SOUTH JORDAN CITY
“COMBINED” MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AND SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT FOR GATE AT ENOS LN.

April 16, 2013

Present:	Mayor Scott Osborne, Council Member Steve Barnes, Council Member Brian Butters, Council Member Chuck Newton, Council Member Mark Seethaler, Council Member Larry Short, CM John Geilmann, City Attorney Rob Wall, ACM Gary Whatcott, Police Chief Lindsay Shepherd, IS Director Jon Day, City Council Secretary MaryAnn Dean 

Others:	Jessica and Charles Mason-Hill, Kevin Condra, Sharlene Nauta, Philip Soelberg, Paul Hammer, SherRon Smith, Bruce Newbold, Brent Kemp, Chris Rogers, Lorene Thompson, LaMar A. Mabey, Luane Jensen, Scott and Leslie Richards, Lori Vance, Steve Young

6:00 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING

I.	GENERAL BUSINESS

A.	Welcome and Roll Call

Mayor Osborne welcomed everyone present. All members of the City Council were present. 

B.	Opening Ceremony 

1.	Invocation

Council Member Butters offered the invocation. 

2.	Pledge of Allegiance

Joel Howard, member of the youth council, led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. 

C.	Motion to Approve Amended Agenda Items, If Any 

None. 

Mayor Osborne indicated that they would be moving item IX. on the agenda to immediately following citizen comment. 

D.	Minute Approval 

1.	April 2, 2013 Work Session Meeting

Council Member Seethaler made a motion to approve the April 2, 2013 Work Session minutes, as printed. Council Member Barnes seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. 

2.	April 2, 2013 Regular Meeting 

Several amendments to the minutes were noted. 

The City Council expressed concern about not being able to access in their drop box, and review the attachments to the April 2, 2013 Regular City Council meeting minutes. 

Council Member Butters made a motion to approve the April 2, 2013 Regular Meeting minutes, as amended. 

Council Member Barnes made a substitute motion to incorporate the changes, as noted, but to withhold the approval of the minutes until the next City Council meeting to give them time to review the attachments. Council Member Newton seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. 

Mayor Osborne asked that the April 2, 2013 Regular Meeting minutes be brought forward for final approval at the next City Council meeting. 

E.	Department Spotlight

Mayor Osborne recognized some visitors from Mali, West Africa, as part of an exchange program. They have spent a day leaning about municipal government practices. The Mayor of Messini (southern city in Mali), and Mayor of Kenniday (southwest part of Mali) were introduced. Their translators were also recognized. Through the translator, they indicated that they have enjoyed their visit and the hospitality shown toward them. They hope to implement some things they have learned. It was noted that one of the Mayors is a young Mayor, and is a student at a University. They thanked the Mayor and City Council for inviting them to South Jordan and showing them how things work. They were thankful to be invited. The visiting Mayors and their translators remained for a significant portion of the meeting.

Jim Bird, State Representative, was acknowledged and welcomed. 

II.	CITIZEN COMMENT

Luane Jensen, 11186 S. 2700 W., thanked the City for their support of Scouting for Food. Staff helped them with snow removal. This year’s Scouting for Food included 1714 youth, they filled 2 semi-trucks, and collected 50,284 lbs. of food. 

Jessica Rice, 11332 River Front Parkway, requested the continuation and completion of secondary water along River Front Parkway. She showed a map of the area (Attachment A). She said they have secondary water in the neighborhood around them, but it was never connected to the homes that front River Front Parkway. CM Geilmann indicated that staff would follow up on that request. 

The City Council moved to item IX. on the agenda.
 
IX.	REPORTS AND COMMENTS 

A.	MAYOR 

None.

B.	CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS

Council Member Newton noted that several of the City Council attended last week’s Utah League of Cities and Towns meeting. He said South Jordan is a tree city. He heard through the division of forestry that the city has grants up to $8,000 that they have never applied for. Staff does not feel this is the case, but is following up on that information. 

Council Member Newton noted the UTA Transit Academy to be held Thursday, May 9th. 

Council Member Newton said there was $20 in overcharges on his hotel bill and asked all City Council members to check their receipts to get that corrected. He said his bill has been corrected. 

Council Member Newton noted an engineering firm based out of Houston Texas that would like to open an office here. He forwarded their information to staff. 

Council Member Short said he missed the History Committee meeting because of the ULCT Conference. They will hear an update tonight. 

Council Member Barnes noted that the youth council is present at tonight’s meeting. He said the Mosquito Abatement District is anticipating Country Fest and would like to have an educational booth at that event. 

Council Member Butters thanked public works for their work to fill a large pothole on 4000 West in a timely manner.
 
Council Member Butters read this prepared statement, “During the last 13 minutes of the work session, April 2, 2013, Mayor Osborne said it had been a terrible week. In fact a really terrible week, and then gave reference to emails between several Council Members. One of the emails I sent in response to Council Member Newton, and I quote: “Chuck, in your last paragraph you write, and I quote, “May I suggest our Mayor have our City Attorney re-draft…” May I remind you, with our form of City Government, the Mayor is to kiss babies, cut ribbons, and conduct meetings, only. Should the Council unanimously, and only the Council, direct the City Attorney to redraft, so be it. Now, I quote from Attachment B of the Council Meeting held April 2, 2013, an email dated Tuesday, March 27, 2012 from Scott Osborne to Mark Seethaler, Steve Barnes and Chuck Newton. And I quote the next to last paragraph. “Let me know your feelings and desires on this front. I am asking each of you that are newly elected to address this, and I have not included Brian and Larry, but will engage them after I have your thoughts. I am not trying to create a rift between us, just feel that your perspective may be different at this point in time and experience.” And I add, I have never received an email from the Mayor and only 1 phone call in the last 16 months. In my mind, there is no question who created the rift. But it was created 15 months ago; and still continues to date.” (Attachment B).
Council Member Seethaler reported on the Oquirrh Mountain Symphony performance at the middle school. Mike Strickland was the guest pianist. They thoroughly enjoyed the concert. It was well done. South Jordan was one sponsor of that event. 

