[0:00] e [0:59] all all right welcome every oh ding welcome everybody to the Wednesday March [1:06] 27th 2024 City vidina Planning Commission meeting we do have someone here in [1:12] person now this is exciting this should be a very quick meeting we have no public [1:19] hearings um but we have a couple items of business uh but say it every time for [1:25] those who are here and tuning in your curiosity your partic participation and [1:30] your feedback is vital to this process as we navigate change together here in Idina regarding the ways in which we'd [1:37] like to use our land so without further Ado we'll jump [1:42] into this uh with a call to order then roll call commissioner elire [1:50] here commissioner Miranda here commissioner Padia here commissioner Smith here commissioner who here [1:57] commissioner Schultz here commissioner day here commissioner felt here [2:03] commissioner hanaman here chair Bennett here thank you next we have the approval [2:09] of tonight's meeting agenda welcome a motion to approve [2:14] that move to approve the agenda second all those in favor say I I so moved next [2:21] we have the approval of the prior meeting minutes which was March 13th 2024 if there are no proposed changes [2:28] I'd also welcome a motion for that motion to approve minutes second second all those in favor [2:36] say I I all right so moved next we have a continuation of some special [2:42] recognitions and presentations and uh last time we welcomed commissioner [2:48] hanaman to the team and absent was commissioner David elire who is [2:54] returning to the team uh it's nice to have you back but we'll give you an opportunity to make maybe just spend a [3:00] couple minutes highlighting who you are for those who don't know you and why [3:06] you're back okay well it's great to be back and starting off my second [3:11] experience with the Planning Commission by missing my first meeting was not the greatest start but uh we had a trip [3:17] planned that um took priority for the family so I'm can't tell you how delighted I am to be back I've spent the [3:24] last year and a half two years in Salt Lake City and um um it's been a really [3:32] having been in Adina for 20 years or so and in Minneapolis for 30 years but ad D [3:38] of 20 years it was a really eye-opening experience for me to live in a place [3:44] where uh for most things I didn't need a car um we had a street car stop on our [3:51] block which connected to the to the um light rail which takes you a lot of [3:56] places not everywhere it's not New York but it takes you a lot of places and it was a walkable Community where we [4:01] had grocery stores and restaurants blocks away and it was just a it was really for me novel experience [4:10] and gave me a vision for how things can be um that I had never had before so [4:17] that was a really fantastic experience for me and I'm hoping to bring you know din is a Salt Lake city is Salt Lake [4:23] City there's certainly some different things about it but it gave me a new appreciation for how infrastructure can [4:29] change people's behavior and give people New Opportunities so I'm interested to see how we can how I can apply that to [4:36] to life you're in ay but thanks for having me back I'm delighted awesome great welcome [4:44] back okay so next we have Community comment and this is the opportunity for [4:49] anyone who's out there maybe one person in person that would like to speak about something not on tonight's agenda you [4:56] have three minutes to do so come up to the podium stay your full name address uh we'll let you know when the time's [5:03] up oh all right seeing none we'll move [5:10] on so again no uh no public hearings tonight uh but we have some reports and [5:16] recommendations to go through and that is the confirmation of the working group [5:22] members So the appointment of that for the Lincoln London Dair small area plan uh carrier you going to give an [5:30] introduction or is that what you said you could um I I could just uh start it off by saying um the we began accepting [5:38] applications on February 15th applications closed on March 8th and we [5:44] received 39 applications and the tri chairs have selected the working group [5:49] and I will turn it over to them to announce those working group [5:55] members so commissioner Miranda felt and day take it away [6:00] so um we had 39 applicants and um out of the 39 applicants we wanted to have uh total of [6:09] nine people including the three of us that would be six uh people chosen from the uh the applicants and of course [6:16] being ad Dina they were all very good applicants you know so it was it was a very difficult Choice um we seem to have come to [6:24] agreement on the six uh Primary people um I suggest sugested two alternates in [6:30] case something happens because I was on the 44th in France plan and somebody got disqualified partway through so I [6:37] thought it was good to have it back up um so but there seems to be some disagreement among that so I'm not sure [6:44] if one of the other co-chairs wants to discuss any issues [6:50] or do we agree that we've chosen the six and plus two or do we want to just go with six [6:58] or you guys want to just share the the six first and then maybe get into that part or is that out of [7:06] order we can present the six first and then to have the move the discussion to whether we want to have alternates or [7:12] not that does that work I guess as long as that doesn't change who the primary people would be [7:19] no I don't think so okay so the six uh drum roll please the [7:25] six people we've CH uh Chosen and I apologize if I don't get any of the names pronounced correctly but Nancy [7:33] Spanos Steve Brown Panda jasha Corin Griffith Jim Diley and Russ [7:45] Rubin jasha is her first name pandia is her last name oh is it I'm sorry okay I [7:51] got it backwards my apologies and what was your criteria [8:00] let's let's discuss the alternate part first and then we can get into the criteria I think because that's a longer [8:06] discussion sounds [8:14] good I am um I suppose can be persuaded either [8:20] way on their alternates or not I mean I love the idea of having to backup [8:26] especially um we haven't yet let everyone know except [8:34] I mean we have on live camera I don't know if they're all watching right