[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] Meeting on 6 o'clock start, so I'd like to get our meeting started, our study session, if you will. I got to read the electronic meeting notice. Again, so let me do that. This meeting will be held electronically. The meeting will be an electronic meeting, according to the city code 2-1-040. The determination of 2020-08% to Utah code annotated 52-4207-4. I may or twerky walk or do hereby determine conducting electronic meeting of the drip city.
[0:29] Council with an anchor location presents a substantial risk to the health and safety of
[0:33] those who have been present at the anchor location and hereby author a
[0:37] jury for city council to conduct electronic meetings without an anchor
[0:40] location before going to termination is based upon the following facts.
[0:44] Federal state and local leaders including the Derbors City Mayor and the city
[0:47] council have all recognized a global pandemic caused by the spread of COVID-19
[0:51] virus. COVID-19 cases in Salt Lake County and Draper continue to increase rapidly
[0:57] I might add at rates which pose the risk of overburdening the local health care system.
[1:01] It's difficult, not impossible, to predict the number of attendees at any meeting
[1:05] and to manage issues regarding social distancing in order to comply with state- phased guidelines.
[1:11] COVID-19 poses a continuing and immediate threat to the health, safety, and welfare of driver
[1:16] city residents. The city's as acknowledged has the technological capability to provide means
[1:22] by which the public may hear or view and hear
[1:25] and the open portions of the meeting
[1:26] and to participate in the public hearings.
[1:29] The original of this written determinations on file
[1:31] in the city recorders office to participate
[1:34] in this meeting, there are two options
[1:35] you can listen through the draper city website
[1:37] at www.draper.ut.us slash 95 slash agendas minutes.
[1:44] You can email comments to public comment at draper.ut.us
[1:48] by 5 p.m. on the day of the meeting.
[1:50] Those will become part of the public record.
[1:51] Those who would speak during the public hearing portions of the meeting send a request for the Zoom ID to the public to public dot comment at draper dot U.T.
[2:02] dot U.S. by noon the day of the meeting.
[2:05] With that being all said and read our first item on our study session agenda is a presentation on the concept of ranked choice voting.
[2:14] Mr. Fox, I understand that you've got Stan Lockhart ready to present something to the council and you have also a PowerPoint presentations that correct.
[2:25] That is correct.
[2:26] Do we have Mr. Lockhart on the line?
[2:28] Yeah, he's unmuted.
[2:29] I'm here.
[2:30] All right.
[2:31] Can you hear me?
[2:31] We can hear you Stan.
[2:33] Go ahead.
[2:36] Well, I need to get the presentation up.
[2:45] They hold on.
[2:46] I've
[2:50] got a great draper city logo in front of me. It's really nice. It's lovely. It has the tree and the mountains.
[2:58] Yes, it does.
[3:00] Hi, Stan.
[3:02] Hello.
[3:03] It's the tree of light, Stan.
[3:08] Yeah, I could see that.
[3:09] Not live.
[3:10] I think light.
[3:22] Stan, you should be able to share the screen now.
[3:25] Yeah, I'm looking for the presentation.
[3:31] I guess I'm looking for files, maybe.
[3:34] No.
[3:47] Oh, that's not working.
[3:52] Share screen.
[3:53] Oh, copy.
[3:54] No.
[3:55] Just share screen.
[4:01] So, Russ, do you have it handy or do you expect me to have it handy?
[4:06] I don't have anything.
[4:08] We did put together our own presentation.
[4:11] But you're not going to be familiar with that one, so.
[4:15] Yeah, so I need to find this.
[4:23] You're okay. You got time to do it. Let's go ahead and find it.
[4:27] Okay.
[4:48] Okay. I've got it in front of me. I don't know if I have it. Oh, there it is. Share.
[4:54] I don't know if that's share of people and groups.
[5:00] Man, this is okay.
[5:11] Looks like we're seeing that, Stan. Oh, you can see it. Yes. Great.
[5:18] That's the first time I've had to do a share screen. Let's do it. My mom always just kind of watch and others do it. So, Council members, thank you for letting me meet with you today.
[5:29] Rank choice voting is an innovation that came to Utah about 25 years ago by conservative grassroots activists who
[5:38] believe that it was a better way of voting. They first advocated using it within the Republican
[5:46] Party, and so the party over the last 20 years has used it at conventions. They've used it
[5:51] in caucuses. They've had, as recently as this past convention cycle, you had the Republican
[6:01] Party using it and the Democratic Party using it with great success. In fact, in a poll of
[6:08] delegates on the Republican side, they found that out of 1,700 delegates, 1,100 of them
[6:17] responded to their poll and 72% want to use right choice voting again in their elections
[6:22] because they liked it so much.
[6:27] This issue has been before the state legislature for several years and the state legislature,
[6:33] even right now, there's a bill that proposes using it in partisan primaries, mostly to deal
[6:38] with the plurality issue when you have far less than 50 percent of the people choosing
[6:43] party nominees when you have multiple candidates on the ballot.
[6:48] And they also wanted to see how it works in Utah, what voters think about it.
[6:53] One of the arguments against it that doesn't hold much water is that voters are too dumb
[6:57] to figure out how to rank their votes.
[7:00] And we're finding over and over that that's just not true.
[7:03] In Pace and Invinier two years ago, they used Ranked Choice Voting.
[7:09] Amelia Powers, the county clerk in Utah County, she coined a phrase that Ranked Choice Voting is better, faster cheaper.
[7:21] It works.
[7:24] So what is Ranked Choice Voting?
[7:27] If you look over on the upper left-hand corner, the voters ranked the candidates in order of preference on the ballot.
[7:32] They then have their first choices counted just as you would in a traditional plurality election, and then if a candidate gets over 50% of the vote, then they're the winner, and that's the end of it.
[7:46] If no one gets 50% of the vote, then they eliminate the last place candidate as you go around in the circle to the bottom, you redistribute the votes from the eliminated candidate to the voters next choice, and then you count the votes again.
[8:01] And then you see what the outcome is, and if Canada gets over 50% of the vote, then they're the winner.
[8:08] And you keep going through that process until you come up with A winner or in the case of multiple winners, it can happen.
[8:18] You can have multiple winners as well.
[8:23] I
[8:28] talked to you a little bit about the success and pace and
[8:30] vineyard two years ago.
[8:34] The county clerk did a poll of voters in that election.
[8:40] And 86% of voters in pace and vineyard say they found
[8:43] rank choice voting very much or somewhat easy to use.
[8:47] Only 4.2% found it not at all easy to use.
[8:51] 82.5% of voters said that rank choice voting should be used
[8:55] in future elections. One of the things we discovered is that once until you use ranked
[9:00] choice voting you're kind of skeptical and then once you use it you like it because it
[9:04] really is easy all the way around on the part of the voter.
[9:11] Of the candidates there was a very
[9:13] positive candidate experience in both cities. 87.5% of respondents reported a positive impression
[9:19] of ranked choice voting. No candidates reported a negative impression and that's both winners and
[9:26] and 75% of those candidates wanted to keep using right choice voting in future elections.
[9:35] These are just some, as we had an open-ended question, I really like the approach and
[9:40] think it should be adopted by more cities, sort of pace and city candidates.
[9:44] I loved it.
[9:44] It's easy and makes a lot of sense, sort of, sort of vineyard city voter.
[9:53] Just this last legislative session, there was a resolution that voted to commend pace and
[9:58] and then your cities as well.
[10:00] Local is Utah County election officials for conducting the first ever ranked choice voting elections in state history in a public election. And in addition, legislators and the governor officially encouraged all 249 cities and towns throughout Utah to adopt ranked choice voting for the upcoming municipal elections.
[10:19] Governor Herbert said, ranked choice voting, something I would support. That was unsolicited. I was surprised as anyone when he said it. I think it has some advantages. If I can't be your first choice, I want to be your second choice.
[10:31] So I think it brings a more civil campaign, and I think that's a good thing, and we can really concentrate really on the issues at hand, said Governor Herbert.
[10:41] So why ranked choice voting? Well, first of all, there are taxpayer savings for cities. Tax-payer dollars are saved by allowing the city to hold one election in November, rather than two elections.
[10:53] You're charged by the number of active registered voters that you have, not on the number of
[11:02] people who vote.
[11:03] And so it costs exactly half as much as the general election to run a primary.
[11:10] And you can save, so you can save half of your election budget by just going to a general
[11:15] election with ranked choice voting.
[11:16] There are shorter, less expensive city campaigns.
