HomeMy Public PortalAboutPKT-CC-2017-01-10Moab City Council
January 10, 2017
Pre -Council Workshop
**5:00 PM**
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
7:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL
CITY CENTER
(217 East Center Street)
CHAMBERS
Agenda
Page 1 of 298
Page 2 of 298
Moab City Council
Regular Council Meeting
City Council Chambers
Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 5:00 p.m.
PRE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
5:00 – 6:15 p.m. Conditional Use Permitting 101
6:15 – 7:00 p.m. Climate Action Briefing
7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
SECTION 1: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1-1 December 13, 2016
SECTION 2: CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
SECTION 3: PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
3-1 Swearing in Ceremony of New Police Officers
3-2 Affordable Housing Briefing – Zacharia Levine, Grand County
SECTION 4: DEPARTMENTAL UPDATES
4-1 Community Services
4-2 Engineering
4-3 Public Safety
4-4 Public Works
4-5 Recreation/Trails
4-6 Recorder/Human Resources
4-7 Treasurer
4-8 City Manager
SECTION 5: PUBLIC HEARING (Approximately 7:15 PM)
5-1 Solicitation of Public Input on a Conditional Use Permit for Dwellings on the Ground
Floor in the C‐4 for Property Located at 1600 Mill Creek Drive
SECTION 6: SPECIAL EVENTS/VENDORS/BEER LICENSES
SECTION 7: NEW BUSINESS
7-1 Award and Approval of Employment Related Legal Services Contract
7-2 Approval of a Purchasing Exception to Parr, Brown, Gee & Loveless for Employment
Legal Services in an Amount not to exceed $65,481.98
7-3 Approval of Utah Division of Parks and Recreation Fiscal Assistance Agreement for
Recreation Trail Program (RTP) Grant
City of Moab
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
Main Number (435) 259‐5121
Fax Number (435) 259‐4135
www.moabcity.org
Page 3 of 298
7-4 Adoption of Council Resolution #01‐2017 Approving a Petition for a Boundary Line
Adjustment for 600 and 610 Dragonfly Trail
7-5 Adoption of Council Resolution #02‐2017 Approving a Petition for a Boundary Line
Adjustment for Lots 1 and 2 of the Roufa Subdivision
7-6 Request for Approval of a Procurement Exception as Allowed by Moab Municipal
Code 2.28‐110(B) ‐ State Approved Contracts for a Police Vehicle Lease (four
vehicles) with Larry H. Miller Ford in an amount not to exceed $51,988.00 annually
for a term of three years
7-7 Approval of Change Order #1 with Harrison Field Services for the WRF Site
Preparation Project in the amount of $134,937.50
7-8 Approval of Change Order #2 with Harrison Field Services for the WRF Site
Preparation Project in the amount of $69,594.60
7-9 Disucssion/Briefing on a Conditional Use Permit for Dwellings on the Ground Floor in
the C‐4 for Property Located at 1600 Mill Creek Drive
7-10 Acceptance of a Petition for Annexation by Nicholas Brown, Located at
Approximately 435 Riversands Road
SECTION 8: MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
SECTION 9: READING OF CORRESPONDENCE
SECTION 10: APPROVAL OF BILLS AGAINST THE CITY OF MOAB
SECTION 11: EXECUTIVE CLOSED SESSION
11-1 An Executive Session to Discuss Pending or Reasonably Imminent Litigation
11-2 An Executive Session to Discuss the Character, Professional Competence, or Physical
or Mental Health of an Individual
SECTION 12: ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations during this meeting should
notify the Recorder’s Office at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532; or phone (435) 259‐5121 at least three (3) working days
prior to the meeting. Check our website for updates at: www.moabcity.org
Page 4 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 1 of 13
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ‐‐ DRAFT
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 2016
The Moab City Council held its Regular Meeting on the above date in the Council
Chambers at Moab City Center, located at 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah.
A recording of the meeting is archived at http://www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html.
Mayor Dave Sakrison called the Workshop to order at 6:00 PM. In attendance
were Councilmembers Rani Derasary, Heila Ershadi, Tawny Knuteson‐Boyd, Kyle
Bailey and Kalen Jones. Also in attendance were Interim City Manager David
Everitt, City Recorder/Assistant City Manager Rachel Stenta, City Attorney Chris
McAnany, City Engineer Phillip Bowman, Community Services Director Amy
Weiser, Planning Director Jeff Reinhart, Treasurer Jennie Ross, Deputy Recorder
Danielle Guerrero, and Public Works Director Patrick Dean.
The Workshop began with a discussion of Proposed Resolution #35‐2016 – A
Resolution Adopting the Water Conservation Plan Update for 2016 for the City
of Moab. Eve Tallman and Canyonlands Watershed Council Executive Director
Jeffrey Adams presented the Plan. Tallman informed the Council that their
findings in the preparation of the report indicate that there has been confusion
in past reports about the difference between paper water rights and actual
water available. She pointed out that the Plan presents what is known about
available water while the United States Geological Survey (USGS) water study is
ongoing, as well as per capita usage which takes into account tourist use, and
makes recommendations for water conservation measures the City can adopt.
Findings indicate that at current levels of tourist impact, the City’s population
can grow to 11,500 before water sources are tapped out. Tallman pointed out
that there are currently 4,000 nightly accommodations in Grand County; there
was some discussion about whether this number is low; inside City limits, there
are approximately 2,000 sewer connections for overnight accommodations.
Councilmember Ershadi asked about calculations used to determine the number
of tourists impacting the system in peak months. Mayor Sakrison noted the high
percentage of culinary water that is used for outdoor watering. Mayor Sakrison
asked about the USGS study and Adams responded that there is still a lot of
uncertainty about our water situation. Councilmember Ershadi also asked about
policy angles to navigate the issue surrounding conservation measures and
future build‐out population. Tallman indicated one of the recommendations is
to tie approval of large new developments to assurances of water supply 20
REGULAR MEETING &
ATTENDANCE
PRE‐COUNCIL WORKSHOP
Page 5 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 2 of 13
years out. Mayor Sakrison suggested an additional policy approach would be for
water quality monitoring and assurance for developments built atop the
watershed. City Attorney McAnany commented that the City has historically
paid attention to aquifer issues and development that might affect the aquifer,
including engineering designs but he stated it is an open question whether this
is enough. Tallman recommended the formation of a regional water authority.
Councilmember Jones asked about what direction the City should take with
regard to the Moab Irrigation Company. He also asked about whether the five‐
year time schedule for this Plan is sufficient. Tallman clarified that the City can
update and act upon the Plan more frequently, and that it is the report to the
State that is due every five years.
Mayor Sakrison asked what should be the next step. Adams suggested modeling
would be a good next step, especially since the USGS reported a 50% margin of
error in their numbers. He cited anecdotal reports of Matrimony Springs flow
reduction, so testing the chemical footprint of that water would be advisable,
and he detailed other examples. Mayor Sakrison stated he has invited a
consultant to present to the Council in January. Councilmember Jones
mentioned seniority of water rights as something that should be explored.
The workshop continued with a discussion of Proposed Ordinance #2016‐14 –
An Ordinance Adopting the City of Moab Pay Plan Schedule and Adopting the
Exempt and Elected Officials Salaries For Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 and Proposed
Resolution #33‐2016 – A Resolution Amending the Moab Personnel Policies and
Procedures Manual. Councilmember Bailey asked about carryover of sick leave
and how that builds up. City Recorder/Assistant City Manager Stenta explained
that the auditors found compensated absences are an unfunded liability for the
City. Stenta stated these changes were proposed in 2015 and Council declined
to act and they will again be presented in an overall Employee Manual update
before the end of the fiscal year in June. Councilmember Jones asked about the
pay plan committee membership and Stenta explained that salary levels were
determined by a third‐party consultant who compared Moab wages with not
only resort towns but also other Utah cities. Councilmember Bailey asked about
whether the pay scales meet the target minimum wage of $15. Stenta
responded that the lowest proposed City wage is $15.61. Bailey also asked
about entry‐level positions and how long it has been since a salary survey had
been done. Stenta replied that entry‐level positions are all proposed to be
brought up to the new baseline and a survey had not been done since about
1995 or 1996. Councilmember Jones asked about factors for scoring job
rankings with regard to on‐the‐job risk and discomfort, and whether this is
DISCUSSION REGARDING
PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2016‐
14
Page 6 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 3 of 13
common. Stenta replied that the rankings are standardized and widely used.
Councilmember Derasary asked about the change from step‐and‐grade to pay‐
for‐performance merit incentives. Stenta described the excitement of the
committee to reward good work versus longevity. Interim City Manager Everitt
mentioned that good training of managers is key to the success of the program.
Deputy Recorder Guerrero answered Councilmember Derasary’s question about
timeliness of evaluations, and she pointed out that supervisors are held
accountable for meeting deadlines. Mayor Sakrison asked about new hires and
probationary periods. Stenta and Guerrero explained this is now called the
“introductory period” and lined out which benefits are accrued at first and why.
Councilmember Ershadi brought up a citizen concern about an unsafe stairway
on a privately‐owned building on Main Street that might be a code enforcement
issue. Interim City Manager Everitt suggested that concerns of this nature can
be directed to Carmella Galley at the City’s main phone number.
Interim City Manager Everitt gave an administrator’s report. He mentioned that
the wastewater plant is operating well, and site clearing has commenced for the
new plant. He attended the Moab Area Travel Council meeting and heard a
presentation on media placement and advertising and the shift to digital media.
He announced a joint meeting with County Council January 17 at 2:00 PM, on
the topic of economic development, and hopes the meeting will also touch on
affordable housing. Councilmember Derasary asked about closure of City offices
and Everitt noted City offices will close Christmas through New Year with staff
on‐call.
Mayor Sakrison called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:57 PM and
led the pledge of allegiance. Forty‐two (42) members of the public and media
were present.
Councilmember Derasary moved to approve the minutes of November 22, 2016
meetings with corrections provided by Derasary. Councilmember Ershadi also
added that she wanted clarification about a discussion regarding whether
conditional use permits can have additional conditions, and to state the policy in
the minutes; Stenta replied that yes, if the policy was discussed in the meeting,
it can be noted in the minutes. Councilmember Bailey seconded the motion. The
motion carried 5‐0 aye, with Councilmembers Bailey, Ershadi, Jones, Derasary
and Knuteson‐Boyd voting aye.
The following citizens were heard:
ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO
ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
Page 7 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 4 of 13
William Love talked about intimidation of City Council by developers and State
and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) and the lack of respect they
appear to show to the City. He discussed the sewer line inadequacy and the
safety and condition of Sand Flats Road and its ability to handle construction
traffic and increased usage from the Lionsback development. He cited a need
for a traffic light at 400 East and Mill Creek Drive, and suggested this should be
paid‐for by the developer. He also mentioned threats to water quality by the
proposed development.
Michael Toninelli is concerned about a development proposed next to his home
and the lack of notification regarding public hearings. He feels placing ads in the
paper is insufficient; he stated it may be legal but it isn’t right and it doesn’t
work. He also noted that the documents he viewed related to the project did
not reflect current ownership, and was at least 12 years out of date. He also
pointed out that the proposed development might not fit the Council’s concept
of “affordable housing.” He cited a drainage on his property that is not reflected
in the planning documents.
Kara Dohrenwend spoke about lack of notification for the conditional use of
neighboring property. She is opposed to the project, even though she is usually
in favor of any affordable housing opportunity. She stated this project
represents the highest density in the entire City, and she has some concerns
about the conditional use that she has detailed in a written memo to the
Council. She pointed out that it is not deed‐restricted and could turn into
overnight accommodations. She also mentioned flaws in the development plan
that are in conflict with current code about housing uses on the ground floor in
a commercial zone and that the parking exception proposed does not meet
code.
Mayor Sakrison presented Michael Brown with the Mayor’s Student Citizenship
of the Month Award for December 2016 for Helen M. Knight School.
A presentation was made by Ashley Korenblatt of Public Lands Solutions
regarding the Bureau of Land Management Master Leasing Plan. She stated that
the Record of Decision will be released later this week. She remarked that 38%
of Grand County public lands are already leased; this Master Leasing Plan covers
new leases only. Councilmember Jones noted that the last Council supported
“Alternative D” and Korenblatt stated the proposed plan is very similar to this.
Councilmember Jones stated this option is a really good thing for our local
recreation economy by balancing uses between areas, rather than “mixed use”
PRESENTATION OF STUDENT
OF THE MONTH
BLM MASTER LEASING PLAN
PRESENTATION
Page 8 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 5 of 13
everywhere. Councilmember Derasary proposed that the City send a letter
reiterating the City’s position to the BLM before the Record of Decision is
released. There was Council consensus to do so.
At 7:27 PM Mayor Sakrison opened a public hearing to receive input from the
public with respect to the issuance of the Wastewater Revenue Bonds and any
potential economic impact to the private sector from the construction of the
Project to be funded by the Bonds. There were no citizens to be heard so the
Mayor kept the hearing open. He closed the hearing later in the meeting, with
no public comments.
Councilmember Ershadi moved to approve Seekhaven’s Puttin’ on the Ritz Event
on February 11, 2017. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion.
Councilmember Derasary further moved that the fee waiver be for the
allowable amount of $290.00. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers
Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Under New Business, The Council discussed revenue projections. City
Recorder/Assistant City Manager Stenta pointed out sales tax revenues have
exceeded budgeted revenues as well as expenditures for the years since 2009.
She presented some graphs, including one showing projections based on
percent increase of revenues over the previous year. She reminded Council that
there will be a budget opening with a public hearing after the first of the year.
Mayor Sakrison proposed inviting a speaker from the League of Cities and
Towns to make a presentation about budgeting practices. Councilmember Jones
commented that the increased revenues can offset the fiscal impact of the
proposed pay plan on the budget. There was some discussion about the state
tax commission’s projected increase of sales taxes being collected on Amazon
sales that will benefit the City revenues.
Councilmember Derasary moved to approve Proposed Ordinance #2016‐14 –An
Ordinance Adopting the City of Moab Pay Plan Schedule and Adopting the
Exempt and Elected Officials Salaries For Fiscal Year 2016‐2017. Councilmember
Jones seconded the motion. Councilmember Derasary noted that she supports
the new pay plan and that it sets a good example for the community.
Councilmember Jones concurred. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers
Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Bailey moved to approve Resolution #33‐2016 – A Resolution
Amending the Moab Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual.
PUBLIC HEARING
SPECIAL EVENTS LICENSE
NEW BUSINESS ‐
DISCUSSION REGARDING
REVENUE PROJECTIONS
PAY PLAN ORDINANCE #2016‐
14, APPROVED
PERSONNEL MANUAL
RESOLUTION #33‐2016,
APPROVED
Page 9 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 6 of 13
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. City Recorder/Assistant
City Manager Stenta explained that the changes reflect the adoption of the new
pay plan, the pay‐for‐performance plan, and a change from “probationary” to
“introductory” employees and other details. Councilmember Jones asked for
consistency in the manual with reference to “governing body” versus “City
Council.” The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐
Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Derasary moved to approve Proposed Resolution #32‐2016 – A
Resolution Designating Depositories for Moab City Funds. Councilmember Jones
seconded the motion. City Recorder/Assistant City Manager Stenta explained
this resolution allows the deputy recorder to be a signer on the City’s bank
accounts. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐
Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd moved to approve a Procurement Exception for
a Budgeted Purchase of Envirosight Rover X Camera System Software & Build
out for the amount of $184,459.02. Councilmember Jones seconded the
motion. It was noted this upgrade replaces equipment from the late 1970’s.
Interim City Manager Everitt mentioned that options to rent out the equipment
to other agencies are being explored. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting
aye.
Councilmember Bailey moved to approve a Procurement Exception for a
Budgeted Purchase of a 2017 Ford Transit 350 HR Van on State Contract for the
price of $29,889.42. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. The
motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi,
and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Derasary moved to confirm the Mayoral Appointment of
Wayne Hoskisson to the Moab City Planning Commission for a Five Year Term
ending on December 31, 2021. Councilmember Ershadi seconded the motion.
The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd,
Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Bailey moved to appoint Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd as
Mayor Pro‐Tem for 2017. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. The
motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi,
and Derasary voting aye.
DESIGNATED DEPOSITORIES
RESOLUTION #32‐2016,
APPROVED
PURCHASING EXCEPTION FOR
SEWER VAN BUILDOUT,
APPROVED
PURCHASING EXCEPTION FOR
SEWER VAN VEHICLE
PURCHASE, APPROVED
PLANNING COMMISSION
APPOINTMENT
MAYOR PRO‐TEM
APPOINTMENT
Page 10 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 7 of 13
Councilmember Bailey moved to appoint Councilmember Derasary as the
Councilmember Responsible for Reviewing the Bills of the City of Moab with
Councilmember Jones providing backup. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd
seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey,
Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Bailey moved to adopt the Regular Council Meeting Schedule
for 2017, removing the meetings the last weeks of November and December.
Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting
aye.
Councilmember Derasary moved to adopt the City of Moab Holiday Schedule for
2017. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. Councilmember Knuteson‐
Boyd asked about designating Christmas Eve as a holiday and City
Recorder/Assistant City Manager Stenta clarified that when this day falls on a
weekday, the City offices close at about noon. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting
aye.
The Information Technology staff from ProVelocity gave an update on their
progress, citing improvements in cyber security and improvements highlighting
security of online payments. Councilmember Jones asked about which online
payment products were updated. Interim City Manager Everitt stated that it has
been great to have the “24/7” presence of the IT staff. IT staff have updated
policies and procedures on a fast‐track and one improvement is that any
downloaded software on City computers must be done by IT staff.
Councilmember Ershadi asked about updates to Tayo reports and City
Recorder/Assistant City Manager Stenta explained how to read the updated
reports. City Recorder/Assistant City Manager Stenta also thanked ProVelocity
and stated she is getting a lot of positive feedback from City staff.
Under Proposed Resolution #36‐2016, Troy Herold and John Andrews of SITLA
made a presentation about the proposed Lionsback Resort. Andrews outlined
the last few years of activity, including the years the development was the
subject of a lawsuit. He stated that the project is “fully entitled” with prior
Council approvals. He described the current disagreement about whether
proposed changes to the development constitute major or minor amendments
and that they have been trying to find a way to resolve the issues in order to
COUNCIL MEMBER
RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING
BILLS
2017 COUNCIL MEETING
SCHEDULE APPROVED WITH
REVISIONS
2017 HOLIDAY SCHEDULE,
APPROVED
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
UPDATE
LIONSBACK RESORT ZONING
RESOLUTION #36‐2016,
TABLED
Page 11 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 8 of 13
move forward. He stated that SITLA values working on the development of the
Utah State University (USU) project which is of great interest to SITLA, USU and
the City, that they value that relationship and would like to get beyond this
issue that they find themselves in. Herold explained that this project and the
USU dormitory project are major initiatives of SITLA. He gave an overview of the
project and changes since 2008 and explained that what is at issue is a definition
of a “unit” in what was originally approved as a “50‐room hotel” and is now
proposed to be a “50‐unit lodge” with up to three‐bedroom units. SITLA
suggests that this change and other changes negotiated with former City
Manager Metzler constitute minor changes. He stated that the proposed
development, located atop the City’s aquifer, does not affect the Water Source
Protection Plan. The presenters pointed out that the traffic study completed in
the past indicates no need to improve the Sand Flats Road until after the first
phase is complete; the City’s discomfort with this was acknowledged and Herold
stated that only phased improvements to the road would be fair and this
development must be treated as are all other developments. The first of the five
phases includes the 50‐unit lodge plus 30 “casita” homes. The new master plan
application was submitted in June 2016. Councilmember Jones asked about the
architecture. Herold stated that a very high‐end development is what is being
proposed. Andrews commented that this is an improvement over the riotous
Spring Break parties from 20 years ago.
City Attorney McAnany gave an explanation of the history that he described as
different from the developers’ presentation. He stated that the changes
proposed require a review process, including a staff‐level review and ultimately
approval by the Council. The developer submitted a new application in June
2016 which has been reviewed by staff. He reiterated the discrepancy between
the 50‐room versus 50‐unit lodge. McAnany stated it is his opinion that this
represents a major change, thereby requiring a more thorough public process.
McAnany stated that the developer requested that SITLA pre‐empt the local
zoning requirements, as allowed by state law, because the developer is
uncomfortable with the public process and wants it to be considered a minor
amendment.
Councilmember Ershadi asked about changes to the proposed sewer
connections. City Attorney McAnany stated that the sewer system at the
development would be a privately‐operated utility with expensive and
maintenance‐intensive lift stations and would tie in with the City sewer.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd voiced concerns about protecting the
RESOLUTION #36‐2016,
CONTINUED
Page 12 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 9 of 13
watershed and is interested in the history of the lawsuit. She heard from
residents that, in the past, when Lionsback was a campground, yards fed by
springs below would dry up. She noted that Sand Flats Road is a County Road.
City Attorney McAnany clarified that annexation of Lionsback into the City also
included the road. City Planner Reinhart stated that there was a Grand County
Resolution that anticipated transferring the road right‐of‐way to the City at the
time of the annexation but that the County did not record the Resolution and so
the right‐of‐way transfer had not happened. City Planner Reinhart stated that
the transfer had been approved by the Grand County Council.
Councilmember Jones asked if the current conflict arose because, after
discussion with the former City Manager, the developer spent money. The
presenters confirmed this. City Attorney McAnany stated he had a different
view about requirements to move forward: land use entitlements are enacted
by Council and are approved in written development agreements by Council.
Councilmember Ershadi mentioned concerns with the geology of the site and
water quality threats for the aquifer below. Herold stated the project was
completely approved and entitled, and delays are a concern. Ershadi brought up
water quality and groundwater source protection, as well as traffic burdens and
safety. She stated that much has changed over the years with regards to traffic.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd also stated her concerns about the history of
the lawsuit and the increase in traffic. City Attorney McAnany reiterated that
source water protection was addressed. Councilmember Derasary asked about
water supply projections from 2008 and whether the City is bound by that in
view of new information from USGS, for example. City Attorney McAnany stated
that yes, the City is bound by old agreements, although common sense would
suggest taking these issues up with the developer in light of new data. He
further affirmed that the approvals in place are for the old proposal and not for
this new proposal. Councilmember Jones asked about the 2011 Source Water
Protection Plan.
Interim City Manager Everitt proposed re‐addressing the history of the project
in January, specifically as it relates to water quality and transportation. Herold
reiterated that all of the concerns were addressed back in 2008. Mayor Sakrison
pointed out that 2008 was a long time ago and many things have changed and
the traffic in particular has increased greatly.
Councilmember Bailey moved to table Resolution #36‐2016 a Resolution
Approving a Zoning Status Agreement for the Lionsback Resort until the second
LIONSBACK RESORT ZONING
RESOLUTION #36‐2016,
Page 13 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 10 of 13
regular meeting in January. Councilmember Ershadi seconded the motion. The
motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi,
and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Jones moved to approve Proposed Resolution #34‐2016 to
adopt fee changes for Moab City Sports and Moab City Parks and Facilities and
their associated fee structures. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the
motion. Parks, Recreation and Trails Director Tif Miller briefly outlined the
changes. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐
Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Ershadi moved to approve Proposed Resolution #35‐2016 – A
Resolution Adopting the Moab Water Conservation Plan Update For 2016.
Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting
aye.
Councilmember Jones moved to approve Proposed Resolution #38‐2016 – A
Resolution Approving the Development Improvements Agreement with JPK TR
Moab II, LLC for the development of the new Sleep Inn to be located at 356 S.
Main Street. Councilmember Bailey seconded the motion. Councilmember
Ershadi asked about some elements of the proposal, including a reference to
the Walnut Lane sewer system. City Attorney McAnany explained the details of
the escrow account for possible future improvements to the sewer line tied to
future development. The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones,
Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Derasary moved to approve Proposed Resolution #37‐2016 – A
Resolution Approving A Cooperative Agreement between the Utah Department
of Transportation (UDOT) and the City of Moab, and to approve the
Construction Reimbursement agreement between the City of Moab and Club
Utah Resort Group, LLC. Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. City
Engineer Phillip Bowman presented some changes to Council regarding the
proposal. City Attorney McAnany described the situation regarding previous
land use entitlements and other details. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting
aye.
Councilmember Ershadi moved to approve the Grading Permit Fee Waiver for
the Water Reclamation Facility Site Preparation Project in an amount not to
TABLED
SPORTS AND RECREATION
FEES RESOLUTION #34‐2016,
APPROVED
WATER CONSERVATION PLAN
UPDATE RESOLUTION #35‐
2016, APPROVED
SLEEP INN DEVELOPMENT
IMPROVEMENTS RESOLUTION
#38‐2016, APPROVED
UDOT COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENT RESOLUTION
#37‐2016, APPROVED
GRADING PERMIT FEE WAIVER
FOR MOAB CITY, APPROVED
Page 14 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 11 of 13
exceed $18,000. Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd seconded the motion. The
motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi,
and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Ershadi moved to approve the Site Plan Application Fee Waiver
for the Water Reclamation Facility Project in an amount not to exceed $5,000.
Councilmember Jones seconded the motion. The motion passed 5‐0 with
Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd, Ershadi, and Derasary voting
aye.
Councilmember Knuteson‐Boyd moved to approve Task Order #380.08.100 with
Hansen, Allen, and Luce, Inc., accepting the Scope of Work for the Development
Criteria Manuals project with a fee amount not to exceed $24,000.
Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion. City Engineer Bowman
explained that he asked the engineering consultant to update the criteria
manuals to modernize them for water sewer, and transportation.
Councilmember Bailey asked about storm water, and Bowman explained the
City adopted the County’s 2015 update on that subject. Mayor Sakrison asked
where the fee amount originated. Bowman said the fees are based on staff
hours estimated to complete the manuals. Interim City Manager Everitt added
that these new criteria manuals are an important part of the larger effort to
make the development review process work better for the City and applicants.
The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd,
Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Councilmember Jones moved to approve the Net Metering Service Agreement
with Rocky Mountain Power. Councilmember Derasary seconded the motion.
The motion passed 5‐0 with Councilmembers Bailey, Jones, Knuteson‐Boyd,
Ershadi, and Derasary voting aye.
Mayor Sakrison closed the public hearing at 9:10 PM. There were no comments.
Council discussed revised legal services. City Attorney McAnany asked to revise
his contract effective January 1, 2017. He has not had a pay raise in over a
decade. He has only billed the City $100 per hour since 2010, which is
considerably lower than market rate for municipalities. His request is for $225
per hour, which is well below his usual rate of $260. Councilmember Ershadi
discussed performance reviews for all staff, including this position. Ershadi
requested review of a job description and a performance review for the City
Attorney before action was taken. Councilmember Jones agreed.
WATER RECLAMATION
FACILITY FEE WAIVER FOR
MOAB CITY, APPROVED
TASK ORDER FOR
DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA
MANUALS WITH HANSEN
ALLEN AND LUCE, APPROVED
NET METERING AGREEMENT
WITH ROCKY MOUNTAIN
POWER, APPROVED
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
DISCUSSION REGARDING
REVISED LEGAL SERVICES
Page 15 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 12 of 13
Mayor Sakrison asked for visual aids connected to Council discussions to be
projected for the audience at meetings.
Councilmember Ershadi wanted to know methods for effectively notifying
citizens about such things as conditional use permits on neighboring properties.
Interim City Manager Everitt and Mayor Sakrison affirmed that the City needs to
do this.
Mayor Sakrison mentioned benchmarking with the Utah City Managers’ group;
he plans to pursue this. He also reiterated the Amazon effort to collect state and
local sales taxes. He also reported that the state legislature will be tackling land
use issues that will impact Moab in the upcoming session.
The Mayor asked City Attorney McAnany about progress regarding lowering in‐
town speed limits on street‐legal ATVs. McAnany stated that there is
precedence to limit speeds for off‐road vehicles on city streets. The Mayor
stated that limiting ATVs to 10 or 15 mph would greatly decrease noise levels.
Councilmember Jones asked if this could also apply to dirt bikes. McAnany
stated he would present an opinion in January on speed limits.
Mayor Sakrison mentioned that Local Officials’ day at the State Capitol is
January 25th.
Councilmember Jones attended a Solid Waste Special Service District meeting
and mentioned there was a representative from upstate that is observing the
SSDs. They got positive feedback. He also attended a housing task force meeting
and Interim City Manager Everitt added the attainable housing proposal will be
reviewed by County Council then sent to City Council and then both Councils
would meet jointly.
Councilmember Derasary attended a land trust meeting and she also
participated in a grants process for the Moab Arts Council. The City contributes
$7,000 to the grant program. The Arts Council will ask the County to contribute
as much as the City does, and they will ask the state for funding, as well.
Derasary also mentioned her praise for the City staff for their work on the Light
Parade float.
Derasary revisited the Colorado Association of Ski Towns membership and is
interested in membership. The cost is $636 for associate membership. She
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
REPORTS
Page 16 of 298
December 13, 2016
Page 13 of 13
indicated the topics taken up by this group are compelling and in alignment with
Moab’s social concerns with regard to the impacts of tourism.
Councilmember Bailey moved to pay the bills against the City of Moab in the
amount of $466,989.55. Councilmember Ershadi seconded the motion. The
motion carried 5‐0 aye, with Councilmembers Bailey, Ershadi, Jones, Derasary
and Knuteson‐Boyd voting aye.
At the suggestion of the City Attorney, the Council cancelled the Executive
Closed Session to Discuss Pending or Reasonably Imminent Litigation.
Mayor Sakrison adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:32 PM.
APPROVED: __________________ ATTEST: ___________________
David L. Sakrison Rachel E. Stenta
Mayor City Recorder
APPROVAL OF BILLS AGAINST
THE CITY OF MOAB
EXECUTIVE SESSION,
CANCELLED
ADJOURNMENT
Page 17 of 298
1
MOAB AREA
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PLAN
Prepared for the residents, businesses, and public officials of:
Grand County
City of Moab
Town of Castle Valley
Written spring 2009 by:
The Interlocal Housing Task Force
Rural Community Assistance Corporation
Updated fall 2016 by:
Zacharia Levine
Interlocal Housing Task Force
City of Moab
Grand County
Page 18 of 298
2
I. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Content Page #
I Table of Contents …
II Introduction & Background …
III Key Findings …
IV Data Sources …
V Demographic and Housing Overview …
VI Affordable Housing Efforts to Date …
VII Housing Needs Analysis …
VIII Barriers / Impediments to Affordable Housing …
VIV Development and Design Solutions to …
Expand Affordable Housing
X Brief Housing Development Summary …
XI IHTF Recommendations …
XII Affordable Housing Goals and Objectives …
XIII Affordable Housing Action Plan …
XIV Housing Terminology …
Page 19 of 298
3
II. INTRODUCTION
Housing is the backbone of every community. Housing has direct and indirect links to all aspects of
community and economic development and serves as the foundation for a high quality of life. The Moab
Area needs an adequate and accessible supply of housing for residents and employees in order to
sustain its reputation as a world-class destination and a great community in which individuals and
families can live, work, and play. To that end, this housing plan shall guide future policy-making,
budgeting, and programmatic development at various levels of local government.
BACKGROUND
Housing affordability has become a primary challenge for communities across the country. Regardless of
size, location, economic profile, or political character, demand for affordable housing has never
exceeded supply by such a large degree, as supported by the data presented in this plan. The imbalance
is exacerbated in amenities-rich communities throughout the American West. Although Moab is not
alone in trying to overcome the housing challenge, it must find solutions appropriate to the local
context.
2009 Housing Study and Affordable Housing Plan
In 2009, the City of Moab and Grand County jointly adopted their first Housing Study and Affordable
Housing Plan. The plan was created through a collaborative, multi-year study and public planning
process. Meeting facilitators included representatives from the City of Moab, Grand County, Housing
Authority of Southeastern Utah (HASU), Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC), and Bureau of
Economic Business Research (BEBR) located within the University of Utah’s David Eccles School of
Business. Stakeholder participants represented a broad cross-section of the community, including
employers, government officials, housing user groups, contractors, financiers, brokers, and concerned
citizens. Details of the process followed to create the plan, key findings, housing needs projections, and
an associated action plan can be found in the 2009 report.
2016 – 2025 Housing Plan
The impetus for creating a new housing plan is multi-faceted. First, housing affordability has declined
further since 2009. Second, the Interlocal Housing Task Force, which is a byproduct of the 2009 effort,
has been revitalized under new leadership. The Task Force meets regularly and believes additional
action would be of great benefit to the community. Third, this document is required by the State of Utah
and is often referenced by local entities seeking state and federal funds for affordable housing
development projects. For example, HASU requires updated market study information in order to
remain competitive in receiving low income housing tax credits (LIHTC) critical to the financing and
construction of affordable housing for very low- and low-income households. Fourth, Moab’s
community and economy continue to evolve rapidly and an updated plan is needed to reflect recent
changes and possible future scenarios.
Page 20 of 298
4
III. KEY FINDINGS
Housing affordability continues to decline. The imbalance between supply and demand in the
housing market has resulted in very high housing costs.
The imbalance between supply and demand for housing in Grand County results from the
following factors: low household income, high housing costs, the influence of external market
demand, the condition of existing housing supply, and restrictive land use regulations.
Existing land use regulations favor low-density, single family detached dwellings with minimal
mixed-use development, which leads to inefficient land use, high infrastructure construction
and maintenance costs, and longer commutes for residents.
Housing is economic development. The shortage of affordable housing currently hinders
business development and employee retention.
The Area Median Income in Grand County increased from $55,300 per year in 2015 to $64,300
per year in 2016, each for a family of four. The $9,000 increase is likely attributable to increased
incomes for the highest earners and increased income from non-labor activities such as
dividends, interest, rent, and retirement related entitlements.
Currently, more than half all households earning 80 percent (80%) or less of Area Median
Income (AMI) in Grand County are cost-burdened, which means they spend more than 30
percent (30%) of household income on total housing costs including mortgage or rent, taxes,
insurance, utilities, and HOA fees where applicable.
Currently, more than one-quarter all households earning 80 percent (80%) or less of Area
Median Income (AMI) in Grand County are severely cost-burdened, which means more they pay
more than 50 percent (50%) of combined household income towards total housing costs.
Assuming recent population trends continue but vacancy rates (e.g. second homes and
residential units used as overnight accommodations) stabilize at 30 percent (30%), the number
of new housing units needed across all price levels rises to will increase by 316 in 2020, 1,024 in
2030, 1,826 in 2040, and 2,737 in 2050 (see Table 14).
Assuming the share of renter-occupied and owner occupied housing remains constant, the 316
new units needed by 2020 will include 98 rental units and 218 owned units.
Decision-making bodies need to exercise political will in the area of affordable housing and
support the regulatory, budgetary, and programmatic action items contained within this
document in order to meet increasing demand for affordable housing.
Page 21 of 298
5
IV. DATA SOURCES
The following data sources were used during the research, analysis, and writing of this report. Zacharia
Levine, Grand County Community Development Director, conducted all quantitative analysis and
modeling. Where tables from the 2009 plan were updated, equivalent methodology was employed.
United States Census Bureau
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
United States Bureau of Economic Analysis
United States Department of Commerce
United States Department of Agriculture
National Association of Realtors
Utah Department of Workforce Services
Utah State Tax Commission
Utah Association of Realtors
Multiple listing service (MLS) – Grand County
Fall 2015 Employee Housing Survey (hotels, motels, and campgrounds) conducted by Zacharia
Levine and Mary Hofhine of the Grand County Community Development Department
Summer 2016 Employee Housing Survey (seasonal outfitters) conducted by Ruth Brown and the
Interlocal Housing Task Force
Building construction permit numbers, compiled by the Grand County building official
Current and ongoing housing workshops conducted by Grand County and the City of Moab
Past affordable housing studies and efforts compiled by the Interlocal Housing Task Force
Page 22 of 298
6
V. DEMOGRAPHIC AND HOUSING OVERVIEW
It is critical to understand housing in the context of recent trends in population, housing characteristics,
employment, construction, and existing housing inventories.
Grand County Population and Households
Population and household formation are arguably the most important indicators of housing demand
over time. In Grand County, however, full-time population may provide misleading information about
housing demand. Seasonal employment, transient residents, undocumented workers, small sample sizes
for intercensal counts, and enormous spikes in temporary populations from tourism lead to
underestimates of housing demand in the Moab Area. It is difficult to estimate the effects of such
demand, so only full-time population and household counts are reported below.
Table 1. Population and Households
Grand County’s full-time resident population has grown at an average of 0.6% per year since
2010, which is slower than the 1.0% average annual growth rate of the 2000s and 2.6% average
annual growth rate of the 1990s.
The average household size in Grand County remains relatively constant around 2.35 persons
per household.
Assuming the average household size of 2.35 persons per household, average annual household
formation in Grand County is 31.4 new households per year.
Although an average of 69 new residential units were constructed countywide each year
between 2013 and 2015 (see Table 4), more than double average annual household formation,
building permits and business licenses reveal the majority were unaffordable to the majority of
Grand County households or immediately converted to short-term rentals, seasonal or vacation
homes.
