Council Meetings - 1 May 2018

Sales tax, contracts, sponsorships, bonds, grants, tax-increment, tentative budget, and more. Nearly every item on tomorrow's agenda impacts the finances of the city.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

1:00 PM, Tuesday, May 1, 2018

Work Meetings are designed to be a less formal venue for discussion among Council Members. Generally, no public input is taken during the meeting.

Business



1. A discussion on the donation of a surplus fire engine (18-059)
   The Fire Department received a new fire engine in February. It is customary to surplus the oldest engine in the fleet when a new engine is received. Chief Miguel has proposed donating the surplus engine to the Recruit Candidate Academy at Utah Valley University. We have a symbiotic relationship with the Academy, and get many direct and indirect benefits from having a strong Academy. The estimated auction value of between $2k and $8k is well below the value of the donation. Continued. Legal flagged this one. I'm sure we can still make this happen, we just need to make sure we do it correctly.
2. A presentation from the Mountainland Association of Governments on third quarter funding in relation to airports and transportation taxes overall (18-054)
   Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG) is presenting on third quarter funding in relation to airports and transportation taxes overall. MAG is the regional transportation planning organization for Utah, Wasatch, and Summit Counties and may have funding resources available for airports. Mayor Kaufusi recently attended a meeting where it was mentioned that regional funding can go to airports. She asked MAG to discuss the option with City leaders. MAG suggested that they do a broader presentation as well to explain the overall regional funding. Presentation only. We spend a lot of money on transportation as a society.
   
   Provo needs to submit a description of the airport for Mountainland's Transportation Plan in order to be eligible for some funding assistance on possible future airport expansion.
3. A discussion on options for funding on Miss Provo and parade float (18-055)
   Provo City and Miss Provo have been partners in promoting Provo for many years, with the City providing limited financial support for the Miss Provo Organization, and a parade float to promote the City with the expectation that Miss Provo participants would ride in the parade. Since 2016, the City Council Office has been Provo City’s liaison to the Miss Provo Organization—a role that had previously been fulfilled by the Mayor’s Office. As a result, the Council Office budget includes funding for Miss Provo and the associated city float. This discussion will address support regarding regarding the Miss Provo pageant and their involvement with the Provo City float. What's the point of having a Provo City float? Is there any value in entering our float in the parades around the valley? What about other cities entering floats in the Freedom Festival Parade? What are the costs? Is it worth doing? What value do we receive from sponsoring the Miss Provo Organization? Is it worth the cost? Discussion only. This item will be brought back to the May 15, 2018 Work Meeting. I wrote this earlier for another publication:
   
   "Traditionally, Provo City has entered a city-themed float into a dozen or so local parades each year. Traditionally, the winner and runners-up of the Miss Provo Scholarship Pageant have been highlighted on the float. This has also been the practice of many other cities in Utah Valley. In the past several years, the Miss Provo Organization has managed the upkeep and refreshing of the Provo City float, as well as getting the float to the various parades and driving the float in the parades. Because of these traditions, Miss Provo and the Provo City float have often been lumped together in budget discussions. I'm hoping that this year we can address these efforts as separate questions.
   
   "To provide value to our tax-payers, the benefits of our activities should out-weigh their costs. Independent of Miss Provo, what is the purpose of Provo City owning a float and entering it into the various local parades? What are the benefits of this activity? What are the costs, in direct funding, but also in the efforts and attention of City Staff?
   
   "Separately, if the float serves a public relations and promotional role, what message do we want to make with it? What is our brand? Does it make sense to continue with the tradition along with our fellow cities, or does it make sense to stand out and be a little different? For example, Provo City has recently been branding itself as the City of Starts, one year we could highlight a different start up in each parade atop our float.
   
