What was said · Salt Lake City
Revised LBA, CRA and Council Formal Meeting
Wednesday, May 6, 2026 — the full transcript. Click any sentence to hear it.
Welcome everyone to the local building authority of Salt Lake City. We have a few items to discuss. Item A1 which is welcome you to the 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 tonight as the City Council, we're going to have some items as the local building authority agenda.
So we're going to have this multiple agendas going on. We bear with us while we go through the process of getting the business of the city done. We're also going to have some work for the community reinvestment agency board. Please join us for the Pledge of Allegiance please. As the local building authority, we are now at the LBA unfinished business item B1 which is a resolution for the tentative budget for the capital projects fund of the local building authority for fiscal year 2026, 2027.
I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the board approve the resolution adopting the tentative budget for the capital project fund of the local building authority of Salt Lake City, Utah for fiscal year 2026, 27. Second. I have a motion by Council Member, but by Council Member Dugan and second by Council Member Carlson, all those in favor say aye.
Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Now we are going to adjourn. Let's ask, I need a motion to adjourn the LBA and then re-investment agency board. So moved. I'll do. Do you want to? Is that enough? Is that enough? Mr. Chairman, that we adjourn our meeting as the local building authority and re-convene as the community reinvestment agency.
Second. I have a motion to adjourn as the LBA and re-convene as the reinvestment agency board. Council Member Wern with the motion and second by Council Member Pietro. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously with one Council Member missing. Now we are going, we ask the Salt Lake City Community reinvestment agency meeting and I will like everybody to help us with the sound and the meeting to get this business done fast.
Item D1 is a resolution for the tentative budget for the community reinvestment agency of Salt Lake City for fiscal year 2026-2027. I need a motion. Mr. Chair, move that the board approve the resolution adopting the tentative budget for the community reinvestment agency of Salt Lake City for fiscal year 2026-27. Second.
I have a motion by Council Member Dugan. By board member Dugan and the second by board member Young. Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. We are going to adjourn. Now as the CRA and I need a motion to adjourn as the CRA and to reconvene as the Salt Lake City Council.
Mr. Chair, I move that we adjourn as the community reinvestment agency and reconvene as the Salt Lake City Council. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Warren and the second by board member Lopez Chavez. Any discussion on this? All those in favor say aye. Aye. This motion carries unanimously. Now we have reconvened as the Council meeting.
And we go through the process to make sure that we are approving some of the budgets that have been discussed in the work sessions and previous meetings. Thank you for everybody for joining us tonight. Before we move through the agenda, I want to quickly go through registration information and share the reasoning about how and why we chair these meetings the way we do it.
We welcome everyone regardless of your opinion or side on any 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 and it 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 meeting can continue and we can conduct this scheduled city business. We invite each of you to contribute to this space, to speak your mind and to welcome others to do the same. In order to create this welcoming and safe space, we will pass the meeting at any action that causes disruption to our ability to conduct the meeting or any safety concern involving threats or unprotected speech.
If there are repeated actions or comments, it may result in removal from the meeting. To avoid intimidating others, please avoid the usual threatening and discriminatory language. Do you want to insult others based on religion, ethnicity, race, color, gender, sexual orientation and physical ability? Do you agree or disagree with someone's comment?
Clapping, cheering, shouting, booing, snapping, gesturing, obstructing or discouraging others from commenting, it is not allowed. As a reminder, as Council members, we will 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 Council staff in person here in the room or you can message us through the Zoom chat for those that are online. 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.
The staff are available during or after the meeting to help with any questions or information sharing. The full meeting rules are listed at the door and our staff are going to post them on the Zoom link. As a reminder of our public comment registration process, individuals may register to comment on scheduled public hearing items up to until the hearing is closed.
For the general comment section, we will accept sign-ups until 7.30 pm. The general comment section is limited to a maximum of 1 hour and would only include commenters who registered before 7.30. So if you are here to give your general comment, please sign up and remember that it is possible that not everyone who signed up may be able to speak.
Now we are going to go to some of the items. That brings us to item F2 which is the Council will approve the retreat meeting minutes of January 7, 2026 and the work session minutes of January 20, 2026, February 10, 2026, February 17, 2026 and the formal meeting minutes of January 20, 2026 and February 3, 2026. I need a motion.
For approval. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Warden and a second by Council Member Doubins. All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Next, we are going to have our Mayor, Mayor Manuel present the proposed City, Select City budget including the Library Fund for Fiscal Year 2026, 2027.
We welcome you Mayor. The floor is yours. Thank you Council. Good evening to the City Council, to our City staff, Council staff and all of my fellow Salt Lakers. I know you are all here to hear the budget speech tonight. Thank you for being here and to everybody who is tuning in online. Thank you for listening in as well.
This is my seventh budget proposal and some may assume that it is a process that gets easier each time that you go through it. The truth is it does not. Each year this responsibility asks us to take an honest look at the moment that we are in. Listen closely to our residents and make discipline decisions about how we serve the City.
This year that work has been especially difficult. It is required months of complicated calculations and a gross cut from every administrative department, even as the demand for our services continues to grow. This budget reflects current reality, a time when federal funding to municipalities is shrinking, when fuel and materials are becoming more and more expensive and when inflation continues to impact households and businesses alike.
Since 2020, when I began this job, the cost of groceries is increased by 31%. Medical care is up 16%. Car insurance is risen by 55%. Salt Lakers know this. You felt it. We all have felt it. Unfortunately, these rising costs don't stop at the household level. We are also driving up the cost of delivering the basic services our city depends upon.
I will give you a few examples. In 2020, a full set of firefighter gear that includes the coat, pants, full hood, boots, gloves and a helmet cost $3,784. Today that equipment costs $4,656. More than $900 increase. Six years ago, we paid $44 per tonne of asphalt to fill potholes. Today that cost $64 per tonne. In 2020, replacing traffic signals at an intersection of two city streets cost about $250,000.
Today that same work is $500,000. Let me be clear, these are not optional expenses. We will not stop fighting fires, filling potholes or maintaining safe intersections. But we must be honest about what it takes to do these things well. This budget has had to hold two truths at the same time. The first is that salt lakers are already feeling stretched.
Every added cost matters. And every decision we make as a city has to respect that. The second truth is that the services residents rely on are also becoming more expensive to provide. Holding both truths at once is not easy, but it is necessary. And it is why, even in a constrained year, this budget continues to invest in the things that make Salt Lake City livable.
This proposal invests nearly $10 million in our continued affordable housing efforts, because we know stability begins with a place to live. It's that kind of sustained commitment, thank you counsel for your support over the years, that has brought us to an exciting milestone as a city. As of last week, Salt Lake City has helped fund more than 1,000 family sized affordable apartments.
This proposal includes $11 million for streets maintenance along with $1.5 million to ensure our sidewalks and our street crossings meet ADA standards, because safe accessible streets are not optional. And it invests $11.3 million in our park system and its continued maintenance. That includes improvements to Glendale, Washington, and Sugar House parks, and new restrooms in areas with the highest need, because public spaces are essential to quality of life in every single neighborhood.
These are meaningful investments, but they're also disciplined ones, focused on the services, infrastructure, and public spaces our residents rely on every day. This budget is fiscally responsible, strategically allocated, and disciplined in how it uses every dollar. It reflects months of incredibly hard work to find efficiencies, reduce costs, and prioritize the services our residents most rely upon.
But even after all of the work, the cost of maintaining core services has outpaced the revenue that's available to fund them. This year, I'm proposing a general fund budget of $498,863,053, which is a 1.57% increase from last year. That includes a property tax increase of 12.5%, which will raise a total of $13.5 million.
To be clear, this does not mean a 12.5% increase to a resident's entire property tax bill. Salt Lake City is just one of several taxing entities, and the increase only would apply to the city's portion. We did not arrive at this proposal quickly or casually. We exhausted every other option before proposing increases to property taxes and fees.
What remains after this are choices none of us want to make, laying off dozens of city employees, cutting services saltlakers depend upon or delaying infrastructure that we need in the next 20 years. For the next 20 years. Before we considered a tax increase, we cut $13.2 million through department-wide cooperation and efficiency.
We kept vacant positions open for longer. We elected in some cases not to rehire at all, which led to more than $6 million in savings. Over the coming year, we project an additional $3 million in vacancy savings. The public services department reduced $2 million through operational efficiencies and contract savings, in part because last year you helped us invest in the clean city team, which reduced our reliance on outside contracts.
We saved $1.3 million of funding for city golf courses thanks to increased play and the resulting revenue there. By the end of this fiscal year, Salt Lake City Police will have saved more than $1 million in overtime pay thanks to Chief Red bringing the department up to full staffing, savings that will continue into the FY27 budget to the tune of $667,000.
Plus we anticipate police efficiencies to continue as we add a new squad dedicated to the west side, which is being paid for entirely by public safety investments from the Utah Inland Port Authority. Every administrative department in the general fund found some way to save more, spend less, or pause hiring. That came with trade-offs and many of them were painful.
One of the hardest decisions was the decision not to implement any across-the-board cost of living salary increase or COLA for city employees. Instead, we're prioritizing targeted raises for frontline workers and those whose wages are currently below market rate. Again, among the options we explored, the choice was between this and mass layoffs.
It was not a choice we made lightly. We've also explored other revenue options that would shift more of the cost the city bears onto visitors who use our infrastructure and our services. To be transparent with you, I had hoped to include some of those options in this budget proposal, but they are complex and they will require more time for us to thoroughly develop them.
I wasn't comfortable building a budget with revenue that I'm not confident we can implement. The work of exploring those new revenue options will continue over the next year. After all of those decisions were made, we still needed $13.5 million, which is where the proposed city property tax increase of 12.5% comes from.
For a typical household that is valued at $624,000, that property tax increase amounts to $9.87 per month. And the let me break down where every cent of that $9.87 goes. $0.17 is for targeted lighting maintenance in our parks and our public spaces. $0.37 for sustainability's environment and energy division, which protects our natural resources, reduces pollution, and improves air quality in our communities.
$0.58 to ensure that youth and family services youth city program continues to provide support for kids and young families. $0.78 for maintaining the fleet that keeps the city running from our snowplows to our emergency response vehicles. $0.82 toward the ongoing maintenance of our new parks, trails, and public lands.
$1.11 toward the city's criminal justice efforts, including coordinated investments in legal defenders, prosecutors, and our justice court, because those systems only work when they are resourced together. $1.32 for fire response and prevention, including the staffing for Fire Truck 3, a civilian fire inspector and vegetation management to reduce our wildfire risk.
And finally, $4.73 to capital improvements essential to maintaining the infrastructure our city depends upon every day. The city property tax proposal addresses general funds services. But some of the city's most essential systems are funded separately through your utility and other service rates. Outside of the general fund, this budget proposal also includes adjustments to public utility and waste and recycling rates.
For a typical single family household with low water use, that would amount to monthly increases of about $14 for water, $11 for sewer, $3 for waste and recycling, $2.60 for street lighting and $1.75 for storm water. I know that this is a lot to hear and I know these increases will be difficult for many salt acres to absorb.
I know your electric bill is going up because ours is too. I know you're paying more for gas because so are we. I also know that waiting on these increases would only make these costs higher. The infrastructure that most people never see, especially our water and our sewer treatment systems, is aging and its maintenance is very expensive.
But it's not nearly as expensive as its failure would be. Across the country, we've seen what can happen when aging water infrastructure fails. The hard reality is that many communities are facing critical water needs with too few resources to address them. Salt Lake City will not wait for failure to force our hand. We're taking steps now to rehabilitate the water infrastructure that nearly 400,000 people rely upon.
And the fact is, most of what you pay for isn't the water itself. It's the system that makes the sinks run and the toilets flush every single day, no matter what. It's the system that makes sure every fire hydrant is ready to use in any emergency. And it's the system that protects our community from extreme flooding. The same system that makes sure the water that flows to the Great Salt Lake is clean and treated for pollutants.
That system is our responsibility. It's one we take seriously and one we cannot ignore. So whether you use 500 gallons of water, the pipes, the treatment plants, the tests, and the crews still have to be there every day. And while the system itself must be maintained every day, our individual water use still matters. Households do have some control over that part of the bill.
So beginning now and continuing through the summer, the city is offering free water checks to households or commercial properties who need help making their lawn irrigations more efficient. And through our partnership with Utah State University, we want to help you learn ways to cut down on your outdoor watering and to save money.
And if you need extra support, we also have a number of financial assistance and tax abatement programs available. You can check our website or you can call public utilities customer service line for more information on eligibility and how to apply. Water, sewer, storm drains, fire hydrants, trash, recycling, those are the fundamentals.
These are the services people depend upon every single day. This budget ensures we can continue delivering them reliably, responsibly, and without compromise. It's also shaped by the people who use these services every day. I want to close by thanking Salt Lakers for their input and ideas and the feedback that have helped create this budget proposal.
Your voices are reflected in the projects that we are proposing to the Council to fund, including three pedestrian safety projects that started with residents seeing a need in their own neighborhoods and speaking up. As of you, this year's CIP or capital improvement program. The budget for CIP includes funding for street crossing safety improvements near Rose Park Elementary School.
It includes funding for the 17th South neighborhood byway crossings by Whittier Elementary School. It includes funding for sidewalks near Highland Park Elementary School, especially where there are none on Atkin Avenue and Kenwood Street. There are many other resident submitted projects that this budget includes funding for.
And thank you residents for your participation with those projects. This year is a year of constraints, but it is not a retreat from our responsibilities. This is a year of rising costs, but it's not one of lowering our standards. And this is a year when hard decisions now can help us avoid harder choices later. Because at the end of the day, this budget isn't about numbers on a page.
It's about whether a parent can trust that their child will get to school safely. It's about whether a neighborhood feels cared for. It's about whether the basics are there when we need them. Clean water, regular trash pickup, first responders and filled potholes. Because we know what's at stake if we don't act. We believe that taking care of this city.
It's people, infrastructure and its future is worth doing right. So thank you again council members and council staff for the work you are about to take on over the next many weeks to carefully consider finalize this budget and hear many, many public comments. And I look forward to hearing the public comments at the upcoming, I know we have official public comment opportunities May 19th and June 2nd as well as at the truth and taxation public hearing on August 11th.
Thank you for listening. Thank you mayor. As many of you know, the council will spend the next several weeks receiving briefings and discussing this proposed budget. Including the proposed property tax increase outline and the property tax impact schedule. Before we are ready to adopt an interim budget in June. We invite members of the public to tune into the budget briefings, attend the schedule public hearings and to share your feedback on these issues.
Thank you mayor and your staff for preparing this thoughtful recommended budget. I know that was a lot of work. Thank you for the time putting this together. I am going to allow for a brief five minute break right now for those that need to move around and my staff has indicated that they may be a need for a quick break.
So we reconvene at 735. We got this. I see you. I see you.
I have to do the room. Hello. What was his time? No. Okay. That sucks. That's a lot. That's a lot. I mean, I died for the feedback. It's the SLCTV for those that watch SLCTV know that music. It might be ingrained in our brains. So we are moving to the public hearing section of our agenda. These are specific proposals before the council that require public hearing.
Your comments should pertain to the hearing item. And if you go off topic, I will ask you to stop your comment. In order to protect this welcoming and safe space, we will pass the meeting. I don't need disruption to our ability to conduct the meeting or any safety concern involving threats or unprotected speech. If there are repeat actions or comments, it may result in the removal from the meeting.
Also, as a reminder, please avoid comments that include profanity, personal attacks, discriminatory language. Such comments can be intimidating for others, and they are no persuasive or compelling to the council. If you are in 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 muted. We will be calling the names in order of sign-ups. If you need staff assistance in the room, please raise your hand, and someone will be here with you to help you. If you are having technical issues in Zoom or need any other assistance, please message staff support and action from our staff can assist you.
If you are unable to finish your comment, please share the rest via email, mail, or call our office. Contact information is listed at slc.gov.counsel. If you have a handout for the council, please notify the council staff who will assist you. Now we are going to public hearing G1 through G4, which are grant applications, and will be heard as one public hearing.
Before we begin taking comments, I will turn the time over to Sylvia Richards, Council policy analyst to give us a short introduction. Sylvia? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Periodically, this city applies for and receives grants that fund various projects and programs. Each grant receives a public hearing allowing the public and the City Council to learn more about the grants.
There are four grants tonight. First is the fiscal year 27 community project funding grant application for police, public safety vehicles, sponsored by Representative Moore. If approved, it would fund the purchase of four transport vans and one operations management center vehicle, which will be used during emergencies, mass casualties, demonstrations, and larger events such as the Olympics.
And the LDS temple open house. Second is the 2026 Utah outdoor recreation regional asset tier one. If approved, it would fund the construction of a pump track, an adaptive pump track and skate park at Glendale park. Third is the Salt Lake City State Historic Preservation Office Cemetery grant. If approved, it would fund the purchase of a large format overhead scanner to digitize years of historic records.
And fourth is the fiscal year 25 emergency management performance grant. If approved, it would fund the purchase of hardware and accessories needed for redundant backup communications plans for the fire department. Again, these are grants for which the city has applied. Thank you. Thank you, Sylvia. Taylor, can you please start with our first public comment?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have four people registered to speak to these items. The first will be Jen Colby followed by Isaiah Rodriguez and then Dave Ilthis. Jen is here in person. Jen Colby district four. I just wanted to comment that I just don't think that this first grant for the so-called public safety vehicles is a wise investment of public tax dollars, especially given our federal budget is way deeper in the hole than the city's one is.
And we really need to see our representatives repeal that big budget busting bill. I don't think these properly address the actual public safety needs of our community. And I think they actually undermine the relationships between our community and our public safety officials. I really think, especially when we're looking at things like mass casualties, our biggest ones are going to be earthquakes or perhaps a horrific fire like we saw in LA.
Those are really, we need the funding for the fire department, not for these transport vans. What are they transporting? What are they doing? That sounds a lot more like ICE fans to me because a lot of my cousins and a lot of my family live in Minnesota and have been suffering through the last several months of assaults in their community.
These kind of vans are the kind of things that make people incredibly nervous when we're talking about being addressed for demonstrations and large events. I don't know, did any of you go to the Olympics? I thought that was the most wonderful, joyful, non-threatening event we made up for our corruption scandal, thanks to the wonderful volunteers that welcome the world here.