Sources: US Census Bureau; Grand County Building Department; Grand County Clerk/Auditor;
Zacharia Levine
Employment Trends
Like many rural gateway communities in the American West, Grand County’s employment profile leans
heavily on service-industry jobs. Tourism related employment accounts for more than 55 percent (55%)
Population and Households
Moab City Population 5,046 54.7% 5,083 54.8% 5,172 55.4% 5,178 55.3% 5,211 55.1% 5,235 55.0%
Unincorporated County Population 4,179 4,195 4,163 4,184 4,240 4,281
Grand County Total Population 9,225 9,278 9,335 9,362 9,451 9,516
Total Housing Units 4,816 4,844 4,943 5,004 5,048 5,120
Occupied Housing Units 3,889 80.8%3,633 72.6%
Vacant Housing Units 927 19.2%1,371 27.4%
2010 2013 2015201420112012
Page 23 of 298
7
of all jobs and remains the primary economic driver in Grand County. Because tourism related
employment is more likely than other employment to be part-time, seasonal, low-paying, and without
benefits, Grand County may benefit from economic diversification that leads to more varied
employment opportunities and higher wages. However, economic diversification and higher wages
alone will not suffice. The housing market needs a stable balance of year-round demand and supply that
accounts for long-term occupancy and short-term occupancy. Higher wages will enable local workers to
compete for market rate housing, but supply across all price levels is relatively constrained.
Table 2: Employment Trends
The number of nonagricultural jobs increased 16.8% between 2010 and 2015. Grand County’s
economy is expanding.
The two industries with the largest percentage increases in employment between 2010 and
2015 were information and professional, scientific, and technical services. A continuation of this
trend would benefit Grand County as wages in these industries tend to be higher than average.
The average annual payroll wage increased 12% to $30,792 between 2010 and 2015. Grand
County ranks 22nd in the state of Utah for average payroll.
The 2014 average household adjusted gross income in Grand County was $53,332, the lowest of
all counties in Utah.
The percentage of households with adjusted gross incomes lower than $20,000 in 2014 was
29.2%. Only three counties exhibited higher percentages in 2014.
Grand County Employment and Income Trends 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Average Annual Nonagricultural Employment
(# of people)4,496 4,616 4,824 4,890 5,073 5,232
Average Payroll Wage ($/mo.)$2,293 $2,340 $2,394 $2,423 $2,490 $2,566
Page 24 of 298
8
Table 3: Grand County Employment by Industry. DWS 2015
Sources: Utah Department of Workforce Services; Utah Tax Commission; Zacharia Levine
Housing Construction
Housing affordability, at its root, is a function of supply and demand. Housing construction is the primary indicator of
changes in supply. Since 2000, roughly 1100 new residential housing units have been constructed in Grand County,
which includes the unincorporated County, City of Moab, and Town of Castle Valley. The majority of residential
construction continues to take place in the unincorporated area of Grand County. Construction rates have increased
slightly in recent years as the nationwide real estate market continues to rebound from the 2007-’08 recession.
Industry Sector
Percent of Total
Employment
(2015)
Number of
Establishments
Average
Monthly
Wage
Average
Annual Wage
(2015)
Mining 1.70%13 $6,090 $73,080
Utilities 0.71%7 $5,936 $71,232
Construction 5.67%57 $3,295 $39,540
Manufacturing (31-33)0.86%7 $2,173 $26,076
Wholesale Trade 1.32%13 $3,246 $38,952
Retail Trade (44 & 45)15.62%82 $2,221 $26,652
Transportation and Warehousing (48 & 49) 1.83%17 $3,468 $41,616
Information 0.99%9 $2,187 $26,244
Finance and Insurance 1.26%13 $3,704 $44,448
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 2.06%32 $2,081 $24,972
Professional Scientific & Technical Services 2.29%33 $3,741 $44,892
Admin., Support, Waste Mgmt, Remediation 2.39%25 $2,458 $29,496
Education Services 5.88%18 $2,388 $28,656
Health Care and Social Assistance 7.52%34 $3,384 $40,608
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 8.93%36 $2,186 $26,232
Accommodation and Food Services 31.58%95 $1,762 $21,144
Other Services (except Public Admin.)1.76%28 $2,886 $34,632
Public Administration 7.64%33 $4,041 $48,492
All Industries 100.00%$2,566 $30,792
*Tourism Related 58.2%$2,063 $24,750
**Monthly cost assumes a 30 year mortgage, 10% down, 4% APR, 2% PMI, $75/mo. property tax, $150/mo.
utilities, $600/yr home insurance, and no HOA fees, OR rent plus $150/mo. utilities.
*Tourism Related industries include: Retail Trade, Real Estate and Rental and Leasing, Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation, and Accommodation and Food Services. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing is included due to its
Page 25 of 298
9
Increased construction activity has also benefited from historically low interest rates, an expanding local economy, and
increasing demand for new housing from residents and investors.
Table 4: Construction Trends in Grand County
Residential construction has remained at lower levels than the pre-2008 recession period. In the years 2013-
2015, an average of 69 residential units across all types were constructed each year. In the years leading up to
2008, an average of 100 residential units across all types were constructed each year.
Building permit data suggest that an increasing share of new residential construction is actually intended for
seasonal or vacation occupancy in the unincorporated areas of Grand County and the City of Moab, representing
38.5% and 34.1% of new residential construction, respectively. These types of end-uses tend to push sales prices
higher than long-term owner- or renter-occupancy.
Multiple mobile home parks were redeveloped between 2008 and 2015. As of 2015, 15 parks provided a total of
491 available lots and remained 80% occupied on average.
Sources: US Census Bureau; Grand County Building Department; Multiple Listing Service; Zacharia Levine
Land and Housing Prices:
Tracking land and housing prices is central to understanding local housing markets. As prices change, opportunities and
constraints also change. The prices for developable land and finished construction have increased steadily since 2000,
with some variability year-to-year. In a growing economy and upward housing market, affordable housing becomes
increasingly difficult to finance, construct, and preserve. Key statistics provided below indicate the upward trend of
Unincorporated County City of Moab Castle Valley
County-
wide
Commercial DUs 2013 0 Commercial DUs 2013 47 Commercial DUs 2013 0 47
Commercial DUs 2014 90 Commercial DUs 2014 94 Commercial DUs 2014 0 184
Commercial DUs 2015 0 Commercial DUs 2015 21 Commercial DUs 2015 0 21
*Total Commercial Dus '13 -'15 90 Total Commercial Dus '13 -'15 162 Total Commercial Dus '13 -'15 252
Mixed Use DUs 2013 0 Mixed Use DUs 2013 0 Mixed Use DUs 2013 0 0
Mixed Use DUs 2014 0 Mixed Use DUs 2014 0 Mixed Use DUs 2014 0 0
Mixed Use DUs 2015 10 Mixed Use DUs 2015 0 Mixed Use DUs 2015 0 10
**Total Mixed Use DUs '13-'15 10 Total Mixed Use DUs '13-'15 0 Total Mixed Use DUs '13-'15 10
Residential DUs 2013 31 Residential DUs 2013 24 Residential DUs 2013 7 62
Residential DUs 2014 36 Residential DUs 2014 32 Residential DUs 2014 4 72
Residential DUs 2015 42 Residential DUs 2015 29 Residential DUs 2015 2 73
***Total Res DUs '13-'15 109 Total Res DUs '13-'15 85 Total Res DUs '13-'15 13 207
Avg. # Res DUs/yr ('13-'15) 36.3 Avg. # Res DUs/yr ('13-'15) 28.3 Avg. # Res DUs/yr ('13-'15) 4.3 69
NEW CONSTRUCTION IN GRAND COUNTY
*Commercial DU = dwelling unit constructed through the commercial building code for commercial uses (e.g. hotel rooms)
**Mixed Use DU = dwelling unit constructed within a development containing both residential and commercial uses
***Residential DU = dwelling unit constructed through the residential building code for residential or commercial uses (e.g. short-term rental)
Page 26 of 298
10
Moab’s housing market, which makes housing less and less affordable to lower income households. The market for raw
land has also increased markedly, which makes development more expensive and, as a result, sales and rental prices
increase as developers pass the costs onto end users.
In May 2015,
The median and average prices for recently sold and active residentially zoned parcels of developable land were
$200,301 per acre and $248,936 per acre, respectively.
The median and average prices for recently sold and active commercially zoned parcels of developable land
were $145,788 per acre and $325,099 per acre, respectively.
The median list price for all housing types was $290,000. The average list price was $351,700.
The median rental price for all housing types was $850; when including utilities, median rental costs were
$1,000. The HUD Fair Market Rent value, used to establish Section 8 rental vouchers, was $757 for a two
bedroom housing unit and $1115 for a three bedroom unit. Very few, if any, rental units are available for rent at
rates that enable usage of the Section 8 vouchers.
The cost to rent a space inside an established mobile home park was between $275 per month and $400 per
month.
The cost to rent a mobile home inside an established mobile home park was between $650 per month and
$1200 per month.
Utilizing an unconventional loan, a family of four earning the 2015 HUD area median income ($55,300 per year) could
afford to purchase a home that cost $193,258. That represents an affordability gap of almost $100,000.
In 2015,
There were 155 residential dwelling units of all types sold in Grand County – 4 were mobile homes without land,
17 were modular or manufactured homes, and at least 50 were very likely to be used as short-term rentals
based on zoning designations.
The median and average list prices of units that sold were $269,000 and $277,549, respectively.
Of the houses for which sales prices can be computed, the median and average sales prices were $263,942 and
$274,202.
In 2016, the average assessed value of all homes within Grand County was $296,000.
Sources: US Census Bureau; Department of Workforce Services; Utah Association of Realtors; Grand County
Assessor; Multiple Listing Service; Local Property Management Agencies; Zacharia Levine
Housing Inventory Condition
While a standardized evaluation of existing housing units could not be completed prior to the writing of this plan, the US
Census Bureau and local research efforts provide a cursory understanding of the quality of Grand County’s housing
inventory. The condition of existing housing units contributes to overall housing costs, neighborhood attachment, and
Page 27 of 298
11
public health. As housing conditions decrease over time, maintenance costs increase. Owners must choose to expend
additional money or defer maintenance, which tends to increase costs in later years. Renters tend to experience
increased rents over time as property owners account for maintenance costs by passing them onto renters. At the
extreme, very old units, perhaps some built to substandard qualities, may result in condemnation and demolition, which
decreases the supply of housing. Alternatively, residents may occupy otherwise uninhabitable housing units that lead to
mental and physical health issues. A healthy housing market depends on a balance of renovating older homes,
rebuilding dilapidated structures, and new construction.
Table 5: Current Housing Occupancy
Page 28 of 298
12
Table 6: Housing Units by Type
Table 7: Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Year Built
Table 8: Renter-Occupied Housing Units by Year Built
The occupancy rate and owner-occupancy rate have declined in Grand County, although the owner-occupancy
rate of 67 percent (67%) still exceeds the national average of 63 percent (63%).
The vacancy rate continues to rise, and is now at 27 percent (27%), which reveals the degree of external demand
for real estate in Moab.
The overwhelming majority of existing housing in Grand County is a one-unit detached dwelling. One-unit
detached dwellings tend to utilize the most land per housing unit.
Mobile homes, RVs, and other housing types account for nearly 20 percent (20%) of all occupied housing in
Grand County.
Of all owner-occupied housing units, 61 percent (61%) were constructed prior to 1980. Of all renter-occupied
housing units, 51 percent (51%) were constructed prior to 1980.
The age of a housing unit may serve as an indicator of high maintenance costs, which increases total housing
costs for owners and renters.
Page 29 of 298
13
The number of mobile home lots has decreased in Grand County due to closures in some mobile home
communities. There are 491 mobile home lots in Grand County, of which roughly 80 percent (80%) are occupied.
The use of RV lots for longer-term occupancy has increased in recent years. Of the 930 Recreational Vehicle (RV)
spaces located inside permitted campgrounds, 106 are utilized for “extended stays” (i.e. longer-term occupancy)
and 25 are identified as employee housing units. In 2016, 14 “employee housing” RV spaces were approved in
the unincorporated county through the commercial campground ordinance.
Sources: US Census Bureau; Department of Housing and Urban Development; National Association of Realtors;
Zacharia Levine
Page 30 of 298
14
VI. HOUSING EFFORTS TO DATE
Multiple partners have aided in the provisioning of affordable housing units in Grand County (See Table 9). These efforts
should be lauded. Additionally, the Interlocal Housing Task Force recently reestablished itself as an active work group
aggressively targeting policies and programs that may help to address the decline of housing affordability and
availability. The task force meets monthly, includes broad representation from the community, and serves as a driving
force behind work in the affordable housing arena. Because of its efforts, the City of Moab and Grand County have made
the topic of affordable housing a standing agenda item on all joint meetings. Further, the City of Moab has included
affordable housing as a top legislative priority. It recently allocated $150,000 to affordable housing. Grand County has
established regular workshops between the Council and Planning Commission, agreed to a work plan, and begun
executing the work plan through policy changes and planning. It too has allocated funds towards affordable housing.
Of particular interest to affordable housing specialists is the period of affordability. Table 9 includes the occupancy type
and deed restriction status for multiple housing developments. The Mutual Self-Help (MSH) program, administered by
HASU, has produced the greatest number of housing units for low-income households. Utilizing USDA 502-direct loans,
the MSH program enables eligible households to contribute “sweat equity” towards the construction of their homes in
exchange for low-interest rates, loan repayment subsidies, and home equity. Community Rebuilds also utilizes 502-
direct and 523-guaranteed loans administered by USDA. Both organizations are working with USDA to create and
implement deed restrictions on newly constructed homes beginning in 2017. Deed restrictions are critical for preserving
long-term housing affordability and may last between 15 and 99 years, or remain in perpetuity.
In May 2016, the Arroyo Crossing Subdivision was approved as the very first private development to include a voluntary
20 percent (20%) set-aside for affordable housing. The agreement followed months of negotiations with the property
owner and developer, a successful rezone request, and master plan approval. Once fully constructed, 44 of the 220
proposed housing units will be deed-restricted for a minimum of 40 years. Eligible households cannot earn more than 80
percent (80%) of AMI and must have at least one adult who works full-time within the boundaries of the Grand County
School District, be of retirement age (62 or older), or have a qualifying mental or physical disability. The development
agreement that establishes this set-aside encumbrance of Arroyo Crossing subdivision represents the single largest
development impact of a non-subsidized, privately constructed project to date. Indeed, it sets a historic precedent in
Grand County.
Page 31 of 298
15
Development Developer
/Owner
# of
Units
Year
Built
Occupancy
Type
Affordability Status/Deed
Restrictions
Single Family
Straw bale
Community
Rebuilds 17 4/yr Owner Implementing deed restrictions
beginning 2017
Archway Village
Apartments 20 1985 Renter Income limits
Huntridge Plaza
Apartments 24 2004
rehab Renter Income limits
Kane Creek
Apartments 36 1993 Renter Income limits
Ridgeview
Apartments 6 1994 Renter Income limits
Rockridge
Senior Housing 35 1998 Renter Age & Income limits;
Compliance period ends in 2018
The Virginian
Apartments HASU 28 Renter Income limits based on HUD
Section 8 Vouchers; Ongoing
The Willows Interact 8 2015 Renter Mental health patients only;
Ongoing
Cinema Court HASU 60 2012 Renter
5:1BR @25%AMI
10:1BR @39%AMI
30:2BR @45%AMI
6:3BR @45%AMI
9:3BR @50%AMI
(99 year compliance period)
Aspen Cove Interact 12 2015 Renter 30% of income; Ongoing
CROWN at
Desert Wind HASU 5 2013 Renter 15 yr. compliance period ends in
2028
CROWN at Sage
Valley HASU 8 1998 Owner 15 yr. compliance period
completed (no longer restricted)
CROWN at Rim
Hill HASU 8 2005 Renter 15 yr. compliance period ends in
2020
Mutual Self-Help HASU 138 On-
going Owner Exploring primary residence
deed restriction beginning 2017
TOTAL: 405 199 deed restricted in 2020
Page 32 of 298
16
Table 9: Affordable Housing Developments to Date
Sources: Zacharia Levine
VII. HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS
The housing challenge in Grand County is a function of multiple factors: low household income, high housing costs, the
influence of external market demand, the condition of existing housing supply, and restrictive land use regulations.
Low Household Income
The affordability gap in Grand County is in large part due to low wages, which limit or prevent homeownership and
payment of market rate rent by many households. Most housing plans, policies, and programs focus on housing supply
and housing prices, but it is equally important to evaluate and increase wages and income. Housing affordability
depends on a balance between housing prices and income.
Table 10: Employment and Income Trends
The average monthly payroll wage in 2015 was $2,566, which is $1,055 less than the statewide average (DWS).
Grand County ranks 22nd among all 29 Utah counties in average monthly payroll wage.
Travel and tourism related employment accounted for 58.2% of all 2015 employment in Grand County.
However, the average monthly payroll wage for such jobs was only $2,063.
The 2014 average adjusted gross income (AGI) for households in Grand County was $53,332, the lowest across
all counties in Utah. The 2014 median AGI in Grand County was $34,337, which means there are many extremely
high earning households pushing the average significantly higher than the median.
In 2014, 29.2% of all households in Grand County earned less than $20,000 (26th across all counties in Utah). This
represents a slight improvement from 2010 numbers (33% of all households and 28th ranked, respectively).
Although not shown in Table 10, the Grand County Area Median Income for a family of four increased from
$55,300 per year in 2015 to $64,300 per year in 2016. Because synchronous increases are not seen in average
payroll wages, the $9,000 increase is likely attributable to increased incomes for the highest earners and from
non-labor activities such as dividends, interest, rent, and retirement related entitlements.
Grand County Employment and Income Trends 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Average Annual Nonagricultural Employment
(# of people)4,496 4,616 4,824 4,890 5,073 5,232
Average Payroll Wage ($/mo.)$2,293 $2,340 $2,394 $2,423 $2,490 $2,566
Rank Among Utah Counties 22 22
Moab City Average Household AGI $49,541 $52,997
Moab City Median Household AGI $32,170 $34,295
Grand County Average Household AGI $49,926 $53,332
Rank Among Utah Counties 26 29
Grand County Median Household AGI $32,266 $34,337
% Earning <$20,000 33.15%29.20%
Rank Among Utah Counties 28 26
Page 33 of 298
17
Sources: US Census Bureau; Department of Workforce Services; Zacharia Levine
High Housing Costs
The affordability gap refers to the large and growing difference between wages and housing costs. Similar to other
isolated, amenities-based, rural gateway communities surrounded by public lands, housing costs in Grand County have
risen much faster than wages. Because demand continues to rise faster than supply, prices continue to increase.
In May 2015, the median list price for all housing types within Grand County was $290,000 whereas the average list
price was $351,700. Several high-priced properties in the area push the average higher than the median. These numbers
offer just a momentary snapshot of houses listed for sale.
When considering only houses that actually sold during the year 2015, the median list price was $269,000 whereas the
average list price was $277,549. The significant differences are likely associated with sellers attempting to capture the
highest equity possible and overshooting what the market will bear. Additionally, higher-end homes tend to list for
longer time periods and not all property listings sell at their asking price.
In 2013, the most recent year in which standardized data exists, median rental costs (rent + utilities) were $1,000 per
month. In August 2016, a survey of local property management companies revealed only 19 rental units were available
at prices that would be affordable to households earning less than 100% of AMI. However, fewer than five such units
would accommodate households with more than two adults and a child. Current sales and rental prices place most
market rate housing units out of reach for Grand County residents, and limits upward housing mobility.
Table 11: Wages and Housing Costs
Sources: US Census Bureau; Department of Workforce Services; Utah Association of Realtors; Multiple Listing
Service; Grand County Rental Management Companies; Zacharia Levine
External Market Demand
External market demand continues to increase housing prices and limit or reduce the inventory of affordable housing.
Like many other rural gateway, tourism-based communities, Grand County is a desirable housing market for individuals
and investment firms located around the world.
Grand County’s beautiful landscape and moderate climate make it very appealing to out-of-area investors.
Consequently, the local housing market has experienced increased external market demand for second/seasonal homes,
short-term rentals, retirement homes, and general investment properties. External market real estate purchasers have
2003 2009 2015
Average Payroll Wage $1,699 $2,280 $2,566
Average Sales Price $135,129 $282,985 $277,549
# of Average Workers Required to be Affordable 1.93 2.70 2.35
Hourly Wage Required by 1 Worker to be Affordable $20.52 $38.41 $37.75
*Monthly cost assumes a 30 year mortgage, 10% down, 4% APR, 2% PMI, 1% property tax
(at 55% of assessed value), $150/mo. utilities, $600/yr home insurance, and no HOA fees.
Page 34 of 298
18
the ability to and typically do bid at higher home purchase prices than those supported by prevailing wages in the local
market. Each home sold at an increased price reduces the quantity of housing that otherwise could be sold to the local
market at its particular need and price point, and increases the sales price of all housing in the inventory.
In addition to the construction of new housing units to meet the external market demand, local housing professionals
report that:
Condominiums and other long-term rental units are being purchased by market investors and converted to
rentals, and
Single family homes in need of major repairs are purchased, repaired or demolished, and resold at a much
higher price.
The result is a reduction of “affordable” housing units and upward pressure on housing prices. While more recent (2008-
2009) economic influences may ultimately contribute to a temporary decrease in external demand for housing, and
ultimately housing prices, these external influences on the Grand County housing market are still very real. Almost all
new housing built since 1998 would have to drop more than 50 percent in price to reach affordability for the median
income Grand County household.
Sources: US Census Bureau; Utah Association of Realtors; Multiple Listing Service; Grand County Building
Official; Zacharia Levine
Condition of the Housing Inventory
Although existing housing tends to be more affordable than new housing, older units in declining condition require more
maintenance, which increases overall housing costs, and may even be in dilapidated or unacceptable conditions. Neither
the Southeastern Utah Association of Local Governments (SEU-ALG) nor Grand County has performed a housing
inventory since 2005, when 1,507 or 35% of all housing units were considered to be in either dilapidated or
unacceptable conditions.
According to the 2013 American Community Survey, 69% of all Grand County housing units were single family detached
dwellings and 19% were mobile homes. Mobile homes were built to very poor construction standards and today would
not be considered acceptable. Banks will not provide loans for mobile home units, which makes an entire class of
housing units almost non-transferable. As a result the number of households living in “extended stay” spaces in
commercial RV parks and campgrounds has increased. A Grand County survey of all commercial facilities suggested that
117 spaces are now used for periods of 30 or more days (Zacharia Levine, 2015).
In 2013, 61% of all owner-occupied housing units in Grand County were constructed prior to 1980. Of all renter-occupied
housing units in Grand County, 51% were constructed prior to 1980. Aging housing units with higher maintenance costs
represent the majority of affordable units in Grand County, but they also require the highest levels of maintenance.
Due to the condition of all types of homes in need of repair in the housing inventory:
Many homes at time of sale do not meet loan qualification standards. Wage earners that require a mortgage for
home purchase are therefore excluded from potential purchase.
As noted above, homes in need of major repairs are appealing to an external market investor for cash purchase,
remodel or demolition, and resale at a much higher price
Housing Vouchers issued by the Housing Authority are not fully utilized because the condition of lower cost
rental housing units is below HUD’s Housing Quality Standards.
Page 35 of 298
19
Sources: US Census Bureau; Zacharia Levine
Employer-Provided Housing
Hotels, commercial campgrounds, recreational outfitters, restaurants, and retail stores create the largest block of
demand for seasonal workforce housing. Indeed, businesses in these industries have experienced the greatest
challenges in employee recruitment and retention due to the lack of affordable housing. In summer 2016, the Interlocal
Housing Task Force conducted a survey of hotels/motels, commercial campgrounds, and recreational outfitters to better
understand employer-provided housing for seasonal employees. The survey also provided information regarding needs
and opportunities for employer-provided housing and highlighted the link between workforce housing and economic
development.
A total of 16 surveys were administered to commercial campgrounds and RV parks. Nine campgrounds provided at total
of 15 employee housing units on-site to resident managers. Of the eleven hotels/motels responding to the survey and
accounting for 285 employees, 77 employees received employer-provided housing. Information was not collected as to
the number, type, or quality of the housing units.
A total of 35 surveys were administered to recreational outfitters across the following activities: cycling related,
canyoneering/climbing related, water sports related, retail recreation, air sports related, and miscellaneous.
Respondents represented outfitters that, in total, accounted for 548 employees. Part-time or seasonal employees
accounted for 72 percent (72%), or 392 employees. Respondents reported approximately 225 part-time or seasonal
employees needed housing. Seven outfitters provided on-site or nearby housing to such employees, eight reported a
desire to provide on-site housing in the form of camper vans and RVs, and nine did not know if on-site housing was
permitted in their zoning district. Employers identified four types of housing utilized by part-time and seasonal
employees: shared rooms or dwelling units, camper vans, tents, and “couch-surfing” with friends. Five respondents
supported the creation of managed housing for seasonal staff in the community, eight opposed, and ten were unsure of
such a system.
The vast majority of responding recreational outfitters (19) cited the lack of housing as one of the most important and
impactful challenges affecting their employee recruitment and retention. Fifteen suggested the lack of affordable
housing limited their abilities to grow their businesses. Although many employers created unofficial policies to hire local
residents only because, presumably, they would already have housing, the majority felt that local residents could not fill
all the job openings across the community.
Clearly, there is an undeniable link between housing and economic development. In a tourism-based community,
workforce housing becomes an integral input into business development. The gap between wages and housing costs and
the shortage of housing supply have the potential to hinder economic expansion in Grand County.
Sources: Interlocal Housing Task Force
Affordable Housing Needs Projections
Currently, at least 1,000 households earning less than 80 percent (80%) of AMI in Grand County are cost-burdened,
which means they spend more than 30 percent (30%) of household income on total housing costs including mortgage or
rent, taxes, insurance, utilities, and HOA fees where applicable. At least 400 households earning less than 80 percent
(80%) of AMI are severely cost-burdened, which means they spend more than 50 percent (50%) of household income on
Page 36 of 298
20
total housing costs. Cost-burdened and severely cost-burdened households already have housing, but some may feel it is
appropriate to consider 1,000 units the baseline need. However, this figure is not included in the future demand
projections presented below.
Table 12: Cost-burdened Renter Households
Cost Burdened Renter Households
43.6%>50% to ≤80% AMI
78.1%>30% to ≤50% AMI
73.3%≤30% AMI
Households Spending 30% or More of Monthly
Income on Housing (by Income Level)
5.5%>50% to ≤80% AMI
37.5%>30% to ≤50% AMI
61.7%≤30% AMI
Households Spending 50% or More of Monthly
Income on Housing (by Income Level)
Page 37 of 298
21
Table 13: Cost-burdened Owner Households
The following charts present the results of a specified model used to project future housing needs in Grand County. It
should be noted that models used to forecast future housing demand are only as good as the data and assumptions
used to create them. Forecasts also become less reliable as the forecasting period increases. For instance, the model
uses recent population trends to forecast future population trends. However, any given year may result in atypical
population growth, either lower than estimated or higher than estimated. The model also assumes the share of owner-
occupied versus renter-occupied housing units remains the same over time. While this assumption has been included to
simplify the modeling exercise, national and regional trends suggest the share of renter-occupied housing units is very
likely to rise further in the coming decades.
Additional assumptions used to specify the model are noted below:
Population increases at an exponential rate based on changes observed between 1990 and 2014.
Population projections do not account for potential episodic increases associated with the construction of a
four-year Utah State University campus, secondary and tertiary economic development associated with a local
campus, or any other policy- or development-oriented changes.
Average household size remains constant at 2.35 persons per household.
Owner-occupied versus renter-occupied ratios remain constant overall and within each income bracket.
The share of households within each income bracket remains constant.
Housing affordability is based on the following parameters:
o Households spend no more than 30 percent (30%) of income on total housing costs
o Ownership costs
Mortgage (principal and interest)
30 year fixed rate
Cost Burdened Owner Households
41.2%>50% to ≤80% AMI
45.5%>30% to ≤50% AMI
64.4%≤30% AMI
Households Spending 30% or More of Monthly
Income on Housing (by Income Level)
0.8%>50% to ≤80% AMI
22.7%>30% to ≤50% AMI
44.4%≤30% AMI
Households Spending 50% or More of Monthly
Income on Housing (by Income Level)
Page 38 of 298
22
10% down payment
4% annual percentage rate (“interest rate”)
2% premium mortgage interest (PMI)
$900 annual property tax
$600 annual property insurance
$150 monthly utility costs
No HOA fees
o Renter costs
Rent
$150 monthly utility costs
The share of available housing affordable to households within each income bracket remains stable over time.
Vacancy rates remain constant at 30 percent (30%).
Projections do not include households currently living in Grand County that are cost-burdened.
Replacement of dilapidated or unacceptable housing units over time is not factored into projected housing
demand.
No consideration is given to housing typologies or variable development costs.
Each of these assumptions can be manipulated to reflect different expectations for Grand County’s future. If Grand
County continues to mirror the trajectories of similar tourism based economies in the American West, vacancy rates
may climb to 40, 50, or even 60 percent, if not higher. Models are inherently limited in predicting the future due to the
necessity of making assumptions. In recent years, planning has shifted more towards scenario planning, where decision-
makers select a set of policies based on a range of possible future states. Nevertheless, the model provides a useful
exercise in understanding future housing demand. The forecasts should be used as a guide for policymaking, and not
considered hard predictions.
Page 39 of 298
23
Table 14: Housing Demand Projections (Total)
Page 40 of 298
24
Table 15: Housing Demand Projections (Renter)
Page 41 of 298
25
Table 16: Housing Demand Projections (Owner)
With the abovementioned assumptions in mind, the housing model suggests,
Per annum housing production affordable to households in each income level must increase in order to keep
pace with future housing demand.
Demand for new housing units will increase by 316 in 2020, 1,024 in 2030, 1,826 in 2040, and 2,737 in 2050.
Of the 316 new units needed by 2020, 98 will be renter-occupied and 218 will be owner-occupied. In 2030, the
numbers increase to 323 and 701, respectively.
In 2020, 177 new units would be needed to meet the demands of households earning less than 80 percent (80%)
of AMI. By 2030, that number increases to 503 new units.
About two-thirds of all new rental construction will need to be offered at price levels affordable to households
earning 80 percent (80%) of AMI or below.
The share of owner-occupied housing demand by households earning 80 percent (80%) of AMI or below will
decrease from 50% in 2020 to just 39% in 2050.
Sources: US Census Bureau; Utah Association of Realtors; Grand County Rental Management Companies;
Zacharia Levine
Page 42 of 298
26
Wages & Housing Affordability
Housing costs and economic development are inextricably linked in all communities. In Grand County, housing is
economic development. In recent years, employers across all industries have struggled to attract and retain qualified
candidates to fill position vacancies. This trend is especially true for essential employment positions such as teachers,
nurses, law enforcement officers, public officials, and others. Job candidates considering a job offer within Grand County
are increasingly unwilling to relocate to Grand County to accept a local job offer. Candidates have articulated a strong
desire to live and work in the community, but cite the large gap between wages and housing costs as the primary
impediment. Individuals currently employed within Grand County are also leaving the community to seek jobs in other
communities. In order to sustain the positive economic growth Grand County has witnessed in recent years, the
construction of housing units for long-term occupancy must keep pace with the growth in demand.
Increasing wages will also reduce the affordability gap for working households. In 2015, the ownership affordability gap
for a single worker earning the average payroll wage across all industries was $185,851. The renter affordability gap for
a single worker earning the average payroll wage across all industries was $380/mo. However, for a single worker
employed in a tourism related industry, where the average annual wage was $24,750, the ownership affordability gap
was $223,110 and the renter affordability gap was $531/mo. Public officials and community leaders have stated that
diversifying the local economy represents a primary goal. Supporting business expansion, retention, and recruitment in
industries that pay higher than average wages will enable employees of such industries to better compete for available
market rate housing.
Page 43 of 298
27
Table 17: Wages and Housing Affordability
Industry Sector
Percent of
Total
Employment
(2015)
Average
Annual Wage
(2015)
30% of income
monthly Max Loan
Single Worker
Affordable
Purchase Price
Single Worker
Ownership
Affordability
Gap
Single Worker
Affordable
Rent
Single Worker
Renter
Affordability
Gap
Mining 1.70% $73,080 1827 $258,861 $287,623 -$1,677 -
Utilities 0.71% $71,232 1781 $251,155 $279,061 -$1,631 -
Construction 5.67% $39,540 989 $119,006 $132,229 $145,320 $839 $162
Manufacturing (31-33)0.86% $26,076 652 $62,864 $69,849 $207,700 $502 $498
Wholesale Trade 1.32% $38,952 974 $116,554 $129,504 $148,045 $824 $176
Retail Trade (44 & 45)15.62% $26,652 666 $65,266 $72,517 $205,032 $516 $484
Transportation and Warehousing (48 & 49) 1.83% $41,616 1040 $127,662 $141,847 $135,702 $890 $110
Information 0.99% $26,244 656 $63,564 $70,627 $206,922 $506 $494
Finance and Insurance 1.26% $44,448 1111 $139,471 $154,968 $122,581 $961 $39
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 2.06% $24,972 624 $58,260 $64,734 $212,815 $474 $526
Professional Scientific & Technical Services 2.29% $44,892 1122 $141,323 $157,025 $120,524 $972 $28
Admin., Support, Waste Mgmt, Remediation 2.39% $29,496 737 $77,124 $85,694 $191,855 $587 $413
Education Services 5.88% $28,656 716 $73,622 $81,802 $195,747 $566 $434
Health Care and Social Assistance 7.52% $40,608 1015 $123,459 $137,177 $140,372 $865 $135
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 8.93% $26,232 656 $63,514 $70,571 $206,978 $506 $494
Accommodation and Food Services 31.58% $21,144 529 $42,298 $46,998 $230,551 $379 $621
Other Services (except Public Admin.)1.76% $34,632 866 $98,540 $109,489 $168,060 $716 $284
Public Administration 7.64% $48,492 1212 $156,334 $173,704 $103,845 $1,062 -
All Industries 100.00% $30,792 770 $82,528 $91,698 $185,851 $620 $380
*Tourism Related 58.2% $24,750 619 $48,995 $54,439 $223,110 $469 $531
**Monthly cost assumes a 30 year mortgage, 10% down, 4% APR, 2% PMI, $75/mo. property tax, $150/mo. utilities, $600/yr home insurance, and no HOA fees, OR rent plus
$150/mo. utilities.
*Tourism Related industries include: Retail Trade, Real Estate and Rental and Leasing, Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation and Food Services. Real Estate
and Rental and Leasing is included due to its strong relationship to the tourism economy.
Page 44 of 298
28
VIII. BARRIERS AND IMPEDIMENTS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The most apparent barriers to expanding the affordable housing stock in the Moab area fall under the umbrellas of
three main categories: land use regulations, site planning and architectural design, and funding issues. Many of the
challenges developers face when attempting to build affordable housing fall under one or more of these categories.
Each barrier has its own repercussions on Moab’s housing market. While a cure-all remedy doesn’t exist, local
governments, developers, and realtors can take steps to address each impediment.
Land Use Regulations
Local land use regulations either encourage or inhibit affordable housing construction. Density limits, lot sizes, setbacks,
height restrictions, street widths, and parking requirements can all lead to low land use efficiencies and, ultimately, high
land costs. The high cost of land is a major impediment to the construction of affordable housing. In recent months and
years, the City of Moab and Grand County have taken steps to remove barriers to affordable housing in their respective
land use codes. Examples include: streamlining the development review process, reducing buffer requirements between
subdivisions, removing open space requirements, expanding accessory dwelling unit opportunities, decreasing minimum
lot and building sizes, and improving code enforcement.
Site Planning and Architectural Design
While land use regulations govern development at the community and site-specific scales, developers and architects
retain a tremendous amount of discretion in how they utilize available land and establish building footprints. Like many
other parts of the United States, the Moab Area is dominated by single family detached dwellings situated on large lots.
The development community can effect positive change by shifting its focus from a sprawling development typology to
one that is more compact, efficient, and affordable. Smaller lots, attached dwellings, and more modest living spaces are
cheaper to build and maintain. Compact development also leads to reduced transportation costs for residents, and
lower infrastructure costs for developers and local governments. The next chapter will focus exclusively on the benefits
of improved land use and design.
Funding Issues
Funding a project is often one of the most difficult aspects of affordable housing. Development teams work tirelessly to
make projects “pencil out,” and rely heavily on outside funding from grants, loans, direct and indirect subsidies, and
private donors to get a development to the point of breaking ground. Grand County and the City of Moab provide
incentives to developers in the form of density bonuses, impact fee waivers, and relaxed site controls, but lower returns
on investment (ROIs) associated with below market rate housing remains a commonly cited impediment. Many
affordable housing experts suggest that direct financial support from public funds needs to play a larger role in
facilitating the development of new units. Indeed, in many instances, affordable housing will not be constructed without
it.
Page 45 of 298
29
VIV. Development and Design Solutions to Expand Affordable Housing
As is said often about solving the affordable housing shortage, there is no silver bullet. It will take a myriad of different
tools and design solutions to lower housing costs in the Moab area. Community Rebuilds, the Housing Authority of
Southeast Utah, and many other organizations have built a substantial number of affordable units, but demand
continues to exceed production. The need is too great for these entities to solve Moab’s housing challenges alone. This
section provides information on housing cost reduction through improved land use and design. It is intended for
policymakers, developers, architects, builders, and, of course, interested citizens.
Missing Middle Housing
Missing Middle Housing represents a range of multi-unit or clustered housing types compatible in scale with single-
family homes that help meet the growing demand for walkable urban living (www.MissingMiddleHousing.com).
