Hyde Park City Planning Commission Meeting 9.16.26

to speak before you? >> I think that would be good. Yeah. >> Okay. Kelly, is that you? >> Kelly Arman, I appreciate uh I appreciate very much the uh planning commission and Michael and Marcus agreeing to putting this on the agenda today. This is for Snackco. We've been negotiating with this customer for over a year uh to build 92,000 square foot uh tiltup manufacturing facility. They manufacture potato chips. They have another factory here in town and the family they actually have uh factories in Europe. Uh so they've they've done this for a while. Um they have made commitments that uh we're finding are going to be difficult to for them to keep the commitments with the uh contracts to manufacture the potato chips. I believe this is the third round of comments that we've been through and um appreciate very much Marcus um calling us into a a DRC meeting uh so that we could discuss the comments from the previous round. Um, I will say that, uh, Capco and our engineers could have done a better job of designing this from the get-go. Um, we've done, um, four other tiltup projects in Hide Park City. And so, we're basing our, uh, uh, expectations on these other four projects. Things are totally different now. We recognize that. So I I'm conceding that we could have done a better job with engineering and design on some of these points. Uh but I will also say that this has been a moving target for us with changes in ordinance and um and it's been a challenge trying to understand what the checklists are. A lot of the checklists for these different applications are on I works that you actually have to have a login to to see the the checklist. Um, but that being said, I don't want to make a bunch of excuses. So, as of yesterday, um, so we did I did resubmit our second round of comments and, uh, on Monday, Marcus reached out to us and says, "Okay, you're on the agenda, but we got to make sure that everything is addressed." And so we met uh in here in the office uh yesterday with uh Sunrise Engineering and uh Brett Knight and uh the rest of the city staff uh and went over another round of comments. Um I am not saying that these comments aren't legitimate, but I am saying of the 38 comments, 30 of these items on this list were not specifically spelled out in previous comments. That being said, we could have done a better job. Um, so basically, um, where I'm at, uh, I I I spent the day going, so our engineer worked on this late into the night and he had it to me this morning at 7:00. Um, as soon as I got into the office, I uploaded it on I work. Um, and uh, then I spent the day going through each individual comments. A lot of the comments were based off of their their drafting techniques, the quality of their drafting, and that is some somewhat subjective. Uh I've been doing this for almost 40 years, and so I've seen all different types of drafting, and I know there are standards. Um but a lot of those were those uh con considerations. Uh I spent the day going through and to the best of my knowledge, every one of those items have been addressed. Um, and I sent through a recap of the uh city the engineering review and I highlighted in red where they were fixed, what we did for those items. There are still some items that are pending. Um, and what we're trying to do is we're trying to get an approval uh or a a recommendation for approval pending these items that should be coming in the next several days. And part of them is part part of these items uh well I I can tell you what they are. The the water calculations and the eru an analysis although we know that at some point this needs to be done and presented to the city. Um we didn't have those done. uh those two C those two documents have been um our are uh engineer are he's working on them and I'm expecting those within the next day or two. Um the uh okay so uh Sunrise Engineering um understands or has made it a point to that that there's a high water table here. Um we've dealt with it. Uh the first building that we put in for Aventus 12,000 foot building. There is water standing in the retention ponds. >> Okay, >> year round. >> We know that. I mean, now we know that, but the other buildings that we've built, we've corrected the problem. There's no water uh back and forth. Uh so um Brian Roberts um is our geotechnical engineer and he is reviewing a document that uses the data from the state historical uh water tables and uh he has already given us a verbal but he needs to go through and do his own research. We're expecting to have that document by Friday with his signature. Um, so I'm just telling you what is what's outstanding. Okay. Uh, the off-site improvement agreement. Uh, we have a a joint access easement to the south of us. So, Boozenbark or Trek uh track properties built a warehouse there. Um, and in an effort to make it work for both parties, we've uh were given a 20ft access easement on our property and their property. Otherwise, they couldn't get anything into their docks besides a small box truck, but this also gives us room to bring the semis in and turn them around and get them back out onto the road. So, that one there was an oversight on my part. I expected that we were talking about off-site improvements with Lee Steen's property to the north, which he's made it very clear nobody's touching his property. Okay. So, that was an oversight on my part and we're working on that right now. We we expect to have that probably by Monday or Tuesday. Just getting the signatures of those uh engineer those individuals. >> You've spoken to Booenberg, is that what you're saying? >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. And and they're fully on board and uh we and we've spoke with the Andersons as well. They're fully on board with the the access easement. Uh percolation test was requested for the storm drain pond. A percolation test was done when we did the 200 west expansion. Uh Adam has started percolation test. He says he should have us that by Friday. Um then the uh the next item on my list uh we do not agree that we so so we designed this to put a a water line down the future 3300 on the half road that we're building. And then we have a 15inch uh storm drain line. It's an existing ditch that we're putting down that um we have uh an 8 in uh sewer um access and maintenance agreement that comes off of 450 South that will service our our uh adjoining lot uh number 68 I think and it will also feed um Brian Lopez's lot out on the highway. So, all of the all of the uh properties on the south side of 3,300 will