The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting beginning with a Work Session at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 17, 2004 in the Lindon City Center, City Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: H. Toby Bath, Mayor Pro Tem

PRESENT

H. Toby Bath, Mayor Pro Tem
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember(arrived at 6:15 p.m.)
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk

Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Kevin Smith, Planning Director

WORK SESSION - 6:00 P.M.

The Mayor and Council will meet with Gordon Raymond of BFI, the city’s waste collection firm, to discuss the recycling program and future contract negotiations.

The meeting began at 6:06 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Bath invited Mr. Gordon Raymond of BFI to the front. Mr. Raymond explained that he has had discussions with Mr. Dameron and Mayor Ellertson for the last six months on implementation of a recycling program in Lindon and extension of the waste pickup contract for Lindon. He observed that the initial recycling proposal had been for a subscription, which is hard to get. He explained that it is easier for drivers to go home to home. He added that the trucks still have to drive all the streets of Lindon and it is hard to remember routes. He informed the Council that if a mandatory program with full participation was implemented, it could be offered for $3.75 per month per home. A program with 50-99% participation would be $4.05 per month per home. Less than 50% would be about $4.65 per month per home. He commented that an effort has been made to judge the interest in the city for a program and 245 have signed up, which is much less than 1,000 (50%). He noted that there is still a need for the program and that some would like to recycle. He observed that the price structure he has quoted here is not a money maker for the garbage collection company, but more of a service. In an attempt to get better pricing, he suggested tying the recycling program to the extension of the solid waste contract. He commented that a one year extension would bring the recycling program cost to $6.10 per month per home.

Councilmember Bath asked if BFI is making a profit from the recycled items, why is there a charge at all. Mr. Raymond replied that this is a common question. He explained that all recycled items are sent to Salt Lake where they are sorted by machine and by hand, and baled for shipment. The amounts quoted here only cover the collection costs. The amounts received for selling the items only cover the shipment costs to manufacturers out-of-state. He explained that this is a "marginal" business and BFI would probably not be in it at all if it was not an "added value" service. He added that the only way he was able to "sell" the lower-cost program to upper management is by tying it to contract extensions. Councilmember Hatch explained that the city would like to make it an economical program for the residents also. Mr. Raymond suggested that a recycling container may allow some homeowners to replace a second container.

There was a discussion about the number of homes involved. Mr Raymond pointed out that Salt Lake City has over 35,000 homes participating in their recycling program. Councilmember Carpenter commented that he had read an article about Layton offering a recycling package for no additional cost. Mr. Raymond was not aware of any such package. Mr. Raymond told the Council that if the count of customers increases to 400 and a two-year extension of the contract is given, the cost may be reduced to $4.10 per month per household. Councilmember Carpenter commented that if you calculate the costs and spread it over the whole city, it is "politically challenging" to justify the expense. Mr. Raymond replied that a two-year extension of the contract may reduce the monthly cost of a 1^st container from the current cost to residents of $8.93 to $8.40 per month.

Councilmember Hatch asked about out-of-state recycling plants. Mr. Raymond replied that the items are shipped to Washington, Oklahoma and California according to the best pricing. He observed that the current volumes do not justify the construction of a plant either here or closer. Councilmember Bath asked if numbers are expanded through extensive advertising in Utah County, would BFI consider a sorting plant locally. Mr. Raymond was not sure. Councilmember Hatch suggested a system of central containers for deposit of recyclable items. There was discussion that many residents would not use the central deposit because of the inconvenience. Councilmember Bath posed a question for Councilmember Bayless and asked why glass and plastic shopping bags are not being accepted. Mr. Raymond explained that glass is easily broken and scattered during shipment and plastic bags are light, fluffy and unmanageable. Councilmember Acerson commented that some of the stores are accepting bags.

