Council meeting minutes May 2, 2016


MONDAY, MAY 2, 2016 AT 6:00 PM



Quorum present:  Council members Eric Bunker, Kasey Bateman, and Jon Blotter were present when Mayor Turner called the meeting to order at 6:05 PM.  Council member Glodowski arrived at 6:07.  Treasurer Sherri Price was present, and also Clerk Lynne Shindurling to record the minutes.

Members of the public in attendance were:  Shelly Bunker, Stefanie Grady, Merry Duggin, Pam Skinner, Nick Lopez, Mike Petersen, Tom Rawlings, Bart and Cindy Wilde, Bridger Wilde, Mary Wynne, Kim Norris, Dan Dearden, and Ryan Taylor.


Nick Lopez introduced himself as a candidate running for the Wasatch County Council South seat.  He gave a personal biography and stated he wanted to come to the meeting to meet the Council members and see what is happening in Daniel, stating he is concerned about the proposed airport expansion, traffic issues, growth and public safety for citizens of Daniel Town.  He gave information regarding his website and asked to be considered in the upcoming election.


Mike Petersen, who is a local developer/builder and County Council member, presented a rendering of a proposed development he is considering on the northwest corner of the intersection of 3000 South and Highway 189, directly across the road from another newly constructed development of his.  He is asking Daniel Town if they would consider annexing the property from Wasatch County into Daniel; and, if so, he will submit an annexation petition.  Mayor Turner stated the property in question is currently in Daniel’s 20-year annexation plan.  Mr. Petersen explained in the process of constructing the development, the intersection would be realigned, a project the County and UDOT have been considering for some time, and there would eventually be a semaphore placed at the intersection.  His proposal would create a much safer intersection in addition to bringing additional taxes to the Town.  He is proposing office/warehouse space, commercial and industrial, with a convenience store and gas station.

Council member Blotter asked why he wanted to annex the property into Daniel.    Mr. Petersen mentioned Charleston had the first option for annexing, but their Board had no interest in the development, but would entertain having a park built on the property.

Merry Duggin inquired if Mr. Petersen is planning on using Daniel Municipal water for the proposed facility.  He mentioned yes, he would like to tie into their water system.

Kim Norris stated he thought it would be awkward, in his opinion, for Daniel to consider annexing property across the highway and supposed it would be quite expensive to bring water across the highway.   Mr. Petersen stated he would pay the cost to bring the water west of Highway 189.

Council member Bunker mentioned this ties in with the Corridor Preservation Cooperative Agreement along Highway 189 which Daniel Town had not wanted to sign as the specifics of the subject intersection were not spelled out.  This proposal would complete the intersection alignment in a way with which Daniel Town is in agreement.

Council member Blotter asked what the time frame for the project is.  Mr. Petersen stated if he receives the go-ahead this evening, he will submit the annexation petition.  If Daniel is not interested in annexing the property, UDOT has plans to make an adjustment to 3000 South on the Charleston side which still does not align the street for a safer intersection.

Mayor Turner said he would like to move forward with the annexation if the rest of the Council is in agreement.  Details on the development could be worked out at a later time.

Cindy Wilde asked what the benefit is to the Town of Daniel, is it just the tax base. Mayor Turner explained it would increase the tax base as well as provide more water revenue.  Council member Blotter explained the financial gain is minimal, in his opinion, but it does make the Town of Daniel bigger.  Mr. Petersen feels the greatest benefit is making a much safer intersection,  something that has been discussed for over a year with different scenarios.

Mayor Turner stated when traffic has increased to what UDOT is expecting and the roads are aligned better, the semaphore should be installed.  Ryan Taylor stated it will not qualify for a light until the roads are aligned so this is the first step.  Mr. Lopez also stated from a safety standpoint this appears to be a good resolution.


Council member Bunker presented two businesses asking for a renewal of their business license, those being Bart Wilde & Associates and Jolley Electric.  Caleb Davis, under the name of Wasatch Back Construction, has submitted an application and appropriate fee for a new business.  Although he was not in attendance, approval was given by the Council for his business license.  Council member Blotter inquired of Mr. Wilde the nature of his business.  He stated he is an independent sales rep and uses his home as his office location.  The Bart Wilde and Jolley Electric licenses were renewed.


