Candidate profile: Tawny Knuteson-Boyd

Tawny Knuteson-Boyd is an incumbent to the Moab City Council, running for re-election in 2019. She was first elected to the seat in 2015.

Here is how Knuteson-Boyd responded to our three questions:     

What are your thoughts on the version of PAD that the city passed last month? What would you like to improve, change or remove?

“My thoughts on the version of the PAD that was passed remain consistent. I do support the version we passed. By temporarily removing R2 from the PAD, we gave ourselves a chance to move forward incrementally and to evaluate how PAD developments impact our current neighborhoods.

“The current density in R3 and R4, while not as high as the PAD allows, are higher than R2, and it gives some clarity to the idea and concept that a PAD development should fit in currently established neighborhoods.

“Listening to concerns, comments and ideas from current residents gave me different insights, new appreciation and helped me see PAD through their eyes. It’s not simply that residents ‘complained;’ I was able to see the changes we incorporated as a compromise and a way forward with additional housing units for the community.”

What are your thoughts on the proposal for council members to get back health coverage that they lost starting in 2014? Would you like to see city council members’ pay and benefits increased, decreased or stay the same?

“My thoughts on the proposal that council members ‘get back’ their health insurance benefits and an increased salary are also consistent. From the beginnings of the pay discussion, I advocated for a moderate and affordable increase for council members; never did I say there shouldn’t be any increase.

“Health insurance is a complex and often misunderstood issue. In 2014, the city changed their insurance carrier, and there wasn’t a category with the new carrier to allow the council positions to continue their coverage; the mayor was able to do so, as the salary limit was within the carrier’s guidelines.

“While I wasn’t privy to those discussions, I would think that the council at that time had some input as to how to manage that detail. They did increase their salaries some to compensate for the fact they were not able to continue their coverage.

“I feel strongly that council positions are public or community service; I feel the same about my 40-hour per week job as the administrative assistant for the Grand County Road Department. I serve the public. They are positions with a different capacity and different salary structure; they are both public services, nonetheless.”

What are your thoughts on removing lodging as a protected use in the City of Moab? Should the rules be less restrictive, or should new hotels and overnight rentals be disallowed completely as proposed?

“My thoughts on ‘removing lodging as a protected use in the city’: This phrase is overly simplified and not in keeping with what the council is considering or what we want to accomplish.

“The Temporary Land Use process we are working through is still in flux and hasn’t been decided upon; words and phrases have been used to describe what is happening, and they have been inconsistent and at times interchangeable and confusing.

“I support managed or balanced growth within the city, and I respect an individual’s private property rights.

“I see no value in governing in such a way as to purposefully and willfully devalue anyone’s property. Often comments are made in the setting of a meeting and become part and parcel of the issue while they were only one comment, idea or concept.

“With this land use policy we are working through, we need to step back, breathe and decide what we are trying to accomplish even if those goals are multifaceted. Then, we need to clearly communicate those ideas, ideals and goals to the planning commission and to staff to help us bring those to fruition.

“I realize there are time constraints, and we have to work things through quickly. The city council should use the powers granted to us by the State Constitution to make thoughtful and carefully considered land use decisions, not decisions based on fear, emotion or personal agendas.”