What's Up? - 6 February 2017

Here is my meeting report from 17 January, followed by my meeting preview for tomorrow's meetings.

Much of what Councilors deal with aren't on the official agendas. Here is a list of some of the things I've been working on since the last "What's Up":

• West Side Planning Committee - the committee approved a list of proposed policy recommendations to be released for public comment. There is a Stakeholders Meeting, open to all stakeholders (anyone who has any interest in the area) February 16th. You may also submit your comments using the Provo Open City Hall interface.
• Brewery - some residents are upset that the Council has not taken up the issue of changing Provo code to allow for a brewpub. I explained my decision here.
• Development Approval Process Review Committee - The administration is working on implementing the identified ways to streamline development approval. The Committee is balancing speed of approval with opportunity for the community to learn about and weigh in on proposals. The Committee is also evaluating how well initial concerns have been addressed so far.
• Rules Committee - After studying and recommending a number of changes to the rules governing how the Council operates, this committee is looking at how the minutes of official meetings are kept. We are trying to find practices which balance efficiency with the ability to capture and communicate effectively the work that takes place in our meetings.
• Attending Neighborhood Meetings - I strive to hit at least one meeting per quarter for each neighborhood in District 5.
• Developments in southwest Provo - Several development proposals are in different stages in this area of Provo. As requested, I'm meeting with the applicants to better understand their intentions and to communicate where the Council and Committee are at in our efforts to develop a plan for growth in southwest Provo.
• Trash receptacle regulations.
• Bedbugs
• Vision 2050
• Road repair
• Liability for incidents at Provo owned facilities
• Parking
• Solar
• Clean air

As before, my reports pull and quote from a number of sources including Support Documents (link), Council Meeting Summary (link), and Council Chair Dave Sewell's email newsletter. Comments in blue are my own.

What Was Up?

COUNCIL WORK MEETING

12:30 PM, Tuesday, January 17^th, City Conference Room, 351 West Center

1. A discussion on incentivizing quality infill
   Presentation only.
   The discussion mostly focused on the questions of what is quality infill and how do we get it. Here are some images from the presentations:
   