now or not but if there's something that [8:40] comes up with one of them having somebody already that has been willing to volunteer their time it's not a bad [8:49] idea um you know but I have not I have been learning through this process I've [8:56] seen the process from just being a resident and attending and now I'm seeing some of the back of [9:01] the house stuff um so I don't know really what's the [9:09] best way to proceed with that and I suppose we if if someone drops out we can [9:14] call um those two people that were thinking of having this alternate and seeing if they want [9:21] to do it or is there some kind of go ahead yeah so I mean in similar I mean I [9:28] was brought onto the Planning Commission because I was a selected alternate so I think it's not something foreign to a [9:35] typical process and as as you go forward if you do lose something someone it's [9:41] important to have that odd number to if there's votes that come come through [9:46] so I don't know why there might be hesitation to selecting alternates I'd like to hear why but it seems like an [9:52] appropriate tool to exercise in our um we emailed staff during this and [10:01] said listen should we do alternates or not and um we got one we got some [10:07] feedback that said just no alternates just proceed without them and I'm like [10:12] oh okay right and that's where my inexperience is Staff over [10:20] there that wasn't me that responded [10:33] it is true we've we've had alternative alternates in the past um if someone [10:41] were to drop off you could go back into the entire pool if you're not agreeable on on um [10:48] alternates cross that bridge at that [10:54] time so they're not like under studies they're not with the process the whole time okay [11:00] and I think one benefit of if we approve them now we don't have to come back and [11:06] approve them later if you guys did have understudies [11:12] would you let them know that they or sorry um alternates would you let them know right like when you let the um [11:20] current people know at the same time okay okay cool and you wouldn't [11:26] just like surprise them hey you're someone dve can you come [Laughter] [11:33] on the Publishers Clearing House swe Stakes we at your front [11:39] door yeah I just think from the 44th in France we lost someone unexpectedly uh [11:45] not pH like conflict of interest um and then [11:50] myself joining the Planning Commission I was an alternate so I it it's not something unusual to the process and it [11:56] it really helps things just keep moving and not taking a step back so I would [12:02] strongly urge you guys do that um from my perspective because this is going to go fast and you're not going to want to [12:09] have a hiccup like that what is it what do other people think yeah sorry I have another question [12:17] will there be a point um into the entire into the entire like road map where you guys stop where like let's say halfway [12:25] in you guys will stop in case um someone does drop about well you guys just won't [12:30] um pull an alternate or like you guys are two months from being done when [12:36] someone leaves I'm assuming it's not really practical it's probably and it depends I [12:43] think really where we are at the process and what the next decision to be made is and whatnot right and how I mean [12:50] potentially if you had somebody that had to drop off potentially they might have not been very engaged in the process to begin with and so it would be better [12:58] offer the dynamic to keep it at what it is right so I think it's a hard question to answer at this [13:04] point yeah and presumably the alternates you know I I presume everybody who [13:09] applied is going to keep track of this in pretty good detail you know I mean like I said and I'm not kidding I mean [13:15] they were all very good applications you know it was tough choosing among them um these are PE and Dina has very engaged [13:22] citizenry so um I'm pretty sure and if they're not keeping track of it dayto day I'm sure it'll be on next door or [13:28] whatever so um yeah I have no concerns that and I wanted to choose two just in case you [13:35] know the first one's like oh I'm going to be on vacation suddenly or something or whatever I mean it just makes it that much easier I think the appointment of a [13:43] particular person also gives them the heads up to be engaged as well be ready [13:49] other thoughts yeah commissioner Smith oh go ahead next yeah just a question here but um if someone does drop off are [13:57] you required to have that spot filled or could he just keep [14:03] going we've we've we've actually done it both ways um the the time at 44th in [14:10] France where we had the member Drop off it was very early in the process as commissioner day stated you [14:17] know it it could be problematic if we're toward the end and someone drops off it kind of depends um when in the process [14:25] that they drop off but it's good if you're doing straw poles to make decisions to move forward it's good to [14:30] have an odd number of people for decision making and that you know if you just [14:37] split then it's like now what do you do yeah our experience at in kahill was [14:43] we uh we had a a larger group to begin with so we did lose at least one I [14:51] actually two if you count Lou um not you another [14:56] Lou and um so and we just continued on we didn't do [15:02] anything about it but you know if we didn't even didn't even consider alternates at the time maybe would have been a good idea it didn't hurt us very [15:08] much because um we had big numbers to begin with and in my limited experience [15:15] of working groups like this um the the numbers you have matters less [15:22] than the engagement of the people who were there so it not losing a particular [15:27] member is they're not not all created equal if you know what I mean so um so I [15:34] I think it's a a fine idea to have alternates just as you were saying speeds up the process if there ends up [15:40] being a conflict with somebody you know to that point is there [15:47] a requirement to attend a certain number of meetings or sessions anything like that like what would make someone would [15:54] you ever take someone off because they're not engaged [16:03] that has not happened we are in [16:12] engage and for