Our biggest threat to the Olympics is the climate emergency that really is not being addressed by this Committee on Commerce, Justice and Science, so-called Committee these days. The Latter-day Saints Temple Open House, I think as well, is going to be a very wonderful event with many, both devote, devout members and also people who are just curious and interested in history and the history of the city.
So none of this makes the slightest bit of sense to me. We have far bigger needs and I would ask you to ask our representative to fund proper things that would actually address public safety. Thank you. No, no, no, nothing. Next comment. Next is Isaiah Rodriguez, followed by Dave Iltas, I'm Rachel Rayner. Isaiah is here in person.
Hello. First, I just want to say I am not a representative or an official capacity a part of AFSCME. I'm just hearing solidarity of them. So I wanted to make a public comment about G1, the COPS grant. The COPS grant, I think, is definitely something we should probably be saying no to. For a few reasons that the person before me mentioned, but not only because of that, you'll see that representative Blake Moore is in big support of this.
And I think it's very interesting because last week on Wednesday on the house floor, he said he was basically willing to get CPP, CPP and DHS funding no matter how he needs to do it. When I look at something like this, that right there is exactly how he does so. Through city ordinances or city funding from grants that on the surface seem not so bad, but can be used against us very quickly.
If we're not careful. That being said, I definitely think that I don't have confidence that these won't be used for detention purposes. I mean, we have officers that sit at the ICE facility or soon to be ICE facility about 14 squatters deep right now as is. So I don't see any reason why we wouldn't be collaborating with them in the future on these things.
I mean, I don't really need to commit. But I mean, those are really just as good as words on paper. Thank you. And next is Dave Ilthiss followed by Rachel Rayner, David Teranpers. My name is Dave Ilthiss. I am commenting on item G2, the grant application for a pump track, adaptive pump track and skate park at Glendale Park.
I would ask that the council approve this. It's a great project idea. And Salt Lake City has a really strong adaptive sports community, adaptive wheeled sports community and a strong skate community. With this goes the dragging of the feet of Salt Lake City to work on opening the canal trail right next to Glendale Park, which is just languished for 10 years or more.
And this is tangential to this, but that needs to be opened so that the park is accessible by the people using the pump track, the adaptive pump track and the skate park. And maybe the council can put pressure on the administration to act upon that because they've just sat on their hands for years on that. So thank you.
And next is Rachel Rayner. Rachel, you may now unmute. Rachel? Okay. Taylor, was that our last comment? Yes, that was the final register, comment. Okay. Thank you. Everyone who made a comment today, I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the council close the public hearing and refer items G1 through G4 to a future consent agenda for action.
Second. I have a motion by Council Member Young and a second by Council Member Dugan. Any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. We are going now to item G5, which is in ordinance for the Fortune Road partial street vacation. We are going to turn the time to Brian Fulmer, our council policy analyst to give us a short introduction.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a proposal from the Thatcher Company to Kate or give up ownership of a portion of Fortune Road between the intersection with Wallace Road and approximately 2040 West. Thatcher owns all abutting parcels and stated its intent to consolidate the parcels and incorporate the street property into their campus.
If approved by the council, the applicant would purchase the street property at market value.
Thank you, Brian. Taylor, please start with our first public comment on this item. Mr. Chair, we have one person registered to speak to this item and that is Rachel Rayner again. Rachel, you may now unmute. Rachel? Okay. That being our last comment, I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move the council close the public hearing and refer action for future council meeting.
Second. I have a motion by Council Member Dugan and a second by Council Member Wharton. Is there any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Now we're going to item G6, which is an ordinance for the month of manner, zoning amendment. Before we begin taking comments, I'm going to turn the time again to Brian Fulmer, our council policy analyst to give us a short introduction.
This is a proposal to amend the zoning map for the property at 1726 South Jefferson Street and a portion of 1750 South Jefferson Circle from their current MU 11 or mixed use 11 and RMF 35, which is moderate density multifamily residential and respective zoning to MU 8. The housing authority of Salt Lake City owns the properties and intends to construct a multifamily residential development on the site.
Taylor, can you thank you for that introduction, Brian Taylor, can you begin with our first public comment? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have three people registered speak to this item. The first will be Amy Hawkins followed by Rachel Rayner. Amy is here in person. Hello, my name is Amy Hawkins. I have the pleasure of serving as chair of the ballpark community council and we appreciate your thoughtful attention to this proposal.
And we also want to say that we really appreciate the housing authority as being a wonderful community partner to us for decades in this neighborhood. We were puzzled that when the planning commission discussed this proposal in January, they recommended an up zone even higher than that of which the housing authority actually requested, which was MU 5.
The majority of these lots that are going to be consolidated are actually RMF 35. MU 5 would still represent an up zone on this site. At the time, planning commissioner suggested that MU 8 could provide continuity with adjacent zoning, but inserting MU 8 here is not a matter of it just matching the surrounding area that it's a little bit arbitrary.
These parcels are also one parcel away from two R15,000 single family lots. So without an updated master plan for this section of the neighborhood, and there is no master plan since the central community master plan, which I believe was 2002, this feels like a really arbitrary way to make zoning decisions. Mixed use neighborhoods are always going to be a hodgepodge of zoning types and defaulting to the highest zone without any master plan guiding that decision.
I just hope that we could be a little more purposeful and I'd love to go with the MU 5 zoning that the housing authority originally requested. Thank you for your time.
And the next we have registered is Rachel Rayner. Rachel, you may now unmute. Can we go to the next commenter for this item? Okay, that was the last commenter. Thank you. All of you that made a comment on this. I need a motion.
Mr. Chair, I move that the council close the public hearing and defer action to a future council meeting. I have a motion by Council Member Young and a second by Council Member Wharton. I'm going to call any discussion. I'm going to call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All of those in favor say aye. Any opposed?
That carries unanimously. We're moving on to item G7, which is a resolution for the honorary street renaming of the city-owned portion of 500,000.
Before we begin taking comments, Brian Fomer, Council President, this is going to give us a short introduction again. Thank you. This resolution would honor rarely name the city-owned portion of 500 south between State Street and 700 East, Dolores Huerta Boulevard, recognizing this for her work as an American labor leader and feminist activist.
She co-founded the National Farm Workers Association and organized farm workers and fought for better wages and working conditions. Thank you. Thank you, Brian. Taylor, can you begin with a first public comment on this item? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have two people registered to speak to this item. The first is Rachel Rayner and then Richard Barnes.
Rachel, if you may now unmute, if you're able to. And if not, we can move on to Richard Barnes, who is here in person. Richard Barnes, wait one minute, maybe they're on the other side of the room. Oh, good evening, everyone. My name, good evening, fellow Americans, and all of those who are under our protection at this moment.
I'd like to consider all of you Americans or friends. Back in 2002, we hosted the Winter Olympics. Our motto is, the world is welcome here. One of the great headquarters of that event was the Grand America Hotel. Also, the Little America Hotel across the street from it. As we hosted people from nearly every country that was happy to send anyone here.
The proposal to change the name Caesar Chavez, first of all, I'd like to say I really want to keep Martin Luther King Boulevard. He may have had problems. All of us, I think, have problems if you look deep enough. But what he accomplished with this, I have a dream speech. I've been there to Washington. But keep that as is, for sure. I was proud to say I'm one of those that signed the resolution to make it a holiday in Utah. It took us another ten years to do it, which was, I was surprised.
I would say anything for a good holiday in January. We need it. Anyway, we're approaching the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which I think most of you know is basically signing their own death warrant. Anybody who signed that against Britain and here's to the solace. Sorry. Those rules are unchangeable. I appreciate you coming in. We do have a process to accept your full extent of your comment. Staff can help you.
Sorry. Thank you. Thank you so much. I apologize. We need to move on with the agenda. You are not on the record. I apologize. Thank you so much for your comment. Are there any other commenters? That was the final register commenter for this item. Okay. Thank you. I need a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the Council close the public hearing and adopt the resolution on a rarely naming the city-owned portion of 500 South between State Street and 700 East Dolores Huerta Boulevard.
Second. I have a motion by Council Member Warren and a second by Council Member Lopez Chavez. Is there any discussion? I would like to thank the many people that reach out to us through email and social media to highlight the work that Dolores has done to set the example of a very complex issue, but highlighting the work and the impact that she has done in our society. I am very thankful for this opportunity to rename this portion of the street Dolores Huerta.
With that, I am going to call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. A new oppose. This motion carries unanimously. We are going to item G8, which is an ordinance for the camping or obstructing public property and park rules text-to-date. Before we begin taking public comment, I am going to welcome Michael Sanders, Council policy analyst, to give us a short introduction.
Michael. Thank you, Council. The purpose of this public hearing is to collect feedback regarding proposed camping ordinance update the Council is considering. The proposal updates the current camping ordinance to address growing challenges arising from the increased use of public space as living space for use such as sleeping, storing property or preparing meals.
The proposal updates the definition of camping and consolidates existing rules. This proposal will accomplish one of the actions outlined in the public safety plan. The Council has left last brief on this item during the April 14th, 2026 work session. Thank you, Michael. Taylor, can you begin with the first public comment?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have about 78 people registered to speak to this. Sorry. Let's keep it together. Taylor, continue. First will be Greg Kelly followed by Teresa Teresa and then Ryan Williamson. Greg is here in person. Taylor, who's the next public comment? Next is Teresa Teresa, followed by Ryan Williamson and then Roy Davies. Teresa, you may not unmute.
Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Teresa Ashman and I'm a resident of the Liberty Wells neighborhood. My street is a popular walking route for people going to Liberty Park with their families and with their dogs. I'm here in support of the proposed camping and obstructing public property and park rules text amendment.
I want to tell you what this issue is looks like on the ground on my street because I think it's important for the Council to understand what residents are actually living in. For the past several months, my street has been affected by the same RV returning again and again. I have filed multiple reports through the encampment report portal. I have contacted SLC compliance and still the vehicle comes back.
Days or weeks after being as moved because under current code, there is no clear legal basis to compel it to stay gone. The vehicle has pornographic graffiti visible from the street and the sidewalk. Occupants have been observed dumping human waste in the street. These are not educated regularly. I want to be clear if I'm talking about this is not someone who has had an unexpected hardship.
These are individuals who have been cycling through our neighborhood for a long time. The pattern requires a different response. This amendment provides exactly that response clear definitions, clear authority and coverage of the streets and park streets for this is actually happening. I urge you to vote yes on this amendment. Thank you.
And next will be Ren Williamson followed by Roy Davies and then Quentin Nolan. Ren is here in person. Good evening. My name is Ren Williamson. Is there anybody in this room who has never had to sleep in their car for any reason? If there is, what a strange and privileged life you've led. How strange to have never been on a long journey and need a few hours rest to continue home safely.
How lucky that you've never gotten home late and realized you forgot your house key. How fortunate that you've never found yourself in between move out and move in date with money for a meal or motel but not both. How truly blessed you are that you have never had to flee your home at an inconvenient hour. I have done all of these things. Do I deserve to be behind bars for them?
If you've slept every night of your existence behind four good walls or on a well planned camping trip then you are the exception. But the government is not designed to serve only the luckiest among them. It is designed to serve its people and your people do not cease to be yours when hard times come to them. We are yours through thick smog and thin mountain air.
We are yours from singing hymns in church to singing for pennies on the street corner. We are yours from family home evening to housing crisis. From the millionaire on the mountain to the transient in the tent we are all your constituents. And we are all under the umbrella of your care. Not just those privileged few who have always had a guaranteed place to sleep.
I urge you to vote no on this bill. It is inhumane. Thank you for your time. No. Next. No. Next. Fully comment. Next is Roy Davies followed by Quentin Noland and then John Gardner. Roy is here in person. This is Quentin Noland followed by John Gardner and then Quentin Yumi Mountain Mute. Hey, did you guys hear me? Yes.
Hey everyone. My name is Quentin Noland. I just moved to Salt Lake City from Chicago actually which is where I grew up and I came here with my girlfriend. And our niece is also here. And I just wanted to say that one of our favorite things to do in Chicago was, and my girlfriend specifically was to go to the park, go for a walk.
She loves to run. So she utilized the parks in Chicago whenever she could. And I would say Chicago is not necessarily a place known for its safety, but at the parks we always felt safe. And the police and the city did a great job of keeping us always comfortable. However, since we came to Salt Lake City, we've noticed that it's been somewhat challenging to find a place where I would feel safe sending my girlfriend or my niece.
And then approached by individuals on multiple occasions and whether or not it's true. They've been very threatening at times. And so I was just going to say that I believe that this motion should be approved so that my girlfriend and other people in my life can feel safe to go to the parks, to go for a run, to go for a walk.
Because I think Salt Lake City is such a beautiful and amazing place. And to be honest with you, I would not feel safe sending somebody close to me there alone, whether during the daytime, during the nighttime. Unfortunately, on the weekends, we are going to have to drive out of the city in order to enjoy the outdoors.
And this is the case at Liberty Park, City Creek, Sugar House Park. And honestly, we've had a really tough time finding a place that we feel comfortable with. And so we will be leaving the city when we want to go outdoors, which is a bummer and not what I wanted to see when I moved to Salt Lake City. So I would appreciate everyone's consideration with getting this passed.
And thank you for the time. Next is James Gallier, followed by Stuart Wheelwright, and then Jade Whitlock. James is here in person. Good evening, and thank you for having me here. To be up front, I am a resident of South Salt Lake, but I work here. My kids go to school here. I grocery shop here. And so I also worship here at the Cathedral Church of St. Mark.
I am asking you to not pass this change. I understand the intent behind it, but as a Christian and as just a human being, I think it is inhumane. I think it criminalizes homelessness. And I am a scientist by trade. And data shows that one of the leading causes of homelessness is the cost of housing, of course. And instead of continuing to criminalize the homeless and packing them all into a mega shelter on the west side, we can invest in things like social housing.
And data also shows that displacing homeless people like this ordinance would do increases the death rate of an already dire death rate of those who are unhoused. I don't care if this will supposedly be applied with nuance. It is not a nuanced proposal. So in the name of human decency, do not pass this proposal. Thank you.
Next will be Stuart Wheelwright, followed by Jade Whitlock, and then John Cook, and your Stuart, you may not unmute. Thank you. My name is Stuart. I'm a resident and property owner in Salt Lake City. I want to speak on the unintended consequences of the city's current approach to encampments and why this ordinance needs to restore real enforcement.
When the mayor's more progressive, compassionate policies were first introduced, I was genuinely supportive. I believe the intent behind them and I was hopeful that they would lead to better outcomes for everyone involved. But my lived experience with how these policies have played out caused me to completely reevaluate that position.
What I saw firsthand made it clear there are serious unintended consequences and I feel a responsibility to speak to that today. Behind my property is a city owned alley that residents depend on for access to their homes. What started with one tent in the middle of the alley turned into an entire encampment that had a large population within 48 hours.
Tense blocked access to our properties. There was constant foot traffic in and out and there were used needles not only on city property, but spilling onto my property as well. I contacted local police multiple times and was told directly that they were not removing encampments and were not making arrests, even when illegal activity was observed.
I specifically asked why I was told that these directors were coming from the mayor's office and their hands were tied. So I escalated. For four weeks I called the mayor's office twice a week asking for help. I asked for a call back. I asked to set up a meeting to discuss what was happening and the unintended consequences of the policies.
I never once received the response. The lack of engagement was just as concerning as the lack of enforcement. During that time, tax paying residents couldn't access their homes safely. Families felt unsafe. A six year old girl in the neighborhood had to look out for drug needles just to play outside in her own yard or to get on the bus to go to school.
Copies amounts of litter and drug paraphernalia overtook an entire neighborhood that was clean, safe and well maintained just weeks before. At some point we have to ask who were these policies protecting because from where we stood it wasn't the residents. And I think it's fair to say no one in the mayor's office would tolerate that level of drug activity directly behind the row in home.
Ultimately we cleared ourselves. I'm just asking the city please help us and pass this ordinance so that the taxpayers and the residents can feel safe in their own homes. Thank you. And next will be Jade Whitlock followed by John Gardner and then Emily A. Sloan Pace. Jade is here in person. Hello, my name is Jade Whitlock.
I am here to represent my mother as well as myself and to talk about ordinance 8 to hope that you won't go through with this as a child and as a daughter who has experienced living in a car in such an early age as well as a daughter who are of a stepfather who had a life in a terrible manner of not being able to have the resources and living a hard life through homelessness.
If you guys agree to move forward with this these people who already don't have housing stability you know they just need to survive and they will. Will there be wraparounds resources that you will be able to offer these people when you go forward with this. Will there be chances that when these people are evicted from their own housing and their choices of living their lives it's just insane.
I don't know but I think possibility to help structure help for these people would be a main goal if you guys go forward with this. If you guys don't think about how going forward with this can really ruin other people's lives. I feel like privileged are not all people deserve a place to sleep and you must not take that away.
People could be one vote bill, one rent and one grocery list away from being on the street. You never know who is about to end up on the street next and it doesn't always mean that it's due to an addiction or that it is a doom to any other situation like that. It could just be a situation of not having enough money or not being able to sustain with a singular job.
There are so many different situations of being underpaid and underheard and I feel like these people don't have the resources if you go through with this. Thank you. Next will be John Gardner followed by Emily Aslan Pace and then Trevor Corey. John is here in person. My name is John Gardner. I have resided in Dan Duke's district for decades.
We developed, owned and operate 283 apartment units across three projects in the heart of Shigerhouse and downtown. We have hundreds of residents in these projects that call these urban neighborhoods home. We continue as their landlord to be very concerned about public safety and crime in these neighborhoods. I urge you to adopt the new ordinance regarding the definition of illegal camping on public property in such a way that the police can do their job and remove illegal campers.
The current ordinance is ineffective because it requires that a structure be erected in order to be defined as camping. There are many camping situations where the parties have household items, blankets, sleeping bags and everything else spread around the park. Yet they are not technically considered as campers. This has to change because it is facilitating illegal camping in parks and public areas.
Another part of the ordinance rewrite which is critical is adding language that explicitly prohibits recreational vehicles. The current ordinance simply limits the time an RV can park on the street. You may say, oh well, the RV campers are not doing any harm to the contrary. They bring a very dangerous element to the neighborhood.
