What was said · Salt Lake City
LBA, CRA and Council Formal Meeting
Wednesday, June 3, 2026 — the full transcript. Click any sentence to hear it.
Yes, that's right. Too late. Welcome everyone. Welcome, yes. Welcome everyone to today's meeting. We're happy to have you here whether you're joining us in person or online. We hope you continue to participate in whichever manner you feel the most comfortable. I would like to highlight that in addition to our Business to Naras City Council, we'll have some business items in our roles as the local building authority and as the Community Reinvestment Agency Board.
And please join us right now for the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you again for joining us tonight. And before we continue through the agenda, I want to quickly remind everybody about registration information and share the reasoning about how and why we share these meetings the way we do. We welcome everyone, regardless of your opinion or your side of an issue, because we will have people with varying opinions on important issues.
The council's goal is to make the meetings a place where people feel safe and comfortable participating. This is the most local level of government that is a key value of ours to ensure that we have created a respectful and safe environment so that no one is intimidated out of free participation. This also allows us to ensure that the meetings can continue and we can conduct a scheduled city business.
We invite each of you to contribute to this space, to speak your mind and to welcome others to the same. In order to create this welcoming and safe space, we will pass the meeting at any action that causes disruption at our ability to conduct the meeting, where any safety concerns involving threats and protective speech.
If there are repeated actions or comments, it may result in the removal from the meeting. To avoid intimidating others, please avoid their usual threatening, undiscriminatory language. Do not insult others based on religion, ethnicity, race, color, gender, sexual orientation or physical ability. Whether you agree or disagree with someone's comment, clapping, cheering, shouting, boing, snapping, gesturing, obstructing or discouraging others from commenting is not allowed.
As a reminder, as council members, we refrain from reacting or responding to allow everyone to share their opinions freely. This is to keep our reactions from affecting your ability to share your opinion freely. If you would like to follow up with any of us, please see our council staff or in Zoom chat with our staff there.
When making your comments, please address the body and not any individual electoral official. If you have a handout for the council, please raise your hand and council staff will assist you. All staff are available during and after the meeting to help you with any questions or information sharing. The full meeting rules are listed at the door and our staff will post a link in the Zoom chat.
Individuals may be able to comment on schedule public hearing items until the hearing is close. The general comment section of the agenda will accept sign-ups until 7.30pm. The general comment section is limited to a maximum of one hour and will only include commenters who registered before 7.30. So if you are here to give general comment, please sign up and remember that it's possible that not everyone who signed up may be able to speak.
Now, finally, that brings us up to the LBA public hearing section of our agenda. Your comments should pertain to the hearing item and this is about the local building authority. This is item B1, a resolution budget for the capital projects fund of the local building authority for fiscal year 2026, 2027. Before we begin taking comments on this item, first let me turn the time to Jennifer Bruno, Council Executive Director to give us a short introduction.
Jennifer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The first hearing will address the fiscal year 27 budget of the local building authority or LBA. The LBA is the city's financing mechanism to build facilities such as some fire stations and the Glendale and Marmalade branch libraries. This is the budget tool to pay off those bonds each year.
While the title references capital projects, this does not include any of the capital projects that were reviewed and recommended by the mayor in the general fund budget. That hearing will be later this evening. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Thank you, Jennifer. Taylor, please start with our first public comment on this item.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have one person registered to speak to this item. That will be Carlos Simoya, who's here in person. Carlos. I don't think Carlos is here. Then we have no other registered commenters for this item. Okay. I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the board close the public hearing and refer the item to a future date for action.
I have a motion by board member Dugan and seconded by board member Young. Is there any discussion? Follow those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. And I need to, this concludes the topics for the items for the local building authority meeting. I need a motion to adjourn as the LBA and reconvene as the Salah City Community Reinvestment Agency Board.
Mr. Chair, I move that we adjourn as the local building authority and reconvene as the community reinvestment authority of Salah City. Second. I have a motion by board member Warden, seconded by board member Carlson. Any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously.
Now we are convene as the Community Reinvestment Agency Board. We are at the portion of the CRA public hearing portion of the agenda, which is E1, resolution budget for the community reinvestment agency Salah City for fiscal year 2026, 2027. They didn't flow very well there, but that's the item. The same rules apply for your comments.