people who aren't I in my experience they've willingly [16:20] communicated like time to replace me or I'm out [16:30] well answer the first part I don't think there's a minimum or mean number of meetings and stuff like that so we [16:35] haven't established that which is kind of the point of you guys having three people instead of two [16:42] is just to allow even the flexibility for the commission to always have at least two represented at each of the [16:49] meetings just because schedule's due things come up in life and you might not make a meeting so I think that was a [16:56] smart thing from the beginning to have three commissioners on this compared to other small area plans [17:02] so keep it going yeah yeah what you got I guess I [17:09] know I just have a quick question if we have 11 people who we all agree are high quality and we're interested in having [17:15] them what's the purpose of only having nine if we have 11 people that were interested in I [17:22] guess I me we have 39 interested um and I think it [17:29] becomes um ease of working with each other um that if [17:37] it's a finite number um and the ratio is two working group members [17:46] to Planning Commission members which makes sense right and then [17:53] there is nine people so it's an odd number if we take a vote [18:00] right and kind of the best way to not make a decision is to have more add more people to the [18:06] committee so it's good to have a constraint I mean I think nine is plenty you know we we uh Nine's a good [18:25] number for what it's worth the Planning Commission policy if a member resigns of [18:31] the commission and it's in the first quarter of the year that seat is replaced after that time you we wait [18:38] till the next year could follow something along those lines with should someone drop off the first quarter of [18:46] the year that this is intended you could go that way I'd kind of Leave It to the discretion of the the working group uh [18:54] co-chairs since you have three you could make a decision not bake it into this that [19:02] works keep it simple let you guys lead [19:08] well so it sounds like you have like full support from all of us to uh [19:13] Identify two alternates is it good time to talk about that and then how you [19:19] selected people or how do you want to proceed I think it Segways well into I [19:25] think that discussion Segways well into the proc process to be honest okay um so [19:32] I mean so the alternate piece I think there was a bit of disagreement on that point right now so from a simple [19:40] Democratic rule voting what standpoint I think we have two um but I did think it [19:46] warranted further discussion at least around the process and you know at least in a public form and amongst ourselves [19:52] how the process went what our individual process was Etc um right [19:59] and to say how we differed on that and why we've come to different conclusions on different members and whatnot so um [20:08] so I mean I'll start so I you know obviously 39 people [20:14] is a lot to go through and you have to set some criteria um I'm an engineer so the first [20:20] thing I did was make a matrix and a spreadsheet and uh it took me a while so [20:27] I it you know I worked through it slowly um but eventually got to you know I [20:34] thought all right how looking at this application without um putting too many numbers too [20:40] many ratings Etc how do how do I start to even make any kind of Headway on this so ultimately the criteria that I [20:47] reached um so I took every applicant I read through their application and I said you know when I [20:54] read through this how much first do enthusiasm do I think that they have have to be part of this working [21:00] group uh what kind of relevant experience they have and relevant doesn't just have to mean from a [21:05] developer stpoint from a real estate standpoint in terms of just overall skill and what did they list right um [21:13] and then really how did they touch on Forward Thinking and looking into the future and whatnot right so kind of for [21:21] some applications that was easier to assign kind of a number or a ranking to [21:26] some applications not so much um but that was my launching point right [21:32] and I did take into account I did note for each one um age the length of time that they've lived in a dino whether [21:38] they own or rent um and then whether they live in the Parkwood NES Community or not so that's was my starting point [21:46] um you know I'll say that being a younger member of the community and not [21:53] having lived here as long as Commissioners um felt the Miranda I didn't know really anybody on this [21:58] applicant list personally right or either from really from reputation so really the the application [22:05] was the only thing that I had to go from right and certainly didn't know that or didn't think that it was uh possible to [22:13] contact by phone all 39 people or I had try to interview them right it was the application that I had to go off of [22:19] which is fair enough right when if anybody on this table's been on one side of a job interview the first thing you [22:25] do is you screen through resumés and you say who has the best experience Who [22:30] projects you know at least enthusiasm in the form of a cover letter right a follow-up email Etc and that helps [22:37] determine you know where you where you go right do you to uh reduce your number [22:44] from 39 to 15 20 whatever it may be and then and then dissect [22:49] further um so you know from from an application standpoint right that's kind [22:55] of where I got so I got to six people you know or a number of people that had [23:01] scores close similar to each other I try to use again from engineer so from a [23:07] lean Six Sigma standpoint I used a a rating SC system of 9631 to give you [23:13] some differentiation between numbers so you don't try to assign what's a nine eight what's a seven what's a six Etc [23:18] right so and then got scores and then said okay now I try to take into account [23:24] since I have these scores and I look at these applicants trying to choose six from here and now I try to taken to [23:30] their amount of time that they've lived in the area their age a little bit their experience levels and trying to balance out do they have experience in a project [23:36] management setting do they have experience in a in a realy setting do they have experience raising three kids [23:42] as a stay-at-home mom right and how do I balance those those experiences um and so that's where I got [23:49] right and again looking at the applications was really the launching point and where I got to um I thought [23:56] again it was really important to to give extra time and consideration to people [24:02] that even put the the bare minimum in into their application and when I say [24:08] that it Le there was definitely a difference in applications so I don't know if I agree necessarily with the [24:14] characterization that all applic all applications were strong um a lot of [24:20] people went into more detail than others some provided paragraphs worth of information some provided maybe a [24:26] sentence or not even a forly form sentence or two on their application in terms of why did they want to be on the [24:32] committee what was their intent Etc and to be honest for me um somebody that [24:38] didn't even put the general time and effort into their application kind of as if you were reading a resume for a job [24:45] application didn't get a high score and was kind of you know discarded [24:51] um so that was where I got and that how I start did my process so I can [24:57] let Commission felt and Miranda describe what their process was and then I think it Segways [25:03] into our alternate discussion great [25:09] cool I my first experience with the small area plan was just attending the [25:15] open houses for the 44th in France project and meeting some of the city [25:22] council people and meeting some of the planning Commissioners and meeting the um working group members and the um you [25:31] know attending some of the meetings that we couldn't participate in and and and being part of the open houses and I was [25:41] um a younger mother of a child then and it was a real introduction to me to the [25:48] city of Adina and how the community works together and there was no I was [25:54] really impressed at how open and [26:02] um the city council was and how willing people were to listen to other people's [26:10] viewpoints and um and I think the strength of the Planning Commission is that there are nine people here and [26:17] there is a general respect for the knowledge someone else may have that you [26:24] might not have um and so I appreciate that that respect that the city council [26:32] has for the community that the Planning Commission has for the community that we have for each other and that we realize [26:39] that we might not share the same knowledge or information but that we are [26:44] willing to respect our fellow Commissioners and work with them and believe in the [26:51] process without any um [26:56] judgment and that at as a community um of engaged citizens and I'm [27:03] really looking forward to meeting um not only the people that we' selected but I'm hoping we meet a lot of people that [27:09] have applied for it at the open houses and I would really like to be able to listen to them as well and hear what [27:16] they say so I think the more that we can respect and [27:21] listen to one another the better off we're going to be because it's not just it's not just one of our communities [27:27] it's also of our community so I guess on that note and maybe to commissioner Pia's [27:34] question um kind of what Ryan touched on what were some of the I guess [27:40] qualifications or what were you looking for and I guess I know you guys met in a [27:46] separate room as kind of before a work session was this a more collaborative [27:51] choice or like the the selection process for you guys or was it kind of [27:57] individual you know resumés shopping and then together you pulled them together [28:02] I'm just trying to understand how those when I wasn't I wasn't on the Planning Commission when the 44th in France uh [28:11] small area plan was devised but did did the commission second guess [28:19] the analysis that the members of the commission of the subcommittee did to [28:25] pick up the pick who was going to be on the committee I just just find this really odd that like we're being second [28:30] guest as to what our choices were no I think I'm thinking what commissioner Pia [28:37] asked is be if someone's tuning in they might not even know like what type of [28:42] people and collection of backgrounds and stuff were you guys looking for to best represent the working group right well [28:48] there was a form that people filled out and I think it it's a pretty standard form the city uses because the questions [28:55] were not they asked us so part of the process is they asked us if we had any additional questions that we wanted to [29:00] ask and I don't think we added anything to what the standard form was and so it asked things like um age [29:07] range um race and some of these I think are optional um maybe they're all [29:13] optional um how long you've lived in a dino what kind of housing you live in um [29:19] and then basically you know like what are your qualifications and why do you want to be on the commission why do you [29:25] want to be on the small area plan that's basically the the data that we had to work and then I guess when you guys just [29:31] selected them did did you just try to get a good mix of people just I'm just assuming I mean you know the day after [29:39] um oops Yeah I hope this does not see I [29:45] don't think this is meant to be like an interrogation I think it's more informational of like just people who might be tuning in like just how were [29:52] these people selected in your guys's opinion just very very quick question that's right I think that was intent [29:59] very quick so MJ sent us the output from the city of the 39 applicants it was all [30:06] in one PDF file and the next day I sent out a uh email to everyone to to my [30:13] fellow uh co-chairs and I um charted out the difference um of the [30:22] of the applicants you know I said how what the count was for each age range they gave how how many of each race or [30:29] ethnicity how many for each length of time in a Dina and how many with a living experience um and I suppose it's [30:36] not really very surprising that we didn't have a lot of variety in any of those um and then I sent out basically [30:44] six