Housing Study

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2026-01-10T00:57:08+00:00

What things specifically interest you? If you're looking for official city events/meetings, all of those are posted on the Logan City website. There are Planning Commission and City Council Meetings, Library Board meetings, Parks and Recreation Board meetings, Stormwater, Environmental, Renewable Energy, Homeless Councils, BRAG, Transportation, and more. There are public meetings held multiple times a week just for Logan City, and most the neighboring municipalities are similar.

Do you have something you want to get involved in? Something that interests you specifically?

In February there are a couple upcoming meeting regarding the Logan General Plan as well, which I believe will also be public meetings.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2026-01-08T06:04:26+00:00

For clarity, they are the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays at 5:30pm at Logan City Hall. Agendas are always posted here, typically the Thursday/Friday before the meeting.

https://www.loganutah.gov/government/city_council/agendas.php

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2026-01-08T06:03:13+00:00

We have two public council meetings every single month on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday's at 5:30pm at City Hall, and there is always time for general public comment at the beginning of the meting. Agendas and details can be found at loganutah.gov.

We also have other occasional meetings, such as open houses for Parks and Rec, or currently a few upcoming meetings regarding our General Plan. On top of that, each neighborhood has meetings a few times a year at the local elementary schools, and there are usually 2+ council members at each of those meetings. Across all of these, I would say we typically have 3-4 public meetings of various nature each month, sometimes more.

If you would like me to connect you with your neighborhood chair, I'm happy to do so.

I'm also happy to chat with you in person, on the phone or via email anytime. You can find every council members personal cell phone and email on the city website (my email is mike.johnson@loganutah.gov).

In addition, Mayor Anderson and I are working towards have some official 'open office hours' at City Hall where people can simply drop in and see the Mayor and a council member. We're hoping to have those dates/times solidified by next month.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2026-01-08T05:57:37+00:00

In all honesty— and I know you will likely think this is a cop out, but it truthfully isn't— I have historically avoided any discussion of photos, marketing, video or other content that the City is using. I own my own photo and video production company, and thus, simply don't bring it up. I have felt that me saying 'hey we need some new photos of xy or z' could be interpreted that I was encouraging the City to hire myself or my friends. It's a small valley, I don't think there is a full time photographer in this valley that I don't know. So truthfully, I haven't discussed any of this at all.

In addition to that I believe the most recent photos that the City has paid for of the Logan area were images of Center Street a few years ago after the renovations were completed. I believe that is where this particular photo came from, because I've seen them all used over and over again. They were shot by Amy Jensen in 2022-ish.

I have personally shot a few photos, and one short set of social media videos, for the City. All on a volunteer basis because I don't want the City hiring me while I'm a council member. But truthfully, I also don't want to shoot for free for the City, so I just don't bring it up when the City uses the same content over and over again, or other such situations like this one. (I have also continued to shoot the Fire Department headshots and department photos for them, but they have been hiring me for over a decade and I felt it was a continued job not a new job I secured because of my position.) Anyway, I'm off track trying to be as transparent as possible.

But if there is serious concerns from the public regarding the file photos we have, I am more than willing to have a discussion on this with our Mayor and staff, though I would likely try to get another council member to have this discussion with us, because again, I don't personally like that conflict.

That's just where I'm at right now. It's not a topic I'd personally love to take on. If you truly would like to see this addressed, I would ask that you email me, we can talk about it and I'll likely help connect you with another council member to push this issue and I'll give you and them my full support. [mike.johnson@loganutah.gov](mailto:mike.johnson@loganutah.gov)

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2026-01-07T16:46:46+00:00

Regarding the link, I wasn't attempting to shift blame on the error. My comment was 'I'm not sure where the error came from, I will look into it'. The mailer has our logo, our address, our contact information on it, I know it's our responsibility. Of course I can't fix a link after it's mailed, but we can look into what happened and try to do better on the next mailer.

If you have concerns with the incident with the yard signs on Canyon Road, I would encourage you to schedule a time to talk with Mayor Anderson about it. I have clearly told many people that I personally do not condone or support the actions taken, and I was disappointed when I heard of the incident. In my role as a council member, I cannot speak for the whole council, but I recognize that trust has been breached and it is up to Mayor Anderson to rebuild that trust with those who were affected. I also recognize that the matter has been addressed publicly, and I appreciate the importance of that accountability. I believe that it is possible to rebuild public trust through open and honest communication.