Mr. Raymond commented that BFI is offering a lot of flexibility options. Their concern is to make sure that the rates take care of the contract extension and add the recycling as an "added value" service. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the recycling program will be hard to build and expand if there is no active program. Councilmember Bath agreed that there are a lot of skeptical people that will not join until the program is active. The Council discussed ideas for reducing the cost to the customer like pickup every other week, and attaching to the programs of neighboring cities. Mr. Raymond observed that Lindon, Highland, Alpine, Pleasant Grove and American Fork are all looking at proposals and if they come to a conclusion together, it would help the total prices. Councilmember Carpenter noted that making the program work is a density issue. Mr. Raymond agreed and asked if the Council would be interested in a contract extension of one year, two years, or even five years. Councilmember Acerson replied that the Council is not opposed to a longer term. Councilmember Bath agreed that the Council may be willing to go long term if the benefits are sufficient. He asked that Mr. Raymond take Lindon’s locale as the closest city to the transfer station into account also. He noted that there is less trucking distance from Lindon than from anywhere else in the County. Councilmember Hatch asked that the "tipping fees" also be figured to be paid directly to the transfer station. Mr. Raymond was encouraged to stay in touch with Mr. Dameron.

The Work Session was closed at 6:40 p.m.

REGULAR SESSION - 7:00 P.M.

Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Larry A. Ellertson
Invocation: Jeff Acerson

PRESENT

Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk

Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Kevin Smith, Planning Director

The meeting began at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES - The minutes of the Executive Session of June 15, 2004, the Special Meeting of June 28, 2004, the Executive Session of June 28, 2004, and the Regular Meeting of July 20, 2004 will be reviewed.

The Minutes of the Executive Session of June 15, 2004 were reviewed. There were no corrections.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 15, 2004 AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

The Minutes of the Special Meeting of June 28, 2004 were reviewed. There were no corrections.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2004 AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

The Minutes of the Executive Session of June 28, 2004 were reviewed. There were no corrections.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION OF JUNE 28, 2004 AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

The Minutes of the regularly scheduled meeting of July 20, 2004 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:

Page 7, Line 28-31: Replace condition #3 "THAT STORAGE MUST BE MOVED INSIDE THE BUILDING BY NOVEMBER 12, 2004" with the condition "ALL ITEMS MUST BE COMPLETED ON THE APPROVED SITE PLAN BY NOVEMBER 12, 2O04."

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 20, 2004 AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

OPEN SESSION - Citizens comments

Mayor Ellertson introduced the Open Session as a time that citizens may bring up items that are not a part of the regular agenda. He asked if there were items to address. Mr. Clay Frandsen of 106 South 300 East presented a two-page petition objecting to the building of a "snake farm" in the neighborhood. He told the Council that he would like to know why there had been no public meeting or notice about a "snake farm" being approved. He suggested that this needs to be brought to the public. He pointed out that this is a commercial business in a separate building–more than just a home office. The neighborhood has concerns about their safety, health and odors. He commented that this use may not be compatible with the neighborhood and he asked for a stay on the project until the neighborhood has had a say.

Mayor Ellertson asked if there were others that would like to comment on this subject. Mr. Lawrence Mitchell of 164 South 300 East asked if this had been approved by the City Council. Mayor Ellertson replied that the Council had approved the combination of two lots into one lot. Mr. Dameron clarified that the Council only had the action to amend the subdivision and the Planning Commission had heard the business proposal.

Mr. Mitchell commented on the impact of a snake house in the neighborhood. He observed that many kinds of snakes are regulated by the State because there are some that are endangered or protected. He asked if the business had limits on quantities or size and how they were fed. He noted most breeders raise the feed also and that the raising of mice and rats create odors. He asked the Council to be very careful about this business. The Council commented that this business did not come before the Council for a conditional use permit and Mayor Ellertson observed that he would check into the process. Councilmember Acerson thanked Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Frandsen for sharing their concerns.

Mr. Mitchell commented that the neighborhood is depending on the Council for protection. He added that it was a shock to find that the business had been approved without any public input. He noted that this is a "tender subject" with people and that some are deathly afraid of snakes. Councilmember Carpenter observed that the Planning Commission is a public meeting and the neighborhoods are always welcome to come and comment. He noted, however, that the Conditional Use Permit process is not one that requires individual notice, just public notice in an agenda and that most people don’t check.