Council Member Seethaler said he requested for the reports and comments section of the agenda to be moved to this portion of the meeting. He read a prepared statement (Attachment C). 

Council Member Seethaler made a motion to publicly reprimand Council Member Larry Short regarding the article Mr. Short wrote and was published in the April 2013 South Valley Journal. Council Member Barnes seconded the motion. 

Council Member Barnes said he agrees with all of Council Member Seethaler’s points. He said there were several parts of the article where he was unsure who on the Council is allegedly having conversations supporting a strong mayor form of leadership at this time. He said he is unhappy to be lumped in the group having conversations about increasing pay and benefits of the City Council. He said he found that hypocritical when in October of 2008, Council Member Short voted to increase the pay of the City Council to qualify for the retirement benefit. He said they have had an opportunity 2 times in the last 14 months for all six of them to take an increase which would allow two Council Members to qualify for the retirement benefit. He is not sure if Council Member Short has taken those increases to qualify for the retirement benefit. He would like to know that. He said while Council Member Short is chastising him for quoting a principle at the state republican party’s platform that he agreed with, Council Member Short then says that the Council should act with principles. 

Council Member Short asked if he should answer the questions? Mayor Osborne indicated that there is a motion on the table, and they now have the opportunity to vote. He said Council Member Short could respond after. 

Council Member Short made a substitute motion to make a statement. 

Mayor Osborne indicated that that was not a motion. A motion would be to amend what has been proposed or not pass the proposed motion. 

City Attorney Wall said the substitute motion would be in order, if it is pertaining to the subject brought up in the original motion. Mayor Osborne asked if a motion is a comment? City Attorney Wall said the motion is that he be allowed to make a comment, before the vote is taken. Mayor Osborne asked if that is what Council Member Short meant? Council Member Short said of course it is. Council Member Barnes asked if a second and a vote are required for the substitute motion? City Attorney Wall said if it is done as a motion, it needs a second. 

Council Member Butters seconded the motion. 

Council Member Barnes asked if approving the substitute motion would replace the original motion? Mayor Osborne said it would. 

City Attorney Wall said under Roberts Rules of Order, you typically have a debate on the motion before you vote. That would be the clean way to deal with this. 

Mayor Osborne opened up discussion on the original motion. 

Council Member Short said they all read their own interpretation of the article. He took this off of information that Council Member Seethaler passed out regarding the compensation committee. The Resolution has changed twice. He said there is nothing in the article that the public does not need to know. He submitted a handout including both drafts of the compensation committee resolution, his article in the South Valley Journal, and Council Member Seethaler’s answer to his article (Attachment D). 

Council Member Short said compensation has been brought up more than anything else that they have done. Council Member Barnes asked if that is an exaggeration? He asked if Council Member Short has the numbers? He said they have talked about the AED Ordinance and collector street fencing many times. Mayor Osborne said there are other issues that have occupied more time than that. They have talked about compensation more than once and they are talking about it again tonight. Mayor Osborne said he would not say it is more than anything else that the City Council has talked about. 

Council Member Short asked who writes these Resolutions? Mayor Osborne said members of the Council write them from time to time. Staff writes them. They come from multiple sources. Council Member Short asked who wrote the one that puts the Mayor as CEO? Mayor Osborne asked where is he referred to as the CEO?

Council Member Seethaler said under their form of government, isn’t the City Manager the Chief Operating Officer? CM Geilmann said there are a number of different titles out there. In the city employee handbook, it specifically says the City Manager is the Chief Executive Officer of the City. In his contract, it specifically says that he is the Chief Administrative Officer of the city. There are different places that different titles are used. 

Council Member Short said in the proposed Resolution, on page 2 (part of Attachment D), it refers to the Mayor as the Chief Executive Officer of the city. He said that reference was removed in the second draft of the Resolution. Council Member Newton asked if the Resolution has been debated? Council Member Short said they bring these things out for debate, and then the next time, it isn’t there. 

Council Member Newton said things evolve in their Legislation. He referred to amendments made in the electronic meeting notice. They debated the different choices and the city attorney brought it back again to clarify further questions. There is an evolution sometimes that they go through. 

Council Member Short asked who wrote the Resolution for the compensation committee, and who wrote the second Resolution? 

Council Member Seethaler said the Declaration of Independence had many changes as it went through the process. Later on in tonight’s agenda, they will be considering a draft Resolution for the compensation committee. He said he drafted the document, and he re-drafted it. He said he has a red-line copy of the second draft with some proposed changes. That is the evolutionary progressive process of drafting a bill, resolution, or motion. Things change in the draft phase. 

Council Member Short asked if Council Member Seethaler is in charge of writing drafts? Mayor Osborne said he can, if he has an item to bring forward; any City Council member can do that. Council Member Short asked if Mayor Osborne knew about the draft Resolution? Mayor Osborne said no, not until it was delivered to him. Council Member Barnes said he knew it was drafted by Council Member Seethaler. When it was originally passed out, he believes Mayor Osborne noted that it was drafted by Council Member Seethaler. 

Council Member Short said the point is that people have brought up the GRAMA Act to the Council. He said there are accusations of people not acting appropriately. He said there are still people asking him and discussing a change in the form of government. He said personally, he would not like that and would not vote for it in this city. Council Member Seethaler noted that was an issue raised 3 years ago. Council Member Short said people still ask about it. Council Member Seethaler asked Council Member Short why did he imply that current sitting elected officials are part of this conspiracy? Council Member Short asked did I imply that? Council Member Seethaler, Mayor Osborne, and Council Member Barnes each said yes. 

Council Member Barnes submitted some email correspondence from Kathie Johnson to him. Also included in those emails are Council Member Short and Council Member Butters, and it deals with city business (Attachment E). He said he agrees with the open meetings act and the importance of it. He said he has trouble with being lectured by hypocrites on an issue. He said the emails were done without a GRAMA request. 

