Council meeting and public hearing minutes October 3, 2016



MONDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2016 AT 6:00 PM



Quorum present:  Council members Glodowski, Bateman, and Bunker were present when Mayor Turner called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.  Council member Blotter arrived at 6:02 PM.  Also present were Treasurer Sherri Price, and Clerk Lynne Shindurling to record the minutes.

Members of the Planning Commission present were:  Gary Weight, Kim Norris, Jaye Binkerd, and Tom Rawlings.  Secretary Kathy-Jo Percy was also in attendance.

Members of the public in attendance were:  Shelly Bunker, Chris and Renée Anderson, Jared Rigby, Brent Waterman, Kim Hoover, Heber Taylor and his wife, Tracy Turner, Phil Mattingly, Jordan Russell, Ian George, Tanner Russell, Adam Knight, Rory Singer, Stefanie Grady, Todd Wall, Tori Jo Skinner, Sue Witt, Melanie Coleman, Marti Blotter, Jamie and Mark McAllister, Justin McAllister, and Ryan Taylor.


Kim Hooper, a resident of Midway, stated he has a son who lives out of state who is interested in property located at 4611 South Cove Lane in Storm Haven.  The property is listed as two parcels comprised of 4.9 acres and 1.9 acres totaling 6.8 acres.  His question is if a person purchased both parcels, could they build a home on one piece and sell the remaining piece as a buildable lot.  Mayor Turner explained this question should be directed to the Town Planner and the Planning Commission before coming before the Town Council.


Deputy Rigby presented a log of calls for service made within Daniel Town through the first three quarters of 2016.  He explained “agency assistance” listed on the logs means medical emergencies, although two deaths were reported in Q3.  He reported they have seen an increase in suicidal subject calls over which his department is concerned.  As a result, law enforcement personnel are receiving additional training in how to deal with these situations.

Council member Glodowski expressed his thanks for the job being performed by the local law enforcement.  Deputy Rigby was appreciative of the comment and stated he finds the community to be kind, on the whole.  Phil Mattingly asked if law enforcement is seeing an increase locally in the number of break-ins and robberies.  Deputy Rigby stated most of these crimes are related to drug abuse and, over the past seven years as chief deputy, he has seen a substantial increase.

Invitation was made by the deputy to a candlelight vigil on October 5th at the police station, as October is domestic violence awareness month.   He mentioned the wrap-up of a murder trial taking place in Heber where the defendant was found guilty for a crime which occurred in 1995.

Mayor Turner thanked the deputy for coming and providing the public with the information and thanked him and his department for their service.

Council member Glodowski moved to go out of regular session and open the public hearing on Daniel Municipal Code 8.25, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed unanimously and the hearing was opened.


Brent Waterman noted the hours put in by Eric Bunker in Planning of 192 for one month and stated he hopes he is paid appropriately for his time.  He asked that the Council members introduce themselves for all who are present and may not be familiar with all members.  All council members introduced themselves, as well as the clerk and Planning Commission members.

Mr. Waterman produced a document he prepared of his thoughts for new code language dealing with home-occupied businesses.  He asked if the current code had been adopted from elsewhere and was not written from scratch.  The Council concurred language was borrowed and rewritten from other jurisdictions to come up with the Daniel Code.  Mayor Turner thanked Mr. Waterman for his efforts and accepted his comments into the record.

Mayor Turner reiterated that Daniel Town’s actions are often complaint driven and asked for other comments from those in attendance.  He stated once the Council has gotten the public input, they will endeavor to write new code which will be enforceable.

Joe Witt produced a document listing many types of businesses, and asked the Council the rhetorical question if these would be allowed.  He feels all of those he has written are being conducted within Daniel Town and many do not currently meet the home occupation code.  He stated businesses related to agricultural endeavors need not comply with the code as conducted in RA5 zoning.

He listed three conditions he feels must be present for a home-occupied business:

  1. Property must have a residence on the property which must be owner occupied;
  2. Occupancy and business operations of home-based businesses must be proportionate to the amount of property owned.
  3. Storage of trucks, tools, equipment or supplies must have a buffer in the form of fencing, trees, landscape berms or out buildings meeting minimum setbacks from property lines. Agricultural operations should follow this guideline also in terms of number of animals allowed on an owner’s acreage with buffers provided for neighboring properties.