paragraphs explaining you know kind of what we should be looking at you know [30:49] and it covered you know all sorts of things but basically the gist of it is [30:54] you know um we want people who will look at what the neighbors want we want to [31:01] look we want people who will look at what the goals of the city are through our policies and and [31:07] procedures um and we want a mix of people because we're not necessarily [31:13] looking only for the views of people who have lived here 30 years we're also looking for the views of people who will [31:18] move here or who have moved here recently right and we want younger people older people we wanted diversity [31:25] of of applicants which was kind of tough um because every was mostly white mostly [31:30] older um mostly homeowners so um but the [31:35] idea is that you know of the people that we have um of our engaged residents you [31:41] know how can we pick people who let's get as broad a mix as we can basically [31:47] what the goal was great awesome and so you did that and you guys agreed on the six so yeah so we each came up with um a [31:56] list and we sent it we did this all by email and we sent it to each other and [32:01] then I again I created another chart that showed you know all the names and then how many people recommended them [32:06] and and like what the vote total was on the side so there was one person who was unanimous there were three or four who [32:14] uh two of us um would choose at a time so one person got three votes uh three or four [32:21] people got two votes um and the rest got one vote you know um or half a vote some [32:26] people recommended uh alternates so I I put that in a chart [32:31] and then um uh so I you know so it wasn't there was no unanimity so I said well here's [32:38] here's what we have so um why don't we write up what we thought of the people that were chosen the top candidates you [32:46] know why don't we write up something about them which we all did um and so um [32:52] of the candidates that we ended so at the end um I kind of Consolidated what [32:59] everybody had and put together a proposed list including the two um [33:04] alternates and um obviously the unanimous person was on [33:10] there all but one of the uh residents who had two votes were on the main list [33:17] and one was put onto the secondary list um and then the rest were all people who got one vote oh one or two people we got [33:24] one vote um and so uh Merryweather agreed and uh Ryan agreed [33:32] uh commissioner day agreed with the uh uh six members but not with the two with [33:38] one of the secondary members that's how that came [33:43] about yeah I was expecting this conversation to go really quick but I think what's good about it all is just [33:49] like if someone's tuning in um it's important to see how thorough each and [33:55] every one of us is with kind of their in it's important to be transparent yeah right yeah I mean people are losing for [34:03] Myriad reasons faith in institutions and government small and large all over the place and if we keep this behind [34:11] behind you know uh behind the scenes and don't explain our choice then there's [34:17] going to be a lot of questions asked right in terms of I wrote a really strong application why was I not considered right um so yeah I mean I you [34:26] know that's I wanted to bring this more into the light and wanted to have a larger General discussion because I so [34:32] you know being new to the the whole experience this is a discussion that will be used not only with this group if [34:39] rests of us have are charged in the future with being leads on a small area plan but potentially future planning [34:46] commissions or members of the community that join the Planning Commission in the future and are let are given the [34:51] responsibility of leading small area plan um right so how do we what what do we even use a as a jumping off point [34:58] right we had to kind of just figure it out on our own because I've never been a part of this merryweather's never been a [35:05] part of this L has some experience more than we do um but it's important to have [35:11] discussion of how this this process goes and what's the strength and weaknesses of the existing system um so I'll bring [35:18] it back to the application piece right and this just disagreement over the two alternates so again you know I [35:26] was my jumping off point in my point of reference is was the application right [35:32] that's the information that I've given was given um and was used and used to [35:37] determine my choices and again I put a point of emphasis on person somebody that seemed interested somebody that put [35:45] enthusiasm somebody that put thought and Care into their application um I don't know that that [35:53] made its way through every application and I think some again did better than others and I don't think think that everybody did have the same so you know [36:01] we need there potentially needs to be discussion on how much you use the application how much you use your [36:06] personal experience with individual applicants rather than their application what if they submit a weak application [36:11] but you know them personally right or you have or they have an or they have a reputation and they only spent a minute [36:18] on their application versus somebody who displayed a lot of enthusiasm and said you know I'm really [36:24] really interested in being part of this let's set off all their experience say gave us two paragraphs of their you know [36:30] how they go there every week they take their kids to a coffee shop that Co the Caribou nearby [36:38] Etc trct in past notes while I'm trying to talk [36:43] um so anyways sorry I lost my train of thought now um but yeah so I think the [36:50] application piece or really that part of the process Bears right at least some discussion at [36:55] least um debate in the public forum sure I think yeah yeah [37:02] commissioner Al I just had a curiosity it's not to second guess at all I was just [37:07] curious in the six were we able to name a renter and how many of the six live in [37:14] Parkwood NS I correlated [37:21] that I can research that right now that's not and I'll let you know I mean I was advocating for a renter I really [37:28] wanted a variety of shared experiences and um