[11:20] The candidate filing period is in August and you took instead of June for plurality elections
[11:29] and you get to compact that time together to run a single election in November rather
[11:36] than in August primary and in November election.
[11:39] ESNS, the voting equipment awarded a state of Utah contract, is capable of running right-choice
[11:45] voting elections. And in fact, that is the equipment that was used last year in Utah County
[11:52] to run the Ranked Choice Voting Elections in pace and inventor.
[11:59] One of the nice things
[12:00] about Ranked Choice Voting, we want voters to express their will, so take the time to go
[12:05] vote, we want them to fully express their will. Many times voters get, they get these choices
[12:14] that aren't really what they want to do.
[12:17] And I'll give you some examples.
[12:20] In 2016, when the presidential election came around,
[12:26] we had President Trump and Hillary Clinton,
[12:29] and then Evan McMullen came to town,
[12:31] and immediately he was viewed as a possible alternative
[12:36] to both of those candidates.
[12:38] His polling went up dramatically,
[12:40] And when it hit about 20%, the cry went up that a vote for McMullen was a vote for Hillary.
[12:48] And so voters who kind of thought they had an opportunity to vote for an alternative now had to factor in, well wait a second.
[12:55] If I vote for him, is that a vote for Hillary? And in the end, his popularity leveled out and actually went down a little bit by the time the election came around.
[13:06] A majority vote, one of the great things about rain choice voting is that you get the final
[13:15] tally between the two top candidates and the winter gets more than 50 percent.
[13:20] That 50 percent can come in an earlier round, but the winners are getting over 50 percent
[13:25] of the voters votes.
[13:28] It eliminates the spoiler effect.
[13:29] So sometimes we get into these elections where, well, a couple of things will happen.
[13:39] The spoiler effect is you get at someone running that you think will take, so sometimes
[13:45] candidates will go out and recruit another candidate that they think can take votes away
[13:50] from their opponent.
[13:52] It happens more often than we think, particularly in partisan elections.
[13:56] And this eliminates that spoiler effect.
[13:59] In fact, it also eliminates the vote splitting that takes place in elections.
[14:04] If you have three candidates who are very similar, who have similar values and similar
[14:09] principles and they have a similar base of support, sometimes they can split votes to
[14:13] the point where someone who is one issue candidate can come in and win under our plurality system.
[14:19] You can't have that happen under ranked choice voting.
[14:21] The candidates who have the broadest and deepest support are the candidates who get elected.
[14:30] So, this slide is a bit outdated.
[14:32] The actual notice to the Lieutenant Governor's Office needs to take place by March 15, 2021,
[14:39] and that's when you need to decide and have a decision that you send to the Lieutenant
[14:46] Governor's Office if you want to do rank choice voting.
[14:54] Okay, that's the end of my presentation.
[14:57] Thank you for that presentation.
[14:58] is there a way we could
[15:00] Can I get a copy of that email to us? Yeah, I've already sent it over to your staff and hopefully they could just send that over to you. Awesome. Thanks.
[15:09] Does anybody else have any questions for Mr. Lockhart? Yeah, I do. Mr. Lockhart, this is Cal Roberts. I've been watching you guys and have followed closely this and I think our democracy probably needs lots of structural changes to make things work better.
[15:28] I'm curious about this. One of the common arguments against rank choice voting is
[15:34] ballot exhaustion, where you have folks who
[15:37] they might only rank three candidates out of five and so when you get to that final fourth and
[15:42] fifth rounds they essentially their votes aren't counted. How would you respond to that concern?
[15:51] I would tell you that you're putting the power in the hands of voters.
[15:54] So, if a voter has the ability under the state laws it stands to rank every single candidate.
[16:04] But if they choose not to, they're actually making a proactive decision that they just simply aren't willing to even rank the ones that they don't want to.
[16:13] Sometimes there are many reasons why they choose to do that.
[16:16] But I think by putting the power into the hands of the voter, you're enabling them to have full discretion on what they do.
[16:29] I mean, I really think that when a voter, let's say there are five or six candidates running and they only choose to vote for three.
[16:37] For whatever reason, maybe they don't know enough about that candidate. Maybe they dislike that candidate so much they can't even put them last, but for whatever reason they've made that choice.
[16:47] so as the rounds go on, their ballot may be exhausted, but it's because they've made that choice,
[16:56] it's not because anybody has chosen it for them. And under plurality voting, there's so many ways
[17:01] to gain the system that sometimes you put voters in a place where they have to think, well, wait a
[17:06] second, if I do this, then I can't do this because I've got to do that. Many times, you'll have a
[17:15] candidate who you really prefer, but they just aren't getting a lot of support around town.
[17:20] But by golly, they believe like you do and you, and you, and you, and you, some, for whatever
[17:25] reason you want to vote for them, but because they don't have a chance of being the winner,
[17:29] many times they won't give you, you won't get their vote. I think that happened during our primary
[17:34] for governor, frankly. I think, I think that Greg Hughes and Thomas Wright didn't get some votes
[17:40] because people perceived it with two candidate rates.
[17:44] And so you don't have to worry about that
[17:46] under ranked choice voting.
[17:47] You can vote your conscience for whoever you want to vote for.
[17:50] And if that means you're going to rank all the candidates you can
[17:53] and if that means you are going to do a subset
[17:55] then you can, but it's in the hands of the voter.
[17:58] Thanks.
[17:59] What happens if candidate A, let's say we're to get 45%
[18:03] on the first ballot candidate B gets 38%.
[18:07] And then we go through multiple rounds
[18:08] with multiple candidates. And that ends up switching. So, Canada today had most the most
[18:15] ardent support at the beginning, but they end up, you know, losing by a sliver. You know,
[18:20] could we really say that that reflects the will of the people better than just by having
[18:24] having the current system that we have now?
[18:29] Yeah, so I think that goes to the heart of what it
[18:32] means for the candidate with the broadest and deepest support to get elected. Today, we have a
[18:38] popularity contest that is only monitored by who gets a vote.
[18:45] So we actually don't know the will of the voter below that.
[18:50] And if a candidate gets a lot of number two votes, it is possible that a candidate will
[18:57] get fewer number one votes and more number two votes and end up bumping up over a candidate
[19:02] that may have started off number one.
[19:04] It doesn't happen often.
[19:05] So it's not like it's a common occurrence.
[19:08] So I'll take you back to our convention,
[19:13] the Republican convention.
[19:15] It really candidates pretty much went out in order round by round.
[19:20] And their votes redistributed the people that had the highest voting total in the first round
[19:26] ended up getting the highest voting total in the last round.
[19:30] So that's the more likely outcome in a ranked choice voting election.
[19:34] But it does sometimes happen where a candidate will get fewer number ones and more number twos.
[19:41] Great. Thank you. Appreciate your presentation.
[19:44] Anybody else have any questions for Mr. Lockhart?
[19:47] I do, Mr. Mayor.
[19:48] So, Stan, if more cities join, does that mean there's an increased cost for more equipment
[19:54] or can the equipment that is currently housed at Utah County cover?
[19:59] I'm just one
[20:00] If you have, oh, if you've calculated for the incremental cost, the variable cost of doing businesses, you increase here. That's all. Yeah. Is that Fred? By any chance, there's that mic. Who's asking the question? That's my green who asked on behalf of Fred, because Fred's microphone's broken.
[20:18] I got my voice sound a little different than Mike's, I'm a little older than him.
[20:28] I got myself into trouble by guessing, didn't I?
[20:33] There are three ways to administer rank choice voting for draper.
[20:37] The first way is to go through Salt Lake County.
[20:40] as you've been outsourcing your elections now for a little over 20 years.
[20:46] If you're like many of the other cities in Salt Lake County and I have no reason to expect
[20:50] that you're different. And the pitch from the very beginning in the late 90s when the county
[20:57] asked cities to do this to outsource to them was that you're going to be able to save money because
[21:04] you don't have to duplicate our efforts and have you by voting equipment and have us by voting
[21:08] equipment. And that was absolutely the truth. So it made sense for cities to go ahead and allow
[21:15] the county to do the elections. However, we've discovered something and what we've discovered is
[21:22] that the counties are resistant to any changes in elections. And it doesn't matter whether it's
[21:28] spoke my mail, whether it is ID at the polls, whether it's same day voter registration,
[21:38] whatever the innovation is or it's ranked choice voting, our county elections officials
[21:44] around the state tend to resist it.
[21:46] And so they also resist ranked choice voting.
