Council Work Session Meeting

0:19Awesome. Well, thank you everyone for waiting. We have a few technical problems. Welcome everybody to the work session for April 7th of the City Council. Our meetings are public and you're welcome to join us in person or by watching from the Council agenda page which might have some issues right now. You can watch us in Zoom or YouTube. The YouTube link does work at the moment. The link on the video will be uploaded to the agenda page after the fact.

0:52We hope you'll continue to join us whichever manner you feel most comfortable. This is a work session meeting during which there's no public comment. You can join us tonight at 7pm for a formal meeting where you can share your comments. We of course will welcome your feedback anytime and you can send that by mail, PO box, 145476, Salt Lake City, Utah, or by email at council.commons at slc.gov.

1:24You can also call our 24 hour phone line and leave a message 801 535 7654. All comments we receive on agenda topics are shared with council members and posted also on our website, slc.gov slash council. Our first agenda item is an ordinance for Wilmington Avenue, partial street vacation approximately at 2192 South 2000 East.

1:53We're going to welcome for informal council policy analysts and barlaws and your planner and Chrissy Gilmore, planning manager. And John Anderson with us. Much, much great. I think for the update, Brian. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a proposal to vacate or give up city ownership of a triangular shaped portion of right of way between the applicants property and the sidewalk.

2:20The right of way section has been fenced as if it was part of the applicants property for several decades. Use of the sidewalk would not be affected by the vacation if the council chooses to adopt it. The applicant is with us and would appreciate an opportunity to address the council and I'll turn it over to Aaron and John.

2:41Thank you. Next slide, please. The impetus for this proposal was the applicant has applied for a fence permit to replace the deteriorating final fence. And upon applying for that permit found that they did not actually own the property where the fence was located. You can see here it's this triangle between the sidewalk and the property there.

3:04This section was vacated to accommodate two subdivisions that did not line up with Wilmington Avenue across the street. There is a section that was vacated. You can see there the same shape of triangle was removed from that side of the street. Next slide, please. So, like I said, this was subdivided in the 30s and it appears that a fence has been there for as long as the current property owners have lived on the property since about the 90s.

3:37And so the applicant one item that was discussed was issues. Why don't they have a lease agreement or just lease the property? But the applicant is concerned that the lease agreement may not be renewed in the future under a change in administration. If things happen, they would then lose those rights to that property in the future.

3:58Next slide. Just some site photographs. You can see the fence here, the final fence that they wish to remove and replace with something newer. Next slide. And so there's council policies that need to be reviewed in order for a proof. My staff recommended approval based on these policies specifically that no public access would be blocked by this vacation and it complies with all five of those policies.

4:40It also complies with the state's tax requirements that it would not detrimentally impact any adjacent property owner or the public. Let's see. Engineering did. The only opposition from city staff was from the engineering department and they were concerned that there may be benefit in the future, but that was an undetermined benefit.

4:58And there's a challenge in recommending denial for proposal for an unknown future benefit because of this irregularly shaped section of right of way. Next slide, please. And that's it. So, yeah, the final commission recommended approval and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. Council members. No questions. You thought I had a question. I mean, this is very obvious to me.

5:30I do have a question related to is there a bus line that goes through this Wilmington at all? No. That sort of gives me all what I needed to know. This makes sense. I mean, the property owner could have done this without pulling permit, which is not allowed. But you know, they could have and they could have built a fence there without finding this and they did the right process. They follow the right process and we discovered this little triangle thing there.

6:01So, I think it makes sense to me. Yeah, I'm sure the the applicant is here too. And I don't know if he wanted to speak. You mentioned that you might want to as well. So, I think you want to give a few minutes. We'd love to welcome him to to. We usually have allow for five minutes, but I feel like we might not need them. But please feel free.

6:32City Council members, thank you for taking this up. I realize it's not the most momentous thing on your calendar right now. I don't need the slides that I brought. They've already been presented here. I do have a survey that shows the exact for square footage. But I believe you have that in your possession. My wife and I acquired this property in June of 1990. There was a chain link fence flanking the sidewalk going all the way up at that time.

6:58In about 2003, we replaced the chain link with the vinyl fence, which has been there since that time. I should mention that at that time, the vinyl fence was part of a housing renovation project we did. And we did submit application and got permitted at that time, which included modification of the driveway and curb cuts.

7:24So, clearly it was before the city at that time and it was approved without comment. I don't know why that happened. This time, however, our builder dutifully sought a building permit and has the city attorney told us during a meeting. Thank you so much for doing that. We appreciate people being civic minded. And the answer is no.

7:41So, I do want to mention, and this is getting the cart before the horse, in the event that approval is given, the usual practice in the past has been to compel the applicant to pay the fair market value of the property being offered. Section 14.5, 2.07, 0 was modified a couple of weeks ago. Such that in a case such as this with a low residential property, payment is not required.

8:18This under subsection C, payment is not required. This section is not expressly made retroactive and our application was pending at the time of its enactment. So, you'll need to ask the city attorney's office whether that's even fair game. I do have to acknowledge that we've had this property for 36 years and have never paid a dime of property taxes on it.

8:39So, it's not like it would be totally unfair. But with that, unless there are questions, that's our application. Any questions? Because I'm very young. So, I just want to say thank you. You have cared for this property for the entire time that you have lived there. You've never once reached out and asked the city to come mow it, to come take care of weeds, that this has been something that your family has kind of assumed responsibility for for the entire duration of you living at that property.

9:12I also appreciate you calling out the fact that we recently had an update to code and that it creates an opportunity for us to look as counsel about honoring that code when it comes to consideration of this. And I would encourage my fellow council members to consider that as we go into the public comment phase. Because this isn't a property that we could sell and or put into a specific use case aside from potentially extending the sidewalk in a very odd way that would ultimately come back to a regulated traditional sidewalk.

9:52So, I just wanted to acknowledge the effort of the Ramptons to follow through on city processes and encourage this council to be able to consider looking at it through the lens of our current requirements. Okay, Council chair, can we ask that the applicant provide their name for the record? I didn't do that. I am Vince Rampton.

10:15I'm one of the two trustees and beneficiaries of the Rampton family trust which owns the property. Thank you. I think that answers our questions. Sometimes it's better that way. Thank you. Thank you. We're moving on to item number two. This is an ordinance for the indefinite, indefinite closure of 7200 West between interest 80 and California Avenue.

10:44We're going to welcome again, Brian former. And then Jorge Chamorro maybe is oh yes, Jorge Chamorro public service director and I some Doppler urban services director will join us at the table maybe. This is a proposal to continue the closure of 7200 in place since 2024. Prior to the closure, there was significant illegal dumping of trash in the area which caused some environmental impacts.

11:14The closure has been effective at mitigating the unsafe condition and the proposal is to close this section of street to public use. But unlike the other previous item, the city would retain ownership of the property. Turn it over to Jorge. Thank you very much, Ryan. Wait, it sounds loud. Good afternoon everyone. Just like Brian for the very willing summary, this is an extension of the closure that was approved two years ago.

11:477200 West extending from California Avenue on the south. And this time around, we are extending a little bit farther to the north from the previous closure just to the terminus of what the city owns on this. Right before you take ownership. I will show you a map in a minute. If we can go to the next slide please. Also as Brian mentioned it, an indefinite closure per state statute does not represent a vacation of the property.

12:27So this property will remain a public right away though with restricted access with a gate at each end. There are no changes to the use of this road. It will continue to be a road. adjacent property owners will remain with access. They have a lock that they can use on their own. They don't have to coordinate times or dates with us.

12:53The closure has been effective. The tearing illegal dumping and illegal activity along this stretch. However, we still see some illegal dumping especially at the gates. Again, I will show you some pictures in a couple of slides. But the reality is that very few of you remember that initial presentation but even a boat was found in this stretch.

13:21And it has been effective. There is still some illegal dumping. Mostly related we assume to the hours of the landfill and the restrictions they put on for example tires and other items people sometimes just dump it on their own. But it is far less to what we have experienced in the past. This effort has been coordinated with engineering and transportation divisions.

13:52We have heard from transportation director that there are some plans on connecting IAD to 201 in the future. We don't have a date for that. But hence they intend to keep it as a public road close for the time being. In the transmittal we added letters of support from the property owners for your review as well. Next slide please.

14:23This is just a map as a visual representation of the current closure goes a little bit south from that unit property. We will just extend it a little bit more to the north and relocate that gate. Next slide please. We are just very minimal still illegal dumping. This was from the most recent cleanup effort just minimal portion of what it was in the past.

14:54And the final slide a couple more examples of what we are finding these days. But happy to answer any questions. Council members? Councilman Garza? Can you help me understand a little bit about the factors that lead to this site being a place where illegal dumping is taking place? So this road, if we can go back to slide number three in the presentation, it's very close to the landfill.

15:33And so if the landfill is closed, it's very easy for people. And there is not a lot of activity happening around this area. So it was very easy for people just to drive in the back road and then just dump what they were pretending. We assumed that they were pretending to take it to the landfill doing the right thing, but end up just dumping it on the street.

16:01In the past when we originally did this, the amount of courage and junk, and vehicles and gigantic things that were abandoned and there was overwhelming. These photos, they don't look very nice, but in comparison with what it was, it's just very, very different. I do want to, I mean, it's certainly supportive of closing.

16:26It seems like you got letters of support for this from Kennecott, Union Pacific, and Waste Management. So everybody has access, what they need access. So the posting of, you know, is illegal to dump. None of the photos, and I'm sure that the photos are not 360, you're not capturing every single angle. But I wonder if there is more signing to do, and maybe even say that these areas are under surveillance or something like that, maybe it may not.

16:59I think it may be as fair to say that maybe the people that are throwing garbage out there might not be watching this meeting. So I think it's maybe worth to bluff a little bit about how many eyes we have in that area. Because I remember last time that you, I think you got the cost of removing all that garbage. It was incredibly expensive.

17:26So I wonder if a few hundred dollars in signage or thousands of dollars, I don't even know how much a sign costs, but maybe worth while you're expanding this area of closing. So we'll consider that for sure. Any questions? Because we're doing. Is there a requirement from UDOT to have a sign on the freeway that says no access office exit or something like that?

17:59Because when you leave that exit, you can't, you turn south and you have a gate and you turn north to just a dead end. Is there a requirement there on their end? We're going up the expert. Yeah. Great question. UDOT has not indicated any need to change their signage. If I remember right, there's some access to the north off of that interchange as well.

18:21So it's not completely closing all access from this interchange. And then there's that area that UDOT actually owns that people can pull off. You know, imagine if you're have a flat tire, you want to pull off. There's a place to pull off. UDOT's never made any indication that they want to change their signage. And it's been closed for a couple of years now.

18:44Okay. I think that we don't have any more questions about it. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Moving on to item number three. This is an ordinance for another indefinite closure. This instance is for 200 south between Montgomery Street and approximately 1640 west. We're going to keep Brian Fuller in our table. Our cons and policy analysts to help us with this item.

19:10Lynn Jacobs, Transparent Director, and Joshua Willy, Deputy City Engineer will join us at the table. This is a proposal to indefinitely close the portion of 200 south between Montgomery Street and approximately 1640 west to create a railroad quiet zone. Under the proposal, the street would be closed to the public, but again, the city would retain ownership.

19:34I'll turn it over to Lynn and Josh. Thank you all for your attention. So this 200 south closure is really to help support this railroad quiet zone that we were trying to create. We as a city have been working on this quiet zone for four or five years now. This would be the fourth quiet zone that we participate with. What's unique about this is this will be the only one that is just uniquely salt like city's quiet zone.

19:58We won't have other cities or communities participating in.

20:05This shows the proposed closure location. It's right next to Montgomery Street. There's currently a skewed crossing of the railroad right here. As we looked at what it would take to make this crossing a quiet zone, it would require pretty significant investment in upgrading this crossing. The skew makes that really complicated.

20:27As does the fact that the Patriot rail, which you can see on the left hand side of your screen is it's moving this way, it sits several feet in elevation below. You need Pacific's tracks in this area and we'd actually have to bring it back up to the same grade, which would take a lot of construction, a lot of money, a lot of investment.

20:49As you change rail alignments, we've talked about that quite a bit. It actually takes a lot to move rail vertically. What happened was that we as a transportation division went out and took a hard look at this roadway. We did some traffic counts to figure out how much it's being utilized. We counted less than 500 cars a day using this road, which is a really low volume for us.

21:13It's at the very bottom end of what we would normally see. The roadway also has connectivity around the backside. If you want to hit the next slide, it shows you a little bit of the design of what we're going to do. What we decided was that it probably would be more cost effective to just close this crossing, rather than to try to bring it up to standard.

21:39The design that you're seeing here is what we would do to close it. We would put in physical closures on either side. We would remove the asphalt and all of the crossing road base and everything, so that it basically just doesn't exist anymore. We put a fence in so that we physically block pedestrians from crossing of this location.

21:59Then we would create a cul-de-sac turnaround area so that if a truck or fire truck needs to come up in this area, they have ability to turn around. The dash lines you see in this image are actually what is plotted out here. This area got plotted back along many years ago. The area where that cul-de-sac is being built is what was plotted as a roadway, so that's actually all existing right away.

22:24We don't need a choir property to build that. We can create this situation where we can turn people around if we need to. We would remove asphalt around the closure and basically clean up that area and just make it so that nobody can cross here anymore. The reason to create this quiet zone is you can see those houses that are just to the bottom of your screen.

22:47There's an entire neighborhood here. Every time the train comes through here, they have to blur their horns. You can imagine at 2 a.m. in the morning if you live them on those houses and you hear that horn blaring, that's pretty disruptive. State law allows us to close roadways if we find that it's not necessary for vehicular traffic if it helps to mitigate a negative impact on an adjacent property, which is exactly what this is, or if it mitigates a safety concern.

23:15With this location, the crossing is skewed, sight lines are horrible. This actually helps us mitigate a safety concern as well, so it meets all three state criteria for closing a roadway. For that reason we brought it to you, if you want to go to the last slide, that shows the overall neighborhood and how that fits in with the bigger picture.

23:35As you can tell, there are properties that have been developed on 200 south to the west of this closure. They still have access, yeah, Orange Street to the wider network. We've checked in with our friends at Fire to make sure that this doesn't disrupt what they need to do. They did report that they occasionally have grass fires next to the ID ramp that they have to fight.

23:58We went through a process of reviewing fire hydrant locations with them, and they're still able to fight fires in that area if this closure is put into place as we're asking for. I believe that's it. We do want to retain this as a public right away. The reason we want to do that is to make sure we maintain that utility corridor for public utilities and other utilities that need to cross the river crossing here.

24:26So it stays as public right away. It just closes as a vehicular path. Council Member, the more questions from your more presentation. Do you have more presentation about this? This is it. Okay. Council Member Duran. Could you go back to the first map? There's going to be a fence. And then is it going to put a curb also on the curvature of this, actually it's the next one.

24:55The next slide would probably be the best one to see what's going on. Yeah, on the left and the right hand side, the east side, is that going to be like a curb? And then just a fence just on the west of that. Correct. The March student city engineer. So on the on the east side, they're at Mount Gumbre Street. They'll be curving gutter that will close that and that radius there.

25:15And then all of the pavement to in between the rail and where that curb and gutter will be removed. And then just say no. Trust passenger, some sign that says you can't walk across that either. Correct. There'll be a chain link fence. There is a chain link fence. We'll just connect the dots. Okay. And it basically a curb on the other side too on the west side of the railroad tracks.

25:36Correct. There is no pedestrian crossing at this location right now. Okay. It's just asphalt. Gotcha. Gotcha. Not really removing a pedestrian crossing, but we're not adding one either. Okay. All right. Thanks. Okay. Let me throw your picture. Typically in favor of whatever keeps the trains quiet, but have we looked at these plans as overlaid with some of the proposed plans for the U-fair district and what they intend to do with infrastructure?

26:08Which districts are the U-fair district, which is going to be immediately north, but there were some grand plans for having extra exits come off of 80 and potentially help people get directly into the power district so that they wouldn't have to see the rest of the west side and could just spend their money in a place where we don't get tax increment.

26:27So but I know that there was a lot of configuration and it just seems before we put too much time and energy into this, if the state is going to override it or has plans for it, it would just be smart for us to check in with them. Yeah. So we have checked in with U-dot on this project and they're okay with what we're proposing to do here.

26:49It is compatible with the plan. And is U-dot or where of? Because I know this was a plan that was going through Wausach regional council and another consultant that came here and presented on it as well as at the U-fair district. Is U-dot up to date with what you think? Yeah. So it's compatible with all of that. Thank you.