Just four months ago on 2150 South Lincoln in Sugar House, a fatality resulted from an altercation over drugs that centered in an illegally parked RV. We made over 10 incident reports to Salt Lake City on that RV. The RV camper would just move around the corner. The RV camper even threw. Hi. Thank you. Thank you. You can submit the end of that comment with our staff.
Thank you. Next will be Emily A. Sloan Pace followed by Trevor Corey and then Shaley Robinson. Emily, you may now unmute. Thank you. My name is Emily Sloan Pace. I live at Maine and Broadway where many of the services for our unsheltered neighbors are located. This is also one block from the July 24th parade route. If this anti camping ordinance is truly about public safety and sidewalk access, I look forward to also seeing it enforced on the night of July 23rd and the morning of July 24th.
Historically, enforcement has been absent along the parade route. Folks from outside the city arrived the night before set up tens chairs, coolers and awnings across public sidewalks. Accessibility is reduced. Trash accumulates. Residents lose access to the spaces outside their homes. Those of us who have to work and up navigating around the encampments that the city has chosen to tolerate for the occasion.
If this ordinance is genuinely intended to address public safety and public access concerns, then residents should be able to expect clear sidewalks on the 24th too. If enforcement disappears when the people occupying the sidewalks are sightseers rather than unhoused residents, it raises an obvious question. Is the issue truly sidewalk access and safety or simply whom the public is more comfortable seeing occupy those spaces?
The city tolerates overnight sidewalk occupation when it considers the activity culturally valuable. That makes it difficult to argue that the mere act of occupying public space overnight is inherently unacceptable or dangerous. Public policy should be measured by whether it is applied consistently, not by whether the people affected are politically convenient to ignore.
Either sidewalk obstruction is a legitimate safety concern that it deserves equal enforcement or enforcement is being selectively applied based on who is occupying the sidewalk and why. Thanks. Next will be Trevor Corey followed by Shaley Robinson and then Bernie Hart, Trevor, you may not unmute. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.
Thanks. I was born in Salt Lake City and in this city has been much about childhood in it as an adult. I lived there for about 10 years. I had to be able to ride because I could no longer afford to live in that city. I'm not only here tonight because I care about the city and the people in it, especially those whose forces are never heard, but because of the continuation of criminalizing homelessness in this state and the rest of the country.
It is baked into the foundation. The first national anti-vigorous law was passed in 1866. Utah became a state 30 years later, added its inception and for several decades later. And still to the state, almost are seen and treated inherently as criminal in the state. Look at the recent history when the city of S1000s of people during the Olympics and Operation Rio Grande.
More recently during the NBA All-Star event, I believe around 300 people were arrested just being within the vicinity of the Delta Center. Not to mention the inhumane sweeps. The city and state have been sweeping the humanitarian crisis that is homelessness under the rug as to try and hide it away from the rest of the world.
Moving on, I know the detrimental effects that the residents will have on those who live out of their vehicle and use it as a tool of survival. It can in many cases be the difference between getting a job, accessing vital resources and even life and death. I'm sure those in favor of this proposed ordinance will argue that individuals and families experiencing homelessness should be sleeping in shelters and not in cars, that we realizing how many barriers there are just in the shelter system, little alone trying to access one.
The bill likely do not have any lived experience in poverty and or homelessness. The shelter system no doubt is part of the problem, something I realized quickly while working within it for around two years. During that period, I spent time at Wigan Center, GMRC, King and Park. I know the correct. Next will be Shalee Robinson followed by Bernie Hart and then Amy Hawkins. Shalee, you may not unmute.
In today, because I believe people deserve empathy and someone to speak up for them. Growing up, I had the privilege of witnessing how the system treats individuals with previous convictions, with drug addictions who have experienced homelessness. I am the product of a veteran who served his country, who fell victim to a drug addiction, homelessness, and then eventually overdosed in Salt Lake County.
I asked my father to fight that systematically doesn't seem to want people like him to win. My father was a fantastic man who taught me to treat human beings as human beings, no matter their financial status, race or appearance. There has to be a better, more empathetic way to treat our community members who are experiencing hardship without any privileges.
While we can't go back in time and fix the system that caused homelessness, we can let people exist and rest in order to survive. Give people grace to sleep in their car or outside in case of emergencies without being convicted. And please do not pass this. Thank you. And next will be Bernie Hart followed by Amy Hawkins and then Natalie Clark, Bernie's hearing person.
My name is Bernie Hart and I think I've been here before. Over the last 15 years, I've seen a lot of different faces sitting up here in front of me and nothing has changed. Not a damn thing. Same issue, same problems, same people on both sides of the issue of saying the same things and nothing ever, ever, ever changes.
I would think at some point you folks would get as tired of that as I am. It can't be make life easier for you to continue doing and working with people that ask for more and more money to never solve a problem. And that's exactly what you're doing. You're giving more money to the police department. They have never solved the problem, all they do is ask for more money and the number of the homeless grew 18% last year and nothing changed.
You're going to pass this ordinance and nothing is going to change. If they can't camp in the camper, they're going to move to the street and you're going to have to hire more police department. So at some point I would ask you to start having a different type of conversation because it's needed. It's needed not only for the people on the street but for the taxpayers and the people in the community and the future people in our community and they're going to have problems and don't know where to deal with them, how to deal with them, where to go for help because there's no where they can go for help.
So please, different time for a different conversation I think. All right, I hope. Thank you. No. Please, we have some rules here. So if you are going to willingly break them, we're going to have you dismissed from the meeting and then the time for the people that want to speak on this item is going to get cut out. So let's keep this safe space here. Let's keep on doing it. How we've been doing it? Next comment.
Next is Amy Hawkins followed by Natalie Clark and then Michael Crockford, Amy's hearing person. My name is Amy Jay Hawkins. I wanted to focus on supporting the portion of the ordinance that includes specific locations where camping would be prohibited even under exceptional circumstances, such as near schools and daycares and senior centers, shelters and supportive housing.
In July 2020 in ballpark, we watched a camp set up in a park strip across the street from Challenger School on Main Street next to the picnic space at Smith's ballpark. In July 2020, it was a single tent but by January 2021, the camp had multiple tents with a bike shop shop and regular drug use. This was about 300 feet from a school for pre-K through eighth grade students.
This was also 400 feet from where 49-year-old enlistment Melendez, a man experiencing homelessness was shot and killed in the middle of the street at 50 East Harrison Avenue at about 5.30 PM. Later in the pandemic on April 26, 2021, Brian Pendergrass, 21, who was living in a tent near 900 South and 500 West, was shot to death in his tent at 5 AM on a Monday morning.
We all hope that we never have to go through exceptional circumstances like that again. But we need some tools to help. Camping is not always safe for people experiencing homelessness. We need some tools to help. Next is Natalie Clark, followed by Michael Crock's bird and then Rob Curtence, Natalie's hearing person. I'll try to be quick. Good evening Council members. My name is Natalie Clark. I'm a co-founder, co-executive director of 1999 Collective.
I am also one of our lived experts on our youth action board, Vice President of our Salt Lake County Youth Action Board, a member for the National Collaborative of Transformative Youth Policy and a Master of Social Work. But today I'm speaking for you to with you as with a title that existed long before any of those things.
I was a foster youth who left the system without a family or permanent support network. I experienced homelessness over four separate times. I've lived the reality of sleeping in my car and my college car parking lot and on Salt Lake City streets, and that reality is really common for young people from the foster care system when we age out of the system.
Salt Lake County is our most dense population of youth aging out of the foster care system and just of young people experiencing homelessness in general. For many of our young people aging out of the state of foster care, it's a choice between having a reliable vehicle or having a safe place to stay, not both and. And that's a reality for most people, but uniquely for foster youth.
And my work every day I see young people that are doing the right things and what they're supposed to do and as soon as they get kicked out in the streets, they have nowhere to go but a car. By passing this amendment, you're essentially telling these young people their struggle to survive is crime. You're punishing them for the gap between their wages and a rent that they did not create.
When we talk about people living in their vehicles, we need to be honest with the math. We're seeing a trend where criminalization for people surviving unlive wages rather than holding anyone accountable for giving people wages they cannot live on. Research consistently shows that we're choosing the most expensive possible ways to handle this.
We have the data housing a person costs roughly one third of what it costs to criminalize them. We're paying a premium to keep a cycle of crisis instead of investing on select solutions that actually work. If we want to address the condition of people living in cars, we have to address the condition of poverty. Criminalizing the survivor does not solve the economic crisis.
It adds legal barriers and existing financial ones being worsened, making it even harder for these young people to ever secure permanent residency. I urge you to vote against this amendment and please listen to the voices and experiences of people with lived experience, as well as the letter that our youth action. Next we'll be in Michael Crock'sburg followed by Rob Kurtets and then Daniel Bolton. Michael's here in person.
Hello, my name is Michael Crockford. Just a little bit of history. I lived in my van for two and a half years. Wasn't an addict, wasn't creating junk all over the place. In fact, I cleaned up the neighborhood of regular people leaving their garbage around. I had police two to three times a week, not to be a nuisance. The other thing is we heard the mayor here talk about a budget.
You guys want to spend more money because San Diego tried to do this. Do you know that? And it's called Bloom versus the City of San Diego. They deemed it unconstitutional. Do you guys want to go through a big legal battle and pay all that money out where you could be using that for actually people that need it in the homeless community and stuff like that?
I just don't understand this. More bureaucracy. Why don't you just enforce the laws, the ordinances that the police already have. You have to park for 72 hours, you have to move. If they're making a trashy situation, get them for littering. Make the cops do what they're already supposed to do. Instead of trying to make it easy, just make it a criminal, be homeless or to be poor and can't afford an apartment.
I just don't understand this. But I'll leave it at that. Next is Rob Cortez, followed by Daniel Bolton and then Marco Garcia. Rob is here in person. My name is Rob Cortez. I'm speaking on behalf of the downtown community council. Our council recognizes that camping in public places by our own house community has created real challenges for public safety, accessibility and neighborhood livability, particularly in certain neighborhoods.
Sidewalked entrances, trails and parks must remain safe and open and accessible for others that want to use them as well. We are supportive of clarifying and consolidating existing camping regulations, particularly provisions that give law enforcement clear and consistent tools to prevent obstruction of public rights away and address unsafe conditions.
We also acknowledge that the ordinance may help address situations where certain individuals or groups are creating unsafe environments for other unhoused individuals and the surrounding community. However, our support is conditional. First, enforcement must be paired with real available alternatives. We do not support actions that merely move people from one location to another.
If camping restrictions are enforced, especially overnight, within rights of way, there must be available shelter, housing or service options. And those options must be clearly communicated at the time of contact. Second, training and discussion are essential. Officers and response teams must receive consistent trauma-informed training and be equipped to communicate options, de-escalate situations and connect people to services. Enforcement should prioritize compliance and safety, not punishment.
Third, the ordinance must not criminalize homelessness. While we understand the proposal does not create new penalties, the default misdemeanor framework raises concerns of safeguards are not in place. Enforcement should be a last resort, accepting cases. Thank you. Next will be Daniel Bolton, followed by Marco Garcia and then some risada, Daniel Thuringperson.
Good evening. I'm going to be fairly quick. My name is Daniel Bolton. I am currently receiving SSDI. And when my father passes away, I plan on living out of my vehicle and touring the country. That being said, there are a lot of people in the same lifestyle who have no other choice with Social Security disability income, but to wait on housing.
That's a seven-year wait. I'm not sure if you guys are familiar with that in Salt Lake City. That's a seven-year wait on average. The only way I'm going to be able to do that is to go ahead and find options that way. I'm going to be able to go ahead and find options that way. The option I had with my last asset, which is my vehicle, and when that day comes, I'll be forced to go ahead and find options that way.
But this is not just my scenario. It is a growing number of citizens who can't afford rent. Please consider that. Next is Marco Garcia, followed by Summer Sada and then Melvin Moreno. Marco's here in person. Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Marco Garcia. I'm an advocate for the American Alliance. And the reason I chose Roman Alliance was because of the policing I saw.
I threw out my window. My five-year daughter told me that was happening at the window. So I had to explain to her that the police were being harsh to the homelessness. The homeless people. I'm asking about this bill because we're talking about this bill because you decide to go ahead and approve this bill. Not only will you be destroying people's lives, but my daughter looks up to no matter.
She looks up to a casino and she likes to blue bus. She's like, Daddy, I want to go to the blue bus. Why? Because she likes to serve. I've taught her that. I've taught her that we as individuals, as Americans, were like giving back to the less fortunate. Why? Because I grew up poor. I grew up with a single mother pretty much. So I like to give back to the community.
I like to give back the best way I can. And the best way I can is by sharing what I have and that's my heart. So I ask you to please, please reconsider this motion because I've seen about 30 people sleeping at blue bus and I've helped. I'm next is Summer Sada followed by Melvin Moreno and then Lori Wagner, summers here in person.
Next is Melvin Moreno followed by Lori Wagner and then Alicia Baker. Melvin is here in person. Good evening. My name is Melvin Moreno. I would strongly advise against changing this ordinance. If you care about the safety of the people in Salt Lake City as a right-shirt driver, there are times after taking drunk people home and advising them against driving home drunk.
Where I get sleeping on the way home. If it was between that, sleeping in my car or having to deal with law enforcement, it would be a tough choice to make. I know that there are tens of hundreds of other drivers that would have to make this decision. And I think it would result in more car accidents, which results in death.
From the things that I've heard today, it's more so people that just don't like looking at something for real safety. I would highly advise against this. Thank you. Next will be Lori Wagner followed by Alicia Baker and then Kelton Baker. Lori is here in person. Hi, I'm Lori Wagner. I'm also a property owner and landlord in Liberty Wells right in the thick of it.
Second east, 1200 south. That's where all the homeless are. I also have a RV that's been parked in for me for days, weeks. And I'm very glad that they're parked there because otherwise they would be in a tent in front of my house or in the alley behind. I would much prefer to have them in an RV. I don't see any waste or drug use because it's in the van most likely.
So I think that's ill advised to outlaw camping in cars. Maybe we should put all the homeless in cars instead. I agree with Bernie that you guys passed laws and more laws and nothing changes. People are all over Liberty Park. You know, homeless with shopping carts. And that's against the law, but that's not enforced. You can call the cops if someone's smoking fentanyl right in your house and they don't care at all.
They say they can't do anything. I've even tried it on tenants. So I think this law is, you know, the path to, when they say good intentions is through to hell or something like that. So I don't think this will come out like people plan. The homeless aren't going to disappear just because you pass the law. Thank you. Next will be Alicia Baker, followed by Hilton Baker and then LOVSC. Alicia is here in person.
Hi, my name is Alicia Baker and I am a 20 year resident of Rose Park District 1. I raise my children here and grateful to be a member of the Salt Lake City community. I am very concerned about the criminalization of homelessness here in Salt Lake City. We do not need to give any police department more power over our lives.
We need real solutions. In his autobiography, Malcolm X said, I have no mercy or compassion in me for a society that will crush people and then penalize them for not being able to stand up under the weight. It is not only cruel. It is unconstitutional to pass laws that target harass and make achieving stability impossible for people living in vehicular homes. People should not lose their home or motive transportation over a parking violation.
This will effectively increase the number of people living unsheltered on the street and is antithetical to what we are trying to accomplish. So I am here in this public sphere to urge my neighbors and representatives to choose solutions rather than criminalization. Next is Hilton Baker followed by LOVSC and then Charlie Padilla, Hilton's here in person.
Hello. Good evening. Just a couple of thoughts. Unintended consequences. Do well written clearly defined laws with reasonable authority? Do they ever have unintended consequences? Yes. Second thought. The police officer has authority to detain you and otherwise interrupt your day through probable cause, probable cause that a crime may have been committed.
Now this may not sound absurd but how often have you heard of officers using bad legal arguments to conduct their business? Ever seen a public place longer than needed for a very specific purpose? Ever had a meal on a public space? Maybe a public parking spot in your vehicle? Do you ever store household items in your car? Do you ever store camping equipment in your car?
Do you ever do a number of things such as store coats and equipment? Maybe you are a hoarder. I don't know. There are a lot of things that you could be doing. Any one of these things can be used by an officer who is well meaning or otherwise. To establish probable cause and create unintended consequences. Thank you. Let's keep those feelings to yourself.
Next is Olivia C followed by Charlie Padilla and then Fane Harris, Olivia's here in person. Hi. My name is Olivia. I live in Salt Lake City. I also just finished graduate school studying the relationship between business and public space. I care deeply about my unhoused neighbors. So to begin I want to emphasize that laws like this proposed ordinance are not actually intended to end homelessness.
The proposed ordinance will expand the current ban on sleeping in public parks to also include sidewalks and vehicles. When someone has no private space to retreat to, they have to live in public. When it becomes illegal for someone to be in public, then their very existence is illegal. If this ordinance passes, more people will have their vehicles and their belongings confiscated and even more will be imprisoned.
Research shows that this leads to more chronic homelessness. The only real solution to homelessness is to alleviate the conditions that create poverty and class inequality in the first place, which is housing and livable wages. We also know that the current shelter options that exist in the valley are abysmal, so many folks either choose to or are forced to live outside in public space.
I just checked a couple hours ago in the closest men's, women's and family shelters are all out of beds tonight. But let's say bed does open up at the Pamela Atkinson Men's Resource Center. It's located six miles away from here, which is over an hour on public transport and out of the free fare bus zone. So it takes a long time to get to the shelter and then you're far away from all other resources except the Salt Lake County Jail, which is conveniently just down the road.
31% of the incarcerated people in the Salt Lake County Jail are unhoused and despite being a mega complex with over 2000 beds, the county jail is almost always full. When a jail has no capacity, it's labeled as a prison crisis, which is then used to justify the expansion of the prison system. We've seen this recent expansion in Utah with the new state prison and the proposed homeless detention center on the Great Salt Lake that's received national attention for its cruelty.
This anti camping ordinance is not a solution to homelessness. It is cruel and unusual punishment to our unhoused neighbors and will only make our carceral system larger. Thank you. Next is Charlie Padilla from by Fane Harris and then Jackson Eudley. Charlie's here in person. Hi, I'm Charlie Padilla and I find it staggering and interesting that we started this meeting off with Mayor Mendenhall talking about our budget proposals.
