City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome. We will call to order the regular meeting of the West Valley City Council this September 8th, 2026 at 630 p.m. in the council chambers of West Valley City Hall. We will recognize Mayor Lange is online along with Council Member Nordfeld online. We also have Here on the dais, Councilmember Wood, Whetstone, Hewn, Christensen, and Mayor Pro Tem Harmon. We're also joined with Ifo Peely, the city manager, and Nicole Kamek, our city recorder. We'd like to begin with opening ceremonies carried out by Councilmember Wood.

Thanks, Mayor Protan. Yesterday was the first Monday in September, and it was also Labor Day. When I was young, I know my parents always taught me that it was a day to recognize the hardworking people of our country. And it's a great day, and it also, to me, signifies kind of the end of summer. When I was growing up, school always started right around Labor Day. So I think we need to acknowledge the hardworkers in our country and in our city and in our state. that have made our lives better in so many different ways. So given that, let's all rise and repeat the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation,

Thank you. We have the minutes of August 25, 2026 before you. Any discussion or motion on those minutes?

I'll move to approve the minutes of August 25, 2026.

Second. We have a motion to second. All in favor, please say aye. Thank you. Those minutes have passed. We will now accept public comment. The comment period is limited to 30 minutes. Any person wishing to comment shall limit their comments to three minutes. Upon recognition by the mayor, you will approach the microphone. If you did not sign up, please give your name and address. All comments shall be directed to the mayor. No person addressing the city council during the comment period shall be allowed to comment more than once. Comments shall be limited to city business and matters within the purview of the city council. Speakers should not expect any debate with the mayor, city council, or city staff. The mayor, city council, or city staff may respond after the comment period has concluded. Speakers shall refrain from personal attacks against fellow citizens, city staff, or members of the city council. We'll start with speaker one. Mike, if you can give us your address. Okay, Alice. Okay, that's right.

So much to say in so little time. First of all, I want to start by, I don't think it's a good idea to have one trucking company. Would you like it if we had only one clothing store, Dillard's, and that's all you could shop at and buy everything you might want? That's a monopoly. I don't think that's a good idea. But I am opposed to the wreckers being parked on public streets because their roll-offs are windshield high. So now I've said that. You know, we try to do a good job on cleaning up our neighborhoods, okay? there's got to be some bite. We can't pat them on the back and say we love you, but you can't do that. I've now got a guy that's been a problem for a long time that's turned his yard into an RV park. In his front driveway, he's got a flatbed, a car hauler, and a box trailer. In his side yard, which is, you can see it from the road, he's got another box trailer, He's got a toy hauler in which he lives in and now he's moved a motor home in on the side of his house that another guy lives in and parks his black Suburban out on Winchester with this Kubota tractor being parked on the most strip. Okay. We got to put some bite to keep these people from doing it. I've already turned it in. We've got Just on one street, we've got four houses right in a row, but nothing but weeds and dirt. You know, they're rentals. We need to go after the property owner. We need to check for their business license. We've got to quit coddling them. I've got the car lot is firing back up in my neighborhood. Right now, they've got a It looked to me like a roll-off tow truck backed into their backyard they're working on. They go to the auctions and they buy the old police cars and stuff like that, park them out on the street. Somehow they get some kind of license plate for them. That's why I was asking the chief if these license plate readers can match up if the plate goes with that car. I don't know. But we've got to put bite... in our ordinances. If they're a repeat offender, there's big fines. Cost them a thousand bucks right off the bat. Quit coddling them. So many people are so willing to pay other money out for other things. We need to quit kissing their you-know-whats. They've got to be dealt with. Thank you.

Speaker 2, Stephen Moores.

Mayor, council members, and members of the community, good evening. My name is Stephen Moores. I'm the general manager at Stauffer's Road Solutions. I'm here tonight on behalf of myself and our entire Stauffer's team and Jesse Stauffer. Unfortunately, he couldn't be here tonight because he's coaching his daughter's flag football game. I want to take these three minutes to tell you who we are, what this opportunity means to us, and what West Valley can expect from Stoppers. Stoppers is a Utah company. Our family's history in Utah's towing and recovery industry dates back to 1954. For more than 70 years, Stoppers has helped keep Utah's roads moving and has been there for Utah families, businesses, law enforcement agencies, and communities when they needed us. Our roots are here. Our employees live here. We raise our families here. We spend our money here. We buy trucks and equipment here. We pay taxes here, and we have invested millions of dollars into the people, equipment, facilities, and technology necessary to provide professional towing and recovery services through our home state. So when we hear the discussion about the importance of supporting local businesses, we do agree. We are one. We are proud of where we came from, and we're proud that a Utah company with more than seven decades of history in this industry has the opportunity to make another major investment right here in West Valley City. We also recognize there has been some criticism surrounding the RFP and the city's decision to move toward a single towing provider. We respect everyone's right to have an opinion. We especially respect the towing companies that have served this community for the years. But I think it's important tonight to separate the debate surrounding the process from the company standing before you. West Valley City established a competitive RFP process. Multiple companies have the opportunity to compete. Stoppers competed under the requirements established by the city, and at the account's conclusion of that process, the city determined that stoppers submitted the highest scoring proposal. We didn't write the rules, we competed under them, and we're incredibly proud of the proposal our team submitted. But winning an RFP isn't the finish line for us, it's the starting line. A proposal doesn't help the person standing on the side of the road after an accident, performance does. Judges by our response times, judges by how quickly we clear an accident scene so the officers and firefighters can get back in the service, judges by the condition of our equipment, judges by how we treat someone who walks into our office after one of the worst days they've had in their whole entire lifetime, judges by how we protect their vehicle and their property while it's entrusted our care, and judges by how we respond when something doesn't go perfectly, but because accountability is part of providing great service. The contract anticipates approximately 35 to 5,000 police-generated tows each year and requires the resources to handle everything from light duty to heavy duty recoveries. We are prepared for that responsibility. We're asking you to give us opportunity to prove why we earned this contract. Give us opportunity to invest in West Valley City. Give our employees opportunity to serve your police officers and your residents. And then hold us accountable to the commitments we've made. We believe a county produces better companies. We believe West Valley deserves a toy partner with the resources, experience, technology, equipment, and people to deliver what the city asked for. After more than 70 years serving Utah, the Stoppers name means something to us. Thank you.