[21:49] And so right now, Sherry Swenson is unwilling to administer ranked choice voting.
[21:54] And we've engaged with her, we've had discussions with her, we have yet to see a valid reason why she's not willing to, but that's where it stands today.
[22:06] The county has just approved her purchase for some new equipment. She will have the ability to it's embedded inside the equipment that she's purchasing.
[22:16] So she could use ranked choice voting if she wanted to, but today we think it's somewhat
[22:22] unlikely that she's going to be willing.
[22:24] She charges about 250 per voter to the cities that she administers for.
[22:30] In Utah County, they charge just a little over $2 per voter.
[22:35] So that means that for every 10,000 voters, you're able to save $5,000 on an election using
[22:43] in Utah County instead of Salt Lake County.
[22:46] And because Draper is in both cities,
[22:49] you really have an easy option
[22:51] to use either county clerk for your voting needs.
[22:54] And so you could save money,
[22:56] even if you use plurality voting,
[22:58] I think I'd recommend that you go use Utah County
[23:00] because they'll save you many thousands of dollars,
[23:05] whether you use rank choice voting or not.
[23:08] But if you choose to use rank choice voting,
[23:10] now you get to save the cost of a primary.
[23:12] You'll save far more than half of what you normally spend on an election.
[23:17] So that really is, if I were in your shoes as a council member voting on this in charge
[23:22] of the budget wanting to save some money, I would go to Utah County and ask them to run
[23:28] either a plurality election or a ranked choice voting election because they're much less
[23:32] expensive on a per registered voter basis than Salt Lake County.
[23:37] The third option you have, there are many cities in Salt Lake County interested in using
[23:42] Range Choice Voting. Salt Lake City has sent a letter to the county clerk asking her to
[23:47] please use Range Choice Voting in 2021. We have several cities that have inquired. We've
[23:54] done presentations to a half a dozen cities. West Jordan and Cottonwood Heights opted in
[23:59] two years ago before opting out at the last minute because the county clerk wouldn't administer
[24:05] it. And so there's a great deal of interest throughout Salt Lake County in the cities.
[24:10] And what the way to do this even cheaper than $2 per voter is to allow ES and S, one
[24:20] of the vendors to rent equipment to the cities, have kind of a co-op.
[24:27] And then we have several organizations that can come in and run a cheaper election.
[24:35] We're actually working on one ourselves that ranked choice voting has gone out.
[24:39] We've got the former state elections officer, Kelleen Potter, who is working on doing this as
[24:49] effectively and securely and efficiently as the county court could do at about the same cost at
[24:57] about $2 for a voter. So those are the
[25:00] There are three options. But I think the best option is just going to Utah County.
[25:08] Any other questions for Mr. Lockhart?
[25:14] All right. Thank you, Stan. You're welcome. Mr. Fox, you had something you wanted to present as well about this. Go ahead. I think just basically, you know, Stan pretty much covered everything that we had for the presentation that we were going to do. Just the one thing we just want to talk about is just a couple of the concerns or just
[25:37] things we need to really kind of consider with rank choice voting. Right now we've got, we've reached out to Utah County, so as like Stan mentioned, you know they've they've run it before.
[25:51] But running a having Utah County run the election in Salt Lake County might be confusing for for people, especially since we've got such a smaller portion of our population is in Utah County.
[26:05] and obviously the majority of the populations in Salt Lake County.
[26:11] So that's one.
[26:13] And we're just pointing out that with Salt Lake County, yes, since they've been authorized
[26:20] to purchase the equipment, and again, we've got trying to get some information from them
[26:24] and whether or not they're going to run the rank choice voting at this point in time.
[26:30] We're still waiting to hear back on that, but they did standpoint it out.
[26:34] they did get authorized to purchase the equipment so they'll have the ability to do that.
[26:42] I'm going to look to Laura see if she has anything else that she wants to add to that.
[26:47] Didn't you have a PowerPoint you wanted to show us?
[26:56] I don't know if we need to show the I don't know if we need to show the PowerPoint after stands because
[27:03] it covers pretty much the same things. The only other the only concern I have is I've reached out to
[27:07] both Utah County and Salt Lake County.
[27:10] Utah County has not responded.
[27:11] This is a super busy time for the counties
[27:13] as you can imagine, so I'm not surprised
[27:15] that they haven't returned my, you know.
[27:17] I did get an email today from Salt Lake County
[27:22] and she will, we're gonna talk next week
[27:27] about whether or not they're gonna be able to do it.
[27:30] My other concern with Utah County,
[27:32] I know Mr. Lockhart said that they could do it.
[27:35] I don't know if they even want to do it and so that's what I'm trying to find out from them
[27:41] That was the question I had for them if that's even an option for them. I do have several other city recorders that are kind of curious
[27:49] About it, but I haven't heard of any others that are
[27:53] Looking into it yet. So we'll see
[27:57] So when I think just to kind of show you this was
[28:00] a sample of the ballot that was done in vineyard just so you can kind of see what the what this looks like
[28:05] There was, it looks like there was seven candidates and so that was just one thing that that would be beneficial for you to see.
[28:17] So yeah, so this is the participation.
[28:21] The three parts, so if we are interested, we need to get a letter into the Lieutenant Governor's office to do it.
[28:28] Again, there's a party mentioned Utah County has the ability to do it and they have party one orange choice voting.
[28:35] And then the issue of Salt Lake County, and then yeah, just what we've already talked about.
[28:41] And I think, you know, Stan did a good job in talking about the requirements for like public education with a new methodology to do this.
[28:52] Russ, can I ask you a question on that?
[28:54] If you opt in then are you locked into it for the five year period then?
[29:00] No, you can withdraw.
[29:04] according to the state statute you can withdraw your notice of intent it just
[29:08] has to be ending to the lieutenant governor by April 15th and actually you
[29:12] have to opt in every time so when you opt when you opt in you're only opting in
[29:18] for that year so if then you're in case it decides to do it they need to go
[29:22] have to reappear so one of the concepts of this is the it only you only have one
[29:29] election right you don't have you don't have a primary election you just have
[29:33] you just have one election with the rank choice ballot.
[29:37] Yeah, that's correct.
[29:38] So three of you are going to be running again.
[29:42] You would even declare to audits.
[29:44] You just have to one election in November.
[29:47] I participated in the Republican Convention vote
[29:51] as a delegate, and it was pretty interesting to watch it.
[29:56] It actually, it happened, and I mean I think the computer did it.
[30:00] Assembly, but they laid it out sort of in a, they, they released the results, they would take a couple of minutes between each tally. But I think they, they think they had the data in the second it was. But it was interesting to watch it. I don't know if you saw it, but it, it's just how it. In that particular one, he was sort of just rose up through. It was, it was interesting. I didn't, I didn't have a problem with it in the, in that context, but I guess just to be clear, it would, it would be different.
[30:29] you wouldn't have a primary election, you only have one election.
[30:32] So you wouldn't even declare until August?
[30:37] Correct.
[30:47] So it really does push the whole thing back.
[30:51] Well, it just shortens the election period.
[30:56] And also, say, yeah, so to me, you reduce the voter
[31:02] fatigue of the residents.
[31:04] And then it's also less expensive for the candidates, too.
[31:08] I do.
[31:11] That to me is a positive.
[31:16] It's like a spotlight on Cal.
[31:21] It's his night. It's your night.
[31:25] I'm frankly interested in it thinking about it.
[31:30] I mean, I've talked to the Mayor of Vineyard, Julie,
[31:33] former and she thought it went well in her city
[31:37] and she thought the public most importantly liked it
[31:40] because the other thing she said that was interesting,
[31:43] she said it was less, there was less inclination
[31:46] for a negative type campaigning,
[31:48] which is a kind of what the governor's quote was,
[31:50] but it was because everyone wanted
[31:52] to at least be your number two, so there was less inclination
[31:56] to, you know, which I'm sure voters would probably
[31:58] appreciate, like more than, especially Utah voters.
[32:01] Utah voters do not like negative, but all right,
[32:06] well, Stan, did you have anything else to add?
[32:08] I see you sitting there nicely quietly.
[32:13] Yeah, I think I would tell you that rank choice, here's a couple of additional things.
[32:19] Ranked choice voting elections are more issue-oriented than typical plurality elections, and it's
[32:26] not just the issues you care about, you're going to talk about the issues your opponents care
[32:30] about, because you want to get their supporters number two votes.