27:08Yeah. I'm glad you asked. And access will be maintained to all the properties there. If you look just to the rider to the east of the cul-de-sac there, the payment isn't removed until about where that arrow is. It says asphalt to be removed. So all of those properties there will still maintain access. Yeah. Yeah. Great question though.

27:33Yeah. So I, what sort of public engagement have we done to tell the neighbors about this? So state law requires us to notify properties that have been a butt enclosure. And in this case, Rocky Mountain Power owns those parcels that you see on the map. And we've got a letter support from them to indicate that they're on board with this.

28:00Yeah. And I, you know, this crossing, and it is a reason why the trains are honking. But, you know, I think we need to make a, we need to make an effort beyond that, beyond what the state requires us to tell the neighbors that this is the, what is on the table, because what is going to happen is I am going to get a couple hundred phone calls and a couple hundred emails and why they were notified about this.

28:29And I feel like if we need, if we tell them that this is what is at stake, you know, we can actually make the trains be quiet. But you know, we make this change. I still be in favor of it most likely after the fact. But I worry that not engaging the neighbors will be a mistake. Yeah. And so I, I noticed, I noticed, I know this area quite well.

29:01And 200 South goes under where we're road and road road is quite high in the area. So it's not like you can, we can actually easily connect it to road road. It's also very close to the entrance to the freeway. So the engineering wise, it's kind of hard to make this road a connection to the neighborhood. It will be amazing to have more connections to the neighborhood because 200 South connects back to, to the other side of the freeway.

29:25And we don't have that many places where you can go under the freeway. And then we can run by past the trains, right? They're very few on the West Side. So, you know, since this is an indefinite, indefinite closure, are the parcels below, and you know, South, I guess, south of the train tracks in most of the, in Google maps they showed us green.

29:55I think there's like a bunch of weeds growing there. Are those on, who are, who are, who are, who know who owns those? And is there a way for engineering to potentially make a connection to this neighborhood, to Redwood Road, another one, connection to Redwood Road in the future, and potentially explore that as a future possibility.

30:13Not, we're not committing, we're, you know, I wonder if there is a way of engineering from your side to connect this, this part of the neighborhood. And there's not only this neighborhood because eventually the South, they can connect back to Redwood Road, but I'm talking about all of the things that are happening with the U-fair, you know, with the power district and all of these changes that are happening.

30:36So, I would like to explore the possibility of an additional road that goes around the train tracks. We can absolutely look at the, the options there. One of the biggest challenges, Council Member, that we have here is that elevation difference between the two adjacent tracks. That's what, when you look at a sheet like this, we will meet with the Federal Rail Administration FRA out on site what we call diagnostic review meetings.

31:04And in those meetings, FRA points out all of their major concerns as to, you know, if we have to put in the safety measures such as pedestrian crossings, although there's not a current pedestrian crossing here, if we had to do that, it presented unsafe conditions almost like a pedestrian refuge island between the two tracks, the Patriot rail on the left or on the right, and the Union Pacific on the right to be able to accommodate the signal timing for the gate arms that come down.

31:31So, there was a, there was a lot of consideration, actually originally the design was to go with pedestrian crossing, but as a result of the unsafe timings, having to put a pedestrian refuge island in between the two tracks and wait, FRA ultimately came up with the determination of the ideal setting for this would be a closure and for them to support the quiet zone.

31:55So, we were pretty limited, although we did start with the design for a pedestrian crossing here and maintain the road open without the closure that's now being proposed. Those were the challenges that we were up against. And so, it was a pretty intense and iterative process to ultimately come up with the road closure that FRA said, but to come back to your original question, we can absolutely look at, you know, providing access.

32:20If you're proposing an additional crossing or road crossing, then we would have to do an additional crossing that would add to the quiet zone here. So, as part of this closure, the 200 South closure, there's also an orange street crossing that is receiving all the safety improvements and Navajo Street there at United Steel.

32:43So, there's three total crossings. It was part of this new quiet zone, Orange Street, 200 South and Navajo Street, 200 South was just the one because of the elevation difference. Because of safety and pedestrians, if we were going to propose a pedestrian crossing, it would be unsafe. Yeah, and I was talking about the vehicle option to connect the bike to a road in the area to make it easy for vehicles to exit the area or come into the area.

33:09Now, going back to your point about like retaining the crossing, when you explained, you said the cost will be very high and the cost will be a lot. Those are the words that I heard. Can you add a little more definitions on to what very high and a lot is to get an idea? I mean, we're looking as we looked at some of the cost savings.

33:35It was in between $1.5 million additional to add all of the additional infrastructure in to make this a vehicular and pedestrian crossing. And so, when we put in these quiet zone elements, it has to take into account, and it's required to take into account the pedestrian component. And so, it almost turned into a zigzag with a median crossing where crossing each rail was at a perpendicular and then a zigzag and crossing.

34:08So, with the elevation change and with that, that's where the cost came in. Now, one of the alternatives is adjusting that Patriot rail line higher. But to be able to raise that rail, it would have to extend just the foot or foot and a half to make the two rail lines the same elevation. It would take thousands and thousands of feet and affecting many more crossings along this rail corridor.

34:43So, 1.5 million was for the first option to start beyond the details of the crossing, the arms maybe. Is that what you're saying? Arms, pedestrian crossing, everything else, it is much higher than that if we were to raise the actual Patriot rail line. So, how much money we're talking about then? Ball part, you give me 1.5 million, but then I was more money than that.

35:10We're talking about. To raise the rail line, you're talking tens and tens of millions of dollars. So, just to make this a viable crossing with arms and whatever safety are required to make sure that this works, we're talking about more than tens of millions of dollars, correct? No. In order to meet FRAs requirements to make this a quiet zone, that's what it would take, tens of millions of dollars.

35:32Okay. I think that would be, you know, that value proposition is a good one to me and to my neighbors to explain. It's not like we have, you know, if it's a million, a million and a half, you know, over years, it feels like it's a doable thing. You know, we can say to the neighbors in the next 10 years, we're potentially working to finding that and maybe some grants, maybe some projects, some funding, but tens of millions of dollars for a crossing that is barely used.

36:07It's a hard one to advocate for. So, I do feel very strongly about the posting in the area that this is being discussed, putting some signs up there and doing some public engagement to those neighbors. So, I don't want to, I feel like you can handle the answers better than I can, because I'm going to send them to you anyway.

36:37So, I will prefer that they have an easier way to understand what is at stake, what are you balancing the cost of this, and what they're gaining, they're gaining sleep. They're going to be able to sleep better with these trains being quiet. So, how could we make sure that there is some public engagement for this? There are several aspects to go there and all the counterparts answer as well.

37:03There's a four week public hearing that we have to, after notifying UDOT, which we already have, a four week hearing process that we're working through with the City Recorder's office, then we'll do additional canvassing in the community to be able to get the word out through mailers and we'll work on what the best approach to that is.

37:29Yeah, I'll just add, there has been some focused engagement as part of our quiet zone project for individual properties that will be directly affected with this project at the various crossings that Mark already mentioned. But in addition to that, we are planning on fliring a larger area to make sure that the neighborhood is aware of the closure of the public comment period that will be opening up as part of this if we move forward with it.

37:59And definitely making sure they understand that this is tied to the railroad quiet zone project that we feel like the negative impacts from the closure would be greatly offset by the positive impacts of implementing the railroad quiet zone. Yeah, so I will be more than supportive of some posting and some engagement. I think it must happen if no, we're going to make this neighborhood very upset.

38:25And I prefer that they're not. So thank you for the presentation. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Moving on to the next item. This is an informational item for fiscal year 2026, legislative intent and open intent from previous years. Alison Roland is going to join us at the table. So the table, we're going to miss Brian former from the last three presentations.

38:52Mary Beth Thompson, chief financial officer. It's here. Or Brian or Melanie Hillier, senior budget and policy analyst may join us as well. It is your time. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is technically, I guess, the second briefing on the legislative intent from 2026, FY 2026 and previous years. The purpose is to raise any questions on the legislative intent that are still open and consider whether to close some of them before the beginning of the annual budget process.

39:30The full text of the administration's transmitted responses can be found in attachment C1. And I am going to share my screen, but what you'll see is summarized versions of the transmitted responses as well as the title of each of the legislative intent will be on your screen. Now all I can see is myself. That's a little better, right?

40:02No, not yet. Perfect. So the idea is to move through the intense one by one and in the context of each item. Potential Council policy questions are noted along with Council staff recommendations of whether to close or sorry, leave open an item or close it and the options for closing them include close or consider closing and completing or closing and continuing.

40:35So the Council can consider closing any of these legislative intents in addition to asking any questions you may have or anything else you really would like to do. So I don't know if it's easiest Mr. Chair to simply scroll through these one by one. Maybe I can read the title and tell us and tell you the staff assessment of it.

41:02Yeah, I think it's like a brief run through a quick, quick update. And if anybody says something, we can talk about it. And if no one says anything, move on to the next one. Okay. So we're starting with the attorney's office. There's an FY26 intent for court system budget and workload evaluation. And the attorney's office is working with the finance department on this.

41:25So we consider the assessment to be still open. I believe we got a report from for this for the workload. I follow up with some questions related to and it's a hard one to answer, which is like, what is the standard because we have numbers from the prosecutor inside and we have numbers from the LDA's. But what, you know, are they matching the standard?

42:06What is the norm as far as what is supposed to happen? Because those numbers are not useful to me as they are, are they're behind? Are they, you know, are they overworked? And the answer is probably yes, but is one of them more overworked than the other one? I guess is the question that I'm trying to answer. And, you know, it's understanding is obvious obvious that the prosecutor, the, the, the prosecuting side of things are going to have more cases to handle than the LDA's because the prosecutors are filing cases for everyone as they are representing the city.

42:47And the LDA is only represent a portion of them. I do want to understand what is the standard as far as like workloads and how many cases an attorney can suppose to be able to handle in a situation like that. So to understand. Would you like to hear from, we have, of course, the city attorney here in Mark Katerl, but, or you could consider it something that, you know, will follow up on and let you know for next time.

43:17I just would like to have something to compare it to because those numbers were useful but not useful. We need to compare it to. I think maybe questions to the LDA and maybe to the, the, the attorney side, the prosecuting side. What is the standard on case loads for competent, you know, on good, good case work. That will give me an idea because what we did this last year is we increased.

43:47I believe it was three attorneys for the, from the DAs and three attorneys for the LDA's. But when I used to work for one of them, it usually was, LDA's needed a little more than the district attorneys did. But I want to understand the numbers. Okay. And I don't see the city attorney jumping up to, to respond. Is it, you're okay?

44:12Well, there's no need to respond, but only if you. Sorry, thanks. Instead of chiming in from behind being the voice of the back of the room, I thought I'd sit up here. We could certainly work to get that standard to compare the data. I think that it's a very tricky thing to do as someone who's been a public defender and has managed heavy case loads.

44:53You know, there's always the quantitative number, but it's also the qualitative nature of some of these cases, right? That, and that can be hard to quantify sometimes. But let us, we've had those conversations with LDA and with the prosecutor's office. Let's see what we can do to get you the information you need to make those assessments.

45:10Thank you. Okay. Any other comments on the first one? Okay. Let's move to the second one. Also on the attorney's office. This one continues to be probably one of my highest priorities for what we need to prioritize during budget upcoming as well. This system needs investment. So just putting that in the record. The first one.

45:33So the second one is from FY 24, department role clarity and ordinance. In the past, the council indicated they'd like to what you would like to review updates for the city code for department of economic development, sustainability, and the city code. And the council mentioned last fall that the DED would likely be the next one you'd like for the attorney's office to review in terms of potential updates to city code.

46:21I mean, one of the questions we had back in the day was about sustainability and that department as a whole and how, you know, whether mission and what really we wanted to accomplish and maybe making some of these things part of earnings book. And so I feel like that needs to happen eventually. So, you know, it's not urgent, but it definitely needs to be treated as the older departments are.

46:53And so, yeah, thank you. And then the final one for the attorney's office is from FY 24 pay parity among attorneys. So the idea is that the county prosecutors, city prosecutors are within an acceptable margin in terms of their salaries and on a review that human resources did, they found that they were within an acceptable margin.

47:23Does this one predate us deciding to bring the prosecution home eventually? Is that a 25? I just, how does this comport with the intention that we are going to be bringing separating out from the county office? I don't know that that is the plan any longer. Okay. Yeah, I think we probably should get an update on that if that's not the plan.

47:49Yeah, I think last year, the administration decided against separating from the county prosecutor's office. So we can get maybe a fuller update for you guys. That'd be great. Yeah, and I remember. Okay. I think there was a miscommunication. If I remember right, miscommunications about the service levels and the costs and there, but I think they were addressed right immediately after.

48:24But that's, we have the source of the information here. So go ahead. We paused it, but the intent is to do a thoughtful analysis to look at the costs for both organizations and the pros and the cons, and we're beginning that process again. So it's still part of... It's Schrodinger's prosecutor, still with the county and also not.

48:48We're looking at pros and cons above. Okay, I've been keeping kind of a mental place block holder for me for renovations office, you know, things that we're going to owe to the prosecutor should we bring them home. So I think for me, budgetarily, that would be really awesome to know if it's possible. Just understand what your inclination is before budget season, just because I have a mental holder in my head up for that work.

49:11But this is not happening anytime soon because there's a huge lift to make to bring them home so it's not happening this year. Exactly, but it's still causing me to look longer term implications of current budgetary decisions. No, it sounds okay. Thank you. And the next department is... I believe, can. Yes, community and neighborhoods department.

49:37The first item on that list is from FY26. They don't block the box idea, which is to... Dan, they're calling your name. It was actually Council Member Pitcher. Oh, what, really? I love my... I love my suburban brother and sisters. I do not love when they come into my town and drive like they have never drive in an urban context.

50:01And especially with the reopening of the temple coming and all the other things we have, I think reminding them that they do not have to shoehorn themselves into every square inch, especially when they block pedestrian safety at crosswalks is in our mutual best interest. Thank you. Sorry for, for getting the... But I am so complimented that I was confused for a Duke initiative.

50:24I feel like my evolution is just really coming along. I feel like maybe you guys remember the conversation. You guys, you mentioned it. You'd like to. Because I mentioned it, but my block isn't on the... the sweet box, not my block. So, do we have any direction from the administration? I guess we heard that it cost $10,000 per intersection.

50:47Does the administration have any data that could say... This crossings may be the best ones to implement something like this. Certainly we cannot do something like this across the city because it's worked too expensive. Right. And so I believe their intention is to do a pilot study. And they've named three intersections that they would start with down at the bottom of the...

51:13You can see them down at the bottom of that box. So we're going to try and see what happens. Test and see how they work. People understand that they had a box here, but they didn't add it yet. So I have to be good for them. If we were to make it in ordinance and do education, could we just begin enforcement? Are we over-complicating things by having to have a pilot program when we have speed limits?

51:39You can just tell people that it's 20 miles an hour now. We could follow up with a transportation division on what that would look like. Based on workload and PD, I'm wondering about how enforcement would be prioritized with some of the other workload that they have. But it doesn't mean that it's not the right thing to do to pass an ordinance.

52:00So we can follow up on that. Thanks. Any other on this item? All right. Then... If you can add that box, add the intersection at 1,300 and... No, no, no, no. 13 South and Foothill. We are piloting this on the west side, sir. It's my first traffic related. Not really. The suggesting 1,300 East Parkway Avenue, 1,300 East, 1 Syminster Avenue, and then South Temple and J Street.

52:34So those are the ones that are... 13 East and 2,200 South. And I believe in... 1,300 South and 2,200 East. I believe the transportation department has a systematic way to measure the problems in different places. And so they may want to present that before we follow up on your item. I think it's worth to find out from streets.

52:57If it's effective, if it's working, if it's really doing what it's supposed to do, and then we can follow up with more tools to this and potentially enforcement. Let's move on to the next one. Okay. This is from FY26, Arts Council funding and programs. The administration has provided an overview of the Arts Council's budget program and priority and proposed ways for the Council to be more engaged.

53:24And they've begun to implement some of the process improvements and increase the number of projects in 2025. So this is an ongoing... An update with reporting ongoing information. So the staff recommendations for it to remain open. I feel very strongly about this, especially about the priorities of the Arts Council. And, you know, as not to talk about the past, it's really talk about the future.

53:52And it's about... I want more public art. And I think that is a policy question of false, well within our side of the aisle as far as do we want to do more of those events. Now there is a lot of competing events. The city has changed big time since these events were started. Now are those traditions, you know, and those are values that are...