Planning Director Bunker mentioned one written complaint had been withdrawn.  As he looks through his documents for further report, Mayor Turner moved on to item #5.


Ryan Taylor presented Mayor Turner with the award letter to Advanced Paving and Construction, who was the low bidder from the invitation to bid, having a bid of $82,792.17.        Mr. Taylor explained the drop in oil prices since last fall has allowed the Town to schedule more work this year than last.  Monies budgeted for roadwork in the 2015-16 fiscal year will be expended by yearend at June 30, 2016, and any additional monies budgeted in the new fiscal year of 2016-17 will be handled as a change order or add-on to the current award, thus not requiring bidding again.

Mr. Taylor also mentioned he would like to upgrade to a synthetic chip, which is a little more expensive than the product on which the bid was received.  The lower construction cost this year compared to last will allow the Town to chip seal more road surface than anticipated in this current fiscal year.  He explained the synthetic chip uses a little different oil which provides better bonding to the chips, and the synthetic product seems to have a longer life.

       Council member Bateman moved to have the Council accept the awarding of the road construction project to Advanced Pavement and Construction, which was seconded by Council member Blotter.  Council member Bunker asked if the motion included the additional amount using the synthetic chip.  Ryan Taylor suggested having a motion for the award at the initial prices, and a second motion utilizing a change order to upgrade to the synthetic chip product.

       Council member Bateman moved to accept the award using the current figures.  Council member Blotter’s second of the motion did not stand.  Council member Glodowski seconded the motion.   The vote was as follows:  “Aye” votes from Mayor Turner and Council members Glodowski, Bunker and Bateman, with a “nay” vote from Council member Blotter.  The motion passed.

       Council member Bateman moved that the Council approve the award to Advanced Paving upgrading to the synthetic chip with the remainder of the budgeted funds, which was seconded by Council member Blotter.

Council member Blotter then inquired if the extended chip seal projects proposed followed the Town’s road plan for improvements.  Mr. Taylor answered the scheduled projects do follow the road plan prepared by Epic Engineering, and a lesser cost allows more surface to be covered.  The increased bid amount brought the total to $96,312.65.

The motion passed with unanimous “aye” votes.


Ryan Taylor presented the Council with bid recommendations for the Ranch Drive waterline.  Mavericks Excavation out of Duchesne, Utah, is the lowest bidder.  The bid for Schedule A work is $121,568.75, this being the waterline, and Schedule B bid, the fiberoptic conduit, is $25,802.50.  He explained as part of the bid process the company will be bonded with the Town of Daniel.  A notice of award will be issued by Epic, with the Council’s approval, and they will have two weeks to get the bonds in place.

          Council member Bunker moved to approve the award of the projects to Mavericks Excavation with a second by Council member Blotter.  Council member Bunker asked if
Epic had utilized their reference list and felt comfortable with the company.  Mr. Taylor stated their references included projects larger than this one.  In answer to Mr. Bunker’s question, Mr. Taylor also stated Epic would have an inspector on site during construction.

Kim Norris inquired if the needed meter box on the Smith property on 3000 South was included in this project bid.  Mr. Taylor stated once the contractor was on site on Ranch Drive, he would direct them to the additional small project and have it performed by change order.

Council member Bunker asked if numbers for installation of laterals on Ranch Drive would be backed out of the bid and paid for by Daniel Town itself.  Mr. Taylor explained that since the bids came in under the $180,000 impact fee, Daniel Town would bill the School District for the $180,000 in full and laterals can be installed using those funds with no additional cost to Daniel for those meters.  If the School District decides to go forward with the fiberoptic conduit, the District will be billed an additional $25,802.50 for the second trench.  (As of the writing of these minutes, the District has opted not to install fiberoptic cable.)

Mr. Taylor asked the Daniel Town clerk to submit an invoice for the $7,500 engineering design cost of the waterline and fiberoptic cable to the District, per Francis Harrison, and they will reimburse Daniel Town for that cost already paid to Epic.  An additional invoice for the $180,000 will be submitted to the District for their Board approval.  Upon receipt of the monies, the notice to proceed will be given to Mavericks Excavation to go forward with the waterline installation.

Council member Glodowski asked if the plans are for the school to connect to the Heber City sewer.  Mr. Taylor answered in the affirmative.  In answer to when the project is to start, assuming payment is forthcoming, Mr. Taylor answered he expects construction to begin in early June.

