[{"_1":2,"_104":-5,"_105":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,84,94],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":-5,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6621105,"mediaKeyId","3381963-7c8fc597ac813bc4b7bdb5e0a7611b2f","parentId",3381963,"title","Appeal authority upholds city decision on Chateau Recovery; building ownership changed","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",4704000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3381963-7c8fc597ac813bc4b7bdb5e0a7611b2f&start=4704&end=4704","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6621105/Utah/Appeal-authority-upholds-city-decision-on-Chateau-Recovery-building-ownership-changed","mediaUrl","author","Oakley Oakley City Council","date","2025-02-26T19:00:00Z","article","City staff reported that the appeal authority has upheld the city’s decision in the Chateau Recovery matter, and that the deadline to file to a higher court had passed.

Staff placed the written decision and minutes from the appeal hearing in the council Dropbox folder and reported that ownership of the building changed after closing; the building is closed. Staff said the party seeking appeal had the opportunity to file with a higher court by a statutory deadline and that, as of the meeting, the deadline had passed.

The report was informational; no additional council action was taken in the meeting minutes provided.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Oakley City Council Meeting - Agenda - CC 2-26-2025 Audio","oneSentenceSummary","The appeal authority upheld the city's earlier action regarding Chateau Recovery. Staff said the appeal period has ended and ownership changed; the building is closed. Documents and the appeal decision were placed in the council Dropbox for review.","taxTitle","Oakley, Summit County, Utah","taxId",80008,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":49,"_50":81,"_52":-5,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":82,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":83,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72},6621110,"Oakley council backs higher rodeo payouts, approves charity portion for upcoming pickleball tournament",1209,3152000,4361000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3381963-7c8fc597ac813bc4b7bdb5e0a7611b2f&start=3152&end=4361","/articles/6621110/Utah/Oakley-council-backs-higher-rodeo-payouts-approves-charity-portion-for-upcoming-pickleball-tournament","Council members signaled support for raising the Oakley Rodeo event payout and discussed logistics for the Oakley City Pickleball Tournament and rodeo ticketing.

Rodeo: The rodeo committee proposed increasing per-event payouts from $20,000 to $25,000 (an incremental $5,000 per event), which would raise total event payouts to $45,000. Committee members and the council said they expect to cover the difference primarily through sponsorships; the council provided a preliminary nod to proceed and asked staff to include the increase in the fiscal 2026 budget process so it can be formally approved when the budget is amended in June. Council members said the rodeo committee has reserves that could cover temporary shortfalls and emphasized the goal of attracting higher-ranked riders and greater television coverage, which could require higher payouts.

Pickleball and charitable proceeds: Council reports indicated the city will hold the pickleball tournament on the weekend before the main rodeo weekend (Friday–Saturday). The council approved, in principle, designating proceeds for a local charity identified during the meeting as “Claire the Heart” (referred to in discussion as a Heart Warrior charity associated with the Root family). Councilors discussed bringing two food trucks and arranging a revenue-sharing plan (a percentage to the city) and asked staff and the event organizer to firm up accounting, insurance and sponsorship details.

Ticketing and logistics: Councilors discussed the city’s use of digital tickets (with delivery 72 hours before events) and requests from some patrons for printed tickets for large-group distribution. Staff said printed tickets can be produced closer to the event upon request (for example, about a month before the rodeo) to reduce scalping and fraudulent resale; council members agreed staff should continue to offer limited printed tickets for locals who request them. Councilors also discussed volunteer and logistical items for rodeo events (portable restrooms, volunteer pickup of fireworks, committee staffing and youth volunteers for junior rodeo events).

Council members asked staff to proceed with notifying the PRCA (Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association) of the council’s intent to raise payouts so the committee can meet PRCA notification deadlines. Formal budget amendment and appropriation are expected as part of the upcoming budget cycle.","Council members gave a general go-ahead to increase rodeo event payouts and approved a charitable beneficiary for the city’s upcoming pickleball tournament; staff will include the rodeo payout increase in the FY26 budget and coordinate ticketing and logistics.",{"_33":85,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":86,"_41":87,"_43":88,"_45":89,"_46":90,"_48":49,"_50":91,"_52":-5,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":92,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":93,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72},6621114,"Oakley council opens discussion on conflict-of-interest policy after in-meeting disclosure",1645,1401000,3046000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3381963-7c8fc597ac813bc4b7bdb5e0a7611b2f&start=1401&end=3046","/articles/6621114/Utah/Oakley-council-opens-discussion-on-conflict-of-interest-policy-after-in-meeting-disclosure","A disclosure by a council member during the Oakley City Council meeting prompted extended discussion on adopting a formal conflict-of-interest policy that aligns with state law.

During consideration of the Oakley 1886 subdivision a council member disclosed a family relationship—identifying that a son-in-law works for a firm with ties to the project—and then abstained from the final plat vote. Council members and staff used the incident to discuss gaps in the city’s current practice and the state requirement that governing bodies have conflict-of-interest policies.