Our budget proposal for 2027. And one of the words that she said is this is a year of rising costs. How many of us in this room and how many of us do we know are living paycheck to paycheck right now? We have experienced over the course of the last 12 months tens of billions of dollars in increased cost for everything that we buy in the cost of tariffs that was then refunded back to corporations in a blatant act of cost.
We have a blatant act of theft. Mayor Mendenhall mentions the rising cost of everything of groceries, of insurance, of medical costs. Everything is increasing and instead of talking about real solutions to protect and help each other as a community, we are talking about further criminalizing homelessness which every single one of us is susceptible to.
If we lose our jobs, if we lose our paychecks, every single one of us is facing the grim reality of having to sleep in our vehicles, of having to find someplace else to stay. And I for one would rather talk about solutions and how we can help each other as opposed to further finding ways to criminalize life happening, our government making everything more and more expensive.
So I urge you to please vote no on this resolution as it is not a way that we can specifically target individuals that we find inconvenienced as we've heard from previous speakers. This is a blanket law that can negatively impact every single one of us. Thank you. No, no clapping. Next is Fane Harris followed by Jackson Eardly and then Lilith Davis. Fane is here in person.
I'm really grateful that you guys have the pronunciation sheets. Can we please use them? My name is Fane Harris. And I oppose the amendments to the anti- camping ordinance and recommend implementing camping guidelines instead. I work at an LGBTQ plus resource center and this matters because unfortunately there are a good amount of LGBTQ plus youth and adults who experience both short-term and long-term homelessness.
Most emergency shelters require certain qualifying factors to get in. Most shelters operate on a lottery basis or first come first serve. No one who camps is camped because they have a better option. It's often in response to the lack of consistency within shelters. In combination with shelter, protocols these camping ordinances and its barbaric amendments say too late, so sad.
And then sends them to nowhere. You can't camp. You can't sleep in your car and you don't have any friends or family. That's a you problem. The city blames the lack of accessibility to transitional housing, unlock good funding from the state. However, we just increased our police budget. Knowing this, you cannot in good faith further criminalize homelessness and say that the solutions exist, but funding doesn't.
That's like saying my dog ate my homework. The unhoused population of the city deserved better than this. I also suggest working with your organizers in a traumatizing to have to inform our city officials of things that you should know. Do you know the names of these people and wonder where they are if they're warm, if they have a bed or if you'll see them tomorrow?
Have you had a 19-year-old tell you that they are addicted to meth so that they can keep it moving in the winter to avoid camping? Because I guarantee if you knew these people and the working with the people that provide these services you want. We have the power to give them space to exist. We choose to sweep them up and not care about how it further marginalizes them and isolates them for more opportunity.
Deny these amendments and create a resolution with folks that work with the unhoused population that allows for safe camping guidelines within our city and give them space. Do not further criminalize them. Next is Jackson Eardly followed by Robert Davis and I'm Brandi Burnham. Jackson is here in person. Hello. So the text around this amendment claims that it just clarifies the existing ordinances, but this is not true.
If you read the ordinance itself, it does expand them into major new areas, as others have said. I've met dozens of folks who will be hit by this. Many of them have jobs and pay income tax to the city but are now being criminalized by it. The number one threat to someone on the streets is losing their belongings. Their clothes, their medicine, their paperwork and IDs and now their car, which as others have said is the thing that helps many people get back into housing.
This ordinance will increase the rate that that happens. As written, it also criminalizes a bunch of activities done by those of us with homes, eating a meal and then brushing your teeth at the park, falling asleep on a picnic blanket, misplacing your things in a public space. These are all normal, natural things that would be considered violations now. You could be considered camping.
The only way this won't affect the rest of us is if it's selectively enforced only against the poorest among us, which is wrong, but seemed likely since this targets the only places they have left to just exist right now. The city has its priorities backwards and we all suffer for it. We've seen the parks be made worse, bathrooms closed, grills taken out, benches made more uncomfortable on purpose, police surveillance where there's no crime or violence.
We shouldn't be removing services and making the city worse for all of us just to target our unhoused neighbors. We should be increasing services that benefit all of us, including those unhoused neighbors. The city should be investing into more bathrooms, more park attendance, more cooking sites, more public showers, less eroding of public spaces to hurt those of us who don't have private property to go home to.
Sleeping, eating and having a place to be are necessities for all of us. They should not be criminalized for some of us. I'd like to invite the council members who are considering a yes vote on this bill to go out, visit with our community and get to know some of these folks that they would be making into criminals today.
They're kind, decent people. This is their home and I hope you do right by them. Thank you. Next is Lilith Davis, followed by Brandy Burnham and then Sean Clay. Lilith is here in person. Hello. I brought this. It's a metaphor. I'm genuinely disgusted, but I'm going to tell you why. And it's going to require me being vulnerable in a city I do not feel safe in.
And I became acquainted with Salt Lake as a little girl. I was born in Provo and I've been here many times, my family's from here. But I was away for many years and came back and lived in South Jordan for about two and a half years ago, three years ago I moved there. I was working at a nuclear lab as an analyst. I was raped, double raped, two assaults in my home in South Jordan, two days in a row. I ended up on disability and then I had to resign at a nuclear lab because genocide.
And then I ended up getting acquainted with the city as a homeless person. Finding out there's an eight-year waiting list. I have two graduate degrees. I'm a psychotherapist. I'm an Allison single mom. And now a rape victim, those people are still walking around. So I hear that you guys talk about that you care about values, you care about people, but apparently you only care about people who own toilets.
Because I can tell you, I can name off a few friends of mine who have difficulty finding just a humane place to use the restroom. And let's have really something that can control this living thing. I've never seen another species be more violent to each other than humans. And I have to say the shame that exists living on the streets and so even in the shelter, by the way, you can get exited for having your pills in the wrong case.
If you have a functional disability, and by the way, there's no one there to help people with functional disabilities. You know how I know that? Because I have to walk around feces to take a shower or to feel like I can use the restroom and not get some kind of like, I don't know, piece of crap. I'm sorry, I'm really trying so hard not to use swear words. It's very challenging for me because I am extremely angry.
Not only did I come to the city during a genocide, but I'm watching a city council ignore the genocide. And actually side with apartheid, I'm watching my mayor have wine. Time. So we are going to keep this meeting the way that we have kept it. And for those that want to, please, yes, for those that want to disrupt, this is your final warning and going to have you removed from the meeting.
And that it's disturbing to the many people that are on the list to speak. And we are going to, you are going to be the reason why so many people are not going to be able to share the public comment. So next public comment, please. Next is Brandi Burnham followed by Sean Clay and then all of Pierce and Jacoby. Brandi, you may now unmute.
Can you hear me? Okay. Yes. Okay. Sorry. I have a jury public speaking, so I'm going to read something here. I spoke to so many people could be both on the alongside accountability. The community, the people that are on the top of the park and other parks have endured negative and healthy and dangerous activity for years.
Children, seniors, you know, especially unsafe to go to these places. I see a lot of violence, repetitive distance guard for others, health and safety every day. It's just empathy to respect our boundaries in which other accountable people, which we should do more. Too many look the other way, my room, business, don't want to get involved.
This or that, whatever the term is. That's because where we are. We need to find a safe place for people to sleep. And if they refuse for whatever reason, that doesn't mean they get a live by a street law. Their own rules and everyone just has to deal with it and comply. Lands, a lot of times, is screaming, intimidation, threats, violence, and people compliant back down.
People, who I respect forever, should continue to be forced to listen, watch and continue to be illegal and consider unhealthy and creative for the recycled trauma. While homelessness, addiction, mental health can explain things, it doesn't mean you should continue to enable people. Just because I will do a count on whether or not their behavior does not mean I don't care for you.
It's because I do. So many of the people causing the majority of the issues do so with a sense of entitlement, attitude, without apology or an effort to modify the behavior. And I get this all the time, the anger and everything. I understand there's reasons behind it, but we have to set boundaries and we should do this for each other before it gets to a point where law enforcement is involved.
We should call each other out when we're not doing the right things for everyone. Having respect for people in public spaces. Sorry I got the very relevant speaker, but that's all I have. Next is Sean Clay, followed by all of Peter, San Jacobe, and then Jeanette Appelman. Sean is here in person. Let's keep on going here.
Good evening, City Council. Good evening, Mayor. My name is Pastor Sean Clay. I'm Executive Director of the Salt Lake City Mission. I am also a lived expert. I was homeless for many, many years. And I was a man who lived in my car also. You know, there's a difference between sleeping in your car and living in your car.
If I have a good time downtown, I'll pull over and sleep in my car so I don't get a DUI. Or if I'm tired while I'm driving on the road, I'll pull over so I can sleep. But when you live in your car, your car is your home. And so when your car is your home, that's all that you have. And when I lived in my car, it was because I lost my home.
And the only thing I had left was my car and whatever I could fit in it because everything else was taken. This was one step before I ended up on the streets. So people that live in their car, it's just one step before they hit a shelter. It's just one step before they're living on the streets. And also a car can go in the other direction.
For me, a car was also one step getting closer to have a home. Buying a car so I could get out of the shelter, so I could get off of the streets, so I could live closer to where I was working. And it was a lot safer to be in my car than it was to be on a sidewalk. It was a lot safer for me to be in a car than being a tent.
It was a lot safer for me to be in a car than in a shelter. And so these, we can't criminalize homelessness. We can't criminalize people who are living in their car because they're in a situation. And we are Utahns, we are salt Lakers, and we can do better than this. We can do better than this because we are better than this.
We can definitely do better than this because when someone goes to jail for sleeping in the car, now they have a record which even makes it harder to get a job, which even makes it harder to get out of the situation that they're in. And these are things that we should be considering. And I hope that you do City Council.
I hope that you do also Mayor and just remember that we're better than this. We're much better than this. Thank you. Next is Olive Peterson Jacoby followed by Jenna Appleman and then Kristen Johnson. Olive, you may not unmute. Well, my name is Olive Peterson Jacoby. I live in District 5. In the Mayor's own words, public spaces are essential to quality of life.
So if this amendment passes, then we have to seriously consider who's lies the city values. The current practice of alternatively ignoring or brutalizing unhoused people suggest that the city actively distains many of its citizens. The police regularly threaten to mean an assault or unhoused neighbors, the damage or dispose of their belongings, and the rock pass shade 10 slacklines picnic blankets, coolers and long furniture set up by housed people to do it.
Who gets to use and feel safe and Republic spaces is entirely based on whether or not they own property. I 100% agree that public spaces are essential to quality of life, especially when they're the only spaces someone can occupy. If the shelter is at full and you can't make rent and you can't cap out in the park or sleep in your car, where are you supposed to go?
It seems your only choices are to dematerialize or go to jail, which is baffling because supposedly the city is trying to reduce police interactions with her vulnerable populations. How does during someone make getting an apartment easier? How is someone whose car has been impounded supposed to get to a shelter? The solution to homelessness is not to criminalize homelessness.
It's to provide resources and restructure our system so that people don't have to sleep in their cars or in a tent or on a bench. And the comfort of disengaged transplants, privileged paternalists and landlords should not be considered in the face of real human suffering. Suppose this amendment. Next is Jeanette Appleman followed by Kristen Johnson and then Patty Dwyer.
Jeanette is here in person. Hi, my name is Jeanette Appleman. I've been homeless for about a year. I have a job. I've had that same job for about 10 years. I work every day. I had an apartment that I love downtown Salt Lake right downtown. I love that apartment, but my paycheck was garnished due to an error and because of that, between that and the legal fees, I fell short on rent and was evicted.
Now it's hard to get a place with an eviction on my record and still being garnished for the treble damages for the lease. But in addition to that, my mother lived in the same building that I lived in. She's getting older and she lived right downstairs from me. In addition to being evicted, I can't not allow it to go on the property.
I can't even go visit my elderly mother at that building anymore. So I'm criminalized that way. So I'm sleeping in my car and by banning vehicles sleeping, it doesn't solve the homelessness. It just pushes people like me further into crisis. It takes away the one thing that's helping us to hold on. I feel safe in my car.
I don't make messes. I join a gym so I can shower there or I mean, you know, where we don't find a place to use the restroom. I don't make messes. I'm not mentally ill. I'm not on drugs. Sorry. There's better solutions. I think we need to find it, you know, maybe a parking place. Is there something like that? Also, instead of criminalizing people that are working and trying to do everything they can to survive, please don't take that away from us. Please vote no. Thank you.
Next is Kristin Johnson followed by Patty Dryer and then Jeff Olson. Kristin is here in person. Hi. My name is Kristin Johnson. I live in downtown Salt Lake City. I'm a volunteer at the Salt Lake Community Bell Fund. The Bell Fund pays bail for members of our community who are trapped in jail for pretrial detention simply because of their inability to pay.
The people who we paid bail for are those in our community with the highest financial need. Increasingly, over the last year, more and more cases that we've paid bail for have been very low bail amounts under $1,000 for unsanctioned public camping and similar crimes of poverty. We've already seen an increase in enforcement of this no camping ordinance over the last year that has led directly to an increased criminalization of poverty in our community.
Continuing to expand the enforcement of this no camping ordinance will only continue to increase the criminalization of poverty and move the city away from and not towards its goal of reducing homelessness. This ordinance will expand the ways that the city can arrest people for experiencing homelessness and to say that this does not conflict with the city's stated goal of reducing homelessness is misleading and increasing the risk of the city's health.
This ordinance is misleading and irresponsible. Funnelling more money into policing and more arrests is directly in conflict with being able to spend money to meet people's needs so they do not experience homelessness in the first place, namely if you're affordable housing. Expanding this ordinance to include arresting people for sleeping in their cars will decrease a person's stability when their car is impounded.
It will lead to more people losing their jobs while they are in jail and all these things will move people further from and not closer to stable housing. This ordinance is clearly not about keeping people safe. If we felt the preventing people from sleeping on sidewalks actually decreased safety, we would not encourage people to camp on parade routes.
The fact that there is a codified exemption in this ordinance for camping on a parade route makes it incredibly transparent that the purpose of this ordinance is not to keep people safe. It is to criminalize poverty and to prevent people from having to feel uncomfortable witnessing poverty. I encourage each and every one of you to vote no on the amendment to this ordinance and reduce the criminalization of poverty in the city.
Thank you. Next is Patty Dwyer followed by Jeff Olson and then April Harper. Patty is here in person. Yeah, an idea is like hired five homeless to oversee the specific site place. They know how to talk and listen to those campus in their situation. Some have their tent as a roof over their head. Some people have addiction, hiding from danger, domestic violence or trafficking.
Some can't get into housing, clicked out even from shelter or just like being outside so forth. There can be provided honey wagon with shower, case manager if needed, food wagon, let homeless help one another. In work along with patrols, with clean environment, comfort and safety, this can reduce stress and cost. The van drivers can transport people from one place to specific place like in New York City.
Now as far as myself, I got off work late at night and the train stopped running and now early so I had to sleep outside. I think the shelter had a curfew but luckily I was able to get in and then also I kept getting sick from the virus at the shelter and not before you take sleep outside. But anyway, it's a community issue not a criminal issue.
So yeah. Is Jeff Olson followed by April Harper and then Darren Mon? Jeff is here in person. My name is Jeff Olson and my position on this amendment has changed from what it would have been six years ago when I first moved to Fair Park. At the time we were just focused on helping the people who were out there but we become aware of the needs of the people who live nearby as well and also the complications of living out there.
How dangerous it can be people we've helped have suffered greatly. First there are people who are not necessarily dealing with homelessness who take advantage of the presence of people who are to cover their criminal activity. They provide drugs, they support prostitution, they fence stolen objects, all of those kinds of things.
Their activity creates problems in the neighborhood and especially prevents stores and shops from opening which the people who live there who are often in permanent supportive housing or affordable housing need but they don't have the shops and stores nearby because of the challenges. So for the last couple of years I've met every couple of weeks with residents and business owners and the police and representatives of city agencies who've been actually amazing at trying to address these issues and help strengthen that community for the sake of those who are in affordable and supportive housing.
But there are so many things they can't do and I believe that a number of these amendments have come out of those meetings. They've identified things that would help so that those neighborhoods would have what they need. The challenges they need parks and trails they need that are safe and they don't have them. Next is April Harper followed by Darren Mann and then Michelle Adali.
April is here in person. Good evening. My name is April and I've lived in my car on and off most of my adult life. My daughter had cancer when she was eight and when that was over and we were done she survived but when we were all done with the treatments I found living in a place was much too big for me. I needed small and that's what I did and it was comfortable.
I was I was I was had a job. I was an employed unhoused person. In 2025 13 out of 10,000 people approximately 4,500 in Utah were unhoused. That's an 18% increase from 2024. Homeless children rose by 12%. Household seniors over 62 up by 42%. Has anything been done to slowly increase of our unhoused population? The demographic that is basically.
I'm going to go there. Understand that there are not enough beds and that beds must be claimed by seven. What would you suggest someone maybe who is an employed unhoused person working a swing shift do if they cannot sleep in their in their bed. Should they be woken up? Should they be harassed? Should they be on the streets?
Barring a major disaster rent prices home prices will not be coming down. That just doesn't happen. More than a third of Utah lawmakers, legislators profit from real estate. Around 26 to 31 legislatures have direct ties to the industry as developers, investors or managers particularly in our Senate. Wouldn't that be a conflict of interest with this law?
According to the Tribune, I'm Andrew Johnson, the city director of homeless policy. In outreach, I'm going to skip that because I don't want to run out of time. Most unhoused people are not shooting up or not being belligerent or violent. They are doing the best that they can with the tools they have to survive. And before you pass this punitive law, consider helping your struggling constituents by raising wages to a living wage and stopping the bleed on social programs.
Make affordable housing actual affordable housing. Next is Darren Mann followed by Michelle Adali and then Robert Salazar. Darren is here in person. Greetings everybody. My name is Darren Mann. I'm a resident of Fair Park and I am the director of the Village Cooperative Farm. It's good to see you guys. I haven't been here in a while.
I've chosen to focus my efforts on practical on the ground efforts. So with the Village Cooperative Farm over the last three years, we've had over 300,000 people, mainly Muslim refugees, struggling from the genocide happening in Palestine, and also homeless and people experiencing poverty. Those of you who may know, I had a homeless kept in my front yard during the pandemic.
