Council Meetings - 14 December 2021

This will be my last set of Council meetings. People keep asking me how it feels, but I've been too busy to even think about it. I'll have plenty of time afterward to reflect. In the meantime, there is always more to be done.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:00 pm, Tuesday, December 14, 2021

Business

1. A presentation regarding the complete revision of the Provo General Plan to guide growth and development for the next 10 to 20 years in Provo. Citywide application. (PLGPA20210364)
   A general plan is a visioning document that sets long-range goals and plans for how a city will grow over the next 10-20 years. It helps guide citywide policy decisions and priorities and inspires a city to look toward the future. General plans are also required by state statute, and this proposal meets the current requirements. City staff and DesignWorkshop (consultants) worked closely with residents to reflect their varied visions of how Provo can reach its potential and become a better place to live, work, and recreate for everyone who chooses to come here. This item was heard in the Planning Commission Study Session on November 10 and approved by the Planning Commission at the meeting on December 8, 2021. I think the draft has improved significantly, but I'm still not comfortable with it. And I haven't taken as much time to review it and make suggestions as I think a document of this importance deserves. I noticed that the actual vote had been continued on the evening meeting, which means I won't get to participate in the final vote, but it also means that there will be more time to review and hopefully improve the document. Presentation only. I'm glad that we did not try to pass this in the evening. It is so important and needs more public review and buy-in. George Handley and I were asked by the rest of the Council to draft a new Vision Statement that better captures Provo and who we want to become.
2. A presentation from BYU Provo Lab regarding a school project researching Provo City Gateways. (21-117)
   The Community and Neighborhood Services Department worked with a BYU class for several fall semesters on various planning projects. This fall the class was tasked with researching five Provo City gateways. Students visited and studied their gateways and will provide context for gateways and address some problematic themes and suggestions for improvements to forward to consultants for a gateways plan in 2022. The report is very well done and looks very professional. Presentation only. I was impressed by the work done by these students. It will help move along the gateways master plan.
3. A presentation regarding the recommendations from TMAC for Center Street evaluation criteria. (21-118)
   Council requested the Transportation and Mobility Advisory Committee create criteria to evaluate future projects and developments along Center Street. The committee has spent the past year on this and would like to present this to Council. This is really exciting to see this return to the Council. This effort will help Center Street evolve into an even better destination and draw for our city. A motion to thank TMAC for efforts in preparing this framework and request that Public Works staff prepare a cohesive plan including timing about how to move forward using these ideas and this framework, was approved 7:0. Great work by TMAC. I hope we can make steady progress on treating Center Street like a destination that people want to be and not just a thoroughfare.
4. A presentation regarding the proposed dredging and development of Utah Lake. (21-122)
   The Utah Lake Restoration Project, started by Lake Restoration Solutions LLC, proposes to dredge part of Utah Lake to then create islands which would become home to new communities. According to the plan, this private development would pay for the lake’s ecological restoration. There are concerns about environmental impacts that this proposed project would have on the lake’s ecosystem. The island idea is a huge, bold proposal. However, I have significant concerns about it. A motion that Councilors George Handley and Shannon Ellsworth draft a resolution regarding the development of Utah Lake, to circulate the draft among the Council and Administration to find common ground, and schedule the resolution on January 4, 2022 for discussion and a vote (including the two new Councilors), was approved 7:0. Did you know that algal blooms in Utah Lake have been getting better each year? I didn't. The lake is such a vital part of the valley that we need to ensure we aren't making any foolish decisions. And laying out islands to make pictures for passing airplanes is just tacky.



Policy Items Referred from the Planning Commission

5. An ordinance adopting Provo City Code Title 15.23 to adopt policies and procedures for the dedication of private streets and utilities. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210360)
   The City has recently received multiple requests from owners (mainly HOAs) of private roads in Provo that their streets and/or utilities be converted to public ownership. However, the City Code does not currently have a procedure in place for accomplishing this, nor does it list factors to consider when evaluating such a request. The proposed ordinance achieves both objectives. It creates a new Chapter with three Sections. Planning Commission recommended approval. My overarching criterion for whether the financial liability of private streets should be taken on by the City is if doing so is in the public's interest. I believe some of these streets were built private because, at the time, the City was not willing to build such a street under such conditions. But the developers wanted to go forward anyway, and so they chose to go the private route. I'm skeptical that it is in the City's best interest to take on the liability and responsibility now. I like how the proposal chapter is written and feel that it does protect the interests of the public, as long as the Council at the time keeps those interests in mind. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the Council Meeting on December 14, 2021. I see little chance that any conversion of infrastructure from private to public is in the best interest of the broader community. But I concede that this proposal creates a good framework for systematically evaluating such proposals.
6. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approximately 4.5 acres of real property, generally located at 1988 N Cove Point Ln, from Residential Conservation (RC) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zone. Grandview North Neighborhood (PLRZ20210331)
   The subject property comprises two (2) parcels with a combined acreage of approximately 4.5 acres. It lies in the RC (Residential Conservation) Zone— between State Street and Columbia Lane—on the northern border of the City with Orem. Single-family residences lie to the northeast and southwest of the development. A city water tank lies to the north, while professional offices lie to the southeast. There is a mix of zoning designations adjacent to the subject property. The lands to the northwest and northeast lie in the RC Zone. The adjacent property in Orem City is the R6.5 (Residential, 6500 SF lots) Zone with ASH (Affordable Senior Housing) Overlay Zone. Land to the south and west lies in the R1.8 and R1.10 Zones. The CG (General Commercial) lies southeast of Cove Point. Staff recommends denial. The Planning Commission recommends denial. After reading through the materials, I am not convinced that the request rezone is appropriate. This item was not heard.
7. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in the Agricultural (A1), Residential Agricultural (RA), and Residential (R1) Zones and to refine the development standards for ADUs. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210345)
   During the 2021 Utah Legislative Session, the Legislature passed House Bill 82 (HB 82) which requires cities in Utah to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in more of their primarily residential-zoned areas. Most cities are required to allow ADUs in at least 75 percent (75%) of the area zoned primarily for residential uses; however, because Provo is home to a major university, it is only required to have a minimum of 33 percent (33%) of the areas primarily zoned for residential allow ADUs. Provo currently allows accessory apartments in approximately 20 percent (20%) of the areas zoned primarily for residential uses, therefore, at a minimum, must allow an additional 13 percent (13%) area where ADUs are permitted. This is the big one. I strongly believe that ADUs are the best tool for addressing the housing affordability crisis and will strengthen and stabilize our neighborhoods by allowing families to compete against institutional investors for existing homes. These advantages are best applied across the City, except in areas where the specific conditions make ADUs inappropriate. A motion to discuss prohibiting ADUs in some portion of the city was approved 7:0. A series of other motions were made during the discussion but only the last substitute motion to recess to Closed Meeting received a vote, which was approved 7:0. See my report for item 15 in the evening meeting.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time.



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, December 14, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.
1. A presentation recognizing the Fall 2021 Provology participants. (21-120)
   Presentation only. This is a great program for citizens who want to better understand how the City government functions. I highly recommend taking it. Congrats to the latest batch of graduates.
2. A presentation recognizing Council Leadership and retiring Council Members. (21-123)
   Presentation only. It was nice to be recognized. I should have expected it, but I was surprised when I was asked to say a few words in parting. I wish I were more eloquent -- it was pretty painful for everyone. Oh well.




Consent Agenda

Items on the consent agenda are generally routine in nature, have been fully vetted in other meetings, or do not need additional discussion. They are approved together as one item. All items on the Consent Agenda were approved 7:0. All of these items have been discussed in detail in past meetings.
3. A resolution adopting the Provo City Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update. (21-046)
   
4. A resolution approving the Wildlife Hazard Mitigation Agreement related to the Provo River Delta Restoration Project. (21-083)
   
5. A resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign lease agreements with Intermountain Golf Cars Inc. and Club Car Connect for 70 golf carts and accessories. (21-081)
   
   
   

   Public Comment

   Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.
   
   Dial 346 248 7799. Enter Meeting ID 871 4857 6574 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 395819.
   
   Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:
   
   Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.
   
   Please limit your comments to two minutes.
   
   State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.




