June 2, 2015

Minutes of the Centerville City Council regular meeting held Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 7:05 p.m. at Centerville City Hall, 250 North Main Street, Centerville, Utah.


Mayor                           Paul A. Cutler

Council Members        Ken S. Averett
Tamilyn Fillmore
John T. Higginson
Stephanie Ivie
Lawrence Wright

STAFF PRESENT        Steve Thacker, City Manager
Lisa Romney, City Attorney
Jacob Smith, Management Assistant
Cory Snyder, Community Development Director
Katie Rust, Recording Secretary

STAFF ABSENT        Blaine Lutz, Finance Director/Assistant City Manager

VISITORS            Interested citizens (see attached sign-in sheet)

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE    led by Merlin Anderson, BSA

PRAYER OR THOUGHT    Councilman Averett


Heather Strasser – Ms. Strasser said she lives in the Shaela Park neighborhood.  She thanked the Mayor and Council for responding and listening to their concerns regarding the zoning change proposal for the Hafoka property on Porter Lane west of 400 West.  Ms. Strasser stated that the current site plan proposal includes 49 units with medium density zoning.  She said that residents still have concerns with traffic, walkability for children, narrow streets within the development plan, a lack of guest parking, usability of proposed green space, and pressure on existing infrastructure.  She expressed a hope that the City and residents can work together with the developer to get answers.

Rick Bingham – Mr. Bingham expressed gratitude for the service given by Council members for the good of the community.  He mentioned that from time to time in Council meetings the Mayor has expressed concern over outbursts from attendees, and pled for an air of civility.  He said he appreciates that reminder.  He asked that Council members also act with respect and work together in harmony, maintaining the decorum of the meeting.

Dorothy Call – Ms. Call said that as a long-time resident of Centerville she has seen a lot of changes over time.  Some changes have been good and some not so good.  She expressed a desire to keep negative changes to a minimum.  Ms. Call expressed the opinion that, if the City is not careful, Centerville will split, and the north end will join Farmington.  She asked if the City could have more homes rather than big high rises, where neighbor communication and a feeling of community is difficult.


The minutes of the May 12, 2015 Special Council meeting and closed meeting, and the May 19, 2015 work session, regular meeting, and closed meeting were reviewed.  Councilwoman Ivie requested an addition to the May 12 Special meeting minutes.  Councilman Wright asked Lisa Romney, City Attorney, if she had given specific direction to the Council regarding communication with Planning Commissioners at the Special meeting.  Ms. Romney responded that she does not recall giving that direction on May 12th, but that she would advise Council members to not lobby Planning Commission members on issues that are pending before the Commission.  Councilman Wright made a motion to approve the May 12, 2015 Special meeting minutes as amended.  Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).  Councilman Wright made a motion to approve the May 12, 2015 closed meeting minutes.  Councilwoman Fillmore seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).

Councilwoman Fillmore requested an amendment to the May 19 regular meeting minutes.  Councilman Higginson made a motion to approve the May 19, 2015 regular meeting minutes as amended, as well as the May 19, 2015 work session and closed meeting minutes.  Councilwoman Fillmore seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).


Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, briefly explained the Planning Commission’s recommendation to approve the Mickelson Meadows final subdivision plat.

Mayor Cutler opened a public hearing at 7:28 p.m., and closed the public hearing seeing that no one wished to comment.  Councilman Averett made a motion to approve the Mickelson Meadows final subdivision plat with the following conditions and findings.  Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).

1.    All professional service fees shall be paid.
2.    A bond shall be posted for all public infrastructure and utility work to be conducted within the subdivision prior to the plat being recorded.  Any public infrastructure or work in the public right-of-way shall require an excavation permit and bonding.
3.    A current title report will need to be submitted and reviewed by City staff prior to the plat being recorded.
4.    The final subdivision plat shall be recorded at the Davis County Recorder’s Office.

1.    The final subdivision plat is in harmony wit the General Plan [Section 12-480-52(1)(e)].
2.    The new subdivision meets the objectives for development within a Residential-Low Zone [Section 12-30-020-(b)(1)].
3.    It appears all applicable development standards for development within an R-L Zone have been satisfied [Table 12-32-1].
4.    It appears all general requirements for a subdivision have been satisfied [Chapter 15-5].
5.    All applicable standards found in the Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to a final subdivision review have been satisfied [Chapter 15-4].
6.    The final plat conforms to the preliminary plat [Section 15-4-106].