So I have on the ground knowledge of actually what it takes to serve our people because our mayor was failing us. This is another example. This resolution, this ordinance is another example of predatory practices towards our children, brothers and sisters. How is somebody going to get off of out of their situation if they're constantly being hounded by police and when I had the homeless camp in my front yard, I'd walk out there every day and I'd had 14 individuals that would camp mostly women and elderly folk.
That were already struggling with predatory issues from the police and also the more predatory elements of society. And I would also have our many neighbors who are upset over paying property taxes to this and they didn't care about the functionality of how our society functions. And we have to take care of all of the people, those that we consider the lowest and the highest.
We're judged by how we treat the people among us that are struggling the most. If you're just going to forsake them and be like, well, we're just going to give you more penalties for camping and whatnot. Well, you know what, I saw something in this ordinance. If you have private property and you can allow camping in your property, you're damn sure that if you pass this ordinance, I will allow another campground in my front yard and I will challenge you a fucking get.
Hi, next is Michelle Dally followed by Robert Salazar and then Caroline Mackenzie, Michelle is here in person. My name is Michelle Dally and while I don't speak for these organizations, I am a Westminster University and McNair Scholars alum. I have presented research projects at National and International conferences and received multiple accolades and I did it all while being homeless.
I'm here today to hopefully change your perception about criminalizing homelessness and your perception of homelessness as a whole. According to the most recent data of Utah's homeless systems outcome, 15,507 people were recorded into him as Utah's homeless management system, meaning that they sought help of that. 9,783 found permanent or temporary destinations, including institutionalization such as jail.
6,934 individuals remain homeless, including 968 individuals that were part of a family unit. Our most recent point in time count found that 4,584 homeless individuals, including 1,233 individuals, are considered chronically homeless. Based on self-reported data out of that 4,584 individuals, 1,046 were reported as unsheltered.
Of that, 63 were unaccompanied youth. 203 had experienced domestic violence, including children. 426 were adults with mental illness and the 197 were adults with substance use disorder. An article published by the American Addiction Center states that in many instances substance uses the result of the stresses of homelessness rather than the other way around.
Keeping in mind that the number of people we fail each year, I want to remind you that that number only increases. It is Robert Salazar followed by Caroline McKenzie and then Michael Price. Robert, you may not unmute.
When Robert Salazar went to Nomad Alliance, we've done a lot of work on this blue bus that continues to come to help keep people out of the colds during harsh winters. We've done so much work to try and help with these kinds of situations. This ordinance will stop the blue bus for one thing, but another thing that also seems like it's just been a band-aid over the situation rather than actually get to the root of the problem.
It will just cost police more money to keep on pushing these people just a different spot. It's just going to not be good for the community if you ask me. And that's it. Thank you. Next is Caroline McKenzie followed by Michael Price and then Rick once we want Caroline is here in person. Hello, Council Caroline McKenzie, District 4, and also survivor of domestic abuse, including financial abuse.
Not long after graduating with my bachelor degree in 2021, I went in my first job as a kindergarten teacher here in Salt Lake. Circumstantially, I was kicked out of my subsidized student housing and was left due to the abuse without enough savings to have a room to find to place a first last month's rent and deposit, et cetera, despite trying as we know the affordability crisis is not new and getting worse.
Well, into my first year as a public school teacher, I was still unhoused and living in an old janky vehicle that I purchased in cash months prior to graduating as the only asset that I had that was not able to be taken by my abuser. Having this car as a home and my mode of transportation to the school where I was working, as well as a livelihood during this time, would have ruined me to be criminalized due to poverty, to be jailed for trying to live in a world that it wasn't successful for me to live in.
I was lucky enough to have some nights where I could couch hop with friends, but that isn't the reality for most. Even when I was able to afford a room, I had to commute from Orm to Salt Lake City because there were no affordable options in the city. While I am much better off now, we all know that Salt Lake City residents are stretched thin.
I hear from my parents that I, of the students that I teach how difficult it is to exist in this world. We are all one paycheck away from this becoming a reality again. I volunteer regularly with many mutual aid groups and please. I'm next will be Michael Price followed by Rick Wadsworth and then Matilda Webb. Michael is here in person.
Are you still here? Michael, next comment. Next is Rick Wadsworth followed by Matilda Webb and then Tamara Walker, Rick is here in person. Greetings folks. My name is Dr. Rick Wadsworth. I'm a homeless advocate. I have degrees in Psychology, two graduate degrees in Education, another one in Substance Abuse Counseling.
I spent the last 15 months interviewing homeless people on the streets, learning their needs, their struggles, and where the gaps exist in government policy, and what needs to occur to affect long term change. What I've discovered is both disturbing and severely lacking. My own son was homeless and addicted to drugs and struggle with mental health issues for three years.
Current government thinking focuses on resource distributions that of helping people change attitudes, thinking of behaviors that lead to long term transformation and success. I created a website and this is for everybody in the room. It's called Out of the Dust, one word, out of the dust.net. The documents my interactions with these marginalized people and includes dozens of videos and audio interviews and explains what is happening to them in their own words.
My website explains the causes for homelessness along with the causes that lead to addiction along with all the problems they are facing. Studies show that mental health and addiction go hand in hand 92% of the time. About 95% of the people that I've interacted with come from a background of childhood abuse, physical, emotional, social attachment disorders, dysfunction, parent incarceration, everything.
Literally hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent by the state every year for homeless services, but the problem is only getting worse for lack of proper services and relevant education. The service industry is making a grumble of money with no intention of fixing the problem because that is their bread and butter and they don't want the government gravy train to end.
These people feel invisible and marginalized. They're seen as dirty, crazy and feared. There are 12 reasons why these people are not employed. I document them on my website. My goal is to create a mobile classroom throughout the valley to help these marginalized people learn their way out the street instead of helping to earn it through free handouts.
Three groups need to be educated, the public, to see these people with more compassion, less fear and more understanding, the politicians who need to understand effective policies and see the all. Thank you. Thank you. You are not on the record anymore. Thank you. Next is Matilda Webb followed by Tanner Walker and then Rio Lynn. I'm Matilda Cenpersa.
I'm Matilda. I wanted to just share an experience, not even just an experience, but just one interaction that happened in the last couple of weeks that is something I feel like is going to just be more and more common. I currently live in the avenues of, I was a ballpark resident for over a decade and got to know my unhoused neighbors in that neighborhood.
That's something that's severely lacking. If we humanize people, you're more likely to want to help them out. I also worked in homeless services for over a decade and saw just the complete misuse of funds. It's outstanding where the money goes to and it's not to our unhoused community. That's for sure. The last place I worked out currently in the last month has evicted eight people for very, very small incidences and permanent supportive housing rather than doing the supportive housing portion of the job that they should be doing.
There's a man that lives in the avenues. He is in his late 70s. He's lost his job at one of the local churches during COVID. He has congestive heart failure. He's had three heart attacks. Our neighborhood has taken care of him over the last few weeks, months, years, because every time he finds the place that he feels safe and erects it little tent out in the woods somewhere, the police show up and take it down.
This has happened four times. Our neighbors have all taken turns buying him food, clothing, tents, because the police continue to just completely destroy this man's life. Last week he fell asleep for maybe five minutes because he had to come down from the mountains to get some food. He fell asleep in front of a church for a few minutes and the cops were called and they took him to jail.
They took his dog from him. Luckily a friend took the dog. That dog ended up being tied to a tree where it tied itself off. It's throughout that heart. It has now he has a vet though. He went to jail. That's a cost. Right. Next is Tamara Walker, followed by Rio Lynn and then Cassina Canaseva. Tamara is here in person.
Next comment. Next is Rio Lynn, followed by Cassina Canaseva and then Chad McQueen. Rio is here in person. Hello. I'm here to just express the absolute embarrassment and atrocity that our society has become. Enforcing things like this. It seems that all that you politicians and rich people, the rich people that you guys are hired to protect, you just want to keep all of your crimes against society out of public views so that you don't have to look at it.
The best example is people from our military. We respect them so much and we're so nice to them and we honor them during our football games and shit like that. But the minute that they end up growing out of beard, their clothes get a little dirty and they're on the side of the road with the tin can, we walk over them just like any other homeless person. Homeless people are the product of the system that betrayed them.
It left them in the dust and there's no chance of them getting out of it. It's all by design. And the only reason that you people want to open up this camp is so that you can further exploit their poverty and their labor. There's no way out. When you charge someone with the crime, they just go deeper and deeper until the options are so limited that there's nothing else that you can do.
All of this stuff is by design. The rich are slowly poisoning our society and degrading all of the working class into the dust. And I love that you guys are able to discuss something like this before ever even slightly considering raising the minimum wage. It's the biggest fucking joke that I've ever heard my entire life. If any of you voted for this, you're fucking embarrassment to society.
Next is Castenia Konoseva followed by Chad McQueen and then Kylie Hansen, Castenia's here in person. I'm sorry. I brought a prop because she's just too cute. My name is Castenia. I'm the executive director of the No-Mat Alliance. As you heard, we run the Blue Bus. And this would completely eliminate that program. The Blue Bus for $4,000 investment, several thousand dollars in renovation costs, and a No-Mat who built it every single day for four months to head a bathroom and a shower.
We have housed 12 to 24 people for months every winter season for four years in a row. For less than $2,000, $3,000 of annual operating budget. Full of all volunteers, the homeless taking care of the homeless. Yes, it's an imperfect solution, but we were trying with no funding. We've never had a death, no overdoses, never use Narcan, no sexual violence, and no bed bugs.
It is an... And yeah, at one o'clock in the morning on a Saturday in late February, cops raided the bus with drug dogs, dozens of cops, waking up nine sleeping people at one in the morning with flashlights tossing the bus, breaking open, like her cupboards, ricking it. Health departments shut it down for meth contamination despite the walls never being tested.
The field test, the presence of paraphernalia in our tenants bags. And now we have to spend thousands of dollars in meth remediation. And drug dogs, is this really good use of your funds? How many people did that bus hurt? And how many did that help? Yes, addicts slept there, addicts will addict. Big whoop, is that the biggest crime going on right now in our society?
No, the biggest crime right now is you guys are sitting here and doing nothing except providing localization that costs me as a taxpayer, money, and money, and money, and all of these people here. To me it seems that the police is filling quotas by harassing the vulnerable because it's easy to know that if someone's unsheltered, they probably have...
Next is Chad McEwan followed by Kylie Hansen and then Mike Rogers. Chad is here in person. Next comment. Next is Kylie Hansen followed by Mike Rogers and then Daniel Bell. Kylie is here in person. Hi, my name is Kylie Hansen. I'm here today to say that I'm really proud of Salt Lake and that is in spite of leaders who are here.
I'm really proud of leaders who continue to fail the people who live here, including the residents who are forced to live in our public spaces. But I'm really proud because sitting behind me, there's so many organizers who are investing their own personal time, finances, resources, people who are already oftentimes on the brink of being homeless themselves and they are willing to give the last food on the table and put the cash on their back to help their neighbor.
You've heard so many creative solutions here from people who are on the ground doing the work of housing people, of getting food to people who don't have access. And all of the people who have been the most effective in doing that, they didn't do it by forcing their neighbors into federal institutions. They are meant to again extract that labor from them.
They did it by reaching out, by getting to know them and by making sure that they saw humanity in every single one of their neighbors, regardless of that person's status, income, background. And again, I'm proud because of the people sitting behind me in spite of the script in front of me.
Next is Mike Rogers, followed by Daniel Bell and then Amy Hawkins. Mike is here in person. Hello, my name is Mike Rogers. I'm one of the ones on the street that you'll want to criminalize. But everybody that's on the street has a different reason that we're all on the street. I came to work, came back here from Atlanta, working for Yellow Frayed.
Two and a half years into it here, Yellow Frayed shut the doors. Put me on the street, put 30,000 people out of work on the street. I couldn't tell you how many Yellow Frayed employees took a gun to their head and are no longer with us. I'm not one of them, but it's taken me, it took me two years, over two years to find another job.
And finally, I get one. I didn't realize that getting a job and being on Medicaid was going to cancel my Medicaid without me even being notified. I had a heart attack on the street December 30th through January 1st of 25. It was a Widowmaker heart attack. It should have killed me. I survived it. I drove myself to the fire department, trying to get to LDS.
They put me in an ambulance and took me to IMED the next day I was in surgery. Everybody's got a different reason for being out here. This flat broke me. I lost everything that I had. My savings was all gone. I didn't put my hand out. I wasn't out on the street trying to beg or steal or borrow or do anything else. I was trying to do it myself.
I tried getting, finding out about housing. They told me it was a seven or eight year waiting period. I figured there's no way I'm not going to be out here this long. Guess what? I'm still on the street. I'm still in my truck. And if you make me a criminal for sleeping in my own vehicle, trying to survive, what do I do?
You take my truck from me. I'm sleeping on the street. Hi. Thank you. Next will be Daniel Bell followed by Angie Mathis and then Jeff Weir. Daniel is here in person. Next comment. Is Angie Mathis followed by Jeff Weir and then Chase Sargent? Angie's here in person. My name is Angie Lina Martinez. I've been homeless for five years due to unexpected shooting that occurred against my family member.
I found myself after 17 years homeless. I have always been a good tenant and ensured that my kids safety came first, my education as well, and my familial status was really tight. Since the occurrence, it has been extremely difficult for me to survive in a sense to understanding and complying with guidelines of the state, also in compliance with myself and inside of who I am.
With these issues, I believe I've become more criminalized in a sense to our citing, camping zoning, stuff like that. I've been through several abatements just to clarify abatements. You abate a mosquito. You don't abate people. Also with that being said, it has been terrifying to always lose my stuff, be taken to jail.
I have up to nine current camping tickets. That is extreme. I don't cause problems. I don't interfere with people. I don't steal. But I'm subjected to always being approached of what I'm doing, how I'm doing it, this and that. I'm just trying to survive. I would like to state that the solutions to these would be possibly.
Next is Jeff Weir, followed by Chase Sargent and then Romy Colvin. Jeff is here in person. Hello, my name is Jeff Weir. I've been here in Utah for the last 23 years. I was better off than what I first came here. I had decent income. I was the majority of the middle class here. In relation to thank you for having me in your state.
For the last eight years I have been going through homelessness. I still worked in what not doing the same type of business that I was when I came here. I was in the landscaping and it's been very difficult to say at least, although I do know there's a lot of different unity between people here and from South where I come from.
Where I come from we have hurricanes. It happens every year. You can depend on that happening and people are going to be homeless. We all pulled together and that's how we make it through things. I'd like to see the same thing here because this is our United States. There's been men in my family that fought and freedom is not free.
So let us be free. Let us create our people. Let us help our people. That's what the young men and women do in our United States to fight these wars for us. You should fight for the politicians. Let's just do what's right here. We know what's right. Thank you very much. Next is Chase Sergeant followed by Romy Colvin and then Bob Nelson.
Chase is here in person. Hi everybody. My name is Dylan. I already worked with still team six and I created a black door federation to make everything okay to make it illegal for you guys to say you can't make everything that's good illegal. And I really go to where we're got behind me and all my angels and demons. And we're in an infinite warfare because the universe is infinitely expanding.
I'm just trying to start a war to end all wars. And I need a pardon. I have been pardoned. I know that. I have told my student that you guys really need to live my life and put it on the news. And I'll wait here. I cowed you in and defroze myself and I understand I'm okay with being tortured. As long as for 24 hours if I agree to it, I agree to it.
And torture dope. It's legal if you agree to it. You agree to it. It'll cost you pull up until your time and it'll take it from you. If you agree to the snips name, it's MIB. It'll cut it out your brain and then you can agree to it. You can really live it and do whatever you want. Watch it on chatter. I don't care. I'm really good.
I know I am. And I know you guys need to investigate all my stuff. And if you can't investigate all my stuff and put yourself through it, how are you going to investigate it? Because you don't know what it does to people. They're going through and you don't understand it. You know what I mean? I'm trying to ease it. People in the BDSM and I'm trying to ease everybody into just being okay and understandable.
And it's yeah, we all you guys have been in my head this whole time and you know it. And a lot of aliens and angels have. Okay. I love you guys. Thank you. I'm Dylan Seystargent. It's on the news. Next is Ronnie Colvin followed by Bob Nelson and then Samantha Watt. Ronnie's here in person. I guess a gentleman in front of me wasn't here.
So my name is Bob Nelson. I grew up very poor in Salt Lake City. In fact, they condemned the place we lived in. My mom was single raising two kids. I understand what poverty and porn is. And I know if we were in today's society, we would be on the streets. There is no doubt about that. I have been fortunate to do well.
I have helped put a shower in the blue bus that Cassenia was talking about. I put showers in the original showers for Hope. Trailer. An amazing thing to see people walk out of this shower with the they're different than when they walk in. That's the help they need. They need that kind of help to get out of their circumstance.
There's some to choose there. That'll be forever. I don't think that's going to change. But the people that really want to get out don't have an opportunity. And then to throw on this additional weight, this criminalization, it just doesn't make sense to me. It shouldn't make sense to you. Because some of these people are under circumstance.
People lose their jobs. They get divorced. There's so many scenarios that you see talking to these people in the streets. Drugs, no doubt. But there are so many that want to get out of this. And to see these people that have got out of this one way or another, to see them be successful, to be loved, to have dignity and respect.
Oh my gosh, it is a heart rendering. A heart. Cool. Thank you very much. Next is Samantha Watt followed by David Elters and then Trinidad Mohan. Samantha's here in person. I hate public speaking. My hands are shaking and my heart has been beating faster than is probably healthy the entire time I've been waiting to speak.
Yet, I am here. Why? Because I have talked to homeless people. I have listened to their stories. I've heard them talk about how they have bachelor's degrees, graduate's degrees, even PhDs. And had high paying jobs. How they worked so hard. But then something went wrong. A car accident, an increase in rent, a loss of job and a horrible job market.
A medical condition that left them without the savings they had spent decades building up. This was not one person. This was so many people. At the beginning of this meeting, we discussed the rising costs of life. However, here we are planning on increasing the cost, price and punishments for homeless people, for people who have already been failed by the system, who are already trying their hardest while dealing with laws that treat them like criminals for being poor.