Mr. Witt provided his writing to Mayor Turner for copying and dissemination to all Council members.

Todd Wall next spoke, stating he has a small trucking company at this home.  He asked for guidance on how many trucks would be allowed in RA5 zoning, how many acres are needed to run specific types of operations, would like regulations in place to control scope and size of operations.  He personally tries to be a good neighbor to those near him.

Richard Willes stated he had applied for a conditional use permit to have events at his home on 3000 South which was denied by the Planning Commission.  He has had friends and neighbors ask to rent his facility for weddings and parties.  He has done research on short-term rentals throughout the state and elsewhere to see how communities are handling rentals.  The issue raises concerns of noise, parking, nuisance, etc.

Council member Blotter stated a bed-and-breakfast home, short-term rentals and the like are different than a home-based business, which is the code currently being discussed.  Commissioner Gary Weight stated the rules need to be equal for all, not a case of saying yes to one and no to another.

Mr. Mattingly asked if there is commercial and/or industrial zoning in Daniel.  The Mayor answered affirmatively.  Industrial is on the north border of Daniel abutting Heber City.  Melanie Coleman stated they bought property in the industrial zone abutting their residence in order to park their semi trucks.  Mr. Mattingly feels a person needs to reside at the residence where their home-based business is located.

Mayor Turner asked the public for comments on the code as redlined with strike- throughs and question marks.  Heber Taylor stated he was not present at the first hearing but was curious about 8.25.03(9) dealing with accessory buildings.  He thinks if you own property you ought to be able to use it.  Mr. Wall agreed that putting items in a building could provide a better appearance than having equipment and other items stored out in plain sight.   Mr. Taylor asked how long the Council plans to address the issue before writing or rewriting this particular code.  The Council has no specific timeline but wants to be through with the issue in several months’ time.  Council member Bunker stated Wasatch County has never allowed use of accessory buildings for home-based businesses, which is where the majority of Daniel’s code comes from.

Commissioner Kim Norris stated in 2005 or 2006 when the Town was incorporated, they formulated a General Plan stating agriculture was to be promoted.  Incorporation and maintaining a five-acre minimum for future subdivision of land would slow growth and encroachment of Heber City annexations.

Mr. Witt inquired how Daniel’s code might stand up to State law as far as how the State determines where business is being conducted.   Is it where you receive your mail?  A lot of business may be conducted in numerous communities or even from a vehicle.  Where should a business license be obtained?  Council member Blotter stated the definitions provided in the Daniel Municipal Code may answer many of these questions.

Mr. Witt stated a business owner may have a business license in a town or city other than Daniel but have equipment stored at his residence in Daniel.  How is the determination made where the license should be issued.  He would like very specific code written so everyone understands the parameters within which they must operate their business.

Mr. Waterman stated he previously held business licenses in Wasatch County, but upon formation of Daniel Town, he was told his licenses should be issued in Daniel where his home office is located.

Chris Anderson feels the business address is that which appears on tax forms, which for many businesses within Daniel would be a person’s home residence.

Shelly Bunker agreed that anyone who has a business office in their home should have a business license issued by Daniel for that endeavor.

Mr. Witt expressed concern that a loophole may exist for someone who elects to conduct business using a post office box and not their home address, therefore enabling them to do whatever they wish on their residential property as far as equipment storage or agricultural endeavors.

Commissioner Tom Rawlings stated he has lived with a trucking company next door to him creating excessive noise, diesel fumes, etc.  He would like the Council to be able to enact and enforce a nuisance ordinance as well as the Home Occupation Code for businesses which impact neighbors.  He explained when he lived in Salt Lake County, there appeared to be many more zoning enforcement officers than police officers policing neighborhoods for violations.

Commissioner Jaye Binkerd added there are sections within the Town Code dealing with nuisance, those beginning at 4-2-1 and going through 4-3-5.  She would like the Code to tie back to these sections which are considered a nuisance.  Mr. Rawlings stated with someone holding a home occupation business license, they still need to conduct their business in a way that it is not perceived as a nuisance by those around them.

