Saturday, February 15, 2020

Fred C Cox for Salt Lake County Council District 2

I believe we must stand up and be heard or watch our constitutionally protected rights disappear. We can't continue to let government take over our lives.

That was the reason I ran for office when my State Representative, Ron Bigelow, stepped down to help the Governor at the end of 2010, and it is still so today.

It was one of the reasons I was awarded the Libertas 2016 Defenders of Liberty Award.

The end of 2019 and the beginning on 2020, I was the original sponsor (of 5) for the Utah 2019 Tax Referendum. Working with voters throughout the state, both liberal, conservative, and everything in between, and as volunteers, we were able to gather over 170,000 signatures in 29 counties, exceeding the 116,000 required signatures in 15 counties. Because of the success of our team, the Legislature and the Governor repealed 2019 SB 2001, instead of facing the backlash of the voters this fall.

For 2015 and 2016, I was given a 100% rating from the Utah Taxpayers Association for voting against tax increases and looking out for the taxpayers. I also received a Salt Lake Chamber 2012, 2015 and 2016 Business Champion award for working to help Utah businesses grow. I worked hard to make sure the legislature didn’t ignore the idea of replacing the prison in Draper, which I believed would have saved over $100 Million, which has since been shown to be true.

I had the opportunity to serve in the Utah House of Representatives in 2011, 2012, 2015 and 2016. During that time I had a reputation of being willing to speak up and to fight for and vote for what I believed was right, no matter the opposition.

 I also had the reputation of reading though all of the bills I would vote on, and after the 2016 session a comedy song joked that I might have known other legislators' bills better than they did. During my service, I had one of the best floor attendance records of anyone in the House, with the exception of one rare House Judiciary Standing Committee meeting called during floor time where I missed 12 votes in 2015. They were the only ones I missed that year. I wanted to be in the chamber during debates and voting so I could hear both sides of an issue and see if a bill was ready, or needed to be amended or voted down. "Motion to Amend" was something I said more than once. I always voted for or against the bill no matter who the sponsor was or what party they belonged to.

I have been asked by many to run. I would appreciate your support, whether by endorsement for 2020 or campaign contribution.

Monday, February 3, 2020

Olympia Hills Project too fast or is the area ready

Olympia Hills Project: too fast or is the area ready?

IF the only choice is approving the current proposed zoning for all 900 plus acres and a very vague development agreement, the answer should be NO.

As an architect I have worked on projects that included mixed use, with densities from 25 units per acre to 64 units per acre,  plus commercial. Some of the masterplan concepts have been up to 80 to 100 acres. When I showed that the Draper Prison did not have to be moved, we were talking closer to 700 acres.

This Olympus Hills Project isn't just one or a few acres, it is over 900 acres. We are not talking less than 100 units, but over 6,000 units. The obvious question, is the area ready for this development? What can be done and what should not be done. As I have driven along Mountain View the last few years between West Valley City and Herriman the last few years, I have witnessed Growth and Traffic skyrocket.

IF the property owner or developer had purchased the land after the property was rezoned to be a P-C Zone or if there was already a signed development agreement with the county, the property owner would be vested and there would not be much anyone could do other than follow the development agreement with the County and the Owner or new owners.

That has not happened. Yet. That could change in 2 weeks. 

If you read the reports the county is posting at:

It is clear from an infrastructure point of view, there is not currently enough sewer and traffic capacity to handle the project.

What can be approved?

1. The county could consider approving a master plan to allow much of the development over time. If it is going to be over 25 year vs the expected 12 years, it may still work.

2. The county could approve a smaller area, perhaps 5 to 10 to 20 acres to be rezoned at this time. Locating this smaller area near existing transportation hubs. The other areas could be rezoned as the infrastructure allows. One county council member favoring the development has stated “It is master-planned as a whole development. It is not going to be piecemealed.”

3. The county could further reduce the number of units. I was only able to hear one hour of public comments this last week, but it was clear the residents are not in favor of the amended proposal. The adjacent city Mayors are not either. While the county has added a lot more requirements to the new project, it is clear the public and adjacent cities are not convinced it is enough.

What is clear is rezoning the entire property to a P-C Zone and signing a development agreement now for entire property ties the hands of future county or city councils by having the property owner vested.

IF the only choice is approving the current proposed zoning for all 900 plus acres and a very vague development agreement, the answer should be NO.