54:29Are those values of us and do we want to continue? Those are, I think, discussions that we should make. But I do want to see more public art. It's kind of sad to see the other cities and then see so many amazing pieces of art. And we have some good ones. And, no, it's about the future now, not about the past. So I would like to put a little more effort on seeing more pieces of art.

54:51Council Member Lopez-Chadis. Thank you. And I concur and I've appreciated your support over the years as we've developed this conversation. Something that I think we are missing and I just want to raise this because Clearfield City and other cities are raising funds constantly using public private partnerships in order to place art.

55:08Just wanted to make sure that that is included in our policy conversation as well. I'm seeing a lot of our neighboring cities really contribute art in a more facilitated manner by using some of these strategic partnerships. And I'd love for us to consider that as well. Thank you. So, yeah, I would love to have a little clarity on that.

55:35And then we can all be on the same page about what we are expecting to see. Thank you. So the next is FY23 Youth and Family Programs streamlining. We also recommend it remains open. And Youth and Family has done a lot on the planning side since this legislative intent was adopted. But there is a policy question that came up because they have developed a strategic plan.

56:04And since that may have some implications for the city budget, we're wondering if the council might want to schedule a work session discussion on it. Yes. I'm being said. Yes, let's do that. Anything else on this item? Can I just say I'm really defensive over this? We should have done this back in 23. More urgently, but I am really going to urge that we defend this program come budget.

56:37This is not the we have built dependencies throughout the town from some of the families who are most dependent on the service. This is not the time for us to enforce any cuts to a program that might be one of the last life. Lifebloods to the people who are struggling.

56:59And the next department is the finance department from 2026 FY2026 and evaluation of non statutory city services. This is something that the council has discussed in the past. The question of what is required, the basics that are required for the city. At this point, the administration has said that they will provide more information on this when the full budget come to the budget recommendations come up.

57:25And they've provided some kind of middle of the road updates to council staff that I think we've shared with council members in the various check in meetings kind of informally that the evolution of the conversation. It's not as easy to say, you know, X, Y and Z are required. Therefore, we can jettison, A, B and Z. There are a lot of services that the city provides that are more like central to the values of the city.

57:51So how we classify what is core required services versus what is a core value of the city and kind of just wanting to reflect that it's probably more of a spectrum and less of a black and white kind of evaluation. So. Yeah. I also understand that there are complexities with people working within the city to maybe feel like they are not working on a core service.

58:16I understand that those are very complex dynamics and I that's not really our intent. But certainly the intent was trying to understand, you know, and I'm not. I say this example, but it comes to mind right now. You know, giving microgrants to, you know, to to to small organizations to small individuals in the organization in the neighborhood for the same time.

58:43You know, having resources to more parks, right? And being delayed a couple months on the, you know, on more in our parts. And to me, it seemed like everybody expects the parks are fall with very much within our responsibility and duty. And we have to really, you know, put that for there. And once we have take care of the basic, you know, we can assess the other core, you know, values of us.

59:10And so that's the framework we were seeing, know that those projects and those programs are not good ones like, you know, e-bikes. Great idea. It may not be the time. So these are, this, that was the premise of the, of the idea. So. Anybody else? Yes, my. Thank you. And I don't know if it's appropriate to get too specific into the programming.

59:37Just an example, I wanted to bring up that constituents have brought up over the years is just trying to understand. Technically, city funding in economic development. Some of the positions there we've seen a lack of retention and just trying to understand what is the scope of work in the future. When we have businesses that are seeking funds, for example, to help support marketing or them overcome construction versus say some of these programs.

1:00:00I just wanted to again emphasize that I think there is confusion of what is essential versus not in some of these departments. I agree. Thank you for that example. Again, and it is not, we don't want to, you know, give it, especially even though that we have given you specific examples. Those are not, these regard that.

1:00:22It's just to just to give you a painted picture about what we mean by core and not core non statutory and statutory. And I understand that that's complicated for the administration to give us. But how close we can get. We are trying to make the best of a complicated budget. Thank you. Okay. The next one is FY26, Consolidated Fee Schedule Review, Department of Public Lands fees.

1:00:53The administration reports here that they've begun to work on this and have made some progress. Basically doing a public lands cost allocations matrix, which I'm sure Marybeth can explain better than I can. If you'd like to hear more about that, but essentially the staff recommendation is to leave it open because it is still a work in progress.

1:01:18Does this include, I still am interested in youth development organizations being able to use sweat equity instead of paying. That is a little further down. Thank you. Separate one. So then the following item is FY25 policy goals for zero based budgeting exercise. Part A is balancing resources in the public lands department and B is a staffing vacancy analysis.

1:01:49So similar to the related but not not identical. The public lands department is developing a strategic capital acquisition and asset management plan, which they've been working on for some time, which will also clarify sort of the resources needed and expected for public lands department. So we believe that should stay open.

1:02:12The second one, the staffing vacancy analysis, the finance department has worked with that and they plan to report it in the recommended budget every year. So we thought you may consider changing it to closing continue. Okay, closing continue. Yes. Okay. Let's do that. Okay. Next is the. This is a one from a previous year, the consolidated fee schedule and evaluation in two areas.

1:02:50Actually, I think there's more than two. Yes, three areas. Side rock closures, lane closures and sidewalk fees, which is part a. B, which is reducing business license fees for push carts and other mobile vendors. And C is providing 100% forgiveness for city playing field, playing field fees for youth development teams.

1:03:14So the one council member, Pedro mentioned all three of those we would consider open, but we do have a policy question on. The reducing business license fees for push carts and other mobile vendors. Because we do have an answer from the. Finance department. And their question was whether he would like them to do an updated.

1:03:38Study of the fees. Of the fees, essentially the fees appropriate for different kinds of businesses. Who fell strongly about this one. I cannot remember. Because I worry about studies and maybe. You know, then we're going to pay money for giving us a study and I'm, you know, we're talking about. 150 or fees for this vendors.

1:04:11Yeah, it may not be worth the cost of the study. So what who I don't remember this conversation might have been. I wonder if there's a way to amend it. So that it's not a study on the fee, but just understanding. I mean, I think in general push carts are great entry into culinary and cuisine and just kind of curious to see.

1:04:29I'm seeing more and more of them. I think the biggest thing that I want to understand is do we have enough permits for them in the city. And has it been accessible or are we seeing a saturation of more entrepreneurs trying to become. Cart vendors and maybe some hesitation or other constraints. That's really my main concern is just making sure that we have enough and they're not oversaturated.

1:04:51If you go to Main Street at any given time or after the Delta Center, they're everywhere. They're everywhere right now. I wonder if we can remove this from a legislative intent and then request administration business licensing to give us a little report on. Push carts and mobile vendors. And if they have some suggestions about how to make the barrier of entry easier.

1:05:14Yeah, I think that's great. And like I said, I think I'd just be curious to see if downtown or other places, then use like eight to one event center. If they're oversaturated or if we're seeing concerns about permitting, otherwise, I think that's great. And then I just want to make sure that those permits are available in other languages because I know being culturally sensitive to the type of folks that really take advantage of this entry into entrepreneurship.

1:05:43Thank you. I agree. This is a good one. Okay. I would like to talk a little bit about a felt like I've been. I was I think Chris and I were talking about trying to remember from four years ago. I was talking about sidewalk closures, lane closures, sidewalk fees, a lot of development. I think because I remember Peter, you also chipped pitch 10 into this.

1:06:13But the understanding the developers sometimes are putting all these fences around sidewalks for obvious reasons. And sometimes even taking some lanes out of the road. And I wanted to make sure that we are getting some fees and some money for that and there's a appropriate amount of money for that. Many times, you know, I see people walking.

1:06:38The sidewalks completely shut down. There is no space and there is no refuge, you know, for people to walk. And they're walking around traffic to try to get to the other side of the street. I wanted to make sure that the fees reflected the urgency that these sidewalks and or lane needs to be open. So you get it. You better get your work done fast.

1:07:06If not, you know, you're going to incur higher fees. So we want, you know, public to move to move through the area easier. So that's what I, you know, my thought on this thing is. Yes. Oh, yes. And if you're amenable, I think something that we need to consider our sidewalk shed policies. It's something that we don't currently require.

1:07:32But I'm seeing more and more construction around some serious thoroughfare such as 7th East. There's a great example, 7th East and 500 South at that intersection has pulled a permit for a sidewalk shed for two years, for example. We're expected to have pedestrians walk in the middle of one of our grand boulevards to cross safely.

1:07:52And I think that's something that concerns central city and East central neighbors. But also as we see more and more construction, it is something that I'd like to understand is when is the sidewalk shed appropriate for how long are we willing to permit those terms. That example is 24 months, but it could be longer. At what point do we decide that temporary pop up is not sufficient for the safety of pedestrians during construction?

1:08:14Or as we wait for construction to even begin? Yeah. And I'm wondering because there's a note in here that the administration never just an accident in cutting and pasting in the transmittal. And so I'm wondering the administration may want to respond to this update on any work they have been doing. I don't know if you want to ask them to come up with faith.

1:08:38Well, if they're, if they'll prepare, if we can talk with them, we can ask them for an update on that. But the intent here is to push some urgency from developers and construction, you know, and the fee may be conduit to say you are impeding the free flow and making things very dangerous for everybody because you pull in the benefit, you know, for a very long permit.

1:09:03And we are trying to, you're developing, we get it, but just be more cognizant of what is around you. So that's really, because I'm more of a picture. Not only the sense of urgency, but any ADA compliance that is lost needs to be accounted for either in a fee or in some sort of accommodation from the developer themselves too.

1:09:25So urgency and ADA for me. Yeah. I would love to get a little more of that. This sort of touches the issue and maybe there is a question that could be asked the administration on this and I see, this is an example, it's just north of North Temple on 900 West. There is a street there that has been under construction because there's a lot of the element that is happening in the street behind the door, the old door tree Victoria.

1:09:55And they trench the street to make some connections. And that trench has been covered with dirt, just dirt for about a year now. And it's a year without asphalt and so all those rocks are flying everywhere. And, you know, it's just like we want good partnerships from the development community and there should be an expectation.

1:10:18And I, there should probably be a fee for, you know, not covering, you know, cutting on our street. I'm not fixing what they should supposed to be fixed. You know, so I will look at the update on how to push them correctly to the right direction through the fees. Thank you. Sorry. I took a little while. I don't know if there are questions on any of the others.

1:10:47I'll be telling you, you pushed quite strongly on the sea back in the day. Yeah, no, I'm, I think we should have a definition for what it means to be a youth definition league. I'm not talking about places that charge, exorbitant fees or competitive things that might end up at the rack or some other venue like that. I'm talking about Rose Park baseball, the West High Junior Panthers, the, the parks that are being used with, you know, coaches who are volunteers from the committee, from the community that focus on youth opportunity and development.

1:11:23I don't think that the cost of using a public space should be added fees. These are becoming cost prohibitive to my Rose Park families and our board is having to go out to find scholarships just so kids can participate. So if we can mitigate cost, especially when the park is better maintained during that season because there are moms and dads out there removing trash, lining the field, taking, you know, I've even seen them mowing the grass and the inside of the field.

1:11:52So, especially if they're going to do those sorts of things that actually in order to the improvement and the maintenance and the activation. I really think that we should be able to see our way clear to not adding the cost of the park. I do think if you're not going to do this by equity, if you're a wealthier league and families want to pay a higher fee for their kids and you want to pay the city to do it, I'm fine if we leave that as an optionality.

1:12:18But I really do believe that we should be able to through sweat equity mitigate the cost of public spaces on these enrollments. So we're asking for some direction from is that what we ask him some like way of standardizing this. It seems to me that we need a definition that can distinguish between like beer hive sports is lovely love them, but they charge for this.

1:12:42So I wanted to distinguish between that and something that is contributing to our health mutually held goals in the city of getting our young people to adulthood safely. So it feels to me like there has to be some kind of definition. And then we just have to make sure that we're not doing anything budgetarily that negatively impacts our public lands department and that there's a concrete agreement right some MOU that says these are the things that will be provided in exchange right something that is really, really clear about what the city is still responsible for is not responsible for and how that's going to work out and probably some liabilities right if they break the brand new meal draper sign because of something what does that look like.

1:13:22And just want to add that yeah, this is something that is still important to me. I mean, I think of course, 100% forgiveness. I think is a good goal to work toward. But I understand that given like our increased concerns about maintenance and things for parks that that might not be achievable. But I so so I won't say that like exactly as it's worded is like the only goal.

1:14:00But I do think that ended support and still really care about how in balance that felt a couple of years ago for the non competitive teams. So if there's a way to do a combination of those things, but I think, you know, for me, it's, it's. You know, what we were charging versus what they what these groups were already providing in terms of service to the city was not fair.

1:14:28And so I'm glad we were able to address that and I hope we can kind of continue to tweak that moving forward. So if that makes sense. The let's see legal defenders was once part of finance departments legislative intent, but that has been moved to the council section because the council wants to remind themselves to consider options.

1:14:56So we'll talk about that in a few minutes if we have time. The next item is IMS promoting my SLC and there's a I have a list up on the screen of the progress that the administration has reported on different aspects of the platform. But we believe this is ongoing work. So we marked it is still open. I will be okay with remove that as a legislative intent since the administration is very on it.

1:15:24I felt like they are doing an excellent job in promoting it. And when we when we were pushing for this, it felt like it was a new platform and it was like in the limbo and they were rolling it out and it felt like it was a big undertaking. So I get it. But I felt like we are on the other side of that. So I don't know if everybody feels okay with that. So close in this one.

1:15:52Okay. Okay. And then we move on to intense for the mayor's office. The first is from FY26 considerations for any proposed property tax increase in the administration responded that it will provide this sort of information through the budget process. So as part of the mayor's recommended budget. So we considered that still open.

1:16:17Sorry. That's what we're doing. I was just asking the same thing. I think there was a there was a year it was probably three or four budget cycles ago where there was maybe a different expectation about the level of information that was provided in terms of what the administration provided versus what the council was hoping to see.

1:16:42So we left it as a legislative intent because sometimes we don't know where to put our feelings. So that said, I think state legislation will require the administration to have a much more detailed. But the property tax increase if there is any is paying for. So we might not need it as a legislative intent anymore. Oh, we okay removing this from here.

1:17:05Okay. The next is from the same year, CIP set aside for community led projects. The administration is reviewing the process for CIP over fiscal year 27 and will present results to the administration and CIP committee before presenting it to the council. So we consider that one still open. The next is the FY26 streets bond funding options.

1:17:37The administration provided an update on bonding capacity last fall. The question. Oh, when there will be a streets quality update, I believe in a few minutes. But there was a policy question of whether you want to discuss the next steps in this process or wait until you have that briefing on the streets conditions. So for the moment, it's open for like the answer is yes to that, right?

1:18:06Yeah. And then another FY26 evaluating efficiencies of all diversified response teams. So the administration continues to work on this and the policy question is whether the council would like to begin the process by potentially saying, you know, we'd like everything in the fall or in the winter or. Whatever day you may like.

1:18:30This is another one that the administration has kind of kept us in the loop along the way as they've tried to hone in on how to evaluate the diversified all of the different teams that have been added to the city over the years. And I think several of you might have seen the way that they've kind of evaluated or at least the draft way that they're evaluating like the different metrics for different purposes.

1:18:57So not every purpose would have the same exact metrics. And so I think it took a while to kind of have our heads wrapped around that list. And so I think the administration is well on their way to having that, you know, but I'm not sure. I'm looking at you guys. I'm not sure that that will be like a completed document for the budget or if it's more of like an ongoing conversation tool for you guys to have.

1:19:23I would like to have. Because you have been a little bit true. You had you had. Oh, sorry. I didn't see it. Go ahead. I think the work that's been done on it was really, really impressive that I saw. I'm sad that it's not ready because this is the year where conversations and decisions have to be made and having that data.

1:19:47So I would like to see this not only continue just in the vein that it's been, but I would also love it if as we approve new programs that we expect with the original funding that we would understand what success is for each program that we approve and what it would look like for that success to be approximated so that we don't have to go and retrofit everything to a metric, but can going forward just have data.

1:20:14And I think our public safety apparatus is really a great, great, great model for this. Anytime chief lead comes and presents anything. He has amazing, concise data. I know what the medical response team does because of chief lead. So I know that there's wheels within the city so that not everything has to be reinvented.

1:20:32I'm not, I'm not trying to make anything more cumbersome than it needs to be, but I am cognizant that difficult decisions need to be made on more than the instinct or political impressions of the people who will be off. And should be based on data for if it's approximating success in reaching city goals or not. Yeah, I feel, I feel the same.