   
2. An introduction to the new budget format
   Presentation only.
   With the ongoing implementation of Provo City's new "Provo 360" software platform, changes will be made to the format of the budget. These changes should increase the visibility and clarity of how the funds are proposed to be used.
3. An overview of the latest Capital Improvement Projects report
   Presentation only.
   The Capital Improvement Projects Report shows in detail the projects and items for each department and illustrates what happened with the funds for these projects throughout the preceding fiscal year (in this case, FY 2016). This shows the status of completed or ongoing projects, expenditures, funds which were carried over to the current fiscal year, as well as projections for future needs. Mr. Grabau explained that this document is primarily aimed at accountability based on the budget.
4. A review of the Engineering Department's Consolidated Fee Schedule
   Presentation only.
   The City periodically recalculates the full costs of providing services in order to provide a basis for setting the associated service charge or fee. This calculation of costs incorporates direct and indirect costs including operations and maintenance, overhead costs, and charges for use of capital facilities, thereby setting fees at a level that is related to the cost of producing the good or service unless otherwise restricted by law.
   A Council intern began the process of reviewing the Engineering Department's Consolidated Fee Schedule by comparing our fees to neighboring comparable cities and estimating the actual cost of providing service. We discussed the early findings and now the project will be taken up by the Engineering Department. Where were a couple of services that I suggested that they consider changing the fee structure. Some cities charge more for street cuts into new roads than into roads that are nearing the point that they need to be refinished. I think we should consider something similar. Another fee charges less per area for large projects than small projects. This makes sense because a large project doesn't cost twice as much to inspect as a project half it's size. But the way this fee is implemented some medium-small projects would incur fees substantially more than medium-large projects.
5. A discussion on amendments to Chapter 4 of the Council Policies and Procedures Handbook
   Approved 5:2. Opposed by Council Members Kim Santiago and Kay Van Buren.
   Most of the discussion centered around using Robert's Rules of Order as a "gap filler" to cover situations not explicitly covered in our Council Rules Handbook.
6. A discussion on forming a zoning committee
   Motion to approve the formation of and mission statement (“To review recommendations from citizens and the Administration pertaining to zoning enforcement and compliance, and to advise the Council on how to move forward with those recommendations.”) for the ad hoc Zoning Compliance Committee, with Kim Santiago (Chair), David Knecht, and George Stewart as Committee Members. Approved 7:0.
   I appreciate the work that Council and other Committee members will invest in this issue and am looking forward to their recommendations. This is one of the priorities that the Council set last year, and I feel that we are finally getting to the point were meaningful changes are going to be implemented.
7. A discussion on Council Priorities and Goals for 2017
   Approved as amended 7:0. Amendment removed “2016” from title.
   We had a good discussion about the goals that we set last year, the progress that has been made, and the work that is left. We talked about whether it was best to set goals yearly, biennially, or to have a running list where items get added and checked off when the situation calls for it. We talked about dropping some goals, we talked about adding others. We discussed whether fewer goals would be better. In the end, we decided to stick with the nine we selected last year. The one change we made was to drop the "year" from the title. These are now our goals, not our 2016 or 2017 goals, just our goals.
8. A discussion on Long Term City Goals
   Discussion only.
   We continued our discussion on goals by asking if we should set a few long-term goals that might take longer for the City to achieve than the terms of the current Council and Mayor. There was some question as to where these goals would fit in between the Council Goals we just affirmed and the Vision 2050 document that we are currently updating. Since the Council's discussion on items 7 and 8, I've been thinking about proposing clean air, parking, and addressing aging City Center as possible goals that we should focus on.
9. A discussion on 2017 Council Assignments for Boards, Committees, and Liaisons
   Changes made, further changes pending staff research. Approved 7:0.
   We reviewed the committee assignments from last year and only made a couple of changes. There were a few assignments about which we had lingering questions. These will be resolved after further research.
10. An update from the Council Budget & Audit Committee
    Discussion only.
    Ms. Santiago discussed the Budget and Audit Committee's request to conduct a thorough review of the Water Department. This is, in part, prompted by the 5-year plan of raising water rates that we are half way through. There was some push-back from the administration, worrying how much staff time and effort would be expended to facilitate this review. Mr. Strachan will draft some additional materials to guide the review: a mission statement and scoping document, including an upper bound on the time commitment required from staff. If the Council and Committee come across issues, they will raise them with Public Works and Administration in order to help identify ways to improve things, but he reiterated that this proposed review is [an] attempt to gain understanding, not to find issues. Mr. Strachan will draft a proposal to a future Work Meeting.

