12/07/2021 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
WORK SESSION
December 7,2021 Tuesday 2:00 PM
Council Work Room
451 South State Street Room 326
Salt Lake City,UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
7:00 pm Formal Meeting
Room 326
(See separate agenda)
Welcome and public meeting rules
After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City &County Building through the main east entrance.
The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters.The public is welcome to listen.Items scheduled
on the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and /or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on
circumstance or availability of speakers.
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined.Item start times and
durations are approximate and are subject to change at the Chair’s discretion.
Generated:20:57:37
The Council has returned to a hybrid meeting approach.Hybrid Council meetings
allow people to join online through Webex or in person at the City &County
Building.
Public Comments:The public can give comments to the Council during their 7
p.m.formal meetings online through Webex and in-person in Room 326 of the City
and County Building.For more information,including Webex connection
information,please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings.(A phone line will
also be available for people whose only option is to call in.)
What to Expect:The hybrid format allows in-person participation and remains
mindful of existing COVID-19 protocols and gathering limits.A maximum of 24
people,including Council members and City staff,will be permitted in a meeting
room.If the capacity has been reached in the primary meeting room,overflow
space will be provided.Social distancing will be maintained.
Per an executive order signed by Mayor Mendenhall,face coverings are required for
vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals inside Salt Lake City facilities.
Work Session Items
1.Informational:Updates from the Administration ~2:00 p.m.
30 min.
The Council will receive an update from the Administration on major items or projects,
including but not limited to:
•COVID-19,the March 2020 Earthquake,and the September 2020 Windstorm;
•Updates on relieving the condition of people experiencing homelessness;
•Police Department work,projects,and staffing,etc.;and
•Other projects or updates.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Recurring Briefing
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
2.Informational:Updates on Racial Equity and Policing TENTATIVE
The Council will hold a discussion about recent efforts on various projects City staff are
working on related to racial equity and policing in the City.The conversation may include
issues of community concern about race,equity,and justice in relation to law enforcement
policies,procedures,budget,and ordinances.Discussion may include:
•An update or report on the Commission on Racial Equity in Policing;and
•Other project updates or discussion.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Recurring Briefing
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
3.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.4 for Fiscal Year 2021-22 Follow-
up ~2:30 p.m.
60 min.
The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about an ordinance that would amend the final
budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year
2021-22.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the
City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.This amendment
includes creating a new Community Health Access Team or CHAT program,creating a new
park ranger pilot program,several items to spend American Rescue Plan Act or ARPA
funds including a new Westside perpetual housing fund,one-time community grants for
non-profits and businesses,and additional funding for the Community Commitment
Program,among other items.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,November 9,2021;Tuesday,November 16,2021;and Tuesday,
December 7,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,November 9,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,November 16,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,December 7,2021
4.Ordinance:Alley Vacation at 1200 Block of Kensington and Bryan
Avenues ~3:30 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would vacate a portion of City-
owned alley situated in the 1200 block of East Kensington and Bryan Avenues that runs east
to west from 1300 East to the McClelland Trail.The intent of the request is to incorporate
the unused alley into the adjacent properties.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,December 7,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,November 16,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,December 7,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,December 14,2021
5.Ordinance:Columbus Street Alley Vacation North of Victory Road ~3:50 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would vacate a portion of City-
owned alley situated adjacent to properties at 583,585,589 and 595 North Columbus
Street;and;590 North Victory Road.The proposal is to vacate this remaining alley
segment and incorporate the vacant land into the neighboring properties.The total area of
the proposed vacation is approximately 2750 square feet.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,December 7,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,November 16,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,December 7,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,December 14,2021
6.Ordinance:Rezone at Redwood Road and Indiana Avenue ~4:10 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of the
properties at approximately 835 South Redwood Road and 1668 West Indiana Avenue
from R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential District)to R-MU-45 (Residential/Mixed Use
District).The property at 1668 W Indiana currently contains an individual single-family
dwelling while the other property is vacant.No specific site development proposal has been
submitted at this time.The change is consistent with changes identified in the Westside
Master Plan which identified the intersection of Redwood and Indiana as the location of a
future Community Node.The Master Plan is not being changed.Consideration may be
given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,December 7,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,November 16,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,December 7,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,December 14,2021
7.Tentative Break ~4:30 p.m.
20 min.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -n/a
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
8.Informational:Health Care Innovation Blueprint ~4:50 p.m.
45 min.
The Council will receive a briefing on A Blueprint for Growing Salt Lake City’s Health
Care Innovation Economy,a document produced by the Gardner Institute at the request
of the City’s Department of Economic Development.The Blueprint lays out a rationale and
strategy for the Department to provide targeted support to businesses in the health care
innovation sector and to encourage students to pursue careers in this sector through
internships and other opportunities.The briefing will serve as a mid-project review with
the Council for the Department,which has requested feedback from the Council.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,December 7,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
9.Resolution:City Consent to Subleases at The Leonardo ~5:35 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a resolution that would authorize subleases
arrangements at The Leonardo.Consent may be given if the sublease fulfills a public
purpose,complies with the purpose of the outstanding bonds,and has a direct relationship
to The Leonardo’s mission and programming plan.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,December 7,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,November 16,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,December 7,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,December 14,2021
Standing Items
10.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair
Report of Chair and Vice Chair.
11.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director
Report of the Executive Director,including a review of Council information items and
announcements.The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to
City Council business,including but not limited to:
•Approval of the 2022 Annual Meeting Calendar;and
•Scheduling Items.
12.Tentative Closed Session
The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session.A closed meeting described
under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including,but not limited to:
a.discussion of the character,professional competence,or physical or mental health
of an individual;
b.strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining;
c.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
d.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property,
including any form of a water right or water shares,if public discussion of the
transaction would:
(i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under
consideration;or
(ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best
possible terms;
e.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property,including any form of a water
right or water shares,if:
(i)public discussion of the transaction would:
(A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under
consideration;or
(B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best
possible terms;
(ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be
offered for sale;and
(iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves
the sale;
f.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel,devices,or systems;and
g.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to
Utah Code §78B-1-137,and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements
of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City
Recorder,does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public
Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)a copy of the foregoing provided
to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others
who have indicated interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not
limited to adoption,rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of
options discussed.
The City &County Building is an accessible facility.People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation,which may include alternate formats,interpreters,and other auxiliary
aids and services.Please make requests at least two business days in advance.To make a request,
please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,801-535-7600,or relay
service 711.
City Council Update –December 7, 2021
Chief Mike Brown
SLCPD Exploring Drone Program
Drone Program Update:
•Researched best practices
•Working with other agencies
•Careful policy and implementation plan
•Program Focus:
Protect citizen rights
De-escalation
Force Multiplier
Officer Safety
Situation Awareness
Transparency
•Implement in stages
•Funding request –Annual Budget
Mobile Cameras & License Plate Reader Cameras
•Flock Safety Test / Evaluation: 25 Cameras March 2022
•Vigilant Solutions (Motorola) Test / Evaluation: 25 Cameras
•Working with other agencies –Best practices
•Careful policy and implementation plan
•Program Focus:
Protect citizen rights
Crime Reduction
Force Multiplier
Transparency
•Funding Request –Annual Budget
Axon Software Update
•Performance: Configuration in Progress
•Respond+: Active, policy/procedure in progress
•Transcribe: Active
•Dictation: Coming first quarter of 2022
Two Other New Applications to Focus on Building Community Relationships
SPIDR Tech
•Funding Request: Annual
Budget
•Implementation goal: 4th
Quarter 2022
Case Service
•Funding Request: Annual Budget
•Implementation goal: 4th Quarter 2022
Questions
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
tinyurl.com/SLCFY22Budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Jennifer Bruno, Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards,
Allison Rowland, and Kira Luke
Budget and Policy Analysts
DATE:November 9, 2021
RE: Budget Amendment Number Four FY2022
________________________________________________________________________________
NEW INFORMATION
On November 16, the Council held a second briefing, public hearing, and then closed the public hearing to adopt
some items including:
- A-5: Community Health Access Team (CHAT) Program Vehicles ($150,000 from $2 Million Holding
Account; $150,000 goes to Fleet Fund)
- A-6: Non-Represented Employees’ Job Salary Survey ($75,000 from General Fund Balance)
- A-10: Community Health Access Team (CHAT) Program Personnel Transfer (Budget Neutral)
- A-11: Rose Park Golf Course Water & Energy Efficiency Grant (Matching Funds) ($1,800,000 from the Golf
Fund
- All items in Section D Housekeeping except D-1
- All items in Section G Consent Agenda for Grant Awards
- I-1: Council Office Reclassifications and Amending FY22 Appointed Pay Plan
The Council is scheduled to continue deliberation of the remaining proposed items at the December 7 work session.
The Council could take a final vote on some items at the formal meeting that same day, at a future formal meeting
or decline to approve a proposed item.
Budget Amendment Number Four includes forty-one proposed amendments and requested changes to thirteen
funds. Total expenditures coming from Fund Balance are $2,884,735, and the Administration is requesting straw
polls for two items which are found in Section A (New Budget Items). Additionally, the Council may wish to note
that the Administration is proposing to add twenty-two ongoing FTE’s paid with one-time grant funding. If all the
items are adopted as proposed, then Fund Balance would be $502,894 below the 13% minimum target established
by the Council in FY 20. Fund Balance would however remain $3 million above 12%.
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Proposed Spending Items
There are several proposed items that would spend nearly $14.5 million of American Rescue Plan Act or ARPA
funding. This is one-time funding from the Federal Government for the City to respond to pandemic-related
impacts and address recovery needs including revenue loss replacement and employee compensation. Many of the
proposed ARPA-funded items would use one-time funding for one-time uses. However, a few items like the park
ranger pilot program and expanded Community Commitment Program would add new full-time employees (FTEs)
which create new ongoing costs. This is in addition to ongoing costs (FTEs/programs) paid for with ARPA dollars in
Project Timeline:
Set Date: Nov. 9, 2021
1st Briefing: Nov. 9, 2021
2nd Briefing: Nov. 16, 2021
Public Hearing: Nov. 16, 2021
3rd Briefing: December 7, 2021
4th Briefing: TBD (if needed)
Potential Action: December 7 and/or 14, 2021
Page | 2
the F22 budget, totaling approximately $22.3 million. These would add to the General Fund’s growing structural
budget deficit in future fiscal years.
It’s important to note that approving the items as proposed would also set in motion the need to spend ARPA
dollars in FY23 (or use another funding source or identify budget cuts) to cover some of the new ongoing costs
particularly new FTEs and ongoing police overtime. The Administration’s transmittal includes a summary
spreadsheet showing how the City’s entire $85 million ARPA award has been used to-date, items proposed in this
budget amendment and potential uses in FY23 and FY24. The Council may wish to discuss with the
Administration how the City’s FY23 and FY24 annual budgets could be impacted by ARPA-funded
items proposed in this budget amendment plus the $22.3 million of ongoing expenses in the FY22
annual budget paid for with one-time ARPA funding.
Sales Tax Update (See Attachment 1)
This attachment shows the confirmed sales tax revenues through the end of FY21. The data table shows sales tax in
FY21 was $7.4 million higher than FY20 particularly the months of February through June. June was the highest
sales tax revenue month on record for the City. The wholesale trade increased, and the biggest decline remains
accommodation and food services. Inflation could also be a contributing factor to greater sales tax receipts.
Revenue for FY 2021-22 Budget Adjustments
Because the fiscal year just started the Fiscal Year 2022 projections are at budget. The following chart shows a
current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2022. Updated revenue projections are expected to be
available for the next budget amendment and after the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is completed.
Page | 3
Fund Balance Update
The Administration is recommending to go below the 13% minimum target established by the Council in FY 20.
This means the Fund Balance would be $502,894 below the target. Fund Balance would however remain $3 million
above 12%. Previously the City has been advised that downward trends in fund balance percentage could have the
potential to impact the City’s bond rating (needed to get desirable interest rates), and the previous minimum
threshold was identified at 10%. Updated Fund Balance projections are expected to be available for the next budget
amendment and after the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is completed.
Impact Fees Update
The Administration provided a summary of impact fee tracking, details on refunding amounts and dates and lists of
unfinished projects with impact fee funding. The information is current as of October 29, 2021. An update since the
information was transmitted is that the four police impact fee refunds listed for July through October in FY22 are
not needed based on the adopted annual budget.
As a result, the City is on-track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds during all FY22.
The Administration reports work is nearing completion to update the fire and parks sections of the impact fee plan.
The transportation section was updated last year. Eligible projects for police impact fees are being identified.
Page | 4
Type Unallocated Cash
“Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring
Impact Fees
Fire $1,487,183 More than a year away -
Parks $8,948,216 More than a year away -
Police $415,503 More than a year away -
Transportation $6,101,644 More than a year away -
Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract
$1,583,500 ARPA Holding Account Update
In the FY22 annual budget, the Council placed $1,583,500 into a holding account from 10 items proposed by the
Administration. The Administration indicates that the holding account items are no longer being recommended.
During deliberations in May and June the 10 items were determined to not be eligible for ARPA funding under the
U.S. Treasury’s ARPA guidance. The holding account was created to give the Administration time for exploring
whether any of the 10 items could be modified to be ARPA eligible. The Council could act in this budget
amendment to free these dollars.
Section A: New Items
(note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the
transmittal for some of these items)
A-1: Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance Costs ($128,888 from General Fund Balance and
$294,820 from Enterprise Funds)
The City has carried both excess liability and cyber security insurance since Fiscal Year 17 (FY17) and has not yet
had to use either. However, premiums for each rose significantly higher than budgeted in the current fiscal year.
Excess liability
The Administration shared the following definition of excess liability insurance:
Excess liability insurance covers judgments and claim settlements in excess of the City's $1,000,000 self-insured
retention. While most claims against the City are subject to judgment limitations under the Governmental
Immunity Act, federal claims, such as civil rights and employment claims, are not.
The Administration attributes the increase to claims in the past year that met thresholds the City is required to
report to the City’s insurance carrier.
Cyber security
The Administration shared the following definition of cyber security insurance:
Cyber insurance covers third-party liability resulting from security breaches. It also covers data recovery, data
breach response and crisis management, cyber-extortion, and ransomware.
In recent years, the City has funded upgraded security resources, including more advanced systems and more
cybersecurity training for City staff. The FY22 budget for the IMS Department also included $50,000 for an audit of
the City’s current network security. Requests in future budgets are likely to continue including hardware and
software upgrades that will improve security, as the City works to keep up with rapidly-advancing technology and
increasing threats. Although these investments ultimately reduce the need to use the insurance, trade publications
for the municipal information technology sector report a large increase in cyberattacks across the board, leading to
higher premiums throughout the industry.
Policy Question: The Council could confirm with the City Attorney's office whether an executive session on
deployment of security and/or pending litigation could allow the Council to learn about any current claims and
the City’s security profile.
A-2: Department of Air Quality Lawnmower Exchange ($250,000 from General Fund Balance)
The Utah Department of Air Quality (UDAQ) administers an annual gas-powered lawnmower and yard equipment
exchange in order to reduce criteria pollutants in the areas of the Wasatch Front that are in non-attainment with the
Clean Air Act air quality standards. Because the Wasatch Front is on track for attainment of wintertime PM2.5,
Page | 5
UDAQ is not running a snowblower exchange this year. Instead, they are focusing on programs to reduce
summertime ozone pollution, for which the Wasatch Front is out of attainment. UDAQ has $900,000 set aside to
continue the exchanges for the foreseeable future. The size of the lawnmower exchange varies each year depending
on the size of financial contributions from partners. UDAQ typically contributes between $300,000 and $400,000.
The Sustainability Department is proposing a budget amendment of $250,000 from General Fund Balance to
partner with UDAQ in FY22 on a gas-powered lawnmower exchange. This would facilitate exchanges for
approximately 1,000 Salt Lake City residents. Salt Lake City participated in 2021, spending nearly $161,000 which
helped 582 residents participate. In total, 509 gas powered mowers were exchanged (the remaining participants
bought new mowers without exchanging an old one). This is the equivalent of removing 4.02 tons of pollution from
the airshed each year. A majority of residents also opted to participate in the City’s Call 2 Haul program to have
their gas mower picked up curbside and recycled by Salt Lake City Waste and Recycling.
The Administration proposes continuing this program in FY 22 (spring 2022). The goal will be to increase
participation from 582 to 1,000 with a continued focus on our Westside neighborhoods. The Administration
anticipates greater awareness and uptake of the program in the coming year due to increased familiarity with the
program, and plans to work with UDAQ on earlier, targeted outreach given the lessons learned from spring 2021.
UDAQ anticipates the program logistics will change in FY 22 to facilitate easier participation and lower
administrative burden. In particular, they are hoping to develop a phone app that participants will use to sign up
and upload any required receipts.
UDAQ is also envisioning the next program will offer a promotional discount code to be used toward the purchase
of electric lawn equipment and an app would also help separate Salt Lake City residents from other participating
Wasatch Front residents. This will reduce confusion as to who is eligible for curbside pickup of their old mowers.
The Administration also indicates that they also hope the app will help keep the exchange open longer for Salt Lake
City residents instead of opening, closing it, and opening it again while UDAQ verifies addresses.
While the exact amount of the discounts have yet to be determined, the Sustainability Department proposes using
$250,000 in City General Funds to facilitate approximately 1,000 gas-powered mower exchanges. This budget
amendment would also fund temporary staffing expenses to assist with running curbside collection of old mowers
through Call 2 Haul. This benefit was very popular last year and helped make this program more equitable to those
who might not have the ability to haul their own mower to a metal recycler.
Policy Questions:
Expanding Program Beyond Lawnmowers – Council Members recently expressed interest in expanding this
exchange to include other common gas-powered yard maintenance equipment like leaf blowers, chainsaws,
trimmers, etc. The Council may wish to ask the Administration what would be necessary to expand the
exchange program along these lines?
Sustainability Funding Contributions – The Council may wish to ask if the Sustainability Department’s
refuse, energy, or environment dollars could be available to contribute to this program?
Context with the Annual budget – Given that this program is proposed to be funded with General Fund
dollars, the Council could ask that it be included in the annual budget in future years.
A-3: COVID Safe Building Improvements ($844,000 from General Fund Balance; $131,000 goes to
IMS Fund)
The Public Services Department identified several recommended building improvements to provide a safer
environment protecting against the spread of disease. Consultants, health officials and current employees
collaborated to identify these changes. The total cost is estimated at $844,000 and includes the following:
- $250,000 for improved indoor air quality by upgrading existing HVAC systems to better capture airborne
particles and contaminants using needlepoint devices
- $165,000 for enhanced janitorial cleaning five days a week for the rest of the fiscal year. The cleaning
schedule would adjust to COVID case counts and feedback from the public and employees
Page | 6
- $131,000 for teleconferencing and meeting equipment for virtual and hybrid public meetings. This
equipment and training would be available to the Mayor’s Office, Council Office and the City’s two dozen
boards and commissions
- $100,000 for reconfiguring cubicle office spaces
- $100,000 for various personal protective equipment (PPE) and cleaning supplies including facemasks,
hand sanitizer, disposable gloves, etc.
- $44,000 for new chairs, tables, reconfigurations and small digital signs in meeting rooms (potentially
including Room 138, Cannon Room and others)
- $17,000 for one seasonal employee working 40 hours/week for six months except holidays to assist with
visitors to the City & County Building
- $16,000 for new chairs in the Committee of the Whole room
- $10,000 for a public noticing digital sign within the ADA entrance at the City & County Building and at
Plaza 349
- $6,000 for desks and chairs to create two check-in areas: one on the first floor between elevators, a second
near the east entrance
o CBI guards would cover the check-in desk as part of the City’s existing contract
o Procedures are being developed for this new function
- $5,000 for appointment management software at the entrance of the building which allows IDing and
monitoring building occupancy
Policy Questions:
Equipment for Hybrid Meetings – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what virtual and hybrid
meeting equipment and training would be made available to the City’s two dozen boards and commissions.
The Council may also wish to ask if the Administration has looked into providing hybrid meeting training to
community councils.
Public Access to City & County Building – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if a policy is
being developed to govern public access during the pandemic to the City & County Building and how the
public would make appointments on the new management software. Currently some departments report
offering limited hours for walk-in visitors and other departments are scheduling appointments.
Public Notice Digital Signs – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if public noticing digital signs
are also needed at the Main Library and the Public Safety Building so the same information is available at
multiple locations across the Civic Campus. Many notices are currently posted on doors with paper.
Other Funding Sources for this Project – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if ARPA dollars
could be used for these expenses (note: this is not recommended for ARPA dollar use by the
Administration).
A-4: Pulled prior to Submission
A-5: Community Health Access Team (CHAT) Program Vehicles ($150,000 from $2 Million Holding
Account; $150,000 goes to Fleet Fund) *straw poll requested*
Note this item is related to items A-10 and C-1
In the FY22 annual budget, the Council created a holding account with just over $2 million from “Funding our
Future” public safety dollars, for diversifying public safety civilian response models. This item is requesting
$150,000 which would be the first use of that holding account. Note that the Council carried over into FY22 a
separate almost $2.3 million holding account originally created in FY21 for implementing recommendations from
the Racial Equity in Policing Commission, the Council’s audit of the Police Department, and the public.
The $150,000 would purchase three new hybrid Ford Explorer SUVs to accommodate increased program staffing.
Two of the vehicles will be used by CHAT staff and the third by the Medical Division in the Fire Department
supporting the program. The estimated cost per vehicle is $50,000 including fuel, upgrades, and maintenance.
The CHAT program currently has one vehicle for two paramedics responding as a team. The program is overseen by
a captain. Item A-10 proposes transferring three social worker FTEs from the Police Department to the Fire
Department. This staffing increase and corresponding vehicle increase would allow the CHAT program to operate
Page | 7
two separate teams. The social workers in the CHAT Program would operate out of the Public Safety Building rather
than the Community Connections Center. The Administration stated the CHAT Program would operate
independent of the Social Worker Program.
The paramedic would assess a subject’s medical condition and the social worker would assess their psychological
condition. The Fire Department responds to approximately 24,000 medical assessment calls annually. If the CHAT
program provides better response options to this frequent call type, then the Fire Department may seek to further
expand the program in the future. The Fire Department and 911 Department presented the expanded CHAT
program proposal to the REP Commission in September which was supportive of this proposal.
An expanded CHAT program with the added skillsets of social workers would respond to calls related to mental
health and homelessness. Some call types are ineligible for CHAT program response including when a weapon is
present or there are threats of violence. This has the potential to divert some calls away from a law enforcement
response so police officers could address other calls for service. The Administration stated the CHAT program
responds to calls for service that (1) do not meet the criteria for emergency service or (2) do not benefit from the
scope of training provided to paramedics and EMTs
Policy Questions:
Identifying and Tracking Calls for Service Diversions from Police to CHAT Program – The Council may
wish to ask the Administration if there are plans to track calls for service diverted from a police officer
response to the CHAT program or other alternative response models. The information could help measure
the success and demand for the City’s civilian response models. The Council may also wish to ask how the
911 Department identifies calls for service that are good candidates for diversion. The City’s alternative
response options include the CHAT program, Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) and the Social Worker
Program (potentially a new Park Ranger program and police civilian responder program too).
Equity in Access to Medical and Mental Health Services – The Council may wish to ask the Administration
how an expanded CHAT program could improve access to medical and mental health services, especially in
communities that historically have disproportionately less access.
Aligning Operating Hours to Mental Health Crisis Call Times – The Council’s operational audit of the Police
Department recommended social worker program and Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) hours change to
include evenings. The Council may wish to ask the Administration if an expanded CHAT program would
have operating hours in the evening. The auditors provided the below graphics showing most mental
health-related calls occur in the evening which is outside the CIT program’s operating hours.
Mental Health-related Calls for Service by Hour of the Day
Page | 8
Straw Poll Request: Does the Council wish to hold a straw poll for this item? The Administration has requested a
straw poll given the significant delays in receiving vehicle orders during pandemic-related supply shortages.
A-6: Non-Represented Employees’ Job Salary Survey ($75,000 from General Fund Balance)
*straw poll requested*
This request is intended for consultative services to be provided by a qualified third-party consultant or firm to
conduct a compensation survey to assess, evaluate and compare the overall pay structure, including actual base pay
and other job elements, of Salt Lake City’s non-represented employees to other public and private sector entities
with whom the City competes for talent. The recommended survey project includes data collection, analysis, and the
development and presentation of a report with recommendations for the City’s Department of Human Resources,
Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC), and elected officials to consider. The survey will be conducted
with a primary focus on cash compensation and rely on the same caliber and methodology as surveys previously
completed for the City's public safety and AFSCME-covered employee groups (as completed by Mercer in early 2019
and 2020, respectively).
Straw Poll Request: Does the Council wish to hold a straw poll for this item? The Administration has requested a
straw poll to allow additional time for selecting a consultant, allowing the CCAC to review at a special meeting in
the spring, and so that results might be available to inform the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for FY2023.
A-7: Sugar House Special Assessment Area Analysis (SAA) ($60,000 from General Fund Balance)
In June, the Sugar House Community Council wrote a letter to the Economic Development Department requesting
the City explore an SAA for economic promotion in the business district. The only existing economic promotion
SAA in the City is for the Downtown. Utah Code defines eligible economic promotion activities as “sponsoring
festivals and markets, promoting business investment or activities, helping to coordinate public and private actions,
and developing and issuing publications designed to improve the economic well-being of the commercial area.”
(Utah Code 11-42-102 Section 19)
The $60,000 of funding would allow the Department to hire consultants and bond counsel to determine specific
rates and revenue estimates, impacted parcels, cost per property owner, legal description of the boundaries and
draft the notice of intent to designate. There is a potential for the assessment to reimburse the General Fund for
those upfront costs.
Page | 9
There is some flexibility in what method is used to measure the assessment such as property frontage, property
area, taxable value or a combination of these. The Council would need to adopt a resolution designating the rates,
budgets, allowable uses and boundaries. An RFP would be issued to accept bids of interested organizations. The
Sugar House Chamber may submit a bid. A letter would also be sent to all impacted property owners notifying them
of the SAA process. An SAA requires support from at least 61% of property owners (not tenants / businesses leasing
space) and periodic approval such as every three years for the Downtown SAA.
Policy Questions:
SAA Activities – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what activities the new SAA
would provide. For example, would an ambassador program be paid for like in the Downtown, North
Temple, and Central Ninth/Ballpark areas?
SAA Reimburse General Fund Balance – The Council may wish to request the Administration include
reimbursement of the General Fund Balance for upfront costs be included in the SAA analysis.
SAA Boundaries – The Council may wish to discuss whether to support the potential boundaries or if
adjustments should be considered. For example, should the residential neighborhood north and south of
Simpson Avenue be included when the SAA is focused on commercial areas and economic promotion?
Council staff created the below map to show the potential boundaries. Note: once notices are sent it is very
expensive to change boundaries, and may cause additional delays.
Context with Annual Budget - Given that this is a new proposal to be funded with General Fund dollars, the
Council could ask that it be evaluated in the context of the annual budget rather than a budget amendment.
Approximate Potential Boundaries for Sugar House SAA
700 East; Interstate 80; 1300 East;
Hollywood Avenue with extension north on 1100 East to Ramona Ave to 1200 East
Page | 10
A-8: Sorenson Impact Center Social Investment Study – Phase 2 Funding – ($150,000 from General
Fund Balance)
The Administration is requesting $150,000 from General Fund balance to continue the contract with the Sorenson
Impact Center to work on Phase 2 of a Social Impact Investment study. A separate agenda item and staff report is
planned for the larger scope of this topic. The Council may discuss adding the following principles/conditions in
considering allocating the funding for the phase 2 work (note: this may change given the discussion during that
agenda item):
- The Council allocates $150,000 in Budget Amendment #4, for the Sorenson Impact Center to continue
work on this potential program, with the understanding that:
o The goal of the program is generational change, and in order to do that it must be ongoing beyond
the initial investment term.
o The City’s investment will not supplant existing programs and funding, and that assurances are
obtained from partner agencies that this understanding will continue for the duration of any
program created with this seed money.
o The Sorenson Impact Center engage the totality of groups that provide these services and conduct
transparent evaluation processes to determine which partners are best positioned to deliver this
long-term generational change.
o There be strict and transparent metrics to show goals are reached, particularly that the opportunity
index score is improving in areas where it currently lags.
A-9: Pulled prior to Submission
A-10: Community Health Access Team (CHAT) Program Personnel Transfer (Budget Neutral)
Note this item is related to items A-5 and C-1
This item would transfer three FTEs from the Police Department to the Fire Department including two social
workers and one case manager that is a licensed clinical social worker. See A-5 for the full write-up.
A-11: Rose Park Golf Course Water & Energy Efficiency Grant (Matching Funds) ($1,800,000 from
the Golf Fund) *straw poll requested*
The Departments of Public Lands and Public Utilities are working together on a grant application to help fund
installation of an updated landscape irrigation system and other water conservation measures at Rose Park Golf
Course. The grant is sponsored by the federal Bureau of Reclamation and would total $1,889,371. Salt Lake City’s
match for the grant would consist of the following:
Cash
Staff
Labor
Contracted
Services
Department of Public Lands | Golf Division $1,800,000 $61,023 $0
Department of Public Utilities $0 $21,348 $7,000
Subtotal $1,800,000 $82,371 $7,000
Total City Cost-Share $1,889,371
The resulting $3,778,742 would be used to replace the existing irrigation system with new equipment, including
high-efficiency nozzles that allow the watering levels to match turf type. In addition, some areas of fairway grass,
which requires a lot of water, will be removed and re-seeded with drought-tolerant grasses, and the square footage
of out-of-bounds rough areas will increase. The Golf Division estimates that Rose Park’s total irrigated areas can be
reduced by 25% this way without impacting play, leading to significant water savings and furthering the goal of this
grant funding. Note that these changes are distinct from those begun in 2015, under a contract with Siemens, in
which a process was developed and implemented to draw secondary water from the Jordan River. That work
included a new storage vault, pump system and some existing head upgrades, while this grant and the City’s match
would fund the irrigation system itself, as well as the turf changes.
In response to a Council staff question about the potential to access Bureau of Reclamation funds for similar
projects at the City’s other courses, the Golf Division identified two limits:
Page | 11
1.the challenges the Division faces with setting aside large amounts for matching funds; and
2.the level of competition for these grants. They believe that Rose Park is a particularly attractive candidate
for these funds because of the potential to shift such a large share of fairway turf to be drought tolerant. The
three other courses the Division reports as needing irrigation system replacements are Mountain Dell,
Nibley and Forest Dale. Bonneville and Glendale were upgraded as part of the 2015 Siemens contract.
Straw Poll Request: Does the Council wish to hold a straw poll for this item? The Administration has requested a
straw poll given the timing of the expected grant award and when the City would need to confirm acceptance if
the application is successful.
A-12: Public Lands Park Ranger Pilot Program ($1,577,291 from General Fund Balance; $195,720
goes to Fleet Fund; $69,247 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items C-1, E-3 and E-4
The Administration is proposing creation of a pilot program with 19 new FTEs in the Public Lands Department
including two sergeants, 16 rangers and one support position. The total annual cost for a sergeant is estimated at
$138,787 and for a ranger is estimated at $111,400. Job descriptions for the two positions were pending at the time
of publishing this staff report. The Administration stated 12 rangers would be needed at a minimum to launch this
new pilot program. The 19 FTEs are being recommended for a larger program.
The program would operate from 8am to midnight seven days a week. The Administration states the rangers may
serve as law enforcement officers. However, rangers would be unarmed and unlike police officers would not be
Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) certified. Rangers would operate out of existing City facilities in parks
including the soon to be redeveloped Fisher Mansion Carriage House and possibly temporary trailers. Rangers
would focus on the Jordan River Trail, Pioneer Park, Liberty Park, and Fairmont Park. Rangers are not expected to
operate in the Foothills or outlying natural areas.
The total annual cost is estimated at $2,350,983. The request before the Council is for a half year funding of
$1,175,491 and $401,800 of one-time costs including three trucks and two light response vehicles. The total cost for
the remainder of FY22 is estimated at $1,577,291.
The nearly $1.6 million cost in FY22 is proposed to be paid for from General Fund Balance. This item also proposes
a reimbursement to Fund Balance for salary restorations resulting from the FY21 hiring freeze. ARPA dollars would
provide $1,508,044 to Fund Balance as flexible General Fund dollars available for any use. This is the maximum
salary restoration amount allowed under U.S. Treasury guidance. The remaining gap of $69,247 would come
directly from ARPA for eligible supplies and services such as homeless outreach.
The salary restoration using ARPA dollars in FY23 is estimated at $1,545,746 which creates a funding gap of
$805,237 compared to the program’s annual cost. Creation of this new ongoing pilot program and the limited
available use of one-time ARPA dollars means the structural deficit in the annual budget could be larger in FY23.
The Public Lands Department (formerly Parks Division within Public Services Department) previously paid for
police officer overtime in parks. The table below summarizes these costs from recent fiscal years.
Fiscal Year Police Officer Overtime Cost Notes
FY2018 $63,226 Overtime was paid over a four month period
FY2019 $226,569 Overtime was paid over a seven month period
FY2020 $23,835 Prolonged reduced staffing of police officers resulted in
significantly reduced overtime in parks
FY2021 $9,738 Prolonged reduced staffing of police officers resulted in
significantly reduced overtime in parks
FY2022 $0 Private security firm used to lock park restrooms at
night and provide park security patrols
The pilot program’s purpose and goals include:
- Serving as law enforcement officers in parks (not POST-certified like police officers)
Page | 12
- Providing services and information to park users
- Assisting with homeless outreach efforts
- Making people feel welcome and safe in parks
- Deterring inappropriate activity
- Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
- Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents and associated costs for repair/replacement
Policy Questions:
Effectiveness of Civilian Rangers Addressing Criminal Issues in Parks – The Council may wish to discuss
with the Administration the limits of civilian park rangers addressing criminal issues in parks and when
rangers would need to rely on a police officer response. The Administration states the rangers may serve as
law enforcement officers but would not be POST-certified like police officers. The Council may also wish to
ask the Administration how park rangers would coordinate with the Police Department’s parks bike squad.
Private Security Guards in Parks – The Public Lands Department currently hires private security guards to
lock restrooms in parks and provide security patrols. The Council may wish to ask the Administration for
the pros and cons of creating a park ranger program instead of continuing the current practice of hiring
private security guards.
Identifying and Tracking Calls for Service Diversions from Police to CHAT Program – The Council may
wish to ask the Administration if there are plans to track calls for service diverted from a police officer
response to park rangers or other alternative response models. The information could help measure the
success and demand for the City’s civilian response models. The Council may also wish to ask how the 911
Department identifies calls for service that are good candidates for diversion. The City’s alternative
response options include the CHAT program, Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) and the Social Worker
Program (potentially this new Park Ranger program and police civilian responder program too).
Growing Structural Deficit for FY23 Budget – The Council may wish to ask the Administration to provide a
mid-year briefing on the estimated structural deficit for FY23 and how ARPA funding this fiscal year creates
ongoing costs that could need ARPA funding next fiscal year.
Request REP Commission Review – The Council may wish to ask the Administration to present the park
ranger proposal to the REP Commission and share feedback and recommendations.
Training and Equipment for Park Rangers – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what training
and equipment would be provided to park rangers. The rangers would not have firearms.
Reviewing Staffing Level – The Council may wish to ask the Administration when and how the pilot
program’s staffing level will be reviewed to determine if fewer or more positions are warranted to meet the
level of community need.
A-13: WITHDRAWN BY THE ADMINISTRATION
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section
(None)
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section
C-1: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless Outreach – Public Lands Park Ranger Program
($1,064,368 – Miscellaneous Grants) (See Items A-12, E-3 and E-4.)
Note: this item is related to items A-12, E-3 and E-4. See item A-12 for the full write-up. This item is an accounting
step for transferring funding to the General Fund.
C-2: Community Commitment Program Rapid Intervention Team ($164,750 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items E-5, E-6 and E-8
The Administration is requesting the Council approve three new FTEs to work in the Waste & Recycling Division of
the Sustainability Department. The employees would provide a new City cleaning team working with Advantage
Page | 13
Services and the Homeless Engagement and Response Team coordinator in CAN. Sometimes employees in the
Public Services and Sustainability departments are diverted from regular duties to assist the Community
Commitment Program and Health Department.
The titles and job descriptions for the three new FTEs were pending at the time of publishing this staff report. The
total annual estimated cost per FTE is $87,600 which would be $262,800 for a full fiscal year. This item is
requesting $164,750 to provide seven and a half months of funding in FY22.
The three FTEs would be listed on the grant-funded section of the staffing document. As with the park ranger
program in earlier items, these new FTEs could add to the structural budget deficit by using one-time funding for a
new ongoing cost.
Policy Questions:
Three New FTEs Sunsetting with ARPA – The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether the
three new FTEs would sunset with ARPA funding availability.
Staffing Level and Community Need – the Council may wish to discuss with the Administration if the three
additional FTEs would meet the level of need in the community and maximize the City’s partnership with
the County Health Department.
CAN Supervising Sustainability Employees – The Council may wish to ask why the three new employees
would be in the Waste & Recycling Division of Sustainability but be coordinated by a supervisor in CAN?
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing ($100,000 – Housing and $100,000 –
General Fund)
Last March, in Budget Amendment #7 of FY21, the Administration requested, and the Council approved, a
$100,000 appropriation to the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) to assist restaurants and bars by
offering funding to expand outdoor dining as an aid to pandemic recovery. The Department of Economic
Development (DED) stated at that time that its intent in using the EDLF was to ensure that funding would not lapse
due to delays caused by the processes of program development and identification of recipients. As it turned out,
DED did not distribute any of these funds because “forgivable loans are not permitted under the EDLF Loan
guidelines.” Now the Department is requesting the funds be moved from EDLF to a separate account so that these
funds may be distributed as grants, rather than loans.
If the Council chooses to do so, DED would transmit a resolution for consideration to set the guidelines for the
proposed Outdoor Business Activity Grant Program. The program would provide up to $5,000 for outdoor
dining/retail costs or $10,000 for costs incurred in hosting an “Open Streets” event.
The Department noted in the BA #7 discussions that they would prioritize areas of the City using “social justice
datasets,” and reach out directly to businesses located within these areas, as well as work with the diverse Chambers
of Commerce, Community Councils, and other community partners. Since that time, the City’s Chief Equity Officer
has been named and is working on frameworks and measurements to be implemented Citywide. In the meantime,
the Chief Equity Officer provided DED the GARE (Government Alliance on Race and Equity) Racial Equity Toolkit,
and DED is using that framework in all new project creation, including this project.
Policy Question: Would the Council like to consider its support for this program now or after more specific
guidelines are proposed by the Department? If these funds stay in the EDLF they will not drop to fund balance.
D-2: Increase Grant Fund ($0.00 – Miscellaneous Grants)
The annual budget proposed funding from the American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA) for revenue replacement.
During budget adoption, the expense was adjusted based on updated grant guidelines. This increased the expense
side of the grant fund, but recognition of the revenue was not included. This request adjusts the revenue side to
recognize the revenue side of the transaction in the Grant Fund. This proposal will bring the Fund into balance in
accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
Page | 14
D-3: Premium Holiday – Other Funds (Refuse, Golf, Fleet and IMs) ($0.00 – Miscellaneous Grants)
The Premium Holiday was submitted with the budget with the transfer from the Insurance Fund, but the transfer
into other funds was not included. This amendment is to balance the inter-fund transfers.
D-4: GPS Housekeeping ($74,600 – General Fund and Fleet Fund)
For FY22 there is an accounting change to put the GPS fees for vehicles in the Fleet budget. We missed the piece to
move the current budgets over to Fleet. Public Services has a budget of $39,203; Public Lands has a budget of
$26,797; and CAN has a budget $8,600 that we need to move to Fleet.
D-5: Signage FTE Correction ($51,847 – General Fund)
In the Mayor's Recommended Budget, an FTE for Signage for the Planning & Ecological Services Division was
initially approved, but later reduced. However, the funding was again inadvertently reduced at the Council level,
thus doubling the reduction. This housekeeping request is to replace the funding that was inadvertently cut from
the Signage budget.
D-6: General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds ($23,400,000 – CIP Fund, and $200,000 – Debt
Service)
In November 2018, voters authorized the issuance of up to $87 million in general obligation bonds to fund street
construction. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A will be issued in November 2021 as the third issuance of
the authorization. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure
budget to pay for construction of the street projects associated with the bonds. It also creates expenditure budget
to pay the costs of issuance for the bonds.
Bond proceeds will be allocated to five project cost centers in Fund 83 and one cost center in Fund 81 for the costs
of issuance associated with the bond. Two cost centers will receive $6,000,000 each for the 200 South Phase 1 & 2
(400 W to 900 E) projects. A third cost center will receive $6,800,000 for the 1100 East (900 S to Warnock Ave)
project. The fourth cost center will receive $1,600,000 for the 300 North (300 W to 1000 W) project. The fifth cost
center will receive $3,000,000 for local streets. The proceeds to pay the costs of issuance associated with the bonds
will be deposited to the debt service cost center in Fund 81.
D-7: Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds Series 2021A ($10,665,000, $10,400,000 and $4,900,000
– Debt Service)
Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2012A, were issued in June 2012 for the purpose of replacing the North
Temple Viaduct and improving North Temple Boulevard. Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2013B, were
issued in November 2013 for the purpose of financing a portion of the costs of the Sugarhouse Streetcar and paying
for the portion of various improvements to create a "greenway" within the corridor.
The Series 2012A and 2013B bonds are being refunded with the Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2021A.
This budget amendment will create the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure budget
to pay off the old bonds and to pay the costs of issuance for the bonds. Two Local Building Authority bonds will also
be refunded by the Series 2021A bonds. This budget amendment creates the budget for the transfer to the LBA to
pay those off. A separate LBA budget amendment is being submitted to create budget for paying off those bonds.
D-8: Budget Carry Forward ($1,175,000 – General Fund)
In the General Fund there were several budgets that did not have encumbrances at the close of fiscal year 2021 the
Administration would request Council approval to roll budget for the projects into fiscal year 2022. The budgets
requested are listed below:
CC CC Name OC OC Description Amount
0900503 Demographer Contract 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $50,000.00
0900925 Financial Risk Assessment 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $100,000.00
0900930 Gentrification Mitigation Study 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $100,000.00
0900705 Washington DC Contract 2324 Special Consultant $75,000.00
0900513 NW Northpoint Plan Airport 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $50,000.00
0900508 Home to Transit Program 2590 Other Expenses $800,000.00
TOTAL $1,175,000.00
Page | 15
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: COVID-19 Local Assistance Matching Grant Program – New Water Reclamation Facility:
Influent Pump Station and Force Mains (Water and Sewer Infrastructure) ($2 million from ARPA)
See Attachment 2 for the grant memo and Council staff report
The Mayor‘s Administration has submitted a grant application requesting funding of $10 million from the State of
Utah to help fund the construction of the new Influent Pump Station force mains, (a sub-project of the Water
Reclamation Facility), and replace the existing pump station and force mains which are at the end of their service
life. This budget amendment item proposes to set aside $2 million in ARPA funds for the required match. The
Council may wish to note that as part of the grant application, the City has committed a $40 million dollar match
for the grant to increase the competitiveness of the application. According to the Administration, the source of the
match includes the Department of Public Utilities planned utility revenue bond issuances, and the secured loan
through the Federal Water Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act.
E-2: Winter Shelter Support ($1 million from ARPA)
This item would provide $1 million of flexible funding for emergency winter shelter support potentially including
shelter operations. The funding is for winter shelter anywhere in Salt Lake County. U.S. Treasury guidance allows
municipalities to spend outside of city limits and/or pool ARPA funding for regional projects and programs for
eligible activities subject to compliance with reporting requirements and showing a benefit is being received for City
residents proportionate to the ARPA funding amount.
Policy Questions
Funding Winter Shelter Outside or Inside City Limits – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if
the funding would go to a winter shelter outside or inside of city limits.
Hotel/Motel Voucher Flexibility – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if the funding could be
used for hotel/motel vouchers instead of costs related to a winter shelter.
E-3: Public Safety and Homeless Outreach – Salary Restoration – Public Lands Park Ranger
Program (See Items A-12, C-1, and E-4) ($443,677 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items A-12, C-1, and E-4. See item A-12 for the full write-up. This item is an accounting
step for transferring funding to the General Fund.
E-4: Public Safety and Homeless Outreach – Public Lands Park Rangers (See Item A-12, C-1 and E-3)
($69,244 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items A-12, C-1 and E-3. See item A-12 for the full write-up. This item is an accounting
step for using ARPA to directly fund eligible homeless outreach services and supplies in the new program.
E-5: Community Commitment Program Rapid Intervention Team Vehicles ($160,500 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items C-2, E-6 and E-8. See the other items for additional info.
This item would purchase two F-350 pickup trucks and a trailer to be used by the three new employees in Waste
and Recycling as part of the expanded Community Commitment Program.
E-6: Community Commitment Program Additional Police Support ($1,505,920 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items C-2, E-6 and E-8
The Administration is requesting $1,505,920 of funding for the Police Department to provide staffing to support the
homeless encampment cleanup and camp re-establishment stabilization as requested by the Salt Lake County
Health Department. Police officers working extra overtime shifts will provide security to ensure the cleanups can
proceed in an environment that will be safe for all involved. Staffing numbers will vary depending on the size,
number of cleanups and the location.
Activity # days Officers # hours Rate Amount Requested
Major Cleanups 14 40 10 $65 $364,000
Minor Cleanups*and area stabilization 122 24 6 $65 $1,141,920
Total Requested $1,505,920
*previously utilized on-duty resources that are no longer available
Page | 16
It’s important to note that these overtime shifts are voluntary and there is no guarantee all shifts will be filled. Prior
overtime shifts for the Community Commitment Program were approximately 75% filled.
As of the October 2, the Police Department had spent $859,460 of the $1,741,890 overtime budget which is 49% of
the available budget. If this trend continues, then the Police Department would be projected to go over the available
overtime budget around mid-fiscal year. The Council increased the ongoing overtime budget by $650,000 as part of
the FY22 annual budget.
Policy Questions:
Total Cost of the Community Commitment Program – The Council may wish to ask the Administration
what is the total cost of the Community Commitment Program if Budget Amendment #4 is approved as
requested? This information was requested and was pending at the time of publishing this staff report.
Area Stabilization Examples – The Council may wish to ask the Administration for examples of area
stabilization outside of immediate cleanup sites.
E-7: Pulled prior to Submission to allow for the completion of Phase 2 of the Social Impact
Investment.
E-8: Community Commitment Program Rapid Intervention Team Cleaning by Advantage Services
($57,000 from ARPA)
Note: this item is related to items C-2, E-5, and E-6
This item would provide $57,000 of additional funding for Advantage Services to conduct cleaning services related
to the Community Commitment Program.
Policy Questions:
Public and/or Private Property Cleaning – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if Advantage
Services cleaning is limited to publicly owned property or if private property is ever eligible.
Quintuple Funding Next Fiscal Year – The Administration indicates the use of ARPA for cleaning by
Advantage Services is expected to increase five-fold from $57,000 to $290,000 in FY23. The Council may
wish to ask why the increase is planned and what changes to the cleaning services could the public expect.
E-9: ARPA Westside Community Initiative (Perpetual Housing Fund) ($4 million from ARPA going
to a New Holding Account in the Grant Fund)
See Attachment 3 for the September 14 transmittal with the proposed framework.
The Administration is requesting $4 million from ARPA to seed a perpetual housing fund dedicated to the Westside
of the City defined as west of Interstate 15. The dedicated housing funds from the Inland Port Authority
Jurisdictional Boundary would provide an ongoing revenue stream. The RDA Board received an initial briefing on
this concept at the September 14 meeting. RDA staff are refining the draft policy and will return to the Board for a
follow up discussion in the coming months. The Council could wait to appropriate the $4 million or place it into a
holding account until the policy is adopted by the RDA Board. The draft program goals include:
- Develop land with a long-term approach to continuously serve a community-defined purpose (could use a
ground-lease approach)
- Create opportunities for revenue generation while balancing the implementation of public benefits (revenue
would be reinvested back into the fund)
- Assist the Westside in mitigating gentrification and displacement (the City’s ongoing study to mitigate
gentrification could inform the program policy)
- Give lower income households the opportunity to build wealth through ownership (similar to a community
land trust model aka a shared-equity model)
- Engage community members in development decisions
- Leverage resources for other neighborhood development purposes (such as subsidizing deeply affordable
housing, commercial space, public infrastructure and art)
- Collaborate with other partners to broaden the pool of funding and expertise
Page | 17
- Carry out efforts with a collective impact approach (including measurable results to report back to the RDA
Board and the public)
E-10: Nonprofit and Business Assistance Community Grants ($4 million from ARPA going to a New
Account in the Grant Fund)
The Administration is proposing $4 million for new one-time community grants split into two separate offerings:
$2 million for business assistance managed by the Economic Development Department (EDD) and $2 million for
nonprofit assistance managed by the Community and Neighborhoods (CAN) Department. The grants must be used
for eligible activities under the U.S. Treasury’s ARPA guidance and meet Federal reporting, compliance and
spending deadlines. Meeting these requirements could create a significant workload for the City’s Finance
Department and Attorney’s Office. For example, some potential categories are narrowly eligible only for evidence
based programs and practices which must have published research supporting interventions producing desired
outcomes. The Treasury is also expected to issue updated final guidance in the coming months.
An ad-hoc committee, or two (unclear at time of publishing this report), would be created to review applications,
question applicants, and have delegated final funding authority from the Council to make funding awards. The
committee(s) would include staff from the two departments managing the grants (EDD and CAN), Mayor’s Office,
Council Office, and a to be determined number of volunteers from several City boards and commissions.
The two departments report a request for proposals would be issued with a one-month window for applicants to
submit proposals. Then the committee(s) would score and rank applications over two weeks and make final
decisions. Funding would be distributed the following month.
Policy Questions:
Delegation of Authority for Deciding Funding Awards – The Council may wish to discuss whether to
delegate authority to the ad-hoc committee(s) or use another approach. For example, the Council could
elect to use the established process the City has for the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), annual grants
like CDBG from the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Department, and one-time CARES Act
relief grants. Under the existing process, the CDCIP Board reviews applications submitted during the open
and competitive process, asks questions of applicants at public meetings, then provides funding
recommendations to the Mayor who provides a second set of funding recommendations, next the Council
deliberates the proposed recommendations, holds a public hearing and makes final funding awards.
Equity Considerations – The Council may wish to discuss whether funding should have equity
considerations built-in to the framework. For example, during the pandemic Council Members discussed
the following categories in other grant programs: businesses in and nonprofits serving the Westside,
women-owned and/or minority-owned businesses, nonprofits serving low-income residents, programs
bridging the digital divide, food insecurity, increasing access to medical services and vaccines, etc.
Applicant Assistance – The Council may wish to ask the departments what community assistance resources
will be available for interested organizations to fill out applications? For example, where will in-person
computer labs be publicly accessible, in what languages will the applications and instructions be available,
who is the single-point of contact for each of the two grant programs, how will potential applicants learn
about the opportunity, etc.
Framework for the Grants – The Council may wish to ask the departments to return with proposed details
of a grants framework such as the CIP and CDBG processes. This could include information like
recommended grant program categories, funding minimums and/or maximums, required application
information, and public engagement steps.
Section F: Donations
(None)
Section G: Council Consent Agenda
Page | 18
G-1: Police Department Asset Forfeiture Grant ($1,500 – Miscellaneous Grants)
The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for and received a $1,500 grant award from the State of Utah,
Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) program. The
SAFG program funds crime prevention and law enforcement activities within specific guidelines. CCJJ developed
the SAFG program as a means of evaluating and distributing state forfeiture funds.
The funds will be used for confidential informant funds to enhance investigations in narcotics-related cases. A
public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
G-2: Utah Department of Health – Bureau of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Grant, FY22 Per
Capita Allocation ($10,250 – Miscellaneous Grants)
The Fire Department applied for and was awarded $10,250 of grant funding from the Utah Department of Health,
Bureau of Emergency Medical Services. This funding will be used towards the purchase of a 12-Lead Cardiac
Monitor and medical supplies relating to the provision of Emergency Medical Services as funding permits. A Public
Hearing was held on 2/16/21 for the grant applications on this award.
G-3: State of Utah, CCJJ (Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice), Jurisdictions with
Halfway Houses and Parole Violator Center Grant, Law Enforcement Services Account (LESA)
The Police Department has applied for and been awarded a $295,570 grant from the State of Utah, Commission on
Criminal and Juvenile Justice, in support of the Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and Parole Violator Centers
grant. This grant provides funding for law enforcement agencies that provide services directly to areas with halfway
houses or parole violator centers, or both. The Police Department will use these funds for law enforcement overtime
related to reducing criminal activity including targeted enforcement operations, increased patrol response, and
responding to mental health calls for service. The Department will also utilize funds for case transcription services,
six overt camera units and maintenance/repairs/supplies for units in the Department's camera program. A public
hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
G-4: Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, 2021-23 VOCA Victims of Crime Act Grant ($364,162 –
Miscellaneous Grants)
The Police Department applied for and received a $364,162.48 grant from the State of Utah, Office for Victims of
Crime under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) program, to be used for the continuation of the Victim Advocate
Program. These funds will be used to pay for salary and fringe for 4 existing full-time Victim Advocate positions and
all of the part-time Victim Advocate positions. This grant also covers the costs for Rita, the program's facility dog.
Additionally, there are supplies for the program, emergency funds for assisting victims, and training for Advocate
staff. No match is required by the funding agency.
VOCA funds cover local and national conferences and trainings needed to meet statutory training requirements for
the Victim Advocates. It also provides and emergency fund that can be used when no other victim funding options
are available - these funds can be used for food, clothing, shelter, transportation and 911 phones for victims of
violent crime. Additionally, it provides for supplies such as Victim Advocate brochures, Traumatic Death
Handbooks, cell phone costs, etc. A $109,938.89 match is required which will be satisfied by the salary and
benefits of City funded Victim Advocates and the Program Coordinator. In-kind matching funds are provided by
the student interns/volunteers that participate in the Victim Advocate Program. A Public Hearing was held 9/7/21
on this grant application.
G-5: Department of Workforce Services, Housing & Community Development Division, FY22
Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant Program ($370,735 – Miscellaneous Grants)
The Community and Neighborhoods Dept. applied for and received State Department of Workforce Services funding
of $370,735 to continue efforts to encourage businesses, residents, Homeless Resource Center (HRC) operators and
guests to participate in constructive community engagement opportunities and encourage service-based
interventions in order to successfully integrate the HRCs into the fabric of their host neighborhoods and ensure the
safety of those neighborhoods.
The SLC Mitigation team currently consists of a SLC Community Engagement Coordinator, VOA Business and
Community Liaison, and VOA Outreach Case Manager. This application requests to continue the current team and
expand the team to include an additional VOA Business and Community Liaison, additional VOA Outreach Case
Manager, and a VOA Outreach Peer Support Specialist, and three new positions as part of the City's existing
Page | 19
Downtown Ambassador program - tailored to the areas surrounding the HRCs (King, Miller, and Youth). A Public
Hearing was held on October 5, 2021.
G-6: Utah State Department of Public Safety – 2021 Emergency Management Performance Grant
(EMPG) ($42,500 – Miscellaneous Grants)
The Emergency Management Services Division received a $42,500 FY2021 EMPG grant from the State of Utah,
Department of Public Safety. This grant is awarded on an annual basis to jurisdictions to help offset costs of
planning and updating emergency preparedness plans, conduct emergency preparedness exercises and produce
materials and other media for public educational outreach and training pertaining to emergency preparedness.
SLC's population increases from 180,000 to an estimated 310,000 each workday. Should a disaster occur during the
workday, employees become a part of the SLC emergency response, but are not trained to assist themselves or
others. These funds will offset costs in providing National Incident Management System (NIMS) training to SLC
staff with emergency response responsibilities during a disaster or other significant event. The funds will be used to
fund community preparedness activities, purchase training materials, supplies and equipment including books,
brochures, handouts, etc. The grant requires a 50% match which will be satisfied with the Community Preparedness
Coordinator's time and budgeted for within Emergency Management’s general fund. A public hearing will be held
for this grant application.
G-7: Cities of Service, Johns Hopkins, Justice for the Jordan Grant – Love your Block – ($100,000 –
Miscellaneous Grants)
The office of the Mayor applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Justice for the Jordan, Love your
Block grant. The grant provides:
1. $60,000 to hire a Love your Block Fellow for 2 years.
2. $40,000 to distribute to the community as mini grants
3. The City is also required to engage 2 AmeriCorps VISTA volunteers, one each year of the grant.
4. The City also receives technical assistance from Cities of Service
The Cities of Service Love Your Block program connects mayor’s offices with community residents to revitalize their
neighborhoods one block at a time. Typically, cities implementing Love Your Block invite community groups to
identify priority projects and award mini-grants to support volunteer-fueled solutions that the community can
implement. The City identifies a problem and then engages with volunteers within the neighborhoods of focus and
engages them early in the project design phase as well as implementation and evaluation. The City identified the
neighborhoods adjacent to the Jordan River in Glendale (census tract 1026, 1027.01, and 1028.01) as the target
area. A public hearing was held October 5, 2021.
G-8: Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, Violence Against Women Act, Domestic Violence Victim
Advocate
The City Prosecutors office applied for and received a $101,039 grant from the State of Utah, Office for Victims of
Crime under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) program, to be used for the Violence Against Women’s Act to fund
Salt Lake City Prosecutor Domestic Violence Victim Advocate. The Prosecutor’s Office is requesting a Victim
Advocate to assist and support victims of domestic violence as their cases move to the prosecution and adjudication
phases. The services include information, education and advocacy through the case and prosecution, assistance
with victim impact statements, support and accompaniment to court and meetings with investigators and
prosecutors. The Victim Advocate assists in post release safety planning, preparation for court appearances, and jail
release agreements.
Until this year, Salt Lake County District Attorney Victim Services has provided this support for victims whose cases
are adjudicate in Salt Lake City Justice Court. Funding cutbacks required the county to reassign the advocates to
County prosecutions. Salt Lake City is applying for this new city position to fill the gap in services. The match is
$12,630 each fiscal year, for a total of $25,260 for the two-year performance period of the grant. The match is met
with cash available in the Office of the Attorney’s budget. A Public Hearing was held 6/15/21 on this grant
application.
Page | 20
Section I: Council Added Items
I-1: Council Office Reclassifications and Amending FY22 Appointed Pay Plan
The table below summarizes the reclassifications of six FTE appointed positions in the Council Office. Vacancy
savings will cover the cost difference for the current fiscal year.
