Minutes for 2006-02-28, Direct pdf link.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF WEBER COUNTYTuesday, February 28, 2006 - 10:00 a.m.
Commission Chambers, Weber Center, Ogden, Utah
Each Commission meeting is recorded on CD or audio tape, which is available to the public through the
County Clerk's Office.
In accordance with the requirements of Utah Code Annotated Section 52-4-7(1)(d), the County Clerk
records in the minutes the names of all citizens
who appear and speak at a County Commission meeting
and the substance “in brief” of their comments. Such statements may include opinion or
purported facts.
The County does not verify the accuracy or truth of any statement but includes it as part of the record
pursuant to state law.
Commissioners Present: Craig L. Dearden, Chair; Camille T. Cain; and Kenneth A. Bischoff.
Others Present: Linda G. Lunceford, Clerk/Auditor; David C. Wilson, Deputy County Attorney; Fátima
Fernelius, Clerk/Auditor’s Office, took minutes.
A. Welcome - Chair Dearden
B. Pledge of Allegiance - Linda Lunceford
C. Thought of the Day - Commissioner Cain
D. Consent Items:
1. Purchase Orders in the amount of $93,677.98
2. Warrants #210623 - #210880 in the amount of $922,837.38
3. Minutes for the meetings held on February 14, 2006 and February 21, 2006
4. (Request to cancel the March 7, 2006 Regular Commission Meeting - This item was voided and
the meeting will be held because there will now be a quorum available)
Commissioner Bischoff moved to approve the consent items; Commissioner Cain seconded, all
voting aye.
E. Presentation - Seal of Service Award presented to Tiffany Opheikens
Chair Dearden read the nomination submitted by three of Ms. Opheikens’ coworkers, including
Randee Ball, who expressed appreciation for Ms. Opheikens’ example and hard work. Ms.
Opheikens thanked the commissioners and coworkers stating that she was part of a great team.
F. Action Items:
1. allocation from federal forfeiture Case #03-33678 to incorporate these funds
into the Weber/Morgan Narcotic Strike Force budget in compliance with Utah
Code, Title 24
Lt. Mike Ashment, Weber/Morgan Narcotic Strike Force Commander, stated that in 2003 the
Strike Force and the FBI had initiated a joint investigation into a drug trafficking organization
based out of Tijuana, Mexico. The investigation lasted about one year, resulted in the arrest and
federal indictments of about 26 individuals. Part of that investigation also resulted in the seizure
of assets in cash obtained by these individuals through their drug trafficking. Lt. Ashment
requested permission, as allowed by State Code, to allocate $20,850 in federal equitable sharing
as a result of this case into the Strike Force budget to be used for ongoing operations. The
commissioners thanked Lt. Ashment for the hard work in the case and for the excellent job he has
done as the Strike Force Commander.
Commissioner Bischoff moved to approve an allocation of $20,850.00 from federal forfeiture Case
#03-33678 to the Weber/Morgan Narcotic Strike Force budget in compliance with Utah Code,
Title 24; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
2. Annual Solid Waste Post - Closure Care Report
Gary Laird, Transfer Station Manager, stated that the State required an annual report on the landfill
that was closed in 1997. The county monitors the gases and water that flow from up-gradient wells
to down-gradient wells. Commissioner Cain asked Mr. Laird if he felt comfortable with the
process the county was engaged in and if he felt the county was fulfilling its obligation according
to landfill closure requirements. Mr. Laird felt that the county’s closed landfill was one of the best
run landfills.
3. Contract with Crane, Christensen & Ambrose Certified Public Accountants to
provide independent audit services to the county for the calender year that ended
December 31, 2005 - Contract C2006-22
Dan Olsen, County Comptroller, presented the annual independent auditors engagement letter,
which generally remained the same as in the past and outlined both parties’ responsibilities. Mr.
Olsen addressed Chair Dearden’s question stating that typically the county sent out Requests for
Proposals about every five years for these services.
Commissioner Bischoff moved to approve Contract C2006-22 with Crane, Christensen & Ambrose
Certified Public Accountants to provide independent audit services to the county for the calender
year ending December 31, 2005; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
4. Deferral of public improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) for Kim and Josh
Estates Subdivision (2 lots), located at approximately 3762 West 900 South
Sean Wilkinson, County Planning Department, showed an area map stating that this subdivision
was less than 1 mile from the elementary school where children were not eligible for bussing and
must walk to and from school. The County Engineer’s Office was requiring installation of curb,
gutter and sidewalk for this subdivision, however, the petitioner and the Planning Commission had
disagreed with this requirement because this subdivision would be the only property in the area
with curb, gutter and sidewalk. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend
approval of these deferrals and also recommended that the County Engineer’s Office study all the
concerns associated with installing these improvements along a larger portion of 900 S. before
requiring any installation.