I don't think that [37:34] ended up in the last mix and we spent a lot of time over the last four days in [37:41] in a lot of emails um and this is where I think we have to [37:49] as co-chairs kind of come together and say there are several bright Minds here [37:56] trying to get to a an agreement all of these people are [38:03] excellent all of these people are community members I would love to work with any of [38:12] them [38:20] and you know and we got kind of pushed to the Limit today so I and I had a [38:26] couple of emergency happen so I finally just said okay we're pretty much there you guys decide we're all in this yeah [38:35] and we're going to make a decision right and we did okay yeah and I I mean I think just in general like how the [38:42] Planning Commission works that you know we entrust each other to make decisions and while you guys were appointed to be [38:49] the small small area plan working group co-chairs um I think you kind of [38:55] Illustrated a nice thorough process that the community can get behind and you know there's 39 people so there's not [39:02] someone's a lot of people are going to get left out right 33 out of 36 so or 39 so unfortunately people aren't going [39:10] to get chosen there's going to be a couple alternates I think it sounds like you guys have agreed to disagree but you've [39:17] selected those two or do do you need our help to about that I actually think at this point we don't have [39:25] alternates because of this discussion I think we keep it to the [39:31] six well the discussion started out by saying we should have alternates I know but then we had the dis this discussion [39:38] so what um so what changed your mind I really I respect everyone in the community [39:50] and I don't and I'm struggling this if I recall the 44th in France we didn't [39:56] select all alternates we just went back to the pool yeah we did and I think we [40:02] addressed that tonight it's just like if we have the opportunity to great I think it sounds like there's some tension in [40:08] selecting those but I think we have an agreement on the six so if we just need to make a decision on those six and have [40:15] to revisit that later that's fine we entrust you guys as the co-chairs to [40:20] figure that out and make the decision and if you need our guidance to kind of settle that we can or we can bring it up [40:28] in another maybe the next Planning Commission we can identify the two alternates but it sounds like you guys have agreed on the six and maybe it's [40:35] worth Moving on but it's only going to be harder in the future yeah but let's just maybe we [40:42] plan to pick it up next meeting I don't I [40:49] don't think we should be continuing this this we are dragging this out way too long what I don't understand no other [40:56] small area plan did anything like this and I'm I'm willing to answer questions that's not a problem but I don't I don't [41:02] I personally don't have any questions I just kind of want to know who the six and the two are I mean the person that [41:08] so Ryan had a problem with one of the candidates and she got two out of the [41:13] three votes and so that's why I put her down because it was you know two out of two [41:19] out of three because we didn't have any more three out of three I wanted you to mischaracterize that because I don't [41:25] have a problem with the applicant I have a problem with their application right so you keep going back to respecting [41:32] members of the well can you can I finish can I finish no I guess [41:39] not I think yeah I think I'm just gonna I think we're not going to get [41:44] anywhere you said that there was two votes and my two votes to one and therefore I was overruled there wasn't [41:50] any knowledge shared I'm sorry to jump with the process sorry to jump in I I [41:56] think we just need to make make a decision on those six at this point um and then we can revisit this it's not [42:03] necessary to the process to have that it sounds like it's not going to help anything right now but maybe we can get [42:08] their next meeting or the one after or just be prepared for a choice in case that event arises but I think it's [42:16] important for people to understand that we're all people making decisions too and nothing's going to be perfect in [42:22] this process and there's going to be tension in a decision but it sounds like [42:27] we have six very qualified people to represent along with you three to [42:34] hopefully get this small area plan in the right place if I may say one thing [42:39] you know I think this is just going to highlight the difficulty of the small area plan and so I think if we kick this [42:45] down the street we're we're just leaving ourselves in for a world of hurt it's [42:51] just my feeling if we don't learn how to how to have conflict and resolve it [42:56] quick then we're just going to be stuck in a meire of indecision this entire [43:04] process sure I I see what you're saying it sounds like we can make a decision [43:10] mutually on the six right isn't that the first goal yeah commissioner Pia I just [43:16] want to clarify our charge here tonight is to approve the six people is that [43:22] correct okay so I think that's our job right now to do that and and as we [43:27] alluded to before there's an odd number you you as co-chairs are an odd number [43:34] and that's a directive we have at every committee is to have an odd number so that you don't end up splitting votes so [43:41] I would say we take up our charge here we vote on the sixth and then you guys [43:46] you're three so you know you won't have anything that can't be decided amongst the three of [43:54] you that contradicts the because we had a two to one vote and you're saying to ignore [43:59] it I'm saying you go with whatever decided I'm saying I changed my [44:05] vote after this okay okay what does everyone feel about [44:12] confirming the appointment of those six right now do we have a [44:18] motion motion to confirm the six names I'll [44:24] second uh all those in favor say I I I [44:30] opposed all right motion carries congratulations to those six people one [44:35] of which is here it looks like right that's [44:40] you I mean there's it's a common name maybe there's more uh and that is that [44:46] for that discussion and again we have no public