►
From YouTube: Salt Lake City Council Special Meeting - 3/29/2019
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
Buddy
to
the
the
special
March
29th
meeting
of
the
Salt
Lake
City
Council,
we
have
one
item
on
our
agenda
regarding
a
resolution.
The
acquisition
of
avocation
easements
Joel
Nelson
from
the
airport
is
here
and
will
will
give
us
a
briefing
followed
by
Joel.
We
will
ask
the
applicant
to
or
that
the
party
to
come
up
to
the
table
and
that
group
will
have
20
minutes
to
present
to
the
council,
and
so
we
will
move
forward
to
that
point.
Joel
thank.
B
You
good
good
morning,
I
just
mentioned.
My
name
is
Joel
Nelson
I
am
the
airport
property
and
real
estate
manager
for
the
Salt
Lake
City
Department
of
airports
in
2004,
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration
offered
to
the
Department
of
airports,
one
time
funding
to
expand
and
improve
the
tool
of
Valley
Airport.
The
airport
took
advantage
of
this
opportunity
and
in
2007
the
FAA
installed
an
instrument
landing
system
which
allows
aircraft
to
make
a
precision
runway
approach
from
the
north
by
providing
both
vertical
and
horizontal
guidance
to
the
runway
from
the
south.
B
There
would
be
a
non-precision
approach
without
the
ILS,
only
a
visual
approach
is
used,
the
project
was
completed
and
the
precision
approach
from
the
north
began
operating
in
2008
as
a
condition
to
funding
the
project
and
the
FAA
regulations
require
the
airport
to
protect
the
air
space,
including
height
restrictions
surrounding
the
runway.
The
proposed
resolution
is
to
authorize
eminent
domain
proceedings
for
an
avocation
easement,
burdening
certain
parcels
of
property
located
south
of
the
airport.
The
allegation
easement
prevents
construction
of
any
structure
with
the
restricted
airspace
over
the
property.
B
Although
the
airport
pursued
voluntary
acquisition,
we
have
been
unable
to
acquire
the
easement
state
law
requires
a
resolution
of
the
city
council
to
authorize
eminent
domain
proceedings.
State
law
also
requires
that
before
the
council
votes
on
the
proposed
resolution,
the
council
must
allow
the
property
owners
the
opportunity
to
be
heard
at
a
public
meeting
on
the
proposed
taking
the
airport
asked
the
council
to
consider
adopting
the
attached
resolution
with
respect
to
the
affected
real
property.
C
C
The
coots
family
has
not
been
opposed
to
the
fact
that
certain
actions
need
to
be
taken
in
order
to
protect.
You
know
the
operation
of
the
runway.
The
problem
they
have
is
the
process
in
which
the
this
city
has
undertaken
to
take
the
take
by
eminent
domain,
the
the
Coons,
properly
property
and,
to
be
perfectly
candid,
it's
been
an
absolute
abomination
that
this
process
started
back
into
that
the
process
by
the
city
to
authorize
the
taking
of
eminent
domain
started
back
in
2007.
C
C
The
state
statute
requires
that
at
every
meeting,
where
the
possibility
of
a
resolution
being
passed
to
authorize
the
use
of
eminent
domain
that
there
that
the
landowner
be
given
an
opportunity
to
speak
at
the
time
in
which
the
the
city,
this
prior
City
Council,
authorized
the
use
of
eminent
domain
in
2007
no
opportunity
was
given
to
the
Coons
family
in
order
to
make
a
presentation
to
discuss
the
issues
and,
on
that
basis,
the
the
3rd
district
court
out
in
Tooele
County.
Recently
rejected
the
city's
efforts
to
take
this
property
and
dismiss
the
complaint.
C
You
know
there's
still
proceedings
going
on
with
that,
and
it's
undoubtedly
going
to
go
up
on
appeal,
but
we're
here
today,
because
you
don't
have
a
valid
eminent
domain
proceeding
currently
pending,
but
the
problem
with
how
it's
going
now
is
perpetuating
the
exact
same
problems
that
you
had
before
and
we're
gonna
be
right
back
here
again
we're
gonna
be
back
before
the
court
on
another
motion
to
dismiss,
we
think
will
be
granted
and
they're
going
to
be
back
before
you
again.
You
can't
shorts
short
step.
The
armed
processes
you
got
to
follow
up.