have uh those two lots have an 80 in sewer line that's in place. We'll just have to run it across the south end of our property. Okay. >> When you say 3,300, are we talking about like 400 South or 450 South or something? >> Yeah, I think it's 350 South. Yeah, >> 350. That sounds right. >> I'm going by markers that I have. I don't know what the address is until >> Come on, Kelly. >> I'm not psychic. Sorry. Anyway, u >> so that being said, uh it was requested by city staff and Sunrise that we put a sewer line in there as well. So in 20 ft we're supposed to I'm making some assumptions here that we're supposed to put the water line and a sewer line and a 15-in storm drain line under half of a road. So what Skyler his point is is he he without being obstinate or anything he says if I am required to do this I will go to the state on budsman because I just do not believe that we have a responsibility to provide all of those utilities in half a road. That being said I directed our engineer to draw those up to draw the sewer line and put it in. Okay. So, one of the things that came up is is if that sewer line goes in, it's going to have to cross over. And so, the state will require an application for us to uh either case the sewer line or water line, I'm not sure which one, in order to cross over those. So, that that is something that is outstanding and it's based off of uh kind of waiting for the the High Park City attorney to say, "Yes, you you need to put that sewer line in or no, that's kind of where it's at." Okay, sorry about the long explanation. Um, and the other thing is uh engineers estimates for improvements. Um, Adam is working on that and that's for the uh letters of guarant letters of guarantee the financial guarantees for the work on in the city right away. So, he's working on that as well. And then the last item was uh the final landscape drawing, which we've submitted the landscape drawings, but city ordinance requires that we submit uh sprinkler drawings. So, we have a party working on that. These are the items that I feel like we could get done in a fairly short order, but if I don't have a building permit, I I probably lose this the cell the of this building on this parcel. And so this is why I've coming before and I appreciate them giving this uh time to discuss this. Um there there's urgency and the other the other part of it is is um this is a is it insulated panel building. We've done um two of those before. Insulated tiltup panel building and that provides certain complexities that we can't deal with winter conditions. We can't we can't pour half a panel and have it snowed on and then and then pour the other half of the panel. So, we got to get we got to get the floor in. We got to get the panels done. Once the panels are done, we can bring the big crane in and set and and raise all these panels and get the roof structure in after the winter. But that's the other big uh item that I'm up against is winter conditions. So, I have no idea what the weather is going to do, but sorry. >> You want me to stop praying for snow? >> Yeah. So it's ski season just so >> is there of all the engineering things I mean is there any other than the one you're in debate with that you see that are going to be a problem like you're worried about like getting the hydraologist to get the right calculations to get I mean he can get the calculations done but are you worried that that maybe it was doesn't pass and it's going to be a lot more work than you thought or is it going to be more complex? So, so, uh, one of the things that was brought up on Monday is that we needed to raise a retention pond so that we kept the 1 foot, uh, lift between the the high water table and the bottom of the pond. So, one of the documents that I submitted on the portal is a survey that was done with the original Neerhouser subdivision, which we abandoned. We bought the land and we didn't we didn't record that plat, but that original survey showed where the original grades were, where the pond is. So basically where our pond is and I'm I'm I'm I'm sorry. I should just tell you no, I'm not worried about anything. >> Yeah, that's a good that's a good answer. >> But but that but Sunrise is worried about Sunrise is worried about the uh Geotech certifying this. We've had the conversations. He uh he says he's not worried about it at all. He's but he's got to go through his process, >> right? And I mean to be to be fair to Sunrise, they're probably worried about it, but they haven't seen the numbers yet. So when they come together, hopefully they'll both agree. >> Yeah, we have submitted a a document, but it wasn't stamped by a geotechnical engineer. So, uh, anyway, um, that being said, any questions you have, I'm happy to answer them. I just would really appreciate any consideration you give you give us today >> for a conditional approval. The things that we don't want to do, right? That's what you're asking for. All right. So, the first item is the preliminary plat and the next is the >> plan >> site plan. >> Well, what I'd like to do is I'd like to combine items E and F because they are the same plan. They're all the same submittals. What this applicant is asking for is approval of the preliminary plat so that they can submit for final plat and at the same time giving final approval to the site plan that's in the preliminary plat package. >> Is this recommendation in the staff report? Is that how you would >> the motion staff report? Mhm. >> allows you to >> give preliminary plat approval and then conditional approval to the site plan. That's what the applicant's asking for and um that's what the city said they would do. >> And the preliminary plat is a recommendation. We are the we are the land use authority on the site plan. >> Correct. >> And why are we requiring the sewer line in there? Can you add a little information there? >> Yeah, I got information for you on that one. >> So, I did have a chance to speak with the city attorney regarding that sewer line that would be in county address 3300 North. And the way that exactions work, we've gone through this a couple times in different meetings. I'll just go over it briefly again. When a development comes in, the city says you have to build a certain amount of road, you have to build utilities, you have to do things that your development creates a need for, right? And that's anything beyond that is what we call an exaction. That's when the city says, "Well, maybe you don't need it, but we want it to happen anyway." And then there has to be some kind of exchange between the developer and the city.