Old Title / Grade New Title / Grade
Communications Director / 31x Public Engagement & Communications Specialist III / 31x
Public Engagement & Communications Specialist I / 26x Public Engagement & Communications Specialist II / 28x
Public Policy Analyst II / 31x Senior Public Policy Analyst / 33x
Public Policy Analyst II / 31x Senior Public Policy Analyst / 33x
Associate Deputy Director / 37x Deputy Director / 39x
Senior Public Policy Analyst / 33x Legislative & Policy Manager / 37x
ATTACHMENTS
1. Sales Tax Update and Chart
2. COVID-19 Local Assistance Matching Grant Program – New Water Reclamation Facility: Influent Pump Station
and Force Mains (Memo from Administration and Council staff report)
3. Westside Communities Initiative RDA Transmittal from September 14
ACRONYMS
ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act
AFSCME – American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
ARPA – American Rescue Plan Act
CAN – Community and Neighborhoods Department
CCAC – Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee
CCJJ – Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice
CCP – Community Commitment Program
CDBG – Community Development Block Grant
CHAT – Community Health Access Team
CIP – Capital Improvement Program
CIT – Crisis Intervention Team
EDLF – Economic Development Loan Fund
EMPG – Emergency Management Performance Grant
EMT – Emergency Medical Technician
FTE – Full Time Equivalent Position
FY – Fiscal Year
GARE – Government Alliance on Race and Equity
HRC – Homeless Resource Center
HUD – United States Housing and Urban Development Department
HVAC – Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
PPE – Personal Protective Equipment
RDA – Redevelopment Agency
REP – Racial Equity in Policing Commission
SAA – Special Assessment Area
TBD – To Be Determined
UDAQ – Utah Department of Air Quality
VISTA – Volunteers in Service to America
VOCA – Victims of Crime Act
1Subject:FW: Sales Tax Update Through FY 2021These are the Actuals of the 1% Sales Tax Through FY 2021. The last half of the year was big especially in the last quarter averaging 33.8% higher than the previous year. There are inflationary factors that play into this as well. The last 3 quarters have shown record highs, when you adjust the revenue by cpi the last month of June was the still the highest month on record. 1% sales tax revenue received, not adjusted for inflation Month of Sale 2019 2020 diff 20‐19 % Change 2021 diff 21‐20 %Change Note July 5,166,159 5,509,305 343,146 6.6% 5,506,282 (3,023) ‐0.1% August 5,494,943 5,453,557 (41,386) ‐0.8% 5,363,921 (89,636) ‐1.6% September 5,990,942 5,979,661 (11,281) ‐0.2% 6,506,479 526,818 8.8% October 4,966,702 5,463,847 497,146 10.0% 5,190,694 (273,154) ‐5.0% November 5,186,889 5,461,007 274,119 5.3% 5,880,648 419,640 7.7% December 6,321,763 6,883,312 561,549 8.9% 7,020,529 137,217 2.0% January 4,901,735 5,697,416 795,681 16.2% 5,255,105 (442,311) ‐7.8% February 4,925,841 4,468,260 (457,581) ‐9.3% 5,280,150 811,890 18.2% March 5,739,003 5,980,157 241,154 4.2% 7,133,537 1,153,380 19.3% April 4,743,045 4,607,410 (135,635) ‐2.9% 6,304,088 1,696,678 36.8% May 5,480,257 4,834,144 (646,112) ‐11.8% 6,319,024 1,484,880 30.7% June 5,980,148 5,986,060 5,912 0.1% 8,017,577 2,031,517 33.9% Total 64,897,427 66,324,138 1,426,711 73,778,034 7,453,896 Accommodation and Food Services is still slow because of the pandemic. 2020 to 2021 ‐ Sale Tax Actuals 2020 2021 Sector Name sales_credit Diff FY Y/Y % Ch % of Total sales_credit Diff FY Y/Y % Ch % of Total Retail Trade 37,076,952 1,471,251 4% 41.4% 36,696,900 (380,052) ‐1% 42.4% Wholesale Trade 11,887,403 523,932 5% 13.3% 12,281,114 393,711 3% 14.2% Accommodation and Food Services 10,358,167 (2,386,736) ‐19% 11.6% 7,629,468 (2,728,698) ‐26% 8.8% Manufacturing 5,846,937 496,178 9% 6.5% 5,755,063 (91,874) ‐2% 6.7% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 4,261,171 (610,243) ‐13% 4.8% 3,810,664 (450,508) ‐11% 4.4% Attachment 1 - Sales Tax Revenues Update through End of Fiscal Year 2021
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE: November 16, 2021
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Nov. 16, 2021
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted seven grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them, the
grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under Public
Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
2. New Water Reclamation Facility: Influent Pump Station and Force Mains –
COVID-19 Local Assistance Matching Grant Program
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to help fund the
construction of the new Influent Pump Station Force Mains, (a sub-project of the Water
Reclamation Facility), and replace the existing pump station and force mains that are at the end
of their service life.
Grant Amount: $10 million dollars
Requested by: Department of Public Utilities
Funding Agency: Utah’s Governor’s Office for Policy and Budget in conjunction with
Utah Division of Water Quality
Match Requirement: $40 million dollars – Sources: The Department of Public Utilities
planned utility revenue bond issuances, and the secured loan through the Federal Water
Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act. The City committed a $40 million dollar
match for this project to increase the competitiveness of the application. Note: There is a
request in Budget Amendment #4 to set aside $2 million in miscellaneous grant funds
towards the $40 million required match.
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Laura Briefer, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia Richards, Linda Sanchez, Recorders
(All), Jordan Smith, Jesse Stewart, Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: September 17, 2021
SUBJECT: COVID-19 Local Assistance Matching Grant Program – New Water Reclamation Facility: Influent Pump
Station and Force Mains
FUNDING AGENCY: Utah Governor’s Office for Policy & Budget
GRANT PROGRAM: COVID-19 Local Assistance Matching Grant Program
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $10,000,000
DEPARTMENT: Department of Public Utilities
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: Utah Division of Water Quality
DATE SUBMITTED: September 15, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
□ Match Required □ In-Kind and □ Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities requested $10,000,000 for the New Water Reclamation Facility:
Influent Pump Station and Force Mains project.
The Influent Pump Station and Force Mains is a sub-project of the new Water Reclamation Facility and replaces
the existing pump station and force mains that are at the end of their service life.
Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities committed a $40 million match for the influent pump station and
force mains construction from its planned utility revenue bond issuances and from the secured loan through
federal Water Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act for the new Water Reclamation Facility to increase
the competitiveness of the application.
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director
DANNY WALZ
Director
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
STAFF MEMO
DATE: August 26, 2021
PREPARED BY: Tammy Hunsaker
RE: Westside Community Initiative – Initial Briefing
REQUESTED ACTION: Briefing on the framework for a new program intended to utilize Inland
Port Housing Funds to advance development activities on the City’s
Westside.
POLICY ITEM: Affordable housing; 9 Line and North Temple project area
development.
BUDGET IMPACTS: Inland Port Housing Funds.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Earlier this year, the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency
of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) directed staff to develop a proposed program for the utilization of funds
received by the RDA from the Inland Port Authority. These funds are received pursuant to Utah
Code Title 11-58 Utah Inland Port Authority Act, which provides that a portion of tax differential
generated within Inland Port Authority Jurisdictional Land shall be paid to the RDA to be utilized for
housing. As such, RDA staff is working to develop a new program, tentatively called the Westside
Community Initiative (“WCI”). While the proposed WCI is based on community land trust and
cooperative-style housing development, it is broader in nature to carry out other project types for a
collective impact.
As proposed, the WCI shall facilitate the implementation of transformative housing and mixed-use
projects with a focus on affordable homeownership as a way of building community cohesion and
personal wealth. The geographic scope of the initiative is proposed to be the City’s Westside defined
as west of I-15. The RDA’s 9 Line and North Temple project areas are included in this larger
geographic area. Affordable and mixed-income housing projects will be leveraged with additional
public benefits including neighborhood services, economic opportunity, and transit-oriented
development. By taking a long-term approach to development projects, the WCI will balance the
implementation of public benefits with the ability to generate revenue to be reinvested back into the
community.
Inland Port Housing Funds are required to be utilized for the purposes outlined in Utah 17C -
Community Reinvestment Agency Act, section 17-C-1-412 – Use of Housing Allocation, which
generally limits eligible activities to the development and preservation of housing targeted to
households at or below 80% of the area median income (“AMI”). Under the statute, funds can be
utilized to implement mixed-income projects, mixed-use projects, and related improvements. As
such, funds can be leveraged as part of housing projects for a broad array of other public benefits,
including infrastructure improvements, economic development, sustainable building practices, and
the redevelopment of undesirable land uses. While the primary source of revenue for the initiative is
anticipated to be Inland Port Housing Funds, the Board would be able to allocate other revenue
sources to the WCI. In addition, the RDA would actively work to acquire outside funding sources
and resources to collaborate on projects and activities. This could broaden the eligible uses of
funding dedicated to the WCI.
This memorandum includes initial information on the proposed framework for the WCI , including
the budget and policy structure, goals, and activities. RDA staff will incorporate the Board’s
feedback as specific details of the initiative are developed for the Board’s consideration at a future
date.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES: Additional details on the proposed framework of the WCI are as follows:
I. Budget & Policy Structure: To implement the WCI, the following efforts would need to be
carried out by the Board:
1. Update the RDA Housing Allocation Funds Policy, resolution R-4-2021, to earmark
the Inland Port Housing Funds for the WCI and to allow for allocations from other
revenue sources. This would be a minor change to the existing policy.
2. Create a new policy for the WCI that establishes the purpose, goals, activities,
metrics, and reporting requirements for the initiative. If the Board is supportive, this
policy would be based on the information contained herein.
While the WCI policy would identify the purposes, goals, and activities of the initiative,
projects would be administered pursuant to existing RDA programs and tools. Additionally, a
new policy would be developed for a Shared Equity Development program. Programs and
tools the WCI would be administered pursuant to are as follows:
• RDA Loan Program Policy: Resolution R-37-2016
• Tax Increment Reimbursement Program Policy: Resolution R-9-2017
• RDA Real Property Disposition Policy: Resolution R-6-2021
• Housing Development Loan Program: Resolution R-7-2021
• Shared Equity Housing Program: Resolution Forthcoming
Refer to Attachment A for a chart depicting the proposed structure of the WCI.
II. Goals: The goals for the WCI are proposed as follows:
• Develop Land with a Long-Term Approach to Continuously Serve a Community-
Defined Purpose
WCI will take a long-term approach to land development and community building so that the
RDA may retain the fee ownership to and a reversionary interest in the property. By ground
leasing to development partners, the RDA will provide an opportunity to receive revenue
generation to serve other public benefits.
• Create Opportunities for Revenue Generation while Balancing the Implementation of
Public Benefits
WCI will strive to balance the development of property with the incorporation of public
benefits. Benefits such as affordable housing and below-market commercial space which
generate limited or no cash flow would potentially be subsidized with land uses that generate
positive cash flow. Revenue generated by projects and received by the RDA will then be
reinvested back into the WCI with the goal of furthering shared prosperity.
• Assist the Westside in Mitigating Gentrification and Displacement
WCI will acquire land with the goal of holding it for the community in perpetuity, thereby
removing land from the speculative market so that it serves low and moderate -income
residents in perpetuity. Housing will remain affordable even as neighborhood change occurs
and gentrification pressures mount, which protects families from displacement.
• Give Lower Income Households the Opportunity to Build Wealth Through Ownership
WCI will create opportunities for families to buy homes at affordable prices by focusing on a
shared-equity model. A shared equity model offers an alternative form of ownership that
provides benefits traditional markets cannot, such as long-term housing affordability and the
ability for low and moderate-income families to build equity. When families decide to sell,
they will receive their portion of the appreciation but the RDA remains as the land owner and
is in the position to continue to sell the home at a below-market price, making it affordable to
another family of limited means. Keeping the home affordable, from family to family, will
benefit future generations by acting as a steppingstone for low-income families to go from
renting to building wealth.
• Engage Community Members in Development Decisions
The RDA will involve the community in the planning and goals regarding long term land use
and housing development. This can translate into residents actively involved in creating
positive change within their communities and projects that reflect the value of its residents.
The result will be projects that incorporate a shared mission and vision with the community.
• Leverage Resources for Other Neighborhood Development Purposes
Revenues acquired through ground leases or partnerships could contribute to other purposes,
including subsidizing deeply affordable housing, below-market commercial space,
infrastructure, public art, etc.
• Collaborate with Other Partners to Broaden the Pool of Funding and Expertise
The RDA would actively work to acquire outside funding sources and professional resources
by bringing together financial institutions, the private sector, nonprofits, public officials,
other government agencies, researchers, and practitioners to collaborate on community and
economic development activities.
• Carry Out Efforts with a “Collective Impact” Approach
The RDA will continuously evaluate how projects work together to address common goals
through a “collective impact” approach that produces measurable results. These measurable
results will be tracked and reported on to promote data-driven and outcome-based decisions.
III. Activities: The activities of the WCI are proposed as follows:
• Strategic Acquisitions
Strategic property acquisitions that may include distressed properties characterized by high
crime rates, properties that are located at target locations, and other opportunities that align
with the City’s objectives and meet predefined policy priorities. Properties will be
redeveloped as elevated real estate development projects that have profound impacts on
people, particularly low-income and vulnerable populations, in order to uplift others, create
economic opportunities, improve health outcomes, and influence the physical and
socioeconomic landscape of Salt Lake City.
• Shared Equity Models of Development
o Land Trust Development
The RDA will retain ownership of land and provide for the sale or rental of housing
to lower-income households. To make certain would-be homeowners and renters
benefit from the arrangement for years to come, the resale prices and rents of the
housing will be capped, maintaining affordability for the next family.
o Multifamily Cooperative Housing Development
The RDA will facilitate the development of cooperative housing projects to provide a
framework for homeownership by bringing people together to own the building in
which they live. A housing cooperative or "co-op" is a type of residential housing
option that is a corporation whereby the owners do not own their units outright.
Instead, each resident is a shareholder in the corporation based in part on the relative
size of the unit that they live in. The co-op housing model provides low-income
households with a way to accumulate personal wealth, through equity accumulation
and mortgage interest deductions.
• Residential and Mixed-Use Rental Housing Development
The RDA will facilitate the development of rental mixed-income and mixed-use projects that
are part of a larger coordinated effort to co-locate housing with the services and resources to
increase a person’s likelihood for upward mobility.
• Other Public Benefits
While it is anticipated that the WCI will focus on affordable housing due to certain funding
source restrictions, there is opportunity to leverage housing projects with broader public
benefits. Furthermore, there is opportunity to broaden the WCI’s funding sources, with both
internal and external sources, to expand the eligible activities funded through the WCI. Other
public benefits could include infrastructure improvements (both street and green
infrastructure), housing for a broad array of AMIs, job creation, small-business development,
street activation, publicly visible art, historic preservation, adaptive reuse, neighborhood
services, among others.
IV. Next Steps
RDA staff will incorporate the Board’s feedback on the information contained herein and
will return to the Board with the following:
1. Revisions to the RDA Housing Allocation Funds Policy, resolution R-4-2021, to
earmark Inland Port Funds for the WCI. The policy will also be revised to allow for
allocations of other sources of revenue to the initiative.
2. A new policy resolution for the WCI that establishes the purpose, goals, activities,
metrics, and reporting requirements for the initiative.
3. A new policy for a Shared Equity Housing Development program that provides for
homeownership by bringing people together to own the building in which they live
while the land is owned by the RDA, or another entity, to preserve affordability in
perpetuity.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION:
• May 2021 – The RDA Board directed RDA staff to develop a proposed program for a
community land trust type program for the City’s Westside that utilizes Inland Port funds.
ATTACHMENTS:
• A – Westside Community Initiative: Proposed Framework Chart
WESTSIDE COMMUNITY INITIATIVE (WCI)
PROPOSED FRAMEWORK
Note: The Initiative’s activities shall be administered pursuant to the following policies:
RDA Loan Program Policy: Resolution R-37-2016
Tax Increment Reimbursement Program Policy: Resolution R-9-2017
RDA Real Property Disposition Policy: Resolution R-6-2021
Housing Development Loan Program: Resolution R-7-2021
Shared Equity Housing Program: Resolution Forthcoming
• Develop Land with a Long-Term Approach to Continuously Serve a Community-Defined Purpose
• Create Opportunities for Revenue Generation while Balancing the Implementation of Public Benefits
• Assist the Westside in Mitigating Gentrification and Displacement
• Give Lower Income Households the Opportunity to Build Wealth Through Ownership
• Engage Community Members in Development Decisions
• Leverage Resources for Other Neighborhood Development Purposes
• Collaborate with Other Partners to Broaden the Pool of Funding and Expertise
• Carry Out Efforts with a “Collective Impact” Approach
GOALS
PURPOSE
The implementation of transformative housing and mixed-use projects with a focus
on homeownership and affordability as a way of building community cohesion and personal wealth.
Housing projects will be leveraged with additional public benets including
neighborhood services, economic opportunities, and transit-oriented development.
A Westside Community Initiative policy will be created that identies the purpose, goals, and activities of the initiative.
Projects will align with the intent of the WCI and will be administered through RDA programs and polices.
INLAND PORT
HOUSING
DIFFERENTIAL
OTHER
SOURCES
ALLOCATED BY
BOARD
WCI
REVENUE
WCI
HOUSING
FUND
FUNDING SOURCES
(revenues)
ACTIVITIES
(expenses)
STRATEGIC
ACQUISITION
SHARED
EQUITY
DEVELOPMENT
OTHER
PUBLIC
BENEFITS
RESIDENTIAL
&
MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT
Note: The RDA Housing Allocation Funds
policy, resolution R-4-2021, will be updated
to provide for the earmarking of Inland Port
Housing Funds, WCI revenue, and other funds
as determined by the BOD for the WCI. As the
Policy currently stands, there is a NWQ Housing
Fund that receives Inland Port Housing revenue.
This fund would be renamed to the WCI Housing
Fund.
www.slcpd.com | @slcpdPAGE 1
UTAH EMERGENCY WINTER HOUSING SHELTER
dATE RANGE FOR OPERATION: DECEMBER 15, 2021 - APRIL 15, 2022 (120 d AYS)
www.slcpd.com | @slcpd
LAW ENFORCEMENT BUDGET AND STAFFING
4 OFFICERS A DAY 5 HOUR SHIFTS $80 AN HOUR
$15 goes to
the agency as
a vehicle, fuel,
maintenance
reimbursement.
$65 goes to
the officer as
overtime pay.
= $1600 DAILY RATE X 120 DAYS (Estimated shelter operating period.) = $192,000
SHIFT 1
SHIFT 3
SHIFT 4
SHIFT 2
AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY
SLCPD A B C
SLCPD WILL PROVIDE 1 SUPERVISOR PER DAY
SUPERVISOR 5 HOUR SHIFTS
= $400 DAILY RATE X 120 DAYS = $48,000
THE TOTAL OVERTIME COST FOR THE SAFETY PLAN IS $816,000.
FUNDING SOURCES FOR PARTICIPATING AGENCIES ARE
STILL BEING IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME
AND WILL BE DETERMINED AT A LATER DATE.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: ________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: October 25, 2021
Amy Fowler, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #4 - Revised
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or
Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403
DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing,
the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2021-22 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $ 1,772,794.00 $ 4,657,529.00
WATER FUND 0.00 18,118.00
SEWER FUND 0.00 7,941.00
STORM WATER FUND 0.00 2,278.00
AIRPORT FUND 0.00 39,790.00
REFUSE FUND 24,907.00 4,109.00
GOLF FUND 14,310.00 1,802,257.00
FLEET FUND 438,905.00 423,258.00
IMS FUND 161,380.00 135,492.00
MISCELLANEOUS GRANT FUND 17,497,861.48 15,751,215.48
DEBT SERVICE FUND 26,165,000.00 26,165,000.00
CIP FUND 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00
RISK FUND 212,897.00 212,897.00
TOTAL $ 69,688,054.48 $ 72,619,884.48
Lisa Shaffer (Oct 25, 2021 17:23 MDT)
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY 2021-22 Budget Adjustments
Because the fiscal year just started the Fiscal Year 2022 projections are at budget. The following
chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2022.
Projections for fiscal year 2021 are coming in better than expected, more detail will be shared as
the audit progresses.
Given the available information fund balance would be projected as follows:
With the current use of fund balance from this budget amendment fund balance drops to 12.86%.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 6,625,050 82,617,126 89,242,176 7,018,483 50,124,619 57,143,102
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance 2,924,682 (7,810,302) (4,885,620) (4,759,137) (19,471,917) (24,231,054)
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,733,743) (6,165,453) (9,899,196) - - -
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 5,815,989 68,641,371 74,457,360 2,259,346 30,652,702 32,912,048
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 16.62%23.32%22.61%5.60%9.64%9.18%
Year End CAFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes - - - - - -
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) - (5,676,583) (5,676,583) 5,759,137 7,652,037 13,411,174
Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 5,815,989 62,964,788 68,780,777 8,018,483 38,304,739 46,323,222
Final Fund Balance Percent 16.62%21.39%20.88%19.87%12.05%12.93%
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - - - 5,138,235 5,138,235
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - - - 490,847 490,847
BA#2 Expense Adjustment - (288,488) (288,488) - (986,298) (986,298)
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (6,239,940) (6,239,940) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000)
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - - - - 1,772,794 1,772,794
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - - - - (4,657,529) (4,657,529)
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - (242,788) (242,788) - - -
BA#5 Expense Adjustment - (2,783,685) (2,783,685) - - -
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment - (63,673) (63,673) - - -
BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - 540,744 540,744 - - -
BA#7 Expense Adjustment - (6,582,824) (6,582,824) - - -
BA#8 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#8 Expense Adjustment (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000) - - -
BA#9 Revenue Adjustment - 439,809 439,809 - - -
BA#9 Expense Adjustment - 362,532 1,555,532 - - -
Change in Revenue 2,202,494 3,018,144 5,220,638 - - -
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - -
- - Adjusted Fund Balance 7,018,483 50,124,619 58,336,102 7,018,483 39,062,788 46,081,271
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 20.05%17.03%17.71%17.39%12.28%12.86%
Projected Revenue 35,000,000 294,345,168 329,345,168 40,359,137 317,980,599 358,339,736
2021 Projection 2022 Projection
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $69,688,054.48 of revenue and
expense of $72,619,884.48. The amendment proposes changes in thirteen funds, with
$2,884,735.00 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes forty-one initiatives
for Council review. Including the addition of 22 FTEs in the General Fund supported by grant
funding.
A summary spreadsheet document, outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The
Administration requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The revision corrects numbering issues in section E of the Detail Document.
The budget opening is separated in eight different categories:
A. New Budget Items
B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C. Grants for New Staff Resources
D. Housekeeping Items
E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F. Donations
G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I. Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2021
Fourth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2021-2022
In June of 2021, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City,
Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1,
2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2021.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes
specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the
same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
2
July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2021.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2021.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
Senior City Attorney
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Risk 212,897.00 212,897.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
GF 128,888.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Water 18,118.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Sewer 7,941.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Storm Water 2,278.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Airport 39,790.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Refuse 4,109.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Golf 2,257.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Fleet 2,938.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
IMS 4,492.00 - - One-time -
2 Department of Air Quality Lawnmower
Exchange
GF - 250,000.00 - - One-time -
3 COVID Safe Building Improvements GF - 844,000.00 - - One-time -
3 COVID Safe Building Improvements IMS 131,000.00 131,000.00 - - One-time -
4 Pulled Prior to Submission - - - -
5 Community Health Access Team Vehicles GF - 150,000.00 - - One-time -
5 Community Health Access Team Vehicles Fleet 150,000.00 150,000.00 - - One-time -
6 Non Represented Employee Job Salary
Survey
GF - 75,000.00 - - One-time -
7 Sugar House SAA GF - 60,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Sorenson Impact Center Social Investment GF - 150,000.00 - - One-time -
9 Pulled Prior to Submission - - - - -
10 Community Health Access Team (CHAT)
FTE Transfer
GF - - - - Ongoing -
11 Rose Park Golf Course Water & Energy
Efficiency Grant (Matching Funds)
Golf - 1,800,000.00 - - One-time -
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section A: New Items
1
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
(Continued)
12 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1 & E-3 & E-4)
GF 1,064,368.00 1,064,368.00 - - Ongoing 19.00
12 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1 & E-3 & E-4)
GF 443,676.00 443,676.00 - - One-time -
12 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1 & E-3 & E-4)
Fleet 195,720.00 195,720.00 - - One-time -
13 ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness -
CCP Rapid Intervention Teams (See Item C-
2 & E-5)
GF 164,750.00 164,750.00 - - Ongoing 3.00
1 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (See Item A-12 & E-3 &
E4)
Misc Grants 1,064,368.00 1,064,368.00 - - Ongoing -
2 ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness -
CCP Rapid Intervention Team (See Item A-
13 & E-5)
Misc Grants 164,750.00 164,750.00 - - Ongoing -
Council Approved
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Administration Proposed
Section A: New Items
2
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing - (100,000.00) - - One-time -
1 Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing 100,000.00 - - One-time -
1 Economic Development Loan Fund Move GF 100,000.00 100,000.00 - - One-time -
2 Increase Grant Fund Misc Grants 1,746,646.00 - - - Ongoing -
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds Refuse 24,907.00 - - - One-time
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds Golf 14,310.00 - - - One-time
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds Fleet 18,585.00 - - - One-time
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds IMS 30,380.00 - - - One-time
4 GPS Housekeeping GF - (74,600.00) - - One-time -
4 GPS Housekeeping GF - 74,600.00 - - One-time -
4 GPS Housekeeping Fleet 74,600.00 74,600.00 - - One-time -
5 Signage FTE Correction GF - 51,847.00 - - Ongoing -
6 General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds CIP 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00 - - One-time -
6 General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds Debt Service 200,000.00 200,000.00 - - One-time -
7 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
2021A
Debt Service 10,665,000.00 10,665,000.00 - - One-time -
7 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
2021A
Debt Service 10,400,000.00 10,400,000.00 - - One-time -
7 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
2021A
Debt Service 4,900,000.00 4,900,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Budget Carry Forward GF - 1,175,000.00 One-time -
Council Approved
Section D: Housekeeping
Administration Proposed
3
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 ARPA Funding - Water and Sewer
Infrastructure Projects
Misc Grants 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 - - One-time -
2 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
Winter Shelter Support
Misc Grants 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 - - One-time -
3 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (See Item A-12, C-1 & E4)
Misc Grants 443,676.00 443,676.00 - - Ongoing -
4 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
Public Lands Park Ranger program (See
Item A-12, C-1 & E-3)
Misc Grants 69,244.00 69,244.00 - - Ongoing -
5 ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness
– CCP Rapid Intervention Team (See Item
A-13 & C-2)
Misc Grants 160,500.00 160,500.00 - - One-time -
6 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
CCP Rapid Intervention Team (Police
Support)
Misc Grants 1,505,920.00 1,505,920.00 - - One-time -
7 Pulled Prior to Submission to allow for the
completion of phase 2 of the Social Impact
Investment
Misc Grants - - - - -
8 ARPA Funding - Housing and
Homelessness - HEART Rapid Intervention
Team (Advantage Services)
Misc Grants 57,000.00 57,000.00 - - One-time -
9 ARPA Funding – Building the lifeboat with
Urban Land Fund
Misc Grants 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 - - One-time -
10 ARPA Funding – Community Grants Misc Grants 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 - - One-time -
-
Section F: Donations
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
Administration Proposed Council Approved
4
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Consent Agenda #2
1 Police Department State Asset Forfeiture
Grant
Misc Grants 1,500.00 1,500.00 - - One-time -
2 Utah Department of Health - Bureau of
Emergency Medical Services (EMS)grant,
FY22 Per Capita Allocation
Misc Grants 10,250.00 10,250.00 - - One-time -
3 State of Utah, CCJJ (Commission on
Criminal and Juvenile Justice),
Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and
Parole Violator Centers Grant, Law
Enforcement Services Account (LESA)
Misc Grants 295,571.00 295,571.00 - - One-time -
4 Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, 2021-
2023 VOCA Victims of Crime Act Grant
Misc Grants 364,162.48 364,162.48 - - One-time -
5 Department of Workforce Services,
Housing & Community Development
Division, FY22 Homeless Shelter Cities
Mitigation Grant Program
Misc Grants 370,735.00 370,735.00 - - One-time -
6 Utah State Department of Public Safety -
2021 Emergency Management Performance
Grant (EMPG)
Misc Grants 42,500.00 42,500.00 - - One-time -
7 Cities of Service, Johns Hopkins, Justice for
the Jordan Grant, Love Your Block
Misc Grants 100,000.00 100,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Utah State Office for Victims of Crime,
Violence Against Women Act, Domestic
Violence Victim Advocate
Misc Grants 101,039.00 101,039.00 - - One-time -
Total of Budget Amendment Items 69,688,054.48 72,619,884.48 - - 22.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Section I: Council Added Items
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
5
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund Class, Budget Amendment #4:
General Fund GF 1,772,794.00 4,657,529.00 - - 22.00
Water Fund Water - 18,118.00 - - -
Sewer Fund Sewer - 7,941.00 - - -
Storm Water Fund Storm Water - 2,278.00 - - -
Airport Fund Airport - 39,790.00 - - -
Refuse Fund Refuse 24,907.00 4,109.00 - - -
Golf Fund Golf 14,310.00 1,802,257.00 - - -
Fleet Fund Fleet 438,905.00 423,258.00 - - -
IMS Fund IMS 161,380.00 135,492.00 - - -
Miscellaneous Grants Fund Misc Grants 17,497,861.48 15,751,215.48 - - -
Housing Fund Housing - - - - -
Debt Service Fund Debt Service 26,165,000.00 26,165,000.00 - - -
CIP Fund CIP 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00
Risk Fund Risk 212,897.00 212,897.00 - - -
- - -
Total of Budget Amendment Items 69,688,054.48 72,619,884.48 - - 22.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
6
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2021-22 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
FY 2021-22
Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total
^^ Total Through
BA#5 ^^
General Fund (FC 10)367,582,070 (5,138,235.00) 986,298.00 2,000,000.00 4,657,529.00 370,087,662.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)2,033,573 2,033,573.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000 1,550,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,699,663 7,098.00 5,706,761.00
Water Fund (FC 51)127,365,555 460,716.00 18,118.00 127,844,389.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)268,213,796 221,826.00 7,941.00 268,443,563.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,201,013 19,705.00 2,278.00 19,222,996.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)706,792,500 1,350,949.00 39,790.00 708,183,239.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,713,505 36,538.00 4,109.00 24,754,152.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)9,697,417 19,649.00 88,749.00 1,802,257.00 11,608,072.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)4,056,856 4,056,856.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)28,090,576 18,999.00 112,646.00 423,258.00 28,645,479.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)24,302,487 219,193.00 135,492.00 24,657,172.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)
5,307,142 5,307,142.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,341,332 5,341,332.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)18,684,617 10,427,551.76 1,522,743.00 15,751,215.48 46,386,127.24
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)273,797 273,797.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)2,752,565 2,752,565.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)16,121,000 - 16,121,000.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)31,850,423 26,165,000.00 58,015,423.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,503,216 (150,753.00) 23,400,000.00 52,752,463.00
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,933,913 24,843.00 2,958,756.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)52,939,489 19,705.00 212,897.00 53,172,091.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,755,009,505 7,688,537.76 2,559,683.00 2,000,000.00 72,619,884.48 - 1,839,877,610.24
Budget Manager
Analyst, City Council
Contingent Appropriation
7
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance Costs Risk $212,897.00
GF $128,888.00
Water $18,118.00
Sewer $7,941.00
Storm Water $2,278.00
Airport $39,790.00
Refuse $4,109.00
Golf $2,257.00
Fleet $2,938.00
IMS $4,492.00
Department: Attorney - Risk Prepared By: Tamra Turpin
For Questions Please Include: Tamra Turpin, Sandee Moore, Katherine Lewis, Aaron Bentley
(1) The cost of excess liability insurance increased significantly for FY22 – more than a 65% increase in premium cost over
the previous policy period. The bulk of this is driven by recent claim development.
Last year’s premium was $267,278. The renewal premium cost is $443,112.54. We had projected a 15% increase and the
actual cost is more than we could cover with our allocated budget.
The City’s insurance brokers were able to arrange for us to pay the premium in two installments with the second half
($221,556.27) being due by 1/1/2022 to give us time to request a budget amendment.
(2) The cost of cyber liability insurance also increased significantly for FY22 -- 320%. Last year’s premium was $45,490.
The renewal premium cost is $190,887.60. Although we had projected an increase, the actual cost is far more than we could
have anticipated. There are a number of reasons for this; particularly the fact that public agencies are becoming frequent
targets, and the number and cost of claim payouts have increased exponentially. After conferring with the City's Chief
Information Officer and City Attorney, it was agreed that allowing the City's cyber coverage to lapse would be too risky.
The City’s insurance brokers were able to arrange a 45-day extension and then a 90-day premium payment deferral in
order to get a budget amendment in place. The cost will be allocated to all funds as shown in the amendment.
A-2: Department of Air Quality Lawnmower Exchange GF $250,000.00
Department: Sustainability Prepared By: Gregg Evans
For Questions Please Include: Debbie Lyons, Sophia Nicholas, Gregg Evans
The Utah Department of Air Quality (UDAQ) administers an annual gas-powered lawnmower and yard equipment
exchange in order to reduce criteria pollutants in the areas of the Wasatch Front that are in non-attainment with the Clean
Air Act air quality standards. Because the Wasatch Front is on track for attainment of wintertime PM2.5, UDAQ is not
running a snowblower exchange this year. Instead, they are focusing on programs to reduce summertime ozone pollution,
for which the Wasatch Front is out of attainment .
UDAQ has $900,000 set aside to continue the exchanges for the foreseeable future. The size of the lawnmower exchange
varies each year depending on the size of financial contributions from partners. Typically, UDAQ contributes between
$300,000 and $400,000 per exchange.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
2
The Sustainability Department is proposing a budget amendment of $250,000 General Funds to partner with UDAQ in
FY22 on a gas-powered lawnmower exchange. This would facilitate exchanges for approximately 1,000 Salt Lake City
residents
Salt Lake City participated in 2021, spending nearly $161,000 which helped 582 residents participate. In total, 509 gas -
powered mowers were exchanged (the remaining participants bought new mowers without exchanging an old one). This is
the equivalent of removing 4.02 tons of pollution from the airshed each year. A majority of residents also opted to
participate in our Call 2 Haul program to have their gas mower picked up curbside and recycled by Salt Lake City Waste
and Recycling.
The Administration proposes continuing this program in FY 22 (spring 2022). The goal will be to increase participation
from 582 to 1,000 with a continued focus on our Westside neighborhoods. The Administration anticipates greater
awareness and uptake of the program in the comin g year due to increased familiarity with the program, and plans to work
with UDAQ on earlier, targeted outreach given the lessons learned from spring 2021. UDAQ anticipates the program
logistics will change in FY 22 to facilitate easier participation and lower administrative burden. In particular, they are
hoping to develop a phone app that participants will use to sign up and upload any required receipts.
UDAQ is also envisioning the next program will offer a promotional discount code to be used towar d the purchase of
electric lawn equipment and an app would also help separate Salt Lake City residents from other participating Wasatch
Front residents. This will reduce confusion as to who is eligible for curbside pickup of their old mowers. We also hope the
app will help us keep the exchange open for longer for Salt Lake City residents instead of opening, closing it, and opening i t
again while UDAQ verifies addresses.
While the exact amount of the discounts have yet to be determined, the Sustainability D epartment proposes using
$250,000 in City General Funds to facilitate approximately 1,000 gas-powered mower exchanges. This budget amendment
would also fund temporary staffing expenses to assist with running curbside collection of old mowers through Call 2 Haul.
This benefit was very popular last year and helped make this program more equitable to those who might not have the
ability to haul their own mower to a metal recycler.
A-3: COVID Safe Building Improvements GF $844,000.00
IMS $131,000.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Lorna Vogt, Dawn Valente
At the beginning of the year, and in anticipation of the reopening of the City and County Building, the Public Services
Department identified a series of critical improvements to minimize the spread of diseases such as COVID -19. Following
recommendations from hired consultants (see attached COVID annex) as well as health officials, changes include a multi -
level approach to keeping building occupants safe, from controlled access through a check-in desk and appointment
management software, to improved indoor air quality. The Department has been informed previously that the following list
of items are likely eligible to be covered under ARPA:
* Needlepoint Devices. When installed in the air handling system of a building, indoor air quality improves reducing
airborne contaminants $250,000 (CCB)
* Open and Public Meeting Rooms: Redesign public meeting rooms for spacing and cleaning considerations. This i ncludes
replacing chairs for disinfecting purposes. $60,000
* Lobby Appointment management software to be installed at the entrance to the building, allowing for IDing and
occupancy control. $5,000
* Entrance furniture. Desk and chairs to be installed at the entrance to the building, creating a check-in area $6,000
* Noticing Board outside of the City & County and Plaza 349 Buildings: Due to State noticing adjustments and the building
access being limited, public notices are not addressing the community in the various accessible options (walking public,
visitors to the building, etc.). Hybrid meetings and other noticing requirements are required to be completed and are
currently being posted on the doors that are frequently accessed. $10,000
* Staffing Entrance. Customer service-oriented staff, under seasonal status, to welcome and direct visitors to the building.
$17,000
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
3
* Enhanced Janitorial. Adjusting the cleaning schedule of all areas of the building from 3 to 5 days a week. (9 months)
$165,000
* Cubicle Pieces. To accommodate office reconfigurations. $100,000
* COVID Supplies/PPE. These supplies are being made available throughout buildings, including facemasks, hand sanitizer
and disposable gloves. $100,000
* Teleconference and Recording Meeting Equipment. Required to accommodate virtual and hybrid public meetings, and
training/orientation including those for Mayor's Board & Commissions, and City Council. $131,000
$844,000 TOTAL
A-4: Pulled Prior to Submission
A-5: Community Health Access Team Vehicles GF $150,000.00
Fleet $150,000.00
Department: Fire/Public Services Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Karl Lieb, Chris Milne, Clint Rasmussen, Lorna Vogt, Nancy Bean, Dawn
Valente
Community Health Access Team, CHAT (formerly known as the Community Healthcare Paramedic Team) was initially
established in 2013, comprised of one SLCFD paramedic. It quickly grew to include a SLCFD Captain and then another
paramedic. The two Paramedics responded as a team to patients that were identified by fire EMS crews as: (1) not meeting
the criteria for emergency service, or (2) not benefitting from the scope of training provided to fire department Paramedics
and EMTs. The CHAT initiative proposes adding two (2) social workers to increase the team’s scope and the ability of the
team to address the overall needs of their patients particularly pertaining to the challenges of mental health and
homelessness.
Currently, the Community Heath team operates with one vehicle. The addition of two social workers will create the need
for two vehicles as two teams will be operating simultaneously. This budget amendment will allow the fire department to
replace the current vehicle, a larger inefficient Chevy Tahoe with a fuel-efficient hybrid Ford Explorer. Additionally, a
second vehicle of the same kind will be purchased for the additional team. The third purchased fuel -efficient hybrid Ford
Explorer will replace an additional Chevy Tahoe in the Medical Division which will be used to support the CHAT initiative
immediately and provide for the anticipated rapid expansion of the CHAT program.
The three hybrid Ford Explorers will need to be outfitted with graphics, radios, tablets, etc. The $50,000 cost pe r vehicle is
the fully loaded cost.
Cost of Vehicle 42,500 127,500
Make ready 2,500 7,500
GPS 316 948
Fuel 2,950 8,850
Maintenance 1,734 5,202
TOTAL 50,000 150,000
A-6: Non-Represented Employees' Job Salary Survey GF $75,000.00
Department: Human Resources Prepared By: David Salazar
For Questions Please Include: Debra Alexander, David Salazar, John Vuyk
This request is intended for consultative services to be provided by a qualified third -party consultant or firm to conduct a
compensation survey to assess, evaluate and compare the overall pay structure, including actual base pay and other job
elements, of SLC’s non-represented employees to other public and private sector entities with whom the city competes for
talent. The recommended survey project includes data collection, analysis, and the development and presentation of a
report with recommendations for the City’s Department of Human Resources, Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee
(CCAC), and elected officials to consider. The survey will be conducted with a primary focus on cash compensation and rely
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
4
on the same caliber and methodology as surveys previously completed for the City's public safety and AFSCME-covered
employee groups (as completed by Mercer in early 2019 and 2020, respectively).
A-7: Sugar House SAA GF $60,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar
The City received a request from the Sugar House Community Council regarding the creation of an economic promotion
special assessment area (SAA) for the Sugar House for roughly west/east boundaries of 700 East to 1300 East and
north/south of Hollywood Avenue (possibly extending north on 1100 East to Ramona Avenue to include supporters in that
area) to I-80. The Department of Economic Development would run the Initial phases of the assessment and present
considerations to Council prior to formal action.
The funding request will provide consulting services for shape files, tax revenue estimates. The funding will also provide
bond counsel for the language in the draft notice of Intent to designate.
A-8: Sorenson Impact Center Social Investment GF $150,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar
The Administration would like to request $150,000 for the completion of Phase II of the Sorenson Social Impact
investment project.
A-9: Pulled Prior to Submission
A-10: Community Health Access Team (CHAT)
Personnel Transfer
GF $0.00
Department: Fire Development Prepared By: Clint Rasmussen
For Questions Please Include: Karl Lieb, Clint Rasmussen
CHAT (formerly known as the Community Healthcare Paramedic Team) was initially established in 2013, comprised of one
SLCFD paramedic. It quickly grew to include a SLCFD Captain and then another paramedic. The two Paramedics
responded as a team to patients that were identified by fire EMS crews as: (1) not meeting the criteria for emergency
service, or (2) not benefitting from the scope of training provided to fire department Paramedics and EMTs. The CHAT
initiative proposes transferring two (2) social workers and one (1) case manager (LCSW) from the Police Department to
increase the team’s scope and the ability of the team to address the overall needs of their patients particularly pertaining to
the challenges of mental health and homelessness.
This amendment would transfer three (3) PCNs from the Police Department to the Fire Department and adjust the staffing
document. The funding for these positions remains in Non-Departmental.
A-11: Rose Park Golf Course Water & Energy Efficiency
Grant (Matching Funds)
Golf $1,800,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Bryce Lindeman
Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Bryce Lindeman, Dawn Valente, Laura Briefer
The Administration is recommending recognizing $1.8 million in Golf revenue as matching funds for a potential grant. The
grant funds and cash match will be used for the installation of water conservation landscape irrigation measures for the
Rose Park Golf Course. The existing simple grid irrigation system will be replaced with a head-to-head system with high
efficiency nozzles that enable watering to match turf type. Turf removal will reduce square footage of high -water fairway
grass types and increase square footage of out of bounds rough areas re -seeded with low water grass types.
The project is a shared priority for the City's Department of Public Utilities and Department of Public Lands. Department
of Public Utilities is the project lead for the grant application. Any additional match committed at the time of application
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
5
that is over and above $1.8 million requested in this budget amendment will be in the form of the cash value of the
dedication of effort by existing full-time position(s) in the Department of Public Utilities and/or Department of Public
Lands to the project.
A-12: ARPA Funding -Public Safety and Homelessness
Outreach - Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1, E-3 & E-4)
GF $1,064,368.00
GF $443,676.00
Fleet $195,720.00
Department: Mayor’s Office & Public Lands Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, Kristen Riker, John
Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city-wide responsibilities and
is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet the
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ranger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen employees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amendment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and two light response vehicles. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current fiscal year.
A-13: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness - Salary
Restoration – CCP Rapid Intervention Team – (See Item
C-2 & E-5)
GF $164,750.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson and John Vuyk
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
6
In September 2020, Mayor Mendenhall launched the Community Commitment Program through the Homeless
Engagement and Response Team. The CCP prioritizes outreach to indi viduals experiencing homelessness while also
emphasizing the need to keep public spaces safe, clean, and accessible to all. The first phase of the CCP was a 12 -week
enhanced neighborhood cleaning program based on neighborhood hot spots reported in CitySour ced via the SLC Mobile
app. The second phase, which has transitioned into an ongoing partnership with Salt Lake County and over a dozen service
providers, focused on intensive encampment outreach of varying lengths of time depending on the size and other
characteristics of camps. After approximately 9 months of this second phase, the City and our partners have been in a
maintenance stage, during which the City has fewer large encampments but is still attempting to handle the nearly 6,000
CitySourced reports over this past year. This figure is triple the number of complaints reported in the app in years past.
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a position that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded to with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling employees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the Cou nty Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
The program will add three FTE’s for the Rapid Intervention Team. These employees will be covered in part the first year.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current fiscal year.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
C-1: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless
Outreach – Public Lands Park Ranger program (See Item
A-12, E-3 & E-4)
Misc Grants $1,064,368.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increas e in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city -wide responsibilities
and is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet th e
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
•
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
7
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ranger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen employees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amen dment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and one light response vehicle. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current and future fiscal years.
C-2: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness– CCP
Rapid Intervention Team (See Item A-13 & E-5)
Misc Grants $164,750.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
In September 2020, Mayor Mendenhall launched the Community Commitment Program through the Homeless
Engagement and Response Team. The CCP prioritizes outreach to individuals experiencing homelessness while also
emphasizing the need to keep public spaces saf e, clean, and accessible to all. The first phase of the CCP was a 12-week
enhanced neighborhood cleaning program based on neighborhood hot spots reported in CitySourced via the SLC Mobile
app. The second phase, which has transitioned into an ongoing partne rship with Salt Lake County and over a dozen service
providers, focused on intensive encampment outreach of varying lengths of time depending on the size and other
characteristics of camps. After approximately 9 months of this second phase, the City and ou r partners have been in a
maintenance stage, during which the City has fewer large encampments but is still attempting to handle the nearly 6,000
CitySourced reports over this past year. This figure is triple the number of complaints reported in the app in years past.
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a position that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded to with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling employees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the County Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
The program will add three FTE’s for the Rapid Intervention Team. These employees will be covered in part the first year.
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing -$100,000.00
Housing $100,000.00
GF $100,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz / Randy Hillier
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar, Loreno Riffo Jensen, Jolynn Walz, Randy Hillier
Under Budget Amendment #7 of FY 2021, $100,000 was appropriated to the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF)
within the Housing Fund (FC78) to provide funding for outdoor dining activities and events in the form of forgivable lo ans.
The purpose of these loans is to assist restaurants and bars recover from the financial effects of the pandemic by offering
funding to expand outdoor dining.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
8
After further examination of the EDLF guidelines, DED was unable to provide forgivable loans . DED has determined that a
traditional grant program is the best way to distribute these funds to businesses and is proposing the $100,000 be moved
to a separate account, allowing DED to administer the grant program.
D-2: Increase Grant Fund Misc Grants $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The annual budget proposed funding from the American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA) for revenue replacement. During
budget adoption, the expense was adjusted based on updated grant guidelines. This increased the expense side of the grant
fund, but recognition of the revenue was not included. This request adjusts the revenue side to recognize the revenue side
of the transaction in the Grant Fund.
This proposal will bring the Fund into balance in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
D-3: Premium Holiday – Other Funds Refuse $0.00
Golf $0.00
Fleet $0.00
IMS $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The Premium Holiday was submitted with the budget with the transfer from the Insurance Fund, but the transfer into
other funds was not included. This amendment is to balance the inter-fund transfers.
D-4: GPS Housekeeping GF -$74,600.00
GF $74,600.00
Fleet $74,600.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Dawn Valente
For FY22 there is an accounting change to put the GPS fees for vehicles in the Fleet budget. We missed the piece to move
the current budgets over to Fleet. Public Services has a budget of $39,203; Public Lands has a budget of $26,797; and CAN
has a budget $8,600 that we need to move to Fleet.
D-5: Signage FTE Correction GF $51,847.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Lorna Vogt, Dawn Valente, John Vuyk
In the Mayor's Recommended Budget, an FTE for Signage for the Planning & Ecological Services Division was initially
approved, but later reduced . However, the funding was again inadvertently reduced at the Council level, thus doubling the
reduction. This housekeeping request is to replace the funding that was inadvertently cut from the Signage budget.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
9
D-6: General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds CIP $23,400,000.00
Debt Service $200,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Brandon Bagley / Marina Scott
For Questions Please Include: Brandon Bagley, Marina Scott, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
In November 2018, voters authorized the issuance of up to $87 million in general obligation bonds to fund street
construction. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A will be issued in November 2021 as the third issuance of the
authorization. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure budget to
pay for construction of the street projects associated with the bonds. It also creates expenditure budget to pay the costs of
issuance for the bonds.
Bond proceeds will be allocated to five project cost centers in Fund 83 and one cost center in Fund 81 for the costs of
issuance associated with the bond. Two cost centers will receive $6,000,000 each for the 200 South Phase 1 & 2 (400 W to
900 E) projects. A third cost center will receive $6,800,000 for the 1100 East (900 S to Warnock Ave) project. The fourth
cost center will receive $1,600,000 for the 300 North (300 W to 1000 W) project. The fifth cost ce nter will receive
$3,000,000 for local streets. The proceeds to pay the costs of issuance associated with the bonds will be deposited to the
debt service cost center in Fund 81.
D-7: Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2021A Debt Service $10,665,000.00
Debt Service $10,400,000.00
Debt Service $4,900,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Brandon Bagley / Marina Scott
For Questions Please Include: Brandon Bagley, Marina Scott, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2012A, were issued in June 2012 for the purpose of replacing the North
Temple Viaduct and improving North Temple Boulevard.
Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2013B, were issued in November 2013 for the purpose of financing a portion of
the costs of the Sugarhouse Streetcar and paying for the portion of various improvements to create a "greenway" within the
corridor.
The Series 2012A and 2013B bonds are being refunded with the Sales Tax Refunding Revenu e Bonds, Series 2021A. This
budget amendment will create the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure budget to pay off
the old bonds and to pay the costs of issuance for the bonds. Two Local Building Authority bonds will also b e refunded by
the Series 2021A bonds. This budget amendment creates the budget for the transfer to the LBA to pay those off. A separate
budget amendment for the LBA is being submitted to create budget for the payoff of those bonds.
D-8: Budget Carry Forward GF $1,175,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Teresa Beckstrand
In the General Fund there were a number of budgets that did not have encumbrances at the close of fiscal year 2021 the
Administration would request Council approval to roll budget for the projects into fiscal year 2022. The budgets requested
are listed below:
CC CC Name OC OC Description Amount
0900503 Demographer Contract 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $50,000.00
0900925 Financial Risk Assessment 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $100,000.00
0900930 Gentrification Mitigation Study 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $100,000.00
0900705 Washington DC Contract 2324 Special Consultant $75,000.00
0900513 NW Northpoint Plan Airport 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $50,000.00
0900508 Home to Transit Program 2590 Other Expenses $800,000.00
TOTAL $1,175,000.00
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
10
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: ARPA Funding – Water and Sewer Infrastructure
Projects Misc Grants $2,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Laura Briefer, Mary Beth Thompson, John
Vuyk
The Mayor proposes to set aside $2 million for required matching funding as we prepare to apply for State funds for water
and sewer infrastructure projects.
E-2: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness –Winter
Shelter Support Misc Grants $1,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Mayor Mendenhall is proposing that the Council set aside approximately $1 million of the City’s Rescue Plan allocation for
emergency shelter needs. Such funds could be used to assist the shelter operator with operations costs or go toward other
expenses such as public safety or neighborhood mitigation.
E-3: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless
Outreach – Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (See Item A-12, C-1 & E-4)
Misc Grants $443,677.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city -wide responsibilities
and is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet t he
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ranger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen employees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
11
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amendment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and one light response vehicle. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the curren t fiscal year.
E-4: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless
Outreach – Public Lands Park Rangers (See Item A12, C-1
& E3)
Misc Grants $69,244.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city -wide responsibilities
and is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet t he
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ranger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen empl oyees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amendment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and one light response vehicle. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be a direct charge to the ARPA grant..
E-5: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness – CCP
Rapid Intervention Team (See Item A-13 & C-2) Misc Grants $160,500.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
12
In September 2020, Mayor Mendenhall launched the Community Commitment Program through the Homeless
Engagement and Response Team. The CCP prioritizes outreach to individuals experiencing homelessness while also
emphasizing the need to keep public spaces saf e, clean, and accessible to all. The first phase of the CCP was a 12-week
enhanced neighborhood cleaning program based on neighborhood hot spots reported in CitySourced via the SLC Mobile
app. The second phase, which has transitioned into an ongoing partne rship with Salt Lake County and over a dozen service
providers, focused on intensive encampment outreach of varying lengths of time depending on the size and other
characteristics of camps. After approximately 9 months of this second phase, the City and ou r partners have been in a
maintenance stage, during which the City has fewer large encampments but is still attempting to handle the nearly 6,000
CitySourced reports over this past year. This figure is triple the number of complaints reported in the app in years past.
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a position that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded to with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling employees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the County Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
The program will add three FTE’s for the Rapid Intervention Team. These employees will be covered in part the first year.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current fiscal year.
E-6: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness – CCP
Rapid Intervention Team (Police Support) Misc Grants $1,505,920.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The Administration is requesting $1,505,920 of funding, to provide funding for Clean Neighborhoods Teams for the Police
Department to provide staffing to support the homeless encampment cleanup and camp re -establishment stabilization as
requested by the Salt Lake County Health Department. Police of ficers working extra overtime shifts will provide security to
ensure the cleanups can proceed in an environment that will be safe for all involved. Staffing numbers will vary depending
on the size, number of cleanups and the location.
Activity # days Officers # hours Rate Amount Requested
Major Cleanups 14 40 10 $65 $364,000
Minor Cleanups* 122 24 6 $65 $1,141,920
And area stabilization
Total Requested $1,505,920
*previously utilized on-duty resources that are no longer available
E-7: Pulled Prior to Submission to allow for the completion of
phase 2 of the Social Impact Investment
In Budget Amendment 4, Mayor Mendenhall proposes to allocate $150,000 in General Fund money to complete Phase 2 of
this study (Item A-9). Mayor Mendenhall further proposes that the City Council hold approximately $10 million of the
City’s Rescue Plan appropriation until the completion of Phase 2, when the City and Sorenson Impact Center have fully
completed a recommendation on the financial structure of the investment, including but not limited to the contributions of
private investors and the long-term financial viability of these programs. Because Rescue Plan funds need not be spent
until the end of 2024, Mayor respectfully requests that the Council leave a portion of the City’s funds un -allocated until the
completion of Phase 2, which is anticipated to t ake 6-9 months, at which point the Administration and Council can make
an informed decision on seed funding for this initiative. During this time, the Administration will also be working with
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
13
potential investment partners with the ultimate goal of funding a $100 million social impact project on the two
interventions Sorenson has identified as the most impactful to the long -term economic health of City residents.
E-8: ARPA Funding – CCP HEART Rapid Intervention Team Misc Grants $57,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Michelle
Hoon
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a position that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded to with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling employees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the County Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
Work will be coordinated with Advantage Services. The program will be monitored for the first six months to evaluate the
effectiveness of the service.
E-9: ARPA Funding – Westside Community Initiative Misc Grants $4,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Ben Kolendar, Danny Walz, Mary Beth
Thompson, John Vuyk
As a function of utilizing the tax differential collected by the Inland Port Authority and allocated to the RDA for affordabl e
housing, the RDA Board has endorsed the creation of an Urban Land Fund in order to develop and secure perpetual
housing affordability on the City’s west side. Under the direction of the RDA, the fund would look to maximize
opportunities for affordability in both rental housing and home ownership as well as limited commercial uses
within mixed use developments. RDA staff is currently working on potential options for the structure of the land fund. This
process includes the evaluation of opportunities for community wealth building and cooperative housing models within a
perpetual housing fund. The allocation of this funding source is intended to offset the impacts on the west side from the
Inland Port development. The opportunity of this program is to strengthen the commun ity by providing a mechanism to
help reverse the historical impacts of disinvestment and inequality on the residents in this area of the City. Mayor
Mendenhall proposes the allocation of $4 million in seed funds for implementing the policy proposals that emerge from
the current study, including the following goals:
Develop Land with a Long-Term Approach to Continuously Serve a Community-Defined Purpose
WCI will take a long-term approach to land development and community building so that the RDA may retain the
fee ownership to and a reversionary interest in the property. By ground leasing to development partners, the RDA
will provide an opportunity to receive revenue generation to serve other public benefits.
Create Opportunities for Revenue Generation while Balancing the Implementation of Public
Benefits
WCI will strive to balance the development of property with the incorporation of public benefits. Benefits such as
affordable housing and below-market commercial space which generate limited or no cash flow would potentially
be subsidized with land uses that generate positive cash flow. Revenue generated by projects and received by the
RDA will then be reinvested back into the WCI with the goal of furthering shared prosperity.
Assist the Westside in Mitigating Gentrification and Displacement
WCI will acquire land with the goal of holding it for the community in perpetuity, thereby removing land from the
speculative market so that it serves low and moderate-income residents in perpetuity. Housing will remain
affordable even as neighborhood change occurs and gentrification pressures mount, which protects families from
displacement.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
14
Give Lower Income Households the Opportunity to Build Wealth Through Ownership
WCI will create opportunities for families to buy homes at affordable prices by focusing on a shared-equity model.
A shared equity model offers an alternative form of ownership that provides benefits traditional markets cannot,
such as long-term housing affordability and the ability for low and moderate -income families to build
equity. When families decide to sell, they will receive their portion of the appreciation but the RDA remains as the
land owner and is in the position to continue to sell the home at a below-market price, making it affordable to
another family of limited means. Keeping the home affordable, from family to family, will benefit future
generations by acting as a steppingstone for low-income families to go from renting to building wealth.
Engage Community Members in Development Decisions
The RDA will involve the community in the planning and goals regarding long term land use and housing
development. This can translate into residents actively involved in creating positive change within their
communities and projects that reflect the value of its residents. The result will be projects that incorporate a
shared mission and vision with the community.
Leverage Resources for Other Neighborhood Development Purposes
Revenues acquired through ground leases or partnerships could contribute to othe r purposes, including
subsidizing deeply affordable housing, below-market commercial space, infrastructure, public art, etc.
Collaborate with Other Partners to Broaden the Pool of Funding and Expertise
The RDA would actively work to acquire outside funding sources and professional resources by bringing together
financial institutions, the private sector, nonprofits, public officials, other government agencies, researchers, and
practitioners to collaborate on community and economic development activities.
Carry Out Efforts with a “Collective Impact” Approach
The RDA will continuously evaluate how projects work together to address common goals through a “collective
impact” approach that produces measurable results. These measurable results will be tracked and reported on to
promote data-driven and outcome-based decisions.
E-10: ARPA Funding – Community Grants Misc Grants $4,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Ben Kolendar, Blake Thomas, Mary Beth
Thompson, John Vuyk
Community grants
Mayor Mendenhall proposes an allocation of $ 4 million toward community grants. These grants will give community
organizations and local businesses the opportunity to propose to the City what COVID -related problems they are trying to
solve City staff and volunteers from relevant City boards and commissions would select grantees at the conclusion of an
open solicitation process. The Administration proposes to split these grant funds into two categories, with half of the
allocation going to Economic Development and half to Community and Neighborhoods. These departments will scope the
challenge facing residents and businesses, and launch two solicitations seeking proposals on the COVID -related problem
that the applicant desires to address under the following broad categories:
o CAN grants -- Nonprofit support (to be further refined by CAN): This could include programs like
retraining of displaced workers, nonprofit legal services for eviction assistance, expanded educational
opportunities, resources to mitigate the digital divide, access to healthcare for underserved populations,
mental health assistance, etc.
o DED grants -- Business assistance (to be further refined by DED): This could include grants for
businesses not included in other government programs during the pandemic, especially small and local
businesses, and support for artist/artisan businesses.
Section F: Donations
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
15
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda #2
G-1: Police Department Asset Forfeiture Grant Misc. Grants $1,500.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Jordan Smith, Shellie Dietrich
The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for and received a $1,500 grant award from the State of Utah, Commission
on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset For feiture Grant (SAFG) program. The SAFG program
funds crime prevention and law enforcement activities within specific guidelines. CCJJ developed the SAFG program as a
means of evaluating and distributing state forfeiture funds.
The funds will be used for confidential informant funds to enhance investigations in narcotics-related cases.
A public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
G-2: Utah Department of Health - Bureau of Emergency Medical
Services (EMS)grant, FY22 Per Capita Allocation Misc. Grants $10,250.00
Department: Emergency Management Prepared By: Brittany Blair/ Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Clint Rasmussen, Brittany Blair
The Fire Department applied for and was awarded $10,250 of grant funding from the Utah Department of Health, Bureau
of Emergency Medical Services. This funding will be used towards the purchase of a 12 -Lead Cardiac Monitor and medical
supplies relating to the provision of Emergency Medical Services as funding permits.