Action Agenda

6. A resolution consenting to the appointment of individuals to Provo Housing Authority. (21-002)
   The Mayor has recommended the appointments of Eric Speckhard and Christian Faulconer to the Provo Housing Authority Board. The names have been presented to the Council and the Council has been asked to approve the resolution granting their advice and consent. I support the appointment of these individuals. They are both particularly well suited to serve on the Housing Authority Board. Approved 6:1, with Shannon Ellsworth opposed. They will be strong additions to the PHA Board.
7. A resolution reappointment Bob Conner as Provo City Constable to serve a four-year term. (20-121)
   Bob Conner started All Pro Security in 2006 after retiring from police work for 33 years. During his time on the force, he worked in all facets of law enforcement, including patrol, investigations, training, media relations and many supervisory positions. His last few assignments were as a Division Commander (Captain) over the Patrol Division and later the Support Services Division. Bob graduated from the F.B.I. Academy in 2001 along with obtaining a Degree in Criminal Justice from BYU. Bob has also been awarded the Patriot Award by the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve for his support for Citizen Warriors. I am comfortable with this reappointment, based, in part, on the recommendations of the City employees who have worked with Mr. Conner. Approved 7:0. I had no concerns.
8. A presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. (21-119)
   This is the annual presentation of this report based on the 2020-2021 Fiscal Year, prepared following the completion of Provo City’s annual audit. I have not taken the time to review this dense, 139-page document, but I look forward to doing so. Presentation only. Provo continues to be recognized for exceeding the highest standards for transparency and accountability in financial reporting.
9. A resolution appropriating $723,939 in the Police Department in the General Fund for police payroll adjustments. (21-110)
   Over the last several months, law enforcement agencies across Utah have been significantly increasing their compensation programs for police officers in an effort to more effectively recruit and retain officers. Recruiting and retention of officers has become quite challenging due to fewer aspiring police officers entering the field of law enforcement, the very tight labor market and low unemployment rates, and declining morale among officers in general due to changing societal attitudes toward the law enforcement profession. As Provo has begun to experience recruiting and retention challenges, City staff undertook a special market analysis and discovered that the City is less competitive in police compensation than we were just a few months ago. An appropriation is being requested to make changes to the City’s compensation structure for police officers to address the imbalance. A shortage of willing, capable, and qualified police officers has drastically increased the going rate for officer salary. It has been dizzying to see how quickly the market has jumped. But, as painful as these adjustments are, I do believe they are necessary. Approved 7:0. These adjustments are painful for the budget, but are necessary.
10. A resolution appropriating $199,165 in the Fire Department in the General Fund for a Fire Wildland Urban Interface Program. (21-114)
    “Our Wildland Urban Interface represents the single biggest threat to our city.” These words combined with the Range Fire and the Timpview Draw fire in 2020 have demonstrated the critical need to protect our Wildland Urban Interface. Our 2021 activities centered on fuel reduction programs in the Timpview Draw and along Lover’s Lane. These efforts represent a fraction of the WUI present in Provo. These activities utilized approximately 1000 staff hours and resulted in the removal of over 400 yards of green waste from 200 homes along the WUI. It is the Fire Department’s recommendation that an ongoing Community Risk Reduction program be implemented to address fire and life safety risk in the community. The department will propose an appropriation of funds for a Community and Firefighter Risk Reduction Specialist (one FTE), and four seasonal, full time, time-limited Fuel Mitigation Specialists. The need is there, and the funding comes from the net proceeds from our firefighters assisting with wildland fires around the country. Based on these two facts, I support the request. Approved 7:0. It costs Provo Fire less than the reimbursement rate to send personnel to fight wildland fires around the country in the summertime. They requested that the net proceeds be used to make Provo safer from wildland fires. I'm happy to approve.
11. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to comply with current state law regarding fireworks sale, distribution, and discharge of class C Consumer Fireworks. (21-113)
    During this year's extreme drought, City officials sought creative ways to allow individuals to still use fireworks but in more safe, controlled ways. As such, the 2021 firework season was a success for the city. To set the city up for success again regarding firework use and to align city code with current state statute, this ordinance is proposed to make some changes about Discharge Restricted Areas and revisions to match state laws. It's not clear which parts of the ordinance are to "set the city up for success" and which parts are to align our "code with current state statute". Approved 7:0. The new ordinance refers directly to the State Statute, so it will automatically be updated as the State Statute is updated.
12. An ordinance amending Provo City Code Chapter 6.06. establishing nighttime brightness standards and zones. (19-102)
    This was continued from the November 30 meeting. As Electronic Digital Signs become more widely used by businesses to advertise their services, there exists a potential for the light illuminating from these signs to cause a public nuisance, especially when those businesses are close to residential neighborhoods. The Sign Committee has been working with local sign companies and national standards that have been adopted by other jurisdictions to create a nighttime brightness standard to minimize the impacts of the light emitted from Electronic Digital Signs in areas in and around residential neighborhoods. I support the Committee's recommendation and believe we should implement the proposal. However, I also have a hard time not taking the industry's representative's offer to walk around with a NIT gun and see for myself what these light levels feel like at night. Approved 7:0. This will ease compliance and enforcement.
13. An ordinance adopting Provo City Code Title 15.23 to adopt policies and procedures for the dedication of private streets and utilities. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210360)
    I support the Committee's recommendation and believe we should implement the proposal. However, I also have a hard time not taking the industry's representative's offer to walk around with a NIT gun and see for myself what these light levels feel like at night. This was item 5 on the work meeting agenda. This item was continued to a future meeting.
14. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approx. 4.5 acres of real property, generally located at 1988 N Cove Point Ln, from Residential Conservation (RC) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zone. Grandview North Neighborhood (PLRZ20210331)
    See my preview for item 5 in the work meeting. This was item 6 on the work meeting agenda. A motion to replace the ordinance in the implied motion with a version of the ordinance which designated the area for ADUs and to refer the issue to a Council committee was approved 5:2, with David Harding and Shannon Ellsworth opposed. A motion revising the ordinance referred to by the implied motion to change the occupancy of an ADU from three to two unrelated adults was approved 5:2, with David Shipley and Shannon Ellsworth opposed. The implied motion was then approved 5:2, with David Harding and Shannon Ellsworth opposed. I'm disappointed with this outcome. The Council chose the option designed to do as little as possible. ADUs must be allowed in at least 33% of the residential areas of Provo (most cities in Utah have to allow it in 75%). To reach that threshold, the residential zones with no single-family homes (SFD homes is where ADUs can be built) were selected for inclusion to hit the threshold, even though it will have no impact. The Council committed to creating a committee to create a plan to expand ADU access in the future, but I don't have much confidence that it will actually happen.
15. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in the Agricultural (A1), Residential Agricultural (RA), and Residential (R1) Zones and to refine the development standards for ADUs. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210345)
    See my preview for item 6 in the work meeting. This was item 7 on the work meeting agenda.
16. ***CONTINUED*** Community and Neighborhood Services requests a complete revision of the Provo General Plan to guide growth and development for the next 10 to 20 years in Provo. Citywide application PLGPA20210364
    This item was not ready to be heard.
17. ***CONTINUED*** Community and Neighborhood Services requests a General Plan Amendment to clarify the existing Westside Development Policies and Future Land Use Map with a Southwest Plan Intent Statement. Citywide. PLGPA20210242
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission.




Adjournment

Council Meetings - 30 November 2021

I was out of town for this set of meetings. I watched the YouTube recordings afterwards, but I did not write any previews or reports.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:30 pm, Tuesday, November 30, 2021