Compact development patterns often lead to the desired outcomes expressed in the general plans adopted by the City
of Moab and Grand County.
Often, conversations about increasing land use densities quickly escalate from detached single-family homes to mid- and
high-rise apartment complexes, painting the image of massive, towering apartment buildings looming next to small,
single-family homes and quaint downtown streets. The Middle Housing concept illustrates that there is a wide range of
housing typologies between such extremes. Urban designers and architects can integrate moderate and even higher
density developments into existing neighborhoods by focusing on compatibility with a site’s surroundings. Such care and
consideration may diminish some local residents’ concerns about high density housing leading to the loss of rural
character.
Missing Middle Housing is not a new type of building or neighborhood design. Mixed density housing was a fundamental
building method until the 1940s, and can be seen in historic districts across the country. A combination of Missing
Middle Housing and detached dwellings makes for a moderately dense community that is more walkable, livable, and
sustainable for all types of residents.
Though there are many development types, ranging from duplexes to courtyard apartment complexes, Middle Houses
often share several characteristics. These include:
Walkable contexts,
Small building footprints,
Lower perceived densities,
Smaller, well-designed units,
Fewer off street parking spaces,
Page 46 of 298
30
Cohesive communities, and
Marketability
Several case studies are presented to demonstrate some possibilities of housing development in the Moab Area, and to
support legislative changes to local land use regulations.
Page 47 of 298
31
PHOTO: STACKED DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT IN OMAHA, NE.
DIAGRAM: TYPICAL DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT. PHOTO AND
GRAPHIC CREDITS: MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING AND OPTICOS
DESIGN
PHOTO: SIDE-BY-SIDE DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT IN PHOENIX,
AZ. DIAGRAM: TYPICAL DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT. PHOTO
AND GRAPHIC CREDITS: MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING AND
OPTICOS DESIGN
Duplex
Description: A small- to medium-sized structure that consists of two dwelling units, either stacked between two levels
or side-by-side, both of which face and are entered from the street.
Units: 2
Typical Unit Size: 600-2,400 SF
Net Density: 8-20 du/acre
Stacked Side-by-Side
Page 48 of 298
32
ABOVE: FOURPLEX DEVELOPMENT IN BERKELEY, CA. LEFT: DIAGRAM
OF TYPICAL FOURPLEX DEVELOPMENT. PHOTO AND GRAPHIC CREDITS:
MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING AND OPTICOS DESIGN
EXAMPLE FLOOR PLAN ARRANGEMENT FOR A SINGLE STORY TRIPLEX DEVELOPMENT
Triplex and Fourplex
Description: A medium-sized structure that houses three or four units, respectively, with a mix of units stacked typically
between two levels. Each unit is separate from the others and has its own entrance
Units: 3 or 4
Typical Unit Size: 600-2,400 SF
Net Density: 15-25 du/acre
Page 49 of 298
33
CINEMA COURT APARTMENTS IN MOAB, UT ARE SEVEN CLUSTERED APARTMENT BUILDINGS
POSITIONED AROUND A COURTYARD. SHOWN FROM STREET VIEW AND AERIAL VIEW.
Courtyard Apartments
Description: A medium- to large-sized complex of units accessed from a courtyard or shared space. Each unit may have
its own entry or several units share a common entry.
Units: Various, ranging from 8-40
Typical Unit Size: 600-1,200 SF
Net Density: 25-35 du/acre
Page 50 of 298
34
BUNGALOW COURTS PRIMARILY ORIGINATED IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF PASADENA, CA FROM 1909-1940S. THE TOP AND BOTTOM
LEFT PICTURES SHOW A FEW HISTORIC BUNGALOW COURTS IN PASADENA, AND BOTTOM RIGHT DEPICTS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE FIRST
BUNGALOW COURT.
Bungalow Court
Description: A “pocket neighborhood” of smaller single-family units positioned around a shared courtyard space.
Bungalow Courts are an excellent balance between the privacy of a single-family home and the communal experience of
a shared green space.
Units: 5-10
Typical Unit Size: 500-1,000 SF
Net Density: 20-35 du/acre
Page 51 of 298
35
PHOTO CREDITS, CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS
Accessory Dwelling Units
Description: Sometimes referred to as a mother-in-law suite or a secondary dwelling unit, accessory dwelling units
(ADU) are single-family dwelling units that are built on the same lot or parcel as another single-family dwelling unit.
Typical Unit Size: 500-1,000 SF
Attached ADU
Detached ADU
Interior ADU, typically
accessible through separate
door from main house
Page 52 of 298
36
Cohousing Communities
Cohousing communities consist of a cluster of private single-family homes built around shared spaces. They typically
have a common house with a large kitchen and dining area, laundry facilities, recreational spaces, and a garden that is
maintained by the residents and helps feed the community. The members of a cohousing community have full control
over the balance between privacy and community engagement. They have independent lives but also share the
responsibility for planning and managing communal property and events. Cohousing communities are formally run by an
HOA or Board of Directors system and place sustainability, conversation, and community in high regard. This type of
community is not very different from any other kind of HOA-managed neighborhood, but communities in which the
stakeholders are also its residents tend to be better maintained because residents are more invested in the property.
Millennials and baby boomers are starting to seek out communal living models, making it easier to age in place, whether
settling down to start a family or settling down after retirement.
The Wasatch Commons in Salt Lake City, built in 1998, is the first cohousing community formed in the state of Utah. The
community is comprised of 26 townhouses, a community garden, common house, playgrounds, and other recreational
facilities.
Page 53 of 298
37
Permanent Supportive Housing
Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is a model that provides both housing and services for people with serious mental
illnesses or other disabilities who need additional, consistent support to maintain their housing and live stably within
their communities. Services can include case management, substance abuse, counseling, employment and education
services, advocacy, and more. A principle aspect of the PSH model is that services are voluntary, not mandatory, for
tenants living in housing projects.
PSH relies on the "Housing First" concept, meaning that housing is given rapidly to those who need it with as few
preexisting requirements as possible.
The Housing First model works on two levels:
At the project level, PSH projects must have screening practices that promote acceptance of applicants
regardless of their sobriety, level of completion of treatment, or history of mental health or homelessness.
On a community level, Housing First means that the community's response to homelessness is oriented to
helping people get permanent housing as soon as possible with as few obstacles as possible. It is supported by
evidence that individuals make the best progress when living in stable housing environments.
Pathways Village Apartments is a new PSH facility in Grand Junction, Colorado. It is a 40-unit complex that serves the
chronically homeless population in the Grand Junction area. It provides numerous services to its residents, creates new
jobs, and generates an estimated $11 million in economic impact for the area.
Page 54 of 298
38
Sustainable Design
Sustainability has become a buzzword in the built environment across all scales and development types. Sustainable
design has influenced residential, commercial, and industrial projects, as well as small area plans and comprehensive
general plans. Buildings consume almost half the energy produced in the United States today, and contribute an equal
share of carbon dioxide emissions. Any savings associated with building energy efficiency improve the bottom-line of
development, and improve local environments (Architecture 2030).
There are countless green building codes, theories, and action plans to try to reduce the major long term impacts
buildings have on global warming, but the bottom line for sustainable building solutions comes down to a simple
mission: people, planet, profit. In order for a project to be successful, it must be economically sound, environmentally
conscious, and socially sensitive; a project will not be able to sustain itself if it is not all three of these things. For
example, a developer cannot create an eco-friendly, economically viable building that is not sensitive to the needs of its
occupants or create a project that is beautiful and heavily occupied that costs too much money to operate in the long-
term.
Community Rebuilds is a champion of this principle in the Moab area.
Environmentally, the nonprofit uses passive design techniques and natural building methods to create an affordable
home that is sensitive to the landscape and easily replicated. The homes are insulated with straw bales, supported by
simple wood frame construction, and finished with mud plastering techniques. The materials are local, natural, and
often donated, salvaged, or recycled, which reduces the cost of construction. Solar panels are added to every house and
partner with passive design techniques to keep utility costs down.
Socially, the builds are fueled by an educational internship program that gives young adults college credit and tangible
construction experience. The homeowners, interns, and other volunteers construct the house together from foundation-
to-finish, which gives both the homeowner and the interns an appreciation for natural building techniques and
affordable housing.
Economically, Community Rebuilds builds houses for low-income residents in the Moab area and works to ensure
affordable housing continues to expand in the Moab area. The education program and natural building methods
significantly lower the cost of construction; the houses are built at about $70 per square foot and average less than $30
per month for utility bills. The nonprofit is working with the community to promote the use of deed restrictions in order
to ensure long term affordability for both Community Rebuilds homes and other units in Moab’s affordable housing
stock.
Page 55 of 298
39
X. Brief Housing Development Summary: CINEMA COURT
To illustrate the unique and often complex process of developing affordable housing, this section provides a brief
summary of a multifamily rental development constructed in the City of Moab. Cinema Court, a 60-unit apartment
complex, provides housing for very low- and low-income households. Readers should note that this summary is provided
by way of example only, and may not characterize the barriers and other conditions facing another project in the Moab
Area. Note the number of income sources required to facilitate the Development, and the substantial contribution of
financing provided through the low income housing tax credit (LIHTC) awarded by the Utah Housing Corporation and
funded by American Express, a global corporation with a charter in Utah. Without the LIHTC, Cinema Court would not
have come to fruition. Since the 2012 project, the Moab Area has not seen another LIHTC development. It may take
another LIHTC award to fund affordable housing developments as large as Cinema Court or a more complex financing
structure that includes additional partners to make any proposal a reality in Grand County. Cooperation, compromise,
and trust among partners is an essential ingredient for any project to succeed.
Need for Project
The 2009 Grand County and City of Moab Housing Study and Affordable Housing Plan projected a 2012 total rental
deficit of 224 units. While no specific data was analyzed in the year 2012 to determine the actual rental deficit at that
time, the projected deficit was likely to be at least as high by the time Cinema Court was completed.
Site and Development Description
HASU endeavored to meet a portion of the rental housing need with the construction of Cinema Court, a new
development including 60 multifamily rental housing units built during the summer of 2012. Cinema Court was built on a
5 acre parcel of land near a variety of amenities including a creek, bike and pedestrian pathways, hiking trails, shopping,
and entertainment. Because a significant percentage of the parcel was deemed unbuildable due to the presence of a
floodplain, the property was acquired at a favorable price but limited building footprints. Comprised of 9 two-story
apartment-style residential buildings, one leasing office/clubhouse, and one playground, the Development caters to
varying household sizes, from single-person households to families with more than 4 individuals. Unit amenities include
dishwashers, garbage disposals, clothes washers and dryers in each unit, two bathrooms in the two and three bedroom
units and comfortable floor-plans. Three of the units are fully accessible; five are set aside for transitional housing for
the homeless or near homeless residents and five are designated for those with mental illness.
Unit size, Number, and Income Targeting
The unit mix and target population was determined by a combination of the housing need and operating budget cash
flow.
Page 56 of 298
40
Unit Type Unit Size
(sq. ft.)
Units @
25% AMI
Units @
39% AMI
Units @
45% AMI
Units @
50% AMI
Unit
Total
1 bedroom,
1 bath 736 5 10 0 0 15
2 bedroom,
1 bath 880 0 0 30 0 30
3 bedroom,
2 bath 1135 0 0 6 9 15
Totals 5 10 36 9 60
Table 18: Unit Mix of Cinema Court Apartments
Development Budget
Through a competitive bidding process, the construction budget was created.
Development Budget
Expense Cost
Land $526,928
Construction $6,036,134
Professional Fees $398,904
Interim Costs $293,182
Permanent Financing $71,290
Soft Costs $92,176
Syndication Costs $5,900
Developer Fees/Profit/Overhead
$1,130,279
Project Reserves $163,880
Total Cost $8,718,673
Table 19: Development Budget
Income Sources
Five different income sources were combined to pay the total development cost. Note that due to low rent levels,
project cash flow supported a permanent loan of only $850,000. Local match, grant funds, and investor equity in the
form of LIHTCs were used to “fill the gap” between the $850,000 dollar permanent loan and the total $8,718,673
development cost.
Page 57 of 298
41
Sources and Uses Budget
Source Amount Uses
Public Sector
City Contribution
(General and CDBG Funds) $509,000 Site, General Construction
County Contribution $90,000 General Construction
State Division of Housing $800,000 Site, Engineering
Housing Authority $389,451 Land, Developer’s Fee
Private Sector Equity /
Loan
Tax Credit Equity $7,416,000 General Construction, Fees,
Marketing
First Mortgage (OWHLF) $850,000 Permanent Loan
HASU CDBG Loan $250,000 Infrastructure/Gen
Construction
Managing Member Equity $25,000 General Construction
Deferred Dev. Fee $177,673 Project Reserves
Development Cost Total $8,718,673
Table 20: Income Sources Budget
Development Timeline
Predevelopment activity began in 2009 and ended with the successful completion of all financial arrangements in fall
2010. Construction began spring 2011 and ended in July 2012.
Since its completion, Cinema Court has remained virtually 100% occupied. At times, there are short gaps between
tenants due to the specific eligibility requirements associated with individual units. After a 15 year federal compliance
period, American Express will transfer ownership to HASU for the remainder of the project lifetime. Cinema Court has,
to date, epitomized a successful affordable housing development.
Page 58 of 298
42
XI. IHTF Recommendations
The mission of the Interlocal Housing Task Force is to support the creation of affordable and attainable housing through
policy recommendations, public outreach, professional development, and project implementation. The Task Force
meets regularly to discuss and review current housing trends, evaluate proposed solutions, and create informational
resources for the public. In support of this housing plan, the IHTF offers the following recommendations:
Establish promote, and utilize the Moab Area Community Land Trust.
Increase funding for affordable housing within the City and County budgets.
Expand the use of deed restrictions to protect existing and new affordable housing.
Engage the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in
identifying development opportunities on state and federally owned land.
Adopt an assured housing ordinance, which will require all new residential and commercial development above
a given size to include a component of affordable housing.
Increase zoning densities along major transportation corridors and within areas proximal to retail, restaurants,
and entertainment.
Support employer provided housing while providing best practices that protect employees.
Provide for greater flexibility in the City and County land use codes to support residential and mixed-use
developments.
Establish regulations that enable the development of “tiny home” communities.
Encourage the Utah legislature to allow greater flexibility in the expenditure of Transient Room Tax (TRT)
revenue.
Page 59 of 298
43
XII. Affordable Housing: Vision, Goals, and Objectives
Vision
A community that includes an affordable housing opportunity available to each resident of the Moab Area.
Goals
1. Achieve the housing vision by 2050.
2. Create and protect enough affordable housing in the Moab Area so that it is not a limiting factor for the
community’s evolution.
3. Upgrade and improve existing low-quality housing.
4. Construct a wider range of housing and development types, especially attached dwellings and apartments.
5. Provide a mix of ownership, rental, and seasonal housing opportunities.
6. Become a model community in the way of implementing successful housing solutions.
7. Create senior housing and housing for individuals with special needs and mental or behavioral health issues.
8. Expand the housing stock through the development of compact, walkable neighborhoods served by reliable
infrastructure.
9. Encourage the development of a public transportation system.
10. Promote housing that is energy efficient and minimizes environmental impact.
Objectives
1. Analyze the housing needs of very low-, low-, and moderate-income households, and develop a mix of strategies
to meet the needs of each income group.
2. Set annual affordable housing targets and report performance to the public.
3. Coordinate with and involve multiple community and outside agencies in developing affordable housing
solutions.
4. Adopt or amend local land use regulations to provide more opportunities for affordable housing development.
5. Facilitate public-private partnerships that lead to affordable housing construction and economic development.
Page 60 of 298
44
XIII. Affordable Housing Action Plan
1. GENERAL
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Hire staff person explicitly responsible for
housing plan implementation City, County Interlocal Housing Task
Force (IHTF)
Property Tax, Sales Tax,
Transient Room Tax 2017
b. Hire staff person explicitly responsible for
economic development City, County
Chamber of Commerce,
USU Moab, Small
Business Development
Center
City, County 2017
c. Collect data relative to the supply and
demand for housing in the Moab Area County City, IHTF
United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA),
Community Development
Block Grants (CDBG)
2016;
Ongoing
2016 Housing
Plan Update
includes current
data
d. Update housing plan as needed to reflect
current data, market analysis, and economic
conditions
City, County IHTF 2017;
Ongoing
e. Evaluate policy scenarios and set
intermediate (1, 2, 5, and 10 year) goals that
lead to the achievement of the Vision.
City, County IHTF 2018
f. Provide annual updates on affordable
housing plan implementation City, County, IHTF IHTF 2017;
Ongoing
Page 61 of 298
45
2. 501(c)3 - MOAB AREA COMMUNITY LAND TRUST (MACLT)
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Create / finalize land trust MACLT MACLT 2016 Done
b. Create land trust board MACLT MACLT 2016 Done
c. Develop board policies MACLT MACLT 2016 Done
d. Create and approve strategy and action
plans MACLT IHTF, City and County
Staff
Rural Community
Assistance Corporation
(RCAC), Grounded Solutions
Network
2017 -
2018
d. Solicit resources MACLT, IHTF IHTF, City and County
Staff
City, County, Low Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC),
CDBG, Olene Walker
Housing Loan Fund
(OWHLF), Private Donors
2017;
Ongoing Will begin in 2017
e. Develop partnerships with local
governments, private landowners,
businesses, and housing developers
MACLT
IHTF, HASU, Community
Rebuilds, Other Local
Developers, City, County,
Private Landowners, Local
Businesses, etc.
2017;
Ongoing Will begin in 2017
Page 62 of 298
46
3. INTERLOCAL HOUSING TASK FORCE (IHTF)
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Expand membership IHTF
City and County Staff,
Local Developers,
Builders, Realtors, and
Bankers, Chamber of
Commerce, Citizens
City, County 2016;
Ongoing
The IHTF has
expanded
significantly over
the previous two
years; Additional
participation from
the development
community is
needed
b. Increase public education through
workshops, advertisements, and outreach
campaigns
IHTF City and County Staff City, County 2017
Workshops
offered
periodically each
year; Ongoing
d. Develop and publicize a housing and
economic development website; Distribute
the Housing Plan; Distribute resources and
tools for affordable housing
IHTF, City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers,
Builders, Realtors, and
Bankers, Citizens
2016;
Ongoing
Website—Done
Housing Plan
Update—Done
Distribution—In
Progress
e. Increase local capacity by reviewing
successful affordable housing developments,
networking with organizations, visiting and
hosting other communities, and attending
conferences
IHTF, City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers,
Builders, Realtors, and
Bankers, Citizens
City, County, Foundations,
Utah Housing Coalition,
Private Donors,
Scholarships
2016;
Ongoing Ongoing
Page 63 of 298
47
4. LAND USE CODE CHANGES TO ENCOURAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Adopt an assured housing ordinance City, County
IHTF, HASU, Community
Rebuilds, Developers,
Business Owners, Citizens
2017
City—In Progress
County—Draft
ordinance under
review
b. Strategically increase zoning densities to
facilitate compact development patterns City, County
IHTF, HASU, Community
Rebuilds, Developers,
Business Owners, Citizens
2017
Will begin
following adoption
of assured housing
ordinance.
c. Develop mixed-used ordinance City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers and
Builders, Citizens
2017 -
2018
Incorporate into
zoning density
discussions;
Downtown Plan
Process; Southern
US-191 Corridor
Planning
d. Strengthen and formalize incentives for
affordable housing developers City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers and
Builders, Citizens
2017 -
2018
City – In Progress
County – Existing
incentives deemed
ineffective
Page 64 of 298
48
4. LAND USE CODE CHANGES TO ENCOURAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING (continued)
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
e. Review City and County Land Use Codes to
identify and document barriers to affordable
housing and engage in public process to
mitigate or remove those barriers.
City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers and
Builders, Citizens
2016;
Ongoing
City –
Development
Code overhaul
planned for 2017
County – Several
amendments
adopted in 2016;
Ongoing
f. Create zoning regulations for “tiny houses”
and “tiny house communities.” City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers and
Builders, Citizens
2017
Several workshops
provided to the
Moab community;
Preliminary
research complete
g. Encourage land use efficiency by allowing
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) City, County
City and County Staff,
Local Developers and
Builders, Citizens
2016;
Ongoing
City – Done
County – Done
(regulations
updated in 2016)
h. Expand infill development opportunities
through use-specific design standards City, County
IHTF, City and County
Staff, Local Developers
and Builders, Citizens
2017 -
2019 Will begin in 2017
Page 65 of 298
49
5. AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK PRESERVATION
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Conduct Housing Inventory
IHTF, Southeastern Utah
Association of Local
Governments (SEU-ALG)
City, County 2018 Discussions with
SEU-ALG ongoing
b. Identify dilapidated units and work with
property owners to upgrade or replace with
safe, adequate housing
Community Rebuilds,
HASU SEU-ALG, City, County
SEU-ALG Weatherization
Program, CDBG, USDA, City,
County
2018
c. Investigate incentives to rehabilitate
deteriorated units Rural Development USDA, HUD, State, SEUALG Year 0-1
d. Promote mobile home rental to ownership HASU, MACLT IHTF, USDA, OWHLF Local banking institutions 2016;
Ongoing
e. Investigate temporary housing alternatives IHTF, HASU, MACLT City and County Staff 2017 -
2018
f. Provide tax abatement on residential
rehabilitation and replacement for low-
income households
County
County Council, County
Assessor, Clerk, and
Treasurer
County 2017 –
2018
Will begin
discussions in
2017
g. Inventory existing subsidized units and
chart financing/flip cycle
HASU USDA, CDBG, OWHLF 2018
h. Require housing mitigation plans when
land use applications propose demolition of
existing housing units
County, City IHTF 2017 -
2018
Will begin
discussions in
2017
Page 66 of 298
50
5. AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK PRESERVATION (continued)
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
i. Promote energy efficiency programs IHTF HASU, City and County
Staff, Utility Providers 2018;
Ongoing
j. Provide public information about utility cost
reduction IHTF HASU, City and County
Staff, Utility Providers 2018;
Ongoing
k. Promote low-interest loans and incentives
for energy reducing improvements IHTF HASU, City and County
Staff, Utility Providers 2018;
Ongoing
Page 67 of 298
51
6. DEED RESTRICTIONS
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Require all new affordable housing to
include deed restrictions City, County 2016;
Ongoing
City—In Progress
County—Done
b. Establish minimum requirements for
affordable housing deed restrictions to be
used in the City and County
City, County IHTF 2017 -
2018
City—In Progress
County—In
Progress
c. Create a library of deed restrictions with
standardized language and make available to
project developers
IHTF City, County, Community
Rebuilds RCAC 2017
Community
Rebuilds – In
Progress
d. Work with USDA to establish deed
restrictions for 502-direct and 523-
guaranteed loan programs
HASU, Community
Rebuilds City, County 2016;
Ongoing In Progress
e. Establish agreements and funding
mechanisms for deed restriction
administration
City, County IHTF, HASU, Community
Rebuilds, MACLT 2017 -
2018
City—In Progress
County—In
Progress
f. Update property assessments to better
delineate appreciation due to land versus
buildings
County Assessor
IHTF, HASU, Community
Rebuilds, Appraisers,
Bankers
2017 –
2018 Will begin in 2017
Page 68 of 298
52
7. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN PRACTICES
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Provide educational resources to local
development community City, County, IHTF
City and County Staff,
Local Developers and
Builders, HASU,
Community Rebuilds,
American Planning
Association (APA),
American Institute of
Architects (AIA), Smart
Growth America
2017;
Ongoing
b. Provide a library of pre-approved building
plans for affordable housing to local
developers
IHTF MACLT, Local Architects,
Developers, and Builders 2017;
Ongoing
One design
complete and
nearly approved;
Library host to be
determined
Page 69 of 298
53
8. DEVELOPMENT COSTS REDUCTION
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Establish housing funds within the City and
County budgets to support the development
of affordable housing
City, County, Special
Service Districts (SSDs)
City and County Staff,
Special Service District
Staff, Local Developers
and Builders, Public
Finance Experts
2016;
Ongoing
City—Doone
County—Done
SSDs—In Progress
b. Evaluate opportunities to develop housing
or mixed use developments on publicly
owned parcels
City, County, SSDs, State
and Federal Land
Management Agencies
City and County Staff,
Special Service District
Staff, Local Developers
and Builders, Public
Finance Experts
City, County, Low Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC),
CDBG, Olene Walker
Housing Loan Fund
(OWHLF), USDA, EDA,
CDBG, Private Donors
2016;
Ongoing
Map of publicly
owned parcels
provided to City
and County Staff in
2016; Evaluation
of development
opportunities—
Ongoing
c. Implement guidelines for fee waivers and
deferrals (e.g. impact fees, development
review fees, building permit fees, and others)
City, County, SSDs
City and County Staff,
Special Service District
Staff, Local Developers
and Builders, Public
Finance Experts
2016;
Ongoing
City—In Progress
County—Done
SSDs—In Progress
d. Consider offering direct subsidies to eligible
low-income households or developers of
affordable housing
City, County
City and County Staff,
Special Service District
Staff, Local Developers
and Builders, Public
Finance Experts
2017;
Ongoing
Depends on
creation of
housing funds with
committed
revenue source
Page 70 of 298
54
9. HOMELESSNESS
ACTION STEPS LEAD AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS
POSSIBLE FUNDING
SOURCES
TARGET
DATE STATUS
a. Work with Local Homeless Coordinating
Committee to consider needs of the homeless
Homeless Coordinating
Committee IHTF State of Utah 2017;
Ongoing
IHTF members
participated in a
permanent
supportive
housing (PSH)
toolkit in 2016;
Homeless
Coordinating
Committee—
Ongoing
b. Expand membership Homeless Coordinating
Committee IHTF 2017;
Ongoing
c. Establish operational budget Homeless Coordinating
Committee City, County State of Utah, Veterans
Affairs
2018;
Ongoing
Page 71 of 298
55
XIV. HOUSING TERMINOLOGY
Affordable housing involves many federal, state, and local agencies, programs, budgets, and stakeholders, each with
their own housing vernacular. The following is a list of common terms used in the affordable housing arena:
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) -- A secondary and typically smaller dwelling unit built on a parcel with a primary
dwelling unit. These are sometimes referred to as “mother-in-law” apartments.
Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) -- Gross income minus adjustments to income.
Affordable Housing -- Federal and State policies consider housing to be affordable when housing costs consume no
more than 30 percent of gross annual household income; this standard particularly applies to households earning less
than 80 percent of Area Median Income. Rental housing costs include rent, water, gas, and electric payments.
Ownership housing costs include mortgage, taxes, insurance, water, sewer, gas, electric payments and homeowner
association fees. Some federal policies consider housing to be affordable when the gross household income remaining
after all housing costs are paid is sufficient to cover other essential expenditures such as food, clothing, healthcare,
transportation, and childcare. This alternative definition of affordable housing is referred to as residual income.
Affordability Gap -- A term that generally refers to the difference between the average sales price for a typical
single family home and the amount that a household could afford to pay for that home without spending more than
thirty percent of gross annual household income on total housing costs. This figure is typically computed for households
earning the Area Median Income.
Area Median Income (AMI) -- Also, Area Median Family Income (MFI) -- The income level of
households in a community where half the households of the same size earn more than the AMI and half earn less than
the AMI. Each year the federal government designates the AMI for a community for households of 1-8 people. Many
affordable housing programs use AMI to determine household eligibility. In 2016, the AMI for a household of four in
Grand County was $64,300 per year (HUD).
Assured Housing -- Also, Inclusionary Zoning or Fair-Share Housing -- A set of policies that requires new
development to include affordable housing. Private housing developers may be required to build deed-restricted
affordable housing as a percentage of or in addition to market rate housing. A community may adopt assured housing
policies to meet a variety of community goals including economic integration and targeted development. Often,
development incentives are utilized to offset the reduced profit associated with construction of deed-restricted units.
Private commercial or non-residential developers may be provided several compliance alternatives including on-site
construction, off-site construction, land dedications, fee-in lieu, or others.
Attainable Housing -- A term with multiple meanings that generally refers to housing that is affordable to a
household earning between 80 percent (80%) and 120 percent (120%) of AMI.
Community Land Trust (CLT) -- A non-profit organization recognized by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development [HUD]. A CLT acquires land through purchase or donation, then allows housing units to be built on
the land through ground leases. By removing the cost of land acquisition and restricting occupancy to income eligible
households, the CLT reduces the overall cost of construction. This helps keep the housing units affordable.
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) -- A non-profit organization recognized by HUD.
A CHDO develops and/or operates affordable housing projects. A CHDO can access a wider range of public and private
financing than other non-profit organizations or government agencies.
Page 72 of 298
56
Cost-burdened -- Households paying more than 30 percent (30%) of gross annual household income are considered
cost-burdened.
CROWN Program -- An affordable home lease-to-purchase program funded by low income housing tax credits
available through the Utah Housing Corporation to qualifying families earning up to 60 percent of AMI. After the
expiration of the 15 year compliance period, the tenants occupying the home have the option of purchasing the home
for an amount equal to the unpaid balance of the financing sources plus a portion of the original equity invested.
Program includes training in personal finance, home maintenance, and repair.
Deed Restrictions -- Part of the deed to a property, restrictions can impose purchase or rental eligibility
requirements, limit the price at which a property can be sold, or limit the rental rate an owner may charge. Deed
restrictions help keep properties affordable over time.
Density Bonus -- Density bonuses allow developers to increase the number of housing units they may build on a
parcel above what is normally allowed in the zone. In exchange, the developer deed-restricts a percentage of the units
so they remain affordable to income-eligible households over time.
Development Code Barrier Reduction or Elimination -- Modification of local housing development codes to
improve land use and reduce housing costs. Many communities are examining local zoning rules to ascertain if there are
regulations (excessive setbacks, height limits, road widths, density restrictions, etc.) that make it difficult to build both
market rate and affordable housing.
Doubling Up -- More than one household living in the same housing unit. In some instances, more than two
households may live in the same housing unit. In the context of this document, the authors refer to multiple households
living together out of necessity more than choice.
Employer Assisted Housing Program -- In some communities, businesses or government agencies attract and
retain key employees by helping them find and pay for housing. Sometimes the help comes in the form of low- or no-
interest loans, forgivable loans, or down payment assistance. Employers can develop their own individual programs or
join with other employers to pool their money into one fund.
Essential Housing -- Also, Workforce Housing -- A term used to describe housing available to a class of
individuals often viewed as vital community service providers, such as police officers, firefighters, teachers, nurses, and
others. In the Moab Area, service industry employees are also viewed as essential service providers.
Fair Market Rent (FMR) -- Rent level guidelines for the Housing Choice Voucher Program established by HUD for
each county in the United States.
Fast-Track Development Process -- An expedited project approval process for developments with affordable
housing units. Reducing review time can often reduce housing costs. May include “front of the line” policies for
reviewing projects.
Fee Deferrals or Waivers -- The fees charged to new construction adds to the cost of an affordable housing
project. In some instances local government can waive fees, allow developers to pay the fees at a later time, or in some
cases pay the fees for the developer, in order to lower the cost of construction.
Page 73 of 298
57
Household Income -- The combined gross income of all residents in a household. Income includes wages and
salaries, unemployment insurance, disability payments, and child support. Household residents do not have to be
related to the householder for their earnings to be considered part of household income.
Housing Quality Standards -- Building safety standards units must meet to qualify for participation in the Housing
Choice Voucher Program and other state rental assistance programs.
Housing Rehabilitation Programs -- Low interest loans or grants available to low-income property owners and
tenants to repair, improve, or modernize their dwellings or to remove health and safety problems.
Housing Trust Fund -- A community may collect public and private funding that can be used to subsidize affordable
housing projects in that community.
HUD -- United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Inclusionary Zoning -- See Assured Housing
Income Eligible Households -- Each affordable housing program defines the income range for households that are
eligible to participate in that program.
Land Banking -- A strategy for identifying and securing lots and undeveloped tracts of land to support future
affordable housing development. When referring to private land holdings, land banking may refer to investment
strategy where property owners choose not to develop housing, suppress supply, and achieve a higher return on
investment later.
Local Match -- A local contribution of actual or in-kind funds required to “match” or leverage Federal, State, and
other funding. Local matches reflect local commitment to the creation of affordable housing units.
Low-income -- Household income between 30 percent and 50 percent of Area Median Income as defined by HUD.
Manufactured Home -- A factory-built, single family structure designed for long-term occupancy that meets the
Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards of 1976 42 U.S.C. Sec. 5401, commonly known as the
HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) Code. Such houses are delivered on permanently attached
axels and wheels and are frequently referred to as “modular” when constructed in more than one building section.
Mobile Home Conversion from Rental to Resident Ownership -- As land prices increase, there is often
financial pressure on mobile home park owners to close the parks and convert the properties to more profitable uses.
Residents of mobile home parks sometimes can, with help from government agencies and non-profit groups, purchase
the mobile home parks they live in, thereby preserving the park for affordable housing use.
Mobile Home Park Loans -- The State of Utah and various non-profit affordable housing organizations provide
low-interest loans to residents of mobile home parks to purchase the parks.
Moderate-income -- Household income between 50 percent and 80 percent of Area Median Income as defined by
HUD.
Mobile Home -- A residential dwelling fabricated in an off-site manufacturing facility designed to be a permanent
residence, and built prior to the enforcement of the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards
beginning June 15, 1976.
Page 74 of 298
58
Modular Home -- A structure intended for long-term residential use and manufactured in an offsite facility in
accordance with the International Building Code (IBC), or the International Residential Code (IRC). This housing type is
produced in one or more building sections and do not have permanent, attached axels and wheels.
Mutual Self Help Housing Program -- A federally funded rural “sweat-equity” home ownership program for
low-income families. A group of families collectively construct their homes supervised by a non-profit housing
developer. Families contribute at least 65 percent (65%) of home construction labor.
Overlay Zone -- A special zoning district that may encompass one or more underlying zones and imposes additional
requirements beyond the regulations for development in the underlying zone(s). Overlay zones deal with special
situations that are not necessarily appropriate for a specific zoning district or that apply to several districts. For example,
a provision of an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone that covers one or more zones might require that tracts above a
specified acreage that are proposed for higher density development would also include a percentage of affordable or
low-income housing units.
Payroll Wage -- The gross pay an employee receives for a given amount of time worked, typically hourly, weekly,
monthly, or yearly. Gross refers to the pay an employee would receive before withholdings are made for such things as
taxes, contributions, and savings plans.
Public Private Partnerships -- Partnerships between local governments, non-profit housing organizations, and the
private sector established to meet local affordable housing needs by bringing additional resources and skills to the
process.
Real Estate Transfer Assessment (Voluntary) -- Fees assessed when real estate properties are sold. These
fees are then used to subsidize affordable housing programs.
Severely Cost-burdened -- Households paying more than 50 percent (50%) of gross annual household income are
considered severely cost-burdened.
Subsidized Housing -- Housing sold or rented at below market values due to government or private contributions.
Tax Abatement on Residential Rehabilitation Improvements -- Incentive to improve residential
properties through a tax incentive. The increase in property tax assessed value generated by home improvements will
not be taxed for a number of years.
Tiny Home -- An umbrella term that describes housing units under 400 sq. ft. in size. While an approved primary
residence or ADU may be classified as a tiny home based on square footage, the term often refers to housing units built
for temporary occupancy and that do not meet the IBC, IRC, or HUD construction standards.
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) -- The removal of the right to develop or build, expressed in dwelling
units per acre or floor area, from property in one zoning district, and the transfer of that right to land in another district
where the transfer is permitted. The transfer may be made by the sale or exchange of all or a part of the permitted
density of one parcel to another.
USDA -- United States Department of Agriculture.
Vacancy Rate -- In this report, vacancy rate refers to the percentage of all housing units that are not currently
inhabited by full-time occupants. A vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual
Page 75 of 298
59
residence elsewhere. New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a
point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place.
Very Low-income -- Household income below 30 percent of Area Median Income as defined by HUD.
Page 76 of 298
p:\planning department\2017\correspondence\pl-17-03 mill creek hsg cup.docx
PL-17-03
Agenda Summary
Moab City Council
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 5-1
Title: Review and Adoption of Resolution #03-2017 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Housing
on the Ground Floor for the Mill Creek Multi-family Housing Project on Property Located at
1780 East Mill Creek Drive in the C-4, General Commercial Zone
Staff Presenter(s): Jeff Reinhart, City Planner
Department: Planning and Zoning
Applicant: Mike Hogan, Hogan and Associates Construction
Background/Summary:
On September 24, 2015, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the site plan and the
parking exception for this housing project located on a 6.56-acre parcel. Resolution #09-2015
established three conditions for the approval of the site plan. Those included:
1.A traffic study shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit;
2.A conditional use permit for housing on the ground floor shall be approved by the City Council;
3.A new site plan showing the adjusted parking of 1 space for each single bedroom and studio unit and 1.5
spaces (54 additional spaces) for all other units shall be submitted for review by the Planning Commission
During the Planning Commission meeting on November 10, 2016, the amended site plan was
reviewed. The plan showed the changes to the parking with the granted exception and the required
increase in additional spaces for the multi-room units. Planning Resolution #17-2016 recommended
approval of the conditional use permit by Council with the conditions:
1.The buildings cannot be located any closer to the property line than currently shown along the
northern and eastern boundaries; and
2.The property line on the south side parking area will be adjusted to be part of the development parcel.