So 3,300 North where it's in the master plan, it's something that we want in our plans. We've said we need it. Now with this new sewer access point that's been provided, they called into question, does the city need this when we have another option? And so in discussing it with the city attorney, he said essentially what the city has to do now is provide an analysis proving that we need it and then we can say no, you have to give it to us. I do not have that analysis prepared at this time. Um, in speaking with our city engineer and public works, we're not sure if the analysis would be worth producing at this time. And so we are prepared to say that we are fine with the sewer line at 3300 north being postponed until the development on the other side of the road comes in and then at that point they can put it in because our friends will have already installed the water line. Um and so people installing the other half of the road can put in the sewer line at that time. >> So that takes the one issue off the table for you. Yes. >> So you check that one cross that one off the list. >> That's good. Well, I would make the motion unless you guys have more. >> Make it. >> I move to send a favor a favorable recommendation for approval to the city council for the prelim preliminary plot for Snackco and to grant conditional approval for the site plan only the SNATCO building. The conditions being resolution of all items listed on the Hide Park City Engineering Review dated 9:14 2026 with no building permits issued until resolution. >> I'll second that. >> That is long. That's really good that you just came up with that, Heather. >> Yeah, I made it up on the spot. >> All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Taylor, a second by Commissioner Hansen on those two combined. Um, they're both for approval. The one is a recommendation to city council. The other is a we are the land use authority, so we get to decide on that one. Um, okay. Any further discussion? Okay. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose say nay. >> Thank you. Appreciate it very much. >> This meet high parks get chips for a deal. >> We want a vending machine. >> They're really good chips. >> I'll bring the sauce. >> Anything. >> All right. No legislative items tonight. Uh we do have a discussion item or ethics training. I know um Muel and I just went to a is it it's APA is that American planners association >> planners association. We attended the Utah chapter. Yeah. Two day conference two-day fall conference. It was really good and a lot of it, I mean, I would say had to do with like collaboration and getting along with people and it shouldn't be us versus them and to see people as people, not things. And I mean, that was part of it. It also gets into the ordinances and >> not being disagreeable. >> Yeah. Yeah. Like we're all in this together. We all want a good city. Yeah. >> Yes. Anyway, so but ethics was part of it. And I'll tell you, I went into this class like, "Okay, I probably haven't been to an ethics one, but I do everything right." And sitting through it, I was like, "Oh, oh, oh, well, yeah, I could have done better there." Yeah. So, not I mean, nothing egregious, but just little things that I went, "Okay, now I know." >> Well, and that's why we're here tonight. Um, so kind of as a There's probably a lot of friends here tonight saying, "I thought we were talking about zoning." Um so with city council's decision last week to uh continue the discussion of the lowdensity residential uh until we find a solution that works for the community, we decided let's put the rest of these zones on pause until we see how that shakes out and then we can rework the other zones that were being discussed. And so when Muel came back and gave me the report of all the nice things she learned at her conference, some of those things being the ethics training and how it's actually required by state law, I said, "Oo, this is a perfect opportunity for us to knock out this requirement, get our training done, and have a nice refresher course and maybe learn some new things." Because some of these things I was like, "Oh, I did not know that was a thing." So >> yeah, can we pause for a minute? Like does everybody know that you have four hours of required? Is it four hours every year? >> I'll get there. >> Okay. >> All right. So, please note, uh, this is a training adapted from state code and information from the Utah property rights on budsman. This is neither the time nor the place to call out officials or staff or raise ethics concern regarding individuals. Ethics complaints can be filed with the mayor and will be dealt with outside of public meeting, but please feel free to interrupt me if you have any questions as we move forward. All right. So, Utah's code 10-20-302. It's You're already so excited for this. I'm already citing code numbers. This is gonna be great. >> I'm surprised these people are still >> All right. So, as the chair was mentioning, it's instate code. The planning commissioners are required to have four hours of annual land use training. Lucky you. Uh one hour is required to be a general powers and duties training. We have one that the state puts on. If you haven't done it yet, I'm sure we can get a link for you to complete it. It's relatively simple and I'm sure for those who've been on the commission for a few years, you've heard it before. Um, the other three hours can be a multitude of different things. Uh, one of those is ethics topics. And there's a couple of things from the menu of options at the end here, exparte, communication, conflicts of interest that I learned a lot about from listening to Muel's report. And so I thought we should probably take some time to talk about what those things mean for us here. So let's that's going to be the focus of our conversation tonight. And if this goes for an hour, you can count it as one of your hours of training. So congratulations. >> All right. The core principle pulled from the state onbudsman's website. Um public office as a public trust. Officials must act with fairness, transparency, and impartiality avoiding personal or financial gain from their position. keep that in mind as we move forward. That's the whole point of talking about ethics and doing our having, you know, doing our job a little better. There is an updated state law that I think everybody should be aware of, why ethics is so important. Um, so in Utah code 10-20-301 section 1B, um, there's only a few things that a planning commissioner can be asked to leave the planning commission for. Uh all all three of them are here. So the first one is using public funds for political purpose. I will say that's really hard for hide park planning commissioners because we don't give you guys access to much money. So I'm not too worried about that one. Um B would be violating a provision of title 10 chapter 3 part 13 which is the municipal officers and employee eth ethics act. So that's why it's important to pay attention tonight because violating this leaves room for planning commissioner to be removed. And then the new section, which we won't spend a ton of time on, but just for people's information, um this is a new section that was added is if a planning commissioner is acting with intent to influence a land use decision or an appeal of a pending land use application in a manner that creates an actual impermissible bias or an unacceptable risk of impermissible bias. That would be grounds for a city to remove a planning commissioner, but we're not talking about that tonight. So, just an FYI, that's a state code that has been updated. All right. As Melinda said, I'm a good person. Why do I need ethics training? I don't do bad things. Well, there's a few points to as to why we're doing this. First, it's a reminder of the public trust, right? We are expected to act impartially and in good faith at all times. That's just what the public has trusted us to do. Uh number two is a reminder of legal accountability. Ethics violations can lead to holes in approvals, which may end in court, as we talked