Mr. Jeremy Stone and his wife, Kara, observed that they understand the concerns of the neighborhood. They presently live in Orem three blocks from this particular neighborhood and have never had an issue in the four years they have been there. They commented that they abide by all State, Federal and City laws and raise small pythons. They also donate time to conduct educational seminars on reptiles. Mr. Stone asserted that his business cannot be defined as a "snake farm." The snakes will be contained within an accessory building on his property. He noted that he was willing to invite the neighbors to see his operation to show them that their fears are unfounded. He added that he feeds his snakes frozen rodents and there is no smell associated. He did not feel that his business is a threat to the neighborhood and if they could see his care, caging and security, he felt they would agree. He noted that his snakes are not indigenous and cannot survive in the open environment. He observed that his biggest fear is not the snakes, but theft. His building is designed to be unobtrusive and part of a home. He observed that they want to be part of the community and make their home there. He asserted that he can understand the concerns and fears about reptiles, but that the neighborhood would never see the animals. He would not have an animal that would endanger his family either. He assured the neighbors and Council that he does not keep venomous or large reptiles. The business is kept clean and professional. Mayor Ellertson thanked Mr. Stone for his input.

Ms. Nancy Zundel of 352 West 600 North commented that she was present at both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings where this application was discussed. She commented that the applicant had asked that public knowledge of the business be limited because of security reasons. Ms. Belva Parr of 73 South 630 East commented that she is afraid of snakes, but her concern is that there was no notification of the neighborhood. She explained that when she started her home business 17 years ago, she was required to have her neighbors sign that they had received notification and approved of her business. There are other home business owners in the neighborhood that also had to fulfill this requirement. She expressed deep concern that this business was being "pushed through behind our backs." She commented that just because it is not seen, it would impact the neighborhood. She added that it was not fair to require one thing of one business and not the others.

Mayor Ellertson commented that this is not an agenda item, so the time must be limited. Mr. Frandsen asked the difference between a public hearing and a public meeting. The Councilmembers briefly described the distinction. Mayor Ellertson commented that the issue seems to be that some of the neighbors were not aware of the application. He observed that he respects their concerns. He noted that the business owner is willing is to talk, answer questions, and attempt to resolve the problems. He suggested that the neighborhood could gather at a public meeting or they could conduct it independently. Mr. Stone welcomed the neighborhood to come by and see his operation. Mayor Ellertson noted that the business has only applied for a building permit and subdivision amendment and not a business license yet. Councilmember Bath asked if Mr. Dameron knew if there were any conditions on the Conditional Use Permit or the building permit. Mr. Dameron replied that he did not know what actions the Planning Commission had taken yet. He added that the Council cannot take action on an open session item and suggested that the neighborhood get together to resolve the concerns before it is brought back to the Council as an agenda item. Mr. Stone agreed to this suggestion. Mr. Frandsen commented on his experience of conditional use permits in Provo. He expressed the opinion that the neighborhood has been deceived. The Stones and Ms. Zundel assured Mr. Frandsen that there was no intention of deception on the part of the Planning Commission. Mayor Ellertson recommended that the concerned citizens meet and be patient with each other to learn and resolve the issues. He suggested that nothing would move forward at the City until some resolution is found. Mr. Stone commented that his intent is not to force his business on an unwilling neighborhood and asked for clarification of the Mayor’s statement. Mayor Ellertson replied that the building permit and recording of the plat will be held until some resolution is found.

Mayor Ellertson reported that there was progress being made on extending 700 North to the new freeway interchange. He also noted that negotiations for the use of the Murdock Canal for recreational purposes was progressing, although there were no specific timetables. He asked if there were questions. There were none.

CONSENT AGENDA - No Items

1. Public Hearing - R2 Overlay Zone Amendment. Staff requests this public hearing to continued for one additional time until the meeting of September 7, 2004 to allow more time to research the item and to gather additional information.

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE R2 OVERLAY ZONE ORDINANCE TO SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mayor Ellertson noted the presence of Brad Pittman in the audience and the open session was returned to briefly to allow his comments.