Business

1. A discussion regarding the appointment of City Constable. (21-111)
   The state code made some changes in 2019 regarding the nominating process for appointing a constable and moving the responsibility to the legislative body. Looking at the code it appears that even though the members of the commission are defined by statute, it must be “the legislative body of a city of the first or second class” that establishes the nominating commission. Furthermore, the entire commission needs to “review each applicant’s credentials.” We are asking the Council to establish the nominating commission, including having them select which Councilor, which judge (it doesn’t have to be our Justice Court judge) and which private citizen serve on the commission. Then the entire body needs to review all the data and make a recommendation to the Council. Alternatively, 17-25a-3 allows currently appointed constables to be reappointed (for a six year term rather than four) without the nominating commission even being involved. An option the Council could consider would be for Administration to bring a request for reappointment to the Council. Included is a recommendation from Judge Romney and ReAnnun Newton on reappointing Bob Conner and the City Constable. Council to decide on route to appointment at Dec 14th Regular Council meeting.
2. A presentation from the Housing Committee regarding an ordinance change for ADU’s. (21-112)
   During the 2021 Utah Legislative Session, the Legislature passed House Bill 82 (HB 82) which requires cities in Utah to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in more of their primarily residential-zoned areas. Most cities are required to allow ADUs in at least 75 percent (75%) of the area zoned primarily for residential uses; however, because Provo is home to a major university, it is only required to have a minimum of 33 percent (33%) of the areas primarily zoned for residential allow ADUs. Provo currently allows accessory apartments in approximately 20 percent (20%) of the areas zoned primarily for residential uses, therefore, at a minimum, must allow an additional 13 percent (13%) area where ADUs are permitted. Discussion to continue in Regular meeting and Dec 14th Council meetings.
3. A presentation regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update - Recommendations and Implementation. (21-046)
   Provo Parks & Recreation has been working with Pros Consulting for over a year on this Master Plan update. Multiple public presentations have been held and feedback received in the preparation of this updated plan. Pros Consulting will give a virtual presentation of the final draft of the updated Parks and Recreation Master Plan at this work session. Discussion and recommendations from Council will be received and final adoption of the Plan is scheduled to be presented in the Council Meeting on December 14. To be on Dec 14th Regular meeting for approval.
4. A discussion regarding the Provo River Delta Restoration Agreement. (21-083)
   For the last several years, city staff and various federal and state partners have been working on a series of agreements related to the Provo River Delta Restoration Project. The City’s primary concerns with the project have been related to the proximity of the restored delta to the Provo Airport and the risk of increasing the incidence of bird strikes at the airport due to the design of the delta and whether or not the delta might result in attracting migratory waterfowl. The parties involved in the development of the agreements include the Utah Reclamation and Mitigation Commission (part of the US Department of the Interior), Central Utah Water Conservancy District, Utah County, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, the United States Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services, Provo City, and our respective legal counsels, consultants and others. Update to Council; Agreement to be brought before Council for a vote in future Regular Council meeting.
5. A discussion regarding the public input process for the consideration of a potential UVX Station on 900 East. (21-115)
   The Mayor's Office in conjunction with the Utah Transit Authority, Mountainlands Association of Government and additional Provo City staff recently hosted two public open houses for the purpose of gathering public input on the question and interest in a potential UVX station on 900 East, approximately between Campus Lane and Birch Lane. These events took place on October 13th and 20th at the Wasatch Elementary School and multi-purpose room at the Provo City Recreation Center, respectively,and a survey was placed on Open City Hall. Council gave direction to go forward with looking into creating this station.
6. An ordinance amending Provo City code to comply with current state law regarding fireworks sale, distribution, and discharge of Class C consumer fireworks. (21-113)
   During this year's extreme drought, city officials sought creative ways to allow individuals to still use fireworks, but in safer, more controlled ways. The 2021 firework season was a success for the city. To set the city up for future success regarding firework use and to align city code with current state statute, this ordinance proposes some changes about Discharge Restricted Areas and revisions to match state laws. Proposed ordinance to appear on Dec 14th Regular meeting agenda.
7. A presentation regarding the 2021 Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) fuel mitigation efforts and proposed ongoing fuel mitigation program. (21-114)
   “Our Wildland Urban Interface represents the single biggest threat to our city.” These words combined with the Range Fire and the Timpview Draw fire in 2020 have demonstrated the critical need to protect our Wildland Urban Interface. Our 2021 activities centered on fuel reduction programs in the Timpview Draw and along Lover’s Lane. These efforts represent a fraction of the WUI present in Provo. These activities utilized approximately 1000 staff hours and resulted in the removal of over 400 yards of green waste from 200 homes along the WUI. It is the Fire Department’s recommendation that an ongoing Community Risk Reduction program be implemented to address fire and life safety risk in the community. The department will propose an appropriation of funds for a Community and Firefighter Risk Reduction Specialist (one FTE), and four seasonal, full time, time-limited Fuel Mitigation Specialists. Appropriation to come to Regular meeting agenda on Dec 14th.
8. A presentation regarding how elected officials and community leaders can strengthen the impact of girls and women in Provo. (21-117)
   As part of the City Council's ongoing discussions on diversity and inclusion efforts throughout the city, this presentation from Dr. Susan Madsen of Utah State University provides a look into best practices for various stakeholders interested in supporting and empowering Utah girls and women. Presentation only.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time.



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, November 30, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Public Comment

Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.

Dial 346 248 7799. Enter Meeting ID 883 7750 8186 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 203600.

Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:

Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.

Please limit your comments to two minutes.

State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.



Action Agenda

1. A resolution consenting to the mayor’s appointment of the City Engineer for Provo City. (21-111)
   The Mayor has recommended the appointment of an individual as the Provo City Engineer. The name has been presented to the Council and the Council has been asked to approve the resolution granting their advice and consent. Approved 5:0, with David Harding and David Shipley excused.
2. A resolution consenting to the mayor’s appointment of the Chief of Police for Provo City. (21-111)
   The Mayor has recommended the appointment of an individual as the Provo City Police Chief. The name has been presented to the Council and the Council has been asked to approve the resolution granting their advice and consent. Approved 5:0, with David Harding and David Shipley excused.




Consent Agenda

Items on the consent agenda are generally routine in nature, have been fully vetted in other meetings, or do not need additional discussion. They are approved together as one item. Approved 5:0, with David Harding and David Shipley excused.
3. An Ordinance granting Teleport Communications America, LLC a nonexclusive franchise to operate a telecommunications network in Provo City, Utah. (21-057)
   Provo City and Teleport Communications have come to terms on an updated Franchise Agreement. Pursuant to Provo City Code, “[n]o franchise contract shall take effect until it has been approved by the Municipal Council.” 5.03.020 (5). The prior Teleport Communications franchise agreement had expired and this will replace the old one. This agreement largely follows the approved template which only differs in one material respect by removing the fiber dedication provision, which the administration has agreed will not be necessary in this instance.
4. An ordinance amending the Provo City Rate Schedule to set electric service rates for distribution Voltage Pilot Optional Time-Of-Use (TOU) and Shared Solar in Provo City, Utah. (21-109)
   Shared Solar is a community solar project built in Spanish Fork to provide residents the opportunity to purchase solar power and lock in the generation cost without the capital outlay required when purchasing solar for the rooftop. This also allows residents who are not able to purchase solar for their homes because of circumstances beyond their control such as HOA covenants, renting or roof issues to purchase a slice of renewable generation.
   
   Time of Use (TOU) rates allow customers to shift the time they use energy from the peak in the City from 3:00 pm to 8:00 pm. By shaving the peak, the City will pay less for the power and the savings will be given back to the customer. The customer will need to be diligent in not using energy during the peak time of the day in order to save money on their bill. In addition, we have added an electric vehicle charging rate for those who would like to save money when charging their vehicle from midnight to 8:00 am in the morning.




Redevelopment Agency of Provo

5. A resolution to approve a real estate purchase contract between Redevelopment Agency of Provo City and Evkell, LLC for the sale of property at approximately 1000 West Center Street for a commercial development. (21-116)
   EVKELL, LLC owns and operates Red Mountain, a floral distributor which is located at 1109 West 100 South, Provo. They have outgrown their current location and want to build a larger distribution building with a retail component. Provo City and the Redevelopment Agency own property at approximately 1000 West Center which would be a good location for the expansion of their business. EVKELL, LLC has agreed to work with Provo City representatives in creating a building that will be a nice addition to the entrance into Provo. Approved 5:0, with David Harding and David Shipley excused.




Action Agenda

6. A resolution to approve a real estate purchase contract between Provo City and Evkell, LLC for the sale of property at approximately 1000 West Center Street for a commercial development. (21-116)
   Same as agenda item 5, but being voted on for Provo City approval. Approved 5:0, with David Harding and David Shipley excused.
7. An ordinance amending Provo City Code Chapter 6.06. establishing nighttime brightness standards and zones. (19-102)
   As Electronic Digital Signs become more widely used by businesses to advertise their services, there exists a potential for the light illuminating from these signs to cause a public nuisance, especially when those businesses are close to residential neighborhoods. The Sign Committee has been working with local sign companies and national standards that have been adopted by other jurisdictions to create a nighttime brightness standard to minimize the impacts of the light emitted from Electronic Digital Signs in areas in and around residential neighborhoods. Continued.
8. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in the Agricultural (A1), Residential Agricultural (RA), and Residential (R1) Zones and to refine the development standards for ADUs. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210345)
   This was item 2 on the work meeting agenda. Continued.




