Council Meetings - 2 March 2021

The evening Council Meeting is lighter than most, but the afternoon Work Meeting is the typical load. The discussion on the money freed up by the CARES money may be the most interesting one to watch, but I'm excited for the discussion on parking management policy.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:00 pm, Tuesday, March 2, 2021

Business

1. A presentation regarding Community & Neighborhood Services fiscal year 2021-2022 budget. (21-015)
   In preparation for the drafting and approval of the FY 2021-2022 budget, each department has been asked to present to the Council. The information presented will inform future budget discussions. The next three departments will be presenting to the Council regarding their work and their requests for the upcoming budget year. Presentation only. Coming out of the hiring freeze, there are needs to fill positions in Zoning Compliance.
2. A presentation regarding the Parks and Recreation Department's fiscal year 2021-2022 budget. (21-015)
   In preparation for the drafting and approval of the FY 2021-2022 budget, each department has been asked to present to the Council. The information presented will inform future budget discussions. Presentation only. The Parks and Rec department was able to thrive even during the pandemic. The biggest fiscal uncertainty for the coming year is how would a hike in the minimum wage affect this department that has over 700 part-time and seasonal employees? Read this Daily Herald article for more details.
3. A presentation regarding Administrative Services for Finance, Justice Court, and Facilities for fiscal year 2021-2022 budget. (21-015)
   In preparation for the drafting and approval of the FY 2021-2022 budget, each department has been asked to present to the Council. The information presented will inform future budget discussions. Presentation only. These are mostly behind-the-scene operations that are critical in facilitating the delivery of other services to our residents. Their competent execution generally keeps the spotlight focused elsewhere, though changes to operational procedure disrupted the work of the Justice Court.
4. A presentation regarding Fiscal Year 2022 General Fund Revenue Projections. (21-015)
   During the months of January and February, the Finance Division does an analysis of current revenue trends and also works with staff from various departments to calculate fiscal year end projections for the current year General Fund revenues. This is done as part of the budget process and helps guide the development of the next year's budgeted revenue numbers. This effort helps define the parameters that we will be working with during the budget process. Presentation only. Continued improvements in the collection and distribution of online sales taxes allowed Provo to weather the pandemic without too much fiscal disruption.



Administration: Mayor's Update

5. A presentation regarding the Legacy CIP funds and the future allocation of those funds. (21-037)
   In August 2020, the City received CARES Act CRF funds from Utah County to be used in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Those funds were used primarily to cover expenditures from the Public Safety COVID-19 response, which freed up General Fund balance that could then be used for other purposes. The Administration proposes to use the funds for various capital projects that would benefit the residents of Provo for years to come. At the February 16, 2021, meeting while allocating some of the funds there was a discussion on how the Administration made the decision to fund certain projects and not others. As part of that meeting the Council asked for the Administration to return to a future Work Meeting to discuss the process, in addition, discuss how the rest of the funds will be allocated. Regular readers will recognize this item from two weeks ago when the Council appropriated $4M of the $6M that the Administration proposed for the $8M freed up by CARES money. I imagine that we'll be discussing the other $2M that the Administration proposed and the remaining $2M. Presentation only. This item will be brought to a future Council Meeting. I'm thrilled to see a level-of-service map for neighborhood parks in Provo. It highlights some gaps in service in northeast Provo. I still need to be convinced that the $900K for the west Provo grocer will be impactful. The largest outstanding issue is what to do with the remaining almost $2M in one-time money.
6. A presentation regarding a budget appropriation regarding the Sales Tax Increment reimbursement post performance payment to Days Market. (21-038)
   In early 2018 the Economic Development Office worked with Days Market to craft a post performance sales tax increment agreement to partially reimburse the Days Market, located on North Canyon Road. The owners of Days 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, Days would be able to earn back some of their costs, if they produced sales above an established base line - which is $39,800. Based on sales tax information and a calculation, they qualify for sales tax reimbursement of $11, 979.76 for fiscal year 2020. This is a ten year agreement. The appropriation will be heard at the March 16 Council meeting. This is similar to the sales tax incentive reports we received two weeks ago for the ROSS property. Presentation only. This item will be brought to a future Council Meeting. Again, this is part of an agreement that we already entered into.
7. A presentation regarding the Small Cell Rate/Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. (21-034)
   Discuss a new rate for Small Cell Installations and propose a rate for the electric vehicle charging stations. Small Cell Installations are currently negotiated under contract. It's likely an administrative decision to charge for the electric vehicle charging stations but would like to discuss with the Council. They have been free for four years and it is time to start charging the average residential rate of $0.11/kwh. These seem like reasonable proposals. My bigger concern is the reliability of the electric vehicle charging stations. Presentation only. This item will be brought to a future Council Meeting. Charging stations can be convenient for Provo residents needing an occasional fast charge, but the greatest benefit is to people visiting Provo who need to recharge while they are here. Generally, they are happy to pay a reasonable rate for the electricity they receive, and it makes sense for the City to charge them.