Council Member Short said if they are deciding on their own raises, is this the last time it will come up? Or are just parts of it going to come back up? Mayor Osborne said the proposal is that the City Council be dismissed from that process and not be involved. Council Member Short said the changes were submitted the day before the meeting and not a lot of people could see it. Council Member Newton said the original Resolution was passed out 4 weeks ago, and it was in the City Council packet. 

Council Member Short said he feels left out of the loop of what is going on. Council Member Seethaler asked if he has proof? Council Member Short said he did not know about the latest compensation committee resolution. Council Member Seethaler said Council Member Short needs to read what is sent out to him. Council Member Short said the change came out 24 hours before the meeting. Council Member Seethaler said that is legal. Council Member Seethaler said he made the request for the change and Council Member Short can also make such a request. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if Council Member Short would accept the terms of the reprimand and issue a public apology? Council Member Short said he didn’t think so. He feels people need to read what he put out there and decide for themselves. 

Council Member Barnes asked if Council Member Short has taken the increases the last couple of years to get the retirement benefit? Council Member Short said yes. Council Member Seethaler asked if retirement is considered a benefit? Council Member Short said it is, and it was considered a benefit from the Legislature when they took office. Council Member Barnes said in the article, Council Member Short said he would never expect to get benefits for part time service. He said that is a benefit that Council Member Short has raised his salary 3 times for, to qualify for that benefit. Council Member Seethaler said it is hypocritical. 

Mayor Osborne called for a vote on the original motion. 

Roll call vote. The vote was 3-2 in favor, with Council Member Butters and Council Member Short opposed.
 

Council Member Barnes commended staff involved in the refurbishment of the pool area and the new equipment. He also commended the changes to the swimming lesson program. Mayor Osborne concurred. He said eventually, they will need to address the fitness center issue. Between 5-8 am, the center is at 100 percent capacity. Between 10 am – noon, it nears full capacity. They will need to address that in the future. He commended the fire department for the cleaning done in the pool area. 

C.	CITY MANAGER

City Attorney Wall updated the City Council on the Legal Aide CDBG funding issue from the last City Council meeting, brought up by Mr. Isbell. He said Mrs. Isbell was represented 3 different times during their divorce proceedings by legal aide, since February 2003. There were also 6 matters handled by a private attorney. He reviewed the history of the court orders. He said the complaint that Legal Aide’s services are provided on a sliding scale (reduced rate over a private attorney) is true. He said they did not find any evidence that there was any inappropriate conduct by Legal Aide. There is no reason to deny the CDBG funding request, from a legal perspective. It does not appear that Legal Aide handled anything inappropriately. He said he talked to a few independent attorneys who said Legal Aid is a formidable foe, but had nothing but good things to say about the service they provide. There was nothing unethical or inappropriate about Legal Aide reported. 

Council Member Newton made a motion to lift the table on this item for consideration. Council Member Barnes seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor, with Council Member Seethaler abstaining. 

Council Member Seethaler noted that he is abstaining from this item because he is on the Board for the South Valley Sanctuary. 

Council Member Newton made a motion to proceed and approve the distribution of CDBG funds to Legal Aide in the amount of $2500. Council Member Barnes seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was 4-0 in favor, with Council Member Seethaler abstaining. 

D.	OTHER

Mayor Osborne noted that when they talk about people rather than programs and issues, they end up in an unhealthy debate. It demeans the city and prohibits their ability to move forward rapidly, effectively, and efficiently. He hopes it can stop. 

III.	AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS

A.	Historical Committee Update (By Chair Richard McMullin & Co-Chair Bruce Newbold)

Richard McMullin, chair of the Historical Committee, said the veteran’s plaques for Memorial Day have been updated. The statue has been polished. They will have a parade entry in this year’s Country Fest parade. He said Glade McKee was touched to be chosen as the grand marshal of the parade this year. He noted activities planned for the July 12th kick off of Aunt Mame’s property. He thanked the Parks staff for the completion of the landscape portion of the Homestead preservation. He indicated that the commemorative and informational plaques are on schedule. It will be a grand affair; Hired Guns will be the MC. 

Mr. McMullin updated the City Council on the bus wreck monument. It is the 75th anniversary of the school bus wreck. Many national school bus safety and railroad crossing safety regulations came about as a result of this event. They are working on the monument design, and will get some preliminary bids. They anticipate doing the whole monument in the low twenty thousands. He gave special thanks for Council Member Short, who is a welcome part of their committee. He thanked Council Member Short for all of his work on their behalf. 

Council Member Newton said he talked to someone from UTA and the Public Relations person from Union Pacific, and they expressed an interest in being involved in the monument unveiling. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if the monument would be located at the wreck site, which is now the front runner station? Mr. McMullin said no. They did not receive approval to do that. There are a couple of other options for the monument site; they will bring back that discussion at another time. He said if they put the monument at the wreck site, no one would ever see it because of the topography of the land. He said they want to put it in a place with more public accessibility. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if they can open this monument up for contributions from residents? He feels there are enough relatives of the victims that may be willing to contribute. Mr. McMullin said they have done it before, with the White Fawn Flour mill. He said the committee has to be careful about asking for donations from residents and companies. They have to coordinate so several entities from the city are not approaching the same individuals. 

B.	Proclamation: May 2013 as Bicycle Safety Month Presented by Youth Council Mayor Sharlene Nauta and Youth Council Mayor Pro Tempore, Philip Soelberg) 

Sharlene Nauta and Philip Soelberg introduced the proclamation proposal and helmet safety issues (Attachment F). They reviewed the proposed proclamation (Attachment G). 

Council Member Barnes asked where did they get the helmets given out at the Mountain View Corridor opening? Ms. Nauta said they were provided by Officer Winkler. It was noted the helmets were purchased by Kennecott. 