Thank you. Speaker 3.

Good morning, Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Curtis Stopper. Thank you for this opportunity to speak tonight and for your consideration of this proposal. I have provided each of you with a longer written statement containing additional facts and contents supporting my comments. And this RFP is not about the benefiting one towing company. It is about public safety. For the motoring industry, public traveling through West Valley City, not only the citizens. It is about giving the officers faster and more consistent seating clearance with less administration burden so they can run and return to protect their community. A single provider model is one of several approaches available to the city. This RFP establishes specific performance requirements and gives the city one provider to hold accountable for. When the proper administration is properly administered, That can mean more consistent response and clearance times, less administrating work for the police officers, and better service for the public. West Valley is likely, like every police department, is a customer. No towing company is automatically entitled to be placed on the rotation list. That opportunity is a privilege that must be earned and provided the personal equipment, responsibility, accountability. The department needs to perform its work safely and I understand why the current rotation companies are concerned about losing call volume. Those concerns deserve to be heard, but the council must base its decision on what is the best service, public safety, and the motoring public. The RFP stated 3,500 police-generated tolls annually. Divide each evenly among 13 companies currently on rotation. That would average 269 calls annually. per company per year, roughly one and a half calls a day, although that actual number from distribution may vary. The central question is not whether every current provider retains the same shares of city-generated tows. The question is which system provides West Valley City with the safest, most dependable, most efficient, most accountable towing service. That is what this proposal is designed to deliver. I would like to address who we are. Stoppers Toyne was founded here in Utah by my father, Vaughn Stopper, in 1954. He started with one truck in the early 80s. I bought the business from him and became the second generation. Today, four members of the third generation are part of the company, local management team. They live here in Utah, as do the company's employees, as we've grown beyond our original service area. That does not erase the company's Utah roots in this local presence. SPEAKER 1. SPEAKER 2. SPEAKER 3. SPEAKER 4. SPEAKER 5. SPEAKER 6. SPEAKER 7. SPEAKER 8. SPEAKER 9. SPEAKER 10.

SPEAKER 11. SPEAKER 12.

SPEAKER 13. SPEAKER 14.

SPEAKER 15.

SPEAKER 16. SPEAKER 17. SPEAKER 18.

SPEAKER 19. SPEAKER 20.

SPEAKER 21. SPEAKER 21. SPEAKER 22. SPEAKER 22. SPEAKER 23. SPEAKER 24. SPEAKER 25. SPEAKER 26. SPEAKER 26. SPEAKER 27. SPEAKER 28. SPEAKER 28. SPEAKER 29. SPEAKER 29. SPEAKER 30. SPEAKER 31. SPEAKER 31. SPEAKER 31. SPEAKER 32. SPEAKER 32. SPEAKER 32. SPEAKER 33. SPEAKER 33. SPEAKER 34. SPEAKER 34. SPEAKER 34. SPEAKER 35. SPEAKER 36. SPEAKER 36. SPEAKER 37. SPEAKER 37. SPEAKER 37. SPEAKER 38. SPEAKER 38. SPEAKER 38. SPEAKER 39. SPEAKER 39. SPEAKER 40. SPEAKER 41. SPEAKER 41. SPEAKER 41. SPEAKER 42. SPEAKER 42. SPEAKER 42. SPEAKER 42. SPEAKER 43. SPEAKER 42. SPEAKER 43. SPEAKER 43. SPEAKER 44. Now onto my issue. I recognize that the city has the authority to regulate signs in residential areas. My concern is whether the city's complete prohibition of commercial signage in residential areas, as applied to my sign, is consistent with the First Amendment. My sign communicates truthful information about a lawful activity that I am permitted to conduct from my home. Commercial speech is still protected under the First Amendment. The fact that the speech is commercial does not automatically remove its constitutional protections. The city allows other forms of speech on residential property, including political speech, such as signs supporting candidates for mayor and other public offices, not to mention yard sales and et cetera. My concern is that my speech is being prohibited because the city has classified it as commercial. I'm not asking the city to abandon its authority to regulate signs. I'm asking the city to explain to me how a complete prohibition of this type of truthful commercial speech satisfies the constitutional protections afforded to commercial speech particularly when other forms of speech are permitted i'm therefore putting the city on notice that unless the city can explain the constitutional basis for prohibiting my sign i intend to put that sign back up if the city believes doing so violates the ordinance then i am prepared to have that issue properly determined through the legal process i'm not asking for special treatment you guys i'm asking for equal application of the law and respect for my constitutional right to communicate lawful, truthful information on my property. Just some added notes for you guys. When you guys do your research, Reed versus Town of Gilbert, Central Hudson Gas versus Public Service, and Metro Media versus City of San Diego. I look forward to hearing a response from somebody, hopefully. And you guys enjoy the rest of your evening.

Thank you. Speaker 5, Randy.

Good evening. I prepared a sheet that hopefully you have that I think will simplify what our request for the amended development agreement is. In the amended agreement, we are asking to reduce the number of homes from 43 to 40, change from currently we have attached two unit and four unit townhome buildings that would be single family detached There's no restrictions on ADUs. Our HOA would prohibit ADUs. There's no restriction currently on rentals. We would have a restriction of up to 70% owner occupancy. The minimum home size increases significantly. Currently, it's 1,520. It would increase to 2,400 square feet. That's without a basement. It almost doubles the home size and values. Currently, there's no actual lot areas. We are proposing to have separate individual lots with rear lots that would be fenced and separated. Front setbacks would increase, would accommodate a truck. Currently, there's sidewalk on one side, no park strips. We would go to a dedicated road and have a park strip and sidewalk on both sides. The HOA costs would significantly reduce with the public road, and you can look at the other items. I appreciate those that spoke with me. There were three concerns that I heard from the Council. One was we do not amend development agreements. I would hope that you're open to that. Everything that is on this list, I believe, is an improvement. I haven't heard a concern about anything we're proposing. None of these seem to be a concern, so I would hope that it's open. I think that what was approved five years ago, things have changed significantly. For example, the city did not have a requirement or even the means for public roads or infrastructure at that time. That was something that has changed. So I would hope that those changes can be made. The other was a concern about the roads with the neighbors. This, if the council approves this, this will still go to a planning commission public meeting with input from the neighbors that would have input for the road and the access. And that can be in numerous different ways. I think there's three options with this property. If it stays the way it is, I think it very well could become a charter school or a complete project.