The motion passed with unanimous “aye” votes. 

Returning to item #4, Council member Bunker presented his planning report for the month of April.  He reported he did send a letter to Wasatch Mobile Home Parks.  Due to the amount of time needed for discussion of items on the agenda, Mr. Bunker elected to forego the update on the Highway 40 agreement.


Mayor Turner explained that since he was not present at the April Council meeting, he had spoken with residents in person and on the phone, reviewed emails submitted regarding whether or not a man gate should be present allowing students to enter the school grounds from Ranch Drive.  He had asked several questions of legal counsel to confirm his understanding of the situation.  He is of the opinion that where no sidewalks are present and the fact that the school made their plans showing no gate for access, he does not want the Council to approve the man gate for access from Ranch Drive.  He would like to hear any further comments from those present and have the Council vote on the issue this evening.

Council member Bateman stated his opinion because of the safety issues, he would like to see the children accessing from the front of the school only.

       Council member Glodowski moved that there be no man gate to enter from the south on Ranch Drive, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed by the following vote:  “Ayes” from Mayor Turner, Council members Glodowski, Blotter and Bateman, with a “nay” vote from Council member Bunker.

Merry Duggin stated there is currently a dead-end sign posted on Ranch Drive near the Teancum intersection and wonders if a sign stating “No School Access” could be added to the same pole to deter traffic from continuing down Ranch Drive only to find they cannot access the school property there.  She would like something posted soon so as to inform construction workers of the situation.  Council member Bunker stated his opinion the Town would have a difficult time enforcing it.  Mayor Turner would like the opportunity to speak with legal counsel before doing this.  Bridger Wilde also stated he is in favor of such signage.  Mayor Turner requested this be an agenda item at the June Council meeting after he has a chance to speak with legal counsel.

Council member Bunker stated now that the public hearing is completed, all school issues have been taken care of until the actual construction begins.  He mentioned there is a disturbance fence in place now which will not be removed until the permanent fence is in place.

Council member Blotter asked Ms. Duggin if she felt the signage issue was worth the cost of getting a legal opinion.  She reported at a school district meeting school officials said signage would be up to the Town of Daniel to post, if they felt the need.  She just wants an informational sign in place to try to reduce the amount of traffic on both Teancum and Ranch Drive.

Dan Dearden stated Steve Hitter, who owns the lot just east of the school property at the north end of Ranch Drive, is concerned of trespass on his property occurring already.  Mr. Dearden informed him their HOA will help with the enforcement but feels additional signage could aid in reducing traffic for those looking to access the school property.  If the Town does not want to post a sign, perhaps their HOA would do so.  Once again, Mayor Turner asked that they further discuss the issue in June.  Mr. Dearden stated perhaps posting information telling where and how to access the school may be better.   Council member Blotter also expects the contractor building the school to instruct workers where to enter their project.


Council member Bunker presented the Council with the April coliform results from the State lab showing an “absent” report.  No other issues were reported.


Kim Norris reported the pump house pump was malfunctioning.  The two pumps were installed to work in succession and thinks using one pump at a time would be more efficient.  He was wondering if the State would add points if the system was changed by taking out the redundancy.  If the first pump failed, the second could be put into service while the first was removed for repair.  Council member Bateman stated in order to remove the first pump, the system is dismantled to some extent and some parts are hard to access.   Kim Norris is concerned if no one was available to perform maintenance at the time of a failure, customers could lose their water for a period.  Mr. Taylor stated the system was grandfathered in with one pump, and if the Town elects to go back to such a system it is at this point acceptable.  If and when an upgrade occurred to the system, Division of Drinking Water would require a two-pump system.

Mr. Taylor stated the concern in the long run is how long does the current system have to last.  The Town has a master plan calling for a new well and pump station with a tank up on the hill, much like Daniel Municipal.  Because the larger project more than likely will not occur within the next year or two, he thinks the Town should spend the money to get two working pumps, even if not in succession but used one at a time, until the bigger project is able to be accomplished.

Kim Norris and Kasey Bateman will be removing the non-working pump and assessing whether it can be rebuilt or purchase of a new pump be more economical and beneficial.   This work is scheduled to take place during this week.   Mr. Norris stated the contractor who installed the generator returned to the site and was able to boost the generator so it can handle the pump and the well.  Mr. Taylor said it should help with the heater used in the winter as well.