about tonight. Sometimes things go ary in a subdivision and people decide they want to sue the city and so ethics is a very tricky piece of the laws. We want to make sure that everything's done above board so we can focus on the details of the application if there is a problem. Uh part three is it helps protect all of you. uh following the ethical rules helps keep your governmental immunity status so that developers can't come after you personally for making some sort of incorrect judgment or decision. And then the last one is reminder of community impact. I was really impressed. These I pulled this slide from some of the state materials and sometimes in my interactions with the state, it doesn't feel like they're super concerned with community impact, but I was impressed to see this on their slides that they want to remind all of us that our decisions impact people's lives and so we need to be aware of what we're doing and how it affects other people. All right, this one was really interesting. I pulled it from the APA slides. Um there was a whole discussion at the conference about how small town ethics look really different from maybe a larger city and I think this applies a lot to us and if we go through and read each of these um it kind of defines why. So we're a tighter net community. The applicants typically are our friends and neighbors, right? We know these people. Uh the prominent community members have multiple roles. you know, the person who's up here trying to get a chip factory approved uh may also we may see them at church or, you know, in the school system. They may be our kids' teachers. And so there's a lot of connection. There's the issue with perception becomes reality, right? Sometimes people hear whisperings and gossips and it it becomes the reality. Uh and of course the high visibility. And so really the point of the slide was to say that in a small town ethics can become even more important than it is for a larger community because we have that extra level of scrutiny from our friends and neighbors. All right. So from the state guidance, here's what they say we need to be careful of and watch out for. And these are the things that kind of define ethics. And we'll go through each of these pieces as we go forward. So, first there's conflicts of interest, uh, government transparency, accountability, and this interesting one they called dual relationships. And I thought of the example of it's kind of the situation where you go to soccer practice and you're there watching your kid play and somebody comes up and taps you on the shoulder and says, "Hey, you're you work for the city. Tell me about X, Y, and Z." And I think what that can be summarized as is just make sure you know which hat you're wearing, right? It's not it's not always inappropriate to talk to people about city business, but just be aware of who you're talking to and what you're discussing when you're meeting with people from the community. And we'll get into why that's important a little later. So, we're going to start with conflicts of interest. I think this one's pretty clear. Everyone's probably really familiar with um how this works and what it is. So uh conflict of interest from the state definition is conflict exists when you, your spouse or an associated business has a direct financial or other interest in a matter before you. Um the two things to remember with conflict of interest are these next two points. Any conflict of interest must be disclosed. Um and commissioners may also recuse themselves from participating in a meeting if there's a conflict. Uh, a couple of common scenarios that got outlined in this training like if the applicant happens to be a family member or relative, if there's a decision affecting property or investment that you're part of, if you um taking a strong position on an issue before public hearing, that could be a conflict or like if you're own properties and one of your employees or your renters appears before the body. That's just some examples of what could be a conflict of interest. So some best practices recommended by the state uh on budsman is first of all to disclose early and often in public meetings. Keep decision related discussion into public meetings. Uh if you're ever unsure if you got a conflict or not, seek legal advice. Again, the city staff, I'm not a lawyer, but we do have a city attorney who could help advise if there's ever any question about if there's a conflict or not. we can help you navigate that. Um, know and follow your local ethics rules. If the planning commission ever decided to adopt like a code of conduct or, you know, specific rules, that would apply there. I don't think our planning commission has anything like that, but maybe it's something you want to look into and work on. That would be fine, too. Um, and then, of course, keep your personal interests separate from your official duties, right? Again, make sure you know which hat you're wearing when you're interacting with the community.

So, this is an interesting slide that I like. I didn't know everything on this slide, so I thought it was important to share with the group. When we talk about recusing yourself from a situation, so if you do have a conflict, what does it look like to recuse yourself? Uh, I'm just going to read it because I thought this is really interesting. So, first you need to announce your conflict before any discussion begins. Publicly announce your conflict of interest on the record. They have a nice script there. If anybody ever needs this, you can come find me. Um, number two, this is the part I didn't know, is you're supposed to step away from the commission table immediately. Do not participate any deliberation, ask questions, or make comments about the matter. And number three, you're even supposed to leave the room. uh you exit the hearing room entirely during discussion and the vote on this item. Your presence in the room during deliberation may still constitute improper influence. Then number four, document the record. Ensure the clerk records your recusal and the stated region reason uh in the official meeting minutes. The recusal must be documented to be legally complete. So yeah, if anybody ever has a reason you need to recuse yourself for the meeting, you're actually supposed to announce that you are not going to be participating in this and you recuse yourself because of a conflict of interest and you get to walk outside and go hang out at the pickle ball courts for 20 minutes while the item is decided. I did not know that. Um, any questions about that? >> Like if if you announce your conflict, I'm guessing you have to have a real conflict. It can't be that you don't want to deal with it. Yes, we're gonna go. We're gonna get to that next >> there. That's always >> So, you have to give the reason and it has to be a valid. >> Yeah. You can't be like, I don't want to deal with my neighbors after. >> I have to interact with that person tomorrow and I don't want to make him mad. I'm going to leave. No, there's there's We're going to get to what is a conflict and when is recusal appropriate? Uh, any more questions about the process? >> Okay, done. Great. So to Commissioner Williams question, when do I disclose andor recusees? So this is one uh slide that was presented. It's kind of a decision tree and I would recommend everybody pay special attention to this one because this is direction from our friends at APA to help you decide if you've got a conflict or not. It's it's not always clear. So, I'm just going to read it again. So, we run through each step before participating in any agenda item. Step one, you ask, "Do I have a direct financial interest in the outcome?" If the answer is yes, then you need to disclose and you would need to recuse yourself. So, really, it's if you have a direct financial, if you're the developer of the project, you probably need to leave the room while the commission deliberates on your project. Um, if the answer to that is no, then step two is says, "Do I have a family or close personal relationship with the