Recording stopped.

Leased out.

Recording in progress.

Time wasn't quite up, but it could all be leased out or please approve the amendment work that I'm proposing. Thank you.

Speaker six, Jennifer.

All right. I wanted to stop by and introduce myself. I am the new acting manager at Hunter Library for the rest of the year. In January, a different manager will come and take over the library, but I'm super excited to be back at West Valley where I previously was a librarian. I had two main reasons for coming tonight. I wanted to give a recap about the end of summer reading. For those of you that don't know, summer reading is a free program. It's open to all ages. Everyone in the city can participate. And it happens every June through August at the library. This year we had a 10% increase in program completers. So we're really excited to keep growing that program next year. The library will have a brief closure for new carpeting. That's going to happen from Monday, September 21st until Monday, October 19th. During the closure, patrons are welcome to visit other branches. and all of the holds will be sent to Kern's branch unless otherwise requested. We'll have a Popsicle party on Saturday, September 19th, and patrons can stop by and ask us any questions about programs or holds at other branches. Thank you so much for letting me come and chat about the library tonight.

Thank you.

Hi, N Canada. I just want to also, before I start, my comment just support the tow truckers who are wanting more fair contracting to avoid the more monopolistic city practice. I think that's really valid. Again, I'm a Wasatch Assembly representative. I came here last week and I just wanted to express my disappointment not hearing from anybody. You know, I gave you the email, we did reach out to you and we still haven't heard back. So I just wanted to say that disappointed. And I think this highlights a larger thing I've been experiencing through my municipal political organizing is that our local bodies are very unresponsive to citizenry. And it's not saying you have to agree with me, but to get a response saying, hey, I don't agree with your policies. That at least makes me know if I can support you or not support you. If when you're running for office again, if I can mobilize against you or for you. and understanding where your political alignment falls. So I think it's unfair to people to not come out and say, especially if we reach out, where you stand. And I think that's a pretty easy ask and a simple ask. So I'm here again talking about ICE and how its unconstitutional nature and terrifying nature is attacking our community and making people feel unsafe, especially black and brown people in West Valley. I think that we need to take a stronger stance in protecting people. I find it ironic that we had Ellis Island where anyone could come from Europe, right? Anyone and their mother could come. And now we have a different policy where this country's birth rate is falling and we're still unwilling to open our doors to people who want to come here. We're not meeting the replacement rate and immigrants are a great way to help that. Often immigrants have more children anyway. So our top three demands, which are voted on by our assembly, is stopping ICE facilities from being constructed, no 287G agreements or municipal resources to ICE, and then free legal services for constitutional rights violations. Again, I would love to know where you guys stand so I can not have a canned response and speak more to the politic of the body. But since you didn't respond, I can't really do that. I will wait after in the hall to, if anyone wants to talk to me about our policy platform and what our organization does, and I urge everybody to fill out our survey we sent in your email that lists our 2026 policies, and if you agree or disagree, so we can get a better understanding of where you guys fall politically. And our top three policy areas have been housing, environment, and immigration. That was voted on by the community. Thank you.

Thank you. Speaker 8, Jim Bissau.

Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem and City Council. Most of the people in this room probably don't know, but we had, or we still have, an indoor football team, an international indoor football team. When this team started, the coaches were in T-shirts, baggy shorts, very, very unprofessional. As the season went on, they got better. Well, long story short, they won the international tournament championship the utah eights a west valley city team won their super bowl a few weeks ago so it was really really cool from i went to every game but one and i was sick for that game and that's the game that they lost the home game so i know a couple other people went but it's great to have a winning football team in west valley city That's considered to be a professional team. And by the end of the season, they did look like professionals.

That's it. Thank you. Speaker 9, Jeremy.

Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Council and Mayor. I'm here to speak on item 6B on your agenda about the parking restrictions on Aaron Hills Lane. I wanted to voice my support for the restriction and also thank the council for taking an interest in the safety of our community.

We will have a public hearing if you want to talk more about it in a minute.

I just have a few brief comments if I may, Mayor. Thank you. I'm sorry. I didn't realize there was a different mechanism for that. But that street is a safety issue, I feel. The traffic there is very constricted. You have people cutting from 56 West to 35 South, and it's very, very narrow. There's a lot of children in the area. And when the car wash is busy, the cars queue up into that street as well. So I think the resolution would add some buffer for those business patrons. So I think the resolution balances the interests of everyone involved. So those are my two bits. Thank you.

Thank you. Speaker 10, Ryan.

Good evening, Council. Ryan Mahoney, West Valley City resident and candidate for State Senate District 13, which happens to incorporate a piece of West Valley City. Before voting on Resolution 2696 tonight, I think the Council should ask itself some very specific questions. What specific problem with the current rotation system are we trying to solve? Do we have any documented evidence that the rotation system is failing our residents? How many West Valley City businesses currently participate in this rotation? What happens if the sole contractor cannot respond or perform with expected expectations? And why is a single company contract preferable to competitive rotation of qualified companies? And have the economic consequences to local businesses within West Valley City been evaluated? government should be very careful about taking an existing competitive market and a government-sanctioned monopoly where one didn't previously exist or creating a monopoly where one didn't exist. So thank you for your time. I'm sure we have plenty more people.

