What's Up? - 2 January 2017

Well, I finally finished it. The meeting reports for December 6th are below, along with the previews for Tuesday's meetings. Enjoy. Oh, and I wish you all a wonderful year in 2017!

What Was Up?

COUNCIL WORK MEETING

12:00 PM, Tuesday, December 6th, City Conference Room, 351 West Center

1. A bi-annual report from the Sustainability Committee
   Report only.
   Don Jarvis, the Mayor's Environmental Adviser and Chair of the Mayor's Sustainability Committee, presented information on the newly formed Provo Agricultural Commission and the Utah Valley Clean Air Task Force, and weighed in on the Lakeview Parkway. We spent a lot of time on the first couple of issues and rushed the end. The handout also listed accomplishments of the Sustainability Committee.
2. Rules Committee Policy Evaluation: A discussion on amendments to Chapter 4 of the Council Policies and Procedures Handbook
   Motion to approve Phase 1 (Formatting): Approved 7:0.
   Motion to continue discussion of Phase 2 at the January 3, 2017 Work Meeting: Approved 7:0.
   This represents many months of work by the Council Rules Committee. The recommendations for chapter 4 of our handbook were separated into two phases: formatting and content. The first phase was passed. The second phase was continued to allow more time to discuss and consider. The most discussed proposal centers on the ability to limit Council discussion. I am hopeful that we will implement these changes and that they will improve the flow of our meetings.
3. A discussion on recommendations of potential committee members for the Impact Fee process and review
   Motion to create the the Impact Fee Committee with the following membership:
   • Council Member Gary Winterton
   • Council Member Kay Van Buren
   • Deann Huish
   • Chris Gamvroulas
   • Monte Kingston
   • Paul Smith
   • Craig Call
   • Dave Decker
   • Gary McGinn (or Bill Peperone or other assignee)
   • Travis Ball
   • Doug Robins
   • The support staff, who do not constitute formal committee members as listed above, will be Brian Jones and a member of Council Staff.
   Approved as Amended 7:0.
   Motion to approve Committee Purpose as stated herewith: “To review the City’s impact fees, the consultant’s report, and make recommendations to the Budget Committee and the Council.” Approved 7:0.
   We felt that this committee make up represented a good cross section of stake holders, including those who will directly pay the impact fees and those tasked with extending the services to the new development.
4. A discussion on sections of the proposed Vision 2050
   • Section 7 - Public and Non-Profit Partnerships
   • Section 8 - Safety
   • Section 10 - Diversity and Unity
   • Section 11 - Governance
   Motion to amend Section 9.1.1 to include “where cost-effective and appropriate.” Approved 4:2, Council Member David Sewell abstained. Opposed by Council Members Gary Winterton and David Harding.
   Motion to place revised Vision 2050 document on Open City Hall to request public feedback. Approved 7:0.
   Most of the work was not captured in the two motions. We went through a dozen or so Councilor-suggested edits and gave suggestions to Bill Peperone of our Community Development Department who will come back with another draft. Objective 9.1.1 says, "Reduce reliance on automobiles by encouraging alternative modes of transportation;" The suggestion was to remove the reference to automobiles and add the phrase "where cost-effective and appropriate." I was able to beat back the first part of it, but not the second. It felt strange to vote against "cost-effective and appropriate" but my argument is that nearly every objective in the vision could say, "as cost-effective and appropriate", but it would be very redundant. I think everyone understands that none of these objectives should be carried out unless they are deemed "cost-effective and appropriate".
5. A discussion on a proposal to create an Arts Council
   Presentation only.
   We met with three dynamic art lovers who will be the nucleus of the new Arts Council.
6. A discussion on an appropriation for Fire Department equipment and software
   Presentation only.
   From the last "What's Up": "There are three components to the proposed appropriation: dispatch software, department operations software, and personal firefighting gear. At the last budget cycle I was appalled at how underfunded our 911 center was. I'm hoping this new software will help ease the stress and demand on our dispatch personnel. The operations software was already approved but delays in the implementation pushed it into a new fiscal year. The firefighting equipment purchase would be taking advantage of a warranty replacement of some gear to get all of the gear updated."
   By paying for the difference between the gear under warranty and the newest model, the gear will be forward compatible with the replacement equipment in the future. We asked the Administration to bring forward an appropriation proposal.
7. A discussion regarding Provo City's Driveway Standard
   Presentation only.
   Why do we have a Driveway Standard? What are we trying to accomplish? Is our Standard getting us the outcomes we want? Is there a better way to do it? What is the best practices in other cities? Community Development wanted to know if we would be interested in these answers and if they should look into them.
8. A discussion on a request for an amendment to the Provo City Major Street Plan for the extension of 620 North Street from Lakeshore Drive to Lakeview Parkway. Lakeview South Neighborhood.
   Presentation only.
   We saw this later, as agenda item 10 in the Council Meeting (described below).
9. A discussion on an ordinance text amendments to Chapter 14.20, Regional Shopping Center (SC3) Zone, to allow for mixed-use redevelopment of the Plum Tree Shopping Center, located at 2230 North University Parkway. City-Wide Impact.
   Presentation only.
   We saw this later, as agenda item 12 in the Council Meeting (described below).
10. A discussion on a request for amendments to the Provo City Sign Ordinance (Chapter 14.38) to increase signage allowances in the DT1, DT2, ITOD, Gateway, and West Gateway Zones. Downtown, Dixon, Franklin, Franklin South, and East Bay Neighborhoods.
    Motion to hear this item on the January 3, 2017 Council Meeting. Approved 7:0.
    From the last "What's Up": "In response to current businesses, Provo Economic Development is proposing some 'modest' changes to our sign regulations in Downtown (and Center Street to the freeway) zones. It mostly affects non-ground-floor businesses and businesses who share a common entrance."
11. Closed Meeting
    A closed meeting was held.