The attached site plan is an updated version of the fifty-four additional spaces to be included on the
site. Staff has reviewed the space count and determined that the requirement for the additional
number of parking spaces has been satisfied. In addition, the siting of the building located in the
northeast corner of the development has been relocated to the south to create a large open space in
that area as a buffer to the adjacent property. The site plan has been approved by the Planning
Commission in accordance with Chapter 17.09.660- 17.09.665.
The final step for this project is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Dwellings and apartment houses
require conditional use approval as noted in MMC Chapter 17.27.020, Use regulations,
(27). Recommendation of approval of the CUP to City Council was made contingent upon the Planning
Commission receiving the amended site plan that has been provided by the applicant.
Page 77 of 298
Page 2 of 7
The review standards are described in Chapter 17.09.530, Conditional uses. Resolution #03-2017
contains the findings of the Planning Commission to consider in approving the Conditional Use
Application.
Process
Moab Municipal Code (MMC) Section 17.27.020 (27) states “Dwellings and apartment houses require
conditional use approval as described in Chapter 17.09.530, Conditional uses. MMC Section
17.09.530 is attached for your convenience.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution #03-2017 to
approve the conditional use permit for dwellings on the ground floor with the conditions listed below:
1. The buildings cannot be located any closer to the property line than currently shown along
the northern and eastern boundaries; and
2. The property line on the south side parking area will be adjusted to be part of the
development parcel.
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt Resolution #03-2017 to approve the conditional use permit
for dwellings on the ground floor with the following conditions:
1. The buildings cannot be located any closer to the property line than currently shown along
the northern and eastern boundaries; and
2. The property line on the south side parking area will be adjusted to be part of the
development parcel.
Attachment(s): Draft Council Resolution #03-2017
Applicant’s Narrative
Aerial
Page 78 of 298
Page 3 of 7
(DRAFT)
CITY OF MOAB
RESOLUTION #03-2017
A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MULTI-FAMILY
DEVELOPMENT WITH DWELLINGS ON THE GROUND FLOOR IN THE C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL
ZONE) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1780 EAST MILL CREEK DRIVE
WHEREAS, Mr. Mike Hogan of Mike Hogan and Associates Construction, with offices at 940 N 1250 W,
Centerville, Utah 84014, as the “Owner” of record of a 6.56 acre parcel of land located in the C-4
(General Commercial Zone) at 1780 East Mill Creek Drive, Moab, Utah, 84532, has applied for the
approval of a Site Plan to construct multi-family rental dwellings on the described property; and
WHEREAS, Moab Municipal Code (MMC) Chapter 17.27.020, Use Regulations (27), requires City
approval of apartments and dwellings in accordance with MMC 17.09.530, Conditional use permits;
and
WHEREAS, Owner is proposing to construct work force housing rental units and the associated
parking and open space on the property described above; and
WHEREAS, Owner is proposing to construct sufficient parking to include one (1) space per single
bedroom and studio units and one and one half (1.5) spaces for all additional units, for a total of 234
parking spaces to be used by the residents of the development as allowed under an approved parking
exception as permitted in MMC 17.09.220 Q; and
WHEREAS, Owner provided the City of Moab with the necessary documents, plans and drawings to
complete the application for review of the site plan as required by MMC Sections 17.09.530; and
WHEREAS, the City of Moab Planning Commission (“Commission”) reviewed the site plan during a
public hearing in a regularly scheduled meeting on September 24, 2015, to hear evidence of
compliance with the requirements of the pertinent code provisions; and
WHEREAS, at said meeting, the Commission tabled the action of adoption of Resolution #09-2015
until a revised site plan was submitted that showed the amended parking plan with “54 additional
spaces”; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2016, in a regularly scheduled meeting, the Commission reviewed the
plan and Resolution #17-2016 to conditionally recommend the conditional use permit for dwellings on
the ground floor to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Commission, having discussed the pertinent aspects of the development and
considered the Staff recommendation, found that the proposed use satisfies the requirements
established in MMC Chapter 17.09.530, Conditional use permits, and has met the requirements of
Title 17.09.531, Conditions for approval of specific conditional uses, as follows:
1. The proposed conditional use and accessory uses are compatible with adjacent existing uses
and other allowed uses in the zoning district.
2. The proposed use has incorporated design features sufficient to protect adjacent uses.
Page 79 of 298
Page 4 of 7
3. The proposed use is not detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare.
4. Adequate public services are available without reduction of services to other uses.
5. Proper maintenance of the site shall be provided.
6. The conditional use shall conform to all regulations of this code.
7. The use is consistent with the City of Moab General Plan as amended by Resolution #15-2009.
8. The applicant has demonstrated that site impacts within the property as well as adjoining
properties have been reasonably mitigated appropriate to the topography of the site.
9. The plans are in accordance with the requirements of MMC Chapter 17.09.531, Conditions for
approval of specific conditional uses.
WHEREAS, the Moab City Council held a public hearing in accordance with MMC 17.09.530 on
January 10, 2017, to review the conditional use permit for dwellings on the ground floor and discuss
the pertinent aspects of the development for compliance with MMC Chapter 17.09.531, and agreed
with the Planning Commission and found that the proposed use satisfies the requirements established
in the Moab Municipal Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Moab City Council, that adoption of Resolution #03-2017
conditionally approves the application for dwellings on the ground floor to be located at
approximately 1780 East Mill Creek Drive in the C-4 Zone with the following conditions:
1. The buildings cannot be located any closer to the property line than currently shown along
the northern and eastern boundaries; and
2. The property line on the south side parking area will be adjusted to be part of the
development parcel.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED by action of the Moab City Council in open session this th day of
January, 2017.
ATTEST:
Rachel Stenta Dave Sakrison
Moab City Recorder Mayor
Page 80 of 298
Page 5 of 7
17.09.530 Conditional use permits.
A. General. “Conditional use” means a land use that, because of its unique characteristics or
potential impact on the city, surrounding neighbors, or adjacent land uses, may not be
compatible in some areas or may be compatible only if certain conditions are required that
mitigate or eliminate detrimental impacts. If the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects of a
proposed conditional use cannot be substantially mitigated by the proposal or the imposition of
reasonable conditions to achieve compliance with applicable standards, the conditional use
may be denied. Conditional use permits may be approved for the uses indicated in the use
regulations of the zoning district of the property for which the conditional use permit is
requested.
F. Planning Commission Review Criteria and Processing. In reviewing a conditional use, the
planning commission shall utilize the criteria listed in subsection (H) of this section.
1. Public Hearing Required. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on any
application for a conditional use permit prior to taking any final action on the
application. The notification requirements shall be followed as listed in subsection (G) of
this section.
2. The criteria listed in subsection (H) of this section shall be used to evaluate the proposal.
3. The planning commission shall convey its recommendation and express its findings to
city council by adoption of resolution.
G. City Council Processing and Review Criteria. In reviewing a conditional use application, the
city council shall utilize the process and criteria listed below.
1. Public Hearing Required. The city council shall hold a public hearing on any application
for a conditional use permit prior to taking any final action on the application.
2. Notification Requirements. The city recorder shall cause notice of the public hearing of
the city council to be given by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city
of Moab without the necessity of notifying property owners by mail. Such published
notice shall state the time and place of such hearing and the nature of the subject to be
considered and the hearing date shall be at least fifteen days from the date of
publication.
H. Conditions of Approval. Both the planning commission and the city council shall use the
following criteria in reviewing conditional use permit requests. It is specifically understood that
certain criteria listed below may not apply to a particular application and that failure to meet
one or more of the applicable criteria may be cause for denial. In accordance with state law,
the applicant shall adequately demonstrate that the criteria have been met:
1. The proposed conditional use and accessory uses are compatible with adjacent existing
uses and other allowed uses in the zoning district. Such compatibility shall be expressed
in terms of appearance, architectural scale and features, site design and scope,
landscaping, as well as the control of adverse impacts including noise, vibration, smoke,
fumes, gas, dust, odor, lighting, glare, traffic minimization or circulation, parking issues,
or other undesirable or hazardous conditions.
2. The proposed conditional use has incorporated design features sufficient to protect
adjacent uses including but not limited to: service areas, pedestrian and vehicular
circulation, safety provisions, access ways to and from the site, buffering, fencing, and
site building placement.
3. The proposed use is not detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare through
effective management or prohibition of outdoor storage, a required sewer connection,
and proper disposal of waste.
4. Adequate public services such as streets, off-street parking, pedestrian facilities, water,
sewer, gas, electricity, police, fire, and EMS protection must be available without the
reduction of services to other existing uses.
5. Provisions for proper maintenance of the building, parking and loading areas, drives,
lighting, signs, landscaping, etc., shall be provided.
Page 81 of 298
Page 6 of 7
6. The proposed conditional use shall conform to all regulations of this code concerning
adopted plans, hours of operation, policies and requirements for parking and loading,
signs, highway access, and all other applicable regulati ons.
7. The use is consistent with the city of Moab general plan as amended.
8. The applicant must demonstrate that site impacts within the property as well as adjoining
properties have been fully mitigated appropriate to the topography of the site. The
review of impacts include, at a minimum, slope retention, flood potential, and possible
damage to riparian or hillside areas.
9. After considering the public comment relating the criteria listed above in relation to the
requested conditional use permit, the planning commission shall adopt a resolution
stating their findings of the applicant’s demonstrated ability to meet the criteria for a
conditional use permit. Approval or denial of the application by the city council shall be
memorialized in the minutes of the meeting. A determination that the applicant has not
met one or more of the applicable criteria shall be sufficient to deny the request. The
planning commission and the city council, respectively, may establish additional
conditions of operation, location, arrangement and construction in the issuance of a
conditional use permit if deemed to be in the public interest or to assure compliance with
other aspects of the Moab Municipal Code.
I. Records. A file containing all documents relevant to the application and disposition of such
conditional use permits shall be maintained by the Moab planning department.
J. Maximum Density. The maximum density allowed by a conditional use permit shall be no
greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district.
K. Specific Performance. Action authorized by approval of a conditional use permit must
commence within one year of the time the permit is issued. If the permit holder has not
commenced action under the permit within this time, the permit shall expire and the holder
must apply for a new permit. The planning commission may grant a one-time six-month
extension for good cause shown. In order to obtain an extension, the permit holder must apply
for the extension in writing before the expiration of the original permit. The application must be
submitted to the zoning administrator with a description of the cause for requesting the
extension.
L. Permit Revocation.
1. The city council may revoke the conditional use permit of any person upon a finding that
the holder of the permit has failed to comply with any of the conditions imposed at the
time the permit was issued. The city recorder shall cause notice of the revocation to be
sent to the holder of the permit and the holder of the permit shall immediately cease any
use of the property that was based on the conditional use permit. Violation of this clause
shall invoke Section 17.78.030.
2. If the city council revokes a permit under this section, the holder of the permit shall have
a right to appeal the revocation. The holder must file the appeal with the city recorder
within fifteen days of the date of the notice that the city has revoked the conditional use
permit.
3. Upon receipt of the appeal, the city council shall set a hearing on the appeal at its next
regularly scheduled meeting which is more than fifteen days after the time the city
recorder received the appeal. The city shall supply the permit holder of the time, date
and place of the hearing at least fifteen days before the hearing. At the hearing, the
permit holder shall have the right to be heard on the revocation.
M. Appeals.
1. Any person adversely affected by the final decision of the city council pursuant to this
chapter may appeal that decision to the Grand County district court.
Page 82 of 298
Page 7 of 7
2. A judicial action seeking review of a decision by the city council must be filed no later
than thirty days from the date of the final decision that is the subject of the action or legal
claim. Any action commenced beyond that time shall be subject to summary dismissal.
3. Review of any conditional use permit application shall be based upon the record of
proceedings before city council. Upon the commencement of a judicial appeal
challenging any decision under this chapter, the city shall transmit to the district court
true and correct copies of all submittals, testimony, orders, and file documents
comprising the record pertaining to the application, including any transcript or tape
recordings of proceedings. (Ord. 2016-02 (part), 2016; Ord. 12-09 (part), 2012; Ord. 12-
05 (part), 2012; Ord. 11-09 (part), 2011; Ord. 11-01 (part), 2011; Ord. 10-13 (part), 2010;
Ord. 10-06 (part), 2010; Ord. 08-05 (part), 2008)
17.09.531 Conditions for approval of specific conditional uses.
(1) Dwellings in the C-4 Commercial Zone. All single-family and two-family dwellings shall be subject
to the following requirements:
A. Minimum wall dimensions of the principal structure, excluding garage, shall be twenty-four feet.
B. All principal residential structures shall:
1. Be placed on a slab-on-grade or perimeter foundation as approved by the building
department;
2. Have a wood, brick or stucco exterior, or a material that looks similar to wood, brick or
stucco;
3. Have a minimum 4:12 roof pitch and a one foot overhang (structures constructed in the
traditional southwest Spanish style are exempt from this requirement);
4. Allowed accessory structures shall not exceed twenty-five percent of the rear yard;
5. Buffering is required in accordance with other provisions of this chapter;
6. Minimum Setbacks for Residential Structures in the C-4 Zone.
Minimum Setbacks for Residential Structures in the C-4 Zone
Front yard 30 feet
Side yard 15 feet
Rear yard 20 feet
Page 83 of 298
1 inch = 200 feet
0 200 400100Feet ÜMill Creek Drive & US 191
Red Rock
Partners
County
Spani
s
h
V
a
l
l
e
y
D
r
.
U
S
1
9
1
-
M
a
i
n
S
t
.
City
Mi
l
l Creek Dr.
Red Rock
Partners
Red Rock
Partners
Intermountain
Capital
Group
Intermountain
Capital
Group
Intermountain
Capital
Group
Hogan Elite
Residential Hogan Elite
Residential
Page 84 of 298
This project narrative is for the Millcreek Employee and Affordable Housing development. This narrative is a follow up to
the approved plan from the Planning Commission Meeting on September 24th, 2015 to address the request to increase
parking spaces and the Conditional Use Permit.
Integration of requested increase of parking spaces:
The revised site plan complies with the request of additional parking spaces utilizing the calculation set at the
September 24th, 2015 commission meeting of 1.0 space per studio/one bedroom unit and calculation of 1.5 spaces for all
other units.
The original site plan had to be slightly modified to account for the added asphalt needed for the additional parking
spaces. With this modified site plan, Millcreek Development saw an opportunity to maintain open space, improve unit
mix, and add the required parking spaces. This was achieved by removing two buildings and adding a garden level to
remaining 10 buildings. This also created an opportunity to generate a better unit mix into the overall development.
Prior plan accounted for only 1 and 2 bedrooms. The modified plan, addresses the need for larger family housing by
adding 3 bedroom units – see chart below for full unit mix and parking space calculations.
Total Unit : 196 Total Parking : 252
Studio/1-BDRM : 84 Parking : 84
2-BDRM : 100 Parking : 150
3-DBRM : 12 Parking : 18
Phase One:
116
Type of
Unit # of Units
# of
Parking
Required
Total
Required
Parking
35% Studio 20 1 20
20% 1-BDRM 28 1 28
40% 2-BDRM 60 1.5 90
5% 3-BDRM 8 1.5 12
100% Total 116 150
Phase Two:
80
Type of
Unit # of Units
# of
Parking
Required
Total
Required
Parking
35% Studio 16 1 16
20% 1-BDRM 20 1 20
40% 2-BDRM 40 1.5 60
5% 3-BDRM 4 1.5 6
100% Total 80 102
Page 85 of 298
Comments to Conditional Permit Use:
1. The proposed conditional use and accessory uses are compatible with adjacent existing uses and other allowed
uses in the zoning district. Such compatibility shall be expressed in terms of appearance, architectural scale
and features, site design and scope, landscaping, as well as the control of adverse impacts including noise,
vibration, smoke, fumes, gas, dust, odor, lighting, glare, traffic minimization or circulation, parking issues, or
other undesirable or hazardous conditions.
The development conforms under current zoning and it improves the current collection of historical dumping of dirt that
has occurred. The buildings are spread across the entire parcel to maximize open space and create landscaping barriers to
minimize the impact to neighboring properties. Currently, the surrounding properties are made up of commercial retail,
single family, and undeveloped properties.
2. The proposed conditional use has incorporated design features sufficient to protect adjacent uses including but
not limited to: service areas, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, safety provisions, access ways to and from
the site, buffering, fencing, and site building placement.
The buildings are spread across the entire parcel to maximize open space and to create enough space for landscaping and
fencing barriers to minimize the impact to neighboring properties. The development will incorporate a walking/biking path
through the open space areas.
3. The proposed use is not detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare through effective management or
prohibition of outdoor storage, a required sewer connection, and proper disposal of waste.
The development will fulfill the much needed housing demand within the community. The housing will be used as employee
housing for the missing middle as well as meeting the demand for lower income families. The development will set aside
deed restricted units and/or build units through the LIHTC affordable housing program.
4. Adequate public services such as streets, off-street parking, pedestrian facilities, water, sewer, gas, electricity,
police, fire, and EMS protection must be available without the reduction of services to other existing uses.
All listed public services are available and existing uses will not be reduced.
5. Provisions for proper maintenance of the building, parking and loading areas, drives, lighting, signs,
landscaping, etc., shall be provided.
All facilities and landscaping maintenance will be scheduled to ensure the safety of the residents and contribute to the
beautification of the developed property.
6. The proposed conditional use shall conform to all regulations of this code concerning adopted plans, hours of
operation, policies and requirements for parking and loading, signs, highway access, and all other applicable
regulations.
The development of the housing will meet all applicable regulations.
7. The use is consistent with the city of Moab general plan as amended.
The development is consistent with the general plan as it helps to fulfil the shortage of available housing.
8. The applicant must demonstrate that site impacts within the property as well as adjoining properties have been
fully mitigated appropriate to the topography of the site. The review of impacts include, at a minimum, slope
retention, flood potential, and possible damage to riparian or hillside areas.
The details of the plans outline the mitigation of impacts.
Page 86 of 298
PL-16-149
TECHNICAL REVIEW
Conditional Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Housing Located in the C-4 Zone
For Presentation: November 10, 2016, Meeting of the Moab Planning Commission
Date Prepared: November 3, 2016
Prepared By: Jeff Reinhart, AICP Planning Director
Name of the Owner(s) of Record:
Hogan and Associates
940 North 1250 West
Centerville, UT 84014
Business Resolutions
50 West 100 South
Moab, Utah 84532
Name of Representative(s):
Mike Hogan
Shik Han
Mike Bynum
Project Address:
1780 East Mill Creek Drive
Moab, Utah 84532
Project Summary
The proposal consists of the construction of six buildings that will provide apartment-style multi-
family housing for local employees. The project includes landscaped open space, a play area, and
storm water detention on the 6.56-acre parcel. A trail system and adequate parking are also
provided.
The proposal was given approval by the Planning Commission on September 24, 2015 with the
conditions:
1. A traffic study shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit;
2. A conditional use permit shall be approved by the City Council;
3. A new site plan showing the adjusted parking of 1 space for each single bedroom and studio unit
and 1.5 spaces (54 additional spaces) for all other units shall be submitted for review by the
Planning Commission
Review of Criteria
MMC 17.09.530, Conditional use permits, lists the following criteria
City of Moab
Planning Department
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532-2534
(435) 259-5129
Fax (435) 259-0600
City of Moab
Planning Department
Interoffice Correspondence
Page 87 of 298
1. The proposed conditional use and accessory uses are compatible with adjacent existing uses
and other allowed uses in the zoning district. Such compatibility shall be expressed in terms of
appearance, architectural scale and features, site design and scope, landscaping, as well as the
control of adverse impacts including noise, vibration, smoke, fumes, gas, dust, odor, lighting, glare,
traffic minimization or circulation, parking issues, or other undesirable or hazardous conditions.
The use is compatible with many of the surrounding uses. The structures are larger in scale than
the single family homes but these new buildings are located on a relatively large parcel of land and
have been located in such a way to minimize impacts to the neighboring properties and focus
impacts toward the interior of the property. Ample open space is provided between the structures
for an open development.
The surrounding uses include an RV/campground to the west across East Mill Creek Drive, a
nursery retail business and three single family residences to the north, undeveloped property to the
south, and to the east is a single-family residence and more undeveloped property.
Landscaping, trails, and other walkways will be provided that is similar to the submitted plan. All
lighting shall comply with MMC 17.09.660 H and be downward directed, fully shielded, full cut-off
fixtures.
2. The proposed conditional use has incorporated design features sufficient to protect adjacent
uses; including but not limited to: service areas, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, safety
provisions, access ways to and from the site, buffering, fencing, and site building placement.
The buildings are sited on the property so many of the impacts are directed toward the interior of
the property. Fences and/or landscaped buffering will be constructed to provide separation from
adjacent residential uses. Improvements to Mill Creek Drive will also be required but future UDOT
improvements to HWY 191 create a possible conflict and there is some uncertainty as to the scope
of the improvements.
3. The proposed use is not detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare; through effective
management or prohibition of outdoor storage, a required sewer connection, and proper disposal of
waste.
The proposed housing is intended to fill a niche that is not currently addressed in the city. The
proposed units will be used for employee housing, and will be connected to the culinary water and
sanitary sewer services that are currently available.
4. Adequate public services such as streets, off-street parking, pedestrian facilities, water, sewer,
gas, electricity, police, fire, and EMS protection must be are available without reduction of services
to other uses.
The listed services are available and will not be reduced to other existing uses.
5. Proper maintenance of the site building, parking and loading areas, drives, lighting, signs,
landscaping, etc., shall be provided.
Maintenance of the above elements will be a practical matter for management of the property. The
safety of residents and visitors is crucial for continued operation of the development. The visual
aspect is also important and a matter of pride for the developer/owner as well as the tenants.
6. The conditional use shall conform to all regulations of this code; concerning adopted plans,
hours of operation, policies and requirements for parking and loading, signs, highway access, and
all other applicable regulations.
Page 88 of 298
The housing will function as any other multi-family development within the City of Moab and all
applicable regulations will be met.
7. The use is consistent with the City of Moab General Plan as amended by Resolution #15-2009.
City Council adopted Resolution #15-2009 on October 13, 2009, to amend the City of Moab
General Plan with the Affordable Housing 5-Year Goals and Action Plan that were adopted as part
of the Grand County and City of Moab Housing Study and Affordable Housing Plan. The stated
goal in the current plan is “To provide or make available affordable housing for all Moab residents.
This private project will meet a portion of the main goal and satisfy other goals to:
1. “…achieve and protect secure, affordable, decent, housing opportunities…;
2. … achieve adequate owned and rental housing opportunities to allow the community to recruit
and retain a workforce with skills and credentials needed in the community…;
3. …achieve creation and retention of housing stock to very low, low, moderate, and moderate to
120 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) households. ;
8. The applicant must demonstrate that site impacts within the property as well as adjoining
properties have been fully mitigated appropriate to the topography of the site. The review of
impacts include, at a minimum, slope retention, flood potential, and possible damage to riparian or
hillside areas.
These issues are addressed in the submitted plans that have been reviewed by staff.
9. The plans are in accordance with the requirements of MMC Chapter 17.09.531, Conditions for
approval of specific conditional uses, and satisfy the minimum wall dimensions, foundation
requirements, setbacks, architectural standards, and buffering requirements.
Page 89 of 298
Page 90 of 298
Page 91 of 298
Page 92 of 298
MAIN LEVEL0"12344.55678SECOND LEVEL10' - 3 1/4"THIRD LEVEL20' - 6 1/2"T.O. PLATE29' - 7 3/4"1EHA5.11EHA5.12EHA5.12EHA5.14" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"EL01EL04EL05EL13EL21EL17EL08EL13EL09EL02AAA999999AAAEL21EL117EHA6.1TYPEL13EL13EL13EL21EL13EL05EL05EL05EL04EL22EL22EL22EL22EL22EL0340' - 11 1/4"EL18MAIN LEVEL0"12344.55678SECOND LEVEL10' - 3 1/4"THIRD LEVEL20' - 6 1/2"T.O. PLATE29' - 7 3/4"1EHA5.11EHA5.12EHA5.12EHA5.1EL09EL01EL10EL05EL134" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"EL01EL02EL05EL13EL06EL171010999AAAAAAEL04EL21EL21EL12EL12EL147EHA6.1TYPEL05EHA3.31SimEL04EL18EL06EL06EL05EL05EL05EL13EL10EL22EL22EL22EL22EL22EL22EL0340' - 10 1/2"EL18COPYRIGHTAE URBIA, LLC.DATE:SHEET #:THESE DRAWINGS AND THE DESIGN SHOWN HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AE URBIA ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS AND THEIR CONSULTANTS. ANY REPRODUCTION, COPYING OR USE OTHER THAN FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT IS PROHOBITED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF AE URBIA ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS. ANY PROHIBITED USE OF THESE DRAWINGS OR DESIGN SHOWN ARE SUBJECT TO LEGAL ACTION.8/25/2015 4:54:51 PMF:\AE URBIA JOBS\2015\AE2015.007 - HOGAN CONSTRUCTION - Moab Student Housing\Cad\Revit\AE2015.07_MILLCEEK Housing_Studio Units\AE2015.07_Moab Housing_Studio Units.rvtPROP. I.D. 02-017-0174MILLCREEK HOUSING1780 E. MILLCREEK DR. MOAB, UT. 84532AE2013.020BUILDINGELEVATIONS -SMALL STUDIOA3.1.115 NOV 2013 1/4" = 1'-0"A3.1.11BUILDING ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"A3.1.12BUILDING ELEVATIONELEVATION KEYNOTESKeyValueKeynote TextEL01 30 YEAR ARCHITECTURALSHINGLES OVER 15 LB. FELT ONPLYWOOD SHEATHING PERSTRUCT.EL02 CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL,SEE STRUCT.EL03 FINISH GRADEEL04 TURTLE VENT (OR EQUAL) - NEEDSTO SUPPLY AT LEAST 50 SQ.INCHES OF NET FREE AREAEL05 VINYL WINDOW - SEE WINDOWSCHEDULEEL06 WOOD COLUMN, SEE STRUCTURALEL08 GAS METER LOCATION, SEEMECHANICAL DRAWINGS FOR MOREINFORMATIONEL09 FIBERCEMENT SIDING - PAINTEL10 FIBERCEMENT TRIM BOARD - PAINTEL11 PRE-VENTILATED ALUMINUM SOFFITEL12 42" HIGH PAINTED STEELGUARDRAIL, NOT TO ALLOW 4"SHPERE TO PASS THROUGH, SEEDETAILEL13 SLIDING GLASS DOOR, SEESCHEDULE & DETAILSEL14 PROVIDE FLASHING AT ALLTRANSITIONS BETWEEN EXTERIORMATERIALSEL15 ADDRESS NUMBERS: MIN. 4" TALL,MIN. STROKE WIDTH 0.5", VERIFY W/FIRE MARSHALL ACTUAL ADDRESSBEFORE INSTALLATIONEL17 PRE-FINISHED METAL GUTTER WITHDOWNSPOUTEL18 METAL GUTTER TO BE HARD PIPEDINTO STORM DRAINEL19 EIFS SIDING SYSTEMEL20 CONCRETE CAPEL21 42" TALL WROUGHT IRON METALRAILINGEL22 3/4" STUCCO REVEALSIssue ScheduleMARKISSUE DATEDESCRIPTIONPage 93 of 298
MAIN LEVEL0"ABCDESECOND LEVEL10' - 3 1/4"THIRD LEVEL20' - 6 1/2"T.O. PLATE29' - 7 3/4"1EHA5.21EHA5.2EL01EL02EL04EL05EL06EL20EL06EL20EL18EL19EL17AAAAAAEL084" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"EL05EL05EL05EL05EL05EL22EL22EL22EL22EL22EL04EL03EL1540' - 11"EL18MAIN LEVEL0"ABCDESECOND LEVEL10' - 3 1/4"THIRD LEVEL20' - 6 1/2"T.O. PLATE29' - 7 3/4"1EHA5.21EHA5.2EL01EL04EL05EL19EL18EL17AAAAAA4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"4" 12"EL22EL22EL22EL22EL22EL22EL03EL0440' - 11 1/2"EL18COPYRIGHTAE URBIA, LLC.DATE:SHEET #:THESE DRAWINGS AND THE DESIGN SHOWN HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AE URBIA ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS AND THEIR CONSULTANTS. ANY REPRODUCTION, COPYING OR USE OTHER THAN FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT IS PROHOBITED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF AE URBIA ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS. ANY PROHIBITED USE OF THESE DRAWINGS OR DESIGN SHOWN ARE SUBJECT TO LEGAL ACTION.8/25/2015 4:55:02 PMF:\AE URBIA JOBS\2015\AE2015.007 - HOGAN CONSTRUCTION - Moab Student Housing\Cad\Revit\AE2015.07_MILLCEEK Housing_Studio Units\AE2015.07_Moab Housing_Studio Units.rvtPROP. I.D. 02-017-0174MILLCREEK HOUSING1780 E. MILLCREEK DR. MOAB, UT. 84532AE2013.020BUILDINGELEVATIONS -SMALL STUDIOA3.1.215 NOV 2013 1/4" = 1'-0"A3.1.22BUILDING ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"A3.1.21BUILDING ELEVATIONELEVATION KEYNOTESKeyValueKeynote TextEL01 30 YEAR ARCHITECTURALSHINGLES OVER 15 LB. FELT ONPLYWOOD SHEATHING PERSTRUCT.EL02 CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL,SEE STRUCT.EL03 FINISH GRADEEL04 TURTLE VENT (OR EQUAL) - NEEDSTO SUPPLY AT LEAST 50 SQ.INCHES OF NET FREE AREAEL05 VINYL WINDOW - SEE WINDOWSCHEDULEEL06 WOOD COLUMN, SEE STRUCTURALEL08 GAS METER LOCATION, SEEMECHANICAL DRAWINGS FOR MOREINFORMATIONEL09 FIBERCEMENT SIDING - PAINTEL10 FIBERCEMENT TRIM BOARD - PAINTEL11 PRE-VENTILATED ALUMINUM SOFFITEL12 42" HIGH PAINTED STEELGUARDRAIL, NOT TO ALLOW 4"SHPERE TO PASS THROUGH, SEEDETAILEL13 SLIDING GLASS DOOR, SEESCHEDULE & DETAILSEL14 PROVIDE FLASHING AT ALLTRANSITIONS BETWEEN EXTERIORMATERIALSEL15 ADDRESS NUMBERS: MIN. 4" TALL,MIN. STROKE WIDTH 0.5", VERIFY W/FIRE MARSHALL ACTUAL ADDRESSBEFORE INSTALLATIONEL17 PRE-FINISHED METAL GUTTER WITHDOWNSPOUTEL18 METAL GUTTER TO BE HARD PIPEDINTO STORM DRAINEL19 EIFS SIDING SYSTEMEL20 CONCRETE CAPEL21 42" TALL WROUGHT IRON METALRAILINGEL22 3/4" STUCCO REVEALSIssue ScheduleMARKISSUE DATEDESCRIPTIONPage 94 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7‐1
Title: Award of the Employment legal services contract/proposal
Fiscal Impact: Variable; see rate structure comparisons
Staff Presenter(s): David Everitt
Department: Administration
Applicant: N/A
Background/Summary:
The City let a request for proposals from qualified professional law firms to
provide a full range of specialized employment counsel services on a part‐time
contractual basis. The period of contract will be one year, with annual renewals
contemplated based on a mutually agreeable working relationship.
All of the proposals received were of high quality; the substantive distinguishing
factors were a) experience of primary and support counsel, b) value‐added
services, and c) potential cost.
Options:
Approve, reject, or modify staff recommendation
Staff Recommendation:
Enter into a contract with Parr Brown Gee and Loveless to provide specialized
employment‐related legal services.
Recommended Motion: Move to authorize staff to contract with Parr Brown Gee
and Loveless to provide specialized employment‐related legal services for the
City of Moab.
Page 95 of 298
Attachment(s):
1. The RFP
2. Bids from:
a. Crowdell and Wolley
b. Crook and Taylor
c. Dufford Waldec
d. Parr Brown Gee and Loveless
e. Smith Hartvigsen
3. Internal scoring sheet
4. Rate comparison
5. Draft contract
Page 96 of 298
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\employment law services
ad.docx
CITY OF MOAB
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
EMPLOYMENT COUNSEL SERVICES
The City of Moab hereby invites interested individual attorneys and law firms with experience in
employment and labor matters to submit written proposals to provide Employment Counsel to the city.
Request for proposal forms are available at the Moab City Offices located at 217 East Center Street,
Moab, Utah 84532 or online at: www.bidsync.com.
All proposals must be turned in to the Moab City Recorder’s Offices, located at 217 East Center Street,
Moab, Utah 84532. Moab City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals; or to accept or reject the
whole or any part of the proposal; or to waive any informality or technicality in the interest of Moab City.
The Deadline for all requests for proposals is 4:00 p.m. Friday, October 7, 2016. For further information,
please contact the Moab City Recorder’s office at: (435) 259‐5121.
/s/ Rachel E. Stenta
City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Published in the Times Independent, September 15, 22 and 29, 2016.
Page 97 of 298
City of Moab – RFP for Employment Counsel – Page 1 Moab City Recorder’s Office
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\Employment Law Services RFP.docx
CITY OF MOAB
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
EMPLOYMENT COUNSEL
The City of Moab hereby invites interested individual attorneys and law firms with
experience in employment and labor matters to submit written proposals to
provide Employment Counsel to the city.
GENERAL SCOPE OF SERVICE REQUESTED
The City of Moab is soliciting the interest of qualified professional law firms to
provide a full range of Employment Counsel on a part-time contractual basis. The
period of contract will be one year, with annual renewals contemplated based on
a mutually agreeable working relationship.
We are seeking a law firm(s) with experience in municipal or local government
and strong general legal practice capabilities to serve as a provider of legal
services for a wide range of employment and labor law issues outlined in this
RFP.
MOAB COMMUNITY BACKGROUND
The City of Moab is located just south of the Colorado River in Grand County and
is a regional center of southeastern Utah. It is located on the west side of the
12,500-foot-high La Sal Mountains in a valley fifteen miles long and three miles
wide within the heart of the Colorado Plateau known as Spanish Valley.
Moab's historical economy was based on farming, ranching, and fruit growing
although some mining was done along the Colorado River and in the La Sal
Mountains. Moab's largest industry for the last quarter century has been tourism.
Page 98 of 298
City of Moab – RFP for Employment Counsel – Page 2 Moab City Recorder’s Office
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\Employment Law Services RFP.docx
The 2010 Census shows the city’s current population at 5,046. Jeeping, hiking,
climbing, mountain biking and river activities are all recreational opportunities
available in Moab.
The City of Moab is governed by a five member City Council with a Mayor. The
City is managed by a City Manager under the policy direction of the City Council.
INFORMATIONAL
The City currently employs approximately 68, full-time benefited positions – 16 of
which are sworn public safety positions - and annually employs over 150 seasonal
and part-time employees.
Our Workers’ compensation carrier is Utah Local Governments Trust.
Our liability carrier is Utah Local Governments Trust.
We provide retirement/pension benefits through Utah Retirement Systems.
PARTNERING RELATIONSHIP
Ideally, we are seeking a partnering relationship with one principal law firm with a
goal of ensuring that all of Moab City’s employment and labor needs are met
within a predictable budget. We are open to ideas on how to develop such
systems and best utilize each other's resources so as to achieve greater
productivity and cost reduction consistent with quality results.
We encourage creative ideas for alternative financial arrangements that provide
incentives and that reward results rather than time devoted to a matter. We are
soliciting your input on a fee arrangement that allows you to deploy your
resources in the most cost-efficient manner and ensures that Moab City has
access to and receives high quality outside counsel services.
SCHEDULE OF LEGAL SERVICES
Proposals should include a statement of qualifications that includes descriptions
of the firm’s experience in all of the following practice areas for which they wish
to be considered:
Work Categories Covered by This RFP for Employment Counsel:
1. Employment matters including employment litigation, including
coordination with Insurance carriers;
a. Experience with local, state, federal and administrative filings
2. Government Investigations, Wage Garnishments, Employment
Verifications, Search Warrants and Subpoenas;
Page 99 of 298
City of Moab – RFP for Employment Counsel – Page 3 Moab City Recorder’s Office
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\Employment Law Services RFP.docx
3. Recruitment & Hiring in a municipal government environment;
4. Employee benefits and pension issues;
5. Compensation practices and FLSA compliance;
6. General labor matters including Loudermill hearings, internal affairs
investigations, grievances, FMLA requests and procedures;
7. Counsel and guidance on discipline, documentation and investigations;
8. RIFs and Separation Agreements;
9. Policy and procedure review and consultation; and
10. Counsel and guidance on compliance, record retention, mandatory
reporting and general matters.
Special Services
Special services are those provided on an as-needed basis when directed by
the City Manager. These special services, anticipated to be provided at a
specified hourly rate, include research, preparation, and follow-through on
various types of specifically requested special services matters. If the firm
proposes to provide litigation services to the City, provide the hourly rates and
other terms that would apply.
Describe any areas of law listed above in which you would need to retain
specialized counsel.
SUBMITTAL PACKAGE
Your Qualifications to Provide Services
The selected firm(s) will assist Moab City by providing quality legal services in a
cost effective value-added manner. Your proposal should contain sufficient
details so that the selection committee can understand your firm's experience in
the identified areas and should provide the following information.