applicant or opponent?" If the answer is yes, then you must disclose, but you don't necessarily have to recuse yourself. So, if the answer is no to that, go to step three. Have I made prior public statements or comments about this application? If the answer is yes, then you need to disclose any prior advocacy you've done for the project or any work you've done before. And also you could consider recusing yourself. If the answer is no, then you go to step four. You say, would a reasonable person question my impartiality based on any other factor? Yes, then disclose and recuse. No, proceed to vote. And I would say the recusal for step four is kind of subjective, right? I would go back to the financial stake or interest. Um, that one's a little more murky to me. But yeah, you'll notice none of these questions was uh am I, you know, am I going to be fighting with this person about it tomorrow at soccer practice? Like that's not one of the questions to consider. >> So I have a question. >> Yeah. If I'm working on like the parking code and then it comes across us, do I say, "Hey, I need to disclose that I have been working on this." >> No, this would be like um mostly if you just have an application. >> Okay. >> For maybe if somebody was proposing a change to the parking code to the city saying, "Yeah, I've applied to change the parking code." And maybe they sat down and met with you. you would need to say, "Hey, I met with this person and talked about these things and here's what we talked about and I need to disclose that." And it's not necessarily something you need to recuse yourself for, but I guess that's more of our next topic. That's what we' call an exparte communication, which we'll talk about in the next section. >> We're just jumping ahead. >> Yeah, a little bit. >> We're so excited. >> You guys are just really ethical. You already know where this is going. That's fine. Any more questions? All right. So, going back to that gray area, I think this is a really good slide to take note of. Um, this one I pulled directly from the state and it said if there's a gray area or you're not sure, like let's say you go through the tree and you're still like, I don't know, here's some great questions to consider um to decide is this a conflict of interest or not? So, question one, would this appear unfair to the public? Do I have access or influence others don't? Have I communicated privately outside the public process? Would my impartiality be questioned? And if the answer to any of those questions is yes for the issue at hand, you probably need to disclose something or take a step back and say maybe what I'm doing is a conflict. So, any questions on that one before we get to the scary part? >> We're all about to be fired. >> It's so sad. >> You're all about to learn what not to do so that you don't get fired. It's great. All right, so prohibited conduct. This is pulled directly from state code 10-3-1304. Um, the best part about this is I'm not aware of this happening with any of us, so good job. Keep it up. Um, so first thing that you cannot do is use your position for personal gain. One of the examples I've heard is like somebody uh walking around and trying to drum up business for like a real estate agency and they're saying, "Well, I'm on the planning commission, so I know all the great places to live." Like that's a no no. You can't do that. You can't use your position with the city to try and advertise, you know, your business or your financial well-being. Um, a second is participating without disclosing a financial interest. So again, if you're a developer of a project and the city doesn't already know, you better tell us real quick before you start voting on stuff. Um, the next one is influencing decisions after recusal. This is the one why it's important if you're recusing yourself to just leave because if somebody takes offense with the approval and wants to sue the city, they could say that person was still here and they were glaring menacingly at the commissioners and so they voted against my project. It's it's a real thing that could happen. >> We're doing this sign. >> Yeah. Making hand signals from the back of the room. Um and then the last one's taking gifts or bribes. This one's tricky, but not as tricky as you would think. So, by state code, the definition of a gift or a bribe would be an item that's greater than $50 in value, but it doesn't count campaign contributions. So, if somebody like wants to take you out to lunch to talk about something, that's not necessarily a gift or a bribe, depending on how fancy of a lunch it is. Stay good. >> We're not going roots Chris. >> So, there you go. And if you're running for office, you absolutely can take campaign contributions from people who want to give you lots of money. Although the rules for that is sticky, but we're not going to get into it. All right. Any questions on the prohibited conduct? I don't think so. That's pretty clear. All right. We're going to get into another piece of conflicts of interest that we brushed on quickly. It's called exparte communications. Now, this is something where you may not have an interest in the project, but um you as a commissioner, and this applies to council members, too. So, all of my friends who may or may not be part of the city council who are in the room, you should pay attention to this part too. You have a certain amount of influence. And so, this is all about trying to make sure that that influence is used appropriately and in the right time and place. So, what is an exparte communication? It's when a commissioner or council member discusses the merits of a pending application outside the public meeting or hearing with a party, their representative or an opponent without all parties present. And when is it a problem? The short version is pretty much any time in the process before that approval happens. So like if a developer says, "Hey, I'm I want to get a project submitted to Hide Park. Ned, let me grab your ear and you can tell I can tell you all about it and you can tell me what you think. Technically, you shouldn't be doing that. >> If you do, then disclose it, right? >> Yeah, that's that's the interesting part. So, let's get into the dos and do not. So, do not this is like the big problems with exparty communications. So during the application process for a project, you should not be accepting private tours of the property with the applicant before the hearing, discussing merits of the application privately before or during the hearing. Allow an elected official to lobby your position off the record. So city council members, that's for you guys. Um make or imply a commitment about your vote before the hearing concludes. So those are all examples of what could be an exparte communication and what you should not be doing. >> Yeah. So this is the one that caught me because when we had that Shriber project, the I knew people at Shriber, I knew people I knew the land owners. I I just felt like I knew people on all sides and the the land owners called me and was asking they were asking me about certain things and so I did I talked to him a little bit. Um, and uh, so I just should have said that in before voting as we discussed that item. I should have disclosed that these guys called me. This is what we talked about. I shouldn't have maybe I don't know. I probably shouldn't have talked to them. I probably should have said I can't talk to you about these things. Submit your comments or questions to the city, you know, to staff so that it goes to everybody. But because I did talk to him, then I certainly should have had that open in the public before we talked about or voted on that item. >> Yeah. So, I'm going to call in Muel for a minute. So, you were at that training. Maybe you can help our commissioners know if they do get these phone calls from people saying, "Hey, I want to submit something to the city or I've got this application that I want to talk to you about to make sure it goes well for me." What should they how should they respond to those calls? Um, I when I served