[32:33] So, there's a lot of talk about what the issues are that would face draper in the next
[32:39] four years.
[32:40] And that is good for our democracy and our republic to have issues-based campaigns and not
[32:47] have them be the politics of personal destruction, which so often happen in our country right
[32:52] now and in our state, frankly, Goli.
[32:56] Those city council races, at least the ones I've been in over the last 20 years, have
[33:01] more negative campaigning than all the partisan races combined.
[33:06] So to have an incentive for candidates to be civil to one another is positive.
[33:11] Also the strategy in a right choice voting election, in a plurality election you try to find
[33:17] your base and then you play to your base and you've got to turn out your base.
[33:21] Well in a right choice voting election you need to reach out to all voters because even if
[33:26] you're not their number one you might be their number two and so voters get more attention
[33:30] from candidates in ranked choice voting elections. And that is positive. But the biggest positive
[33:35] in a ranked choice voting election is that the will of the voters more fully expressed. And that
[33:41] is also good for our form of government.
[33:45] Anybody else have any comments or further discussion?
[33:49] I got one more questions last point. I'm just thinking through this. So push back if I'm wrong.
[33:54] I just think about city council races, and I wonder if what results as yields is more, yes,
[34:03] you do get a push towards the middle so to speak, but do you then not get representation of key areas?
[34:09] So instead of getting representation of the west side or the south side where you got the rabbit base there,
[34:17] instead you just get kind of like three more vanilla candidates from the center area.
[34:22] And so I wonder if in some situations it doesn't actually give this much representation for our type of option
[34:28] I'm just throwing it out there
[34:31] What would you say to that stand on if you followed me my logic there, but
[34:36] Yeah, we don't have districts so
[34:39] Like if you wanted if you wanted to have
[34:42] Representation as areas. That's what you do. I don't think right choice really
[34:49] Well I think it could because what it does is the geographic area is at least here in
[34:53] Draper they're associated typically with a base a lot of times in these elections if you
[35:00] I'm just wondering if you nullify or you kind of, you know, you get rid of that effect. And so what you end up getting is certain areas that no longer actually are. Their vote isn't as potent as it would have been. Have they been able to kind of choose a line and get behind their candidate. Instead it gets diffused amongst, you know, called the establishment candidate. Yeah, I kind of see that differently. I kind of see it where maybe those that are.
[35:29] that third or fourth choice could maybe I think it would actually balance it more than what we have now.
[35:38] And I would agree with what Mr. Green said, you know, we're all at large, so you should be campaigning to everyone to begin with, right?
[35:45] You're going out and you're meeting with everybody and saying you'd be a voice to all residents, so you would simply be continuing to do that.
[35:53] Right. I know what you're going to say to that if he understood the question.
[36:02] Here's what I would say. Ranked choice voting has less gaming of the system than plurality voting.
[36:09] So when you have multiple winners in an election as many of our cities do,
[36:14] there's actually a statistical reason for you to tell your supporters only vote for me
[36:21] because statistically it gives you a better chance of being elected.
[36:25] Under ranked choice voting there is no advantage in telling your supporters to only vote for one.
[36:29] Under ranked choice voting you tell your supporters, please rank me number one.
[36:36] But there's no advantage in having somebody else, you know.
[36:41] I guess the way to say it is there are just fewer opportunities to game the system.
[36:47] Let me give you one other cool thing that came up during the presidential primaries this
[36:53] year.
[36:55] We had several candidates drop out towards the end of that race after many of the mail-in
[37:00] votes were sent in on the Democrat side.
[37:03] There were literally millions of voters that were disenfranchised because their favorite candidate
[37:09] who they had voted for dropped out of that race within three or four days before the election.
[37:15] So it solves that problem as well if if if a candidate does drop out right before the election, it won't harm your election.
[37:23] That candidate will will get their share of the votes, but because they've ranked them, the other candidates, the voter will still get a chance to participate in the election.
[37:43] Thank you, Stan. Appreciate it.
[37:45] You're welcome pre-figure tiny council members and mayor and staff
[37:52] Right our next item on the agenda is
[37:56] A need for a closed session
[38:00] Sorry, man, we put that on there in case we don't have a good one. We don't need one
[38:04] All right, that takes us to item number three, which is council manager
[38:08] Or council manager discussion who would like to go first?
[38:17] Mr. Lowry go ahead, sir
[38:19] I sent an email of a photo to everybody, this afternoon, I don't know if you saw it, at least to the council members, the document that was shared in the Tree Commission meeting this week, and basically this
[38:48] issue was brought up with the construction on 138 South when we widened that and then put in that new land.
[38:56] landscaping. I don't know, Rhett did waitlin' talk to you about this at all from Monday,
[39:03] yesterday.
[39:06] So there's a concern when the contractor planted those trees that they, you know,
[39:16] and did the landscaping. They just planted those trees in road base, and then also left
[39:21] a lot of concrete and stuff along the drive strip and just lay the top soil on the slot over the
[39:28] top of it. And what it did is it just brought up a concern or an issue that we have like where
[39:34] way those trees have been planted they're not going to survive they're we're going to lose them
[39:39] so it's just kind of a waste. And I guess one of the things that's been brought up with this is when
[39:46] engineering comes out to inspect that the road make sure it's all done
[39:51] you know they're focused on making sure that that road and all of that's been
[39:56] done correctly but the landscaping isn't
[40:02] And we had one of the members on the tree commission that lives near here. And she gave the example of when she noticed how it was going, she went talk to the contractor and said, hey, you realize that those trees need to be planted differently. And then also discuss the concern about the drive strip where there was all these concrete chunks and things. And by the time she got back from work, they'd already covered it with top soil. You know, you can tell. Now,
[40:29] Now one of the concerns is we don't want this to create too much bureaucracy you haven't
[40:34] have so many inspections or whatever but it was kind of discussed that maybe we could
[40:41] come up with a plan where the parks and public works could coordinate where the landscaping
[40:49] of that requires maybe a review or an inspection by someone in the parks or the same way that
[40:57] we'd have the street and stuff constructed to help prevent something like this happening
[41:02] so that if we're paying for that kind of landscaping, we want to make sure that it'll
[41:09] be successful.
[41:11] That makes sense.
[41:12] Absolutely.
[41:13] I shouldn't have happened that way.
[41:14] We'll make sure that it gets taken care of.
[41:16] So it's just a matter of it.
[41:18] And this is not a criticism at all because it's easily lost with the street inspection.
[41:24] We should just be part of our contract, actually.
[41:27] Yeah, and I think that materials hauled out. Yeah, and I think they're probably it was explained, you know, and they're given the documentation on how to properly plant the trees and all of that, but you know, sometimes you're in a hurry just to get the job done and get out of there.
[41:41] And I know there was a lot of pressure on 138. So we're just using this as an example of what maybe we need to look at going forward. So we'll follow up on that.
[41:51] And there was one other thing with the tree commission, they are going to move forward
[41:57] in planning an entrance for down on from Riverton into Draper on 126 South or 123 South.
[42:09] And once they can give us a plan on that, then we can figure out a budget.
[42:15] And I think that's pretty much the main thing.
[42:18] they are we've got a good active commission there right now people that are
[42:23] really interested in wanting to to have input I don't know Russ if you have
[42:28] anything to add to it is Russ was there um no either than just a one one thing
[42:35] they're also working on is they're they're gonna focus on looking at our code and
[42:41] getting some of the suggestions and changes so we've been wanting them to do for a
[42:46] while so and they're getting pretty active with that.
[42:50] They want to have a put together an educational campaign
[42:53] on, you know, help beautifying our yards
[42:55] and proper tree planning, taking care,
[42:57] what kind of trees work.
[42:58] We mentioned Bretney that they may,
[43:00] as we're redeveloped on the website,
[43:02] have a way that we can help promote it
[43:04] through there too.
[43:06] Okay, that's all I have.
[43:09] Who's next?
[43:10] Could we do anything with the 146 exit?
[43:14] It looks so terrible.
[43:15] Could it be beautified at all?
[43:27] Do you mean the intersection itself?
[43:30] Well, as you come off and come out toward Maverick,
[43:34] it's just the strash everywhere.
[43:36] There's no landscape name.
[43:41] It doesn't say welcome to Drey Per sign and stuff.
[43:44] Yeah, well, what comes, my dear?
[43:47] Thank you.
[43:48] Would you want the Tree Commission to give any suggestions
[43:51] on that or not?
[43:52] I'm not, David, would you want them to give any suggestions on that?
