Mar. 2, 2010 City Council

Highland City Council Meeting
March 2nd, 2010
Attendees: Brain W. Braithwaite (Council Member), Tom Butler (Council Member), Larry Mendenhall (Council Member), Lynn V. Ritchie (Mayor), Kathryn Schramm (Council Member), Scott Smith (Council Member)
Open Issues:
1. Woman who was told that she could have animals on her property: She was told that she could by Highland City. Called ten times to confirm. Now she is told she is in violation. Asked that her two animals could remain on the property for the time being.
2. Fence needed on 4800 West Street. Petition signed by neighborhood. They were told they would get one. Would start at SR-92 and end at Canyon Road.
Public Hearing on the 2009-2010 Fiscal Budget:
1. Increase revenue for open spaces budget.
2. Had to adjust such items as traffic revenues, sales tax, and library revenue downward.
3. Adjusting salaries downward, such as city administrator which they don’t have at this time. Reducing benefit costs.
4. Most items were over-budgeted.
5. Adjusted parks and cemeteries upward (repairs).
6. Over-budgeted garbage by 100K.
7. Found savings on 220K on sewer.
8. Net savings: $297,292.
9. $262,400 net between revenues and expenditures.
My impressions: It seems that the gentleman who presented the financials did cost projections on actual figures. I’m not sure if whoever did the budget last year didn’t have any concrete numbers to base their figures on or if they were just lazy, but they were obviously way off.
The budget will be presented again in June. It will be updated twice per year.

Manuel Bueno, a citizen of Highland, posed the question of fiscal responsibility because the new mayor and city councilmen ran on this platform. There was no comment on this. Next meeting will have an ordinance to adopt the amendments to the budget.
Ordinance: Considering an ordinance amending the impact fee schedule
Wants to change impact fee schedule (for the towne center multi-family housing development Toscana) to be consistent with multi-family. Contends that the actual impact COSTS for builders (what it costs the city) is much higher. Proposes that we increase fees consistent with actual use. Based on 2.75 people per town home. FYI, impact fees are for items such as water (culinary and irrigation) and sewer. Personally, I agree. Kathryn Schramm asked who would pay for the water that would fill the Toscana pool (which will not be public). Answer: Toscana would hook up to fire hydrant and would be charged by the gallon (water would be metered). Other sites that would be affected: church and commercial.
Motion: For City Staff to schedule a public hearing to discuss amending the impact fee schedule. Seconded.
One of the Highland City citizens who drafted the Utah State impact fee laws commented: said the city was discussing five different issues. Impact fees historically are not high enough. Main point: collect impact fees to fund future obligations. You can charge impact fees based on different use, but it should be based on future infrastructure change/capital facilities plan. They have approximately seven years once they charge the fee to actually use the fee.
Motion retracted, and second retracted.
Motion: For City staff to identify from the capital improvements budget and other city needs through build out what the cost expectations will be for the city and that they return with proposed impact fee changes and bring it to the next meeting if possible. Seconded.
Ordinance: Considering an Ordinance to deal with disposal of real (public) property.
Motion: Council adopt an ordinance repealing section 2.44 and re-enacting 2.44 with changes stated clarifying real public property and equipment and licensed appraiser. Seconded.
Resolution: Considering a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Provo Reservoir Canal Rights-of-way Greenway Interlocal Agreement for purpose of constructing a multi-use trail. There is a 7% match (Highland city has to match at 7%). The Mayor originally told the City it would be a zero cost project. There were over 100 people at the open house about the project, all in support. Scott Smith presented the issues related to this. He reviewed the state law and the proposed project in detail. He wants to make sure what the city’s entire obligation will be on this trail. Worried that the trail doesn’t follow the easement and will affect property owners. Answer: the trail isn’t clearly marked yet. Another concern: the trail won’t be fully landscaped except with native grasses. Also wondered if maintenance vehicles would be accommodated. Answer: yes.
My impressions:
The new mayor and city council are doing a great job. They are doing their due diligence about Toscana, the budget and the trail. Their attention to detail is impressive.