They are just trying to live. I'd be the first to say that I don't fully understand what it means to be homeless. I've never been homeless. However, I do know that I am a whole lot closer to being homeless than I am to being rich. One major expense, one loss of job, one medical emergency and BAM, I am out on the streets with these laws.
These are my neighbors. I was taught to serve and love my neighbors. Even though we all know who the main targets of this bill are, this thing is, it impacts all of us. You're going to put a discriminatory policy in place that will decimate property rights and deny the public access to public property. Please vote no.
Mr. Chair. Yes. Oh, sorry. Did we, the name just get announced? No. Okay. Mr. Chair, I was going to ask if we can just take, I know a lot of people are still here waiting to speak. I want to hear them speak as well. We have, I think, 24 names here and then we have two more public hearings. So can we take a quick five to ten minute break?
And I hope everybody who can stay a little bit longer because I do want to hear from you. Yes. I agree. Let's reconvene at 9.55. Okay. You make yourself a little burrito bowl? No, you have to. Oh. Sorry. Yeah. Yes. I hate that feeling. Can you resume the public comment section? It's true. We need to be a day of eltis followed by Trinidad Lujan and then Steven Coates.
The ad is here in person. Tilly, will you say that first name? One more time. I think I missed, we might have missed it in the room here. Dave Eltis. Dave Eltis. Great. Thanks. My name is Dave Eltis. I wanted to speak against this ordinance. Criminalizing homelessness is absolutely not the solution. You need to be looking at ways to prevent homelessness and prevent some of the problems that people in cars in particular are experiencing.
One of the things that I brought up with the city before that is fallen on deaf ears is there is no free dumping site for RVs in Salt Lake City. There's not a single one. There's one in West Valley City. There's one in South Salt Lake. There may end up being one at the Maverick, whether that's going to be free or not on the West side.
There's no city sponsored campground. That would be a huge step forward. Of course, that would cost money. You can't just have an open site where people camp, but much better than having people camp all over the place where you spend 800,000, I think, a few years ago on removing human waste. You could probably use that money towards having a sponsored campground.
You could look at eliminating the Salt Lake City sales tax on food. That would be a very small thing, but for people on the edge, that would be a huge boon. The whole idea of this is just draconian. It's really awful. There's a line from the battle hymn of the Republic. My nighs have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.
He's trampling out the vintage where the grapes of Rathers stored. If you look at John Steinbeck's novel, this is just a repeat of that and shame on this ordinance. Thank you. Next is Truna Dad Lujan, followed by Stephen Coates and then Ethan Diamond. I'm the lawyer of all evil, I testify as my sleep-raigial protocol.
I'm calling all sleep-raigial to testify on them. Thank you. I'm really there. I really moved that fast. Thank you. Will you repeat the name, please? Next is Stephen Coates followed by Ethan Diamond and then Salem Murray. Hello, my name is Stephen Coates. I had a lot of things. I was kind of going to my head here today.
I don't want to say about this matter. I mean, we heard so all that good things. But, you know, I don't know why it has to be that difficult. If people wouldn't turn their backs on people in time of need, perhaps wouldn't be here to be here today. But I think the problem comes from prevention too. Before we could actually deal with the homeless problem and get it taken care of, I think we have to look at prevention as well because we're good to do the one crowd dealt with when you got whole another crowd on its way out.
I mean, you know, it wouldn't hurt to put a cap on the rent and definitely bring the wages up because I don't know anybody that can, I don't know anybody person that can afford to make a living without getting a roommate, period. You got to get a roommate, somebody up and split the bill because you're not going to do it on your own wages unless you got some amazing job and make a lot of money.
I just don't see that happening. But this bill that they're proposing is definitely not the way to go. I mean, if you want to fill up our jails with people that probably don't deserve to be there in the first place, then that's fine. If you want to spend a lot of money on hiring more police officers to go out there and do what, that's fine.
But I think you can probably put that money in other places and do better things with it to, with better situation. And I mean, there's a lot of brilliant people here. Everybody's got these degrees in mind. I mean, surely you can put your hands together and come up with a better solution other than the one that you proposed.
And that's all I have to say about that. Next is Ethan Diamond followed by a Salem Murray and then Jason. Ethan, you may not unmute. And I beard. We can hear you. Cool. My name's Ethan Diamond. I am a nomadic worker and I do about probably a third of my business here in Salt Lake. A lot of that is setting up for events.
And a lot of those events started about eight in the morning set up and often go about 14 hours on their set up. Other words, I've always found it very helpful to be able to go sleep in my rig, which is set up for event work. And then be able to hit the road and go to the next destination. This would make that completely illegal and would put me on the road with other drivers after doing hard labor for 14 hours, which doesn't make a whole lot of logical sense.
Outside of that, appealing to the pocketbooks of everybody on the front stand there, when I come to Salt Lake, I buy gas and pay whatever taxes are associated with that. I don't do drugs. I don't drink. But I do have a tobacco habit and I do buy that tobacco from a couple of favorite shops in Salt Lake and pay the taxes associated with that.
I buy my food at grocery stores in Salt Lake and pay the taxes associated with that. A lot of my money goes directly into Salt Lake City's coffers, through taxes. And then I set up events, which also brings a whole lot of money to Salt Lake. And I know I'm not the only worker that does this. It's pretty common in the industry.
So you're going to criminalize people who enjoy setting up events and then look towards the safety of your citizens on the road. That doesn't make sense. That's exactly what this is going to do. It seems a little bit backwards. I do. Next is Salem Murray followed by Janet Heming and then Rachel Rainer. Salem is here in person.
Next comment. Next is Janet Heming followed by Brynne's Bovu Girl and then Sierra Shorart. Janet is here in person. Good evening. Three years ago, I participated in the annual Pit Count in Salt Lake County to identify the homeless in our region. It lasted three days from 4 a.m. to 6 a.m. in bitterly cold January weather.
I met face to face with those who struggled daily for survival and countered violence and abuse and coped with physical, mental and emotional challenges. I was forever changed by this experience. You cannot see your fellow human beings in those harsh and unforgiving conditions and not feel compassion, empathy and heartache.
They freely shared their stories with me. They were living in our v's and cars and trucks. They were camping at bus stops or near the Jordan River. Many were involved in drugs, even as dealers or addicts. Some were prostitutes. Some admitted they stole things. One told us she was about to commit suicide because of meth and fentanyl addiction.
Fortunately, we intervened. I saw it all. Surprisingly, not one person wanted to move into a warm shelter or any kind of homeless facility, even though they were available. Story one said no. These are not healthy conditions for the unhoused. And neighbors and small businesses or other public places often bear negative impacts.
How can we find a balance between initiating more healing services for this traumatized population and addressing public safety issues? These codes can be an important tool in that toolbox. Public Services Director, just announced at your work meeting today that streetlight costs are going to exponentially increase partially because of crime and theft associated with stolen utility wires.
One year these steps cost the city of Salt Lake $1 million. Next is Brinsville Vocal followed by Sierra Sherhart and then Cara Westbrook. Brins is here in person. Hello. My name is Brinsville Vocal. I'm from District 7. I want to start by reading an excerpt from a 2025 study by Leibovitz and Sullivan in Policy Studies Journal.
This study uses quasi-experimental design to test whether criminalization policies such as housing bans decrease homelessness. What they found is that contrary to the deterrence logic, local criminalization ordinances cannot be relied upon to reduce the social crisis rate, i.e. the number of people experiencing homelessness.
They later note that this finding, quote, supports the theoretical argument that criminalization policies are created and enforced with the intention of tying the concept of deviance to a specific identity. In this case, policies that criminalize activities closely related to homelessness can be thought of as intentionally designed to connect the concept of criminality to people who experience homelessness.
They are then implemented in a way that intends to levy personal costs on homeless individuals given the stigma and blameworthiness associated with homelessness. If you don't want people living in parks, cars, and public spaces, you need to house them. If people have no place to go, all this ordinance will do is increase the state's ability to target a community that is already systematically underserved.
I understand that there are powerful people who see this as a profitable venture and will contend that housing for all is untenable at the city level. But there are things you could be doing now to help people build stability instead of tearing that down. For example, you could pass an ordinance saying non-camence cannot be abated if people do not have a safe place to go with their pets.
You could pass an ordinance that people's possessions must be stored at the expense of the city or the police department if there are camp for some reason has to be moved. These are things that are passed by Boston City Council. Most immediately, you can vote no on this ordinance. Next is Sierra Sherout, followed by Cara Westbrook and then Jimmy McKee.
Sierra is here in person. I do not at all support this. I am an employee with Unshultered Utah. They were opened in 2023 and they have saved people's lives multiple times with cold blue shelters which are only allowed to open at negative 18 degrees which is just insane. Multiple people have frozen to death on our streets.
That is why they were originally opened. That is why people are, anyway, multiple beds are taken out every year. We have heard the stories. Another question that I have is will this apply to long haul truckers and people who are forced to sleep in their vehicles? If not, then it is just selective enforcement yet again.
Again criminalizing being poor which is just asinine. As Sonia Sotomayor said multiple years ago, the fact that we are still facing this is insane. Anyway, she said for people with no access to shelter including cars, I am adding that, that punishes them for homelessness that is unconscionable and unconstitutional. Punishing people for their status is cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment.
This is disgusting that you are even considering it. The fact that America has countless times with the UN voted against food as a human right is disgusting. It proves more times than not that our government is purely for profit for their own game. They do not care about the people. None of you care about the people. You have all voted against them multiple times.
And it is disgusting that we are still facing this just because they are unable to afford a home over their heads does not make them less valuable as people. And the fact that we are allowing people who are just as important as us to be criminalized simply because they are paid for it. I am set as Carl Westbrook followed by Jamie McKee and then Keisha Essick.
Carl is here in person. Hi, my name is Carl. Most people know me as Carl with a K although her honor may know me as case worker number three. Anyway, first thing I would like to say is this is kind of off topic a little bit but in China they have practically eliminated homelessness. Okay. That is one thing. This prison that they are talking about out here, how much is it going to cost?
150, 175 million. Is that right? Okay. Anybody here ever hear of the company called Boxable? Boxable makes a home, a one bedroom home you can set it up in two hours, cost 100,000. Do you know how many of those you can buy with 175 million dollars? Somewhere between 1500 and 2000, somewhere in there. Anyway, that is a simplistic approach to it.
But why don't we start by building solutions instead of aggravating problems? That is what we are doing. And for what you need. That is the last I will say. And one more thing. The average price of a starter home here, $575,000. How many of your children will be able to afford that? Next is Jimmy McKee followed by Kisha Essek and Dustin Jones.
Jimmy is here in person. I really am nobody. I used to be someone that did like to talk a lot. I was someone that was disruptive enough that made Jack hedge decide that this was not a welcoming place for him. But I am not an elected official. I only have a high school diploma. And the day that I needed my elected official the most when I was being punished for simply having a disability, you looked at me and you said that I needed to know why you got a seat at this table.
And what I want to know is why you took up a seat at the table and now you just look like furniture. And instead of like making a difference, you have made a change you. And before you there was Darren and before Darren there was you. And why is my name ubiquitous amongst my family? And I haven't seen you and I'm there with these people often.
And since that exit, this is the first time I've seen you. I've seen you at weddings, on Facebook. I've seen a lot of social events. But I haven't seen you too, engaging with this community as much as these people. Why? Why are we making such really disruptive actions when you and I haven't even had a congress conversation as to why there hasn't been more action done when I was absolutely and legally refused to home and you could have mitigated that harm that it committed in my life.
And then three months later after that because I was broken, I completed with Fenton who had to have CPR. And a simple intervention of the jobs that you hold. I don't hold these jobs. You do. And I felt betrayed. And the reason why I've been sitting here looking at you with such contempt is because you literally sat there as I was being exited of a home.
And the first thing you asked me to said to you is that I've recognized that I was unsafe in that moment. I'm not going to sit there and try to make any more than that, but you were literally there. You're elected to help. You are my representative and you've done nothing. So how are we supposed to take genuine any kind of faith in any of you?
Thanks. It's time. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Put next comment. Next is Kresha Essack followed by Dinn Jones and then Valerie McKinnon. Kesha is here in person. Good evening. I'm here on behalf of Nomad Alliance. And we are just sick and tired of being criminalized. We just would like to pass this to help us get back off the streets if we have no else to go.
Thank you for your time. Next is Dustin Jones followed by Valerie McKinnon and then Patricia Lovejoy, Dustin's hearing person. Next comment. Next is Patricia Lovejoy followed by Brooke Gren and then Laura Harper. Patricia is here in person. Okay. Hello. My name is Valerie McKinnon. I am from Salt Lake City. I love this city.
I'm here to urge you to vote against this ordinance because if you can get into legal trouble for being on public property when it's the only place that you have to go, then it is in function illegal to have nowhere to go. That is what we mean when we say that you've criminalized extreme poverty and this ordinance extends that to people in slightly less extremes who find shelter in cars in public.
40% of people who take shelter in the streets in this country have at least one job. The experience of losing all your belongings including your shelter in a legally sanctioned suite during one of the less stable times in your life is as you can imagine traumatizing. Today in Salt Lake it's a class seeing misdemeanor to camp in public parks overnight.
Your agenda claims that you're trying to reduce confusion and ensure proper enforcement by calling sleeping in vehicles on public property camping and by extending the legal definition of public property beyond parks to include sidewalks, plazas and other public spaces. And I know that we are tired of these parallels but it became illegal for beggars to be on the streets of Germany in the early 1930s.
One of the first in Hamburg it was one of the first things that Hitler's admin did in an effort to clean up the cities and they put those people into work camps eventually. Here's a quote from a poem by Ilya Kaminsky. At the trial of God we will ask why did you allow all this? And the answer will be an echo. Why did you allow all this?
Your constituents believe too much in your critical thinking capacities to think that you don't see the harm here. Thank you. Next is Patricia Lovejoy followed by Brooke Brin and then Laura Harper, Patricia's members. I hope you're wise enough to vote against this. Terrible public speaking but I'm looking at all you guys like maybe you were there but you weren't during the civil rights movement.
How did you get your spot there? What were people doing in the parks? They were naked on drugs doing crazy, crazy things in the streets as well. Moving on, unfortunately my name is Patty. I was homeless for three years in LA because I got really sick and I don't have resources. I don't have a family structure to go back to in New York.
So I had to live in my car and I had to handle it with leprosy all over my skin for three years, crazy as it is. But here's what I learned about LA. They spend a billion dollars a year. Do you know how many million dollars that is? It's $1,000,000,000 dollars in case anybody didn't get all the zeros right. So apparently the director of the Nomad Alliance has proposed to you a budget to handle it.
I would also like to point out too the reason why it cost a billion dollars a year which they only spent. You can look it up. You can just pull it up on your AI. $500,000,000,000 this year. Okay. Chicken Coops. Have you been to Home Depot? Do you need a developer for chicken coops? Have you seen how big the sheds are at Home Depot?
Because crazy enough, again, somebody from your public has proposed a parking lot solution which was submitted. Time. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next bullet comments. Is Brooke Brain followed by Laura Harper and Linda Brooks. Brooke is here in person. Mine's short. There's a theologian who once said I screamed to God for the starving children until I realized that the starving children were God screaming at me.
God screams at us. Please read this. In the eyes of every homeless person in our lovely city, if you vote to incarcerate the homeless, all here will know that you voted to hide them and their suffering. Much like a child who wets the bed might hide their sheets. It is your failure. You might feel safe knowing who those people don't vote.
But the stench of your cowardice will reach all of us. Would you dare try and silence the voice of God? Please. Laura Harper followed by Linda Brooks and then Lila Burros. Laura, you may now unmute. My name is Laura and I'm wanting to thank you for listening to all the comments and I support the vote of no on this, whatever it is, criminalization of homelessness and people in transition, sleeping in their cars, finding any kind of shelter that they need.
I'm on housing. I get housing and I have a two bedroom apartment for me and my two children. I make around $20,000 annually and I have a titanium pelvis from having bone cancer at 8 years old, my mother spoke earlier. And I am a substitute for Salt Lake City School District. So I go and meet all of the youth that will be growing in this state and becoming adults needing a place to live and be safe.
I'm not advocating for homelessness. I'm advocating for common sense policies that protect individuals no matter what their situations are. If funding for housing was to end, it would be so hard for so many people with disabilities to make their rent. It's already very hard for them to work and we are all doing the best we can.
You should be doing the best that you can as well to help the future generations and the people now. And this is not how you help. This is not how you serve your constituents. You need to think about what you can do to serve and to be godly like the former person said. Next is Linda Brooks, followed by Lila Burrows and then Lily Burrows.
Linda, you may now unmute. And if me, I am commenting to urge the council to vote against this ordinance, it is unconscionably cruel for all of the many, many reasons that you've heard this evening. So much love and respect for the people experiencing homelessness who showed out. We've had a few voices in favor as well.
These are without fail, Politico's, Realtors, developers, people who care primarily for capital and feel uncomfortable seeing unhoused people. It is also clear that this ordinance is another step towards a complete criminalization of poverty and a step towards manufacturing consent for the concentration camp in North Point.
I'm struggling to figure out what to add to this conversation. So let me just say how inspired I feel. So many have come here to oppose this. So many are here also representing labor, waiting patiently for your time, solidarity to y'all. There is also a protest tonight in Box Elder County against the data center and thousands of protests are being filed there.
What a day to be alive. What a day to fight back. But I want to address the crowd now. What we are hearing is that this council are mayor or confused as to what's right. We, however, are not. We know what to do. I'm imploring this council to reject this ordinance. But also I am dreaming of a near future in which we all realize block by block that we can take care of ourselves better than our government can.
Our neighbors deserve better. We can realize this even if our government can't. And I encourage everyone listening to think of what they can do in case the thinkable happens and this ordinance is approved. But I urge this August body to reject it. Thank you. Next is Lila Burrows followed by Lila Burrows and then Skye Standel by the is here in person.
I am Lila Burrows and I'm 16 years old. I have volunteered for the Nomad Alliance for about a year. They're in the whole year I have volunteered. I have not once encountered a dangerous unsheltered person. On the contrary, I have met so many people that have become friends that I look forward to seeing each month. And all they want is to be seen and heard like a human.
There's a lack of resources for mental health and drug abuse. And I don't see how implementing this law will help the issue. I want to see leaders in our community that can identify the problem and take relaxions and come up with a plan that will make a change. This is from my uncle Taylor Henry Eyring who almost passed away multiple times on the street from the lack of resources.