hearings tonight we have uh only chair [44:53] and member comments and then staff comments so I guess I turn it over to any of the members of the Planning [44:59] Commission that'd like to make comments yeah yeah thank you uh chair [45:07] Bennett so just two things right um I'm really happy that we made a decision on [45:15] on the six I appreciate that I just want to also commend the co-chairs for [45:23] working together to to get to that clearly there's always going to be some level of tension on decision making and [45:30] stuff like that and and I just want to say that's very normal and that is kind [45:35] of what's supposed to happen I think going forward as you guys work together right you're going to go through a set [45:41] of stages right you're going to form the team you're going to have even more conflict as we look at the small area [45:47] plan you're going to probably bump heads with the six that you've selected right [45:52] that's again all normal and I say that because I don't want this to devolve [45:58] into uh a situation where you can't resolve issues right it's just a matter [46:04] of communicating and making it transparent so I one 100% commend you [46:12] guys for even taking it up and working through it clearly to me it was a very thoughtful process and I know there's [46:18] tension there but I think that's going to get resolved with that being said I would suggest in the future right if um [46:27] um you know we could take the learnings from how you guys went through your process of selecting candidates and if [46:33] we could somehow agree as a commission for the future what should the selection [46:39] criteria be how should we organize applicants and how do we go [46:44] through a process of selecting them that's consistent so everybody's using the same method and if it has a vote for [46:52] example that you have to make a vote for that that's really clear what the next step is I know you get we making it up [46:57] as you go but I think if we could somehow come up with a set of guidelines for the future that might make the [47:03] process a little bit easier so that's just kind of my two points there and I think Lou you might be able to share [47:10] that email that you sent out to us I mean you did a lot of work kind of setting this up and providing us [47:16] guidelines for how to go through this um and I think we all bring our individual [47:23] selves to that selection process and and I think that's the power of [47:29] working as a commission that it doesn't have to be in the end we picked [47:36] um people that some of us agreed on not all of us agreed on but then in the end [47:42] we reached a an agreement together [47:49] um and I think that was the important part of [47:55] this is Kissinger the one who said a good compromise is everyone's equally unhappy with the [48:04] result yes but hopefully we have six happy people out there ready to go right and [48:12] that's a goal I mean with these okay so any [48:18] other comments I I mean one quick one is next Tuesday will be the presentation [48:24] to city council for the Adu so commissioner Smith I don't know if you want to give an update on [48:32] that yeah you know uh so Addison and I uh we kind of hashed out a little bit [48:38] today on the final presentation it pretty much close to what we covered in [48:43] the last working session we just added a few more slides in there um we're really excited our approach is that we didn't [48:51] want to rehash everything from the first time we started to talk about adus and we hoping that the content was like a [48:58] you know a stepping tone of building up to this point where with all you guys support and input we have all the key [49:05] criteria and we just going to talk through that um we feel pretty good where things sit um we definitely will [49:12] be getting a lot of questions we hope that there's a lot of testimony from residents and in support of it but I [49:19] feel really good and if you guys want to join in and give some testimony too or [49:25] or have your palm poms in the back I I would I would certainly welcome that but [49:30] um really good progress we're excited and I think we're ready to go by uh on on April [49:37] 2nd good luck to you other [49:43] comments yeah commissioner Miranda yeah just that I think I mentioned last time that we had our [49:49] first meeting um uh with four Commissioners for the uh areas of [49:56] potential change and we have set the next three meetings up so scheduled to go for [50:03] that anything else areas of potential change it's basically identifying this [50:09] kind of came up through the Kevin Keys site historically and even Lincoln London da of these areas that are kind [50:16] of just not being addressed in any other way minus conflicting zoning and [50:22] comprehensive plan guidance so it's ultimately just identif in all of those [50:28] and then the next step would be what to do with it right plus areas we've had like developer interest that the city [50:34] doesn't that's not part of a small area plan so there's no real guidance for it but we have developers like Kevin keys [50:40] or the uh there were few housing proposals in the greater kill District [50:48] um uh and the affordable housing where there's not enough sewer thing you know so so these are areas where either uh [50:56] changes coming to us externally from from developers or where we have to do [51:02] other kinds of planning or some other way of like tying these areas together to think about what we're going to do so [51:08] about the only decision we made so far is that we're not you know most of the single family home areas you know we're [51:14] not we're not looking at building skyscrapers in the middle of neighborhoods or [51:20] anything Mr day yeah so different topic just but it [51:26] I think it change to the Planning Commission and development as a whole um I don't know if people seen recently in [51:32] the dinos Sun Times the the article about the accusations of uh wage theft with the union workers at the FR um and [51:40] I thought it was a relevant discussion a relevant point for us to bring up here in terms of you know there's ultimately [51:46] many sides to the story um but if we as we talk about you know our residents and [51:52] making sure we respect our residents and whatnot I would hope