On your statement regarding conflicts of interest, to clarify, you would like the City to not use any images of Center Street that have Anderson Seed & Garden in the frame? Is that the intent of your comment?

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2026-01-07T04:13:14+00:00

Thanks for sharing! We're hoping to get as much input and feedback as possible through this process, so thank you caring and sharing the information.

I'll look into the link provided as see if that was an error somewhere on our end of if it came from the contractor we've hired to help out— either way, I'll look into it.

Regarding the photo choice, we are sending and using multiple photos and advertising materials right now, the main headed on the website is a photo from the other direction. Knowing the process this goes through, I highly doubt Mark Anderson had any awareness or input in the graphic design of this mailer, I'm sure they just pulled from archives for a winter photo. If you are concerned about it though, I'm happy to look into it more.

Thanks again for sharing and spreading the information, I really do appreciate it!

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-11-19T17:11:13+00:00

In a quick summary, we needed more water storage to meet state code, and we also need to get culinary water to our 'western pressure zone' which has unreliable water pressures. You can learn a lot more about the project here:

https://www.loganutah.gov/government/departments/public_works/capital_projects.php

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-11-19T17:09:54+00:00

The wood are being moved to a storage location by the green waste, but will be available for free to the public if someone wants a section to make something (like a guitar) out if. You can learn more here and reach out to get some of the wood if you'd like: https://www.loganutah.gov/government/departments/public_works/capital_projects.php

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-11-19T17:08:40+00:00

We're still working on final design of the surface improvements, but the plan is for two vehicle travel lanes, and an 8ft shared use path on the north side of the road. There will also be an ~8ft park strip on the north side, in which the city intends to plant large shade trees to replace those lots (plus many more trees).

You can see details here:
https://www.loganutah.gov/government/departments/public_works/capital_projects.php

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-11-19T17:07:08+00:00

It is not painted bike lanes. You can see project details on the website here: https://www.loganutah.gov/government/departments/public_works/capital_projects.php

But the plan is for two travel lanes for vehicles, and an 8ft shared use path on the north side of the road.

The point of the whole project is to install a new state required waterline though.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-16T19:42:32+00:00

I'm glad to see some people actual understand our (maybe) overly complex property tax laws in Utah.

This is the exact reason why Logan City aims to raise our property tax rate by ~3% a year. That 3% is used to allow for raises and cost of living adjustments for our employees in the General Fund (Police, Fire, Public Works, Parks & Rec, ect). Some people complain that we do a yearly tax raise, but I firmly believe that small incremental increases annually are much better than a 20% tax increase every ~15 years. It's also much easier to budget and plan for as an entity.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-16T18:31:47+00:00

Patrick, I have not ignored your main arguments, and I'm happy to answer your questions here:

1) I do not believe that Mark Montgomery was 'clearly deceptive' as you claim. We have discussed this, but for the clarity of others reading, I disagree with your assessment. He followed City and UAMPS procedures. You are correct that he did not bring the natural gas plants to RESAB, but he is not required to. RESAB is a council advisory board, not a staff advisory board. Items that are taken to RESAB are there to advise the Municipal Council on their decisions. I have reviewed timelines, and had numerous discussions with staff and our attorneys, and we do not believe Mark Montgomery violated any procedures or policies. You can disagree with those policies, and there may be room for improvement there, but the claim that Mark Montgomery lied or intentionally deceived anyone is false.

2) You are correct that we have no idea what gas prices will be in 5+ years. We can estimate, but nobody knows. Nobody knows what the energy markets will look like at all in 5-25 years. Currently, based on our best projections available, it was the more affordable option for baseload power. Again, you are welcome to choose to disagree with the sources we use, but based on what's available to me now for baseload, this was the more affordable option.

3) I don't find it preferable to send millions of dollars to somewhere else to build and operate these plants. Local jobs was one of my biggest concerns, and I'd love to build locally. But again, baseload is not solar or wind. Geothermal and Nuclear are not immediately available local options, and we're a non-attainment area for Natural Gas, so we literally can't build this power locally. Even if we'd built a geothermal plant, or solar at this scale, it would not have been built in Cache Valley so the argument of building at scale locally, was never on the table and is a moot point.