Mr. Snyder reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Miles Manor final subdivision plat.

The Mayor opened a public hearing at 7:31 p.m., and closed the public hearing seeing that no one wished to comment.  Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to accept the Miles Manor final subdivision plat with the following conditions and findings.  Councilwoman Fillmore seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).

1.    All professional service fees shall be paid.
2.    Removal of the home shall take place or a bond shall be posted prior to recording the plat, for the demolition of the existing building located on the property line of Lots 2 and 3.
3.    A bond shall be posted for all public infrastructure and utility work to be conducted within the subdivision prior to the plat being recorded.  Any public infrastructure or work in the public right-of-way shall require an excavation permit and bonding.
4.    Remediation concerning the environmental assessment shall be determined by the City Engineer and adhered to by the applicant prior to any building permit being issued for the subdivision.
5.    The applicant shall obtain a Davis County Development and Construction Permit, with a copy being submitted to City staff.
6.    A current title report shall be submitted as part of the final plat submittal to the City staff.
7.    The final subdivision plat shall be recorded at the Davis County Recorder’s Office.
8.    Subdivision drainage plan shall be reviewed and accepted by the City Engineer prior to the recording of the plat.

1.    The final subdivision plat is in harmony with the General Plan [Section 12-480-52(1)(e)].
2.    The new subdivision meets the objectives for development within a Residential-Low Zone [Section 12-30-020(b)(1)].
3.    It appears all applicable development standards for development within an R-L Zone have been satisfied [Table 12-32-1].
4.    It appears all general requirements for a subdivision have been satisfied [Chapter 15-5].
5.    All applicable standards found in the Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to a final subdivision review have been satisfied [Chapter 15-4].
6.    The final plat conforms to the preliminary plat [Section 15-4-106].


The final plat for the Legacy Trail Apartments Subdivision was approved by the Council on December 2, 2014.  Such approval was conditioned upon a number of terms and conditions, many of which are still outstanding.  Mr. Snyder explained that, due to many circumstances, the applicant, Mr. Hale, has submitted a request to extend the final plans and plat approval for 3-6 months.  Following brief discussion, Councilman Wright made a motion to approve extension of Final Subdivision Plat Approval for the Legacy Trail Subdivision located at the southwest corner of Parrish Lane and 1250 West, to September 14, 2015.  Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).


Mayor Cutler opened the meeting to public comments regarding the South Main Street Corridor (SMSC) and Overlay Zone at 7:37 p.m.  He stated that the purpose of the comment period is to receive comments regarding the principles and regulations of the SMSC Plan, and suggested that citizens refrain from focusing comments on specific developers and projects.

Scott VanOrman – Mr. VanOrman said it is his understanding that there is no specific density mentioned in the SMSC Plan, and requested the Council place a low-density stipulation, limiting development to single-family residences as much as possible.

Robyn Mecham – Ms. Mecham said she believes there are only four buildings in the SMSC that are not prime for redevelopment.  She said she recently found some of the comments she presented to the Council in 2008 during the SMSC Plan process.  Ms. Mecham commented that Farmington Station was financed by the California Teacher’s Union, and asked the Council what would stop a group from buying and redeveloping Centerville Main Street.  She said she feels there are big loopholes in the current zoning.  Ms. Mecham read aloud portions of the comments she made in 2008, and emphasized that the area of Main Street under discussion is the most historic neighborhood in Centerville.  She pointed out that Centerville now exceeds the Federal requirements for affordable housing.  Ms. Mecham expressed concern for the safety of children in the neighborhood.  She stated that more than a majority of property owners on Main Street were against density in 2008, and she provided a copy of a citizen survey taken at the time.  She asked the Council members to drive down Parrish Lane and look at what already exists in the business district, and see that it is not what is wanted on Main Street.  She asked the Council to please lower the density and lower the height allowance, and asked if it would be possible to grant zoning amendments with the stipulation that the original zoning would revert back if the proposed projects do not occur.  Ms. Mecham emphasized she feels it is important to ensure that new buildings fit in with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods.

Travis Davis – Mr. Davis said he grew up in West Valley City, and watched the change that took place in the community as density increased.  He briefly explained restrictions being implemented by West Valley City on the limited remaining developable residential properties.  He recommended the City consider a Residential-Low base zoning, not PDO, on Main Street.  Mr. Davis said he would like to see the City coming to the residents to explain why medium and high densities are preferable, rather than the citizens trying to prove why the City should have low-density.