Ms. Nauta said the only law regarding helmet usage is regarding motorcyclists under 18. The Youth Council felt that this proclamation was an easy place to start. They felt they could influence the youth most, and lead to a larger movement. It was noted that the Youth Council wrote the Proclamation. 

Council Member Barnes said what they have done is great. He feels it was good to do a Proclamation rather than an Ordinance. Council Member Seethaler concurred. He said he has cracked a few bike helmets. He told of a story emphasizing the importance of helmets and bike safety. 

Mayor Osborne presented the Proclamation to the Youth Council. 

IV.	SHORT RECESS PRIOR TO BEGINNING BUSINESS & PUBLIC HEARINGS

The City Council took a brief recess. 

V.	PUBLIC HEARINGS AND POTENTIAL LEGISLATIVE ACTION ITEMS	 

A.1.	Public Hearing – Ordinance 2013-01, Amending the South Jordan Development Code; Title 16, Specifically Amending General Development Provisions, Sections 16.04.010 through 16.04.190 of the South Jordan Municipal Code, Pertaining to various subdivision regulations, including lots and parcels, access and connectivity, streets, and other development standards within Chapter 16.04 of the Municipal Code. (By City Planner Greg Schindler)

City Planner Greg Schindler reviewed the background information on this item. He said staff is asking that the rounding section of the code not be considered at this time. He said after discussion with legal counsel, that section is written too vague. They will bring it back as a separate Ordinance change. 

Mayor Osborne asked about the fiscal impact of this Ordinance? Planner Schindler said there are currently properties undeveloped that could be developed and increase property tax revenues to the city. 

Council Member Seethaler asked what is the premise for discouraging private streets and gated developments? He noted that he lives in a gated community with private streets. Planner Schindler said the concern is that they lose connectivity to other neighborhoods. Private streets and gated communities can be approved through a PUD. Private streets have to be built to city standards. He said staff feels that those neighborhoods don’t have the extra security that they perceive. If a person is looking for a place to burglarize, those areas are targeted. 

Council Member Seethaler asked about the process of getting an exception for a private street and gated development? Planner Schindler said the process would be the same that it is now, through a PUD. They can also do it in a Mixed Use zone. In the Mixed Use zone, the approval process is done through the City Council. 

Council Member Seethaler said with complaints and appeals, the connectivity issue concerns people. Planner Schindler said if there is a stub road built, it will connect eventually. They also need to consider additional access and safety issues. It is not just a connectivity issue. He said they want neighbors to be neighbors. It is a different situation when it is a commercial development next to a neighborhood. He said they should encourage residents to work with the developers early on to get the most natural flow of development next to their neighborhood.  Planner Schindler said that is important especially if it is a change in density next to them; connectivity of roads is still important. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if they have a fire code official, and who is it? Planner Schindler said yes; it is Ty Montalvo. 

Council Member Barnes asked how does the discouragement of private roads and cul-de-sacs take place? Planner Schindler said they will encourage through streets as part of developments. At some point, a secondary access is needed. He said they do not want to discourage development, but still make the city as nice and neighborhood friendly as possible. 

Council Member Short said to build the private roads to city standards also discourages private roads. 

Council Member Newton said he is concerned about the elimination of the cul-de-sac. It is an attractive feature for families. It provides some traffic safety for families. Planner Schindler said they would like to prohibit cul-de-sacs that are 1000 ft. long. He said they are not prohibiting cul-de-sacs altogether, but they would like to encourage connectivity. He said they feel the more connectivity they have, the less traffic they’ll have on each street.  If you funnel all of the traffic onto the only through street, it is not fair to those residents. 

Council Member Newton said the way this is written, it could be perceived that cul-de-sacs are being eliminated. He said cul-de-sacs are an attractive feature of South Jordan. He said he is okay restricting the length of the cul-de-sac, but he does not want to discourage the cul-de-sac. He said people want connectivity, but not at the level being proposed by staff. 

ACM Whatcott said cul-de-sacs are hard to service for garbage collection and snow removal. Council Member Newton concurred. He said cul-de-sacs are a primary feature of the city. He wondered if they should address this in a survey to the community. 

Mayor Osborne opened the public hearing. 

Paul Hammer, 10252 S. 3570 W., said he feels the concerns of the residents are not being heard. Staff has an agenda and they push that. He said the current agenda is that staff does not want cul-de-sacs. He said they all want to be connected to neighbors, but not Wal-Mart. He said he would like the word balance used when discussing cul-de-sacs. He said staff won’t follow balance because they don’t want cul-de-sacs. He asked why is there 2 sets of mailing labels and notices? He thought that was only mailed once to people within 300 ft. He feels 300 ft. notice is insufficient. He is 420 ft. from Wal-Mart, but he is only 3 houses away from Wal-Mart. He said the public notice posted outside city hall is insufficient. He said they need constructive notice, not just legally sufficient notice. He said they should use direct mail notice more often. He urged an increase from 300 ft. to substantially more, and mail notice for each public meeting. He urged posting of signs on the lot that something is going on. 

Lamar Mabey, 10511 Highline Cir., said he supports cul-de-sacs, but connectivity is a major issue. Sometimes, a cul-de-sac is the only thing that will work. They can still have cul-de-sacs off of connected streets. He said he owns a flag lot off 2700 West and he has not had an offer on it. He said the City Council and staff do a great job. Staff is trying to bring the best possible solution to the City Council to make the decisions for the city. Staff has spent hours into the Ordinances. They should support what staff does. Staff talks to the citizens; they are experienced professionals. They have the city’s best interest at heart. With this Ordinance, it might need some modifications. He feels the Council should support and approve the Ordinance. 