on planning commission, I found it helpful to just have some language tucked away in the back of your mind for when that happens. As a member of the planning commission, I'm directed by the state to not have conversations with applicants about their application. I need to walk into a meeting in a neutral position and I need to consider the findings of facts and then draw a reasonable conclusion at the meeting. I mean, that's a lot a mouthful, but you can have something to that effect just tucked away in the back of your mind so that you can address it when it happens. You don't because we're in a small town. It was much easier at a county, right? I didn't have a lot of interactions, but in a small town like this, you're going to. And so, you need to be prepared and you need to be able to say, you know, my duties as a planning commissioner are to be impartial. And and as much as I like you and would like to listen to what you have to tell me, I'm I'm been directed that that's not what I'm supposed to be doing. >> Should maybe we uh suggest they submit something in lie of talking to us as individuals? That's always a great suggestion. Anybody can send an email to planninghputah.gov. We also have on the web page a form you can fill out general general inquiries or feedback. We have several different ways that people can interact. >> Sure. >> And they can always send an email, a group email, right? You guys get those all the time. um people will write an email and name all the members of planning commission and all the members of city council and that goes to everybody and you're able to read it. What you can't do is respond other than thank you for your comments if you choose to do that. >> I thought we made I think we need to respond and we kind of have made that Melinda replies not to fix the issue but thank you for >> thank you for >> because citizens are mad. I would be mad if I didn't get a reply. And we've got to remember >> that we are working with the public and it's important to have that. >> And and as always, yeah, thank you for your comments is is where it needs to stand because once you start engaging >> send this email to here to planning and we can discuss >> and we can put it on the record that type. >> What if you walk through a project by yourself without the applicant? >> Well, let's make a distinction. So, like I'll use Mr. Harmon here as an example because he's invited several members of city council planning commission to come and tour the gateway now that it's done and it's not on the agenda anymore, right? That's perfectly fine. You guys can go and do as many tours as you want of facilities after they've been moved through the process and they're under construction. That's great. But this all goes back to being impartial, right? And so even if you know you're walking your dog and you're like, "Hey, there's that property." You know, you can take a look. That's fine. But you just have to remember that you need to stay impartial and make a decision based on the facts and the merits of the application, right? Um >> visiting the site is always a >> it was educational for me. >> The site I encouraged that when I was a planning commissioner, I always did a little drive. I have done that a lot. >> Stopping and talking to all the neighbors. >> I don't do that >> you guys under you understand where the line ends. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, we went over like the bad parts and what you shouldn't do. So, here's what you should do. And really, the funny part about this is like this is all about if you have one of these. Um, I'll admit that as I read through this, I didn't realize this was a thing until I was visiting with Muel. And so I I felt like I needed to put this in here because I know that this is something that we have done as a small town and we're probably going to have a hard time breaking this habit. And so here's some things to remember when this does happen. So first of all, you have to disclose any of these things at the very start of the hearing on the record. So if you do happen to talk with your neighbor about a project, it's not the end of the world, but you need to let people know that you've had that discussion with them, right? you need to let it let everybody know here on the record. Um, if there's any written communications that happen, like let's say there's that email that comes to you and you write a response saying, "Well, yeah, I know some things. Let me tell you what I know about it." Um, you would just have to submit that into the public record during the hearing. Um, and then you have to state the required disclosure script clearly for the record, which yeah, there's specific wording you have to use. So, if anybody ever needs that, let us know. We can get that for you. Um, and then one of the things that we're going to start doing as city staff is well with the chair, we're going to add to the agenda a segment at the beginning of each meeting to kind of ask for have an open-ended asking for people to disclose any communications that you may have had that could influence your your vote, right? And that way we're just providing that opportunity for anybody where you can say, "Yeah, well, I went and sat down with the developer and they showed me their site plan and these are the things that we talked about." Just so that we're being transparent for the community. Any questions with that? >> You can't motion to adjurnn yet. >> Okay. All right. I'll keep going. Oh, look. Questions? Okay. Any questions about anything we've talked about so far? blank stairs. Great. Okay. Part two of ethics training is a little less doom and gloom and city code and a little more how do we work with the people that we have to work with, right? Um I like to refer to us as team Hind Park City, right? The planning commission, city council, city staff, even the public, we're all on the same team, right? We're trying to make the city a better place like we talked about earlier in the meeting. And so we're gonna go through just a few things to try and help us as you as city officials and us city staff have better ethical communications and transparency with the public. So first of all, the League of Cities and Towns has this great conflict resolution uh top five tips that I want to go over um especially with all of our really energetic public hearings we've had the past couple of uh weeks. So, the first tip is my favorite tip. Remember that conflict just is we're going to make people mad probably no matter what we do. There's always going to be somebody who's upset with what the city is doing. And so, just remember that just because there is a conflict doesn't automatically mean something is wrong. It probably means we're doing our jobs right. Um, point number two is when there is a conflict, you need to have active listening. Part of that is knowing how to ask open-ended questions to try and get to the heart of the issue and find out what are they really mad about. I I know when I get home from work sometimes I'm a little bugged and my wife's really good at that. She'll try and force me to figure out what am I actually mad about and usually I just need to eat dinner. So anyway, sorry that was a bad joke. All right, point number three. Uh regulate your body and mind. It's really shocking for me whenever I get into a situation where there is people really upset with me. If I can just take a deep breath, that helps me a lot. Just focus and remember that we're all human beings and maybe we're just the individual I'm talking to is having a bad day and we need to try to be nice to each other. Um, the fourth one's really important for public servants, especially in a small town. Make sure that we're differentiating position from interest, right? Goes back to figuring out maybe we all we all want a better community, but people see that differently, right? Um, people have a different idea of what standard of living means for the community. People have a different goal for how they want to live their lives. We need to remember that the city's position