[43:57] But I can give us, leave it alone.
[43:58] Give this staff a real quick chance to just look at it and see what options there are.
[44:02] Part of it is it's controlled by you, some of it's controlled by you.
[44:04] Yeah.
[44:05] So we just have to see what Jerry's, we can do something at, and maybe you don't want to let us do
[44:10] some work, but we can look at it.
[44:12] That would be nice, especially with plural sight, that's going to be used a lot there.
[44:18] I don't know what's going on with all the trash there recently, but I've gotten a couple
[44:21] complaints about how poorly it's looking.
[44:27] Well, they can't they can't put the
[44:28] convicts out to pick up the trash on account of the COVID. So usually you have
[44:34] people out doing their community service if you will and now their community
[44:38] cannot be served due to the COVID. So the trash crews may be quarantined if you
[44:45] will. That could be one of the reasons,
[44:51] but hopefully we can get them back out
[45:00] Mr. Roberts, do you have anything?
[45:04] I don't have anything except addressing this public comment. I was forwarded to us by Kelly. Is that was that about the dearest property? Yeah, I'm not sure what they're looking for. Well, council's direction was once we sold off the 10 acres or so up there that we would put the remaining property in the conservation movement. So we were just going to wait until that happened. And then
[45:31] We've got any bytes interest on that property at all.
[45:36] Yeah, last I talked with the real estate agents.
[45:40] We have had several developers that were interested in the property.
[45:46] We did have a single user that's looking at possibly purchasing it.
[45:53] Last I talked to him, he was hoping to get an offer, but we still haven't seen that yet.
[45:59] Thank you, that's all from me.
[46:01] It's Fondry.
[46:03] I don't have anything.
[46:05] I had one thing.
[46:07] So I had a chance, Kelly and I had a chance to interview all the applicants for the new board, the cultural diversity inclusion board.
[46:16] And I've selected the nine people plus three alternates that I want to have on it.
[46:21] You should all have been given an opportunity to look over all those names if you haven't.
[46:25] but there's a packet you can get to look over.
[46:28] I just wanted you to see who they were
[46:30] and if you have any issues, just talk to me about it.
[46:33] I'm happy to talk about them.
[46:35] Kind of go through the process, what we did,
[46:37] but it was a pretty awesome experience.
[46:40] We had a lot of applicants,
[46:42] and it's a great group of people.
[46:44] I'm pretty excited about it, actually.
[46:46] There are a lot of very interesting, well-educated
[46:50] and diverse groups of folks
[46:52] that are very interested in seeing our community
[46:54] to be, you know, more diverse and more sensitive to those issues.
[46:58] So I think it'll be, it'll be a great thing.
[47:01] We're going to hopefully put it on the agenda for our next meeting.
[47:04] So you can get those guys in place and working.
[47:08] So and then, um, thanks, mayor for putting the work in on that.
[47:13] I think that's going to be really good.
[47:14] I think it will be.
[47:16] Yeah.
[47:16] And then we, we had the, we had for a few of us, David and me and Fred,
[47:24] went on the Jordan River a couple been three weeks ago now probably but I just
[47:30] wanted y'all to know that I wasn't sure what it was going to be like to canoe
[47:34] down the Jordan River because I haven't done it for a long time but it was
[47:38] actually quite lovely it was very it was fun it was it was pretty fun and you
[47:44] know there was one canoe that tipped over a few times but my sister was in that
[47:48] she's not a very good canoeer but but it was it was cool to see the river from
[47:53] perspective and I think that we ought to maybe do some focus if we can. I know we're
[48:00] putting our boat dock in but I just wanted to know I think that resource, the opportunity
[48:04] to recreate there is going to be pretty awesome. And the other question I have is if we
[48:09] do a dock at the launch point at the Rotary Park, I wonder if I was wondering about finding
[48:17] some way to maybe improve a way to get out of the river like at 114th or wherever we did.
[48:22] Now, I had a little trouble navigating myself out of the canoe.
[48:26] I stayed completely dry until that part, but I felt in the river at the deepest point
[48:32] of the river.
[48:33] But if we're going to do that boat launch, maybe there's a way we could find a spot
[48:37] or two to make it clear out an area so people could run there, you know, get out of the
[48:41] river.
[48:44] If you'd maybe look into that, Rhett.
[48:46] I don't think you have to do like a dock, but like it was a, it was a, it was a treacherous
[48:51] get out spot. Isn't that a part of the county's plans when they do the loading
[48:56] docks to make it in area to easily get in and out of? Yeah, they've got
[49:02] several places planned. I think the closest one if you put in a rotary would be
[49:08] in South Jordan but there might be just a casual place that we could clear
[49:14] out. Maybe we just got out there to make it shorter but it was it was a spot
[49:19] where there was a way to fall in.
[49:21] Didn't Mr. Dobbins manage to get out easily and drive?
[49:25] He's a lot, he's a lot skinnier than me in April to him.
[49:28] He was in the front of the canoe.
[49:30] I got him right up to the get-outs spot,
[49:33] and then I had to, he left me essentially.
[49:37] That's what it was, he just left me in there
[49:40] and canoe was unstable due to my girth and went over.
[49:45] But it'd be something that one person could accomplish
[49:47] on their own but it was I would call it a little different than that but that's okay it was it
[49:54] was cool to do though and I think we all y'all ought to go try it we ought to do it again because it
[49:58] It was, it was fun.
[50:00] It's a cool river. It's not as deep in most places as where I fell in, but we ran it ground
[50:06] with time with you, but it was, I think there's, it's a great, I think there's awesome
[50:10] potential, especially as it goes by our TOD spot, and all the areas there that people could
[50:15] really get to enjoy it. It could be cool. I just think it's a matter of people don't realize
[50:19] it's another recreational thing we have. There was a really cool company that came and spoke
[50:25] at parks and trails, a nonprofit group. He actually lives here in Draper that wants to set up a little
[50:31] business to rent kayaks and can use and bikes at the new Rotary Park. Yeah, and he then also
[50:41] run a little shuttle to bring people back from wherever they get off. So I think that would be cool,
[50:46] just to make it more available. If you could have a shuttle thing set up, it would be that would be
[50:53] golden. But it's it's it's it was pretty fun I liked it so what's the water like like when you're
[51:01] actually in it?
[51:04] Well he didn't die so surprisingly it was surprisingly really quite clear yeah it was
[51:13] clear it didn't you know it's I mean it was pretty clean I mean the water's clean there's just some
[51:20] spots where there's trash but um that you know but it yeah it was I was surprised I
[51:25] I thought it'd be more canal-like than it was it wasn't it wasn't there's it
[51:30] moves pretty fast too that that's what I was really kind of surprised by how fast it
[51:34] goes it was from what 123rd to 114th South it was about what 40 minutes 35 40
[51:42] minutes you would had no idea that you were in the middle of the city yeah it was
[51:48] it was pretty awesome but that was all I had Mr. Green did you have any council
[51:53] manager items? All right that we have about 10 minutes and we go ahead. We've had
[51:59] a string of break ins at cars at trailheads and parking lots. Some of these are
[52:05] happening just in the middle of the day while people are other people are in that
[52:10] area so we had a meeting today with chief finding and rat we're looking at what
[52:14] that would take to put security cameras in our parking lots
[52:19] and areas so that we can increase the safety.
[52:23] And if there is a break in, we will have a recording of it.
[52:26] So probably about a month or two of a plan to come back to you.
[52:30] But you'll probably hear from residents
[52:31] that there's a growing concern about how
[52:34] brazen these people are.
[52:36] We've had two, at least in the last two weeks,
[52:39] I'm aware of, within 10 minutes of the person parking
[52:41] or car leaving, the car was broken into you.
[52:43] So it's clear that people are watching them and are going after it.
[52:48] We're going to remind people not to leave things in their cars, don't leave valuables in
[52:54] it.
[52:55] That will help discourage it.
[52:57] But clearly there's a lot of activity going on that we want to deal with, but we think
[53:03] that we can deal with some of it.
[53:04] We have a few parking lots that just don't have access or don't have power that we may not
[53:10] be able to get it to, but we're going to look at all of our parking areas to see if we can address it.
[53:17] That's all I had.
[53:22] Due to the excessive COVID-19 issues that we are experiencing, where many more
[53:28] people are using the outdoors and the parking lots, etc. Is it a COVID-related potential to have maybe
[53:36] you can hire some private security, you know, a security company to do some patrols just
[53:44] to just maybe not forever, but just to get it, what's a potential for that.