He eventually went to a sober living where he overdosed from the lack of resources there. He was a bi-sole who lost his life at 25 years old. Next comment. Next is Lily Burroughs followed by Skystandle and Wendy Garpen, the least-hand person. Good evening. My name is Lily Burroughs. I'm 16 years old and I volunteer for Nomad Alliance.
Every month we provide food and food water resources and more. Then sheltered people are humans too. They deserve to be treated like a human, like any other person. They're experiencing what most of us can never live through. They are in a place where humanity should exist more than ever. During my experience with Nomad for the last year, I personally never seen any violence.
I've only made friends. I've met people full of gratitude and kindness. Then sheltered people are overlooked or often seen as gross or dangerous people. Many suffer from mental or physical illness, drug or alcohol addiction and more. Many times from the lack of resources. Many times from the lack of resources they are given or offered.
Addiction is often a symptom to a deeper issue. My uncle Taylor Henry Eyring, great nephew to Henry B Eyring, was out on the streets experiencing homelessness, sleeping in his vehicle some night, saved his life. I expect to see a change that helps people not set them further back. This is for my uncle, RIP and for all the friends that I've made.
If this law moves forward, you will bring many lives. Thank you. Next is Sky Stand All Phone by Wendy Garvin and then Hope Clark. Sky is here in person. Next comment. Next is Wendy Garvin followed by Hope Clark and then Zoran Simonson. Wendy is joining online. Hi friends. I've been thinking as I listen to all of these comments.
I've known some of you for 10 years. You've all known through this terrible struggle that we've all been fighting as homelessness has increased. And I know you care. I know because I've seen you show up over and over and over and over again. And in a world where nobody will hear our voices, whether it is in Brigham City or at the White House or at the United Nations, you are one of the few people who will listen to us and I really want to thank you for giving us the time to speak out on this ordinance.
You already know what I think. You know the solutions proposed and I just urge you to do some of the very small things that you can do right now to make this world a better place because there's not very many people fighting for that and I know you guys will. Thank you. Next is Hope Clark followed by Zoran Simonson. Hope is here in person.
Hi. So my name is Hope and I'm 27 and I moved here at 21 Living in my van from Nashville. And I was living in my van for four years and I was coming from an unsafe environment and I came here to get away. And my question is what would have happened if I moved here living in my vehicle and then I was just arrested. When I was just trying to find safety and shelter and a family environment for me to live in and create a new life out west.
I'm from the south. There's not much for us out there. I needed to go somewhere with my disabilities. I have spinal fusion to get help. We come from a rural area. And I want to be here working in music business, helping people who sleep in their cars touring. They sleep at night in their vehicles. They need a safe place.
If there's a place we can have for them to park, that would be great. If there's a place we could create for people to go, that would be great. I know it was hard for me being in the street in the van but I was able to make a life here for myself that was so beautiful and it would kill me to see kids not be able to experience what I got to here in my 20s to be able to live the life that I could and find that freedom and find that safety and find my family here that I couldn't find back out south or in the east.
So I hope we can say no to this because kids deserve their freedom to go out and create a life for themselves and musicians also deserve the ability to go ahead and travel and play and perform and not be seen as criminals for going ahead and bringing people together and creating events for everybody in our community. Thank you.
And next is Swain Stevenson who's here in person. Thank you. Good to be with you all this evening. It's a heartbreaking conversation I know and there's a lot of strong opinions. I want to make it clear that I'm speaking my own opinions and not those of my employer this evening. I'm going to share just a little bit of my family history.
My great grandfather, Simonsson, came to Utah as an orphan from Denmark. He traveled with his sister a couple years older when he was a preteen. He was homeless for a period of time, lived out of trains and was taken in by a Danish family in Brigham City. He went on to become the mayor of Brigham City and instilled in me a passion for community.
My grandfather, Simonsson, lived through the depression. He was a regional sales manager for Grandma Cookie Company. He lived out of his car. As he traveled around Northwestern States, putting cookies on shelves because he couldn't afford to stay in a hotel. And he sent all of his money to his family here in Utah. My mother lost her home to bombing raids by allies in Germany during World War II and immigrated to the United States in 1951 and was homeless with her family for a year but was taken in by other family, extended family and found a place to live until they were stable.
My best friend in high school suffers from an extreme mental illness and lives in an RV right now. I just saw him recently as he was traveling from Texas to Oregon to establish a new life. Three years ago, New Metaliance presented a proposal for safe legal camping sites in Salt Lake City. That proposal wound up with the pop-up village that's been operating successfully now for a couple of years.
It's a very expensive proposition because of all the infrastructure that's come along with it. We have thousands of years of human history of people living nomadic lifestyles in this location. 99% of the 10,000 years of human history here people live nomadic lives. We call them native people, pioneers, trappers and traitors, cowboys and ranchers.
Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That was the final register commenter for this item. Thank you. Thank you all of those that share your comments today. I'm looking for a motion. Mr. Chair, move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Dugan, seconded by Council Member Lopez Chavez.
Is there any discussion on this item? Council Member Pietro. I'm going to, there's nothing organic about me speaking now. I'm actually doing it in response to a community member who said it would be something that they would feel encouraged by if they saw it. I want to thank everyone who came to speak, especially those who shared personal experiences.
As a rule, I typically like to say that you shouldn't have to bleed for me to believe you when you say you're hurt. And some of you got a peer in blood for us. And that's not something that's easy. I appreciate the sacrifice that it is. And I'm sorry that you had to do it. When we, when this ordinance was conceived, it was created in a context where we would have partners.
The public safety plan was written in a context where we would have partners. And perhaps it was naive of us to believe that those partners would do their jobs with fidelity, centering humanity. But they're not. We do not have a state right now that is pushing forward on human-centered solutions. What I'm hearing in this room is what I'm seeing in the headlines.
It's what I'm experiencing in my own life. I drop my kids off at our Title I school. And I look at the mothers who I've been with for the past 15 years while we put our kids through school together. It's that we've stressed the social contracts and institutions. There is a dereliction of duty at the federal government.
It's trickled down to a state that's flirting with the same principles and same guiding ethos. The county is struggling to figure out where they fit in. And we are the level of government that consistently shows up. We are not designed to be the human health and human services response by statute. We are not. We are designed to be the public safety backstop when someone is a danger to themselves or others.
That's what our statutory responsibility is. Like most of you said, it doesn't change the fact that those who live on the Jordan River Trail and those whose backyards back up to the Jordan River Trail are both my constituents. And I lose sleep equally over making sure that the 14th Amendment and equal protection under the law applies to both of them.
We are living in a time that is not just imperfect, but is being structurally tested from sources outside of us. And not only are there not perfect solutions, oftentimes I don't think there are good solutions. What I am confident about is that I serve with people who not because we're shamed, not because there's lights on us, but because we all take seriously the charge that we have to uphold the Constitution of Utah and the best interest of our neighbors will work on creative solutions.
I know that even the consideration of this has caused some righteous indignation. I have expressed to many people what my position is. I don't believe we can create a law that forces people into a position where they can't comply with that law. That means that we're going to have to get creative on a bunch of things. I also know that complete lack of structure doesn't work.
I don't park my car on a sidewalk because when we live in cities and urbanize, and yes, we have a history of being nomads, but we currently live in an urbanized context, which means we have to learn a social contract. That means that we have to have some basic parameters on how we're going to interact with each other and what we're going to do in what place.
Never should those parameters deprive someone of basic human dignity. I don't believe that is the intention here, but because of the material differences in what partners are doing or not doing and the way things are shaking out for me, I'm going to be looking for some other things to be in place before I'll move forward on an ordinance like this.
What I do want to reaffirm is the humanity of my co-counselers, of the staff, the lawyers, the mayor and the administration who are constantly working to balance the many tensions and looking to do it now in an ecosystem where increasingly we are the only level of government that will show up, which means our solutions have to become more creative, which means we are going to be yelled at for everything from the minimum wage to failure to comply with international law to the things that we actually do control.
And I think that's our burden and our privilege at this moment in time. And I'm thankful that you all could become numb to the realities as we see the world around us be challenged in the way it has never been. I'm thankful that you show up. I'm thankful that you yell at me. I'm thankful that you look at me in the eye.
I'm thankful that you care about your neighbor more than you care about yourself. If I could ask one thing, it would be please ask a question before you get so angry. There might be answers. You know what? The world is complex and your lives are complex and we're all hustling, working multiple jobs, trying to keep it together.
So if you don't have time to ask the question, we'll continue to be the safe place where you can come and you can yell. Unlike Brigham City, which didn't allow any comment, we just sat here through 200 minutes of comment. We will continue to be that place for you. You can continue to be mad at me. You can continue to make ugly faces at me.
And I'm going to continue to center your dignity. I'm going to continue to consider the dignity of the two people who were sleeping in the parking lot when I showed up at my gym this morning. And I'm going to do the best I can with the resources I have without displacing more people from their homes through abject property taxation to find creative solutions in a moment that calls for us to be radically creative.
I'm sorry for the frustration you all felt tonight. I am not sorry that this city is willing to consider and work on solutions to complex problems and do it in whatever way is imperfect in front of you. Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others. And I promise my commitment to you is that we will continue to be the bastions of democracy, upholding voice and protecting dignity.
Thank you. No. No. Let's keep on going. I have a question on the table. I can remember do going for the motion. Oh, wait. Can we still speak to this? Yes. I just want to also echo the thanks and appreciation for people that came and gave your comments and those of you that have stayed. I know other people still want to comment on other issues.
So I just want to be really quick and say that in Utah cities only have the power that's given to us by the state and the areas that where sometimes we want to regulate and where we want to see more change cities aren't allowed to make those kinds of changes. We aren't allowed to raise living wage in Utah. Cities can't do that.
We're not allowed to require affordable housing in Utah. We can only do incentive based. So I just want those that are listening to understand that while often our tools are very limited in the area of what we want to do and then when something like this comes along people can't understand why we would consider something over here without also considering something over in this area and there are reasons for that that.
I'm happy to explain not in this speech. I also have some really big concerns with this ordinance chiefly among them like creating a situation where people who want to comply are not able to comply. And so I think there is an opportunity to work on this. I've talked with staff about my concerns. I'm talking with my co-counselers about those concerns.
But we also have to understand that there are individuals in the community that are using the law to perpetrate violence on more individuals that are using the law to take people that are in a vulnerable situation and make life even worse for them either through drugs or through trafficking or through sex work and people that are being the victims of crimes that our police are telling us that they're not able to reach and to help.
So I want to try to find a way that we can make the changes, make some of the necessary changes that people identified and I hope that you'll stay tuned while we continue to do that because the vote today to close the public hearing and defer action doesn't mean that it's done. It just means that now we have our work cut out for us.
So thank you for the comments. Okay. Thank you. Something that came to mind through the public feedback, it's almost like we are a family here and we sometimes take it on our own families because we know each other too well. I'm proud of many of you and the work that you do every day to balance these constraints between the issues that you hear from all of your constituents.
And it's, well, we are the only level of government in so many ways that shows up. We also the only level of government that is constantly blamed for the problem, which is many of us who are trading. The micro shelter community was something that this council championed back in the day as a way of pushing the needle forward and proving this tool.
It was this council who championed public restrooms and still working towards access and public restrooms. And it is this administration and the city who's working on record number of affordable housing units. And what is other cities doing? What are the other cities doing? What are other levels of government doing? What is our state doing?
What is our federal government doing? And I acknowledge that it's not enough. And the constraints that we have are balancing all of these challenges together and it's not easy. But I'm not, and I know from most of you, you guys work hard to find the best solution. So I'm looking forward to making meaningful changes that fit with our community.
So thank you all of you for this. I have a question on the table, Council Member Douban and seconded by Council Member Lopez-Chavis. All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. This motion carries unanimously. Now we're going to go to our final item, which is G9. For those that are exiting the room, please try to do it as quick and simple as possible.
We have a lot of items still to go through. We would like to also go to our families. Thank you. One minute. Okay. Okay. The purpose of this public hearing is to hear a public comment on the proposed zoning amendment and master plan amendment at approximately 346, 350, 354, 370 south, 800 east, and 775 east, 400 south.
Written comments have been received and shared with City Council. With the rezone, the three northern parcels are proposed to change from RMF 35 to MU5. MU5 is the same zone as the southern two parcels and the majority of the block. The proposed plan amendment would change the parcels from medium density residential and medium density transit oriented development to high density transit oriented development.
The applicant is requesting these amendments to allow the construction of a five story mixed use building. In addition to the two applications identified for public hearing this evening, due to the building facade length, the Planning Commission is also reviewing a design review application. The Planning Commission has opted to take action after the Council's consideration of the general plan and zoning map amendments.
A few additional comments. The development rights of the property are already in place for the southern two parcels to build the proposed building elements on those two parcels. However, to have fire department access for the full building, the fire department requested the roof be flat. The rezone allows height up to five stories to provide the flat roof for fire access to the building's full length.
The rezone request expands that development a right to the northern three parcels. Additionally, the properties currently contain three existing residential buildings, which include seven residential units. These buildings are not in a local historic district and are not protected. At this time, the property owner has the right to demolish these existing structures.
The Council was briefed on this item on April 14th and is tentatively scheduled to take action on May 19th. Thank you. Thank you. Taylor, can you begin with the first public comment on this item? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have about 20 people registered to speak to this item. The first will be Jen Colby followed by his send you Karl and then Mata.
Jen is here in person. Thanks. Jen Colby district four and wow. This has been a long night and thank you for sticking it out for this one. I do oppose this owning and plan amendments and also ask that perhaps you continue this hearing given the late hour and maybe earlier on another agenda. Anyway, this issue does connect to the past hearing.
The city housing decisions make a big difference in what's available to people and who gets housed and who doesn't. Market versus affordable new luxury versus retaining naturally affordable housing. I do support appropriate development at the old pizza hut and adjacent vacant lot but not as proposed and combined with the three RMS 35 lots as a massive outer scale podium.
Any redevelopment should be within current zoning if that means two different buildings and projects so be it. In some ways though the proposed building plans are a distraction from the court decisions. Zoning goes with the land. The proposed project is just a sales pitch. The requested rezoning radically changes the land use by right.
There's no guarantee the project would be built or stay residential. There are several recent examples in the city of an owner receiving a zoning or subdivision change then putting the property up for sale rather than build or change the use or demolish housing for a parking lot. Expansion of permitted uses from residential to MU5 would include hotels and motels parking lots, bars and taverns, offices, self storage and many others.
The only good news, data centers and nuclear reactors are not allowed. Give the state a minute though. The major expansion of non-residential uses is wrong for the three properties on 800 east once they are used by right the city has no control. Hardage hospitality is an extended state hotel management group with no apparent experience long term rental management.
Agreements are temporary and unnecessary. Other issues, wrong building height and mass for the full half block. They owned the property next door. They sold no affordable units. Demolition by neglect should not be rewarded. The proposed project is too car centric in a transit center area along a key bicycling route. Okay.
Thanks. Next is Hissen Yookao from Bimata and then Mark Rex. Hissen Yumi no Annyou. Hi. Good evening council members. My name is Xing Yi. I would like to comment on the item G9 and I'm speaking on behalf of myself and my father who owns the home at 336 south 800 east which is directly next to the proposed development site.
I live in this home for many years so I know this neighborhood and it's daily connection very well. So my primary concern is the proposing resolming from RMS 35 to MU5 and to high density transit oriented development. This is not only about the current 109 unit project. The resolming would permanently increase the development and intensity allowing on these parcels and could significantly change the long term character and future development pattern of this residential area.
Well, I do understand the need of housing in the city. I'm concerned that this resolming shifts the area from primary residential neighborhood to where a more intensive mixed use. My home owners like my family may no longer have the residential environment we originally invested in and the traditional home buyers may become less willing to live directly across from a large mixed use development.
I'm also very concerned about the scale and placement of this project in relation to the Linden Avenue which is on the north side. It's a narrow one way residential area lane that already experienced parking and traffic limitation today. The problem also includes a 55 foot tall mixed use building extend across much of the block indirectly facing existing low density residential homes based on this proposal related to the discussion that we have.
I think I respectfully ask the council to carefully consider the long term impacts of this resolming. Thank you for your time and consideration. Next is Malta followed by Mark Rex and then Matthew Mer. Malta is here in person. Honey, I'm at 744 East 300 South. I've lived on the block in question for 40 years. This is not the first time Hardidge has requested an up zone on these properties.
All we ask is that they build to the zone. Zoning these properties are a 35 was not a mistake nor was it an or is it obsolete zoning. It was a calculated effort to a deliberative and long process. This would not be an issue if they would build to the zone. For 20 years this request in one form or another keeps rearing its ugly head.
Why do I say ugly? Because they've not built trust with the neighborhood. They've existed in opposition to it. Acquiring properties tearing down properties getting the zoning changed down them like 370 requiring more properties telling people if you don't sell out you're going to be living in the shadow. And then tarping the roofs and keep asking for an up zone.
This project needs more work and the city rewarding bad stewardship exacerbates neighborhood trust in the city and the process. Hardidge will be eliminating naturally occurring affordable housing. Replacing it with units that have no affordability component. And once they have the zone change there's no guarantee that they won't build a hotel.
You know the old bait and switch because after all they are in the hotel business. So and I think it's very relevant to the previous item on the agenda. Thank you. Next is Mark Rex followed by Matthew and Tyler Mead. Mark is here in person. Hello I'm Mark Rex and I've lived on this block for over 30 years. Part of it on eight east and part of it barely around the corner.
My backyard abuts this very narrow linden that we were talking about. Those properties in linden are about to be overshadowed by a giant to be overshadowed or permashattered by a giant box canyon which is entirely incongruent with the housing that we have there now which is numerous small houses and smaller rentals. Further eight east has traditionally been free lined and a bike friendly and an islanded street with numerous housing types but reasonable and congruent to one another.
We documented between south temple and 900 south that there are currently no five story types of buildings. It's primarily one, two, three and up to three and half. Many of those are our M.S. 35 apartment types of buildings so we're not opposed to having reasonable development. Many of these units like the one next to my house the Spencer Stewart just around the corner is a 1920 beautiful building, 29 units there right next to our house.