Mr. Mattingly stated an annual review ought to be required for a business before renewal can take place.  The current process requires renewals come before the Town Council and discussion of complaints, if any, raised against said business.  Mayor Turner once again stated actions are complaint driven and written complaints must be made for any enforcement action to occur.   Council member Bunker explained when he receives a complaint, upon initial contact with the offender the matter is usually resolved, once a problem has been brought to their attention.  Mrs. Anderson asked if written complaints are kept even after resolution of the problem.  Council member Bunker answered yes, for at least five years.

Commissioner Rawlings stated though some do comply, not all persons against whom a complaint is made attempt to rectify the problem.  There are agricultural endeavors which can also be offensive, not just outside businesses.  Some farm equipment sounds just like a diesel motor in a truck.

Council member Bunker stated signed written complaints are necessary so that if a matter goes as far as a lawsuit, the signatore on a complaint becomes a witness in the matter.

Mrs. Anderson stated her belief that residents don’t want to have to purchase multiple permits.  Fewer permits is better.  Commissioner Rawlings expressed his opinion if there are no complaints, “if it ain’t broke, why fix it.”  Council member Bateman stated a written code must be enforced.  Commissioner Rawlings thinks it is unfair to those who have been in the valley for decades with no complaints to have to conform to new rules and standards.  Council member Bateman stated the purpose of this exercise is to write code that will make it easier for everyone to meet the requirements.

At this point Council member Blotter read an e-mail he received from a Daniel resident, Tim Jones.  In short, he stated he is in agreement with the verbiage the Council has changed and/or added to the current code in the hearings thus far, but is concerned with the number of employees which may park at a residential business and traffic problems that can arise.

Where it has been stated by the Council that enforcement action is complaint driven, Council member Blotter wonders if he sees a violation but there has not been a written complaint about same, should he ignore it.  Mr. Waterman and several others in attendance voiced their opinion that they would like to have a complaint be made in writing.  The Councilman viewing a problem could well be the one to make a written complaint, but they expressed a desire to have the complaints in writing.  Mayor Turner stated he too has pondered over the same issue and decided he cannot police the Town on his own, but if someone comes to him with a complaint, he would like them to put it in writing.

Council member Bunker added a concern, as opposed to a complaint, should also be addressed.  Early notice of a problem can keep the matter from developing further and being reported as a complaint.

Mr. Waterman stated his view that codes are often miswritten and always misinterpreted.  He feels codes need to be updated more often and before so many businesses fall into a situation where they are out of compliance.  He expressed his view that to make a complaint is to make a change.  If the code seems to not fit the circumstances within the Town, it needs to be changed.  Mr. Rawlings stated sometimes things out of compliance cannot be fixed quickly and become a hardship to residents.

Mr. Anderson suggested new code be written, enact the changes, make sure all business owners know what they must do to be in compliance.  When their license is up for renewal, they must be aware of what it will take to comply and be able to accomplish this, or their license will not be renewed.

Council member Glodowski would like new business license applicants to be given a copy of the code they must operate under to see if they can lawfully obtain a license.

Mr. Mattingly referred the Council to 8.25.06(e) stating: “The home occupation is clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling for dwelling purposes and does not change the character of the building from that of a dwelling.”  He feels if this language remains in the Home Occupation Code, many businesses cannot operate as they have in the past and a lot of problems are solved.

Commissioner Binkerd added very few of the current licensed businesses within Daniel are operating within code, which is the very reason 8.25 is under scrutiny and is looking at being updated and possibly modified.

Mark McAllister stated after several hearings and public comment, no specifics have been stated or suggestions made as to specific wording.  He would like the Council to produce a written proposal to the public and asked if more input will be allowed by the public once this is done.  Mayor Turner explained when the new code is created, it will be presented in open and public meetings in the future.  The public may speak, but the Council will decide on the needed verbiage.

Mr. McAllister stated as some businesses continue to grow, they should be moved to a commercial or industrial zone of their own doing.  He does feel businesses which were in existence long before Daniel Town was incorporated should be afforded a grandfather clause to be able to continue doing business as they have perhaps for decades.  Mayor Turner stated if an existing business was in conformance with the code at the time of Daniel’s creation within the boundaries of Daniel, they were grandfathered in.  If they were involved in illegal use of their land at the time of incorporation, Daniel has the right to bring them into conformance or question their operation.