1:20:56I also worry that with the Bay Tough Budget, many of us may feel inclined to, to stop some programs. And then the administration may come back with, you know, actually this program fulfills this explain and see. And I, you know, we're going to have to, you know, go through the process, lead it blind. Hopefully the administration can help us with that information along the way.

1:21:26And I know it's tough when we disagree with administration on the council, but many of us are going to have to maybe feel strongly about scrutinizing some of these programs. Okay. And then the final one, which is in the mayor's office. Bunch is FY 25, noise enforcement. Work on both vehicular and nonvehicular vehicular noise enforcement.

1:21:57The responses are said to be forthcoming.

1:22:05We move to the Department of Public Lands. The first or the only is FY 26 water usage by the Department of Public Lands. And you can see the department's response to the, to our question about about updates in the up on the screen. Essentially they have been working on this on a number of fronts. And so the question I guess is whether to consider changing this to close and continue or to leave it open if you have additional concerns.

1:22:44So processing the information there. So one second. Oh, because we're going to again. Sorry. No worries. While you're reading, I'll just say that historically everything I've seen coming out of public lands and the administration is a very water conscious approach. I also understand the limitations related to historical infrastructure and that we're trying to balance those upgrades while focusing on water conservation.

1:23:19So for me, the report and or what we've seen historically needs this need. I don't know if I would benefit from additional information in that space. Just noting like I said, what I've seen historically. I agree. I'm not sure that additional information is needed at this point, but what I would like to see more is actually matching that information with the request administration is asking a little more congruent to that.

1:23:50I, you know, we recently heard about, you know, a new vision here for this area. While we still have like tens of millions of dollars of separating sprinkler lines versus tree watering lines and we had the report highlighted the need to separate those for drought purposes to make sure that our trees don't die in our parks.

1:24:14While we are saving water when we are in peak drought. So it's almost like we need to really be congruent with some of these goals. So I'm hoping that the goals are still guiding us and to and to more of that. So generally I am okay to close in and continuing, but I would like to be to see a little more connection between that and what we see from requests.

1:24:43And not just for us, but also just for the general public to understand what we are saving in our what we are doing to conserve the water, you know, from the, from our parks from our golf courses from our just general usage. How we are walking the walk here in this area and making sure that we're doing a good job of doing that in.

1:25:11Highlight what we're doing and we were asking for them to do the same thing. So, but yeah closing the continue. I can see that is being the right way to go.

1:25:24I feel like this is a good place to make it to stop unless any of you have any of those legislative and tense or feelings, intense that we have place in there. Yeah, I want to discuss before we make it make a pause. Yeah, take a break. Okay. And we're very close. Thank you. Thank you. So, again, we're going to take a break for 20 minutes. We're going to get back here at four o'clock. Thank you. We're back online.

1:55:00Now going back to number, item number six, this is informational item 2025 pavement condition survey and executive summary results. I'm going to welcome. At the table. Kate word, Council policy analyst, Dave Jones, communications and engagement manager, Max Stevens, city engineer and Scott Gordon with roadway asset services.

1:55:28Great. Thank you. As part of the fiscal year 2026 budget, the city council approved the 2025 pavement condition survey. The survey assess the conditions of roadways city wide. Funding for the roadway maintenance and reconstruction comes from the general fund, including funding our future sales tax dollars, class C money and the county quarter cent and the fifth of its sales tax for transportation.

1:55:56In 2018, the council placed an $87 million general application bond to fund street projects on the ballot, which salt lake city voters approved. The bond funds have been spent or assigned to ongoing projects. A list of these projects can be found in the on the city's funding our future dashboard web webpage. The 2025 pavement condition survey was completed to gauge the impact of the last several years of roadway capital improvements and to insist in future strategy planning.

1:56:27There is no council action required today. The goal is to consider policy direction and questions that you may have moving forward. The council may wish to hold a policy discussion on overall goals for the city on streets and how to move forward with that. I'll turn it over to the pavement team. Thank you. Mark, Stephen City engineer. Thank you so much for listening to our presentation today. We have Scott Gordon with us, who is the owner of roadway asset services.

1:56:58This is the second year that or the second time the roadway asset services is done. The pavement condition survey for Salt Lake City and the continuation of the data that we received through the 2020 pavement condition survey and now the 2025. I think you'll be pleased with the results that we will be presenting on today. And so I'll turn that time over to Scott.

1:57:21All right. Thank you. Afternoon, counsel. My name is Scott Gordon. I am president of roadway asset services. I'm a professional engineer working in pavement design and maintenance for the past 35 years. So I've been doing a lot of work in this area throughout the state. In fact, states all over the country work in about 26 different states presently.

1:57:41I was with another firm called DTS data transfer solutions when we did the analysis in 2017. So I'm familiar with your network dating back to that time. This is the second analysis we've done as RAS. We did the first one in 21. And this follow up in 25. So I'm going to quickly go through some slides to show your results. Going to talk to you about what we're looking at the data and what we see in that. So next slide.

1:58:07Just kind of a quick overview. City maintains approximately 592 center line miles of roadway. That is your asset. If we were to have to replace that, we're looking at over $2.8 billion worth of funds. So it's a very expensive asset. So it's very valuable to the city that we maintain it properly. We're going to talk a little bit today about pavement condition index. I know you likely have heard the term overall condition index OCI out of cartograph.

1:58:35PCI is a portion into that equation. I'll explain that in a little bit. Condition index is done through ASTM D6433 procedure. It's a nationwide procedure that is followed to measure all the distresses. It gets very technical, but it's looking at the density and severity of different types of cracking. It puts a weight value on it.

1:58:55We calculate a deduct to get a 0 to 100 scale score for the condition index. I'll talk a little bit more about how that factors in. Next slide.

1:59:06So this is equipment that we run the streets with. Some people call it the Ghostbusters van, but it's got some high technology on it. Really the back end of it is the most important. It's a laser crack measuring system LCMS 2. It's a laser that is directed to the pavement surface. We have sensors that are in the center.

1:59:24We have sensors that measure basically the texture of the pavement surface. From that texture, we can determine the cracks, the widths, the links, the type of patterns. We can decipher from that what we have as far as conditions. We've got antennas for GPS. Each image that we take out of this van is geo GIS located so we know exactly where it is within the network and what street.

1:59:47We have a overhead camera that also picks up views of assets within the roadway. We've produced in the past and we'll update it in this run of video logger that uses these images to basically give you a Google Earth type view walking down your streets with this latest data. Along the front there, you'll see a profiler on the front bumper. It's more lasers pointing on the pavement surface and that gives us profile.

2:00:10We can pick up running with that. We can also get the International Roughness Index or the RIDE Quality. That RIDE Quality factored with the PCI is how we eventually get to OCI. So I'll show you that. Next slide. So the equipment that I just showed you is not unique to RAS. There's other vendors that have that. But this road trip is our algorithm that we use to calculate the PCI.

2:00:37That is unique to RAS. This is something I developed over years of experience with a programmer of how we determine what the density, the types of cracking from the texture of the pavement surface to calculate that. So this is our unique algorithm that we run through that with. So basically it's just our experience. We tweaked that. I came and spent a day with your staff looking out the streets early on in the project to make sure that that was calibrated correctly.

2:01:05Everything was tracking with what we saw in the field. So we do a lot of field checks with it and updates. So the schedule of the project, some of the delays were the fact that we were going back double checking things. We had to look at some road intersections because we had overlapping GIS. We wanted to clear that up. Make sure that we have adequate scores and efficient scores on accuracy of the pavements and not doubling up on what we saw in some of the intersections.

2:01:33Next slide. So this is just quick overview. Most of it's based on the sensors. We're actually measuring the stresses. You may have heard of AI. It's a hot topic now. There's people out there doing some of the pavement evaluation utilizing AI. It's not as efficient. It's looking at patterns. It's looking at shapes. It's not measuring anything. We do use a component of AI in measuring patterns of brick crosswalks.

2:02:03We have some cities we work with have full brick streets and AI can pick up that pattern and make sure we're not counting it as a distress. So there is some use of AI, but it's not quite there yet to give us the accuracy that we want out of measuring. So just wanted to point that out. Next slide. So this is the first glimpse of the data. This is looking at the pavement condition index number. So this is looking at the cracking and the different types of distress.

2:02:32Pretty typical stair step from having roads up into the good category all the way down through satisfactory as the highest two categories. What I will point out that has changed since 2017 when we did that survey in 17, we had 65% of your network was poor or lower. What has happened over the last several years with your maintenance. You have now flipped it to where 70 65% is greater than poor the fair satisfactory and good category.

2:03:04So you've improved that due to maintenance money that you've been spending. So we've seen a change in improvement. Next slide. We look here. This is the ride quality factor that is played into the OCI. So it's much lower factor in the calculation, but it does affect it slightly. This is very typical that you see a shift to the left in those categories of ride quality. Because in a city streets, you've got a lot of things like utilities, manhole covers, you've got some drainage.

2:03:33Things at a slower speed driving down, you're going to fill it when you drive across it. This is not U.DOT standard freeway that we're looking at. So you're going to have a little bit rougher ride quality in a city. But this is very normal how we see that shift. This does play into the number. If we look at the next slide now, these two previous slides of PCI and IRR now factored in to give us our OCI that you're familiar about hearing.

2:04:01So if you look at the pattern, you see there it's not a huge change of what we saw in the PCI because that IRR is not a huge factor in the change. This does give us the comparison. So the overall OCI average is 66. If you look at the national average of what we see across the country, usually it's around 65 to 75. You guys are a little bit low on the end of that scale. But it's been holding pretty steady over the last several years.

2:04:30Another factor we look at, the percentage that's in the good and satisfactory roadways. We want to see that up around 30 to 40% are greater and you are in that region. So we're in good shape there. Another thing that we look at in the lower end, those red ones, those last three on the left is what we call backlog. That's below an OCI 40 meaning we probably have to do a major overlay of a thicker overlay or in place recycling or reconstruction of the roadway.

2:05:01When roads fall into that category based on the distress. That is running up above 20. We typically want to see that around 10%. 15% is okay. It's getting a little high. You're up above 20. So we've got some work to do. That's where some of this bond money I know you're looking at could go into play in that. Talking to your staff, it sounds like our emphasis is going to look at local streets.

2:05:26If we look at the breakdown of your network, 70% of your network are local streets. If we break down the OCI average between categories of street, your arterials are averaging a 77. Your collectors are averaging a 72. Your locals are averaging a 63. So we know the road conditions of the road types that are bringing this average down to a 66.

2:05:53So we feel if we put an emphasis focus on the local streets, that's going to carry a big impact. We can do a lot of preservation. We can do some repairs. The next step in this program is to do an optimization of the budgeting to look at where we need to be spending the money. What roads need to be treated based on this optimization of the best value of your money to be spent.

2:06:17Next slide. So this is your overall map. I know we've given this to the city. You can zoom in and look at individual streets and those type of things on your GIS. They're all color coded based upon these categories you see in the table. If a road falls, a road segment falls into that category, that's the color coding on there.

2:06:36You can see a little end set up on the other right that gives you the actual OCI number for that road segment. A change that has occurred in this last treatment that we did not have in 21 is now we're calculating the OCI to what we call sample layer. ASTM defines a sample of every 200 feet in our lane. So typical GIS segmentation is blocked a block.

2:07:00So we've traditionally always had a number for that block. What we now are breaking it down into is a sample layer every 200 feet. So within a block you can actually zoom in and now not only see the segment number, you'll see every 200 feet a number. So it helps the maintenance team be able to go in your engineering staff to go look through it and find out where the problems are happening.

2:07:21Get really detailed in where maybe there's localized maintenance that needs to be done or repairs to potholes, that type of thing. So it gives you a lot more detail than what you've had. And I think Mark turned fidelity, higher fidelity in the data so it gives us a lot more to work with. Next slide. So this is kind of your overall map of what we see as needing major work.

2:07:47This is what we've termed as the backlog. If you look there the red is the arterial, the green, there's a few collectors in there that need some work. But majority of them are the local streets that show up in yellow there. So you can see throughout the city pretty good distribution of where we need to work on some local streets.

2:08:07But this will give us a map to start looking at where do we need to focus our work on. When we get in this next month into the budgeting, we're going to go through and look at which of these streets are going to be there. Which of these streets are critical, meaning if we don't treat them in the next year or two, they're going to fall into a much more expensive category.

2:08:23So once we get that report, then we'll be able to share that information there. I believe that's the last slide in advance. Be happy to answer any questions you've got. I know we went through that pretty quickly. Council Member Dugan. I already have to raise my hand. I knew it was coming. I appreciate that. Because I've been asking for this for a while.

2:08:48And we've been in without this data. We've noticed that the streets are, the local streets are in bad condition. But we also knew that the bond, we deliberately focused on the arterials and the collective streets. 80 to 20. It was the breakdown of that. We can see the results of that. Our major streets, our arterials, the collectives are in much better shape than our local streets.

2:09:18And that's where we put the money. So I appreciate the fact that we've really, now we have the data that says, yes, your local streets are really bad. And I'm glad that we also broke it down into segments. Because I think that also is more fidelity so that this street would have been a 60. But there's really sections that are a 10 and other sections that are actually not too bad.

2:09:46Just because of just life. But at this point, we don't really have an idea of the cost because we still need to maintain, do the preventative maintenance on the good satisfactory streets to maintain them in that category so they can last longer. But we got to repair that one block, two blocks, that's going to cost us a million dollars.

2:10:11But that's because it's gravel right now. But we can't figure that cost yet for a bond until we go through more of this study. And when we do that, we can't do a street, or can we do a street that's totally failed and decent. Do we just replace the whole thing? Or can we do it in sections of different repair? No, those are great questions. I'll touch on a couple items there.

2:10:45I feel back to Scott's comments about optimization. In the 2021, they took different scenarios of how we could optimize our money in between. Full reconstruction, partial debt reconstruction, which is like three inches of asphalt overlay or more. Versus what's maintenance, which is two inches of overlay and less. Optimize that money to give us kind of what you've heard in the past.

2:11:07We're talking about an average of about 45 million per year for continuous five years to get us up to about that 15% backlog number. So what Scott was referring to in these final steps that they're taking to get us those costs, they will be doing that optimization that we came up with that 45 million number back in 2021 and give us the 2026 numbers of is it still 45 million a year for five years or have we gone up to 50 or 55 million a year every five years to bring us back down to that industry standard of 15% backlog or less.

2:11:41And to answer your second question, yes, we can take a roadway with these segmentations. That was part of the reason why it took a little bit longer to get the results because we wanted to give that higher fidelity information of segmentation every 200 feet instead of just block to block. And at the intersections verifying that data so there was an overlapping data that made it incongruent.

2:12:04But yes, in a roadway we can take the segmentation and say, yeah, all we need to do is a two inch overlay here, spot repair and two inch overlay, a millen overlay, and the rest of the road we need to do a full depth reconstruction. And yes, we can in our designs and in our construction we can optimize how we utilize that money.

2:12:24And that segmentation is really a great way to be able to determine how we can do that. And when we do this, we did a great job of splitting up to the city and making sure that everyone was getting touched. And every street's getting repaired. In this case, we also look like across the city it's pretty even that all the streets across all seven districts are all in bad shape.

2:12:49There's not one district, it doesn't seem just my quick guide. It doesn't seem like there's one district that's forcing the rest districts. They all have their really, really bad. So we're basically switching the equation 80% local, 20% arterial collective, and then just divide it like we did before. Optimizing the number of streets you do in an area so you're not going from east to west to south and bouncing the equipment around and costing money and transportation.

2:13:17Is that how the vision that you have as far as going forward? Yes, what in recent past we've talked about the possibility of a bond or another bond. I know there was a legislative intent back in August by the council for the intent to look at another roadway bond that would focus on 80% local, 20% arterial, flip the script of the 2018 bond where 80% went to collectors and arterials.

2:13:43And so with one of the benefits of doing local roads with that amount of money is that there's not as much transformative work with our larger collectors and our arterials and police streets. So the benefits were still incorporating complete streets elements into those, but it's not the major utility relocates. And so we can do more streets with the same amount of money doing the local streets versus collector arterials.

2:14:07So as a network, all streets, all everything, if we were to take that same $87 million and put it towards local streets, 80% towards local streets, the network OCI would raise much faster comparatively. So on one of the first bar graph slides, the collector arterials were in a much higher grain better condition than the local roads.

2:14:30So that flip or that script would flip by putting 80% of a comparative bond towards local streets first. That makes sense. One more question, Mr. Chair. On the good and satisfactory streets, would our regular maintenance funds pay to keep those streets in that category with just the chip seal and the alligators correction?