C
The
eminent
domain
code
is
very,
very
clear.
For
instance,
and
and
we've
I
assume
you
receive
the
materials
we
sent
to
you
part
of
it
in
order
to
file
an
eminent
domain
action.
There
must
be
reasonable
negotiation
with
the
landowner.
It
doesn't
mean
you
have
to
actually
come
to
a
resolution,
but
at
least
an
offer
needs
to
be
made
to
the
landowner
for
the
acquisition
of
the
property
right.
Now
that
hasn't
been
done.
No
effort
has
been
made
to
value
the
avocation
easement.
C
That's
being
that
sought
to
be
taken,
and
ever
has
back
in
2007,
an
offer
of
281
thousand
dollars
was
made
to
the
Coons
family
by
the
by
an
appraiser
Stan
Kraft,
who
then
six
months
later
changed
his
appraisal,
it'll
434
thousand
dollars,
and
that's
what
was
used
by
the
city
to
obtain
immediate
occupancy
of
the
property
that
has
a
valuation
date
back
in
2007,
apparently
that
that
same
number
is
now
being
offered
to
the
Coons
family.
You
know
for
the
taking
of
the
avocation
easement,
an
appraisal,
that's
12
years
old.
C
It
just
doesn't
comport
with
with
the
eminent
domain
code
that
requires
that
the
valuation
of
the
property
be
made
concurrent
at
the
time
the
complaint
is
going
to
file
be
filed.
You're
gonna
have
to
file
a
new
action.
I
assume
the
resolution
isn't
clear.
I
assume
that's
what
the
City
Council
is
looking
to
do
is
to
authorize
a
new
proceeding
to
pursue
eminent
domain.
If
all
you're
trying
to
do
is
retro
actively
approve
what
was
done
back
in
2000
I.
Think
that's
gross
bad
faith
and
that's
gonna
be
rejected
by
the
courts.
C
So
if
you
are
taking
condemnation,
action
too,
new
you're
gonna
have
to
get
a
new
appraisal
for
the
property
that
has
not
been
done.
You're
relying
on
a
12
year
old
appraisal,
also
notice
requirements
have
to
be
given.
State
statute
is
very
clear
that
you
have
to
provide
the
landowner
with
materials
from
the
Ombudsman's
office,
materials
that
have
been
prearranged
and
certain
notice
is
set
forth
in
the
Utah.
Code
has
to
be
provided
the
landowner
that
has
not
been
done
now.
C
The
exact
same
problems
that
permeated
the
prior
action
are
just
being
perpetuated
again.
We
think
we're
gonna
be
right
back
again
before
the
court
see
on
another
motion
to
dismiss
and
we're
gonna
be
back
here.
You
have
to
give
the
landowner
a
meaningful
opportunity
to
respond
to
this.
If
again,
if
this
action
is
just
to
try
and
rough
retroactive,
retro
actively
approved
what
was
done,
there's
no
meaningful
opportunity
to
speak
due
process.
Rights
are
being
violated
here.
C
Courts
are
very
clear
to
well
establish
that
timely
and
adequate
notice
and
an
opportunity
to
be
heard
in
a
meaningful
way
are
the
very
heart
of
procedural
fairness
that
procedural
fairness
has
never
been
offered
to
the
Coons
family
and
that's
what
we
ask
this
City
Council
do
that
this
City
Council
not
approve
the
requested
resolution
that
the
appropriate
steps
be
taken
in
order
to
acquire
the
Koons
property,
and
then
we
go
through
what
should
be
done
properly
with
that.
Let
me
turn
it
over
to
mr.
Neil
Coons.
D
So
I
am
very
familiar
with
looking
at
plans
and
specifications,
so
my
attorneys
outlined
the
legal
aspects
of
this,
but
I
wanted
to
address
the
concerns
that
we
have
about
the
engineering
that
has
not
been
done
properly
on
this
project
and
I
first
want
to
say
that
if
anything
was
ever
submitted
to
the
city,
whether
it's
a
building
permit
or
a
housing
permit,
it
would
all
have
to
be
stamped
by
a
licensed
professional
engineer
that
state
law
that
they
have
to
do
that.
None
of
the
drawings
that
I
submitted
in
the
package.
D
Those
are
the
drawings
from
the
department.
Airports
have
not
followed
state
law
or
City
procedures.