Mayor Turner explained he wanted this on the agenda for the Council to discuss the Home Occupations code as written as he has received numerous complaints and had residents raise concerns about what is allowed within the Town for residents.

The Mayor began to read the written code starting at Section 8.25.03 Application and proceeding forward.  He read each subparagraph and asked if other Council members had comments or questions pertaining to each.  Council member Blotter commented he has not reviewed the applications as they come in to the Planning staff and would like to from here on out.

On paragraph 8.25.04 Council member Bunker stated the Planning staff does not issue permits but only business licenses to be approved by the Council.  On 8.25.05 Mr. Bunker stated no licenses, to date, have been revoked.   Paragraph 8.25.06, subparagraphs (1)(a) through (j), were discussed next and comments by the Council members were there appear to be infractions under each subparagraph as they understand the language.     

Council member Bateman commented the language needs to be reviewed piecemeal and see if it meets the Town’s needs.  He is aware that construction companies have home occupation licenses and are storing numerous pieces of equipment at their residences.  Council member Glodowski stated being in the agricultural zone means having a lot of farming equipment as well.  Tom Rawlings commented some of the farming equipment, such as a tractor, has a similar loud engine to that of a semitruck.  Council member Blotter stated many of the complaints of diesel equipment could relate to noise or smell, which falls under the nuisance policy.  Mr. Rawlings feels control needs to be enforced across the board regardless of the business a person is conducting, including farming one’s own land.  Mayor Turner stated the purpose for having the equipment on site needs to be addressed.

Council members inquired if the issue had been discussed in the Planning meetings.  Planning Director Bunker stated the Planning Commission wants to know why the Council is issuing business licenses to individuals when they state to the Council they’re going to be storing materials outside, which is contrary to the code being discussed.

Tom Rawlings doesn’t question the process of reviewing and perhaps rewriting the code, but it needs to be fair to everyone.  Dan Dearden stated he feels the Town officials are being fair, but perhaps some thought could be given to HOW things are stored.  Equipment can be stored in a fashion that is not a perceived “eye sore.”

Mayor Turner agreed, and went on to state this may be where conditional uses are more appropriate when attempting to license a new business.  Council member Bunker stated the conditional use can be a nightmare, but under certain circumstances it has its place.  He would like to see the Town expend its energy going after individuals conducting business within Daniel Town with no license rather than pursuing those who have taken the time and trouble to become licensed.

The Mayor discussed with legal counsel whether a complaint needs to be submitted in letter form to the Town.  His understanding is a writing initially is not needed as the Town begins enforcement of a violation, but if a case reaches a court proceeding, someone needs to be willing to testify as to what they saw that was in violation, even if that person is the Council member who investigated whether such complaint was valid.   The Council would still instruct Council member Bunker to write the violation letters to be delivered to residents in violation.   If a resident is not willing to sign their name to a complaint, it should still be recognized.  Council member Blotter stated as an elected official, he has a responsibility to uphold the code and if he perceives himself there is a violation, he should act upon it.

Tom Rawlings asked if the Mayor had received a legal opinion on persons who were conducting business within the County before Town of Daniel was formed.  The Mayor stated he had not had that discussion with counsel but would certainly do so.  Mr. Rawlings finds it hard to enforce the code for removal of equipment if it was in place on property for extended periods before the existence of Daniel Town.  Are there grandfathering rights to residents?

Discussion ensued stating both sides of the issue whether an older business can legally be forced to comply with newly established code in a community, and the answer could be totally different depending on the judge, and no one in attendance could provide a clear resolution.

Mayor Turner stated he is not trying to portray the Council as coming out with a hammer into the community to try to enforce code, to which Shelly Bunker disagreed.  She feels the Council is trying to strong-arm business owners and would like to see the Council hold a public hearing for input from those business owners.  At the formation of Daniel CC&Rs were not wanted, and she thinks the Council is now trying to enforce those types of measures on residents, is trying to shut their businesses down, to which the Mayor strongly disagreed and stated they’re trying to consider writing better code in an attempt to meet the needs of the local business owners.  Council member Glodowski stated there needs to be, within reason, some kind of compliance to our written code.