A Public Hearing was held on 2/16/21 for the grant applications on this award.
G-3: State of Utah, CCJJ (Commission on Criminal and Juvenile
Justice), Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and Parole Violator
Centers Grant, Law Enforcement Services Account (LESA)
Misc. Grants $295,571.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Clint Rasmussen, Brittany Blair
The Police Department has applied for and been awarded a $295,570 grant from the State of Utah, Commission on
Criminal and Juvenile Justice, in support of the Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and Parole Violator Centers grant.
This grant provides funding for law enforcement agencies that provide services directly to areas with halfwa y houses or
parole violator centers, or both. The Police Department will use these funds for law enforcement overtime related to
reducing criminal activity including targeted enforcement operations, increased patrol response, and responding to mental
health calls for service. The Department will also utilize funds for case transcription services, six overt camera units and
maintenance/repairs/supplies for units in the Department's camera program.
A public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
G-4: Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, 2021-2023 VOCA Victims
of Crime Act Grant Misc. Grants $364,162.48
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Wendy Isom/ Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Wendy Isom, Jordan Smith, Shellie Dietrich
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
16
The Police Department applied for and received a $364,162.48 grant from the State of Utah, Office for Victims of Crime
under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) program, to be used for the continuation of the Victim Advocate Program. These
funds will be used to pay for salary and fringe for 4 existing full-time Victim Advocate positions and all of the part-time
Victim Advocate positions. This grant also covers the costs for Rita, the program's facility dog. Additionally, there are
supplies for the program, emergency funds for assisting victims, and training for Advocate staff.
No match is required by the funding agency.
VOCA funds cover local and national conferences and trainings needed to meet statutory training requirements for the
Victim Advocates. It also provides and emergency fund that can be used when no other victim funding options are available
- these funds can be used for food, clothing, shelter, transportation and 911 phones for victims of violent crime.
Additionally, it provides for supplies such as Victim Advocate brochures, Traumatic Death Handbooks, cell phone costs,
etc.
A $109,938.89 match is required which will be satisfied by the salary and benefits of City funded Victim Advocates and the
Program Coordinator. In-kind matching funds are provided by the student interns/volunteers that participate in the
Victim Advocate Program.
A Public Hearing was held 9/7/21 on this grant application.
G-5: Department of Workforce Services, Housing & Community
Development Division, FY22 Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation
Grant Program
Misc. Grants $370,735.00
Department: Community and Neighborhoods Prepared By: Michelle Hoon / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Michelle Hoon, Brent Beck
The Community and Neighborhoods Dept. applied for and received State Department of Workforce Services funding of
$370,735 to continue efforts to encourage businesses, residents, Homeless Resource Center (HRC) operators and guests to
participate in constructive community engagement opportunities and encourage service-based interventions in order to
successfully integrate the HRCs into the fabric of their host neighborhoods and ensure the safety of those
neighborhoods.
The SLC Mitigation team currently consists of a SLC Community Engagement Coordinator, VOA Business and Community
Liaison, and VOA Outreach Case Manager. This application requests to continue the current team and expand the team to
include an additional VOA Business and Community Liaison, additional VOA Outreach Case Manager, and a VOA
Outreach Peer Support Specialist, and three new positions as part of the City's existing Downtown Ambassador program -
tailored to the areas surrounding the HRCs (King, Miller, and Youth).
A Public Hearing will be scheduled for the application on this grant.
G-6: Utah State Department of Public Safety - 2021 Emergency
Management Performance Grant (EMPG) Misc. Grants $42,500.00
Department: Emergency Management Services Prepared By: Audrey Pierce / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Audrey Pierce, Clint Rasmussen
The Emergency Management Services Division received a $42,500 FY2021 EMPG grant from the State of Utah,
Department of Public Safety. This grant is awarded on an annual basis to ju risdictions to help offset costs of planning and
updating emergency preparedness plans, conduct emergency preparedness exercises and produce materials and other
media for public educational outreach and training pertaining to emergency preparedness.
SLC's population increases from 180,000 to an estimated 310,000 each workday. Should a disaster occur during the
workday, employees become a part of the SLC emergency response, but are not trained to assist themselves or others.
These funds will offset costs in providing National Incident Management System (NIMS) training to SLC staff with
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
17
emergency response responsibilities during a disaster or other significant event. The funds will be used to fund community
preparedness activities, purchase training materials, supplies and equipment including books, brochures, handouts, etc.
The grant requires a 50% match which will be satisfied with the Community Preparedness Coordinator's time and
budgeted for within Emergency Managements general fund.
A public hearing will be held for this grant application.
G-7: Cities of Service, Johns Hopkins, Justice for the Jordan Grant,
Love Your Block Misc. Grants $100,000.00
Department: Office of the Mayor Prepared By: Hailey Leek / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Hailey Leek
The office of the Mayor applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Justice for the Jordan, Love your Block
grant.
The grant provides:
1. $60,000 to hire a Love your Block Fellow for 2 years.
2. $40,000 to distribute to the community as mini grants
3. The City is also required to engage 2 AmeriCorps VISTA volunteers, one each year of the grant.
4. The City also receives technical assistance from Cities of Service
The Cities of Service Love Your Block program connects mayor’s offices with community residents to revitalize their
neighborhoods one block at a time. Typically, cities implementing Love Your Block invite community groups to identify
priority projects and award mini-grants to support volunteer-fueled solutions that the community can implement. The City
identifies a problem and then engages with volunteers within the neighborhoods of focus and engages them early in the
project design phase as well as implementation and evaluation. The City identified the neighborhoods adjacent to the
Jordan River in Glendale (census tract 1026, 1027.01, & 1028.01) as the target area.
A public hearing will be held for this grant application.
G-8: Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, Violence Against Women
Act, Domestic Violence Victim Advocate Misc. Grants $101,039.00
Department: Attorney’s Office Prepared By: Scott Fisher / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Katherine Lewis, Scott Fisher
The City Prosecutors office applied for and received a $101,039 grant from the State of Utah, Office for Victims of Crime
under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) program, to be used for the Violence Against Women’s Act to fund Salt Lake City
Prosecutor Domestic Violence Victim Advocate.
The Prosecutor’s Office is requesting a Victim Advocate to assist and support victims of domestic violence as their cases
move to the prosecution and adjudication phases. The services include information, education and advocacy through the
case and prosecution, assistance with victim impact statements, support and accompaniment to court and meetings with
investigators and prosecutors. The Victim Advocate assist in post release safety planning, preparation for court
appearances, and jail release agreements.
Until this year, Salt Lake County District Attorney Victim Services has provided this support for victims whose cases are
adjudicate in Salt Lake City Justice Court. Funding cutbacks required the county to reassign the advocates to County
prosecutions. Salt Lake City is applying for this new city position to fill the gap in services.
The match is $12,630 each fiscal year, for a total of $25,260 for the two-year performance period of the
grant. The match is met with cash available in the Office of the Attorney’s budget.
A Public Hearing was held 6/15/21 on this grant application
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
18
Section I: Council Added Items
FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 TOTAL
Taking Care of the City:
Revenue Loss (Based on Calendar Year Calculations)11,432,646$ 34,372,399$ -$ 45,805,045$ 1
Salary: Bonus 1,193,000$ 1,193,000$
Salary: Police Retention and Recruitment 7,798,233$ 7,798,233$
Council Adopted ARP Allocation
- Special Projects Assistant for Community Commitment Program (CAN)93,829$ 93,829$
- Youth & Family Community and Program Manager (from BA#2) (CAN)90,633$ 90,633$
- Youth & Family COVID Programming Continuation (CAN)711,350$ 711,350$
- Economic Development Strategic Plan (Economic Development)50,000$ 50,000$
- Economic Development Staff (Economic Development)290,000$ 290,000$
- Grant Administrator (Finance)101,020$ 101,020$
- Grant Manager (Finance)95,000$ 95,000$
- Apprenticeship Program (All Departments)1,000,000$ 1,000,000$
- MRT Expansion [6 Months] (Fire)136,762$ 136,762$
- MRT Expansion [One-Time $46,700] (Fire)46,700$ 46,700$
Water and Sewer Infrastructure 2,000,000$ 2,000,000$
Council Added BA2 - Annex Building Renovation for Odyssey House 500,000$ 500,000$
Homelessness and Public Safety: the City's Greatest Current Need
Clean Neighborhoods teams 1,505,920$ 1,505,920$
Public Lands Park Rangers (from Salary Restoration)1,508,044$ 1,545,746$ 792,195$ 3,845,985$ 2
Public Lands Park Rangers (One-time directly from ARPA funding)69,247$
CCP clean-up 325,250$ 329,500$ 164,750$ 819,500$
HEART 57,000$ 290,000$ 290,000$ 637,000$
Advantage Services Contract -$
Emergency Shelter Set Aside 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$
Building Community Resilience
Social Impact Investment 10,000,000$ 10,000,000$ 3
Urban Land Fund 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$
Community Grants
Community Grants 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$
TOTAL 1,193,000$ 36,811,634$ 46,537,645$ 1,246,945$ 85,719,977$
Amount of Distibution 85,411,572$
Salt Lake City
ARPA Budgeted Funding
FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 TOTAL
Salt Lake City
ARPA Budgeted Funding
Items listed in Blue are new proposals.
1 Projected Amount. This funding is not allocated to projects, creates flexible spending dollars.
Revenue Loss Dollars can potentially cover all or a portion of these expenses in FY2023 and FY2024
Police Retention and Recruitment (Salary Enhancements)7,993,189$ 4,096,509$ 12,089,698$
Special Projects Assistant for Community Commitment Program (CAN)96,175$ 49,290$ 145,464$
Youth & Family Community and Program Manager (from BA#2) (CAN)92,899$ 47,611$ 140,509$
Youth & Family COVID Programming Continuation (CAN)729,134$ 373,681$ 1,102,815$
Economic Development Strategic Plan (Economic Development)51,250$ 26,266$ 77,516$
Economic Development Staff (Economic Development)297,250$ 152,341$ 449,591$
Grant Administrator (Finance)103,546$ 53,067$ 156,613$
Grant Manager (Finance)97,375$ 49,905$ 147,280$
Apprenticeship Program (All Departments)1,025,000$ 525,313$ 1,550,313$
MRT Expansion [6 Months] (Fire)140,181$ 71,843$ 212,024$
Park Ranger Program 805,237$ 383,297$ 1,188,534$
Fiscal Year 2022 One-Time Revenues
ARPA Revenue Loss 11,432,646$ 11,432,646$
One Time Use of General Fund Balance 15,335,334$ 15,335,334$
One Time Use of General Fund Balance (FOF)2,129,483$ 2,129,483$
46,157,818$
2 Park Ranger Program
Annual Costs 1,175,491$ 2,350,983$ 1,175,492$
One-Time Costs 401,800$
TOTAL 1,577,291$ 2,350,983$ 1,175,492$
Available Salary Restoration Funding 1,508,044$ 1,545,746$ 792,195$
Difference (Another Funding Source is needed, possibly revenue loss)(805,237)$ (383,297)$
3 Social Impact Investment
Focus will be on two specific interventions -- early childhood education and workforce training -- that will increase residents’ access to opportunity and
economic mobility.
Request to hold allocation of approximately $10 mil until the completion of Phase 2. Can be adjusted based on actual spending.
Impact Fees ‐ Summary Confidential
Data pulled 7/27/2021
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center UnAllocated
Cash Notes:
Impact fee - Police 8484001 525,991$ A
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 1,084,253$ B
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 9,384,420$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 5,571,233$ D
16,565,896$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
202007 (Jul2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202008 (Aug2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202009 (Sep2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202010 (Oct2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202011 (Nov2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202012 (Dec2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202101 (Jan2021)2021Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202102 (Feb2021)2021Q3 16,273$ -$ -$ -$ 16,273$
202103 (Mar2021)2021Q3 16,105$ -$ -$ -$ 16,105$
202104 (Apr2021)2021Q4 1,836$ -$ -$ -$ 1,836$
202105 (May2021)2021Q4 14,542$ -$ -$ -$ 14,542$
202106 (Jun2021)2021Q4 30,017$ -$ -$ -$ 30,017$ Current Month
202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 10,107$ -$ -$ -$ 10,107$
202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 6,804$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 6,804$
202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 5,554$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 5,554$
202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 3,106$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 3,106$
202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202201 (Jan2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202202 (Feb2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202203 (Mar2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202204 (Apr2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202205 (May2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202206 (Jun2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202207 (Jul2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202208 (Aug2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202209 (Sep2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202210 (Oct2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202211 (Nov2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202212 (Dec2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202301 (Jan2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202302 (Feb2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202303 (Mar2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202304 (Apr2023)2023Q4 118$ -$ -$ -$ 118$
202305 (May2023)2023Q4 469$ -$ -$ -$ 469$
202306 (Jun2023)2023Q4 276$ -$ -$ -$ 276$
Total, Currently Expiring through June 2021 78,774$ -$ -$ -$ 78,774$
Notes
^1 FY 2023Calendar
Month
7/27/21: We are currently in a refund situation. We will refund $15k in the next 3 months without offsetting expendituresFiscal Year 2021FY 2022Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
Total
Impact Fees Confidential
Data pulled 7/27/2021 AAA BBB CCC DDD = AAA - BBB - CCC
Police
Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Police Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Police Allocation
Encumbrances Sum of Police Allocation YTD Expenditures
Sum of Police Allocation
Remaining Appropriation
Impact fee - Streets Westside 8484005 -$ -$ -$ -$
Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 5,520$ 3,507$ 1,955$ 58$
Police Impact Fee Refunds 8421102 438,897$ -$ -$ 438,897$
Police Refunds 8418013 539,687$ -$ 69,291$ 470,396$ A
PolicePrecinctLandAquisition 8419011 1,410,243$ 239,836$ -$ 1,170,407$
Grand Total 2,440,385$ 289,381$ 71,246$ 2,079,759$
Fire
Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Fire refunds 8416007 82,831$ -$ -$ 82,831$
Fire Station #14 8415001 6,650$ 6,083$ 567$ -$
Fire Station #14 8416006 52,040$ -$ 7,428$ 44,612$
Fire Station #3 8415002 1,568$ -$ -$ 1,568$
Fire Station #3 8416009 1,050$ 96$ 485$ 469$
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 -$ -$ -$ -$
Impact fee - Streets Westside 8484005 -$ -$ -$ -$
Study for Fire House #3 8413001 15,700$ -$ -$ 15,700$ B
FireTrainingCenter 8419012 46,550$ -$ 46,550$ -$
Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 10,965$ 4,883$ 6,024$ 58$
FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 66,546$ -$ 10,516$ 56,031$
Fire Station #3 Debt Service 8421200 541,106$ -$ 541,106$ -$
Fire Station #14 Debt Service 8421201 339,172$ -$ 339,172$ -$
Grand Total 1,164,177$ 11,063$ 951,846$ 201,268$
Parks
Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 -$ -$ -$ -$
JR Boat Ram 8420144 125,605$ 15,561$ 110,044$ -$
Three Creeks Confluence 8419101 173,017$ -$ 173,017$ -$
Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 515,245$ 88$ 515,157$ -$
Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 7,643$ 4,815$ 2,786$ 42$
Folsom Trail/City Creek Daylig 8417010 766$ -$ 620$ 146$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 24,056$ 23,000$ 526$ 530$ C
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 16,087$ -$ 14,977$ 1,110$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 11,856$ -$ 10,287$ 1,570$
9line park 8416005 86,322$ 19,702$ 64,364$ 2,256$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 27,000$ 15,811$ 6,589$ 4,600$
Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 50,356$ 43,597$ 605$ 6,155$
FY Parks and Public Lands Compreh 8417008 7,500$ -$ -$ 7,500$
Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 27,478$ 4,328$ 14,683$ 8,467$
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 15,939$ -$ 6,589$ 9,350$
ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ -$ 10,830$
Park refunds 8416008 11,796$ -$ -$ 11,796$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 350,000$ 1,905$ 291,986$ 56,109$
Parks Impact Fees 8418015 102,256$ -$ 875$ 101,381$
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 200,000$ 22,524$ 64,916$ 112,560$
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 727,000$ 574,709$ 4,080$ 148,211$
9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ -$ -$ 195,045$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 225,000$ -$ 753$ 224,247$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ -$ 275,000$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 350,250$ 10,285$ 59,974$ 279,990$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 400,000$ 7,790$ 11,523$ 380,688$
Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ -$ -$ 431,000$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 490,830$ -$ 1,142$ 489,688$
Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 540,732$ 1,883$ 16,843$ 522,007$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,145,394$ 34,222$ 50,965$ 1,060,208$
Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ -$ -$ 1,098,764$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,442,199$ 229,022$ 98,295$ 3,114,882$
Grand Total 11,415,591$ 1,009,242$ 1,521,594$ 8,884,756$
Streets
Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ 152,500$ -$ -$
IF Roundabout 2000 E Parleys 8420122 455,000$ -$ 455,000$ -$
Impact fee - Streets Westside 8484005 -$ -$ -$ -$
500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 41,027$ 32,718$ 8,309$ -$
Transportation Safety Imp 8418007 147,912$ -$ 147,912$ -$
500 to 700 S 8418016 575,000$ 96,637$ 478,363$ -$
Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$
700 South Reconstruction 8414001 310,032$ -$ 310,032$ -$ D
700 South Reconstruction 8415004 1,157,506$ 2,449$ 1,155,057$ -$
LifeOnState Imp Fee 8419009 124,605$ -$ 124,605$ -$
Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 22,360$ -$ 20,916$ 1,444$
Gladiola Street 8406001 16,544$ 13,865$ 435$ 2,244$
Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 210,752$ 87,472$ 115,100$ 8,180$
Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 39,176$ 17,442$ 9,360$ 12,374$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 125,000$ -$ 89,608$ 35,392$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 250,000$ 20,697$ 191,220$ 38,083$
1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 200,000$ -$ -$ 200,000$
TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 375,000$ -$ 72,947$ 302,053$
IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,858,090$ 1,469,774$ 607,870$ 780,446$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 251,316$ -$ 29,628$ 221,688$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ 300,000$ -$ -$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ -$ -$ 875,000$
Grand Total 9,292,247$ 2,206,554$ 3,816,363$ 3,269,330$
Total 24,312,401$ 3,516,240$ 6,361,049$ 14,435,112$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
9,384,420$
5,571,233$
16,565,896$
8484002
8484003
8484005
525,991$
$1,084,253
8484001
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: ________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 3, 2021
Amy Fowler, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #4 - Revised
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or
Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403
DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing,
the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2021-22 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $ 1,772,794.00 $ 4,657,529.00
WATER FUND 0.00 18,118.00
SEWER FUND 0.00 7,941.00
STORM WATER FUND 0.00 2,278.00
AIRPORT FUND 0.00 39,790.00
REFUSE FUND 24,907.00 4,109.00
GOLF FUND 14,310.00 1,802,257.00
FLEET FUND 438,905.00 423,258.00
IMS FUND 161,380.00 135,492.00
MISCELLANEOUS GRANT FUND 17,497,861.48 15,751,215.48
DEBT SERVICE FUND 26,165,000.00 26,165,000.00
CIP FUND 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00
RISK FUND 212,897.00 212,897.00
TOTAL $ 69,688,054.48 $ 72,619,884.48
Lisa Shaffer (Dec 3, 2021 17:11 MST)
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY 2021-22 Budget Adjustments
Because the fiscal year just started the Fiscal Year 2022 projections are at budget. The following
chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2022.
Projections for fiscal year 2021 are coming in better than expected, more detail will be shared as
the audit progresses.
Given the available information fund balance would be projected as follows:
With the current use of fund balance from this budget amendment fund balance drops to 12.86%.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 6,625,050 82,617,126 89,242,176 7,018,483 50,124,619 57,143,102
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance 2,924,682 (7,810,302) (4,885,620) (4,759,137) (19,471,917) (24,231,054)
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,733,743) (6,165,453) (9,899,196) - - -
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 5,815,989 68,641,371 74,457,360 2,259,346 30,652,702 32,912,048
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 16.62%23.32%22.61%5.60%9.64%9.18%
Year End CAFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes - - - - - -
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) - (5,676,583) (5,676,583) 5,759,137 7,652,037 13,411,174
Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 5,815,989 62,964,788 68,780,777 8,018,483 38,304,739 46,323,222
Final Fund Balance Percent 16.62%21.39%20.88%19.87%12.05%12.93%
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - - - 5,138,235 5,138,235
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - - - 490,847 490,847
BA#2 Expense Adjustment - (288,488) (288,488) - (986,298) (986,298)
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (6,239,940) (6,239,940) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000)
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - - - - 1,772,794 1,772,794
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - - - - (4,657,529) (4,657,529)
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - (242,788) (242,788) - - -
BA#5 Expense Adjustment - (2,783,685) (2,783,685) - - -
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment - (63,673) (63,673) - - -
BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - 540,744 540,744 - - -
BA#7 Expense Adjustment - (6,582,824) (6,582,824) - - -
BA#8 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#8 Expense Adjustment (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000) - - -
BA#9 Revenue Adjustment - 439,809 439,809 - - -
BA#9 Expense Adjustment - 362,532 1,555,532 - - -
Change in Revenue 2,202,494 3,018,144 5,220,638 - - -
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - -
- - Adjusted Fund Balance 7,018,483 50,124,619 58,336,102 7,018,483 39,062,788 46,081,271
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 20.05%17.03%17.71%17.39%12.28%12.86%
Projected Revenue 35,000,000 294,345,168 329,345,168 40,359,137 317,980,599 358,339,736
2021 Projection 2022 Projection
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $69,688,054.48 of revenue and
expense of $72,619,884.48. The amendment proposes changes in thirteen funds, with
$2,884,735.00 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes forty-one initiatives
for Council review. Including the addition of 22 FTEs in the General Fund supported by grant
funding.
The revision from December 3rd includes detail for police spending around the homeless
resource centers in two attached documents.
A summary spreadsheet document, outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The
Administration requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The revision corrects numbering issues in section E of the Detail Document.
The budget opening is separated in eight different categories:
A. New Budget Items
B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C. Grants for New Staff Resources
D. Housekeeping Items
E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F. Donations
G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I. Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2021
Fourth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2021-2022
In June of 2021, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City,
Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1,
2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2021.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes
specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the
same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
2
July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2021.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2021.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
Senior City Attorney
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Risk 212,897.00 212,897.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
GF 128,888.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Water 18,118.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Sewer 7,941.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Storm Water 2,278.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Airport 39,790.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Refuse 4,109.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Golf 2,257.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
Fleet 2,938.00 - - One-time -
1 Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance
Costs
IMS 4,492.00 - - One-time -
2 Department of Air Quality Lawnmower
Exchange
GF - 250,000.00 - - One-time -
3 COVID Safe Building Improvements GF - 844,000.00 - - One-time -
3 COVID Safe Building Improvements IMS 131,000.00 131,000.00 - - One-time -
4 Pulled Prior to Submission - - - -
5 Community Health Access Team Vehicles GF - 150,000.00 - 150,000.00 One-time -
5 Community Health Access Team Vehicles Fleet 150,000.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 One-time -
6 Non Represented Employee Job Salary
Survey
GF - 75,000.00 - 75,000.00 One-time -
7 Sugar House SAA GF - 60,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Sorenson Impact Center Social Investment GF - 150,000.00 - - One-time -
9 Pulled Prior to Submission - - - - -
10 Community Health Access Team (CHAT)
FTE Transfer
GF - - - - Ongoing -
11 Rose Park Golf Course Water & Energy
Efficiency Grant (Matching Funds)
Golf - 1,800,000.00 - 1,800,000.00 One-time -
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section A: New Items
1
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
(Continued)
12 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1 & E-3 & E-4)
GF 1,064,368.00 1,064,368.00 - - Ongoing 19.00
12 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1 & E-3 & E-4)
GF 443,676.00 443,676.00 - - One-time -
12 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1 & E-3 & E-4)
Fleet 195,720.00 195,720.00 - - One-time -
13 Withdrawn GF - - - - -
1 ARPA Funding -Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (See Item A-12 & E-3 &
E4)
Misc Grants 1,064,368.00 1,064,368.00 - - Ongoing -
2 ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness -
CCP Rapid Intervention Team (See Item A-
13 & E-5)
Misc Grants 164,750.00 164,750.00 - - Ongoing 3.00
Council Approved
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Administration Proposed
Section A: New Items
2
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing - (100,000.00) - - One-time -
1 Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing 100,000.00 - - One-time -
1 Economic Development Loan Fund Move GF 100,000.00 100,000.00 - - One-time -
2 Increase Grant Fund Misc Grants 1,746,646.00 - 1,746,646.00 - Ongoing -
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds Refuse 24,907.00 - 24,907.00 - One-time
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds Golf 14,310.00 - 14,310.00 - One-time
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds Fleet 18,585.00 - 18,585.00 - One-time
3 Premium Holiday - Other Funds IMS 30,380.00 - 30,380.00 - One-time
4 GPS Housekeeping GF - (74,600.00) - (74,600.00)One-time -
4 GPS Housekeeping GF - 74,600.00 - 74,600.00 One-time -
4 GPS Housekeeping Fleet 74,600.00 74,600.00 74,600.00 74,600.00 One-time -
5 Signage FTE Correction GF - 51,847.00 - 51,847.00 Ongoing -
6 General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds CIP 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00 One-time -
6 General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds Debt Service 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 One-time -
7 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
2021A
Debt Service 10,665,000.00 10,665,000.00 10,665,000.00 10,665,000.00 One-time -
7 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
2021A
Debt Service 10,400,000.00 10,400,000.00 10,400,000.00 10,400,000.00 One-time -
7 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
2021A
Debt Service 4,900,000.00 4,900,000.00 4,900,000.00 4,900,000.00 One-time -
8 Budget Carry Forward GF - 1,175,000.00 - 1,175,000.00 One-time -
Council Approved
Section D: Housekeeping
Administration Proposed
3
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 ARPA Funding - Water and Sewer
Infrastructure Projects
Misc Grants 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 - - One-time -
2 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
Winter Shelter Support
Misc Grants 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 - - One-time -
3 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (See Item A-12, C-1 & E4)
Misc Grants 443,676.00 443,676.00 - - Ongoing -
4 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
Public Lands Park Ranger program (See
Item A-12, C-1 & E-3)
Misc Grants 69,244.00 69,244.00 - - Ongoing -
5 ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness
– CCP Rapid Intervention Team (See Item
A-13 & C-2)
Misc Grants 160,500.00 160,500.00 - - One-time -
6 ARPA Funding - Housing & Homelessness -
CCP Rapid Intervention Team (Police
Support)
Misc Grants 1,505,920.00 1,505,920.00 - - One-time -
7 Pulled Prior to Submission to allow for the
completion of phase 2 of the Social Impact
Investment
Misc Grants - - - - -
8 ARPA Funding - Housing and
Homelessness - HEART Rapid Intervention
Team (Advantage Services)
Misc Grants 57,000.00 57,000.00 - - One-time -
9 ARPA Funding – Building the lifeboat with
Urban Land Fund
Misc Grants 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 - - One-time -
10 ARPA Funding – Community Grants Misc Grants 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 - - One-time -
-
Section F: Donations
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
Administration Proposed Council Approved
4
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Consent Agenda #2
1 Police Department State Asset Forfeiture
Grant
Misc Grants 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 One-time -
2 Utah Department of Health - Bureau of
Emergency Medical Services (EMS)grant,
FY22 Per Capita Allocation
Misc Grants 10,250.00 10,250.00 10,250.00 10,250.00 One-time -
3 State of Utah, CCJJ (Commission on
Criminal and Juvenile Justice),
Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and
Parole Violator Centers Grant, Law
Enforcement Services Account (LESA)
Misc Grants 295,571.00 295,571.00 295,571.00 295,571.00 One-time -
4 Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, 2021-
2023 VOCA Victims of Crime Act Grant
Misc Grants 364,162.48 364,162.48 364,162.48 364,162.48 One-time -
5 Department of Workforce Services,
Housing & Community Development
Division, FY22 Homeless Shelter Cities
Mitigation Grant Program
Misc Grants 370,735.00 370,735.00 370,735.00 370,735.00 One-time -
6 Utah State Department of Public Safety -
2021 Emergency Management Performance
Grant (EMPG)
Misc Grants 42,500.00 42,500.00 42,500.00 42,500.00 One-time -
7 Cities of Service, Johns Hopkins, Justice for
the Jordan Grant, Love Your Block
Misc Grants 100,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 One-time -
8 Utah State Office for Victims of Crime,
Violence Against Women Act, Domestic
Violence Victim Advocate
Misc Grants 101,039.00 101,039.00 101,039.00 101,039.00 One-time -
1 Council Office Reclassifications GF - - - - On-Going
Total of Budget Amendment Items 69,523,304.48 72,455,134.48 52,910,185.48 54,327,204.48 22.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Section I: Council Added Items
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
5
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund Class, Budget Amendment #4:
General Fund GF 1,608,044.00 4,492,779.00 - 1,451,847.00 19.00
Water Fund Water - 18,118.00 - - -
Sewer Fund Sewer - 7,941.00 - - -
Storm Water Fund Storm Water - 2,278.00 - - -
Airport Fund Airport - 39,790.00 - - -
Refuse Fund Refuse 24,907.00 4,109.00 24,907.00 - -
Golf Fund Golf 14,310.00 1,802,257.00 14,310.00 1,800,000.00 -
Fleet Fund Fleet 438,905.00 423,258.00 243,185.00 224,600.00 -
IMS Fund IMS 161,380.00 135,492.00 30,380.00 - -
Miscellaneous Grants Fund Misc Grants 17,497,861.48 15,751,215.48 3,032,403.48 1,285,757.48 3.00
Housing Fund Housing - - - - -
Debt Service Fund Debt Service 26,165,000.00 26,165,000.00 26,165,000.00 26,165,000.00 -
CIP Fund CIP 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00 23,400,000.00
Risk Fund Risk 212,897.00 212,897.00 - - -
- - -
Total of Budget Amendment Items 69,523,304.48 72,455,134.48 52,910,185.48 54,327,204.48 22.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
6
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2021-22 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
FY 2021-22
Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total
^^ Total Through
BA#5 ^^
General Fund (FC 10)367,582,070 (5,138,235.00) 986,298.00 2,000,000.00 1,451,847.00 366,881,980.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)2,033,573 2,033,573.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000 1,550,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,699,663 7,098.00 5,706,761.00
Water Fund (FC 51)127,365,555 460,716.00 - 127,826,271.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)268,213,796 221,826.00 - 268,435,622.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,201,013 19,705.00 - 19,220,718.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)706,792,500 1,350,949.00 - 708,143,449.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,713,505 36,538.00 - 24,750,043.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)9,697,417 19,649.00 88,749.00 1,800,000.00 11,605,815.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)4,056,856 4,056,856.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)28,090,576 18,999.00 112,646.00 224,600.00 28,446,821.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)24,302,487 219,193.00 - 24,521,680.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)5,307,142 5,307,142.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,341,332 5,341,332.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)18,684,617 10,427,551.76 1,522,743.00 1,285,757.48 31,920,669.24
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)273,797 273,797.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)2,752,565 2,752,565.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)16,121,000 - 16,121,000.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)31,850,423 26,165,000.00 58,015,423.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,503,216 (150,753.00) 23,400,000.00 52,752,463.00
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,933,913 24,843.00 2,958,756.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)52,939,489 19,705.00 - 52,959,194.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,755,009,505 7,688,537.76 2,559,683.00 2,000,000.00 54,327,204.48 - 1,821,584,930.24
Budget Manager
Analyst, City Council
Contingent Appropriation
The Council adopted the items highlighted in yellow at the Council meeting on November 16th.
7
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Risk Excess Liability and Cyber Insurance Costs Risk $212,897.00
GF $128,888.00
Water $18,118.00
Sewer $7,941.00
Storm Water $2,278.00
Airport $39,790.00
Refuse $4,109.00
Golf $2,257.00
Fleet $2,938.00
IMS $4,492.00
Department: Attorney - Risk Prepared By: Tamra Turpin
For Questions Please Include: Tamra Turpin, Sandee Moore, Katherine Lewis, Aaron Bentley
(1) The cost of excess liability insurance increased significantly for FY22 – more than a 65% increase in premium cost over
the previous policy period. The bulk of this is driven by recent claim development.
Last year’s premium was $267,278. The renewal premium cost is $443,112.54. We had projected a 15% increase and the
actual cost is more than we could cover with our allocated budget.
The City’s insurance brokers were able to arrange for us to pay the premium in two installments with the second half
($221,556.27) being due by 1/1/2022 to give us time to request a budget amendment.
(2) The cost of cyber liability insurance also increased significantly for FY22 -- 320%. Last year’s premium was $45,490.
The renewal premium cost is $190,887.60. Although we had projected an increase, the actual cost is far more than we could
have anticipated. There are a number of reasons for this; particularly the fact that public agencies are becoming frequent
targets, and the number and cost of claim payouts have increased exponentially. After conferring with the City's Chief
Information Officer and City Attorney, it was agreed that allowing the City's cyber coverage to lapse would be too risky.
The City’s insurance brokers were able to arrange a 45-day extension and then a 90-day premium payment deferral in
order to get a budget amendment in place. The cost will be allocated to all funds as shown in the amendment.
A-2: Department of Air Quality Lawnmower Exchange GF $250,000.00
Department: Sustainability Prepared By: Gregg Evans
For Questions Please Include: Debbie Lyons, Sophia Nicholas, Gregg Evans
The Utah Department of Air Quality (UDAQ) administers an annual gas-powered lawnmower and yard equipment
exchange in order to reduce criteria pollutants in the areas of the Wasatch Front that are in non-attainment with the Clean
Air Act air quality standards. Because the Wasatch Front is on track for attainment of wintertime PM2.5, UDAQ is not
running a snowblower exchange this year. Instead, they are focusing on programs to reduce summertime ozone pollution,
for which the Wasatch Front is out of attainment.
UDAQ has $900,000 set aside to continue the exchanges for the foreseeable future. The size of the lawnmower exchange
varies each year depending on the size of financial contributions from partners. Typically, UDAQ contributes between
$300,000 and $400,000 per exchange.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
2
The Sustainability Department is proposing a budget amendment of $250,000 General Funds to partner with UDA Q in
FY22 on a gas-powered lawnmower exchange. This would facilitate exchanges for approximately 1,000 Salt Lake City
residents
Salt Lake City participated in 2021, spending nearly $161,000 which helped 582 residents participate. In total, 509 gas -
powered mowers were exchanged (the remaining participants bought new mowers without exchanging an old one). This is
the equivalent of removing 4.02 tons of pollution from the airshed each year. A majority of residents also opted to
participate in our Call 2 Haul program to have their gas mower picked up curbside and recycled by Salt Lake City Waste
and Recycling.
The Administration proposes continuing this program in FY 22 (spring 2022). The goal will be to increase participation
from 582 to 1,000 with a continued focus on our Westside neighborhoods. The Administration anticipates greater
awareness and uptake of the program in the comin g year due to increased familiarity with the program, and plans to work
with UDAQ on earlier, targeted outreach given the lessons learned from spring 2021. UDAQ anticipates the program
logistics will change in FY 22 to facilitate easier participation and lower administrative burden. In particular, they are
hoping to develop a phone app that participants will use to sign up and upload any required receipts.
UDAQ is also envisioning the next program will offer a promotional discount code to be used towar d the purchase of
electric lawn equipment and an app would also help separate Salt Lake City residents from other participating Wasatch
Front residents. This will reduce confusion as to who is eligible for curbside pickup of their old mowers. We also hope the
app will help us keep the exchange open for longer for Salt Lake City residents instead of opening, closing it, and opening i t
again while UDAQ verifies addresses.
While the exact amount of the discounts have yet to be determined, the Sustainability D epartment proposes using
$250,000 in City General Funds to facilitate approximately 1,000 gas-powered mower exchanges. This budget amendment
would also fund temporary staffing expenses to assist with running curbside collection of old mowers through Call 2 Haul.
This benefit was very popular last year and helped make this program more equitable to those who might not have the
ability to haul their own mower to a metal recycler.
A-3: COVID Safe Building Improvements GF $844,000.00
IMS $131,000.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Lorna Vogt, Dawn Valente
At the beginning of the year, and in anticipation of the reopening of the City and County Building, the Public Services
Department identified a series of critical improvements to minimize the spread of diseases such as COVID -19. Following
recommendations from hired consultants (see attached COVID annex) as well as health officials, changes include a multi -
level approach to keeping building occupants safe, from controlled access through a check-in desk and appointment
management software, to improved indoor air quality. The Department has been informed previously that the following list
of items are likely eligible to be covered under ARPA:
* Needlepoint Devices. When installed in the air handling system of a building, indoor air quality improves reducing
airborne contaminants $250,000 (CCB)
* Open and Public Meeting Rooms: Redesign public meeting rooms for spacing and cleaning considerations. This i ncludes
replacing chairs for disinfecting purposes. $60,000
* Lobby Appointment management software to be installed at the entrance to the building, allowing for IDing and
occupancy control. $5,000
* Entrance furniture. Desk and chairs to be installed at the entrance to the building, creating a check-in area $6,000
* Noticing Board outside of the City & County and Plaza 349 Buildings: Due to State noticing adjustments and the building
access being limited, public notices are not addressing the community in the various accessible options (walking public,
visitors to the building, etc.). Hybrid meetings and other noticing requirements are required to be completed and are
currently being posted on the doors that are frequently accessed. $10,000
* Staffing Entrance. Customer service-oriented staff, under seasonal status, to welcome and direct visitors to the building.
$17,000
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
3
* Enhanced Janitorial. Adjusting the cleaning schedule of all areas of the building from 3 to 5 days a week. (9 months)
$165,000
* Cubicle Pieces. To accommodate office reconfigurations. $100,000
* COVID Supplies/PPE. These supplies are being made available throughout buildings, including facemasks, hand sanitizer
and disposable gloves. $100,000
* Teleconference and Recording Meeting Equipment. Required to accommodate virtual and hybrid public meetings, and
training/orientation including those for Mayor's Board & Commissions, and City Council. $131,000
$844,000 TOTAL
A-4: Pulled Prior to Submission
A-5: Community Health Access Team Vehicles GF $150,000.00
Fleet $150,000.00
Department: Fire/Public Services Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Karl Lieb, Chris Milne, Clint Rasmussen, Lorna Vogt, Nancy Bean, Dawn
Valente
Community Health Access Team, CHAT (formerly known as the Community Healthcare Paramedic Team) was initially
established in 2013, comprised of one SLCFD paramedic. It quickly grew to include a SLCFD Captain and then another
paramedic. The two Paramedics responded as a team to patients that were identified by fire EMS crews as: (1) not meeting
the criteria for emergency service, or (2) not benefitting from the scope of training provided to fire department Paramedics
and EMTs. The CHAT initiative proposes adding two (2) social workers to increase the team’s scope and the ability of the
team to address the overall needs of their patients particularly pertaining to the challenges of mental health and
homelessness.
Currently, the Community Heath team operates with one vehicle. The addition of two social workers will create the need
for two vehicles as two teams will be operating simultaneously. This budget amendment will allow the fire department to
replace the current vehicle, a larger inefficient Chevy Tahoe with a fuel-efficient hybrid Ford Explorer. Additionally, a
second vehicle of the same kind will be purchased for the additional team. The third purchased fuel -efficient hybrid Ford
Explorer will replace an additional Chevy Tahoe in the Medical Division which will be used to support the CHAT initiative
immediately and provide for the anticipated rapid expansion of the CHAT program.
The three hybrid Ford Explorers will need to be outfitted with graphics, radios, tablets, etc. The $50,000 cost pe r vehicle is
the fully loaded cost.
Cost of Vehicle 42,500 127,500
Make ready 2,500 7,500
GPS 316 948
Fuel 2,950 8,850
Maintenance 1,734 5,202
TOTAL 50,000 150,000
A-6: Non-Represented Employees' Job Salary Survey GF $75,000.00
Department: Human Resources Prepared By: David Salazar
For Questions Please Include: Debra Alexander, David Salazar, John Vuyk
This request is intended for consultative services to be provided by a qualified third -party consultant or firm to conduct a
compensation survey to assess, evaluate and compare the overall pay structure, including actual base pay and other job
elements, of SLC’s non-represented employees to other public and private sector entities with whom the city competes for
talent. The recommended survey project includes data collection, analysis, and the development and presentation of a
report with recommendations for the City’s Department of Human Resources, Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee
(CCAC), and elected officials to consider. The survey will be conducted with a primary focus on cash compensation and rely
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
4
on the same caliber and methodology as surveys previously completed for the City's public safety and AFSCME-covered
employee groups (as completed by Mercer in early 2019 and 2020, respectively).
A-7: Sugar House SAA GF $60,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar
The City received a request from the Sugar House Community Council regarding the creation of an economic promotion
special assessment area (SAA) for the Sugar House for roughly west/east boundaries of 700 East to 1300 East and
north/south of Hollywood Avenue (possibly extending north on 1100 East to Ramona Avenue to include supporters in that
area) to I-80. The Department of Economic Development would run the Initial phases of the assessment and present
considerations to Council prior to formal action.
The funding request will provide consulting services for shape files, tax revenue estimates. The funding will also provide
bond counsel for the language in the draft notice of Intent to designate.
A-8: Sorenson Impact Center Social Investment GF $150,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar
The Administration would like to request $150,000 for the completion of Phase II of the Sorenson Social Impact
investment project.
A-9: Pulled Prior to Submission
A-10: Community Health Access Team (CHAT)
Personnel Transfer
GF $0.00
Department: Fire Development Prepared By: Clint Rasmussen
For Questions Please Include: Karl Lieb, Clint Rasmussen
CHAT (formerly known as the Community Healthcare Paramedic Team) was initially established in 2013, comprised of one
SLCFD paramedic. It quickly grew to include a SLCFD Captain and then another paramedic. The two Paramedics
responded as a team to patients that were identified by fire EMS crews as: (1) not meeting the criteria for emergency
service, or (2) not benefitting from the scope of training provided to fire department Paramedics and EMTs. The CHAT
initiative proposes transferring two (2) social workers and one (1) case manager (LCSW) from the Police Department to
increase the team’s scope and the ability of the team to address the overall needs of their patients particularly pertaining to
the challenges of mental health and homelessness.
This amendment would transfer three (3) PCNs from the Police Department to the Fire Department and adjust the staffing
document. The funding for these positions remains in Non-Departmental.
A-11: Rose Park Golf Course Water & Energy Efficiency
Grant (Matching Funds)
Golf $1,800,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Bryce Lindeman
Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Bryce Lindeman, Dawn Valente, Laura Briefer
The Administration is recommending recognizing $1.8 million in Golf revenue as matching funds for a potential grant. The
grant funds and cash match will be used for the installation of water conservation landscape irrigation measures for the
Rose Park Golf Course. The existing simple grid irrigation system will be replaced with a head-to-head system with high
efficiency nozzles that enable watering to match turf type. Turf removal will reduce square footage of high -water fairway
grass types and increase square footage of out of bounds rough areas re -seeded with low water grass types.
The project is a shared priority for the City's Department of Public Utilities and Department of Public Lands. Department
of Public Utilities is the project lead for the grant application. Any additional match committed at the time of application
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
5
that is over and above $1.8 million requested in this budget amendment will be in the form of the cash value of the
dedication of effort by existing full-time position(s) in the Department of Public Utilities and/or Department of Public
Lands to the project.
A-12: ARPA Funding -Public Safety and Homelessness
Outreach - Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (see Item C-1, E-3 & E-4)
GF $1,064,368.00
GF $443,676.00
Fleet $195,720.00
Department: Mayor’s Office & Public Lands Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, Kristen Riker, John
Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city-wide responsibilities and
is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet the
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ranger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen employees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amendment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and two light response vehicles. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current fiscal year.
A-13: Pulled Prior to Submission
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
6
C-1: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless
Outreach – Public Lands Park Ranger program (See Item
A-12, E-3 & E-4)
Misc Grants $1,064,368.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city -wide responsibilities
and is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet t he
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
•
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Range r program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen employees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amendment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and one light response vehicle. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current and future fiscal years.
C-2: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness– CCP
Rapid Intervention Team (See Item A-13 & E-5)
Misc Grants $164,750.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
In September 2020, Mayor Mendenhall launched the Community Commitment Program through the Homeless
Engagement and Response Team. The CCP prioritizes outreach to individuals experiencing homelessness while also
emphasizing the need to keep public spaces safe, clean, and accessible to all. The first phase of the CCP was a 12-week
enhanced neighborhood cleaning program based on neighborhood hot spots reported in CitySourced via the SLC Mobile
app. The second phase, which has transitioned into an ongoing partnership with Salt Lake County and over a dozen service
providers, focused on intensive encampment outreach of varying lengths of time depending on the size and other
characteristics of camps. After approximately 9 months of this sec ond phase, the City and our partners have been in a
maintenance stage, during which the City has fewer large encampments but is still attempting to handle the nearly 6,000
CitySourced reports over this past year. This figure is triple the number of complai nts reported in the app in years past.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
7
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a positi on that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded to with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling employees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the County Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
The program will add three FTE’s for the Rapid Intervention Team. These employees will be covered in part the first year.
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Economic Development Loan Fund Move Housing -$100,000.00
Housing $100,000.00
GF $100,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz / Randy Hillier
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar, Loreno Riffo Jensen, Jolynn Walz, Randy Hillier
Under Budget Amendment #7 of FY 2021, $100,000 was appropriated to the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF)
within the Housing Fund (FC78) to provide funding for outdoor dining activities and events in the form o f forgivable loans.
The purpose of these loans is to assist restaurants and bars recover from the financial effects of the pandemic by offering
funding to expand outdoor dining.
After further examination of the EDLF guidelines, DED was unable to provide forgivable loans. DED has determined that a
traditional grant program is the best way to distribute these funds to businesses and is proposing the $100,000 be moved
to a separate account, allowing DED to administer the grant program.
D-2: Increase Grant Fund Misc Grants $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The annual budget proposed funding from the American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA) for revenue replacement. During
budget adoption, the expense was adjusted based on updated grant guidelines. This increased the expense side of the grant
fund, but recognition of the revenue was not included. This request adjusts the revenue side to recognize the revenue side
of the transaction in the Grant Fund.
This proposal will bring the Fund into balance in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
D-3: Premium Holiday – Other Funds Refuse $0.00
Golf $0.00
Fleet $0.00
IMS $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The Premium Holiday was submitted with the budget with the transfer from the Insurance Fund, but the transfer into
other funds was not included. This amendment is to balance the inter-fund transfers.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
8
D-4: GPS Housekeeping GF -$74,600.00
GF $74,600.00
Fleet $74,600.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Dawn Valente
For FY22 there is an accounting change to put the GPS fees for vehicles in the Fleet budget. We missed the piece to move
the current budgets over to Fleet. Public Services has a budget of $39,203; Public Lands has a budget of $26,797; and CAN
has a budget $8,600 that we need to move to Fleet.
D-5: Signage FTE Correction GF $51,847.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente
For Questions Please Include: Lorna Vogt, Dawn Valente, John Vuyk
In the Mayor's Recommended Budget, an FTE for Signage for the Planning & Ecological Services Division was initially
approved, but later reduced . However, the funding was again inadvertently reduced at the Council level, thus doubling the
reduction. This housekeeping request is to replace the funding that was inadvertently cut from the Signage budget.
D-6: General Obligation Series 2021A Bonds CIP $23,400,000.00
Debt Service $200,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Brandon Bagley / Marina Scott
For Questions Please Include: Brandon Bagley, Marina Scott, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
In November 2018, voters authorized the issuance of up to $87 million in general obligation bonds to fund street
construction. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2021A will be issued in November 2021 as the third issuance of the
authorization. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure budget to
pay for construction of the street projects associated with the bonds. It also creates expenditure budget to pay the costs of
issuance for the bonds.
Bond proceeds will be allocated to five project cost centers in Fund 83 and one cost center in Fund 81 for the costs of
issuance associated with the bond. Two cost centers will receive $6,000,000 each for the 200 South Phase 1 & 2 (400 W to
900 E) projects. A third cost center will receive $6,800,000 for the 1100 East (900 S to Warnock Ave) project. The fourth
cost center will receive $1,600,000 for the 300 North (300 W to 1000 W) project. The fifth cost ce nter will receive
$3,000,000 for local streets. The proceeds to pay the costs of issuance associated with the bonds will be deposited to the
debt service cost center in Fund 81.
D-7: Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2021A Debt Service $10,665,000.00
Debt Service $10,400,000.00
Debt Service $4,900,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Brandon Bagley / Marina Scott
For Questions Please Include: Brandon Bagley, Marina Scott, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2012A, were issued in June 2012 for the purpose of replacing the North
Temple Viaduct and improving North Temple Boulevard.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
9
Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2013B, were issued in November 2013 for the purpose of financing a portion of
the costs of the Sugarhouse Streetcar and paying for the portion of various improvements to create a "greenway" within the
corridor.
The Series 2012A and 2013B bonds are being refunded with the Sales Tax Refunding Revenu e Bonds, Series 2021A. This
budget amendment will create the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure budget to pay off
the old bonds and to pay the costs of issuance for the bonds. Two Local Building Authority bonds will also b e refunded by
the Series 2021A bonds. This budget amendment creates the budget for the transfer to the LBA to pay those off. A separate
budget amendment for the LBA is being submitted to create budget for the payoff of those bonds.
D-8: Budget Carry Forward GF $1,175,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Teresa Beckstrand
In the General Fund there were a number of budgets that did not have encumbrances at the close of fiscal year 2021 the
Administration would request Council approval to roll budget for the projects into fiscal year 2022. The budgets requested
are listed below:
CC CC Name OC OC Description Amount
0900503 Demographer Contract 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $50,000.00
0900925 Financial Risk Assessment 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $100,000.00
0900930 Gentrification Mitigation Study 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $100,000.00
0900705 Washington DC Contract 2324 Special Consultant $75,000.00
0900513 NW Northpoint Plan Airport 2329 Other Professional & Tech Serv $50,000.00
0900508 Home to Transit Program 2590 Other Expenses $800,000.00
TOTAL $1,175,000.00
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: ARPA Funding – Water and Sewer Infrastructure
Projects Misc Grants $2,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Laura Briefer, Mary Beth Thompson, John
Vuyk
The Mayor proposes to set aside $2 million for required matching funding as we prepare to apply for State funds for water
and sewer infrastructure projects.
E-2: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness –Winter
Shelter Support Misc Grants $1,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Mayor Mendenhall is proposing that the Council set aside approximately $1 million of the City’s Rescue Plan allocation for
emergency shelter needs. Such funds could be used to assist the shelter operator with operations costs or go toward other
expenses such as public safety or neighborhood mitigation.
Under the revised transmittal the Administration is recommending $400,000 for Public Safety, Police, needs associated
with homeless shelters. Two documents outlining the expenses are attached to the revised transmittal as backup
information.
E-3: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless
Outreach – Salary Restoration - Public Lands Park
Ranger program (See Item A-12, C-1 & E-4)
Misc Grants $443,677.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
10
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city -wide responsibilities
and is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet t he
following program success indicators:
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ra nger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen employees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amend ment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and one light response vehicle. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current fiscal year.
E-4: ARPA Funding – Public Safety and Homeless
Outreach – Public Lands Park Rangers (See Item A12, C-1
& E3)
Misc Grants $69,244.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
Over the past few years, Public Lands has experienced a dramatic increase of individuals experiencing homelessness using
the parks for overnight camping. This vulnerable population also attracts an increase in people who prey upon them and
impact other park users with drug use, drug sales, and other crime. Public Lands employees have found themselves in the
middle of this extremely complex community crisis, without training or resources to work in this new environment. Public
Lands relies on the SLCPD to enforce camping and anti-loitering ordinances, to assist in clearing areas so staff can
complete their duties, and to respond to calls for public safety in parks. However, SLCPD has city -wide responsibilities
and is not always available for non-urgent park safety needs.
SLC Public Lands is proposing a Park Ranger program to maximize public safety, protect park resources, and to provide
services and information to park visitors. Park rangers may serve as law enforcement officers, environmental experts,
interpreter of cultural and historical points of interest or a combination of the three. This proposal is intended to meet t he
following program success indicators:
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
11
Making people feel welcome and safe in our parks
Deterring inappropriate activity
Gaining voluntary compliance of park codes and rules
Reducing the number of annual vandalism incidents
Reducing annual costs to repair/replace damaged landscape & infrastructure
The Mayor is proposing to allocate $5.1 million toward a Public Lands Park Ranger program. Funding for the program will
be partially supported through the use of eligible salary restoration dollars. The program will help ensure park safety,
including homeless outreach in the parks.
The Program will include the addition of nineteen empl oyees in the Public Lands Department. The positions are two Park
Ranger Sergeants, sixteen Park Ranger Officers and one support person. The projected annual cost for personnel including
uniforms, training and operational costs is $2,350,983. The amendment proposes to add these positions on January 1 at a
cost of $1,175,491 for the current fiscal year.
The proposed funding will also support one-time costs to implement the program of $401,800, including the purchase of
three trucks and one light response vehicle. Funding for personnel and ongoing costs will be transferred to the General
Fund while funding for the vehicles will be transferred to Fleet.
This funding will be a direct charge to the ARPA grant..
E-5: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness – CCP
Rapid Intervention Team (See Item A-13 & C-2) Misc Grants $160,500.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
In September 2020, Mayor Mendenhall launched the Community Commitment Program through the Homeless
Engagement and Response Team. The CCP prioritizes outreach to individuals experiencing homelessness while also
emphasizing the need to keep public spaces saf e, clean, and accessible to all. The first phase of the CCP was a 12-week
enhanced neighborhood cleaning program based on neighborhood hot spots reported in CitySourced via the SLC Mobile
app. The second phase, which has transitioned into an ongoing partne rship with Salt Lake County and over a dozen service
providers, focused on intensive encampment outreach of varying lengths of time depending on the size and other
characteristics of camps. After approximately 9 months of this second phase, the City and ou r partners have been in a
maintenance stage, during which the City has fewer large encampments but is still attempting to handle the nearly 6,000
CitySourced reports over this past year. This figure is triple the number of complaints reported in the app in years past.
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a position that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded to with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling employees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the County Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
The program will add three FTE’s for the Rapid Intervention Team. These employees will be covered in part the first year.
This funding will be established through a capture of funding for salary restoration from the current fiscal year.
E-6: ARPA Funding – Housing & Homelessness – CCP
Rapid Intervention Team (Police Support) Misc Grants $1,505,920.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
12
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The Administration is requesting $1,505,920 of funding, to provide funding for Clean Neighborhoods Teams for the Police
Department to provide staffing to support the homeless encampment cleanup and camp re -establishment stabilization as
requested by the Salt Lake County Health Department. Police of ficers working extra overtime shifts will provide security to
ensure the cleanups can proceed in an environment that will be safe for all involved. Staffing numbers will vary depending
on the size, number of cleanups and the location.
Activity # days Officers # hours Rate Amount Requested
Major Cleanups 14 40 10 $65 $364,000
Minor Cleanups* 122 24 6 $65 $1,141,920
And area stabilization
Total Requested $1,505,920
*previously utilized on-duty resources that are no longer available
E-7: Pulled Prior to Submission to allow for the completion of
phase 2 of the Social Impact Investment
In Budget Amendment 4, Mayor Mendenhall proposes to allocate $150,000 in General Fund money to complete Phase 2 of
this study (Item A-9). Mayor Mendenhall further proposes that the City Council hold approximately $10 million of the
City’s Rescue Plan appropriation until the completion of Phase 2, when the City and Sorenson Impact Center have fully
completed a recommendation on the financial structure of the investment, including but not limited to the contributions of
private investors and the long-term financial viability of these programs. Because Rescue Plan funds need not be spent
until the end of 2024, Mayor respectfully requests that the Council leave a portion of the City’s funds un -allocated until the
completion of Phase 2, which is anticipated to t ake 6-9 months, at which point the Administration and Council can make
an informed decision on seed funding for this initiative. During this time, the Administration will also be working with
potential investment partners with the ultimate goal of funding a $100 million social impact project on the two
interventions Sorenson has identified as the most impactful to the long -term economic health of City residents.
E-8: ARPA Funding – CCP HEART Rapid Intervention Team Misc Grants $57,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Michelle
Hoon
To more effectively and rapidly address these complaints from residents and businesses, the Mayor is proposing the
creation of a Rapid Intervention Team coordinated through HEART. The HEART coordinator (via a position that was
funded by the Council in the FY23 budget) will ensure that complaints are responded t o with the appropriate level of
outreach through the SLCPD’s CCC or VOA, SLCPD officers to standby if necessary, as well as a City cleaning team working
with Advantage Services. By having a dedicated team to respond, Public Services and Waste & Recycling e mployees will not
be pulled away from their regular duties, as they are currently when the County Health Department requires camp
abatement support. The Public Services and Waste and Recycling employees will also be available to respond to illegal
dumping complaints throughout the City.
Work will be coordinated with Advantage Services. The program will be monitored for the first six months to evaluate the
effectiveness of the service.
E-9: ARPA Funding – Westside Community Initiative Misc Grants $4,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Ben Kolendar, Danny Walz, Mary Beth
Thompson, John Vuyk
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
13
As a function of utilizing the tax differential collected by the Inland Port Authority and allocated to the RDA for affordabl e
housing, the RDA Board has endorsed the creation of an Urban Land Fund in order to develop and secure perpetual
housing affordability on the City’s west side. Under the direction of the RDA, the fund would look to maximize
opportunities for affordability in both rental housing and home ownership as well as limited commercial uses
within mixed use developments. RDA staff is currently working on potential options for the structure of the land fund. This
process includes the evaluation of opportunities for community wealth building and cooperative housing models within a
perpetual housing fund. The allocation of this funding source is i ntended to offset the impacts on the west side from the
Inland Port development. The opportunity of this program is to strengthen the community by providing a mechanism to
help reverse the historical impacts of disinvestment and inequality on the residents in this area of the City. Mayor
Mendenhall proposes the allocation of $4 million in seed funds for implementing the policy proposals that emerge from
the current study, including the following goals:
Develop Land with a Long-Term Approach to Continuously Serve a Community-Defined Purpose
WCI will take a long-term approach to land development and community building so that the RDA may retain the
fee ownership to and a reversionary interest in the property. By ground leasing to development partners, the RD A
will provide an opportunity to receive revenue generation to serve other public benefits.
Create Opportunities for Revenue Generation while Balancing the Implementation of Public
Benefits
WCI will strive to balance the development of property with the incorporation of public benefits. Benefits such as
affordable housing and below-market commercial space which generate limited or no cash flow would potentially
be subsidized with land uses that generate positive cash flow. Revenue generated by projects and received by the
RDA will then be reinvested back into the WCI with the goal of furthering shared prosperity.
Assist the Westside in Mitigating Gentrification and Displacement
WCI will acquire land with the goal of holding it for the community in perpetuity, thereby removing land from the
speculative market so that it serves low and moderate-income residents in perpetuity. Housing will remain
affordable even as neighborhood change occurs and gentrification pressures mount, which protects families from
displacement.
Give Lower Income Households the Opportunity to Build Wealth Through Ownership
WCI will create opportunities for families to buy homes at affordable prices by focusing on a sh ared-equity model.
A shared equity model offers an alternative form of ownership that provides benefits traditional markets cannot,
such as long-term housing affordability and the ability for low and moderate -income families to build
equity. When families decide to sell, they will receive their portion of the appreciation but the RDA remains as the
land owner and is in the position to continue to sell the home at a below-market price, making it affordable to
another family of limited means. Keeping the home affordable, from family to family, will benefit future
generations by acting as a steppingstone for low-income families to go from renting to building wealth.