may be different than our personal interests and learn how to separate that out when we're in a position where it may be causing conflict. Uh, and the last is the process matters and especially communicating that process to the public. Like we heard from one of our developers tonight, the city's process has been a little um hard to follow lately because of all the changes we've been making. with state code and also just trying to make the process better. The problem is when you change the process, the people who know the process get upset because the process has changed. So yeah, part of conflict resolution is having good communication with the public and letting them know what we're doing and how we're doing it. It goes a long long way. So yeah, that's something that we probably could improve on. Uh any questions or comments about conflict resolution? Anybody have other tips that you have helped you you would like to share? >> Yeah, I' I've got one. Um, one or two. Um, one of the things that I've noticed is we often get a lot of information, sometimes more than we need here. For example, we might get a a whole bunch of information about a project and we have to make a decision and we keep getting wrapped around some of that information that we receive when it has nothing to do with the decision that we have to make. Maybe we have to. Um, well, there was a project down at the bottom of the hill on the corner where they were worried about getting permission from us to do something. Go, wait a minute. That's not even our department. That's someone else that needs to approve that exceptions or inspector approvals. And that's does not even involve us. So that kind of goes with number two, getting to the heart of the issue. Sometimes we try to get so much information that we're almost overwhelmed by it and we don't need it. Well, we figure out exactly what we have to do. Oh, that's easy once we figure it out. Figuring out the problem though is sometimes the hardest part. What's the real issue? and fact from public clamor sometimes I mean we want like on our legislative issues we definitely want you know opinion and but on the administrative items it's

just comparing an application to what's in our code it either meets and we have to pass it whether we want it or not and if it doesn't meet we can't pass it whether we want it or not. So separating yeah the facts the things we need to know from some of that that we don't it does every I mean do each of you understand the difference between administrative items and legislative items is that because those are kind of two different hats. >> One of the things I think the public sometimes doesn't understand is the difference between a public meeting and a public hearing. >> Yeah. We're a hearing, we're asking the public to provide us findings of fact about the topic. And a public meeting, the public can come and observe us doing the city's business, but they don't provide imp uh input. They don't provide findings of fact for every topic. And I think for whatever reason, a lot of the public thinks that they get to speak at every that they're supposed to be speaking at every meeting um no matter what and they don't really understand the difference. So um we might be using our social media to to help educate folks on civics. >> I think we need to because I ended up seeing a flyer that went around. I never saw it prior to last city council's meeting, but it was urging everyone to come to city council and to speak. And so, no wonder why last week was full and they were expecting to come and speak. I don't know who started that. I don't know who created that. Um, so I think educating and using social media is good because like I said even before, you know, I've learned a lot this past year and prior to that I would have been upset too and so we just don't know. Citizens don't know. >> But didn't I just put that in the newsletter a couple months ago? >> But people don't >> don't read the newsletter. >> I have to do like seven different It's so hard. raise your hands. >> And there's an important difference for people to realize between planning commission and city council because city council has that opening time where people can talk about anything except for what's on the agenda because what's on the agenda was previously uh if it was a public hearing previously, that was the time. But that first three minutes, if it's not on the agenda, city council's responsible to hear from the people. We we aren't as planning commission. We only do public hearings. Well, there's also a difference there, too. That open and call to the public that happens at the beginning of our city council meetings, that's not required by the state. In fact, a lot of municipalities have done away with that because it just turns into open mic night where people just come and air their grievances. We have three or four different places on our city website where folks can um report issues or or file a complaint or air their grievance. We have feedback forms that they can write an email to the city um at any time about any topic. Um the fact that your city council still does open call to the public is a courtesy. >> I like that. >> And I think the more that it gets abused um the less Yeah. If it gets abused, the less likely they will be to to keep that traditional practice. Um so it's something that is actually a privilege and not a right. And so, um, yeah, it need it needs to be appreciated for sure. >> Logan City was the most recent city in the valley to shut it down. I think it was only like last year and it caused a huge uproar, but it was because members of the public were coming and using it to say inappropriate things or disparage members of the council or, you know, just be nasty. And so eventually their city council said, you know, this isn't helping. and so they did away with it. So yeah, I think as long as our residents are using it the right way and using it to convey concerns and and things that are relevant to the council, I think that's one of the things that's read before that is keep it to things that are relevant to the council's authority. It'll probably stay forever. It's a great time for people to come and talk, but also it's um it's not a great place to have a dialogue either, right? because people come to the microphone and they say their excuse me say their piece and really the city council is supposed to say thank you for your comments and move on. I know that previously in hide park that wasn't the way it was done but that's how it's supposed to be done and so that doesn't give you a chance to go through these steps if somebody has a conflict or probably want to bring up and so it it's been a controversial thing at the state level for a while. They've talked about, you know, changing how public comment works and public hearing requirements. In the end, cities fight to keep it open because they feel like people need a place to be heard. But the open call to the public probably isn't the best place to get real conflict resolution just because of the format >> because you can't back and forth. Right. >> I think with all the changes we're pondering and with the public sentiment, I think we need to work harder and maybe this is city council's purview, not planning commission per se, but because we are all involved in the process, I think we need to do better at transparency and getting giving a place where people can give public input >> on the record so that huge changes that really affect everybody in the community, they have a chance to feel like not just that they we've listened to them and saying thank you for your comment, but where they've had actual input and then we take into consideration. >> Yeah, we're going to get to we're going to talk a little bit more about transparency moving on, but that's point number five, right? The process matters, but we also have the responsibility as a city to have a good process and something that helps the public or, you know, whoever we're dealing with have a chance to resolve a conflict, not just to sit there and nod and be like, whatever. So, yeah, we'll we'll talk a little bit more about transparency as we move forward. All right. Mayor Cox, our previous mayor, had a saying. I never really understood, but he said it meant teamwork. Um, and it was we raised the ship together. I think he probably got it from somewhere. He never explained where he got it from. So, in honor of him, I've titled these next two slides, uh, we raised the ship together. So, these are things that I'm sure we already know, but of course, since this is an ethics training, we'll just run through them real quick. So these are just points to help us be better decision makers in the community. So commissioners and council must not quote unquote join a side regarding controversial issues. Again, it's fine to have opinions. It's fine to have um a differing vote, but it's not okay to go out and lobby actively for a cause. And it goes back to that impartiality thing, right? um you as the decision makers of the city have to consider all of the information brought to you and then make a decision. Um

