OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Riverton, Utah/Meeting Portal
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Riverton City Council Meeting - August 4, 2026

Meeting Portal — Tuesday, August 4, 2026
BodyRiverton, Utah
SessionMeeting Portal
DateTuesday, August 4, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:46:33

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:21

All right, good afternoon, Council.

0:23

Let's go ahead and get started.

0:24

It's our work session.

0:26

It's our work session.

0:29

All members of the council are present.

0:31

I'm Mayor Tish Baroker.

0:33

We will start with a presentation on traffic management speed study from Mr.

0:39

Castle.

0:45

Good evening.

0:46

I was told I have 15 minutes.

0:48

I talked too fast.

0:49

I could be done in about two, but I'll try to drag it out.

0:54

However long you need.

0:56

Don't need to.

0:57

So I'm here today to uh try to give you an overview of our traffic calming uh program.

1:03

Uh hopefully by going through it a high high level going through that program may answer some of your questions, but we obviously we open for other questions as we go through this.

1:13

Um our traffic calming program is not something new.

1:17

A lot of other cities do it.

1:18

We're trying not to reinvent the wheel, and so what we're doing is really using information uh on from a national level to help us make decisions as we go forward.

1:29

So we have a couple of goals, and the first one is uh data driven equity and encourage safer, more responsible driving.

1:37

And those are kind of the goals in my mind that we should be achieving or going after.

1:43

Data driven equity is and I have it written down prioritizing projects using objective metrics like crash history, measured 85th percentile speeds and pedestrian proximity rather than purely emotional requests.

1:58

So okay, keep going.

2:05

So are we there?

2:12

I'm looking, Brooke.

2:13

You're gonna give me a thumbs up, right?

2:21

Okay, give it a shot.

2:25

Okay.

2:26

Um that's what this slide got.

2:32

Next slide.

2:33

So the original traffic program we had had just had a few people on it.

2:38

Um and one of the things I wanted to make sure this program does is as an engineer, um, the decisions we make don't affect me.

2:48

They do affect police, they do affect fire.

2:51

Um, response time for those two organizations is extremely important, and it's a metric they track all the time.

2:58

For public works, it's maintenance, it's snow removal.

3:01

Uh so any time we try and go in and fix slow change road sections and do things that impact police fire and public works, we need them to prove it to say yes to to acknowledge it before we go any farther.

3:17

If it's something that they can't bear, we simply aren't going to do it.

3:21

And speed bumps is a perfect example.

3:23

Uh I'm for or against it, but it it's police fire and public works are the ones that if you put a speed bump in, they're the ones that it slows down the response time.

3:33

They've got to plow, they've got to remove um uh clean the the gutters.

3:38

It it causes them issues, and they're the ones that really need to make decisions on what when we use uh uh uh try to fix things, uh which ones we should be using.

3:50

Next slide, please.

3:53

So it's not written, but uh one of the things we need to finish is our standard operating procedure.

4:03

And I've at a high level, I just want to talk about what we are thinking and the direction we are going to go.

4:09

And what we're talking about is a phase one, phase two, phase three approach.

4:13

So phase one is something that we see every day.

4:15

A single person comes in, or they fill out uh uh a request form, and we go out there and we track if it's a speeding request, we track speeds, we track a couple other things, and we give them an answer.

4:26

Oftentimes that answer is no.

4:29

Um, and so what I'd like to do is add a couple other phases, which is phase two is if we give them a no, but they can go out there and get five other people in their neighborhood to sign off saying that we need to look into it further, that we go to a phase two approach.

4:43

And the same thing that if that ends up being a no, that there's a phase three, and I'm not gonna go deep in the phase three, but they need a higher level of their uh neighborhood to be involved in that.

4:53

Phase three oftentimes is a request for a higher level of service.

5:00

Phase three is one that has to come to you all to make a decision.

5:02

It's not something that the traffic uh uh uh traffic calming team can make a decision on.

5:09

That's a decision that has to come to you.

5:10

So we have to be very careful, very slow how we analyze that before we get to a phase three and start trying to make a decision of uh uh doing a capital project that increases the level service for that neighborhood.