Council member Bunker invited people to e-mail suggestions to any council member if they’re apprehensive to bring it up in the public meeting.

Council member Bateman read the revised language of section 8.25.06(c) as follows:  “The home occupation does not involve the use of any accessory buildings, ag buildings, or yard space for storage or activities outside of reasonable residential use.”  Commissioner Binkerd in response referred to the version written by Brent Waterman stating it uses concise language.  Commissioner Rawlings offered Waterman’s 8.25.06(b) as well.   Ms. Binkerd added comments throughout the public hearings bring up the point that many businesses use accessory buildings and the new code needs to address this.  At the point when a home businesses expands beyond the confines of the home (and perhaps use of an accessory building) they should move to a commercial location.

Shelly Bunker stated her family moved from Heber City to Daniel because they were raising kids and wanted the space to do so.  She is concerned that residents applying for a home occupation license in Daniel are not aware of what the code is and the rules which would govern their business, even though it is available on the Town’s website.   She does not want to see the introduction of CC&Rs on Daniel properties telling residents what they can and cannot have or do on their properties.  She explained one reason Daniel incorporated was the people at the time did not want to stay within Wasatch County or get annexed into Heber City with all of the rules and regulations in place.  She reiterated the Town’s mission statement is to be an agricultural community.  Mrs. Bunker stated she is grateful so many business owners and other residents of Daniel have attended the hearings and informed everyone the Council has been working hard on this code language for months and really does want to hear the public’s suggestions on wording.

Mr. Rawlings as a private citizen suggested language allowing use of accessory buildings in the home businesses code, referring specifically to Mr. Waterman’s paragraphs (b) and (c) referred to above.

Jordan Russell stated he is a business owner, did not apply for a license, did not receive a copy of the Daniel code.  He dealt strictly with Wasatch County in starting his business on 3000 South in Daniel, a dumpster business at his home.  He expressed language in the current code under section 8.25.06(e) limited to one commercial vehicle is too restrictive.

Commissioner Weight commented instead of thinking about what you want to be able to do, think in terms of what do you want your neighbors to be able to do on their property.  He stated zoning is determined for compatible uses on the properties.

Council member Bateman wants the public to think about why the language was put in to begin with, what purpose does it serve, what is it governing, does it pertain to me in my business and what does it do to my neighbors.

Mr. Witt expressed concern for the residents not in attendance at the public hearings on the code thinking they can buy land in Daniel and store materials or do whatever they want on the land because there are no ordinances in effect to prevent it.  He wants the Council to move forward and update the code and make it enforceable for all.

Mayor Turner thanked all for coming and asked that they check the website for dates of future meetings.

Council member Glodowski moved to close the public hearing, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed unanimously.

Council member Bateman moved to open the public hearing on budget amendments.   The motion was seconded by Council member Glodowski and passed unanimously.  In order to address a business license applicant, the motion was withdrawn.  Item #9 was next discussed out of order.


Heber Taylor and his wife explained they have applied for a business license for Full Scope, a business providing contract sewing to clients.  They explained they make suitcases and medical bags.  They have no other employees.  Mr. Taylor stated he previously had an interior design and consultation business.  No customers frequent their residence.  They do all pick up and delivery.  The Council approved issuance of the business license for Full Scope.

Housekeeping by Dawn and Lone Peak Sprinkler and Landscaping were also up for renewal of their licenses.  Commissioner Binkerd stated the owner of the Lone Peak Sprinkler business does not live at the residence, he rents it to others.  This is in violation of the current code requiring the business license holder live on the property in order to conduct the business.  Since the code is under review, the two licenses were renewed and may be reviewed at a later time.

At this point Council member Glodowski moved to leave the regular session of the meeting and open the public hearing regarding the budgets.  Council member Bateman seconded the motion which passed with all “ayes.”  The public hearing was opened.


Clerk Lynne Shindurling presented the budget amendment for the 2015-16 general budget.  She explained the reason for the amendment was to move highway and street funds allocated in fiscal year 2015-16 to the 2016-17 fiscal year, since the chip seal projects were done in July rather than in June.