   "Lastly, two years ago the Provo City Council decided to increase funding by $10,000/year to directly sponsor the Miss Provo Scholarship Pageant. Some of the money helps fund the scholarships for the winners, and some of the money helps pay for the program expenses. We need to ask if this is a good use of taxpayer money, what is the purpose, what are the benefits, and what are the costs?"
4. A discussion on the Municipal Wastewater Planning Program Self-Assessment Report for Provo 2017 (18-053)
   The State of Utah requires this assessment as part of of the permit process for municipal wastewater systems. The self-assessment is broken into three parts, Financial, Collection, and Treatment. We are doing great in the Collection and Treatment sections (though much of our treatment is nearing or beyond its useful service life). We pretty much fail in the Financial section because for decades we did not charge sufficient sewer rates to pay for the services we were receiving. We've just started to play catch-up. There is far more to come. Presentation only. There were no surprises. The preview covers it.
5. A discussion on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Variance Resolution (18-051)
   A resolution is being submitted for Council’s approval on the City’s financing plan for the plant, which needs to be submitted to the State by June 1 in order to meet the requirements of the City’s water quality regulation various. The variance resolution is tentatively scheduled for the May 15 Council meeting. The State imposed some deadlines as part of the deal to allow Provo time to build a new treatment plant before meeting the now tighter sewer treatment plant regulations. This will allow us to put the money into the new plant, rather than upgrading a crumbling plant that will fail soon anyways. Presentation only. The plan is to build a new treatment plant in phases.
6. A discussion on the Program Year 2018 Annual Action Plan, Fourth Year Update to the 2015 Consolidated Plan, including CDBG and HOME Funding recommendations (18-056)
   This introduces the 2018 draft of the Annual Action Plan on proposed usage of CDBG and HOME funds. These are federal funds provided through Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Two public hearings will be held and an open comment period will begin with the May 1 Council meeting. This Annual Action Plan guides the use of Federal Funds and our coordination with housing and service providers in the community. This serves as the master plan for addressing homelessness and affordable housing in the valley. I believe the overall plan and the objectives are sound. I'd like to have some discussing on the allocation of funding across the county, as well as the effectiveness of the selected projects to achieve the goals. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the May 1, 2018 Council Meeting. The Action Plan includes the recommendations of three different committees who review applications for the funding. They work with estimates because the federal allocation happens later. Coincidently, the final numbers were released earlier that day. The funding is a half million dollars more than expected. During the month-long public review period, we will be looking into how to ensure this unexpected portion is programmed wisely.
7. A discussion on tax increment financing (18-057)
   In recent months, the Council has encountered several opportunities to approve retail deals involving tax increment financing. Some Council members have wondered whether continuing to make tax increment financing deals is in the best interest of the City. Dixon Holmes will lead a discussion on tax increment financing and answer questions the Council may have. Frequent readers of this blog know that I have concerns about our use of tax-increment incentives. I am looking forward to this opportunity to review the purposes of these incentives and hopefully get to the point where we have an easily articulable strategy for their use. Presentation only. This item will be brought back to a future Work Meeting. It was a very helpful presentation, but there wasn't much time for discussion. We will likely discuss it further in the next Work Meeting on the 15th.
8. A discussion on retail (18-058)
   Scott Bowles, Provo Towne Center Manager, requested an opportunity to discuss with Council members the topic of retail from business and strategic planning perspectives. Scott use to work for Provo City in the Office of Economic Development. Presentation only. Mr. Bowles contrasted the long and delicate process to bring in retailers and contrasted that with the public impression that mall managers or city officials just need to call up the stores the public wants and invite them into our community.



Policy Items Referred From the Planning Commission



9. A discussion on an ordinance text amendment to Section 14.14A.070 to increase the height limit for assisted living facilities in the Low Density Residential (LDR) Zone from 30 feet to 40 feet. Although this project is in the Riverbottoms neighborhood, the proposed amendment has citywide implications because it could apply to future LDR zones. (PLOTA20180054)
   This is a request to increase the height limit for assisted living facilities within the LDR zone from 30 feet to 40 feet if the facility is 200 feet away from the nearest detached one-family residential structure. The applicant is looking begin phase 2 of their development at 4100 N University Avenue and they would like to go to three stories. I have a few questions about this one. With these extra allowances, does this use really fit in an LDR zone? Why are detached one-family structures called out? Wouldn't it be better to create a buffer from the edges of the zone? Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the May 1, 2018 Council Meeting We discussed our concerns and it carried over to the evening meeting, see the report for agenda item #7 in the evening meeting.