2:15:00I don't really. The alligator term, I don't know what that term is, but. Yeah, that's the idea. You want to be able to spend the money in the maintenance and the preservation and keep it in that higher level. What we look at is it's cost of deferral. So if we let things deteriorate into a more expensive, that additional cost is what gets you.

2:15:22So if we can keep things in that higher, cheaper, quick chip seals, slurry seals, any kind of surface treatments, crack sealing even can help us keep it in that higher at a lower cost. So at the market point, you cover more mileage for the same amount of budget. And so you're going to make a bigger impact. So it's not always fixing the worst roads first.

2:15:43That's the hardest thing to kind of grasp in this, but we're looking at optimization, picking where we can spend the money to get the biggest bang for the buck. Where do we get the biggest improvement that we're spending that money? A good general number is, let me average it 45 and 55 just to 50 million a year for five years.

2:16:04That the optimization, this government's referring to will get us to that new number before it was around 45 million per year for five years. Okay. But we anticipate that amount to go higher than the 45 million per year. Yeah. Yeah. And then after that, you still, then you still have a hefty maintenance cost just because we got five hundred, four and 50 some odd road, main miles.

2:16:26Correct. I mean, the main that's along could to maintain that 15% OCE could be in to the $10 to $20 million range every year. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Dugan. I knew you had a good questions for all of us. Anybody else? Council Member Bichro? So the top five categories are fantastic, right? The increases are where you want to see them, the decreases are where you want to see them.

2:16:56The serious in fail, the serious is increased. I mean, it's still not a huge amount of our overall inventory, but the number has consistently increased while the other has gone down. Is that because of the way we allocated the funding? Are those that are failed, the ones that weren't covered by the bond and therefore weren't prioritized?

2:17:16Or is there some other explanation for why the serious and failed tracks up slightly while everything else tracks in the appropriate direction? And I think if we could go back to the side that says payment right, quality versus payment condition results. The payment condition category or the PCI is what we're really looking at.

2:17:37When we look at it, we talked about worse first. If we're looking at an OCI of less than 40, those are really your candidates for reconstruction. The road has gotten to a condition where yes, could you spend maintenance dollars on it? Is that optimizing your dollars? No. And so anything OCI of 40 or less is what we focus reconstruction dollars on.

2:17:58And that was the intent of the bond in 2018 was the worst first approach. And that was based on the 2017 data that we had when it's got work first previous. And it was worse first regardless of it as an arterio or a local road? Correct. And so at the time back in 2018, my understanding was as part of my time on the city that the highest need was on a lot of these collectors or arterials because of their condition and OCI or PCI.

2:18:27Now that we've done enough serious improvements to your 300 West Street 2100 South or 200 South or 900 South. Now that we can focus those dollars on local streets, we can do more with the same amount of money in increasing the OCI. But what the bond did is that it gave candidates to our streets division to do more maintenance less costly maintenance compared to reconstruction when you get to the city.

2:18:55When you get less than 40. So one of the things that Scott spoke to his first is optimization is looking at those roads that are nearing 40. What can we do now to keep them going before 40 below 40 where it's more costly reconstruction and keeping in the maintenance side, even though it may be like a two inch overlay or less in maintenance.

2:19:14That optimization and getting the biggest bang for your buck is what the results from this condition survey will give us. Perfect. Thank you. Any other questions? I would love to get this map with with the with analysis. I have the ability to actually zoom in and maybe like really look at the streets a little better that will make a big difference for us.

2:19:43It's in your email. Okay, perfect. And then I do see that some state roads and you know our Martin this study did the study in 2017 included a state roads to and are we keeping consistent with or did not included state roads like state street and whatnot. No, we didn't do state roads. We just did city owned roads with the survey.

2:20:06And so you got does their own analysis and and when they do their surface treatments or reconstruction things. But yes, how do you explain and it's great to see that progression those three points of data is actually incredible to see the change. So for those neighbors that feel like our streets are failing. I mean the data shows us differently, but the feeling is true.

2:20:36Like if you if your street is has a bigger part hold and most likely you may have you know you're never a street for you. The streets are worse. Right. And that's how you measure the success of our city. Hence with your program your analysis is is showing us that our neighborhood streets are struggling right now. And this is where we want to see more emphasis and I think that will answer some of the pressure some council members are seeing.

2:21:07So I how would you explain that that portion of sugar house back in the south part of the valley southeast part of the valley that all the streets in the neighborhood are green or yellow. And pretty much everywhere except for the avenues have and the avenues have a few red ones in there. But it seems like kind of odd that is a little chunks of the city that seem to be really really good.

2:21:37A lot of it has to do with the biography. And so you'll see a big concentration in district in in district six and district seven. Because of if you take two roads and there's a flat road let's take you know a perfectly flat road and you take that same road same cross section the way it was built and put it up in the foothills.

2:22:02You have heavy truck traffic that the loads on those roads are the same but the topography and how the roads are utilized. That makes a big difference and so that's why you see a lot of red up in and around council member Dugan and council member Young's area because of the hills and how heavy truck traffic garbage trucks and things affected payment differently than a flat road.

2:22:31So no all roads are created equal right depends on the topography of the where they're located in inclination. They use and maybe that neighborhood in the in your house is the narrow neighborhood the narrow streets neighborhood probably know that many trucks come to that neighborhood for any you know random thing but probably garbage.

2:22:53Which which may explain why they impact us you know they're seeing less impact. And another another item also is age every time we will go in and reconstruct a railway we will do court or soil samples underneath to determine what you know just without the payment what the the load rating of the payment or the soil underneath is and then that will determine what the thickness of the various sections of a road will be base course surface course asphalt or concrete that so the design standards on roads that are eighty nine years old are not the same standards.

2:23:28They are today and so the age also plays a big factor in what the design standards were at the time. So that is also big factor as well. That makes sense. And the last question I have a consumer Carlson right after is about bike lanes the city put a part of effort on making more putting more bike lanes and you know adding better transportation.

2:23:57For for for different users. Does this study include a portion of the bike lanes. And if it doesn't do we have a way of measuring how bad or good they are. That's an excellent question. One of the things that we did contract with our services to do is to do the bike lane so part of them were done last year and the rest will be done the spring.

2:24:25And Scott if you want to speak to that. Yeah we have a specific bike with all the cameras and everything on it we're going to ride the bike lanes here this spring kind of waiting to see the winter get through I think we're pretty safe at this point so I'll get with our team and find out when we get that. Can we ride the bike.

2:24:42It seems like a fun bike to ride a bunch of sensors on that. It's an e-bike so. I just want to say I appreciate how data driven this process is and that as we evaluate the conditions of our roads it's not about anyone council member jockeying for their roads to get fixed but rather we have some objective data to guide that decision making so I really appreciate that.

2:25:09I would love to just in my mind and entertain me help me understand and more fully make the case about why maintenance is so important so if we were to take just imagine a road in our mind what's the cost of deferring maintenance and the cost of reconstructing that road versus maintenance over time. If you'd be willing to entertain that exercise with me I know there are so many different factors but I just want to really understand how important it is for us to invest in maintenance over time rather than defer defer defer.

2:25:50That's a great question I've done studies looking at 30 year time spans of life cycle cost analysis. If you take a network and you apply preventive maintenance which is the cheap surface seals every four to six years and you apply that over a 30 year period for one lane mile of roadway you're going to spend a little over a million dollars to do that in that time frame.

2:26:14If you let a road deteriorate over that same 30 years to where it's completely failed from a structure and you have to rebuild it you're going to be spending four times that amount of money. So really the clear answer is quick cheap preservation treatments throughout the life you're going to have to do an overlay at some time because you can't just perpetually keep it going but if you do it with that your average PCI or OCI is going to stay higher over that same period and you're going to end up saving a lot of money.

2:26:51I just wanted to share just for our your own budget context and knowledge. We've never Salt Lake City has never hit that ideal level of ongoing maintenance investment. You know we we acknowledge what it is and we acknowledge that you know we do the best we can with the money we can scrape together but we don't hit that kind of ideal level of ongoing investment in that preventative maintenance type stuff.

2:27:15Because when we're young. Thank you so much. And the information is so helpful. I think I'll loop back to what Council Member Duke and said. You know we're only as good as the information that we have available to us. And one of the things that I've often questioned is when we're looking at the quality of our streets.

2:27:38We see that obviously change over time and especially when we have major construction projects like we've seen across the city but also in District 7. We do see increased deterioration on some of those local streets that might be being used as kind of a detour route and therefore are experiencing higher level impact of semi trucks and other things that wouldn't traditionally be on that road except for the piece.

2:28:06So being able to say no we have updated information I think makes a huge difference and how we're able to respond to community questions. So I'm very very grateful for that study. I think my question builds off of being with the mayor last Friday where they kicked off pothole. So exciting go my SLC everyone and report your potholes.

2:28:33But as a part of that I had the chance to see some of the newer treatments and the newer equipment that the city has invested in. I guess my question related to that is as we look at improvements how much of it would you say Mark is on the we need equipment that allows us to do maybe some of the more current technology in terms of street repair.

2:29:00And how much of that really falls into that mile by mile like every dollar gets us so many more miles related to that. I'm just trying to get a sense of the balance in my head of where you see those needs holistically. Sure no that's a great question. I think over the past five to six years we sent an increase in investment by the city to our streets division in equipment and FTEs to be able to do work in house.

2:29:28I'm focusing on maintenance as Scott referred to and the more money that we can spend on maintenance instead of deferred maintenance that gets us into the reconstruction realm. I've noticed the I 40 or less. One of the things that a lot of people hear me say is that you know Kevin Costner Field of Dreams is great build it and they'll come.

2:29:51But who's going to maintain that out field who's going to maintain the dugout who's going to maintain all of that. And so when we're going through design when we're going through these things for reconstruction projects and all of the complete streets elements. The big question is how are we going to maintain this you know if you've got separated by claims how are we going to plow the snow how snow fighting going to be to any new equipment.

2:30:13So we're trying to optimize and then we've used that word a lot today. Optimize our dollars where if we could have a big focus on maintenance. Then our roadways will last because today's dollars are cheaper than future dollars and the more we defer that maintenance to the year by year, mile by mile. Which ends up being reconstruction most of the time.

2:30:37You know this is a plug into our streets division who's phenomenal. We enjoy working with them and they're they're phenomenal at what they do. If the city had an even increased investment in our streets division and maintenance. Now to get those roads that are nearing 40 OCI and everywhere between 40 and 100. We could save ourselves a lot of future dollars for future city engineers for future council members for future mayors and future taxpayers.

2:31:10I think that that increased focus in maintenance and increasing maintenance. Will really make a large difference in our generations to come. If I can just add my gratitude. I have had the opportunity to work with several of the individuals yourself included on different needs that we've experienced. And I can just say with full confidence that every interaction that your team has attended to with our residents.

2:31:43Not only has been at the highest level of professionalism but also is so expertly informed. And I learned something every time I'm out there with you. You know being able to hear about what the considerations of our streets are. How we reconstruct streets. The importance of working with urban forestry. You know to be able to make sure that we're not laying down a new street that's ultimately going to have a pothole in it two years out because of damage to a root system and different pieces like that.

2:32:14I think that all of our residents should know that we have the best of the best leading out in these areas. And that when you come and say this is what we're going to need to be able to take care of it. We have the right experts who are leading the way. So thank you. Thank you for that. We have an amazing team. We have great consultants that help us out and all of our endeavors.

2:32:36And we're very fortunate to have the team that we do and also the support that we do from Mayor, Staff and Council and across the board. So thank you for that. Thank you everyone. I appreciate the presentation. Moving on to item number seven. This is another informational item. Food Hills natural area planning update.

2:32:55We're going to welcome at the table Austin Kimmel, Council policy analyst Taylor. Narrow trails and natural lands director and Kim Shelley, public lands director, maybe I'll have you online. Austin. Thanks, council members. The Department of Public Lands is here to update you on foot Hill trails efforts in the progress since the last formal update to the council in August of 2024.

2:33:25At that time, the council voted in a straw poll to allow a limited use of trail funding for planning and design for foot Hill trail. Area zones in the district three area and agreement making activities with public entity landowners, including public utilities, the University of Utah Division of State Parks and the US Forest Service.

2:33:47Today, public lands returns with updates on the foot Hill, the foot Hills natural area management partnership. It's new foot Hills zone development process in the proposed foot Hills community working group. Public lands is requesting the council support for the foot Hills zone development process and is requesting the council to remove the existing hold on trail construction funding.

2:34:13At the end of this briefing, staff will ask for a straw poll on both of those items. And with that, I will turn it over to Tyler. Thanks Austin. That's loud. Okay. Well, hi everybody. Thanks for seeing us and it's nice to be back. I'm Tyler Fonero the trail son natural lands division director for the Department of Public lands.

2:34:35Next slide please. As shared in the transmittal and staff report, our objectives today are to share pertinent updates related to requests from council. At our last update in August 2024, there's a lot of new faces here. So we'll give some background as well. We're also here to request feedback and endorsement of our foot Hill zone development process and lift the hold on funding as Austin mentioned.

2:35:01Next slide. Some background. In the foot Hills trail system master plan was adopted by city council in March 2020. The city paused future trail development in 2021 to allow public lands to evaluate its processes, which including the plant itself. The evaluation included open space planning environmental planning and communications.

2:35:25The evaluation was completed in 2024, which resulted in the foot Hill zone development process. Public land share this process with city council in August 2024. And at that time the council approved the release of funds to support two phases of that plan, the planning and design phases, and requested that public lands return with a finalized process that could serve as a framework for future foot Hills development and construction.

2:35:52Next slide. To understand foot Hills management, we have to understand foot Hills land ownership. For public entities land owners have property in the foot Hills natural area. So our first step towards a comprehensive management plan for the foot Hills required collaboration with these other agencies. If you see in the map that is the foot Hills natural area as we've defined, the blue Salt Lake City Corporation.

2:36:19That includes lands of public utilities department and public lands department. You can also see the US Forest Service has significant ownership of lands in the foot Hills. So does the University of Utah near their campus. And this is the place Heritage Park program of the Utah Division of State Parks has property down at immigration Canyon.

2:36:40Public lands contracted with the environmental dispute resolution program at the University of Utah's law school to facilitate a working agreement between these four landowners or these five land managers. Our group met through 2025 and now have a drafted agreement and defined purpose and goals. We do not have a signed agreement at this time due to restrictions coming out of Washington DC.

2:37:04But we have a formalized working relationship. We are continuing to meet on a bimonflip basis and I is the trails natural lands division director and the public lands representative to this group and the chair of that group. Next slide please.

2:37:21Over the last year the five agencies have agreed on these purpose and these goals. To coordinate public foot Hills public entity land owners management efforts to provide for safe accessible and high quality recreation. To protect its natural environment, cultural history and utility infrastructure and adjacent watershed and to respond to ongoing and emerging challenges and opportunities.

2:37:45Our goals is to create and implement a common strategic vision for the foothills to provide consistent planning, maintenance and guidelines for the foothills. To increase collaboration and share resources, technical expertise and local knowledge for comprehensive improvement improvements for the foothills and to improve the user experience.

2:38:02Next slide please. In August 2024 work session city council called for the creation of a community stakeholder group. Building on the progress being made by this management partnerships that we now have in place public lands contracted with the environmental distribution resolution program as well. To conduct a situation assessment to assess readiness for and if relevant inform the development of a working group to help guide management of the foothills.

2:38:35EDR initiated this process and conducted 47 interviews between September 2025 and January 2026. They were extensive stakeholders across the foothills and Salt Lake City area. EDR's recommendation from that that a foothills community work in group could and should be situated within the peanut advisory board which advises the mayor and city council on issues related to the city department of public lands properties and parks.

2:39:02Public lands and the mayor's leadership team met and agreed as this existing structure in place for formalized community discourse on public lands properties and management concerns. The Department of Public Lands is now proposing that the existing peanut foothills committee that has been existence for the last few years serve as the community working group to help guide foothills trail efforts and management.

2:39:26The Peanut Foothills Committee may also invite additional advocates or experts to unrelevant topics as they see fit. The specifics of this group role have not been finalized and are currently being discussed with public lands leadership and the Peanut Board. Given EDR's familiarity with this project thus far they may be contracted to assist the department and the board with the facilitation of this group.

2:39:50Next slide. Okay. I look at this every day. You look at this every two years. As a refresher one of the major recommendations of the evaluation was to use a zone based development plan to guide the comprehensive management framework of the foothills. So you see the map. Consider it just seven parks that are all connected by the moment of Bonneville Shoreline Trail.