Mr. Pittman asked if there had been a decision from the Council on the purchase of the parcel behind his home. Mayor Ellertson explained that nothing has changed yet, but that some things were happening that may change this situation now. Mr. Pittman asked the time frame. Mayor Ellertson assured him that another month should be sufficient. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the problem has been in trying to get a response from the forest service in a timely manner. He apologized for the delays.

2. Review and Action - Fryer Petition for Disconnection. The City Council has held the required public hearing for this petition and will now make a final decision to allow or disallow the disconnection.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the Council has heard the arguments for and against the disconnection petition and has closed the public hearing; and now have to render a decision on the application and petition. He noted the presence of City Attorney Jared Frei as a resource. He noted that he would like to summarize and comment on some of the concerns that were expressed in the request as reasons for disconnection. He observed that utilities can be provided regardless of which city the property is located in. He noted the fact that the city boundary runs through the property is the result of the difference between the original plans and the actual construction of 800 North/1000 South and that the boundary was intended by both City Councils to be the south side of the street. He expressed a concern about continuing to promote the jogging of the city boundary and that it would be more consistent to keep it in Lindon. His final comment is a concern that the City has not allowed disconnections in the past and that allowing one now may create a precedence for the future. Councilmember Carpenter added that it is a safety issue to crisscross the boundary too many times.

Mr. Dameron asked Mr. Frei if he had anything to add. Mr. Frei commented that the boundary changing makes addresses difficult to find and may create safety issues with law enforcement for residents. Mr. Dameron reiterated that utilities services will be provided if the property remains in Lindon. Mr. Frei asked if the Council would like to address any geographical or social issues.

Councilmember Carpenter commented that Mr. Fryer has commented on the possible advantages of being in a community that is across the street rather than across the fence. He added, however, that he could see no reason to conclude that this makes a difference. Mayor Ellertson commented that there is a possibility of potential precedence being cited by other property owners in this corridor. Mr. Frei added that the property can be developed in harmony with development in Lindon. Mayor Ellertson agreed and noted that development can be in concert with Pleasant Grove also. He observed that there are differences between the two cities, but a residential subdivision would be within the character of either city. Mr. Frei confirmed that the differences are not "compelling." Mayor Ellertson replied that he agreed with this statement.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO DENY THE PETITION BY DAVID FRYER, KENNETH FRYER AND LAURA FRYER FOR DISCONNECTION FROM LINDON FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. FINDINGS OF FACT - THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS THE FOLLOWING FACTS TO BE RELEVANT TO ITS DETERMINATION TO DENY THE APPLICANT’S PETITION FOR DISCONNECTION:
A. THERE IS NO CURRENT ABSENCE OF CITY-PROVIDED WATER SERVICE, GARBAGE SERVICE, SEWER SYSTEM SERVICE, TELEPHONE SERVICE, AND STREET FRONTAGE TO THE PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT WILL NOT EXPERIENCE INCREASED DEVELOPMENT COSTS BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT IN LINDON RATHER THAN IN PLEASANT GROVE BECAUSE OF A LACK OF UTILITY SERVICES.
B. HERE IS SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LINDON AND THE PETITIONER’S PROPERTY. WHILE THE PROPERTY DOES STRADDLE THE LINDON-PLEASANT GROVE BORDER, THE PROPERTY DOES NOT EXPERIENCE ANY PHYSICAL, SOCIAL, OR ECONOMIC BARRIER TO LINDON.
C. THE LINDON-PLEASANT GROVE BOUNDARY WEAVES BACK AND FORTH THREE TIMES IN THE SHORT STRETCH BETWEEN STATE STREET AND 400 EAST WHICH ENCOMPASSES THE APPLICANT’S PROPERTY. THREE BOUNDARY CHANGES MEANS THE STREET ADDRESSES CHANGE FIVE TIMES. IT WOULD MAKE MATTERS WORSE TO ADD MORE BOUNDARY CHANGES.
D. ONLY A SMALL PORTION OF THE PETITIONER’S PROPERTY IS BISECTED BY THE LINDON-PLEASANT GROVE BOUNDARY, WITH 81% (1.65 ACRES) OF PETITIONER’S LAND RESIDING IN LINDON.
E. UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING, THE PETITIONER COULD SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO FOUR 20,000+ SQUARE FOOT LOTS FRONTING ON 1000 SOUTH IN PLEASANT GROVE.
F. LINDON HAS NOT ALLOWED ANY PRIOR DISCONNECTIONS ALONG THE LINDON-PLEASANT GROVE BOUNDARY.

2. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - THE LINDON CITY COUNCIL HAS CONSIDERED THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED DISCONNECTION ON THE FOLLOWING AREAS AND CONCLUDES:
A. COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. THERE IS NO ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, OR GEOGRAPHICAL BARRIER BETWEEN THE PROPERTY AND LINDON THAT DICTATES DISCONNECTION INTO PLEASANT GROVE. THUS, EQUITY AND JUSTICE DO NOT COMPEL DISCONNECTION IN THIS REGARD.
B. ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. THE DISCONNECTION WOULD FURTHER EXACERBATE THE UNFORTUNATE ZIG-ZAG EXISTING ALONG THE LINDON-PLEASANT GROVE BOUNDARY, RESULTING IN THE CHANGING OF ADDRESS NUMBERS MANY TIMES IN A SHORT STRETCH OF 1000 SOUTH. THIS WILL CREATE EXTREME CONFUSION TO SURROUNDING RESIDENTS IN TRYING TO LOCATE ADDRESSES OR UNDERSTAND WHAT CITY THEY ARE CURRENTLY IN. THIS IS A COMPELLING REASONS TO DENY THE PETITION.
C. EXISTING OR PROJECTED STREETS. THE PROPOSED DISCONNECTION DOES NOT IMPACT ANY EXISTING OR PROJECTED STREETS. THUS, EQUITY AND JUSTICE DO NOT COMPEL DISCONNECTION IS THIS REGARD.
D. WATER AND SEWER MAINS AND SERVICES. ALL UTILITY SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PROPERTY AT THE SAME CONVENIENCE REGARDLESS OF WHAT CITY THE PROPERTY IS IN. THUS, EQUITY AND JUSTICE DO NOT COMPEL DISCONNECTION IS THIS REGARD.
E. LAW ENFORCEMENT-EMERGENCY SERVICES. THE DISCONNECTION WOULD FURTHER EXACERBATE THE UNFORTUNATE ZIG-ZAG EXISTING ALONG THE LINDON-PLEASANT GROVE BOUNDARY, RESULTING IN THE CHANGING OF ADDRESS NUMBERS MANY TIMES IN A SHORT STRETCH OF 1000 SOUTH. THIS WILL CREATE EXTREME CONFUSION FOR POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY. THIS IS A COMPELLING REASON TO DENY THE PETITION.
F. JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THERE IS NO OTHER COMPELLING REASON IN JUSTICE OR EQUITY THAT DICTATES THAT THE APPLICANT’S PETITION MUST BE GRANTED.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (4-0, ONE ABSENT).

The Fryers asked when the minutes of this meeting would be available. They were told approximately September 7, 2004.

3. Public Hearing - Surplus Property Resolution (#2004-11). The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve a resolution declaring certain property of the city as surplus and approving the disposition of the listed property.

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR AGENDA ITEMS #3 AND #4. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mayor Ellertson asked the timetable on the advertising for bids. Mr. Dameron replied that the advertisement would be placed in early September. He explained that the advertisement would detail the date the bidding would close and that sealed bids are required. He noted that the items would be available for inspection at public works. Councilmember Bath suggested that consideration also be given to placing the advertisement on the internet. He explained his experience with the Alpine School District’s surplus bids. There was a discussion that the bids need to be sealed and cannot be submitted over the internet. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION #2004-11, DECLARING CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY TO BE SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE DISPOSAL OF THE LISTED PROPERTY. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (4-0, ONE ABSENT).

4. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment, Section 13.12.025 - Rental Utility Agreement (#2204-8). The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve an ordinance amendment to Section 13.12.025 of the Lindon City Code which will change certain requirements relative to the utility agreement for rental units. Additionally, the Council will consider adopting a new utility policy which complies with the recommended changes in the ordinance amendment.