Adjournment

Town Halls on Parking

Last night, the Provo City Council held a town hall meeting to discuss a recommendation by the Parking Committee to create an On-Street Parking Management Area in Joaquin Neighborhood. The crowd overflowed the Council Chambers. The anger, concern, and frustration were evident, but everyone who addressed the Council did so in a clear and civil manner that was appreciated. We listened to concerns, we responded to questions, and we hear some good suggestions. I hope everyone left with a better understanding of what is being proposed and why.

(I took pictures of some of the creative signs brought to the meeting. This was well before the starting time, before the room was full.)

Unfortunately, we ran out of time and towards the end we asked everyone already in line and waiting virtually to speak to do so quickly and without the councilors responding. A lot of questions and good points were left unaddressed. I promised to hold some follow-up meetings with another chance for everyone to speak and hopefully I'll be able to respond to them all. I invite everyone who is interested in the issue to come, listen, and participate in the discussion.

Council Meetings - 16 November 2021

The agenda for tomorrow is bursting at its seams. I'm most anxious about the items on ADUs and the on-street parking management tool. We will be certifying the results of the election. I'm pretty excited about the Energy Department items.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:00 pm, Tuesday, November 16, 2021

Business

1. A presentation from the Housing Committee regarding an ordinance change for ADU’s to comply with Utah State Law. (21-102)
   Presentation on zoning compliance process with ADUs. When properly used, I am a big fan of ADUs. They can help stabilize neighborhoods that are transitioning to less owner-occupancy. They can help aspiring homeowners afford a home sooner at the same time as providing more options for people looking to rent. They tip the scales in favor of aspiring homeowners and away from investors. Motion to hear at November 30, 2021 Council Meeting, motion made by Councilor Harding, seconded by Councilor Fillmore, passed 7-0
2. A presentation from the Sign Committee regarding the development and adoption of a nighttime brightness standard for on premises electronic digital signs. (19-102)
   As Electronic Digital Signs become more widely used by businesses to advertise their services, there exists a potential for the light illuminating from these signs to cause a public nuisance, especially when those businesses are close to residential neighborhoods. The Sign Committee has been working with local sign companies and national standards that have been adopted by other jurisdictions to create a nighttime brightness standard to minimize the impacts of the light emitted from Electronic Digital Signs in areas in and around residential neighborhoods. We already have a brightness standard that is relative to ambient light. So at night, when ambient light is much less, these signs must have much lower brightness. I'm curious to hear why this approach is better than our current approach. Presentation Only.



Administration: Mayor's Update

3. A presentation regarding new Electric Rates for Shared Solar and Pilot Time of Use Rate. (21-109)
   Shared Solar is a community solar project built in Spanish Fork to provide residents the opportunity to purchase solar power and lock in the generation cost without the capital outlay required when purchasing solar for the rooftop. This also allows residents who are not able to purchase solar for their homes because of circumstances beyond their control such as HOA covenants, renting or roof issues to purchase a slice of renewable generation. Time of Use (TOU) rates allow customers to shift the time they use energy from the peak in the City from 3:00 pm to 8:00 pm. By shaving the peak, the City will pay less for the power and the savings will be given back to the customer. The customer will need to be diligent in not using energy during the peak time of the day in order to save money on their bill. In addition, we have added an electric vehicle charging rate for those who would like to save money when charging their vehicle from midnight to 8:00 am in the morning. I'm excited about the Shared Solar project. I hope anyone considering roof-top solar also looks into this option.
   
   I'm even more excited about the Time of Use rates. Not all electricity is created equal. The cost to the City to provide electricity depends on when it is used. With our current rate structure, residents aren't incentivized to avoid using electricity when it is most expensive for the City to provide it. Most aren't even aware of costly and cheap times. This pilot program will give residents the option to save money by helping the City save money. By aligning our financial incentives, it is a better deal for all. Presentation Only.
4. A presentation regarding compensation for Police Officers. (21-110)
   Over the last several months, law enforcement agencies across Utah have been significantly increasing their compensation programs for police officers in an effort to more effectively recruit and retain officers. Recruiting and retention of officers has become quite challenging due to fewer aspiring police officers entering the field of law enforcement, the very tight labor market and low unemployment rates, and declining morale among officers in general due to changing societal attitudes toward the law enforcement profession. As Provo has begun to experience recruiting and retention challenges, city staff undertook a special market analysis and discovered that the City is less competitive in police compensation than we were just a few months ago. HR staff and the interim police chief will be presenting the results of the market study and requesting a future agenda item for an appropriation to make changes to the City’s compensation structure for police officers to address the imbalance. I support the general policy that Provo needs to offer adequate, market-rate pay to recruit and retain quality employees. This is particularly true for first-responders who put their safety on the line to protect our community. Presentation Only.



Policy Items Referred from the Planning Commission

5. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to Define Sign Copy Area. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210318)
   Provo City Development Services is requesting an ordinance text amendment to add new definitions to Title 14. The proposed amendment is specific to Chapter 14.38.160, definitions pertaining to signs, and will provide a new definition for “sign copy area” and “sign face area” to this Title to be applied to signs within Provo City. Planning Commission recommended approval 6:0. I consider this "code clean-up" to clarify our code, not substantially changing the regulations. Presentation Only.
6. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to adopt updated Local Development Standards. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210341)
   This is an annual update. Provo City Planning has reviewed the proposed changes from Provo City Public Works and supports the updates and amendments proposed. Planning Commission recommended approval. The yearly updates help keep our standards current. As an engineer, I enjoy looking over the drawings and tables. Presentation Only.
7. An ordinance amending the Zone Map classification of approximately 3.8 acres of real property, generally located at 1400 W 890 South from Residential Agricultural (RA) to One Family Residential (R1.10) Zone. Sunset Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210344)
   Zach Steele is requesting approval of a zone map amendment from the RA zone to the R1.10 for 3.58 acres of land in the Sunset neighborhood. This land has historically been used for agricultural purposes by the Steeles, but they now desire to create building lots for members of the family. Initially, the plan was to create one or two lots at a time by using the RA zone. However, when the applicant began the subdivision process, it was found that they would have to abandon existing utility feeds built under 890 South. Since the long-term plan for the Steele family is to create additional lots for family members, it did not make financial sense to kill these feeds just to re-install them at a later date. Therefore, the proposal now is to amend the zone to R1.10 and create five building lots. Four of the lots would access 890 South, and the fifth off of 990 South. Planning Commission recommended approval 6:0. This project has been brought up in the past with the idea that it would remain RA. They are asking for an R1.10 zone, but dividing 3.5 acres into five parts means that the average lot size would be around 30,000 sq ft. What assurances would we have that no more than five homes would be built? I'd be okay with more than five lots, but we need to understand what we are approving. With five lots of this size, I'm not worried about housing type diversity, but that would become an issue for me if more homes are possible. Presentation Only.
8. An ordinance amending Provo City Code regarding Floodplain Development Standards. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210362)
   The applicant is requesting an ordinance text amendment to update the building elevation requirements within the floodplain. Requirements are currently 1 (one) foot above the base flood elevation (BFE). The proposal is to require a 3 foot above BFE requirement in the floodplain to add increased protection in a flood event. Additionally, the applicant is proposing changes to the Provo River setback in order to allow more building options in areas adjacent to the Provo River and outside of the floodplain. Planning Commission recommended approval 6-0. I appreciate the attempt to balance flood mitigation with development opportunities. I'm looking forward to understanding this proposal better. Presentation Only.
9. An ordinance enacting the Airport and Airport Industrial Zones and related Development Standards. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210299)
   The Community and Neighborhood Services Department has proposed to amend the Provo City Code to add the Airport Zones chapter as Chapter 14.17D and Airport Adjacent Design Standards as Section 14.34.296. This chapter includes two zones, the Airport (A) zone and Airport Industrial (AI) zone. The two airport zones correlate together, and staff saw a need to combine two zones into one zoning chapter of the Provo City Code. In relation to the Airport zones the Signs and Outdoor Advertising (14.38), Standards for Conditional Uses (14.34.250) and Supplemental Landscaping Requirements (15.20.080) are being amended. Staff works closely with the Airport and other professional organizations and municipalities in drafting the Airport Zones chapter. Planning Commission recommended approval 6:0. There were no documents provided, so I only have the background provided. I'm not clear how much of this is a reorganization and how much is new. Presentation Only.
10. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approximately 899.25 acres of real property, generally located at 3421 Mike Jense Parkway from Public Facilities (PF) and Agriculture (A1) To Airport (A). Provo Bay Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210300)
    The Community and Neighborhood Services Department, on behalf of the Airport Director, requests various parcels be rezoned to the proposed Airport (A) zone (14.17D). Staff has worked closely with the Airport Director in drafting the language of the proposed zone and with the City Ombudsman on a list of parcels to be rezoned. There is no proposed development requesting to utilize this zone; however, the existing airport property is included in the rezone request. Planning Commission recommended approval 6:0. This proposal would apply the proposed Airport zone to the airport entirely owned by Provo City. Presentation Only.