[53:49] Maybe I'll just have to look at the federal legislation on it and see if it qualifies.
[53:55] Basically, the funding, it's clear it stays that it has to be a direct COVID-related expense.
[54:04] And then they leave it up to us to make that decision with the caveat that if they think we're wrong then we pay it back.
[54:10] So we just, I'll go through and look at it.
[54:12] I think that pandemic training center with a very large theater to help a lot of people come in and learn about pandemics is a good idea.
[54:22] Back to that though, we do have more people out using the trails and more people out unemployed to be able to steal from them.
[54:31] And that is all COVID related.
[54:32] So I mean, I don't think private security be that expensive.
[54:36] It would supplement our cops.
[54:38] And they, I mean, I think that's enough of a deterrent.
[54:42] On childless, chief, I didn't see what he thinks.
[54:44] I'll let you know.
[54:45] All right, then anyone else with the Mr. Rat?
[54:50] Go ahead.
[54:50] If I could just quick, Mayor.
[54:52] We've had a trail naming policy question for you.
[54:57] If you remember 2015, we passed a resolution saying it's
[55:00] Recommended to get council approval to name a trail after someone's name. We've had several private donors that have had the opportunity to name a trail, but when it's named after someone that requires council approval. Some of the last ones we've done would be like Lexi and Ethan Trail, Ralph Trail, after Ralph Wadsworth, of course Clarksman's. The executive director of the Quorum Canyon Trellist Foundation is paid for many trails and just put in the one
[55:30] connecting Anne's to up to the Rage Hill connecting to the higher new trail. He's
[55:35] requested to name that trail or that portion to name it Liffey's Trail which would
[55:41] be after his adopted daughter. I'm just putting that forth towards the Mayor
[55:47] Council with that something you would be interested in doing or I could do it in a
[55:52] more formal process if you prefer. That was just his request to name Liffey's
[56:00] trail. Is this bill becker? Yes.
[56:05] You just put a lot of time into it for sure. What's your other?
[56:12] We'd have to put on an agenda. You just want to see what the temperature is for it. I think the
[56:17] resolution says it's just suggested to get council approval. I could formally put it in a resolution if
[56:24] you prefer.
[56:28] I don't have a problem with it because nice if you had a formal resolution and there's
[56:32] record of it for for them to you know what we can do that next but not I would probably
[56:39] good idea just to make it formal so we'll we'll come back with it and let's make sure that Bill
[56:44] really wanted this trail because he kind of wasn't sure at the end of the last meeting okay he was
[56:53] like well maybe not this trail I'm not sure about this trail anymore the next trail all right that
[56:59] gives you about a seven minute break so we'll take a break until our seven o'clock meeting
[57:05] Behind folks. Let's get I'd like to call our study or a
[57:10] Britha session to order. It is a little bit past seven.
[57:15] Normally we're on time. Our first item is a proclamation.
[57:22] Am I reading this proclamation? I think
[57:28] I will read it.
[57:30] This is a it's item number two. It's a proclamation regarding
[57:34] including the declaring October 4th through the 10th, 2020 as fire prevention week.
[57:42] So let me read this proclamation.
[57:43] Whereas the city of Draper, Utah is committed to improving the safety and security of all
[57:47] those living in and visiting Draper City.
[57:50] And whereas fire is a serious public safety concern both locally and nationally, and homes
[57:55] are the locations where people are at greatest risk from fire.
[57:58] And whereas home fires killed more than 2,630 people in the United States in 2017,
[58:05] according to the National Fire Protection Association, the NFPA,
[58:10] and fire departments in the United States responded to 357,000 home fires.
[58:16] And whereas cooking is the leading cause of home fires in the United States,
[58:20] where fire departments respond to more than 173,200 annually between 2013 and 2017.
[58:27] and we're as two of every five home fires start in the kitchen with 31% of these fires
[58:35] resulting from unattended cooking and we're as more than half of reported non-fatal home
[58:40] cooking fire injuries occurred when the victims tried to fight the fire themselves whereas
[58:45] children under five faced a higher risk of non-fire burns associated with cooking than
[58:50] being burned in a cooking fire whereas draper city residents should stay in the kitchen when
[58:55] frying food on the stovetop, keep a three-foot kid-free zone around cooking areas, and keep
[59:01] anything that can catch fire away from stovetops.
[59:04] Whereas residents who have planned and participated at a home fire skate plant are more prepared
[59:08] and will therefore be more likely to survive a fire, and whereas working smoke alarms cut
[59:13] the risk of dying and reported home fires in half, whereas Draper City's first responders
[59:19] are dedicated to reducing the occurrence of home fires and home fire injuries through prevention
[59:23] and fire protection education, and whereas drapes of these residents are responsive to public education matters and can take personal steps to increase their safety from fire, especially in their homes and whereas the 2020 fire prevention week theme, serve up fire safety in the kitchen effectively serves to remind us to stay alert and use caution when cooking to reduce the risk of kitchen fires.
[59:46] Therefore, I mayor Troy Walker, a very busy city to hear by proclaim October the 4th through
[59:51] the 10th, 2020, as fire prevention week and throughout the city and I urge all people
[59:57] will very percentage to check their
[59:59] Kitchens for fire.
[1:00:12] All right. That was a long one. What a good one. All right. That's done. Item number three is public comment, general public comment period. I know we got one public comment emailed to us. Mr. Fox is there anyone on the on the Zoom would like to make a public comment.
[1:00:29] I will ask if anyone would like to make public comment at this point in time, click on
[1:00:36] your name and then click the race hand feature and then I will unmute you.
[1:00:48] Mr. Mayor, nobody's raised their hand at this point.
[1:00:50] All right.
[1:00:50] Seeing no one for general public comment, I'll close that public comment and bring it back
[1:00:54] to the council.
[1:00:54] Item number four is a consent items.
[1:00:56] Item A is approval of the September 15th, 2020 City Council meeting minutes.
[1:01:01] Item B is approval of September 20th, 2020 City Council meeting.
[1:01:04] In the treatment minutes, item C is approval of ordinance number 1455,
[1:01:09] amending section 7-4-130, and 15-1-050 of the drape sheet municipal code,
[1:01:16] pertaining to firearms and disturbance and disturbance of wildlife.
[1:01:22] Item D is approval of ordinance number 1460, enacting a temporary land use
[1:01:27] regulation that suspends certain provisions of subsection 9-26-080D of the drape
[1:01:34] Mr. Smith, regarding temporary signage, those are all the consent items, council members.
[1:01:40] Mr. Mayor.
[1:01:41] Ms. Fodderick.
[1:01:42] I move we approve consent items A through D.
[1:01:45] Motion is to approve items A through D and my Ms. Fodderick is there a second.
[1:01:49] I'll second.
[1:01:50] Second by Mr. Roberts.
[1:01:51] Any further discussion?
[1:01:54] Ms. Fodder, how do you vote?
[1:01:55] Yes.
[1:01:55] Mr. Roberts.
[1:01:56] Yes.
[1:01:57] Mr. Green.
[1:01:57] Yes.
[1:01:58] Mr. Lowry.
[1:01:59] No.
[1:02:02] Mr. Lowry.
[1:02:03] Yes.
[1:02:03] and Miss Lowry is no, right, so that item passes four to one.
[1:02:09] Item five is next, this is a public hearing.
[1:02:13] It's ordinance number 1458 and number 1459, one, two, three, XD land use and zone map amendment.
[1:02:20] It's a request by Keaton Morton representing XD development to amend the land use map for
[1:02:25] the southern half of the subject property from town center to neighborhood commercial and to amend the zoning designation for
[1:02:32] the entire site from RA2 residential agricultural 20,000 square foot lot, a minimum to CC community
[1:02:39] commercial, the properties located approximately 736 East, 1, 2,300 South, and 749 and 3763 East
[1:02:47] Pioneer Road. Staff report by Mary Ann, go ahead Mary Ann.
[1:02:50] Thank you Mayor. The subject property is shown on your screen, and you can see it borders
[1:02:56] there's a hundred and twenty-third south on the north and then it goes all the way through to
[1:03:00] green your road on the south. 700 east is just to the west of the site and this corner
[1:03:07] parcel here you would know as the Beehive Homes development.