A. Contact Information
The name and contact information of one person with whom the selection
committee or its designees should communicate regarding any questions
about the submission.
B. Firm Information
Proposals should include a short history of the firm, its size, financial
stability and experience in the practice areas. Provide the addresses of: (i)
home office, and (ii) proposed office(s) that would provide services to
Moab City.
C. Your Expertise/Staffing
1. Describe your experience in the relevant practice areas.
2. Identify the practice leads by practice area.
Page 100 of 298
City of Moab – RFP for Employment Counsel – Page 4 Moab City Recorder’s Office
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\Employment Law Services RFP.docx
3. Identify the attorneys in your firm who would be working as the core
team to provide the services defined in this RFP (include a
resume/CV for those attorneys) in the practice areas.
4. Considering the scope of work proposed, describe the staffing you
would propose, including an explanation of how you would resource
projects.
5. Describe how your firm will provide services to Moab City and your
firm's ability to respond to both normal and urgent requests.
6. Complete and submit the firm Self Evaluation (Appendix B)
regarding your firm’s current expertise for each Work Category that
is offered to your existing client base.
7. Describe the firm’s practices regarding ongoing professional
development, training and keeping current on legal developments
affecting its clients?
D. Conflicts
Moab City considers the activities of all firm members in determining
whether a conflict of interest exists. Please identify any known or potential
barriers which would prevent your firm from being able to represent Moab
City.
Moab City expects disclosure of the following:
1. Representation of a Moab City Official or Employee; and
2. Representation of a party in a matter adverse to Moab City.
E. Communication
Explain how you will keep Moab City fully apprised of firm activity regarding
Moab City and project status. Explain how you will ensure that service
delivery is uniform and advice is consistent across Moab City. Does your
firm offer on-line tracking/data?
F. Value Added Services/Resources
Explain what additional resources the firm can offer, including updates/in-
house education programs for Moab City executives, HR staff, managers
and employees. Please describe any complimentary or fee-based
resources including type of service, frequency and cost (if applicable).
G. Fee Proposal
Provide your recommendation for the fee structure. If you propose
alternative fee options, identify how the fee was determined and the
amount. If any part of your fee proposal includes using a billable hour fee,
describe how you would manage such billable hours to ensure effective
value added legal service within the dollar range referenced above for
legal services, and describe each level of legal service provider and the
applicable fee.
Page 101 of 298
City of Moab – RFP for Employment Counsel – Page 5 Moab City Recorder’s Office
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\Employment Law Services RFP.docx
Identify the frequency of your billing cycle and payment terms. Please also
identify what, if any services, are not billable and the content of your
invoicing statements.
Identify what charges the firm will impose for travel time and estimated
monthly travel time.
H. Summary
Please summarize the scope of the proposal and include an explanation
of why your proposal should be selected.
I. References
Please include the names, titles, phone number and e-mail address for two
current municipal government clients for whom your firm provides services
similar to what you propose to provide to Moab City.
SELECTION PROCESS
If you decide to respond to this RFP, your proposal and your firm will be
evaluated by your ability to meet the requirements of Moab City, your fee
arrangement applicable to your recommended approach, and the overall value
of your firm to Moab City. The Moab City Manager will lead a committee of
members of Moab City's Human Resources Department together with Moab City
executives to review and evaluate all proposals. Proposed fee arrangements,
experience, service delivery and other qualifications will all be important
selection factors.
You may be asked to come to our offices in Moab, Utah to make presentations to
the committee. All respondents will be notified of the selection, once a final
decision has been made.
In order to serve the best interests of the city, Moab City reserves the rights and
options to:
1. Reject any or all of the submittals
2. Waive any of the provisions in the Request for Proposals
3. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposals
4. Cancel the Request for Proposal process
5. Waive any technical error in the responses it receives
6. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the respondents to the Request
for Proposals in regard to costs or to further refine the scope of
services to be provided
7. Award a contract or contracts to more than one firm for different
services
Page 102 of 298
City of Moab – RFP for Employment Counsel – Page 6 Moab City Recorder’s Office
C:\Users\rstenta\Google Drive\Recorder\Bids\2016\Employment Law\Employment Law Services RFP.docx
Proposers may submit additional information as deemed appropriate.
All inquiries regarding this Request for Proposals should be directed using
Bidsync.com
All answers to questions and additional materials will be disseminated to all firms
which have indicated their intent to submit a proposal so that everyone has the
same information.
The deadline for submitting the completed proposal in its entirety is:
It is acceptable to submit an electronic version of the proposal via email though a
hard copy via U.S. Mail is preferred. Proposals must be received no later than
HOW TO APPLY
Proposals should include a cover letter and a response to the RFP. The RFP
response should not exceed twenty pages exclusive of résumés.
Proposals may be mailed to:
Rachel Stenta, City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Attention: Employment Counsel Proposal
City of Moab
217 East Center Street
Moab, UT 84532
The process timetable is:
Deadline for Receipt of Proposals is Friday, October 7, 2016 at 4:00 PM.
Committee Review and Selection of Interviewees, if any will be determined at a
date after the proposal deadline.
We greatly appreciate your interest in supporting our organization.
Page 103 of 298
Oct. 7, 2016
Rachel Stenta
City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Attention: Employment Counsel Proposal
City of Moab
217 E. Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
RE: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, Employment Counsel Services for the City of Moab
Dear Ms. Stenta and Moab City officials,
Thank you for taking the time to review this packet, which constitutes our “Statement of Qualifications”
and our proposal. We are very interested in providing employment counsel to the City of Moab, and we meet all
of the requirements specified in its RFP. We are a private Utah law firm that specializes in working with
municipalities and local government. We have provided prosecution services to Moab City for the past two years,
and we have very much enjoyed working with the City, municipal court, law enforcement officers and other
interested parties. In addition to our work with Moab City, we currently are appointed as the City Attorney for
the cities of Taylorsville and Ephraim, and the County Attorney for Daggett County. As such, we are well versed
in all areas of employment and labor law issues.
In providing prosecutorial services for the City of Moab, we have gained a deep understanding of the
issues before the City. We have developed excellent relationships with key stakeholders, even friendships, and
gained valuable experience. Our law firm also provides prosecution services for the cities of South Salt Lake,
Taylorsville, Draper, and Herriman, as well as for Daggett County and several cities in Sanpete County. We have
tackled numerous employment and labor matters in representing municipal government in our civil capacities as
city and county attorneys. Cowdell & Woolley Partner Tracy Cowdell also is an appointed hearing officer to the
Utah State Board of Education’s Utah Professional Practices Advisory Committee, where he oversees and
conducts hearings that directly involve employees and matters of employment.
Our firm of 7 attorneys and a dozen support staff members has direct knowledge of employment
litigation, government investigations and wage garnishments, recruitment and hiring in a municipal government
environment, compensation practices and FLSA compliance, and other general labor matters. Because we focus
exclusively on representing government and public-sector entities, our firm readily understands the unique needs
and issues before Moab City and we are ready to be of immediate service. Thank you again for considering our
proposal. It has been an honor to work with Moab City to date as its prosecutors, and we hope to expand upon
that relationship by providing the city with Employment Counsel.
Yours Truly,
COWDELL & WOOLLEY
Tracy Scott Cowdell, Esq.
(801) 550-9864
tcowdell@me.com
Chad L. Woolley, Esq.
(801) 550-3988
cwoolley@me.com
Page 104 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 2
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
With this proposal, we have attempted to closely follow the request for proposal outlined
by the City of Moab. We are available to provide the City with a full range of Employment
Counsel services on a part-time contractual basis. We are highly qualified, with direct
experience in municipal and local government and strong general legal practice capabilities
relating to a wide range of employment and labor law issues. We have represented Moab City as
its municipal prosecutors for the past two years so we know the issues and area well. Because
we already have worked in partnership with Moab City, we are able to step right in and do what
needs to be done – ensuring quality results and that all of Moab’s employment and labor needs
are met within a predictable budget.
Our firm’s specialty is representing governmental entities, political subdivisions and
municipalities. We understand the issues and circumstances before local government entities
who rely on taxpayer funding, and we have a strong track record of helping them achieve their
goals. In all, our firm has 7 experienced attorneys, led by Tracy Cowdell and fellow firm partner
Chad Woolley. We also employ a dozen support staff members, and all of our staff are
permanent employees. As a firm, we have been representing municipalities for the past decade.
We have extensive experience relating to employment law, along with foundational experience
related to representing elected and appointed officials. With more than 15 years of practice
experience, our firm has been heavily involved with employment issues and staffing. We have
sued insurance companies; conducted employment verifications, search warrants and subpoenas;
provided counsel and guidance on employee discipline; handled RIFs and Separation
Agreements, and ensured compliance on record retention and other reporting.
Our trademark is customer service; we make sure our customers are satisfied. We are
known for our communication, responsiveness and attention to detail. We care about our clients
and their goals. Our niche is government work because we recognize the difference local leaders
make each day. Their decisions have impact on citizens that few ever realize and many take for
granted. We take a great deal of pride in assisting those efforts.
All of our attorneys will be available to help on complicated projects or with specialized
questions. We are available to provide city officials with appropriate legal research, draft
policies as necessary, provide counsel and guidance, and represent and advise the City in all
areas of employment and labor law. We are also available to help the City Manager with
research, preparation, and follow-through on various special services matters. We will represent
the City if litigation is needed. Our firm has attorneys with 15 years of knowledge and
experience with Utah municipal law, other public sector experience and employment law.
Collectively, we have more than 50 years of experience practicing law in the public sector.
Our firm recognizes that each of our governmental clients have unique needs and wishes.
Therefore, we keep a very flexible mindset when interacting with each client. Before deciding
on each provision, may we suggest a meeting between the relevant parties to discuss any
Page 105 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 3
outstanding issues or questions. We at COWDELL & WOOLLEY, P.C. feel that we are able to meet
all of the City Council’s requirements and will do so with a high level of quality.
A. CONTACT INFORMATION
The contact person for this RFP is Cowdell & Woolley Partner Chad Woolley. His contact
information is:
Chad L. Woolley
32 E. Main Street
Sandy, Utah 84070
Phone: 801-550-3988
Fax: 801-458-6276
Email: cwoolley@me.com
B. FIRM INFORMATION
COWDELL & WOOLLEY, P.C. is a Utah law firm with a broad background in municipal law,
criminal prosecution, and civil litigation. We focus exclusively on representing
governmental entities with impressive experience in civil representation of municipalities and
other political subdivisions of the State of Utah. We have a presence in Sandy, Taylorsville,
South Salt Lake, Draper, Herriman and Moab, as well as Sanpete and Daggett counties. So
we are accessible, responsive and available. Because of our unique focus on the latest
technologies, we are only minutes away when needed and can be called upon whenever an
issue comes up. We are available and willing to meet in person anytime the need arises. We
also have an in-house pilot who can get us to Moab in a hurry, if needed.
Our home office is: 32 E. Main Street Sandy, Utah 84070. Because we provide prosecution
services for Moab City, we also regularly have an attorney in Moab working there most
every week.
C. EXPERTISE/STAFFING
1. Experience. Our firm is exceptionally experienced in working with elected and
appointed officials. We report directly to elected officials in our representation of other
governmental entities. As such, we are skilled, professional and tactful. At the same
time, we are down-to-earth in the manner in which we work in concert with public
officers. We understand how elected officials feel when stories run in the media, and are
therefore discreet and careful in our approach in handling confidential or sensitive
information, with particular consideration given toward those to whom we report and
toward the effect our actions could have on furthering the interests of the City and
community at large.
Page 106 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 4
Our clients include South Salt Lake, Taylorsville, Draper, Moab, Herriman, Daggett
County and several cities in Sanpete County. We also represent Sandy Suburban
Improvement District and the South Valley Water Reclamation Facility. All 7 of our
attorneys are members in good standing with the Utah State Bar Association. Our
attorneys also are licensed and admitted to practice in Utah State and Federal Courts. In
addition, all of our attorneys are familiar with the statutes, court rules, constitutional
provisions, and case law relevant to municipal and employment law. Our attorneys are
diverse and speak several world languages including Spanish, Portuguese, French,
Japanese and Tagalog. Our attorneys also represent a variety of backgrounds, with
attorneys from rural communities like Manti to suburban communities like Sandy and
Salt Lake City. Our firm’s attorneys bring a wealth of experience in civil, criminal legal
work and government work, including employment law.
2. Practice Leads. Between them, firm partners Tracy Cowdell and Chad Woolley have
more than 25 years of experience in governmental practice. Chad and Tracy are both
trained mediators and have experience in conflict resolution, mediation, arbitration and
negotiations. They both are trained in parliamentary procedure. They have both trained
others regarding the Open and Public Meetings Act. They are comfortable advising
clients regarding the latest procurement requirements for local and special districts,
employment and labor law, GRAMA, and other relevant state and local rules. They are
comfortable training the staff on legal issues. They also have experience investigating
complaints and defending a governing body regarding legal action against its operating
organization. Chad and Tracy have both tried numerous cases to conclusion in front of
juries and judges in both state and federal court. Through their work as civil city
attorneys, they are both experts in all areas of employment and labor law.
3. Core Team/Résumés. All of our attorneys will be available to help on complicated
projects or with specialized questions. Cowdell & Woolley’s attorneys bring a wealth of
experience in government, civil and criminal legal work, including employment law.
Following is a brief summary of the background and work experience of firm partners,
Tracy Cowdell and Chad Woolley, and the firm’s associates who each have the requisite
experience and knowledge to assist in representing Moab City as it relates to employment
and labor law. (Their résumés are attached at the end of this proposal).
Tracy Scott Cowdell earned degrees in political science and sociology as well as a
certification in criminology and corrections at the University of Utah, graduating summa
cum laude (top 1 percent). He obtained a law degree from Brigham Young University.
For the past 13 years he has represented governmental entities, practiced criminal law,
and represented various private individuals and corporations. As a volunteer, Tracy has
served on Sandy City’s Board of Adjustments, is the past Chairman of the Sandy
Elementary School Community Council and acts as Assistant Coordinator of the Historic
Sandy Neighborhood Watch. He also has served as president of the Canyons School
District Board of Education, as a member of Sandy City’s Community Development
Block Grant Committee and as the Institutional Head of Boy Scouts of America Troop
Page 107 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 5
1231. Tracy represents Sandy Suburban Improvement District and the South Valley
Wastewater Treatment Facility. He has excellent experience advising board members
and elected officials. He was appointed by the Utah State Board of Education to decide
employee matters as a hearing officer for the Utah Professional Practices Advisory
Committee. Tracy is the part-time appointed civil city attorney for Taylorsville.
Chad L. Woolley has 14 years of prosecutorial and city attorney experience. He has a
bachelor’s degree in Design Engineering Technology from BYU and has been a
programmer and the IT manager for several companies. He began practicing law in 2001
after graduation from BYU Law School. Chad is still actively involved in the IT industry
and is the main developer who created the scheduling system in use with our municipal
clients. He has been prosecuting in multiple Sanpete County justice courts for over nine
years and has found an area where he is able to make a difference in the communities he
serves. In addition to his career, Chad Woolley volunteers time as the Murray Ute
Conference Football District President, a Scout cubmaster, and as a football, softball,
baseball and basketball coach. Chad also sat on the Board of Directors of the Murray
Area Chamber of Commerce. He is the appointed county attorney for Daggett County, as
well as the Ephraim City Attorney.
Stephen K. Aina who began work in criminal prosecution during law school and
continued with that field as his emphasis since graduating from Brigham Young
University’s J. Reuben Clark School of Law in 2013. Stephen enjoys practicing in other
areas of the law as well and has both understanding and experience in numerous areas of
civil practice, including employment and administrative law, family law, business
creation and associations, mediation, corporate debt collection, property rights and
recording, wills, trusts, and estates, and matters relating to special service districts and
other political subdivisions. Stephen also enjoys being able to take on local pro bono
matters in and around Sandy, where he resides with his family.
Joshua T. Collins who was born and raised in Sandy, Utah, where he graduated from
Jordan High School and is proud to be a Beetdigger. Josh graduated from Salt Lake
Community College in 2006 then transferred to the University of Utah where he received
his B.A. in English with a minor in Asian American History in 2008. Josh then moved
his family to Spokane, Washington, where he received his law degree from the Gonzaga
University School of Law in 2011. In early 2012, Josh began working with Cowdell &
Woolley in Taylorsville focusing mostly on prosecution. In addition to prosecuting
cases, Josh also spent time drafting inter-local agreements, researching issues relating to
the Salt Lake County Area-Wide Water Quality Management Plan for the Sandy
Suburban Improvement District and South Valley Water Reclamation Facility, and
practiced some landlord tenant law. In December 2012, Josh began working as a
prosecutor in the Salt Lake City Prosecutor's Office. Josh returned to Cowdell &
Woolley two years ago and now prosecutes in Taylorsville.
Page 108 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 6
Marcus Gilson is originally from eastern Washington and has been living in Utah since
2008. Marcus graduated from Brigham Young University with a bachelor’s degree in
Portuguese in 2011 and then started law school at BYU that same fall. Marcus enjoys
spending time with his family. He loves music, watching college football and being
outside. Marcus has a special interest in criminal work, as well as being involved in local
government. Marcus has strong legal writing skills, and enjoys being in the courtroom
and working with people. Marcus served as the Executive Editor, Journal of Public Law
from 2013-2014 and as Associate Editor, Journal of Public Law, 2012-2013.
Ryan Richards is an associate attorney with Cowdell & Woolley, who works as the City
Prosecutor for South Salt Lake City. He graduated magna cum laude from the J. Reuben
Clark School of Law at the University of Utah in 2012, and received his bachelor’s of
arts in political science from the U. Prior to joining Cowdell & Woolley, Ryan worked as
an associate prosecutor for the Salt Lake City Prosecutor’s Office. He served as an intern
at the U.S. Mission to NATO for Michael Ryan, the U.S. Army Defense Advisor for the
U.S. Mission to the E.U., and worked as an intern at the Utah State Legislature for
Senators Wayne Niederhauser and Kevin Van Tassell. Ryan served a religious mission
to Toulouse, France, and is conversant in French.
Stephanie A. Shelman graduated from Brigham Young University with a bachelor’s
degree in public relations. Stephanie continued on to earn her law degree from Arizona
Summit Law School in 2014. Stephanie specialized in municipal criminal prosecution
during law school and interned at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Salt Lake City and at the
Maricopa County Superior Court. Stephanie also practiced criminal prosecution for the
cities of Glendale, Avondale, and Buckeye while in law school. Stephanie joined
Cowdell & Woolley, P.C. in 2014 and currently works as both a deputy city attorney for
Taylorsville and as an assistant prosecutor for Taylorsville.
4. Staffing. Chad Woolley will be the principal attorney assigned as Employment Counsel
to Moab City, with Cowdell & Woolley Partner Tracy Cowdell as back up. We also have
the advantage of a firm of attorneys and support staff. All of our attorneys will be
available to help on complex matters. With 7 attorneys and a dozen support staff
members, we have the necessary personnel available to help Moab City. Of course, we
will want to consult with Moab’s City Manager and/or Mayor and City Council to assess
the exact scope of work and staffing needs. Overall, our approach is a proven model.
We have several jurisdictions in which we have crafted unique “out-of-the-box”
arrangements to take care of our clients. While our specialty is in representing
governmental agencies, we recognize that each is different with their own sets of needs
and circumstances.
5. Responsiveness. Our lawyers primarily work for political subdivisions of the state of
Utah. Because of this work, we understand that we are “on call” 24 hours a day. Please
contact our references regarding our responses, time and availability. We are always
available by e-mail, cell phone or texting. In addition, our home office is only a few
Page 109 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 7
hours away and because we represent Moab City as its municipal prosecutors, we already
regularly have an attorney on site.
6. Self-Evaluation. Our strongest asset is the experience and knowledge we have acquired
in representing governmental and public sector entities. We know what works and what
doesn’t. We have the ability to step right in and do what needs to be done. Our work
ethic is strong and we are committed to doing our best. We are highly competent with
relevant statutes. We have direct experience relating to employment and labor law
through our work as City Attorney for Taylorsville, City Attorney for Ephraim City, and
County Attorney for Daggett County. We have provided to our clients all employment
and labor services listed in Moab City’s RFP, including:
• Employment litigation and coordination with insurance carriers, as well as
experience with local, state, federal and administrative filings
• Government investigations, wage garnishments, employment verifications, search
warrants and subpoenas
• Recruitment and hiring in a municipal government environment
• Employee benefits and pension issues
• Compensation practices and FLSA compliance
• General labor matters, internal affairs investigations, grievances, FMLA requests
and procedures
• Counsel and guidance on discipline, documentation and investigations
• RIFs and Separation Agreements
• Policy and procedure review and consultation
• Counsel and guidance on compliance, record retention, mandatory reporting and
general matters
7. Professional Development. All 7 of our attorneys are members in good standing with the
Utah State Bar Association. Our attorneys also are licensed and admitted to practice in
Utah State and Federal Courts. In addition, all of our attorneys are familiar with the
statutes, court rules, constitutional provisions, and case law relevant to municipal law.
We regularly attend trainings and conferences specific to governmental attorneys and
staff, such as those hosted by the Utah City and District Attorneys Association
(UCDAA), the Utah Association of Counties (UAC), the Utah Prosecution Council
(UPC), and the Utah Prosecutorial Assistants Association (UPAA), among others.
D. CONFLICTS
Our current client list includes the following:
Taylorsville (Civil and Criminal)
Daggett County (Civil and Criminal)
Ephraim (Civil and Criminal)
South Salt Lake City (Criminal Only)
Page 110 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 8
Draper (Criminal Only)
Herriman (Criminal Only)
Moab (Criminal Only)
Spring City (Criminal Only)
Moroni (Criminal Only)
Fairview (Criminal Only)
Fountain Green (Criminal Only)
South Valley Water Reclamation Facility Sewer Treatment Plant
Sandy Suburban Improvement District
By executing this document, we certify that we have no known conflicts of interest. We are a
smaller firm and it is easy to determine potential conflicts. Generally speaking, if a conflict
arises it is readily apparent. However, during our weekly staff meetings, all attorneys and staff
discuss pending issues. Any conflicts that have not otherwise been found are discussed and
remedied during the meeting. We have relationships with many municipal attorneys that are
available should any conflict arise during our performance of services.
Neither the firm nor any of the attorneys employed by the firm have ever been sued by any city or
any other client for malpractice. No attorney at our firm has ever been formally disciplined by the
state or any court. All of our attorneys are members in good standing with the Utah State Bar. As
described, Cowdell & Woolley provides prosecution services to Moab City. We do not represent
any Moab City official or employee individually. We also do not represent any party in a matter
adverse to Moab City.
E. COMMUNICATION
Communication is very important to us. We are available to meet regularly with key staff and
City officials. We are known for our responsiveness. We are always available by phone, text or
email. Feedback is important to us, as well. We would want to meet regularly with key
stakeholders in an effort to improve our services. In addition, firm Partner Chad Woolley has
developed a software system that allows our firm to manage cases and track tasks. It could
easily be applied to any or all employment matters to provide online tracking of information and
data.
F. VALUE ADDED SERVICES/RESOURCES
Our attorneys have extensive experience relating to employment law and other matters that come
before the cities we serve. We have experience in federal, state and justice courts. Our attorneys
are competent in all areas of civil and criminal practice related to local governments. In addition,
Cowdell & Woolley prosecutes approximately 5,000 cases in the justice courts per month (over
60,000 cases annually).
Our area of specialty in working with government agencies is directly relatable to the needs of
Moab City. Because we work with governmental, municipal and political entities, we
Page 111 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 9
understand the inherent fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers and we know how to develop
creative solutions given our knowledge of local municipal law. We also have experience
representing municipalities that are comparable in size to Moab City, and our lawyers are
experienced in interacting with the media. We value relationships. The connections we have
formed with Utah legislators, city leaders and other elected officials may be useful from time to
time.
Other advantages of contracting with our firm include:
• ORGANIZATION AND STAFF SUPPORT — We have two paralegals who
will assist when necessary. We also are a progressive office regarding the usage
of technology.
• RESEARCH — Our firm subscribes to an online database. This database
provides us with all state and federal rules and regulations. This is provided at no
charge to the client.
• ACCESSIBILITY AND RESPONSIVENESS — Our lawyers primarily work
for political subdivisions of the state of Utah. Because of this work, we
understand that we are “on call” 24 hours a day. Please contact our references
regarding our responses, time and availability. We are always available by e-
mail, cell phone or texting. Chad Woolley is also a pilot and flies to Canyonlands
Field regularly. This makes it convenient for meeting face to face, as necessary.
• PUBLIC RELATIONS — We employ a former journalist on staff as
Communications Coordinator, who is available to help our clients with public
relations as the need arises. We have developed close relationships with local
media and understand communication advocacy, public outreach and messaging.
Several of our attorneys also have experience in public relations. We are highly
capable in assisting in this area.
• GOVERNMENT RELATIONS — We have worked to develop relationships
with elected officials across the state, including mayors, city council members and
legislators. We believe in networking and bringing people together. We also
know many key lobbyists and have worked closely with them in meeting our
clients’ goals. In addition, our attorneys have drafted bills that have been enacted
as law by the state Legislature and governor. We understand the process, and
have a strong record of success in this area.
Our priorities perhaps most set us apart from our competitors. Areas of particular commitment
include:
Page 112 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 10
1. Consistency. The same attorneys will be working with Moab City so that they develop
relationships with you and your staff. This will also ensure that the attorneys are familiar
with the specific legal issues, the cases and the interests of the City.
2. Exceptional Communication. Our customer service is what separates our office from
other firms and attorneys. We are willing to do whatever it takes to make sure we meet
our clients’ needs, and we understand the value of forming and keeping relationships.
3. Representation at Meetings. Our attorneys will attend all meetings relevant to the job,
and provide legal advice as necessary or requested at those meetings.
4. Availability and Office Hours. Our schedule works well with Moab City’s hours of
operation. We also are available 24/7 to provide advice. We regularly field after-hours
calls by cell phone. We are always available to discuss relevant employment matters or
other questions.
5. Legal Advice. Our attorneys are comfortable in advising elected and public officials. We
will provide legal advice based on an in-depth understanding of applicable local
ordinances and state laws, with which our attorneys are well versed.
6. Acting as a Liaison. Our attorneys will coordinate outside legal counsel as needed and as
directed by the City.
7. Drafting of Ordinances and Resolutions. Our attorneys are very experienced in and are
competent to draft ordinances, resolutions, codes and other documents on behalf of the
City. We are also comfortable working with staff who simply prefer to draft such
documents themselves and have legal review of them.
8. Preparing, Filing and Reviewing all Documentation. We will prepare, file and review all
appropriate documents, including, but not limited to contracts, agreements and other
compliance documents.
9. Representing the City. In the event that litigation counsel is needed, we will be available
to represent the City as appropriate. We will determinedly represent the City’s interests
in any legal or civil actions as necessary where it is a party.
10. Assisting Outside Counsel Work. Our firm is very capable in supervising and assisting
outside counsel work, including special litigation.
11. Expertise with Governmental Organizations. The majority of our practice is representing
governmental entities. We understand current budget constraints. We seek to save our
clients money. We are committed to be fiscally responsible in our representation of our
clients.
Page 113 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 11
12. Networking. Our office has developed a political network with local municipalities,
special districts, education leaders, counties and key legislators. These relationships may
be helpful from time to time, especially in monitoring and implementing any legislative
changes involving the City and its employees.
13. Personnel Matters. Our attorneys are knowledgeable in both state and federal laws
involving employees and the workplace. We will assist in employee discipline,
grievances, personnel policies, and other personnel work involving legal interpretation,
advice or representation. Perhaps more importantly, we will work with the City to
maintain good relationships between employees and supervisors and a positive working
environment.
14. Open Meetings Act Training. We offer annual training on the Utah Open Meetings Act
for elected officials. Training is also available regarding State Procurement Code, the
Utah Employee Ethics Act, and other relevant codes and statutes.
15. Training for Law Enforcement and Code Enforcement. In consultation with law
enforcement leaders and the planning department, we are available to conduct formal
training for officers as desired.
16. All Legal Research Materials and Books. As part of our contract, we will provide all
periodicals and research materials.
17. Legal Training. As part of the contract, we will pay for all continuing education
requirements for the lawyers and staff.
18. Regular Meetings with Stakeholders. We will hold regular meetings with city officials to
determine how we can improve our services.
19. Regular Verbal and Written Reports. As needed, we will provide reporting to the City
Council. We will also appear and make reports as needed in council meetings, work
sessions and any other relevant meetings.
20. Travel Time. We do not bill our governmental clients for regular travel time. For
unanticipated and special or unplanned meetings, we may charge a reasonable fee.
21. Other Duties. We will perform other legal services and tasks as requested.
G. FEE PROPOSAL
A rough range of our fees is approximately $110.00 to $150.00 per hour depending on the length
of the term. For a longer term relationship, we charge lower hourly fees. We prefer to negotiate
a flat monthly fee that includes all of the legal services that our clients require. Generally, with a
flat fee, we estimate the number of hours we will work each week, or each month and create a
Page 114 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 12
schedule around that estimate. As time progresses, we determine through feedback from our
clients and our attorneys whether our estimate was accurate and adjust accordingly. We feel that
a flat fee agreement allows us to set a regular schedule and actually charge our clients less than a
straight hourly rate would allow for. We use this same philosophy with our prosecution work
and it works very well. Litigation is not included in the flat fee because it is not possible to
accurately estimate the time involved. We bill for litigation on an hourly basis at a negotiated
rate. Our litigation rate is $210 per hour, but for our flat fee clients we lower that fee to $150 per
hour or less. We are flexible in establishing regular days and times as needed. If attorney time
required (including litigation) is more or less than estimated, we can adjust our proposal
accordingly.
Typically, we bill monthly for our services. We prefer to negotiate a flat fee arrangement for the
reasons stated earlier; it is also simpler for city budgeting. (We currently have a flat fee contract
with Moab City for prosecution services, for instance, and it seems to be working well for both
our firm and the City). We will offer an hourly discount if we enter into a flat-fee agreement.
We request that our clients pay us at the beginning of the month for the work we will do for that
month. We try to be flexible in our methodology to conform to the requisite needs. We are also
open to negotiating an hourly rate, if Moab City prefers that route. Other services are offered
without fee, including:
Regular Travel Time: No Charge
Paralegal/Secretarial: No Charge
Legal Periodicals: No Charge
Supplies: No Charge
Conferences: No Charge
Training: No Charge
H. SUMMARY
Our strongest asset is the experience and knowledge we have acquired in representing
governmental and public sector entities. We know what works and what doesn’t. We have the
ability to step right in and do what needs to be done. Our work ethic is strong and we are
committed to doing our best. Perhaps most especially, we are a proven quantity. We have
thoroughly enjoyed working with Moab City in our role as municipal prosecutor and we hope to
be able to expand that work and relationship. We know employment law and believe that
knowledge could be of great benefit in assisting Moab City.
I. REFERENCES
Below is the contact information for two of our current municipal government clients, as
requested:
Page 115 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab 13
John Taylor
City Administrator, Taylorsville City
2600 West Taylorsville Blvd.
Taylorsville, Utah 84129
Phone: (801) 963-5400
Email: jtaylor@taylorsvilleut.gov
Karen Perry
Daggett County Commissioner
95 North 100 West
Manila, Utah 84046
Mobile: (801) 608-6063
Office: (435) 784-3218 ext. 133
Email: kperry@daggettcounty.org
Page 116 of 298
RFP for Employment Counsel City of Moab Supplemental Material
Attachment to Cowdell & Woolley Proposal
RÉSUMÉS
Page 117 of 298
TRACY SCOTT COWDELL
32 EAST MAIN STREET, SANDY, UTAH 84070 • cell: 801.550.9864 • home: 801.566.4287 • e-mail: tcowdell@me.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Partner, COWDELL AND WOOLLEY, P.C., Sandy, Utah (2001-Present)
•Areas of emphasis include: all areas of representation of governmental entities
•Represent public and elected officials in their official capacity
•Administrative Law Judge for Draper City
•Daily experience with negotiation, collaboration and problem solving
•Senior advisor to appointed and elected officials
•Practice includes GRAMA, Utah Open Meeting Act, Employee Ethics Act,
land use, the state procurement code, prosecution and other governmental
related regulation
•Appointments: City Attorney for Taylorsville, Midvale and Draper City
•Other clients include: Sandy Suburban Improvement District, South
Valley Water Reclamation Facility and other governmental clients.
Chief Operations Officer, Advanced IT Solutions, Inc., Sandy, Utah (1998-2001)
•Co-founder and Principal
•Proficient in MS Office, the Internet, LAN/WAN management and
other technology applications
•Liaison between company management and technical support team
EDUCATION AND CREDENTIALS:
Juris Doctorate, (2001) J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University
•Faculty Award for Meritorious Achievement and Distinguished Service
•Extern in Chief Judge Dee Benson’s Office, U.S. District Court
•Trained in mediation, negotiation and meeting facilitation
•Member of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Society
Bachelor of Science, (1997) summa cum laude, University of Utah
•Political science and sociology (double major) certified in criminology
and corrections
•GPA 3.93 (top one percent)
•Sociology Scholar and Scholarship
•Alpha Kappa Delta sociology honors
•Member of Golden Key and Phi Beta Kappa Honors Societies
•Research, writing and publishing experience
PUBLIC AND VOLUNTEER SERVICE:
Member, Canyons School District Board of Education, Sandy, Utah (2008-2014)
•President, Canyons School District Board of Education, Sandy, Utah (2008-
2012)
•Key member in creating Utah’s first new school district in 100 years
Page 118 of 298
" W e i g h e d a n d d e c i d e d d o z e n s o f e m p l o y e e a p p e a l s a n d o t h e r p e r s o n n e l i s s u e s ,
i n c l u d i n g d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n a n d i n s o m e c a s e s t e r m i n a t i o n
" S t r a t e g i c p l a n n i n g , i n c l u d i n g t h e h i r i n g o f t h e d i s t r i c t s f i r s t s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ;
p l a n n i n g f o r s u c c e s s f u l p a s s a g e a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f $ 2 5 0 m i l l i o n
c o n s t r u c t i o n b o n d , a n d d e v e l o p i n g p r o g r a m s t h a t e n h a n c e t h e a c a d e m i c
p e r f o r m a n c e f o r a l l s t u d e n t s
" C o m m u n i t y b u i l d i n g , d e v e l o p e d k e y p a r t n e r s h i p s b e t w e e n s c h o o l d i s t r i c t , c i t y
a n d l e g i s l a t i v e l e a d e r s a n d b u s i n e s s c o m m u n i t y
" S k i l l e d d i p l o m a t , c o l l a b o r a t o r , n e g o t i a t o r a n d c o m m u n i c a t o r
V i c e P r e s i d e n t , J o r d a n S c h o o l D i s t r i c t B o a r d o f E d u c a t i o n , S a n d y , U t a h ( 2 0 0 7 -
2 0 0 9 )
" D a i l y i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h p u b l i c a s a n e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l
" L e a d e r s h i p o f a s i z e a b l e o r g a n i z a t i o n ( t h e l a r g e s t s c h o o l d i s t r i c t i n s t a t e a t
t h e t i m e )
" I n s t r u m e n t a l i n b r i n g i n g s t a k e h o l d e r g r o u p s t o g e t h e r
C h a i r p e r s o n , S a n d y E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l C o m m u n i t y C o u n c i l
" L e a d e r s h i p a t a s c h o o l l e v e l , h e a d i n g c o m m i t t e e o f p a r e n t s , t e a c h e r s
a n d p r i n c i p a l
" O v e r s i g h t o f f u n d r a i s i n g
" W o r k e d t o i d e n t i f y a n d c l o s e t h e s c h o o l s g a p s i n s t u d e n t a c h i e v e m e n t
" I n c r e a s e d c o m m u n i t y e n g a g e m e n t a n d p a r e n t a l i n v o l v e m e n t a t t h e s c h o o l
C h a i r p e r s o n , S a n d y E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l T r u s t L a n d C o m m i t t e e
" I m p l e m e n t e d s o u n d f i s c a l p o l i c y i n p r i o r i t i z i n g n e e d s o f s c h o o l
" M a x i m i z e d e f f i c i e n t u s e o f r e s o u r c e s t o p r o m o t e e x c e l l e n c e i n t e a c h i n g
a n d l e a r n i n g
" P a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h o t h e r s i n p l a n n i n g a n d d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g
D i r e c t o r , C o m m u n i t y M e d i a t i o n C e n t e r , P r o v o , U t a h ( 2 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 1 )
" C o - f o u n d e r a n d d i r e c t o r
" O v e r s a w d a i l y o p e r a t i o n s o f t h e c e n t e r
" F a c i l i t a t e d m e e t i n g s , g r o u p p r e s e n t a t i o n s , s t r a t e g i c p l a n n i n g , g o a l s e t t i n g
a n d f u n d r a i s i n g
" T a u g h t d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n a n d c o n f l i c t m a n a g e m e n t
" M e m b e r , b o a r d o f d i r e c t o r s ( 2 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 4 )
M e m b e r , B o a r d o f A d j u s t m e n t , S a n d y C i t y ( 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8 )
" S e r v e d o n q u a s i - j u d i c i a l b o a r d h e a r i n g c o m p l e x l a n d u s e m a t t e r s
" I s s u e d f i n d i n g s r e g a r d i n g v a r i a n c e s , s p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n s , e t c .