Mr. Wilkinson addressed Commissioner Bischoff’s questions stating that most properties in the
area existed prior to the zoning requirements and did not require subdivision, there was no curb,
gutter and sidewalk nor deferrals in place, and the county would bear the cost of putting in these
improvements if there was no deferral. Commissioner Bischoff noted that when there were
deferrals for these improvements the cost was deferred to future property owners and he asked why
the county did not require the developer to put money in escrow. Curtis Christensen, County
Engineer, said that this had been discussed previously and the reason was that these construction
costs were difficult to estimate since they can change substantially. However, Chair Dearden
pointed out that even so there would at least be some funds in escrow to help offset the costs.
Commissioner Cain noted that a couple of years ago the School District requested that the county
enforce putting in curb, gutter and sidewalk within 1.5 mile radius of schools. Part of the
discussion with the School District had been that there had to be a starting point at which the
county began requiring these improvements and the Commission had requested that County
Engineering begin to review where the deferrals were located, how to determine when to call in
these improvements, etc. She asked where Engineering was in this process and Mr. Christensen
said that they had a map showing where they were, and had listed the costs to put in these
improvements in areas that were now developed. She also asked about the possibility of forming
special improvement districts in areas where those assessments had to be made and Mr.
Christensen replied that one of the provisions of the deferral agreement is that property owners
agree to enter into a special improvement district if one is created. However, for properties that
existed prior to the zoning there is no financial recourse for the county.
The commissioners discussed at length the dilemma created by this type of issue: it did not make
much sense to have one or two lots with curb, gutter and sidewalk in front of them and all the rest
without because it did not really enhance the safety factor the school wanted. On the other hand,
deferrals were inconsistent with the position the School Board had asked the Commission to take
and created a challenge not to be arbitrary.
Mr. Christensen said that there was a drain ditch across from this property and the improvements
could be taken to that point, there was additional property to the east that could be developed in
the future but to the west (toward the school) there was limited ground. Commissioner Cain asked
if the petitioner had met the other three engineering requirements such as whether the Surveyor had
reviewed if this property encroached into the right-of-way and Mr. Christensen said that he had
not received a final plat showing a change. The property goes to the canal which is basically the
boundary of the subdivision, and Mr. Christensen believed the 20 ft. wide access easement along
the canal would be required on the final plat. County Engineering had asked for fencing along the
canal but Mr. Christensen had learned today that the developer might request a waiver. Mr.
Wilkinson said that he had a letter from the canal company stating that the easement had been
worked out with them. The canal company had left the fence issue requirement up to the County
Engineers, however, if required, it would have to be built according to the canal company’s
standards.
Mr. Christensen showed photographs of the property and road, pointing out that it was a typical
rural road, probably 20-24 ft. of asphalt, the drainage system on the south side of the road was
piped, there were no unusual grades.
The petitioner, Phil Hancock, stated that this was an original 2-acre parcel with an existing house
(on lot 2) that had been divided into a 2-lot subdivision. Recently two building permits had been
issued along the north side of 900 S. going west toward the school and neither one would fall
under these requirements because they were existing parcels, and this was the case with every
parcel from there to the school. Thus, a “starting point” to begin requiring these improvements
with the idea of future development between there and the school was irrelevant. He said that in
the past when these improvements were required, they had never been extended without the
demolition and removal of the original improvements, thus they were a waste of time and money.
He noted that no grade had been set and by the time curb, gutter and sidewalk goes in this area, it
may be converted into secondary water and the grade of the canal could be changed. He suggested
that if curb, gutter and sidewalk goes into this area that it be coordinated. He has lived there for
over 50 years and there is no unclimbable fence along that canal and if sidewalk was put in, it
would end right at the canal without any protection of the canal. The petitioner is anxious to move
forward; he plans to build a home on the other lot.
Commissioner Bischoff asked legal counsel if there was a problem with requiring an escrow for
future curb, gutter and sidewalk and Mr. Wilson said that this was a policy decision that could be
examined more closely if the Commission would like to move in that direction. Mr. Wilkinson
stated that this subdivision had not been presented to the County commission for final approval.
Because there was no plan for these improvements for the area, and generally the one section put
in would not match up grade with future improvements, and requiring them would not add much
to the safety factor, Commissioner Bischoff moved to grant the deferral. Commissioner Cain said
she could not take a position today because there wasn’t adequate information in order to be
consistent and because the Commission had obligated itself to work with the School District on
this issue, which had made a rather passionate plea reminding the Commission that if one child
was hit, it would be more serious than an independent approval of improvements for one lot.