Aleta Taylor, 11131 S. Anna Cir., said she feels that flag lots will always have challenges. She believes in protecting people’s private property rights and their ability to sell and use those lots. Sometimes, those lots provide privacy and benefits to those families. She said regarding the cul-de-sacs, she understands the challenges they bring with providing city services. She said if they are actually eliminating cul-de-sacs, she has a problem with that. They need to leave the door open to preserve those property rights. Sometimes, a cul-de-sac is the best configuration for a lot. Cul-de-sacs are one reason people come to South Jordan. There is a balance between the ease of management and the rights of the citizens. She said they should make sure cul-de-sacs are allowed when it’s the best choice. 

Steve Young, 1201 W. Country Ridge Dr., said he is a developer. Every week, he designs at least two subdivisions. He has 14 offers on UDOT ground in South Jordan right now, and he is trying to find a way to beautify the lots. He said staff is excellent. He said they should leave the Ordinance open so they don’t allow just 2 flag lots. He said he likes the Ordinance. He said he likes connectivity of roads; developers get more lots without cul-de-sacs. Sometimes, you have to have a cul-de-sac. He said they have been required to put up signs on all changes regarding commercial and office. He said stub streets are difficult for police and fire protection. He said in his neighborhood, the fire department did not use the crash gate. They went around and the fire in his neighborhood burned longer. He said the roads should be connected to allow access for police, fire, garbage, water lines, etc. He said he loves the Ordinance and asked for it to be passed. 

Mayor Osborne closed the public hearing. 

A.2.	Potential Action – (See V. A.1.) ORD 2013-01

Council Member Seethaler asked for clarification on notifications. Planner Schindler said in this Ordinance, it includes notifications for all applications processed in the city that require a public hearing, except for rezoning and general plan amendments. Rezoning and General Plan amendments require the 300 ft. notification, but they also require a posting on the property as well. Council Member Seethaler asked if 300 ft. notification is adequate? Planner Schindler said 300 ft. is a nationwide standard. He assumes there are cities with notification of more than 300 ft. He said the Utah Code used to specifically require 300 ft. 

Council Member Seethaler said he has heard many times about the inadequate notification. He asked about the impact to extend the notification to 500 ft. Planner Schindler said it would impact the developer because they pay for the mailing; the city would have to make more copies. He said he is not sure if extending the notification will give the residents more control over what is developed. He said if the proposed use is permitted, the residents can’t stop it. They are looking for input on issues that could affect the development, such as a ditch that staff is not aware of, etc. Council Member Seethaler said if they improve their notification as a city to more than average, it gives the existing and perspective residents more opportunity to be aware of and participate in the process. Planner Schindler concurred. 

Council Member Seethaler said not all cul-de-sacs are designed equally. They are less problematic if there is connectivity within a development in addition to the cul-de-sacs. If the cul-de-sac goes onto a collector street, that can be problematic. Planner Schindler concurred. Long cul-de-sacs can also be problematic. 

Council Member Barnes asked if there should be some geographical consideration in the notification, including an entire subdivision? 

Council Member Butters said he likes his cul-de-sac, but noted a neighboring boy was killed by a garbage truck backing up in a cul-de-sac. They can create a problem, but there are cases where cul-de-sacs have to be developed. 

Council Member Newton suggested they not allow cul-de-sacs exceeding 750 ft., unless approved by the Planning Commission. He wants to encourage development and connectivity. He does not want to be too limiting to developers. Cul-de-sacs have been an attractive feature in the city. 

The City Council discussed the radius/diameter of cul-de-sacs developed today. They are large enough so a garbage truck doesn’t have to back up, if there are no cars parked in there. It is a similar issue with school buses. It was noted that there are no cul-de-sacs in Daybreak; the development concept is moving away from them. Cul-de-sacs are still appropriate in some locations. 

Council Member Newton said development preferences go in cycles. City Engineer Klavano concurred, but said they are not doing away with cul-de-sacs, just discouraging them. Council Member Newton said he feels they should leave the design of the streets up to the developers and let the market drive the need for cul-de-sacs. City Engineer Klavano said with in-fills, connectivity is important. 

Council Member Newton made a motion to approve Ordinance 2013-01, with the exception that the provision of rounding be removed as proposed by staff and be dealt with separately, and on item 16.04.180, striking the language in Item I. regarding discouragement of cul-de-sacs. It should just state that cul-de-sacs shall not exceed 750 ft. in length. Council Member Barnes seconded the motion.

Council Member Butters made a substitute motion to approve Ordinance 2013-01, with the exception of the rounding provision to be dealt with separately, per staff’s recommendation. Council Member Short seconded the motion. 

Council Member Seethaler said there are many references to cul-de-sacs in the document. If Council Member Newton’s motion is approved, are other amendments required to not have the explicit discouragement of cul-de-sacs? Council Member Newton said the other items are just clarifying items for cul-de-sacs that might be allowed. No other changes are needed. This change just leaves the design up to the developers; it is no change from anything that they currently have. 

Roll call vote on the substitute motion. The vote was 2-3, with Council Member Newton, Council Member Barnes, and Council Member Seethaler opposed. The motion failed. 

Roll call vote on the original motion. The vote was 3-2 in favor, with Council Member Short and Council Member Butter opposed. 

Council Member Barnes made a motion for staff to look at alternatives to all noticing requirements including the foot requirement and any geographical considerations, and any other alternatives deemed appropriate, and to include any increased cost to developers. 

City Attorney Wall suggested they consider land use notifications first, and then look at others. 

Council Member Barnes amended his motion to look at land use notice requirements, and come back with some recommendations and thoughts. 

Mayor Osborne said it is with land use that an individual has a chance to stop a development from moving forward. Once land use is established, the entitlement for the developer is there and people cannot make a change. 

Council Member Seethaler seconded the motion. 

It was agreed that staff would bring back the issue by the first meeting in July. CM Geilmann said staff would bring this back as a discussion item in a work session, prior to an Ordinance consideration. The City Council concurred. 

The vote was unanimous in favor. 

VI.	PUBLIC HEARINGS AND POTENTIAL ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ITEMS

None.

Council Member Seethaler made a motion to recess the City Council meeting and move into a Special Service District meeting. Council Member Newton seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. 