M e m b e r , C D B G S a n d y C i t i z e n C o m m i t t e e , S a n d y C i t y , S a n d y , U t a h ( 1 9 9 7 - 2 0 0 4 )
" R e v i e w e d g r a n t a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r S a n d y C i t y C o u n c i l
" R e c o m m e n d e d a l l o c a t i o n o f C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t B l o c k G r a n t f u n d s
P a g e 1 1 9 o f 2 9 8
ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE VOLUNTEER SERVICE:
Stake President, Sandy Utah West Stake, Sandy, Utah (2009-Present)
LDS Bishop, Sandy Utah West Stake, Sandy, Utah (1997-2004)
Campaign Manager, Sandy City Council members (1993 and 1997)
Assistant Coordinator, Historic Sandy Neighborhood Watch (2002-Present)
Institutional Head, Boy Scouts of America troop 1231 (1997-2004)
Member and General Counsel, Sandy Museum Foundation (2003-2004)
Board Chair and General Counsel, Gateway to Canine Partnerships (2005-
2006)
General Counsel, Ute Conference Football League (2009-Present)
Internship, Hinckley Institute of Politics, Sandy City (1997)
AWARDS:
Sandy City’s Outstanding Elected Official Award (2010)
Service Provider of the Year, City of Taylorsville (2011)
Sandy City’s Outstanding Service Award (2012)
AFFILIATIONS:
Utah Association of Special Districts
Parent Teacher Association and Parent Teacher Student Association
J. Reuben Clark Law Society
Salt Lake County Bar Association
Utah Bar Association
Utah Prosecution Council
BYU Alumni Association
Utah Alumni Association
Utah School Boards Association
Canyons Education Foundation
POLITICAL APPOINTMENTS:
Administrative Law Judge, Draper City
City Attorney, Midvale City
City Attorney, Draper City
City Attorney, City of Taylorsville
Interim Study Committee Member, Utah Legislature
SKILLS AND INTERESTS:
Technology, the arts, HARLEY-DAVIDSON® motorcycles and Muscle cars
Page 120 of 298
Chad Lyle Woolley
Cowdell & Woolley, PC. • 32 East Main Sandy, Utah 84070 • (801) 550-3988 • cwoolley@me.com
PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY
Attorney-at-Law with criminal trial experience combining superior technology expertise with excellent
interpersonal and communication skills. Demonstrated ability to find, create, motivate, and lead productive
teams. High-caliber presentation, negotiation and closing skills. Solid experience joined with a world-class
education. Seeking opportunities where I can contribute with my unique abilities as well as enhance my trial
and litigation skills.
Career Experience
DRAPER CITY, SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY
Prosecution Services Apr 2014 – Present
TAYLORSVILLE CITY – “Outstanding Service Provider 2010”
Prosecution Services Aug 2010 – Present
EPHRAIM, FAIRVIEW, FOUNTAIN GREEN, MORONI & SPRING CITIES
Sanpete County, Utah Mar 2002 – Present
City Prosecutor
¥ Misdemeanor litigation. Trial work, Plea Negotiations, Liaison to Police Officers. Police Officer
seminars and training. Various civil duties as needed.
MIDVALE CITY
City Attorney and Prosecution Services July 2014 – December 2015
COWDELL & WOOLLEY, PC
Sandy, Utah June 2006 – Present
¥ Partner. Justice Court Prosecution. Civil Litigation. Governmental Entity Representation. Technology
and Business Law.
ZOLL & TYCKSEN, LC
Murray, Utah January 2005 – June 2006
¥ Associate. Justice Court Prosecution. Civil Litigation. High-dollar Business Litigation.
CHAD L. WOOLLEY, PC
Payson, Utah October 2001 – December 2004
¥ Sole Practitioner. Justice Court Prosecution, Collections, Litigation, General Practice.
RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER, PLLC
South Jordan, Utah August 2001 – December 2002
Of Counsel
¥ Patent drafting and prosecution under the direction of Steve Nichols, Esq.
Page 121 of 298
LARSEN AND RAMMELL, Attorneys At Law
West Valley City, Utah October 2001 – 2002
Of Counsel
¥ Criminal defense and trial practice for West Valley City. Considerable client interaction.
Substantial communication and negotiation with prosecutor’s office.
ADVANCED IT SOLUTIONS, INC.
Sandy, Utah 1998 – 2003
Founded the company. Responsible to investors for business success. Main areas of responsibility include
recruiting and training top notch technicians and promoting and selling AITS’s services.
¥ Starting with zero customers, built a customer base of over 50 companies by building a strong
rapport with potential customers and providing unparalleled customer service to clients.
¥ Contracted as Chief Technical Officer for Industrypro.com. Interfaced with company President on
issues of strategy, management and budgeting. Responsible for design, structure and
implementation of IT infrastructure as well as creation and management of development team.
¥ Developed custom databases, programs and websites for many clients. Consulted with clients on
how to integrate technology to increase productivity and bring in more revenue.
MOSBY MATTHEW BENDER
Provo, Utah June 1996 – August 1998
Systems Architect
Responsible for IT functions in enterprise locations across the U.S. Supervised IT managers and staff at 6
locations. Responsible for integrity and functionality of WAN/LAN integration.
Functioned as troubleshooter within the corporate organization (20+ offices).
¥ This position was created at my suggestion. The company was experiencing considerable problems
integrating newly purchased companies. Created one smoothly functioning team from many,
individual, feuding IT teams. Interpersonal skills were essential.
¥ Worked on team implementing Citrix Winframe project across the organization. Responsible for custom
programming and scripting, mainly for security.
Education
JURIS DOCTORATE 2001
J. Reuben Clark Law School, BYU Provo, Utah
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE, DESIGN ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY 1991
Brigham Young University Provo, Utah
HIGH HONORS, COLLEGE PREP 1984
Spanish Fork High School Spanish Fork, Utah
Page 122 of 298
STEPHEN K. AINA
8 614 S. 550 E., Sandy, UT 84070 | H: 801.561.5272 | C: 801.413.6093 | skaina.law@gmail.com
PROFILE SUMMARY
Strong leadership/management skills and experience, Self-starter, Hardworking, Outstanding
interpersonal skills, Well versed in all aspects of criminal law, procedure, evidence, and courtroom
practice, Positive, Ambitious, Able to think quickly-on-feet, Preparation-minded, Thrives in
challenging and demanding environments, Service oriented.
RELEVANT PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
COWDELL & WOOLLEY, P.C. (2011 – Current)
HEAD OF PROSECUTION OPERATIONS
- Manage prosecution services for all jurisdictions served by Cowdell & Woolley
- Establish policies, scheduling, and best practices for meeting the needs of municipal
prosecution clients.
- Provide initial and continuing training and guidance for firm prosecuting attorneys
- Liaise with client city officials as necessary to ensure client satisfaction
- Work with office staff manager to ensure smooth operation of prosecution support services.
LEAD PROSECUTING ATTORNEY – Taylorsville, UT and Herriman, UT
- Supervision of Criminal Prosecution and related matters for the City
- Experienced and highly effective in Pre-trial negotiations, and Bench and Jury Trial practice
and preparation.
- Created procedures for handling Expungement Petitions, Bail Bond Forfeitures, Special
Writs, and other less known but essential prosecutorial responsibilities.
- Exceptional Motion and Brief Writer, with particular skill in persuasive clarity and logical
progression.
Highlights
- Attorney Member of the State of Utah Bail Bond Surety Oversight Board (Appointed
July, 2014, by State of Utah Insurance Department Commissioner)
o Work with Board, Insurance Dept., and AG’s Office to improve legislation, compliance,
and screening related to Bail Bond Surety posting, standards, and forfeiture in criminal
matters.
- Member, Misdemeanor Legislative Action Committee (MISLAC)
o Further State policies and objectives by evaluating and proposing legislation and
modification of statutes that address misdemeanor criminal offenses, their elements,
and related penalty enhancement provisions.
- Obtained Key Jurisdictional Ruling in Favor of Briefed Position in 2014 regarding
municipal codes, preventing the possibility of hundreds of criminal justice court
convictions being incorrectly reopened and retroactively dismissed.
CIVIL PRACTITIONER – in Salt Lake and Utah Counties, UT
Page 123 of 298
- Experience and understanding in handling private, business, and governmental cases and
legal matters in the following areas of law:
o GRAMA and Open Meetings Act
o Political Subdivision representation
o Employment and Administrative Law
o Contracts and Interlocal Agreements
o Business Creation and Associations
o Municipal Leadership and Council Structure
o Debt Collection – private and corporate
o Property Rights and Recording
o Family Law (divorce, decree modification, mediation, custody disputes)
o Wills, Trusts, Estate Planning, and Probate
EDUCATION
- Juris Doctorate – 2013 – J. Reuben Clark School of Law, Brigham Young University
- Bachelor of Science in Psychology – 2003 – Brigham Young University
- Two years, US Air Force Academy – Dean’s List, Commandant’s List, Athletic Director’s List,
Superintendent’s List, Honorable Discharge
PERSONAL INTERESTS AND SERVICE EXPERIENCE
Volunteer Assistant Coach for Blue Knights youth competition soccer team
Firearm Safety/Handling Instruction, NRA Instructor, Utah Concealed Carry Instructor
Volunteer Sandy City Recreation youth soccer and basketball coach
Volunteer math tutor for college, and junior high math students
Local Church service
Local Home Owners’ Association Board Member, President
Page 124 of 298
JOSHUA THOMAS COLLINS
288 W. Bubbling Brook Ln. Draper, UT 84020 • (801) 557-7682 • jthomascollins@gmail.com
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
Member Utah State Bar October 2011
EDUCATION
Gonzaga University School of Law Spokane, Washington
J.D.May 2011
•Gonzaga Law Review - Member Editorial Staff
•CALI Award - Legal Research & Writing IV
•J. Reuben Clark Law Society - Northwest Regional Representative
University of Utah Salt Lake City, Utah
B.A. English May 2008
•Dean’s list three semesters
Salt Lake Community College Salt Lake City, Utah
A.S. General Education May 2006
•Dean’s list all four semesters
•Writer, Globe Student Newspaper
LEGAL EXPERIENCE
Cowdell & Woolley, P.C. Sandy, Utah
Associate Attorney February 2015 – Present
•Prosecution for South Salt Lake, Taylorsville City, and other municipalities, performing research, and
supervising other attorneys and staff.
•Represent South Salt Lake City in front of the Utah Court of Appeals
Salt Lake City Prosecutor’s Office Salt Lake City, Utah
Associate City Prosecutor December 2012 – February 2015
•Prosecution for Salt Lake City
Armknecht & Cowdell, P.C. Sandy, Utah
Associate Attorney January 2012 – December 2012
•Prosecution for Taylorsville City
Eric M. Steven, P.S. Spokane, Washington
Rule 9 Legal Intern March 2010 – April 2011
•Draft motions and orders and perform Legal Research relating to Landlord/Tenant law
•Appear in the Spokane District and Superior Courts daily
PUBLICATIONS
Deseret News Salt Lake City, Utah
•Setting The Pace: Utah Native’s Record Power Surge Helps Get Tigers
Off To Fast Start, May 2, 2006.
•Festival Atmosphere at Meet, May 19, 2006.
•Riverton and Bingham Square off Again Tonight, Feb. 16, 2007.
Page 125 of 298
Marcus L. Gilson
4173 N Autumn Wood Cir. Lehi, UT, 84043 Phone: (919) 440-3252 marcuslg@byulaw.net
Education
J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
Juris Doctor, April 2014
•Executive Editor, Journal of Public Law, 2013 – 2014
•Associate Editor, Journal of Public Law, 2012 – 2013
Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
Bachelor of Arts in Portuguese, Minor in Business Management, August 2011
•GPA 3.79
•Academic Merit Scholarships, 2005, 2009 – 2011
Bar Membership
Utah State Bar, October 2014
Experience
The Honorable Clark Waddoups, U.S. District Court of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
Judicial Extern, January – April 2014
•Researching and preparing bench memoranda on motion matters
Franklin County Prosecutor’s Office, Pasco, WA
Rule 9 Legal Intern, Summer 2013
•Prosecuted cases under the supervision of an attorney, including working as lead
counsel on a jury trial
•Prepared various motions with memoranda regarding admissibility of evidence
•Prepared a successful appellate motion to dismiss on the merits
•Negotiated offers with defense counsel
•Argued bail and other conditions of release
Intern, summer 2012
•Researched hearsay issues for a homicide trial
•Helped write a memorandum to admit hearsay evidence under an exception
Cerqueira Leite Advogados Associados (Law Firm), São Paulo, Brazil
Extern, summer 2012
•Revised and translated legal documents and client communications
•Researched real estate and operational issues for corporate clients
Service
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Recife, Brazil
Volunteer Representative, 2006 – 2008
Skills & Interests
Fluency in Portuguese, Eagle Scout, Reading Fiction, Trumpet, Foreign Language
Page 126 of 298
Ryan J. Richards
2588 Neffs Lane • Salt Lake City, Utah 84109 • Phone: (801) 278-2446 • Email: rjr72@byulaw.net
Education:
• J. Reuben Clark School of Law (Graduated 2012)
Juris Doctorate: Graduated Magna Cum Laude
• University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (Graduated 2009)
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
Work Experience:
• Cowdell &Woolley – Salt Lake City, Utah (July 2015-Present)
Associate—Served as the City Prosecutor for South Salt Lake City. Responsible for all facets of the
City’s prosecution from screening through appeals.
• Salt Lake City Prosecutor’s Office – Salt Lake City, Utah (June 2013-July 2015)
Associate City Prosecutor— Represented Salt Lake City in all facets of criminal prosecution from
screening through appeals. Represented the City at arraignments, evidentiary hearings, motion
hearings, and various other proceedings. Tried many bench trials and over 25 jury trials in both
the Justice and District Courts. Represented the City before the Utah Court of Appeals.
Represented the City at SWAPLAC meetings, Pioneer Park Coalition Meetings, and various
coordination meetings with other agencies.
• Salt Lake City Prosecutor’s Office – Salt Lake City Utah (2011-2012)
Intern—Represented the City in bench and jury trials. Wrote motions and responses to motions.
Presented arguments at motion hearings. Performed research for attorneys on salient legal issues.
• Law Office of Sharon Preston P.C. – Salt Lake City, Utah (Summer 2010)
Intern – Practice areas included federal criminal defense and class action labor law litigation.
Primarily performed research and wrote memos, including memos on various admissibility of
evidence issues and mental competence.
Extracurricular Activities and Volunteer Experience:
• Intern at the US Mission to NATO for Michael Ryan, US Army Defense Advisor U.S. Mission to E.U.
(2009)
Researched and prepared background papers. Attended NATO-EU meetings including the NATO-
EU Capabilities Working Group meeting, the USEU Pol-Mil Team meetings, the USNATO ODA Staff
Meeting, and multi-lateral diplomatic meetings. Assisted in arranging and participated in
diplomatic lunches/dinners.
• Senate Intern at the Utah State Legislature for Senators Wayne Niederhauser
and Kevin Van Tassell (2008).
Collected, organized, and analyzed polling data. Researched and tracked legislation and
other salient issues. Wrote talking points for bills. Drafted letters and emails to constituents,
lobbyists, and other legislators. Coordinated and managed the daily schedule.
• Volunteer Church Representative – Toulouse, France (2004-2006)
Read, write, and conversant in French.
Page 127 of 298
Stephanie A. Shelman
11517 S. Field Haven Way Utah Bar Member #: 15208 (801) 631-7718
South Jordan, UT 84095
stephanie.nate89@yahoo.com
PROFESSIONAL LICENSES & AFFILIATIONS
Utah State Bar – Admitted 2014; active
Utah State Bar’s Litigation Section – 2014
Utah State Bar’s Criminal Law Division - 2014
Utah State Bar’s Young Lawyer’s Division - 2014
Women Lawyers Association – 2014
Salt Lake County Bar Association – 2014
Central Utah County Bar Association – 2014
EDUCATION
Arizona Summit Law School, Phoenix, AZ
Juris Doctorate, April 2014 – Cum Laude
GPA: 3.35/4.0
Honors: CALI Award Recipient, Civil Procedure
CALI Award Recipient, Lawyering Process III
Recipient of Merit Scholarship
Recipient of Castro Scholarship
Phoenix Law Review Comment Publication – Volume 6, Number 3, Spring 2013
Dean’s List, Spring 2013, Fall 2013
Community Service Certificate for Pro Bono Service
Activities: Arizona Summit Law Review, Staff Editor, Fall 2012, Senior Technical Editor, Spring 2013-Spring 2014
J. Rueben Clark Law Society, Phoenix School of Law Chapter, Secretary, 2012-2013
Phoenix Law Women’s Association, Member
J. Rueben Clark Law Society, Member
Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
Bachelor of Arts in Communications: Public Relations, Minor in Political Science, December 2010
GPA: 3.7/4.0
Honors: Dean’s List
Academic Scholarship Recipient
Activities: BYU Pre-Law Review, Editor
Pre-Law Student Association, President
Bela Gallery Art Studio Public Relations, Campaign Volunteer
Public Relations Student Society of America, Member
EXPERIENCE
Cowdell & Woolley, P.C. September 2014 - Present
Deputy City Attorney
Assistant City Prosecutor
Review and edit legal documents, including real estate purchase and sale transactions and amendments, contracts, and city
communications. Conduct legal research on a variety of legal subjects, including contracts, telecommunications franchise, real
estate transaction closing documents, and mayoral veto powers. Supervise real estate transaction closings. Coordinate with city
administrators, staff, and outside counsel regarding contract negotiations and finalizations. Attend city council meetings. Draft
various legal documents, including legal memos, contracts, real estate purchase and sale agreements and amendments, resolutions,
ordinances, and annual audit response letters. Prosecute traffic and misdemeanor cases. Conduct pretrial conferences and
negotiations with defendants and defendant’s counsel. Conduct plea and plea in abeyance negotiations. Conduct arraignments.
Prepare for and represent the city in assigned bench trials. Represent the city in Orders to Show Cause and Reviews. Screen cases
for potential prosecution on criminal charges. Draft probable cause statements to be included in Informations. Prepare and file
Informations and other court documents. Review plea in abeyance agreements for compliance and dismissal. Conduct legal
research.
Page 128 of 298
Rule 38-Certified Practitioner January 2014 – April 2014
Glendale City Prosecutor’s Office – Glendale, AZ
Avondale City Prosecutor’s Office – Avondale, AZ
Prepared for and represented the city in misdemeanor criminal trials. Researched various legal issues for assigned trials, including
applicable case law and rules of evidence. Prepared trial notebooks for assigned trials. Met with and interviewed witnesses for
trials. Conducted pre-trial conferences with various defendants. Conducted arraignments. Attended mental health court staff
meetings and subsequent hearings, as well as other court proceedings.
Law Clerk May 2013 – August 2013
United States Attorney’s Office – District of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
Researched various legal issues and drafted court documents related to that research. Drafted and prepared documents related to
international requests made pursuant to numerous Mutual Legal Assistance treaties. Attended strategy conferences with division
attorneys, phone conferences with witnesses, and defendant interviews. Worked with DEA agents to gather and organize
evidentiary information. Attended various court proceedings, including motion hearings, grand jury selection, status conferences,
sentencing hearings, and plea hearings.
Legal Intern, Commissioner Patricia Starr February 2013-May 2013
Maricopa County Superior Court of Arizona, Phoenix, AZ
Observed various court proceedings, including criminal trials, settlement conferences, scheduling conferences, and bond hearings.
Researched legal issues and wrote legal memoranda regarding legal issues to assist Commissioner Starr in deciding several matters.
Teaching/Research Assistant, Lawyering Process Program August 2012-April 2014
Arizona Summit Law School, Phoenix, AZ
Prepared and taught first-year students Bluebook citation style. Researched and wrote model memos and motions for grading
purposes. Aided in grading student exercises and quizzes.
Legal Assistant, Washington Seminar Program April 2009-August 2009
Rosenau & Rosenau, Attorneys at Law, Washington, D.C.
Conducted extensive legal research using the Lexis Nexis database. Drafted various court documents, including motions, briefs,
and interrogatories. Maintained open communication with clients. Attended and took notes regarding client conferences.
Prepared evidence for trials.
Page 129 of 298
D. Scott Crook
scott@crooktaylorlaw.com
Jeremiah R. Taylor
jerry@crooktaylorlaw.com
Crook & Taylor Law PLLC, a professional limited
liability company, including members D. Scott
Crook Law, PC and Jeremiah Taylor Law, PLLC
2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500
Salt Lake City UT 84106
801‐326‐1943
www.crooktaylorlaw.com
October 7, 2016
Via Email [rstenta@moabcity.org & bobbie@moabcity.org]
Rachel E. Stenta
MOAB CITY RECORDER’S OFFICE
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
Re: Response to Request for Proposal, Moab City Employment Counsel
Services
Dear Ms. Stenta:
Enclosed please find Crook & Taylor Law PLLC’s response to the request for proposals
to provide Employment Counsel Services to the City of Moab. We are excited to submit this
response and welcome you to contact any of our current or former clients to explore the high
quality of service we provide and our commitment to responsiveness.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. We hope that the City will
be pleased with our proposal and would gladly begin working with the City on all of its
employment needs.
Sincerely,
D. Scott Crook
Encls.
cc: Jerry Taylor
Carrie Vanous
Page 130 of 298
D. Scott Crook
scott@crooktaylorlaw.com
Jeremiah R. Taylor
jerry@crooktaylorlaw.com
Crook & Taylor Law PLLC, a professional limited
liability company, including members D. Scott
Crook Law, PC and Jeremiah Taylor Law, PLLC
2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500
Salt Lake City UT 84106
801‐326‐1943
www.crooktaylorlaw.com
October 7, 2016
Via Email [rstenta@moabcity.org & bobbie@moabcity.org]
Rachel E. Stenta
MOAB CITY RECORDER’S OFFICE
217 East Center Street
Moab, Utah 84532
Re: RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, EMPLOYMENT COUNSEL
SERVICES
Dear Ms. Stenta:
Crook & Taylor Law PLLC (the “Firm”) is excited to submit this proposal to provide
Employment Counsel Services to the City of Moab. We believe that our firm offers the highest
caliber of legal services available, not only because of our combined years of experience, but
also because of our commitment to building strong relationships with our clients. Simply put,
we understand the needs of our clients and pride ourselves on our ability to provide them
with practical advice and quality services in a variety of legal scenarios.
Contact Information
The name and contact information of the contact person for this response to the
request for proposal is:
D. Scott Crook
801.326.1943
scott@crooktaylorlaw.com
2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500
Salt Lake City, Utah 84106
Firm Information
The Firm actively practices in the area of employment law. Crook & Taylor Law PLLC,
which recently formed on October 1, 2016, is the successor firm to D. Scott Crook Law, PC,
which is a well‐known Utah law firm that has provided employmen t counsel services to local
government entities throughout Utah since 2011. Its home office is located in the Sugarhouse
area of Salt Lake City at 2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah. It has meeting
room and office spaces available located throughout the Wasatch Front in Farmington,
Draper, Lehi, and Provo.
Page 131 of 298
Page 2 of 18
The firm is currently comprised of two attorneys and a support staff of one. It has
close working relationships with other lawyers located throughout Utah, including in Carbon
and Emery Counties. It frequently appears as co‐counsel with other attorneys if staffing
requires.
We would propose providing our services out of our main office. We have the
resources to conduct video conferencing where necessary and, through our ongoing
relationships with Carbon and Emery County, could coordinate meetings and travel to Moab
when necessary. Our firm represents entities with offices in Utah, Idaho, Arizona, and North
Carolina and find that we are able to make ourselves available without any problem.
Experience/Staffing
General Description of Experience in Relevant Practice Areas
As described more fully below, D. Scott Crook has been practicing employment law
for two decades. Our Firm and its attorneys are qualified to practice law in all of the various
disciplines of employment law, and we provide a wide variety of services in this area. These
services include, but are not limited to, the following:
Consultation regarding personnel issues
Consultation regarding and negotiation of collective bargaining agreements with
labor unions
Representation before administrative agencies such as the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division,
Department of Labor, and Utah Labor Commission
Representation in litigation when the need arises
Review and audit of Fair Labor Standards Act compliance
Review and audit of human resource, employee, or personnel manuals and
policies
Review and audit of employment forms, including applications, Fitness for Duty,
FMLA Requests, and other necessary personnel forms
Review and audit of recordkeeping practices
Review and audit of human resource or personnel practices
Review and audit of background and reference checking processes
Review and audit of drug abuse policies
Training on discrimination and sexual harassment issues
General consultation on “best business practices”
Practice Leads
D. Scott Crook manages the employment practice group at Crook & Taylor Law PLLC.
Page 132 of 298
Page 3 of 18
Lawyers Forming Core Team
D. Scott Crook
D. Scott Crook has been practicing employment law since the beginning of his career
(over 20 years), and he currently manages the employment law practice section at the Firm.
Mr. Crook is frequently requested to lecture on employment issues, including recent
seminars entitled “Attorneys’ Guide to Local Government Law,” “Advanced Employment
Law‐Working through Common Problems,” and “Legal Updates (Utah Associations of
Counties, Human Resources/Personnel).”
Mr. Crook has assisted public and private employers in developing and auditing
workplace policies, such as drug‐free workplace and discrimination policies, handbooks,
employment applications, and legally compliant human resources forms. Mr. Crook has
significant experience auditing local governments’ policies and procedures manuals for
compliance with local, state, and federal laws. In his position as outside employment counsel
for local governmental entities, he has also reviewed, revised, and drafted amendments to
policies and procedures manuals and collective bargaining agreements. Recently, he
reviewed payroll and compensation practices for both private and public entities for Fair
Labor Standards Acts compliance and assisted employers with investigations conducted by
the U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Divisions. Not only has Mr. Crook provided
employment law advice to the Firm clients, but he has defended Firm clients successfully in
state and federal court proceedings and in administrative proceedings before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Commission, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, the Wage Claim Division, the Department of Workforce Services, and the United
States Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division.
Mr. Crook has also been recognized every year since 2005 by Utah Business Magazine
as one of “Utah’s Legal Elite” in Employment and Labor Law. He was also identified as a
“Rising Star” in 2008‐09, a “Super Lawyer” since 2011 in Mountain States Super Lawyers
Magazine, and has been listed in Best Lawyers in America since 2013. He graduated in the top
10% of his class at J. Reuben Clark Law School located at Brigham Young University and was
an editor of the BYU Law Review, a prestigious position. Upon graduation from law school,
Mr. Crook served as a clerk to two judges. Mr. Crook is a member of the Utah State Bar and
the Idaho State Bar.
Mr. Crook’s resume detailing specific experience is attached as Addendum 1.
Jeremiah R. Taylor
Jeremiah R. Taylor has been practicing law for more than eight years. He was recently
identified as a Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Star. Before partnering with Mr. Crook,
he worked at a Salt Lake firm that practices in a wide variety of legal fields affecting Utah
businesses, including litigation, real estate, employment and contract law. Mr. Taylor has
represented employers faced with wage claims. He has defended against multiple allegations
of discrimination brought before the UALD Fair Housing Unit. In addition, Mr. Taylor has
Page 133 of 298
Page 4 of 18
consulted with numerous employees and former employees regarding potential claims of
discrimination in the workplace, wrongful termination, and unpaid wages.
Before entering private practice, Mr. Taylor was an Assistant City Attorney for the
City of Boise, Idaho. There, he prosecuted hundreds of misdemeanor crimes, handled nine
jury trials, and was selected to the police advice and training team. He represented the city
at a variety of court proceedings and also assisted with the enforcement of city ordinances.
After graduating from the University of Idaho College of Law toward the top of his
class, Mr. Taylor clerked for the Honorable Michael McLaughlin in the Fourth Judicial District
Court of Idaho. During law school summers he was an intern at the City of Rexburg, Idaho
and an extern for Justice George Nicholson at the California Court of Appeal. He was also an
editor for the Idaho Law Review Journal. Mr. Taylor is a member of the Utah State Bar and
the Idaho State Bar.
Mr. Taylor’s resume is attached as Addendum 2.
Staffing
Given the Firm’s substantial focus on employment law, all of the attorneys and staff
at the Firm would be available to provide the legal services contemplated.
Proposed Methodology
D. Scott Crook would be the lead and managing attorney. Accordingly, he would be
the principle contact at the firm. After the City discussed any issue or project with Mr. Crook,
Mr. Crook would provide the necessary staffing after assessing the experience of each
member of the firm and the best and most cost‐effective method of providing the services.
The firm is extremely responsive to all of its clients. Although Moab is a considerable
distance from Salt Lake City, Crook & Taylor Law is a very forward‐thinking firm that uses
technology to allow urgent response on all matters. Aside from the most obvious methods of
contact, telephone and email, the firm has video‐conferencing, client‐sharing portals, and
other cloud computing resources, and its attorneys are available for travel. In addition,
Moab’s close proximity to other Firm clients makes traveling to Moab on a regular basis a
viable alternative.
Firm’s Expertise for Each Work Category
1. Employment Matters including employment litigation, including coordination
with Insurance Carriers
a. Experience with local, state, federal and administrative filings.
Page 134 of 298
Page 5 of 18
Public Entity Litigation Defense
February 2016 to Present
Defense of Rule 65B Action against County and County Deputy
Attorney
Defending County as counsel retained by insurance carrier in claim
against County Attorney’s Office demanding that the County Attorney
charge a person in criminal case. Obtained settlement that included
dismissal of all claims without prejudice with no payment and no
admission of liability.
May 2010 to July 2014
Defense of FMLA and Due Process Claims
Successfully defended Carbon County as inside counsel working with
counsel retained by insurance carrier in federal lawsuit and
subsequent appeal in claim alleging Due Process violations, intentional
infliction of emotional distress, breach of covenant of good faith and
fair dealing, interference with economic relations, FMLA, and civil
conspiracy claims arising out of termination of employee.
March 2011 to October 2013
Defense of Age Discrimination Claim
Successfully defended County before the Utah Antidiscrimination and
Labor Division and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on
claim of age discrimination.
December 2010 to September 2013
Defense of Unemployment Claim
Defended County in unemployment appeal in front of Department of
Workforce Service, Utah Court of Appeals, and Utah Supreme Court.
September 2010 to June 2011
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented County in investigation conducted by the U.S. Department
of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Wage and Hour
Division.
September 2008 to July 2009
Defense of Union Grievance Arbitration and Litigation
Defended Local Government Entity in arbitration and litigation arising
out of termination based upon employee failure of a drug test.
Private Entity Litigation Defense
March 2015 to Present
Page 135 of 298
Page 6 of 18
Defense of Wage Claim
Defending Private Employer in wage claim brought before the Wage
Claim Unit of the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division and the
subsequent claimant appeal of decision favorable to Private Employer.
December 2012 to June 2015
Defense of Sexual Harassment Claim
Successfully defended Private Employer before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division and Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission on claim of sexual harassment
discrimination.
December 2013 to December 2014
Defense of Wage Demand
Defended Private Employer faced with demand of wages and a
partnership interest from a former employee, which resulted in a
settlement favorable to the employer.
October 2013 to December 2014
Defense of Wage Claim
Defended Private Employer before the Utah Antidiscrimination and
Labor Division on an employee wage claim, which resulted in no
recovery for the employee.
January 2011 to September 2014
Defense of Age and Disability Discrimination Claim
Successfully defended Private Employer before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division, Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, and federal district court on claim of age and
disability discrimination.
March 2013 to June 2014
Defense of Age and National Origin Claim
Successfully defended Non‐Profit Corporation before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division and Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission on claim of age and national origin
discrimination.
Page 136 of 298
Page 7 of 18
February 2013 to June 2014
Defense of Fair Housing Discrimination
Successfully defended large, low‐income housing corporation against
five separate discrimination claims.
September 2011 to July 2012
Defense of Wage Claim
Successfully defended Non‐Profit Corporation in wage claim brought
before the Wage Claim Unit of the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor
Division.
October 2009 to October 2010
Defense of Race Discrimination Claim
Successfully defended Private Employer in federal district court on
claim of race discrimination.
September 2005 to July 2007
Defense of Sexual Harassment Claim
Defended Private Employer before the Utah Antidiscrimination and
Labor Division, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and
federal district court on claim of sexual harassment.
Not only have our Firms’ attorneys provided these services to the Firm clients, but D.
Scott Crook has provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human resource
professionals with respect to many litigation issues. Specifically, Mr. Crook has taught, or is
scheduled to teach, the following continuing education law courses that are relevant to this
work category:
Advanced Employment Law‐Working through Common Problems (to be presented
December 6, 2016)
Attorneys’ Guide to Local Government Law (May 13, 2016)
Advanced Employment Law‐Working through Common Problems (June 24, 2015)
Legal Updates (Utah Association of Counties, Human Resources/Personnel)
(November 13, 2013)
Strategic Discovery Practice: Putting a Plan in Place & Effective Deposition Practice
(National District Attorneys Association) (May 23, 2013)
Legal Issues Involving Local Governments (April 23, 2013)
Employment Law Update, (Utah Municipal Attorneys Association) (May 4, 2011)
Employment Laws Made Simple (April 21, 2010)
ADA Amendments Act of 2009: New Definitions and Challenges (December 7, 2009)
Employment Law Alphabet Soup (June 24, 2009)
Employment Laws Made Simple (April 5, 2007)
Page 137 of 298
Page 8 of 18
2. Government Investigations, Wage Garnishments, Employment Verifications,
Search Warrants, and Subpoenas.
Although search warrants are rarely implicated in employment litigation, Jeremiah
Taylor is a seasoned prosecutor who spent three years working as an Assistant City Attorney
for Boise, Idaho.
Relevant Public Entity Work
September 2010 to June 2011
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented County in investigation conducted by the U.S. Department
of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Wage and Hour
Division.
November 2010 to December 2010
Employee Complaint and Employee Morale Investigation
Conducted investigation regarding employee complaints about alleged
illegal employment practices and employee morale for Nonprofit
Corporation.
August 2007 to September 2007
Employee Sexual Harassment Complaint Investigation
Conducted investigation regarding employee complaints about alleged
illegal sexual harassment for city. Prepared written report, including
findings and conclusions.
Relevant Private Entity Work
The Firm regularly represents private clients in claims against other
business entities and individuals. In that work, they frequently appear
in Court seeking garnishment and wage garnishment. Accordingly, the
Firm frequently deals with garnishment issues.
March 2015
Employee Wage Garnishment Dispute
Represented Private Employer in dispute over priority of claims in
multiple garnishments filed against an employee.
June 2010 to May 2012
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented Private Employer in investigation conducted by the U.S.
Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Wage
and Hour Division.
Page 138 of 298
Page 9 of 18
March to September 2006
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Avoided any penalties and fines in successfully representing Private
Entity Employer of 150 employees in investigation conducted by the
U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration,
Wage and Hour Division.
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. Specifically, Mr. Crook
has taught, or is scheduled to teach, the following continuing education law courses that are
relevant to this work category:
Attorneys’ Guide to Local Government Law (May 13, 2016)
Nuts & Bolts of Workplace Investigations (October 3, 2007)
Secrets to a Legally Compliant Human Resource Recordkeeping System (January
9, 2006)
3. Recruitment & Hiring in a municipal government environment.
The Firm or its attorneys has represented in the past or currently represents multiple
governmental entities with respect to all of their employment and human resource issues.
These services have included short discussions regarding particular discrete questions to
advice on developing, creating, amending and adopting all personnel policies relative to
recruitment and hiring.
Public Entity, Quasi‐Governmental Entity Advisory Work
May 2008 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Carbon County on employment and labor law issues.
April 2011 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Kids on The Move employment and labor law issues.
May 2013 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Wellington City on employment and labor law issues.
May 2013 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise East Carbon on employment and labor law issues.
February 2015 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Page 139 of 298
Page 10 of 18
Advise Emery County on employment and labor law issues.
June 2015 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Roads to Independence employment and labor law issues
July 2012 to June 2014
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Duchesne County on employment and labor law issues.
July 2012 to January 2013
Personnel Policies and Procedures, Employment Application
Forms, Employment Forms, Drug Abuse Policy, and Federal and
State Employment Law and Regulation Review
Advised Duchesne County on all aspects of its existing personnel
policies and procedures, forms, and applications.
November 2004 to April 2011
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Magna Water District on all employment and labor law issues.
May 2008 to April 2009
Personnel Policies and Procedures, Employment Application
Forms, Employment Forms, Drug Abuse Policy, and Federal and
State Employment Law and Regulation Review
Advised Carbon County on all aspects of its existing personnel policies
and procedures, forms, and applications.
January to March 2006
Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual Audit
Audited Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual for Cedar Hills City.
January to July 2005
Personnel Policies and Procedures, Employment Application
Forms, Employment Forms, Drug Abuse Policy, and Federal and
State Employment Law and Regulation Review
Advised Magna Water District on all aspects of its existing personnel
policies and procedures, forms, and applications.