Business

11. A presentation from the Neighborhood Program Review Committee regarding the possible changes to the Neighborhood Program. (21-071)
    The Neighborhood Program Review Committee has some recommendations for the direction of the Neighborhood Program and would like to get approval from the full Council before getting into the finer details. I appreciate the work of this committee and look forward to better understanding their recommendations. However, I have mixed feelings about what I understand so far. Motion to accept the three recommendations from the Neighborhood Program Review Committee and to continue working on the Neighborhood Program made by Councilor Ellsworth seconded by Councilor Fillmore, motion passed (6-1) with Councilor Sewell voting no.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time. motion to close the meeting made by Councilor Handley, second by Councilor Ellsworth passed (7-0)



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Board of Canvassers

Agenda

1. A resolution of the Mayor and the Municipal Council sitting as the Board of Canvassers accepting the election returns and declaring and certifying the results of the vote for General Elections held on Tuesday, November 2, 2021. (21- 092)
   This is a presentation of the final vote tallies in the municipal general election. Congrats to Michelle Kaufusi, Katrice MacKay, George Handley, and Rachel Whipple on winning their races. And I want to express my heart-felt gratitude to Ken Dudley, Aaron Skabelund, and Coy Porter for their willingness to run. Motion to approve the resolution made by Councilor Hoban, second by Councilor Fillmore, motion passed (8-0)




Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

6:00 PM, Tuesday, November 16, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Public Comment

Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.

Dial (346) 248-7799. Enter Meeting ID 811 6507 8598 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 202517.

Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:

Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.

Please limit your comments to two minutes.

State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.



Action Agenda

1. A resolution adopting the 2022 Council Regular Meeting Schedule (21-108)
   Pursuant to Utah Code Section 52-4-202(2), at least once each year the Municipal Council is required to give public notice of the Council's regular meetings that are scheduled in advance over the course of a year. Many considerations go into creating this. The proposed calendar looks good to me, but then again, it won't affect me as much as it has the past six years! Passed; 7-0
2. A resolution consenting to the mayor’s appointment of the City Recorder for Provo City. (21-111)
   With the appointment of Amanda Ercanbrack as the Director of Customer Service, the Council’s advice and consent is requested on the Mayor’s appointment of a new City Recorder. Amanda Ercanbrack has been a joy to work with and leaves some large shoes to fill. Passed; 7-0
3. A resolution consenting to the appointment of individuals to the Planning Commission. (21-039)
   The Mayor has recommended Miles Miller and Peter Fife to be appointed to the Planning Commission. These names have been presented to the Council and the Council has been asked to approve the resolution granting their advice and consent. The applications for these two individuals are quite impressive. I'm grateful to all who are willing to serve our community on our boards and commissions. Passed; 6-1 with Council Ellsworth voting No
4. An ordinance Amending Provo City Code to Define Sign Copy Area. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210318)
   This was item 5 in the work meeting. See my preview of item 5 in the earlier meeting. Passed; 7-0
5. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to adopt updated Local Development Standards. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210341)
   This was item 6 in the work meeting. See my preview of item 6 in the earlier meeting. Passed; 7-0
6. An ordinance amending the Zone Map classification of approximately 3.8 acres of real property, generally located at 1400 W 890 South from Residential Agricultural (RA) to One Family Residential (R1.10) Zone. Sunset Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210344)
   This was item 7 in the work meeting. See my preview of item 7 in the earlier meeting. Implied Motion Passed 7-0, Motion to reconsider passed 7-0, motion to amend passed 7-0, new implied motion passed 7-0
7. An ordinance amending Provo City Code regarding Floodplain Development Standards. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210362)
   This was item 8 in the work meeting See my preview of item 8 in the earlier meeting. Passed; 7-0
8. An ordinance enacting the Airport and Airport Industrial Zones and related Development Standards. Citywide Application. (PLOTA20210299)
   This was item 9 in the work meeting. See my preview of item 9 in the earlier meeting. Passed; 7-0
9. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approximately 899.25 acres of real property, generally located at 3421 Mike Jense Parkway from Public Facilities (PF) and Agriculture (A1) To Airport (A). Provo Bay Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210300)
   This was item 10 in the work meeting. See my preview of item 10 in the earlier meeting. Passed; 7-0
10. An ordinance enacting On-Street Parking Management Regulations. Citywide Application. (21-028)
    The Parking Committee proposes a new parking paradigm called the On-Street Parking Management (OSPM) program that would be created with the proposed Provo City Code Chapter 9.90. The Parking Manager would have the authority to apply the solutions in Chapter 9.90 within a Council-approved OSPM area without returning to the Council for every change, though they would have to notify residents in affected areas. The Parking Manager could create parking zones where one of two parking management strategies could be applied: 1. Paid timed parking 2. Permit parking with paid timed parking. The item on the agenda would create a tool for on-street parking management. Any application of the tool would need to be decided on at a future time. This Thursday, there will be a town hall meeting to discuss the possible application of this tool in the Joaquin Neighborhood. Passed; 7-0
11. ***CONTINUED*** An Ordinance Text Amendment to Title 15, to add a new chapter establishing policies and procedures for the dedication of private streets and utilities. Citywide application. (PLOTA20210360)
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission.
12. ***CONTINUED*** ordinance amending the zone map classification of approximately .77 acres of real property, generally located at 46 W to 90 W 800 North, from Residential Conservation (RC) to Campus Mixed Use (CMU) Zone. North Park Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210112)
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission.
13. ***CONTINUED*** A request to amend Code Sections 14.08.020, 14.09.020, 14.10.020, & Chapter. 14.30 to allow ADUs as accessory uses to owner-occupied, single-family detached dwg. in the A1, RA, R1 Zones & refine the dev. std. for ADUs. Citywide (PLOTA20210345)
    This item was not ready to be heard.
14. ***CONTINUED*** Community and Neighborhood Services requests a complete revision of the Provo General Plan to guide growth and development for the next 10 to 20 years in Provo. Citywide application. (PLGPA20210364)
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission.
15. ***CONTINUED*** Community and Neighborhood Services requests the adoption of the Provo Conservation and Resiliency Plan to support the 2021 General Plan Update. Citywide application. (PLGPA20210367)
    This item was continued by the Planning Commission.




Adjournment

Council Meetings - 26 October 2021

Towing, Parking, Housing, Art. It's a short but broad agenda.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