VII.	SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT PUBLIC HEARING 

A.1.	Public Hearing – Resolution SSD 2013-01, A Resolution Levying an Assessment on Property Owners within the King Benjamin and Holland Park Gate Special Service District Assessment Area. (By City Engineer Brad Klavano) 

City Engineer Klavano reviewed the background information on this item. 

Board Member Seethaler asked if the money will cover the existing and expected administrative costs? City Engineer Klavano said yes. Board Member Seethaler said on an ongoing basis, is there a provision to change the collected amount if they are overcharging, or if the account is underfunded? City Engineer Klavano said adjustments can be made, if needed. If the values are changed, this Board will reconvene after the new calculation is put together. 

Chairman Osborne opened the public hearing. There were no comments. He closed the public hearing. 

A.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VII. A.1.) SSD 2013-01		

Board Member Seethaler made a motion to approve Resolution SSD 2013-01. Board Member Butters seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was unanimous 5-0 in favor. 

Board Member Newton made a motion to adjourn the Special Service District meeting and move back into City Council meeting. Board Member Seethaler seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. 


VIII.	OTHER BUSINESS 

A.1.	Fence Appeal AP-2013-02, Appeal of Section 16.04.200 Requesting Approval for an Eight (8) Foot Tall Wall/Fence along a Collector Street (11400 S.) on Property Located at 11375 S. Berg Hollow (805 W.) Scott and Leslie Richards (Applicants)

Planner Schindler reviewed the background information on this item. 

Council Member Seethaler asked for clarification of the configuration of the lot, what is behind the house, and if the lot is recessed. He asked if this will be the first of several requests they receive for a taller fence? Planner Schindler said this is the only request he is aware of and it is largely because of the adjacent use (Soccer City in Draper). Council Member Seethaler said there is another house that would also be impacted by Soccer City. They reviewed the fence requirement for the fence in front of the home. 

Leslie Richards, 11375 S. Berg Hollow Ln., 

Council Member Seethaler asked how much property is south of the brick wall? Ms. Richards said 2 ft. Council Member Seethaler noted some vacant property adjacent to the Richards. Ms. Richards said it is owned by UDOT and maintained by the City. 

	A.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VIII. A.1.)

Council Member Barnes made a motion to approve Appeal AP-2013.02. Council Member Seethaler seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous 5-0 in favor. 

B.1.	Resolution R2013-13, Authorizing the Mayor of South Jordan City to sign the Southwest Salt Lake County Transit Corridor Project Development Interlocal Agreement. (By ACM Gary Whatcott)

ACM Whatcott reviewed the background information on this item. South Jordan City’s contribution is $10,000 for the study. It is a budgeted item and is funded in the next fiscal year’s budget. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if it is a one time commitment of $10,000?  ACM Whatcott said yes. Council Member Seethaler asked if the principle behind this is that the track is not in the city, but it connects the city. Therefore, the city is paying a minor share of the study, while others are paying substantially more. ACM Whatcott said yes. Council Member Seethaler asked if the project is contingent on the federal government’s 50/50 match. ACM Whatcott said this study would prepare them for the future ability to quality for a federally funded project. WFRC approved this, and Riverton has committed their money as well. Council Member Seethaler asked if an entity does not approve the study, would the agreement have to be re-negotiated? ACM Whatcott said yes, but the city approved a cap at $10,000. 

B.2.	Potential Action Item (See VIII. B.1.) R2013-13

Council Member Newton made a motion to approve Resolution R2013-13. Council Member Seethaler seconded the motion. Roll call vote was unanimous 5-0 in favor. 

C.1.	Resolution R2013-16, Approving the 2013 Polling Precinct Location Listing Prepared by the Salt Lake County Clark’s Office, Elections Division, For the 2013 South Jordan Municipal Election. (By City Recorder Anna West)

CM Geilmann reviewed the background information on this item. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if there are more or less polling precinct locations? CM Geilmann said there are about the same. The residents will likely vote at the same polling precinct location as they did 4 years ago. 

C.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VIII. C.1.)

Council Member Seethaler made a motion to approve Resolution R2013-16. Council Member Newton seconded the motion. Roll call vote was unanimous 5-0 in favor. 

D.1.	Discussion: Government Records Access Management Act (GRAMA)

City Attorney Wall said they would be discussing GRAMA relative to the scope of requests and the costs that can be reimbursed to the city for these requests. He said case law and Appeal
Board rulings are inconsistent.

Assistant City Attorney Loose discussed a West Valley City homicide case. He said they cannot charge an attorney’s time to determine what classification a record is. He said with GRAMA, if a request is denied, it can be appealed to the City Manager. If he denies it, it goes to the State Records Appeal Board. He said that Board is less consistent than the courts. He said there have been a few special circumstances where it was essential and complicated so an attorney was paid for classifying documents. That is the exception, not the rule. He said South Jordan’s practice has been that they never charge for time beyond document compilation. They also cannot charge for the first 15 minutes of compiling a document. He said sometimes the amount of documents to go through for classification is voluminous, such as the gun vault appeal. He said one request took almost 2 weeks to fill prior to litigation, and they were never charged for the attorney’s time. It is safe not to charge for their time, unless there are extraordinary circumstances. They can charge for the cost of the lowest paid person with access to pull a file.

City Attorney Wall said staff has tried to get state law passed to preclude people from “fishing” for an issue, but the Legislature has not been willing to consider that. If they begin charging fees for the attorney’s time, they might win with the Appeals Board, but they would likely lose at the District Court level considering prior court decision.

Council Member Barnes said his concern is if a resident is on a fishing expedition; he does not feel the taxpayers should have to pay for staff time. City Attorney Wall said if the request is specific enough, the entity can identify what records are wanted. It is easier with computers to do compilations than it was 20 years ago. They have to balance the right of the residents to be involved in government business versus protecting the private information of an individual. 