Blane Roskelley – Mr. Roskelley referred to the high rise slums and high crime rate in Detroit, and mentioned that Detroit was once a fine, growing city.  He stated he would hate to see Centerville become like that.  He said he believes if traffic is increased with higher density along Main Street, it will not be safe for children crossing to school.  Mr. Roskelley said he would like to see the integrity of the City remain where it is.

Cami Layton – Ms. Layton pointed out that this is Centerville’s Centennial year, and quoted from comments in the City’s Sesquicentennial brochure regarding the goal to limit growth and preserve a small town atmosphere.  She stated that the City is small, and she would not want Centerville to be known as “the city squeezed in between”.  She quoted from a Deseret News article that states that Salt Lake City rents are among the cheapest in the region.  Ms. Layton said that cheap rent is available elsewhere, and does not need to be here.  She does not want the congestion and other issues that come with density.  Contention is not healthy in the community. She expressed confidence that the City can help developers and please citizens at same time, but the City should be honest with developers that come to Centerville regarding the desire for a small town atmosphere.  She said she believes staff and the Council should have the citizens’ interests at heart.  Ms. Layton said she does not want Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) or Envision Utah telling Centerville how the City should be built.  She does not want Main Street to be an active, busy section of town; Main Street is not the hub of the City anymore.  She is concerned about a possible rippling effect that could occur with properties on Main Street.  Ms. Layton stated she feels quality of life should be more important than getting State funding.  She also expressed concern for the aging population and stated the City should have single-level residences where the elderly can live.  She added that the City needs to think about providing cemetery space, and said she hopes this Centennial year can be a good year.

Dale McIntyre – Mr. McIntyre asked the Council members if they are representing the citizens who voted for them, or representing financial interests.  He stated that the Landmarks Commission is in the process of creating the Deuel Creek Historic District.  Mr. McIntyre said there is nothing historic about high-density housing in Centerville.  Historically, children have been able to walk to school safely, and he asked how safe they would be with high-density housing.  He asked the Council members to represent those who voted for them with the belief that their desires would be represented.

Ryan Archibald – Mr. Archibald said that he grew up across the street from Centerville Junior High and walked around the neighborhood safely, and he is concerned that children and the crossing guard may not be safe crossing the street with high density.

Bret Milburn, Davis County Commissioner – Commissioner Milburn expressed appreciation for the service given by the Council members, and said he knows that decisions are not easy, and everything is not black and white.  He said he is perplexed by the “not in my backyard” type of commentary.  He said he feels Main Street has a few businesses and many run-down lots, and he would like to see change on Main Street in a manner conducive with the desires of the citizens and the mindset of what Centerville wants to be known for in the future.  He said that change is inevitable, and he is not opposed to density in the right amounts.  He expressed the hope that citizens have taken the time to share their vision for the future through the Envision Utah online survey.  He commented that the arguments in favor of keeping a small-town Centerville, and the desire for citizens’ children to be able to afford to live in Centerville, seem to be in conflict, and a balance needs to be reached.  He said he does not feel it is just about density, although density does have an impact on a variety of different things.  Commissioner Milburn asked if the City has spoken with other stakeholders, such as the school district and emergency services, about possible impacts.  He pointed out that the population is expected to double along the Wasatch Front in the next 20-30 years.  Other cities along the Wasatch Front are facing the same issues and problems.  Main Street will not be the same as it was 80 years ago, and the City should be cautious and move into the future with a plan.  Commissioner Milburn suggested that UDOT may not be willing to lower the speed limit on Main Street to residential speeds, and expressed curiosity regarding what is driving the sudden interest by developers in ultra high-density development.  He cautioned the citizens to be reasonable, with reasons and solutions rather than only saying “no”.

Neil Lish – Mr. Lish expressed the hope that the Mayor and City Council will adhere to their campaign claims of valuing the small-town atmosphere in Centerville.

Dale Engberson – Mr. Engberson spoke very complimentary about Brighton Homes as developers.  He stated that the City cannot change the rules midstream just because someone doesn’t like the project.  He suggested that many citizens could take advantage of the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance that the City is working on.