COUNCIL MEETING

5:30 PM, Tuesday, December 6th, Council Chambers, 351 West Center

1. A special Citizen Recognition for Sally Breeden presented by the Mayor.
   Presentation only.
2. A Presentation of Handel's Messiah - Amy Norton, Wasatch Chorale
   Presentation only.
3. Provology Graduation
   Presentation only.
4. An audit report from Hansen, Bradshaw, Malmrose, & Erickson and a presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR)
   Report only.The professionalism and quality of Budget Team and the value and safeguards provided to the residents of Provo is remarkable. Want some evidence?
   Public Comment
5. An ordinance amending Provo City Code Chapter 2.28 (Metropolitan Water District) to change the number of board members and rules for removal.
   Approved as Amended 7:0.
6. A resolution appointing individuals to the Metropolitan Water Board of Provo.
   Approved 7:0.
   I've spent far more time on this item since we passed it than I did before. There appears to be some discrepancies between the ordinance that we passed and state statue, so we will likely need to fix this soon.
7. A resolution adopting the 2017 Council regular meeting schedule.
   Approved 7:0.
   Get these into your calendar now, you won't want to miss a single meeting!
8. An ordinance amending Provo City Code Section 2.50.010 (Municipal Council Rules) regarding the procedure to adopt, suspend, or repeal Council rules.
   Approved 7:0.
   This makes it so the Council must have a 2/3s majority (5 votes) to suspend a rule during a meeting rather than the simple majority (4 votes) that it takes now.
9. A resolution authorizing eminent domain proceedings on the properties generally located on 3110 West from 435 South to Center Street and west along Center Street to 3240 Center Street in order to acquire right of way for Phase 1 of the Lakeview Parkway.
   Continued to January 3, 2017 Council Meeting to allow legal staff review the legal arguments made by Mr. McCoard’s attorney, to allow staff to gather information on the archeological claims, provide information on road route options and why that specific route was chosen, and provide information on land values and how to account for business use. Approved 4:3. Council Members Gary Winterton, George Stewart, and David Harding opposed.
   This item by itself took more than four hours of our meeting time. I was prepared to vote for the continuance, but just seconds before the vote, Mr. Stewart stated that he wanted to approve it now because he didn't see the four week delay changing the outcome. That struck me as true, so as the vote was being called I switched by vote to oppose the continuance. There were many questions raised, but nothing new that hadn't been studied and decided on over the past five or so years. The route has been carefully studied, it is the best alignment for the City. We need to secure the alignment before development happens, or we will end up in another situation like we have with a disconnect between 820 North and 620 North at Geneva Road. I believe everyone wishes that the road alignment had been considered before the developments went in that are there now.
   As I stated in the "West Provo" blog post, authorizing eminent domain does not guarantee that it will be used. So far, in the previous phase of the Parkway, eminent domain has not been used, even where it was authorized, and, last I heard, all but two of the properties had reached negotiated resolutions. I don't want to minimize the anxiety and hassle caused to the property owners who have been approached by the City to secure the corridor, but I have confidence that our Public Works will negotiate in good faith, and believe that eminent domain will not be used.
10. A resolution amending the Major and Local Street Plan to extend 620 North Street from Lakeshore Drive to Lakeview Parkway. Lakeview South Neighborhood.
    Approved 7:0.
    Speaking of 620 N, we amended the Major and Local Street Plan to complete the 820/620 corridor all the way out to the Lakeview Parkway. This will be an important connection for many commuters, including those headed to and from the new PHS campus.
11. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approximately 6.4 acres of real property, generally located at 54 West 4200 North from Agriculture (A1.5) to One-Family Residential (R1.10). Riverbottoms Neighborhood.
