Minutes for 2007-05-29, Direct pdf link.

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF WEBER COUNTY
Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 10:00 a.m.
Commission Chambers, Weber Center, Ogden, Utah
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: Kenneth A. Bischoff, Chair, Jan M. Zogmaister, and Craig L. Dearden.

Others Present: Alan D. McEwan, Clerk/Auditor; David C. Wilson, Deputy County Attorney; Fátima Fernelius,
Clerk/Auditor’s Office, took minutes.

A. Welcome - Chair Bischoff
B. Pledge of Allegiance - Fátima Fernelius
C. Thought of the Day - Commissioner Dearden

D. Consent Items:
1. Purchase Orders in the amount of $66,315.38
2. Warrants #226078-226367 in the amount of $1,881,308.93
3. Minutes for meetings held on May 15 and 22, 2007
4. Cancel regular Commission meeting for June 5, 2007
5. Surplus a damaged fax machine from Animal Control Services
6. Surplus 26 desk chairs from the Assessor’s Office
Commissioner Dearden moved to approve the consent items; Commissioner Zogmaister seconded, all
voting aye.

E. Proclamation naming June 2007 as American Cancer Society’s “Relay For Life” Month

Commissioner Dearden read this proclamation. This relay, the signature activity of the American
Cancer Society, honored survivors and remembered those lost to the disease. The Weber County
Commission encouraged citizens to participate in the events. On behalf of the American Cancer
Society, Cheryl Cox, accepted the proclamation and thanked the Commission for its support. Garrett
Gallegos, an elementary student who created a mini Relay for Life at his school, outlined the event and
its success in raising funds.

F. Action Items:

1. Request for Contract with West Warren Park Service District for a RAMP grant

This item was held.

2. Real Property Lease Agreement with S&S Excavation - Contract C2007-167

Nate Pierce, County Operations Department Director, stated that this contract allowed S&S to lease
part of the county’s property in Ogden Valley where the county road shed was located. This 1-year
contract had two 1-year renewable options and was in the amount of $200/month, plus the
improvements that S&S will make to the property, which included fencing, detention basin
improvements and access gates. S&S will use the property to store soil and gravel materials.
Commissioner Zogmaister moved to approve Contract C2007-167, Real Property Lease Agreement
by and between Weber County and S&S Excavation; Commissioner Dearden seconded, all voting aye.

 

 3. Resolution expressing the Board’s disapproval of the proposed “Voter Confidence
and Increased Accessibility of 2007, (HR 811)” - Resolution 31-2007

Chair Bischoff read this resolution. The United States House of Representatives was considering
a bill, which, if adopted, would render unlawful the current DRE electronic voting machines,
mandated by the federal government only about five years ago at a huge investment by all
governments involved. This proposal would require a change to a new voting system at another
huge expense. Respondents surveyed had felt somewhat or very confident with the current voting
process, thus, Weber County joined other counties in expressing its disapproval and urging the 110th
Congress to reject HR 811.
Commissioner Dearden moved to adopt Resolution 31-2007 expressing the Weber County
Commission’s disapproval of the proposed “Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility of 2007,
(HR 811)”; Commissioner Zogmaister seconded.
Roll Call Vote:
Commissioner Zogmaister. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
Commissioner Dearden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye
Chair Bischoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aye



4. Approval of a prior year refund of Personal Property Tax for GE Commercial
Finance

Douglas Larsen, Assessor’s Office, presented the Tax Review Committee’s recommendation to
refund $70,759.34 for tax years 2005 and 2006. This equipment was not located in Weber County.
Commissioner Zogmaister moved to approve a prior year refund of $70,759.34 on personal
property tax to GE Commercial Finance; Commissioner Dearden seconded, all voting aye.


5. Action on 2 appeals of the March 14, 2007 decision of the Ogden Valley Township
Planning Commission regarding Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 31-06 for a
Wastewater Treatment Plant located in the Bison Creek Ranch Cluster
Subdivision at approximately 8150 E. HWY 39

Sean Wilkinson, County Planning Department, showed maps and renderings of this project located
approximately 900 ft. from Highway 39. On 3/14/2007 the Ogden Valley Planning Commission
voted to approve this CUP for a wastewater treatment facility with two conditions: 1) that the
wastewater facility only support 225 connections (it had been proposed for 750) and 2) that the
location of the plant be moved further into the development. The latter had been accomplished.

This project had been proposed as a regional sewer treatment facility that could accommodate
approximately 750 connections at full capacity. The building was approximately 38 ft. high and
met the criteria for height variance. Evergreen trees were required to be part of the landscape plan
for screening and buffering, and building materials were predominantly natural, muted earth tone
colors. The County Engineer’s Office, County Building Inspection, County Environmental Health,
and the Weber Fire District had responded with no significant concerns. The State Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) had issued a conceptual approval letter as well as another letter
stating support for regionalization of wastewater treatment facilities in Ogden Valley (Valley).