5:24

And if I could interrupt you just briefly, the phases are not meant to delay the process or postpone a decision, but many times I've seen it where you have a resident or only two residents make a request.

5:37

Right, and the rest of the neighborhood isn't even aware, or it may negatively impact the rest of the neighborhood.

5:44

So that's really why is that request goes out there.

5:47

We need to see a much broader buy-in from the entire community.

5:52

Absolutely correct.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Public Safety█████████████████████21%
Transportation Safety██████████████████18%
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████████████17%
Public Engagement█████████████13%
Procedural████████8%
Immigration Policy███████7%
Parks and Recreation██████6%
Community Engagement█████5%
Affordable Housing███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Riverton City Council Meeting - August 4, 2026

The Riverton City Council held a hybrid Work Session at 4:33 PM and a Regular Council Meeting at 7:01 PM on August 4, 2026, at City Hall. The Work Session included discussions on traffic management, the Timberline project, and a Town Days debrief. The Council Meeting featured citizen comments, a recognition of Gospel Hope Church volunteers, approval of the consent agenda, tabling of a rezone ordinance, a fraud risk assessment presentation, and a discussion-only review of window signage regulations.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved the minutes from July 21, 2026.
  • Approved Resolution No. 26-39, authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Cyvl Inc for the Cyvl Transportation Infrastructure Platform.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Kent Davis, Republican nominee for Salt Lake County District Attorney, introduced himself and emphasized communication and transparency between the DA's office and local communities, particularly regarding repeat offenders and public safety.
  • Dave Mobley urged the Council to maintain Riverton's 287(g) agreement with ICE, arguing that ending it would threaten public safety and constitutional principles. He criticized organizations advocating for abolishing ICE.
  • Kenneth Lyons, a Riverton resident, opposed the 287(g) agreement, citing concerns about masked, unidentifiable federal agents operating in neighborhoods and undermining public trust.
  • Dot Lyons shared a personal story of leaving an unsafe home and encouraged prioritizing safety and compassion for individuals needing to relocate.
  • Summer Joos described her uncle's arrest and deportation by ICE over an unpaid speeding ticket, arguing that ICE actions do not improve community safety and urging the City to end the 287(g) agreement.
  • Randall Peterson questioned the process by which the 287(g) agreement was established, stating it was executed without a City Council vote and citing city code requiring such agreements to be adopted by ordinance or resolution.
  • Shane Manwaring, candidate for Salt Lake County Sheriff, introduced himself, highlighted his prior service with Riverton Police and military leadership, and emphasized improving jail operations to reduce officer transport time and address addiction issues.
  • Michael McCall expressed strong opposition to ICE and President Donald Trump.

Discussion Items

  • Traffic Management/Speed Study Discussion: City Engineer Matt Cassel presented a proposed phased traffic calming program (Phase 1-3) using data-driven criteria (crash history, 85th percentile speeds, pedestrian proximity). The program would require neighborhood buy-in (e.g., five signatures to advance to Phase 2) and would involve police, fire, and public works impact assessments. Council supported the approach, requesting timelines, public transparency, and monthly updates on request status. The discussion also addressed UDOT coordination, private roads, and the role of the citizen traffic committee.
  • Timberline Project Discussion: Development Services Director Jason Lethbridge reviewed a proposed rezoning and development plan for property near 13550 South and Redwood Road. The plan includes an RM-8 zoning designation, a General Plan amendment, and a development agreement allowing modified lot sizes and setbacks. UDOT requires a public road connection to Redwood Road; a gated connection to 1175 West is proposed to address neighborhood concerns. Council discussed RM-8 vs. RM-6 density, parking concerns (narrow streets, garage capacity, overflow), and the potential removal of the gate. Staff will prepare an RM-6 alternative and explore additional parking options.
  • Town Days Debrief: Events and Operations Director Sheril Garn reported approximately 39,000 attendees across 21 events, including a rodeo, parade, concert, car show, races, breakfast, carnival, and fireworks. Financial highlights: $66,500 in Town Days sponsorships, an additional $20,500 through elected officials, and $125,514 in rodeo revenue. Over 2,100 attended the breakfast and 1,002 participated in races. Discussion focused on traffic closures for 2027, safety concerns, and event capacity limitations. Council and staff discussed modifying road closures, one-way traffic, and providing resident access.
  • Fiscal Year 2026 Fraud Assessment Discussion: Administrative Services Director Nick Geer presented the annual fraud risk assessment, scoring 375 out of 395 points ("very low risk" category), matching the previous year. The city did not receive 20 points due to lacking a formal internal audit function, though internal audits are still performed.
  • Ordinance No. 26-19 – Window Signage Regulations: Discussion only on proposed amendments to clarify window sign definitions, exclude window tinting, and limit signage to 50% of an individual window and 30% of the building's overall surface area. Council members expressed mixed views; some supported repealing restrictions entirely, citing subjective aesthetics and business flexibility. Chief Taylor noted the proposed limits are acceptable from a safety standpoint. Staff will prepare a repeal option for the next meeting.

