | |
| Because that too collects the property taxes as they give us. It's an idea of over, over or we're under. This year we projected a | 02:46:01 | |
| little bit low, so the sun's coming a little bit more and move that there. We would like to take the money that we have gotten | 02:46:07 | |
| from that and put it towards a senior planner position. I think you have all heard how how many master plans we have going on and | 02:46:13 | |
| the things that are happening with that department and it is definitely a need. The second thing I want to bring to your attention | 02:46:19 | |
| is. | 02:46:25 | |
| A ULA grant that we received for the 22,500 that is going to go towards putting sand volleyball pits down on the lakefront. | 02:46:32 | |
| Awesome. OK, Can I get a motion to open a public hearing? | 02:46:42 | |
| Thank you. Marty, can I get a second? Thanks, Jake. All in favor, Aye. All right. We're in a public hearing. Is there any comments | 02:46:48 | |
| from the public? We had a public hearing on this and then we continued it so that you would ask additional questions. So Daria, | 02:46:53 | |
| come up to the microphone, state your name, where you're from and what your question is. | 02:46:59 | |
| Daria Evans in your resident. I just have a question for Morgan. Those staff volleyball kids, are they going to be on the Vineyard | 02:47:11 | |
| beats? | 02:47:15 | |
| Where are they going, you said, the lake Fritz? Or are they going to be on that new Vineyard beach? | 02:47:20 | |
| So I know that our Parks and Recreation director is looking at a few spots, I think near near the beach, but also there's the, the | 02:47:25 | |
| townhomes that at lakefront community that are just South of that. There's a public easement on either side of the, the clubhouse. | 02:47:32 | |
| And we, we're in the process of working with edge homes. The developer develops that to try and clear that that area. But that | 02:47:40 | |
| actually might be a really good spot too, because it's, it would be sandwiched between the two public trails. | 02:47:47 | |
| And then access via the easement. So I think he's considering kind of both spots. OK, So that spot you're talking about, that's | 02:47:55 | |
| that weedy area that used to be kind of grassy. And now it's just. Yeah. And hopefully we can get that cleaned up soon so that | 02:48:01 | |
| that'll be part of it. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Daria. | 02:48:06 | |
| Any other questions? | 02:48:14 | |
| OK. | 02:48:17 | |
| Darlene Price Villas, this is just a very common sort of question. This year is the first year I've been able to or that I'm doing | 02:48:24 | |
| IRS taxes, right. And so the IRS has asked me when I do my budget and I say, for example, travel, they want to know what exactly | 02:48:31 | |
| the travel went to where I went and why that is considered a deduction. I would like to see the same kind of transparency with our | 02:48:38 | |
| budget. | 02:48:45 | |
| That we've got. So if you say it's travel, then where are you going? List where you're going and how much each one of those are | 02:48:53 | |
| going to cost. Same thing with miscellaneous. What is miscellaneous? Is it screws and bolts for the school buses? What is that? | 02:49:01 | |
| Instead of just putting a big lump sum in a miscellaneous, I would like to see more specific kinds of things listed instead of | 02:49:09 | |
| just a generic travel and this is how much it's going to cost. That would just help me as a person who is now paying more taxes. | 02:49:17 | |
| And to be more supportive. Thank you. | 02:49:26 | |
| Oh, OK. OK. Thank you. | 02:49:32 | |
| All right, any other comments? | 02:49:35 | |
| Hey, something else. There are no other comments. I'm going to close the public hearing. Can I get a motion so moved? Thank you, | 02:49:38 | |
| Amber, can I get a second? | 02:49:41 | |
| I'll second thank you, Sarah. All in favor, Hi. Hi. All right, we are now out of a public hearing. | 02:49:46 | |
| Council, do you have discussion on this item? | 02:49:54 | |
| Sarah, I don't know who. I don't want to go 1st every time. Does anyone want to go first? I'm just looking around. | 02:50:01 | |
| I don't have anything to say, so I'm OK with that. OK. Thank you, Marty. I'm ready to move forward with it. | 02:50:06 | |
| OK. Thank you, Amber. | 02:50:12 | |
| You know, we push this back on the last two meetings just because we're waiting for numbers and we still haven't, we still haven't | 02:50:17 | |