Two appeals had been filed concerning the 3/14/2007 Planning Commission decision: 1) On
3/23/2007 the Weber County Planning and Engineering Departments filed asking that the facility
be designed to serve up to 750 connections as originally proposed. Staff believed that it was
shortsighted to construct a plant to serve a limited number of developments when the land for the
facility was now available and the wastewater disposal need was apparent in comparison with the
cost of constructing an additional plant in the future.
 2) On 3/29/2007 Dennis Shaw, on behalf of Valley Citizens for Responsible Development (VCRD),
filed asking that the Planning Commission’s decision be overturned due to State law violations of
§17-27a-406, County Zoning Ordinance Chapter 22 (conditional uses) violations, that the request
did not conform to the current Ogden Valley General Plan (OVGP), that it was not in the public
interest, and the new plant location was not specifically defined as noted in the appeal letter.

Mr. Wilkinson said that staff felt this facility conformed to the OVGP (including that the facility
met the conditional use requirements in the AV-3 zone), and was in the public interest by protecting
air quality, protecting ground water and water resources–reusing effluent for irrigation water,
preventing ground water contamination, providing improved water quality and sanitary sewer
services as a large centralized sewer system for the East Huntsville/South Fork area with room for
future developments–and the new location conformed to all applicable Zoning Ordinances and met
the Planning Commission’s imposed condition. Additionally, that a centralized wastewater
treatment system should be developed in the East Huntsville/South Fork area with room to serve
existing and future dwellings. He stated that this facility would treat wastewater to drinking water
standards, significantly reduce harmful elements that destroyed ground water quality, and made it
possible for lot sizes to be reduced to 10,000 sq. ft. and clustered together with the bulk of property
left in open space. The Ogden Valley Wastewater Management study was completed in 5/2003 and
one of its recommendations was treatment and reuse of wastewater in the Valley. The County
Commission had agreed to be the body politic for this facility (6/13/2006). Staff recommended
approval of this CUP with the 750 connections. The commissioners had visited this site.

The commissioners noted that 225 connections would only handle the three current proposed
developments. The Planning Commission had felt they did not have enough information to justify
750 connections, other than the three proposed developments. Curtis Christensen, County
Engineer, addressed Commissioner Zogmaister’s question regarding communication she had
received that this system had not been fully tested. He referred to information from Oakely Sewer
on tested items–BOD, coliform, nitrogen, phosphorus, TSS–which had low counts. He stated that
this technology had been ongoing in other parts of the world for a number of years and was found
to get high quality effluent. Mr. Wilkinson responded to Commissioner Dearden’s question that
the Planning Commission had approved this CUP after discussions about noise, traffic and odor.

Dave Hubble, representing (VCRD), expressed concerns including lack of adherence to the general
plan as required, higher fees, potential assessments and other charges in replacement of these
systems when the population grew beyond capacity, lack of oversight and site planning, that
decisions about public sewage treatment in the Valley should not be made at the development level
but at the county level with more foresight into the future. He said that although this facility would
last for a few years, ultimately a more centralized sewer system would be needed in the Valley and
recommended this item go through the general plan’s approval process to obtain the public’s
input/participation, that sewage and treated water not be put into the high water table areas where
there were lots of aquifers and aquifer-recharge zones. Mr. Hubble said that the VCRD had not
been aware of the project’s new location until now but it appeared there was a good faith movement
of the facility. He stated that this facility was in a wetland area where it would discharge into ponds
and the pressure of the water would push it down through a very saturated watertable and thereafter
shortly end up in the Pineview Reservoir. The facility was fairly experimental and allowing 750
rather than 225 connections was moving too fast without the foresight needed. He expressed
concerns with this facility having sewer lines coming across the Valley and connecting to each other
and Commissioner Dearden asked what was the difference from a centralized system. Mr. Hubble
response was that this should have public input.

Commissioner Dearden stated that most of the residents were within the 300 ft. required for
connection and would be impacted but on a regional system such as this one only a few might be
impacted. Mr. Hubble responded that this underscored the reason for more public involvement in
the decision, that with something like 12,000 homes there would be water quality changes.
Commissioner Dearden read DEQ’s letter citing five reasons for supporting regionalization of
wastewater treatment facilities in the Valley. Mr. Hubble said that VCRD had been allowed to look
at Planning Commission records but not copy them because of copyright laws, and he even felt
records had been withheld. He added that if more information about the technology had been
available there would have been less misunderstanding and suspicion. Commissioner Dearden
asked if VCRD did not have an opportunity to state their position at the Planning Commission
meetings and Mr. Hubble stated they had and believed this could work but was experimental, thus
should be limited to a smaller number of connections to check for problems relating to the wetland
areas, the very highwater table, and flooding. He said that commonly there was standing water after
significant winters and they would be pumping it down into already saturated ground, and he
wondered if the ground would be porous enough to absorb all the water from 750 homes.
Commissioner Dearden asked if there was any impact to the wetlands from this system and Mr.
Christensen replied there would not be.