Cindy Wilde asked how amenable are the business owners to getting together to try to work through these issues.  She wonders if a public hearing on the issue wouldn’t be appropriate to allow all to speak on the language of the new code.  Tom Rawlings asked if the number of complaints received recently is larger or different than those received perhaps 10 years ago.  Mayor Turner stated the number of complaints has probably quadrupled over what it was in the earlier years.  Council member Bateman stated many of the companies have been around since the 1980s, but more people are affected now as building continues to increase and large tracts of land disappear.

Merry Duggin reminded everyone that Town of Daniel just passed their ten-year anniversary.  When the code was put into place, it worked well as the Town was just getting started.  But now it is time for revisions in the code to be made.  She acknowledges the number of pieces of equipment parked at residences has increased.

Council member Blotter stated his observation is the current code appears to have been written for businesses which have no equipment associated with them, where the business can be conducted entirely inside of the premises.  He opines perhaps two different types of licenses need to be issued to encompass all types of businesses conducted within the Town.

Mr. Rawlings also stated as he reads the code, no employees may come to a residence to perform work outside of the members of the resident family.  He thinks that is tough to enforce.   Council member Bateman stated many businesses have changed and grown since their inception and have become in violation.  Pam Skinner said you must give and take.  You can change the code to fit what’s going on, within reason, and hold people accountable.  Council member Blotter stated that is the purpose of this exercise.  He suggests the Council hold a work meeting welcoming the public to come and give their input.  He would like the Council to create a draft plan, hold a public hearing for additional comment, and try to write new code.

Cindy Wilde asked if input could be generated online.  This is difficult as not many seem to know Daniel has its own website.  Nick Lopez wondered if the Town has an idea how many businesses are operating without a license.  Council member Bunker suggested at least 15.  Council member Blotter said most that know a license is required go through the process to obtain one.  Tom Rawlings stated even if licensed, people store equipment on the premises, which the code, as written, clearly does not allow.

Mr. Lopez inquired if the Town would consider an amnesty period for a new business owner waiving the first year’s fee to bring them into compliance.  Bart Wilde inquired how the Daniel Code came into being.  Mayor Turner stated much of it was adopted from the Wasatch County Code and assembled by the Duggins, Dan Harvath, and the existing Council.  Merry Duggin stated Title 16 was adopted from the County, and much of the rest came from Springville City’s online code.   She cited 2007-2009 as years when new people came into Daniel to set up their home businesses, but there is perceived abuse of the process with large numbers of equipment parked at so many homes.

Council member Bateman stated Daniel’s zoning of RA-5 is one of the few places left in the Heber Valley that affords large tracts of land for people to bring their businesses.

         Council member Blotter moved for the Council to have a work meeting outside of the monthly Council meeting to focus on this code, prepare a draft of new code 8.25, and mail it to all residents residing in Daniel, after which set a Public Hearing for input. 

Cindy Wilde expressed concern of holding a public meeting because people get so emotional.  She suggests mailing out the draft and allowing people to redline and add comments in the proposed draft.  Council member Blotter stated he likes the idea, but he does not think people will return the document with comments.  Mayor Turner expressed concern over the cost of mailing something to all Daniel residents.

Tom Rawlings stated neighbors he has dealt with in the past oppose any changes and feel their businesses have been in existence long enough to be “grandfathered” in and allowed to continue to operate as they have in the past.  Council member Blotter would like the Council to get some legal advice on the concept of “grandfathering.”

At this point Council member Bunker advised the Council members they should read Daniel Code Section 3-1-2 Notices.

        Council member Glodowski seconded the motion on the table.  Council member Blotter added to the motion he would like to hold the work meeting in two weeks or, after checking on the availability of the meeting room, as soon as possible.  He also clarified after review of Code Section 3-1-2.   The motion passed with the following vote:  “Ayes” from Mayor Turner, Council members Glodowski, Blotter and Bateman, with a “nay” from Council member Bunker.

Pam Skinner asked if the public can attend a work meeting.  The Mayor answered yes.

The clerk will give the proper 7-day notice in the newspaper and posting on the website and usual community locations.

Council member Bunker clarified he will pursue enforcement of violations within Daniel based on a written complaint, even if it is written by a Council member who has witnessed the violation.