that the city is taking that accusation seriously um again I don't know the full [51:59] details a dinon article gives me a high level overview right um but as we work [52:05] with developers you know I would hope that we would keep that in mind and keep those types of things in mind um and [52:11] that there is if there if there is you know substance to the wage theft accusations and whatnot that the city [52:17] comes down hard on that um I think it's you know a travesty that we would [52:22] withhold wages from from contractors and people that live paycheck to paycheck especially in this economy and I really [52:29] think it's you know important again that people pay attention to this issue and that we recognize that and as we work [52:35] with developers that we keep that in mind so that's [52:42] it commissioner Al just a really quick story I'll try to keep my Salt Lake City [52:48] Stories to a minimum but this one I thought I'd share with you so um Salt [52:53] Lake City's structure kind of like Minneapolis there's city council Planning Commission but it's a big [52:58] enough City where they have a structure of uh Community councils as they do in Minneapolis so I was part of the [53:04] Sugarhouse Community Council that's the neighborhood we lived in and part of the land use and zoning committee so it's as [53:10] close to being a planning commissioner as you can without actually being a planning commissioner anyway we're in a meeting one night and uh there's [53:17] discussion about a particular uh change it was a multif family change and [53:24] somebody made a comment and a one of the members of the group response to the comment was oh we don't [53:30] need to listen to them they're renters they don't pay any taxes now my wife and I rent Sal Lake [53:38] City and nobody objected to what this person said and so once my jaw got up off the floor I said excuse me I'm a [53:46] renter and I actually do pay quite a lot of taxes in fact the building that I live in pays about 10 times as much in [53:53] taxes as it would if it were single family homes like a lot of our city so [53:59] the reason I bring that up is well two reasons um well the main reason is Adina [54:05] has a lot more renters than it did 10 years ago and a lot fewer renters than it's going to have 10 years from now so [54:11] I'm thinking how do we make sure we engage those people in land use decisions in at because they're [54:17] residents just like homeowners are um and also I bring up that story just to [54:24] um illuminate that there are misjudgments about renters in general and their role in the [54:31] community and and their rights and and uh opportunities here as citizens of Ado [54:40] that's great story one thing to share [54:45] um I was kind of knowing on it after our Adu discussion you know last commission [54:51] meeting and I was pushing for kind of these last minute changes couple of which we you know [54:57] um made happen and I was wondering why it was just kind of sitting with me a bunch of last couple [55:03] weeks I think some of it's a product of having sat on this Planning Commission a [55:10] while uh you see certain Trends um over time of when we're [55:17] getting it right or we're getting it wrong and so earlier today we had a work session and we're trying to kind of [55:23] tweak some zoning ordinances and I think it's important for people to understand what we're doing in the background to try to get it more right um because some [55:33] of the response and I think it's an easy way out for us too is if we don't get [55:39] something quite close it's like well hey they can ask for a variance I think in [55:45] the same breath of renters taking that into context with say a homeowner um to [55:51] go through any sort of process to see us uh to apply for variance requires a lot [55:58] of time and a lot of money so it's not just the application fee but likely you [56:03] need to pay for a survey like you likely you're paying for someone to provide some sort of Design [56:08] Services so it's also kind of that that urge for us and I and I think and I hope [56:14] people can see that we're trying to be really thoughtful but the better and the [56:19] the more we can get it right uh not perfect but closer to perfect the better [56:24] we're going to save a lot of people time in trouble to do kind of the things that make sense with say the comprehensive [56:31] plan where we're trying to go in the in the future with the city to allow different type of renters like in [56:39] adus um and that only can start with more adus happening so it's all kind of [56:45] connected but I think that's why it was sitting with me you know and I've heard from a developer that my wife and I we [56:52] went to Parade of Homes a couple months ago or within a month and talk to a [56:58] particular developer that if there's a variance required they will not pursue it here because of the process and how [57:06] it's gone before so I guess it's it's again more ammunition for us to kind of keep our ear to the the [57:14] ground listening to all different Vantage points not just ours not just the residents who are here but also the [57:21] developers the land owners Property Owners to see you know what impact there [57:26] are and I hope people can see like we are trying to think very holistically but the closer we can get it right in [57:33] respond to like now and the future the more we're going to make it easier to get there so a lot went into the Adu [57:41] process and I sure hope that the council supports it so we can take a step in the [57:48] right direction for our community and get more worthy residents in our city so [57:55] hope that make sense to people that's all I got any other [58:01] comments all right turn it over to staff for any comments nothing for me tonight [58:06] no council update all right and kind of tradition is any new planning [58:12] commissioner has the final word here tonight I was hoping I would get to yeah [58:18] I would have been disappointed if I didn't uh motion to adjuring Second [58:23] anyone second all those favor say I I I so move the meeting has been adjourned [58:30] thank you [58:38] everyone you can look through the public document and figure out which [58:45] one that was a thing you know I picked who I wanted based on my criteria but [58:51] not every for