Keith Rounkles, Ogden Valley Planning Commission, stated that the Planning Commission had
made their decision based upon DEQ’s letter dated 2/17/2006, where they had only examined the
facility for 150 homes and not 750. He said that the letter cautioned even with 150 homes in this
particular area because of the high surface and ground water. By starting with a smaller number
of connections each phase could be studied for water problems. The Division of Wildlife had also
expressed concerns. Mr. Rounkles expressed concern with increasing from 225 to 750 connections.

Commissioner Dearden referred to the DEQ letter (dated 2/17/2006) which stated they regarded
contaminants discharged to the ground water as potentially having direct impact to Pineview
Reservoir because of the movement of underlying ground water directly to the Reservoir an the
proximity of this project to the Reservoir, which contained excessive phosphorus and nitrogen.
DEQ requested that the treatment option used involve maximum removal of these nutrients.
Commissioner Zogmaister moved to grant the first appeal filed by Weber County Planning and
Engineering to allow the plant to have 750 connections, due to the fact that there was enough land
and ability, that to wait and try to upgrade in the future would be costlier, and she directed the
County Attorney’s Office to prepare written findings in accordance with this decision;
Commissioner Dearden seconded because having sewer systems all over the Valley was not
desirable and a centralized system was a move in the right direction. All voted aye.

Commissioner Dearden moved to deny the second appeal filed by Dennis Shaw, on behalf of Valley
Citizens for Responsible Development, based upon information received that the proposal did
adhere to the general plan and met the requirements; Commissioner Zogmaister seconded, all voting
aye.

6. Contract with the State of Utah–Parks and Recreation–and Sheriff’s Office, to
jointly plan, develop and manage boating enforcement safety, laws & rules at
Pineview Reservoir & to provide the County with use of the state-owned vessels
for operation and patrol on Pineview Reservoir - Contract C2007-168

Weber County Sheriff Brad Slater presented this contract renewal that provided for the enforcement
of boating laws on Pineview Reservoir. He stated that this contract had been in effect for five years
and was mutually advantageous. Under this contract the State provides the vessels/equipment and
$21,000 to help offset the Sheriff deputy salaries.
Commissioner Dearden moved to approve a Contract C2007- 168 by and between the State of Utah,
Division of Parks and Recreation, and the Weber County Sheriff’s Office, to jointly plan, develop
and manage boating enforcement safety, laws and rules at Pineview Reservoir and to provide the
County with use of the state-owned vessels for operation and patrol on Pineview Reservoir, subject
to the County Comptroller’s approval; Commissioner Zogmaister seconded, all voting aye.

G. Assign Pledge of Allegiance & Thought of the Day for Tues., June 12, 2007, 10a.m.

H. Public Comments:

(See item F.5.). Robin Roberts, of Huntsville, stated she owned property surrounded by Bison
Creek and asked where the process was with today’s decision and the commissioners explained that
it was final approval. Ms. Roberts asked to see a picture of the treatment plant’s new location and
Sean Wilkinson, County Planning Department, provided it to Ms. Roberts who stated it did not look
like what she had received in the mail and that the treatment plant would not be next door but rather
it looked to be quite a long way off.

(See item F.5.). Dennis Shaw, of Huntsville, representing Citizens for Responsible Development,
stated they were not against development but simply wanted to make sure that this was done in the
best interest of the area residents, with thought to the future. He stated that they had a difficult time
obtaining information from the county and today was the first time they found out the new location
for the plant. He expressed their concerns regarding the impact to sensitive lands with the increased
volume of water coming into the lake that the petitioners would build, concerns if it froze, and the
impact on the wildlife habitats in that area. Mr. Shaw stated that many citizens lived around that
area that were concerned with noise, odor, etc., and that the plant seemed a bit experimental for the
potential harm it could cause to Pineview Reservoir. He reiterated that the area had a very
highwater table. Chair Bischoff noted that the county was in the process of looking at the whole
sewer situation for the Ogden Valley and hoped to have a good idea of how to proceed by the end
of the year. He stated that the Commission was very aware of the situation and wanted this to be
done in a manner that would be right for the area residents.

I. Adjourn
Commissioner Dearden moved to adjourn at 11:33 a.m.; Commissioner Zogmaister seconded, all
voting aye.

Kenneth A. Bischoff, Chair
Weber County Commission

Alan D. McEwan, CPA
Weber County Clerk/Auditor