Business

8. A presentation regarding Provo City’s Master Parking Plan. (21-035)
   In 2017 the Provo Municipal Council adopted a Strategic Parking Management Plan the mission statement of that plan was “The Provo parking program will strive to develop a superior, customer-oriented parking system, responding to the current and future needs of parkers, including residents, visitors, employees, employers, and property owners through active planning, management, coordination, and communications. The Provo parking program shall be considered an integral component of the community’s economic development strategies and programs.” As part of the plan it has objectives and guiding principles. It has been three years since the plan was adopted and the Council may wish to review the plan to see if the objectives are being met. This is a continuation of the discussion that started four weeks ago. The Administration is interested to see if the Council still supports the implementation of the Strategic Parking Management Plan. I will be leading the discussion to verify the support for the Plan and subsequent policies enacted by the Council. If there is still support, I will try to determine if there is support for jump-starting the implementation of these plans and policies. A motion reaffirming the Council’s support of the current parking policies and visioning documents as discussed (2015 Strategic Parking Management Plan, 2017 Parking Vision and Guidelines/Principles, and 2019 Downtown Parking Policy & Downtown Parking Vision) and to signal support to the Administration that they move forward with implementation of these policies immediately was approved 7:0. I am hopeful that we have everyone on the same page now and can make some solid progress on implementing the Strategic Parking Management Plan.



Policy Items Referred from the Planning Commission

9. An ordinance amending the zone map classification of approximately .30 acres of real property, generally located at 619 N. 500 West, from Residential Conservation (RR) to Professional Office (PO) Zone. North Park Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210022)
   This property, although designated as Commercial in the General Plan, has been zoned RC since 2002. The RC zone was established to “encourage conservation of existing housing by limiting the use of a given lot or parcel to the legal use existing on April 2, 2002.” The property was built as a commercial office space in 1980 and has operated as such throughout its life. The owners inquired of the City what would be needed to remodel the building and provide a new covered entry on the south side of the structure. Development Services staff informed the owners that the current RC zone is very limiting to the use of the land and that a zone change would be beneficial to them and to the City. The surrounding uses include a duplex to the north, an apartment building to the west, and a medical center to the south; all within the RC zone. Across the street to the east is North Park in the Public Facilities (PF) zone. Planning Commission recommended approval. This appears to be a straightforward request. This property should never have been zoned RC. Only now has it become a problem as the owner wants to make a minor improvement to the existing structure. There is no reason I can think of not to support this request.
   
   Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the Council Meeting on March 2, 2021. See my report on the second item of the evening agenda.



Business

10. A presentation regarding Robert’s Rules of Order. (21-036)
    As part of the ongoing training for the Council, there will be a presentation on Robert’s Rules of Order. Robert's Rules provides rules and procedures that allow a deliberative assembly to make its decisions efficiently, but with all due regard for the rights of the members of the Council. I feel like the Council has a good balance between formality and flexibility that allows our meetings to flow well. Presentation only. These Rules of Order help the Council to operate smoothly, particularly when emotions are running high. Fortunately, we usually keep our emotions in check and can be loosely guided by these formal rules.



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, March 2, 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.



Action Agenda

1. A resolution regarding the Sales Tax Increment post performance payment with Eastbay Shopping Center LLC (formally Woodside Capital Partners). (21-033)
   In June 2018, Provo City entered into a Sales Tax Increment agreement with Woodside Capital Partners to offset and incentivize the remodel, construction and opening of a new Ross retail store in the East Bay Shopping Center. The store was intended to serve as a magnet to attract other retailers and fill an otherwise low occupancy retail center. As discussed last time, we held the sales tax increment (created by investment into the property) as an incentive. Now that the investment has occurred and the sale tax went up $38k, it is time to appropriate that amount to East Bay Shopping Center, as agreed. Approved 7:0. This is an obligation that we committed to when we entered into the agreement. The amount owed is based on the sales tax increase that they achieve, so the payment amounts aren't known until each year is complete, and then we have to appropriate that amount.
2. An ordinance amending the zone map classification of approximately .30 acres of real property, generally located at 619 N. 500 West, from Residential Conservation (RR) to Professional Office (PO) Zone. North Park Neighborhood. (PLRZ20210022)
   This was item 9 in the Work Meeting. See my preview for item 9 in the afternoon meeting. Approved 7:0. This property never should have been zoned RC, so not only am I happy to rezone it to a proper zone, I joined with the Planning Commission in asking Planning Staff to bring forward a proposal to rezone all similar properties along this stretch of State Street.
3. An ordinance amending the Zone Map classification of approximately 8.5 acres, generally located at 1724 South State Street, from CM, RA, R1.6, R1.10, and A1.5 to the MDR Zone. Spring Creek Neighborhood. (PLRZ20190356)
   This had a first hearing at the February 16 Council meeting. The developer has proffered an agreement that appears to address concerns regarding traffic congestion and flow at the start and end of the school day. Approved 5:2, with George Handley and Shannon Ellsworth opposed. I feel that there were two key questions: (1) Is this the right development at this location and (2) should the Council hold off on a rezone if there are separate legal or technical issues that could prevent the proposed development from occurring. I voted for the rezone because I believe that (1) this is the right development for this location and (2) it is appropriate to rezone even if there are outstanding issues as long as the developer proffers a development agreement. After all, if the legal issues or the technical issues can't be worked out then nothing changes anyway. This decision allows them to move forward only if all of those outstanding issues get resolved. It reduces the uncertainty for the developer and allows them to address the outstanding issues with greater confidence.
   
   

   Adjournment