Staff reviewed examples from other Utah cities and recommended a short, plain-language policy that: (1) references the Utah Municipal Officers’ Ethics Act (state code), (2) requires annual conflict disclosures to be posted online, (3) provides a mechanism for the city attorney to review and issue a written opinion that becomes part of a member’s disclosure record, and (4) specifies that members with a conflict should disclose before the matter is acted on and generally abstain from voting. Council members discussed how broadly to define family/household ties and whether to allow limited participation (e.g., answering questions) when a member abstains from voting.

No final ordinance or resolution was adopted at the meeting. Council members directed staff to draft a simplified local policy modeled on the cited examples (including a version similar to Mill Creek’s 2023 policy), add a clause enabling pre-review by the city attorney, and return the draft for council consideration. Staff also reminded council members that the state now requires annual conflict-of-interest disclosures that will be published on the city website.

Council members expressed the desire to keep the policy clear and practical for a small city where many residents and officials have interrelated business and family ties. The city attorney was asked to provide guidance on how to define the scope of relationships (household, close relatives, etc.) and how the council should handle perceived conflicts that are raised by other members or the public.

No formal vote to adopt policy language occurred; city staff will prepare draft language and consult the city attorney before returning the item to council.","Council members discussed adopting a clear conflict-of-interest policy after a council member disclosed a family tie to a firm involved in the Oakley 1886 subdivision; staff proposed drafting a simplified policy aligned with state law and using the city attorney for pre-review and written opinions.",{"_33":95,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":96,"_41":97,"_43":98,"_45":99,"_46":100,"_48":49,"_50":101,"_52":-5,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":102,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":103,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72},6621118,"Oakley council approves Oakley 1886 subdivision final plat, including deed-restricted affordable unit",1261,215000,1476000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3381963-7c8fc597ac813bc4b7bdb5e0a7611b2f&start=215&end=1476","/articles/6621118/Utah/Oakley-council-approves-Oakley-1886-subdivision-final-plat-including-deed-restricted-affordable-unit","The Oakley City Council voted to approve the final plat for the Oakley 1886 subdivision following a public hearing and staff presentation.

City planning staff described the proposal as a 12-lot subdivision created from four parcels spanning areas in two zoning designations (A-5 and A-40). The council was told the project includes an existing home designated as the affordable unit for compliance with the city’s affordable-housing requirement; that home (on Lot 13) will be deed restricted in perpetuity as affordable housing. A secondary dwelling (ADU) on Lot 13 could be allowed at market rate because the lot is not being subdivided further, staff said.

The planner explained project infrastructure and restrictions: the subdivision will connect to Oakley City culinary water via an 8-inch line with hydrants, be served by a pressurized secondary irrigation system, and use septic systems for wastewater. Water rights associated with the development will be deeded to the city in amounts appropriate to each lot’s acreage. A private 50-foot easement for access and utilities will provide ingress; the paved travel-way was described initially as 26 feet but staff and the applicant discussed reducing pavement to 24 feet to reduce impervious surface. An emergency/secondary access easement and public utility easements are shown on the plat.

The development agreement will specify building envelopes for primary and accessory dwellings, allow agricultural structures outside those envelopes, govern fencing (with limited grandfathering of existing concrete perimeter fencing), and incorporate the recorded Weber River Corridor Trail easement and related access provisions. Staff noted wetlands and sensitive-land overlays on parts of the property and said soils and bio-testing were provided to the city; buyers were cautioned those overlays carry development limitations enforced at the building-permit stage. A conditional-use allowance for a training/ropes course was described as permitted until issuance of the first building permit, at which point the conditional use would terminate and remaining building rights would be extinguished.

Developer representative Josh Paul addressed water-rights distribution and site access and praised the city’s review process: “Wow. We’re extremely appreciative of the ability to work with Oakley City,” Paul said. He confirmed the developer intends to allocate water shares to individual lots and that the applicant is open to reducing the paved road width.

The planning commission had reviewed the subdivision in two hearings and recommended approval. During the council meeting a council member disclosed a family relationship to an employee of a firm with involvement in the project; after that disclosure the member abstained from the vote. The final plat motion was moved and seconded and the council approved the plat with recorded aye votes and the stated abstention.

Documents referenced at the hearing include the development agreement, recorded trail easement documents, CC&Rs for the proposed association, soil and wetland delineation reports, and review comments from the fire marshal and city engineering.

Votes at a glance: Motion to approve final plat for the Oakley 1886 subdivision — moved/seconded on the record; outcome: approved (recorded aye votes; one abstention after disclosure).","The Oakley City Council approved the final plat for the Oakley 1886 subdivision after a public hearing and brief discussion. The 12-lot development includes a deed-restricted affordable unit on Lot 13, private road access, protections for wetlands and trees, and transfer of water rights to the city.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Appeal authority upholds city decision on Chateau Recovery; building ownership changed

Oakley council backs higher rodeo payouts, approves charity portion for upcoming pickleball tournament

Oakley council opens discussion on conflict-of-interest policy after in-meeting disclosure

Oakley council approves Oakley 1886 subdivision final plat, including deed-restricted affordable unit