Jennifer, will you give us an introduction on this item? Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next hearing pertains to the fiscal year 27 budget of the community reinvestment agency or CRA of Salt Lake City for strategic investments in housing and tax increment reimbursements in specific previously adopted CRA project areas. If there are comments about the proposed city general fund or library budgets, those comments should be presented to the council in the public hearing later tonight.
This budget was discussed at a work session earlier in May and recordings and a staff report on that budget can be found on the council's budget website, which is link.slc.gov forward slash SLC FY27. Thanks. Thank you, Jennifer. Taylor, can you start with our first public comment? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We don't have anyone now to start to speak to this item.
Okay. There is no public comment, so I need a motion on this item. Mr. Chair, I move that the board close the public hearing for the item to a future date for action. Second. I have a motion by board member Dugan, a seconded by board member Wharton. Is there any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?
This motion carries unanimously. Now I need to do the same thing. We need to adjourn as the CRA agency board and reconvene now as a select city council. Mr. Chair, I move that we adjourn as the community reinvestment agency board and reconvene as the select city council. Second. Any? Second. Okay. Motion by board member Wharton, seconded by board member Carlson.
All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Now we are the select city council. Thank you for joining us today. This happens a lot through the recession where we jump through the different boards. Now we need to approve item F1 which is meeting minutes for March 10, 2026. I have a motion by council member Wharton, seconded by council member Dugan.
Any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Now we're talking, we're moving on the agenda to the public hearing section. And these are proposals before the council that require public hearing. Your comments should pertain to the hearing item. And if you go off topic, we'll probably ask you to stop your comment.
In order to create this welcoming and safe space, we will pass the meeting at any disruption to our ability to conduct the meeting or any safety concern involving threats or unprotected speech. As I mentioned earlier, if there are repeated actions or comments, it may result in your removal from the meeting. Please avoid comments that include providing personal attacks or discriminatory language.
Such comments can be intimidating for others and no persuasive or compelling to the council. If you are on Zoom, please unmute your microphone when your name is called. Each person will have two minutes. If you reach the two minute mark, the host will announce time and your microphone will be unmuted. We'll be calling the names in the order they signed up.
If you need a staff assistance in the room, please raise your hand and someone will be here with you. If you're having technical issues with Zoom, message staff support and action from our staff who can assist you. If you are unable to finish your comment in those two minutes, please share the rest of the comment with our staff through, you can also email it to us or you can mail it.
You can also call our 24-hour phone line. That information is listed at slc.gov. Additionally, if you have any handout for the council, please notify the council staff who will assist you in getting that to us. Now G1 and G3 in the agenda are grant applications and will be heard as one item. Please begin taking comments.
Before we begin taking comments, I will turn the time to Sylvia Richards. We will call the council and the council to give us a short introduction. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Periodically, this city applies for and receives grant funding which funds some city programs. Each grant receives a public hearing to provide the council and public with additional information.
There are three grants. First is the Department of Transportation Airport Improvement Program sponsored by Senator John Curtis as part of the fiscal year 27, Congressionally Directed Spending Request. If approved, the grant would fund replacement of pavement on Salt Lake City, airports, taxiway F and portions of taxiway G. Also included is pavement marking and reinstallation of in the pavement, center line and taxiway edge lights with new underground cabling and connectors.
Second is the BJA Fiscal Year 25 Edward Byrne, a memorial justice assistant grant application program. If approved, it would fund the purchase of technology and equipment such as projectors, conferencing cameras, switches, control panels, cabling and hardware for the real-time crime center. Third is the Fiscal Year 26 Snow Water Supply Forecasting Program.
If approved, it would fund laser snowpack surveys of the six creeks watershed during the snow seasons between January 2027 and March 2029 to increase accuracy of forecasting. Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you Sylvia. Taylor, can you begin with our first public comment on these items? Thank you Mr. Chair. We do not have anyone registered to speak to these items.
I will need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the Council close the public hearing and referralize G1 to G3 to a future consent agenda for action. I have a motion by Council Member Dugan and seconded by Council Member Pietro. Is there any discussion? I would like to highlight Senator Curtis for always his partnership with our city and his incredible good demeanor to listen to our concerns.
So it's actually amazing to see him advocating for something that is very needed in this case. I wanted to highlight that for ourselves I guess. So I have a motion on the table by Council Member Dugan and Council Member Pietro. There is no further discussion. I'm going to call the questions. All of those in favor say aye.
Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Now we are in item G4 which is in ordinance for the Budget Amendment No. 5 for Fiscal Year 2025 and 2026. We begin taking comments but before that I'm going to turn the time to Austin Kimmel, Council Policy Analyst to give us a short introduction. Austin. Thanks Council Members.
This is a public hearing for Budget Amendment No. 5 for Fiscal Year 26. This Budget Amendment includes 28 proposed amendments with about 104.3% revenues and just over 112.2 million in expenditures. It also proposes adding 13 FTEs for the Police Department. Last week the Administration resubmitted the Budget Amendment with an additional item that I'd like to mention.
That item is a budget neutral rescope of $3 million in approved CIP funding for the Civic Campus which encompasses Washington Square and Library Square. The current scope is limited to the public right of way improvements along 200 East between Washington Square and Library Square. This amendment would expand the use of those funds to include improvements to the interior block of the Civic Center Campus such as potential playgrounds, plaza, gathering space and other enhancements.
Thanks. Thank you Taylor. Austin, see you. Taylor can you begin with our first comment? Mr. Chair we don't have anyone registered to speak to this item. Well that's surprising. Any other motion? Mr. Chair I move that the Council close the public hearing and adopt the following items 8-2 which is the important related police expense and revenues and defer action on the remaining items.
I have a motion by Councillor Mardugan and a seconder by Councillor Mabry-Pitro. Any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. about compensation for elected and statutory officers, as well as executive municipal officers.
This includes the city's elected officials, as well as department directors and other statutorily required officers. Closing this hearing does not adjust pay. That would happen when the council adopts the final budget later in June. Thank you, Jennifer. Taylor, can you begin with our first public comment? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We don't have anyone registered to speak to this item. Well, I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I'm going to let the council close the public hearing for the item to a future date for action. You're on fire. Second. Wow. Council Member Dugan for a motion again. And Council Member Pietro for the second. Is there any discussion?
All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Our next public hearing are items G6 through G22. And there are ordinances and resolutions that are associated with the implementation of the mayor's recommended budget for select city, including the library fund for fiscal year 2026, 2027.
These are our second public hearing.
Before we begin taking comments, I would like to turn the time again to Jennifer Bruno, our council executive director to give us an introduction. Jennifer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The council considers all ordinances relating to the fiscal year budget in one public hearing as they are all needed collectively to implement the mayor's recommended fiscal year 27 budget, including the library.
Tonight's public hearing addresses items G6 through G22. The various ordinances set property tax rates and the budget levels. They address fees and compensation among other items. For the public's information, those that may not be aware, departments are discussed in detail at each of the council's public work sessions through May and June, which typically start at 1 or 2 p.m.
Recordings of those discussions as well as staff reports are available on the council's website.
An analysis of each department is on the council's website. That link is link.slc.gov forward slash SLC FY27.
Thanks. Thank you, Jennifer. Taylor, can you begin a first poll comment? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have about 10 people registered to speak to this item. The first will be Chris Butler, followed by Barbara Baz-Juman and then Michael Crow. Chris, you may now unmute. Hi, so I'm here to talk about the police budget. And so I just think it's just another outrageous amount that we're giving to the police.
And it's gross that we just keep raising it year after year when so many times we see and like studies come out that police themselves are not the ones keeping us safe or preventing crime.
And so just some of the things that like we're talked about in Chief Red's talk for the council was like the drone program being piloted. And one of the big takeaways I found of that is that the police just aren't needed in most situations. And so like by just seeing a situation, it's clear that the police are not who should be helping.
And so I think why are we not investing more into social workers or other options that are sent that are clearly the better option? Instead, we're just pouring money into the police when we could fund more mental health, things to help end chronic homelessness, improving public transit. Always that we know can reduce crime.
I also just am concerned that a drone with a camera is being flown around the city when it didn't get told to us what happens with that footage. If like an innocent person or just random people, innocent or not are being filmed there. And I think that just feels like it's easy to abuse. And then the last thing is just that crime is supposed to be down, but they don't really say like, is the police the one solving these crimes?
And is it because of the police? So I just really like more clarity on that from the police because you can see what crimes are being committed, but the police don't ever show you how many are being solved and things like that. And I'm out of time, so thank you.