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
Page 140 of 298
Page 11 of 18
4. Employee benefits and pension issues
As discussed in response to Work Category 3 above, our Firm’s attorneys provide, or
have provided, general human resource advice with respect to all employment matters to a
number of local governmental entities. With respect to all of those entities, our Firm has
provided significant advice regarding benefits and pension issues. In addition to the general
work identified above, we have provided specific advice on all the following issues:
The negotiation of a pension benefit for the Magna Water District as part of union
contract negotiations with the Teamsters Union
The intersection of issues involving workers compensation, FMLA, ADA, and
short‐term and long‐term health insurance
Calculation of leave entitlement
Employee Notice Requirements on 401(k) issues
Workers compensation benefits issues
Unemployment insurance benefits
Additionally, the Firm provides general advisory work to private employers that
includes advice on benefits and pension issues, including:
BODEC
Fort Knox
Genesis Pure
The Hamlet Companies
MultiLing Corporation
Pilkington Metal Finishing
The Local Pages
European Marble & Granite, LLC
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
5. Compensation practices and FLSA compliance
As discussed in response to Work Categories 3 and 4 above, our Firm’s attorneys
provide, or have provided, general human resource advice with respect to all employment
matters to a number of local governmental entities and private employers. With respect to
all of those entities, our Firm has provided significant advice regarding compensation
practices and FLSA compliance.
In addition, our Firm’s attorneys have not only performed compensation practice
audits, but we have represented our clients in Wage and Hour Claim Division FLSA
compliance audits as follows:
Page 141 of 298
Page 12 of 18
September 2010 to June 2011
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented County in investigation conducted by the U.S. Department
of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Wage and Hour
Division.
June 2010 to May 2012
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented Private Employer in investigation conducted by the U.S.
Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Wage
and Hour Division.
March to September 2006
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Avoided any penalties and fines in successfully representing Private
Entity Employer of 150 employees in investigation conducted by the
U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration,
Wage and Hour Division.
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
6. General labor matters including Loudermill hearings, internal affairs
investigations, grievances, FMLA requests and procedures.
As discussed in response to Work Categories 3 and 4 above, our Firm’s attorneys
provide, or have provided, general human resource advice with respect to all employment
matters to a number of local governmental entities and private employers. With respect to
all of those entities, our Firm has provided significant advice regarding disciplinary issues,
Loudermill hearings, internal affairs investigations, grievances, FMLA requests and
procedures. Specifically, our Firm’s attorney have assisted our clients in Loudermill
hearings, grievances, career service council appeals, internal affairs investigations in all of
the following specific circumstances:
Internal investigation of County Sheriff
Internal investigation of County Emergency Management Director
Grievance of employee regarding discipline
Career Service Council appeal of employee dismissed as a result of
reclassification of position
Internal investigation of illegal drug use of employee
Loudermill hearing for disciplined county employee
Internal investigation of sexual harassment complaint against City Manager
Page 142 of 298
Page 13 of 18
Internal investigation of abusive behavior of interlocal governmental entity
supervisor
Moreover, our Firm’s attorneys have heavily participated in labor negotiations for
one of the few local government entities in Utah that has a union contract.
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
7. Counsel and guidance on discipline, documentation, and investigations;
As discussed in response to Work Categories 3 and 4 above, our Firm’s attorneys
provide, or have provided, general human resource advice with respect to all employment
matters to a number of local governmental entities and private employers. With respect to
all of those entities, our Firm has provided significant advice regarding discipline,
documentation, and investigation on dozens, if not hundreds, of occasions. Specifically, our
Firm’s attorney have recently assisted our clients in the discipline of employees,
documentation and investigation in the following specific instances:
Internal investigation of County Sheriff
Internal investigation of County Emergency Management Director
Grievance of employee regarding discipline
Career Service Council appeal of employee dismissed as a result of
reclassification of position
Internal investigation of illegal drug use of employee
Loudermill hearing for disciplined county employee
Internal investigation of sexual harassment complaint against City Manager
Internal investigation of abusive behavior of interlocal governmental entity
supervisor
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
8. RIFs and Separation Agreements
As described in response to Work Category 3 and 4 above, our Firm’s attorneys
provide, or have provided, general human resource advice with respect to all employment
matters to a number of local governmental entities and private employers. With respect to
all of those entities, our Firm has provided significant advice on lay‐offs and has developed
specific separation form agreements for the use of our clients. Many of our clients recently
Page 143 of 298
Page 14 of 18
conducted significant lay‐offs. We provided the advice and the forms for use in separation
agreements.
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
9. Policy and procedure review and consultation.
Our firm is one of, if not, the leading firm in Utah with respect to the review of policy
and procedure review and consultation for local government entities. Not only have we
reviewed the form procedure manuals developed by the Utah Leagues of Cities and Towns
and the Utah Association of Counties, we have developed form pr ocedures that correct many
of their deficiencies. In total, our attorneys have audited, amended, or substantially rewrote
the manuals or procedures for the following local government entities, non‐profit
organizations, or quasi‐governmental agencies:
Cedar Hills
East Carbon/Sunnyside
Magna Water District
Carbon County
Duchesne County
Emery County
Kids on the Move
Roads to Independence
Additionally, we have consulted with and made amendments to policies for the
following entities:
Wellington City
European Marble & Granite, LLC
The Local Pages
BODEC
The Hamlet Companies
Pilkington Metal Finishing, LLC
MultiLing
D. Scott Crook has also provided continuing legal education to attorneys and human
resource professionals with respect to many employment law issues. These courses are
listed under Work Categories 1 and/or 2 above. One or more of these courses are applicable
to this Work Category.
Page 144 of 298
Page 15 of 18
10. Counsel and guidance on compliance, record retention, mandatory reporting
and general matters.
As discussed in reference to Work Category 9 above, our Firm’s attorneys are among
the leading, if not the leading, attorneys on local government entity policy and procedure
compliance. Along with developing policies and procedures, we work closely with our clients
in developing record retention policies for all human resource matters. In addition, D. Scott
Crook has specifically written on and trained other employment attorneys on these issues in
the following seminars:
Legal Updates (Utah Association of Counties, Human Resources/Personnel)
(November 13, 2013)
Legal Issues Involving Local Governments (April 23, 2013)
Employment Law Update (Utah Municipal Attorneys Association) (May 4, 2011)
Employment Laws Made Simple (April 21, 2010)
Secrets to a Legally Compliant Human Resource Recordkeeping System (January
9, 2006)
Conflicts
We have no conflicts that would preclude our representation of Moab City. We do not
and have not represented any party against Moab City in litigation or otherwise. Of course,
if we are retained, we will not represent any party against Moab City during the term of our
agreement and beyond the term of the agreement on any matters in which we have
materially represented Moab City or about which we have material information.
Communications
Our Firm prides itself on its communications with its clients. We provide our clients
with instant communication about all matters. We have developed a file intake system which
requires as part of its process the immediate forwarding of any and all communication
received about a clients’ matters. We allow are clients to choose how they wish their
communication to occur—by telephone call, video conferencing, text messaging, email, mail,
client‐shared folders, or all of the methods.
Our firm employs a billing and time‐tracking system that is web‐based that has client
portals that allow the clients to see all tasks, communications, notes, time‐lines, etc. instantly.
With D. Scott Crook as the primary contact, he will provide case management and
reporting so that the provision of service is consistent at all times.
Value Added Services/Resources
Given the Firm’s long history of providing employment‐related services, it has
amassed a great library of forms all of which are provided to its clients as needed or
Page 145 of 298
Page 16 of 18
requested without cost. Additionally, on occasion, the Firm will provide free education to its
clients on particular matters of interest. Finally, one of the greatest resources available to its
clients is the blog maintained by D. Scott Crook, The Utah Employment Lawyer. The blog
maintains a vast library of statutes, regulations, and case law, all available at no cost. The
blog is maintained consistently and is frequently updated with all relevant cases affecting
Utah employers, including important statutory or regulatory changes.
Fee Proposal
Subscription Rate Proposal
CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING TWO:
ATTORNEY’S FEES RATE
1(a). $1,250/month 20 hours per quarter of general employment law
advice and consultation; or
1(b). $1,000/month 6 hours per month of general employment law
advice and consultation.
Once the above‐described allotment of attorney time is used, general employment law
advice and consultation will be provided at the hourly rate set forth below.
With each of the above two options, the City would be permitted to apply unused hours
to any of the below four categories of legal services during the time period for which
those hours were unused. For example, if the City chose the 20 hours per quarter plan,
and it has used only 10 hours of general employment law advice during a given quarter,
it may apply the remaining 10 hours to, for example, litigation during that same quarter.
Any hours left unused at the end of a given time period will carry over until the end of
the one year; but, hours that have been carried over may be used only for general
employment law advice and consultation. Hours carried over may not be used for any of
the below categories of legal services.
2. Litigation Hourly rate as set forth below
3. Hearings Hourly rate as set forth below
4. Full Policy Revision Flat fee of $7,000
5. Other Hourly rate as set forth below
Hourly Rate Alternative
Of course, if the City prefers, the Firm will provide its services to the City on an hourly
basis. Crook & Taylor Law provides competitive rates to all of its clients; however, for its
local governmental entity clients it provides a 25% discount. Thus,
Our rates would be as follows:
Page 146 of 298
Page 17 of 18
ATTORNEY’S FEES RATE
D. Scott Crook $225.00 per hour
Jeremiah R. Taylor $170.00 per hour
Law Clerks $50 ‐ $125.00 per hour
Paralegals $50 ‐ $115.00 per hour
Time is billed on a 1/10th of an hour basis.
Other Terms
Whether the City accepts the Subscription Rate Proposal or the Hourly Rate
Alternative, the Firm will still charge the following amounts for any extraordinary external
costs. For example, the Firm will not charge for internal copie s, long‐distance phone charges,
etc., however, any external cost to the Firm will be charged to the City. The Firm rarely incurs
costs for external services, but on occasion it will. They will be charged as follows:
OTHER SERVICES RATE
Filing Fees At cost
TRAVEL COSTS:
Airline Tickets At cost
Car Rentals At cost
Cab Fares At cost
Firm or Personal Vehicles IRS authorized rate
Lodging At cost
Food At cost
OTHER EXPENSES At cost
Time and expenses are billed on a monthly basis. Each monthly bill will include a
summary description of each item with the usual supporting documents and receipts
remaining on file in our offices. These bills describe the services provided. They will always
indicate the total fees for services rendered and itemized disbursements.
Summary
The Firm believes that it is the premiere law firm in Utah for providing employment‐
specific services to local government entities. We believe that our firm offers the highest
caliber of legal services available, not only because of our combined years of experience, but
also because of our commitment to building strong relationships with our clients. Simply put,
we understand the needs of our clients and pride ourselves on our ability to provide them
with practical advice and quality services in a variety of legal scenarios. We invite the City to
contact our referrals and discuss their experience with our Firm. We are certain that the City
will hear nothing but good reports.
Page 147 of 298
Page 18 of 18
References
Rose Barnes
Carbon County Human Resources Director
435.636.3290
Rose.Barnes@carbon.utah.gov
Mary Huntington
Emery County Personnel Officer
435.381.3578
maryh@emery.utah.gov
Christian Bryner
Carbon County Deputy County Attorney
435.636.3704
Christian Byner@carbon.utah.gov
Jeremy Hume
East Carbon City Attorney
435.650.6603
jhumes@humeslaw.com
Mike Olsen
Emery County Attorney
435.381.2543
mikeo@emery.utah.gov
John Schindler
Wellington City Attorney
435.636.3243
john.schindler@carbon.utah.gov
Sincerely,
CROOK & TAYLOR LAW PLLC
D. Scott Crook
Page 148 of 298
Addendum 1
Page 149 of 298
D. Scott Crook
scott@crooktaylorlaw.com
2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 •(801) 326-1943 • www.crooktaylorlaw.com
Summary of Public Entity Litigation Defense
Specific
Experience February 2016 to Present
Defense of Rule 65B Action against County Attorney
Defending County in claim against County Attorney’s Office
demanding that the County Attorney charge a person in criminal
case.
May 2010 to July 2014
Defense of FMLA and Due Process Claims
Successfully defended County as inside counsel in federal lawsuit
and subsequent appeal in claim alleging Due Process violations,
intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of covenant of
good faith and fair dealing, interference with economic relations,
FMLA, and civil conspiracy claims arising out of termination of
employee.
March 2011 to October 2013
Defense of Age Discrimination Claim
Successfully defended County before the Utah Antidiscrimination
and Labor Division and Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission on claim of age discrimination.
December 2010 to September 2013
Defense of Unemployment Claim
Defended County in unemployment appeal in front of Department
of Workforce Service, Utah Court of Appeals, and Utah Supreme
Court.
September 2010 to June 2011
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented County in investigation conducted by the U.S.
Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration,
Wage and Hour Division.
September 2008 to July 2009
Defense of Union Grievance Arbitration and Litigation
Defended Local Government Entity in arbitration and litigation
arising out of termination based upon employee failure of a drug
test.
Page 150 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 2 of 10
Private Entity Litigation Defense
March 2015 to Present
Defense of Wage Claim
Defending Private Employer in wage claim brought before the
Wage Claim Unit of the Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor
Division and the subsequent claimant appeal of decision favorable
to Private Employer.
December 2012 to June 2015
Defense of Sexual Harassment Claim
Successfully defended Private Employer before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division and Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission on claim of sexual harassment
discrimination.
January 2011 to September 2014
Defense of Age and Disability Discrimination Claim
Successfully defended Private Employer before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division, Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, and federal district court on claim of age
and disability discrimination.
March 2013 to June 2014
Defense of Age and National Origin Claim
Successfully defended Non-Profit Corporation before the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division and Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission on claim of age and national origin
discrimination.
September 2011 to July 2012
Defense of Wage Claim
Successfully defended Non-Profit Corporation in wage claim
brought before the Wage Claim Unit of the Utah
Antidiscrimination and Labor Division.
June 2010 to May 2012
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Represented Private Employer in investigation conducted by the
U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration,
Wage and Hour Division.
Page 151 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 3 of 10
October 2009 to October 2010
Defense of Race Discrimination Claim
Successfully defended Private Employer in federal district court on
claim of race discrimination.
September 2005 to July 2007
Defense of Sexual Harassment Claim
Defended Private Employer before the Utah Antidiscrimination
and Labor Division, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
and federal district court on claim of sexual harassment.
March to September 2006
Fair Labor Standards Compliance Investigation
Avoided any penalties and fines in successfully representing
Private Entity Employer of 150 employees in investigation
conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment
Standards Administration, Wage and Hour Division.
Public Entity Advisory Work
May 2008 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise County on employment and labor law issues.
April 2011 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Non-Profit Company on employment and labor law issues.
May 2013 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise City on employment and labor law issues.
May 2013 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise City on employment and labor law issues.
February 2015 to Present
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise County on employment and labor law issues.
July 2012 to June 2014
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise County on employment and labor law issues.
Page 152 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 4 of 10
July 2012 to January 2013
Personnel Policies and Procedures, Employment Application
Forms, Employment Forms, Drug Abuse Policy, and Federal
and State Employment Law and Regulation Review
Advised County on all aspects of its existing personnel policies
and procedures, forms, and applications.
November 2004 to April 2011
Employment and Labor Law Advice
Advise Local Water and Sewer District on all employment and
labor law issues.
November 2010 to December 2010
Employee Complaint and Employee Morale Investigation
Conducted investigation regarding employee complaints about
alleged illegal employment practices and employee morale for
Nonprofit Corporation.
May 2008 to April 2009
Personnel Policies and Procedures, Employment Application
Forms, Employment Forms, Drug Abuse Policy, and Federal
and State Employment Law and Regulation Review
Advised County on all aspects of its existing personnel policies
and procedures, forms, and applications.
August 2007 to September 2007
Employee Sexual Harassment Complaint Investigation
Conducted investigation regarding employee complaints about
alleged illegal sexual harassment for city. Prepared written report,
including findings and conclusions.
January to March 2006
Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual Audit
Audited Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual for City.
November 2005
Personnel Policy and Procedures Review
Advised Local Governmental Entity on issues related to
disciplinary procedures
Drafted and proposed severance agreement for Local
Governmental Entity Manager
Page 153 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 5 of 10
January to July 2005
Personnel Policies and Procedures, Employment Application
Forms, Employment Forms, Drug Abuse Policy, and Federal
and State Employment Law and Regulation Review
Advised Local Governmental Entity on all aspects of its existing
personnel policies and procedures, forms, and applications.
November 2004 to February 2005
Employee Complaint and Employee Morale Investigation
Conducted investigation regarding employee complaints about
alleged illegal employment practices and employee morale for
Intergovernmental Entity.
Professional October 2016 to Present
Experience Managing Partner, Attorney, Crook & Taylor Law PLLC
Salt Lake City, Utah
Advisory, litigation, and administrative practice with emphasis on
employment, complex litigation, water, land use, and appellate
matters.
Represented clients on employment issues before the U.S.
Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division; Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission; Utah Anti-
Discrimination and Labor Division; Merit Systems
Protection Board; National Labor Relations Board;
National Transportation Safety Board; Federal Aviation
Administration; and Public Service Commission.
Represented clients on grievance personnel matters at the
Utah State Tax Commission, Federal Bureau of Land
Management, Utah Air National Guard, and United States
Air Force.
Represented city in negotiations with Ute Indian Tribe and
Department of the Interior, and before United States
Congress in passage of private law deeding century-old
water rights from Indian Irrigation Service to city.
Represented irrigation company in informal conferences
before the Utah Division of Oil, Gas & Mining regarding
water displacement, quality, and quantity issues.
Represented counties in successful litigation efforts
involving multiple employment issues.
Page 154 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 6 of 10
Briefed, argued, and otherwise represented clients before
the Utah Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals,
and Utah Supreme Court.
2011 to Present
Attorney, Shareholder, D. Scott Crook Law, PC1
Salt Lake City, Utah
2002 to 2011
Attorney, Partner, Smith Hartvigsen PLLC
Salt Lake City, Utah
Founded firm with three others in 2002.
Served as President/Executive Committee Chair from
August 2009 until January 2011.
1998 to 2002
Attorney, Shareholder, Nielsen & Senior, P.C.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Worked as attorney as an associate and shareholder until forming
Smith Hartvigsen in 2002.
1997 to 1998
Judicial Clerk, Honorable Norman H. Jackson, Utah Court of
Appeals
Salt Lake City, Utah
Researched and drafted memoranda advising Judge Jackson on
civil, administrative, and criminal issues. Prepared initial drafts of
published and unpublished decisions of the Utah Court of Appeals,
discussing significant land use, municipal, civil, and criminal
issues.
1996 to 1997
Judicial Clerk, Honorable William H. Woodland, Idaho Sixth
Judicial District Court
Pocatello, Idaho
1 From May 2012 until September 2015 D. Scott Crook Law, PC, practiced as a member of Arnold &
Crook PLLC. D. Scott Crook Law, PC, continues to practice as a member of Crook & Taylor Law PLLC.
Page 155 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 7 of 10
Researched and drafted memoranda advising Judge Woodland on
civil, administrative, and criminal issues. Prepared initial drafts of
decisions discussing significant land use, municipal, civil, and
criminal issues, including bonding and state constitutional
questions regarding city authority to incur indebtedness. Assisted
Judge Woodland in trial and other hearings.
1995 to 1996
Law Clerk, Brigham Young University Office of General
Counsel
Provo, Utah
Reviewed and proposed changes to University policies and
procedures. Researched legal issues and drafted internal
memoranda. Drafted and revised contracts, policy documents, and
business formation documents. Prepared motions, briefs, and other
materials for litigation.
Education 1996
Juris Doctor, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young
University
Provo, Utah
Order of the Coif; Graduated Magna Cum Laude; Top 10% of
graduating class; Brigham Young University Law Review Staff
Member 1995-96; BYU Journal of Public Law Associate Editor
1994-95; Law School Scholarly Writing Award 1996; Foundation
Press Award for Excellence in Constitutional Law 1995; Law
School Scholastic Award 1995; studied Chinese law at the East
China University of Politics and Law 1995.
1993
Bachelor of Arts, Weber State University
Ogden, Utah
Graduated Summa Cum Laude; Phi Kappa Phi; Political Science
Outstanding Academic Achievement Award 1993; Model United
Nations Delegate at the Model United Nations of the Far West.
Professional Utah State Bar, 1996
Memberships Employment and Labor Section
Past Chair, Appellate Practice Section
Litigation Section
Energy, Natural Resources and Environmental Law Section
Young Lawyers Section
Idaho State Bar, 1997
Page 156 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 8 of 10
Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, 2003
United States Supreme Court, 2000
Awards and Best Lawyers in America, 2013-2017
Distinctions Litigation – Labor Employment
Mountain States Super Lawyer, 2011-2016
Employment and Labor
Utah Business Magazine, Utah Legal Elite
Labor and Employment, 2005-2012, 2016
Business Litigation, 2006
Civil Litigation, 2013-2014
Publications Author, State v. Davis: Peremptory Strikes and Religion--The
Unworkable Peremptory Challenge Jurisprudence, 9 B.Y.U.J. Pub.
Law 309 (1995)
Author, Affirming the Untested-Affirming a Trial Court Based on
Issues Raised Sua Sponte, Utah Bar Journal, Oct. 2001, at 10
Blogs The Utah Employment Lawyer
theutahemploymentlawyer@blogspot.com (2009 to Present)
Course Continuing Legal Education Seminars
Instruction
Advanced Employment Law‐Working through Common
Problems (to be presented December 6, 2016)
Attorneys’ Guide to Local Government Law (May 13, 2016)
Advanced Employment Law-Working through Common
Problems (June 24, 2015)
Legal Updates (Utah Association of Counties, Human
Resources/Personnel) (November 13, 2013)
Strategic Discovery Practice: Putting a Plan in Place &
Effective Deposition Practice (National District Attorneys
Association) (May 23, 2013)
Legal Issues Involving Local Governments (April 23, 2013)
Boundary Disputes: Determining Ownership When Lines are
Blurred (May 14, 2012)
Find it Free and Fast on the Net: Strategies for Legal
Research on the Web (April 13, 2012)
Employment Law Update, (Utah Municipal Attorneys
Association) (May 4, 2011)
Employment Laws Made Simple (April 21, 2010)
Page 157 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 9 of 10
ADA Amendments Act of 2009: New Definitions and
Challenges (December 7, 2009)
Employment Law Alphabet Soup (June 24, 2009)
Nuts & Bolts of Workplace Investigations (October 3, 2007)
Employment Laws Made Simple (April 5, 2007)
Small Office Management for the Legal Professional
(November 3, 2006)
Secrets to a Legally Compliant Human Resource
Recordkeeping System (January 9, 2006)
Boundary Disputes Trial Preparation and Litigation(February
4, 2008)
Road and Access Law: Successfully Handling Disputes
(November 7, 2007)
Easement and Boundary Issues in Utah (June 23, 2005)
Roads and Access Law in Utah: How to Research and Resolve
Access Disputes (March 9, 2004)
Roads and Access Law in Utah: How to Research and Resolve
Access Disputes (January 16, 2003)
Published Dixon v. Pro Image, 987 P.2d 48 (Utah 1999)
Cases
Southland Construction v. Semnani, 2001 UT 6, 20 P.3d 875 (Utah
2001)
SME Industries, Inc. v. Thompson, Ventulett, Stainbeck &
Associates, Inc., 2001 UT 54, 28 P.3d 669 (Utah 2001)
Guardian Title Co. v. Mitchell, 2002 UT 63, 54 P.3d 130 (Utah
2002)
Green River Canal Company v. Thayn, 2003 UT 50, 84 P.3d 1134
(Utah 2003)
Bradshaw v. Wilkinson Water Co., 2004 UT 38, 94 P.3d 242 (Utah
2004)
Swan Creek Village Homeowners Ass’n v. Warne, 2006 UT 22,
134 P.3d 1122 (Utah 2006)
Newton v. Federal Aviation Administration, 457 F.3d 1133 (10th
Cir. 2006)
Wayment v. Howard, 2006 UT 56, 144 P.3d 1147 (Utah 2006)
Radakovich v. Cornaby, 2006 UT App 454 (Utah Ct. App. 2006)
Page 158 of 298
D. Scott Crook
Page 10 of 10
Ellsworth v. American Arbitration Association, 2006 UT 77 (Utah
2007)
Newton v. Utah Air National Guard, 668 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (D.
Utah 2010)
Wasatch Oil & Gas, LLC v. Reott, 2011 UT App 152, 263 P.3d
391 (Utah Ct. App. 2011)
Carbon County v. Department of Workforce Services, 2012 UT
App 4, 269 P.3d 969 (Utah Ct. App. 2012)
Carbon County v. Workforce Appeals Board, 2013 UT 41, 308
P.3d 477 (Utah 2013)
Krejci v. City of Saratoga Springs, 2013 UT 74, 322 P.3d 662
(Utah 2013)
Page 159 of 298
Addendum 2
Page 160 of 298
Page 1 of 2
JEREMIAH R. TAYLOR
2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 • (801) 326‐1943
jerry@crooktaylorlaw.com • www.crooktaylorlaw.com
EXPERIENCE
Partner, Crook & Taylor Law PLLC, Salt Lake City, UT, October 2016 – Present
● Litigate, negotiate and/or advise private entities, public entities, and individuals in the areas of
employment, business, and real estate law.
Associate Attorney, Terry Jessop & Bitner, Salt Lake City, UT, May 2012 – September 2016
● Represented numerous individuals and entities in civil litigation involving breach of contract,
business, fraud, construction, real estate, judgment enforcement, and other areas of law.
● Defended employers faced with wage claims.
● Consulted with employees regarding employment‐related legal issues, including discrimination,
wages, termination, non‐solicitation, non‐disclosure, and non‐compete.
● Represented financial institutions in foreclosure deficiency, breach of contract, bankruptcy, and
collection litigation.
● Represented landlords in eviction proceedings.
● Defended multiple fair housing discrimination complaints before the UALD.
● Drafted, negotiated, and/or reviewed a variety of contracts involving, for example, the sale of
business assets, credit applications, employment, non‐disclosure, non‐compete, commercial leasing,
real estate transfer, lending, title lending, liability release, and dispute settlement.
Assistant City Attorney, Boise City Attorney’s Office, Boise, ID, July 2009 – May 2012
● Tried 9 jury trials with 5 guilty verdicts, including 2 complex drug DUI verdicts.
● Tried 71 infraction and misdemeanor court trials with 62 guilty verdicts.
● Negotiated guilty pleas on more than 1,000 cases.
● Selected to police advice and training team.
Judicial Law Clerk, Judge Michael McLaughlin, District Court, Boise, ID, August 2008 – July 2009
● Drafted more than 50 bench memoranda and decisions for civil motions dealing with contracts, real
property, business, and other areas of law.
Law Clerk/Extern, Justice George Nicholson, CA Court of Appeal, Sacramento, CA, May – August 2007
● Drafted proposed opinions for criminal cases on appeal relating to standards of review, admission of
evidence, jury instructions, constitutional rights, and other issues.
Intern, City of Rexburg Prosecutor’s Office, Rexburg, ID, May – August 2006
Researched and presented recommendations relating to several municipal legal issues, e.g.
annexation, business registration, public rights‐of‐way, and service area agreements.
Junior Public Relations Associate, Snapp Norris Group, Salt Lake City, UT, June 2004 – July 2005
Page 161 of 298
Page 2 of 2
● Provided strategic public relations services to multiple technology trade companies to help create
greater awareness, increased sales opportunities, and third‐party editorial validation among
targeted audiences.
● Spearheaded media relations efforts for Special Olympics Utah and Utah Valley Entrepreneurial
Forum.
EDUCATION
University of Idaho College of Law, Juris Doctor, May 2008
● Class Rank: 15/95; Dean's List
● Idaho Law Review Journal Articles Editor and Technical Editor
● Employed as Legal Research & Writing Instructor's Assistant
● Selected as BarBri representative
● Small Business Legal Aid Clinic
● 1L Appellate Brief Finalist
Brigham Young University, B.A., Communications, Public Relations emphasis, August 2004
● GPA: 3.65
● Internship with Snapp Norris Group PR; Offered full‐time position after graduation
Licensed Idaho Real Estate Agent, 2012, (License Expired)
OTHER
Member: Utah Bar Real Property, Banking and Finance, Litigation, Collection, and Business Sections
Personal Interests: Technology, sports, productivity, family
Page 162 of 298
Page 163 of 298
Page 164 of 298
Page 165 of 298
Page 166 of 298
Page 167 of 298
Page 168 of 298
Page 169 of 298
Page 170 of 298
Page 171 of 298
Page 172 of 298
Page 173 of 298
Page 174 of 298
Page 175 of 298
Page 176 of 298
Page 177 of 298
Page 178 of 298
Page 179 of 298
Page 180 of 298
Page 181 of 298
Page 182 of 298
Page 183 of 298
Page 184 of 298
Page 185 of 298
Page 186 of 298
Page 187 of 298
Page 188 of 298
Page 189 of 298
Page 190 of 298
Page 191 of 298
Page 192 of 298
Page 193 of 298
Page 194 of 298
Page 195 of 298
Page 196 of 298
Page 197 of 298
Page 198 of 298
Page 199 of 298
Page 200 of 298
Page 201 of 298
Page 202 of 298
Page 203 of 298
Page 204 of 298
Page 205 of 298
Page 206 of 298
Page 207 of 298
Page 208 of 298
Page 209 of 298
Page 210 of 298
Page 211 of 298
Page 212 of 298
Page 213 of 298
Page 214 of 298
Page 215 of 298
Page 216 of 298
Page 217 of 298
Page 218 of 298
Page 219 of 298
Page 220 of 298
Page 221 of 298
Page 222 of 298
Page 223 of 298
Page 224 of 298
Page 225 of 298
Page 226 of 298
Page 227 of 298
Page 228 of 298
Page 229 of 298
Page 230 of 298
Legal Employment Services RFP Responses: Staff Evaluation
(5 max per category)
Respondent Experience Value Added
Services
Staffing
Approach
Communication
Approach
Proposed
cost
Total
score (25
max)
Crowdell and
Wolley
3 3 4 3 4 17
Crook and Taylor 4 2 4 3 3 16
Dufford Waldec 4 2 3 3 3 16
Parr Brown Gee
and Loveless
5 4 4 3 2
18
Smith Hartvigsen 4 2 4 3 3 16
Page 231 of 298
Sr atttorney rate Jr attorney rate Consider flat fee for certain services?average rateScenario: 10 hrs/monthParr Brown $ 333.00 $ 229.50 yes $ 281.25 $ 33,750.00 Crowdell wolley $ 150.00 $ 110.00 yes $ 130.00 $ 15,600.00 Dufford Waldec $ 220.00 $ 180.00 $ 200.00 $ 24,000.00 Crook and Taylor $ 208.33 $ 208.33 $ 208.33 $ 25,000.00 Smith Hartvigsen $ 275.00 $ 150.00 $ 212.50 $ 25,500.00 Legal services fee comparisonsPage 232 of 298
City of Moab
EMPLOYMENT LEGAL SERVICES
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into effective the ____ day of ___________, 2017, by and between
the City of Moab, which shall be called the "City" in this agreement; and ________________________, who
shall be called the "Contractor" in this agreement.
In consideration of the mutual conditions set forth in this agreement, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1. Compensation.
a. The City agrees to pay the Contractor for the legal services to be rendered pursuant to this
agreement based on a negotiated hourly/set rate of _____________.
2. Terms, Termination and Compensation.
a. This contract shall be in effect for a period of one year, beginning January 15, 2017, and
ending January 14, 2018. It may be renewed for additional one-year terms upon the mutual
agreement of both parties.
b. In the event that either party shall deem the other to be in breach of any provision included in
this contract, the party claiming the existence of the breach on the other's part shall notify, in
writing, the other party of such breach. The other party shall, within fifteen (15) days,
commence all actions reasonably necessary to cure the breach and shall notify the complaining
party in writing of the actions taken to cure the breach. In the event that actions reasonably
necessary to cure the breach are not timely commenced, the complaining party may terminate
this agreement upon ninety (90) days’ written notice.
c. In the event of disciplinary action by the Utah State Bar against the Contractor, this contract
may be terminated without notice.
d. In the event the Contractor intends to cease in its contracted relationship with the City, ninety
(90) days written notice to the City is required.
e. Compensation shall be payable on a monthly basis. Invoices should be submitted to the City of
Moab Recorder’s Office, 217 East Center Street, Moab Utah, 84532.
3. Legal Services.
The Contractor will advise, assist, and advocate for the City in employment-related matters,
including:
a. Employment-related litigation, including coordination with insurance carriers and the relevant
Page 233 of 298
local, state, federal, and administrative filings;
b. Government investigations, wage garnishments, employment verifications, search warrants
and subpoenas;
c. Recruitment & hiring practices and protocols;
d. Employee benefits and pension issues;
e. Compensation practices and FLSA compliance;
f. Employee discipline and investigations;
g. Reduction-in-Force initiatives
h. Separation agreements;
i. General labor matters, including but not limited to Loudermill hearings, internal affairs
investigations, grievances, FM LA requests and procedures;
j. Human resources policy and procedure review and consultation;
k. Compliance, record retention, and mandatory reporting requirements; and
l. Other special services as requested by the City, including research, preparation, and follow-
through on various types of specifically requested special services matters.
4. Conflicts or Inability to Represent.
In the event of a conflict of interest, inability or circumstances such that the Contractor is not able
to represent the City, such conflicts shall be made immediately known to the City.
5. Disclaimers.
a. It is understood and agreed that neither the Contractor nor any of its staff or agents are
employees of the City.
b. The Contractor will be acting in all respects as an independent contractor and the City will in
no way be liable for or on account of the conduct, negligence, or omissions of the Contractor.
6. Renewal of Contract, or, Transition Upon Termination of Contract.
In the event this appointment is not renewed by the City:
a. The Contractor agrees to cooperate with its successors including filing the necessary pleadings
for withdrawal and to deliver all applicable files, information and materials to its successor.
b. All matters pending at that time shall become the responsibility of the subsequently appointed
contracted law firm, or if no firm is so appointed, the City Attorney.
c. In the event the Contractor is not permitted to withdraw from the representation in any matter
by the court upon the conclusion of this agreement and any extensions hereto, the City agrees
to compensate the Contractor at the negotiated rate for services provided beyond the term of
this agreement and any extensions thereto.
Page 234 of 298
7. Status.
In the event of any change of address, ongoing conflict, or inability to practice law, the Contractor
shall promptly notify the City in writing of such change in status.
8. Non-Assignability.
This agreement may not be assigned by the Contractor to any other attorney or law firm without
the prior written consent of City.
9. Notice to the Parties.
Any notice required by this agreement to be given shall be given in writing at the following
address unless designated otherwise in writing:
• Moab City Manager, 217 East Center Street, Moab, Utah 84532.
• ________________________________________________[Contractor address]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement in duplicate, each of which shall be
deemed an original, on the _____ day of ______________, 2017.
CITY OF MOAB:
_____________________________________
Mayor David L. Sakrison
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder
CONTRACTOR:
_______________________________________
By:________________________________
Page 235 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7‐2
Title: Approval of a Purchasing Exception to Parr, Brown, Gee and Loveless for
Employment Legal Services
Fiscal Impact: $65,481.98
Staff Presenter(s): Rachel Stenta, City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Department: Administration/Human Resources
Applicant: N/A
Background/Summary: First, please be advised that detailed billings contain
specific attorney/client privileged information that is classified as Protected under
GRAMA (U.C.A. 63G-2-305(17)) and are not included in this public packet. If the
Council would like to review the detailed billings, they are available in my office.
As you are aware, we had several Internal Affairs investigations in 2016. During
the personnel issues that arose during the course of the investigations, we
utilized employment counsel to reduce the City’s future liability and risk exposure.
You may recall that during this time is when the former City Manager was placed
on Administrative Leave. As Acting City Manager, I requested Authorization of
Interim Employment Attorney Services at the September 27, 2016 Council
Meeting and the direction that I received from the Council was to stay the course
with Parr, Brown, Gee and Loveless. The total of IA related employment counsel
for this billing is $35,876.23 which concludes the billing for the two investigations
that began earlier in 2016.
Also during this time, a need arose for employment counsel in connection with
the Administrative Leave of the former City Manager. Parr, Brown Gee and
Loveless were utilized and the total on this billing for those services is:
$25,527.70.
The remainder of the billing is for GRAMA related services of $7,961.90 and
General employment counsel of $2,724.00. Parr, Brown, Gee and Loveless
offered an overall courtesy discount of ($6,607.85) bringing the total of the
purchasing exception to: $65,481.98.
Page 236 of 298
The Request for Proposals for Employment Counsel Services was released in
September and closed in late October. The selection of a firm to provide
employment counsel should minimize future purchasing exceptions for these
services.
Options: Approve, Deny or Postpone
Staff Recommendation: The services were authorized by City Council and the
services have been rendered satisfactorily, staff recommends approval of the
purchasing exception.
Recommended Motion: Move to approve agenda item #7-2
Attachment(s): Summary billings from Parr, Brown, Gee and Loveless
Page 237 of 298
Page 238 of 298
Page 239 of 298
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7-3
Title: Approval of Utah Division of Parks and Recreation Fiscal Assistance
Agreement for RTP Grant
Fiscal Impact: $8,000 in Matching Funds
Staff Presenter(s): Tif Miller, Parks Recreation and Trails Director
Department: Recreation
Applicant: N/A
Background/Summary: The City applied for and received up to $8,000 in
matching grant funds in September 2015. To receive these funds the City of
Moab must complete and sign the attached agreement. The project must be
completed by September 30, 2017. The project will help to resurface the asphalt
trail along 191 near Moab Springs Ranch, and will provide a road base trail from
500 West to the bridge along 500 West all the way to the tunnel underpass
along the Mill Creek Parkway.