2:40:17So we're not going to develop all seven parks at the same time. We're going to do one at a time. So these zones were identified along natural geographic features to guide more manageable planning efforts. Next slide. So to develop each of these open space parks or these zones we developed a zone development process. A second major recommendation of the evaluation was to formalize this zone development process that would outline the requisite steps to be followed by the public lands department.

2:40:52This was also a request of City Council in 2024 to return with the formalized process. You all have a detailed description of the zone process in your staff packet and it's also publicly available on our website slcfootals.com. The proposed zone development process is divided into three phases planning design and implementation.

2:41:14The implementation phase would be the construction of trails restoration projects and installation of amenities. The planning phase includes all of the high level considerations reviewing of existing environmental and recreation plans and documents, dialogues with landowners and public entity stakeholders and numerous site visits to assess on the ground conditions.

2:41:35The design phase includes the creation of alternative proposals and designs for new trails, real line trails, trail closures, trail system amenities like signage and rest areas and restoration projects that would include fencing and restoration seating. Design proposals are then shared with the community for input and discussion and finalized designs are then produced by the public lands department.

2:41:59Once that design phase is completed then the implementation phase begins which includes the prioritization of projects based on the greatest need and available funding. While some projects will still be bid out and contracted, the Tina Division staff's expertise and budget capacity will allow for some project to be constructed by staff as well as occasionally utilized volunteers to building community spirit.

2:42:24Next slide please. Okay, so that's very quickly the seven zones and our development process. So what is the public lands done in regard to planning and design since 2024? As an example, I'm going to share the how the process works using the e-city creek zone and proper to open space. So as another refresher from our 2024 update, Council approved the release of funds for public lands to initiate the planning design phases for the e-city creek zone and twin peak zone.

2:42:57Scott, can you go back to slide seven real quick? There, thank you. The e-city creek zone is shown in yellow and includes lower city creek above memory grove. The eastern slope of city creek below the protected city creek canyon watershed and the foothills open space above 18th avenue and Terrace hills. The planning phase and design proposals for this zone have been completed.

2:43:23As for the twin peak zone due to its larger size, diverse ecological conditions and significant private land ownership, it will need more time and design proposals should be completed by the end of the summer. Planning and design proposals for proper to open space shown in yellow with the southern edge of twin peaks have also been completed and that will be included in the e-city creek zone development process.

2:43:48Can I ask the question? Yeah, please. Sorry. So, Popperton is the area in yellow at the base of twin peak. Correct. Correct. So is that considered part of twin peaks or is that just kind of called out as a separate component? Great question. It's basically geographically in the twin peak zone because of that. The reason the zones were created were based on their contiguousness, if you will, and because Popperton is basically a tiny appendage out of that and everything is, we can treat that separately.

2:44:21We would likely do something similar over in the East bench preserve. It's just totally because they're separated by roads. Super helpful. Yeah. So, as phase one trail construction in 2020 and 2021 included Popperton, it felt more appropriate to do e-city creek and Popperton at the same time. And that's really what we're doing.

2:44:39This is why the e-city creek zone we're focusing on first. When we came in 2020, it was a trails plan. Now we're doing a management footals open space plan. And so we're going back to where the trails were and we're doing a cleanup and going forward.

2:45:00As I'm, oh, Scott, we can go back to slide nine now, please. Thanks. So, as I mentioned, the planning steps and design proposals, which is part of step three for e-city creek and Popperton have been completed. Public lands is currently finalizing documenting all of the planning information and design proposals into a formal development document, which will be published in the next few weeks.

2:45:25That document will be shared with the community via SHAPE SLC for input and feedback. The Peanut Foothills Committee could also review this document and share its recommendations with public land staff. Once the comprehensive feedback is reviewed, public lands will create finalized designs for the zone and share back with the community.

2:45:45This would conclude the design phase. At that point, the implementation phase could begin, which would include new trail construction beginning in the summer, 2026. So that concludes our formal presentation. I would love to respond to any questions anyone has. Council members? Yes, go ahead. And I appreciate you walking me through the process.

2:46:09I wanted to better understand if we are just trying to conserve the existing trail system. And it sounded like you're also trying to design future trails. Is that correct? It depends. The CER... So, it actually reminds me of Mark's presentation about quality of roads. There's been before 20, in 1994, the BST was built. That was the only formalized trail.

2:46:40In 2020, we built these new trails, which were built up to modern standards. People have been recreating in the foothills for generations. Utilities have been using access roads in the foothills for generations. They need to be built better or closed and built somewhere else, otherwise, so that the maintenance cost is not horrific over time.

2:47:04So a lot of the trails that people use are not on sustained grades and may need to be realigned to something that's more sustainable grade. Because of the unique geography of the Salt Lake City foothills, which is very steep, is a lot of folks don't have access to that type of recreation because they don't have the experience, the equipment, or the stamina or fitness to enjoy those trails.

2:47:27No, that's great. That's helpful. I was just curious to see if at any point we would develop outside of those seven areas. Because there is a lot of conservation land that I know we want to protect, and so just curious in public lands, is seeking to expand beyond that? At this time, no, we are not. If you pull up the map, Scott, if you can go back to slide seven again, you'll see that the City Creek Canyon watershed and the red-buted scientific research area is already a protected zone.

2:47:59The green twin peaks, Dry Creek Canyon, you see, is not a protected zone, and that would be something for consideration when we look at that zone because of the unique ecological value of that space. But we're not looking to do any recreation activation north of that because of the protection of resources. Great. That's really helpful. And then my final question was just how are we able to articulate limiting safe usage?

2:48:242020 occurred and we saw a significant increase of recreational users. We want people out there. We want to connect with communities that wouldn't have access. But I also recognize we don't want to overly saturate trails either because of increased erosion. Also just the unsafety of having, for example, bicycles, different mountain bikers, other types of recreation and pedestrian users.

2:48:47That's a great question. And it actually speaks to the design of a modern trail system. For example, in the City Creek section in 2020, in phase one trail development, there was the Bonneville Shoreline Trail, was the only formal trail that went through, and then we added a hiking only trail called the Avenue's Ridge Trail and the downhill bike trail called the 19-Dap Trail, which separated users on the same different types of users that increased enjoyment because the trails were designed for that user group, and it increased exponentially safety because as a downhill biker, you don't have to worry about somebody hiking up the trail.

2:49:19It also reduced the impact on the existing Bonneville Shoreline Trail. That's a pretty standard psychology of trails to stack three trails relatively close to each other. The other thing you're getting from that is you're putting those three parallel trails near each other so that you're not disturbing more ecological areas.

2:49:38The other piece that's super important that has been a request, and we are working on actively with the Management Partnership, is a unified trail etiquette campaign and education. Okay, thank you. That's all you needed to hear. And that was one of those uncomfortable realities is that the Forest Service had different rules than the University which had different rules and regulations than us.

2:50:00And we have to have all of us to be on the same page so that we know where eBikes can go. We know where dogs can be on leisure. We know that no motorized vehicles are ever allowed there. Thank you. Yeah, that's awesome. Any other questions? There is some straw polls on the table. Oh, Dan, sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Tyler, could you kind of just touch on the community involvement and the community conversations to make sure the transparency and everyone's kind of on that same vision.

2:50:29And we have that same vision as far as the future of the trails and the network between the different zones because we don't want to develop a zone and then change our vision on the next zone because they're not congruent with each other and how you plan to do that work. That's a great question. And just to be consistent with the language, there's one vision for the foothills.

2:50:48There's not different visions for each zone. The zone takes in the local geography, land ownership, neighbors, things like that, and the topography. The Mount Van Cott zone is mostly University of Utah property. They are going to be a heavy hand on what happens there, and they will be the final decider of what happens on University property.

2:51:05I think that's a really important transparent reminder to people. The city can advise the university what they do in their open space. With the Forest Service, they're not going to do much. We get to decide and then they approve it. So we'll go through that process. So as far as, excuse me, we will, as we did in the city of Arizona, we assess what's there.

2:51:25We talk to the community, and then we make a presentation, and then they have the opportunity feedback. And if it aligns with the goals and the purpose of the goals in need for that zone, then we would follow through. Councillor Werten. Thank you. I want to thank public lands for all of the work that you've done on this.

2:51:52This has been a lot longer pause than any of us ever anticipated. And so I know that that was because a lot of work needed to be done. And so I appreciate all of that. I also really want to thank all of the community members that put so much time and effort into helping improve this and get us to this point. There's no way that that would have happened without their sustained commitment.

2:52:31And so I really, really appreciate that. I think that they have helped us create a better policy and a better system that we can replicate not only in public lands, but in other departments as well. And they did all of that work on their own time and on their own time. And I sincerely appreciate the service that they've given to the city through this project.

2:53:02And then I also want to thank all of the people who were who have waited patiently for all of this to happen. And I personally told multiple times, like I'm sure next year will be the year. And yet here we are. And so I really appreciate the patience. But again, I said at the very beginning that we have to make sure that this end product is, we've had trails that were being used for thousands of years before Salt Lake City.

2:53:45And then since Salt Lake City has been here that have been used for hundreds of years by residents on a daily basis. And we just have to make sure that the trails that go forward are sustainable and as well thought out and continue to serve the residents of this area for another several hundred or several thousand years.

2:54:06So this is something that was worth taking the time to get right. And so I'm really glad that we are at this point. I do have a couple questions. Have you talked a little bit or have you talked about the working group? Yes. Can you talk a little bit about why you think it's best to be a part of the peanut board and what like advantages that offers as opposed to this being a standalone group?

2:54:40Yeah. Thank you for that question. So the recommendation came from EDR for that to be situated in the peanut board. I've been working with the five members of the peanut board who have volunteered to be, who are appointed, appointed positions who have volunteered to serve on the foothills community because of their interest and expertise in that area.

2:55:08And this was a concern thinking about how this would work because particularly since there's a four other land owner agencies or entities that don't fall under the jurisdiction of the city. So working with EDR and finding that management partnership that we all got on the same page and discussed things co-cohesively, they all supported the idea as well being a formal group instead of a second or a third or a fourth stakeholder group.

2:55:36One of the summary because that would just feel like it was competing with each other for making decisions. The speaking with, and this has not been finalized with peanut, but because that structure exists already from appointed positions felt like it was the right place to be and an opportunity to create new working groups in the peanut committee.

2:56:02And I've talked to very involved key stakeholders who understand their concerns and actually have more recently shared that they think that's an interesting idea to pilot this opportunity to really set a new tone of rhetoric and dialogue in that space. The summary report from EDR also shared the complications of how many diverse stakeholders there are and this is an opportunity for both the Foothills Committee as well as the working group to set a new precedent for that.

2:56:33Yes. Okay. And then can you talk a little bit more about how this framework would be used for something like the Twin Peaks where we don't have a decision yet, but run us through that as an exercise. Big zone. So this is why, no, no, I'm going to use it. No, it's great because it's next. It's important. No, no, no, I'll give you an example because so for example, there are four homeowners on Tomahawk drive who you would be shocked at how far their ownership goes up the hill.

2:57:12And so we need to have conversations with them about easements or acquisition or if they are not interested at all, we can't go on their land. You know, so those are, I've had one conversation with the new homeowner at the Lime Kiln who's has opened, he'd be very interested in an easement. I've met with one of the others and I'm still trying to locate this through one.

2:57:30You know, so those are those elements. Another element has, is talking about clarifying cultural sensitivities around Twin Peaks with indigenous cultures that has been brought up for the last few years. And we have different response to that, which I'm not going to explain to you all how complicated that can be. So that's a piece that we will be working on.

2:57:51As I mentioned earlier about that long, I'll call it thumb and up dry creek canyon that between research, that's a high ecological value, we will prioritize that in that space. So even within the zones, there are, I dare say sub zones that really think about different ecological watersheds and recreational watersheds for opportunities.

2:58:08The big theme across the board is that more recreation should be occurring closer to the urban interface and less should be occurring farther from the urban base. So there's already huge impacts we want to just lean into that impact rather than creating new impacted farther spaces. Okay, thank you. Yeah. Okay, time check.

2:58:29We're way behind. So a brief question, hopefully it's a very brief answer. Yes. Bountiful, Northside Lake had like trailheads. I've been in some of them. It feels like they have developed their trailhead on the trail system and then all of a sudden that zone. That zone, when it comes to Salt Lake City connection of the trailheads or the trails.

2:58:50Are we, does our vision for some of these trails connect with other cities are doing? Yes. Okay. So it's a much more elaborate system of, of, of, of, of, correct. Correct. After Twin Peaks, we would go to North Capitol and then Meridian Peak, which is tunnel Springs, North Salt Lake. One little upper show is a question.

2:59:08Yeah. My final question is, are we coordinating with the fire department to make sure we're planting species and holding in. Yes. Where we see erosion or fire. Yes. Yes. And the extensive interviews with the fire department with Captain Winkler at station four and others at the department on emergency access. That's a big component of, of the plan is emergency access as well as fire, wild firefighting.

2:59:33Strouples. What are we doing? Mr. Chair. I would like to make a straw poll that the council endorses the foothills zone development process as the framework for future foothills trail development. And you could do it together. Okay. And I propose that the council support releasing the remaining approximately 200,000 in trail construction and I'm going to say realignment.

3:00:04Funding with the understanding of public lands will return to request additional funding in the future. Okay. We have a, we have a, we share with you our feelings about that. Thank you so much for a very thoughtful presentation and I'm sure that we might have some other questions, but it seems like you have this well covered.

3:00:26Thank you so much. Thank you for the award. Yeah. I appreciate your time. We're going to move on to a big important item item number eight, which is fiscal year, 2020, 2020, seven funding allocations for federal housing and community development grants. And city funding our future housing programs follow up. We are going to welcome Alison Roland, council policy analyst to the table.

3:00:52Tyler Dourffi, community development policy and program manager. Dennis Radlidge, community development and grant supervisor, Jack Markman, community development and grant specialist. Alison, it's your, your lead now. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the second of three opportunities plan for you to review the funding recommendations of the CDC IP board and discuss any potential changes to them.

3:01:17There's substantial argument, sorry, if there's substantial agreement on the final allocations today, the third briefing would not be needed. Responses of responses to council member questions from the first briefing can be found in attachment five of the updated staff report. There were also a couple of corrections that needed to be made on the funding log, which were made in the version I have.

3:01:39That I'll put up in the screen in a minute. And then further review of unspent funds identifying the specific programs, awards and reasons for each organization are in attachment C6. So without further ado, I will try to share my screen again. And I imagine Mr. Chair, you'd like to go through these. I can figure this out.

3:02:06I really can. I think that might be the best way to go, but I also wanted to prioritize, you know, if we have, if it's council members have a specific request, maybe we can be more efficient in going through the whole thing, but I'm open to you leading the conversation. Council member. Any answers to questions been emailed to us or is it fair to ask?

3:02:29I'm particularly wondering about the South Valley services question. Yes. I was addressed. It's in attachment five. I have a version. Yeah, I have a version that is not on your screen. Let's see the South Valley services. One of the questions was how many salt lakes salt Lakers receive case management services for CD, CDBG number 17.

3:02:57And the response is that they anticipate the shelter director and community resource center director will support case management service delivery to over 450 Salt Lake City residents for FY 27. And then the same question for South Valley services in their application for funding our future number 12 says they will serve 175 Salt Lake City residents if awarded funding.

3:03:22And then specifically only serve Salt Lake City residents with awarded funding our future funding. There's also information from the big brothers, big sisters CDBG application that says 60 children and youth in Salt Lake City will be matched one to one with an adult mentor outside their immediate family. Children and youth in our programs will be provided with resources that go beyond academics to support their whole development.

3:03:45Thank you.

3:03:51So I have a question related to the presentation of the unspent funds like within the document. Can we just get maybe like a one minute like here's what that means related to the program? Yeah, I can speak to the funds. So when we went to the CDC IP board, they requested that we they wanted to see what the unspent funds were for the programs for a handful of the previous years and they just wanted them set up.

3:04:21And so we just wanted them set as what did the organization spend in HUD funds generally, like unspent funds generally. And so when they requested that we also made sure that we put it on yours because usually what we try to do with anything that we give the CDC IP board, we try to give you guys as well. We have realized that that's probably not the best way of doing it.

3:04:40Both do you guys and the CDC IP board because it's not very clear as to what those numbers actually mean. So in the future years, we're actually going to start breaking them down by program and not by organization. So for example, if just for example a certain program spends money on a certain project, in the last three years, what unspent funds they've had on that project.

3:05:00So for this one currently on these ones, it's just saying like for example, let's just say assist. I don't have the number from in front of me of what they have on the spent funds. It's just what from the year, I think it's the end of FY 22 through FY 25 for HUD funds generally, what they have at unspent. There was a question last time of unspent funds and in that responses we sent you, we actually sent you a breakdown of like the larger amounts.