Discussion then continued. Mr. Hancock stated that one problem related to this issue was that
currently the improvements along this road were tied only to subdivision property and any property
that did not require the process of subdivision approval would never fall under the requirements
for curb, gutter and sidewalk. In his opinion, meeting the public safety needs through this
approach was flawed because it would never achieve that goal. He suggested the Commission
review how this type of issue could be solved more adequately and fairly distributed rather than
just on subdivision property. Chair Dearden said that if the county would be responsible for
putting in these improvements west of this property, which might not happen for 15-20 years, a
deferral might be appropriate and for the owners to pay for those improvements at that future time.
He asked Mr. Christensen to make recommendations and for legal counsel to review this issue in
relation to an escrow to help offset the costs.
Commissioner Bischoff moved to approve a deferral of public improvements (curb, gutter and
sidewalk) for Kim and Josh Estates Subdivision (2 lot), located at approximately 3762 West 900
South; Chair Dearden seconded, both voting aye. Commissioner Cain voted nay.
5. Contract with David Eccles Conference Center and Peery’s Egyptian Theater to
hold the Miss Weber County Scholarship Pageant on March 4, 2004 - Contract
C2006-23
Jan Wilson, Weber County Fair, presented this contract in the amount of $1,760.00.
Commissioner Cain moved to approve Contract C2006-23 by and between Weber County and the
David Eccles Conference Center and Peery’s Egyptian Theater to hold the Miss Weber County
Scholarship Pageant on March 4, 2004; Commissioner Bischoff seconded, all voting aye.
6. Contract with the Standard Examiner Home & Garden Show for a show to be held
March 1 - March 6, 2006 at the Golden Spike Event Center - Contract C2006-24
Jim Harvey, GSEC, stated that there would be an entrance fee of $1.00. This event has been held
at the GSEC for 10 years.
Commissioner Bischoff moved to approve Contract C2006-24 by and between Weber County and
the Standard Examiner Home & Garden Show for a show to be held March 1 - March 6, 2006 at
the Golden Spike Event Center; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
7. Contract with Stirrin’ Dirt Racing, LLC for an indoor derby to be held March 18,
2006 at the Golden Spike Event Center - Contract C2006-25
Jim Harvey, GSEC, briefly presented this contract.
Commissioner Cain moved to approve Contract C2006-25 by and between Weber County and
Stirrin’ Dirt Racing, LLC for an Indoor Derby to be held on March 18, 2006 at the Golden Spike
Event Center; Commissioner Bischoff seconded, all voting aye.
8. Amendment to the existing 2003 License Agreement by and between Weber County
and the Western Bison Association for selected dates between 2005 and 2009 -
Contract C2006-26
Weber County entered into an agreement in 2003 to conduct Western Bison Association’s (WBA)
annual show and sale. Jim Harvey, GSEC, stated that this contract extends that agreement for two
years and now allows the county to get panels that do not come directly out of WBA’s inventory
and can be custom ordered to the county’s needs. A portion of what will be paid to the county will
be exchanged for panels, which the GSEC desperately needs.
Commissioner Bischoff asked why the county did not take cash from the WBA and purchased
what it needed instead of trading for panels. Mr. Harvey explained that initially the county’s
facility did not have the equipment the WBA needed to hold the show and their consigner brought
in all the panels and was paying to transport them. When the county stadium was built, no funds
were allocated for panels, which has been a detriment for cattle sorting, storage, etc. Events are
held not only in the stadium but around the stadium which affects the other footprint of the
fairgrounds that require gates, panels and pens to make the Golden Spike Arena work. Currently,
when shows come in, staff has to constantly tear down some area in order to set up another one,
which is very labor intensive. The WBA did not have money to pay for the facility’s use so it was
mutually agreed to do the exchange. The county also receives the distributor price, which it would
not be able to get on its own merit and which translates into tremendous savings for the county.
Commissioner Bischoff moved to approve Contract C2006-26, amendment to the existing 2003
License Agreement by and between Weber County and the Western Bison Association for selected
dates between 2005 and 2009; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
9. Interlocal Agreement between Weber County, Ogden City and Roy City for the
purpose of distributing JAG Grant Funds - Contract C2006-27
David Wilson, Deputy County Attorney, stated that this was similar to a contract approved last
year, Contract C2005-42. It is a joint application to fulfill the Byrne Grant program. Ogden City
will apply for a JAG (Justice Assistance Grant) grant on behalf of Roy City and Weber County.