Thank you. Can you pause the clock for a minute? OK, we're going to the second page. There's eight on the second page and we've got six minutes and 51 seconds. So if you take your full three minutes, there's only two of you left. So just keep that in mind. All right. I'm trying to pause it so I could give that announcement so you can try to be judicious with your time and maybe share. So, all right. We'll start the clock again once Becky starts speaking. Number one.

Hello, my name is Becky Beck, and my husband and I purchased Harmon's Towing from Larry Harmon in 2001. We towed for the West Valley Police rotation for over 10 years. We continue providing yard space to other towing companies, primarily so that they can serve this rotation. Currently, eight of the companies in our yard are on this rotation, and I just want to share a little bit about a few of them. Aaron and Nicole with ATR Towing have served the West Valley rotation for 25 years. Aaron, would you stand up? That's Erin right there. Erin respects the department's strict rules and is quick to keep the other companies in our yard informed of changes and correct procedures. Marianne, owner of Shamrock Towing, has also faithfully served the rotation for 16 years. Marianne, there we go. She was the first female tow truck driver I ever met. And I can remember her taking West Valley police calls right up until she delivered her baby girl. A few days later, she was back in her tow truck taking calls with her newborn baby in the car seat beside her. You may remember hearing from Mariela last month, owner of Utah Towing. Mariela? There we go. Mariela towed for West Valley City before the lottery began, but hasn't been drawn since. Yet here she is tonight, and she was here last month advocating for her friends because she knows exactly what it means to lose this opportunity. I understand the police department chose to recommend this change because the current rotation requires intensive maintenance and supervision, and that having a single provider would mean less administration work. I have to believe we can find a way to make the rotation easier to manage without taking away the opportunity for these local companies to continue to serve West Valley. Behind these local towing companies are good people who work hard to provide for their families. Many have faithfully served West Valley for many years. We've supported these companies in that work, and we'd like to see them continue to be able to serve this community. I hope you'll keep these families in mind as you make this decision. Thank you.

Thank you. Speaker 12, Tony.

Good evening, council members.

I did not intend to speak. I was asked to speak, so I've got some rough notes. We're not here to speak ill of stoppers. We're here for an explanation of your judgment and your motives for reverting to this system. I know stoppers. They're an excellent company. But hell, we're all stoppers. We all buy it. Our trucks here in Utah maintain them. We supply them. We're all trained, certified, experienced. I've been towing since 85. A lot of the folks that you see here are very experienced. Nothing wrong with stoppers, just we're wondering why. That's all.

Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 13, Haley. Sure. Speaker 14, Lisa.

Good afternoon. I just want to touch on a few things. Mr. Stauffer said that they had a good track record. and that they would like to prove it to you. However, Topro has already proven that. To be factual, my company is tied for first in response times. I average 15 minutes. Stauffer's average is 21 minutes. I answer the phone when the police call Stauffer's. They don't pick up the phone 19 times. So I think that their record should go ahead and speak for itself. And another point is they said that they're a company that's been around for 70 years and that their company has a name. And if that's the case, it makes me really wonder, why did they sell out to the huge corporations? Thank you.

Thank you, Speaker 5. Is it Mariella? Mariella?

Good afternoon, mayor and council members. Hopefully you have read several of the emails that I sent you and had a chance to understand the size of this proposal. I will be touching a point here. On the RFP, the contract required two tow truck drivers per truck to make the job faster. That's a lie. That's a lie. Whoever is there, he knows that it's a lie. On Appendix A, where staffers place their bid, they put $150 per hour for an extra driver. So let me break it down. A toll fee is $211 per hour, 44 admin fee, that's paperwork fee. Fuel cell charge now is $63.30. One day storage is 42. And that's what the UDOT allow us to charge. They're trying to add $150 per hour, what is not per statue. It's simply a fee West Valley City Police is authorizing them to charge. That will be a total of $510.30 for just one day the car sits in the lot. And this is the bare minimum. A person can let the car sit there for two or three days. But imagine a person that makes $18 at Walmart, or I'm saying Walmart, but how much a person makes a week? $700. And they have to go and pick up a car for $510.30 because the city allows it. I remember back on the days where West Valley rotation was fairly strict. Detective Getz is now, and Detective Maurer, I don't know if he retired, but will not allow for any reason to charge any extra minute. Let's say that we take a little bit more than an hour, 15 minutes, 30 minutes. First, we needed to get a signature from the officers on scene. After that, we need to get permission from the coordinator on the time, Getz, Maurer, And they will allow us to charge those 15, 30, 40 minutes extra. Let's say that we spend a lot of time in an accident. It doesn't happen all the time, but you know when it happened. Many times we didn't have a chance to charge those 15, 30, 40 extra minutes because they didn't get back to us. So we just have to let it go. From what the rotation was at that time and what it's going to be now, it's going to be a huge difference. So my question is to you. Why was additional time previously subject to specific authorization, and now the contract structure appears to allow additional charges?

Thank you. Thank you. Collin, speaker 16? OK. Speaker 17, Montoya? Oh, is that it? Oh, that was it. Sorry, that's 30 minutes. I didn't know which one was ringing. Thank you for your comments. We'll turn the time over to the council for any comments. OK, we will now close the comment period. We will go to our public hearings. Our public hearing is for an application that would vacate a portion of 2320 South right of way east 1070 West for Granger Hunter Improvement District for the construction of a new well house. I will now open the public hearing for this. Is there anyone here that would like to speak on this item? Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing and turn the time to the council for discussion or motion.

Motion to approve ordinance 26-36.

I'll second.

We have a motion and a second. Ms. Kamik.

Council Member Wood. Yes. Council Member Whetstone.

Yes.

Council Member Hume.

Yes.

Council Member Christensen.

Yes.

Council Member Nordfeldt.

Yes.

Mayor Lang.

Yes.

And Mayor Pro Tem Harmon.

Yes.

Motion passes unanimously.