Options: The Council may approve, approve with conditions, deny or postpone
the item.
Staff Recommendation: City staff recommends approval of the agreement
as submitted.
Recommended Motions: "I move to approve the Utah Division of Parks and
Recreation Fiscal Assistance Agreement for RTP Grant
Attachment(s):
Fiscal Assistance Agreement
2011 Trail Easement
Page 240 of 298
State Contract #:
Vendor #:
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
NON-MOTORIZED TRAIL MATCHING FUND PROGRAM
FISCAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2015,
between the UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION, hereinafter referred to as
the DIVISION, and MOAB CITY, qualifying under this agreement as a federal agency,
state agency, political subdivision of the State of Utah, or a nonprofit group and
hereinafter referred to as the PARTICIPANT.
WHEREAS, the DIVISION and the PARTICIPANT desire to provide for the planning,
acquisition, construction, or improvement of non-motorized trails and associated
facilities in Utah; and,
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration’s Recreational Trails Program (RTP)
funds for this purpose are to be matched by the PARTICIPANT for said project of
planning, acquisition, construction, or improvement of motorized trails and
associated facilities herein after described: and,
WHEREAS, federal agencies are authorized to enter into this agreement under
provisions of the Granger-Thye Act of April 24, 1950, (16 U.S.C. 490, 504-504a, 555,
557, 571c, 572, 579a, 580c-5801, 581 i-l), specifically Sec. 5; the Cooperative
Funds Act of June 30, 1914 (CH. 131, 38 Stat. 415, as amended: 16 U.S.C. 498);
and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), Public Law 94-
579.
NOW, THEREFORE, the DIVISION and PARTICIPANT hereby agree as follows:
PROJECT EXECUTION FOR: Mill Creek Parkway/500 West Extension
TOTAL AMOUNT OF RTP FUNDING $8,000.00
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PARTICIPANT FUNDING $8,000.00
TOTAL TRAIL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $16,000.00
Page 241 of 298
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FISCAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
1. The DIVISION shall reimburse the PARTICIPANT up to a total of $8,000.00
from funds made available from the Federal Highway Administration’s Recreational
Trails Program (RTP) upon receipt of satisfactory documentation of total trail project
expenditures and certification that the project has been completed as proposed in
the project application, which application, by reference is made part of this
agreement. Said project shall be started within one hundred eighty (180) calendar
days and be completed on or before September 30, 2017.
2. The PARTICIPANT shall comply with all applicable Federal and State Statutes
and will be responsible for obtaining any necessary permits and approvals prior to
commencement of the project, such as the RTP Environmental Clearances and
Check List.
3. Each contract the PARTICIPANT signs with a contractor (and each
subcontractor the prime contractor signs with a subcontractor) must include the
following assurance:
The contractor, sub recipient or subcontractor shall not discriminate on the basis
of race, color, national origin or sex in the performance of this contract. The
contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR part 26 in the award
and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry
out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in
the termination of this contract or such other remedy, as the Division deems
appropriate.
4. The PARTICIPANT, excluding federal agencies, shall indemnify the State of
Utah and its officers, agents, and employees against and hold the same free and
harmless from any and all claims, demands, losses, costs, and/or expenses of
liability due to, or arising from, either in whole or in part, whether directly or indirectly,
and relative to, the execution of this project, subject to and in accordance with the
provisions and limitations contained within the Utah Governmental Immunity Act and
the Utah Public Employees Indemnification Act.
5. The PARTICIPANT agrees that the project area acquired, developed or
improved pursuant to this agreement shall not be converted to other than public
motorized recreational trail use without written notice to the Director of the Utah
Division of Parks and Recreation. Furthermore, if a trail developed with the Federal
Highway Administration’s Recreational Trails Program funds is converted to other
use, another trail of comparable value, as mutually agreed by both parties, in the
same general location, will be provided by the PARTICIPANT.
Page 242 of 298
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FISCAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
6. The PARTICIPANT shall maintain all facilities and property covered by this
agreement in a safe, usable, and attractive condition. The DIVISION makes no claims
to ownership nor management interests of facilities constructed pursuant to this
agreement on lands legally owned by the PARTICIPANT.
7. The PARTICIPANT shall provide suitable permanent public acknowledgment of
State participation at the project site. Such acknowledgment shall at least be the
display of a sign, the design of which to be made by mutual agreement.
8. Buy America - The PARTICIPANT agrees to comply with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j) and
49 C.F.R. Part 661, which provide that Federal funds may not be obligated unless
steel, iron, and manufactured products used in federally funded projects are
produced in the United States, unless a waiver has been granted by the DIVISION or
the product is subject to a general waiver.
The PARTICIPANT must submit to the DIVISION the appropriate Buy America
certification (below) with all bids or offers on federally-funded contracts, except
those subject to a general waiver. Bids or offers that are not accompanied by a
completed Buy America certification must be rejected as nonresponsive. This
requirement does not apply to lower tier subcontractors.
A. Certification requirement for procurement of steel, iron, or manufactured products.
Certificate of Compliance with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(1)
The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it will meet the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(1) and
the applicable regulations in 49 CFR Part 661.5.
Date ____________________________________________________________
Signature______________________________________________________
Company Name_______________________________________________________
Title _____________________________________________________________
Certificate of Non-Compliance with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(1)
The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it cannot comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C.
5323(j)(1) and 49 C.F.R. 661.5, but it may qualify for an exception pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
5323(j)(2)(A), 5323(j)(2)(B), or 5323(j)(2)(D), and 49 C.F.R. 661.7.
Date _________________________________________________________________
Signature ___________________________________________________________
Company Name _________________________________________________________
Title _______________________________________________________________
Page 243 of 298
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FISCAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
B. Certification requirement for procurement of buses, other rolling stock and associated
equipment.
Certificate of Compliance with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(2)(C).
The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it will comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C.
5323(j)(2)(C) and the regulations at 49 C.F.R. Part 661.11.
Date _________________________________________________________________
Signature ____________________________________________________________
Company Name ____________________________________________________________
Title _________________________________________________________________
Certificate of Non-Compliance with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(2)(C)
The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it cannot comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C.
5323(j)(2)(C) and 49 C.F.R. 661.11, but may qualify for an exception pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
5323(j)(2)(A), 5323(j)(2)(B), or 5323(j)(2)(D), and 49 C.F.R. 661.7.
Date _______________________________________________________________
Signature ____________________________________________________________
Company Name ________________________________________________________
Title _______________________________________________________________
9. Any PARTICIPANT that is a nonprofit corporation must disclose whether it meets
or exceeds the requirements listed in Subsection 51-2a-102 (6)(f) in the previous
fiscal year of the nonprofit corporation; and 51-2a-102 (6)(f): (f) the governing board
of any nonprofit corporation that receives:
(i) at least 50% of its funds from federal, state, and local government entities
through contracts; or
(ii) an amount from the DIVISION that is equal to or exceeds the amount specified in
Subsection 51-2a-201(1) that would require an audit to be made by a competent
certified public accountant; and anticipates meeting or exceeding the requirements
listed in Subsection 51-2a-102 (6)(f) in the fiscal year the grant is issued.
In addition the PARTICIPANT (nonprofit corporation) shall provide the following to the
DIVISION as a supplement of this contract:
(a) bylaws that provide for:
(i) the financial oversight of the state money; and
(ii) compliance with state laws related to the state money;
(b) procedures for the governing board of the nonprofit entity to designate an
administrator who manages the state money; and
(c) procedures for the governing board to dismiss the administrator
Page 244 of 298
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FISCAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
Further, the PARTICIPANT (nonprofit corporation) shall provide the DIVISION an
itemized report at least annually detailing the expenditure of state money. The
nonprofit may be required to return to the state entity any amount of money that is
expended in violation of 63J-9-201 if the nonprofit fails to comply with the
agreement.
B. TERMINATION
1. The PARTICIPANT, upon written notice to the DIVISION and by refunding all
monies received pursuant to this agreement, may unilaterally rescind this agreement
prior to the commencement of the project. After project commencement, this
agreement may be rescinded, modified, or amended only by mutual agreement. The
project shall be deemed commenced when the PARTICIPANT makes any expenditure
of funds provided in this agreement or incurs any financial obligation with respect to
the project.
2. The PARTICIPANT shall, at no cost to the DIVISION, execute, complete, operate
and maintain the approved Project in accordance with the approved Project Proposal
and applicable plans and specifications, which documents are by this reference
made part hereof. Failure to render satisfactory progress or to complete the Project
may be cause for the suspension of all obligations of the DIVISION under this
agreement. In the event this agreement is terminated under the provisions of this
paragraph and in the event the Project has not been brought up to a useful stage at
the time of such termination, the PARTICIPANT shall reimburse to the DIVISION all
payments, which have been received by the PARTICIPANT under this agreement.
3. Failure by the PARTICIPANT to comply with the terms of this agreement, if not
corrected within thirty (30) days after written notice from the DIVISION, shall be
cause for suspension of all obligations of the DIVISION hereunder and may result in a
declaration by the DIVISION that the PARTICIPANT is ineligible for participation in
DIVISION sponsored grant programs.
C. FINANCIAL RECORDS
1. The PARTICIPANT shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles
and shall maintain its fiscal accounts in a manner that provides an audit trail of
payments adequate to establish that such funds have been used in accordance with
this agreement.
Page 245 of 298
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FISCAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
2. The PARTICIPANT shall provide to the DIVISION a fiscal report within sixty (60)
days after completion of the project, or within sixty (60) days of the contract
expiration date on forms to be provided by the DIVISION. Said report shall include an
accounting of project expenditures and assurances that all monies paid to the
PARTICIPANT by the DIVISION under this agreement were used for the planning,
acquisition, construction, or improvement as herein described. Said report shall also
include a summary list of all personnel, supplies, materials and construction costs
associated with this project in a manner prescribed by the DIVISION.
3. The DIVISION, upon reasonable notice, shall have access to and the right to
examine such books, documents, papers or records as the DIVISION may reasonably
require.
4. The PARTICIPANT agrees to make immediate monetary restitution for any
disallowances of costs or expenditures determined through audit or inspection by the
DIVISION.
FURTHER, the PARTICIPANT shall prosecute all phases and aspects of the project in a
timely manner and shall in all respects comply with the terms, conditions, covenants
and other obligations of this agreement. It is understood and agreed that the
PARTICIPANT shall have the basic responsibility for all phases and aspects of the
project and that all phases of the project are subject to review and acceptance by the
DIVISION.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement the year
and day first above written:
MOAB CITY
Signature Date
Title
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS & RECREATION
Director Date
Page 246 of 298
Page 247 of 298
Page 248 of 298
Page 249 of 298
Page 250 of 298
Page 251 of 298
Page 252 of 298
Page 253 of 298
Page 254 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
PL-17-01
Agenda Item
#: 7-4
Title: Adoption of Council Resolution #01-2017 Approving a Petition for a Boundary Line Adjustment
for 600 and 610 Dragonfly Trail
Staff: Jeff Reinhart, City Planner
Department: Planning and Zoning
Applicants: Colin Topper
Background/Summary:
Mr. Colin Topper, as the owner of Lots 21 and 23, Mulberry Grove, Planned Unit Development (also
600 and 610 Dragonfly Trail), has applied to amend the boundary line between the two lots. Lot 21
will be amended to consist of 2,891 square feet and Lot 23 will consist of 5325 square feet.
The area of both lots meet the minimum lot size for an approved Planned Unit Development The
request complies with State Code Chapter 10-9a-608(2) that allows a subdivision plat to be amended
by the Land Use Authority (Council) without a public hearing if:
“(a) the petition seeks to:
(i) join two or more of the petitioner fee owner's contiguous lots;
(ii) subdivide one or more of the petitioning fee owner's lots, if the subdivision will not result in a
violation of a land use ordinance or a development condition;
(iii)adjust the lot lines of adjoining lots or parcels if the fee owners of each of the adjoining lots
or parcels join in the petition, regardless of whether the lots or parcels are located in the same
subdivision;
(iv) on a lot owned by the petitioning fee owner, adjust an internal lot restriction imposed by the
local political subdivision; or
(v) alter the plat in a manner that does not change existing boundaries or other attributes of lots
within the subdivision….”
The request does not vacate or amend a public street, right-of-way, or easement and this request
meets the applicable requirements listed in state law and the dimensional requirements of Moab
Municipal Code.
Options:
Council can:
1.Approve the petition for the lot line adjustment as submitted;
2.Approve the petition with conditions;
3.Table the petition if additional information is needed.
Page 255 of 298
Page 2 of 2
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that this application be approved by Council; it satisfies
the requirements of Utah State Code and the Moab Municipal Code.
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt resolution #01-2017 and approve the lot line adjustment as
submitted.
Attachment(s): Copies of: Proposed plat
Signed Petition to Vacate, Alter, or Amend a Subdivision Plat
Narrative
Council Resolution #01-2017
Aerial
Page 256 of 298
Resolution #01‐2017 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION # 01-2017
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR LOTS 21 AND 23,
MULBERRY GROVE, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AS SUBMITTED BY COLIN TOPPER
WHEREAS, Mr. Colin Topper, of 441 Tusher Street, Moab, Utah 84532, as “Owner” of Lots 21 and 23,
Mulberry Grove ( 600 and 610 Dragonfly Trail, respectively) has applied for a lot line adjustment between
the two lots; and
WHEREAS, the properties are located in a Planned Unit Development that overlays the RA-1, Residential
Agricultural Zone; and
WHEREAS, the Owner submitted to the City of Moab the appropriate application and documents for review
and approval of the proposed lot line adjustment; and
WHEREAS, Lot 21 will consist of 2,891 square feet (.066 ac) and Lot 23 will be 5,325 (.1222 ac) square
feet in size; and
WHEREAS, the proposed lot dimensions satisfy lot areas for the approved Mulberry Grove, Planned Unit
Development; and
WHEREAS, the Moab City Council (“Council”), in a regularly scheduled public meeting held on January10,
2017, reviewed the proposal for compliance with the Moab Municipal Code and State Code Chapter 10-9a-
608(2) that allows an amendment of a subdivision plat without a public hearing if:
(a) the petition seeks to:
“Adjust the lot lines of adjoining lots or parcels if the fee owners of each of the adjoining
lots or parcels join in the petition, regardless of whether the lots or parcels are located in
the same subdivision…”
WHEREAS, subsequent to the consideration of a Staff recommendation and having reviewed the technical
aspects of the pertinent code sections, and pursuant to Council Resolution #01-2017, the City Council
hereby finds, that the code requirements have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOAB CITY COUNCIL THAT, the application for the lot
line adjustment for Lots 21 and 23 of the Mulberry Grove Planned Unit Development, is hereby approved.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED by action of the Moab City Council in open session this
10th day of January, 2017.
ATTEST:
Rachel Stenta Dave Sakrison
Moab City Recorder Mayor
Page 257 of 298
Page 258 of 298
Page 259 of 298
Page 260 of 298
Page 261 of 298
1 inch = 30 feet
0 30 6015FeetÜTopper Lot Line Adjustment
Lots 21 & 23
Mulberry Grove Subdivision
Dragonfly Trail
Lot 21
Peach PathLot 23
Page 262 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
PL-17-02
Agenda Item
#: 7-5
Title: Adoption of Council Resolution #02-2017 Approving a Petition for a Boundary Line Adjustment
for Lots 1 and 2 of the Roufa Subdivision
Staff: Jeff Reinhart, City Planner
Department: Planning and Zoning
Applicants: Chad Harris
Background/Summary:
Mr. Chad Harris, as the owner of Lots 1 and 2, Roufa Subdivision (459 and 469 Bowen Circle), has
applied to amend the boundary line between the two lots. The amended Lot 1 will consist of 17,538
square feet (.41 acre) and Lot 2 will consist 8, 257 square feet (.18 acre).
The area of both lots meet the minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet for the R-2, single and two
family Residential Zone. The request also complies with State Code Chapter 10-9a-608(2) that allows a
subdivision plat to be amended by the Land Use Authority (Council) without a public hearing if:
“(a) the petition seeks to:
(i) join two or more of the petitioner fee owner's contiguous lots;
(ii) subdivide one or more of the petitioning fee owner's lots, if the subdivision will not result in a
violation of a land use ordinance or a development condition;
(iii)adjust the lot lines of adjoining lots or parcels if the fee owners of each of the adjoining lots
or parcels join in the petition, regardless of whether the lots or parcels are located in the same
subdivision;
(iv) on a lot owned by the petitioning fee owner, adjust an internal lot restriction imposed by the
local political subdivision; or
(v) alter the plat in a manner that does not change existing boundaries or other attributes of lots
within the subdivision….”
This request minimally amends a previously approved flag-shaped lot as defined in Moab Municipal
Code Chapter 17.06.020, Definitions:
“Flag-shaped or panhandle-shaped lots” may be created in any single-family or two-family
residential zone if all of the following requirements are met:
1.The lot has at least twenty feet of frontage on a dedicated public street, which frontage
serves as access only to the subject lot or parcel- the frontage is twenty five (25) feet in width;
2.The handle portion of the lot is at least twenty feet in width, and not more than one
hundred fifty feet in length- the handle is 57.79 feet in length;
Page 263 of 298
Page 2 of 2
3. That the body of the lot meets the lot area and lot width requirements of the applicable
zones- both lots exceed the minimum lot area of five thousand square feet.
The request does not vacate or amend a public street, right-of-way, or easement and this
request meets the applicable requirements listed in state law and the dimensional requirements of
Moab Municipal Code sections 17.06 and 17.48.030.
Options:
Council can:
1. Approve the petition for the lot line adjustment as submitted;
2. Approve the petition with conditions;
3. Table the petition if additional information is needed.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that this application be approved by Council because it
satisfies the requirements of Utah State Code and the Moab Municipal Code.
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt resolution #02-2017 and approve the lot line adjustment as
submitted.
Attachment(s): Copies of: Proposed plat
Signed Petition to Vacate, Alter, or Amend a Subdivision Plat
Narrative
Council Resolution #02-2017
Aerial
Page 264 of 298
Page 265 of 298
Ü 1 inch = 30 feet
Roufa Subdivision
Boundary Line Adjustment
Bowen Circle
0 30 6015Feet
Lot 22 A
469 Bowen Circle
Locust Lane
Lot 22 B
459 Bowen Circle
Page 266 of 298
Page 267 of 298
Resolution #01-2017 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION # 02-2017
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR LOTS 1 and 2 of the ROUFA
SUBDIVISION AS SUBMITTED BY CHAD HARRIS
WHEREAS, Mr. Chad Harris, PO Box 301 Moab, Utah 84532, as “Owner” of Lots 1 and 2, Roufa
Subdivision, (459 and 469 Bowen Circle has applied for a lot line adjustment between the two lots; and
WHEREAS, the properties are located in the R-2, single-family and two-family Residential Zone; and
WHEREAS, the Owner submitted to the City of Moab the appropriate application and documents for review
and approval of the proposed lot line adjustment; and
WHEREAS, Lot 1 will be comprised of 17,538 square feet (.40 acre) and Lot 2, a flag lot, will consist of
8,257 square feet (.19 acre) with a “pole length of 57.79 lineal feet; and
WHEREAS, the proposed lot dimensions satisfy the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet for the R-2
Zone; and
WHEREAS, Lot 2 satisfies the definition of “flag-shaped or panhandle lots” in Moab Municipal Code
Chapter 17.06.020, as follows: “Flag-shaped or panhandle-shaped lots” may be created in any single-
family or two-family residential zone if all of the following requirements are met:
1. The lot has at least twenty feet of frontage on a dedicated public street, which frontage serves
as access only to the subject lot or parcel;
2. The handle portion of the lot is at least twenty feet in width, and not more than one hundred
fifty feet in length;
3. That the body of the lot meets the lot area and lot width requirements of the applicable zones.
WHEREAS, the Moab City Council (“Council”), in a regularly scheduled public meeting held on January 10,
2017, reviewed the proposal for compliance with the Moab Municipal Code and State Code Chapter 10-9a-
608(2) that allows an amendment of a subdivision plat without a public hearing if:
(a) the petition seeks to:
“Adjust the lot lines of adjoining lots or parcels if the fee owners of each of the adjoining
lots or parcels join in the petition, regardless of whether the lots or parcels are located in
the same subdivision…”
WHEREAS, subsequent to the consideration of a Staff recommendation and having reviewed the technical
aspects of the pertinent code sections, and pursuant to Council Resolution #2-2017, the City Council hereby
finds, that the code requirements have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOAB CITY COUNCIL THAT, the application for the lot
line adjustment for Lots 1 and 2 of the Roufa Subdivision, is hereby approved.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED by action of the Moab City Council in open session this
8th day of January, 2017.
ATTEST:
Rachel Stenta Dave Sakrison
Moab City Recorder Mayor
Page 268 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7‐6
Title: Award of Police Vehicle Lease Bid
Fiscal Impact: $51,988 annually (within budget)
Staff Presenter(s): Bret Edge, Sergeant
Department: Police Department
Applicant: N/A
Background/Summary: The Police Department is requesting approval to lease
four (4) Ford Police Interceptor SUV’s to replace Dodge units that have reached
the end of their service life and to provide patrol vehicles for new officers. Our
fleet is aging and recurring mechanical issues with Dodge products, as well as a
lack of dealership support in Moab, warrant that we consider other options.
After considerable research we identified several reasons the Ford Police
Interceptor SUV’s would best serve our needs. Historically, the department has
purchased vehicles and kept them in the fleet for 5 or more years, auctioning
them off for pennies on the dollar at the end of their service life. Police vehicles
are subjected to significantly more abusive use than the average civilian vehicle.
As a result, police vehicles over three years old suffer more frequent mechanical
failures that result in costly repairs and downtime. We are proposing that future
police vehicles be leased for three years, at which time they will be replaced with
new leased vehicles. The estimated cost to lease police vehicles is
approximately the same as purchasing them, but with several advantages, i.e.
less vehicle downtime for repairs, reduced repair costs, reduced officer downtime
and reduced payroll expenses.
The police department budgeted a total of $119,739 for the purchase of three
fully equipped Dodge Chargers during this fiscal year. The approximate cost to
lease four Ford SUV’s during this fiscal year is $51,988.00, which includes a
complete police package up-fit. This year Utah State Purchasing replaced state
contracts on vehicles with “qualified vendor contracts”, which are dealerships that
have agreed to provide a state discount on vehicles. This was done for a variety
of reasons, including service issues with state contracted dealer(s).
We contacted all four state qualified vendors and requested bids. Three of the
state qualified vendors responded: Larry H. Miller, Ken Garff and Young
Automotive. We also requested a bid from the local Ford dealer but they
Page 269 of 298
declined to submit one. The bids we received were within $200/year of one
another. The service we received from Larry H. Miller was significantly better
than either of the other two dealers.
Options: Approve, deny or postpone
Staff Recommendation: The Police Department recommends that council
award the lease purchase to Larry H. Miller.
Recommended Motion: I move to approve item
Attachment(s): Bids from three state qualified vendors
Page 270 of 298
Page 271 of 298
Page 272 of 298
Page 273 of 298
Page 274 of 298
Page 275 of 298
Page 276 of 298
Page 277 of 298
Page 278 of 298
Page 279 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7-7
Title: Approval of Change Order #1 with Harrison Field Services for the WRF Site
Preparation Project in the amount of $134,937.50
Fiscal Impact: $134,937.50
Staff Presenter(s): Phillip M. Bowman, P.E., City Engineer
Department: Engineering
Contractor: Harrison Field Services, Inc. (HFS)
Background/Summary: This Change Order is required to address differing field
conditions encountered by the contractor on the W RF Site Preparation Project.
During the course of work on the project, Harrison Field Services (HFS) found two
(2) issues that created the need for additional top soil removal from the site. First,
the depth of existing top soil on the site was not consistent and varied significantly.
Second, the amount of tree roots below the existing top soil in large portions of the
site required the removal of additional top soil and subgrade material. The original
estimate for the amount of top soil to be removed from the site was 12”, and due to
these issues the actual amount of top soil removal is varying between 18” to 24”.
The amount of additional top soil removal requires that additional fill material be
placed on the site. HFS has proposed the use of a substitute fill material at a lower
cost that originally bid on the project. This substitute fill material is suitable for use
at the deeper portions of fill placement, but is not suitable for the entire amount of
fill to be placed on the site. The proposal has been discussed and analyzed by
City Staff, the project design engineer, and the project geotechnical engineer, and
all agree that the proposal will meet the needs of the project. The estimated
amount (cubic yards) of this substitute fill material and unit cost (cost per cubic
yard) are itemized on the attached Contract Change Order #1 form and support
documentation. The total cost for Change Order #1 is $134,937.50, and the total
contract amount for the project will now be increased to $1,045,740.50.
The increased total contract amount is budgeted in Fiscal Year 2017 as part of the
“Impact Project/Sewer – WWTP Upgrades” project in the Capital Projects Budget.
However, there will be a budget adjustment required for the “WWTP Upgrades”
line item due to anticipated cost increases on the overall project as the final design
Page 280 of 298
was completed. The proposed budget adjustment will also reflect the increase in
cost on the Site Preparation Project due to Change Order #1.
Options: The Council may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or postpone
the item.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Change Order #1.
Recommended Motion: “I move to approve Change Order #1 with Harrison
Field Services for the WRF Site Preparation Project in the amount of
$134,937.50”
Attachments:
Contract Change Order #1 form and support documentation
Page 281 of 298
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
Project: City of Moab – WRF Site Preparation Project
Date: January 4, 2016
Change Order No.: 1
To: Harrison Field Services, Inc.
You are hereby directed to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications:
Item No. Description of Changes, Quantities, Units, Unit
Prices, Change in Completion Schedule, etc.
Decrease In
Contract
Price
Increase In
Contract
Price
CO # 1 6-inch minus Fill Material Placement $134,937.50
(estimated 6,250 C.Y. @ $21.59 per C.Y.)
Change in contract price due to this Change Order: $0.00 $134,937.50
Total Decrease $0.00
Total Increase $134,937.50
Difference between Col. 3 & 4 $0.00 $134,937.50
Net increase or decrease $0.00 $134,937.50
The amount paid for Change Order # 1 shall be based on the actual cubic yards of 6-inch minus Fill Material placed,
and paid for at the unit rate stated above.
The sum of $ 134,937.50 is hereby added to the total contract price and the total adjusted contract price to date
thereby is $ 1,045,740.50 .
The time provided for completion in the contract is unchanged. This Document shall become an amendment to the
contract & all provisions of the contract will apply hereto.
Recommended: January 4, 2017 _
Phillip M. Bowman, City Engineer Date
Approved by:
David L. Sakrison, Mayor Date
Attest:
Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder Date
Page 282 of 298
Page 283 of 298
Page 284 of 298
Page 285 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7-8
Title: Approval of Change Order #2 with Harrison Field Services for the W RF Site
Preparation Project in the amount of $69,594.60
Fiscal Impact: $69,594.60
Staff Presenter(s): Phillip M. Bowman, P.E., City Engineer
Department: Engineering
Contractor: Harrison Field Services, Inc. (HFS
Background/Summary: This Change Order is required to address differing field
conditions encountered by the contractor on the W RF Site Preparation Project.
During the course of work on the project, Harrison Field Services (HFS) found a
large area of subgrade that was fully saturated with groundwater and was not
suitable for the placement of fill material. HFS worked with City staff, the project
design engineer, and the project geotechnical engineer to develop a method of
subgrade stabilization to allow the placement of fill material to proceed. The
contractor will place geofabric on the saturated subgrade area, and then place
approximately 24” to 36” of the 2” Drain Rock material on the geofabric to stabilize
and bridge over the saturated subgrade area. This type of subgrade stabilization
was not included in the original project scope, so this work will need to be paid for
through a Change Order.
The costs associated with Change Order #2 are summarized on Estimate # 1079
submitted by HFS. The proposal has been discussed and analyzed by City Staff,
the project design engineer, and the project geotechnical engineer, and all agree
that the proposal will meet the needs of the project. The estimated quantities and
costs are itemized on the attached Contract Change Order #2 form and support
documentation. The total cost for Change Order #2 is $69,594.60, and the total
contract amount for the project will now be increased to $1,115,335.10.
The increased total contract amount is budgeted in Fiscal Year 2017 as part of the
“Impact Project/Sewer – WW TP Upgrades” project in the Capital Projects Budget.
However, there will be a budget adjustment required for the “WWTP Upgrades”
line item due to anticipated cost increases on the overall project as the final design
was completed. The proposed budget adjustment will also reflect the increase in
Page 286 of 298
cost on the Site Preparation Project due to Change Order #2.
Options: The Council may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or postpone
the item.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Change Order #2.
Recommended Motion: “I move to approve Change Order #2 with Harrison
Field Services for the WRF Site Preparation Project in the amount of
$69,594.60”
Attachments:
Contract Change Order #2 form and support documentation
Page 287 of 298
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
Project: City of Moab – WRF Site Preparation Project
Date: January 4, 2016
Change Order No.: 2
To: Harrison Field Services, Inc.
You are hereby directed to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications:
Item No. Description of Changes, Quantities, Units, Unit
Prices, Change in Completion Schedule, etc.
Decrease In
Contract
Price
Increase In
Contract
Price
CO # 2 2-inch Drain Rock for subgrade stabilization $69,594.60
(Per Estimate # 1079 dated 12/30/2016)
Change in contract price due to this Change Order: $0.00 $69,594.60
Total Decrease $0.00
Total Increase $69,594.60
Difference between Col. 3 & 4 $0.00 $69,594.60
Net increase or decrease $0.00 $69,594.60
The amount paid for Change Order # 2 shall be based on the actual amount of 2-inch Drain Rock placed, in Tons,
and paid for at the unit rate stated on the Estimate.
The sum of $ 69,594.60 is hereby added to the total contract price and the total adjusted contract price to date
thereby is $ 1,115,335.10 .
The time provided for completion in the contract is unchanged. This Document shall become an amendment to the
contract & all provisions of the contract will apply hereto.
Recommended: January 4, 2017 _
Phillip M. Bowman, City Engineer Date
Approved by:
David L. Sakrison, Mayor Date
Attest:
Rachel E. Stenta, City Recorder Date
Page 288 of 298
Page 289 of 298
Page 290 of 298
AGENDA SUMMARY
MOAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item
#: 7‐10
Title: Acceptance of a Petition for Annexation by Nicholas Brown located at
approximately 435 Riversands Road
Fiscal Impact: Undetermined
Staff Presenter(s): Rachel Stenta, City Recorder/Assistant City Manager
Department: Recorder
Applicant: Nicholas Brown
Background/Summary: . The attached proposed annexation for Nicholas
Brown is in the initial stage. I’ve attached a flowchart for your reference that
outlines the Annexation process as regulated by Utah State Code Annotated Title
10 Chapter 2 Part 10. You will see that the first step is acceptance of the petition
by the governing body. I then have 30 days to certify the petition. A public
hearing date before the City Council will be set and the Planning Commission will
review the annexation and make a recommendation to the City Council prior to
the public hearing.
I’ve attached the state code pertaining to protests. Please keep in mind that we
are NOT located in a county of the first class, so as with previous annexations,
protests can only be filed by affected entities.
Please let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you for your
consideration
Options: Acceptance of the petition to move forward in the process:
Approve, Deny or Postpone
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends letting the petition proceed
through the process
Recommended Motion: I move to approve item #7-10
Attachment(s):
Annexation Petition
Flow Chart
Utah code outlining who can file a protest
Page 291 of 298
Page 292 of 298
Page 293 of 298
Page 294 of 298
Page 295 of 298
Petitioner mails
Notice of Intent to
affected entities
START
Petitioner files
Annexation
Petition with City
Recorder
Petitioner mails
copies of
completed petition
to Co. Clerk &
Planning Chair
Moab City
Planning
Commission
Reviews &
Recommends
City Council
Reviews at next
regular meeting at
least 14 days after
filing date
Council
Accepts
Petition
Notice of Denial
mailed within 5
days to Contact
Sponsor, Co. Clerk
& Planning Chair
City Recorder
reviews Petition for
certification within
30 days of
acceptance
Petition
certified within
30 days
Council denies
petition
City Recorder mails
Notice of Certification
to City Council,
Contact Sponsor,
County Council,
Planning Chair
City Recorder rejects
petition for certification
Notice of Rejection and
reasons mailed to City
Council, Contact
Sponsor, County
Council, Planning Chair
Petition may be
modified to correct
deficiencies and
re-filed with City
Recorder
City Recorder publishes
notice of certification once
a week for three weeks no
later than 10 days after
certification
City Recorder mails notice
of certification to each
Affected Entity within 20
days of certification
County Council or Affected
Entity files protest with
Boundary Commission within
30 days of City Council Notice
of Certification – protest must
be mailed to City Recorder
City Recorder provides
copy of protest to
Boundary Commission
within 5 days of receipt
and notifies County
Council
STOP
No protests are
filed
City Recorder
publishes notice of
public hearing at
least 7 days prior
to hearing
City Council receives
Boundary
Commission’s
Decision within 30
days of conclusion of
hearing
City Council sets
Public Hearing
date
City Council holds
Public Hearing
City Council Denies
Petition
City Council Grants
Annexation by Adoption
of Ordinance
City Recorder sends
Notice of Annexation to
each Affected Entity
within 30 days of
adoption
City Recorder Records
Annexation with County
Recorder within 30 days
of adoption
City Recorder sends
written notice of
Annexation to Lt.
Governor’s Office within
30 days of adoption
Annexation
Completed
Lt. Governor issues
Certificate of
Annexation
CITY OF MOAB – ANNEXATION PROCESS
(REVISED 06/13/07)
Page 296 of 298
Utah Code
Page 1
Effective 5/12/2015
10-2-407 Protest to annexation petition -- Planning advisory area planning commission
recommendation -- Petition requirements -- Disposition of petition if no protest filed.
(1) A protest to an annexation petition under Section 10-2-403 may be filed by:
(a) the legislative body or governing board of an affected entity;
(b) the owner of rural real property as defined in Section 17B-2a-1107; or
(c) for a proposed annexation of an area within a county of the first class, the owners of private
real property that:
(i) is located in the unincorporated area within 1/2 mile of the area proposed for annexation;
(ii) covers at least 25% of the private land area located in the unincorporated area within 1/2
mile of the area proposed for annexation; and
(iii) is equal in value to at least 15% of all real property located in the unincorporated area within
1/2 mile of the area proposed for annexation.
(2)
(a) Each protest under Subsection (1) shall:
(i) be filed:
(A) no later than 30 days after the municipal legislative body's receipt of the notice of
certification under Subsection 10-2-405(2)(c)(i); and
(B)
(I) in a county that has already created a commission under Section 10-2-409, with the
commission; or
(II) in a county that has not yet created a commission under Section 10-2-409, with the clerk
of the county in which the area proposed for annexation is located;
(ii) state each reason for the protest of the annexation petition and, if the area proposed to be
annexed is located in a specified county, justification for the protest under the standards
established in this chapter;
(iii) if the area proposed to be annexed is located in a specified county, contain other
information that the commission by rule requires or that the party filing the protest considers
pertinent; and
(iv) contain the name and address of a contact person who is to receive notices sent by the
commission with respect to the protest proceedings.
(b) The party filing a protest under this section shall on the same date deliver or mail a copy of
the protest to the city recorder or town clerk of the proposed annexing municipality.
(c) Each clerk who receives a protest under Subsection (2)(a)(i)(B)(II) shall:
(i) immediately notify the county legislative body of the protest; and
(ii) deliver the protest to the boundary commission within five days after:
(A) receipt of the protest, if the boundary commission has previously been created; or
(B) creation of the boundary commission under Subsection 10-2-409(1)(b), if the boundary
commission has not previously been created.
(3)
(a)
(i) If a protest is filed under this section:
(A) the municipal legislative body may, at its next regular meeting after expiration of the
deadline under Subsection (2)(a)(i)(A), deny the annexation petition; or
(B) if the municipal legislative body does not deny the annexation petition under Subsection
(3)(a)(i)(A), the municipal legislative body may take no further action on the annexation
petition until after receipt of the commission's notice of its decision on the protest under
Section 10-2-416.
Page 297 of 298
Utah Code
Page 2
(ii) If a municipal legislative body denies an annexation petition under Subsection (3)(a)(i)(A),
the municipal legislative body shall, within five days after the denial, send notice of the
denial in writing to:
(A) the contact sponsor of the annexation petition;
(B) the commission; and
(C) each entity that filed a protest.
(b)
(i) If no timely protest is filed under this section, the municipal legislative body may, subject to
Subsection (3)(b)(ii), approve the petition.
(ii) Before approving an annexation petition under Subsection (3)(b)(i), the municipal legislative
body shall:
(A) hold a public hearing; and
(B) at least seven days before the public hearing under Subsection (3)(b)(ii)(A):
(I)
(Aa) publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation within the
municipality and the area proposed for annexation; or
(Bb) if there is no newspaper of general circulation in those areas, post written notices of
the hearing in conspicuous places within those areas that are most likely to give notice
to residents within those areas; and
(II) publish notice of the hearing on the Utah Public Notice Website created in Section
63F-1-701.
Amended by Chapter 352, 2015 General Session
Page 298 of 298