Closed Meeting



10. The Municipal Council or the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency will consider a motion to close the meeting for the purposes of holding a strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation, and/or to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property, and/or the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual in conformance with § 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq., Utah Code.
    Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed above. No closed meeting was held.

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, May 1, 2018

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.

• Roll Call
• Prayer
• Pledge of Allegiance

Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.

1. A presentation on the Provo Serves initiative
   Mayor Kaufusi is championing a new initiative to encourage Provo citizens to make an extra effort to serve their neighbors. I love the idea and am looking forward to participating in it. Presentation only. I love this initiative and hope the community rallies around it. It's all about neighbor serving neighbor and residents serving the community. As an added incentive, each time someone posts to social media a picture of service with the hashtag "provoserves", $2 will be donated to a charity that provides prostheses to people who need them. Details will be at service.provo.org (but this site hasn't gone life at the time writing.
2. A presentation of the proposed tentative budget for Provo City Corporation for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2018 and ending June 20, 2019 (18-005)
   The City’s administration is required by Utah State law to present the proposed budget to the Council at the first Council meeting in May. Council will vote to tentatively adopt the proposed budget at the May 15 Council meeting. Watch for updates and timelines on the budget page on the website. This is the first of at least three public meetings on the budget. It'll be the first time we get to see the budget. Despite months of pre-meetings, there are several aspects that I curious about how they will look in the final budget proposal. Presentation only. The budget will take quite some time to get through, but here are some highlights from the presentation.
   • It is a balanced budget (This is required by law, but wouldn't it be nice if the federal government could balance a budget?)
   • No property tax increase is proposed
   • Four officers and an analyst will be added to the Police Department
   • There is a (one-time) cost of living adjustment of 1% for all employees
   • There is a bump in funding for cyber security (ask Atlanta why this is important)
   • The budget now includes performance indicators, as requested in past years.
   Want to know more? Here is a link the to actual proposed budget.



Public Comment

• This public comment period is intended to allow comment on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Fifteen minutes has been set aside for this comment period.
• For items on the agenda requiring a public hearing, time to comment will be provided, after the item is presented, for all those who wish to speak.
• For items not requiring a public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to a ten minute total comment period.