The
city
would
reject
those
if,
as
a
professional
engineer,
I
submitted
them,
the
city
that'd
be
rejected.
So
but
I
also
wanted
to
just
talk
about.
You
know
why
we
are
here
and
what's
needed
and
I
recognize.
The
city
needs
a
right
of
flight
over
my
property
and
it's
not
just
an
easement
Joel
talks
about
it
being
a
zoning
easement
for
a
height
restriction.
D
The
height
restriction
is
to
allow
a
surface
so
that
the
planes
can
fly
a
right-of-way
of
right
of
flight.
Just
like
a
roadway
for
every
roadway
in
your
cities,
you
have
a
right
away.
You
have
to
have
a
right
of
flight
so
with
that
I
recognize
that
that
for
this
Airport
you
need
it,
but
we
want
it's
over
the
entire
property,
not
just
a
portion
of
it
that
the
city's
asking
for.
So
we
believe
that
there's
an
error
on
that.
D
So
I
wanted
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
background
when
we
first
purchased
the
property
out
in
Tooele,
my
family
wanted
to
move
out
and
build
the
houses
out
there
develop
the
property.
My
father
had
talked
to
the
department
airports
and
asked
them
if
they
were
expanding
Airport,
because
when
we
moved
out
there
it
was
a
small
rural
Airport
with
the
deficient
runway.
The
runway
was
not
one
that
they
could
land
Jets
on.
It
was
small,
it
was
for
a
b2
Airport
airplane,
but
it's
a
little
propeller
driven
plane,
not
Jets.
D
So
when
he
got
the
response
was
that
we're
not
gonna
expand
the
airport.
So
with
that,
we
continued
our
development
and
went
on
in
the
middle
of
our
development.
The
airport
said
that
they
were
going
to
expand,
and
so
they
went
in
and
put
a
longer
wider
runway
in
and
developed
up
put
in
a
bigger
so
that
they
could
put
in
bigger
aircraft
and
land
bigger
aircraft
and
then
also
with
the
ILS
system,
an
instrument
landing
system.
This
expanded
all
of
the
easements
around
the
airport
that
they
had
not
had
before
you
Dan.
D
It
required
all
of
their
right
of
ways
to
increase,
think
about
going
from
a
two-lane
road
to
a
four-lane
road
and
so
our
property
you're
trying
to
keep
them
out
in
Tooele.
So
there's
roughly
salt
lake
city
across
Salt,
Lake
County
into
Tooele
County.
Now
the
area
there
you
guys
have
these
maps
the
area
that
they're
trying
to
condemn
is
the
area
in
yellow.
But
there
are
surfaces
that
are
not
shown
on
this
map
and
that's
where
the
airport,
the
Department
Airport,
has
made
some
errors
in
this
that
they're
trying
to
get
just
this
part.
D
Just
the
part
in
yellow
the
surface
is
within
35
feet
of
the
ground
that
mean
it
means
it
doesn't
even
meet
the
setback
requirements
for
the
city
standard
setbacks
are
35
feet
from
roadways.
That's
35
feet
from
a
right
of
flight,
a
right
of
way,
and
so
I
mean,
and
it's
just
continually
on
I
mean
you
can
see,
go
back.
D
D
D
But
again
those
red
areas
are
the
transition
surfaces
shown
on
their
out.
Now.
This
is
information
that's
put
out
by
the
department,
airports
again,
they're,
not
stamped,
but
these
are
the
certified
drawings
that
they're
using
for
development
and
yet
then
they
come
back.
Staff
tells
us
that
we're
not
in
the
transition
surfaces
and
can
can't
develop
them
so
either
they
don't
know
how
to
read
the
drawing
toward
they're
just
being
false
and
their
information
that
they're
given
to
you
and
to
the
port,
and
this
one
it
requires
contain
the
right
of
flight.
D
These
surfaces
are
all
eligible
for
FA,
reimbursement
and
I'm,
just
showing
you
the
design,
circulars
I've,
given
you
a
copy
of
it.
You
know
my
attorney
also
alluded
to
this.
We've
had
five
different
appraisals
on
it
from
2004.
They
actually
came
out
and
sent
the
first
letters
in
June
of
2004,
but
you
can
see
that
the
property
valuations
have
just
been
all
over
the
place
and
I
realize
my
father
and
I
realized
that
we
just
wanted
to
buy
their
port
to
buy
us
out.