Okay. We'll now accept public input regarding parking restrictions on Erin Hill Lane. This restriction would authorize the city to restrict on-street parking to one side of both Erin Hill Lane and Caddy Hill Lane. I will now open the public hearing. Is there anyone here wishing to speak on this item? I think we've got a couple. Come on up. Please give your name and address.

Good evening. My name is Haley Bingley. I live on 3554 Blue T Lane in the Erin Hills Estates. I want to speak tonight in favor of this resolution to shut off one side of the street for parking. I have been an owner and resident of my townhome unit since 2022. My home actually faces Caddy Hill Lane, right where this trouble area is. I have personally witnessed one accident. I have seen many near accidents. There are emergency vehicles that I have personally witnessed that have backed up because they cannot get through the cars. Fortunately, the Wendover buses no longer come through our neighborhood, but they have oftentimes have to also back up and not been able to make it through the narrow way along Caddy Hill Lane. There are lots and lots of blind spots. It's very scary for pedestrians, and if cars are not 100% attentive to stop and wait to let cars kind of jockey for position, it's just a scary thing on a daily basis. I'm in favor of this solution to pass this resolution however I think an additional solution could also be that the parking restriction be put to the other side of the street closer to the homes that would allow for slightly more perimeter and a few more cars to park along the side that's currently being looked at to be restricted I think that another solution would be for our HOA, which currently is a difficult situation where as homeowners we don't have a lot of, have any say with our current HOA, that's another issue. But another solution would be that we, that our HOA work out some kind of agreement with UDOT where we could use the mostly unused parking lot that is right there anyway. I think we could also amend to find a handful of safe spaces along Blue T Lane in the middle of the town home units where a handful of cars could be parked and if that was able to be studied and analyzed. I think that this is a big issue for the safety and well-being of our residents there, and I appreciate the time for the comment tonight.

Thank you. Come on up. Name and address, please.

Hi. My name is Colin Donilon. I am an owner and resident of Aaron Hills. 5, 5, 10 West straight lane. I'm on the back end side of it. Um, we have got, uh, I'm in favor of this resolution. A hundred percent. We have got major issues with this. The UDOT have, um, stopped parking for the fun bus to Wendover. So now they are actually using it as a parking lot as well around that road. Other members have actually explained to you, yes, there is restrictions. You cannot get through it sometimes. The mailboxes are restricted, so you have to double park, effectively just blocking off the whole road while you collect your mail. Fire trucks cannot go through it. It is too narrow. The kids that play there, they'll pop out. You don't even see them. And as mentioned before by someone, They actually, when there's roadworks on 56 and 35, they will use that as a cut through as well, which is making it more dangerous. So please, ban parking for the whole thing.

I'll be happy.

We are a single family community. There should be plenty of parking within your home residence. You've got a two car garage and you've also got driveway access. Or we've got visitors bargain. Maximum, if you've got a family, you've got four cars. Max, if your kids are like mine and they still live with you. But we need to ban it completely. Thank you. Thank you. It was nice speaking to you guys.

Anyone else for the Aaron Hill topic? Okay, come on up. Name and address, please.

Good evening. My name is and I live on 3538 South Blue T Lane, which also faces Erin Hills Lane. I'm actually the main house just right in front of Shiny Shell, so I get to see everything. I'm in favor of this block and the current block on the west and north side because crossing the street, people parking across would have to cross the street, so that would be a safety issue in the future. And it is in front of my house, but I still am for this measure. We have a lot of issues with safety vehicles, as was mentioned before. Oncoming traffic getting blocked and having to go around each other. So we've seen a couple accidents or near accidents. I see parking enforcement out there consistently. People are parking in front of the mailboxes because there's no parking on the adjacent side of the road. People are parking in front of the shiny shell where there's a tiny little strip. So when you're turning out of Erin Hills, there is no clearance. You can't see cars. So that's another issue. The Wendover bus doesn't pull through Aaron Hills anymore. However, they stop at the UTA parking spot, and all of their patrons park down our street. So they sometimes leave their cars for 24 hours, put their sun shades on, have a great day. And so it's just kind of a mess, especially for the little kids that are running around. I don't know if there is some type of UTA agreement that we could come to. However, I know I spoke to some UTA officials and they said they had such an issue with long-term parking, people not following the rules of the parking lot. So that's kind of why our community got kicked out of the parking lot. But it's a very large parking lot that we could potentially find some common ground. And yeah, as what the other homeowner was touching on, You know, we don't have a rental cap in our community, so we have over 51% of rentals. And so we're seeing a lot of not good stewardship, right, with the parking. A lot of parking is coming from that. They're not using the garages. This is homeowners and rental leases. And so it's just kind of a free-for-all. And so for the current map, I think that it will free up a lot of the parking issues and safety issues that we're going to see, that we continue to see every day. And thank you guys so much for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else that would like to speak on the Aaron Hills item? Great. Name and address?

Yes. Excuse me. Neil Ashton, 5579 Aaron Hills Lane. So I just wanted to also voice my support for the motion to block off the parking on that north and west side of those lanes. We're currently actually building, a concern that I have is that we're currently building an office building right there on Aaron Hill Lane. The access is right on that south side. So I'm concerned that, I mean, I'm sure there are rules with parking being restricted too close to an entryway or an exitway. So I just want to make sure that if this does pass that we don't just have a, I don't know, somehow the parking doesn't just get pushed onto our side and it becomes an issue with getting off of 5600 West and ingress it and egress there. So I think this is a good proposal. I think it's going to, it is scary driving down that road. It's just packed with cars. I've a couple of times, just kids come out of nowhere. You have to drive really slow. So I think it's a very wise safety thing. for that area, so thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments on the Aaron Hill agenda item? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and turn the time to the council for discussion or a motion.

I just have a comment.

Yeah. I appreciate all those residents that came out. I drive through there as well, and it's an absolute nightmare. I feel your pain. So I'm glad that this is an option for our city to restrict parking, to make it safer and more accessible for your subdivision and others throughout the city. We've done it before and it works. And so anybody else have a comment?