Engage Community Members in Development Decisions
The RDA will involve the community in the planning and goals regarding long term land use and housing
development. This can translate into residents actively involved in creating positive change within their
communities and projects that reflect the value of its residents. The result will be projects that incorporate a
shared mission and vision with the community.
Leverage Resources for Other Neighborhood Development Purposes
Revenues acquired through ground leases or partnerships could contribute to other purposes, including
subsidizing deeply affordable housing, below-market commercial space, infrastructure, public art, etc.
Collaborate with Other Partners to Broaden the Pool of Funding and Expertise
The RDA would actively work to acquire outside funding sources and professional resour ces by bringing together
financial institutions, the private sector, nonprofits, public officials, other government agencies, researchers, and
practitioners to collaborate on community and economic development activities.
Carry Out Efforts with a “Collective Impact” Approach
The RDA will continuously evaluate how projects work together to address common goals through a “collective
impact” approach that produces measurable results. These measurable results will be tracked and reported on to
promote data-driven and outcome-based decisions.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
14
E-10: ARPA Funding – Community Grants Misc Grants $4,000,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Ben Kolendar, Blake Thomas, Mary Beth
Thompson, John Vuyk
Community grants
Mayor Mendenhall proposes an allocation of $ 4 million toward community grants. These grants will give community
organizations and local businesses the opportunity to propose to the City what COVID -related problems they are trying to
solve City staff and volunteers from relevant City boards and commissions would select grantees at the conclusion of an
open solicitation process. The Administration proposes to split these grant funds into two categories, with half of the
allocation going to Economic Development and half to Community and Neighborhoods. These departments will scope the
challenge facing residents and businesses, and launch two solicitations seeking proposals on the COVID -related problem
that the applicant desires to address under the following broad categories:
o CAN grants -- Nonprofit support (to be further refined by CAN): This could include programs like
retraining of displaced workers, nonprofit legal services for eviction assistance, expanded educational
opportunities, resources to mitigate the digital divide, access to healthcare for underserved populations,
mental health assistance, etc.
o DED grants -- Business assistance (to be further refined by DED): This could include grants for
businesses not included in other government programs during the pandemic, especially small and local
businesses, and support for artist/artisan businesses.
Section F: Donations
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda #2
G-1: Police Department Asset Forfeiture Grant Misc. Grants $1,500.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Jordan Smith, Shellie Dietrich
The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for and received a $1,500 grant award from the State of Utah, Commission
on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) program. The SAFG program
funds crime prevention and law enforcement activities within specific guidelines. CCJJ de veloped the SAFG program as a
means of evaluating and distributing state forfeiture funds.
The funds will be used for confidential informant funds to enhance investigations in narcotics -related cases.
A public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
G-2: Utah Department of Health - Bureau of Emergency Medical
Services (EMS)grant, FY22 Per Capita Allocation Misc. Grants $10,250.00
Department: Emergency Management Prepared By: Brittany Blair/ Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Clint Rasmussen, Brittany Blair
The Fire Department applied for and was awarded $10,250 of grant funding from the Utah Department of Health, Bureau
of Emergency Medical Services. This funding will be used towards the purchase of a 12 -Lead Cardiac Monitor and medical
supplies relating to the provision of Emergency Medical Services as funding permits.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
15
A Public Hearing was held on 2/16/21 for the grant applications on this award.
G-3: State of Utah, CCJJ (Commission on Criminal and Juvenile
Justice), Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and Parole Violator
Centers Grant, Law Enforcement Services Account (LESA)
Misc. Grants $295,571.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Clint Rasmussen, Brittany Blair
The Police Department has applied for and been awarded a $295,570 grant from the State of Utah, Commission on
Criminal and Juvenile Justice, in support of the Jurisdictions with Halfway Houses and Parole Violator Centers grant.
This grant provides funding for law enforcement agencies that provide services directly to areas with halfway houses or
parole violator centers, or both. The Police Department will use these funds for law enforcement overtime related to
reducing criminal activity including targeted enforcement operations, increased patrol response, and responding to mental
health calls for service. The Department will also utilize funds for case transcription services, six overt camera units and
maintenance/repairs/supplies for units in the Department's camera program.
A public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
G-4: Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, 2021-2023 VOCA Victims
of Crime Act Grant Misc. Grants $364,162.48
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Wendy Isom/ Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Wendy Isom, Jordan Smith, Shellie Dietrich
The Police Department applied for and received a $364,162.48 grant from the State of Utah, Office for Victims of Crime
under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) program, to be used for the continuation of the Victim Advocate Program. These
funds will be used to pay for salary and fringe for 4 existing full-time Victim Advocate positions and all of the part-time
Victim Advocate positions. This grant also covers the costs for Rita, the program's facility dog. Additionally, there are
supplies for the program, emergency funds for assisting victims, and training for Advocate staff.
No match is required by the funding agency.
VOCA funds cover local and national conferences and trainings needed to meet statutory training requirements for the
Victim Advocates. It also provides and emergency fund that can be used when no other victim funding options are available
- these funds can be used for food, clothing, shelter, transportation and 911 phones for victims of violent crime.
Additionally, it provides for supplies such as Victim Advocate brochures, Traumatic Death Handbooks, cell phone costs,
etc.
A $109,938.89 match is required which will be satisfied by the salary and benefits of City funded Victim Advocates and the
Program Coordinator. In-kind matching funds are provided by the student interns/volunteers that participate in the
Victim Advocate Program.
A Public Hearing was held 9/7/21 on this grant application.
G-5: Department of Workforce Services, Housing & Community
Development Division, FY22 Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation
Grant Program
Misc. Grants $370,735.00
Department: Community and Neighborhoods Prepared By: Michelle Hoon / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Michelle Hoon, Brent Beck
The Community and Neighborhoods Dept. applied for and received State Department of Workforce Services funding of
$370,735 to continue efforts to encourage businesses, residents, Homeless Resource Center (HRC) operators and guests to
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
16
participate in constructive community engagement opportunities and encourage service-based interventions in order to
successfully integrate the HRCs into the fabric of their host neighborhoods and ensure the safety of those
neighborhoods.
The SLC Mitigation team currently consists of a SLC Community Engagement Coordinator, VOA Business and Community
Liaison, and VOA Outreach Case Manager. This application requests to continue the current team and expand the team to
include an additional VOA Business and Community Liaison, additional VOA Outreach Case Manager, and a VOA
Outreach Peer Support Specialist, and three new positions as part of the City's existing Downtown Ambassador program -
tailored to the areas surrounding the HRCs (King, Miller, and Youth).
A Public Hearing will be scheduled for the application on this grant.
G-6: Utah State Department of Public Safety - 2021 Emergency
Management Performance Grant (EMPG) Misc. Grants $42,500.00
Department: Emergency Management Services Prepared By: Audrey Pierce / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Audrey Pierce, Clint Rasmussen
The Emergency Management Services Division received a $42,500 FY2021 EMPG grant from the State of Utah,
Department of Public Safety. This grant is awarded on an annual basis to jurisdictions to help offset costs of planning and
updating emergency preparedness plans, conduct emergency preparedness exercises and produce materials and other
media for public educational outreach and training pertaining to emergency preparedn ess.
SLC's population increases from 180,000 to an estimated 310,000 each workday. Should a disaster occur during the
workday, employees become a part of the SLC emergency response, but are not trained to assist themselves or others.
These funds will offset costs in providing National Incident Management System (NIMS) training to SLC staff with
emergency response responsibilities during a disaster or other significant event. The funds will be used to fund community
preparedness activities, purchase training materials, supplies and equipment including books, brochures, handouts, etc.
The grant requires a 50% match which will be satisfied with the Community Preparedness Coordinator's time and
budgeted for within Emergency Managements general fund.
A public hearing will be held for this grant application.
G-7: Cities of Service, Johns Hopkins, Justice for the Jordan Grant,
Love Your Block Misc. Grants $100,000.00
Department: Office of the Mayor Prepared By: Hailey Leek / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Hailey Leek
The office of the Mayor applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Justice for the Jordan, Love your Block
grant.
The grant provides:
1. $60,000 to hire a Love your Block Fellow for 2 years.
2. $40,000 to distribute to the community as mini grants
3. The City is also required to engage 2 AmeriCorps VISTA volunteers, one each year of the grant.
4. The City also receives technical assistance from Cities of Service
The Cities of Service Love Your Block program connects mayor’s offices with community residents to revitalize their
neighborhoods one block at a time. Typically, cities implementing Love Your Block invite community groups to identify
priority projects and award mini-grants to support volunteer-fueled solutions that the community can implement. The City
identifies a problem and then engages with volunteers within the neighborhoods of focus and engages them early in the
project design phase as well as implementation and evaluation. The City i dentified the neighborhoods adjacent to the
Jordan River in Glendale (census tract 1026, 1027.01, & 1028.01) as the target area.
A public hearing will be held for this grant application.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #4
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
17
G-8: Utah State Office for Victims of Crime, Violence Against Women
Act, Domestic Violence Victim Advocate Misc. Grants $101,039.00
Department: Attorney’s Office Prepared By: Scott Fisher / Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Katherine Lewis, Scott Fisher
The City Prosecutors office applied for and received a $101,039 grant from the State of Utah, Office for Victims of Crime
under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) program, to be used for the Violence Against Women’s Act to fund Salt Lake City
Prosecutor Domestic Violence Victim Advocate.
The Prosecutor’s Office is requesting a Victim Advocate to assist and support victims of domestic violence as their cases
move to the prosecution and adjudication phases. The services include information, education and advocacy through the
case and prosecution, assistance with victim impact statements, support and accompaniment to court and meetings with
investigators and prosecutors. The Victim Advocate assist in post release safety planning, preparation for court
appearances, and jail release agreements.
Until this year, Salt Lake County District Attorney Victim Services has provided this support for victims whose cases are
adjudicate in Salt Lake City Justice Court. Funding cutbacks required the county to reassign the advocates to County
prosecutions. Salt Lake City is applying for this new city position to fill the gap in services.
The match is $12,630 each fiscal year, for a total of $25,260 for the two-year performance period of the
grant. The match is met with cash available in the Office of the Attorney’s budget.
A Public Hearing was held 6/15/21 on this grant application
Section I: Council Added Items
Impact Fees ‐ Summary Confidential
Data pulled 10/29/2021
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center UnAllocated
Cash Notes:
Impact fee - Police 8484001 415,503$ A
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 1,487,183$ B
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 8,948,216$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 6,101,644$ D
16,952,545$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
202007 (Jul2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202008 (Aug2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202009 (Sep2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202010 (Oct2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202011 (Nov2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202012 (Dec2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202101 (Jan2021)2021Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202102 (Feb2021)2021Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202103 (Mar2021)2021Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202104 (Apr2021)2021Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202105 (May2021)2021Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202106 (Jun2021)2021Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 (0)$ -$ -$ -$ (0)$
202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month
202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202201 (Jan2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202202 (Feb2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202203 (Mar2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202204 (Apr2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202205 (May2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202206 (Jun2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202207 (Jul2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202208 (Aug2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202209 (Sep2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202210 (Oct2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202211 (Nov2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202212 (Dec2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202301 (Jan2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202302 (Feb2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202303 (Mar2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202304 (Apr2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202305 (May2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202306 (Jun2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total, Currently Expiring through June 2021 0$ -$ -$ -$ 0$ FY 2023Calendar
Month
Fiscal Year 2021FY 2022Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
Total
Impact Fees Confidential
Data pulled 10/29/2021 AAA BBB CCC DDD = AAA - BBB - CCC
Police
Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Police Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Police Allocation
Encumbrances Sum of Police Allocation YTD Expenditures
Sum of Police Allocation
Remaining Appropriation
Public Safety Building Replcmn 8405005 14,068$ 14,068$ -$ 0$
Police Impact Fee Refunds 8421102 338,448$ -$ 60,722$ 277,727$
Sugarhouse Police Precinct 8417016 10,331$ 10,331$ -$ -$
Police Refunds 8418013 -$ -$ (3,588)$ 3,588$
PolicePrecinctLandAquisition 8419011 239,836$ 239,836$ -$ -$
Eastside Precint 8419201 21,639$ 21,639$ -$ -$
Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 3,565$ -$ 3,565$ -$
ReimbExcessPoliceCapacity IF 8422800 1,898,497$ -$ 1,898,497$ -$ A
Grand Total 2,526,385$ 285,875$ 1,959,195$ 281,315$
Fire
Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Study for Fire House #3 8413001 15,700$ -$ -$ 15,700$
Fire Station #3 8415002 1,568$ -$ -$ 1,568$
Fire Station #3 8416009 565$ 96$ -$ 469$
Fire Station #14 8415001 6,083$ 6,083$ -$ -$
Fire Station #14 8416006 44,612$ -$ -$ 44,612$
Fire refunds 8416007 82,831$ -$ -$ 82,831$
Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 4,941$ 3,021$ 1,862$ 58$
FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 56,031$ -$ -$ 56,031$ B
Grand Total 212,331$ 9,200$ 1,862$ 201,268$
Parks
Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
9line park 8416005 21,958$ 19,702$ -$ 2,256$
Park refunds 8416008 11,796$ -$ -$ 11,796$
Parks and Public Lands Compreh 8417008 7,500$ -$ -$ 7,500$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,094,430$ 9,402$ 24,821$ 1,060,208$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,110$ -$ -$ 1,110$ C
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,530$ 23,000$ -$ 530$
Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 49,752$ 6,000$ 37,597$ 6,155$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 290,276$ 10,285$ 4,515$ 275,475$
ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ -$ 10,830$
Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 4,857$ 2,596$ 2,219$ 42$
Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ 1,038,968$ 59,796$ -$
Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 20,411$ -$ 20,411$ -$
Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ -$ -$ 431,000$
9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ 32,650$ -$ 162,395$
Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,795$ 4,328$ -$ 8,467$
JR Boat Ram 8420144 15,561$ 6,378$ -$ 9,183$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 489,688$ 64,333$ -$ 425,355$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,343,904$ 169,077$ 59,946$ 3,114,882$
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 135,084$ 21,169$ 1,355$ 112,560$
Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 388,477$ 92,174$ 30,958$ 265,346$
Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 88$ -$ 88$ -$
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 722,920$ 571,809$ 3,343$ 147,769$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 58,014$ 1,905$ -$ 56,109$
Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 523,889$ 287,290$ 8,852$ 227,746$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 224,247$ 173,467$ 34,134$ 16,646$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ -$ 275,000$
Parks Impact Fee Refunds 8418015 101,381$ -$ -$ 101,381$
Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$
GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,200,000$ -$ -$ 3,200,000$
Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 610,000$ -$ -$ 610,000$
Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ -$ -$ 420,000$
SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ -$ -$ 1,304,682$
SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 425,000$ -$ -$ 425,000$
Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ -$ -$ 510,000$
RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 180,032$ -$ -$ 180,032$
Grand Total 16,694,447$ 2,534,534$ 288,033$ 13,871,881$
Streets
Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Gladiola Street 8406001 16,109$ 13,865$ -$ 2,244$
500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 32,718$ 16,691$ 16,027$ -$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
700 South Reconstruction 8415004 2,449$ -$ 2,449$ -$
1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$
Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 1,444$ -$ -$ 1,444$
500 to 700 S 8418016 96,637$ 22,744$ 73,893$ -$
9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ 139,280$ 13,220$ -$ D
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 200,000$ -$ 12,484$ 187,516$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 35,392$ -$ -$ 35,392$
Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 95,653$ 44,088$ 50,864$ 700$
Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$
Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 29,817$ 17,442$ -$ 12,374$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 221,688$ 10,244$ 7,033$ 204,411$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ 300,000$ -$ -$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ -$ -$ 875,000$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 58,780$ 20,697$ -$ 38,083$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,250,220$ 290,460$ 1,216,451$ 743,309$
TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 302,053$ -$ -$ 302,053$
IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$
200S TransitCmpltStrtSuppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ -$ 37,422$
900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$
Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ -$ -$ 25,398$
400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$
Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$
900 S Signal Improvements IF 8422615 70,000$ -$ -$ 70,000$
Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$
Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ -$ -$ 44,400$
1700S Corridor Transfrmtn IF 8422622 35,300$ -$ -$ 35,300$
Grand Total 5,967,404$ 888,511$ 1,392,421$ 3,686,472$
Total 25,400,567$ 3,718,120$ 3,641,511$ 18,040,936$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
8,948,216$
6,101,644$
16,952,545$
8484002
8484003
8484005
415,503$
$1,487,183
8484001
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 TOTAL
Taking Care of the City:
Revenue Loss (Based on Calendar Year Calculations)11,432,646$ 34,372,399$ -$ 45,805,045$ 1
Salary: Bonus 1,193,000$ 1,193,000$
Salary: Police Retention and Recruitment 7,798,233$ 7,798,233$
Council Adopted ARP Allocation
- Special Projects Assistant for Community Commitment Program (CAN)93,829$ 93,829$
- Youth & Family Community and Program Manager (from BA#2) (CAN)90,633$ 90,633$
- Youth & Family COVID Programming Continuation (CAN)711,350$ 711,350$
- Economic Development Strategic Plan (Economic Development)50,000$ 50,000$
- Economic Development Staff (Economic Development)290,000$ 290,000$
- Grant Administrator (Finance)101,020$ 101,020$
- Grant Manager (Finance)95,000$ 95,000$
- Apprenticeship Program (All Departments)1,000,000$ 1,000,000$
- MRT Expansion [6 Months] (Fire)136,762$ 136,762$
- MRT Expansion [One-Time $46,700] (Fire)46,700$ 46,700$
Water and Sewer Infrastructure 2,000,000$ 2,000,000$
Council Added BA2 - Annex Building Renovation for Odyssey House 500,000$ 500,000$
Homelessness and Public Safety: the City's Greatest Current Need
Clean Neighborhoods teams 1,505,920$ 1,505,920$
Public Lands Park Rangers (from Salary Restoration)1,508,044$ 1,545,746$ 792,195$ 3,845,985$ 2
Public Lands Park Rangers (One-time directly from ARPA funding)69,247$
CCP clean-up 325,250$ 329,500$ 164,750$ 819,500$
HEART 57,000$ 290,000$ 290,000$ 637,000$
Advantage Services Contract -$
Emergency Shelter Set Aside 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$
Building Community Resilience
Social Impact Investment 10,000,000$ 10,000,000$ 3
Urban Land Fund 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$
Community Grants
Community Grants 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$
TOTAL 1,193,000$ 36,811,634$ 46,537,645$ 1,246,945$ 85,719,977$
Amount of Distibution 85,411,572$
Salt Lake City
ARPA Budgeted Funding
FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 TOTAL
Salt Lake City
ARPA Budgeted Funding
Items listed in Blue are new proposals.
1 Projected Amount. This funding is not allocated to projects, creates flexible spending dollars.
Revenue Loss Dollars can potentially cover all or a portion of these expenses in FY2023 and FY2024
Police Retention and Recruitment (Salary Enhancements)7,993,189$ 4,096,509$ 12,089,698$
Special Projects Assistant for Community Commitment Program (CAN)96,175$ 49,290$ 145,464$
Youth & Family Community and Program Manager (from BA#2) (CAN)92,899$ 47,611$ 140,509$
Youth & Family COVID Programming Continuation (CAN)729,134$ 373,681$ 1,102,815$
Economic Development Strategic Plan (Economic Development)51,250$ 26,266$ 77,516$
Economic Development Staff (Economic Development)297,250$ 152,341$ 449,591$
Grant Administrator (Finance)103,546$ 53,067$ 156,613$
Grant Manager (Finance)97,375$ 49,905$ 147,280$
Apprenticeship Program (All Departments)1,025,000$ 525,313$ 1,550,313$
MRT Expansion [6 Months] (Fire)140,181$ 71,843$ 212,024$
Park Ranger Program 805,237$ 383,297$ 1,188,534$
Fiscal Year 2022 One-Time Revenues
ARPA Revenue Loss 11,432,646$ 11,432,646$
One Time Use of General Fund Balance 15,335,334$ 15,335,334$
One Time Use of General Fund Balance (FOF)2,129,483$ 2,129,483$
46,157,818$
2 Park Ranger Program
Annual Costs 1,175,491$ 2,350,983$ 1,175,492$
One-Time Costs 401,800$
TOTAL 1,577,291$ 2,350,983$ 1,175,492$
Available Salary Restoration Funding 1,508,044$ 1,545,746$ 792,195$
Difference (Another Funding Source is needed, possibly revenue loss)(805,237)$ (383,297)$
3 Social Impact Investment
Focus will be on two specific interventions -- early childhood education and workforce training -- that will increase residents’ access to opportunity and
economic mobility.
Request to hold allocation of approximately $10 mil until the completion of Phase 2. Can be adjusted based on actual spending.
1
Weisberg, Brent
From:Brown, Mike
Sent:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 03:56 PM
To:'rruso@ch.utah.gov'; 'j.eining@draper.ut.us'; Troy D. Carr; 'cburnett@murray.utah.gov';
'dhutson@rivertonpd.org'; 'gseverso@sandy.ut.gov'; 'Jeff Carr';
'dcarruth@southsaltlakecity.com'; 'btcottam@taylorsvilleut.gov'; 'fross@rideuta.com';
Ken Wallentine; 'colleen.jacobs@wvc-ut.gov'; Sheriff Rosie Rivera; 'dcarruth@sslc.com';
'ken.wallentine@westjordan.utah.gov'
Cc:Brown, Mike; VanDongen, Lance; Zayas, Yvette; Weisberg, Brent; Ewell, Lamar; Purvis,
Brian
Subject:Winter Shelter Outside Agencies
Chiefs and Sheriff:
As you may know, after many months of effort to find a location for a temporary winter emergency homeless
shelter, the Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness has requested the use of a motel within Salt Lake
City for winter overflow shelter. The intent of this facility is to allow access to indoor beds through this winter
to adults in the county experiencing homelessness. Salt Lake City has agreed to allow this use. However, the
city needs support to ensure the safety and security of those accessing shelter, as well as for the surrounding
neighborhood.
I understand that all of our departments are experiencing staffing shortages. SLCPD is not immune to this
reality as well. Hosting this county-wide service requires all of us to share some level of responsibility for its
support to allow all to benefit from the services. Below is a proposed plan and a request of each of you, as our
partner agencies, to assist in making this winter service available as soon as possible.
SLCPD will contribute four officers and a supervisor. The city would be responsible for coordinating the
schedule.
Our ask is that at least three other agencies, or a combination of agencies, contribute four officers (on
overtime) to fill the four, five-hour shifts each day.
The hourly rate is $80 with $15 going back to the agency for vehicle, fuel, and maintenance
reimbursement.
The remaining $65 is paid in overtime to the officer.
Shifts will be scheduled starting as soon as the program can open in December and will last until the
end of the winter program in April.
As this is both a county and state involved program, Unified PD and the State Department of Public Safety
have been contacted and invited to provide support as well.
Please review this draft and let me know how your department will be able to contribute to this multi-
jurisdictional approach.
I will be reaching out to all of you by phone in the very near future to have additional conversations.
2
Thank you,
Mike
MIKE BROWN
Chief of Police
Salt Lake City Police Department
801.799.3801 | mike.brown@slcgov.com
www.slcpd.com | @slcpdPAGE 1
UTAH EMERGENCY WINTER HOUSING SHELTER
dATE RANGE FOR OPERATION: DECEMBER 15, 2021 - APRIL 15, 2022 (120 d AYS)
www.slcpd.com | @slcpd
LAW ENFORCEMENT BUDGET AND STAFFING
4 OFFICERS A DAY 5 HOUR SHIFTS $80 AN HOUR
$15 goes to
the agency as
a vehicle, fuel,
maintenance
reimbursement.
$65 goes to
the officer as
overtime pay.
= $1600 DAILY RATE X 120 DAYS (Estimated shelter operating period.) = $192,000
SHIFT 1
SHIFT 3
SHIFT 4
SHIFT 2
AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY
SLCPD A B C
SLCPD WILL PROVIDE 1 SUPERVISOR PER DAY
SUPERVISOR 5 HOUR SHIFTS
= $400 DAILY RATE X 120 DAYS = $48,000
THE TOTAL OVERTIME COST FOR THE SAFETY PLAN IS $816,000.
FUNDING SOURCES FOR PARTICIPATING AGENCIES ARE
STILL BEING IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME
AND WILL BE DETERMINED AT A LATER DATE.
Item E12
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:December 7, 2021
RE: Alley Vacation at 1200 Block of Kensington and Bryan Avenues
PLNPCM2021-00413
MOTION 1 – close and defer
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 – continue
I move the council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 3 – close and adopt
I move the Council close the public hearing and adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 4 – close and reject
I move the Council close the public hearing and reject the ordinance.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:December 7, 2021
RE: Alley Vacation at 1200 Block of Kensington and Bryan Avenues
PLNPCM2021-00413
This item was originally scheduled for a briefing on November 16, 2021. However, due to time
constraints on that day, the briefing was postponed, and the public hearing was still set for December 7,
2021. That is why the briefing and public hearing are on the same day.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to vacate an east/west City-owned alley from the McClelland
Trail (~1200 East) to 1300 East between homes on Kensington and Bryan Avenues. It is approximately 11
feet wide and 717 feet long, adjacent to 28 properties on Kensington and Bryan Avenues, and homes at
1542 and 1550 South 1300 East. The alley does not continue west beyond the McClelland Trail or east of
1300 East. It should be noted access to and use of the McClelland Trail will not be impacted if the alley is
vacated.
The applicant included signatures supporting the alley vacation from 23 of the 28 adjacent property
owners. None of the remaining property owners have communicated any objection to Planning or Council
staff as of the date of this report.
During City department and division review of the alley vacation application, the Engineering Division
objected to the proposal stating the division gererally opposes any vacation of rights-of-way. Rocky
Mountain Power stated establishing an 11’ wide utility easement on the alley property would be acceptable.
The applicant is aware of and amenable to a utility easement.
The subject alley is impassable due to a garage obstructing access at the east end and various
encroachments from other abutting properties. Historic photographs indicate the structure at the alley’s
Item Schedule:
Briefing: December 7, 2021
Set Date: November 16, 2021
Public Hearing: December 7, 2021
Potential Action: December 14, 2021
Page | 2
eastern end and potentially other encroachments have been in place since at least 1970. Planning staff
stated that other than a curb cut and some concrete slabs to access the garage from 1300 East, there is little
evidence the alley ever existed through the block other than on paper.
Planning staff recommended and the Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to
vacate the alley to the City Council. In its recommendation the Commission also included a condition to
establish a public utility easement along the alley property.
If approved by the City Council, the subject alley property would be vacated and incorporated into abutting
property owners’ parcels.
Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division
Goal of the briefing: To review the proposed alley closure, address questions Council Members may
have and prepare for a public hearing.
POLICY QUESTION
1. If the Council is supportive of this alley closure request, will it include the public utilities easement
recommendation?
ADDITONAL INFORMATION
Alley vacation requests receive three phases of review, as outlined in section 14.52.030 Salt Lake City Code
(see pages 5 - 7 below). Those phases include an administrative determination of completeness; a public
hearing, including a recommendation from the Planning Commission; and a public hearing before the City
Council.
Page | 3
The Planning Commission staff report provides information relating to the following five key
considerations related to this alley vacation. A short description of each issue is provided below for
reference. Please see pages 3-4 of the Planning Commission staff report for full analysis of these issues.
1. Property Owner Consent
Section 14.52.030.A.1 Salt Lake City Code states “the petition must bear the signatures of no less
than seventy five percent (75%) of the neighbors owning property which abuse the subject alley
property.” As noted above, 23 of 28 abutting property owners (82%) signed the petition supporting
the alley vacation.
2.Policy Considerations
City Code states alley vacations will be considered only when proposals satisfy at least one of the
following policy considerations: Lack of Use; Public Safety; Urban Design; Community Purpose.
Planning staff found the proposed alley vacation is consistent with the lack of use policy
consideration. It is Planning staff’s belief sidewalks on Kensington and Bryan Avenues are a
sufficient connection between the McClelland Trail and 1300 East.
3.Master Plan Considerations
Planning staff found using the subject alley as a pedestrian walkway would be redundant in
accomplishing the goals of the Central Community Master Plan and Plan Salt Lake
recommendations for mid-block access and connections. The McClelland Trail provides
north/south access, and as discussed above, sidewalks on Kensington and Bryan Avenues are
east/west connections between the trail and 1300 East.
4.Nature of the Alley
As noted above, there is little evidence the alley existed other than on paper. Attachment B (pages
6-12 of the Planning Commission staff report) includes aerial photographs of the alley and ground
level photos of the eastern and western ends of the alley.
5. Future Public Use of the Alley
Planning staff stated providing pedestrian or vehicle access to the alley would require significant City
resources to remove trees and buildings and pave the alley. It would also likely be unpopular with
adjacent residents.
Planning noted the power lines currently running through the alley and stated a utility easement within
the alley would preserve access for public utility providers.
Attachment D (pages 32-34 of the Planning Commission staff report) is an analysis of factors City Code requires
the Planning Commission to consider for alley vacations (Section 14.52.030 B Salt Lake City Code). In addition
to the information above, other factors are summarized below. Planning staff found the proposed alley vacation
complies with seven of the eight factors below. For the complete analysis, please refer to the staff report.
City Code required analysis: The City Police Department, Fire Department, Transportation Division
and all other relevant City departments and divisions have no reasonable objection to the proposed
disposition of the property.
Finding: Does not comply. As noted above, City Engineering objected to the alley vacation. According
to Engineering staff, the division generally opposes any vacation of public rights-of-way. Other City
departments and divisions had no issues with the proposal or provided no comments. Rocky Mountain
Power stated establishing an 11’ wide utility easement on the alley property would be acceptable.
Page | 4
City Code required analysis: The petition meets at least one of the policy considerations for closure,
vacation or abandonment of City owned alleys (Lack of Use, Public Safety, Urban Design, Community
Purpose).
Finding: Complies. Planning staff determined the proposed alley vacation satisfies the Lack of Use
policy consideration.
City Code required analysis: The petition must not deny sole access or required off-street parking to
any adjacent property.
Finding: Complies. No abutting properties use the subject alley for required off-street parking.
City Code required analysis: The petition will not result in any property being landlocked.
Finding: Complies. All abutting properties have public street access. No property would be landlocked
as a result of this alley vacation request.
City Code required analysis: The disposition of the alley property will not result in a use which is
otherwise contrary to the policies of the City, including applicable master plans and other adopted
statements of policy which address, but which are not limited to, mid-block walkways, pedestrian paths,
trails, and alternative transportation uses.
Finding: Complies. Vacating the subject alley will not create or result in any use that is contrary to City
policies. The residential character of the block would remain essentially the same as it is now since all
abutting properties already encroach on the subject alley.
City Code required analysis: No opposing abutting property owner intends to build a garage
requiring access from the property, or has made application for a building permit, or if such a permit has
been issued, construction has been completed within 12 months of issuance of the building permit.
Finding: Complies. While five abutting property owners did not sign the initial petition, they have not
raised any opposition to the vacation. Additionally, as of the publishing date of this report, the Building
Services Division has not received any building permit application to construct a garage that would use
the existing public right of way for access.
City Code required analysis: The petition furthers the City preference for disposing of an entire
alley, rather than a small segment of it.
Finding: Complies. The applicant has requested to vacate the entire length of the alley between 1300
East and the McClelland Trail (Jordan & Salt Lake City Canal). No segment would remain if the vacation
were approved.
City Code required analysis: The alley property is not necessary for actual or potential rear access to
residences or for accessory uses.
Finding: Complies. None of the properties abutting the subject alley use it for rear access.
PUBLIC PROCESS
June 7, 2021-Notice of the alley vacation request sent to the East Liberty Park and Wasatch Hollow
Community Council Chairs with a link to the online open house webpage. Neither community council
asked Planning staff or the applicant to attend one of their meetings.
The Wasatch Hollow Community Council expressed support for the proposed alley vacation provided it
does not interfere with the Jordan and Salt Lake Canal (which it does not).
Early notification announcement sent to residents and owners within 300 feet of the subject alley. The
notice included information about the online open house webpage and how to provide public comment.
Page | 5
July 15, 2021-Public Hearing notice mailed.
July 16, 2021-Public notice posted on City and State websites and Planning Division listserv.
July 28, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. There were no comments at the hearing. The
Commission closed the hearing and voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council.
The process for closing or vacating a City-owned alley is outlined in Section 14.52 Salt Lake City Code.
14.52.010: DISPOSITION OF CITY'S PROPERTY INTEREST IN ALLEYS:
The city supports the legal disposition of Salt Lake City's real property interests, in whole or in part,
with regard to city owned alleys, subject to the substantive and procedural requirements set forth
herein.
14.52.020: POLICY CONSIDERATIONS FOR CLOSURE, VACATION OR
ABANDONMENT OF CITY OWNED ALLEYS:
The city will not consider disposing of its interest in an alley, in whole or in part, unless it receives a
petition in writing which demonstrates that the disposition satisfies at least one of the following
policy considerations:
A. Lack Of Use: The city's legal interest in the property appears of record or is reflected on an
applicable plat; however, it is evident from an onsite inspection that the alley does not
physically exist or has been materially blocked in a way that renders it unusable as a public
right of way;
B. Public Safety: The existence of the alley is substantially contributing to crime, unlawful
activity, unsafe conditions, public health problems, or blight in the surrounding area;
C. Urban Design: The continuation of the alley does not serve as a positive urban design element;
or
D. Community Purpose: The petitioners are proposing to restrict the general public from use of
the alley in favor of a community use, such as a neighborhood play area or garden. (Ord. 24-02
§ 1, 2002)
14.52.030: PROCESSING PETITIONS:
There will be three (3) phases for processing petitions to dispose of city owned alleys under this
section. Those phases include an administrative determination of completeness; a public hearing,
including a recommendation from the Planning Commission; and a public hearing before the City
Council.
A. Administrative Determination Of Completeness: The city administration will determine whether
or not the petition is complete according to the following requirements:
1. The petition must bear the signatures of no less than seventy five percent (75%) of the
neighbors owning property which abuts the subject alley property;
2. The petition must identify which policy considerations discussed above support the petition;
3. The petition must affirm that written notice has been given to all owners of property located in
the block or blocks within which the subject alley property is located;
Page | 6
4. A signed statement that the applicant has met with and explained the proposal to the
appropriate community organization entitled to receive notice pursuant to title 2, chapter 2.60
of this code; and
5. The appropriate city processing fee shown on the Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule has
been paid.
B. Public Hearing and Recommendation From The Planning Commission: Upon receipt of a
complete petition, a public hearing shall be scheduled before the planning commission to
consider the proposed disposition of the city owned alley property. Following the conclusion of
the public hearing, the planning commission shall make a report and recommendation to the
city council on the proposed disposition of the subject alley property. A positive
recommendation should include an analysis of the following factors:
1. The city police department, fire department, transportation division, and all other relevant city
departments and divisions have no reasonable objection to the proposed disposition of the
property;
2. The petition meets at least one of the policy considerations stated above;
3. Granting the petition will not deny sole access or required off street parking to any property
adjacent to the alley;
4. Granting the petition will not result in any property being landlocked;
5. Granting the petition will not result in a use of the alley property which is otherwise contrary
to the policies of the city, including applicable master plans and other adopted statements of
policy which address, but which are not limited to, mid-block walkways, pedestrian paths,
trails, and alternative transportation uses;
6. No opposing abutting property owner intends to build a garage requiring access from the
property, or has made application for a building permit, or if such a permit has been issued,
construction has been completed within twelve (12) months of issuance of the building permit;
7. The petition furthers the city preference for disposing of an entire alley, rather than a small
segment of it; and
8. The alley property is not necessary for actual or potential rear access to residences or for
accessory uses.
C. Public Hearing Before The City Council: Upon receipt of the report and recommendation from
the planning commission, the city council will consider the proposed petition for disposition of
the subject alley property. After a public hearing to consider the matter, the city council will
make a decision on the proposed petition based upon the factors identified above. (Ord. 58-13,
2013: Ord. 24-11, 2011)
14.52.040: METHOD OF DISPOSITION:
If the city council grants the petition, the city owned alley property will be disposed of as follows:
A. Low Density Residential Areas: If the alley property abuts properties which are zoned for low
density residential use, the alley will merely be vacated. For the purposes of this section, "low
density residential use" shall mean properties which are zoned for single-family, duplex or twin
home residential uses.
Page | 7
B. High Density Residential Properties And Other Nonresidential Properties: If the alley abuts
properties which are zoned for high density residential use or other nonresidential uses, the
alley will be closed and abandoned, subject to payment to the city of the fair market value of
that alley property, based upon the value added to the abutting properties.
C. Mixed Zoning: If an alley abuts both low density residential properties and either high density
residential properties or nonresidential properties, those portions which abut the low density
residential properties shall be vacated, and the remainder shall be closed, abandoned and sold
for fair market value. (Ord. 24-02 § 1, 2002)
14.52.050: PETITION FOR REVIEW:
Any party aggrieved by the decision of the city council as to the disposition of city owned alley
property may file a petition for review of that decision within thirty (30) days after the city council's
decision becomes final, in the 3rd district court.
This is a request from Steven Black,property
owner of 1236 East Kensington Avenue,
representing the property owners of the
adjacent parcels,to vacate the 11-foot-wide
alley within the 1200 block of East
Kensington and Bryan Avenues that runs
east to west from 1300 East to the
McClelland Trail (Jordan &Salt Lake City
Canal).The intent of the request is to
incorporate the unused alley into the
adjacent properties.
REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Kensington / Bryan Avenue Alley VacationPLNPCM2021-00413
Based on the findings and analysis in this
report,Planning Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission forward a positive
recommendation to the City Council with the
condition that a utility easement is established
in place of the existing public alley right of
way.
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
RECOMMENDATION
Aaron Barlow // Principal Planner
aaron.barlow@slcgov.com
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: October 18, 2021
Amy Fowler, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: PLNPCM2021-00413 - Alley Vacation at 1200 Block of Kensington and Bryan
Avenues
STAFF CONTACT: Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner, aaron.barlow@slcgov.com, 385-386-2764
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The City Council follows the Planning Commission’s recommendation
to approve the ordinance to Vacate the Alley located within the 1200 Block of Kensington and
Bryan Avenues on the condition that a public utility easement is established in its place.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
This is a request from Steven Black, property owner of 1236 East Kensington Avenue,
representing the property owners of the adjacent parcels, to vacate the 11-foot-wide, 717-foot-long
alley located within the 1200 block of East Kensington and Bryan Avenues that runs east to west
from 1300 East to the McClelland Trail (Jordan & Salt Lake City Canal). The petition to vacate
the alley was signed by 23 of the 28 owners of property abutting the alley. The alley is essentially
unused as a public right of way and impassible to travel because of encroachment from the adjacent
properties. The intent of the request is to incorporate the unused alley into the adjacent properties.
With their positive recommendation, the Planning Commission recommended establishing a
public utility easement in the alley’s place. Additional information regarding this request can be
found in Planning Commission Record C, (Planning Commission Staff Report of July 28, 2021).
Lisa Shaffer (Oct 19, 2021 15:56 MDT)
10/19/2021
10/19/2021
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property owners
located within 300 feet of the subject Alley on June 7, 2021.
• Notice was also sent to the Chairs of the East Liberty Neighborhood Organization and Wasatch
Hollow Community Council on June 7, 2021.
• Staff hosted an online open house to solicit public comments on the proposal. The online Open
House period started on June 7, 2021 and ended on July 14, 2021.
• Staff received letters from both the East Liberty Neighborhood Organization and the Wasatch
Hollow Community Council. They were included with the Planning Commission report.
• Staff also received seven public comments, which were included with the Planning
Commission report.
• The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing for this request on July 28, 2021. By a vote
of 5-1, they forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed Alley
Vacation with the condition that a utility easement be established in its place.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
A. PC Agenda of July 28, 2021 (Click to Access)
B. PC Minutes of July 28, 2021 (Click to Access)
C. Planning Commission Staff Report of July 28, 2021 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1. Project Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ________ of 20___
(Vacating a city-owned alley situated in the Amended Plat of Whitaker Subdivision of Lots 18
and 19, Block 16A, 5Acre Plat A. Big Field Survey located between lots 1-55 running from 1300
East Street and the Salt Lake & Jordan Canal)
An ordinance vacating an 11 foot wide unnamed city-owned alley situated in the
Amended Plat of Whitaker Subdivision of Lots 18 and 19, Block 16A, 5Acre Plat A. Big Field
Survey located between lots 1-55 running from 1300 East Street and the Salt Lake & Jordan
Canal, pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00413.
WHEREAS, an 11 foot wide public alley running east and west through Block 2 of the
Amended Plat of Whitaker Subdivision of Lots 18 and 19, Block 16A, 5 Acre Plat A. Big Field
Survey was dedicated for public use;
WHEREAS, the City has authority by state law to vacate public streets, including alleys;
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (the “planning commission”) held
a public hearing on July 28, 2021, to consider a request made by Steven Black (“Applicant”)
(Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00413) on behalf of the alley’s 28 adjacent property owners; and
WHEREAS, at its July 28, 2021, hearing, the planning commission voted in favor of
forwarding a positive recommendation on said petition to the Salt Lake City Council;
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council (the “city council”) held a legally notified public
hearing as per section 10-9a-208 of the Utah Code on _____________;
WHEREAS, the city council finds after holding a public hearing on this matter, that the
city’s interest in the city-owned alley as more particularly described in Exhibit A,” attached
hereto and incorporated by reference, is reflected on a plat; however, the alley has been
materially blocked in a way that renders it unusable as a public right of way;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is good cause for the vacation of the alley
and neither the public interest nor any person will be materially injured by the proposed
vacation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the vacation of the alley upon the conditions set
forth herein are in the best interest of Salt Lake City.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Vacating City-Owned Alley. That an unnamed, city-owned alley situated
in the Amended Plat of Whitaker Subdivision of Lots 18 and 19, Block 16A, 5Acre Plat A. Big
Field Survey located between lots 1-55 running from 1300 East Street and the Salt Lake &
Jordan Canal, which is the subject of Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00413, and which is more
particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto, hereby is, vacated and declared not
presently necessary or available for public use.
SECTION 2. Reservations and Disclaimers. The vacation is expressly made subject to
all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every description now
located on and under or over the confines of this property, and also subject to the rights of entry
thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or rerouting said utilities,
including the city’s water and sewer facilities. Said vacation is also subject to any existing
rights-of-way or easements of private third parties.
SECTION 3. Conditions. This proposed alley vacation is conditioned upon the
following:
1.) A reservation of easement, evidenced by a declaration of easement, recorded by and
for the benefit of the City for purposes of the use and location of public utilities.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder. The city recorder is
instructed not to publish or record this ordinance until Real Estate Services certifies that the
condition has been satisfied.
SECTION 5. Time. If the conditions identified above have not been met within one year
after adoption, this ordinance shall become null and void. The city council may, for good cause
shown, by resolution, extend the time period for satisfying the conditions identified above.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
______________, 20___.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 20___
Published: ______________.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Hannah Vickery, Senior City Attorney
9/22/21
EXHIBIT “A”
Legal description of the unnamed, city-owned
alley to be vacated:
AN 11.00 FOOT WIDE ALLEY TO BE VACATED WITHIN BLOCK 2 OF WHITAKER
SUBDIVISION AMENDED, SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
COMMENCING AT THE MONUMENT IN THE INTERSECTION OF KENSINGTON
AVENUE & 1300 EAST STREET (POC); THENCE S89⁰56’37W ALONG THE MONUMENT
LINE IN KENSINGTON AVENUE (BASIS OF BEARINGS) A DISTANCE OF 6.55 FEET
AND S00⁰10’33”W A DISTANCE OF 29.18 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
BLOCK 2, WHITAKER SUBDIVISION AMENDED, AND CONTINUING S00⁰10’33”W
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF BLOCK 2 (ALSO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 55) A
DISTANCE OF 105.19 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 55 TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING (POB).
THENCE N89⁰55’03”W ALONG THE SOUTH LINES OF LOTS 29-55 A DISTANCE OF
715.62 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 29;
THENCE S06⁰32’02”W A DISTANCE OF 3.96 FEET;
THENCE S13⁰00’36”W A DISTANCE OF 7.25 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
LOT 28 OF SAID BLOCK;
THENCE S89⁰55’03”E ALONG THE NORTH LINES OF LOTS 1-28 A DISTANCE OF
717.67 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 AND A POINT ON THE EAST
LINE OF SAID BLOCK 2;
THENCE N00⁰10’33”E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF BLOCK 2 A DISTANCE OF 11.00
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINS 0.18 ACRES.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Project Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
1. Project Chronology
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2021-00413 – Alley Vacation at 1200 Block of Kensington and Bryan Avenues
April 27, 2021 Petition for Alley Vacation received by the Planning Division.
May 27, 2021 Petition assigned to Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing.
June 7, 2021 Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Chairs of the East Liberty
Neighborhood Organization and the Wasatch Hollow Community Council.
June 7, 2021 Staff hosted an online Open House to solicit public comments on the proposal. The
online open house period started on June 7, 2021, and ended on July 14, 2021.
July 14, 2021 Public Hearing Notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning
listserv for the July 28, 2021, Planning Commission meeting. Public hearing notice
mailed to owners and tenants of property within 300 feet of the alley.
July 16, 2021 Public hearing notice sign with project information posted around block containing
subject alley.
July 28, 2021 Planning Commission reviewed the petition and conducted a public hearing. The
Commission then voted to send a positive recommendation to the City Council.
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00413 - Alley
Vacation at 1200 Block of Kensington and Bryan Avenues - This is a request from
Steven Black, representing the property owners of the adjacent parcels, to vacate the 11-
foot wide alley within the 1200 block of East Kensington and Bryan Avenues that runs
east to west from 1300 East to the McClelland Trail. The intent of the request is to
incorporate the unused alley into the adjacent properties. The subject alley is located
within the R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District and is within Council District 5,
represented by Darin Mano. (Staff contact: Aaron Barlow at 385-386-2764 or
aaron.barlow@slcgov.com).
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive
comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City
Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be
held:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Emergency
Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). Please visit slc.gov/council/news/featured-
news/virtually-attend-city-council-meetings-2/ to learn how you can share
your comments live during electronic City Council meetings. If you would like
to provide feedback or comments via email or phone, please contact us
through our 24-hour comment line at 801-535-7654 or by email at
council.comments@slcgov.com.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please
call Aaron Barlow at 385-386-2764 between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday or via e-mail at aaron.barlow@slcgov.com.
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make
requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats,
interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two
business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535- 7600, or relay service 711.
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
W&NE FAM TR 10023 S WASATCH BLVD SANDY UT 84092
KATELIN GOINGS 1089 S MCCLELLAND ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ALEXANDER A ZUHL 1147 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MARGARET D & MARK K MEYERS 1165 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CECILY A LIGHT 1167 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JOHN W BRANSON 1170 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MICHAEL HESS 1172 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
TIFFANY ROUSCULP & CHRIS LIPPARD 1172 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CAROL SHINKOSKEY 1175 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
KLAIR WHITE 1176 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ELLEN E GOLDBERG & CLONTON PERSCHON 1177 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
SHELLEY L HENSON 1179 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JAMIE CHRISTENSEN; DI GIACOMO, LISA CHRISTENSEN 1179 E MILTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
FELICIA ALVAREZ 1180 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JAKE C & SUZANNE RICKER 1182 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ASHLIN V SMITH 1184 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MATTHEW RAY & MADISON BLOCKER 1186 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
DAVID M SUHRE & BRIDGET A FARFEL 1188 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
HOA HOANG 1189 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
GREG & EMILY VANDYKE 1193 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
PEGGY ANDERSON 1195 E MILTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CHRISTINE E JAHJA &INGRID B BLANKEVOORT 1199 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ALEXANDER J ALLEN 1206 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
THOMAS A & LESLIE A KEMP 1207 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MICHAEL J & JILL NICOLE MOSDELL 1211 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ERICK R BILLETDEAUX & STEPHANIE J ATHERTON 1212 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MARC MOODY 1216 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RICHELLE RASMUSSEN & ANDREA T JAGER 1218 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
STEVEN L & JUNE A OLSEN 1218 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JESSICA THOMAS 1218 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JOHN G ALLEMAN 1220 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ANDREW C & HANNAH E ETHERINGTON 1225 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JRH FAM TRUST 1225 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RODNEY J GORDON 1226 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
SHAHRAM KARAKHANI 1226‐1228 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CHAD M & PAMELA A SALVADORE 1228 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JEFFREY A C LEFAVOR 1229 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WENDY L NELSON 1230 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RUDY J & YVONNE M SCHENK 1230 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RUSSELL E COSTA 1233 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
PAVLIK‐LOUDERBACK REVOCABLE TRUST 1233 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
DANIELLE & ELIJAH SZASZ 1234 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
DARRELL L PETERSEN 1234 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
STEVE BLACK 1236 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JOI T MATSUKAWA 1236 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
KRISTEN AMEEL 1238 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
BICYCLE KICK, LLC 124 19TH ST HERMOSA BEACH CA 90254
AARON BARLOW 1242 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
J RICH WHITTAKER 1244 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MICHAEL K KING 1246 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ZAHRA GHORBANI 1247 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WILL JAMISON 1248 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CHRISTOPHER A & SARAH H TAYLOR 1250 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
PATRICK WILSON 1250 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
PETER REGIS & THOMAS CHILTON BENNETT 1253 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
STEVENSON FAMILY TRUST 1255 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RALPH D & COLLEEN S CHIPMAN FAMILY TRUST 1256 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
HAYES, DELBERT K & HONG‐HAYES, HUI C 1258 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JENNA M PIKE 1259 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
LWH LIV TRUST 1260 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
DUNCAN HILTON 1262 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WILHELM KAPFHAMMER 1265 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
LISA C KRILEY 1266 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JODIE L SWANSON 1268 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
PAUL GREGORY RUBIN 1271 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
STEPHEN GRAY & KRISTINE FERREIRA 1273 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
VIRGIL L & MIRIAM MERRILL 1276 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
TERRY K SMITH & EILEEN NAUGHTON 1276 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
BRIAN P DANG 1280 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JASON ALBINO & CARI LYNN NICHOLSON 1284 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JEFFERY C & NICOLE R BECK 1315 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
NICHOLAS W & JODI L NORRIS 1319 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MARC KORBULY 1321 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ANDERSEN, KAI A & ILENE S; TRS 1323 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
DAVID & DENA DEBRY 1324 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RYAN S & BETH A STUTSMAN 1324 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CHRISTINA & JEREMY FALK 1327 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
LOUIS W PITT 1330 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WILLIAM C & JOANN HANSON 1332 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
HECTOR JR & MARLENE SUAREZ 1371 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
1175 MILTON LLC 14029 S 8TH PL PHOENIX AZ 85048
JACKIE & PAUL EDGCOMB 1405 US HIGHWAY 130 HIGHTSTOWN NJ 08520
M. KEITH & ELLIE D. PENDLETON 1514 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
EMOND, ABRAHAM M & HEUSCHER, SONJA A 1515 SCENIC LOOP FAIRBANKS AK 99709
MATTHEW A BARRAZA & RICHARD ANTHONY MILLER 1520 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JULIE A STOUT 1535 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WILLIAM V & TAMARA RUESCH 1536 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WILFORD W WHITAKER & SUSAN ANN BOHNING 1537 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JEFFERY OLESEN 1541 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
LEANN KAMAU 1549 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ALBORZ GHANDEHARI 1550 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JIMMY KHUE NGO 1567 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
DNH REV TRUST 1570 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MICHAEL MIKE VARDAKIS 1573 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
BV 1300 EAST, LLC 1580 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
RICHARD ANDREW GODFREY & JOSEPH PIETRAFESA 1588 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CHRISTOPHER C LINDSEY & LAURA E GILCHRIST 1589 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
BLAKE & SUSANNA G KARRINGTON 1593‐1595 S 1200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MJRFT 1646 S DEVONSHIRE DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
W.J.H. PROPERTY, LLC 1694 E MILLBROOK RD MILLCREEK UT 84106
PARTH GANDHI 1809 E MICHIGAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
CLOVER ENTERPRISES, LLC 187 E DORCHESTER DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
SUGAR HOUSE PROJECT LLC 1943 BEAR HOLLOW DR PARK CITY UT 84098
MOUNTAIN SUNSHINE LLC 2466 S PROMONTORY DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
VINCENT & EUGENIA DREYER 2553 N CYPRESS WAY LEHI UT 84043
MARK ALDER 2779 E 2880 S MILLCREEK UT 84109
MIRIAM ELLIS 2883 E BELTON CIR SANDY UT 84093
ANTON BURTSEV & GANNA M SHESTAKOVA 3007 BARCLAY WAY ANN ARBOR MI 48105
STEPHEN A REGAN 3031 E MORNINGSIDE DR HOLLADAY UT 84124
KIMBERLY NORMAN & DALE W HARRELL JR 3166 S 2700 E MILLCREEK UT 84109
BENJAMIN M & MARY W WHEELER 4065 S EVELYN DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84124
HMTW INVESTMENT LLC 4088 W 1630 N LEHI UT 84043
LEHUA 1224, LLC 4115 NE 66TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97218
CAMASASLC, LLC 4275 PALOMINO CIR RENO NV 89519
JESSE J HEINEMAN & KIMBERLY S SHELDON 4512 GARDEN RD KNOXVILLE TN 37919
KOTA & ANASTASIA IKEDA 4666 MISSION AVE # 5 SAN DIEGO CA 92116
SUZANNE DOUTRE 4762 S NANILOA DR HOLLADAY UT 84117
RVM REV TR 5141 S EASTMOOR RD HOLLADAY UT 84117
INDY REVOCABLE TRUST 516 DAWSON RD AUSTIN TX 78704
HIRSCHEL ADLER PROPERTIES LLC 6 STILLWATER IRVINE CA 92603
TIMOTHY S & CAMILLE ALEXANDER 6127 SW NEVADA CT PORTLAND OR 97219
CLG LIV TR 6149 GLEN OAK ST LOS ANGELES CA 90068
JON K SIMONSEN & PHILLIP MOULTON 69 BRUCKNER BLVD APT 3 BRONX NY 10454
DAVID BODELL & TRISHA CALLELLA 8680 SHANNON RIVER CIR FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA 92708
DENNIS OWENS 921 S GREENWOOD TER SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
JOSE T & MARIA S TOFOLLA 962 W 200 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
PLATINUM CENTURY INVESTMENTS LLC 965 S MILITARY DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
MELROY & DONNA HARWARD 9928 S TREASURE CIR SOUTH JORDAN UT 84095
ELEANOR M MILLER PO BOX 521141 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
ALAN T & TINA M DROEGEMEIER PO BOX 526383 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
Current Occupant 1178 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1180 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1163 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1185 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1234 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1236 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1256 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1278 E EMERSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1498 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1219 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1245 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1249 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1265 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1205 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1511 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1515 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1315 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1170 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1192 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1196 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1175 E MILTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1208 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1216 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1224 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1213 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1219 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1229 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1273 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1542 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1558 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1560 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1241 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1202 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1206 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1242 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1252 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1258 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1266 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1568 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1578 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1595 S 1200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1256 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1592 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1226 E WOOD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1555 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1316 E KENSINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1312 E BRYAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Current Occupant 1581 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
Item E13
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE: December 7, 2021
RE: Columbus Street Alley North of Victory Road
PLNPCM2020-00564
MOTION 1 – close and defer
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 – continue
I move the council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 3 – close and adopt
I move the Council close the public hearing and adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 4 – close and reject
I move the Council close the public hearing and reject the ordinance.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:December 7, 2021
RE: Columbus Street Alley North of Victory Road
PLNPCM2020-00564
This item was originally scheduled for a briefing on November 16, 2021. However, due to time
constraints on that day, the briefing was postponed, and the public hearing was still set for December 7,
2021. That is why the briefing and public hearing are on the same day.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to vacate a north/south City-owned alley north of Victory
Road and adjacent to properties at 583, 585, 589, and 595 North Columbus Street, and 590 North Victory
Road as shown in the image below. The five properties have a total of four property owners, all of whom
signed a petition supportive of the alley vacation.
Properties adjacent to the alley are zoned R-2 (Single- and two-family residential district), and OS (Open
Space). The subject alley is approximately 150 feet long and total area is approximately 2,750 square feet.
An alley segment north of the subject alley was previously vacated, and the southern end of the alley
terminates at a UDOT right-of-way. The alley was recorded but undeveloped and exists only on paper. It is
unlikely the alley could ever be developed due to steep topography of the hillside on which it is located.
Planning staff recommended and the Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous positive
recommendation to the City Council for the alley vacation.
If approved by the City Council, the subject alley property would be vacated and incorporated into abutting
property owners’ parcels. Owners of the residential properties would not be charged for their ½ width
portions of the alley. The Open Space zoned parcel is privately owned, and that property owner would be
charged market value for the ½ width alley property abutting theirs.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: December 7, 2021
Set Date: November 16, 2021
Public Hearing: December 7, 2021
Potential Action: December 14, 2021
Page | 2
Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division
Goal of the briefing: To review the proposed alley closure, address questions Council Members may
have and prepare for a public hearing.
ADDITONAL INFORMATION
Alley vacation requests receive three phases of review, as outlined in section 14.52.030 Salt Lake City Code
(see pages 4-6 below). Those phases include an administrative determination of completeness; a public
hearing, including a recommendation from the Planning Commission; and a public hearing before the City
Council.
The Planning Commission staff report provides information relating to the following four key
considerations related to this alley vacation. A short description of each issue is provided below for
reference. Please see pages 3-4 of the Planning Commission staff report for full analysis of these issues.
1. Property Owner Consent
Section 14.52.030.A.1 Salt Lake City Code states “the petition must bear the signatures of no less
than seventy five percent (75%) of the neighbors owning property which abuse the subject alley
property.” As noted above, all four abutting property owners signed the petition supporting the
alley vacation.
Page | 3
2.Creation/History of the Alley and Disposition if Vacated
The City Surveyor found the subject alley was not dedicated through the usual subdivision process.
Rather, it was dedicated as a public right-of-way through the original platting of the city.
As stated above, if the alley vacation is approved by the City Council, residential property owners
would not be charged for the alley abutting their property. The Open Space property owner would
be charged fair market value for the abutting alley property. The method of disposition is included
in Chapter 14.52.040.C Salt Lake City Code below.
3.Existence of the Alley
The alley was platted but exists only on paper. Planning staff noted “While the history is not clear,
it is possible that there may not have been an intent to actually establish an alley in this location.
Given the angle of slope coming off of Victory Road, a UDOT road, it is also likely that if an alley
was planned, it was never built due to the physical constraints of the property grade.”
4.Future Public Uses of the Alley
It is Planning staff’s belief there is no viable future use for the subject alley. No City department
identified potential public uses and did not raise any objections to the alley vacation.
Attachment E (pages 14-16 of the Planning Commission staff report) is an analysis of factors City Code requires
the Planning Commission to consider for alley vacations (Section 14.52.030 B Salt Lake City Code). In addition
to the information above, other factors are summarized below. Planning staff found the proposed alley vacation
complies with all eight factors below. For the complete analysis, please refer to the staff report.
City Code required analysis: The City Police Department, Fire Department, Transportation Division
and all other relevant City departments and divisions have no reasonable objection to the proposed
disposition of the property.
Finding: Complies. No City department raised objection to the alley vacation.
City Code required analysis: The petition meets at least one of the policy considerations for closure,
vacation or abandonment of City owned alleys (Lack of Use, Public Safety, Urban Design, Community
Purpose).
Finding: Complies. Planning staff determined the proposed alley vacation satisfies the Lack of Use
policy consideration.
City Code required analysis: The petition must not deny sole access or required off-street parking to
any adjacent property.