    Approved 7:0.
    From a previous "What's Up": "The rezone is requested to accommodate a new extended cul-de-sac with 14 lots for single family residences."
12. An ordinance amending Provo City Code Chapter 14.20 (SC3 - Regional Shopping Center Zone), to allow Mixed-Use development within the zone. City-wide Impact.
    Approved 7:0.
    From the previous "What's Up": "I am excited about this development, but I was a little worried about how changes to the SC3 zone might unintentionally affect other properties in Provo with this zoning designation. In reading through the material I was encouraged that the staff also had this concern and had put considerable thought into how the proposed changes might affect the Provo Towne Centre and Riverwoods properties."
    Community Development wants to create a new "Mixed Use" zone for developments like this, but didn't feel it had time to create a new zone, so it made these modifications to the existing zone. I encouraged them to push forward quickly to get the new zone written.
13. A resolution to adopt the Southeast Neighborhoods Plan as a component of the Provo City General Plan.
    Continued to January 3, 2017 Council Meeting. Approved 7:0.

What's Coming Up?

Text in GREEN comes from the document packet. Click here for instructions on how to access the packet.

COUNCIL WORK MEETING

1:15 PM, Tuesday, January 3rd, City Conference Room, 351 West Center

1. A discussion on the programs and goals of the Utah Lake Commission
   In November 2016, members of the Provo City Council expressed interest in learning about the mission, programs, and goals of the Utah Lake Commission.
   I believe the Provo City Council helped found the Utah Lake Commission.
2. A presentation on Falls at Kelshaw Lane/Scott's Corner Project
   An earlier version of this project, known as Scott’s Corner, was presented at the August 16, 2016 Work Meeting. The original plans involved building a development on the corner of 890 South and widening 1600 West. At the time, Council members expressed concerns over the original plans, specifically regarding safety issues and the lack of a southwest master plan. Alan Price, the applicant, has brought back a revised version of the plans in effort to address some of the safety concerns posed by the Council. The new plans include a new section that will provide a full-sized, fully-improved public roadway leading up to 600 South and Sunset Elementary School. Mr. Price says that the new section is being referred to as “The Falls on Kelshaw Lane” because his company wants to build a new waterfall/water-feature on the corner where the project would attach to 600 South. In addition, the family that sold the land has the last name of ‘Kelshaw’, and the developers would like to name the road—leading back to the south into the project—after them.
   I believe the Westside Planning Committee is getting close to recommending policy to the Council. As long as these proposals generally conform to the direction of the Southwest Area Master Plan that is being written, I am willing to consider rezoning property while it is being written.
3. A discussion on Mayoral and Council compensation
   It is proposed to create a process for independent review and recommendation of council compensation by including that process in the existing mayoral compensation review process and renaming the commission the Elected Officials Compensation Commission, with the same structure and similar timing as already established. Said commission would be appointed in February 2017 and complete its work by end of April 2017, with any changes to council member and mayoral compensation to take effect in January 2018 when new terms of office commence.
   I feel that the less hands-on the Council is in setting its own compensation, the better.
4. A discussion on amendments to Chapter 4 of the Council Policies and Procedures Handbook
   During the last Work Meeting on December 6th, 2016, the Provo City Council discussed possible changes to Chapter IV of the Council Policies and Procedures Handbook. The Council unanimously approved Phase 1 of the proposed changes (regarding formatting). The Council continued the discussion of Phase 2 (regarding content changes) to the January 3rd, 2017 Work Meeting.This was agenda item 2 from the previous Work Meeting (see notes above).
   