I just would agree. It's nice to have an option. You know, a year ago, we didn't have a good process to handle these kind of streets with parking issues. And thanks to good staff and a city manager that worked with us, we were able to put together a process that allows the citizen to file a complaint and let us study it and come to a conclusion like this.

One more thing that I think Steve's here, but the comment from the gentleman with that commercial building, I mean, we can't do anything with this, but would they be restricted for letting their customers park out there? Because it'd be on the north and the west side for the restrictions, but that building is on, the access is on the south side.

So we do require that they have a certain amount of parking spaces on site. We can't prohibit customers from parking on the street, but they would be subject to the same restrictions if we put up the no parking signs.

Okay. And what's the, how close can people park to the curb cut?

So, we have basically what we call a 20-foot clear, well actually in the case of two public streets, it's a 40-foot clear view area. And it's a little bit difficult to describe without a diagram. But imagine if the two curbs came to a point, you measure back 40 feet in each direction and create a triangle from that. And that's the area where there can be no obstructions like a sign or something like that that would block the views.

But people can also park in that area to...

That's the intent of the code is so that as you're pulling out that you can actually, well, so in this, so if it's two streets, it's 40 feet. If it's a private driveway in a street, then it's 20 feet. So I correct myself there. But yeah, the intent is that you don't have anything blocking within that 20 foot clear view area.

Great. Okay. Any other discussion or motions?

I'll go ahead and make a motion. Move to approve. My computer's booting, so maybe somebody else better make the motion.

Motion to approve Resolution 26-102. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Ms. Kamek.

Council Member Wood.

Yes.

Council Member Whetstone. Yes. Council Member Huynh. Yes. Council Member Christensen. Yes. Council Member Nordvelt.

Yes.

Mayor Lang. Yes. Yes. And Mayor Pro Tem Harmon. Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. We have resolution 2696 in front of us. This agreement would provide comprehensive towing services to West Valley City with Stauffer's Road Solutions LLC for a period of one year with a one-year renewal, with one-year renewals. And I'll turn the time to the council for discussion or a motion.

Thank you. I have a couple of questions. If someone, maybe Eric Bunderson or someone else, maybe a police officer would come up here and have a couple of questions. I appreciate that. Thank you, Eric.

And this is Sergeant Pete Valencia from the Police Department.

Okay.

Subject matter expert.

Okay, great. Thank you. I know I like you guys very much. And I'm so glad that I heard both side of the stories, you know, from local business here and also from you guys. But I also have a couple of questions I want to ask you. Very simple. What is the main reason why you bring this resolution 2696 to us. Why?

So, what the police department's position on that is, is that the maintenance of the current tow rotation, which has gone anywhere from 1340 to currently about 13 right now, is a full-time job for one of our police officers. who also is assigned other duties, including school safety, traffic, things like that. And so the administration of that is inefficient and takes up a lot of time. And as I said in the study meeting last week, in doing some research into other jurisdictions, the sole source contract for towing has been quite a boon to them, actually, in terms of efficiency. And that's not only for administration of the rotation itself, but on the actual call-outs. Getting one tow company to respond has shown in those other places that the tow trucks get there quicker, which gets the cars out of the way quicker and is is both safer and conducive to the the flow of traffic and commerce and everything else in in the Community.

How long have. How long have we been doing business with the local toward companies on the rotation yeah probably I don't I don't know the answer that year to year, so it.

Dave Kuntz, does fluctuate sometimes we have 20 and it could be these different companies and when they do another rotation when city explores that it's the same thing we randomized companies that put in.

Dave Kuntz, It signs of a number randomizes it and then it just plugs out of the air, these numbers, so, so I think to answer your question directly, many of these companies have been here for a long time on that rotation.

So we if we're going to. sign a contract with the staffers tonight? I mean, pass the resolution 2696. So the city going to sign a contract with the staffers? Is that right?

That's the resolution.

Okay. Did we sign a contract with the local towing companies before?

Yes. Each of those contracts on the rotation had, sorry, each of those tow companies on the rotation each had a contract.

Did we talk to them about a 21, 27,000, the staffers company, torn our vehicles, and we save about $27,000 per year. Did we talk to the local companies about that?

Well, when we posted the RFP, my advice to the police department, which they followed, is we can answer questions for everyone, but we didn't go out and talk to the tow companies, because that would be an unfair advantage if we talked to any of them. So we couldn't have a discussion and say, for example, hey, we're going to do this RFP. You should do this or you should do that. That would be inappropriate. So my advice was to simply issue the RFP, which we did both on the state system and on our website, which linked to the state system.

My question is, why you have to do it this time? About 20 years, 17 years, 15 years, 10 years. Why you do it right now?

Because I think, again, from the standpoint of the police department, it was time to do better for our residents.

So you're talking about efficiency, right? Did you sit down with them to talk to the local companies here about efficiency too?

Again, once we issued the RFP, we didn't. My advice was not to speak to anyone about that.

Why don't we do that before? Why don't we sit down with them and talk to them on expectation?

Because that could give an unfair advantage for the bid process.

It seems like this one is unfair to the local business here for the torrent company. Because monopoly, I don't like you guys very much, but I don't like monopoly, to be honest with you. One reason is the consumers will suffer because no competition, no, you know, accountability, no quality of a service. You can, they can promise you or promise us to do good thing But later, maybe a year later, two years later, three years later, what are we going to do? Only one person to run the business.

Right. And that is the beauty of the contract that we have drafted and that Stouffers has agreed to, is that not only will it be monitored and the performance will be seen on a nightly basis. Remember, we have several tows every night. Each party has... way out of that contract before the term ends and so again we have no dog in the fight in terms of who was selected that was simply done on the basis of of the best RFP that was submitted but everyone was given a fair shake at the RFP so that the contracts the contract is A one-year contract, it is renewable, but it is also cancelable on either side. And we could come back here again in 90 days if things aren't working out. So again, based on the quality of the submissions, we don't believe that will happen and the referrals that we've gotten. But that is why the police department asked and brought this forward.

