OCR Text |
Show A-10 The Park Record Meetings and agendas TO PUBLISH YOUR PUBLIC NOTICES AND AGENDAS, PLEASE EMAIL CLASSIFIEDS@PARKRECORD.COM AGENDA SUMMIT COUNTY COUNCIL Wednesday, February 13, 2019 NOTICE is hereby given that the Summit County Council will meet in session Wednesday, February 13, 2019, at the Sheldon Richins Building, 1885 West Ute Blvd, Park City, UT 84098 Herbert signs bill that will scale back Proposition 3 Tweaks to Medicaid expansion depend on waiver bet (All times listed are general in nature, and are subject to change by the Council Chair) 8:30 AM – Council Members to attend the County Officials Day on the Hill event held in the State Office Building Auditorium, at 3120 State Office Building, Salt Lake City, UT 84114 (5 hours) Regional Water Special Service District Administrative Control Board 5) Council Comments 6) Manager Comments 1:30 PM – Travel to Richins Building (60 min) 6:00 PM Public Input 2:30 PM – Work Session (held in Room 133) 1) Interview applicant for vacancy on the Summit County Restaurant Tax Advisory Committee (15 min) 2) 2:45 PM - Interview applicants for vacancies on the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission (1 hour 45 min) 6:15 PM – Work Session continued 1) Legislative update; Kim Carson and Janna Young (30 min) 4:30 PM Closed Session – Litigation (30 min); property acquisition (30 min) One or more members of the County Council may attend by electronic means, including telephonically or by Skype. Such members may fully participate in the proceedings as if physically present. The anchor location for purposes of the electronic meeting is the Sheldon Richins Building auditorium, 1885 W. Ute Blvd., Park City, Utah Individuals with questions, comments, or needing special accommodations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act regarding this meeting may contact Annette Singleton at (435) 336-3025, (435) 615-3025 or (435) 783-4351 ext. 3025 Posted: February 8, 2019 5:30 PM – Move to auditorium 5:40 PM Consideration of Approval 1) Pledge of Allegiance 2) Acceptance of 2019 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest disclosure statements for elected officials and department heads; Brian Bellamy 3) Appointment of members to serve on the South Summit Cemetery Maintenance District 4) Appointment of members to serve on the Mountain 6:45 PM Closed Session – Personnel (60 min) Project X’ed: Police crash huge Glenwild teen party Caller contacted sheriff after seeing pictures of bash ANGELIQUE MCNAUGHTON The Park Record An anonymous tip over the weekend helped deputies with the Summit County Sheriff’s Office break up a large party in Glenwild that an estimated 150 teenagers attended. According to Sheriff’s Lt. Andrew Wright, a caller, identified only as a woman, contacted the Sheriff’s Office just before 11 p.m. Saturday to notify law enforcement officers of the party. The caller said she was receiving pictures from teens who were there and suspected alcohol was involved. She gave the authorities the address, but stressed that she wanted to remain anonymous. She did not live in the area. Wright said a majority of the teens fled the scene before deputies arrived. But, a Sheriff’s Office report states they were still “fleeing in all directions” when deputies pulled up. Several bottles of alcohol were found on the property and in surrounding yards. No citations were issued. Deputies made contact with a 15-year-old girl who appeared to live at the house, as well as 10 others. They had not been drinking. The Sheriff’s Office report stated the teen told deputies, “There was no problem now that everyone left and that (the deputies) could leave unless a warrant was produced.” Wright said the girl’s mother was contacted and returned to the home. “With something like a juvenile alcohol party, we aren’t going to just go barging into someone’s home without the consent of an adult or someone who has the legal right to allow us in there,” he said. “We had the cooperation of the mother of the juvenile. She stayed there with the kids and made sure nothing further took place.” Deputies have the ability to apply for a warrant and, if it is granted by a judge, enter a home. But, Wright said it is up to the deputy to take that action. “Could they have applied for a warrant? Absolutely,” he said. “Based off of the photographs and the fact that juveniles were running and they did see alcohol, they could have at least applied for the warrant.” While teen parties aren’t uncommon, authorities approach each situation differently, Wright said. He said “it is just one of those things we, unfortunately, deal with in our community.” “It is one of those delicate situations that we often find ourselves in that we have to make sure we are using good discretion when dealing with these types of things,” he said. “The fact that there were juveniles that were there that had stuck around and weren’t drinking proves they are responsible kids.” Wright was grateful for the person who called to report the party. He said tips like that can help inform the Sheriff’s Office of illegal activity. “There was a large party of underage students