Action Agenda



3. A resolution adding personal property to the surplus property list and authorizing the Mayor to dispose of the property (18-059)
   The Fire Department received a new fire engine in February. It is customary to surplus the oldest engine in the fleet when a new engine is received. Chief Miguel has proposed donating the surplus engine to the Recruit Candidate Academy at Utah Valley University. From my preview of this item in the earlier meeting, "We have a symbiotic relationship with the Academy, and get many direct and indirect benefits from having a strong Academy. The estimated auction value of between $2k and $8k is well below the value of the donation." Continued.
4. A resolution approving a Substantial Amendment to the 2015 Five-Year Consolidated Plan to incorporate the use of the Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program. (18-046)
   An amendment is necessary to incorporate the use of the Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program as a resource. This will fund infrastructure improvements necessary due to the Duncan Aviation expansion. We heard this in the Work meeting last week. I said this last time, "The policy question is whether we should commit future CDBG funds to pay for this infrastructure. We have previously decided to head in this direction." Approved 7:0. There was little discussion because this is just a technicality to implement the plan that we had previously decided on.
5. A public hearing on the Program Year 2018 Annual Action Plan, Fourth Year Update to the 2015 Consolidated Plan, including CDBG and HOME Funding recommendations (18-056)
   This is the first of two required public hearings and initiates a public comment period (May 1 - June 5) regarding the 2018 draft of the Annual Action Plan on proposed usage of CDBG and HOME funds. These are federal funds provided through Housing and Urban Development (HUD). From the earlier meeting, "This Annual Action Plan guides the use of Federal Funds and our coordination with housing and service providers in the community. This serves as the master plan for addressing homelessness and affordable housing in the valley. I believe the overall plan and the objectives are sound. I'd like to have some discussing on the allocation of funding across the county, as well as the effectiveness of the selected projects to achieve the goals." Public hearing only; this item will be voted on at the June 5, 2018 Council Meeting. See the report for agenda item #6 in the earlier meeting.
6. A resolution approving the Wastewater Self-Assessment in accordance with the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit. (18-053)
   The State of Utah requires this assessment as part of the permit process for municipal wastewater systems. From earlier, "The self-assessment is broken into three parts, Financial, Collection, and Treatment. We are doing great in the Collection and Treatment sections (though much of our treatment is nearing or beyond its useful service life). We pretty much fail in the Financial section because for decades we did not charge sufficient sewer rates to pay for the services we were receiving. We've just started to play catch-up. There is far more to come." Approved 6:0, with Council member Kay Van Buren excused. There were no surprises. The preview covers it.
7. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to increase the height limit for assisted living facilities in the Low Density Residential (LDR) Zone. The project initiating this proposed change is in the Riverbottoms Neighborhood, but the proposed amendment would have a citywide impact. (PLOTA20180054)
   This is a request to increase the height limit for assisted living facilities within the LDR zone from 30 feet to 40 feet if the facility is 200 feet away from the nearest detached one-family residential structure. The applicant is looking begin phase 2 of their development at 4100 N University Avenue and they would like to go to three stories. From earlier, "I have a few questions about this one. With these extra allowances, does this use really fit in an LDR zone? Why are detached one-family structures called out? Wouldn't it be better to create a buffer from the edges of the zone?" A motion to continue this item until the next Council Meeting with a request to Community Development staff to bring back a recommendation on a vehicle that would allow the project to move forward with the requested height of 40 feet that would not involve changing the definition of our current zones (unless the recommendation is PRO-zone) was approved 6:0, with Council member Kay Van Buren excused. The MDR idea got legs. Several city councilors were uncomfortable with carving out such a specific exception for when a use more intense than LDR can go into an LDR zone. We asked Community Development to bring back a proposal to rezone the project area as MDR (or some other zone that would accommodate the project).
8. An ordinance amending Provo City Code regarding allowing motorcycle parking to count toward vehicle parking requirements. Riverbottoms Neighborhood. (PLOTA20180025)
   This would allow two motorcycle spaces to be substituted for one required vehicle parking space in the Arbors on the Avenue PRO Zone, with a limit of no more than one out of every 50 required vehicle parking spaces. The first hearing of this item was at the April 24 Council meeting. From last week, "The applicant requested the ability to convert up to 1 out of every 25 required spaces into two motorcycle spaces. I think this is a good opportunity to try this out, and think it could be helpful in other areas of the City."
   
   Last week we discussed the idea that the adjacent properties could work together to improve access. This might require the elimination of a couple other parking stalls. I'm interested to see if there were any developments on this front over the past week. Approved 6:0, with Council member Kay Van Buren excused. Such a short "result" for such a long discussion. It is in everyone's best interest to interconnect the access for these developments, but it may be difficult to work out all of the details. We discussed holding up the amendment as an incentive to work out an agreement, but, in the end, decided to grant the amendment and to just ask nicely that they work in good faith to find an access solution.
9. ITEM CONTINUED TO A FUTURE DATE: The Provo City Community Development Department requests amendments to Section 14.34.295 Downtown Development Design Standards to clarify architectural requirements in the Downtown Zones. Central Business District, Joaquin, Maeser, Franklin, and Timp Neighborhoods. (16-0005OA)
   Previously noticed for the May 1 Council meeting, the item was not ready to be heard at this time.