with that there's another thing that is uh happens sometimes which is voting the other way just to let the public feel heard. Um oftentimes there'll be a split vote like tonight we had a 3-2 vote and it was fine because the split vote was based on facts and based on the application, right? But if we were to go through, call for a vote and it was, you know, a split vote and the one person said, "Well, I I just voted that way because I wanted the person to feel like the city listened to them." That's actually not an appropriate way to vote. The voting should be done based on the facts pre presented to us. Um, and then lastly, the big no no is representing personal views as the city's official position. I think we already knew that one. That one's pretty obvious. Um, and then the should not things that maybe you should think about before you do them, but it's not necessarily like against the rules. Uh, air personal grievances in a public meeting uh or disparage members of the staff, city council or public on the record. I know that sometimes there's people get frustrated with people. We get called lots of names from the podium. That's okay. But we as the city, well, they're expressing their first amendment rights. That's they can express their right to, you know, criticize their officials. That's fine. But we as the people making the decisions need to be better than that. So, all right. And then the next one for raising the ship together is the commissioner, city council people, we have to politely disagree. I think we do a really good job of this as Hide Park City. I feel like there's very good um communication with the bodies. Um there's been some hiccups in the past, but I think right now we're in a good spot and there's good communication between the different bodies with that is respecting others regardless of votes. Um and of course disclosing our conflicts of interest or exparte communications. Just had to put that one back in there. Um, and then things that you should do that will probably help you out is ask questions, come visit with the staff before voting if you have questions. We're here to help you. Um, come to meetings, ready to hear discussions and to vote. Again, keep that open-mindedness, but also be ready to participate in the public process. And lastly, we we like people who are excited to solve problems, right? The public wants people who are ready to solve problems. So, we hope that the commission and the council is ready to attend and be part of the process to make the city a better place. >> I have a question. >> Yeah. >> Back to someone voting because they just felt bad for that applicant. Can you revote? Like, how do you deal with that? If someone says that, what do we do? >> Nothing. Like if somebody does that, >> I it >> is it just too late or can that vote not count? I'm just curious. >> Normally when that happens, right, it would be like a 4 to one vote and Ned felt sorry for them so so he voted. The the items still passed, right? >> Okay. >> Now, if it was >> you all voted in favor because this is not how I really feel, but we just felt bad or something to that effect, right? that wouldn't be an action that staff or the city needs to take, but it very well could be an app an action that the >> applicant >> um they could definitely uh appeal, which is fine. That's part of the process. And then if they weren't satisfied with that appeal, they could sue the city and say your your process was flawed and your planning commission um didn't follow their own bylaws and um code of conduct. And so it's it's important. Sometimes you'll have people who abstain because I don't I don't want my name involved in this or whatever. That it's kind of the same thing. Unless you really have a reason to abstain, which is probably you should recuse instead. Um you have to listen to the findings of fact and then reach your reasonable conclusion and then vote as your conscience tells you. So there is no abstain only recuse. >> You should only abstain if there's a reason for that. And it's it's just like um recusing. >> Yeah. Like abstaining's >> old fashioned term that we don't use anymore. >> No, it it's like if you're abstaining, you probably should just recuse, right? That's probably the proper thing to do. But it's not that you can't abstain. It's just not >> like said, you have to have a specific reason to do it. >> Oftentimes, people will abstain because they realize part of the way through the hearing that they should have recused or it gets to the vote and they're like, you know what, I after hearing this person and this person speak, it's clear to me that I'm I have a reason that I shouldn't participate in this vote and so they'll abstain. But you you must state your reason. So that would be the point you where you would disclose that I didn't know I had a conflict but based on facts that were presented or information now I feel that there is >> right but the disclosure only works if you do it before the hearing. Oh, >> so in that case you would be like, >> "Yeah, I need to recuse or not recuse, I need to abstain from voting because >> okay, >> I can't do this." >> But being absent and approving minutes from a meeting you were not at is not a reason to abstain either. They said like if no one else has issues with those minutes and like you're on the planning commission, even though you weren't there for that particular meeting, you should still vote on those minutes. Mhm. Um, another thing to note with the like one person voting against just because, there are certain applications in state law that if it's a unanimous vote, it becomes kind of ironclad and you can't have challenges or appeals. But if there's even one vote against, then you have a hole and there's an opportunity for a developer or community member to appeal or have a referendum on the decision or something. So, I just encourage you to always be very intentional with your vote and do it with a specific reason. I mean, if it's four to one and the and the one has a really good reason to vote against, that's fantastic. What we don't want is somebody voting no and just saying like, I just don't feel like it. I just don't think this is a good thing or I don't like that guy, so I'm going to vote no for his project. We can't do that kind of thing. I I think it's a good practice that when you do vote against something that you for the record offer offer a reason why based on fact or things you know whatever you've heard, >> right? >> So that explain it before you vote, right? so that everyone knows, okay, that's the reason. And yeah, >> kind of like the split vote tonight, like the two dissenting votes already explained before the vote that they would rather have it move forward differently if the circumstances were different. So you've already kind of explained why you would vote against. So for in the record, in the minutes, it reflects the reasoning for that vote. >> Yeah. All right. Other questions relating the section about how to be nice to each other?