Mayor Ellertson noted that a public hearing was still open and confirmed that this amendment is proposed for the rental utility agreement. Mr. Dameron explained that this policy and ordinance had been drafted originally in response to a problem with a local renter and an owner in California. Since then, the utility clerk has experienced a conflict with owners signing a guarantee and has suggested that the owner be fully responsible from day one. He also commented that the renter has been required to make a deposit on the account, and if this amendment is adopted and the owner is responsible, there will no longer be a requirement for a deposit. Mayor Ellertson asked if unpaid utility bills show as a lien on the property. Mr. Dameron replied that the owner is at risk and liable for all unpaid utility bills. Mayor Ellertson asked if the owners of rental units have been given notice of this proposed change to the ordinance and policy, and if there had been any feedback from owners and renters. Councilmember Acerson suggested a transition period.

The Council discussed the proposed amendment. Mayor Ellertson observed that the City does not want the owners to become the billing entity. Mr. Dameron agreed that the utilities could be added as part of the base rent. Councilmember Carpenter suggested some changes in the wording of the ordinance. Mr. Dameron observed that a copy of the ordinance and new policy will be sent to the owners of rental units on the utility rolls and a period of time will be set to allow them to submit an application in their name. Mayor Ellertson commented that he wished there was a way to avoid doing this without notice to the owners and renters. Councilmember Acerson commented that he appreciates the fact that the desire is there. Mayor Ellertson asked the magnitude of the problem. Mr. Dameron replied that there is not a large problem; there is just a need to fine tune the program before there is a large problem. Councilmember Carpenter asked if this would be used to push compliance with the accessory apartment requirements. Mr. Dameron replied that there is no cross check set up at present. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was any public comment from the audience. There was none. There was a discussion on the period of time to conform. It was decided that 60 days would be adequate.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE #2004-8, AMENDING THE LINDON CITY RENTAL UTILITY BILLING POLICY BY AMENDING CHAPTER 13.12 OF THE LINDON CITY CODE WITH THE ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN SECTION 13.12.025(3) TO REMOVE THE WORD "UNPAID" ON LINE TWO, AND (6) TO ADD THE WORD "ADVANCE" BEFORE THE WORD "NOTICE." ON LINE ONE. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (4-0, ONE ABSENT).

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

5. Review and Action - Bid Award - McKinley Drive Trail (A Segment of the BST). Requests for bids have been properly advertised and received for the construction of the McKinley Drive Trail, a segment of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail. The low bidder is Geneva Rock, Inc. in the amount of $109,568.90. This firm has an excellent reputation and staff recommends awarding the contract to Geneva Rock, Inc.

Mr. Dameron distributed the bid tabulations from the City Engineer. There was a discussion on the various line items in the bids.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO ACCEPT THE BID FROM GENEVA ROCK IN THE AMOUNT OF $109,568.90 AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO THEM.

Councilmember Carpenter asked what happens if the project is rebid. Mr. Dameron replied that there is a time delay. Councilmember Acerson suggested that the contractors may be more "hungry for work" later in the year. Mr. Dameron replied that his only reservation concerning re-bidding is that the neighborhood is anxious for the completion of this trail. Mayor Ellertson asked if the engineers have made any comments on the differences in the line items. Mr. Dameron replied no. Councilmember Carpenter pointed out that the low bid is double the other bids for excavation. There were other discrepancies pointed out in the line items. Mr. Dameron observed that the Council would find discrepancies on line items in all the bids. Mayor Ellertson asked why the City Engineer’s estimate is so low on the unit price for excavation. Councilmember Carpenter suggested a three week delay to the next meeting so that the discrepancies can be investigated. Mayor Ellertson suggested a conditional approval that would allow the awarding of the contract if the differences can be resolved to the satisfaction of himself and the engineers. Councilmember Hatch commented that the contractor may have overestimated on the digging around the Salt Lake Aqueduct.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE CONDITION THAT THE CONTRACT WILL BE AWARDED TO GENEVA ROCK PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE LINE ITEM PRICES ON THE BID TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS, MAYOR ELLERTSON AND MR. DAMERON. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Councilmember Hatch reported that the Fair Committee has requested another speaker system and power facilities on the upper park. The Council discussed the requests. Councilmember Hatch reported that the landfill board has received a proposal by Mountainland Technology to put their campus on the farm property by the viaduct north of the old landfill and east of the race track. He also reported that the Tucker Lawn Care proposal to compost on landfill property was presented and approved. He presented the Council with a copy of the Housing Consortium’s action plan. He noted a Consortium-sponsored training on lead paint safety scheduled for October 26. He asked that this information be transmitted to the builidng inspectors in Lindon. A senior housing project in the old Maeser building was discussed. There was a short discussion about the compatibility of the Mountainland Technology proposal.