3:05:25I think it was like over 5% if I remember correctly for each of those organizations that were on the list for what they had awarded, what their unspent amounts were, and what their rationalization for not spending those funds were. So that should be in the information that was sent to you guys. Yeah, that's an attachment C6.

3:05:42Can I ask a follow up? So then related to those unspent funds, they're still allocated to those organizations for future use or we've reclaimed those and that is being re awarded and is a part of the projections that we're seeing from the CDC, CIP board and the mayor. I just I'm trying to put those pieces together. That's a good question. Yeah. All the numbers that you're seeing for unspent funds have all been reallocated or have been recaptured and are being reallocated.

3:06:10So whether they've been reallocated in past years or in this current year, they were getting put back into the HUD funding or I'm not quite sure about the funding or future how that really works with the general funds, but the HUD funds at least, it is reallocated back into the program. So if they had unspent CDBG dollars, it is put back into CDBG for the next year to be respent.

3:06:30So they're respent back on the community. And is that the case with fund or future? No, for funding our future, because those funds aren't spent at that point, once the contract is over, they just dropped a fund balance since their general funds. So they're just back into the general fund. Okay. Okay. So then in the case this is the first year of that funding our future, this is the first year we've handled it this way, this particular way. Okay.

3:06:56So I'm going to repeat it back and tell me if I'm getting it wrong. So in the case of the HUD funds, we have unspent balance that is then being reallocated in the projected awards from CDCIP and from the mayor. For funding our future, anything that was unspent was not reallocated because that dropped to fund balance. Correct.

3:07:22Okay. Thank you. Just like an extra clarification, you'll see that on the HUD funds at the top of them, they actually have a section for reallocated funds. Most of that is from the previous year. So in the original trans mill that was sent, we actually break down where those dollars come from down to the dollar on the reallocated funds where exactly that's coming from.

3:07:41So you should be able to see that. If you need that again, we can always send that to you guys if you have any questions, of course. Thank you.

3:07:49Okay. Thank you for that clarification. That helps us a lot. Understand the unspent funds and how they played on this. And because it's two different metrics or two different ways of handling it for these two different funds, it's complicated. I guess there's no one mentioning anything. So maybe let's start with the neighborhood and housing infrastructure number two, I guess, since number one is not one that we originally.

3:08:21So this is the YWCA. Yes. Would you like to continue? Anybody has any questions about that? Do we want to do we just continue? In years past, well, we've handled it lots of different ways. One of the ways that you could choose to do it is to the extent that the mayor and CDCI board have the same recommendation. The council could just say we are going with the mayor's recommendation for that section and then maybe then Allison could just populate the cells.

3:08:58If you have changes to the mayor's proposal, it would be good to highlight that now. And then in the case where the mayor and board differ, you could clarify which recommendation you're wanting to go with. And there's only one, well, two cases really where the CDC IP board and the mayor differ. They're online. Well, they're on public services, CBBG public services, number 14, while such homeless health care during businesses for a street clinic.

3:09:35And so I've marked those in red. And then the fit to recover, number 20. And basically the mayor prefers to allocate 50,000 from the four street clinic to fit to recover. So that's the only difference actually in the recommendations between the board and the mayor. Can I ask another clarifying question? Councillor MURPHY.

3:10:17In further reviewing these, item number nine and item number 16 under the funding our futures are two separate organizations, but the application program title is the same. They're both house 20. Is this two organizations working on the same 20 people? Is it a model that we're implementing? So it's labeled the same. Why do I have two that say house 20 with really comparable descriptions?

3:10:47That's a great question. So the shared name is an artifact of the previous funding years. So previously there are just two funding categories this year, tenant-based housing and equity and homeownership. Previously there was up to 10. And one of those categories was house 20. Now, funding our future began in 2018. That was program, the pilot program that was started in partnership with the city by the road home.

3:11:16But to keep things competitive, it was opened competitively each year. Last year, VOA applied for that program as well and was also given funding. And so them having the name house 20 is an artifact of that. Their programs are similar. They serve overlapping categories. I couldn't speak to whether they serve the exact same clients.

3:11:38We could probably ask and get some clarifying information. But the way that those two programs overlap and coming with the people that they serve is partially an artifact of the previous programming. But they're similar. I'd also like this to go into deeper discussion about how we do allocate things and make them competitive.

3:11:59I like open competitive RFP processes. I don't like incentivizing the initiation of programs that we can't commit to year over year. Now it looks like based on the description, we actually caused a multiplication of a program that we're unable to perpetuate at the same level. So I would like a deeper discussion about how we can maintain competitive processes that are open and transparent.

3:12:26I think the RFPs would be without inadvertently doing that. Okay. So let me go back to neighborhood and housing infrastructure section, which is the beginning of our sheet. So I don't get too lost. I don't have any changes on this one section. Okay. So we section is a section the neighborhood house. Sorry. Neighborhood housing and infrastructure.

3:13:01Okay. So that's item number two through eleven. So anybody else? Good. Okay. Now moving on to this is a way of doing it. Well, this does this work. Okay. Now the section on public services. Council members. Thoughts? This goes from line twelve to line and it keeps on going. 38. Yes. Go ahead. Okay. Sorry. So when we're saying we're good, we're saying we're good with the mayor's recommendation in that box, not CDC IP because there could be a difference.

3:13:43That's correct. But there are only two differences. So in practice. I just want to make sure I'm not like reading the wrong line and being like, I'm good. And then it turns out I'm reading the wrong line and you're like, you are not good. No, I appreciate clarifying. So we're on the same page. So this will be the mayor's recommendation for that one section and we can go into the different sections.

3:14:02The times of those two deferment. My only thing that I would bring up here is that in this section, we are paying South Valley services, $60,000 for case management services. In funding our futures later, we are also once again paying for comprehensive wraparound case management services. I do get that that could be a nuanced thing, but that is one organization getting a lot of money for case management when this is one of those sections where you and I were looking for how to get a Salt Lake American.

3:14:35I haven't gone to voting or like asking for feedback on that. We're just starting a public services. So let's talk about that. Yeah. You just call this two, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So that's my only concern in this section. Okay. That conversation was about the previous section where good with neighborhood housing and infrastructure.

3:14:52So public services now. Okay. Yes. What was it again? Sorry. Okay. So in the second section, that's my only one line number 17. In the funding our future later on, we are giving them significant money for also case management services. If those numbers hold true, they are doing a significant service to ours, but they're getting $213,400 out of funding our future.

3:15:22This is one of this is the tightest category where there is nothing to spread around. I am not saying this is not a worthy ask. I am saying that if there's wiggle room, that might be one of the places. Recommendation there to move that to number 33 or yes, that would be my. And my reason, my reason for this Salt Lake American reaches a very, very, very difficult to reach constituency with fidelity every year.

3:16:11I even would be okay. I know we have our threshold of 50,000. That's a threshold we have created. I would even be okay giving them just the 30,000 that they asked for and then reallocating those other 30,000. That would require us to do some magic somehow. But I would like the priority to be Salt Lake American. Any other thoughts about this one request or?

3:16:37I support that request. I feel like they're providing such a small organization providing such a valuable and valid resource to the community. And I would support the 50,000 as part of the minimum. So your request, you're thinking about going up above what they're requesting? So they wrote the request. We know that there's traditional language barriers.

3:17:07They traditionally do not score super well because of barriers around applications. So they missed the adjustment this year that the lowest threshold was 50 and applied again for 30,000. So if we want to continue to honor the 50,000, what Council Member Carlson is saying, let's go to the 50,000 for them. And then that would give us 10,000 to put on another project.

3:17:31Or yes, sir. I do want to say we reached out to them actually before all of this when they applied to ask if they could actually take the 50,000 and they say they could. So they're okay with the 50,000 if that's what you say. Yeah. And they do a lot of work in my district with a lot of neighbors across the city. It's actually incredible and I'm thankful for what they do with the.

3:17:54If we did give them the 60, I mean, I know it would go directly towards food assistance at this point. The food demand is beyond what they can respond to. Yes, Council Member Lopez-Shaw. Thank you. Awesome. I wanted to outline. We have a new applicant, Thrive Center for Survivors of Torture Line 16, right above line 17.

3:18:14And then we have an applicant at Wasatch Community Gardens. You've heard me advocate for them before and a lot of them have written in. I just learned WCG. The city has actually asked them to expand capacity. And so this comes out of time when, for whatever reason, they were not ranked once more. This is a recurring applicant as you know, the green team addresses both homelessness employment.

3:18:35And food scarcity. Line 16 is Thrive Center for Survivors. And I jumped ahead. This is a new organization that we're funding. I don't know them well. Sorry Council Member. Is that within the CDBG second category public services? No. I see Vosatch Community Gardens there. Online 27. Okay. So what's up above? Yes. So once everyone gets it.

3:19:06So where I left off is we have this new applicant and we haven't worked with them in the past. I think while we know we are economically constrained. I want to just highlight again that Wausatch Community Gardens is being asked by public lands to take on more of our lands to service. And they utilize the green team for that expansion.

3:19:22They notified me that they've been asked to take over a parcel on 7th East and about 17th South to expand it. Green team is something that has been utilized to help both the food bank as well as relieving salt Lakers of food sources. So this is something that I'd advocate for is to remove funding from line 16 and transfer over to line 27 to make sure we have continuity of these sustainable food sources.

3:19:50So you would remove the 50,000? That's correct. That's our line minimum. So 16 to 27. Correct. Mr. Chair, my question on this one is if the public lands is asking a non-profit, non-profit organization to do work, then public lands should be paying for that work to be done for them and not for them to be getting asking for money from our CBDG funding pot.

3:20:25So my question would be back to the city. Public lands is asking them for to do something, then they should be doing it through their budget not through the. I need to check ownership of that property because I know that there are you dot contracts with a lot of people to maintain because you dot homes a lot of that, right?

3:20:48I'm just I'm confirming that. Yeah. I also would like to have the same follow up questions about this. I also struggle with removing the funding from an organization that is very relevant to the times that we live in. And this is not to make an organization better than others. All of them are fulfilling different important pieces of our city.

3:21:08But, you know, I remember the presentation from last year from Wasatch Community Gardens. And while they important, the impact was a few dozen people and it's a huge impact. And I'm not saying that that impact is no meaningful, but we're talking about hundreds with the same amount of money impacted in another service.

3:21:28And again, worth for everybody to keep on throwing ideas here. 16 to 27 from customer roll up a showers. Anybody else has any thoughts? Just Mr. Chair. Oh, yes. The 10,000 that's left remain for item 17 South Valley services since that is well below the $50,000 threshold. I would say we could recommend that we move it back up to line 14, which is the 4th state clinic.

3:22:01Because that was where the money was taken out to fund the 20. So just add the 10 up to that area. Will you repeat that again? Yeah, sorry. So there's when we took, I'm out of 17 South Valley services. We took $50,000 out of that and we moved it into line 33 Salt Lake American. That left us with 10,000. Yes. Right. So move that 10,000 that's remaining from the South Valley services up to line 14, which is the 4th street clinic line 14.

3:22:41So that will make it from 157 to 112 to 167. Yeah. I think that this is tied to your request, the council member, Pietro. Would you be supportive of that? I absolutely will. So then we can close at least a little piece of the chapter. I'm a thousand percent at peace with that. Because we're playing with it. It's 50,000 to Salt Lake American, 10,000 to 4th street clinic.

3:23:06And so many ways we're playing 3D chess here. So I'm trying to figure out if we can close some chapters. I'm happy with that. I'm happy with that. I'm so comfortable with maybe. Yes. Okay. One chapter close. So going back to the Wasatch Community Gardens request. So if I understand correctly, they have requested funding from CDBG funds and funding our future.

3:23:32And they received the recommendation from the mayor and the CIP board for 52,000 from funding our future. So if we don't fund with the CDBG dollars, the current recommendation is that they would receive the funding. They would receive the 52 from funding our future. Is that right? So I will just share that on the current recommendations for South Valley services for funding our future, they're recommended for a total amount of 213.

3:24:08No, sorry. I'm asking about Wasatch Community Gardens. Oh, excuse me. Yeah. Sorry. I'm not around here. Line 13 under funding our future. 52,000. Okay. The programming for the two Wasatch Community Gardens requests are slightly different. I believe that this, the green team case management is focused on rental assistance and case management for people that are working in the green team.

3:24:32I can't comment on what's being funded for the HUD application for the Wasatch Community Gardens, but they are, I think they're distinct. But what I think what you're saying, a council member Carlson, is that there is a line item for Wasatch Community Gardens, different funding part. But there is some money going to his organization.

3:24:53That's exactly right. Yes. Any, do we want to sell any other, and I apologize if you feel like council members that I'm like trying to, I'm trying to do my best to streamline this. If you have any other ways of doing it, please suggest it. So any other moving pieces or still advocating for your own suggestions? That's correct.

3:25:26Do we have any, Council member Lopez-Chun? Thank you. Instead of a straw poll, I would recommend, can we just double check what is the differences? I'd love to understand. I did not skip his head, so I appreciate you pointing that out. The way they communicated it with me, it was the HUD funding that was most proper for what they needed.

3:25:46Versus the case management, could we ask the organization if the case management is effective and still has the same efficacy and impact, or is it the HUD funding and how would that differ? I think that would help me understand better. Yeah. We can reach out and ask. So what we say we do when we have kind of follow up questions, we can, I think we say we'll start it to come back next week at the next discussion.

3:26:15So we can flag those two items to get more information on that before you guys draw a poll. And I guess if there is a request for public lands, the communication I received from their executive director and team was, there might be a request from public lands. I would love to know what are the terms of that, if any. Just wanted to reiterate my support for a line 20 fit to recover.

3:26:45This was a mayor's recommendation, but this organization really provides, I mean all of the organizations here provide critical services. I feel like this one in particular not only serves the individuals who are directly impacted but serves as a broader community space for more community members to gather and to be present in.

3:27:05So I just want to reiterate kind of my strong support for the 50,000 funding to fit to recover. Any movement, any other thing that you want to move around in this section? So a lot of organizations that are not getting funding there. Okay, maybe we can close public services, spending some more questions raised by council members.

3:27:42Are we okay with closing public services section? Yes, yes. Okay. Let's move on to. ESG. ESG for one. Part one and part two. And just as a reminder, part one and part two are separate so you can't move funds between part one and part two. Each one is its own funding source. I still don't know how to make this happen. Just council members, I wanted to raise rough evidence and organization that's moved to the West Side.

3:28:24You know, why people might think, you know, animals are in a different level of need versus, you know, they work that these organizations are doing. It is completely tied to the success of some of these individuals. Sometimes it feels like a secondary need for many but once you understand how people access services or not because of they don't know how to figure out what to do with their partner in life, in many cases their animals, the success or not of their progress changes.

3:29:07So I'm trying to figure out how to get some money out of, you know, there and I'm not sure. This makes me want to know where the threshold again. I completely agree with you. I was wondering if it makes sense at all for us to consider unspent funds in this case only because these organizations still have funds available to them and then my other question was are we utilizing a $50,000 minimum in this section as well?

3:29:31The unspent funds have been recaptured by us. Yeah, they're not. Never mind. Yeah. But I think that maybe some of that, I think this is not an unfair conversation and again, I want to be, I don't want to use this argument just for the benefit of an organization that I care about. So I just said that as a disclaimer but, you know, I wonder if knowing that some of these organizations are not able to go through the funding as fast as we are able to give it to them.

3:30:04That's not to say that they could do better in the future that we may be able to lower some of them to try to get rough having some funding even below the 50,000,000,000. Yeah. So I actually had a really good conversation with one of the pending applications today about unspent funds. And I think one of the things that's like super challenging is it depends on what you're spending on, right?

3:30:31Like if you're buying sprockets, you know, like you can say, oh, yes, sprockets, have you not seen the Jetsons? Okay. You're all too young. Anyway, but if you're buying like a tangible good, there's going to be some sort of like, you know, potential impacts due to supply chain, you know, and things like that. But otherwise, you can pretty much bank on the fact that if I place my order in enough time, those will come through because a lot of these projects though are often based in personnel.

3:31:01Sometimes you may have something where you have the absolute best case management individual who then gets an incredible offer from a competing organization. And because of the specialty of the population you serve, you can't just jump on like an indeed dot com and be like, oh, you next. And so you have a gap in service, which is not related to the need you're facing, but it is related to the dynamics of like a human resource process.