Mayor Turner read Daniel Resolution DR 2016-10-03A into the record.  Council member Glodowski moved to adopt the resolution, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  Council member Bunker questioned the budgeted amount for weed spray on the amendment.  The clerk explained the actual purchases came in lower than $500 and will be reflected on the year-end Agreed Upon Procedure.  The motion passed unanimously.

The clerk next presented the budget amendment for fiscal year 2016-17 pointing out carry-over funds in the highways and streets category.  She had also increased the budgeted amount for Professional Services – Info Tech by $1,000.

Mayor Turner read into the record Daniel Resolution DR 2016-10-03B.  Council member Bunker explained the Council must come out of the public hearing before motions may be taken on adoption of the resolutions.

           Council member Glodowski moved to come out of the public hearing, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed unanimously.

Council member Glodowski moved the meeting come back into regular session.  The motion was seconded by Council member Bateman and passed unanimously.

           Council member Glodowski moved for adoption of resolution DR 2016-10-03A.  The motion was seconded by Council member Bateman and passed unanimously and the resolution was adopted.

           Council member Bateman moved for adoption of resolution DR 2016-10-03B, which was seconded by Council member Glodowski.  The motion passed unanimously and the resolution was adopted.


             The clerk presented the quarterly reports for the current fiscal year’s budgets, those being the general fund, the Daniel Municipal Water fund, and the Storm Haven water fund.


The clerk explained Gilbert & Stewart have not, as of this date, prepared an engagement letter for their services, but have stated it should be the $3,000 for an Agreed Upon Audit as was performed last fiscal year.   The budget contains an amount of $3,500 for the procedure.

With no letter in hand, Council member Bunker moved to hire Gilbert & Stewart to perform the AUP at a cost not to exceed $3,500, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The vote was as follows:  “Aye” votes from Mayor Turner and Council members Bunker, Bateman, and Glodowski, with a “nay” vote from Council member Blotter.

             At the November 16, 2016 joint meeting with the Planning Commission, before approval of the October 3rd minutes, Council member Bunker withdrew his motion to expend up to $3,500 for the Agreed Upon Procedure.  Council member Bunker moved that Gilbert & Stewart be retained to perform an audit for FY 2015-16 at a cost not to exceed $5,500.  The motion was seconded by Council member Glodowski and passed with all “aye” votes.



Kim Norris produced a schedule from Resolution DR-2013-06-10D which sets out meter sizes and water usage, with costs associated with each.  The schedule only goes up to a 3” meter and the new Daniel Elementary School has installed a 4” meter.  Ryan Taylor stated he had previously prepared a spreadsheet going up to an 8” meter and he can extract the pricing on the 4” if the Council wishes him to do so.  Larger numbers were not included in the schedule in 2013 as the Council wanted to address anything above 3” on a case-by-case basis.  Alternatively, the base rate for a 3” meter can be used on the 4” as well, which is $315 per month.  Council member Bunker stated the school paid Daniel’s cost for the 4” meter to facilitate installation when the contractor was ready on site.  He would like to check notes of conversations with school district officials to see if they were quoted a number.

Mr. Norris also produced a letter he recommends be sent to water customers who are in substantial arrears on their water bills.  Not all are paying off their accounts in April and October as hoped.  The Council reviewed the letter.  Council member Bunker suggested adding that in case of hardship, a customer can come before the Council or submit something in writing asking for a different option.  Mayor Turner volunteered adding his name and phone number as a contact, or any of the Council members with the Daniel number of (435) 654-5062 and e-mail addresses, and asked that the letter be sent to those the water personnel have on an overdue list.  This information will be passed along to the water secretary, Kathy-Jo Percy.

Council member Glodowski moved to increase the charge for shut-off of water and return of service from $50.00 to $100.00 due to nonpayment of a water bill.  The motion received no second and did not carry.

Council member Bateman stated three months in arrears should trigger the letter from the water department for payment.  Once the bill reaches $500 or more, it becomes extremely difficult to pay in full.  The shutoff times in April and October were set previously.


No additional comments were made beyond discussion regarding payment terms.


             Planning Director Eric Bunker presented his planning report for the month of September, which showed 136.25 hours dealing with planning matters and 73.50 hours doing Blue Stakes.   The Council reviewed the report and questioned regarding specific properties listed therein.  Ryan Taylor commented the Ritchie lot split has been completed forming Three Farm Estates.  Director Bunker stated potential buyers need to be aware the northern part of the lots is in the Daniel industrial zone.