So we can coexist but we don't need to set a precedent for a big box canyonization of a street that has not experienced this before up until now. We see numerous examples of this already in the city particularly on four south and areas such as between third south and fourth east. In units that are R.M.F. 35 these are more of a human scale so you will see as I do with my neighbors next door in the Spencer Stewart as one example.
We see human interaction. You have activity on the time. Mox is Matthew Mayor followed by type of liberal warfull. Matthew is here in person. Thank you. I want to address a couple of things that have already been brought up and add to them as well as potentially bring up a couple of new points. One of which this question of whether this is a historic landmark or not these buildings that we live in.
I live in one of the buildings that's proposed to be demolished. It was built in 1906 and I think it disqualifies as a historically protected home simply because they did renovations in the 70s to make it livable and make it a four unit family complex. I can tell you with confidence that if these houses are demolished I will be struggling with being unhoused.
These newer developments are always focused on upper income individuals who are able to afford added services, who are able to afford inflated prices and that will drive the prices and the rest of the neighborhood up. I have major concerns with the out of state company from San Diego that is planning on developing what is proposed to be residential but as mentioned could turn around and be a hotel.
I looked at their website, Heartage Hospitality and right on your home page, Heartage Hospitality, Hotel Management Company. We can quickly bring your property online and provide highly customized services to maximize revenue growth. I want you to think for a little bit about what their intention here is. Is it to provide housing?
Is it to help with homeless people at the homeless issue in Salt Lake City? Is it to build the community and make it feel like a neighborhood friendly, family friendly place? No. It's to turn a profit. If you want to let people come in from out of state or out of country and take over our neighborhoods, then really what is the point of having these beautiful neighborhoods like East Central?
Thank you. Next is Tyler Need followed by Deborah Rathal and then Jesse Burtula Rathal. Tyler is here in person. I don't think he is. Next comment. Next is Deborah Rathal followed by Jesse Burtula Rathal and then James Burtula. Deborah, you may know on mute. My name is Deborah Rathal. I have owned my home at 331 South on 800 East for 30 years and raised my kids there.
I'm asking you to deny the rezone proposed by the Hardidge Hospitality Development Company. We do support thoughtful, right-sized development. If you walk our streets and stand with us rezone with land, you will see immediately it's completely out of scale with the residential block. These parcels were purposefully zoned, RMF 35, to buffer the neighborhood.
I used to safely herd my children up and down the lanes on their bikes. That won't happen for subsequent families with a Bahima MU5 dumping cars into our tiny lanes. I'm proud of my neighbors for standing up for each other and for what's right. The charm of this place is real and the proof is in the passion you hear from our neighbors.
Quail and Hawk live on our block. Eight families do too that we don't want to lose on the three parcels of affordable housing that Hardidge wants to demolish. Something is wrong if a company can realize huge financial gain at a dear cost to the fabric of a neighborhood. The Hardidge Hospitality should play by the same rules that we all do.
One more thing, 800 East is a designated cycling corridor in Salt Lake City's bike network. A network this council has invested in building. A 109 unit development means substantially more vehicle traffic, rideshare activity, and deliveries on this active bike route. This council has been building a bike friendly city and this project undermines the safe and easy riding corridor that exists on 800 East.
Please deny the rezone. Thank you. Next is Jesse Britchelor-Athel and then James Britchelor and then Mary Seizmour. Jesse, you know on me. I just want to let you know Jesse had to go home and go to bed. So he submitted his comment already. So my name is James Britchelor. I've worked as a land use planner and a policy analyst both in Colorado and in California and I've created a whole bunch of extra reading for you all to do, some of which I've submitted tonight, some of which I've already submitted online.
My wife Deborah and I have owned the home at 331 South 800 East since 1996. I'm asking you to deny the rezone of the three residential parcels in question here. 48 of my neighbors who signed a petition last week agree with us. You have the petition now. I support new housing in this neighborhood. My problem is with the outsized scale and lack of affordable housing of this specific proposal.
The developer has plenty of existing options to add new housing at a scale that works in the neighborhood without asking for a rezone. I've read the staff report and the Planning Commission transcript and I provided a detailed analysis and a plain language walk through here via email. In 2012 this council adopted exhibit A of the 400 South livable communities project a zoning map that drew the boundary between transit supportive development on 400 South and the residential block to the north.
The three hardage target parcels were specifically excluded from the transit supported designation. They were drawn as the residential side of that boundary by council action. Approving this rezone would lift those three parcels out of the surrounding RMF 35 block at one applicant's request. The structural pattern of spot zoning overrides what this council itself decided through public process less than 14 years ago.
Hardage hospitality builds hotels in 16 states. They don't build apartments. They wanted to abolish eight existing affordable homes on these three parcels. The zoning they're asking for stays with the land and MU5 permits hotels, parking lots and all the other things you heard earlier on these parcels regardless of what they propose today.
Something just doesn't add up. We deny the rezone and the general plan amendment. Next is Mary Sizemore, followed by a semi-chromor and then Audrey Dayton. Mary, you may now unmute. Hi, thanks council for hearing all of our concerns not only on this topic but on all other topics this evening. I live off of London Ave which is the one way street mentioned.
We are surrounded by a lot of arterials, 400 south, 700 east but London itself is a peaceful and livable street and we love it. I support transit oriented development along tracks on 400 south. At the same time I have concern for my neighbors who will lose their naturally affordable housing. I have concerns that this out of state developers and for the money and not to further our shared goals of ending homelessness through affordable housing.
I would love to see missing middle housing on these rezone parcels. If the rezone does move forward, I request that the driveway access is placed on 400 south which is much more appropriate for cars and that trees be preserved throughout as they are our only barrier from these big roads. Thank you so much for your time.
Next will be Cindy Kramer followed by Audrey Dayton and then Collette Holmes. Cindy's here in person. My name is Cindy Kramer and I have lived in the Bryant neighborhood for over 50 years. I owned a single family residence on this block 20 years ago and I still own a fourplex and a single family house near the intersection of 300 south and 800 east.
Note that I mentioned two single family residences and a fourplex. I want to say four things tonight. First of all, please keep this hearing open. I'm extraordinary pleased that so many of my neighbors had stayed but this is late. It's been long. Hardage, this is the second one, hardage owned property on 400 south with the zoning it now seeks.
It sold and began buying properties on 800 east. That was 20 years ago. I sent a member of your staff what they got per unit for the sale of the zoning they now want. And in those 20 years there's been deterioration in the maintenance. I sent data to your staff about how they bragged on their website that they had the zoning they needed before they got it from the city.
There are no buildings on 800 east of the scale proposed here. None. 100 east is one of the great streets in this city. And number four, I have talked to you multiple times about the corruption of the community benefit concept. A bike station in Sugar House Park would not have been an appropriate community benefit. A gym is not a community benefit when residents can already walk a block and a half to one or ride tracks to stops or walk another block and beat another gym at trolley square.
This neighborhood already has everything it needs except affordable, accessible housing and children. Next is Audrey Dayton followed by Collette Holmes and then Melinda Maine. Audrey is hearing person. I don't think Audrey is here. Next comment. Next is Collette Holmes followed by Melinda Maine and then Kathy Scott. Collette's here in person.
I don't think that person is here either. Next we'll be Melinda Maine followed by Kathy Scott and then Esther Hunter. Melinda should be here in person. Hi, my name is Melinda Maine. I've lived in the neighborhood for many, many years. I just feel like it's one of the last walkable neighborhoods in Salt Lake that's unique, that's got any variety of resident, any variety of resident.
And to build something of the scale that's being proposed here, it does not fit on that street and for it to intensify the building structure. It'll set precedence for any other developers that are just chomping at the bit to come to Salt Lake. And I would like to ask you to oppose this amendment to the zoning for the RMF 35.
The upgrade. Thank you. And next is Kathy Scott followed by Esther Hunter and then David Denise. Kathy is here in person. Good evening. I'm Kathy Scott, a 30 year resident, two blocks from the project that we're discussing this evening. And I strongly recommend that you deny the master plan and zoning amendment request for the sound reasons that the community councils had recommended when before planning commission and then the sound reasons that the planning commission denied the future land use map amendment.
To change the zoning and the maps would result in a development that as we heard, it's going to be out of scale, out of character, not compatible with the existing buildings that are in the neighborhood. The proposed development would have no affordable units and at the same time would be removing affordable housing units from the market.
But I think most important is to look at the impact on the current residents and the character of the neighborhood and the betrayal of trust by the government, by our city government, by all of us. As you know, I was a planning commissioner years ago too and 30 years ago, even prior to being a planning commissioner, 30 years ago when the tracks line was proposed, resident city planners and consultants spent thousands of hours developing a transit oriented district plan to encourage sensible development along with the tracks line while protecting the neighborhoods filled with historical architecturally sound buildings.
Of course, everyone who came to the table had to make concessions but with collaborative and thoughtful effort and a plan that protected walkability, site, view and shadow issues and neighborhood charm, a plan was established. The TOD plan was later amended and replaced but the abiding characteristic was to prevent the removal of affordable housing, historic buildings and to protect against the intrusion of intense.
I'm next to Esther Hunter followed by David Dansey and then Sean Thompson. Esther is here in person. Hi, I'm Esther Hunter. I'm representing East Central Community Council as its chair. And the first thing I want to say to you is I'm very sorry that we're here tonight because we really pride ourselves on trying to work win-win with every development in our area.
The last 15 years we've been quite successful. So we're asking for your support, your representation to help us on this project to quickly find a win-win that works both for the community, for the developer and for the city at large. As I want to say first of all, a lot of people don't know where East Central is. Seventh east, fourth east, east, south Temple the night south.
We are your second largest, naturally occurring affordable housing in the city. We are important to you for the hearing that we had just before this. We provide a great deal of housing and ability for people with friends still down to the $799 level for people to be able to live in the area. So it's important that we try to keep the housing if possible.
We support transit. We support the transit on four south. We support the two lots that could be developed on and I do not believe it needs to be all or nothing. For instance, one of the previous plans kept the four plaques with the new proposals that are coming in in terms of being able to build behind buildings, being able to change the number of people per family per unit.
A lot can be done here if we can actually work on something like that. What's important about East Central is that it is also between downtown and the university on the number two, two or nine in the fixed transit. So workforce housing and important for families to be able to live there. I stopped mid-straight on 11th East the other day because I suddenly heard kids laughing and how long it's been since I've heard that because we actually had affordable units going on for south.
Time. Next is David Danzy followed by Sean Thompson and then Carl Westbrook. David is here in person. My name is Dan Danzy and I am the attorney for the applicant. I'm a resident of District 7. I appreciate your time tonight. This is a long meeting and the council clearly deals with a lot of important topics and we understand that.
This is an important topic as well. This is an important topic obviously to the residents. It's an important topic to the applicant as well. The applicant has spent a lot of time and put a lot of thought into this project. The applicant has spent time meeting with the community council, meeting with members of this council to try and address the needs and the concerns that the community council has.
The applicant believes that the project that is now anticipated now in front of the council is reflective of that desire to work with the community, to work with members of this council, to work with staff, to try and put together something that is one of the previous commenters said a win-win solution. We would point out that previously there have been iterations of this project.
Previously there were iterations that we thought had supported the community council only to find out when it came before the city that it did not. And so this is a project that we think we have done an effort to abide by the desires of the community. The staff report that you have before you illustrates a number of ways that we have tried to address the concerns that were raised at the planning commission.
Notably we have taken steps to address the concerns about unit replacement by providing a number of different types of units, family-centered units. We have tried to address the affordability issue by voluntarily contributing to the city's loan. Next is Sean Thompson followed by Cara Westbrook and then resident catalyst.
Sean is here in person. Good evening and how excited are we all to be here at this time. Thank you all for your attention. My name is Sean Thompson and I am the architect. We have been working on this project for approximately four years now over four years. This piece of parcel, this parcels are a bit of an odd condition.
Due to the configuration of the parcels themselves, the zoning that overlays them, the requirements of different zoning abutting each other, it creates a really convoluted approach of how to actually design something. Then when we actually have the overlay of the power line, the width of 800 east, the size of the Parkship on 800 east, that precludes fire department access from that side, what we run into is a situation that just further compounds the complexity.
Believe us, if we can develop by rights and have it work, great. We have tried for four years plus. As Dan mentioned, we have tried doing density on the south side of the parcels, was not received by the community. We tried again. Meeting, we thought we had a solution. We found out when we met with the fire department that they were pretty adamant about the single level of fire roof access in light of the white horse fire and some of those things.
Pretty well founded concern. Please know that we have tried. We're happy to answer any questions you may have on that. But believe us, we have tried multiple ways to play by all of the existing rules. Thank you. Next will be Carl Westberg followed by resident catalyst, Carl is here in person. Next comment. Next is resident catalyst, teaming out on mute.
I'm just really happy that all the residents have come. That's really amazing. I don't see what you could even consider more beneficial than abiding by the people who hired you, pay you at this employer and play meeting going on here. But I don't understand. The motivation would be in any way to violate this neighborhood because I went to U of U, and lived right on third south and seventies.
And I know we're an amazing neighborhood. And I know there's a lot of business around there and two think that you could be convinced somehow that going against all of these people's wishes with families and homes, you're going to have to start justifying some day to somebody. But we are really just all this safely or alive and just take from opportunity to embrace the role you get to play because this is going to come back on you.
And I want to make you taste shame. Mr. Chair. Yes. So we thank you for all of those that comment. I will look for a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Lopez Chavez and a second by Council Member Carlson. Is there any discussion on this motion?
Yes, Mr. Chair. Go ahead. Thank you. I want to thank all of you for staying here for as long as you have to really make sure that the type of development that comes into the neighborhood is intentionally active and is something that's duplicative to the type of housing needs that we have. Gosh, I think the first meeting we had Esther was in 2020 regarding this parcel and the rezone request.
So it's been many, many, truly many iterations now. Now I also want to thank the developers, specifically the architect who spent lots of time trying to decipher this. I think we still haven't come up with a solution though. And I'm looking forward to extending this public hearing. I hope my colleagues supported of course, but we need the opportunity to really come together.
This is not a project yet that I see fitting into this neighborhood. Thank you. I have a motion on the table. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion is carried unanimously. Moving on. Right now, there is no potential action items, but there is a new business item. This is a tentative motion for the code of conduct and leadership position.
I look for a motion. Mr. Chair, I have two motions. The first motion. I move that the council establish a working group of council members, Carlson, Dugan, and Wharton. The working group will retain an independent investigator to aid in conducting an investigation of allegations regarding council member Lopez Chavez in any potential violations of the code of conduct.
It is our intention that the investigation will take place over the coming months and conclude before the end of July. This timeline may be adjusted as needed based on the investigation or direction of the working group. Do I have a second? Second. I have a motion by council member Young and a second by council member Wharton.
There is a discussion on this item. I'm going to call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. There is one abstention. Council member Pietro. Mr. Chair, for the second motion, while an investigation is underway, I move that the council temporarily suspend council member Lopez Chavez's following duties.
A, conducting formal meetings. B, suspension of CRA leadership role. C, engaging in city-related travel. D, speaking on behalf of the council. And E, use of the communications budget to communicate about this investigation. Second. A motion by council member Young and a second by council member Wharton. Is there any discussion on this item?
I'm going to call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any abstentions? Abstain. So, I have two abstentions on all of the rest of the council members are in favor. This more motion carries. Carries. 5 to 2. With the 2 being abstentions. Moving on on the agenda. We're going to item J1. This is a resolution for a tentative budget for Salt Lake City.
Include the tentative budget for the library fund for fiscal year 2026-2027. I look for a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that the council approve of resolution adopting the tentative budget of Salt Lake City including the tentative budget of the library fund for fiscal year 2026-27. Second. Council member Dugan, offer a motion and a second by council member Wharton.
All of those, is there any discussion? All of those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay, this motion carries unanimously. I also have the consent agenda from me. I will look for a motion. Move for approval. Second. I have a motion by council member Young and a second by council member Wharton. Mr. Chair, yes. We need to move.
Sorry, I'll. Yeah. Very investment agency. Point me to have that. Turner Bitten. So I'll revise my motion. Move for approval except for item four, the board appointment related to the housing authority of Salt Lake City for turner Bitten. Council member Wharton, do you? That's still second. Okay, you're still seconder motion.
All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously on the consent agenda. Mr. Chair. Yes. Can I just quickly clarify? Yes. I'm not able to connect with Mr. Bitten and we'll reconsider his opportunity related to that particular position and are a future meeting. Yes, yes. Thank you for the clarification, Council member Wharton.
Council member Young. We are now on the comment section of the agenda. But other questions, other any questions for the mayor? Okay. Thank you mayor for being here in this meeting today's long meeting. Thank you for. Who grew the peonies? There's a question. The peonies. What do you call peonies? Peonies. Peonies, excuse me.
It's really late guys. What one of our staff members did? Okay. Thank you, Council member Wharton for that question. Very, very thankful. Let's move on to the comments to the city council. This is a one hour time's love for the public to comment on city business, no schedule for public hearing. Each person will have two minutes to talk.
General comment registration closes at 7.30. And the rules apply, the same rules apply for the other hearings. Taylor, can you begin with our first general comment? Thank you. Will be run Williamson followed by Roy and then Taylor Payton. Run is hearing person. I don't think that's true. Next comment. Roy Davies and Taylor Payton.
Next comment. Taylor Payton and then Isaiah Rodriguez. Next comment.
Isaiah Rodriguez and then Adam Nies. Next comment. Okay, Adam Nies. Next comment. Thank you. No one else has left. I have the individuals here. Did we skip your names or did you not sign up? Are you the chair? Mr. No, I'm sorry. I'm Mr. Mr. I wondered openly. It's late. That's not word. I apologize for that. Thank you for that question.
Are there any that we have skipped that are here? Thank you. Yes, I apologize. It's not here. Were you on the list and we skipped you? Unfortunately not allowed. We would love to hear your comments. Staff is here still. They would love to take your comments, give you an email address to our phone number and they make it to us.
They give those comments to us. So thank you for trying. This concludes our Salt Lake City Council meeting. The Council for more meeting now stands adjourned. I'm going to be nice with this. Thank you. Sorry. No, it's okay. I was just like. It's napping here. I'm just worried that we're going to be like.
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.