[1:03:11] As noted the current land use designation for these parcels is split, the northern half
[1:03:16] is neighborhood commercial and the southern half is currently town center. The applicant
[1:03:22] is proposing to change the entire site to neighborhood commercial and then also as noted the current
[1:03:29] zoning of the property is RA2 which is the brown and the applicant is requesting to rezone to
[1:03:35] CC. We can see there is some CC in the area on the east side here which is known as hangar 15 bicycles
[1:03:44] and then also adjacent and across the street to where 711 is to the north where the shopping center
[1:03:50] as worked on in these is is CN. The CC zone is what the applicant has requested and that would
[1:03:59] allow a building up to 45 feet or approximately three stories and height. Any proposed building
[1:04:05] the applicant has indicated that it would be closer to the 123rd frontage and the rear portion
[1:04:12] would be used for parking and then access onto Pioneer Road. The CN zone across the street has a
[1:04:19] height limit of 35 feet for reference.
[1:04:24] This was heard before the Planning Commission
[1:04:26] on June 11th, 2020,
[1:04:28] and the negative recommendation was forwarded
[1:04:31] to the City Council with a vote of four to one.
[1:04:34] These are some photos of the site.
[1:04:37] This part of 123 is currently the large field
[1:04:40] and the house here is the one
[1:04:43] that typically puts up all the inflatables
[1:04:45] for the different holidays.
[1:04:47] And then this is the entrance from the backside
[1:04:49] from Pioneer the canal is just over here on the left side of the screen and then
[1:04:55] and the high pumps is over.
[1:04:58] I did receive one.
[1:05:00] Call from a neighboring property, and he was just looking for more information about the application. It'd be happy to answer any questions you have.
[1:05:13] Anyone have any questions for Mary Ann?
[1:05:20] All right, seeing none at this time is the, is the applicant online?
[1:05:28] Previously, there was Eric from XD development was online, and I don't see him anymore.
[1:05:39] All right. The applicant's not on there. Let me go to
[1:05:44] to the public hearing, is there anyone from the public that would like to address the council on item number five?
[1:05:53] Again, anyone who's interested in doing public comment, press on the presentation, or
[1:05:59] excuse me, press on the participants button, click on your name and hit the raise hand feature.
[1:06:21] Council, I just received a request from the applicant to withdraw the application.
[1:06:28] All right, Mr. Fox, was there anyone from the public that wanted to comment?
[1:06:32] No, Mr. Mayor.
[1:06:34] All right, okay, so we'll close the public hearing.
[1:06:36] This all over, go ahead again.
[1:06:37] You're saying that the applicant wants to withdraw?
[1:06:43] Mr. Barker, give us your legal analysis, said withdraw.
[1:06:51] I believe the applicant is under our ordinance if I'm not mistaken is allowed to pull that mask down just a little, sir.
[1:07:02] I think under our code they're allowed to withdraw their application anytime.
[1:07:07] It's treated differently than any.
[1:07:11] Let me just check our code to verify that.
[1:07:15] Mr.
[1:07:30] Barkin, can we still vote on it if we want?
[1:07:33] I think if they wanted a draw, there would be no vote at this point.
[1:07:37] Okay.
[1:07:37] Would be a null application, if you will.
[1:07:50] No pressure, Mr. Barker.
[1:07:52] No, there's nothing like looking up code while we're silent.
[1:07:58] I have a curiosity question for Mary Ann, if we want to entertain that while you're.
[1:08:03] Fill the silence.
[1:08:05] So Mary Ann, was there a reason why the town center zoning didn't fit on their parking?
[1:08:10] I mean, it was the Townsend or Land Use designation, but it wasn't zoned that.
[1:08:16] No, but they would have the only zone that's compatible with the Townsend or Land Use is the Townsend or Zoned, and that zone, it'd be very difficult to develop the site because the buildings have to be closer to the street, and it would almost make this pioneer roadside difficult to use as access, and they would need it because they only have that one access on 123rd.
[1:08:39] Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I was looking under a separate section of code but under under 9-5-040C, the applicant can withdraw an application anytime prior to action on the application by the council.
[1:08:54] So if they've made their intent to withdraw their application known, then I think at this point there's nothing back upon.
[1:09:04] Okay, Mr. Oliver, that's their intent, it was the withdrawal, you're 100% it's the right applicant and
[1:09:12] Okay
[1:09:13] All right, well that makes that one easier that item number five for the record has been withdrawn from consideration by the council by the applicant
[1:09:24] via text message to
[1:09:27] Miss Oliver
[1:09:27] all right
[1:09:30] For the record
[1:09:31] All right, number six is also, now this is the question I have.
[1:09:36] Didn't we do a public hearing on 6 and 7 already?
[1:09:39] Yes.
[1:09:41] We continue to.
[1:09:43] Okay, so these aren't going to be public hearing items.
[1:09:45] That's a, for the record, that's a misprint on this agenda.
[1:09:49] We've already done the public hearing.
[1:09:50] It was closed.
[1:09:51] So these items are set for the Council to take action.
[1:09:54] These should be an action item, item number six, action item.
[1:09:57] So item number six as an action item is
[1:10:00] Ordinance, December 1457. It's the short subdivision zoning map amendment. It's on the request of ballot, short to amend the zoning designation for the property of RA1 residential agricultural, 40,000 square footlot minimum to RA2 residential agricultural, 20,000 square footlot minimum, the property is approximately 1.5 acres in size and is located approximately 1017 East 13200 South. And we have a staff report by Mr. Todd Draper, a descendant of William Draper.
[1:10:29] go ahead, sir.
[1:10:33] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[1:10:36] So as you
[1:10:37] quickly stated, this was presented at the last council meeting. I don't have
[1:10:43] anything new necessarily to add, but I can go through the slides again if there's
[1:10:47] anything that you have questions on. This is a rezone or a zoning map amendment
[1:10:54] from the RA1 to the RA2 zone. And it's by Alex short.
[1:11:07] Okay, councilmembers, you had a chance to hear this and consider it, heard public hearing.
[1:11:13] It's now for action. Is there a motion?
[1:11:18] What did the planning commission vote on this? They moved 4-1 correct to pass.
[1:11:23] So, Todd, if you're planning staff, what I have for my notes was I believe they were 5-0 before a positive recommendation to the council.
[1:11:31] I
[1:11:36] actually have some concerns about this one.
[1:11:38] I'm worried that it's going to have an adverse impact on some of the adjacent property.
[1:11:44] Mr. Mayor, I move to deny the application.
[1:11:47] All right, Mr. Green's made a motion to deny item number six, one is number 1457.
[1:11:54] Is there a second?
[1:11:55] I'll second that.
[1:11:56] All right, motion by Mr. Green and a second by Ms. Lowry.
[1:12:00] Is there further discussion on the motion, Mr. Green?
[1:12:04] I just have too many questions about its access entry compliance with the flag law that I just think it's best to that stay that one acre.
[1:12:15] I would agree. I just think it just doesn't just doesn't seem to fit by by changing that.
[1:12:27] We are looking to maintain some unique characteristics in this neighborhood and it should have some of these large lots remain.
[1:12:33] And I do believe that there are some adverse impacts on the adjacent properties by moving forward here
[1:12:42] Any further discussion or comments?
[1:12:47] All right, seeing none. I'm Mr. Green. How do you vote? Yes? Ms. Lowry. Yes, Mr. Lowry. Yes, Ms. Faudry. No
[1:12:56] Mr. Roberts
[1:12:58] No
[1:12:59] All right, that item passes three to two
[1:13:04] The denial passes how many passes three to two and it has been denied
[1:13:09] Item number seven is also misappropriatedly written as a public hearing.
[1:13:15] It's an action item.
[1:13:17] We've already done the public hearing, so I'm going to correct that.
[1:13:20] So this is item number seven is an action item.
[1:13:23] It's ordinance number 1456.
[1:13:25] City initiated flag law text amendment.
[1:13:28] It's on the request of driver city for a text amendment to amend section 9-27-090 flag
[1:13:36] this application is known as the city initiated flag lot tax amendment, and we'll have, again, staff report Mr. Todd Draper go ahead sir.
[1:13:45] Thank you again Mr. Mayor Todd Draper here. We do have a little bit additional present here tonight.
[1:13:52] After this came before you at the last meeting we did take the ordinance back.
[1:13:57] made a couple of additional changes to the one that's reflected in front of you the night,
[1:14:02] where we have removed the section that increased area of the flag portion of the lot, we have
[1:14:10] again reduced or restored the width to the 20 feet of the stem portion of the lot, we removed
[1:14:19] the landscaping requirements that were in that ordinance.