I personally think we need to Maybe not right now, but we need to in the future, you need to sit down with the local foreign companies and. give them very clear picture about what we want them to do expectation about they told our vehicles they don't have a chart. If they we went to they have to pay penalty for that or they have to pay a fee for that. or three stripes is out. you know, one month or two months or something. And that's some kind of a string or some kind of things we can tie them up together because this seem like they unfair to them because they've been doing business here for years and years and they paying for local taxes, property taxes, county taxes, or grand school taxes. mosquito basement taxes and fees here. I think it's a burden for them if they don't have that kind of business to run for them, have support for their family. I know maybe Starforce is a good company, but I think there's people here, they need to rely on those to support for their family. Monopoly, I do not like it at all, to be honest with you. What I came from is a monopolist place, a Vietnam communist country. I've seen this many, many, many, many, many times because I left the country when I was 19 years old. I was not only five or six or two or three, 19 years old. I saw things, I understood them, and I felt very bad for people around my village or even my family. So Monopoly is not my type.

Yeah, to be honest with you.

I will vote no. I don't know my other colleagues here, my other council members are going to do, but I will vote no for this. I like you guys very much. I like you guys very much. But, you know, that's my philosophy and what I believe.

Yeah. Thank you. Ifo, did you want to speak?

Yeah, if I may, Mayor Pro Tem, Council. I just want to make it clear. There seems to be a lot of philosophical discussions, and I know people have different opinions on them. And I'm just going to come out straight out. I mean, there have been accusations. There have been all kinds of things thrown at my staff, my police department, my city attorney. I just want to make it clear, you know, the answer why we're doing this. It's really to be more efficient and to streamline things. You may disagree, but you may have disagreements on whether or not it will make us more streamlined. But I just want to make it clear, just for the record, we give sole source contracts. In fact, the majority of our contracts are to give single source, for example, our maintenance on our sidewalks. There's tons of people, tons of local businesses that could... that can do this. We don't rotate it out of efficiency, right? We don't want to have to go through and manage all the different sidewalk contracts. Instead, we have one and it's to make it better. As our city attorney has said, we may be wrong. So we may look, like you said, 90 days, we may come back and say we were wrong, but to do something you've never done before, you got to do something you've never done before, right? I mean, the worst thing you can do is nothing I have all my staff all my department heads constantly looking for ways to improve and I want to be very clear this was a way to improve this was a way to improve the system we're currently working through but I respect people's opinions and you may differ with that where it becomes frustrating is when you know there's accusations individuals and that's fine everybody's subject to their own opinion but calling my supervisor over this incompetent, lazy, all these things because we're just trying to do something better for the community. And so, again, I mean, everyone's welcome to their own opinions, but I don't want any implications with our staff. Like I said, if there is any truth to any of these accusations, I've told anyone that have come and talked to me, bring it. Bring the evidence because we would gladly pursue it. Bring the evidence. But to say that we've done anything nefarious in this process, bring outside auditors. I mean, this is a normal process that everyone had the equal opportunity to apply for. And like I said, I think if the council is concerned with those that are losing business opportunity, that's very valid. That's a valid point that people bring up. And that's, that's a tough job for the council to be in, right? Because you've got to balance between what we feel, what we're presenting to you would make us more efficient. You know, the sole source is not only about the administrative process, but it was also about just, if you just think logically, I mean, I don't know much about the total business, but just think about it logically. You get one company that's able to stage that's able to be there we heard anecdotally that in some cases you have companies you have a where you had a sole source they've shown up even before the police officer because because they are the sole source and they can't stage properly now I'm not saying that's going to be the case here but it has to the thing is we we have to look right my staff has to look for better ways to improve that's what we're that's what we're here for. We don't want us to be stagnant. And again, if we're wrong, then we'll be right back here. But that's why I'm answering the question of why it was brought forward. There's like Eric said, there's no dog in this fight for anyone, for our police department, for our city attorney, nobody has a dog in this fight. If, if this is something that council chooses otherwise, and we go back to making, trying to figure out how to make our processes better again, I mean, in other ways, but, this is not uncommon. It's very common that we choose a single source. Like I said, I can keep going. I can go down the list of when the bids that go out. Forgive my indulgence, Mayor Pro Tem. I just felt like between last week and this week, it kind of needed to be said.

Thank you. Do you have anything?

One quick thing. When under the former contracts, ones previously, all those on the rotation, when there was a problem, you met with them and talked to them about that problem and how to fulfill it on their contract, didn't you not?

Yes, there were. We did remove two.

So they have been warned. It wasn't that we went out all at once and made a decision. They have been warned along the way. Thank you. And one thing that I'm going to say is all of the emails that I got that all mentioned basically the same thing, all of the texts that I got, phone calls and everything else that all mentioned basically the same things, they almost had me swayed until one word was used tonight. And we do not have liars on our staff. And I will not support anyone who thinks we do.

Let me say something. Just one thing. I appreciate you guys coming out tonight to share your opinions and for us and against us. When you look at this resolution, just like I tried out, I wrote out a few things here. Like Mike Markham, he's not in this business. He's a regular guy in this city. And it's that monopoly, it's not good. I know it's a time, efficient is the key that you guys want to do. But I would love in the future You got to sit down with them and let them know we have that kind of expectation. If they don't do that or they don't achieve that expectation and they're out. I mean, I want to be fair, give them a fair chance because look like this case look like a livelihood versus efficiency. Yeah, they lose their livelihood. for their family. And we are expect for efficiency. I mean the good, fast, quick. But I believe, one thing I believe is lack of communication for both of us, for the city, maybe for local tour companies too. We need to sit down and we have to share our concerns and the problems and we can solve the problem together as a good team, city and local business. Yeah, that's all I can say.

Cindy? Yeah, I just have another comment. So regardless of how I vote for this resolution, I have total confidence in our staff that whatever information they provided adheres to state regulations. I trust them, and I mentioned that to people that contacted me when they wanted to debate rates and things. It's like we rely on our city attorney. We rely on our police department. So I am in support of them. I understand why this was brought, and I just wanted it to be made known. Whatever the outcome is or how I vote, I do support our city staff, and they do the best job that they can do, and I appreciate that.