| gotten those. And you know, I, I want to do a complete sister city study of where we are. If we commit to hiring someone, we're | 02:50:24 | |
| not going to hire them for the end of this year. We're probably going to have that position forever, right? And so I haven't seen | 02:50:32 | |
| the finance finances for the fire station. It's a top priority for us. | 02:50:39 | |
| And voted in and so they just don't have the bandwidth without. | 02:51:26 | |
| The additional support and tools to complete the jobs that need to be done with a fast growing city. And so I feel really ready to | 02:51:32 | |
| move forward on this. Yeah, Christie, I appreciate you responding to my e-mail to answer my question where that money comes from | 02:51:38 | |
| and you put it in here. So I appreciate that. | 02:51:43 | |
| Like was just spoken by. | 02:51:51 | |
| Mr. Price, sorry, we moving forward we'd like to see more more explanation besides just miscellaneous, but I feel comfortable | 02:51:58 | |
| moving forward voting for this today with the understanding Morgan replied to me on e-mail. So I understand you have a heavy load | 02:52:05 | |
| and and that this this actually comes from from an excess that you anticipate. Is that correct? So I feel OK about moving forward | 02:52:12 | |
| with it today. All right, if there are no further comments, I just need a motion and this is done by ordinance. So we will a | 02:52:19 | |
| resolution. | 02:52:27 | |
| So we will have a roll call. I move to adopt Resolution 202401 proposed 2024 budget amendment #3 is presented by staff. All right, | 02:52:35 | |
| we have a first fight. Amber, I need a second. | 02:52:41 | |
| Second, Second by Sarah and this is done by roll call Sarah. | 02:52:48 | |
| Marty. | 02:52:55 | |
| Yay, Amber. Aye and Jake. All right, thank you. We will move on to 8.2 Public hearing General plan update Goal 2 technology | 02:52:57 | |
| element. We had talked about this in a prior prior work session. We'll go ahead and start out by opening the public hearing. | 02:53:06 | |
| I need a motion to open a public hearing. Second, Marty, second by Amber. All in favor. Aye, aye, All right. And our economic, | 02:53:16 | |
| our, our community development Director, Morgan Brim will present this technology element that deals with privacy. | 02:53:24 | |
| Great. Thank you, Mayor and members of the council. Let me see if I can get this up a little bit. | 02:53:34 | |
| Scroll in there we go. So hopefully you're I'll speak, so hopefully you're able to see this. So we were directed by the City | 02:53:40 | |
| Council. It was in June of last year to put together some policy or or some additional language to our general plan strategies | 02:53:48 | |
| under the technology chapter that would help guide privacy and the protection of like sensitive information as we implement | 02:53:55 | |
| technology. | 02:54:02 | |
| And so, as we know, technology is. | 02:54:10 | |
| There's always advances and things that could help us from the City side, but we need to ensure that it's gonna protect | 02:54:13 | |
| information of our public. | 02:54:17 | |
| And that information is being utilized properly. And so under these, there are 6 strategies. Four of those are new strategies 4-5 | 02:54:24 | |
| and six. And then strategy three has some additional language. So I'll read through these fairly quickly. So Strategy 3 utilized | 02:54:31 | |
| communication technology to increase public awareness and involvement in city planning and decision making. | 02:54:38 | |
| Strategy 6 update forums on which personal information is collected to include a notice of purpose and use of information. Ensure | 02:55:18 | |
| use of information is limited to those purposes and uses and so we, the Planning Commission, did assign. | 02:55:24 | |
| Commissioner Bramwell, who is actually the state privacy officer. So we're very lucky to have that, that resource to work, to work | 02:55:33 | |
| with us. We worked with him and also our legal counsel and drafting these we did, we held a. | 02:55:40 | |
| A work session with the City Council, work session with the Planning Commission, and also a public hearing with the Planning | 02:55:47 | |
| Commission. And they did recommend approval in their last meeting. Happy to answer any questions you may have. All right, great. | 02:55:52 | |
| Are there any questions from the public about this privacy policy? | 02:55:57 | |
| OK. Seeing if there's none, I'm going to go out of the public hearing. Can I get a motion? Thank you, Amber, I need a second. | 02:56:05 | |