[1:14:23] If there's any other questions or pieces that you'd like me to go over, I'd be happy to.
[1:14:36] Anyone have any questions, comments? Further discussion?
[1:14:40] On the written text part, number 16 is all I noted.
[1:14:46] Can we go there?
[1:14:53] Maybe you didn't write. Maybe it's not out.
[1:15:00] Number 16 talked about limiting how much area of the lot could be used for the house. And I just question
[1:15:13] we're already limiting them by adding to the setback, we're limiting the height.
[1:15:21] I'm just
[1:15:22] wondering if we should also put, you know, more of a restriction on how much of the lot they
[1:15:31] can build on.
[1:15:35] So that's my question.
[1:15:41] Move the microphone closer.
[1:15:46] Go ahead now.
[1:15:48] Are you asking if we should further restrict it? Well I think we did restrict it
[1:15:53] more than a lot of this acreage would be restricted and I'm thinking that
[1:15:59] maybe we don't need to go that far is what my point is or my question is.
[1:16:07] Well
[1:16:07] There it is down at the bottom.
[1:16:09] Total up coverage of flag lots is limited to no more than 35% of the area.
[1:16:17] I just think it should be the same as whatever that zoning allows.
[1:16:22] Because I think we've already limited them twice.
[1:16:26] So that's just my comment.
[1:16:30] What about the 30 feet height?
[1:16:33] I'm fine with the other two.
[1:16:35] With the setbacks and the height, I just don't.
[1:16:38] I just think that we should leave that as the same as any other lot of that size would be allowed.
[1:16:48] Because we've already protected the neighbors by limiting the height from the setbacks.
[1:16:58] Susan, you just want it to be whatever a lot that size would allow.
[1:17:03] Would allow it? Yeah, not so.
[1:17:05] So it's not a change. It's just staying with what they get in my sense, I see.
[1:17:09] But isn't part of the purpose of doing this was to protect the other property owners
[1:17:17] around there from having something that would be too obtrusive in their backyard.
[1:17:24] Yeah, so what I'm saying is we've already increased the setbacks from the neighbors.
[1:17:30] We've already decreased the height allowed.
[1:17:33] So do we need to further limit the size of the bill?
[1:17:39] Because you're saying by increasing the setback, that 30 foot height wouldn't impact them as much, because it'd be setback further.
[1:17:49] I'm saying that we've already proposed to decrease their height, right?
[1:17:54] No, is the 30 feet, is that a decrease?
[1:17:59] Todd, right over here.
[1:18:00] Yes, that is a decrease.
[1:18:01] increase. Is it 10 feet decrease or 5 foot I believe. 35 feet to 30.
[1:18:11] So anyway I'm
[1:18:11] just saying that it feels to me like we've already limited the size of our
[1:18:16] building and I just wonder if we need to continue to limit or treat it the
[1:18:21] same as another lot in that zone would be training.
[1:18:35] This one's a tough one. I
[1:18:37] think the staff you've done a really good job on that a really good job on this
[1:18:42] and then coming back and put a lot of thought into it and I appreciate your
[1:18:48] patience with us on it. I think one of the biggest concerns we just want to
[1:18:53] make sure we do it right. Because it does impact a lot of people. We don't want
[1:18:59] it to be too restrictive but we also want to make sure that it prevents too much of
[1:19:05] an impact on the people that will live around it.
[1:19:10] So Christina, will you speak to
[1:19:12] that do you think that it is sufficient with the setbacks or do you think that
[1:19:16] this additional one is necessary to achieve what we've been trying to achieve
[1:19:34] you're
[1:19:36] mic on we can't hear you very well can you put closer to your COVID generator if
[1:19:47] could.
[1:19:53] Oh, we do. We got our
[1:20:00] Aye, tea guy back. You missed us so much. I know.
[1:20:05] Probably user error. Is that better?
[1:20:09] Little. I will speak very loud and firmly and enunciate. So it just truly is a decision of whether or not you want to house at 40% of the lock coverage or at 35%. It's the floor plate of the house. That's the only thing you're making the determination on. So 35% will result in a smaller home.
[1:20:34] But not necessarily in height, it could still.
[1:20:40] I'm sorry.
[1:20:42] That doesn't really restrict the height as much though, right?
[1:20:46] Yeah.
[1:20:48] The height will still be limited.
[1:20:50] In
[1:20:56] all of the residential zones, we have a 35 height limit.
[1:21:02] And we're reducing it to 30 for this particular type of an application.
[1:21:07] So in concrete numbers for me to try to grasp, let's say it's like a half acre that someone's trying to build this flag lot on.
[1:21:17] What would this translate in square footage? You're to run that quick method.
[1:21:25] I'm just here to say it's a good one.
[1:21:27] It is.
[1:21:29] You can look at the map here.
[1:21:30] This is the.
[1:21:31] Yes, sorry.
[1:21:40] That's the lot, not the home, right?
[1:21:43] That would be where the home could be.
[1:21:46] But the lot's the home's not 20,976.
[1:21:51] That's the lot size.
[1:21:53] So it can only occupy.
[1:21:54] It could only be 30% of the 20 of 20,976, right?
[1:21:59] is not what you're saying. It could only be 35% of 20,976.
[1:22:08] The entire back square.
[1:22:10] Yes. So running that 30% looks like it's about 7,300 square feet.
[1:22:21] That could be made up of home as well as any detached structures.
[1:22:27] garages or other accessory buildings.
[1:22:34] That's still pretty big for that size of
[1:22:40] law. So to be totally clear, it's an incremental 5% on this entire lot. So the
[1:22:49] incremental number change would be for this example from the regular. Yeah, regular
[1:22:58] 40% yeah, so from 40 just what's that 5% difference I'm just curious I'm
[1:23:36] I'm wondering if that's still I mean that's still
[1:23:39] That's still pretty big isn't it
[1:23:42] Or not that's not restricted at all. Yeah, like nobody's going to build
[1:23:46] 8,000 square foot
[1:23:52] Yeah, they they will that's what I'm I'm almost so
[1:24:07] when we say like that 7,000 square feet is that total square feet or
[1:24:12] of the whole of
[1:24:13] just the main floor yeah yeah that's a I don't think we've restricted it I mean
[1:24:23] I mean we maybe need to look at 25% or I don't know maybe not I just we're
[1:24:32] still talking about this right but
[1:24:39] remember it can only be two stories right but
[1:24:43] that could be a 14,000 foot home and there could be 30 feet high I mean it still
[1:24:49] would it would still devour someone's backyard the whole purpose of what we're
[1:24:55] trying to do but it wouldn't
[1:25:00] I mean, it wouldn't devour it because you're lower in the height. No, only you'd have this wide abstain, but only five feet. That's 30 feet still high.
[1:25:19] Anyone that would like to make a motion, I'm excited for. Go ahead, someone.
[1:25:37] All right, we have a motion by Ms. Vodry to approve it as written.
[1:25:42] Is there a second?
[1:25:45] Second.
[1:25:46] Second by Ms. Lowry.
[1:25:48] All right.
[1:25:50] Okay, so we have the ordinance 1456.
[1:25:52] The motion is to prove it as it's been presented with no changes.
[1:25:57] Second, motion of Ms. Lowry, second, Ms. Lowry, any further discussion?
[1:26:03] All right.
[1:26:04] I think this does a good job of balancing the both interests of property owners,
[1:26:09] looking to further develop and existing property owners around.
[1:26:14] And I think staff's done a great job and I'm proud to support it.
[1:26:20] All right. Any other discussion, comments?
[1:26:24] All right. I'll call the vote, Ms. Lowry. How do you vote?
[1:26:26] Yes.
[1:26:27] Yes.
[1:26:27] Mr. Lowry.
[1:26:28] Yes.
[1:26:29] Mr. Roberts.
[1:26:30] Yes.
[1:26:31] Mr. Green.
[1:26:31] Yes.
[1:26:32] And Mr. Lowry.
[1:26:36] No.
[1:26:38] All right.
[1:26:40] We got some diversity in voting this evening.
[1:26:43] That has passed four to one.
[1:26:47] Item number eight is next.
[1:26:49] Mr. Green.
[1:26:50] Mr. Mayor, I move to adjourn.
[1:26:52] Motion by Mr. Green to adjourn, is there a second?
[1:26:56] I'll second.
[1:26:57] All in favor say aye.
[1:26:58] all right all right all right all right we stand adjourned thank you we're
[1:27:04] still friends yeah we're not we're not the federal Congress yeah