Next will be Barbara Basznajin and then Michael Crow followed by Matthew Morris, Barbara is here in person. You can begin. Okay. My name is Barbara Basznajin, I'm from Salt Lake City. I'd like to thank the council members for your time and your consideration. And I'd like to thank Kat Andra from the Department of Public Lands.
And I'd like to thank Rachel Molinari for guiding me through the CIP application. I'm here to talk about a CIP project, Median Conversion to Parklet. It's number 64 in the mayor's budget and it's located in District 6. The credit goes to Kat Andra from the Department of Public Lands. She brought focus to the idea and created a projected budget of $52,000.
First and foremost, critical infrastructure improvements must be completed. New, curb and gutter will bring the median to current code height regulations. New irrigation to support drought, tolerant landscaping will replace aging, turf, watered with overhead spray. Trees, a bench and landscape boulders will complete the project and create an inviting neighborhood gathering space.
This project requires a little bit of imagination because we're asking for a park where currently a park does not exist. However, similar parklets have been implemented throughout our neighborhood and we're looking to continue this trend and create a place of beauty. I have a letter of support from the East Bench Community Council fully supporting this project and I have over a hundred signatures gathered from residents of Skyline Drive, Wausach Drive, Foothill Drive, 1700 South and Kensington Avenue, also fully in support of this project.
This neighborhood green space could benefit from improvements, a relatively small investment, will pack a big punch. Thank you on behalf of our community and you can see what we have and this is what we're hoping to avoid, which is paving over a.
And next will be Michael Crow followed by Matthew Morris and then Jack Willite. Michael is here in person. My name is Michael Crow, residents of Salt Lake City's 2nd District and we're your rider of Utah Trans Authority's bus tracks and front-runner network. We're moving back here in June last year. I lived in the, I lived in the Chicago Line area and would regularly have to debate what transit pass I needed for the month that best reflected my ever-changing transportation needs.
Once I found out about the HIVE pass, I became a massive supporter program and while I have been getting my fares covered by my U-card as a part-time employee of the University of Utah since October, my HIVE pass gave me the affordability I needed to freely get around the city and region via transit before then. While I'm no longer on the program, I may appreciate knowing that if I ever lose my position with the University of Utah, that I have an affordable means of accessing public transit services I rely on, especially as someone who has a job calls all across the region.
That's why I came as a major shock, that funding for the HIVE pass is being cut this year after over a decade of existence. I understand it has a low user base and many residents of the city like myself already get transferred covered by their employer, but I believe that there's more of a case of potential users of the past not knowing about it.
Even as an avid public transit advocate, I did not know about the program for two months after moving here. Reducing the amount of use I got for the past down in just three months before I got my U-card. This is evident when you look at the city's social media accounts as the last post I could find regarding the program was over two years ago, which they choosing not even advertise the past an alternative way to paying for continuing increasing grass prices.
In fact, the most viewed post about the HIVE pass was posted recently prior to its termination announcement came not from the city, but from a YouTube video by co-founder of the Rio Grande Plan Christian Lenhart. Back in September, when the city raised the cost of parking downtown, I commended the decision as a way to continue funding alternative forms of transportation, specifically the HIVE pass.
Now, the HIVE has been cut and appears and not all the funding is being reallocated into providing accessible transportation options. I'm questioning where those additional revenue streams are going. I understand raising the cost similar to what has been done with the EcoPass and Vineyard. And thank you. And next will be Matthew Morris, followed by Jack Willite, and then John Rossog.
Matthew is here in person. Good evening, Chairman Puis and members of the council. My name is Matthew Morris and I live in Glendale, District 2. I'm here in support of a constituent capital improvement program proposal, the active transportation user improvement project. I'm asking for you to fund this project. This is a resident submitted project born out of our Glendale neighborhood council meetings.
Neighbors have voiced their opinions of what routes and roads scare them, and we're trying to respond to this feedback. Every day, schools and families watch their kids crossing California Avenue, a fast street, to reach the dual immersion academy in other schools with almost no crossing protection. Glendale carries a heavy load, three highways, a freight rail line, the highest social vulnerability rating in the city, and a history of disinvestment going back to redlining.