COUNCIL MEETING

5:30 PM, Tuesday, January 17^th, Council Chambers, 351 West Center

1. A presentation of the Provo Bicycle Committee's Silver Recognition from the League of American Cyclists.
   Presentation only.
2. A presentation of the Employee of the Month for November 2016, to Officer Tyler Nisonger, Police Department.
   Presentation only.
   Public Comment
3. A public hearing regarding a proposed expansion of the Foothill Park Parking Permit Area.
   Motion was to direct the Parking Committee to bring a proposal back for expansion of the Foothill Park Parking Area. Approved 7:0.
   A parking program is already in place in the area, but as new streets have been built and populated, they are not automatically added but need to follow the rigorous process required to create or modify a parking permit area.
4. An ordinance codifying a process for determining Council member compensation.
   Approved as amended 7:0.An ordinance was approved that put into place a process for reviewing salaries for the Mayor and members of the City Council and making recommendations for updates. An Elected Official Compensation Commission will be formed with three Provo residents appointed by the Mayor, three Provo residents appointed by the Council, and one additional Provo resident selected by the other six members of the Commission. They will be appointed in February 2017 and will report to the Council with their recommendations in April. Council will vote on those recommendations, with any changes taking effect in January 2018.
5. An ordinance amending and enacting new Provo City Code provisions regarding distributed generation (including solar generation) by residential customers of Provo City Power.
   Approved as amended 7:0.
   We enacted new code to implement the Solar and Energy Committee's recommendations from the last meeting. I have to commend Brian Jones, Council Attorney, for the great job that he did in converting the recommendations into proposed code changes.
6. A resolution authorizing a Section 108 program application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the purpose of funding the infrastructure necessary for the expansion of Duncan Aviation.
   Approved 7:0.Passed three resolutions (this one and the next two) regarding infrastructure necessary for the expansion of Duncan Aviation. One was to authorize a Section 108 program application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide funding. The second was for an appropriation of $300,000 in the Airport Fund for design work. The third declared intent to reimburse certain expenditures through the proceeds of bonds.
7. A resolution appropriating $300,000 in the Airport Fund for design work applying to the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017.
   Approved 7:0
8. A resolution of the Municipal Council of the City of Provo, Utah, declaring official intent with respect to certain expenditures to be reimbursed from proceeds of an obligation to be issued by the City; and providing for related matters.
   Approved 7:0.

What's Coming Up?

COUNCIL WORK MEETING

12:00 Noon, Tuesday, February 7th, City Conference Room, 351 West Center

1. A presentation by BYU MPA students regarding a project in the Franklin and Franklin South Neighborhoods
   BYU Masters of Public Administration students studied our Franklin and Franklin South Neighborhoods for economic revitalization, specifically with an eye toward making the area more attractive to millennials. 
2. A presentation from the Utah Ombudsman's Office regarding eminent domain proceedings
   I assume this presentation is to better inform the Council about how the eminent domain process plays out and what resources residents have once the use of eminent domain has been authorized. I thought this pamphlet was very helpful.
3. A discussion on the West Side Sewer Line planning
   Some changes to the sewer infrastructure plan have been proposed for the western portion of Provo.
4. A discussion regarding a proposed resolution expressing opposition to House Bill 164 and support for municipalities with respect to Enterprise Funds transfers
   House Bill 164 would significantly raise property taxes in Provo. My open letter, as well as background information, can be found here.
5. A report on the progress of the Urban Deer Program
   Last year the Council approved an Urban Deer Control Plan. Highlights of the implementation so far include:
   • 32 deer harvested, with the meat donated to needy and interested citizens
   • 487 specialist hours spent harvesting the deer
   • 30 deer captured
   • 28 deer successfully transferred
   • At least 74 officer hours spent capturing and transferring the deer (not including volunteer hours)
   • 1 significant injury to an officer handling a live deer
   The full report is here.
6. A presentation from Utah Transit Authority regarding development near the proposed BRT line in Provo
   This presentation will focus on the potential impacts that the BRT will have on the areas immediately surrounding the line, and particularly the stops. What are some things that we can do to get the most public benefit out of this project?
7. A discussion on an update regarding the city-wide Economic Development Strategic Plan
   Up until 2012 Provo City did not have an economic development strategic plan. In 2011 the Municipal Council appropriated $100,000 for such a study. The work commenced and through an extensive community outreach effort a plan was development. In June of 2013 the Municipal Council adopted the City Wide Economic Development Strategic plan as an advisory document. The shelf life as intended for the plan was five years. It has now been almost five years since the plan was completed. The economic development staff felt there would be value in having a conversation with the Municipal Council in the form of an update since the plan was adopted and what the future might look like.
8. A discussion on a proposed ordinance regarding camping on public property
   Within the last year 2015-2016 there has been a noticeable and documented increase in the number of calls for service/citizen complaints concerning individuals “camping” on public property. Specific nuisance areas include downtown Center Street, 350 N Freedom Blvd (Smith’s Grocery), 400 E 600 S, bird refuge, and East Bay Golf Course [etc.]
   Adaptation and enforcement of this ordinance will allow the Provo Police Officer to cite individuals who are in violation and remove the campsites in a timely matter. The ultimate goal being a REDUCTION in citizen complaints and negative effects on local businesses.
9. A discussion on mission statements for all Council Committees
   Last year we stipulated that each Council committees should have a mission statement. There are only three committees remaining that lack a mission statement.
10. A discussion on a Budget Committee request for a Water Division review
    This is a continuation of item 10 from the last Work Meeting (see above).
11. A discussion about whether the Council would like to fund both a new attorney and another zoning officer in the upcoming budget year
    In our efforts to improve zoning compliance, needs have been identified for not only a new zoning officer but also for an additional attorney to handle the case load.