3:31:30And so one of the things that I think is challenging in this space is being able to compare those two different types of needs and how we as the city are then saying we have an expectation of spending down funds across those use cases while still not leaving money sitting on the table. Different ways that I've seen it done outside of just the city processes includes being able to say upfront, you are limited to, you know, 90 days past when you have to have all of the all of your, you know, all of your receipts submitted so you have an award post period reimbursement window.

3:32:14And then on top of that, if there is flexibility to say we could extend it beyond the award period, you're limited to a threshold of a certain percentage of the award that you can carry forward versus what you actually have to return if it hasn't been spent. A lot of those processes though, from my experience have to be put forth at the time of award, you can't usually go back and change the terms and conditions of an award.

3:32:41Anyway, I'm just sharing all of this because it was discussed today and I too would like to find a way to recapture some of those unused funds, but I think we have to be thoughtful about how we do it, just recognizing the diversity of use cases that we're seeing even in this applicant pool. That makes sense. Thank you for that clarification.

3:33:00Still, I know how to get them some funding, but I wanted to just say that. Is there, oh, sorry. I'll just say I also don't have any ideas, but I support the effort. And so if there is a way forward, I'd love to hear ideas. Thanks. Can you call us in? I know these are CDBG, CDBG. I don't know why the acronym is such a helpful for me to say dollars that we're considering for this particular section, but as I think about the flexibility of funding our future dollars, might there be an opportunity there?

3:33:39I don't know what the precedent might be if applicants applied for one set of funding, but we awarded them another. But given that we're looking at these two things at the same time, I wonder if that might be something to consider when we talk about the funding our future. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yes, even just general ones.

3:34:02So no other thoughts about ECG part one. Okay, ECG part two then. Thoughts? ECG. I believe you all to be quiet. No. Okay, good. Nothing. ECG part two going once. Okay. We're closing with ECG part two. Now the home section number two, all applications. Not a lot, but most of them are getting a word. Right. All of them are fully funded.

3:34:47Yeah. Yeah. Now to their request, but they are getting funding. Any thoughts there? Okay. Moving on to, I mean the other one is very easy. CHDO applicants. Now we're going to hope. Hope. I'm fine. Gosh, that one is a hard one too. It's a bad acronym. No questions there. Yes, go ahead. Can I go back? I just wanted to frame this question for applications related to the home grant for our neighborhoods.

3:35:26It's not questioning the funding. I just wanted to understand because this is helping with down payment assistance, whether or not this amount is helping a family. I mean they have quite a bit of, again, awarded funds that are unspunned. I just wanted to understand if there's maybe a situation where they aren't able to deploy these funds.

3:35:47It just seems like a lot of funding to get people in the down payment assistance. Yeah. We can reach out and ask. Now that they did, in some of the previous ones we had answered for previous years, why they had unspunned funds. But we can ask them if this is enough for future funding and if they're able to provide down payment assistance with this request.

3:36:04Can I ask also, just because I don't know this, is this, I understand it's for low and moderate income households, but is there a barrier for town homes and condos? That's a good question. Sometimes the home regulations are a little weird. I'll have to double check. I don't want to tell you one thing or not. Yeah, I'd love to understand.

3:36:21There's plenty of those on the market and they're affordable in comparison to single family homes. Yeah, let me tell you that. Okay. Going to, I lost my internal thoughts. It's my fault. Hapwa. No questions there. Then now we're going to the fun part. The faff. The faff part. No? No one can. No one. Someone left. Okay.

3:36:55What are we thinking about the equity and home ownership assistance? So my question existed around item number two. That amount of money for down payment assistance versus the ability to do home improvements, it's a qualitative consideration at this point. I know they're saying they're going to serve. It's up to $39,000 per household.

3:37:28I get that they're doing creative things, but I'm not actually proposing anything. I think I'm just asking us to look at this and say is that where $200,000 gets a spang for a buck? Or would we be able to say, hey, neighborhood housing, we really want to focus on home improvements and maybe more NOAA kind of things, right?

3:37:51Like the affordable housing preservation. I'm not proposing anything at this point. I have just been thinking about 200,000 isn't a stellar amount for down payment assistance. Your average down payment at 20% has to be 100,000 right now. So we're approximating less than 25% of that with this. It was a good start. Good start.

3:38:23It's true. Yeah. Give a start. Ten based housing assistance section. There's a few organizations that are not getting funding and several organizations that are getting less what they're requested. And I'm saying, toward the mayor's recommendation. I'm just, you know, we've all talked to one program and we're looking to see about different funding there.

3:38:59And on here, you know, we have wines 6, 7, and 9, the road home. Now, three different programs. But one organization shared housing, supported housing, house 20. And I'm just, and to get combined, it's $500,000. And I'm just looking at, is there an overlap in those three funding sort, three funding requests that we could allocate to it another program?

3:39:36And I'm just looking at allocating to the line, where to go? Line 21, first step housing. And to your point, I think, Council Member Dugan, I wanted to see if we could do something for 18. I felt like it's also very relevant, very relevant to the times that we live in since this, you know, focusing their work on refugees and we're going to see a long-seeker seeking woman.

3:40:07And they never been awarded by us. But I also, I think maybe the conversation and some of the things that we said here, all of this realization do such an amazing work. But sometimes relying so much on us is something that maybe is a conversation for us to have, like, organizations that rely specifically almost, not entirely, but a big chunk of their funding comes through this path.

3:40:38Knowing so, I mean, all of us knowing so that we live in times where these funding funds may not happen in the future. Funding our future is different. But I just wanted to highlight that, that I felt like we live in times that we need to potentially allocate some of these resources to the populations that are under extreme pressures.

3:41:01Yeah. There's also, again, a lot of money leaving the city to go to South Valley. It's a higher number. I am not actively proposing that we take any from it. But as we consider things, but I do have a soapbox to write on about when we tell nonprofits not to depend on funding streams, when we depend on them to keep our communities together.

3:41:23That's a personal soapbox. So if we get into it, it's tensions that need to be balanced. But all that does go ahead with any awards that we give this year. I would like to explicitly remind people that there is an active proposal to cut CDBG to fund the current OR and that next year there is no way for the city to absorb this and should financial difficulties continue funding our future, which is primarily sales tax, should also be expected to be lower.

3:41:53So in that vein, while I don't want to be stingy with funding, I do think this is worth noting to everyone who receives and everyone who applied that if you have a creative way for us to help you find funding, but this we can't count on this in perpetuity. So that's a very young and customer at Carlson, I saw your hands together so you guys can do well.

3:42:15I just had a question about line five, Utah community action. I saw that, you know, they're requesting a little bit less than double what was requested in previous years in 2024, fiscal year 2024, 25, I guess they were awarded 200,000. And then this year, the recommendation is over 355,000. And so I wanted to serve 83 households.

3:42:45I wanted to understand what is behind that great increase and to hear a little bit more about that project. So you talk to media action, landlord, tenant mediation, line five. So I don't fully know what the reasoning is for the larger request this year from the previous year, we can ask them and get some clarification on that.

3:43:09The program is essentially helping with eviction prevention. I believe UCA is one of the few programs that is engaging in this sort of landlord, tenant mediation programming to as an alternative to eviction or legal proceedings. But we can get that information about what the explanation is for the larger request. Thank you.

3:43:33And then also can we follow up? I see its mediation training statewide. So I would love to get the special for funding our future dollars. How many Salt Lake City residents would benefit from this program? I will clarify with them as well. But I imagine the number that they provided other people that would be Salt Lake City residents because UCA is very aware that the people that they serve with this funding need to be from Salt Lake City.

3:43:59So I will double check with that. But the number that they reported should be for Salt Lake City residents. So we have, Council Member Dugan brought up the potential, sorry, because so young, go ahead. I got skipped. Sorry. Nope, it's fine. I think one of the other pieces that is challenging within this space is we're seeing like a snapshot of one piece of what is usually a larger portfolio that's coming in.

3:44:37And so at least for me that is challenging because as we're hearing from some of the various applicants, like an example would be if I'm receiving, you know, county funds to be able to provide housing vouchers to 300 individuals, but I need a case manager with which to support individuals that may have additional needs.

3:45:01We're just seeing the case management piece. We're not necessarily seeing all the other funding that either could be put on hold and or could be limited in terms of services when some of these pieces aren't funded. I don't have like a very clear and straightforward solution, but I just wanted to highlight that. That I do think that even though we're looking at these, you know, one to two sentence descriptors related to it, that it is a component in many cases of a larger portfolio of services where because of the various types of funding, they need city dollars related to a piece that usually human personnel that maybe isn't as fundable through some of the other venues in which they're receiving resources.

3:45:51Thank you. That was useful. I think that some of the things that were floating in the air from this conversation were some of the things that Council Member Dugan brought up, but potentially they wrote home, right, on some of the things there. I also, there's some questions on the table to some of the organizations here.

3:46:25Yes, we can, yes, yes, more stars. And then there was questions about inter-community action, about, you know, the amount of funding and why they were potentially so much higher. I want to figure out a way to potentially try to fund some funding for women of the world organization. I might forget it in some one. I think I feel like I'm interested in looking at a little bit for First Step House, if acknowledging how impossible it is in already telling them that I'm not sure.

3:46:58Yes, I'm First Step House in this section. Okay, can we close this one? There's a lot of stars. We have the 10 base housing assistance. Any, can we move to the next section? That's it. Can I ask one more clarifying question? Yes. So I know we said theoretically in funding our future, we're trying to keep these buckets of money separate.

3:47:29But theoretically, we have more say over that, correct? Correct. That's correct. Well, while you can't necessarily take a funding or future application and fund them with HUD funding, that's because of the HUD requirements, you could theoretically take an unfunded or underfunded HUD application and use funding or future dollars to fund them if you...

3:47:52If we look at line number one. On which section? On the first, the equity home ownership portion of funding our future. They only applied for 100,000 and are getting 150,000. I'm assuming that's because there was more in the bucket than requests or because it didn't make sense. If women of the world were a priority, that 50,000 could be a nice nod, it would require us to take it from the equity and home ownership assistance bucket and put it in the tenants-based housing assistance.

3:48:29But that theoretically is something that we do have jurisdiction over since that is our own sales tax. You would probably...and we want to confirm with finance, I would think you need to follow it up with the budget amendment to officially move that money from one line item to the other line item, but because you have say over the budget amendment process too, you can reasonably...

3:48:49I just wanted to raise that as a possibility. I don't know if you want to go through that, but it is the only application I saw that's getting more than it asked for. Yeah. I actually think for noticing that. I don't know how you did that, but I'm impressed. It is an option. I think that that is something that I feel very strongly about, especially with the times that we live in are complicated for those in that space.

3:49:18I would probably support that, but let's ask more questions about why they are getting more than they requested. I think that will be an interesting piece to put on there. And I can provide some clarification on why they are giving being recommended for more, if that would be helpful for the council. The board determined that the Salt Lake neighborhood housing, number three, their minimum acceptable amount was...I don't remember the exact number, but I believe it was around 200,000, and since 50,000 was left over, the board determined that they would give that additional 50,000 to the number one scored applicant and the mayor agreed.

3:50:03Yeah. That makes it easy for me to support this idea of moving those 50,000 to women of the world and then not playing, moving the chairs and the Titanic on tenant-based housing assistance. So I will be supportive of that. Any thoughts about this? Okay. See you next week. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, I do have something to say before we finished.

3:50:41Yes. Well, you know, so this way of funding, this organization through funding, our future is been years past. I was also been approached by some organizations that had the struggle with the process and they had many of them, I mean, the organization that came to us had a very thought out explanation of why they struggle with the process.

3:51:09It wasn't as simple as we didn't like the process. It was just very specific about why. But I also, so that's one piece. And then the other piece is we are separating by doing this right now and I'm talking about funding our future dollars. By doing this ahead of time, ahead and by mean ahead of time is separating from the budget, we're sort of potentially cutting ourselves in option as those responsible for the budget of a tool that could allow us to potentially balance the budget, meaning in the past we used to talk about funding our future in the context of the budget.

3:52:01And right now we are allocating these funds ahead of time, not thinking about the budget. And we all know that potentially the budget discussions are going to be complicated to say the least. And I would like to request that, and I would like to hear if you guys are okay with this, that we go a different route on bringing those two conversations back again together.

3:52:29And I'm not talking about CBTG since that is funding from the feds and they have their own timelines that goes ahead like it used to go. We discussed that before the budget overall, but for year 27 that we go to funding our future and talk about it in the context of the budget in case we need some of these funds for other purposes.

3:52:53And this goes back to your question, because I remember, Peter, that some of these organizations might realize that if we are on fire, we might need to use these funds for all the things. Mr. Chair, could I clarify? Because just to make sure everybody is clear, what you're allocating now in the funding our future funds are from FY26.

3:53:18So they're funds that were already part of the FY26 budget. I think when we were talking, though, wanting to kind of put a notice for lack of a better word out that for fiscal year 27 were those funds have not yet been allocated, we may need to look at a different process. Okay. Thanks. So, yes, this is not a, yeah, this is not to say to all of the processes these organizations did and the conversation we just had for the last 40 minutes, we're not honoring that process, but this is just to say, I'll prefer that we didn't do that for the future.

3:53:55I don't know how you guys feel about it. You have any opinions about this? Excuse me. Can we revisit it at the next one? I just want to take time to, like, wait a frozen cons because I see it both ways. And you don't need to, I should have been clear, you don't need to make that decision in conjunction with this decision that's in front of you right now.

3:54:20So, it can be a budget conversation that you think about the pros and cons. Yes, I agree. There's nothing that we can commit right now, but I just wanted to throw it out there since this is a new thing and it also limits potentially, from my perspective, it limits our options on the overall budget discussion. So, let's talk about it in the future.

3:54:42I think that finishes this conversation for now. Thank you so much. Thank you, Chef. Yes. There is also on the report of the chair and vice chair. We have an announcement. The announcement is that we want to propose, you know, that Dolores Huerta is the name that we put forward and that we set that for public discussion as the name and seeking feedback from the community and the public hearing.

3:55:39And that is the opportunity for the community to share their thoughts. I personally heard from many of our community members and we heard on the record about, you know, the community members and I heard from other ones, other elected officials that I hold here that that should be the name. So, I wanted to tell you that that is something that we would like to start on any thoughts in here.

3:56:17Thank you. Yeah, I would declare my initial support for that, you know, but would like to hear more about the public, but I also heard that message from a lot of our public commenters. And I, meanwhile, though, I also asked staff about some other potential changes that would be that might not fit neatly within this change, but I would nevertheless like to move forward on those with having to talk more about it offline.

3:56:55Thank you. Any other thoughts? Councilwoman Pietro? Naming entities after living, people are still dangerous while women have a far better track record when it comes to acknowledging the consent and autonomy of other people's bodies. The moment someone says she was abusive to them as a staffer or was it Amy Klobuchar who threw a brush at someone or a salad, there was something.

3:57:18I just, as long as we're prepared to stand in headlands, should those sorts of things come to pass? We know that passionate people are the ones who change the world, so I wouldn't be surprised and it wouldn't change my view of her and what she's accomplished, but I do think we should stand by our conviction that this is something we're going to adapt.

3:57:37So it sounds like we have support to move ahead and we'll advertise the public hearing. That's the process that we went through the last time we did an honorary street naming change so the public will have a chance to wait on that. More to come on when that public hearing will be. And I think having heads up from when the public hearing will happen will be a big deal for many of us so we can share with the community and keep people for them to know.

3:58:09So that will be very useful. Thank you. Sorry. Yes, that's what we're doing. But in the meantime, are we going forward with the actions that we discussed or what we're taking in the meantime? The signs have been removed. Okay. So I think that box has been checked at least. So I think we just go forward with what goes in their place.

3:58:31Gotcha. So the signs were removed. I didn't even notice that. Even though I drove down the street to talk. Thank you. Yeah. You know, there was some good developments from the administration and they put quite a bit of work to get this name removed. But I'm excited for this proposal. Certainly, someone that I look up to.

3:58:52And I would love to see a Latina leader, civil rights activist and all the things that she accomplished to I personally feel like in some ways for me to be here. So I would love to hear from the community about that. So this you don't have any announcements? Okay. Then we need a motion for a close meeting. Can I make it?

3:59:23Chris Worden. And Greg. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I move that we enter into closed session for the purpose of discussing collective bargaining, pending or reasonably imminent litigation and attorney client matters. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Warten and a second by a Council Member Lopez-Chavis. I'm going to call the question, Council Member Dugan.

3:59:52Yes. Council Member Lopez-Chavis. I. Council Member Carlson. I. Council Member Warten. Yes. Yes. And so Member Pietro. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. This. We are in close meeting now. Thank you. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I.