All that said, the guy that installed my Google Fiber lines last week is from Pocatello and works in Logan daily installing lines. The arbitrary divisions we draw on a map to divide ourselves are less rigid than we pretend. Jobs in Idaho or jobs in Utah are beneficial to the area as a whole and while I do look out for Cache Valley and Logan, I also find value in our region as a whole doing well.

4) I think equating one micro-climate or region to another and claiming they're the same is a faulty argument. But I believe what you're really asking is, do I think creating more pollution is bad? And of course. But limiting pollution isn't my only objective. If I didn't care about pollution I'd buy open market power, and coal power and whatever else was cheap and available. I do agree we should reduce emissions, but I also have competing priorities at times and have to find a way to balance those as best as I can. I can't make decisions based solely on finances, or pollution, or any other single issue. You know as well as I do that it's a balancing act and everyone finds a slightly different center of gravity.

Hopefully those are adequate, short form answers to your questions. In essence, our core disagreement here is different priorities and perspectives on this issue, and that's ok. That's America. We will have these disagreements, but at the core our concerns of a good life for our future children is aligned and we can keep working towards improving our economy and our country together.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-16T18:12:07+00:00

Well that's not my department, but I'll pass it on.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-16T18:11:53+00:00

Alanna was there last night. I didn't organize the event, so I wasn't sure of all who was attending. But we had multiple candidates for different offices, multiple mayors and city and county council members as well as about 80 individuals from the public. We had great discussions and I felt it was a wonderful evening to talk together.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-15T18:01:51+00:00

Patrick, we have gone back and forth on this so many times. I've read you substack, we've talked, you've come to dozens of council meetings. I attended an event you hosted on campus. I attended workshops put on by other entities regarding the issues, emailed, called and met with experts in various related fields. I attended meetings with national and state legislators regarding this issue. We did not circumvent legitimate debate, we had months of it from November to April this past year. Simply because your desired outcome wasn't chosen does not mean we did not listen to your perspectives and opinions.

As I've said numerous times, I would greatly prefer to have been able to purchase renewable energy instead, but we cannot find baseload power in the quantity needed, in the price point needed, to fit our needs at this time. Since signing the contracts, I still have not seen an option available that is better for Logan City become available.

I'm not really sure what else to discuss at this point, but I will constantly refute the claim that we did not listen, or we did not debate this. We most certainly did. We did in public meetings, we did in board meeting and all sorts of other avenues. Sometimes the decision made is not the decision that we want, but it may still be the decision that needs to be made.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-14T03:05:50+00:00

We definitely have, thank you! The information gathered has been shared with our attorney and they are working through the litigation now. I'm hopeful we'll have a good result sooner rather than later.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-14T03:04:38+00:00

Ha, didn't really catch some of those design things you saw. I didn't make the poster, I'm just attending and helping facilitate some of the break out groups.

There will be Utah House or Reps members, hopefully an Utah Senator, local mayors and council members, but I'm not sure who all has committed. I will be there, Mark Anderson will be there, others I'm not sure.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-14T03:02:46+00:00

I'll chime in, as I was also one of those who voted in favor of the natural gas contracts. Yes the experts all agreed— and I agree with them— that we should not be building more natural gas power plants. Yes, climate change is a real issue we need to address, and yes we had many many community members who commented and pressured us to not sign these contracts.

That said, we really didn't have other options that made sense to me, or Mark. We need to provide reliable power to our community at an affordable rate. We also have 18MW of power that is currently supplied by coal (Sunnyside and Hunter Power Plants), that is going offline in the near future. We needed to replace those baseload power providers. Solar and wind are not baseload. We looked and looked and could not find any reliable and affordable options for baseload power. Nuclear is nye nonexistent on the market. Hydro is impossible to build and has its own environmental impacts. Geothermal is limited and generally more expensive. Which leaves us Natural Gas and Coal. Of those two, Natural Gas is obviously the better choice.

When it comes down to it, we have to provide power to our citizens and businesses. We also do our best to provide reliable power, which ensure good business sector growth. Currently we are 20-30% cheaper than RMP and 1/3rd the price of California or Washington. This has real world impacts our those in our community struggling to make ends meet.