Paula Tinnabe – Ms. Tinnabe stated she has a long family history in Centerville, and is a long-time employee of the Centerville Post Office.  She said that people love Centerville because of what Centerville is.  People did not move here to have Centerville become what they left; they moved here because of what Centerville was.  She said she does not want a lot of high-density apartments in the neighborhoods, and expressed the hope that we can keep it a nice town.

Carol Bake – Ms. Bake said she liked the mixed-use idea when it was originally put in the SMSC Plan.  She said her only concern is that it will not be implemented.  She stated she loves her neighborhood dearly, and when she reads the Plan she feels she is reading something different than many of her neighbors.  She expressed concern that her home appraised for less than expected because the neighborhood is considered a “declining neighborhood” with empty lots, and rundown or empty buildings.  Ms. Bake said she does not see the concerns that have been voiced being a problem with the SMSC Plan.  Centerville is not Detroit or West Valley City.  Centerville is not an affordable place to live, and she would like to see places along the SMSC where some young families or older residents could afford to live.  She said she would hate to see all the young families living on the west side because that is the only place they can afford.  A lack of younger families in the neighborhood would contribute to a declining neighborhood.  She expressed a desire for a family friendly Centerville for now and future generations.  She read portions of the Plan aloud and said she does not see cause for alarm.  She does not see high-rise development occurring with the current Plan.  Ms. Bake said she has heard from citizens that they don’t trust the City Council, and she expressed confidence that Centerville will not become like Detroit or West Valley City unless the Council throws out their Plan that was drafted by the Planning Commission.  Some tweaks here and there may be needed.  She said she loves Centerville and would like to see the Corridor become what it can be, not perpetuate what it is now.

Stephanie Richardson – Ms. Richardson stated that citizens are not saying the City can’t have any multi-family dwellings; they are trying to avoid higher density than the City already has.  The City should create guidelines for developers to prevent really high density.  She said she lives within the historic district, which has a lot of small homes that are rentals, and many young families renting that can’t find medium-sized homes.  There is a need for medium-sized single-family homes to balance out the apartments across the freeway.

Cami Layton – Ms. Layton stated the General Plan needs to be amended with stronger words that protect quality of life and the values of the citizens.  The Plan has too many inconsistencies and loopholes for developers.  She said she feels that density, not building design, is the issue.  She referred to the Walmart development and developments to the south of Walmart up to Porter Lane, and said that those projects were well-done and look nice because citizens got involved.  Ms. Layton stated that Brighton Homes sounds like a good company.  She said she does not believe Centerville should be an entitlement city.  The Wasatch Front is expensive.  If children can’t afford to live here, too bad.  She referred again to the affordable housing in Salt Lake.

Rolf Sorensen – Mr. Sorensen said he lives across the street from one of the proposed projects.  He and his wife realize that things change.  He does not want to leave, but he does not want to see happen here what he moved away from in California.  He expressed concern about the traffic that would come with high density.  He agreed with the need to look at things cautiously, and said he moved here for the Centerville, Utah feeling.  Mr. Sorensen expressed confidence in the natural real estate process.

Pamela Sorensen – Ms. Sorensen stated that the change that occurs needs to be the right change.  She expressed concern about the density because of traffic that already exists in her neighborhood without high density.  She does not want to be forced to leave Centerville.  She appealed to the Council members as members of families, and said she hopes the issue will be thought out seriously, with families in mind.

Rick Bingham – Mr. Bingham stated that residential real estate in Centerville is in high demand.  He does not know of many areas that are declining in value, and commented that there is affordable housing in Centerville.  The City cannot be all things to all people, and he does not think the City should try to provide houses for all income levels.  He asked for clarification of the definition of mixed-use development.  Mr. Bingham said he would not want to lower the value of the community with high density, and he feels a master plan is needed for the area to guide the future.  He stated that, even if the population along the Wasatch Front doubles, the population of Centerville does not need to double.  He added that he would like the zoning to be changed to reflect residential on Main Street, not commercial.

Tim Hawkes, Utah House of Representatives – Representative Hawkes said he thinks people will like the revised plan for Walton Village.  If they like it, it will be in spite of the overlay, not because of the overlay.  He said he feels the City should be careful what is incentivized.  The demand for commercial does not seem to be there.  Without density restrictions, developers will economically follow high density.  Representative Hawkes said the City should make sure that the Centerville being incentivized is the Centerville we know and love.