We're only asking for small fixes here, a trail crossing where the JRT crosses California, a speed table, raised crosswalks, a curb extension near the dual immersion academy, that these will directly protect lives in our neighborhood. And this isn't just a wish list, it's aligned with the city's own Connect Salt Lake City Transportation Plan, and backed by our neighborhood council's letter of support with the proposal.
I wanna be clear that this proposal could be staged if full funding is tight in this cycle, we'd ask you to start with our two highest priorities, the Jordan River Trail Crossing on California Avenue, and then improvements right at the dual immersion academy, and phase the rest as resources allow. We'd ask that you please fund this project.
Thank you very much for your time. Next will be Jack Willite followed by John Roswag, and then Scott Johnson. Jack was here in person. Okay, yes. Jack Willite, I'm from Conwood Heights, Utah, and I'm here to discuss, or just please let you understand how I feel about the water rating increase for the was, that went through in 2026, and also another rate increase going in effect in 2027.
Personally, my water rates went up 33% in 2026, and now the city is proposing another rate increase. I don't know what it's gonna be, I would assume it's probably 10 to 50, but if you add the two numbers together, we're almost at 50% rate increase on water usage. To me, I feel, and I don't have any necessarily proof, but anytime you have large rate increases like this, to me this shows a lack of planning and management on part of the public utility.
Okay, for example, we're stating that we're gonna have increase our rates again, because the infrastructure that we use in Conwood Heights is 70 years old. Well, it didn't become a problem last year. It was a problem from day one, right? So where's the preventative? Where is money being spent on preventative uses? What are we doing?
What does the rainy day fund look like for potential costs on replacing projects? Not just repair, but replacement. I have a very concern there. My feeling is, as that is a city, the number, the most important functions of city government is one to be financial, fiscally strong, and then proper oversight of those funds.
Number two, public safety, three infrastructure. If we don't have those three, we do not have a well-functioning city, and we don't have a well-functioning public utilities. And unfortunately, I'm fine. Next is John Rosshogg, followed by Scott Johnson, and then Greta Millet, John T. Remberson. Yeah, thanks. I'm John Rosswag, so District 6, also chair of the Wasatch Hollow Community Council, then on that leadership team for going on six years.
So I can tell you a very important topic that's come up again and again in our meetings. And I'm gonna speak towards a capital improvement project that we, a proposal we submitted, is the off-leash dog area of Wasatch Hollow Park, and the times that's used, and how it's being used. So in short, we submitted a proposal for SIP grant to have a fixed-in half acre of the park.
So we figured that'd be the best compromise to, for all the people that still wanna use it, it's very popular off-leash area to use in Salt Lake City, that they can still use it. But other people that are just walking their dogs that need to walk them on leash, or use the park without having to not use off-leash area, can still use the park.
So we would love to have that support, and I think it's a good compromise. And we had it devoted on in our meeting, that passed 28 to not have a, then stand area that's half acre. So that's all I have to say. So thanks. Next is Scott Johnson, followed by Greta Millet, and then Leslie Trezkri. Scott is your first. Hi, good evening.
Tonight I'm speaking on an evergreen issue that affects both current and recent past city decisions. Over the last two years, citizens have repeatedly been asked to trust important claims, supporting billions of dollars of public spending decisions. City and private leaders have said pulling supported those decisions, that economic analyses supported those decisions, that academic peer review supported those decisions, that elected officials studied comparable projects in other cities.
And now during the current budget process, city leaders are asking citizens to trust revenue forecasts, and assumptions behind tax increases that will shape future spending and public services, and quality of life for all residents and visitors to the city. The common thread here is transparency. The city's budget documents state that revenue forecast rely on historical trends, simulation models, ongoing monitoring of collections, et cetera.
Those methods all may be entirely reasonable, but public confidence depends on the ability to review the assumptions underlying those forecasts. On May 11th, I submitted a grammar request seeking records related to those forecasts and methodologies. After the required 10 business day period, the city responded that the request could not be fulfilled until a full month later, after the first submission next Thursday, June 11th.
That delay is just the latest example of troubling pattern of public officials providing too little transparency to foundational background information too late, if ever. The larger the decisions, the greater the importance that the public have timely access to the information used to justify them. Every new delay or obfuscation serves to undermine the public's trust.
This evergreen issue requires this council's leadership to ensure its stated commitment to the principal transparency. Thank you for your time. Next is Greta Millet, followed by Leslie Trebetsky, and then Shannon Wolfe. Greta is here in person. Thank you, thanks for being here. My name is Greta Millet. I live on 2000 East in Salt Lake City, which is east of the Sugar House Park.