Key Outcomes

  • The consent agenda was approved unanimously.
  • Ordinance No. 26-16 (Majestic Homes Rezone) was tabled to the September 1, 2026 City Council meeting by a unanimous vote.
  • The Timberline project discussion concluded with staff directed to prepare an RM-6 alternative and additional parking options for future consideration.
  • The window signage discussion will return with both the proposed amendments and a full repeal option for Council action.
  • No action was taken on the fraud assessment; it was presented for informational purposes.
  • The meeting adjourned at 7:56 PM without a closed session.

Meeting Transcript

All right, good afternoon, Council. Let's go ahead and get started. It's our work session. It's our work session. All members of the council are present. I'm Mayor Tish Baroker. We will start with a presentation on traffic management speed study from Mr. Castle. Good evening. I was told I have 15 minutes. I talked too fast. I could be done in about two, but I'll try to drag it out. However long you need. Don't need to. So I'm here today to uh try to give you an overview of our traffic calming uh program. Uh hopefully by going through it a high high level going through that program may answer some of your questions, but we obviously we open for other questions as we go through this. Um our traffic calming program is not something new. A lot of other cities do it. We're trying not to reinvent the wheel, and so what we're doing is really using information uh on from a national level to help us make decisions as we go forward. So we have a couple of goals, and the first one is uh data driven equity and encourage safer, more responsible driving. And those are kind of the goals in my mind that we should be achieving or going after. Data driven equity is and I have it written down prioritizing projects using objective metrics like crash history, measured 85th percentile speeds and pedestrian proximity rather than purely emotional requests. So okay, keep going. So are we there? I'm looking, Brooke. You're gonna give me a thumbs up, right? Okay, give it a shot. Okay. Um that's what this slide got. Next slide. So the original traffic program we had had just had a few people on it. Um and one of the things I wanted to make sure this program does is as an engineer, um, the decisions we make don't affect me. They do affect police, they do affect fire. Um, response time for those two organizations is extremely important, and it's a metric they track all the time. For public works, it's maintenance, it's snow removal. Uh so any time we try and go in and fix slow change road sections and do things that impact police fire and public works, we need them to prove it to say yes to to acknowledge it before we go any farther. If it's something that they can't bear, we simply aren't going to do it. And speed bumps is a perfect example. Uh I'm for or against it, but it it's police fire and public works are the ones that if you put a speed bump in, they're the ones that it slows down the response time. They've got to plow, they've got to remove um uh clean the the gutters. It it causes them issues, and they're the ones that really need to make decisions on what when we use uh uh uh try to fix things, uh which ones we should be using. Next slide, please. So it's not written, but uh one of the things we need to finish is our standard operating procedure. And I've at a high level, I just want to talk about what we are thinking and the direction we are going to go. And what we're talking about is a phase one, phase two, phase three approach. So phase one is something that we see every day. A single person comes in, or they fill out uh uh a request form, and we go out there and we track if it's a speeding request, we track speeds, we track a couple other things, and we give them an answer. Oftentimes that answer is no. Um, and so what I'd like to do is add a couple other phases, which is phase two is if we give them a no, but they can go out there and get five other people in their neighborhood to sign off saying that we need to look into it further, that we go to a phase two approach. And the same thing that if that ends up being a no, that there's a phase three, and I'm not gonna go deep in the phase three, but they need a higher level of their uh neighborhood to be involved in that.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com