that were gathering and participating in unlawful conduct,” he said. “She reported it to us and we appreciate it. It gives us an opportunity to ensure people are OK and to make sure we are not allowing people to create another hazard or danger to themselves or others.” Town partners with student Winter Park studies sustainability plan with graduate MCKENNA HARFORD Sky-Hi News WINTER PARK, Colo. — Less than two months after the town of Winter Park approved its Imagine Winter Park master plan, it is already getting started on tackling some of the goals the plan identified, namely pertaining to the healthy and thriving environment section. Andrew Williams, a graduate student from the University of Colorado Denver, is partnering with the town to complete a sustainability assessment that will identify what measures the town is already taking and where the town could implement sustainable policies and practices. “Having worked on a plan in another mountain community, I thought that I might have some skills I could bring over from that, but also (Winter Park) is an interesting community to work in and to help implement some of that change,” Williams said. Williams, originally from Central Florida, became involved in urban planning and sustainability issues after seeing developments “leaving people behind.” Since then, he has worked with other Colorado mountain towns, such as Dillon and Boulder, on creating development plans. He has witnessed how planning, and urban planning in particular, has impacted the environment and local communities. He recognized that sustainability was a big part of successful community planning. “I just came to see planning and sustainability as a way to help communities and the residents,” he said. At a workshop with the Winter Park Town Council in early February, council members provided Williams with some ideas of what they would like to see the assessment focus on, such as ways to promote healthy and sustainable water and energy use. “Over the years, the one thing we’ve had some conversations on and action on is water and that’s a big one for us,” said Mike Periolat, Winter Park town council member. “It really does help us, if not to have actual numbers, but if we do have an (outline) of these … things you can do within departments just from a new ordinance.” Ultimately, Williams said he wants the assessment to outline how these issues affect the community and what’s being done, to identify gaps, include goals and suggest ideas for these issues. Many of the council members’ suggestions, as well as suggestions made by town staff, highlighted goals and ideas from the Imagine Winter Park plan, such as working toward becoming a dark sky community and having wildlife-proof trash bins. Mara Owen, Winter Park town planner, said it is important not only to follow up on goals the town has identified, but also to base the assessment on what the community wants and will support. “It can’t just be what (the town) thinks is good, but what the com- munity is actually going to go for and say is important,” Owen said. Williams agreed and said he plans to reach out to the community because it’s important for the assessment, which is a baseline for the town to reference for future projects and plans, to reflect both what the town and its residents want for their community. “It’s important to have the town and the community be on the same page to understand what shared visions and goals are there,” Williams said. “We’re making sure there’s a lot of opportunities for us to be all on the same page and make sure the goals and the assessments coming out is useful.” Aside from reaching out to the community and continuing conversations with the town, Williams will also be interviewing experts on the issues and researching what other nearby towns have done. Owen said Williams’ role is similar to a consultant, where the town is relying on his perspective. “One thing we’re really excited about with having a student who’s focused on sustainability is to kind of see what the new technology coming out looks like and maybe having some new ideas coming into the community that wouldn’t otherwise,” she said. Then, all of that information will be compiled into the assessment. Owen said the town hopes to use the assessment to move forward with its sustainability plan and specific goals. “Sustainability is not going to be an overnight thing,” she said. “We’d like to know what we should be planning for in the future.” Wed/Thurs/Fri, February 13-15, 2019 JAMES HOYT The Park Record Gov. Gary Herbert signed a bill modifying the state’s voter-approved Medicaid expansion plan Monday after a bitter fortnight on Capitol Hill. S.B. 96, sponsored by state Sen. Allen Christensen, R–North Ogden, became a flashpoint from day one of the 2019 legislative session. Originally, it represented a more drastic return to the Republican-majority Legislature’s partial Medicaid expansion plan passed last year, which voters rejected by approving a ballot measure for full expansion in November. Proponents of the bill said it was necessary to keep the expansion in good financial shape, while opponents pointed