Mr. Bunker brought up the legislative update from the Utah League of Cities & Towns dealing with home businesses which states “shall not enforce, enact, or amend” in relation to municipal licensure.   Since Governor Herbert called a special veto session, the results have not been publicized as of yet and the current status of the bill is unknown.  It will be updated in the future.  If the Council is looking at spending money on a mailing to residents, Council member Bunker is concerned about the cost if municipalities no longer have licensure ability.   Though the suggestion was made to postpone the discussion until the legislative outcome is known, Mayor Turner wants to pursue review and rewrite of this section of code to make it more clear.

Bridger Wilde asked if this takes away from municipal zoning.  Mayor Turner stated it puts more emphasis on zoning within the municipalities.  Council member Bunker suggested a reason for the licensure change may be too many cases going to court and burdening the judicial system.  That puts the emphasis on nuisance ordinances to deal with some of the issues in question; i.e., noise, dust, smoke, and odor, provided for in Daniel Code Section 4-3-2 Declaration of Nuisance.   The door-to-door sales code within all cities is the same.  The legislature is also changing code dealing with conditional use.


         Council member Glodowski moved to approve the minutes as written, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed unanimously.


Lynne Shindurling presented the three tentative budgets for 2016-2017.  She explained the format used is a little different than in years past.  She also mentioned an amount will need to be transferred out of the general fund into a capital project fund as there is an overage in the general fund.  On the general operating budget it was pointed out that the payroll amount is increased due to a raise given by the Council to Town officials.  A line item for Employee Benefits has been added to allow disbursement to employee retirement accounts not previously done.  Council member Bunker asked if the irrigation easement legal costs are included in the general budget.  It was explained by Ms. Shindurling that is included in the Storm Haven Water Enterprise budget.

Ms. Shindurling said per her discussions with Ryan Taylor, the $160,000 allotted in this fiscal year’s budget is expected to be totally spent by June 30, with an additional amount budgeted for in the next fiscal year.

After discussion in regards to the money to be transferred to a capital projects fund, the Council agreed to put it into the Capital Projects Land fund.  The amount will be known by the June 6th Council meeting.   Council member Bunker asked that the amount of Planning/Land Use Committees of $500 be increased to $1,000 to afford additional training to personnel.

There was discussion of an equipment lease for a backhoe through Honnen Equipment proposed to be split between the General Operating Budget and the Water Enterprise Fund that has been built into the budgets.

There was discussion on variability of utilities in the Water Enterprise Fund budget, and it was determined to leave it as budgeted.

On the Storm Haven Water Enterprise budget it was determined to raise the utilities expense from $1,000 to $2,000 in next year’s budget.   Monies received from the CDBG grant and an engineering grant from the Division of Drinking Water were reviewed.

Clerk Shindurling informed the Council she has looked into a new software product on which to keep the books of the Town, rather than QuickBooks.  She will in the future give a more in-depth presentation and ask the Council to acquire the Pelorus software.  This will reduce time involved in bookkeeping and be more advantageous in procedures like budgeting and compilation of information.

The clerk explained that next month the proposed Amended 2015-16 budgets will be presented, as well as the final 2016-17.   The Council adopted the tentative budgets with the stated adjustments, and the Public Hearing date was set for June 6, 2016 at 6:00 PM at the same time as the Town Council meeting. 


The clerk presented the April warrants for approval by the Council.  She noted engineering design expenses incurred on the design of the Ranch Drive waterline had been paid out of the Town General Operating Fund, but since it is being reimbursed by the School District, the monies will be deposited back into the Town bank account.  An invoice was presented at the meeting from Smith Hartvigsen for $800 in regards to the Daniel Irrigation easement, which was added to the Storm Haven expenditures.

In conversation with Heber Light & Power, a request was made that the power company have access to the meter to monitor the demand usage and have a more accurate idea of monthly charges as they are incurred.  Ryan Taylor assumed responsibility to see that the gates are accessible by them.

         Council member Blotter moved to approve the warrants as discussed.  The motion was seconded by Council member Glodowski and passed by unanimous “aye” votes. 


        Council member Glodowski moved to adjourn the meeting, which was seconded by Council member Bateman.  The motion passed unanimously and Mayor Turner adjourned the meeting at 9:34 PM.

Lynne Shindurling






Comments are closed.