Assistant City Attorney Loose said if a document is still being drafted, it can be denied because it is not considered a record until the document is finalized. They go by the date of the request. If it is unclear what records are wanted, staff will call the requester and ask. If needed, they will request a written response via email. 

Council Member Seethaler said they seem to approach this in a requester friendly way. It appears that the city charges for a CD or other audio medium. City Attorney Loose said yes, unless it takes longer than 15 minutes, then they charge for compilation time. 

Council Member Seethaler noted a recent GRAMA request and said it is hard to believe that in the 3-5 months it took to fill that request that staff did not spend more than 15 minutes pulling emails from the server. Assistant City Attorney Loose said he understands it does not take a long time to pull the emails from the server. If that time was not submitted to the City Recorder, he cannot speak to that. He said significant time was spent by the legal department in that case reviewing for classification purposes. 

Council Member Seethaler said if a resident is angry with the City, they can legally request information knowing it will cost the city dozens of hours in legal time. Assistant City Attorney Loose said that is common. It happens in many government entities. 

Council Member Seethaler asked if it would be appropriate to have a log of what time was spent by staff on GRAMA requests? City Attorney Wall said yes; the attorneys informally track their time anyway. Council Member Seethaler said they should track clerical time, IT/Technical time, administrative time, and legal time on GRAMA requests. He said he does not want to back charge people, but would like to understand and identify the cost of that service. 

Council Member Barnes asked about City Council members counting their time for finding certain emails? Assistant City Attorney said they can, if they want a total view of it. 

Council Member Newton asked if they provided the records in paper form, is there a copy charge? Assistant City Attorney Loose said they are changing the fee schedule to charge 25 cents per page (current schedule says 50 cents a page). Council Member Newton said when they are giving an electronic copy, they may consider charging 3-5 cents per page. 

Council Member Newton said when giving a copy of the record on CD, it is not always in a readable format. Assistant City Attorney Loose said State Law requires that they provide it in the same form as received. That is the most defensible. He said there are some exceptions, like the finance database produces its reports in Excel. He said if someone asks for a large number of police cases, it is given to them in the Police software program form. 

Council Member Barnes asked how is that done for various email formats? IT Director Day said all emails are imported into Exchange. Mayor Osborne said it should then be delivered in an Exchange format and not converted to a pst file. IT Director Day said the files are all run through Barracuda spam filter and backed up every night. They are converted at that time; it has nothing to do with GRAMA requests. It is faster to pull the emails where they are archived versus going into a person’s private account. Assistant City Attorney Loose said the GRAMA request should be done in the least expensive, most responsive, and least time consuming way. City Attorney Wall said GRAMA was written in a time when most people did not have personal computers. It was written for paper records. 

Mayor Osborne said he is completely supportive of GRAMA requests and wants the records accessible. He has a concern when it takes 40-70 hours of attorney time to classify those records. 

Council Member Seethaler reiterated that he would like staff’s time tracked and logged. City Attorney Wall said he would remind the leadership Council to submit their time and he will have the City Recorder keep track of that time. 

	D.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VIII. D.1.)

None. 

E.1.	Appointment of Chic McGowan to the Seniors Advisory Committee for a Two (2) Year Term as Replacement for Shirley Bell. (Sponsored By Mayor Osborne)

Mayor Osborne said Mr. McGowan is well suited to help with the Senior Committee and wants to be part of the community. 

	E.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VIII. E.1.)

Council Member Seethaler made a motion to appoint Chic McGowan to the Seniors Advisory Committee for a two (2) year term as replacement for Shirley Bell. Council Member Barnes seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. 

F.1.	Re-Appointment of Sharon Weeks to the Seniors Advisory Committee for an additional Two (2) Year Term. (Sponsored by Council Member Short)

Council Member Short indicated that Ms. Weeks is doing a good job and wants to continue serving. 

	F.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VIII. F.1.)

Council Member Short made a motion to re-appoint Sharon Weeks to the Seniors Advisory Committee for an additional two (2) year term. Council Member Seethaler seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. 

The City Council took a break. 

G.1.	Discussion Only: Compensation Committee Resolution (By Council Member Seethaler)

Council Member Seethaler said he has had some desire with respect to compensation overview. The concept is similar to the audit review committee passed last year. He referred to a redline copy of the Resolution that was in the packet; the clean copy represents the changes made (Attachment H). He reviewed the proposed Resolution. 

CM Geilmann noted that the city management has responsibility for the oversight of budgets and sustainability, under the general direction of the elected officials. Council Member Seethaler said there may be a better way to word the second whereas in the Resolution. He said there should be some checks and balances in the process. 

Council Member Butters asked what does the differential duties of the Mayor have to do with the compensation review? Council Member Seethaler said the Mayor is compensated at a different level than the Council members and there is a historical basis for that. He said the Mayor has different duties than the rest of the Council. The Mayor serves and is involved for longer periods of time than the rest of the Council, and the responsibilities are different. The differential duties are a basis for the difference in compensation.

Council Member Short asked if the committee would approve the compensation every two years? If they’re going to raise salaries, don’t they have to bring that to a public meeting? Council Member Seethaler said he does not want to shortchange anything that should be part of a public meeting. The wording on this can be improved. He suggested that the compensation adjustments be revisited every couple of years. He said that would include any public hearings and votes required. 

Mayor Osborne said it may be better to change the date to a fiscal year date rather than January 1, representing a calendar year date. 

Council Member Barnes asked if the Committee would determine the compensation and the Council would not vote on that? Council Member Seethaler said the intent is that the committee would have a strong hand in the recommendation. From there, it would go to the appropriate public hearings and discussions, and the Council would perform all of its duties working off the recommendation of the committee. 

Council Member Newton said they would want an odd number on the committee if they are voting, in case of a tie. He suggested the human resource officer be an advisor to the committee rather than a committee member. He asked who is the City Officer? Council Member Seethaler said that is the human resource officer. Council Member Newton said that should be clarified. Council Member Seethaler said he feels the human resource officer should be part of the committee. Council Member Barnes said there are 5 proposed members of the committee so there is no concern with a tie. 