COUNCIL MEETING

5:30 PM, Tuesday, February 7th, Council Chambers, 351 West Center

3. A presentation by the Rotary Club about their efforts installing benches in Provo City Parks along the Provo River Trail
4. A discussion and update on the BRT project
   There will be a presentation from UTA near the beginning of Tuesday night’s meeting concerning the status of the BRT project.  Additionally, a group of citizens has asked some questions about the BRT Lease Agreements, the related Interlocal Agreement, the BRT Executive Committee, and related letters and documents involving UTA and FTA.  Council attorney Brian Jones will be doing a presentation to address some of these issues.  Because of litigation involving the city and UTA, and because of the nature of some of the questions, he will not address them point-by-point.  However, the presentation is intended to provide helpful information related to these concerns.  There will be no public comment on this item because there is no decision the Council needs to make.  The item was intended to be informational and had originally been scheduled for Work Meeting but was moved to the public meeting so that more interested citizens could attend or watch.
   
   Public Comment
5. A resolution consenting to the appointment of individuals to various Boards and Commissions.
• Liz Maxfield, Arts Council until June 30, 2019
• Eliot Wilcox, Arts Council until June 30, 2019
• Paul Greenwood, Energy Board until December 31, 2020
• Dave Anderson, Planning Commission until June 30, 2019
• Deon Turley, TMAC until June 30, 2019
• David Harding, Library Board until December 31, 2017
6. A resolution of intent to expand the Foothill Park Parking Permit Area.
   Since our last meeting (see item 3 above) the Parking Committee has reviewed the request and we will consider their recommendation.
7. A joint resolution of the Provo Mayor and Municipal Council outlining their support for a Provo Agriculture Commission.
   This resolution would document our support of the creation of a Provo Agriculture Commission.
8. Consideration of a motion to rescind an action relative to the Metropolitan Water District taken on December 6, 2016, and an ordinance amending portions of Provo City Code regarding the Provo City Metropolitan Water District.
   In December, the Council made a mistake when it attempted to expand the size of the water board from 5 to 7 and appoint some new members.  Neither Public Works nor Council staff knew that the Metropolitan Water Board operates under some very different requirements spelled out in State Code than other city boards.  For example, the Council does not have the authority to change the size of the board.  The Council soon found out about the mistake and held the ordinance without allowing it to go into effect.  This Tuesday we will rescind the previous action and pass an ordinance change that brings City Code into compliance with State Code.
9. A resolution appropriating $118,326 in the General Fund to fund the purchase of equipment and operational needs for the Fire Department and applying to the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017
   I wrote this back when this item was heard in the December 5th Work Meeting: "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."
10. A resolution appointing individuals to the Compensation Commission used to evaluate the compensation of the Municipal Council Members.
    We will be appointing members to the Compensation Commission that we created in our last meeting. (See item 4 above.)
11. A resolution of the Provo City Municipal Council stating their opposition to House Bill 164 which limits the ability for a municipality to transfer funds from an Enterprise Fund to the General Fund.
    If you haven't already, see my blog post about this.
12. A joint resolution of the Provo Mayor and Municipal Council outlining their support for House Bill 134 to require the testing of medium and light-duty diesel vehicles in Utah County.
    If you can handle the "whereas" language, the resolution explains this item very well.