OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Riverton City Council Meeting – August 4, 2026: Work Session and Regular Meeting

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

Transcript — Verbatim
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 met on August 4, 2026, starting with a work session at 4:30 PM followed by the regular council meeting at 7:00 PM at City Hall, 12830 South Redwood Road. The work session covered a traffic management speed study, the Timberline project development, and a Town Days debrief. The council meeting included citizen comments, recognition of Gospel Hope volunteers, consent item approvals, tabling of a rezone ordinance, a fraud assessment discussion, and a discussion-only review of proposed window sign regulations.

Consent Calendar

  • Minute Approval: Minutes from July 21, 2026, were approved.
  • Resolution No. 26-39: Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Cyvl Inc for the Cyvl Transportation Infrastructure Platform was approved unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Kent Davis (Cottonwood Heights): Republican nominee for Salt Lake County District Attorney, outlined his qualifications and commitment to partnering with Riverton on public safety and accountability.
  • Mr. Mobley (Riverton): Expressed strong support for maintaining the 287(g) agreement with ICE, arguing it enhances public safety and should not be weakened due to activist pressure.
  • Kenneth Lyons (Riverton): Opposed the 287(g) agreement, citing concerns about masked, unbadged federal agents operating in neighborhoods and calling for accountability and dignity in enforcement.
  • Dot Lines: Shared a personal story about fleeing an abusive home and urged the council to prioritize safety and responsibility for those needing to traverse for safety.
  • Summer Joos (Bluffdale): Relayed her uncle’s arrest by ICE for an unpaid speeding ticket and subsequent deportation, arguing the 287(g) agreement does not protect families and demanding its full termination.
  • Randall: Criticized the council for not voting on the 287(g) agreement, stating the mayor acted alone without required city code approval, and urged the council to take responsibility.
  • Shane Manwaring (Bluffdale): Introduced himself as a candidate for Salt Lake County Sheriff, emphasizing his military and law enforcement background and goals to reduce jail booking times and break the cycle of addiction and crime.
  • Michael McFall: Did not speak; no card submitted.

Presentations/Recognitions

  • Gospel Hope Volunteer Recognition: Mayor Buroker recognized volunteers from Gospel Hope Church for their cheerful and essential support during the Fourth of July celebration, presenting them with certificates and semi-quincentennial medallions.

Discussion Items

  • Traffic Management/Speed Study (Work Session): City Engineer Matt Cassel presented a proposed three-phase traffic calming program (Phase I: individual request, Phase II: neighborhood sign-off, Phase III: council decision). Emphasis on data-driven equity using metrics like 85th percentile speed, crash history, and pedestrian proximity. Council members expressed support for the phased approach and requested monthly updates and a transparent public process.
  • Timberline Project (Work Session): Development Services Director Jason Lethbridge updated on the proposed RM-8 zoning for a 3,000-square-foot-lot single-family development near Redwood Road and 1350 South. Discussion centered on street connectivity (UDOT requirement for a public road connection), a gated emergency-access connection to the north, and parking concerns. Council leaned toward RM-8 with additional guest parking and removal of the gate to improve long-term traffic flow, and requested an RM-6 layout for comparison.
  • Town Days Debrief (Work Session): Events Director Sheril Garn reported on the July 4th celebration: 7,500 rodeo attendees, total revenue of $125,513.50, 1,002 race participants, 30 employees working 18–22 hours on the holiday, and 39,000 attendees for the concert (2025 figure). She recommended closing 1300 West and 12600 South during the race for safety, citing a post-event incident where a motorist pulled a gun. Council supported exploring one-way closures with resident passes.
  • Fraud Assessment (Regular Meeting): Administrative Services Director Nick Geer presented the annual fraud risk assessment, scoring 375 out of 395 points (unchanged from 2025). The only missed points were for a formal internal audit function. The council acknowledged the strong score.
  • Window Sign Ordinance (Regular Meeting, Discussion Only): Jason Lethbridge presented proposed amendments to limit window signs to 50% of any single window and 30% of total building surface, with definitions excluding window tinting. Several council members expressed preference to repeal window sign restrictions entirely, citing aesthetic subjectivity and market forces, though public safety concerns were noted. Staff will bring both the planning commission’s version and a repeal option to the next meeting.

Key Outcomes

  • Consent Agenda: Approved all items via a single motion (unanimous).
  • Majestic Homes Rezone (Ordinance 26-16): Tabled to the September 1, 2026 City Council meeting by a roll-call vote (5–0).
  • Window Sign Ordinance: No action taken; staff directed to prepare alternatives including full repeal for the next meeting.
  • Traffic Program: Staff will formalize the three-phase process, begin monthly traffic-request updates to the council, and improve public transparency on the city website.
  • Timberline Project: Developer will revise plans to explore RM-6 layout, additional guest parking, and removal of the gate; the project will return for a public hearing after council feedback.
  • Town Days 2027 Planning: Staff to evaluate road closures for the race and coordinate with police, golf course, and pool access.
  • Fraud Assessment: Acknowledged and filed; no further action required.
  • Upcoming Meetings: Next regular meetings on September 1, 2026 (Work Session 4:30 PM, Council 7:00 PM) and September 15, 2026. Strategic planning meeting moved to September 19, 2026.
  • Closed Session: None.
  • Adjournment: Motion passed, meeting adjourned.

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