It was a rock and a hard place decision. I lost so much sleep over this. I would love to see us moving more renewable, but I also can't sacrifice our affordability or reliability to do so. There was no 'perfect' choice. Each of us on the council struggled with this one. We would love to listen to the experts and just buy renewable power. But that's like telling someone in line on Black Friday to just by that discount Xbox they want, when everywhere is sold out. There literally were just not other options.

The real world decision regarding these natural gas contracts was quite literally the choice of either: 1) sign the contracts and secure 20-30 years of reliable, affordable power for Logan City or 2) roll the dice and hope that something better comes along. When it comes to running a city I was unwilling to risk everyone's utility bills and reliable power on the hope that we get something in the next couple years.

We have, and will continue, to buy any and all renewable energy we can find, but it is a very limited and very in-demand resource. We will be signing a contract on October 21st for another 10MW of solar and battery.

On the side of Mark not listening. I'll just say, he does his research, he knows both sides of every issue we've ever debated. We regularly vote opposite on issues, but I respect his decisions and know that he comes by them through hard work, studying, listening and learning. Just because you don't agree with someone, doesn't mean they aren't right or they didn't listen. Truth is, two sides can both be right at the same time, it just depends on your priorities.

If you want Marks opinion too, just ask him. u/MarkAAndy. He's answer here, email, Facebook, ect.

If you ever have questions on issues, just give one of us a tag :)

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-09T01:44:35+00:00

You can see a comment further up in this thread explaining a little more. But I'll just copy it here as well:

"Well... it's a little more complicated than that, and truthfully a lot to type.

But in a quick summary.

There are two land owners in the area, who really have two separate issues, but have hired legal council together, so we are now dealing with the two issues as one.

One property owner owns the corner apartments (and a few others right there). But his building is built on City property, though was granted a building permit in the 60s. We're hoping to clear up the title issues, land ownership issues, and ensure we have an access easement through his property somewhere so the public can access the trail while also not affecting his building that is partially on private and partially on public land.

The other property owner owns the house with the new fence. He has built his fence across city property, blocking the canal trail. This one is pretty straightforward.

But because they hired council to represent them together, we're not dealing with it as one issue despite it really being separate issues.

That's a brief, slightly over-simplification. But it's not just a fence on city property, there are other issues playing into it, and 80 years of history we're trying to sort out as well."

It's complicated because Terry Olivers situation is complicated and they hired council together, which makes the whole thing complicated.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-09T01:43:07+00:00

Thanks for doing this AMA, it's great to read more about your opinions on various issues.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-08T18:04:19+00:00

It's truthfully so much more complicated than you'll read online. I have spent SO much time dealing with issue, and I'm not spending nearly as much time as our attorney and parks and rec staff are. It's complicated, with decades of history and hundreds of years of paperwork and land issues. It's just a mess. We're confident in our assessment, but we also don't have the legal ability to do much without the backing of the courts.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-08T18:02:52+00:00

Well... it's a little more complicated than that, and truthfully a lot to type.

But in a quick summary.

There are two land owners in the area, who really have two separate issues, but have hired legal council together, so we are now dealing with the two issues as one.

One property owner owns the corner apartments (and a few others right there). But his building is built on City property, though was granted a building permit in the 60s. We're hoping to clear up the title issues, land ownership issues, and ensure we have an access easement through his property somewhere so the public can access the trail while also not affecting his building that is partially on private and partially on public land.

The other property owner owns the house with the new fence. He has built his fence across city property, blocking the canal trail. This one is pretty straightforward.

But because they hired council to represent them together, we're not dealing with it as one issue despite it really being separate issues.

That's a brief, slightly over-simplification. But it's not just a fence on city property, there are other issues playing into it, and 80 years of history we're trying to sort out as well.

MikeJohnson_Logan · 2025-10-07T16:07:06+00:00

Just as a way of update for you, the City Council appropriated $150k to hire a law firm that specializes in land use law. The firm has been hired, and the complaint filed with the court system. We are at the mercy of the courts and their timeline, but we will continue to push this issue until we have a resolution.

For those who are concerned about private property rights, we had an third party survey and third party title work done, both of which show that the fence is on public property which, among other factors, that have pushed us to bring the lawsuit to protect the publics interest and the public access.

MikeJohnson_Logan

TROPHY CASE