| Second by Marty, All in favor, aye. All right, Council, do you have questions, thoughts, input, things you would like to change? | 02:56:12 | |
| I'm just going to thank you. We're going through the operational. | 02:56:22 | |
| Level of getting all of this put together and it's so expansive and it's going to take a lot of work, but having this framework is | 02:56:26 | |
| going to make it very easy for us and easy for the public to follow along as well. | 02:56:31 | |
| My comment is also I love the grassroots effort of. | 02:56:38 | |
| Morgan and them of how they did that. I would love to do a similar thing exactly like that with public records. I know I just | 02:56:44 | |
| wanted to make it aware of you guys. I've had five or six people that have said, hey, you know, I want your records on your phone | 02:56:50 | |
| or I want this and that. And I'm like, well, they're on my private phone right now. I'd I'd give you my phone, look at it, but I | 02:56:56 | |
| don't, you know, and so I think a great general plan update or a great records request that citizens each of you guys could put | 02:57:02 | |
| someone on it. | 02:57:08 | |
| You know, I could suggest people that support you guys that want it and I can suggest people and just. | 02:57:16 | |
| Look at it and go above and beyond the grammar process. | 02:57:21 | |
| You know, so I just I just love how this. | 02:57:27 | |
| Isn't one of us that has nothing to do with anything, right? Yes. I'm saying I do want to say I love this and let's bring it up | 02:57:30 | |
| together. But let's focus on the agenda item right now. Is there anything that you want to add on this privacy policy in | 02:57:37 | |
| particular? Except for you love this plan. Just the culture of how it was created. OK, thanks. Yeah, I feel like it was a great | 02:57:43 | |
| culture. And Amber, thank you. And Chris Bramwell, he's not here, but he really did a great job. And your whole team. | 02:57:50 | |
| Just going out and meeting with a lot of people around the stage and bringing in a lot of voices to us. So thank you for that. | 02:57:56 | |
| Marty or Sarah, do you have any comments before we make a motion? No. OK, then if there's no other comments, I would just need a | 02:58:02 | |
| motion. | 02:58:08 | |
| We already went out of public. And yes, I move to adopt Ordinance 2024, Dash 4 to amend the technology element of the Vineyard | 02:58:15 | |
| General Plan to safeguard privacy and the protection of sensitive information and the implementation of technology as presented. | 02:58:23 | |
| All right, we have a first by Marty. Can I get a second? Thank you, Sarah. Any discussion? If not, I'm going to call Roll call, | 02:58:31 | |
| Jake. Aye, Amber. Aye aye, Marty. Yay, Sarah. Yes. All right. | 02:58:39 | |
| We'll go ahead and move on to a discussion and action items of Vineyard Days celebration. This is a fireworks versus a drone show. | 02:58:47 | |
| You've been able to see the three options presented before you. I don't know who is presenting on this because it is not in my | 02:58:55 | |
| packet. Sorry, this is this is an Anna item, but she was not able to be with us tonight. So the three options are we have a 200 | 02:59:03 | |
| drone show that is 22,000 approximately 5100 drone show that is 15,000. | 02:59:11 | |
| And we have. | 02:59:20 | |
| Fireworks show option with 2 1/2 inch shells is kind of the specifics there, which would be similar to the previous fireworks show | 02:59:22 | |
| that was a mix of 2 1/2 inch and three inch shells. | 02:59:28 | |
| That cost just a little over 14,000. The accommodation that was made for the fireworks show, if that's the the route that you | 02:59:34 | |
| choose, was to put the fireworks show behind Freedom Elementary. They offered that location so that viewers can sit and relax and | 02:59:40 | |
| enjoy the show from Grove Park and not worry about any of the fireworks fallout and and kind of create that safety buffer between | 02:59:47 | |
| the two. | 02:59:53 | |
| And those are the options in front of you. | 03:00:01 | |
| Can I add so I've been able to work with Anna the past few years on events and last year the council voted to do the drone show | 03:00:04 | |
| because I thought it was really cool we did it for the. | 03:00:09 | |
| It was announced 9/11. I know what we had done it before that, but then it got postponed because of the weather, so then we did it | 03:00:16 | |
| on 9/11. | 03:00:19 | |