1:00 pm, Tuesday, October 26, 2021

Business

1. A presentation regarding the review of Annual Fraud Risk Assessment. (21-106)
   Utah State Auditor's office requires this assessment be completed and shared with the Municipal Council in a public meeting. Provo City has completed this assessment and the score for this year is 391 out of a total possible 395! The best tier starts at 355. I so pleased with the way that our Finance Department has handled this Fraud Risk Assessment. The State came out with this a few years back and rather than treat it hostilly, the Department took it as a opportunity to review all their procedures and make improvements. Presentation only.
2. A discussion on percent for the arts programs. (21-098)
   The Council at the September 21, 2021 meeting heard a presentation on the concept of a Percent for Arts program, why public art matters, how they are funded, and some Utah examples. Direction was given to begin the outline of a Percent for Arts program for Provo City. Art helps make a place worth living in. Public buildings are major investments and it makes sense to direct a little of that money into incorporating art into the projects. A motion to create an ad hoc committee to explore and develop a recommended policy regarding a percent for arts program, and to defer selection of the committee chair and vice-chair until January, with a target date of April to report back to the Council was approved 7:0.
3. A presentation from the Kem C. Gardner Institute: "A Time to Build: Physical, Human, and Social Capital" (21-094)
   As part of the Gardner Policy Institute's presentation series for the Provo Council, this third discussion focuses on the benefits of building and maintaining social capital within neighborhoods and communities. Additional information on housing and economic conditions in Utah will be provided. I'm looking forward to this presentation. Utah leads the nation in this area. While there is always room for improvement, I think we should embrace what has lead us to this point and should take care that we don't undercut our success. Presentation only. This was a very informative presentation.
4. A presentation on proposed Chapter 9.90 On-Street Parking Management. (21-028)
   The Parking Committee proposes a new parking paradigm called the On-Street Parking Management (OSPM) program that would be created with the proposed Provo City Code Chapter 9.90 and applied to the Joaquin Neighborhood with Provo City Code Chapter 9.91. The Parking Manager would have the authority to apply the solutions in Chapter 9.90 within a Council-approved OSPM area without returning to the Council for every change, though they would have to notify residents in affected areas. The Parking Manager could create parking zones where one of two parking management strategies could be applied: 1. Paid timed parking 2. Permit parking with paid timed parking Chapter 9.90 is on Open City Hall for public feedback. It will return to the Council for deliberation once that is closed. Two weeks ago I made an impassioned pitch as to why we need to update the way we manage on-street parking in areas of excess demand. I guess CNS wants an opportunity to describe the nuts and bolts of the proposal. Presentation only. This item is still open for additional feedback on Open City Hall and will return to the Council at a future meeting. We'll be considering this item at our next meeting on November 16th.
5. An ordinance on towing fees (21-105)
   In 2013, the City adopted City Municipal Code 9.31.110 which included a limitation on the maximum fees and charges a towing company operator may charge for: (i) booting or otherwise immobilizing a vehicle, and (ii) towing a vehicle. The fee limits in question only apply to patrol type tows at residential properties. Provo does not impose a fee cap for any consent tows or for non-consent tows (1) at non-residential properties or (2) at residential properties where the property manager or designee calls for the tow. In an attempt to prevent predatory towing, in 2013, Mayor Curtis proposed, and the Council approved, rules requiring patrol tows of residential properties to be done under a contract that meets certain requirements. One of those requirements is a cap on the fees. A local towing operator is requesting a change in the rates to help address costs increases (vehicle, employment, insurance, equipment, etc.). The Council directed staff to bring for its consideration an ordinance setting the non-consent, non-police towing and booting at 80% of the state limit. In 2013, Provo passed a law to discourage the use of patrol towing in an effort to reduce predatory towing. This reduced but did not eliminate the problem of predatory towing in the city. By pinning the cap to the state limit, we would be ensuring that patrol towing is always financially viable. By keeping the cap where it is, the disincentive to continue patrol towing increases with inflation and at some point it won't make sense to continue patrol towing. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the Council Meeting on October 26, 2021. See my report from the evening meeting.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time. A closed meeting was held.



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, October 26, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.
1. A presentation to recognize Brooklyn Martinsen on her award-winning essay for ULCT's "Why I Like My Community" Essay Contest
   Presentation only.
2. A presentation to recognize Provo Parks and Recreation for receiving the Gold Medal Award from the American Academy for Parks and Recreation Administration
   Presentation only.




Public Comment

Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.

Dial 346 248 7799. Enter Meeting ID 846 9856 7119 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 734278.

Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:

Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.

Please limit your comments to two minutes.

State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.



Action Agenda

3. A resolution appointing individuals to various boards and commissions (21-039)
   The Mayor has recommended a number of individuals to be reappointed to various city boards and commissions. These names have been presented to the Council and the Council has been asked to approve the resolution granting their advice and consent. Thomas Halladay (Board of Adjustment), Mitsuru Saito (TMAC), James Hamula (TMAC), Laureen Urquiaga (TMAC), Robert Knudsen (Planning Commission) I've said it a number of times already, though this may be my last time in this capacity, but I am so grateful for the many people throughout Provo who volunteer thier time and effort to serve our community. Our city is as great as it is because of people like the ones serving on our city boards and commissions. Approved 7:0. Provo is a better place because of all the service given by volunteers.
4. An ordinance on towing fees (21-105)
   This was item 5 in the work meeting. See my preview for item 5 in the earlier meeting. Approved 4:3, with Shannon Ellsworth, George Handley, and David Harding opposed. I know a careful balance was worked out in 2013. I don't feel comfortable making adjustments unless I understand the issue better. I would want to hear from the various stakeholders first.




Adjournment

Council Meetings - 12 October 2021

I only have five more Council meetings days left. And yet there is still so much to be done! The big topics for tomorrow are ADUs and on-street parking management.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

1:30 pm, Tuesday, October 12, 2021

Business

1. A presentation regarding GRAMA in relation to public and confidential records retained by the city and how the process on how they are made public. (21-006)
   This is part of our ongoing training regarding GRAMA and how we treat documents created by staff. While most documents are subject to GRAMA requests, some of the information contained within those documents may not be public information and will need to be redacted prior to being released to the public. In addition, there is a process on how these documents can be released to the general public. This is the State dictated process for balancing privacy and the public's right to know. Presentation only. GRAMA is an important tool for transparency and properly balancing privacy and the public's right to know.
2. A presentation regarding an update on the Bridal Veil Falls Feasibility Study (21-031)
   The Utah State Parks Department is completing a feasibility study of Bridal Veil Falls (to be designated as State Monument or State Park) and will report back to the legislature this fall with a report evaluating whether it should be a state park or a state monument. CRSA, an architecture firm, is working on the stakeholder study. They are about 70% done with background research and ready to hold a Workshop with the leadership team with initial findings. They are also working on the Public Engagement Plan, which includes an online survey and public meeting(s). An update for the City Council, which earlier this year adopted a resolution in favor of protecting Bridal Veil Falls, regarding progress has been requested. Bridal Veil Falls is such a gem and is beloved by the people of Provo. Presentation only. It seems like the momentum was for the State to take over management of this area, but I'm not sure there is a clear-cut, best option. The public may be best served with more local management and funding.
3. A presentation from the Housing Committee regarding an ordinance change for ADU’s to comply with Utah State Law. (21-102)
   In the 2021 Utah General Legislative Session, lawmakers passed a bill regarding accessory dwelling units and conditions of their permitted use in cities throughout the state. All cities in Utah must adjust their city ordinances accordingly to align with the new state law. A new State law requires that we make adjustments to our zoning regulations. The question is should we do the minimum to comply or something more. I think that ADUs are a key piece of the housing puzzle. They increase the flexibility of the housing stock, encourage homeownership, make housing more affordable to both renters and homeowners, and increase housing options with minimal impact on surrounding properties. A motion that the Council submit the least restrictive version of the Housing Committee’s recommendations to the Planning Commission for review and to bring back to the Council to continue the discussion was approved 5:2, with David Sewell and Bill Fillmore opposed. By getting a recommendation from the Planning Commission on the least restrictive vesion, we will be able to implement anything between that and the current status. This gives us the most flexibility. I do believe that we should allow ADUs citywide, unless there is a compelling reason why they shouldn't be allowed in a particular area (like the sewer capacity in the area is almost reached and adding more units could cause problems). But I also strongly believe that we need to preserve the requirement that there be an internal connection in ADUs and that we leave the occupancy limit for ADUs at 2 (plus minors).
4. A discussion on towing fees (21-105)
   In 2013, the City adopted City Municipal Code 9.31.110 which included a limitation on the maximum fees and charges a towing company operator may charge for: (i) booting or otherwise immobilizing a vehicle, and (ii) towing a vehicle. The fee limits in question only apply to patrol type tows at residential properties. Provo does not impose a fee cap for any consent tows or for non-consent tows (1) at non-residential properties or (2) at residential properties where the property manager or designee calls for the tow. But in an attempt to prevent predatory towing, in 2013, Mayor Curtis proposed, and the Council approved, rules requiring patrol tows of residential properties to be done under a contract that meets certain requirements. One of those requirements is a cap on the fees. A local towing operator is requesting a change in the rates to help address costs increases (vehicle, employment, insurance, equipment, etc.). Options include: 1) reject the request for a change; 2) remove the cap; or 3) change the cap to: (i) a new fixed dollar amount, or (ii) a percentage of the state maximums. I was surprised to see this back. I didn't see any interest from the Council in making changes. A motion to direct staff to prepare for the Council’s consideration an amendment that would set Provo’s rate on patrol towing at 80% of the state’s rate was approved 5:2, with George Handley and David Harding opposed. This struck me as an odd conversation. We are interested in exploring reports that other Utah cities have prohibited patrol-type tows, but we are also considering raising the amount that businesses can charge for such tows. I'm a fan of the status quo, keep the cap where it is and inflation over time will increase the incentive to tow companies to move to a different model.
5. Presentation from Parking Committee. (21-028)
   The Parking Committee proposes a new parking paradigm called the On-Street Parking Management (OSPM) program that would be created with the proposed Provo City Code Chapter 9.90 and applied to the Joaquin Neighborhood with Provo City Code Chapter 9.91. The Parking Manager would have the authority to apply the solutions in Chapter 9.90 within a Council-approved OSPM area without returning to the Council for every change, though they would have to notify residents in affected areas. The Parking Manager could create parking zones where one of two parking management strategies could be applied:
   1. Paid timed parking
   2. Permit parking with paid timed parking
   After years of study, the Committee is ready to recommend action by the Council. The first chapter creates a new way of managing on-street parking. It is designed to be flexible, adaptable, demand-based, and as convenient as possible. The second chapter would create one of these areas to include the Joaquin Neighborhood. A motion to direct staff to present the proposed Chapter 9.90 on Open City Hall and gather public feedback with the intent to bring the item back for consideration by the Council was approved 7:0. A motion to direct staff to present the proposed Chapter 9.91 on Open City Hall and gather public feedback with the intent to bring the item back for consideration by the Council failed 1:6, with David Sewell, David Shipley, George Handley, Shannon Ellsworth, Bill Fillmore, and Travis Hoban opposed. Chapter 9.90 would create the program framework and 9.91 would create an area covering Joaquin where the program could be implemented when it is ready. The Council wants to get feedback on and decide on the broader framework before considering whether or not to create an area covering Joaquin Neighborhood.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time.