Finding: Complies. Vacating the alley would not impact parking or access to any property.
City Code required analysis: The petition will not result in any property being landlocked.
Finding: Complies. No property would be landlocked as a result of this alley vacation request.
City Code required analysis: The disposition of the alley property will not result in a use which is
otherwise contrary to the policies of the City, including applicable master plans and other adopted
statements of policy which address, but which are not limited to, mid-block walkways, pedestrian paths,
trails, and alternative transportation uses.
Finding: Complies. Vacating the subject alley will not create or result in any use that is contrary to City
policies. There is no use for the alley and it likely could never be built due to site constraints.
Page | 4
City Code required analysis: No opposing abutting property owner intends to build a garage
requiring access from the property, or has made application for a building permit, or if such a permit has
been issued, construction has been completed within 12 months of issuance of the building permit.
Finding: Complies. No abutting property owner opposed the alley vacation and no building permit
applications have been submitted.
City Code required analysis: The petition furthers the City preference for disposing of an entire
alley, rather than a small segment of it.
Finding: Complies. The request is to close a remaining alley segment. A continuation of the alley to the
north was previously vacated, though the City Surveyor was not able to determine when that occurred.
The remaining alley segment would be considered an “entire alley” and as such meets this factor.
City Code required analysis: The alley property is not necessary for actual or potential rear access to
residences or for accessory uses.
Finding: Complies. None of the properties abutting the subject alley use it for rear access.
PUBLIC PROCESS
August 10, 2020-Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Capitol Hill Neighborhood
Council Chair.
August 11, 2020-Early notification announcement sent to residents and owners within 300 feet of the
subject alley. The notice included information about how to provide public comment.
May 13, 2021-
Public hearing notice mailed
Public hearing notice signs posted on property
Public notice posted on City and State websites, and Planning Division listserv.
May 26, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. There were no comments at the hearing. The
Commission closed the hearing and voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City
Council.
The process for closing or vacating a City-owned alley is outlined in Section 14.52 Salt Lake City Code.
14.52.010: DISPOSITION OF CITY'S PROPERTY INTEREST IN ALLEYS:
The city supports the legal disposition of Salt Lake City's real property interests, in whole or in part,
with regard to city owned alleys, subject to the substantive and procedural requirements set forth
herein.
14.52.020: POLICY CONSIDERATIONS FOR CLOSURE, VACATION OR
ABANDONMENT OF CITY OWNED ALLEYS:
The city will not consider disposing of its interest in an alley, in whole or in part, unless it receives a
petition in writing which demonstrates that the disposition satisfies at least one of the following
policy considerations:
A. Lack Of Use: The city's legal interest in the property appears of record or is reflected on an
applicable plat; however, it is evident from an onsite inspection that the alley does not
physically exist or has been materially blocked in a way that renders it unusable as a public
right of way;
Page | 5
B. Public Safety: The existence of the alley is substantially contributing to crime, unlawful
activity, unsafe conditions, public health problems, or blight in the surrounding area;
C. Urban Design: The continuation of the alley does not serve as a positive urban design element;
or
D. Community Purpose: The petitioners are proposing to restrict the general public from use of
the alley in favor of a community use, such as a neighborhood play area or garden. (Ord. 24-02
§ 1, 2002)
14.52.030: PROCESSING PETITIONS:
There will be three (3) phases for processing petitions to dispose of city owned alleys under this
section. Those phases include an administrative determination of completeness; a public hearing,
including a recommendation from the Planning Commission; and a public hearing before the City
Council.
A. Administrative Determination Of Completeness: The city administration will determine whether
or not the petition is complete according to the following requirements:
1. The petition must bear the signatures of no less than seventy five percent (75%) of the
neighbors owning property which abuts the subject alley property;
2. The petition must identify which policy considerations discussed above support the petition;
3. The petition must affirm that written notice has been given to all owners of property located in
the block or blocks within which the subject alley property is located;
4. A signed statement that the applicant has met with and explained the proposal to the
appropriate community organization entitled to receive notice pursuant to title 2, chapter 2.60
of this code; and
5. The appropriate city processing fee shown on the Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule has
been paid.
B. Public Hearing and Recommendation From The Planning Commission: Upon receipt of a
complete petition, a public hearing shall be scheduled before the planning commission to
consider the proposed disposition of the city owned alley property. Following the conclusion of
the public hearing, the planning commission shall make a report and recommendation to the
city council on the proposed disposition of the subject alley property. A positive
recommendation should include an analysis of the following factors:
1. The city police department, fire department, transportation division, and all other relevant city
departments and divisions have no reasonable objection to the proposed disposition of the
property;
2. The petition meets at least one of the policy considerations stated above;
3. Granting the petition will not deny sole access or required off street parking to any property
adjacent to the alley;
4. Granting the petition will not result in any property being landlocked;
5. Granting the petition will not result in a use of the alley property which is otherwise contrary
to the policies of the city, including applicable master plans and other adopted statements of
Page | 6
policy which address, but which are not limited to, mid-block walkways, pedestrian paths,
trails, and alternative transportation uses;
6. No opposing abutting property owner intends to build a garage requiring access from the
property, or has made application for a building permit, or if such a permit has been issued,
construction has been completed within twelve (12) months of issuance of the building permit;
7. The petition furthers the city preference for disposing of an entire alley, rather than a small
segment of it; and
8. The alley property is not necessary for actual or potential rear access to residences or for
accessory uses.
C. Public Hearing Before The City Council: Upon receipt of the report and recommendation from
the planning commission, the city council will consider the proposed petition for disposition of
the subject alley property. After a public hearing to consider the matter, the city council will
make a decision on the proposed petition based upon the factors identified above. (Ord. 58-13,
2013: Ord. 24-11, 2011)
14.52.040: METHOD OF DISPOSITION:
If the city council grants the petition, the city owned alley property will be disposed of as follows:
A. Low Density Residential Areas: If the alley property abuts properties which are zoned for low
density residential use, the alley will merely be vacated. For the purposes of this section, "low
density residential use" shall mean properties which are zoned for single-family, duplex or twin
home residential uses.
B. High Density Residential Properties And Other Nonresidential Properties: If the alley abuts
properties which are zoned for high density residential use or other nonresidential uses, the
alley will be closed and abandoned, subject to payment to the city of the fair market value of
that alley property, based upon the value added to the abutting properties.
C. Mixed Zoning: If an alley abuts both low density residential properties and either high density
residential properties or nonresidential properties, those portions which abut the low density
residential properties shall be vacated, and the remainder shall be closed, abandoned and sold
for fair market value. (Ord. 24-02 § 1, 2002)
14.52.050: PETITION FOR REVIEW:
Any party aggrieved by the decision of the city council as to the disposition of city owned alley
property may file a petition for review of that decision within thirty (30) days after the city council's
decision becomes final, in the 3rd district court.
Planning Commission
Location and Zoning
Planning Commission
Aerial View of Platted Alley
Planning Commission
Physical Condition of the Alley
Planning Commission
Physical Condition of the Alley
________________
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
Date Received:
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council:
09/24/2021
09/28/2021
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE:
Amy Fowler, Chair
September 24, 2021
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
SUBJECT: Columbus Street Alley Vacation North of Victory Road
STAFF CONTACT: David J. Gellner, AICP, Senior Planner, david.gellner@slcgov.com
(385) 226-3860
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve an Ordinance to vacate the alley.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Nicholas Kanaan, a property owner at 585 N. Columbus Street
and James Carr, a property owner at 583 N. Columbus Street are co-petitioners asking to vacate
an approximately 150-foot long section of platted alley adjacent to their respective properties. The
recorded but completely undeveloped alley segment runs north-south of Victory Road and abuts a
total of five (5) properties owned by four (4) different property owners. The continuation of the
alley to the north of this segment was previously vacated. The proposal is to vacate this remaining
alley segment and incorporate the vacant land into the neighboring properties. The total area of the
proposed vacation is approximately 2750 square feet.
The platted alley is highlighted on the aerial photo below. The alley starts north of the UDOT
right-of-way on Victory Road and runs approximately 150 feet to the north. The applicant’s
reason for the request is based on the alley being platted but never having been developed. The
area is filled with tall weeds and the alley could likely never be developed based on the steep
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
Lisa Shaffer (Sep 24, 2021 12:24 MDT)
topography. The applicant asserts that there are no potential future uses for the alley and no
reason to keep it in place.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Chair of the Capitol Hill
Neighborhood Council on August 10, 2020.
• Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property
owners located within 300 feet of the project site on August 11, 2020 providing notice
about the project and information on how to give public input on the project.
• No formal comments were submitted by the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Council.
• No public comments were submitted in relation to this proposal.
• A Planning Commission Public Hearing was held on May 26, 2021.
• The Commission also voted unanimously to forward a Positive recommendation to City
Council for the alley vacation.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of May 26, 2021 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of May 26, 2021 (Click to Access)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of May 26, 2021 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1. Project Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. of 2021
(Vacating a city-owned alley situated adjacent to properties located at
583, 585, 589 and 595 North Columbus Street; and; 590 North Victory Road)
An ordinance vacating an unnamed city-owned alley adjacent to properties located at
583, 585, 589 and 595 North Columbus Street; and; 590 North Victory Road, pursuant to
Petition No. PLNPCM2020-00564.
WHEREAS, Nicholas Kanaan, owner of 585 North Columbus Street filed a written
petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2020-00564, to vacate a city-owned alley situated
between properties 583, 585, 589 and 595 North Columbus Street and 590 North Victory Road
and as more particularly described in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and incorporated by
reference ; and
WHEREAS, the neighboring property owners of 605 North Ensign Street, 589 North
Columbus Street, and 583 North Columbus Street reviewed and also designated in writing their
approval of the petition; and
WHEREAS, the petition demonstrates that the alley does not physically exist despite the
and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 26,
2021, to consider the petition; and
WHEREAS, at its May 26, 2021 meeting, the planning commission following the public
hearing and discussion voted in favor of forwarding a recommendation of approval on the
petition to the Salt Lake City Council ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after holding a public hearing on this matter, that
there is good cause to vacate the alley and that vacating the alley will not materially injure the
public interest or any person.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Vacating City-Owned Alley. That an unnamed, city-owned alley adjacent
to properties located at 583, 585, 589 and 595 North Columbus Street; and; 590 North Victory
Road, which is the subject of Petition No. PLNPCM2020-00564, and which is more particularly
vacated and declared not presently
necessary or available for public use.
SECTION 2. Reservations and Disclaimers. The vacation is expressly made subject to
all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every description now
located on and under or over the confines of this property, and also subject to the rights of entry
thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or rerouting said utilities,
o any existing rights-
of-way or easements of private third parties.
SECTION 3. Conditions. This vacation is conditioned upon the following:
1) The proposed method of disposition of the alley property shall be consistent with the
the Salt Lake City Code,
and all other applicable laws; and
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder. The city recorder is
instructed not to publish or record this ordinance until the conditions identified above have been
met real property manager.
,
SECTION 5. Time. If the conditions identified above have not been met within one year
after adoption, this ordinance shall become null and void. The city council may, for good cause
shown, by resolution, extend the time period for satisfying the conditions identified above.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of
, 2021.
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on .
Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed.
MAYOR
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. of 2021
Published: .
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City
Date:_7__/2/_2_02_1
By:
Hannah Vickery, Senior City Attorney
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal description of the city-owned
alley to be vacated:
A portion of a 20.00 foot wide alleyway located within Block 15, Plat "J", Salt Lake City Survey, Salt Lake
Base & Meridian; Being described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest corner of lot 17, Block 15, Plat "J" Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence
South 00°00'47" East 150.00 feet, more or less along the east line of an existing alleyway to a point on
the Northerly right of way line of Victory Road; thence North 38°37'47" West 32.05 feet along said right
of way line to a point on the west line of an existing alleyway; thence North 00°00'47" West 124.96 feet
along said west line of alleyway; thence North 89°59'13" East 20.00 feet to the point of beginning.
The above described parcel contains 2,750 square feet or 0.06 acre, more or less.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Project Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
1. Project Chronology
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
PETITION: PLNPCM2020-00564 - Columbus Street Alley Vacation North
of Victory Road
July 27, 2020 Petition for the alley vacation received by the Salt Lake City
Planning Division
August 3, 2020 Petition assigned to David Gellner, Principal Planner, for staff
analysis and processing.
August 10, 2020 Information about the proposal was sent to the Chair of the Capitol
Hill Neighborhood Council in order to solicit public comments and
start the 45-day Recognized Organization input and comment
period.
August 11, 2020 Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all
residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project
site providing information about the proposal and how to give
public input on the project.
September 28, 2020 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations
ended. No formal comments were submitted to staff by the
recognized organizations to date related to this proposal.
May 13, 2021 Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the
Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting of May
26, 2021. Public hearing notice mailed.
May 13, 2021 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of
the Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the
property.
May 26, 2021 The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on May 26, 2021.
The Commission voted unanimously to forward a Positive
recommendation to City Council for the proposed alley vacation.
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2020-00564 - Columbus Street
Alley Vacation North of Victory Road – Nicholas Kanaan, a property owner at 585 N. Columbus
Street and James Carr, a property owner at 583 N. Columbus Street are co -petitioners asking to
vacate an approximately 150-foot long section of platted alley adjacent to their respective
properties. The recorded but completely undeveloped alley segment runs north-south of Victory
Road and abuts a total of five (5) properties owned by four (4) different property owners. The
platted alley north of this appears to have been previously vacated. The proposal is to vacate this
remaining alley segment and incorporate the vacant land into the neighboring properties. The
total area of the proposed vacation is approximately 2750 square feet. The subject alley is located
within Council District 3, represented by Chris Wharton. (Staff contact: David J. Gellner at (385 -
226-3860 or david.gellner@slcgov.com )
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive
comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City
Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held
electronically:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Emergency
Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). Please visit
https://www.slc.gov/council/news/featured-news/virtually-attend-city-
council-meetings/ to learn how you can share your comments live during
electronic City Council meetings. If you would like to provide feedback or
comment, via email or phone, please contact us at: 801-535-7654 (24-
Hour comment line) or by email at: council.comments@slcgov.com .
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call
David Gellner at 385-226-3860 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday or via e-mail at david.gellner@slcgov.com
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least
two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.(P 19-19)
3. Original Petition
,,,
S:lgnatnreh&e
The previous Alley Vacation / Closure Request document was reviewed and
approved by all parties who own land adjacent to the proposed alley vacation/
closure request
The alley is located on a steep sloping hill side that is currently fallow with weeds
and grasses overgrowing it and unused. Due to the steep topography, this alley is
completely unusable and cannot be accessed by a vehicle safely. The alley has never
been in use, and does nothave potential for future use. There are no city structures
or improvements on the alley, and as such it seems there is no utility to keeping this
small plot of land as an alley any longer.
The alley is located off of Victory Road between Ensign St and Columbus St and has
width of 20', length on West of127.5', length on East of 150', and a total area of
2612.5 square feet (please see attached SIDWELL and PLAT maps.
Keri HoUand t,,fV r.alumbus 101-023
First Name Last Name n Date Address Parcel
• I
l ---sss""fJ.Colµalbus St. 7 I 60 Norris & G Yaldine
11 1031 Gary bd Family
l'I
T""
589 N. Columbus St.
6 17 Keri Holland 0
1 101023 LO
585 N. Columbus St. 18 DocProperties 0
Nicholas Kanaan LO
101024 7- 583 N. Columbus St.
9p.t.
19 James & Debbie Carr 0
101025 LO
20 0
I . - ,..
I ,
Aney Vacation/ Closure Request
ID
101026
1
1...,
20' Wide, 127.S "!a_ t Length, 150' East Length
1 0
101027 LO
0
LO 7 102012
0
LO 6
0
LO 5
102013
I
l
102014
I l ·,
I
'
g 4 102015
I
J
i
!
0
LO 3 102016
I
0
LO 2 10201i
g
.. ..
..
..
1,•• ..,-
[... .
t'
-- .......................
--
l '
.• .t :,,
- . ..-
i I
...10
.-.-
I ' -
...
I • -,
I-
< 'I •
.•• u II.
--
" >-
• " UI ·>-
I :::,
'·,"4'-
I '
.•.• -I-
I •
,w
t I "'-'
'G!Llk'--........
....-:,.-n.-•.,.·....-...-..
-•Id...
W 1/2 NW 1/4 Sec 31 TIN RIE
SALT LAKECOlJNTY. UTAH
09-31-11
_ ,_a:
.
.
\.
1-._
'(,·
.
t"'cor i , .., ti
4. Mailing List
OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR OWN_CITY OWN_STATE OWN_ZIP
MARK R MILLIGAN; JENNIFER M MILLIGAN (JT) 580 N WESTCAPITOL ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
MARTIN I STEINBERG; MARGARET CHANDLER (JT) 576 N WESTCAPITOL ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
AMELIA K MATHISON 42 W GIRARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 36 W GIRARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
CAPITOL VIEW PROPERTIES, LLC 1559 W 3860 S WEST VALLEY UT 84119
599 NORTH DARWIN, LLC 672 E UNION SQ SANDY UT 84070
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 579 N DARWIN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
ED ISABELLE 30 W GIRARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
KELLI A FRAME 28 W GIRARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
STEVEN B BOYINGTON; STUART N STONE (JT) 633 N VICTORY RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
RALPH W PATTERSON; JODI A PATTERSON (JT) 554 N WESTCAPITOL ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
ZAFFIRO PROPERTIES LLC 141 ASPEN DALE WY SW CALGARY, ALBE TA T3H0R
GIRARD PROPERTIES UT, LLC 65 W 700 N BOUNTIFUL UT 84010
NORRIS W FAMILY GOOLD; TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 595 N COLUMBUS ST # B SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
CHRISTOPHER LEE 655 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
651 COLUMBUS, LLC 651 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
KERI LYNNE HOLLAND 589 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
DOCPROPERTIES, LLC 585 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
DEBBIE A CARR; JAMES A CARR (JT) 583 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
S REV TRUST 1169 E 5290 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117
SHAWN CLAY; CORIN J CLAY (JT) 563 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
DANIEL A HERSHKOWITZ; ALYSSA M HERSHKOWITZ (JT) 135 S LAKE MERCED HILL SAN FRANCISCO CA 94132
MARK T WOOD 12861 VIAVISTA DEL PASADO ORO VALLEY AZ 85755
GALEN C BAGLEY; LESLEY H BAGLEY (JT) 642 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
FABERT PROPERTIES, LLC 6914 S 2160 W WEST JORDAN UT 84084
G WILKING PROPERTIES, LLC 1610 E DEAUVILLE AVE MURRAY UT 84121
ERIC J YOUSSEFI 612 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 2560 VIA ANITA PLS VRDS EST CA 90274
CLEMENS A LANDAU; JOANNA E LANDAU (JT) 600 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
KEVIN M MACK; HEIDI D RISTER (TC) 594 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
FOSTER/MAZZOLINI FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 12/18/2018 588 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
MATTHEW V WENNER; JODY L WENNER (JT) 582 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
PATRICIA C OGDEN; PATRICK R OGDEN (JT) 576 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
BRAEWICK, PROPERTIES LLC 142 E BRAEWICK RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
JOHN HOWA 564 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
MICHAEL S HATCH 617 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
FRED S IV EDWARDS 611 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
RICHARD M BROWN; SHEILA BROWN (JT) 605 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
ALAN L OKAWA; ALLISON OKI (JT) 599 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
LARRY L FRY; SHAWN E FRY (JT) 593 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
LAURA L ARELLANO 587 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
JOHN GEOFFREY FITZWILLIAM; MELANIE GALL FITZWILLIAM (JT) 581 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
RICHARD D OLSEN 575 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
CHARLES P MORGAN; PETER J MORGAN (JT) 571 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
STERLING S HOLDEN; MIA M HOLDEN (JT) 31 E GIRARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
AF RENT LLC 1361 E YALE AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 6852 S HOLLOW MILL DR COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84121
TANYA F BARRON 743 23RD ST APT 1F OGDEN UT 84401
LINDA SMITH‐HUNTER 1319 E 1700 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
WEST GIRARD APARTMENTS LLC PO BOX 712416 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84171
JEREMIAH P JOHNSON; DEBORAH L JOHNSON (JT) 1029 N MAIN ST FARMINGTON UT 84025
NICOLE CHRISTINE ZAATAR 3 W GIRARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
LELAND B SWANSON; JOANN B SWANSON (JT) 545 N DARWIN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 558 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
EJAELA2 LLC 548 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
DANIEL EYLAN; MI OLSZEWSKA (JT) 546 N COLUMBUS ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
TODD ANDREWS; CATHERINE OSBORNE (JT) 559 N DESOTO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
Current Occupant 660 N VICTORY RD Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 580 N WEST CAPITOL ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 578 N WEST CAPITOL ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 576 N WEST CAPITOL ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 610 N WEST CAPITOL ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 599 N DARWIN ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 620 N VICTORY RD Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 554 N WEST CAPITOL ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 49 W GIRARD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 57 W GIRARD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 665 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 605 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 600 N VICTORY RD Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 590 N VICTORY RD Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 605 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 599 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 573 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 595 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 611 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 613 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 623 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 559 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 636 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 632 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 608 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 570 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 617 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 611 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 605 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 599 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 593 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 587 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 581 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 575 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 571 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 635 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 631 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 616 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 614 N COLUMBUS ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 26 W GIRARD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 41 W GIRARD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 37 W GIRARD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84103
Current Occupant 559 N DE SOTO ST Salt Lake City UT 84103
Salt Lake City Planning ‐ David Gellner PO BOX 145480 Salt Lake City UT 84114
Item E10
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet
Policy Analyst
DATE:December 7, 2021
RE: Rezone: 835 S Redwood Road & 1668 W Indiana Avenue
from R-1/5,000 to R-MU-45 PLNPCM2021-00249
MOTION 1 – close and defer
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 – continue
I move the council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 3 – close and adopt
I move the Council close the public hearing and adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 4 – close and reject
I move the Council close the public hearing and reject the ordinance.
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: December 7, 2021
RE:Rezone: 835 S Redwood Road &
1668 W Indiana Avenue
from R-1/5,000 to R-MU-45
PLNPCM2021-00249
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Dec 7, 2021
Set Date: November 16, 2021
Public Hearing: Dec 7, 2021
Potential Action: Dec 7 or 14
2021
This item was originally scheduled for a briefing on November 16, 2021. However, due to time
constraints on that day, the briefing was postponed, and the public hearing was still set for December 7,
2021. That is why the briefing and public hearing are on the same day.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of properties at
approximately 835 South Redwood Road and 1668 West Indiana Avenue from R-1/5,000 (Single-Family
Residential District) to R-MU-45 (Residential/Mixed Use District). The property at 1668 West Indiana
currently contains an individual single-family dwelling while the other property is vacant. No specific site
development proposal has been submitted at this time. However, the applicant has indicated that if the
zoning change is approved, they intend to consolidate the parcels and develop a mixed use on the
combined property with ground floor commercial/retail and upper floor apartments.
The change is consistent with changes identified in the Westside Master Plan which identified the
intersection of Redwood and Indiana as the location of a future Community Node.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 9, 2021 and forwarded a positive
recommendation to the City Council by a majority vote of 4-2.
Page | 2
Vicinity and Zoning Map
(pages 2-3 of the Planning Commission Staff report)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Page | 3
Pages 3-6 of the Planning Commission staff reports includes a discussion about the key issues
identified by the Planning Staff. A short summary of those is provided below. See the Planning
Commission staff report to view the full analysis.
1. Neighborhood and City-Wide Master Plan Considerations
Planning Staff found the proposed change is generally in compliance with the Westside
Master Plan and vision for this intersection as a future Community Node. A community
Node is defined as:
o Community nodes are larger in scale than their neighborhood counterparts
because they generally offer retail and services that attract people from a
larger area. While some existing community nodes do not have residential
components, new developments at these locations should incorporate housing.
These nodes provide good opportunities to add density with multifamily
residential units. Densities should be on the order of 20 to 30 dwelling units
per acre with appropriate building forms to complement adjacent lower
density uses if necessary. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs), which are fully
separate dwelling units that are located on the same lot as the primary
residence, may be appropriate at community nodes. ADUs are an effective
way to increase density within the stable areas, especially with the
community’s deep single-family lots. Retailers such as grocery stores, clothing
stores or small professional offices are appropriate anchors for community
nodes. These nodes can also be anchored around or include institutional uses,
such as churches, schools or daycares. Community nodes should be
comfortable and safe for pedestrians and bicyclists while providing some off-
site parking that is located behind or to the side of the buildings. Developments
around these type of nodes should also be accessible to regular public
transportation service.”
Planning Staff found the proposed zoning map amendment and overall project is
aligned with the vision and guiding principles contained in Plan Salt Lake and are
supported by policies and strategies that encourage neighborhoods: that provide a safe
environment and opportunity for social interaction, provide people with choices about
where they live and support local businesses.
2. Change in Zoning and Compatibility with Adjacent Properties
Planning staff found given the location of the property and surrounding zoning, the
change in zoning from R-1/5000 to R-MU-45 on these properties would be appropriate
in the context of the area and would not lead to changes that are out of character or
incompatible with the existing development in the area.
The requested R-MU-45 zoning allows for commercial, multi-family and mixed uses
that are not allowed under the current zoning. Since the proposed zone abuts single
family residential zoning, the height limit in the R-MU-45 zoning district would be
strictly limited to 45-feet.
o There is not a process to exceed that height.
When abutting single or two-family zoning, a landscaping buffer of 10-feet would be
required.
Page | 4
The side yard setback would have to be increased one foot (1') for every one foot (1')
increase in height above thirty feet (30') on the subject property.
o The building may be stepped so taller portions of a building are farther away
from the side property line
3. Housing Mitigation Loss Requirements
If the properties are developed strictly for a commercial use without a residential
component, the removal of the existing dwelling would be subject to the provisions of
Chapter 18.97 – Mitigation of Residential Housing Loss of City Code.
o The applicant would have to pay a mitigation fee for removing the existing
housing unit.
o The application and process would be reviewed by the Housing Advisory and
Appeals Board (HAAB).
Note: The Council may wish to ask the Administration for a status update on potential
changes to the Housing Loss Mitigation program and Gentrification/Displacement
study.
4. Consideration of Alternate Zoning Districts
Planning Staff considered and analyzed different zoning districts for the property,
including; Corridor Commercial, Residential Mixed Used-35. But ultimately supported
the applicant’s request for R-MU-45.
PUBLIC PROCESS
The public process is outlined on page two of the transmittal letter. It met the standard requirements
of noticing surrounding property owners, informing the Community Council and a public hearing at
the Planning Commission.
No formal comments have been submitted, nor objections raised in regard to the proposed changes.
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE:
Amy Fowler, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Redwood Road and Indiana Avenue Zoning Map Amendment
STAFF CONTACT: David J. Gellner, AICP, Senior Planner, david.gellner@slcgov.com
(385) 226-3860
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve an Ordinance to amend the zoning map for the subject properties,
changing them from R-1/5000 (Single-Family Residential) to R-MU-45 (Residential/Mixed
Use).
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Property owner Khiem Tran requesting that the City amend
the zoning map for two (2) properties located at 835 S Redwood Road and 1668 W Indiana Avenue
respectively. The property at 1668 W Indiana currently contains an individual single-family
dwelling while the other property is vacant. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning map
designation of the property from R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential) to R-MU-45
(Residential/Mixed Use). No specific site development proposal has been submitted at this time.
The change is consistent with changes identified in the Westside Master Plan which identified the
intersection of Redwood and Indiana as the location of a future Community Node. The Master
Plan is not being changed.
The subject properties are highlighted on the zoning map/aerial photo below.
October 18, 2021
Lisa Shaffer (Oct 19, 2021 16:00 MDT)
10/19/2021
10/19/2021
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Chair of the Poplar Grove
Community Council on March 25, 2021.
• Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property
owners located within 300 feet of the project site on March 25, 2021 providing notice
about the project and information on how to give public input on the project.
• Staff hosted an online Open House to solicit public comments on the proposal. The
Online Open House period started on March 29, 2021 and ended on May 10, 2021.
• No formal comments were submitted by the Poplar Grove Community Council.
• No public comments were submitted in relation to this proposal.
• A Planning Commission Public Hearing was held on June 9, 2021. By a majority vote of
4-2, the Planning Commission forwarded a Positive recommendation to City Council for
the proposed zoning map change.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of June 9, 2021 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of June 9, 2021 (Click to Access)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of June 9, 2021 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1. Project Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2021
(Amending the zoning of the properties located at approximately 835 South Redwood Road and
1668 West Indiana Avenue from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to R-MU-45
Residential/Mixed Use District.)
An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to the properties located at 835 South
Redwood Road and 1668 West Indiana Avenue from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential
District to R-MU-45 Residential/Mixed Use District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-
00249.
WHEREAS, the property owner, Khiem Tran, submitted a petition number
PLNPCM2021-00249 (the rezone petition ) to rezone the properties located at 835 South
Redwood Road and 1668 West Indiana Avenue (Tax ID Nos. 15-10-205-016 and 15-10-205-
017, respectively -1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to R-
MU-45 Residential/Mixed Use District; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the underlying R-1/7,000 and R-1/5,000 zoning, the parcels are
further zoned with an overlay zoning designation of Airport Flight Path Protection Overlay; and
WHEREAS, at its June 9, 2021 meeting, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a
public hearing, had discussion, and voted to forward a recommendation of approval to the Salt
Lake City Council (the City Council ) on the rezone petition; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that
adopting this ordinance to amend the Salt Lake City zoning map to change the underlying zoning
as set forth herein ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to retain the overlay designation of the Airport Flight
Path Protection Overlay, and, nothing contained herein should be construed to remove that existing
designation.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted
by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and
hereby is amended to reflect that the Properties located at 835 South Redwood Road and 1668
West Indiana Avenue, more particularly described and
incorporated by reference shall be and hereby are rezoned from R-1/5000 Single-Family
Residential District to R-MU-45 Residential/Mixed Use District.
SECTION 2.Effective Date. This Ordinance take effect immediately after it has been published
in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-713
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________,
2021.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 20___.
Published: ______________.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Hannah Vickery,Senior City Attorney
6/17/2021
Legal Description for the Properties to be Rezoned:
Address: 835 South Redwood Road
Tax ID No. 15-10-205-016
LOT 2, TRAN SUBDIVISION
Contains 5,663 sq feet or 0.13 acres more or less.
Address: 1668 West Indiana Avenue
Tax ID No. 15-10-205-017
LOT 1, TRAN SUBDIVISION
Contains 6,432 sq feet or 0.1456 acres more or less.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Project Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3. Original Petition
4. Mailing List
1. Project Chronology
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
PETITION: PLNPCM2021-00249 - Redwood Road & Indiana Avenue
Zoning Map Amendment
March 22, 2021 Petition for the zoning map amendment received by the Salt Lake
City Planning Division
March 23, 2021 Petition assigned to David Gellner, Principal Planner, for staff
analysis and processing.
March 25, 2021 Information about the proposal was sent to the Chair of the Poplar
Grove Community Council in order to solicit public comments and
start the 45-day Recognized Organization input and comment
period.
March 25, 2021 Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all
residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project
site providing information about the proposal and how to give
public input on the project.
March 29, 2021 Staff hosted an online Open House to solicit public comments on
the proposal. The Online Open House period started on March 29,
2021 and ended on May 10, 2021.
May 10, 2021 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations
ended. No formal comments were submitted to staff by the
recognized organizations to date related to this proposal.
May 27, 2021 Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the
Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting of May
26, 2021. Public hearing notice mailed.
May 27, 2021 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of
the Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the
properties.
May 27, 2021 The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on June 9, 2021.
By a majority vote of 4-2, the Planning Commission forwarded a
Positive recommendation to City Council for the proposed zoning
map change.
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00249 – Zoning Map
Amendment at Redwood Road & Indiana Avenue – Khiem Tran, the property owner is requesting
that the City amend the zoning map for two (2) properties located at 835 S Redwood Road and
1668 W Indiana Avenue respectively. The property at 1668 W Indiana currently contains an
individual single-family dwelling while the other property is vacant. The applicant is requesting
to change the zoning map designation of the property from R-1/5,000 (Single-Family
Residential) to R-MU-45 (Residential/Mixed Use). No specific site development proposal has
been submitted at this time. The change is consi stent with changes identified in the Westside
Master Plan which identified the intersection of Redwood and Indiana as the location of a future
Community Node. The Master Plan is not being changed. The property is located within Council
District 2, represented by Dennis Faris. (Staff contact: David J. Gellner at (385) 226 -3860 or
david.gellner@slcgov.com )
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive
comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City
Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held
electronically:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Emergency
Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). Please visit
https://www.slc.gov/council/news/featured-news/virtually-attend-city-
council-meetings/ to learn how you can share your comments live during
electronic City Council meetings. If you would like to provide feedback or
comment, via email or phone, please contact us at: 801-535-7654 (24-
Hour comment line) or by email at: council.comments@slcgov.com .
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call
David Gellner at 385-226-3860 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday or via e-mail at david.gellner@slcgov.com
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least
two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.(P 19-19)
3. Original Petition
Zoning Map Amendment - Khiem Tran
Date:
Mar. 18, 2021
Project Description
A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment.
The Westside community identified several existing and potential community nodes
during outreach and engagement activities. Some nodes were clearly popular choices:
Redwood Road at Indiana Avenue is an example of a potential node that was
mentioned.
The two properties that have Parcel #15102050160000 and 15102050170000 located
at 835 S Redwood Road and 1668 W Indiana Avenue Salt Lake City, UT, 84104,
respectively, are currently zoned as R-1/5000 (single-family residential), and I propose
to change the zone to RMU-45.
A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned.
My buildings would support the Westside Master Plan, which designates the
intersection of Redwood Road and Indiana Avenue as a "Community Node". Rezoning
the property to RMU-45 would allow me to build a complex that supports multi-family
apartments and commercial/retail business rather than two single-family homes.
Specifically, the ground level of the buildings would be for commercial/retail business.
The upper levels would be multi-family apartments. Each floor would have three to four
apartments, with either two or three bedrooms and approximately 1200-1400 square
feet per apartment. This would promote the desired reinvestment and redevelopment
that the Westside Master Plan describes. This location would be appealing to families
with easy access to Salt Lake City and the freeway.
These buildings would promote reinvestment and redevelopment in the Westside
community through changes in land use, improved public infrastructure, and community
investment. Businesses such as grocery stores, clothing stores, fast food and sit-down
restaurants, and offices would be convenient for both the nearby single-family homes,
multi-family residents, and the nearby industrial employees.
The Westside Master Plan emphasizes the need to "maximize use of property”.
Allowing property owners at the identified community nodes to take full advantage of
their properties to add density and commercial intensity to the area will be the best use
for the property and its community. A certain percentage of residential development
should be required for developments over a certain size, and the density benchmarks
should be between 25 to 50 dwelling units per acre. Developers should be encouraged
to aim for three to four stories in height, provided appropriate buffering and landscaping
can make the new development compatible with any surrounding single-family
development.
List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area.
1 - The other three corners at the intersection of Redwood Road and Indiana Ave. are
currently zoned for commercial use. The northwest and southwest corners are already
commercial buildings, and the large property adjacent to the property at the southeast
corner is also a commercial building, meaning that it would not be ideal to build two
single-family homes at the intersection.
2 - The intersection of Redwood Road and Indiana Ave. is one of the entrances to
downtown, so it needs to have an aesthetically-pleasing building to welcome people
downtown instead of two simple single-family homes.
3 - Multi-family dwelling units may require less land than a single-family home.
My proposal to rezone the properties will create a new look at the Redwood
Road at Indiana Avenue Community Node and also contribute a part to making the
Community Node more attractive to the community and also support the designations of
the Westside Master Plan’s expectations. Because of the reasons stated, my proposal
to rezone my properties will benefit the Community Node and its residents.
LEVEL 1 FLOOR
PLAN
LEVEL 2 ( T.O.
CMU WALL)
LEVEL 3 T.O.
FLOOR JOIST
STUCCO MORNING
MIST # 751 CLASSIC
FINISH BY BASF-
SENERGY
STUCCO MORNING MIST
# 751 CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO REVEAL
DARK GRAY
PARAPET CAP TO
MATCH WALL PANEL
STUCCO REVEAL
T.O. DECK
1
234
7
WINDOWCASEMENT/FIX
WINDOW
DECORATIVE
VERTICAL
ALUMINUM BARS
STUCCO BAND
HARRIER # 3094
CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO BAND
HARRIER # 3094
CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
5
2
6655
7
22
7 733 3
3336
7 7
3
2
3 3
T.O. FRAME
WINDOW EYEBROW,
TYP.
WINDOW
LEVEL 1 FLOOR
PLAN
100' -0"
LEVEL 2 ( T.O.
CMU WALL)
108' -8"
LEVEL 3 T.O.
FLOOR JOIST
119' -0"
CASEMENT/FIX
WINDOW
T.O. DECK
128' -11 1/2"
1 2 3 4
DECK COVERGLASS OVER
ALUMINUM
CANOPY
GLASS OVER
ALUMINUM CANOPY
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
LIGHT FIXTURE
DECORATIVE
VERTICAL ALUMINUM
BARS
LIGHT FIXTURE, TYP.
AC UNIT, TYP.
GUARDRAIL
1
111
1 1
111
4
A603
3
TYP.
T.O. FRAME
129'-11"
STUCCO MORNING MIST #
751 CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO MORNING
MIST # 751 CLASSIC
FINISH BY BASF-
SENERGY
DARK GRAY
PARAPET CAP TO
MATCH WALL PANEL
STUCCO BAND
HARRIER # 3094
CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO BAND HARRIER
# 3094 CLASSIC FINISH
BY BASF-SENERGY
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
STUCCO MORNING
MIST # 751 CLASSIC
FINISH BY BASF-
SENERGY
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
OR CONCRETE WALL
GLASS OVER
ALUMINUM CANOPY
3/16" = 1'-0"1
3/16" = 1'-0"2 FRONT ELEVATION (WEST)
BACK ELEVATION (EAST)
PROPOSAL 1: MIXED USE
DOOR DOORDOORSTOREFRONT STOREFRONTSTOREFRONTRETAIL 1 RETAIL 2 RETAIL 3
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONCEPT OF PROPERTY
AT 835 S REDWOOD RD. AND 1668 INDIANA AVE.
LEVEL 1 FLOOR
PLAN
LEVEL 2 ( T.O.
CMU WALL)
LEVEL 3 T.O.
FLOOR JOIST
STUCCO MORNING
MIST # 751 CLASSIC
FINISH BY BASF-
SENERGY
DOOR WITH
SIDELIGHT
STUCCO MORNING MIST
# 751 CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO REVEAL
DARK GRAY
PARAPET CAP TO
MATCH WALL PANEL
STUCCO REVEAL
T.O. DECK
1
234
7
WINDOW
4H"X8"WX16"L
ELBONY SPLITFACE
CMU BY AMCOR
GARAGE DOOR
COLOR DARK GRAY
DOOR WITH
SIDELIGHT
LIGHT FIXTURE,
TYP.
CASEMENT/FIX
WINDOW
DECORATIVE
VERTICAL
ALUMINUM BARS
STUCCO BAND
HARRIER # 3094
CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO BAND
HARRIER # 3094
CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
5
2
6655
7
22
7 733 3
3336
7 7
3
2
3 3
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
T.O. FRAME
WINDOW EYEBROW,
TYP.
WINDOW
GARAGE DOOR
COLOR DARK GRAY
GARAGE DOOR
COLOR DARK GRAY
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
OR CONCRETE WALL
LEVEL 1 FLOOR
PLAN
LEVEL 2 ( T.O.
CMU WALL)
LEVEL 3 T.O.
FLOOR JOIST
CASEMENT/FIX
WINDOW
T.O. DECK
1 2 3 4
MAIN BREAKER
AND METER PANEL
125 AMP, TYP.
LIGHT FIXTURE,
TYP.
DECK COVERGLASS OVER
ALUMINUM
CANOPY
GLASS OVER
ALUMINUM CANOPY
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
DOOR
LIGHT FIXTURE
DECORATIVE
VERTICAL ALUMINUM
BARS
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
LIGHT FIXTURE, TYP.
AC UNIT, TYP.
GAS METER,
TYP.
AC UNIT, TYP.
GUARDRAIL
1
111
1 1
111
4
A603
3
TYP.
T.O. FRAME
129'-11"
STUCCO MORNING MIST #
751 CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO MORNING
MIST # 751 CLASSIC
FINISH BY BASF-
SENERGY
DARK GRAY
PARAPET CAP TO
MATCH WALL PANEL
STUCCO BAND
HARRIER # 3094
CLASSIC FINISH BY
BASF-SENERGY
STUCCO BAND HARRIER
# 3094 CLASSIC FINISH
BY BASF-SENERGY
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
STUCCO MORNING
MIST # 751 CLASSIC
FINISH BY BASF-
SENERGY
4H"X8"WX16"L CMU
HONED COLOR
NATURAL, BY AMCOR
OR CONCRETE WALL
CORRUGATED DARK
GRAY METAL PANEL
SELECT BY OWNER
GLASS OVER
ALUMINUM CANOPY
3/16" = 1'-0"1
3/16" = 1'-0"2 FRONT ELEVATION (WEST)
BACK ELEVATION (EAST)
PROPOSAL 2: TOWNHOMES
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONCEPT OF PROPERTY
AT 835 S REDWOOD RD. AND 1668 INDIANA AVE.
4. Mailing List
OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR OWN_CITY OWN_STATE OWN_ZIPVU LINH CAO 1785 MAPLE HILLS DR. BOUNTIFULUT 84010RUSTED SPUR LLC 1717 S REDWOOD RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104SILVER ANTLER, LLC 1717 S REDWOOD RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104BKR HOLDINGS, LLC5845 CRESTRIDGE ROAD BILLINGS MT 59101GARY D TAYLOR 1676 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104THANH V TRAN TRUST 08/21/2017; HUONG T.M. LE TR 2852 W MATTERHORN DR TAYLORSVILLE UT 84129MARGARET VALERIO 1660 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104GUSTAVO CARRILLO; MELITZA MEJIA CENTENO 1652 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104BLAKE A BACKUS; JERALD J THOMPSON (JT) 1644 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104ROGELIO RODRIGUEZ 1675 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104THANH V TRAN TRUST 08/21/2017; HUONG T.M. LE TR 2852 W MATTERHORN DR TAYLORSVILLE UT 84129KENT V LIVINGSTON 1659 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104RANDY L BINGHAM; SERENA L BINGHAM 1651 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104RENE LEYVA 1643 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104RICHARD W YOUNG 1635 W 800 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104BRANDON PERRY 1656 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104BLUEMOUNTAIN INC 2441 S 1560 W WOODS CROSS UT 84087ANTONIO A FUENTES; MARIA R FUENTES (JT) 1644 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104MIKE NIELSON; KELLY E NIELSON (JT) 1638 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104KHIEM T TRAN; YEN TRAN (JT) 5830 S STONE BLUFF WY SALT LAKE CITY UT 84118D. AMY WILLIAMS 1657 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104D E WILLIAMS 1651 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104JAMES A LEROY; LISA M LEROY (JT) 1647 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104MARY ROBERTS 1639 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104HASIB ODOBASIC 6308 S TIMPANOGOS WY TAYLORSVILLE UT 84129APPLIED INSTALLATION AND ERECTION INC 875 S REDWOOD RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 148420 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114Current Occupant 836 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 762 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 1720 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 850 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 1668 W 800 S Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 811 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 1667 W 800 S Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 1648 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 835 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 1668 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104Current Occupant 1633 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104Salt Lake City Planning ‐ David GellnerPO BOX 145480 Salt Lake City UT 84114
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Allison Rowland
Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:November 16, 2021
RE: INFORMATIONAL: HEALTH CARE INNOVATION BLUEPRINT
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has been working to develop and refine a “blueprint” for supporting
businesses in the health care innovation sector, as well as students who may be encouraged to
pursue careers in this sector through internships and other opportunities. A Blueprint for
Growing Salt Lake City’s Health Care Innovation Economy is the product of work by the
Gardener Policy Institute with 20 local stakeholders drawn from economic development and
health care innovation, including Council Member Dan Dugan and two City department directors
(Blake Thomas and Danny Walz), who met for five discussions over the spring and summer of
2021. Since then, according to the transmittal, the Gardener Institute and City Department of
Economic Development (DED) staff have met with other organizations and requested feedback on
the ideas and draft recommendations in the Blueprint. While this briefing is informational only,
the Administration is asking for Council guidance on this work, as this could be considered a
midpoint in this process, analogous to the Council’s master plan check-in process. Full
implementation of the Blueprint may require Council approval of new ongoing City budget
expenses or zoning changes in coming years.
In summary, the reasoning behind this new City initiative is as follows:
-The Department of Economic Development (DED) is already working through the
Mayor’s Tech Lake City initiative and the State’s Biohive initiative to connect and
promote the growing presence of health care innovation firms in the SLC area.
-Jobs in the health care innovation sector are characterized as offering higher-than-
average wages and multiple entry points at different salary levels, in addition to
opportunities for internships and apprenticeships for high school and college
students.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: November 16, 2021
Set Date: n/a
Public Hearing: n/a
Potential Action: n/a
Page | 2
-Through the Tech Lake City initiative, the Administration wishes to help provide
better access to City residents from underserved and diverse communities to
apprenticeships and internships that can lead to high-paying jobs.
-The focus on health care innovation forms part of the Administration’s shift to a
“more proactive” and “people-centered” approach to the City’s economic
development.
Goal of the briefing: Review and provide guidance on the Blueprint for Growing Salt Lake
City’s Health Care Innovation Economy.
ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A.Blueprint Recommendations. The recommendations in the Blueprint are summarized
below.
1. Brand, Promote, & Grow
Build global brand
Increase awareness of job opportunities
Highlight successes
2. Increase Investment
Maximize industry partnership
Capitalize on private capital
Target social impact investments
3. Emphasize Pathways & Partnerships
Create education-to-workforce partnerships
Connect pathways to education and employment
Identify alternative pathways to education and employment
4. Strengthen Foundation & Remove Barriers
Create a baseline
Reduce business barriers (review City regulations and zoning)
Inventory R&D opportunities
Ensure lab and office space is available
The Blueprint does not define which of these activities are foreseen as exclusive
responsibilities of the City, and which would involve partnerships with organizations outside
the City. In response to a staff question, DED stated,
“Most of this is done through partnerships and convening. The most
strategic consideration for the City as it pertains to potential Council
action will be the ‘strengthen foundation’ category. The council has already
heard the proposed zoning changes as an early example.”
See Policy Question F for more on the topic of role clarity for the future.
Page | 3
B.Potential Funding Requests. DED stated that City funding and other City resources may
be requested through the annual budget process to implement aspects of the Blueprint.
Examples they included the following:
●“Ongoing support for the BioHive may be a consideration the
administration might recommend to the Council
●Staff time to coordinate initiatives and convene partners around
recommended priorities in the document
●Support for BioUtah may be a consideration the administration might
recommend to the Council
●Staff time to conceptualize supporting lab and office space development
to support this industry may result in considerations to come before the
Council”
The Department also noted that some of the organizations whose members participated in
Blueprint’s Advisory Group might contribute to City initiatives in the future, but that “No
expectations have been set in this document for funding commitments.”
The Blueprint itself suggests some additional potential sources of funding beyond the City
(page 5):
“Local, regional, and national banks, along with Utah’s many industrial loan
corporations (ILCs) and other financial institutions, provide opportunities for
tapping into Community Reinvestment Act funds and other sources. Partnering
with the Federal Reserve is one way to convene and educate banks about the
City’s people focused approach and how it offers new prospects for investing in
meaningful and lasting community and social impact. In addition, convening
an ongoing advisory group of local, national, and global funders with industry
expertise can help Salt Lake City officials understand funding structures and
opportunities, brainstorm and strategize funding approaches, and seek advice
on economic development efforts.”
C.Potential Benefits. The Blueprint states that over 83% of jobs located within Salt Lake City
currently are held by residents of other jurisdictions. DED does appear to recognize, at least
tacitly, that there is potential for “spillover” benefits from its focus on the health care
innovation sector to residents of surrounding jurisdictions. In response to staff questions
about whether, for example, new jobs in health care innovation or internship possibilities
intended for underserved high school and college students—which would be funded in part by
Salt Lake City taxpayers—could end up benefitting people who live in the surrounding
metropolitan areas, the Department responded as follows:
“Choosing a fast growing, high wage, economically stable, and
entrepreneurial & capital centered industry as well as an industry with
multiple entry points for career opportunities makes sense and since the
concentration of these jobs and careers are here, the city has the
opportunity to take a lead role in coordinating stakeholders.”
“This exercise [of creating the Blueprint] has already brought together
partners at the [Salt Lake City] school district and companies in
healthcare innovation. The City seeks to advance this work through
aligning those partners with STEM pathways and classroom
engagement opportunities. One lever could be to place requirements on
Page | 4
any considerations regarding ongoing funding for the BioHive. Our
outreach is focused on the community groups who interact and provide
services to the underserved communities and is aligned with the Biohive
and other partners in education, industry, and other organizations in
the community.”
“This effort acknowledges and emphasizes that economic opportunities
in SLC aren’t equally available despite our economic strengths as the
capital city. Those decisions will be made by the companies, though the
Council may consider DEI requirements and engagement with diverse
community organizations for future BioHive funding considerations.”
D.Additional Information
1. The Blueprint mentions that BioHive has raised more than $1,100,000 in public and
private investment. DED reports that these funds have come from the State
legislature (through GoUtah), the University of Utah, EDCUtah, and World Trade
Center Utah, as well as private companies in the industry. The Department describes
BioHive as
“[…] the story telling arm for health care innovation in Utah focused on
branding and marketing the industry. They are working with the city and other
stakeholders to support apprenticeships and workforce development programs
with the city and other groups across the state. They write articles, podcasts,
and run social media accounts, provide marketing collateral, hold events, and
are leading diversity and inclusion initiatives through their parity pledge
focused on women and people of color.”
2. In response to a staff question about the potential economic risks and costs of City
government choosing a single industry for its focus, DED responded, in part:
“In practice, an economy with only one industry is exposed to greater
economic risk as its success is correlated with industry success, rather
than broader economic success; however, Utah is the most diverse
economy in the United States with a 2019 Hatchman Index of 97.3 -
meaning that the state is correlated with the wider economy of the
United States to a very large extent. Within the State, Salt Lake County
has the highest Hatchman Index rating of 94, so these risks are very
minimal and in fact add value to our efforts as there is diversity within
the industry focus as a result of our existing diverse economy.”
The Department also stressed the importance of data that refers to the existing
concentration of these types of businesses in the City relative to other places, and the
sector’s recent high growth rates.
POLICY QUESTIONS
A. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether the Blueprint’s Advisory Group will
remain available to provide feedback on questions and unanticipated complexities that may
arise in DED’s work, and how that feedback process might occur. The Council may also wish
Page | 5
to request regular feedback from the Advisory Group to provide advance notice and input on
any potential funding requests that may arise.
B. Would the Council like to request the Administration develop an implementation strategy for
new City tasks associated with the Blueprint’s Recommendations, and that this include some
elaboration on potential future budget and staffing requests?
C. Would the Council like to request information on the potential environmental costs of
significant expansion in the health care innovation sector, particularly on research, testing,
and medical laboratories? For example, would the need for hazardous waste disposal services
increase? Other sustainability considerations could include water use and the potential need
for testing for toxins released into the water and air. The Council could request that the
Department of Economic Development engage with the City’s Sustainability Department to
ensure these concerns are addressed.
D. The Blueprint mentions that Salt Lake City has “adopted the Opportunity Index as a measure
of how well economic growth is distributed to the City’s residents.” The Council may wish to
ask the Administration about efforts referred to in the Blueprint to adapt this metric for use at
the City level, given that it is computed by OpportunityIndex.org only at the county and state
levels. The Council also may wish to ask DED to develop additional, City-specific, short-term
measures of the effectiveness of their work to achieve the goals outlined in the Blueprint. The
Department has indicated that it is working with IMS on developing a more City-focused
approach. It is not clear, though, whether this may require more staff and/or budget for IMS
given their already-full workload. It is also unclear if IMS would be collecting this data or
interpreting existing data in a usable way.
E. The Council may wish to request the Administration research and consider options for
ensuring that the bulk of the expected benefits of the City’s support for the health care
innovation sector accrue to City residents, rather than the broader metropolitan area.
F. The Council might wish to consider specifying that any future funding requests for the health
care innovation initiative reflect existing government roles, responsibilities, and funding
sources. For example, that the Council would consider any allocation for the activities
described in the Blueprint with the understanding that:
The City’s investment will not supplant existing State or private programs and
funding, or the potential for those programs’ independent expansion.
Rigorous and transparent metrics will be developed to show goals are reached,
particularly that the opportunity index score is improving in areas where it
currently lags.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment C1. Department of Economic Development Responses to Council Staff Questions
Attachment C1. Responses of Department of Economic Development to Council Staff
Questions.
1. Of the recommendations listed in the Blueprint (summarized below), which are foreseen as exclusive
responsibility of the City, and which would involve partnerships with organizations outside the City?
- Brand, Promote, & Grow: Build global brand; Increase awareness of job
opportunities; Highlight successes.
- Increase Investment: Maximize industry partnerships; Capitalize on private
capital; Target social impact investments.
- Emphasize Pathways & Partnerships: Create education-to-workforce
partnerships; Connect pathways to education and employment; Identify alternative
pathways to education and employment.
- Strengthen Foundation & Remove Barriers: Create a baseline; Reduce
business barriers (review City regulations and zoning); Inventory R&D opportunities;
Ensure lab and office space is available.
The Tech Lake City initiative intends to place a primary emphasis on this industry. Most of this is done
through partnerships and convening. The most strategic consideration for the City as it pertains to
potential Council action will be the “strengthen foundation” category. The council has already heard the
proposed zoning changes as an early example.
2. Has the Administration developed a strategy for the timing of new City tasks associated with the
Recommendations? The blueprint is not meant to be a document which outlines the details of tasks, but
rather serves as a collection of multidisciplinary feedback for what considerations are for partners, the
industry, and the city to serve the industry as well as to provide inclusive economic opportunity for
residents. One consideration that currently does have a timeline associated is the proposed zoning
amendments for tech uses.
3. Funding:
a. What City funding and other City resources may be needed in the future to
implement the Blueprint? While this document is not meant to approve future
requests, additional funding or policy considerations may be requested for the
following:
●Ongoing support for the BioHive may be a consideration the
administration might recommend to the Council
●Staff time to coordinate initiatives and convene partners around
recommended priorities in the document
●Support for BioUtah may be a consideration the administration might
recommend to the Council
●Staff time to conceptualize supporting lab and office space development
to support this industry may result in considerations to come before the
Council
b. Which other entities are expected to contribute funding or other support for the
actions recommended for the City in the Blueprint? Which have committed to helping
fund and support City actions? Those partners mentioned on page 13 have been
highly engaged with their time on this project and may be sources of funding in the
future. No expectations have been set in this document for funding commitments.
c. Will the request for any new resources come to the Council in the context of the
annual budget, or at some other time? Items referenced in part “a” are considerations
that may be presented to the Council from the administration depending on
prioritization of future budget recommendations from the Mayor’s Office.
4. Please provide more information and documentation about this item listed in the transmittal:
“BioHive has raised more than $1,100,000 in public and private investment.”
a. How many other public and private entities have contributed? State legislature
through GoUtah, University of Utah, EDC Utah, World Trade Center Utah, private
companies and from within the industry, and other organizations that support the
industry.
b. What kinds of investments have been made, or could be made, with the funds raised
by BioHive? BioHive is the story telling arm for health care innovation in Utah
focused on branding and marketing the industry. They are working with the city and
other stakeholders to support apprenticeships and workforce development programs
with the city and other groups across the state. They write articles, podcasts, and run
social media accounts, provide marketing collateral, hold events, and are leading
diversity and inclusion initiatives through their parity pledge focused on women and
people of color.
c. Are BioHive investments limited to activities in Salt Lake City? The BioHive is a
statewide effort to brand and message industry success and economic opportunity
across the state in Healthcare Innovation, however the density and hub of activity
within this industry is centered in Salt Lake City. Our partnership with the Biohive
ensures their investments and activities are taking place in Salt Lake City.
5. Salt Lake City’s (and Utah’s) economic successes in recent years are due in part to the successful
diversification of its economy relative to many other cities.
a. What are the potential risks and costs of the City government picking a single
industry to focus on? It is this administration’s priority to attract the innovative jobs
of the future and those technologies with the most potential are in healthcare
innovation. Health care Innovation is a broader term for biotech, medtech, life
sciences and digital health to be more inclusive of supporting industries. In practice,
an economy with only one industry is exposed to greater economic risk as its success
is correlated with industry success, rather than broader economic success; however,
Utah is the most diverse economy in the United States with a 2019 Hatchman Index
of 97.3 - meaning that the state is correlated with the wider economy of the United
States to a very large extent. Within the State, Salt Lake County has the highest
Hatchman Index rating of 94, so these risks are very minimal and in fact add value to
our efforts as there is diversity within the industry focus as a result of our existing
diverse economy. Within this industry Utah is just 1 of 4 states with industry
concentrations in multiple health care innovation sectors, including pharmaceuticals,
medical devices and research, testing, and medical laboratories. In short, this
industry is one of the most diverse in and of itself which is noteworthy. (Source: The
Bioscience Economy: Propelling life-saving treatments, supporting state & local
communities 2020; Teconomy Partners, LLC; Biotechnology Innovation
Organization; Public Affairs Consultants: 2020)
b. Did the administration evaluate options for similar efforts in other industries? Yes.
Healthcare Innovation was prioritized given that SLC is uniquely positioned in the
state, but also the nation. Salt Lake is 2nd in the nation for medical device
employment concentration, 2nd in the nation for annual growth in life sciences and
has the nation’s highest concentration of life sciences jobs. 7.2% growth in life
sciences jobs in 2020 compared to 0.5% in life science job growth nationally, ranking
Utah #2 in the nation. Life Science job concentration reached 1.9%- highest in the
nation more than double the national average of 0.9%. For the period 2012-2020,
Utah life sciences employment grew at an annual rate of 4.8% ranking Utah #2 in the
nation, only .06% less than Arizona.
6. The Blueprint suggests that health care innovation is already thriving in Salt Lake City, and in Utah.
Why, then, does it need City taxpayers to support its growth? This exercise was meant to bring together
partners to understand how to enable the industry, and also how to harness its growth for the benefits of
SLC residents through inclusive economic opportunity and improved health and well-being for all
residents. This industry has not received the attention like others in our state which provides an
opportunity to harness the growth, high wages, multiple entry points to start a career, upskill capabilities,
and the overall trajectory. As we create pathway programs, apprenticeships, mentorships, and better
connectivity with K-12 and higher education we can convene the companies within this industry to
provide entry points that will empower communities within the city to utilize these components to better
their lives and provide better opportunities for upward mobility.
7. Utah’s health care innovation jobs are said to be focused on research, testing, and medical
laboratories. What are the associated costs for cities that have large or increasing concentrations of these
kinds of industries? The questions below were outside of the scope of this exercise. They can be further
explored if desired by the Council.
a. For example, does the need for hazardous waste disposal services increase?
b. What about water use and testing for toxins released into the water and air?
8. How will potential benefits from investments paid for by Salt Lake City taxpayers, like access to new
jobs in health care innovation, be targeted to City residents, rather than people who live in the
surrounding metropolitan areas? Choosing a fast growing, high wage, economically stable, and
entrepreneurial & capital centered industry as well as an industry with multiple entry points for career
opportunities makes sense and since the concentration of these jobs and careers are here in the city has
the opportunity to take a lead role in coordinating stakeholders.