   Break
5. A presentation on zoning in the Provost Neighborhood
   This fall, Hannah Petersen—the Provost Neighborhood Chair—came to a Council Leadership Meeting and presented various statistics regarding zoning violations in her neighborhood. Based on her presentation, the Provost Neighborhood has experienced a particularly high number of over-occupancy cases, which concerns homeowners and permanent residents who want to preserve the quality of their neighborhood. Ms. Petersen has various recommendations that could improve zoning compliance, both in the Provost Neighborhood and in the overall city. 
6. An update on the Council Priority concerning zoning enforcement, and a discussion on what to do about zoning in the future.
   At the September 6th, 2016 Work Meeting, Mayor Curtis briefly updated the Council about the Administration’s analysis of zoning enforcement. He mentioned that employees had been brainstorming a wide-array of options that they would hone down over the next several months. Since the September 6th, 2016 Work Meeting, City employees and community members have compiled their findings regarding ways the City could change and improve zoning compliance. Gary McGinn—the director of Community Development—will present some of these suggestions. In addition, Carrie Walls—Provo’s Zoning Administrator— will provide actual recent numbers that show the current status of zoning compliance in the City. 
7. A discussion on a resolution authorizing the Redevelopment Agency of Provo City to enter into an agreement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the purpose of seeking funding for the infrastructure necessary for the expansion of Duncan Aviation.
   Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency Board conduct a public hearing for the purpose of considering the merits of utilizing a Section 108 Loan for to fund infrastructure improvements necessary for Duncan Aviation’s expansion
   The last time we heard this issue was July 19th. At that time, based on the information presented to us, we stated our preference that Section 108 funding not be used, but rather borrow the money from CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds. I'll be interested to hear why this is not what they are recommending now.
8. Closed Meeting

COUNCIL MEETING

5:30 PM, Tuesday, January 3rd, Council Chambers, 351 West Center

3. Recognition of Louise Jorgensen, Council Executive Assistant, as she retires.
   After almost ten years working in the Council Office, Louise Jorgensen is retiring. One of the many roles that she has served in over the years is Neighborhood Program Coordinator. It was in this role that I first met Louise, as I became involved in my neighborhood. I would have thought twice about getting involved if I knew where I would end up, but Louise has been there every step of the way facilitating the work that gets done by the Council and by the Neighborhoods. She will be missed.
   Public Comment
   