I represent a CIP project. The road between approximately 2280 South and 2300 South
becomes very, very wide. It's about triple S Street. And in part of that is the entrance to what was once Rosalind Heights Elementary and is now Rosalind Heights Sports Complex, which is primarily there, it's owned by the Salt Lake City School District and it's primarily for Highland High, which is undergoing rebuild over the next several years.
Following the rebuild, this will become, it will still be used by the district, but will primarily be open to the public in a more public manner. Currently, this wide part of the road doesn't even have a crosswalk. And my proposal puts in a safety island. That's not the safe part, but what it does is will allow traffic calming and better way to funnel traffic back and forth on 20th East, which is a major thoroughfare from that area, and also allow for a crosswalk,
which will help with this really populated park. It is open to the neighborhood, and it is used every day by, I can't tell you how many people, it is an absolute joy, but it does present quite a safety issue and speed issue on this road. And so that is my proposal to quiet and calm that traffic, to funnel traffic, and an island would be cute.
So if we're being honest, it would look really nice, but would be low maintenance. So thank you for your time. Next will be Leslie Trebetsquay, followed by Shannon Wolfe and then Corbina Miller. Leslie is here in person. Good evening.
I'm a citizen, I've been here my whole life.
I've lived in a couple locations currently. I'm on 60th and 8th South, both my residents, and I'm a small business owner.
I have paid property tax on that property for 30 years.
And all I'm getting is more property tax increases at the same time. Other taxes are going up, utilities are going up, and I see the city going in a direction of making a person of my age and my potential retirement years coming up, making it unaffordable for me to live in the city that I love so much that I've been here 65 years.
There's plenty of things, the ideas, opinions, if you want to talk to someone who's been watching the corner of 8th South and 60s for 30 years, and I'm available there at Arts of the World Gallery. Next will be Shannon Wolfe, followed by Corbina Miller. Shannon, you may know, I mean. I'm a resident of Fair Park and a user of the Hyde Pass, and I can't believe the city would get rid of it.
It won't use public transit if it is discontinued, and I can't imagine the city wants more cars on the road. For my main comment though, I want to talk about the proposal to increase police funding. I'm disgusted by that proposal to increase police funding when there are people in our city without housing, without access to food, without access to necessary healthcare, including mental health and substance abuse treatment.
Please do not solve any of these issues. Instead, they target and harass our poorest residents. They implement the city's clear policy of jailing rather than housing the homeless. All of these officers do not keep us safe. Instead, they target and arrest poor people for things like riding tracks without a ticket. And I can't prove the life of me understand why we would invest in policing tracks, rather than using the money we waste in our police department to make tracks free for everyone, where everyone would benefit.
The police also arrest people commonly for sitting on the grass across from the courthouse, across from my bus stop, all over town, and they call it criminal trespassing. And when they do this, they show up in unjustifiable numbers. I commonly see and document a commonly eight police patrol vehicles surrounding one person who looks like they're experiencing homelessness and taking them into custody.
Eight patrol vehicles, eight police officers, to respond to class B misdemeanor non-violent conduct. How could we possibly justify this? It is a gross use of my taxpayer dollars currently. And I can't imagine that we would look to increase the amount that we spend to do this. What possible reason could we have to add more money to the police when they're already everywhere downtown and on the West Side?
The poor parts of our city are crawling with our police department. I strongly urge the council to use the money to invest in the community rather than this police surveillance state. And next will be Cabrina Miller, who is here, verse. Hello, I just have a question about why we're not really rising to meet inflation.
We make cuts and the efficiencies is in everything. But if we just keep making cuts every year, it makes sense to the rises in taxes because everyone should be inflated at the same rate. But if we're just gonna rely on cuts every year, it doesn't feel like we're rising to meet inflation. That was the final registered commentary for this item.
Okay, thank you. Thank you all of you that made a comment. If you didn't finish your comment or if you wanna follow up or if you want to add to it, please refer to the council staff. If you're here in person, if you're online, you can reach out to us through mail, email, or our phone line and we'll get back to you.