Thank you. Yeah.

Oh, there's someone online.

No, go ahead. I just wanted to mention, I be the first to admit, I don't know a ton about towing industry. Um, I did, I have had several conversations with many of you throughout this past week, uh, to try to just understand the situation, to understand, um, what you're up against and, um, I do, you know, there was a comment made a couple of weeks ago about having a deeper, you know, an analogy of having a deeper bullpen. And it just seems intuitively that that would be, make sense to have, to provide the best service to have more providers. There's been a lot of talk about Topro and the benefits that that can provide. And it just seems like the, While I do appreciate staff's desire to bring efficiency to whatever process the city's involved in, I do think maybe giving Topro a chance would help with the efficiency question. So that's just all I have to say.

One last one. I would love to have a better solution instead of sitting here and see our local foreign companies here. They're losing their income.

Do we have a motion on the floor? We don't.

I would move to approve resolution 2696.

A motion to approve 2696. Any further discussion or?

I think it's dead. A motion to deny solution 2696.

We have a motion to deny 2696. Second. We have a motion and a second. Ms. Cammack?

Council Member Wood? Yes. Council Member Whetstone?

Yes.

Council Member Huynh?

Yes.

Council Member Christensen?

No.

Council Member Nordfeldt?

No.

Mayor Lang?

Yes.

And Mayor Pro Tem Harmon?

No.

Motion for denial passes by majority.

Thank you. Okay, we have resolution 26-101. This resolution would authorize a development agreement with Moore Homes, LC to replace an existing agreement. This would change the development from attached senior condos to single family detached homes. I'll turn the time to the council for discussion or a motion.

Mayor Pro Tem, I just had a comment on this. I do like the new design, particularly two things. Well, one thing is eliminating the access to Parkway and also directly onto 7200. I just think that that will help with gaining access to either of those two streets. But a question is, I don't know if staff has an answer, but Have we heard, and I know this doesn't go out for notification, but I'm assuming none of the neighbors know about this new design.

They haven't been notified.

That's correct. Sure. The development agreement amendment, just being a resolution, we don't do a notice. We have not heard from residents of that neighborhood. Okay.

Mayor Pro Tem Harmon. Yes. It looks like Mayor Ling has her hand up.

Mayor Ling.

Yes. And with Steve up there, he can correct me if I'm wrong. But one of my concerns is we've made a policy of not adjusting development agreements, which this is. And second, if this proposal had been brought to us before the senior living, it would not have been eligible to go even before us. So for me, voting for the senior living in this area was a need that was worth the compromise for the higher density. This is not a need in my book to change to this situation. We can have threats that it might be a charter school or other things. But for me, it's staying with the policy of not changing development agreements. And if this had come to begin with, This would not have even been brought to us because it wouldn't have qualified.

Thank you.

Do we have a policy or has it just been practice of readdressing development agreements?

So there have been some development agreements the city has amended. I think we definitely staff discourage those because realizing those are You know, the council spends a lot of time considering those, but there have been instances where the council has agreed to amend development agreements for a variety of reasons. One of the things, at least as staff, that we've told folks is that if you're considering an amendment, we – Before we bring it to the council, we want to know that it's at least equivalent or better. Again, I know that's somewhat subjective depending on the circumstances, but we've had a number of developers that come to us and because of cost concerns say, hey, we just want to cheapen this. And we're like, we're not really interested in looking at that. But in other cases, it's been wanting to do something different that's maybe an improvement, but not necessarily good. making it cheaper, just a change. So the city has considered scenarios like that, but again, not all have been approved. Thanks.

I'll just, I am not in favor of amending development agreements in theory or in practice. My brother lives in Sugar Plum, and they were sold a project five years ago that they could swallow because it was a senior housing project. If this would have been brought to Planning Commission or Council five years ago, the whole subdivision would have gone ballistic. They would not have been happy. And they won't be happy now when they get notified, which is then it's out of our control because we've amended the development agreement. Yeah, I think those are my main points. And yeah.

So I have another question, Steve. So before this was approved, it would have been the RE zone here because of the size of the acreage. So at the time that the 55 plus came, that was a zone change.

Correct.

I voted against it on planning commission and I'd rather see our E zone be here then. Because I also, I remember the residents coming in and they were concerned about traffic and all of that. So I, and the other thing is we have denied changing development agreements just in the year and a half. I've been on the council and I was, I'm don't know that I agree with that, but I understand it. And, to me if we start amending development agreements, it's just gonna blow up on us. And so I have strong feelings towards that. It's nothing about you, but that's my, you know, that's how I feel.

So, thanks. Is there a motion in there?

Yeah, I'd move to deny ordinance or resolution 26-101. Do we have a second?

I'll second.

We have a motion and a second.

Council Member Wood.

Yes.

Council Member Whetstone. No. Council Member Hune.

No.

Council Member Christensen.

Yes.

Council Member Nordfeldt.

Yes.

Mayor Link. Yes. And Mayor Pro Tem Harmon. Yes. Motion for denial of passes by majority.

We have 14 items on our consent agenda this evening, including two interlocal cooperation agreements and a memorandum of understanding for the police department.

This is a mouthful.

An interlocal with Salt Lake County for a youth advocacy grant, a renewal of services provided by Highland Software, and several of our usual real estate purchase agreements and acceptance of deeds and easements.

Fourteen.

I believe there are 14 there. We can get to my script here. Any motion on those 14?

Move to approve the 14 items on the consent agenda. Second.

All right, we have a motion and a second.

Council Member Wood? Yes. Council Member Whetstone? Yes. Council Member Hune?

Yes.

Council Member Christensen? Yes. Council Member Nordfeldt? Yes. Mayor Lange?

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem Harmon? Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. That's the end of our meeting. We have one more motion.

Motion to adjourn.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

We are adjourned.