This application asks for $8,000 for Roy to enhance overtime shifts for their Bike Patrol and
Underage Drinking programs; $27,500 for the Strike Force for Weber County; $27,500 for Ogden
City’s contribution to the Strike Force and $15,809 for the Ogden Metro Gang Unit.
Commissioner Cain moved to approve Contract C2006-27, Interlocal Agreement between Weber
County, Ogden City and Roy City for the purpose of distributing JAG Grant Funds; Commissioner
Bischoff seconded, all voting aye.
G. Public Hearing
1. Commissioner Bischoff moved to adjourn the public meeting and convene the public hearing;
Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
2. Public hearing to amend the existing zoning boundary located at approximately
3650 North Eagle Ridge Drive, known as the proposed Eagle Ridge Cluster
Subdivision Phase 6
Scott Mendoza, County Planning Department, showed a proposed preliminary plat stating that the
petitioner was requesting to amend the existing zoning boundary by rezoning an approximately 3/4
of an acre parcel from Agriculture A-1 zone to Residential Estates RE-20 zone and another parcel
that is approximately 393 sq. st. from RE-20 to A-1 zone.
Mr. Mendoza stated that this existing zoning boundary was part of an overall master plan
community and is a result of a previous petition that was approved prior to the zoning change in
the Ogden Valley in 1996. The actual alignment of this zone followed a centerline of a proposed
future road, however, the Weber County Engineering Office, Planning staff and adjacent land
owners recommended against connecting that future road to the existing 4350 East south of this
project. The developer agreed to make the change to the road system within the community and
redesigned it but the change had never been reflected in the zoning boundary. The change to the
zone will allow the boundary to follow a new Phase 6 road centerline to a point where it can follow
a lot line to the development boundary, eliminating two zones within the lots. Mr. Mendoza stated
that this rezone would not affect densities. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended
approval. Chair Dearden invited public comments. Chad Martin, the developer, noted that this
realignment should have occurred in December 1996.
3. Commissioner Bischoff moved to adjourn public hearing and reconvene public meeting;
Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
4. Action on public hearing:
G.2. - Public hearing to amend existing zoning boundary for Eagle Ridge Cluster
Subdivision Phase 6 - Ordinance 2006-4
Commissioner Cain moved to adopt Ordinance 2006-4 amending an existing zoning boundary
located at approximately 3650 North Eagle Ridge Drive known as the Eagle Ridge Cluster
Subdivision Phase 6; Commissioner Bischoff seconded.
Roll Call Vote:
Commissioner Cain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
Commissioner Bischoff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
Chair Dearden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
H. Assign Pledge of Allegiance & Thought of the Day for Tues., March 7, 2006, 10 a.m.
I. Public Comments:
Nan Peacock, from Hooper, stated she had contacted several different parties to see when appointments
to the Hooper Cemetery could be discussed. David Wilson, Deputy County Attorney, stated that the
county was the appointing authority and explained the process for making those appointments,
including that a request to the County Commission was necessary from any existing board member
indicating there weren’t sufficient board members or the terms had expired, and requesting that the
Commission participate in that appointing process. The start of that process can be approved next
week in Commission meeting. Ms. Peacock asked if there was a process whereby Hooper, which was
now a city, could be the appointing authority. Mr. Wilson responded that generally the appointing
authority falls to the entity that created the district, which was Weber County in 1945. He was not
aware of any process to transfer the authority to the city, but Mr. Richards, Hooper City Attorney, was
researching this issue. Mr. Wilson believed that if the District decided to dissolve, there would be a
vote of the people to dissolve and the City could take over the Cemetery. He directed Ms. Peacock
to the attorney assigned to handle local matters in the Attorney General’s Office. Mr. Wilson said that
Ms. Peacock had contacted the Special District Association and they were going to try giving some
assistance to the Cemetery District and also to help them come into compliance, not only with the
board appointments but with the Open Meetings Act. Mr. Wilson said that he would contact the
District to see if they would send a letter to the County Commission requesting that the appointing
process begin.
Closed Executive Session to discuss imminent or ongoing litigation
Commissioner Bischoff moved to adjourn the regular meeting and convene a closed executive
session to discuss imminent or ongoing litigation; Commissioner Cain seconded.
Roll Call Vote:
Commissioner Cain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
Commissioner Bischoff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
Chair Dearden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
There was no action taken on the closed executive session.
J. Adjourn
Commissioner Bischoff moved to adjourn at 10:24 a.m.; Commissioner Cain seconded, all voting aye.
Craig L. Dearden, Chair
Weber County Commission
Linda G. Lunceford, CPO
Weber County Clerk/Auditor