Planning Interview Panel and Mock PC Presentation – May 20, 2026

On May 20, 2026, the Sandy City planning interview panel conducted a second-round interview for a planner position, including a mock Planning Commission presentation by candidate Michael Jones. The panel consisted of Development Services Manager Clint Spencer, Zoning Administrator Melissa Anderson, Planning Manager Warner, and other staff members (Brian and James). The session focused on evaluating Jones' ability to review a conditional use permit (CUP) application, present findings, and respond to general planning scenarios.

Mock Planning Commission Presentation

• Candidate Michael Jones presented a staff report for a proposed conditional use permit for Wade Tree Service, a home occupation at 9470 South Cobalt Circle (zoned R-18). Key issues included non-compliance with city code: three commercial vehicles stored on site (only one permitted), material storage in yard spaces, and potential employee parking on streets.
• Jones initially recommended denial unless conditions were met, citing non-compliance and the need to mitigate impacts.
• Panel members questioned the recommendation. Clint Spencer noted that state law presumes CUP are permitted uses unless detrimental impacts are proven, making denial difficult. Jones clarified that if conditions were imposed (e.g., reducing vehicles, removing materials, road damage bond, compliance reviews), approval could be granted.
• Jones identified gaps in his own information: lack of the son's name (business operator), additional site photos, and a site plan.

General Interview Questions

• Approach to the CUP review: Jones described starting with the code, comparing the request to home occupation standards and parking rules, then listing conditions.
• Hypothetical mistake scenario: Asked how he would handle a missed setback after permit approval, Jones stated he would contact the applicant, acknowledge the city's error, and ensure future reviews are thorough.
• Explaining regulations to frustrated applicants: Jones cited an experience with ADU updates, emphasizing that state law compelled the changes, not his personal opinion.
• Team qualities: Communication and timeliness were highlighted.
• Professional growth feedback: Jones noted a previous supervisor advised him to ask more questions upfront to reduce rework; he now does so.
• Prioritizing competing deadlines: He would communicate with supervisors to determine priority and seek assistance.
• Long-term planning interests: Jones expressed a passion for long-range community planning and designing for future generations.
• Question from panel: Jones confirmed he was recently laid off from Johnson Demill Engineering due to slow work, and that his departure was performance-related but primarily due to lack of projects.

Key Outcomes

• The panel provided feedback: Jones' recommendation should have been clearly "approve with conditions" rather than playing both sides; staff reports should present a clear recommendation with alternative scenarios.
• No decision was made during the meeting. The panel indicated a decision would be communicated to Jones by Friday, May 22, 2026.