| I wish we could. I wish our budget could have us do drones every 911 because I thought that was really cool. I thought that the | 03:00:25 | |
| feelings there and that how just the whole program was beautiful. | 03:00:31 | |
| Now without talking about that because we're focusing on specifically Vineyard days, my thought and hope and I'm I don't I don't | 03:00:38 | |
| have a personal preference which one we do, but I was thinking maybe to be able to represent. | 03:00:44 | |
| So there is that option too if you guys wanted to. | 03:02:10 | |
| And we have to go for that. Yeah, that's a good point. | 03:02:14 | |
| Jake, do you have a comment? Yeah, my, my comment is that I think that we have arrived as a city to. | 03:02:19 | |
| Move in your days out of the out of the city and grow like Orem with Orem Fest and the Freedom Festival of Provo and Strawberry | 03:02:28 | |
| Days where it's not controlled by the City Council anymore. It it is, it creates a cultural event to where. | 03:02:38 | |
| You know, you could ask a, you know, I know they caught create 501 C 3S for that. I can't tell you how incredible it is to have | 03:02:49 | |
| service and people. I know that the Heritage Commission used to control it back in the day. There wasn't a lot of people around | 03:02:56 | |
| until then. It got put over into the city because we could do a good thing. And now we have such a great population to if we could | 03:03:04 | |
| survey the city and say, would there be a desire for a committee, an organization for Vineyard Days to be set up for next year? | 03:03:11 | |
| Fire and police and where they and they just do whatever. So I guess what we would need to decide. | 03:05:00 | |
| We, we do have it running through them. This specifically they wanted us to change status on. So the status would be how much | 03:05:06 | |
| you're willing to put towards it as funding, which does fall in this purview. And then second, you could say we don't care, we'll | 03:05:13 | |
| send it back to the committee or you could say fireworks. But most likely if you approve anything less than, I mean 15,000, it's | 03:05:19 | |
| going to end up being the fireworks. | 03:05:25 | |
| Just make a comment. Yeah, I would just like us to consider veterans and people with PTSD as well as dogs, because fireworks do | 03:05:33 | |
| cause issue with themselves. Take that under consideration. I agree. I think that having it publicly noticed, I mean, I don't know | 03:05:40 | |
| if we can make that an official public notice, but making sure people are aware of that is really important, OK. | 03:05:47 | |
| We could work on that. | 03:05:54 | |
| All right. So what I'm hearing is if you want this decision to go back to the committee and give them full rein, you will need to | 03:05:57 | |
| approve the $22,000 so that they can decide between the fireworks or the drones. If you're wanting to have it on a rotational | 03:06:03 | |
| schedule, you would want to state that and then you would probably want to approve the 14,000 for the fireworks within the | 03:06:10 | |
| location that was identified, which I believe is option 3. | 03:06:17 | |
| If there's a different recommendation because you're worried about the veterans, it's it's OK if we notify it if that's the | 03:06:25 | |
| consensus we're building. Does that work for you? | 03:06:28 | |
| I hear so much good about the drones from the community, and I think that that's also a good option to cover that. Would you be OK | 03:06:34 | |
| if we do rotation or send it back to the committee with sending your concerns about it? OK? Is there anybody that would like to | 03:06:39 | |
| take a stab at a motion? | 03:06:43 | |
| Well if if everyone's OK with it, I move to approve up to 22,000 to cover drugs. | 03:06:49 | |
| To cover the possibility of doing 200 drones, but I would like to leave it up to the committee to make the final decision with our | 03:06:59 | |
| recommendation of possibly going on a rotating schedule. OK, We have a first by Marty. And can you also add that we will tell them | 03:07:07 | |
| about the notification that the notification for the veterans and PTSD. | 03:07:14 | |
| OK. We have a first by Marty. Can I get a second, second, second by Amber, all in favor, Aye. All right, great. Thank you. This | 03:07:22 | |
| brings us to the end of this meeting. I'm going to go ahead and adjourn our meeting and then we will be back in 10 minutes or so | 03:07:27 | |
| for our already in need. | 03:07:33 |