At 9:14 p.m. Mayor Cutler closed the public comment period, and pointed out that public comments will be welcome on June 10th at the Planning Commission meeting, and at the Council meeting on June 16th.  Property owners will be specifically invited to a public meeting with the Council on June 17th.

The Mayor explained that a zoning change can be initiated by three parties: property owners, the Planning Commission, and the City Council.  Responding to some of the questions asked during the public comment period, Mayor Cutler stated that the City encourages positive development, but has no financial or other interest in encouraging more dense development.  The City does not select specific developers, but responds to those who ask questions.  The height restrictions on Main Street are currently lower than height restrictions in residential zones.  Mr. Snyder responded to the question regarding changed zoning reverting back if intended projects do not occur, stating that he feels “contract zoning” would be against existing law.  Property is zoned based on all possibilities within a zone being acceptable, and a lot of legal problems would be raised by going back and forth depending on the project.  Supporting reasons are needed to change zoning.  Ms. Romney added that City ordinances are not set up to require development plan or site plan with a rezone request.  However, a site plan can be required in an overlay.  Mixed-use traditionally involves something like retail on the bottom floor, and something like an office or dwelling on the second floor.  The SMSC Plan allows for vertical, horizontal or side-by-side mixed-use.  Funding for “ideal” mixed-use is difficult.  Mayor Cutler recognized the suggestion made during the comment period to change the Commercial zoning on Main Street to Residential-Low.

The Council took a break at 9:26 p.m. and returned at 9:36 p.m.


The Council previously reviewed and discussed Ordinance No. 2015-09 regarding Street Name and Addressing Regulations at the Council meeting on May 19, 2015.  The Council directed staff to revise the ordinance to add a public hearing requirement, and to require a petition to be submitted with any street name change request including the signatures of at least 75% of the property owners affected by the proposed change.  The requested changes have been made.  Mr. Thacker mentioned that the Ordinance provides for the Council to make the final determination and decision, which may not agree with the petitioners’ request.

Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2015-09 enacting Section 11-01-160 of the Centerville Municipal Code regarding Street Name and Addressing Regulations with the amendments proposed.  Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).


In the budget work session prior to the Council meeting, the Council discussed the proposed restricted area for the discharge of fireworks.  Police Chief Worsley and Fire Chief Bassett both indicated support for a standing ordinance, as has been done in North Salt Lake.  Bountiful and Centerville enact the prohibition annually to evaluate the restricted area each year.  Councilman Wright expressed a desire to look into the possibility of enacting a permanent ordinance in Centerville.  Councilman Wright made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2015-10 designating a restricted area within Centerville City for the discharge of fireworks due to hazardous environmental conditions.  Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).


•    Mayor Cutler said he will bring a resolution regarding the transportation sales tax ballot question to the Council for review at the June 16th meeting.  The Davis County COG has been discussing this matter.
•    The Mayor made the Council aware of multiple code violations on the Ada Jensen property, and described the mediation efforts that have been made by the City.  Animal control has been involved.  Staff will be proceeding with enforcement of City code.  Councilman Wright stated that his heart goes out to her, but no one is above the law.


Councilwoman Fillmore reported that eight movies have been selected by the Parks and Recreation Committee for Movies in the Park this summer, and described activities planned and sponsored by the Committee in conjunction with the Centennial.  She stated that the Recreation District is gearing up for summer activities, and reported that the website has been improved due to public feedback, a positive example that public feedback can make a difference.

Councilman Higginson followed up with a suggestion he made at a previous meeting that the outdoor pool area at the Recreation Center be open to the public free of charge, since all residents pay taxes.  Councilwoman Fillmore responded that the Recreation District is always trying to balance revenue and operating expenses.  A public splash pad has been considered by the Parks and Recreation Committee, and the suggestion was made to ask all the cities within the Recreation District to contribute.  Councilman Wright asked if the Recreation Center could offer free days to residents of the City.  Mr. Thacker stated that was done in the first few years the facility was open, but the City was required to provide supervision, and by the third time it was offered there were relatively few citizens who took advantage of the opportunity.  Councilman Higginson suggested that if free admission to Centerville citizens were offered during regular operating hours, the Recreation Center employees would already be in place as supervision.  Apparently Woods Cross City is currently using this approach.


City Manager Thacker announced that a retirement luncheon for Gary Thomas will be held on Wednesday, June 3rd, at 12:00 p.m.