9. One of the public benefits associated with this initiative is providing more internship possibilities for
high school and college students.
a. How would the City ensure that these opportunities reach residents who
traditionally have inequitable access to these? This exercise has already brought
together partners at the school district and companies in healthcare innovation. The
City seeks to advance this work through aligning those partners with STEM pathways
and classroom engagement opportunities. One lever could be to place requirements
on any considerations regarding ongoing funding for the BioHive. Our outreach is
focused on the community groups who interact and provide services to the
underserved communities and is aligned with the Biohive and other partners in
education, industry, and other organizations in the community.
b. Would the opportunities be reserved for specific community members, for example,
people of color? This effort acknowledges and emphasizes that economic
opportunities in SLC aren’t equally available despite our economic strengths as the
capital city. Those decisions will be made by the companies, though the Council may
consider DEI requirements and engagement with diverse community organizations
for future BioHive funding considerations.
10. The Opportunity Index appears to be available for Salt Lake County, but not Salt Lake City. This is an
identified need in the City that DED has been working with IMS on.
a. Would a similar database be developed for the City to track the potential impacts of
the Health Care Innovation Blueprint? This is a goal that the department would
welcome and could work with IMS on. This would require staff time in IMS and/or
additional funding.
b. If so, which entity or City department would be charged with developing and
updating this information over time? This would require additional scoping of a
project to address the question in section a. There would likely be several options to
consider.
c. Is City-level data reliably available for all the indicators in the Opportunity Index?
DED does not yet know the answer to this question; however, this is an identified gap
in using the index for the City’s equity measure. In addition, the index does not
include information about racial diversity. The index does offer the interventions in
detail, however. We have explored elements of this important data and have received
positive feedback that the City could develop and request access to city level data sets
through our own sources or in partnership with other organizations.
11. Which organizations that were not involved in the creation of the Blueprint were asked by the City to
provide feedback on it? What were the most common questions and concerns of these organizations
Those listed in the document were the audience brought in for the recommendations contained in the
blueprint.
12. The Blueprint states that early childhood development and workforce interventions can be integrated
with the City’s approach to focusing economic development in the health care innovation industry. Could
you elaborate on the potential relationship between early childhood development and the health care
innovation industry?
Much research shows that the earlier children are exposed to STEM, the greater the probability they will
pursue STEM education and STEM careers. These Healthcare Innovation industries have the unique
opportunity to engage with young children and “spark an interest” in STEM opportunities. Salt Lake City
School District is currently highly engaged in a “STEM Ecosystem” development process, which will
include meaningful pathways into STEM education, capturing that “sparked interest and leading to career
exposure, all with the hope in mind young people will train and be retained within Utah companies. DED
has been engaged with both the school district and the companies about their pathway development.
Advancements within the life science industry impact the lives and well-being of our community. The
health care innovation ecosystem (life sciences + digital health) is critical to improving individual and
public health outcomes, in addition to quality of life through technology and innovation. A higher
concentration of digital health, life science, and healthcare professionals lead to a more health conscious,
higher educated, and economically resilient community.
13. Could you elaborate on the meaning and relevance of the following Opportunities and Challenges
listed in the chart on page 12 of the Blueprint? These items were identified as opportunities and
challenges by the multidisciplinary task force convened for this effort. These are high level observations
by the group.
a. Competency vs. credential gap for available workers
b. Established Research Park in SLC
c. Interconnected transportation systems
d. Limited resources (e.g. land, real estate, water, broadband, lab space)
e. Lack of "center" for health care innovation
f. No philanthropic focus for health care innovation
g. Lack of CRA/city coordination
A Blueprint for Salt Lake City’s
Health Care Innovation Economy
Vision
Salt Lake City will be a premier health care
innovation hub that provides expanded
economic opportunity and improved health
and well-being for all residents.
Utah’s Economic Heart
-Large and diverse economy
-Nearly 300,000 jobs located in Salt Lake City
-Approximately 40% of Salt Lake County’s jobs
-Approximately 20% of Utah’s jobs
Health Care Innovation (noun)
An industry that includes companies from the life sciences,
med tech, pharmaceuticals, health tech, and device
manufacturing. It does not include doctor-patient care.
Health Care Innovation
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis of Utah Dept. of Workforce Services data
Health Care Innovation
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Life Sciences Workforce Specialization, 2020
Health Care Innovation
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis
of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Advisory Group
Jared Bauer
CEO, IONIQ Sciences
David Bearss
Senior Managing Director,
Therapeutic Labs
Silvia Castro
Director, Suazo Business Center
Ginger Chinn
VP of Public Policy, Salt Lake
Chamber
Colby Cooley
VP of Business Development,
EDCUtah
Kelvyn Cullimore
CEO, BioUtah
Daniel Dugan
Council member, Salt Lake City
Victor Garcia
Global VP, Varex Imaging
Miles Hansen
President and CEO, World
Trade Center Utah
Chandana Haque
Executive Director, Altitude
Lab & Recursion
Anh Hoang
Chief Science Officer, Co-Founder
Sofregen Medical Inc.
Sara Jones
CEO and Founder, Inclusion Pro
Ben Kolendar
Economic Development Director,
Salt Lake City
John Librett
CEO, Survivor Wellness
Keith Marmer
Chief Innovation & Economic
Engagement Officer,
University of Utah
Jacob Maxwell
Workforce Development
Manager, Salt Lake City
Heidi Hall
Senior Advisor and Project
Consultant, Intermountain
Healthcare
Katelin Roberts
Executive Director, BioHive
Scott Romney
Manager Talent Ready Utah,
GoUtah
Melisa Stark
Commissioner of Apprenticeship
Program, Department of
Workforce Services
Blake Thomas
Director, SLC Community &
Neighborhoods Department
Danny Walz
Director, SLC Redevelopment
Agency
Timeline
Opportunities & Challenges
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Recommendations
Brand, Promote,
& Grow
Increase
Investment
Emphasize Pathways
& Partnerships
Strengthen Foundation
& Remove Barriers
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Brand, Promote and Grow
•Build Global Brand
•Increase Awareness of Job Opportunities
•Highlight Successes
•Maximize Industry Partnerships
•Capitalize on Private Capital
•Target Social Impact Investments
Increase Investment
•Create Education-to -Workforce Partnerships
•Connect Pathways
•Identify Alternative Pathways
Emphasize Pathways & Partnerships
•Create a Baseline
•Reduce Business Barriers
•Inventory R&D Opportunities
•Ensure Space is Available
Strengthen and Foundation
and Remove Barriers
A Blueprint for Health Care Innovation
Salt Lake City will be a premier health care
innovation hub that provides expanded
economic opportunity and improved health
and well-being for all residents.
A Blueprint for Growing Salt Lake City’s
Health Care Innovation Economy
November 2021
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURINGii
VISION
Salt Lake City will be a premier health care innovation
hub that provides expanded economic opportunity and
improved health and well-being for all residents.
Table of Contents
Letter from Mayor Mendenhall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Recommendations in Brief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Brand, Promote, & Grow ............................4
Increase Investment ................................5
Emphasize Pathways & Partnerships ................6
Strengthen Foundation & Remove Barriers ..........7
Utah Health Care innovation industry . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Measurements for Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Opportunities and Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Health Care innovation Advisory Group . . . . . . . . . .13
Advisory Group and Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474
WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
November 2021
Dear Friends,
Salt Lake City enjoys a well-rounded and growing economy that offers most residents and businesses plentiful
opportunities for success and prosperity.
Some residents, though, lack access to the educational and employment opportunities that many take for
granted. This leaves individuals and families behind, economically and socially, and creates an imbalance in our
community’s overall wealth and well-being that affects us all.
We’re working to change that. Everyone in Salt Lake City deserves a chance to learn, earn, and be part of a
thriving community.
That’s why my administration, through our Tech Lake City initiative, is invigorating our focus on inclusive growth
that empowers upward mobility for both residents and businesses. Our focus for this human-centered approach
is the health care sector, an area in which Salt Lake City already boasts a flourishing foundation of institutions and
businesses. With the highest concentration of life science-related jobs in the state located in the Capital City, we
have a tremendous opportunity to become a world-class hub for health care innovation.
This blueprint includes our vision, mission, guiding principles, action steps, and recommendations, to guide the
daily and long-term direction of Salt Lake City’s economic and social development efforts. It reflects our desire to
identify and strengthen community assets to ensure the City’s foundation supports structures that are fair,
equitable, inclusive, and diverse.
Much effort and many ideas have gone into building this plan, including the work of a multidisciplinary Health
Care Innovation Advisory Group convened for this purpose, along with work by City staff, the Gardner Institute,
and many other individuals and groups. It will be a management tool to guide our common vision, to unite people
and organizations, and to shape our City’s unique assets to build upward mobility of both businesses and people
to solve global challenges.
Not only will this approach improve the health of people locally and around the world, it will extend the capacity
to succeed to those who haven’t had the opportunity to do so.
Success will require collaboration and long-term effort by the private and public sectors. By working together,
we will reach our goal of raising Salt Lake City’s prominence as a worldwide hub for health care innovation, we will
build a more diverse, inclusive, and fair community.
We have an amazing opportunity in front of us, and we have momentum on our side. Let’s take up the challenge
to combine innovation with compassion to establish a thriving, inclusive, and equitable place called Salt Lake City.
Warmly,
Mayor Erin Mendenhall
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING2
Utah’s economic heart . Salt Lake City is well-established as the economic hub of the
Wasatch Front, Utah as a whole, and the Intermountain West region. With nearly 300,000
jobs – 40% of all jobs in Salt Lake County; and nearly 20% of Utah’s total jobs – Salt Lake
City’s economy is large and diverse, although inextricably linked to the local and regional
economies.
Opportunities aren’t equally available . Despite its strengths and resiliency, not all residents
share in Salt Lake City’s economic success because of lack of opportunity, or more
specifically, lack of access to opportunity. Indeed, the Opportunity Index score for Salt Lake
County is a below-par C+. The Opportunity Index measures not just a community’s
economic health, but how available economic opportunities are to all residents, and how
well a community provides the social support needed to increase economic mobility.
Recognizing that 36 percent of the City's residents are members of ethnic and racial
minority groups, one of the four main objectives of Mayor Mendenhall’s SLC 2021 Plan –
“Creating inclusive and equitable opportunity for all” – aims to address this need head-on.
Unique initiative considers social values and needs . Mayor Mendenhall has challenged
the City’s economic development team to create a strategy that addresses residents’
social, as well as economic, needs; reaches all communities; and considers the City’s
human capital, and not just its physical, financial, and intellectual forms of capital.
Focusing on health care innovation will broaden opportunity . With life sciences already a
pillar of the economy, Salt Lake City chooses to leverage it with the strengths in research
and development, manufacturing, financial services, entrepreneurship to emphasize the
region's leadership in healthcare innovation. Careers in health care innovation offer higher
than average wages, are "sticky" and not easily transferrable, are more recession-proof
compared to any other major industry in the state and provide a range of entry points at
different salary levels. This industry already has a diverse workforce, along with the ability to
scale apprenticeship and mentorship opportunities and connect to STEM education within
our school district. Our community colleges and universities offer a wide range of programs
from lab technician training, biomedical informatics, and genetic discovery, along with
programming that assists in re-skilling and up-skilling our community.
What is
Health Care
Innovation?
The health care innovation
industry is a disruptor industry
including companies from the
life sciences, med tech, and
health tech industries aimed at
innovating and improving the
health care ecosystem.
It does not include doctor-
patient care.
A People-focused Approach to
Economic Development
The premise for this blueprint is simple: Build on Salt Lake City's economic strengths in
health care innovation and provide expanded economic opportunity and improved health
and well-being for all residents. This is a people-focused approach to economic development.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 3
Brand, Promote, & Grow
Growing and maintaining Salt Lake City's
reputation as one of the nation's top
locations for health care innovation is
instrumental to the city's success. We offer three
recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Build global brand;
2. Increase awareness of job opportunities; and
3. Highlight successes.
increase investment
With the objective of increasing social and
income mobility through the health care
innovation industry, the city can help
inform and connect available public and private funding
to support innovation ecosystem in the City. We offer
three recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Maximize industry partnerships;
2. Capitalize on private capital; and
3. Target social impact investments.
Emphasize Pathways &
Partnerships
Available, accessible, and affordable
education and training opportunities are
imperative to supply as workforce for Salt Lake City's fast-
growing health care innovation economy. We offer three
recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Create education-to-workforce partnerships;
2. Connect pathways; and
3. Identify alternative pathways.
Strengthen Foundation &
Remove Barriers
Salt Lake City's health care innovation
ecosystem is only as strong as the foundation
that supports it. Streamlined regulations and up-to-date
information can help the industry flourish. We offer four
recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Create a baseline;
2. Reduce business barriers;
3. Inventory R&D opportunities; and
4. Ensure lab and office space is available.
Recommendations in Brief
These four pillars create the foundation to building a strong and sustainable
health care innovation industry and providing hyper-localized opportunities
for all of Salt Lake City’s residents.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING4
Growing and maintaining
Salt Lake City’s reputation
as one of the nation’s and
world’s top locations for
health care innovation is
instrumental to the City’s
success. Here are
recommendations to
help accomplish this:
Build Global Brand – Establish and sustain Salt Lake City’s unique
position and brand in the national health care innovation ecosystem and
participate in national and global organizations to glean best practices and
raise awareness about the City. Partner with BioHive, BioUtah, the University
of Utah, and others, to expand the City’s reach by sharing stories of our talent
base to attract interest, attend and sponsor events inside and outside the
state, and promote innovative efforts of local companies and initiatives.
increase Awareness of Job Opportunities – Create a powerful
grassroots messaging and outreach campaign focused on engaging and
educating underserved communities about opportunities in the health care
innovation sector. Partner with BioHive, BioUtah, local nonprofit organizations,
the Salt Lake City School District, and others, to educate about potential career
pathways, showcase successful role models, and raise awareness of easy-to-
access education and training options.
Highlight Successes – Demonstrate the City’s shift to people-focused
economic development efforts by promoting innovative and successful
ways the City and partner organizations are uplifting underserved
populations through the news media (local, national, and global), social
media, awards, and other channels. Continue to build and strengthen
relationships with public and private agencies in the health care innovation
sector and engage their support in coordinating a consistent program of
media relations.
Brand, Promote, & Grow
“Tech Lake City” is the overarching concept guiding Salt Lake City’s
current and future economic development efforts, the centerpiece of
which is the fast-growing health care innovation sector.
Mayor Mendenhall launched the Tech Lake City initiative in January
of 2020 to attract more innovation and tech talent to the City, and to
help improve pathways to tech education and employment for all City
residents, particularly those in underserved communities.
Tech Lake City represents a pivot to a more-proactive, non-traditional
approach to economic development focusing on strengthening key
sectors, starting with health care innovation.
A key example of this new approach is the City’s work to secure
investment to create BioHive, a public-private agency designed to
connect and promote the 1,100+ life sciences and health care
innovation companies in and around Salt Lake City. BioHive coordinates
with its statewide sibling, BioUtah, and interacts with related
innovation-focused efforts like the Salt Lake Chamber’s newly created
Wasatch Innovation Network.
The Tech Lake City initiative is managed by Clark Cahoon, technology
and innovation advisor in the Department of Economic Development,
and overseen by department director, Ben Kolendar.
Salt Lake City
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 5
With the objective of
increasing social and
income mobility through
the health care
innovation industry, the
City can help inform and
connect available public
and private funding to
support the innovation
ecosystem in the City.
Maximize industry Partnerships – To be successful, Salt Lake City’s
efforts require working closely with economic development agencies at the
state and local levels, as well as with health care innovation industry
organizations like BioUtah and BioHive, of which the City is a founder. By closely
analyzing the City’s specific needs, officials can identify and fill gaps, while
deepening important and symbiotic relationships.
Capitalize on Private Capital – Local, regional, and national banks, along
with Utah’s many industrial loan corporations (ILCs) and other financial
institutions, provide opportunities for tapping into Community Reinvestment
Act funds and other sources. Partnering with the Federal Reserve is one way to
convene and educate banks about the City’s people-focused approach and how
it offers new prospects for investing in meaningful and lasting community and
social impact. In addition, convening an ongoing advisory group of local, national,
and global funders with industry expertise can help Salt Lake City officials
understand funding structures and opportunities, brainstorm and strategize
funding approaches, and seek advice on economic development efforts.
Target Social impact investments – Salt Lake City is investigating
novel opportunities, such as directing public investment into community-based
programs to increase opportunity and economic mobility, particularly on the
City's west side, which historically has been redlined, marginalized, and
underserved. The two areas of focus are early childhood development and
workforce interventions, both of which can be integrated with the City’s approach
to focusing economic development in the health care innovation industry.
Increase Investment
Chandana Haque
Selected as one of 30 Women
to Watch in 2021 by Utah
Business magazine, Chandana
is Executive Director of
Altitude Lab, Utah’s largest
incubator for growing
early-stage life science and
health care companies.
A collaboration launched in 2020 by biotech firm
Recursion and the University of Utah’s PIVOT Center,
Altitude Lab fills the critical role of lowering hurdles
for underrepresented entrepreneurs. The
organization’s aim is to foster socially responsible
entrepreneurship, job creation, and economic
productivity.
I’m proud that 80 percent of startups at Altitude Lab are led
by women and minorities. Their diversity enables them to
innovate and address the disparities they have experienced
first-hand. Providing founders with a network of top-tier, national
investors, something that is difficult for underrepresented
founders to access, can completely change the trajectory of their
startup, propelling them to not only compete but excel in our
fast-changing health care innovation landscape.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING6
Available, accessible, and
affordable education and
training opportunities are
imperative to supply a
sustainable workforce for
Salt Lake City’s fast-
growing health care
innovation economy.
Tapping into existing
programs, and filling in
gaps to meet specific
needs, is fundamental to
the City’s success.
Create Education-to-Workforce Partnerships – Partner
with the Salt Lake City School District, STEM Action Center, BioHive,
BioUtah, and others, to help better meet the community’s education-to-
workforce needs. Involve higher education and industry partners to define,
refine, and customize, training and education efforts. Seek one or more
industry firms to join the effort as partners for mentoring and internship/
apprenticeship opportunities.
Connect Pathways – Partner with Talent Ready Pathways program to
create localized opportunities for students to engage in the health care
innovation industry. Create city-specific metrics to help guide the success
of the program within Salt Lake City.
identify Alternative Pathways – Survey industry businesses to
identify positions that typically require higher education or certification
that could be reassessed to include alternative pathways such as
apprenticeship, internships, skills tests, etc. Use survey results to create a
strategic plan on how to inform and motivate businesses to create more
alternative pathway opportunities for employees.
Emphasize Pathways & Partnerships
Keith Marmer
A holder of three patents and
founder of four companies,
Keith has helped raise more
than $1 billion in investment
capital for multiple startups
and overseen the creation of
more than 140 companies
during the last 30 years.
Now, as Chief Innovation & Economic Engagement
Officer for the University of Utah (the U), Keith
oversees the school’s globally-recognized PIVOT
Center. On behalf of the U, PIVOT Center serves as a
catalyst for the regional innovation economy,
integrating technology commercialization, corporate
engagement, and economic development.
Health care innovation is an area of existing strength for Salt
Lake City and Utah and the city and state are positioned well to
continue to make global impact. It’s a field that thrives and relies on a
constant supply of new ideas and approaches; the PIVOT Center sits
at that critical junction where laboratory innovations become
marketable, life-saving products and treatments. Moving the
economic needle – particularly to benefit those innovations with less
access to opportunity – will require ever-stronger partnerships
between education, industry, and government, something I’m
excited to see in this effort led by Mayor Mendenhall.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 7
Salt Lake City’s health
care innovation
ecosystem is only as
strong as the foundation
that supports it.
Streamlined regulations
and up-to-date
information can help
the industry and
businesses flourish.
Create a Baseline – Collect citywide data on workforce development
needs, job growth, and wage growth within the health care innovation
industry to provide a baseline measurement and the ability to set thoughtful
and strategic goals. Identify and track a handful of key metrics to understand
how well the City’s economic development and social mobility objectives are
being met over time.
Reduce Business Barriers – Identify ways that city regulations and
zoning laws may be impeding the success of building a thriving health care
innovation ecosystem; then, identify and implement ways to resolve concerns.
inventory R&D Opportunities – Work with partners, identify current
and planned research and development activities by colleges and universities,
health care providers, nonprofit organizations, and private companies.
Compile and analyze existing inventories to identify gaps and potential
opportunities, such as promising but unrealized patents, then determine
how best to move forward with a short list of encouraging possibilities.
Ensure Space is Available – Create a streamlined and collaborative
real estate plan to promote health care innovation industry incubator
development, wet lab spaces, and industry-friendly commercial land
development, prioritize real estate opportunities to support the innova tion
ecosystem. Focus on the Innovation Corridor already underway, options for the
development of city assets, and aligning plans with University of Utah, Research
Park, and real estate development leaders.
Strengthen Foundation & Remove Barriers
Anh Hoang, PhD
A native of Salt Lake City’s Glendale
neighborhood, Anh has built a
successful career as a life sciences
entrepreneur with a doctorate in
biomedical engineering, thanks in
part to a college scholarship
from her father’s employer,
O.C. Tanner Company.
Anh co-founded Sofregen Medical Inc. in the Boston
area and serves as the firm’s Chief Science Officer. Under
her guidance, Sofregen developed the first product made
from reconstituted silk protein to be cleared by the FDA
for a medical use. Anh is also a faculty member at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Catalyst
LinQ program and was a recipient of the 2018 Medtech
Boston 40 under 40 Healthcare Innovators.
My success can be anyone’s success if they have access to
education, training, and most importantly, mentors and role
models. That can be especially difficult for people living in
underserved communities like the one I grew up in. We need a
more direct approach to engage young people and demonstrate
the world of opportunities that await them. That’s why I’m excited
about Salt Lake City’s health care innovation initiative and am
eager to return to Utah to help make it a reality.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING8
Cementing Salt Lake City’s role as a worldwide
health care innovator and leader rests on Utah’s
historic and current success. The fact is that many
innovative and economically strong health care
elements already support our community. Amplifying
this advantage will strengthen and broaden our
economic foundation of larger anchor firms, as well
as innovative spin-offs, that create new ways of
helping the world and offer opportunities for well-
paying and satisfying jobs for Salt Lake City residents.
Being more successful requires the City and its
partners to effectively tell the story of our health
care innovation economy, within Utah and across
the nation and globe. BioUtah's recently established
industry association, BioHive, is working to fill this
need with support from the City and public and
private partners.
Our legacy of health care innovation and new
partnerships like BioHive allow us to seize the
moment and proactively shape the way our City
grows – with a clear focus on equity, social and
human capital, and a desire to reach our full potential
within an industry that improves and extends the
health and well-being of not only our residents, but
people everywhere.
Home-Grown Health Care Innovations
n Salt Lake City was the home of the first artificial heart
successfully implanted in a human. Retired dentist
Barney Clark lived 112 days with the device in his chest,
an advancement that attracted worldwide media
attention to University Hospital.
n The first hospital information system to integrate
patient data for clinical decision support – Health
Evaluation through Logical Programming, or HELP –
was developed here and led the way to worldwide
adoption of electronic medical records.
n The University of Utah is home to the Utah Population
Database, the nation’s only and world’s largest
repository for genetics, epidemiology, demography,
and public health data.
n We also have steady grant funding from the National
Institutes of Health, a top five technology transfer
ranking, as well as an overall employment growth rate
of 26% from 2012 to 2016.
n Founded in 1984 by University of Utah pathologists,
ARUP Laboratories has grown into a national nonprofit
and academic reference laboratory at the forefront of
diagnostic medicine. With more than 4,000 employees,
ARUP offers 3,000+ tests and test combinations and
processes over 50,000 specimens every day, 24/7.
Utah's Health Care Innovation Industry
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute; BioHive
More Than 1,100
companies are part of the ecosystem.
Life sciences
produce 8% of
Utah’s total GDP.
Utah is 6th per capita
in life sciences investment in the U.S.
Salt Lake area is
2nd in the nation
for medical device
employment concentration.
Economic Proof Points
Utah is 2nd in the nation
for annual growth
in life sciences employment growth
between 2012 and 2020.
Nation's highest
concentration of life sciences jobs – twice the national average.
Utah is 1 of just 4 states
with industry concentrations in multiple
health care innovation sectors, including
pharmaceuticals, medical devices and research,
testing, and medical laboratories.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 9
Utah Life Sciences: Comparisons with Other Leading States
In 2020, Utah’s life sciences job growth reached an exceptional
7.2% amid nationwide employment gains in the industry
averaging 0.5%. Utah’s growth ranked second among the 20
largest state life sciences industries, eight of which contracted
since 2019.
Since 2007, even through business cycle fluctuations, growth
in the life sciences industry has outpaced the rest of Utah’s
economy. For example, life sciences employment gains were
robust in 2020 when the state experienced an overall 1.8%
contraction in average employment.
In 2020, Utah’s workforce concentration in life sciences
reached 1.9% of all employees, first among states and more
than double the national average of 0.9%. Utah had the 15th
most life sciences jobs of any state, which was high for the 31st
largest employed workforce in the U.S.
Within the life sciences industry, Utah compares favorably
among states in terms of workforce specialization in devices
(second), pharmaceuticals (fourth), research and laboratories
(eighth), and distribution (16th).
Figure 2 . Life Sciences Workforce Specialization,
2015 and 2020
(Life Sciences Share of Total Employment in the Top 20 States)
Note: Employment shares represent all employees at life sciences companies, regardless
of occupation. Top 20 states selected by their 2020 life sciences employment level.
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
GA
TXWA
OH
NY
MI
FLTN
AZ
PA
CO
WI
CANC
MA
NJ
IN
MN
UT
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
1.2%
1.4%
1.6%
1.8%
2.0%
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000Life Sciences Employment as a Percent of Total EmploymentLife Sciences Employment
U.S. median = 0.6%
U.S. average = 0.9%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.7%
0.7%
0.8%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
1.0%
1.0%
1.2%
1.2%
1.4%
1.5%
1.7%
1.7%
1.9%
0.9%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.7%
0.8%
0.7%
0.7%
0.8%
0.9%
0.8%
0.7%
1.1%
1.1%
1.3%
1.4%
1.5%
1.4%
1.6%
0.8%
0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%
Georgia
Texas
Washington
Ohio
New York
Michigan
Florida
Tennessee
Arizona
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Colorado
Wisconsin
California
North Carolina
Massachusetts
New Jersey
Indiana
Minnesota
Utah
U.S.
2015 2020
IL
166.6
121.6
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
20072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020Life Sciences Industry Other Industries
Single-Year, 2019–2020
Figure 1 . Life Sciences industry Annual Job Growth
Percentage Change for States with the 20 Largest Life Sciences
Industries
Note: Top 20 states selected by their 2020 life sciences employment level. Alaska and
Hawaii, not shown, were not among the states providing the most life sciences jobs.
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
Five-Year Average, 2015–2020
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING10
Salt Lake City Employment
Salt Lake City hosts more than 294,000 jobs, or about 19 percent of all jobs in
Utah, and 40 percent of all jobs in Salt Lake County. As Figure 1 shows, Utah
specializes in research, testing, and medical laboratories – a noted strength of
Salt Lake City, which is home to 46% of Utah’s professional, scientific, and
technical services employment. Salt Lake City is not just a premier employment
center for the state, it is a growth center for life sciences jobs.
While these industries include jobs outside of life sciences or health care, they
are indicators of the general state of jobs in the health care innovation sector
with companies in the life sciences manufacturing and research and
development industries.
Salt Lake City also employs a labor pool made up of non-resident commuters.
Of Salt Lake City’s residents, 43.2 percent of the working residents live and work
in the City while 56.8 percent of citizens commute outside of Salt Lake for work.
Of those employed in Salt Lake City, 83.1 percent live outside the area.
Salt Lake City Resident Commuting Patterns
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
Salt Lake City Employment Commuting Patterns
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
Table 2: Employment by industry, 2019
Employment Financial Services Life Sciences iT/Software
Salt Lake County 736,746 57,538 28,848 44,930
State of Utah 1,559,843 86,784 43,584 86,602
County Share of Industry Employment 47%66%66%52%
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Insititute analysis of Utah Department of Workforce Services data
Table 1: industries in Health Care innovation Employment, 2019
industry Salt Lake City
Salt Lake
County
Utah
County State of Utah
Share of industry in
Salt Lake County
Share of industry
in Utah
Manufacturing 25,895 57,834 19,679 136,893 44.8%18.9%
Professional/Scientific/Technical Services 50,506 60,548 21,946 109,824 83.4%46.0%
Health Care and Social Assistance 23,796 81,706 32,005 179,929 29.1%13.2%
Subtotal 100,197 200,088 73,630 426,646 50.1%23.5%
Total Employment 294,156 736,746 266,837 1,559,843 39.9%18.9%
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Insititute analysis of Utah Department of Workforce Services data
70.4%
22.6%
24.6%
81.3%
18.0%
58.2%
55.2%
15.2%
11.6%
19.1%
20.2%
3.5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Life Sciences Distribution
Drugs and Pharmaceuticals
Medical Devices and Equipment
Research, Testing, and Medical Laboratories
Utah Other States Other Countries
Figure 1: Utah Life Sciences industry Components, Share of Output Sold by Destination, 2017
Source: Utah Department of Workforce Services, Bureau of Economic Analysis, REMI PI+ economic model, and Biotechnology Innovation Organization.
Source: US. Census Bureau
The City's Blueprint incorporates economic metrics to pair
with broader City initiatives to create more opportunity for
residents. In this way, the Blueprint serves as both a community
and economic development tool.
The Blueprint's long-term goals on social mobility require
metrics beyond the traditional economic development
measurements.
Tracking the City’s Opportunity index Score
Traditional economic development metrics track growth
indicators like the growth of the city’s tax base, job growth,
wage growth, private investment, and the amount of real estate
dedicated to life sciences. These metrics provide an
understanding of how much growth is happening, where, and
why it may be happening. By creating a baseline of these more
traditional economic development, or placemaking, metrics,
the City is able to track the progress and efficacy of the Blueprint
and make course corrections as necessary.
The City also intends to implement a version of the Opportunity
Index as a measure of how well economic growth is distributed
among City residents. This Index includes metrics housed in
four areas of community well-being:
• Economy
• Education
• Health
• Community
These metrics include data on employment, wages, income
inequality, housing, educational attainment, and insurance
coverage, among others.
Considering the Benefits of Social Capital
Access to economic opportunity for individuals varies across
geographies. Nationally, rates of income mobility have steadily
fallen since 1940. This is primarily due to decreasing economic
growth and an increasingly unequal distribution of growth.
Increasing economic growth is not enough to increase rates of
income mobility, the growth must occur across the income
distribution.1, 2 Areas with high income mobility share five basic
characteristics, including less residential segregation, less
income inequality, better primary schools, greater social capital,
and greater family stability.3
Of these characteristics, social capital is one of the most
important connections between economic development and
increasing opportunity for all. Social capital refers to the
existence of mutual support and cooperation, networks of
trust, institutional effectiveness, goodwill and civic virtue.4, 5
Community development efforts, like the City’s blueprint,
encompass these characteristics into a structure for positive
and purposeful collective action.6 It builds a community’s
capacity to improve the well-being of its residents based on
existing human, social, and economic assets.7 It also recognizes
that some factors affecting well-being are nonlocal factors, and
provides a realistic appraisal of opportunities and constraints.8
1. Chetty, R., et al. (2017). The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Mobility. Science 356(6336): 398-406. Retrieved from https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/the-fading-
american-dream/
2. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
3. Chetty, R. et al. (2014). Where is the Land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the United States. Quarterly Journal of Economics 129(4): 1553-1623, 2014.
Retrieved from https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/land-of-opportunity/
4. U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee. (2018). Social Capital Project: “The Geography of Social Capital in America.” Retrieved from https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
republicans/2018/4/the-geography-of-social-capital-in-america
5. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
6. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
7. Flora, C.B. and Luther, V. (2000). An Introduction to Building Community Capacity. Small Tow and Rural Economic Development: A Case Studies Approach. Connecticut: Praeger
Publishers.
8. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 11
Measurements for Growth
The Blueprint's long-term goals on social mobility requires metrics beyond the traditional
economic development measurements.
Opportunity index
The Opportunity Index was jointly developed by
Opportunity Nation and Measure of America and measures
16 indicators, scoring all 50 states plus Washington DC on a
scale of 0-100 each year. In addition, more than 2,600
counties are graded A-F, giving policymakers and leaders a
useful tool to identify areas for improvement and to gauge
progress over time.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING12
A crucial part of developing this blueprint was to identify
opportunities and challenges facing Salt Lake City and the
health care innovation industry. Members of the Advisory
Group, stakeholders, and the project team, viewed this task
through the lens of the guiding principles, a set of foundational
concepts embedded throughout the process.
Opportunities and challenges were identified for four types
of “capital,” three of which – physical capital, intellectual capital,
and financial capital – are commonly assessed in economic
development planning. The fourth, human and social capital,
adds the perspective of the City’s current and future workforce
and residents, and their ability to succeed – a complex,
undervalued, and critical factor for creating this plan.
Once articulated, the opportunities and challenges were
analyzed and organized into four common thematic areas to
help define and shape Salt Lake City’s approach to people-
centered economic development. In turn, the thematic areas
provided structure to help organize the blueprint’s
recommendations, which are outlined on the following pages.
Physical Capital
Opportunities:
n Crossroads of the West
n Interconnected transportation
systems
n Utah's urban & cultural core
Challenges:
n Limited resources (e.g. land, real
estate, water, broadband, lab space)
n Lack of "center" for health care
innovation
Human & Social Capital
Opportunities:
n Growing # of STEM grads (but still need more)
n Strong social & economic mobility in SLC
n Strong sense of community
n Relatively low wages/COL compared nationally
n Growing support networks (BioHive, BioUtah, etc.)
Challenges:
n Lack of engaged diverse communities
n Lack of coordination between support networks
n Competency vs. credential gap for available workers
n Negative cultural & environmental concerns
Financial Capital
Opportunnities:
n Low tax rate
n Strong small business programs
n Strong philanthropic culture
n Strong banks & ILCs
Challenges:
n Low VC funding
n No philanthropic focus for health
care innovation
n Lack of CRA/city coordination
intellectual Capital
Opportunities:
n Research university with robust health
sciences in SLC
n Established Research Park in SLC
n Growing population of potential workers
Challenges:
n Lack of incubators & accelerators from
Research Park
n Lack of representation of diverse
communities in industry & government
Common Themes
That Define
Salt Lake City's Role
Frame & Brand
Convene & Connect
Inspire & Invest
Support & Sustain
FOUNDATiON—Elements integral to All Activities
n Inclusive, equitable growth
n Global perspective, interconnected region
n Leverage existing assets
n Focused attention, long-term horizon
n Public/private/community collaboration
n Time-constrained, data-driven, measurable
Opportunities and Challenges
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 13
Health Care Innovation Advisory Group
These advisory group members were selected to create a fabric across the city that will create an interconnected web within our
health care innovation community as we embark on filling gaps, building upon our strengths, and bring organizations together as
we tap into the capital city’s full potential.
Jared Bauer
CEO, IONIQ Sciences
David Bearss
Senior Managing Director, Therapeutic Labs
Silvia Castro
Director, Suazo Business Center
Ginger Chinn
VP of Public Policy, Salt Lake Chamber
Colby Cooley
VP of Business Development, EDCUtah
Kelvyn Cullimore
CEO, BioUtah
Daniel Dugan
Council member, Salt Lake City
Victor Garcia
Global VP, Varex Imaging
Miles Hansen
President and CEO, World Trade Center Utah
Chandana Haque
Executive Director, Altitude Lab & Recursion
Anh Hoang
Chief Science Officer, Co-Founder Sofregen Medical Inc.
Sara Jones
CEO and Founder, Inclusion Pro
Ben Kolendar
Economic Development Director, Salt Lake City
John Librett
CEO, Survivor Wellness
Keith Marmer
Chief Innovation & Economic Engagement Officer,
University of Utah
Jacob Maxwell
Workforce Development Manager, Salt Lake City
Heidi Hall
Senior Advisor and Project Consultant,
Intermountain Healthcare
Katelin Roberts
Executive Director, BioHive
Scott Romney
Manager Talent Ready Utah, GoUtah
Melisa Stark
Commissioner of Apprenticeship Program,
Department of Workforce Services
Blake Thomas
Director, SLC Community & Neighborhoods Department
Danny Walz
Director, SLC Redevelopment Agency
Supporting Staff:
Max Backlund, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Clark Cahoon, Salt Lake City Economic Development
Meredith King, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Siobhan Locke, The Langdon Group
Dianne Olson, The Langdon Group
Jennifer Robinson, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Paul Springer, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Brian Wilkinson, Wilkinson Ferrari & Co
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING14
The following principles guide the Gardner Institute and the
Governance Advisory Group in the discussion and
development of the Blueprint.
Leverage our unique assets to unite people and
organizations .
We acknowledge the significant role that health care research,
systems, design, and manufacturing play in Salt Lake City,
home to two-thirds of Utah’s jobs in this sector. We seek to
better connect organizations and people to increase
employment, raise average incomes, and improve the
community’s health and well-being. We will identify needs and
gaps to build on our advantages and ensure long-term
economic competitiveness.
Lasting economic prosperity requires focused attention
and willingness to forego short-term gains when needed .
We seek to unlock the full potential of our health care
innovation ecosystem to ensure opportunity and advance
prosperity for all residents of Salt Lake City. We will do this by
broadening traditional economic development approaches to
focus equally on equity, diversity, and inclusion of those who
are often overlooked. We also recognize that fundamental,
lasting economic improvements may require changes by
governments and the investment of public and private dollars
in different ways.
Our regional economy is an interconnected web .
We recognize that health care innovation and economic
development do not respect jurisdictional boundaries. While
our efforts are focused on Salt Lake City, the entire Wasatch
Front region will share in opportunities and positive outcomes
from our work. We support the idea that everyone can thrive if
we all work together toward common goals.
Collaboration is crucial to our success .
Achieving success in our economic development and social
equity aims will require strong partnerships between
government, business, and community. Collaboration between
the public and private sectors, combined with engagement
from all parts of society, is required for our visionary plan to
produce enduring, life-changing outcomes.
Efforts must be time-constrained, data-driven, and
measurable .
We will develop a blueprint with specific strategies and tactics
designed to produce tangible results within 500 days (1⅓ years)
and long-term, transformational changes within a 5,000-day
time horizon (about 13.5 years). Our efforts will be driven by
data and informed by community experience and needs. We
will measure results with established methods, such as the
Opportunity Index, and create others that are customized to
our situation.
Process Timeline
The Health Care Innovation Advisory Group met five times between April and July 2021, identifying the opportunities and
challenges with the industry, and discussing recommendations to help create a health care innovation hub in Salt Lake City,
providing opportunity for all SLC residents.
Kickoff Meeting
Wednesday, April 28th
Noon to 1:30pm
2nd Meeting
Wednesday, May 19th
10am to 11:30am
3rd Meeting
Wednesday, June 9th
10am to 11:30am
4th Meeting
Wednesday, June 30th
10am to 11:30am
5th Meeting
Wednesday, July 21st
10am to 11:30am
Advisory Group & Process
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 15
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING16
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute I 411 East South Temple Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 I 801-585-5618 I gardner.utah.edu
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute Staff and Advisors
Leadership Team
Natalie Gochnour, Associate Dean and Director
Jennifer Robinson, Associate Director
Shelley Kruger, Accounting and Finance Manager
Colleen Larson, Administrative Manager
Dianne Meppen, Director of Survey Research
Pamela S. Perlich, Director of Demographic Research
Juliette Tennert, Chief Economist
Nicholas Thiriot, Communications Director
James A. Wood, Ivory-Boyer Senior Fellow
Staff
Eric Albers, Research Associate
Max Backlund, Senior Research Associate
Max Becker, Research Associate
Samantha Ball, Senior Research Associate
Mallory Bateman, Senior Research Analyst
Andrea Thomas Brandley, Research Associate
Kara Ann Byrne, Senior Research Associate
Mike Christensen, Scholar-in-Residence
Phil Dean, Public Finance Senior Research Fellow
John C. Downen, Deputy Director of Economic
and Public Policy Research
Dejan Eskic, Senior Research Fellow
Emily Harris, Senior Demographer
Michael T. Hogue, Senior Research Statistician
Mike Hollingshaus, Senior Demographer
Thomas Holst, Senior Energy Analyst
Meredith King, Research Associate
Jennifer Leaver, Senior Tourism Analyst
Levi Pace, Senior Research Economist
Shannon Simonsen, Research Coordinator
Joshua Spolsdoff, Senior Research Economist
Paul Springer, Senior Graphic Designer
Laura Summers, Senior Health Care Analyst
Natalie Young, Research Analyst
Faculty Advisors
Matt Burbank, College of Social and
Behavioral Science
Adam Meirowitz, David Eccles School of Business
Elena Patel, David Eccles School of Business
Nathan Seegert, David Eccles School of Business
Senior Advisors
Jonathan Ball, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst
Silvia Castro, Suazo Business Center
Gary Cornia, Marriott School of Business
Wes Curtis, Community-at-Large
Theresa Foxley, EDCUtah
Dan Griffiths, Tanner LLC
Emma Houston, University of Utah
Beth Jarosz, Population Reference Bureau
Darin Mellott, CBRE
Chris Redgrave, Community-at-Large
Wesley Smith, Western Governors University
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute Advisory Board
Conveners
Michael O. Leavitt
Mitt Romney
Board
Scott Anderson, Co-Chair
Gail Miller, Co-Chair
Doug Anderson
Deborah Bayle
Cynthia A. Berg
Roger Boyer
Wilford Clyde
Sophia M. DiCaro
Cameron Diehl
Lisa Eccles
Spencer P. Eccles
Christian Gardner
Kem C. Gardner
Kimberly Gardner
Natalie Gochnour
Brandy Grace
Rachel Hayes
Clark Ivory
Mike S. Leavitt
Derek Miller
Ann Millner
Sterling Nielsen
Cristina Ortega
Jason Perry
Ray Pickup
Gary B. Porter
Taylor Randall
Jill Remington Love
Brad Rencher
Josh Romney
Charles W. Sorenson
James Lee Sorenson
Vicki Varela
Ex Officio (invited)
Governor Spencer Cox
Speaker Brad Wilson
Senate President
Stuart Adams
Representative Brian King
Senator Karen Mayne
Mayor Jenny Wilson
Mayor Erin Mendenhall
Partners in the
Community
The following individuals
and entities help support
the research mission of the
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute.
Legacy Partners
The Gardner Company
Intermountain Healthcare
Clark and Christine Ivory
Foundation
KSL and Deseret News
Larry H. & Gail Miller Family
Foundation
Mountain America Credit Union
Salt Lake City Corporation
Salt Lake County
University of Utah Health
Utah Governor’s Office of
Economic Opportunity
WCF Insurance
Zions Bank
Executive Partners
Mark and Karen Bouchard
The Boyer Company
Salt Lake Chamber
Sustaining Partners
Clyde Companies
Dominion Energy
Staker Parson Materials and
Construction
(HC)SLCHI Report B Nov2021
DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ERIN MENDENHALL
MAYOR
BEN KOLENDAR
DIRECTOR
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
_______________________ DATE RECEIVED: ___________
LISA SHAFFER, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER DATE SENT TO COUNCIL: ___________
__________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: October 6th 2021
Amy Fowler, Chair
FROM: Ben Kolendar, Department of Economic Development Director
SUBJECT: Health Care Innovation Blueprint
STAFF CONTACTS: Clark Cahoon, Technology and Innovation Advisor
(clark.cahoon@slcgov.com)
DOCUMENT TYPE: Information Item
RECOMMENDATION: Requesting direction and next steps from the City Council.
BUDGET IMPACT: NA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Mayor Mendenhall launched the Tech Lake City initiative in January 2020 to attract more
innovation and technology talent to the City, and to help improve pathways to technology -based
education and employment for all City residents, particularly those in underserved and diverse
communities. This initiative has been executed alongside traditional economic dev elopment
activities, such as responding to developers’ requests for information and coordinating business
recruitment with state and regional agencies. Tech Lake City also represents a pivot to a more -
proactive approach focused on strengthening key sectors , starting with health care innovation, an
industry with tremendous potential for the future as the City explores apprenticeships and
internships that can lead to high-paying jobs. The culmination of this work by a multidisciplinary
group has led to the development of a Health Care Innovation Blueprint that will catalyze
economic development in the industry and forge Salt Lake City as a global leader in this sector
which has some of our best and brightest innovators and business leaders in the City and the
State.
Lisa Shaffer (Oct 7, 2021 14:48 MDT)
10/07/2021
10/07/2021
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
PREVIOUS WORK
• May 2019: Growing the life sciences industry has been a focus of the Salt Lake City
Economic Development team for a few years now. In early 2019, the Department of
Economic Development released a Life Sciences and Opportunity Zones Prospectus, which
was a first draft, a conceptual analysis of how to utilize Opportunity Zones to attract Life
Sciences companies to Salt Lake City. In that prospectus, there is a loosely -defined Life
Sciences corridor proposed, based largely on where existing companies are located.
• May 2020: The City Council created and funded the position of a Technology and
Innovation Advisor to further support this strategic industry. An early success is the City’s
work to secure public investment to match industry funding which ultimately led to the
creation of the BioHive in November of 2020, a public -private agency designed to connect
and promote the 1,100+ life sciences and health care innovation companies in and around
Salt Lake City.
• September 2020: City Council supported the initiative with a $50,000 investment,
which to date has raised more than $1,100,000 in public and private investment. BioHive
coordinates with its statewide sibling, BioUtah, and interacts with related innovation -
focused efforts like the Salt Lake Chamber’s newly created Wasatch I nnovation Network.
The work will also focus on Mayor Mendenhall’s desire to develop a ‘tech corridor,’ a
concentration of technology-based businesses in Salt Lake City to drive economic
development in the health care innovation sector and create high -paying jobs and
economic mobility for residents.
• May 2021: The Department of Economic Development collaborated with the Planning
Division to update the zoning code to allow for research and development, lab space, and
general technology and innovation activity to meet the needs of these industries and city
staff. This process is currently in motion as we make these necessary changes to help
connect with our overall strategy with Tech Lake City.
• 2021: The Department of Economic Development convened an advisory board with Kem
C. Gardner Policy Institute at the University of Utah to develop a Blueprint for Growing
Salt Lake City’s Health Care Innovation Economy, which would serve to catalyze this
health care innovation initiative. City Council selected Councilmember Dan Dugan to
participate in the convening. He was among the first to support and actively participate in
the development of the Health Care Blueprint. That support has been critical in getting
this Blueprint across the finish line. A final draft of th e document will be shared and
discussed with the City Council at an upcoming work session briefing.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY & HEALTH CARE INNOVATION
The premise for this Blueprint is simple: Build on Salt Lake City's economic strengths in health
care innovation, provide expanded economic opportunity and improved health and well -being for
all residents. This is a new, deliberately people -focused approach to economic development that
looks to address underlying communitywide challenges like improving residents’ income mobility
and access to economic opportunities.
The opportunities in the health care innovation sector are plentiful and “sticky,” meaning they
tend to stay in one place once they are established – for example, at the University of Utah’s
health sciences campus, Research Park, and, increasingly, in and near downtown Salt Lake City.
These jobs also tend to offer higher-than-average wages, provide multiple entry points at different
salary levels, and provide internships, apprenticeships and other oppor tunities for high school
and college students, making them particularly attractive for individuals from less -advantaged
and diverse communities.
Salt Lake City hosts more than 294,000 jobs, or about 19 percent of all jobs in Utah, and 40
percent of all jobs in Salt Lake County. Utah’s health care innovation jobs are focused on research,
testing, and medical laboratories – a noted strength of Salt Lake City, which is home to 46 percent
– nearly half – of the state’s total Utah’s professional, scientific, and technical services
employment.
Salt Lake City is the state’s premier employment center and the growth center for life sciences
jobs, but many of these opportunities are filled by non -resident commuters. Of Salt Lake City’s
residents, 43.2 percent of working residents live and work in Salt Lake City, while 56.8 percent of
City residents commute elsewhere for work. Of those employed in Salt Lake City, 83.1 percent live
outside the area.
While jobs in the City are plentiful, opportunities to secure aren’t equ ally available to residents
because of lack of opportunity, or more specifically, lack of access to opportunity. Indeed, the
Opportunity Index score for Salt Lake County is a below-par C+. The Opportunity Index,
produced by the nonprofit group Opportunity Nation, measures not just a community’s economic
health, but how available economic opportunities are to all residents, and how well a community
provides the social support needed to increase economic mobility. The Opportunity Index, in
whole or part, will be an ongoing measure of success for the City’s economic development efforts.
Access to economic opportunity for individuals varies across geographies. Nationally, rates of
income mobility have steadily fallen since 1940. This is primarily due to decreasi ng economic
growth and an increasingly unequal distribution of growth. Increasing economic growth is not
enough to increase rates of income mobility; growth must occur across the income
spectrum. Areas with high income mobility share five basic characteri stics: less residential
segregation, less income inequality, better primary schools, greater social capital, and greater
family stability.3
Of these characteristics, social capital is one of the most important connections between economic
development and increasing opportunity for all. Social capital refers to the existence of mutual
support and cooperation, networks of trust, institutional effectiveness, goodwill, and civic virtue.
Community development efforts, like the City’s Blueprint, encompass these c haracteristics into a
structure for positive and purposeful collective action.
PUBLIC PROCESS
The process to develop the Blueprint included outreach to multiple economic development and
health care-related agencies and enterprises to gather data and request involvement. An Advisory
Group was established with 20 representatives from these organizations to provide expert advice
on industry and community needs and opportunities, along with input on potential
recommendations. This highly engaged group, which includes Salt Lake City Council Member Dan
Dugan, met five (5) times over six (6) months to help shape the Blueprint.
In addition, representatives from the Kem C. Gardner Institute and the City’s Department of
Economic Development have met with a variety of organizations to seek feedback on the ideas and
draft recommendations in the Blueprint. These meetings to check in with interested groups and
individuals continue to take place.
VISION OF THE BLUEPRINT
Vision: Salt Lake City will be a premier health care innovation hub that provides expanded
economic opportunity and improved health and well-being for all residents.
HIGH LEVEL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BLUEPRINT
• Growing and maintaining Salt Lake City's reputation as one of the nation's top
locations for health care innovation is instrumental to the City's success. We offer
three recommendations to help accomplish this:
o Build global brand;
o Reach out, lift up; and
o Highlight successful innovation.
• Identify available, accessible, and affordable education a nd training opportunities to
supply the workforce for Salt Lake City's fast-growing health care innovation
economy. We offer four recommendations to help accomplish this:
o Promote STEM learning;
o Create education-to-workforce partnership;
o Connect pathways;
o identify alternative pathways.
• Increase Investment. With the objective of increasing social and income mobility through
the Health Care Innovation industry, the City can help inform and connect available public
and private funding to innovative entrepreneurs. We offer three recommendations to help
accomplish this:
o Pursue untapped resources;
o Capitalize on private capital; and
o maximize social impact bonds.
• Strengthen Foundation & Remove Barriers. Salt Lake City's health care innovation
ecosystem is only as strong as the foundation that supports it. Streamlined regulations and
up-to-date information can help the industry flourish. We offer four recommendations to
help accomplish this:
o Create a baseline;
o Reduce business barriers;
o Inventory R&D opportunities;
o Ensure space is available.
Scheduling a work session briefing soon for the City Council is the subject of this transmittal.
While City Council approval of the Blueprint is not required, recommendations may require future
financial resources to implement.
Mayor Mendenhall, Natalie Gochnour, Ben Kolendar and Clark Cahoon will be at the table to
present and answer any questions.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Health Care Innovation Blueprint
A Blueprint for Growing Salt Lake City’s
Health Care Innovation Economy
October 2021
[SLC
Logo]
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURINGii
VISION
Salt Lake City will be a premier health care innovation
hub that provides expanded economic opportunity and
improved health and well-being for all residents.
Table of Contents
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 1
October 2021
Dear Friends,
Salt Lake City enjoys a well-rounded and growing economy that offers most residents and businesses plentiful
opportunities for success and prosperity.
Some residents, though, lack access to the educational and employment opportunities that many take for
granted. This leaves individuals and families behind, economically and socially, and creates an imbalance in our
community’s overall wealth and well-being that affects us all.
We’re working to change that. Everyone in Salt Lake City deserves a chance to learn, earn, and be part of a
thriving community.
That’s why my administration, through our Tech Lake City initiative, is invigorating our focus on inclusive growth
that empowers upward mobility for both residents and businesses. Our focus for this human-centered approach
is the health care sector, an area in which Salt Lake City already boasts a flourishing foundation of institutions and
businesses. With the highest concentration of life science-related jobs in the state located in the Capital City, we
have a tremendous opportunity to become a world-class hub for health care innovation.
This blueprint includes our vision, mission, guiding principles, action steps, and recommendations, to guide the
daily and long-term direction of Salt Lake City’s economic and social development efforts. It reflects our desire to
identify and strengthen community assets to ensure the City’s foundation supports structures that are fair,
equitable, inclusive, and diverse.
Much effort and many ideas have gone into building this plan, including the work of a multidisciplinary Health
Care Innovation Advisory Group convened for this purpose, along with work by City staff, the Gardner Institute,
and many other individuals and groups. It will be a management tool to guide our common vision, to unite people
and organizations, and to shape our City’s unique assets to build upward mobility of both businesses and people
to solve global challenges.
Not only will this approach improve the health of people locally and around the world, it will extend the capacity
to succeed to those who haven’t had the opportunity to do so.
Success will require collaboration and long-term effort by the private and public sectors. By working together,
we will reach our goal of raising Salt Lake City’s prominence as a worldwide hub for health care innovation, we will
build a more diverse, inclusive, and fair community.
We have an amazing opportunity in front of us, and we have momentum on our side. Let’s take up the challenge
to combine innovation with compassion to establish a thriving, inclusive, and equitable place called Salt Lake City.
Warmly,
Mayor Erin Mendenhall
Can/should we add a signature?
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING2
Utah’s economic heart. Salt Lake City is well-established as the economic hub of the
Wasatch Front, Utah as a whole, and the Intermountain West region. With nearly 300,000
jobs – 40% of all jobs in Salt Lake County; and nearly 20% of Utah’s total jobs – Salt Lake
City’s economy is large and diverse, although inextricably linked to the local and regional
economies.
Opportunities aren’t equally available. Despite its strengths and resiliency, not all residents
share in Salt Lake City’s economic success because of lack of opportunity, or more
specifically, lack of access to opportunity. Indeed, the Opportunity Index score for Salt Lake
County is a below-par C+. The Opportunity Index measures not just a community’s
economic health, but how available economic opportunities are to all residents, and how
well a community provides the social support needed to increase economic mobility. One
of the four main objectives of Mayor Mendenhall’s SLC 2021 Plan – “Creating inclusive and
equitable opportunity for all” – aims to address this need head-on.
Unique initiative considers social values and needs. Mayor Mendenhall has challenged
the City’s economic development team to create a strategy that addresses residents’
social, as well as economic, needs; reaches all communities; and considers the City’s
human capital, and not just its physical, financial, and intellectual forms of capital.
Focusing on health care innovation will broaden opportunity. With life sciences already a
pillar of the economy, Salt Lake City chooses to leverage it with the strengths in research
and development, manufacturing, financial services, entrepreneurship to emphasize the
region's leadership in healthcare innovation. Careers in health care innovation offer higher
than average wages, are "sticky" and not easily transferrable, are more recession-proof
compared to any other major industry in the state and provide a range of entry points at
different salary levels. This industry already has a diverse workforce, along with the ability to
scale apprenticeship and mentorship opportunities and connect to STEM education within
our school district. Our community colleges and universities offer a wide range of programs
from lab technician training, biomedical informatics, and genetic discovery, along with
programming that assists in re-skilling and up-skilling our community.
What is
‘Health Care
Innovation’?
The health care innovation
industry is a disruptor industry
including companies from the
life sciences, med tech, and
health tech industries aimed at
innovating and improving the
health care ecosystem.
It does not include doctor-
patient care.
A People-focused Approach to
Economic Development
The premise for this blueprint is simple: Build on Salt Lake City's economic strengths in
health care innovation and provide expanded economic opportunity and improved health
and well-being for all residents. This is a people-focused approach to economic development.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 3
Brand, Promote, & Grow
Growing and maintaining Salt Lake City's
reputation as one of the nation's top
locations for health care innovation is
instrumental to the city's success. We offer three
recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Build global brand;
2. Increase awareness of job opportunities; and
3. Highlight successes.
increase investment
With the objective of increasing social and
income mobility through the health care
innovation industry, the city can help
inform and connect available public and private funding
to support innovation ecosystem in the City. We offer
three recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Maximize industry partnerships;
2. Capitalize on private capital; and
3. Target social impact investments.
Emphasize Pathways &
Partnerships
Available, accessible, and affordable
education and training opportunities are
imperative to supply as workforce for Salt Lake City's fast-
growing health care innovation economy. We offer three
recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Create education-to-workforce partnerships;
2. Connect pathways; and
3. Identify alternative pathways.
Strengthen Foundation &
Remove Barriers
Salt Lake City's health care innovation
ecosystem is only as strong as the foundation
that supports it. Streamlined regulations and up-to-date
information can help the industry flourish. We offer four
recommendations to help accomplish this:
1. Create a baseline;
2. Reduce business barriers;
3. Inventory R&D opportunities; and
4. Ensure lab and office space is available.
Recommendations in Brief
These four pillars create the foundation to building a strong and sustainable
health care innovation industry and providing hyper-localized opportunities
for all of Salt Lake City’s residents.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING4
Growing and maintaining
Salt Lake City’s reputation
as one of the nation’s and
world’s top locations for
health care innovation is
instrumental to the City’s
success. Here are
recommendations to
help accomplish this:
Build Global Brand – Establish and sustain Salt Lake City’s unique
position and brand in the national health care innovation ecosystem and
participate in national and global organizations to glean best practices
and raise awareness about the City. Partnering with BioHive, BioUtah, the
University of Utah, and others, is essential to expand the City’s reach by
sharing stories of our talent base to attract interest, attending and
sponsoring events inside and outside the state, and promoting innovative
efforts of local companies and initiatives.
increase Awareness of Job Opportunities – Create a
powerful grassroots messaging and outreach campaign focused on
engaging and educating underserved communities about opportunities
in the health care innovation sector. Partner with BioHive, BioUtah, local
nonprofit organizations, the Salt Lake City School District, and others, to
educate about potential career pathways, showcase successful role models,
and raise awareness of easy-to-access education and training options.
Highlight Successes – Demonstrate the City’s shift to people-
focused economic development efforts by promoting innovative and
successful ways the City and partner organizations are uplifting
underserved populations through the news media (local, national, and
global), social media, awards, and other channels. Continue to build and
strengthen relationships with public and private agencies in the health
care innovation sector and engage their support in coordinating a
consistent program of media relations.
Brand, Promote, & Grow
“Tech Lake City” is the overarching concept guiding Salt Lake City’s
current and future economic development efforts, the centerpiece of
which is the fast-growing health care innovation sector.
Mayor Mendenhall launched the Tech Lake City initiative in January
of 2020 to attract more innovation and tech talent to the City, and to
help improve pathways to tech education and employment for all City
residents, particularly those in underserved communities.
Tech Lake City represents a pivot to a more-proactive, non-traditional
approach to economic development focusing on strengthening key
sectors, starting with health care innovation.