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, October 12, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Public Comment

Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.

Dial 346 248 7799. Enter Meeting ID 870 9093 6378 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 201335.

Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:

Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.

Please limit your comments to two minutes.

State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.



Action Agenda

1. A resolution appropriating $8,772.09 in the Economic Development Division in the General Fund for a sales tax increment post performance payment to Day’s Market. The funding source of the appropriation is General Fund Sales Tax Revenues. (21-038)
   In early 2018, the Economic Development Office worked with Day's Market to craft a post performance sales tax increment agreement with Day's Market, located on North Canyon Road. The owners of Day's Market were planning an extensive remodel of their aging store and requested that Provo City assist in reducing the construction costs by entering into a sales tax reimbursement agreement on a post performance basis. Days Market would spend approximately $1.3 million dollars on the interior remodel of the store. Similar to other sales tax agreements, Day's would be able to earn back some of their costs if they produced sales above an established baseline -- which in this case was set at $39,800. Based on sales tax information and a calculation, they qualify for sales tax reimbursement of $8,772.09 for fiscal year 2021. This is a ten-year agreement. We heard this item in our Work Meeting three weeks ago. We are contracted to pay this amount, so there isn't much of a decision to make. It is nice to get an update, though. Approved 7:0. It's hard to imagine that this kind of incentive really tipped the scales to convince this business to move forward with a $1.3M renovation.
   
   To be clear, I'm a huge fan of Day's Market. I wish them all the success in the world, and wish they would open five more locations around Provo. My concern is the way that Provo uses TIF (tax-increment financing). TIF can be a powerful tool, but we apply it in situation that I don't think are impactful.




Adjournment

Council Meetings - 21 September 2021

I think the housing crisis is the main theme for tomorrow's meetings (yet again). But this most public feedback has been regarding the proposed water feature for the new City Hall.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

1:00 pm, Tuesday, September 21, 2021

Business

1. Fiscal Year 2021 Carryover Report to Council. (21-100)
   At the close of each fiscal year, the Finance Division compiles a carryover list detailing budget amounts from the old year that should be "carried over" into the new year. The carryover list includes the following: 1) Budget to cover encumbered invoices that were not paid by June 30th. 2) Old year balances for CIP funds, grants, vehicle replacement accounts, the Parks Capital Equipment account, and the Facilities Capital Equipment account. 3) Surplus budget for specific purchases or projects. The final carryover list is approved by the Mayor and then presented to the Council in a work meeting each fall. I feel that this report keeps getting better each year and appreciate the collaboration with the Administration. I'm still crunching a few numbers, but so far, my only question is if the "ongoing" projects were the same projects for which the money was originally allocated. Presentation only.
2. A resolution appropriating $8,772.09 from General Fund sales tax revenues to the Economic Development Division in the General Fund for a contractual Sales Tax Increment post performance payment to Day's Market. (21-038)
   In early 2018, the Economic Development Office worked with Day's Market to craft a post performance sales tax increment agreement with Day's Market, located on North Canyon Road. The owners of Day's Market were planning an extensive remodel of their aging store and requested that Provo City assist in reducing the construction costs by entering into a sales tax reimbursement agreement on a post performance basis. Days Market would spend approximately $1.3 million dollars on the interior remodel of the store. Similar to other sales tax agreements, Day's would be able to earn back some of their costs if they produced sales above an established baseline -- which in this case was set at $39,800. Based on sales tax information and a calculation, they qualify for sales tax reimbursement of $8,772.09 for fiscal year 2021. This is a ten-year agreement. Like the project that we reviewed last week and will approve in the evening meeting, this is necessary to fulfill a contract that we already agreed to. I don't see a real choice to be made here, but I think there is value in seeing how these agreements we made previously are playing out. So far, the sales tax receipts have average 20% more after the project than before. The portion of the sales tax increase that goes directly to the City is roughly $10k per year. All of it is being reimbursed back to the business. The business will get all of the increase in sales tax reimbursed back to it, unless the amount jumps to around 100k per year for the remainder of the ten years. If the increased sales tax goes over $700k in the ten years, then the City gets to keep 50% of the amount of $700k. It appears extremely unlikely that we will reach that $700k mark. It looks like the City will get $398,000 over ten years based on the City's portion of the sales tax received in 2018 (before the project). Any increase will go to the business. After two years, it looks like the total reimbursement will be around $100,000 over ten years. Will this turn out to be a good deal and a wise decision for the City? To say for sure, you would need to know what would have happened if we hadn't entered into this agreement. If the sales tax would have increased anyway, even just with inflation, then we have lost sales tax revenue overall. If the business would have closed down or moved elsewhere, then this $100,000 was a great investment. Presentation only. This item will be scheduled for the Council Meeting on October 12, 2021. We are contracted to pay this amount.
3. A discussion on towing fees (21-105)
   In 2013, the City adopted City Municipal Code 9.31.110 which included a limitation on the maximum fees and charges a towing company operator may charge for: (i) booting or otherwise immobilizing a vehicle, and (ii) towing a vehicle. The fee limits in question only apply to patrol type tows at residential properties. Provo does not impose a fee cap for any consent tows or for non-consent tows (1) at non-residential properties or (2) at residential properties where the property manager or designee calls for the tow. In 2013, in an attempt to prevent predatory towing, Mayor Curtis proposed, and the Council approved, rules requiring patrol tows of residential properties to be done under a contract that meets certain requirements. One of those requirements is a cap on the fees. A local towing operator is requesting a change in the rates to help address cost increases (vehicle, employment, insurance, equipment, etc.). Options include: 1) reject the request for a change; 2) remove the cap; or 3) change the cap to: (i) a new fixed dollar amount, or (ii) a percentage of the state maximums. I applaud the Administration and Council's efforts in 2013 to address "Predatory Towing" that many in the City felt was a huge issue. Since 2013, the problem has gotten marginally better, but remains a major concern and hassle for many in Provo. I think we should continue to encourage other forms of private parking enforcement (like "call-in towing") and don't feel a strong need to allow for higher fees for "patrol towing". Presentation only. It didn't seem to me that the Council was interested in making any adjustments.
4. A presentation on updates regarding City Council communications. (21-103)
   The Council's Community Relations Coordinator manages communications for the Council office and coordinates the City's Neighborhood Program. This update will show the Council and the public what efforts are being made to get information out to the public and to invite engagement. Communication is key! Presentation only.
5. A presentation from the Housing Committee regarding an ordinance change for ADUs to comply with Utah State Law. (21-102)
   In the 2021 Utah General Legislative Session, lawmakers passed a bill regarding accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and conditions of their permitted use in cities throughout the state. All cities in Utah must adjust their city ordinances accordingly to align with the new state law. I support allowing ADUs on single-family-detached properties throughout the entire City, when the right conditions exist on the property, when built to certain standards, and when our enforcement capabilities can reasonably ensure compliance. The state has passed a new law that preempts local control and makes it so that internal ADUs are allowed in any single-family-detached home. The state allows most cities to exempt up to 25% of their residential area from this new law, and allows a few college towns like Provo to exempt up to 67%. Unfortunately, it appears the state law doesn't allow as many conditions to be placed on ADUs which worries me that we may get some ADUs that have a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Presentation only. This issue has been referred to the Council’s Housing Committee for further review. We need to deal with this soon.
6. A presentation from the Kem C. Gardner Institute: "Affordable Housing and Housing Affordability" (21-094)
   The State of Utah's population reportedly grew 18% in the last decade. Along with that growth has been a growing housing crisis, both in affordable housing and housing affordability. Factors contributing to this housing crisis include local and state housing policies, a global pandemic, and disrupted supply chains among several other things. Market conditions assuredly affect the state's housing stock greatly, but so do local, state, and federal housing policies. Presentation only. Good conversation.
7. A presentation on the housing development process with varied and mixed housing types. (21-080)
   As part of a series of presentations and discussions on housing development, this presentation's goal is to demonstrate a basic proforma regarding mixing housing types, which all have different values, with no increase in density permitted and how these varied housing types also contribute to a community's larger economy. We have been talking about this issue for the entire 6 years I've been on the Council. Presentation only. Great presentation. I wish all developers in Provo were as creative and sensitive to impacts as these presenters are. They suggested that projects over 5 acres should be able to have multiple housing types.
8. A presentation on Provo's Sustainability Committee's request for Council support of a program providing rainwater harvesting barrels to citizens for a discounted rate. (21-101)
   Utah Rivers Council (URC) runs discounted sales of 50-gallon rainwater barrels. They are black recycled plastic, with a bottom spigot, at a $149 retail cost or $83 for the city. Most cities order and subsidize a specific number of barrels by $33 each in order to sell to residents for $50 each. Some cities do not subsidize and their residents pay $83 a barrel. With either option, URC sets up a purchase portal, does 2-3 rounds of press releases, and the city advertises via its social media for 6-8 weeks. A truck delivers all barrels to a distribution event, purchasers get a time slot, and volunteers load them into purchasers’ vehicles. The best time for such a campaign would be March/April 2022. The Sustainability Committee urges the city to participate and suggests using $5,000 to provide a $33 per barrel subsidy for 150 barrels. If more people want them, they can pay $83 and get one without the subsidy. I'm intrigued by this idea. Apparently, the price per container is going up by $8 this year. Presentation only. The Council referred this issue to the City Administration. Years like this one illustrate why we need to be careful with how we use water.
9. A presentation on facility and construction updates specifically regarding traffic challenges in the Timpview neighborhood from Provo City School District. (21-104)
   As Provo City School District continues their renovations on Timpview High School, various traffic challenges in the surrounding neighborhood have risen. Provo School district is requesting help from the city to help alleviate the stress on the traffic flow in the area. I'm not sure why this needs to be done in a Council meeting. It seems that this is an Administrative matter. I imagine the City would be happy to coordinate to help alleviate traffic. Presentation only. The Council referred this issue to the City Administration. I appreciate the cooperation between the City and the District.