Councilmember Bayless was excused.

Councilmember Bath reported a complaint about the Police Department not being on time for the Lindon Days parade. He explained that the officers were late because a person went through one of the police lines on the parade route and almost caused an accident. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the CERT teams be used to augment the police in future events. There was also a suggestion to use the jeep patrol. There was a discussion about the fireworks display, the carnival, and the possibility of constructing an amphitheater in Lindon.

Councilmember Acerson reported that Lindon Days was done for another year and he was anxiously awaiting comments. He also reported that the current chairpersons have consented to do another year. There was a short discussion about the carnival personnel. Mayor Ellertson asked Councilmember Acerson to pass on thanks to all the chairpersons for Lindon Days.

Councilmember Carpenter reported that the sealing projects seemed to be progressing on schedule. He asked about the offering of the school property on 600 North for bid. Mr. Dameron replied that the school district has explained that they want to test the market, but that they have reserved four acres for the city park. He noted that action on this parcel may have to be taken soon. Mayor Ellertson commented that the school district would probably make a commitment to work with the city. The possible price of the property was discussed.

Mr. Dameron:
1. Reported that interviews for the Assistant Treasurer’s position would be conducted tomorrow.
2. Invited the Council to attend the Wal-Mart Grand Opening at 7 am on Wednesday. The Little Miss Lindon Royalty has been invited and are planning to attend. He noted that the city has rented a pair of scissors and a pair of posts for the event. Mayor Ellertson suggested a plan to obtain some scissors for future events.
3. Announced the Engineering Coordination meeting for August 25. Councilmember Acerson volunteered to attend.
4. Presented an invitation to the Council to come to the Utah Valley State College President’s Scholarship Ball on October 15 at 6 pm.
5. Noted that a copy of the I-15 transportation corridor workshop announcement was in the staff report. This workshop has been scheduled for September 1, from 9-11 am at the Lindon City Center.
6. Asked for requests from the Project Tracking List. There was none. Councilmember Carpenter asked if the environmental impacts of the cultured marble businesses had been considered. Mr. Dameron explained that the DRC has reviewed these applications and considered the fire, sewer and storm water retention aspects. He noted that there will be no floor drains. He added that he feels staff is protecting Lindon’s interests.
7. Announced that the Recycling signups have reached 245.
8. Noted a GRAMMA request had been received from an attorney regarding door to door solicitor licensing.
9. Informed the Council that Black Scott was experiencing some internal struggles that may jeopardize this project.
10. Asked for an answer for the "U in Utah" presenter. The Council discussed the presentation, and the pros and cons of being involved. They asked Mr. Dameron to inform Mr. Jury that Lindon would not be interested at this time. Councilmember Carpenter suggested that an evaluation of the program in four years may be considered.
11. Pointed out a copy of an article in the staff report that may be of interest on a rancorous election.
12. Reported that he had talked to Mayor Gammon about an area-wide sewer study. Mayor Ellertson commented that this plan will be of interest to Orem, but if the overall plan is changed, it may have interest for Lindon. Mr. Dameron expressed concern about the high cost of the study. Mayor Ellertson suggested that Mr. Dameron discuss this item with the Orem sewer department head.
13. Presented more material on the "Freedom Gallery."

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 9:58 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

APPROVED - September 21, 2004