A key example of this new approach is the City’s work to secure
investment to create BioHive, a public-private agency designed to
connect and promote the 1,100+ life sciences and health care
innovation companies in and around Salt Lake City. BioHive coordinates
with its statewide sibling, BioUtah, and interacts with related
innovation-focused efforts like the Salt Lake Chamber’s newly created
Wasatch Innovation Network.
The Tech Lake City initiative is managed by Clark Cahoon, technology
and innovation advisor in the Department of Economic Development,
and overseen by department director, Ben Kolendar.
Salt Lake City
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 5
With the objective of
increasing social and
income mobility through
the health care
innovation industry, the
City can help inform and
connect available public
and private funding to
support the innovation
ecosystem in the City.
Maximize industry Partnerships – To be successful, Salt Lake
City’s efforts require working closely with economic development
agencies at the state and local levels, as well as with health care innovation
industry organizations like BioUtah and BioHive, of which the City is a
founder. By closely analyzing the City’s specific needs, officials can identify
and fill gaps, while deepening important and symbiotic relationships.
Capitalize on Private Capital – Local, regional, and national banks,
along with Utah’s many industrial loan corporations (ILCs) and other
financial institutions, provide opportunities for tapping into Community
Reinvestment Act funds and other sources. Partnering with the Federal
Reserve is one way to convene and educate banks about the City’s people-
focused approach and how it offers new prospects for investing in
meaningful and lasting community and social impact. In addition,
convening an ongoing advisory group of local, national, and global funders
with industry expertise can help Salt Lake City officials understand funding
structures and opportunities, brainstorm and strategize funding approaches,
and seek advice on economic development efforts.
Target Social impact investments -- Salt Lake City is investigating
novel opportunities, such as directing public investment into community-
based programs to increase opportunity and economic mobility, particularly
on the City's west side, which historically has been redlined, marginalized,
and underserved. The two areas of focus are early childhood development
and workforce interventions, both of which can be integrated with the
City’s approach to focusing economic development in the health care
innovation industry.
Increase Investment
Chandana Haque
Selected as one of 30 Women
to Watch in 2021 by Utah
Business magazine, Chandana
is Executive Director of
Altitude Lab, Utah’s largest
incubator for growing
early-stage life science and
health care companies.
A collaboration launched in 2020 by biotech firm
Recursion and the University of Utah’s PIVOT Center,
Altitude Lab fills the critical role of lowering hurdles
for underrepresented entrepreneurs. The
organization’s aim is to foster socially responsible
entrepreneurship, job creation, and economic
productivity.
I’m proud that 80 percent of startups at Altitude Lab are led
by women and minorities. Their diversity enables them to
innovate and address the disparities they have experienced
first-hand. Providing founders with a network of top-tier, national
investors, something that is difficult for underrepresented
founders to access, can completely change the trajectory of their
startup, propelling them to not only compete but excel in our
fast-changing health care innovation landscape.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING6
Available, accessible, and
affordable education and
training opportunities are
imperative to supply a
sustainable workforce for
Salt Lake City’s fast-
growing health care
innovation economy.
Tapping into existing
programs, and filling in
gaps to meet specific
needs, is fundamental to
the City’s success.
Create Education-to-Workforce Partnerships – Partner
with the Salt Lake City School District, STEM Action Center, BioHive,
BioUtah, and others, to help better meet the community’s education-to-
workforce needs. Involve higher education and industry partners to
define, refine, and customize, training and education efforts. Seek one or
more industry firms to join the effort as partners for mentoring and
internship/apprenticeship opportunities.
Connect Pathways – Partner with Talent Ready Pathways program to
create localized opportunities for students to engage in the health care
innovation industry. Create city-specific metrics to help guide the success
of the program within Salt Lake City.
identify Alternative Pathways - Survey industry businesses to
identify positions that typically require higher education or certification
that could be reassessed to include alternative pathways such as
apprenticeship, internships, skills tests, etc. Use survey results to create a
strategic plan on how to inform and motivate businesses to create more
alternative pathway opportunities for employees.
Emphasize Pathways & Partnerships
Keith Marmer
A holder of three patents and
founder of four companies,
Keith has helped raise more
than $1 billion in investment
capital for multiple startups
and overseen the creation of
more than 140 companies
during the last 30 years.
Now, as Chief Innovation & Economic Engagement
Officer for the University of Utah (the U), Keith
oversees the school’s globally-recognized PIVOT
Center. On behalf of the U, PIVOT Center serves as a
catalyst for the regional innovation economy,
integrating technology commercialization, corporate
engagement, and economic development.
Health care innovation is an area of existing strength for Salt
Lake City and Utah and the city and state are positioned well to
continue to make global impact. It’s a field that thrives and relies on a
constant supply of new ideas and approaches; the PIVOT Center sits
at that critical junction where laboratory innovations become
marketable, life-saving products and treatments. Moving the
economic needle – particularly to benefit those innovations with less
access to opportunity – will require ever-stronger partnerships
between education, industry, and government, something I’m
excited to see in this effort led by Mayor Mendenhall.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 7
Salt Lake City’s health
care innovation
ecosystem is only as
strong as the foundation
that supports it.
Streamlined regulations
and up-to-date
information can help the
industry and businesses
flourish.
Create a Baseline – Collect citywide data on workforce development
needs, job growth, and wage growth within the health care innovation
industry to provide a baseline measurement and the ability to set thoughtful
and strategic goals. Identify and track a handful of key metrics to understand
how well the City’s economic development and social mobility objectives are
being met over time.
Reduce Business Barriers – Identify ways that city regulations and
zoning laws may be impeding the success of building a thriving health care
innovation ecosystem; then, identify and implement ways to resolve concerns.
inventory R&D Opportunities – Working with partners, identify cur-
rent and planned research and development activities by colleges and univer-
sities, health care providers, nonprofit organizations, and private companies.
Compile and analyze existing inventories to identify gaps and potential oppor-
tunities, such as promising but unrealized patents, then determine how best to
move forward with a short list of encouraging possibilities.
Ensure Space is Available – Creating a streamlined and collaborative
real estate plan to promote health care innovation industry incubator
development, wet lab spaces, and industry-friendly commercial land
development, prioritizing real estate opportunities to support the innova tion
ecosystem. Immediate efforts should focus on the Innovation Corridor already
underway, options for the development of city assets, and aligning plans with
University of Utah, Research Park, real estate development leaders.
Strengthen Foundation & Remove Barriers
Anh Hoang, PhD
A native of Salt Lake City’s Glendale
neighborhood, Anh has built a
successful career as a life sciences
entrepreneur with a doctorate in
biomedical engineering, thanks in
part to a college scholarship
from her father’s employer,
O.C. Tanner Company.
Anh co-founded Sofregen Medical Inc. in the Boston
area and serves as the firm’s Chief Science Officer. Under
her guidance, Sofregen developed the first product made
from reconstituted silk protein to be cleared by the FDA
for a medical use. Anh is also a faculty member at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Catalyst
LinQ program and was a recipient of the 2018 Medtech
Boston 40 under 40 Healthcare Innovators.
My success can be anyone’s success if they have access to
education, training, and most importantly, mentors and role
models. That can be especially difficult for people living in
underserved communities like the one I grew up in. We need a
more direct approach to engage young people and demonstrate
the world of opportunities that await them. That’s why I’m excited
about Salt Lake City’s health care innovation initiative and am
eager to return to Utah to help make it a reality.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING8
Cementing Salt Lake City’s role as a worldwide
health care innovator and leader rests on Utah’s
historic and current success. The fact is that many
innovative and economically strong health care
elements already support our community.
Amplifying this advantage will strengthen and
broaden our economic foundation of larger anchor
firms, as well as innovative spin-offs, that create new
ways of helping the world and offer opportunities
for well-paying and satisfying jobs for Salt Lake City
residents.
Being more successful requires the City and its
partners to effectively tell the story of our health care
innovation economy, within Utah and across the
nation and globe. BioHive, a recently established
industry association, is working to fill this need with
support from the City and public and private partners.
Our legacy of health care innovation and new
partnerships like BioHive allow us to seize the
moment and proactively shape the way our City
grows – with a clear focus on equity, social and
human capital, and a desire to reach our full potential
within an industry that improves and extends the
health and well-being of not only our residents, but
people everywhere.
Home-Grown Health Care Innovations
n Salt Lake City was the home of the first artificial heart
successfully implanted in a human. Retired dentist
Barney Clark lived 112 days with the device in his chest,
an advancement that attracted worldwide media
attention to University Hospital.
n The first hospital information system to integrate
patient data for clinical decision support – Health
Evaluation through Logical Programming, or HELP –
was developed here and led the way to worldwide
adoption of electronic medical records.
n The University of Utah is home to the Utah Population
Database, the nation’s only and world’s largest
repository for genetics, epidemiology, demography,
and public health data.
n We also have steady grant funding from the National
Institutes of Health, a top five technology transfer
ranking, as well as an overall employment growth rate
of 26% from 2012 to 2016.
n Founded in 1984 by University of Utah pathologists,
ARUP Laboratories has grown into a national nonprofit
and academic reference laboratory at the forefront of
diagnostic medicine. With more than 4,000 employees,
ARUP offers 3,000+ tests and test combinations and
processes over 50,000 specimens every day, 24/7.
Utah's Health Care Innovation Industry
More Than 1,100
Companies are part of the ecosystem
Life sciences
produces 8% of
Utah’s total GDP
Utah is 6th per capita
in life sciences investment in the U.S
Salt Lake area is
2nd in the nation
for medical device
employment concentration.
Economic Proof Points
Utah is 2nd in the nation
for annual growth
in life sciences employment growth
between 2012 and 2020.
Nation's highest
concentration of life sciences jobs – twice the national average.
Utah is 1 of just 4 states
with industry concentrations in multiple
health care innovation sectors, including
pharmaceuticals, medical devices and research,
testing, and medical laboratories.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 9
Utah Life Sciences: Comparisons with Other Leading States
In 2020, Utah’s life sciences job growth reached an exceptional
7.2% amid nationwide employment gains in the industry
averaging 0.5%. Utah’s growth ranked second among the 20
largest state life sciences industries, eight of which contracted
since 2019.
Since 2007, even through business cycle fluctuations, growth
in the life sciences industry has outpaced the rest of Utah’s
economy. For example, life sciences employment gains were
robust in 2020 when the state experienced an overall 1.8%
contraction in average employment.
In 2020, Utah’s workforce concentration in life sciences
reached 1.9% of all employees, first among states and more
than double the national average of 0.9%. Utah had the 15th
most life sciences jobs of any state, which was high for the 31st
largest employed workforce in the U.S.
Within the life sciences industry, Utah compares favorably
among states in terms of workforce specialization in devices
(second), pharmaceuticals (fourth), research and laboratories
(eighth), and distribution (16th).
Figure 2. Life Sciences Workforce Specialization,
2015 and 2020
(Life Sciences Share of Total Employment in the Top 20 States)
Note: Employment shares represent all employees at life sciences companies, regardless
of occupation. Top 20 states selected by their 2020 life sciences employment level.
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
GA
TXWA
OH
NY
MI
FLTN
AZ
PA
CO
WI
CANC
MA
NJ
IN
MN
UT
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
1.2%
1.4%
1.6%
1.8%
2.0%
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000Life Sciences Employment as a Percent of Total EmploymentLife Sciences Employment
U.S. median = 0.6%
U.S. average = 0.9%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.7%
0.7%
0.8%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
1.0%
1.0%
1.2%
1.2%
1.4%
1.5%
1.7%
1.7%
1.9%
0.9%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.7%
0.8%
0.7%
0.7%
0.8%
0.9%
0.8%
0.7%
1.1%
1.1%
1.3%
1.4%
1.5%
1.4%
1.6%
0.8%
0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%
Georgia
Texas
Washington
Ohio
New York
Michigan
Florida
Tennessee
Arizona
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Colorado
Wisconsin
California
North Carolina
Massachusetts
New Jersey
Indiana
Minnesota
Utah
U.S.
2015 2020
IL
166.6
121.6
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
20072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020Life Sciences Industry Other Industries
Single-Year, 2019–2020
Figure 1. Life Sciences industry Annual Job Growth
Percentage Change for States with the 20 Largest Life Sciences
Industries
Note: Top 20 states selected by their 2020 life sciences employment level. Alaska and
Hawaii, not shown, were not among the states providing the most life sciences jobs.
Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
Five-Year Average, 2015–2020
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
0.3%
-0.2%
3.6%
1.1%-1.4%
-1.3%
2.0%
-2.8%
1.9%
3.2%
0.6%
-2.2%
-0.6%
-4.0%
1.8%
4.4%
7.1%
7.2%10.2%
-1.3%
-4.0% to 0.0%0.0% to 1.9%2.0% to 3.9%4.0% to 10.2%Not top 20
5.5%
7.0%
4.1%4.8%
6.1%
2.6%
2.1%
3.4%
2.5%
0.8%
1.8%
1.9%1.4%
3.6%
1.3%
0.9%
2.7%
3.8%2.1%
1.3%
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING10
Salt Lake City Employment
Salt Lake City hosts more than 294,000 jobs, or about 19 percent of all jobs in
Utah, and 40 percent of all jobs in Salt Lake County. As Figure 1 shows, Utah
specializes in research, testing, and medical laboratories – a noted strength of
Salt Lake City, which is home to 46% of Utah’s professional, scientific, and
technical services employment. Salt Lake City is not just a premier employment
center for the state, it is a growth center for life sciences jobs.
While these industries include jobs outside of life sciences or health care, they
are indicators of the general state of jobs in the health care innovation sector
with companies in the life sciences manufacturing and research and
development industries.
Salt Lake City also employs a labor pool made up of non-resident commuters.
Of Salt Lake City’s residents, 43.2 percent of the working residents live and work
in the City while 56.8 percent of citizens commute outside of Salt Lake for work.
Of those employed in Salt Lake City, 83.1 percent live outside the area.
Table 2: Employment by industry, 2019
Employment Financial Services Life Sciences iT/Software
Salt Lake County 736,746 57,538 28,848 44,930
State of Utah 1,559,843 86,784 43,584 86,602
County Share of Industry Employment 47%66%66%52%
Source:
Table 1: industries in Healthcare innovation Employment, 2019
industry Salt Lake City
Salt Lake
County
Utah
County State of Utah
Share of industry in
Salt Lake County
Share of industry
in Utah
Manufacturing 25,895 57,834 19,679 136,893 44.8%18.9%
Professional/Scientific/Technical Services 50,506 60,548 21,946 109,824 83.4%46.0%
Health Care and Social Assistance 23,796 81,706 32,005 179,929 29.1%13.2%
Subtotal 100,197 200,088 73,630 426,646 50.1%23.5%
Total Employment 294,156 736,746 266,837 1,559,843 39.9%18.9%
Source:
Salt Lake City Resident Commuting Patterns
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
Salt Lake City Employment Commuting Patterns
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
43.2
56.8
SLC Resident and
Employed in SLC
SLC Resident
Commuting Outside
16.9
83.1
SLC Resident
Employees
Non-SLC Resident
Employees
70.4%
22.6%
24.6%
81.3%
18.0%
58.2%
55.2%
15.2%
11.6%
19.1%
20.2%
3.5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Life Sciences Distribution
Drugs and Pharmaceuticals
Medical Devices and Equipment
Research, Testing, and Medical Laboratories
Utah Other States Other Countries
Figure 1: Utah Life Sciences industry Components, Share of Output Sold by Destination, 2017
Source: Utah Department of Workforce Services, Bureau of Economic Analysis, REMI PI+ economic model, and Biotechnology Innovation Organization.
The City's Blueprint incorporates economic metrics to pair
with broader City initiatives to create more opportunity for
residents. In this way, the Blueprint serves as both a community
and economic development tool.
The Blueprint's long-term goals on social mobility requires
metrics beyond the traditional economic development
measurements.
Tracking the City’s Opportunity index Score
Traditional economic development metrics track growth
indicators like the growth of the city’s tax base, job growth,
wage growth, private investment, and the amount of real estate
dedicated to life sciences. These metrics provide an
understanding of how much growth is happening, where, and
why it may be happening. By creating a baseline of these more
traditional economic development, or placemaking, metrics,
the City is able to track the progress and efficacy of the Blueprint
and make course corrections as necessary.
The City has also adopted Opportunity Index as a measure of
how well economic growth is distributed to the City’s
residents. This Index includes metrics housed in four areas of
community well-being:
• Economy
• Education
• Health
• Community
These metrics include data on employment, wages, income
inequality, housing, educational attainment, and insurance
coverage, among others.
Considering the Benefits of Social Capital
Access to economic opportunity for individuals varies across
geographies. Nationally, rates of income mobility have steadily
fallen since 1940. This is primarily due to decreasing economic
growth and an increasingly unequal distribution of growth.
Increasing economic growth is not enough to increase rates of
income mobility, the growth must occur across the income
distribution.1, 2 Areas with high income mobility share five basic
characteristics, including less residential segregation, less
income inequality, better primary schools, greater social capital,
and greater family stability.3
Of these characteristics, social capital is one of the most
important connections between economic development and
increasing opportunity for all. Social capital refers to the
existence of mutual support and cooperation, networks of
trust, institutional effectiveness, goodwill and civic virtue.4, 5
Community development efforts, like the City’s blueprint,
encompass these characteristics into a structure for positive
and purposeful collective action.6 It builds a community’s
capacity to improve the well-being of its residents based on
existing human, social, and economic assets.7 It also recognizes
that some factors affecting well-being are nonlocal factors, and
provides a realistic appraisal of opportunities and constraints.8
1. Chetty, R., et al. (2017). The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Mobility. Science 356(6336): 398-406. Retrieved from https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/the-fading-
american-dream/
2. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
3. Chetty, R. et al. (2014). Where is the Land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the United States. Quarterly Journal of Economics 129(4): 1553-1623, 2014.
Retrieved from https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/land-of-opportunity/
4. U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee. (2018). Social Capital Project: “The Geography of Social Capital in America.” Retrieved from https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
republicans/2018/4/the-geography-of-social-capital-in-america
5. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
6. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
7. Flora, C.B. and Luther, V. (2000). An Introduction to Building Community Capacity. Small Tow and Rural Economic Development: A Case Studies Approach. Connecticut: Praeger
Publishers.
8. Wilkinson, K. (1991). The Community in Rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 11
Measurements for Growth
The Blueprint's long-term goals on social mobility requires metrics beyond the traditional
economic development measurements.
Opportunity index
The Opportunity Index was jointly developed by
Opportunity Nation and Measure of America and measures
16 indicators, scoring all 50 states plus Washington DC on a
scale of 0-100 each year. In addition, more than 2,600
counties are graded A-F, giving policymakers and leaders a
useful tool to identify areas for improvement and to gauge
progress over time.
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING12
A crucial part of developing this blueprint was to identify
opportunities and challenges facing Salt Lake City and the
health care innovation industry. Members of the Advisory
Group, stakeholders, and the project team, viewed this task
through the lens of the guiding principles, a set of foundational
concepts embedded throughout the process.
Opportunities and challenges were identified for four types
of “capital,” three of which – physical capital, intellectual capital,
and financial capital – are commonly assessed in economic
development planning. The fourth, human and social capital,
adds the perspective of the City’s current and future workforce
and residents, and their ability to succeed – a complex,
undervalued, and critical factor for creating this plan.
Once articulated, the opportunities and challenges were
analyzed and organized into four common thematic areas to
help define and shape Salt Lake City’s approach to people-
centered economic development. In turn, the thematic areas
provided structure to help organize the blueprint’s
recommendations, which are outlined on the following pages.
Physical Capital
Opportunities:
n Crossroads of the West
n Interconnected transportation
systems
n Utah's urban & cultural core
Challenges:
n Limited resources (e.g. land, real
estate, water, broadband, lab space)
n Lack of "center" for health care
innovation
Human & Social Capital
Opportunities:
n Growing # of STEM grads (but still need more)
n Strong social & economic mobility in SLC
n Strong sense of community
n Relatively low wages/COL compared nationally
n Growing support networks (BioHive, BioUtah, etc.)
Challenges:
n Lack of diversity
n Lack of coordination between support networks
n Competency vs. credential gap for available workers
n Negative cultural & environmental concerns
Financial Capital
Opportunnities:
n Low tax rate
n Strong small business programs
n Strong philanthropic culture
n Strong banks & ILCs
Challenges:
n Low VC funding
n No philanthropic focus for health
care innovation
n Lack of CRA/city coordination
intellectual Capital
Opportunities:
n Research university with robust health
sciences in SLC
n Established Research Park in SLC
n Growing population of potential workers
Challenges:
n Lack of incubators & accelerators from
Research Park
n Lack of diversity in industry & government
Common Themes
That Define
Salt Lake City's Role
Frame & Brand
Convene & Connect
Inspire & Invest
Support & Sustain
FOUNDATiON—Elements integral to All Activities
n Inclusive, equitable growth
n Global perspective, interconnected region
n Leverage existing assets
n Focused attention, long-term horizon
n Public/private/community collaboration
n Time-constrained, data-driven, measurable
Opportunities and Challenges
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 13
Health Care Innovation Advisory Group
These advisory group members were selected to create a fabric across the city that will create an interconnected web within our
health care innovation community as we embark on filling gaps, building upon our strengths, and bring organizations together as
we tap into the capital city’s full potential.
Jared Bauer
CEO, IONIQ Sciences
David Bearss
Senior Managing Director, Therapeutic Labs
Silvia Castro
Director, Suazo Business Center
Ginger Chinn
VP of Public Policy, Salt Lake Chamber
Colby Colley
VP of Business Development, EDCUtah
Kelvyn Cullimore
CEO, BioUtah
Victor Garcia
Global VP, Varex Imaging
Miles Hansen
President and CEO, World Trade Center Utah
Chandana Haque
Executive Director, Altitude Lab & Recursion
Anh Hoang
Founder, Life Science Fund
Sara Jones
CEO and Founder, Inclusion Pro
John Librett
President, Survivor Wellness
Keith Marmer
Chief Innovation & Economic Engagement Officer, University
of Utah
Heidi Hall
Senior Advisor and Project Consultant, Intermountain
Healthcare
Katelin Roberts
Interim Director, BioHive
Scott Romney
Manager Talent Ready Utah, GoUtah
Melisa Stark
Commissioner of Apprenticeship Program, Dept. of
Workforce Services
Blake Thomas
Director of SLC Community & Neighborhoods Department
Danny Walz
CEO, SLC RDA
Supporting Staff:
Max Backlund, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Clark Cahoon, Salt Lake City Economic Development
Meredith King, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Siobhan Locke, The Langdon Group
Dianne Olson, The Langdon Group
Jennifer Robinson, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Paul Springer, Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute
Brian Wilkinson, Wilkinson Ferrari & Co
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING14
The following principles guide the Gardner Institute and the
Governance Advisory Group in the discussion and
development of the Blueprint.
Leverage our unique assets to unite people and
organizations.
We acknowledge the significant role that health care research,
systems, design, and manufacturing play in Salt Lake City,
home to two-thirds of Utah’s jobs in this sector. We seek to
better connect organizations and people to increase
employment, raise average incomes, and improve the
community’s health and well-being. We will identify needs and
gaps to build on our advantages and ensure long-term
economic competitiveness.
Lasting economic prosperity requires focused attention
and willingness to forego short-term gains when needed.
We seek to unlock the full potential of our health care
innovation ecosystem to ensure opportunity and advance
prosperity for all residents of Salt Lake City. We will do this by
broadening traditional economic development approaches to
focus equally on equity, diversity, and inclusion of those who
are often overlooked. We also recognize that fundamental,
lasting economic improvements may require changes by
governments and the investment of public and private dollars
in different ways.
Our regional economy is an interconnected web.
We recognize that health care innovation and economic
development do not respect jurisdictional boundaries. While
our efforts are focused on Salt Lake City, the entire Wasatch
Front region will share in opportunities and positive outcomes
from our work. We support the idea that everyone can thrive if
we all work together toward common goals.
Collaboration is crucial to our success.
Achieving success in our economic development and social
equity aims will require strong partnerships between
government, business, and community. Collaboration between
the public and private sectors, combined with engagement
from all parts of society, is required for our visionary plan to
produce enduring, life-changing outcomes.
Efforts must be time-constrained, data-driven, and
measurable.
We will develop a blueprint with specific strategies and tactics
designed to produce tangible results within 500 days (1⅓ years)
and long-term, transformational changes within a 5,000-day
time horizon (about 13.5 years). Our efforts will be driven by
data and informed by community experience and needs. We
will measure results with established methods, such as the
Opportunity Index, and create others that are customized to
our situation.
Process Timeline
The Health Care Innovation Advisory Group met five times between April and July 2021, identifying the opportunities and
challenges with the industry, and discussing recommendations to help create a health care innovation hub in Salt Lake City,
providing opportunity for all SLC residents.
Kickoff Meeting
Wednesday, April 28th
Noon to 1:30pm
2nd Meeting
Wednesday, May 19th
10am to 11:30am
3rd Meeting
Wednesday, June 9th
10am to 11:30am
4th Meeting
Wednesday, June 30th
10am to 11:30am
5th Meeting
Wednesday, July 21st
10am to 11:30am
Advisory Group & Process
A BLUEPRINT FOR GROWING SALT LAKE CITY’S HEALTH CARE INNOVATION ECONOMY 15
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute I 411 East South Temple Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 I 801-585-5618 I gardner.utah.edu
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute Staff and Advisors
Leadership Team
Natalie Gochnour, Associate Dean and Director
Jennifer Robinson, Associate Director
Shelley Kruger, Accounting and Finance Manager
Colleen Larson, Administrative Manager
Dianne Meppen, Director of Survey Research
Pamela S. Perlich, Director of Demographic Research
Juliette Tennert, Chief Economist
Nicholas Thiriot, Communications Director
James A. Wood, Ivory-Boyer Senior Fellow
Staff
Eric Albers, Research Associate
Max Backlund, Senior Research Associate
Max Becker, Research Associate
Samantha Ball, Senior Research Associate
Mallory Bateman, Senior Research Analyst
Andrea Thomas Brandley, Research Associate
Kara Ann Byrne, Senior Research Associate
Mike Christensen, Scholar-in-Residence
Phil Dean, Public Finance Senior Research Fellow
John C. Downen, Deputy Director of Economic
and Public Policy Research
Dejan Eskic, Senior Research Fellow
Emily Harris, Senior Demographer
Michael T. Hogue, Senior Research Statistician
Mike Hollingshaus, Senior Demographer
Thomas Holst, Senior Energy Analyst
Meredith King, Research Associate
Jennifer Leaver, Senior Tourism Analyst
Levi Pace, Senior Research Economist
Shannon Simonsen, Research Coordinator
Joshua Spolsdoff, Senior Research Economist
Paul Springer, Senior Graphic Designer
Laura Summers, Senior Health Care Analyst
Natalie Young, Research Analyst
Faculty Advisors
Matt Burbank, College of Social and
Behavioral Science
Adam Meirowitz, David Eccles School of Business
Elena Patel, David Eccles School of Business
Nathan Seegert, David Eccles School of Business
Senior Advisors
Jonathan Ball, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst
Silvia Castro, Suazo Business Center
Gary Cornia, Marriott School of Business
Wes Curtis, Community-at-Large
Theresa Foxley, EDCUtah
Dan Griffiths, Tanner LLC
Emma Houston, University of Utah
Beth Jarosz, Population Reference Bureau
Darin Mellott, CBRE
Chris Redgrave, Community-at-Large
Wesley Smith, Western Governors University
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute Advisory Board
Conveners
Michael O. Leavitt
Mitt Romney
Board
Scott Anderson, Co-Chair
Gail Miller, Co-Chair
Doug Anderson
Deborah Bayle
Cynthia A. Berg
Roger Boyer
Wilford Clyde
Sophia M. DiCaro
Cameron Diehl
Lisa Eccles
Spencer P. Eccles
Christian Gardner
Kem C. Gardner
Kimberly Gardner
Natalie Gochnour
Dr. Michael Good
Brandy Grace
Rachel Hayes
Clark Ivory
Mike S. Leavitt
Derek Miller
Ann Millner
Sterling Nielsen
Cristina Ortega
Jason Perry
Ray Pickup
Gary B. Porter
Taylor Randall
Jill Remington Love
Brad Rencher
Josh Romney
Charles W. Sorenson
James Lee Sorenson
Vicki Varela
Ted Wilson
Ex Officio (invited)
Governor Spencer Cox
Speaker Brad Wilson
Senate President
Stuart Adams
Representative Brian King
Senator Karen Mayne
Mayor Jenny Wilson
Mayor Erin Mendenhall
Partners in the
Community
The following individuals
and entities help support
the research mission of the
Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute.
Legacy Partners
The Gardner Company
Intermountain Healthcare
Clark and Christine Ivory
Foundation
KSL and Deseret News
Larry H. & Gail Miller Family
Foundation
Mountain America Credit Union
Salt Lake City Corporation
Salt Lake County
University of Utah Health
Utah Governor’s Office of
Economic Opportunity
WCF Insurance
Zions Bank
Executive Partners
Mark and Karen Bouchard
The Boyer Company
Salt Lake Chamber
Sustaining Partners
Clyde Companies
Dominion Energy
Staker Parson Materials and
Construction
INCLUSIVE, EQUITABLE & ENDURING16
Item E14
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke
Budget and Policy Analyst
DATE:December 7, 2021
RE: City Consent to Subleases at The Leonardo
MOTION 1 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
I move that the Council close the public hearing and refer the item to a future date for action.
MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING
I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future date.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke
Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:December 7, 2021
RE: City Consent to Subleases at The Leonardo
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
Property management including leasing and subleasing is typically an administrative function handled by the
executive branch of City government. The request from The Leonardo for approval of subleasing space is coming
to the Council like public benefits analyses required for private use of a public asset. In this case the public asset
is the former library building at 209 East 500 South and the private use is The Leonardo subleasing spaces in
the City-owned building to other entities.
There are three requirements any sublease must satisfy at the former library building:
1. State Law Public Purpose – A sublease must advance a public purpose to comply with state law.
2. Voter-approved Bond Purpose – A sublease must comply with the purpose stated on the ballot when
voters approved the general obligation bond. The ballot language was a bond “paying the costs of
renovating, improving, and preserving the old main library building and providing related facilities
located at approximately 5th South Street and 2nd East Street to establish a science, culture and art
education center.”
3. Lease Section 19 for Subletting – A sublease must have “the written consent of the City,” … and “a direct
relationship to The Leonardo’s Mission and programming plan.”
The City has leased the former library building to The Leonardo since June 2009 after the City Council held a
public hearing, considered a public benefits analysis and determined the lease served a public purpose. The lease
allows The Leonardo to sublease space if the City consents and the entity subleasing has a direct relationship to
The Leonardo’s mission and programming. The organization’s mission is “exploring and connecting art, culture,
and science in imaginative ways to enrich peoples’ lives, expand consciousness, and enhance the community.” A
sublease could include joint programming and partnerships with The Leonardo. The primary lease between the
City and The Leonardo remains unchanged by any subleases that are approved.
The Attorney’s Office provided a resolution for the Council’s consideration that would authorize the Mayor’s
Administration to approve subleases at The Leonardo. This approach would allow the Administration to conduct
property management including future sublease requests instead of each request coming to the Council for
individual approval. The Administration would determine for each request if the sublease meets the three
requirements listed above, that is, “fulfills a public purpose, complies with the bond purpose, and has a direct
relationship to The Leonardo’s mission and programming” (end of page one of resolution).
Project Timeline:
1st Briefing: December 7, 2021
Public Hearing: December 7, 2021
2nd Briefing: December 14, 2021 (if needed)
Potential Action: December 14, 2021
Page | 2
1
9
5
8
0
The Administration’s transmittal includes a draft sublease agreement, a copy of the primary lease between the
City and The Leonardo and a public benefits analysis specific to Ken Sanders Rare Books. There is also an
exhibit detailing five potential phases for Ken Sanders Rare Books under a draft sublease at The Leonardo which
envisions 11,437 of square feet and related building improvements being used as premises for the sublease. This
would represent approximately 13% of the building’s total square footage.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. Delegation of Authority for Consenting to Subleases – The Council may wish to discuss if it
supports the delegating authority approach for the Administration to handle sublease requests at the
former library building. This approach is like property management typically being an administrative
function under separation of powers.
2. Long-term Plans for the Old Library Building – The Council may wish to discuss with the
Administration what plans exist for the old library building?
3. Maintenance and Building Status – The Council may wish to ask the Administration for a status
update on the building including maintenance and capital improvement needs. Under the primary lease,
the City is responsible for repair and replacement of the building foundations, structural systems both
interior and exterior, and all electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems.
4. Signs and Façade Changes – The Council may wish to ask if changes to the former library building’s
façade such as signs or banners are anticipated to indicate new tenants.
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Original and Refinanced Bonds
Salt Lake City voters approved issuance of tax-exempt general obligation bonds in November 2003. Due to
several delays the City issued the $10.2 million of bonds in November 2009. In 2017 the bonds were refinanced
to save taxpayers money, and the City continues making payments.
The Former Library Building (209 East 500 South)
The former library building was constructed in 1964 with unreinforced masonry. The building has almost
87,000 square feet across five levels including the basement and sub-basement. In 2020, the recommended
capital improvement needs were estimated at over $4 million to maintain current uses according to the Public
Services Department’s Facilities Condition Index.
Length of Primary Lease
The primary lease between the City and The Leonardo was recorded in June 2009 and has an initial term of 20
years. If both the City and The Leonardo agree, then the lease may be extended three times for an additional 10
years each time which could add 30 years to the lease. It’s worth noting that The Leonardo pays $1 per month in
rent under the primary lease for the duration of the term.
Recent City Investments
The Council approved$322,729 in 2016 as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) using General Fund
dollars to replace the former library building’s atrium roof deck. The project was intended to fix roof leaks that
existed since the building was renovated in 2008-2010.
The Council approved $60,000 in 2014 to increase access to the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit at The Leonardo so
that students and families of Title One schools, and other Salt Lake City low-income residents, were able to
attend the exhibit. The funding also covered related costs, such as (but not limited to) school bus rentals.
RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2021
(Authorizing Subleases at The Leonardo)
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2003, Salt Lake City voters approved the issuance by the
City of general obligation bonds for the purpose of “paying the costs of renovating, improving
and preserving the old main library building and providing related facilities located at
approximately 5th South Street and 2nd East Street to establish a science, culture and art
education center” (the “Bond Purpose”).
WHEREAS, to fulfill the Bond Purpose, Salt Lake City Corporation (“City”) leases the
former main library building, located at 209 East 500 South, to The Leonardo, formerly known
as The Library Square Foundation for Art, Culture, and Science, pursuant to a Lease Agreement
recorded with the City Recorder on June 25, 2009 (the “Lease”).
WHEREAS, the Leonardo’s mission is “exploring and connecting art, culture, and science
in imaginative ways to enrich peoples’ lives, expand consciousness, and enhance the community.”
WHEREAS, under the terms of the lease between the Leonardo and the City, The Leonardo
may sublease space within the building with the written consent of City so long as the sublease
has a direct relationship to The Leonardo’s mission and programming plan.
WHEREAS, the former main library building is a City asset and any use of such asset must
be for a public purpose under Utah law.
WHEREAS, The Leonardo has requested that the City consent to the sublease of a portion
of the old main library, and the City Council desires to authorize the Administration to consent to
such sublease requests, provided that the sublease fulfills a public purpose, complies with the Bond
Purpose, and has a direct relationship to The Leonardo’s mission and programming plan.
WHEREAS, the City Council has, following the provision of not less than fourteen (14)
days public notice, conducted a public hearing relating to the foregoing, and has fully considered
all comments made during the public hearing.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as
follows:
1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that it is appropriate for the City to
consent to sublease arrangements at The Leonardo, provided that the Administration finds that the
sublease fulfills a public purpose, complies with the Bond Purpose, and has a direct relationship
to The Leonardo’s mission and programming plan.
2
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of _________, 2021.
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
By: ______________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
____________________________
CITY RECORDER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
______________________________
Kimberly Chytraus, Senior City Attorney
Date: ______________________ November 19, 2021
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE:
Amy Fowler, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: The Leonardo; City Consent to Sublease to Ken Sanders Rare Books
STAFF CONTACT: Kimberly Chytraus, Senior City Attorney
DOCUMENT TYPE: Consent to Sublease
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Consent
BUDGET IMPACT: N/A
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City leases the old library building to The Leonardo to
operate a science, culture and art education center. The City has also issued bonds in connection
with The Leonardo and use of the property must comply with the purpose of the bonds. Under
the Lease, a sublease must fulfill the mission of The Leonardo and be consented to by the City.
The Leonardo has requested that the City consent to a sublease to Ken Sanders Rare Book, for
collaboration on programs to enhance the mission of The Leonardo and operation of the gift shop
and bookstore. The City analyzed if the sublease fulfills a public purpose in the attached memo
and recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing prior to approving the consent to the
sublease.
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing with 14 days’ prior notice
EXHIBITS:
1)Memo
2)Lease
3) Proposed Sublease with City Consent
November 1, 2021
Lisa Shaffer (Nov 2, 2021 12:33 MDT)
11/02/2021
11/02/2021
2
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council Members
SUBJECT: Informal Analysis of Public Benefits Provided by The Leonardo Sublease to Ken
Sanders Rare Books
Introduction
Salt Lake City Corporation (“City”) leases the old main library building, located at 209
East 500 South, to The Leonardo, formerly known as The Library Square Foundation for Art,
Culture, and Science, pursuant to a Lease Agreement recorded with the City Recorder on June
25, 2009 (the “Lease”). The Leonardo has requested that the City consent to a sublease of a
portion of the building to Dream Garden Press, Inc., doing business as Ken Sanders Rare Books
(“Ken Sanders”). The Leonardo and Ken Sanders intend to collaborate to provide educational
and cultural content and programming to further enhance the mission of The Leonardo as well as
allow Ken Sanders to operate his rare bookstore. The Administration recommends that the City
Council hold a public hearing on Though a formal analysis of the benefits to be received by the
City in exchange for consenting to the sublease is not required under Utah Code ⸹10-8-2, this
informal analysis has been prepared to help evaluate whether the City’s consent to the proposed
sublease is appropriate given the legal restrictions on the use of the building under the bond and
lease.
Background
Bonds. On November 4, 2003, Salt Lake City voters approved the issuance by the City of
general obligation bonds for the purpose of “paying the costs of renovating, improving and
preserving the old main library building and providing related facilities located at approximately
5th South Street and 2nd East Street to establish a science, culture and art education center (the
“Bond purpose”). The City issued the bonds in 2009 and 2017 (the “Bonds”).
Lease. To fulfill the Bond purpose, the City leased the building to The Leonardo. The
Leonardo pays a nominal rent as approved by the City Council as a public benefit in satisfaction
of Utah Code § 10-8-2 (“§10-8-2”). Pursuant to Section 19 of the Lease, The Leonardo may
sublease space within the building with the written consent of the City (which consent shall not
be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed) and the sublease must have a direct
relationship to The Leonardo’s mission and programming plan. The Leonardo’s mission is
“exploring and connecting art, culture, and science in imaginative ways to enrich peoples’ lives,
expand consciousness, and enhance the community.”
Sublease. The Leonardo and Ken Sanders have proposed a sublease whereby Ken
Sanders will enhance and fulfill The Leonardo’s mission and programming. They plan to engage
the community in discussions on current topics and social issues and employ each other’s
strengths to obtain greater community reach and impact. Joint programs will include book clubs
on relevant topics, exhibitions featuring rare books, maps and posters, poetry readings, festivals,
children’s educational events and joint humanities exhibitions, all of which are designed to
3
enhance The Leonardo’s Mission to inspire creativity and innovation in all people. The first book
club is a Children’s Story Hour for families featuring Ken Sander’s new and vintage children’s
books. Ken Sanders will also be responsible for operating The Leonardo’s gift shop.
Legal Framework
Bond Requirements. The Administration has explored with bond counsel whether the
sublease presents any issues under the Bonds that would jeopardize the Bond’s tax-exempt
status. It is a multifactorial analysis to determine whether the sublease would be permissible.
The outstanding question is whether the sublease fulfills a public purpose and complies with the
Bond purpose. Current law relating to municipal bonds indicates that a governing body of a
municipality “may not spend bond money raised for a designated purpose for a purpose not
approved by the voters.”1 Here, the voters approved a bond to finance improvements of the
building and establish a science, culture and art education center, and the sublease must comply
with this Bond purpose.
Determination of a Public Purpose. The City cannot expend public funds for private
purposes.2 §10-8-2 governs municipal appropriations and dispositions of real property. It allows
the City to appropriate funds only for a “corporate purpose,” which is broadly defined as any
purpose that, in the judgment of the municipal legislative body, provides for the safety, health,
prosperity, moral well-being, peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the inhabitants of the
municipality”3 (a “public purpose”), and applies a similar standard to the disposition of real
property. The City’s determination of a public purpose is valid unless found “arbitrary and
capricious.” The City Council approved the Lease to The Leonardo as having a public purpose
following a public hearing and public benefit analysis under §10-8-2.
In this context, the City has been asked to consent to a sublease of City property. While
§10-8-2 may not strictly apply to the City’s consent of the sublease, it provides a helpful
framework by providing a definition of public purpose and proscribing a public hearing to
determine if the sublease fulfils a public purpose. For this reason, we recommend that the City
Council first hold a public hearing before determining if the sublease fulfills a public purpose
and complies with the Bond purpose.
Analysis Supporting the Consent to the Sublease
For the City to consent to the sublease, several conditions must be met under the Lease
and the Bonds:
1 Concerned Citizens v. BD. of Com’rs, 897 P.2d 1267, 1271, (Wash.App.Div.1 1995). See also City and County of
Denver v. Currigan, 362 P.2d 1060, 1064 (Colo. 1961)(citing McNichols that a city has reasonable discretion in the
use of the proceeds of the bonds, but a use for a purpose other than that authorized by the voters is not within the
range of reasonable discretion.)
2 “Closely related to the prohibition against the lending of the state’s credit, although technically not a part of it due
to the narrow and specific wording of section 29, is the principle of law that public funds cannot be expended for
private purposes.” See Utah Tech. Fin. Corp. at 412.
3 Utah Code § 10-8-2(3)(e)(3)
4
1. The sublease must have a direct relationship to The Leonardo’s mission and
programming plan to satisfy the requirements of the Lease.
2. The sublease must fulfill a public purpose to comply with the application of
§10-8-2.
3. The sublease must comply with the Bond purpose to satisfy the requirement that
the Bonds be used only for the purpose approved by the voters.
The sublease has a direct relation to The Leonardo’s mission. Ken Sanders will sell
books related to art, science, and technology, as well as special collections of books to
complement The Leonardo’s collections, exhibits, and programs within the museum. The joint
collaborations will allow community members to explore and connect art, culture, and science in
imaginative ways to enrich peoples’ lives, expand consciousness, and enhance the community,
all part of The Leonardo’s mission.
The sublease will fulfill a public purpose. The Lease was already determined to fulfill a
public purpose demonstrated through the prior bonding process and §10-8-2 public benefit
analysis. The collaboration and community events will create a dynamic and inclusive space for
community to come together and exchange ideas, learnings and experiences. Its diverse book
offerings offer a unique resource to the City on history, art, education, science, and culture. The
Leonardo and Ken Sanders this year have collaborated on several activities to engage the
community in discussions on current topics and social issues. These services will enhance the
moral well-being, comfort, or convenience of the inhabitants of the City.
The sublease also complies with the Bond purpose. The addition of a vintage bookstore
with collections geared toward enhancement of the exhibits and activities at The Leonardo will
contribute to the science, culture and art education center that is The Leonardo. Ken Sanders is a
longtime Salt Lake City institution and is a proven resource to the community to provide
educational and cultural content and programming. Its diverse book offerings offer a unique
resource to the City on history, art, education, science, and culture.
Conclusion
Taking into consideration that the proposed sublease fulfills the Lease conditions, has a
public purpose, and fulfills the Bond Purpose, the Administration requests that the City Council
hold a public hearing to consent to the proposed sublease by The Leonardo to Ken Sanders.
1
SUBLEASE AGREEMENT
This Sublease Agreement (“Sublease”), dated effective as of as of March 29, 2021 (the
“Effective Date”), is entered into between The Leonardo, a Utah non-profit corporation formerly
known as The Library Square Foundation for Art, Culture and Science, having an address of 209 E.
500 S., Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (“Sublandlord”) and the Dream Garden Press, Inc., a Utah
corporation doing business as Ken Sanders Rare Books (“KSRB”) with an address of 268 S. 200 E.,
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (“Subtenant” and, together with Sublandlord, collectively referred
herein as the “Parties” or individually as a “Party”).
RECITALS
A. Sublandlord is a tenant under that certain Lease Agreement dated on or about June
24, 2009 (the “Primary Lease”, a copy of which has been provided to Subtenant, and all capitalized
terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Primary
Lease) with Salt Lake City Corporation (“Prime Landlord”).
B. Pursuant to the Primary Lease, Sublandlord leased those certain premises (“Demised
Premises”) more particularly described in the Primary Lease and located at the property having a
street address of 209 East 500 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (the “Property”).
C. Sublandlord desires to sublease a portion of the Demised Premises leased under the
Primary Lease to Subtenant, and Subtenant desires to sublease a portion of Sublandlord’s Demised
Premises from Sublandlord, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Sublease.
D. Sublandlord and Subtenant are entering into this Sublease in order to enhance
Sublandlord’s cultural programming and audiences. Both Sublandlord and Subtenant are dedicated
to engaging the community in discussions on current topics and social issues, and desire to employ
each other’s strengths to obtain greater community reach and impact. Joint programs will include
book clubs on relevant topics, exhibitions featuring rare books, maps and posters, poetry readings,
festivals, children’s educational events and joint humanities exhibitions, all of which are designed to
enhance Sublandlord’s mission to inspire creativity and innovation in all people. Subtenant shall
also be responsible for operating Sublandlord’s Gift Shop.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, and conditions set
forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Demise. Sublandlord hereby leases to Subtenant, and Subtenant hereby leases from Sublandlord,
the portion of the premises described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Subleased Premises”).
The Subleased Premises shall include use of the common areas associated with the Subleased
Premises, which common areas Subtenant shall be permitted to use in common with Sublandlord
and any other subtenants of Sublandlord. In addition, Subtenant shall be required to purchase
parking passes at the rate charged by Prime Landlord (such parking spaces, together with the other
common areas, the “Common Areas”). In the event that Subtenant’s use of the Common Areas is
2
excessive or interruptive of Sublandlord’s operations conducted at the Property, Subtenant shall
comply with Sublandlord’s reasonable policies adopted from time-to-time with respect thereto.
Included in the Subleased Premises is the furniture, furnishings and decorations that are present in
the Subleased Premises as of the Sublease Commencement Date, and Subtenant shall have the duty
and obligation to keep, maintain and replace, if necessary due to damage caused by Subtenant and its
guests and invitees, such furniture, furnishings and decorations as are necessary to deliver such to
Sublandlord at the end of the Term in substantially the same condition as of the Sublease
Commencement Date, reasonable wear and tear excepted.
2. Term.
(a) The term of this Sublease (“Term”) shall commence on the Effective Date (also known as
the “Sublease Commencement Date”) and shall continue thereafter for a period of five (5)
years (“Sublease Expiration Date”), unless sooner terminated or cancelled in accordance with
the terms and conditions of this Sublease. Unless sooner terminated or cancelled in accordance
with the terms and conditions of this Sublease, the Sublease shall renew for a consecutive 5-year
term on the same terms and conditions.
(b) If for any reason the term of the Primary Lease is terminated prior to the Sublease
Expiration Date, this Sublease shall terminate on the date of such termination and Sublandlord
shall not be liable to Subtenant for such termination.
(c) If any court declares or determines in a final, unappealable order that this Sublease
violates the terms of the bonds which Salt Lake City obtained in connection with rehabilitating
the Demised Premises, then this Sublease shall automatically terminate.
3. Permitted Use. Subtenant shall use and occupy the Subleased Premises solely in accordance with,
and as permitted under, the terms of the Primary Lease and for no other purpose. Sublandlord and
Subtenant shall, on a quarterly basis during the term of this Sublease, provide a report to Prime
Landlord describing and detailing the activities undertaken between Sublandlord and Subtenant which
further the mission and programming plan of Sublandlord.
4. Payment of Rent.
(a) Throughout the Term of this Sublease, Subtenant shall pay to Sublandlord fixed base rent
(“Base Rent”) at the rate five percent (5%) of the total gross revenues generated by Subtenant
from the conduct of its business on the Subleased Premises. The sole and exclusive exception
are “consignment sales,” which mean the sale of books and ephemera that are owned by
someone other than Subtenant. Starting January 1, 2022, Base Rent shall be a minimum of
$3,000 per month but not to exceed $10,000.00 per month for each month or part thereof during
the Term. Each month during the Term and in conjunction with each monthly payment of Base
Rent, Subtenant shall provide to Sublandlord a summary report of Subtenant’s total gross
revenues for the prior month, together with Subtenant’s calculation of the Base Rent.
Sublandlord shall have the right, not more than once a year and at Sublandlord’s cost and
expense, to audit Subtenant’s books and records relating to Subtenant’s calculation of the
monthly Base Rent. Subtenant shall pay to Sublandlord the first installment of Base Rent
3
(accruing from the Effective Date until the time of execution and delivery of this Sublease by
Subtenant to Sublandlord) and shall pay all other installments of Base Rent monthly on or before
the first day of each month during the Term for such month. Any payment of Base Rent that is
not received by Sublandlord within five (5) days of the date due shall incur a late fee of 5% of
the amount due. Any other monetary amounts owed by Subtenant hereunder are sometimes
referred to as “Additional Rent”, which shall be paid by Subtenant to Sublandlord within thirty
(30) days of written notice from Sublandlord. Base Rent and Additional Rent are sometimes
referred to collectively as the “Rent”.
(b) All Base Rent shall be due and payable without demand therefor unless otherwise
designated by Sublandlord and without any deduction, offset, abatement, counterclaim, or
defense.
5. Signage. Subtenant shall be permitted to display such signage on the Subleased Premises as is
approved in advance by Sublandlord and is permitted by the Primary Lease, and all signage
displayed by Subtenant shall be removed upon termination of this Sublease and any damage to the
Property from the removal of such signage shall be restored by Subtenant.
6. Incorporation of Primary Lease by Reference.
(a) Subtenant, with respect to its use of the Leased Premises, does hereby covenant and
agreed to abide by Sections 4, 13, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27 through 38 of the Primary Lease
as though Subtenant were the “tenant” named in the Primary Lease, and Sublandlord shall have
the right to enforce such provisions of the Primary Lease against Subtenant as though
Sublandlord were the “landlord” named in the Primary Lease. If any of the express provisions of
this Sublease shall conflict with any of the provisions of the Primary Lease, the provisions of the
Primary Lease shall govern.
7. Subordination to Primary Lease. This Sublease is subject and subordinate to the Primary Lease.
8. Representations of Sublandlord. Sublandlord represents and warrants the following is true and
correct as of the date hereof:
(a) Sublandlord is the tenant under the Primary Lease and has the capacity to enter into this
Sublease with Subtenant, subject to Prime Landlord’s consent.
(b) The Primary Lease provided to Subtenant is a true, correct, and complete copy of the
Primary Lease, is in full force and effect, and has not been further modified, amended, or
supplemented except as expressly set out herein.
(c) Sublandlord has not received any notice, and has no actual knowledge, of any default by
Sublandlord under the Primary Lease.
9. AS-IS Condition; Alterations. Subtenant accepts the Subleased Premises in its current, “as-is”
condition. Sublandlord shall have no obligation to furnish or supply any work, services, furniture,
fixtures, equipment, or decorations, except Sublandlord shall deliver the Subleased Premises in
4
broom clean condition. On or before the Sublease Expiration Date or earlier termination or
expiration of this Sublease, Subtenant shall restore the Subleased Premises to the condition existing
as of the Sublease Commencement Date, ordinary wear and tear excepted, unless otherwise agreed
to in writing by Sublandlord and Prime Landlord. The obligations of Subtenant hereunder shall
survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Sublease. Subtenant shall not make any material
modifications or alterations to the Subleased Premises without Sublandlord’s consent, which may be
withheld in Sublandlord’s sole discretion; provided, however, that Subtenant may make such
alterations as described in Exhibit A following Sublandlord’s approval of the plans and
specifications for such alterations. In the event that Sublandlord does provide consent to any
modifications or alterations of the Subleased Premises, all such shall be made in accordance with all
applicable governmental requirements, shall be of good quality and workmanship and shall not result
in the lien or encumbrances of the Property.
10. Cleaning and Maintenance. Subtenant shall keep the Subleased Premises in a clean,
commercially reasonable condition, and shall repair or replace all components of the Property to the
extent damaged by Subtenant, its guests and invitees. Sublandlord shall provide janitorial services
for the Subleased Premises, and except as provided in the previous sentence, shall keep and maintain
the Property in good maintenance and repair.
11. Utilities. Sublandlord shall pay all utilities used by Subtenant in the conduct of its business in
the Subleased Premises. If possible, Subtenant shall establish its own utility accounts. If not
possible, Subtenant’s obligation for utility consumption shall be determined pro rata based on the
square footage then in use. In no event shall Sublandlord be responsible for the failure of any third-
party utility provider to provide utilities to the Property, including without limitation power outages
or other temporary interruptions in service.
12. Taxes. Sublandlord shall pay all real property taxes relating to the Property, if any, and
Subtenant shall not pay any proportionate share of such taxes. Subtenant shall pay and discharge
when due all taxes relating to the conduct of Subtenant’s business on the Subleased Premises,
including without limitation personal property taxes and sales taxes that may become due on Rent
payable hereunder.
13. No Privity of Estate; No Privity of Contract. Nothing in this Sublease shall be construed to
create privity of estate or privity of contract between Subtenant and Prime Landlord.
14. No Breach of Primary Lease. Subtenant shall not do or permit to be done any act or thing, or
omit to do anything, which may constitute a breach or violation of any term, covenant, or condition
of the Primary Lease, notwithstanding such act, thing, or omission is permitted under the terms of
this Sublease.
15. Subtenant Defaults. If Subtenant fails to cure a default under this Sublease within any
applicable grace or cure period contained in the Primary Lease, Sublandlord, after five (5) days’
notice to Subtenant, shall have the right, but not the obligation, to seek to remedy any such default
on the behalf of, and at the expense of, Subtenant, provided, however, that in the case of: (i) a life
safety or property related emergency; or (ii) a default which must be cured within a time frame set
out in the Primary Lease which does not allow sufficient time for prior notice to be given to
5
Subtenant, Sublandlord may remedy any such default without being required first to give notice to
Subtenant. Any reasonable cost and expense (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’
fees and expenses) so incurred by Sublandlord shall be deemed Additional Rent and shall be due and
payable by Subtenant to Sublandlord within thirty (30) days after notice from Sublandlord.
16. Consents. Whenever the consent or approval of Sublandlord is required, Subtenant shall also be
obligated to obtain the written consent or approval of Prime Landlord, if required under the terms of
the Primary Lease. Sublandlord shall promptly make such consent request on behalf of Subtenant
and Subtenant shall promptly provide any information or documentation that Prime Landlord may
request.
17. Prime Landlord Consent to Sublease. This Sublease is expressly conditioned on obtaining the
written consent of Prime Landlord (collectively, “Prime Landlord Consent”). The parties
acknowledge that the Prime Lender may only give consent after a public hearing and City Council
approval.
(a) If the Prime Landlord Consent is not obtained within thirty (30) days from the date of City
Council approval, either party may terminate this Sublease on written notice to the other,
whereupon Sublandlord shall promptly refund to Subtenant the Rent paid to Sublandlord, and
neither party shall have any further obligation to the other under this Sublease, except to the
extent that the provisions of this Sublease expressly survive the termination of this Sublease.
(b) This Section 17 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Sublease.
18. Assignment or Subletting. Subtenant shall not sublet all or any portion of the Subleased
Premises or assign, encumber, mortgage, pledge, or otherwise transfer this Sublease (by operation of
law or otherwise) or any interest therein, without the prior written consent of: (a) Sublandlord, which
consent may be unreasonably withheld or may be withheld in its sole and absolute discretion; and (b)
Prime Landlord.
19. Indemnity. Subtenant shall indemnify and hold harmless Sublandlord from any claims,
liabilities, and damages that Sublandlord may sustain resulting from the conduct of Subtenant’s
business on the Subleased Premises or a breach by Subtenant of this Sublease. Likewise,
Sublandlord and shall indemnify and hold harmless Subtenant from any claims, liabilities, and
damages that Subtenant may sustain resulting from the conduct of Sublandlord’s business on the
Demised Premises or a breach by Sublandlord of this Sublease.
20. Release. Subtenant hereby releases Sublandlord or anyone claiming through or under
Sublandlord by way of subrogation or otherwise. Subtenant hereby releases Prime Landlord or
anyone claiming through or under Prime Landlord by way of subrogation or otherwise to the extent
that Sublandlord releases Prime Landlord under the terms of the Primary Lease. Subtenant shall
cause its insurance carriers to include any clauses or endorsements in favor of Sublandlord, Prime
Landlord, and any additional parties, which Sublandlord is required to provide under the provisions
of the Primary Lease. Likewise, Sublandlord hereby releases Subtenant or anyone claiming through
or under Sublandlord by way of subrogation or otherwise.
6
21. Notices. All notices and other communications required or permitted under this Sublease shall
be given in the same manner as in the Primary Lease. Notices shall be addressed to the addresses set
forth above.
22. Brokers. Sublandlord and Subtenant each represent to the other that it has not dealt with any
other broker in connection with this Sublease and the transactions contemplated hereby.
Sublandlord and Subtenant each indemnify and hold harmless the other from and against all claims,
liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees and
other charges) arising out of any claim, demand, or proceeding for commissions, fees,
reimbursement for expenses, or other compensation by any person or entity who shall claim to have
dealt with the indemnifying party in connection with the Sublease other than Broker. This Section 22
shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Sublease.
23. Entire Agreement. This Sublease contains the entire agreement between the parties regarding
the subject matter contained herein and all prior negotiations and agreements are merged herein. If
any provisions of this Sublease are held to be invalid or unenforceable in any respect, the validity,
legality, or enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Sublease shall remain unaffected.
24. Amendments and Modifications. This Sublease may not be modified or amended in any manner
other than by a written agreement signed by the party to be charged.
25. Successors and Assigns. The covenants and agreements contained in this Sublease shall bind
and inure to the benefit of Sublandlord and Subtenant and their respective permitted successors and
assigns.
26. Counterparts. This Sublease may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which
when so executed and delivered shall be deemed an original for all purposes, and all such
counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same instrument. A signed copy of this
Sublease delivered by either facsimile or email shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as
delivery of an original signed copy of this Sublease.
27. Choice of Law. This Sublease shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws
of the State of Utah, without regard to conflict of law rules.
[remainder of page left blank; signature page follows]
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Sublease to be executed as of the
Effective Date.
SUBLANDLORD:
The Leonardo, a Utah non-profit corporation
By____________________________
Name:
Title:
SUBTENANT:
Dream Garden Press, Inc., a Utah corporation,
doing business as Ken Sanders Rare Books
By___________________________
Name:
Title:
8
Exhibit A
Subleased Premises
Description:
Subleased Premises to consist of the following portions of the Property, to be
occupied by Subtenant at the time agreeable to Sublandlord:
Phase 1: Build-out of the west side of the main floor space. Approximately 1,600
square feet north of the existing gift shop, including bathrooms and emergency exit
door.
Phase 2: Approximately 837 square feet of proposed gallery space between the
escalators at the back of the elevator walls, contiguous to the Phase 1 property.
Includes small space behind escalators with connecting passage to the gift shop, and
also includes KSRB storage under the escalators.