You
need
it.
I
don't
want
to
have
a
right
of
flight.
D
These
surfaces
that
are
required
are
gonna.
Allow
planes
to
be
within
10
feet
of
my
house
and
my
mother's
house
I.
Don't
want
that.
That's
just
not
acceptable
they're
making
my
place
by
putting
these
surfaces
over
there
they've
made
my
place
incompatible
for
residential
use.
It's
just
with
the
noise.
It's
just
not
compatible
with
that,
and
it's
devalued
my
property
there's
nobody
that
I
can
sell
this
property
to
other
than
the
airport
because
of
these
surfaces.
D
Now
this
is
their
new
2010
out
the
most
current
one,
and
none
of
the
surfaces
up
here
have
changed,
but
you
can
notice.
A
new
surface
has
popped
up.
That
is
not
even
contained
in
your
new
easement
that
they
have
put
in
here,
they've
put
in
a
new
surface.
So
this
is
the
one
that
my
father
and
I
were
really
concerned
about.
You
can
see
that
it's
much
wider
than
the
approach
surface
and
it's
lower.
D
This
is
the
one
that
puts
it
within
10
feet
and
here's
the
design
circular,
so
I'm
not
pulling
this
out
of
thin
air
I'm,
not
making
it
up.
This
is
on
the
department's
drawings,
but
the
easement
that
you're
looking
for
doesn't
encompass
this.
So
even
if
everything
they
say
is
correct,
the
FAA
is
gonna
require
you
to
come
back
and
get
this
surface
at
a
later
date,
once
they
figure
out
that
oh,
we
haven't
required
that
surface.
Yet
you're
gonna
have
to
come
back
in
for
another
easement
and
I.
Don't
want
that.
D
It's
12
years
is
enough.
I
would
like
it
to
be
done.
I
really
would
so.
This
is
a
sketch
I've
done
and
you
can
see
here's
my
mom's
house
and
there's
my
house
and
here's
that
forty
to
one
surface,
that
new
one
that's
come
up
on
the
drawings
and
you
can
see
it
encompasses
almost
all
of
my
property
and
that
that
10-foot
that's
less
than
you
would
let
a
building
be
from
a
roadway,
and
these
are
planes
that
can
fly
over
there.
Legally.
D
A
plane
can
fly
within
ten
feet
of
my
house
by
that
surface
and
I'm,
not
making
it
up
it's
hard
to
see
in
this
one
because
it's
divided
out,
but
that
airplane
went
over
my
house
it's
hard
to
sleep
at
3
o'clock
in
the
morning
when
they
put
the
ILS
system.
In
now
they
can
do
night
flights
out
there.
So
3
o'clock
in
the
morning
I
can
get
woke
up
by
a
plane
coming
over.
D
D
Height
restrictions
and
zoning
ordinances
are
not
acceptable.
They're
not
adequate
to
provide
the
right
of
flight.
That's
required,
and
this
is
just
per
the
airport
or
FAA
requirements.
But
again,
we've
had
staff.
Tell
us
well,
the
rest
of
your
property
is
unnecessary.
I
think
I've
pretty
much
shown
that
it
is
necessary.
You.
E
D
You
don't
get
it
now.
You're
gonna
be
coming
back
here
later.
This
was
a
presentation
that
the
department
put
on
this
was
January,
9th
2007
to
the
City
Council
and
even
in
their
own
title
to
the
City
Council.
They
say
that
zoning
ordinances
are
inadequate
to
protect
it,
and
you
can
see
there's
that
little
yellow
line
and
my
properties
right
there
right
in
the
middle
of
the
red.
D
So
I
wanted
to
just
take
a
minute
to
talk
about
the
uniform
act,
because
you
guys
have
got
money
from
I
should
take
Salt
Lake
City
has
got
money
from
the
FAA
to
do
all
these
expansions,
as
Joel
has
talked
about
so
with
that
you're
required
to
comply
with
the
uniform
act
by
that
grant,
and
so
you've
got
several
grant
acquirements
to
do
that
now,
your
attorneys
have
argued
I,
don't
know.
If
staffs
told
this,
your
attorneys
are
arguing.
You
don't
have
to
follow
the
uniform
act.
D
D
D
The
last
thing
that
I
wanted
to
say
is
is
when
they
talk
about
fair
value.