Councilman Wright made a motion to commence the warranty period for the Sonic Drive-In, effective June 2, 2015.  Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).


At 9:57 p.m. Councilman Wright made a motion to move to a meeting of the Centerville Redevelopment Agency.  Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).  In attendance were: Paul A. Cutler, Chair; John T. Higginson, Vice Chair; Directors Averett, Fillmore, Ivie, and Wright; Steve Thacker, Executive Director; Lisa Romney, City Attorney; and Katie Rust, Recording Secretary.

The Council returned to regular meeting at 10:17 p.m.


At 10:19 p.m. Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to adjourn the meeting.  Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).

____________________________        ___06-16-2015_____
Marsha L. Morrow, City Recorder            Date Approved

Katie Rust, Recording Secretary

June 2, 2015 Work Session

Minutes of the Centerville City Council work session held Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 250 North Main Street, Centerville, Utah.


Mayor                          Paul A. Cutler

Council Members        Ken S. Averett
Tamilyn Fillmore
John T. Higginson (arrived at 6:10 p.m.)
Stephanie Ivie
Lawrence Wright

STAFF PRESENT        Steve Thacker, City Manager
Bruce Cox, Parks and Recreation Director
Randy Randall, Public Works Director
Neal Worsley, Centerville Police Chief
Katie Rust, Recording Secretary

STAFF ABSENT        Blaine Lutz, Finance Director/Assistant City Manager
Lisa Romney, City Attorney

VISITOR            Jeff Bassett, South Davis Metro Fire Chief


Employee Compensation – Steve Thacker, City Manager, explained that City employee compensation is based on the principles of internal equity, external equity, and individual equity.  Internal equity is determined using a point factoring system.  External equity is determined with annual benchmarking.  Staff will prepare a three-part ordinance including salary administration guidelines and a position pay grade schedule, based on direction given by the Council.  The City’s goal has been to pay employees and keep benefits somewhat better than average compared to other cities in order to attract and retain employees.  Mr. Thacker stated he is recommending a 1% increase (market adjustment) to all pay ranges (the FY 2015 market adjustment was 2%).  He continued that he is recommending the same pay raise matrix percentages as last year, equal to 3% of the total of all employee salaries (2.5% to fund raises for employees who meet or exceed expectation, and an additional 0.5% to reward exceptional performance).  Mr. Thacker provided comparative data for increases approved by other agencies.

City Manager Thacker said he is expecting increased pressure from the job market this year.  Councilman Averett asked how much turnover the City had in the last year.  Mr. Thacker responded that the Police Department had one retirement.  Councilman Averett commented that the Fire Agency recently lost half of its part-time recruits, which means the Fire Chief will need to begin the recruitment process again.  Councilwoman Fillmore said she views that as an argument against part-time officers.  Training is expensive.  Councilman Wright argued in favor of hiring part-time officers.

Justice Court Judge – The City has explored the idea of allowing West Bountiful or    Farmington to bring their cases to the Centerville Court.  The caseload that Farmington would bring would move the City from a level two to a level one court, which would require a dedicated court room.  The West Bountiful caseload would put the City very close to that threshold.  Mr. Thacker reminded the Council that the Justice Court Judge must receive an increase each year equivalent to the average increase of other City employees.  He recommended a 2.5% increase in Judge Miller’s salary, to comply with State law.  Centerville Court revenues continue to exceed operating expenses.

Elected Officials Compensation – Last year the Council increased elected official compensation, to be reviewed every four years by ordinance.  Therefore, no increase is recommended this year.

Planning Commission Compensation – Mr. Thacker provided comparative data of Planning Commission compensation provided by other Davis County cities.  Councilwoman Fillmore suggested incentivizing attendance at training meetings by compensating Commissioners for training meetings attended.  The Commissioners are currently able to receive mileage reimbursement and per diem for meals, but no payment for their time at training.  Staff reported that Planning Commissioners do not always take advantage of the compensation for mileage and meals.  Councilwoman Fillmore expressed a desire to recognize the importance of, and show appreciation for the time they spend in training.  Following brief discussion, a majority of the Council indicated they would approve compensating the Planning Commission $35 (the compensation for one Planning Commission meeting) for a half-day or more spent in training.  Staff will prepare a resolution to alter the Fee Schedule.