Commissioner Weight commented he had listened to a UTLG webinar dealing with roads and rights-of-way in the last few weeks.  If others are interested the recording can be found on the Trust’s website.  This was mentioned in regards to the building of a fence by Rex Reeder where a survey finds it in the right-of-way.  Director Bunker is dealing with the matter.

Director Bunker produced a letter from the State Department of Natural Resources dated September 2, 2016, requesting a letter from the Town in support of the Dark Sky Park initiative.

Council member Glodowski moved that the Council approve submitting a letter in support of the initiative.  The motion was seconded by Council member Bunker, which passed unanimously.

             At this point Council member Bunker produced the current Wasatch County code dealing with the placement of septic tanks and drainfields on buildable lots.  This code does contain language, as does the Daniel Code, stating: “Septic tank drainfields shall be separated by a minimum of 200’.”  The language had been challenged in a previous meeting by Blake Allen, the contractor building a home on Mill Road for Jed Seus.  Council member Blotter asked if the Council hadn’t already approved placement of the septic on the lot.  The lot owner was able to go ahead with the home site as planned having received a letter from the adjacent lot owner to the south agreeing to the septic drainfield placement.


Daniel Town has told the buyer the waterline is ready to be moved and the Town will perform the work once monies have been received.  Mr. Taylor said they contacted him and stated they will have their own contractor do the work.  A new meter will be installed on the existing lot.  The existing meter will remain in place but will not be used.

The Mylar produced by the attorney for Tim Clark who bought the Smith property shows a change to the back lot.  Mr. Taylor is awaiting a Quit-Claim deed or similar document showing with the front lot having grown by 300’ square feet, the back lot was reduced by 300’ square feet.  All of the property is owned by the new owner of the Smith property.  The matter has passed through the Planning Commission and now rests with the Town Council.  Mr. Taylor recommends the Council approve the plat pending relocation of the water meter and the concurrent recordation of a Quit-Claim Deed.

Council member Glodowski moved that the Council approve the lot line adjustment pending relocation of the water meter and the Quit-Claim Deed being recorded concurrently.   No second was made and the motion was withdrawn after discussion.

Council member Glodowski moved the Council approve the lot line adjustment pending moving of the water meter to the appropriate lot and the existing water meter be abandoned and left in serviceable condition, and recordation of a Quit-Claim Deed concurrently.  The motion was seconded by Council member Bateman and passed with the following vote:  Mayor Turner “aye”; Council member Glodowski “aye”; Council member Bateman “aye”; Council member Bunker “nay”; and Council member Blotter “nay.”  The motion passed.


Clarification of the motion in the middle of page 6 to the end of the page was noted by the clerk, and a slight modification to the language in the motion at the bottom of page 8 regarding “the placement of the Seus septic tank 200’ away from the existing septic tank on the lot to the north and 100’ from the southern property line, or requesting a signed letter from the property owner to the south…”

With those changes put into the minutes, Council member Blotter moved to approve the minutes of September 12, 2016, which was seconded by Council member Bunker.  The motion passed unanimously.


             The clerk presented the warrants and explained several of the Town items, those being the Pelorus server, Jeff Bradshaw’s software for the payroll program for 3 years, Blue Stakes continuing to rise quarterly.

Next were presented the water companies’ warrants, noting the cost to Master Meter for software support being split between Daniel Municipal Water and Storm Haven Water.

Council member Blotter moved to approve the warrants as presented, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed unanimously.

Council member Blotter moved that if another public hearing is held regarding the Home Occupation code, all residents in the Town of Daniel receive a letter informing them of the meeting.  Council member Glodowski asked if there is a master list of all residents’ names and addresses, or property owners within Daniel.  One does not currently exist but is being assembled.  Council member Bunker explained a motion cannot be made on an item which did not appear on the agenda.  The item may be discussed next month.  Council member Blotter withdrew the motion.


Council member Glodowski moved to adjourn the meeting, which was seconded by Council member Bunker.  The motion passed unanimously and Mayor Turner adjourned the meeting at 10:06 PM.

Lynne Shindurling


Comments are closed.