to other states’ successful rollouts of full expansion. The proposal, which lawmakers said was hurried through to meet an April 1 deadline for federal government waivers to be granted, underwent multiple major revisions. It’s receiving backup in the form of H.B. 210, sponsored by Rep. Ray Ward, R–Bountiful, which provides a backstop in case the Trump administration doesn’t grant the waivers. One of the key differences between S.B. 96 and Proposition 3, the voter-approved plan, is a narrowing of eligible adult patients from those living on up to 138 percent of the federal poverty line to 100 percent. People in the resulting coverage gap will have an option to enroll in Affordable Care Act benefits, though many will pay monthly premiums. A work requirement equivalent to the one in place for SNAP ben- efits was also included in the bill. S.B. 96 is estimated to cover up to 90,000 new patients in Utah, down from 150,000 under Prop 3. Rep. Tim Quinn, R–Heber, who opposed the Legislature’s partial expansion last year on the basis of opposing all Medicaid expansion, said that he was initially against S.B. 96, but that the final product was an acceptable compromise between Prop 3 and what conservatives said were necessary amendments to the plan. Prior to its fourth and final substitution, the bill included effectively a kill switch for Utah Medicaid expansion as a whole if the federal government did not approve the necessary waivers by July 1, 2020. “Whether you agree with expanding (Medicaid) or not, once you do something it’s very difficult and not morally right to take that coverage back from people you had covered for the 15 previous months,” said Quinn, whose district includes Park City. “We worked for days and days to come up with a solution that many of us felt satisfied the requirements for the voter will of Proposition 3, if you will, while maintaining the ability for the state to pay for it.” On the other side of the House aisle, House Minority Leader Rep. Brian King, D–Salt Lake, lamented the Legislature stepping in to alter a plan that 53 percent of Utah voters approved in November. He opposed the plan the Legislature passed last year because, he said, it didn’t go far enough. King’s district includes Summit Park and parts of Pinebrook. “What the Legislature has done is to say, ‘We’re going to come in and make some significant changes that are substantive,’” King said. “I’m sorry to see Prop 3 diluted and changed in a way that is not good for the people of the state of Utah generally.” Beth Armstrong, executive director of the Park City-based People’s Health Clinic and a prominent advocate for Proposition 3, watched the proceedings with dismay. “My disappointment is mostly with the process itself; just the enormous waste of human effort from the very beginning of proposing the initiative, to pushing the initiative to getting the signatures, getting 113,000 to sign it in order to get it onto the ballot,” Armstrong said. “If they are so much smarter than we are, then why didn’t they come up with this and get something passed without us having to do all of that work? While the clinic, which cares for uninsured patients, would continue operating as normal, Armstrong said the passage of S.B. 96 was a blow to voters. “(Legislators have) been successful at one thing, and that’s discouraging anyone that thinks differently than they do from doing the work to change things,” she said. “They’ve discouraged change by showing us that we really do not have a voice in this state.” Roughly 65 percent of Summit County voters supported Prop 3, and every state legislative district that stretches into the county voted in favor of it as well. Aside from King, every legislator representing Summit County — Christensen; Sen. Ron Winterton, R–Roosevelt; Quinn; and Rep. Logan Wilde, R–Croydon — voted to pass S.B. 96. In the end, it all comes down to the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Christensen, Quinn and Republican leadership have stated they’re betting on the Trump administration’s approval for partial expansion. King and Armstrong don’t share their confidence — Utah would be the first state to have such a waiver approved. As the deadline for approval approaches, it appears that 150,000 Utahns will have to wait and see. Housing predictions dire Aspen’s shortage of units to only get worse by 2027 SCOTT CONDON The Aspen Times ASPEN, Colo. – The affordable housing shortage in the Roaring Fork Valley region is expected to get worse in coming years unless something unexpected occurs, according to a new housing needs assessment that looked at conditions in 2001, 2017 and anticipated conditions in 2027. There is expected to be a deficit of 5,700 units by 2027 for households making less than the Area Median Income. The current deficit is 700 units for households making 100 to 120 percent of AMI. That is expected to get worse. The current deficit is 1,200 units for households at 120 to 160 of AMI. That is expected to get worse. The Roaring Fork Valley region is expected to have a deficit of about 5,700 units of affordable housing for households earning less than the median income