This
was
in
June,
15
2007.
This
was
after
it
was
already
voted
to
condemn
my
property,
where
I
wasn't
able
to
speak,
they
offered
the
281
there
for
the
easement
the
same
one.
That
is
in
your
letter
that
was
dated
March
15
2019,
but
they
did
offer
us
1.8
million
and
they
had
an
appraisal
for
it.
But
I
want
you
to
notice
that
this
was
the
2005
8
budget
and
that
number
exactly
matches.
D
No
I
know
what
my
property
was
worth
and
it
was
worth
a
lot
more
than
1.8
million
in
2007
and
I
met
with
the
appraisers
and
went
through
that
with
them.
But
we
just
got
the
budget
number
offered
to
us.
It
wasn't
a
fair
valuation.
I
mean
it
is
exactly
the
same
number
and
it
is
not
just
I
haven't
just
pulled
the
number
out.
This
is
for
TV
a
land
acquisition
all.
F
D
D
Oh
with
that,
the
attorney,
as
he
said,
it's
dismissed
and
our
property
is
increased
in
value
now,
so
to
offer
the
same
valuation
that
you
did
12
years
ago.
I
think
is
bad
faith
because
we
can
develop
it
further.
My
brother
and
I
have
been
working
on
this
soon
as
this
is
dismissed
or
it
has
been
dismissed,
we're
filing
and
rezoning
our
property,
but
really
we
just
want
to
be
done.
The
best
thing
that
you
could
do
I
mean
you've
got
an
inadequate
easement
that
their
reports
asking
for
the
solution.
D
G
A
G
G
G
If
you
look
at
that
sketch
everything,
that's
in
purple
is
owned
by
Salt
Lake,
City
Department
of
aerosol
Lake,
City
Corporation.
They
have
fee
title
to
the
ground,
they
own
the
ground,
everything
there's
no
dimensions
on
this
drawing,
but
it's
reasonably
to
scale.
The
yellow
is
what's
proposed
for
the
easement,
the
yellow,
the
Highline
yellow
portion.
The
orange
is
the
transition
surfaces
that
we
believe
that
they
have
made
an
error
on
because
they're
condemning
for
an
approach
surface,
while
ignoring
the
departure
surfaces
that
are
required
by
the
exact
same
table
that
defines
the
approach
surfaces.
G
A
G
Property,
the
backward
property
borders
on
the
left
hand,
side.
That
is
where
the
surface
is
14
feet
from
the
ground.
They
don't
want
the
property
they
want
to
operate.
Planes
give
legal
right
to
operate
planes
this
far
from
the
ground
at
upwards
of
a
hundred
and
sixty
two
miles
an
hour.
It's
not
reasonable.
G
G
Allow
those
same
planes
to
legally
fly
within
my
mother's
now.
This
is
the
distance
at
a
hundred
and
sixty
two
miles
an
hour
by
their
own
neurons.
It's
an
animal
all's
we're
asking
is:
please
take
the
ability
for
them
to
negotiate
away
from
the
point
somebody
to
buy
our
property.
That's
all
we
want.
We
get
it.
We
understand
we're
on
board
we're
engineers.
My
brother's
been
an
engineer,
went
to
school,
traditionally
educated
Bennington
engineers
licensed
in
Utah
for
20
years,
I've
been
in
the
engineering
field
and
been
licensed
for
the
last
15.
G
C
The
resolution
be
amended
to
require
a
total
take
of
the
property
that
be
done
it
if
the
parties
can't
agree
on
the
value,
that's
what
the
courts
are
for
to
argue.
What
is
the
just
compensation
to
which
they're
entitled,
but
that
really
is
the
appropriate
thing
to
do
here,
not
to
try
and
take
this
property
in
piecemeal
by
avocation
easement
after
avocation
easement
after
avocation
use
men.
C
A
F
F
A
A
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
A
F
F
One
item,
and
that
is
that
on
Tuesday,
when
you
have
your
council
meeting
and
you'll
be
looking
at
adoption
of
a
resolution
and
the
Nobel
Peace
Prize
winner
will
be
in
attendance,
and
the
mayor's
office
is
going
to
have
a
reception
just
prior
and
the
mayor
will
be
out
of
town.
So
they've
invited
the
council,
of
course,
to
act
in
a
hosting
capacity.
So
brighten.