I need a motion on this section of the agenda. Mr. Chair, I moved at the council close the public hearing and refer the items G6 through G22 to a future date for action. Second. We got a shy there to start, but council member Young for the motion and council member Wharton for the second, is there any discussion? No discussion.
I would like to say that for those that commented on specific CIP requests, every year we've received a lot of incredible projects from the community. There are very few cities that actually have a CIP program where neighbors can actually propose specific improvements in their own neighborhoods.
And we do have one and it's a well-established one and we make good on many of those every year. We cannot fund all of the things. So if your CIP project doesn't get funded this year, don't give up. Just keep on submitting it. There's many of the CIP projects from the West side, from my part of town that took many years to get it done and those neighbors didn't give up.
And while frustrating, I get it, we're trying to make good with the limited funds we have. So I just wanted to highlight that piece. I think it's important. Council member Young made the motion. Wharton made the second. All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Now we are on potential action items, which there is none, and then a new business, which I, new business item one, for just a resolution,
fair and transparent method for elimination of district four vacancy applicants. And I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the council adopt the resolution. Second. Motion by Council Member Dugan and second by Council Member Carlson. Is there any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
This motion carries unanimously, and I would like to highlight the recorder's office. The amazing work have put together in the last few weeks to receive the applicants for the vacancy in this council. And we are following the state law on how selecting the applicant for the district four seat.
So we are looking forward to hearing from all of them in the next meeting.
There is no unfinished business, but there is consent. There is a big, large consent agenda, portion of the agenda, and I need a motion. Move for approval. Second. Motion by Council Member Wharton, second by Council Member Pietro. Any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Now we're going to the L portion of the agenda, which is general comments or comments.
And other questions to the mayor from the City Council. Thank you Council Mayor Stafford for being here today. And we're now on the general comment portion of the agenda. This section is for the public to comment on any city business, not scheduled for a public hearing today. It is limited to a maximum of one hour, and only those individuals who have registered before 730 may be able to join in.
Our meetings rules apply here. Remember avoid disruptions or threats. And if you need assistance, ask staff member to assist you. Please avoid profanity, personal attacks, intimidation, discriminatory language, and because there are no persuasive or compelling to this Council, there are no helpful to create a respectful or safe environment.
As we have done recently, we're going to be calling the names and the order they signed up. When your name is called, much like we just did, unmute yourself if you're in Zoom. If not, you can just, you know, if your name is called, you can join here in front of us. If you didn't finish your comment in the two minutes, you can send us the rest of your comment.
And if you're having technical issues in Zoom, even if you need assistance, message, staff support, an act, Shay, who is a staff member who can assist you.
Now, Taylor, can you begin with our first public general comment? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have one person registered. That will be Kylie Hanson. Kylie, you may not unmute. Thank you, yes. I also would like to comment on the public spending on the police budget and the increase of the police budget from around 134 million to 142 million year-over-year from 2026 budget.
This would reflect over the time since Merriman and Hal tick office, and almost 70% increased in the police budget. And as a Salt Lake City resident, this is very upsetting, knowing that there has not been a 70% increase in crime, at least if there has been. That seems like something that should be addressed more transparently.
But frankly, there's been no transparency in how these funds are being spent and why we're willing to make cuts in every other way to library spending, water spending, utilities, and all these other critical services that so many other people have spoken about today, making public transit accessible, making sure we have access to green spaces, safer roads, and making sure that people's basic needs for housing and water are met.
But somehow there's no transparency around why we would need such a large increase to our police budget and why inflation seems to be impacting every other area of our budget, except this one where we seemingly have funds to spare every single year. So I just encourage more transparency of the City Council and of the mayoral office to help constituents understand where these funds are really being spent.
Thank you.
And that was the final registered commentary.
Thank you, everybody, for being here for your comments. This concludes the Salt Lake City Council meeting for today. This Council formal meeting now stands adjourned.
Nick Tarbit at 747.
Nick Tarbit.
Nick Tarbit, collector of laws, 747.
Well done.
Audio streams from the city’s repository on demand — press play, or click any sentence, to start it.
This transcript does not identify who is speaking. Paragraph breaks follow pauses in the recording, not changes of voice, so a single paragraph can contain more than one person — and does, where people talk over each other. The transcript is produced automatically from the city’s published audio, is not an official record, and contains recognition errors, especially on names and dollar figures. The audio is the source: every sentence plays the moment it came from so you can check it.