4. The election of Municipal Council officers; chair and vice-chair.
   Provo City Code Section 2.50 outlines the rules for government organization, including rules pertaining to the Municipal Council. Chapter 2.50.020 indicates that at the first Municipal Council meeting, the Council shall elect members to serve as Chair and Vicechair. Council members will make proposals as to these officer positions, and the selection must be approved by a majority vote.
   No debate will take place on the proposals, only votes. The discussion on leadership has to take place before the meeting.
5. A resolution acknowledging the election of the chair and vice-chair of the Provo Municipal Council for calendar year 2017.
6. The election of Redevelopment Agency of Provo officers; chair and vice-chair.
   The purpose of this discussion is to establish officer positions for the Redevelopment Agency of Provo (RDA). Section 2.1 of the RDA bylaws states: Officers…The positions of Chair and First Vice Chair and any other Vice-Chair shall be appointed annually at the beginning of each calendar year by majority vote of the Board…” Council Members will make proposals as to these officer positions and the selection must be approved by a majority vote.
7. A resolution appointing the chair and vice-chair of the Redevelopment Agency of Provo City for calendar year 2017.
8. A resolution authorizing eminent domain proceedings on the properties generally located on 3110 West from 435 South to Center Street and west along Center Street to 3240 Center Street in order to acquire right of way for Phase 1 of the Lakeview Parkway.
   This is a request for Council to authorize City administration and staff to utilize Eminent Domain if necessary to secure property for the Lakeview Parkway and Trail, Phase I Project. This Project has received construction funding through Mountainland Association of Governments and this action is necessary to secure right-of-way prior to construction beginning on the project.
   Currently we are in various stages of negotiation for right-ofway with different owners of property within the project boundaries. Construction of the project is time sensitive and this Council action is necessary to keep the Project on schedule. 
   I discussed this item in my report of the last Council Meeting above (agenda item #9). I believe that the proposed alignment is in the best interest of the City. The only question for me is what is the best way to secure that alignment. As I've said many times before, authorizing eminent domain does not necessarily mean that it will be used. Everyone is hopeful that negotiations will be successful.
9. An update from the Solar & Energy Committee.
   During the November 1st, 2016 Council Meeting, the City Council approved the creation of a joint commission that would explore the answer to the following question: “What is the best way to protect the long term health of Provo Power/City while at the same time appropriately supporting our citizens’ desire for alternative energy sources?” The Council tasked the joint commission, known as the Solar & Energy Committee, to report back to the Council by January 3rd, 2017, or by January 17, 2017 at the latest. Since the November 1st, 2016 Council Meeting, the members of the Solar & Energy Committee have met multiple times. They have prepared five recommendations for the Council to now consider.
   I am pleased that this committee was able to reach consensus on these recommendations within the allotted time, and I am generally pleased with the recommendations. I have several questions to ask so I can better understand the recommendations, but I believe I will be able to support them. These are so important, I'm going to reprint them here:
   1. Net Metering Rate – Excess energy produced by solar panels above that used by the customer and placed on the grid will be compensated at a rate set by the Council. The suggested rate after the last cost of service study is $0.06742/kWh. Based on current net metering agreements, credits will be wiped out at a prescribed time each year.
   2. Grandfather Existing Customers – All customers that have signed a net metering agreement by [October 4, 2016] will be grandfathered and compensated at the current published rate. Grandfathering clause is non-transferable subject to the same policy that customer service uses with respect to deposits.
   3. Change Residential Rate - Starting March 31, 2017, increase the customer service charge gradually to the recommended base rate based on the Cost of Service Study over the next 4 years and decrease the energy rate to remain revenue neutral.
   4. Re-evaluate Solar Rates – In three (3) years, the rates for solar customers should be reevaluated based on existing data from AMI meters to determine what kind of rate to select – time-of-use rate, demand rate, etc.
   5. Examine ways to make the utility bills more transparent
10. A resolution to adopt the Southeast Neighborhoods Plan as a component of the Provo City General Plan.
    This was continued from last meeting. Here is what I wrote before that meeting: "Two years in the making, the Southeast Neighborhoods Plan is ready for a vote by the City Council. I recommend interested parties read the plan."
11. A discussion on a request for amendments to the Provo City Sign Ordinance (Chapter 14.38) to increase signage allowances in the DT1, DT2, ITOD, Gateway, and West Gateway Zones. Downtown, Dixon, Franklin, Franklin South, and East Bay Neighborhoods.
    See agenda item 10 in the December 6th Work Meeting Report above.