Council Member Newton asked what if the information research/analyst goes more than 5 days a year? He said he is not sure that should be limited. Council Member Seethaler said his vision is that this person would lend their participation to the committee and guide the issues, but not be the researcher or analyst. He said they don’t want to end up with a part time employee. 

Council Member Newton said they need to redefine and clarify the issues before the approval goes further down the road. Council Member Seethaler said he would like to have the draft positioned as a legal resolution. He would like the concerns and considerations addressed in the next draft. He would prefer to turn the issue to the legal staff and ask if a more formal draft for Resolution could be structured addressing the concerns brought up tonight. 

ACM Wall said in the policies and procedures for Boards and Commissions, it is set out that any ongoing committees is comprised of 6 members with a member appointed by each City Council member. They will need to revise that policy so it fits what they are doing here. They need to do that for the audit committee as well. He said they need to make sure this is consistent with city code provision, specifically the powers of Mayor, the City Council, and the City Manager. He said he can bring it back in Resolution form. 

Mayor Osborne said the documents become aged quickly because there are figures in the 2012 budget (77 percent). He said in a few years, the 65 percent may already be achieved. They may consider putting it in a preamble of some type rather than making it part of the actual resolution.                             

Council Member Seethaler encouraged them to update their policy and procedures for boards and committees. He said this does not follow the same format versus other citizen committees. City Attorney Wall said they would clarify in the policy ongoing committees versus ad-hoc committees. This issue will be discussed during the June visioning or work meeting.
 
H.1.	Discussion: Council Member Compensation

Council Member Seethaler made a motion that the compensation of the five Council Members be reduced to the January 2012 base rate of $426.05 every 2 weeks, and first reflected for the pay period starting April 28, 2013. Further, any adjustment to Council Member wages be subject to the authority of the compensation committee to be duly established by Resolution, debate, and vote of this Council. 

Council Member Seethaler said his proposal is to remove this cause of contention. He believes it is a matter of fairness. He said he is open to extend the date to January 1, 2014. 

Council Member Barnes requested the wording be changed from “reduced to” to “set at”.

Council Member Short asked how do they know that the compensation committee will be approved? Council Member Seethaler said this is presupposing that they will get on a better schedule of self-administering. 

Council Member Butters asked if the intent is to remove he and Council Member Short from retirement compensation? Council Member Seethaler said no. He said all paid and invested benefits would be theirs. At the time the compensation goes below the level to qualify for retirement, there would be no more contribution towards that retirement (the 18 percent), but the benefits would be theirs. 

Chief of Staff Cunningham said the vested benefits would stay there. This would stop them from accruing additional retirement credit. He said if they are going to change the Ordinance, it will need to be re-drafted. 

City Attorney Wall said they researched the impact or risk to the city if the two City Council members are no longer receiving the retirement benefit. He said the impact is that it is an unknown question. He said it is the same argument held at the State level. There is not a definitive answer. He said they feel the best practice would be to delay the effective date to January 1, 2014 so they are not taking away a benefit that was relied upon when a council member entered office. He said that is staff’s recommendation, if they determine to remove the retirement benefit. Under state code, the salary of the elected official must be set by Ordinance. 

City Attorney Wall said because the fundamental nature of the proposal is opposite of the original proposal, the best practice would be to bring it back to a public hearing again. 

Council Member Seethaler said compensation has been widely discussed, but they are dealing with few dollars. When they started out, the City Manager proposed an idea to equalize the pay. He brought the proposal forward. If they had the majority vote then, they would not have talked about it at all. He said he voted in favor of that, but no one else did. The issue has continued to fester. This has been a long standing issue and has been cumbersome and awkward. He said they haven’t even addressed medical and other benefits that are or are not being taken advantage of. 

Council Member Seethaler said many of the residents have said the City Council is elected to represent them. There is a nominal pay associated with it. They are not elected to make retirement and benefits and to make it so lucrative financially, so they have every financial reason to run and be elected. If the difference between the base wage and the retirement benefits makes it so it is not worth it for them to run for a new term, that is not the right motivation for a representative that they want. 

Council Member Barnes asked if it could be stated that this has the same type of application as reducing the life insurance or health benefit? Do they need to be concerned that this would be a breach of contract? City Attorney Wall said generally, retirement is viewed more as compensation rather than a benefit. 

Council Member Short asked what happens if he runs and wins again, and the compensation committee increases the salary again. Then what do they do? Mr. Cunningham said they would begin getting the benefit again. That could also happen if a tier 1 eligible person wins the mayoral position. Council Member Seethaler said if it happens again, they would deal with that scenario in the future. 

Mr. Cunningham asked if it is their intent to reduce the Mayor’s salary to the 2012 salary as well? The majority of the Council said yes. 

Mr. Cunningham asked if it is their intent to allow participation in health insurance, the 401K match, and the employee life insurance? Council Member Seethaler said he has no intention of dealing with those issues. It was noted that each Council Member has a 100,000 life insurance policy, as well as spouse and dependent coverage. 

Council Member Seethaler said he would prefer to make this effective after the next pay period, but he would leave open the offer to January 1, 2014. 

City Attorney Wall said they can decide the effective date in 2 weeks. 

Council Member Barnes apologized for not equalizing the pay last year. He said at that time, he did not feel right about equalizing up. 

	H.2.	Potential Action Item – (See VIII. H.1.)

None.

IX.	REPORTS AND COMMENTS

This item was discussed after item II. 

ADJOURNMENT

Council Member Short made a motion to adjourn. Council Member Newton seconded the motion The vote was unanimous in favor. 

The April 16, 2013 City Council meeting adjourned at 11:46 p.m.


This is a true and correct copy of the April 16, 2013 City Council meeting minutes, which were approved on May 7, 2013.
  
South Jordan City Recorder