Positions Recommended For Compensation Review – Mr. Thacker stated that he feels the City’s two technology-related positions – the GIS Specialist, and the technology position in the Police Department – merit a pay grade review.  He also said he would like to increase the responsibilities of the Management Assistant position to include H.R. Specialist and possibly other duties.  Councilman Wright suggested also adding a SPHR certification requirement to the Management Assistant position.  Mr. Thacker said he would like to engage an independent hourly consultant to help review the three positions. Mayor Cutler recommended forming a subcommittee to review certain management positions, which the benchmark data indicates may be below market.  Councilmen Wright and Averett will serve on that committee with the Mayor.

Benefits – There is no increase in the retirement system contribution rate or employee health insurance rates for FY 2016.  The Council discussed the need to cap the City’s paid leave liability.  Mr. Thacker stated the employee committee studying paid leave liability will have a proposal for the Council within the next 3-6 months.

At 6:10 p.m. Councilman Higginson arrived, and the City department heads and Fire Chief joined the discussion.  Councilman Wright asked Police Chief Worsley if he does indeed plan to retire this year.  Chief Worsley responded that he does.


Fire Chief Bassett said he feels the restricted area in the proposed fireworks ordinance is sufficient.  Both he and Police Chief Worsley indicated they would be in favor of a standing ordinance for the July celebration period.  Council members Ivie and Wright both stated they would be in favor of a standing ordinance.


South Davis Metro Fire Agency Staffing – Fire Chief Bassett stated that part-time officers are heavily used in Davis County.  They recently lost many part-time officers to full-time positions with different agencies.  He explained the staffing changes that are being implemented within the Fire Agency.  Councilman Wright asked about citizen education regarding fireworks restrictions.  Mr. Thacker responded that information will be included in a mailer sent out by the City.  Councilman Wright suggested sending a reverse 911 call, and the Council discussed using the Peachjar option through the School District.

Public Works and Parks and Recreation – Randy Randall, Public Works Director, and Bruce Cox, Parks and Recreation Director, discussed needs in their departments with the Council.  Councilwoman Fillmore stated she knows the Parks and Recreation Department relies heavily on college students for seasonal help, and asked if it would be helpful to have another full-time team member.  Mr. Cox responded that it would be nice, but he does not think there would necessarily be enough work to keep an additional full-time team member busy year-round.  Mr. Randall said he is concerned about the work load in his department.  The scope of work is becoming more complex, with increased Federal requirements and City requirements and needs.  Mr. Randall said he would like to see the City move in the other direction by cost-effectively focusing on what can be done long-term, making do with what we have, and being as fiscally responsible as possible.  He expressed the concern that the Complete Streets Policy will have the opposite effect, creating a need for more man-power or cost.

Mr. Randall and Mr. Cox both indicated they feel the Tentative Budget is reasonable.  Councilwoman Fillmore pointed out that after making do year after year a breaking point is reached.  The Council wants to know what is needed in the budget to maintain quality in the City.  Mr. Randall expressed the opinion that Centerville has some of the best streets in the State, but there has to be a balance between having perfect streets and having reasonable streets.  The Council agreed.  Mr. Randall stated that as he gets closer to retirement age and looks around for someone who could replace him, he is looking for someone with specific skill sets willing to put in the time that is required.  The Council and department heads discussed the need for succession planning.  Mayor Cutler said he feels Chief Worsley has done a good job of grooming people to take on leadership roles in the Police Department.  They discussed the possibility of hiring employees with the idea of training them for leadership.  Chief Worsley said he feels it is a good idea to train existing employees for leadership positions, and Councilman Wright suggested that the needed skills might be available in other departments within the City, and over time there may be employees interested in switching departments.

Mayor Cutler said he would like the departments to think about how technology or productivity increases could be utilized to control the need for additional personnel long-term.  Mr. Thacker pointed out that each year the department heads submit a three-year list of needs to anticipate what will be needed.  Councilwoman Fillmore emphasized that she appreciates a fiscal conservative approach, but she does not want the City to get too far behind.  Councilman Wright stated it will be important to maintain strong emergency management leadership as restructuring within the Police Department occurs.  He also recommended it would be valuable for the City or the Fire Agency to purchase a drone for emergency management purposes.


Mayor Cutler adjourned the work session at 6:56 p.m.

____________________________        __06-16-2015______
Marsha L. Morrow, City Recorder            Date Approved

Katie Rust, Recording Secretary