Closed Meeting

Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed in Utah State Code (§ 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq.). If a closed meeting is needed, it will be announced at that time. None requested.



Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, September 21, 2021

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.
1. A presentation of the Provo City Justice Court Annual Report. (21-099)
   No support documents were provided. Presentation only. Judge Romney and his team run an exemplary Justice Court.




Public Comment

Instructions for making public comments at this electronic meeting can be found on the officially published agenda: agendas.provo.org.

Dial 346 248 7799. Enter Meeting ID 897 9020 4420 and press #. When asked for a participant ID, press #. To join via computer, use the same meeting ID and enter passcode: 584295.

Fifteen minutes have been set aside for any person to express ideas, concerns, comments, or issues that are not on the agenda:

Please state your name and city of residence into the microphone.

Please limit your comments to two minutes.

State Law prohibits the Council from acting on items that do not appear on the agenda.



Action Agenda

2. Appointment of Amanda Ercanbrack as Director of Customer Service. (21-039)
   Requesting advice and consent to the appointment of Amanda Ercanbrack as director of the City's Customer Service Department. She will replace Karen Larsen, who recently announced her retirement. Ms. Ercanbrack began her career with the City in customer service and has also served as the Deputy City Recorder and the City Recorder. I've been thoroughly impressed by the professionalism, helpfulness, and abilities of Ms. Ercanbrack over the years I've interacted with her. I can't think of a better person for the job and expect great things from her. Approved 7:0. I'm continually amazed at the caliber of individuals who choose to work at Provo City. It is a testiment to the good people who live and our community and the community is blessed by their service.
3. A resolution appropriating $400,000 for City Hall Public Art. (21-102)
   The City Council is working on the creation of a Percent for Public Arts program, whereby a determined percentage of a total project budget is set aside for public art. Since the program is not yet adopted, the Council is considering whether to ensure sufficient funding for public art in the new City Hall project, which is expected to be completed early in 2022. As building costs have risen the project leadership cut a significant arts piece, an artistic water feature, from the project to retain sufficient contingency funds for the remaining work. Appropriating funds now for public art would meet the aims of a Percent for Arts program and would enable the proposed feature to be installed now without having to tear up the plaza later. Should the contigency fund be sufficient in the final accounting to cover this feature, it is intended that any unused funds appropriated pursuant to this action would be returned to the General Fund. The architect and/or the project manager will participate in the presentation and discussion. Here are some answers that the Administration provided to Council questions. I support incorporating public art as we build public buildings. I'm a bit torn on this particular proposal. It's not my favorite peice, but trust other's expertise in art over my own. It will be a part of our City Hall so I feel that the Council may have a greater interest in it than other public buildings. My biggest concern is that is doesn't degrade the use of this plaza as a public gathering space. I have heard concerns from the public about several aspects from its consumption of water (10 gallons per week, which is equivalent to the water used for one person brushing their teeth) to the cost ($600k, which seems high to me, but is an investment in a peice of art for the life of the building). Approved 5:2, with Councilors Shannon Ellsworth and Travis Hoban opposed. I support public art and think this budget is appropriate for a project of this scope. I'm not convinced that this is the best project that could have been proposed, but I trust the process that has lead us to this point and that is why I voted the way I did.
4. A resolution appropriating $39,982 in the General Fund and $83,296 in the Energy Fund to correct elements of the fiscal year 2021–2022 budget. (21-015)
   Provo has a large budget, and after reviewing it and working with various departments, we've identified a few corrections that will require an appropriation. This was item 1 in the 7 Sep Work Meeting. Approved 7:0. Mistakes are understandable in documents as large and complicated as our budget. I applaud the way that our Finance team handled this so transparently.
5. A resolution appropriating $12,855 in the Economic Development Division in the General Fund for a sales tax increment post performance payment to Parkway Village. (21-097)
   On November 15, 2016, the Municipal Council approved a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between Provo City and Parkway Village LLC. The Council was presented with a request to reimburse the ownership group for certain extraordinary costs associated with the removal of an existing occupied retail pad, participation of the installation of a new traffic signal and the construction of a replacement retail pad. The reimbursement would be funded through retail sales tax increment above the established predetermined sales tax revenue actually generated by the retail center as of a certain date. The baseline revenue was established at $136,476, which represents 1/2 of 1% of total sales generated at the center or that portion of sales tax revenue received by Provo City from the retail center, as provided by the State of Utah. Provo City will continue to receive the baseline amount of $136,476. The developer/owner will receive an annual reimbursement against their actual out-of-pocket expenses, any additional sales tax revenue above the baseline amount of $136,476. The term of the agreement runs for 10 years. In that time the developer/owner will be able to be reimbursed for up to 1/2 the out-of-pocket costs for the expenses. The target reimbursement amount is $1,053,395.86, which is half of the total out-of-pocket expenses ($2,106791.72). As this is the second payment in the 10-year agreement ($12,855) which represents that amount over the baseline of $136,476, it is not likely that full reimbursement amount will be achieved This was item 2 in the 7 Sep Work Meeting (and similar to item 2 in the earlier meeting). Approved 7:0. We are under contract for this payment, but the Council still needs to approve it.
6. ***CONTINUED*** Consideration of an amendment to Title 15 regarding the process and requirements for appeals related to impact fees. Citywide. (PLOTA20210273)
   This item was not ready to be heard.




Adjournment