by 2027, according to a final draft of a housing needs assessment. But the region’s blue-collar workers are far from the only ones facing problems finding affordable housing, the study said. There is a “missing middle” in the affordable-housing market that looms as a major problem for the Roaring Fork Valley and Interstate 70 corridor between Eagle and Parachute, the study said. “(The) troubling trend as seen across the country is the disappearance of housing affordable to middle-income households,” said the Roaring Fork Valley Regional Housing Study. There was a shortage of about 700 units in 2017 for households making between 100 to 120 percent of area median income and a shortage of 1,200 units for households at 120 to 160 percent of the median income, according to the study. Those gaps are likely to intensify by 2027. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reported the median household income in Pitkin County was $98,000 in 2017 compared with $89,500 in Eagle County and $70,400 in Garfield County. People making between 140 and 160 percent of the area median income will feel the greatest pinch over the next decade, the study said. They are priced out of the free market but make too much for many subsidized-housing programs. The Roaring Fork Valley Regional Housing Study was funded by the Aspen-Pitkin County Housing Authority, Garfield County, Eagle County and Basalt, Carbondale and Glenwood Springs. It was initiated at the urging of David Myler and Bill Lamont, two midvalley residents with a long history of interest in civic issues. Economic and Planning Systems Inc. and RRC Associates, both with offices in Denver, performed the study. The 139-page report will be shared with local governments after final revisions are made and a concise summary prepared, Myler said. His hope is that the information is used as part of a regional approach to the affordable-housing problem. “I think the basic thrust is there’s a pretty dramatic need in all categories of affordable housing,” Myler said. The study provides an abundance of information about population, jobs and housing changes in the valley and along the Interstate 70 corridor west to Parachute and east to Eagle between 2001 and 2017. New housing between New Castle and Parachute, as well as Dotsero to Eagle, made a big dent in the housing deficit between 2001 and 2017, the study said. But surging population and job generation are expected to exacerbate the housing shortage once again, according to the study. The region added 28,000 permanent residents over that time, boosting the population to about 103,000, the study said. More than 10,000 jobs were added over that 16-year period, though current employment still hasn’t bounced back to pre-recession levels. There are about 50,000 jobs in the region now. There were 55,000 in the third quarter of 2008, the study said. The population and job growth were somewhat offset by construction of 11,900 residential units between 2001-17. More than 60 percent of the construction activity occurred in the New Castle-to-Parachute and Ea- gle-to-Gypsum areas, according to the study. “The region’s workers have struggled for decades with the price of housing in the Roaring Fork Valley,” the study said. “That’s the main reason why the region has become so large — i.e. the down valley commute has extended farther and farther away in search of more affordable prices.” The report showed that Aspen and Snowmass Village continue to generate jobs at a greater rate than affordable housing. The upper valley had a demand for 2,500 affordable-housing units that was not met in 2001, the study said. That grew to about 3,000 units by 2017. In 2027, the unmet demand for affordable housing will grow to between 3,000 and 3,400, the study said. Aspen and Snowmass Village import an average of 7,500 workers per day. That requires commuters from other towns. The consultant surveyed households throughout the region to find out commuting patterns, among other things. “Survey results show that in communities between Snowmass and El Jebel, between 62 percent and 97 percent of respondents have one or more household member working in Aspen,” the study said. “Among Carbondale residents the figure drops to 49 percent, and it then falls off even more sharply among Glenwood Springs (16 percent) and Rifle (8 percent) residents. Nonetheless, a still significant 18 to 20 percent of New Castle and Silt households report one or more persons working in Aspen.” Glenwood Springs imports about 2,400 workers per day. The other locations within the region provide more workers than they require within, according to the study. The challenge for easing the affordable-housing shortage is daunting, as illustrated by the study. The affordability gap — the difference between what an average family can afford and the median price of housing — will continue to widen, the study predicted. The gap currently ranges from $116,000 in the Eagle to Gypsum area to $290,000 in Carbondale to $1.4 million in Aspen and Snowmass Village. That’s why middle-class families are finding it increasingly difficult to gain a toehold in the valley. |