Phase 3: Approximately 3,000 square feet of space in the sub-basement, currently
known as “the KIVA”, including the two offices and the mezzanine space above, all
located on the basement level.
Phase 4: Approximately 4,000 square feet of the sub-basement to be walled off from
the rest of the library at Subtenant’s cost and expense and in the manner approved by
Sublandlord and to be used for KSRB Used Book Dept.
Phase 5: Approximately 2,000 square feet of the sub-basement to be walled off from
the rest of the library at Subtenant’s cost and expense and in the manner approved by
Sublandlord and to be used for KSRB Storage.
RECORDED
JUN 2 4 2009
LEASE AGREEMENT rlTV RECORDER
BETWEENSALTLAKECITYCORPORATIONJMiD'n .
THE LIBRARY SQUARE FOUNDATION FOR ART,CULTURE AND SCIENCE
SALT LAKE CITY LIBRARY BUILDING
209 EAST 500 SOUTH
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement"or "Lease"),dated as of Itme_,2009
(the "Effective Date"),is entered into by and between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION,a
Utah municipal corporation (the "City"),and THE LIBRARY SQUARE FOUNDATION FOR
ART,CULTURE AND SCIENCE,a Utah nonprofit corporation ("The Leonardo").
RECITALS:
A.The City has constructed a new public library and parking facility (the "New
Library"),and owns the old main library building (the "Building")located at 209 East 500
South,Salt Lake City,Utah 84111.
B.The Leonardo desires to lease the Building from the City,and the City has found
that The Leonardo's proposed use of the premises within the Building will benefit the conmlUnity
by serving the cultural,educational,and aesthetic needs of the community,by contributing to the
revitalization of downtown Salt Lake City,and by attracting visitors to the area as part of a civic
center.
C.The Leonardo has been fonned to utilize the Building in achieving its mission of
exploring and connecting art,culture,and science in imaginative ways to eruich peoples'lives,
expand consciousness,and enhance the community ("The Leonardo's Mission").
D.On November 4,2003,the Salt Lalce City voters approved the issuance by the City
of up to $10,200,000 of general obligation bonds to renovate,improve,and preserve the Building
for the purpose of housing a science,culture,art,and education center,Imown as "The Leonardo at
Library Square."The issuance of the general obligation bonds,however,was contingent upon The
Leonardo first raising an equal sum of money to be used for exhibits,progranls and activities to be
conducted within the Building.
E.As certified by the City'S Chief Financial Officer,The Leonardo has met its
obligation to raise the $10,200,000 in matching funds.
F.The City is now in a position to issue $10,200,000 of general obligation bonds and
to use the sale proceeds thereof to allow the Building renovation to begin.
G.In addition to the general obligation bonds to be issued by the City,as of the date of
this Agreement,additional funding sources and grants have been made available for the completion
ofthe renovation of the Building.
AGREEMENT:
The City and The Leonardo,for good and valuable consideration receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged,hereby agree as follows:
1.LEASE OF BUILDING:The City hereby leases to The Leonardo,and The
Leonardo hereby leases from the City,the Building and property described in Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein,and as depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated
herein (the "Premises"),subject to the tenns and conditions of this Agreement.The Building
shall be used by The Leonardo and,for limited purposes as set forth in Section 4 below,the City
as more particularly set forth herein.The City also grants to The Leonardo,its tenants and
licensees,and their employees,guests,and invitees,a non-exclusive license to enter upon and
use the exterior walkways and sidewalks to and from the Building and the parking lot owned or
operated by the City located on the city block between 400 South and 500 South and between
200 East and 300 East.
Furthemlore,and without limiting the foregoing,the City hereby grants The Leonardo the
right to the non-exclusive use of the sidewalk and driveway area depicted on Exhibit B as the
"Shared Use Driveway."The parties agree that The Leonardo shall have the right to use such
Shared Use Driveway for the purposes of loading (and unloading)exhibits and other property to
and from the Building,Building construction and maintenance access,access by patrons .to the
Building,and other related purposes.In this regard,the parties acknowledge that The Leonardo
cunently anticipates that the north entrance to the Building will be the main entrance to the
Building for The Leonardo's patrons and guests.The Leonardo shall be issued a keyes)for any
chain or other gate installed along the Shared Use Dliveway from time to time.The Leonardo's
coordination of the use of the Shared Use Driveway for delivery,pickup,and/or other designated
uses (other than patron access)shall be through the City's appointed employee responsible for
scheduling events at the Library Square.The City agrees that it shall not pemlit any exhibits,
booths,or other displays to be located at any time within either the Shared Use Driveway or the
sidewalk area adjacent to and directly to the north of the Shared Use Driveway (which cunently
consists of concrete pavers),including but not limited to during any festival,show,or other
special event OCCUlTing on or around Library Square.
2.TERM:
2.1 Initial Occupancy Tenn.The initial tenn of this Lease shall be twenty
(20)years (the "Initial Occupancy Teml"),begilming upon "Substantial Completion"of the
"Improvements"(as such tenns are defined in Section 6 of this Agreement)(the
"Commencement Date").Upon Substantial Completion of the Improvements,the City and The
Leonardo shall sign a written acknowledgement confimling the Commencement Date,as well as
the condition as of the Commencement Date of (a)the Building and (b)the altwork referred to in
Section 21.9 below.Once signed,such acknowledgment shall be attached hereto and
incorporated herein as part of this Agreement.Notwithstanding the foregoing,in the event that
the City is unable to sell the general obligation bonds referenced in the Recitals above on or
before October 1,2009,notwitllstanding the City's use of its best efforts to do so,then either
party may tenninate this Lease following such date alld prior to the time that such bonds are sold,
2
by giving written notice to the other party,whereupon this Lease shall be tenninated,and in such
event,both parties shall be released from their respective obligations hereunder.
2.2 Pre-Occupancy Period.The period of time between the Effective Date of
this Lease and the Commencement Date shall be referred to herein as the "Pre-Occupancy
Period."During the Pre-Occupancy Period,the Building will be renovated and improved,as
more fully set f011h in Section 6 below.
2.3 Extended Occupancy Tenns.The Initial Occupancy Term may be
extended by The Leonardo,with the written consent of the City (which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld)for three (3)additional periods of ten (10)years (each,an "Extended
Term")on the ternlS and conditions as provided in this Lease,unless The Leonardo provides the
City with a written notice terminating this Agreement at least sixty (60)days prior to the
expiration of the Initial Occupancy Term or then existing Extended Ternl,as applicable;
provided,however,that The Leonardo's foregoing right to extend the Initial Occupancy Ternl
(or Extended Ternl,as applicable),shall be null and void if The Leonardo fails to cure a
substantial and material default of this Agreement and the applicable cure period has expired
after receipt of written notice of such default as provided herein.The Pre-Occupancy Period,the
Initial Occupancy Ternl,and any subsequent Extended Tenn(s)shall collectively be referred to
herein as the "Ternl."
At least one (I)year prior to the expiration of the Initial Occupancy Ternl or any
Extended Ternl(s),the Parties shall consult with each other regarding the advisability of
extending the then applicable Tenn of this Agreement,and whether any modifications or
amendments to this Agreement (including a discussion of Base Rent,taking into account the then
CUlTent conditions)are necessary in cormection with such extension.In this regard,and for
pUlposes of deternlining whether to consent to the extension of the then-cunent ternl of this
Agreement,the City shall consider,among other interests relating to the public good and
welfare,whether The Leonardo is actively pursuing the fulfillment of The Leonardo's Mission,
The Leonardo's reasonable expectations (evidenced in among other ways,by The Leonardo's
fundraising and programming activities during the then cunent ternl0f this Agreement)relating
to its continued use and enjoyment of the Premises for an additional Extended Tenn(s),and
whether the City has an imminent need for an alternative use of the Building which serves a
greater public interest than the public interest served by The Leonardo.
2.4 Further Extension of Tenn.If The Leonardo desires to continue to occupy
the Building at the conclusion of the Tenn,the City shall discuss in good faith the possible
further extension of the Teml or the entering into of a new lease with The Leonardo consistent
with this Agreement.The City hereby agrees to consult with The Leonardo regarding The
Leonardo's continued use of the Building after the expiration of the Term and prior to soliciting
or accepting any offers from any third parties regarding the Building or any part thereof,and
agrees to provide an opportunity for The Leonardo to present an offer to the City regarding the
continuation of The Leonardo's use of the Building on tenns consistent with this Agreement.
Except as provided in the immediately preceding sentence,The Leonardo shall vacate the
Building at the end of the Tenn and the City shall not be obligated to pay The Leonardo anything
with respect to The Leonardo's investment in the Building.
3
3.RENT:As consideration for this Agreement and the right to use the Building
throughout the Tenn,The Leonardo shall pay to the City the sum of TWELVE DOLLARS
($12.00)per year ("Base Rent").The first installment of Base Rent shall be paid in advance on
or before the Commencement Date and shall be paid for the remainder of the initial calendar year
in which the Initial Occupancy Ternl commences,prorated to the nearest month.Except for the
first payment of Base Rent,all installments of Base Rent shall be due and payable in advance for
one year on the first day of each calendar year during the Tern1.The Leonardo may pay any and
all installments of Base Rent for the Tenn in advance,without penalty.All installments of Base
Rent shall be made payable to Salt Lake City Corporation,and sent to its City Treasurer,451
South State Street Room 225,Salt Lake City,Utah 84111 or at such other location as may be
designated by the City to The Leonardo in writing.
4.USE OF PREMISES:
4.1.Use of Premises.As consideration for this Agreement and the right to use
the Building,The Leonardo shall establish exhibits and operate programs and activities within
the Building consistent with and in furtherance of The Leonardo's Mission,and subject to
Sections 4.2 and 20 below,The Leonardo shall have the right to exclusively use the Premises for
its operations as a science,culture,and art education center,and the operations of its tenants and
licensees,so long as such uses are consistent with The Leonardo's Mission.The Leonardo,its
patrons,invitees,agents and employees,and tenants (if any),shall.have the unrestricted right to
enter and leave the Premises at all times consistent with the nonnal operational hours of The
Leonardo.The Leonardo shall not use the Premises for any purpose other than that stated above.
The Leonardo shall not use the roof of the Building for The Leonardo's Mission or put items on
the roof without the prior consent of the City,which consent shall not he unreasonably withheld.
To the extent that any portion of the Building is placed on a state or federal historical register,
The Leonardo shall not damage,alter,remove,or replace such registered property or items in
violation of applicable laws governing historic sites.In addition,the parties consider the
following items to be of historic interest and value and therefore not to be damaged,altered,
removed,or replaced by The Leonardo without the consent of the City:leaf lights;escalator;
wood paneling;artwork;exterior concrete panels;and exterior glass curtain walls.If the City
desires to add additional items to that list,it must first notify and discuss such additions with The
LeonaTdo,but the City shall have authority to make the ultimate decision regarding any such
additions.However,if The Leonardo presents,with respect to the second floor leaflights,a plan
for non-permanent removal and replacement of such lights,the City will evaluate that plan and
not unreasonably withhold its consent to that plan.
4.2.Additional City Use of Building and Premises.The City,with reasonable
advance notice and with due consideration for The Leonardo's programming and administrative
schedule,may have limited access to and use of the Premises for meetings,receptions,and other
activities in a way that is compatible with The Leonardo's Mission.Although the City's use of
the Premises for this limited purpose shall be on a rent-free basis,the City will be responsible for
the associated costs of any event it sponsors or manages in the Premises.The.City will use its
best efforts to avoid scheduling events for the Premises at times or for events which will conflict
with The Leonardo's exhibits or events.In the event that the City uses the Building or the
4
Premises at a time or in a way that requires The Leonardo to close an exhibit during The
Leonardo's ordinary hours of operation,the City shall reimburse The Leonardo Jor The
Leonardo's lost revenues resulting from such closure.Notwithstanding anything to the contrary
in this Section 4.2,the City shall not have the right to use (or license.to third parties the .use of)
the sidewalks or landscaped areas comprising a portion of the Premises (as depictyd in Exhibit
~)for art festival displays or other outdoor exhibits,booths,tents,or galleries.
5.SIGNAGE:The Leonardo shall be pem1itted to install both pem1anent and
temporary signage on the Building and Premises,provided that such signage (i)satisfies the
requirements of the Salt Lake City Code,and (ii)confonns to a sign fastening system(s)
acceptable to the City that does not compromise or damage the Building's exterior panels and
surface (the "Sign Fastening System").The Sign Fastening Systems(s)must be agreed upon by
The Leonardo and the City (including but not limited to the City's Engineering and Facilities
divisions)prior to the Commencement Date,and any amendments or modifications to such
system must be mutually agreed upon by the City and The Leonardo.Furthem1ore,the Parties
anticipate that The Leonardo may be pem1itted to place temporary signage on the exterior of the
Building during the initial renovations to the Building,consistent with the Salt Lake City Code
and to the extent that such signage does not interfere with the construction and renovation
project,subject to the prior approval of the City.The Leonardo shall be responsible to repair
any damage done to the exterior of the Building by itself or its employees or agents in
cOlmection with such signage.
6.DESIGN,RENOVATION,AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BUILDING:The
Building shall be renovated and refurbished by the City,in cooperation with The Leonardo,in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement,and for the purpose of housing a
science,culture,art,and education center to be known as "The Leonardo at Library Square."
The improvements to be perfonned with respect to the Building (the "hnprovements")are more
particularly identified in the current project scope and cost estimate attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit C.The parties acknowledge that the Improvement costs shall be
financed through the issuance of the general obligation bonds referred to in Recital D above,and
that additional funding sources and grants have been made available for the completion of the
renovation of the Building.
The City shall be solely responsible for design and construction management of the
Building,but the City and The Leonardo shall work together in good faith to agree upon a design
for the Building that meets the City's building renovation objectives,supports the basic
programming objectives of The Leonardo as a science,culture,art,and education center,and
meets a reasonable construction timeline (the "Design and Construction Objectives").To this
end,the City and The Leonardo agree that they shall jointly fonn a design and construction
management oversight team (the "Design Team")of five (5)members,with three (3)members
being appointed by the City and with two (2)members being appointed by The Leonardo (the
"Leonardo Representatives").The Design Team will actively participate and be primarily
responsible for the oversight of the design and construction management process relating to the
Improvements,including but not limited to,reviewing and approving (a)conceptual plans,(b)
constl'llction drawings,plans,and specifications,(c)construction scheduling and progress,(d),
construction budgets,and (e)other related issues relating to the .successful completion of all of
5
the Improvements,and changes and amendments to the aforementioned items.Notwithstanding
the foregoing,(a)the members of the Design Team appointed by the City shall be primarily
responsible to make decisions relating to asbestos removal and seismic upgrades,and (b)
particular consideration shall be given to the Leonardo Representatives'input and concerns
relating to design issues that impact museum operations.In a good faith effort to maintain
transparency and the efficient flow of infonnation between the Parties,the City and The
Leonardo shall promptly and in good faith report and convey infonnation relating to the
Improvements to the Design Teanl,and the City-retained architect,engineer,and contractor shall
be required to provide the Design Team with regular updates.In making decisions relating to the
Improvements,including but not limited to decisions relating to cost overruns and any
amendments to the scope of the Improvements,the Design Team shall attempt to give due
consideration to each of the Design and Construction Objectives.
The Inlprovements,which shall be designed by an architect and perfonned by a
contractor selected and engaged by the City,shall be designed,constructed,and otherwise
perfonned and completed in compliance with any and all building codes applicable to said
Improvements.All work perfonned shall be done ina·good and worlmlanlike manner.
Furthernlore,the architectural design and construction shall comply with the requirements to
receive LEED CI Silver certification awarded by the United States Green Building Council
("USGBC").The City shall direct the architect and contractor to prepare and file the request for
LEED CI Silver certification,and all costs associated with the initial certification shall be paid
out of the construction budget for the Improvements.The City shall provide notice to The
Leonardo upon receipt of the LEED CI Silver certification.Within one (1)year following
receipt of the City's LEED CI Silver certification,The Leonardo shall apply for LEED EB Silver
certification,and shall be responsible for the costs associated with such certification.The
Leonardo shall also be responsible to recertify with the USGBC from time to time,as required
by the USGBC,to maintain the LEED EB Silver certification in good standing.The Leonardo
shall provide proof of the certification and recertification to the City's Facilities Services
Manager.
It is cun·ently anticipated that the Inlprovements shall be Substantially Complete (as
defined below)on or before the cunently estimated substantial completion date of November 1,
2010,but neither the validity of this Lease nor the obligations of either party under this Lease
shall be affected by a failure to Substantially Complete the Improvements by such date.For
pUllJoses of this Lease,"Substantial Completion"of the hnprovements shall be deemed to have
occurred as soon as all of the Improvements have been constructed,a final certificate of
occupancy has been issued for tbe Building,tbe Premises are in a "broom clean"condition (e.g.,
reasonably free of construction dust and debris resulting fi·om the installation of the
Improvements),and are otherwise ready to be utilized for the use of the Premises pennitted by
this Lease.
After The Leonardo occupies the Premises all material damages that may occur during
the ternl of this Agreement shall be promptly reported to the City's Facilities Services Division
Manager.All pennanent alterations made by The Leonardo to the structure,pernlanent walls,
controls,BYAC,fire protection,elevators,and plumbing,electrical and lighting of the Premises
shall be detailed in writing and approved in advance (which approval shall not be wrreasonably
6
withheld),and shall not proceed without written approval of the City's Facilities Division
Manager or other designee.
7.DEPOSIT:The Leonardo shall not be required to pay a monetary deposit
associated with this Agreement.In lieu of a monetary deposit,The Leonardo accepts the
Building "AS IS"as of the Commencement Date.
8.ALTERATIONS OF BUILDING AND INSTALLATION OF FIXTURES
AND OTHER APPURTENANCES:The Leonardo may,at The Leonardo's .sole cost and
expense in a good and workmanlike maimer,make such alterations and repairs to the.Premises
following the Commencement Date as The Leonardo may reasonably require in connection with
its operation of the Building,including but not limited to,the installation of exhibits or other
progranIming improvements,provided that The Leonardo does not (without first obtaining the
consent of the City)materially alter the basic character of the Building,weaken any structure on
the Premises,or materially and pemIanently alter the HVAC,plumbing,electrical systems,
utilities systems,roof systems,exterior wall systems,or elevator or escalator systems.The
Leonardo shall also have the right to erect and install,at The Leonardo's sole cost and expense,
temporary partitions,including exhibit partitions,and .other trade equipment and wiring,
electrical fixtures,additionallights and wiring and other trade appliances as may be reasonably
necessary to facilitate the handling of The Leonardo's operations.Any alterations or
improvements to the Premises (excluding The Leonardo's personal property and trade fixtures
and equipment),not removed by The Leonardo on or before the expiration or earliertermination
of this Agreement (or a reasonable time thereafter),at the option of the City,shall become the
property of the City.If the City elects not to take ownership of such property,The Leonardo
shall remove such property.If The Leonardo fails to remove such property,the City may do so
and bill The Leonardo for the expenses of such removal.In the event that The Leonardo
removes any such trade equipment,fixtures,or other improvements made by The Leonardo
pursuant to this Section,The Leonardo shall remove said equipment,fixtures and other
improvements in a good worlG1lanlike maimer,and all damage done to the Premises by such
removal shall be repaired at The Leonardo's sole cost and expense.The Leonardo shall restore
the Premises to the condition as existed on the COimnencement Date,reasonable wear and tear
excepted.
9.CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE:
9.1.The Leonardo's Maintenance Obligations.As consideration for this
Agreement,commencing on the Conmlencement Date and continuing throughout the Tenn,The
Leonardo,at its sole cost and expense,shall keep and maintain the Building and all pailS thereof,
in good and clean condition alld repair and in accordance with LEED EB guidelines,and shall
provide for the regular janitorial upkeep in accord alICe with the City's green cleaning standard
and as required for LEEDEB operations and cellification described below,exterior grounds and
landscaping services (including lawn,plantings,tree,and shrubbery care,irrigation,snow and
ice removal and other seasonal services,and debris clean up that will keep the Premises in a neat,
orderly,and aesthetically pleasing way),alld trash removal for the Premises.In addition to the
foregoing,The Leonardo's responsibility includes the regular maintenance alld upkeep of
electJical,plumbing,elevator,escalator,and mechanical systems exclusively servicing the
7
Premises,such maintenance and upkeep to be done according to National Fire Protection
Association,National Electrical Code (NEC)70B,National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
72 and 75,and ANSI-ASHRE-ACCA standard 180-2008.The elevator and escalators in the
Building are to be maintained by a State of Utah licensed elevator and escalator company and
must receive annual inspection and recertification per applicable codes.Further,The Leonardo
shall keep the sidewalks within the Premises reasonably free from ice and snow.The Leonardo
shall also be responsible for all security and surveillance services to be provided on the Premises.
The Building card access system shall be maintained by The Leonardo and disconnected from
the City intranet once The Leonardo occupies the Premises.Upon termination of this Agreement,
The Leonardo shall,at its sole expense,restore the Building card access system back to the City
network.The Leonardo shall also take reasonable measures to assure that the artwork on the
Premises,including the items mentioned in Section 21.9,are not damaged beyond the condition
they are in as of the Commencement Date,as agreed by both parties on the Commencement Date
pursuant to Section 2.1 above.The Leonardo shall not move any such artwork without the prior
consent of the City.
If The Leonardo fails to perfonn maintenance or repair of any portion of the Premises as
required by this Section 9.1 within thirty (30)days after receipt of a written notice from the City
(except in the event of an emergency situation,in which case no notice shall be required),and
thereafter fails to diligently perform such maintenance or repair to completion,the City may,at
its discretion,perfoml such maintenance or repair on behalf of The Leonardo upon written notice
to The Leonardo.The Leonardo shall reimburse to the City the reasonable cost to perform such
maintenance Of repair within thirty (30)days after receipt of notice from the City setting forth in
reasonable detail such costs and the items to which they relate.
9.2.The City's Maintenance Obligations.Prior to the Commencement Date,
the City,at its sole cost and expense,shall be responsible for all maintenance and cleaning of the
Premises.At all times prior to and following the Commencement Date,the City shall be
responsible to keep alld maintain in good condition,at its sole cost and expense and without
reimbursement or contribution by The Leonardo,and repair and replace,if necessary,the
foundations,stmctural systems (both interior and exterior)including,without limitation,the roof,
roof membrane,roof drains,roof covering (including interior ceiling if damaged by leakage),
load-bearing walls,columns,lintels,beams,footings,floor slabs,masonry walls,and sidewalks
immediately adjacent to the Building (other than snow and ice removal)and constituting part of
the Premises.Furthennore,the City shall be responsible,at its sole cost and expense,to replace,
if necessary,all electrical (inclUding the photovoltaic system located on the roof of the Building),
plumbing,and mechanical systems servicing the Premises (excluding ally such system(s)
installed by The Leonardo in accordance with Section 8 above),and the upgrade of any such
systems,provided that such upgrades are not required as a result of expansion of The Leonardo's
use of the Building.Notwithstanding the foregoing,The Leonardo shall be entirely responsible
for any cost or expense caused by the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of The Leonardo
or any of The Leonardo's employee's,contractors,invitees,agents,guests or patrons relating to
any Building system or other improvement.
If the City fails to perfonn maintenance,repair,alld/or replacement of any portion of the
Premises as required by this Section 9.2 within thirty (30)days after receipt of a written notice
8
from The Leonardo (except in the event of an emergency situation,in which case no notice shall
be required),and thereafter fails to diligently perfornl such maintenance,repair,or replacement
to completion,The Leonardo may,at its discretion,perform such maintenance,repair,or
replacement on behalf of the City upon written notice to the City..The City shall reimburse to
The Leonardo the reasonable cost to perfornl such maintenance,repair,or replacement within
thirty (30)days after receipt of notice from The Leonardo setting forth in reasonable detail such
costs and the items to which they relate.
10.UTILITIES:The City shall provide utility service to the Building.The City
represents,and The Leonardo aclmowledges,that the heat to the Building is generated by steam
supplied by a boiler plant operated by the City (the "Boiler Plant")and that the Building is not
serviced by any natural gas or furnaces,and that the cooling of the Building is provided by
chillers located within the Boiler Plant.As of the date of this Agreement,a meter is in place that
will measure and assign to the Building the amount of natural gas consumed in the Boiler Plant
to heat the Building.In addition,the electrical service to the Building is initially provided to the
Boiler Plant by PacifiCorp,and then runs from the Boiler Plant to the Building and is metered by
an electrical sub-meter on the Building.Domestic water and sanitary sewer service is provided
directly to the Building.The City shall maintain the facilities through which the various utilities
are provided to the Building.At the commencement of tlle Initial Occupancy Term,any
telephone service or internet service to the Building shall be contracted directly by The Leonardo
and paid by The Leonardo directly to the telephone provider.
11.PAYMENT OF OPERATION,MAINTENANCE AND UTILITY COSTS:
11.1.Payment of Utilities and Operation and Maintenance Costs.Subject to the
terms and conditions of this Section II,commencing at the beginning of the Initial Occupancy
Ternl and continuing throughout the Term of this Lease,The Leonardo shall pay to the City,as
"Building Operating Costs,"the following costs:(a)the costs of utility service to the Building,
and (b)as further set forth in this Section II,the costs associated with the operation oftlle Boiler
Plant that are allocated to the Building,so long as such costs are reasonably supported by the
City.The Leonardo shall pay the Building Operating Costs identified in an invoice from the
City within fifteen (15)days after receipt of such invoice.Except as set forth in the previous
sentence,the costs of utility service to the Building and the costs associated with the operation of
the Boiler Plant shall be calculated as follows:
11.1.1 Natural Gas.The costs for natural gas allocated to the Building
shall be based upon the monthly gas bill received from Questar Gas Company,or its successor
gas provider,and then allocated to the Building by a separate BTU sub meter.The allocation of
gas cost shall be calculated by the ratio of BTU's used by the Premises divided by the total
BTU's for all buildings served of the central gas meter and lUultiplying the ratio to the total cost
of gas as provided by the monthly Questar gas bill,resulting in a reasonable cost allocation for
the Premises.The City shall prepare a separate monthly billing and shall send it to The
Leonardo.
11.1.2 Electricitv.The costs for a kilowatt hour (KWH)and a kilowatt
demand (KWD)will be based off of the sub-meter on the main electrical switchgear supplying
9
the Building.Such sub-meter shall measure the electrical consmnption for the Building.The
cost of electricity for the Building shall be based upon the cost of KWH and l(WD measured by
the sub_meter for the Building.The cost per KWH shall be detemlined based upon the current
month's unit cost as calculated from the bill sent by PacifiCorp to the City for the electricity
provided to the central electrical meter in the Boiler Plant.
11.1.3 Domestic Water.The cost of domestic water shall be based upon
the amount of water consumed associated with the Building as measured by a separate water
meter for the Building.
11.1.4 Boiler Plant Operating Costs.As of the date of this Agreement,
the City's accounting system separates and collects costs associated with the operation of the
Boiler Plant in a specific costs center.The costs included on this account include the costs
associated with the operation of the Boiler Plant and the materials (such as pumps,motors,
grease,lights,fan belts,etc.)necessary to keep the boiler plant in optimum rmming order.The
costs to operate the Boiler Plant (including labor and materials)shall be allocated to the Building
based on a ratio,the numerator is the Building's total BTDs for gas and electricity,and the
denominator is the total BTDs for gas and electricity for all buildings served by the Boiler Plant,
which buildings shall inclUde,at a minimum,the Building,the City and County Building,and
the New Library.
11.1.5 Boiler Plant Utilitv Costs.As of the date of this Agreement,there
are electrical,natural gas,and water costs associated with operation of the Boiler Plant that are
not directly metered or allocated to the Building or other buildings and facilities serviced by the
Boiler Plant.The Boiler plant utility costs shall be allocated to each of the buildings served by
the central gas and electricity meters based on the ratios calculated in section 11.1.1 for gas and
in 11.1.2 for electricity.The amount of natural gas used in the Boiler Plant shall be deemed to be
the total natural gas consumption measured by the natural gas meter to the Boiler Plant less the
natural gas consumption sub-meter to the Building and any and all other buildings and facilities
serviced by the Boiler Plant,which buildings shall include,at a minimum,the Building,the City
and County Building,and the New Library.A water meter shall separately meter the water used
by the Boiler Plant and shall be allocated to each of the buildings served by the Boiler Plant
(which buildings shall include,at a minimum,the Building,the City and County Building,and
the New Library) based on the combined ratios for the respective building electricity and gas
usage ..
11.2.Excluded Costs.The Building Operating Costs shall not include,and The
Leonardo shall not be obligated to pay for the costs associated with:(i)any costs associated with
the installation or construction of improvements associated with the Locker Room and the City'S
use thereof;(ii)any damage to the Building caused by the City's negligent or intentional acts or
omissions;(iii)the repair or restoration of any portion of the Building caused by any damage or
destruction that should be covered by the insurance required to be maintained by Section 21.4;
and (iv)any cost associated with any other building owned or operated by the City or with the
Main Library and its grounds and exterior features,unless The Leonardo has use of such
building.
10
11.3.No Additional Financial Support by the City.Other than by providing the
Building at the specified rent,tlle City shall have no obligation to provide additional financial
support to The Leonardo or to the operation or use of the Building or to programming during the
Term of this Agreement beyond that already committed by the City,as set forth in Recital G
above.The foregoing shall not limit the City's obligations under this Agreement,including
without limitation those obligations relating to capital improvements,the provision of heating
mld cooling,and other similar obligations.
12.TAXES,LICENSES·AND PERMITS:The Parties aclmowledge that the
Internal Revenue Service classifies The Leonardo as a SOI(c)(3)corporation,and the City is a
municipal corporation.As a result,neither party is a taxable entity.If either Pmiy allows a use
within the Building that subjects the Building to any real estate taxes or assessments orallY other
taxes or assessments,such Party shall be responsible for the taxes alld assessments arising from
such use.Each Party shall pay any sales taxes and other taxes that are applicable due to such
Party's use and operation within the Building.Throughout the entire Tenn hereof,each Party
shall pay directly to the appropriate taxing authority when due all taxes,assessments,fees,and
charges levied on such Party's personal property,including,but not limited to,equipment,
fixtures,furnishings,alld other personal property owned by such Party within the Building.
Notwithstallding anything herein to the contrary,The Leonardo shall be responsible for paying
any privilege taxes imposed on or with respect to the Building.
Either Party,at its sole cost and expense,may contest any taxes or assessments affecting
the Building,and the other Party agrees to reasonably cooperate in any such contest,including
the execution of mlY necessary documents.Any refunds and rebates of taxes or assessments
obtained through a contest shall be applied as follows:(a)first,to the costs incurred in contesting
such taxes and assessments,(b)second,to the Party responsible to pay such taxes pursuant to the
tenus and conditions of this Agreement.
13.RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERSONAL PROPERTY:Neither Party shall be
responsible for ally dmuage,loss,haml,injury,vandalism,theft,or pilferage whatsoever of or to
any fiImiture,artwork,furnishings,equipment,or other personal property owned by the other
Party or its tenants,licensee's,guests,or invitees.Any pers0l1al property placed within the
Building shall be placed therein at the sole risk and hazard of the owner of such personal
property.Each Party shall be responsible to maintain adequate insurance covering its own
personal property.Each Party shall require any tenant or licensee to agree to the ternlS and
conditions of this Section 13 and to maintain adequate insurance for such party's personal
property that may be located within the Building.
14.PARKING:The Leonardo shall have the right to priority and exclusive use of
nine (9)parking spaces in the U1lderground parking facility located beneath Library Square,with
three (3)of such spaces to be located adjacent to the underground dock area of the Building for
periodic exhibit delivery,and the remaining six (6)spaces to be located on the northeast comer
of Levell of the parking facility (for the purpose of parking a trailer (a.lea."The Leonardo on
Wheels")in such stalls).An additional two (2)parking spaces at the southwest comer of Level 1
shall be granted to The Leonardo for the purpose of a dunlpster.Furthenuore,The Leonardo
shall have the right to request from the City at any time during the Tenu hereof,the non-
11
exclusive use of up to an additional thirty (30)unreserved spaces in the underground parking
facility (at no additional cost to The Leonardo),to accommodate and satisfy the parking needs .of
The Leonardo's management and staff.Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the ability of
The Leonardo's invitees,patrons,and guests from parking (in common with the public)in any
other City owned parking areas surrounding the Building,subject to and consistent with the
City's rules and regulations regarding such parking areas then in effect.Any special event usage
of parking must comply with City policy and requires the prior consent of the City.
Notwithstanding the foregoing,ifthe City alters or changes its policy on how it will
manage and finance the underground parking facility,including the charging of fees for
employee use,such policy change will immediately apply to use of the parking spaces granted to
the Leonardo,except for the two (2)parking stalks for the dumpster and the three (3)parking
stalls adjacent to the loading dock that are not used for employee parking.However,the
application to the parking spaces granted to The Leonardo of any such policy change shall not be
done in such a ma1111er as to treat employees of The Leonardo less favorably than City employees
are treated.
15.SURRENDER OF THE BUILDING:Upon the expiration or earlier
tennination of this Agreement,The Leonardo shall surrender the Building in.good,broom clean
condition,ordinary wear and tear excepted.Upon such ternlination,The Leonardo at its .sole
expense shall remove all of its personal property from the Building,restore and repair any
damage sustained to the Building resulting from removal of such personal property,and shall
leave the City's personal property intact.It is agreed and understood by both Parties that
existing heating,ventilation and air conditioning ("HVAC")equipment,electrica~plumbing,and
lighting equipment attached to the Building is part of the Building and shall remain the City's
property at the expiration or earlier termination ofthis Agreement,and shall not be removed
from the Building,unless otherwise agreed upon by the Parties hereto in writing.The Leonardo
shall sUITender all keys to the Building to City upon vacating the Building.
16.QUIET POSSESSION:The City represents and warrants that it has.good and
marketable title to the Premises (including but not limited to tlle Building),and that the Premises
is free and clear of any encumbrances.So long as The Leonardo confonns to the requirements of
this Agreement,The Leonardo shall quietly and peacefully enjoy the Premises,and the City shall
defend The Leonardo in such enjoyment and peaceful possession throughout the Initial
Occupancy Ternl and any Extended Tenn(s)of this Agreement.
17.WAIVER:The waiving of any of the covenants or provisions of this Agreement
by either Party shall be in writing and limited to the particular instance and shall not be deemed
to be a waiver of any other breaches of such covenant or any provision hereof.
18.FORCE MAJUERE:Any failure on the part of either Party to perform any
obligation hereunder,and any delay in doing any act required hereby,shall be excused if such
failure or delay is caused by any strike,labor dispute,lockout,governmental restriction,fire or
other casualty,weatller or natural disaster,damage to facilities (not caused by such Party),
conduct by third parties,or any similar cause beyond the reasonable control of the Party failing
12
to perform,to the extent and for the period that such cause continues,save and except that the
provisions of this Section shall not excuse any nonpayment when due of money hereunder.
19.ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING:The Leonardo may sublease space
within the Building only with the written consent of the City,which shall not be unreasonably
withheld,conditioned,or delayed.Any such sublease must have a direct relationship to The
Leonardo's Mission and programming plan.No sublease agreements shall be in conflict with this
Agreement.Subject to the above,this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the Parties
hereunder shall not be assigned to any other person or entity without the other Party's prior
written consent.
20.LOCKER/SHOWER ROOM:The City,as part of thelmprovements,shall
construct a locker room with lockers and showers consisting of approximately 1,100 square feet
on the first floor below the Main Floor as shown on the Floor Plans (the "Locker Room").The
Locker Room may be used by employees of The Leonardo and The Leonardo's tenants,if any,
and by the City's employees whose offices are in the City and County Building,the building
occupied by the City at 600 South 200 East,the building occupied by the City known as Plaza
349,the Justice Court Building occupied by the City at 333 South 200 East, and any other
building located within two blocks of the Building (the "Locker Room Authorized Users")..The
Locker Room shall be accessible for use by the Locker Room Authorized Users pursuant to a
separate,undergrOlllldentrance.The Leonardo and the City shall jointly manage the use of the
Locker Room so that the Locker Room may be equally used and enjoyed by the Locker Room
Authorized Users.The Leonardo and the City may establish reasonable rules and regulations
relating to the use of the Locker Room,which rules must be mutually approved by the Parties.
Furthennore,the City shall be responsible for the maintenance and janitorial upkeep of the
Locker Room,and The Leonardo shall be responsible to pay all water and other utility costs
associated with the operation and use of the Locker Room.Under no condition shall the .use of
the Locker Room create a burden upon,interfere with,or hinder the use of the Building by The
Leonardo,nor shall The Leonardo unreasonably deny access to the locker room to any City
employee.As part of the construction project,the City shall ensure that the Locker Room is
properly secured.
21.INSURANCE:
21.1.General.Any insurance coverage required of The Leonardo herein that is
written on a "claims made"form rather than on an "occurrence"foml shall (i)provide full prior
acts coverage or have a retroactive date effective before the date of this Agreement,and (ii)be
mailltained for a period of at least three (3)years following the end of the temlofthis Agreement
or contain a comparable "extended discovery"clause.Evidence of current extended discovery
coverage and the purchase options available upon policy tennination shall be provided to the
City.All policies of insurance provided shall be issued by insurance companies licensed to do
business in the State of Utah and either (1)listed on the United States Treasury j)epartment's
Listing of Approved Sureties (Department Circular 570)(as amended),or (2)currently rated "A-
"or better by A.M.Best Co..Each Party shall cause copies of certificates of insurance to be
fumished to the other Party concurrently with or prior to the signing of this Agreement.If
requested,The Leonardo shall also cause copies of the insurance policies required by this
13
Agreement to be provided to the City.In the event that governmental immunity limits are
subsequently altered by legislation or judicial opinion,The Leonardo shall provide a new
celtificate of insurance within thirty (30)days after being notified thereof in writing by the City,
certifying coverage in compliance with the modified limits or,if no new limits are specified,in
an amount acceptable to the City.The City may satisfy its insurance obligations through self-
insurance.
21.2.Worker's Compensation Insurance.Each Party shall obtain and n1aintain
during the Tenn of this Agreement worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance
sufficient under Utah law to cover all of such Party's employees employed at the Building.In
the event The Leonardo subcontracts any work or subleases any space in the Building,The
Leonardo shall require its subcontractor(s)orsublessees similarly to provide worker's
compensation insurance for all of the latter's employees,unless a waiver of coverage is allowed
and acquired pursuant to Utah law.
21.3.Commercial General Liability Insurance.The Leonardo shall secure and
maintain during the Tenn of this Agreement commercial general liability (CGL)insurance with
the City as an additional insured,in the minimum amount of $2,000,000 per occurrence with a
$3,000,000 general aggregate and $3,000,000 products and completed operations aggregate.
These limits can be covered either under a CGL insurance policy alone,or a combination of a
CGL insurance policy and an umbrella insurance policy and/or a CGL insurance policy and an
excess insurance policy.The policy shall protect the City,The Leonardo,and any subcontractor
or sublessee from claims for damages for personal injury,including accidental death,and from
claims for property damage that may arise from The Leonardo's operations under this
Agreement,whether perfonned by The Leonardo itself,any subcontractor or sublessee,or
anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them.Such insurance shall provide coverage
for premises operations,acts of independent contractors,products and completed operations.The
City represents and warrants that it is self-insured pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code
Section 63G-7-80l and may levy an aImual property tax sufficient to pay any claim,settlement,
or judgment pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code Section 63G-7-704.The minimum limits
aI1d coverage of liability insurance shall not limit The Leonardo's indemnification obligations
hereunder.
21.4.Casualty InsuraI1ce.The City shall maintain in full force and effect during
the Tem1 of this Agreement a primary and non-contributing policy or policies of commercial
"All-risk"(also lmown as a "Special Perils Fom1")insurance covering fire and extended
coverage,vandalism and malicious mischief,sprinkler leakage,and all other insurable perils of
direct physical loss or damage which are customarily found in all-risk policies for similar
buildings located in Salt Lake County,and any other coverage mutually agreed to by the Parties
for the full replacement value of the Building and the fixtures and equipment affixed thereto and
considered a paIt thereof.The City shall set the amount of any deductible and The Leonardo
shall pay any deductible unless the City causes the loss to which the deductible relates,provided
that such deductible shall not be in excess of $10,000.It is agreed that the City may satisfy its
obligations under this Section tluough a reserve fund established purSUaIlt to Utah Code Section
63G-7-703.If a third-party insurance policy is available that provides similar or better coverage
at a lower cost,The Leonardo may obtain a policy of insurance from such third-party insurance
14
carriers,in lieu of the policy otherwise maintained by the City in cOlmection with this Section.
Such policy shall include at least the same coverage as provided in this Section.
The insurance proceeds shall be released to the City in accordance with Section 22 of this
Agreement to reconstruct the Building.
The Leonardo shall pay the premium allocable to the Building for the insurance maintained by
the City pursuant to tlus Section 21.4.
21.5.COImnercial Automobile Liability Insurance.The Leonardo shall
maintain during the Tenn of this Agreement .commercial automobile liability insurance that
provides coverage for owned,hired,and non-owned automobiles in the minimum amount of a
combined single limit of $2,000,000 per occurrence or $1,000,000 liability per person,
$2,000,000 liability per occurrence,and $250,000 property damage.These limits can be reached
either with a commercial automobile liability insurance policy alone,or with a combination of a
commercial automobile liability insurance policy and an umbrella insurance policy and/or a
commercial automobile liability insurance policy and an excess insurance policy.
21.6.Insurance Non-cancelable for 30 Days.All required certificates and
policies provided by The Leonardo shall provide that coverage thereunder shall not be canceled
or modified without providing,in a malJl1er approved by the City Attorney,30 days prior written
notice to the City.
21.7.Personal Property Insurance.Subject to Section 21.9,each Party shall
insure,or cause to be insured,all personal property of such Party or of its tenants,licensees,or
employees located within the Building.Neither Party shall pernlit the Building to be used for
any purpose that would render the insurance thereon void.or canse cancellation thereof or cause
the insurance risk to be more hazardous,or increase the insurance premium in effect at the time
of the commencement of the Ternl.Neither Party shall keep,use,or sell,or pennit to be kept,
used,or sold in or about the Building any article or materials that are prohibited by law.
21.8.Waiver of Certain Rights.With respect to any loss or damage that may
occur to the Building (or any improvements thereon)or the respective property of the Parties
therein,arising from any peril customarily insured under a fire and extended coverage insurance
policy,regardless of the cause or origin (to the extent allowed by law),including negligence of
the Parties,their agents,servants,tenants,licensees,or employees,each Party hereby releases the
other Party from all claims with respect to such loss;arld each Party agrees that it and its
insurance company,if any,shall have no right of subrogation against the other Party on account
of any such loss,and each Party shall procure from its respective insurers under all policies of
fire and extended coverage insurance a waiver of all rights of subrogation against the other Party
which the insurers might otherwise have under such policies.
21.9.Insurance of Artwork.The City shall maintain in full force and effect during
tlle Tenll of this Agreement replacement cost propelty insurarlce or,where applicable,fme arts
coverage,for the artwork owned by the City within the Building,including without limitation
insurance for the following artwork:(a)the Doug Snow mural;(b)the.To Roper sculptured wall on
15
the south side of the Building;and (c)the Caravaglia fountain sculpture in the Atrium Garden.The
City shall set the amount of any deductible and The Leonardo shall pay any deductible unless the
City causes the loss to which the deductible relates,provided that such deductible shall not be in
excess of $10,000.It is agreed that the City may satisfy its obligations under this Section through
a reserve fund established pursuant to Utah Code Section 63G-7-703.
The Leonardo shall pay the premium allocable to the artwork in the Building for the insurance
maintained by the City pursuant to this Section 21.9.
22.DAMAGE/DESTRUCTION:If fifty percent (50%)or greater of the Building is
wholly or partially destroyed by fire or other casualty at any time during the Initial Occupancy
Term or any Extended Term(s),The Leonardo or the City shall have the right to terminate this
Agreement by providing written notice to the other party within sixty (60)days after the casualty
event.If this Agreement is tenninated,the proceeds of the insurance maintained by the City
pursuant to Section 21.4 shall be paid and released to the City.If this Agreement is not
temlinated by The Leonardo or the City as provided above,the proceeds of insurance maintained
under Section 21.4 shall be released to the City and the City shall,as soon as commercially
possible and in no event later than within sixty (60)days after such damage occurs commence
the plmming and design for the repair,restoration and reconstruction of the Building (and
thereafter diligently pursue them to completion)consistent with the final plans,including any
fixtures and equipment that are deemed part of the Building,except as may be otherwise agreed
upon by the Parties.Notwithstanding the above,if the Building is substantially danlaged or
destroyed and the City desires to construct a new or different Building on the Property,the City
shall notify The Leonardo in writing alld the Parties shall meet to discuss the possibility of
replacing the Building with a new building and having The Leonardo occupy the new building.
During any period The Leonardo cannot reasonably use the Building for The Leonardo's
intended use due to any damage to the Building during the Initial Occupancy Tenn or Extended
Teml(s)of this Agreement,as applicable,such applicable Tenn shall be tolled and The
Leonardo's obligation to pay rent or ally other amounts under this Agreement shall be abated
until such time as The Leonardo is able to reasonably use the Building for The Leonardo's
intended use.
23.CONDEMNATION:
23.1.Total Taking.If the entire Building is taken under the power of eminent
domain,this Agreement shall automatically temlinate as of the date The Leonardo is required to
vacate the Building,and the City mld The Leonardo shall each thereafter be released from any
further liability under this Agreement,except for any provisions hereof that shall survive the
temlination of this Agreement.
23.2.Pmiial Taking.If a portion in excess of twenty percent (20%)of the
squm'e footage of the Building is taken under the power of eminent domain,either Party may
temlinate this Agreement as of the date The Leonardo is required to vacate the Building,upon
thirty (30)days prior written notice to the other Party.If this Agreement is not tenninated,The
Leonardo shall remain in that portion of the Building not so taken and,in that event,the City
shall,at the City's sole cost and expense,restore the remaining portion of the Building as soon as
16
possible to a complete unit of like quality and character as existed prior to such taking and The
Leonardo,at its sole cost and expense,shall repair,restore,and rebuild The Leonardo's
furnishings,fixtures,equipment and other personal property located within the Building,if
applicable.
23.3.Condemnation Awards.If this Agreement is temlinated due to
condemnation,or any portion of the Building is taken but this Agreement remains in effect with
respect to any portion not so taken (pursuant to Section 23.2 above),any and all awards or
proceeds from such condemnation shall be payable to The Leonardo up to the total amount ofthe
proceeds,insurance,or other funds and any other awards that may be payable to The Leonardo
under law.Any condemnation award in excess of such proceeds,insurance,or other funds or
awards shall be payable to the City.
24.INDEMNITY:As a contractual obligation and material consideration of this
Agreement,each Party ("Indemnifying Party")shall indemnify,save harmless,and defend the
other Party,its agents and employees,from and against any and all suits,actions,liens,damages,
claims,liability,and expense (including attorney's fees,witness fees,discovery and investigative
costs,and other legal related expenses)in co:nnection with or arising out of the active or passive
negligence or action of the Indemnifying Party,and/or its agents,servants,contractors,and
employees.In the case of The Leonardo,such obligation also applies to any actions or damages
resulting from The Leonardo's contracts with third parties relating to the Building,including any
rotating or special exhibits and including without limitation the contract with ExNet.Nothing
herein shall require the IndenmifYing Party to indelll1lify the other Party for the other Party's own
negligence or action.
25.DEFAULT:
25.1.The following shall be deemed events of default of this Agreement:
25.1.1 Either Party ("Defaulting Party")fails to pay any anlount to the
other Pmiy ("Non-defaulting Party")when the same is due,and such failure continues for thirty
(30)days after the Non-defaulting Pmiy has given the Defaulting Pmiy wlitten notice specifying
the amount due.
25.1.2 The Defaulting Party fails to observe and perform any other
provision of this Agreement to be observed or perfoDned by the Defaulting Party,where such
failure continues for ninety (90)days (except where a different period of time is specified in this
Agreement)after written notice by the Non-defaulting Party to the Defaulting Party.If tile
nature of such default is such that the default cmmot be cured within such ninety (90)day (or
other)period,the Defaulting Party shall not be deemed to be in default if the Defaulting Party
shall within such period have commenced such cure and thereafter diligently prosecutes the same
to completion.
25.1.3 After the commencement of the Initial Occupancy Ternl,The
Leonardo fails to continuously occupy mld to use the Building consistent with The Leonardo's
mission,as defined in this Agreement,for a period of ninety (90)consecutive days,and
17
thereafter fails to continuously occupy and use the Building consistent with The Leonardo's
Mission for an additional period of thirty (30)consecutive days after receipt of a written notice
from the City.For purposes of this Section 25.1.3,failure to occupy and use the Building shall
not include reasonable periods of vacancy or non-occupancy due to:(a)damage,destruction,
condemnation,remodeling,repairs,or restoration of or to the Building;(b)transition of
occupation of portions of the Building by tenants or licensees;(c)progranmling,arranging,
preparing,and setting up exhibits within the Building;and (d)transitions between exhibits and
displays,so long as other portions of the Building are being occupied and used by The Leonardo
consistent with The Leonardo's mission.
25.2.If an event of default occurs,the Non-defaulting Party shall have the right
to:(a)tenninate this Agreement upon fifteen (15)days prior written notice to the other Party;or
(b)pursue any and all other rights and remedies available under this Agreement,at law,or in
equity.Notwithstanding the above,because of the up-front costs incurred by The Leonardo
associated with the Building,it is acknowledged and agreed by the City that the City calmot
temlinate this Agreement unless The Leonardo breached a substantial and material term of this
Agreement.Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary,failure to pay base rent or any
other amount due under this Agreement within six (6)months after written notice ofdelinquency
is issued by the City shall be deemed a substantial and material breach of this Agreement.If this
Agreement is temlinated,The Leonardo shall remove from the Building its fixtures,furnishings,
equipment,and personal property and surrender the Building in the condition as required under
this Agreement,and The Leonardo shall have a reasonable anlount of time to remove such items
and repair the Building.If The Leonardo fails to remove any of its movable personal.property
from the Building upon the temlination of this Agreement,the City may remove,store,sell,and
dispose of such personal property in accordance with applicable law.
25.3.Dispute Resolution.Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary,if
there is a dispute concerning the existence of all event of default,the Parties agree to amicably
attempt to resolve the dispute using good faith efforts,including,if requested by either Party,
paliicipation in non-binding mediation.The Parties shall equally share the cost of the mediator.
26.REPORTING:On an annual basis,The Leonardo shall provide a copy of its (a)
finallcial statements alld a report relating to the perfonnance of The Leonardo during the
preceding year to the City,within ninety (90)days following the end of The Leonardo's fiscal
year,and (b)annual budget (approved by The Leonardo Board of Trustees)for the then-current
fiscal year,within thirty (30)days following the commencement of such fiscal year.
Notwithstanding the foregoing,the substance of any such infomlation provided pursuant to this
Section shall not,in and of itself,be grounds upon which the City may declare The Leonardo to
be in default ofthis Agreement.To the extent allowed by law,all infonnationprovided by The
Leonal'do pursuant to this Section shall be confidential and not subj ect to public disclosure under
the Government Records Access and Management Act,Utah Code Title 63G,.Chapter 2.
27.NOTICES:All notices,requests,demallds,and other communications hereunder
shall be in writing and shall be given by (i)established express delivery service which maintains
delivery records,(ii)hand delivery,or (iii)certified or registered mail,postage prepaid,retum
18
receipt requested,to the Parties at the following addresses,or at such other address as the Parties
may designate by written notice in the above maImer:
The Leonardo
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
clo Facilities Division
248 East 600 South
Salt Lake City,Utah 841 I1
With a copy to
clo Property Management
P.O.Box 145460
Salt Lake City,Utah 84114-5460
The Leonardo at Library Square
209 East 500 South
Salt Lake City,Utah 84 II1
Attention:Executive Director
The Leonardo shaIl make any payments to the City to the address for the City set forth above.
Notwithstanding the foregoing,during the Pre-Occupancy Period (e.g.,prior to The Leonardo's
occupancy of the Building),notices to The Leonardo shall be sent to The Leonardo at Library
Square,P.O.Box 2129,Salt Lake City,Utah 84110).
28.REPRESENTATION REGARDING ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR CITY
OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES AND FORMER CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES:
The Leonardo represents that it has not:(1)provided an illegal gift or payoff to a City
officer or employee or former City officer or employee,or his or her relative or business
entity;(2)retained any person to solicit or secnre this Agreement upon an agreement or
understanding for a commission,percentage,or brokerage or contingent fee,other than
bona fide employees or bona fide commercial selling agencies for the purpose of securing
business;(3)knowingly breached any of the ethical standards set forth in City's conflict of
interest ordinance,Chapter 2.44,Salt Lake City Code;or (4)knowingly influenced,and
hereby promise that it will not knowingly influence,a City officer or employee or former
City officer or employee to breach any of the ethical standards set forth in City's conflict
of interest ordinance,Chapter 2.44,Salt Lake City Code.
29.TIME:Time is of the essence in this Agreement and of every term,covenant,
and addition herein contained.
30.SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS:AIl of the rights and obligations of the Parties
under this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective heirs,
executors,and their permitted successors.This Agreement shall not be assignable.
31.INTERPRETATION:The captions by which the sections of this Agreement are
identified are for convenience only and shaIl have no effect upon the interpretation of this
Agreement.The Parties acknowledge and agree that all of the temlS and conditions of this
Agreement are contractual in nature and shall be interpreted under any applicable law as
contractual obligations,and each Party waives any claims or defenses to the contrary.Vvhenever
19
the context so requires,the singular shall include the plural,the plural shall refer to the
singular,and the neuter gender shall include the masculine and feminine genders.This
Agreement shall be interpreted in a reasonable maImer to give effect to the Parties'intentions as
set forth herein.
32.CITY IS A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY:The Leonardo is hereby informed
that the City is a governmental entity under the Govenmlental Immunity ActofUtah,Utah Code
AIm.§§63G-7-101 et seq.(2008)(the "Act").The Parties acknowledge that all of the tenns and
conditions contained herein represent contractual obligations as such tenn is used in Utah Code
Ann.§63G-7-301 (l)(a)(2008).Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to enlarge or
lessen any rights ofthe Parties under the Act.
33.AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE:Each person executing this Agreement
individually and personally represents and warrants that he or she is duly authorized to execute
and deliver the SaI1le on behalf of the entity for which he or she is signing,aI1d that all corporate
and/or legislative authority aI1d approvals,as the case may be,have been obtained,and that this
Agreement is a binding obligation on such entity.
34.NO AGENCY:In assuming and performing the obligations of this Agreement
including but not limited to any obligations relating to The Leonardo's prograI11ming,the City
and The Leonardo are each acting as independent parties as landlord and tenaI1t,respectively,
and neither shall be considered or representitself as a joint venturer,partner,agent,or employee
of the other.There is no intent by either Party to create or establish third party beneficiary status
or rights in aI1Y third party,aI1d no such third party shall.have any rightto enforceaI1y right or
enjoy any benefit created or established under this Agreement.
35.APPLICABLE LAW:TIllS Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with
and enforced under the laws of the state of Utah.
36.ENTIRE AGREEMENT:This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement
between the Parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement,and incorporates all prior
correspondence,communications or agreements between the Parties relating to The.Leonardo's
lease of the Building from the City,and cannot be altered or assigned except in Wliting signed by
both Parties.
37.STATE SCIENCE CENTER AGREEMENT:The City hereby represents and
wan'ants to The Leonardo that the Utah Science Center Agreement has been tenninated and is of
no further force or effect.
38.ENTRY BY THE LEONARDO:In addition to .all other rights set forth in this
Lease,dUling the Pre-Occupancy Period The Leonardo and its consultants and contractors shall
have the right at all reasonable times and upon reasonable notice to the City to enter the Building
to:(a)inspect and examine the Building;and (b)show the Building to prospective donors;
provided,however,that the City shall have the right to reasonably object to such entry by The
Leonardo in the event of health or safety concems.The City shall not be obligated to provide
electricity and other utility service to the Building before the Commencement Date,except to the
20
extent to prevent damage to the Building.The Leonardo shall enter into the Building during the
Pre-Occupancy Period at its sole risk and hazard.
[Remainder ofPage Intentional~l'Le/i Blank.}
21
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day
and year first above written.
By:
Its:
"The Leonardo"
"City"
THE LIBRARY SQUARE FOUNDATION
FOR ART,CULTu;t}E AND SCIENCE
FOUNDATION,.a'T.Jtah nonprofit corporation
(/;J\t-ji,/\..../r8.lC(,';·)t·~PlfpdiJ {;
ILL ,I-<c/..'-O!r:1..o
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION,a Utah
municipal corporation
By:~~Rlll])B~Mayor
Attest and Countersign:RECOR 0E0
~12 cz1<]..ei'-PA ~JUN 2/:2009
CITY RECORDER C.lTV RECORDER
Approved as to foml:
se::iL Z~o=.~-----
:55.
The foregoing instru efore me this __day of-:-::=-=-=-==-:=-=-
2009 by the of THE LIBRARY SQUARE
FOUNDATION FOR ART,CULTUR D SCIENCE,a Utah nonprofit corporation.
Notary Public
Residing at Salt Lak'
My commiss'expIres:
22
EXHIBIT A
(Property Description)
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:LEASED PROPERTY LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 37,PLAT "A",SALT LAKE
CITY SURVEY;THENCE NORTH 0°01'02"WEST 179.88 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 37;THENCE NORTH 89°58'25"EAST 279.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH
LINE OF A CONCRETE WALL;THENCE SOUTH 179.88 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE
OF A CONCRETE WALL EXTENDED TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 37;
THENCE SOUTH 89°58'48"WEST 278.95 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF BLOCK 37
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINS 50182 SQUARE FEET OR 1.152 ACRES
MORE OR LESS.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:MAINTENANCE LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POlNT (TBC)ON THE EAST SIDE OF 200 EAST STREET,POINT
BEING NORTH 0°01 '02"WEST 25.17 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF BLOCK 37 AND
WEST 15.28 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 37,PLAT "N',
SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY;THENCE NORTH 0°01'00"WEST 184.01 FEET ALONG
SAID TBC TO THE EXTENDED LINE OF THE NORTH LINE OF A CONCRETE
RETAINING WALL,THENCE NORTH 89°58'25"EAST 294.28 FEET ALONG SAID
NORTH LINE OF WALL TO THE EXTENDED EAST LINE OF A CONCRETE WALL ON
THE EAST SIDE OF THE LEONARDO BUILDING;THENCE SOUTH 238.35 FEET
ALONG SAID CONCRETE WALL EXTENDING TO THE TBC ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
500 SOUTH STREET;THENCE THE NEXT 4 CALLS ALONG SAID TBC AS FOLLOWS:
SOUTH 89°55'51"WEST 288.80 FEET TO A POINT OF A 21.19 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO
THE RIGHT;THENCE 31.27 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE;THENCE NORTH
01°01'03"WEST 16.86 FEET;THENCE NORTH 40 0 38'28"EAST 23.37 FEET TO THE POIN
OF BEGINNING,CONTAINS 70757 SQFT (1.624 ACRES)MORE OR LESS.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:EXCEPTING THAT PORTION FOR UTILITY ACCESS OF A
WATER VALVE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 200 EAST STREET,
SAID POINT BEING NORTH 0°01 '02"WEST 95.19 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF BLOCK 37,PLAT "A",SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY;THENCE GOING WEST
8.00 FEET;THENCE NORTH 7.00 FEET;THENCE EAST 8.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH
7.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING,CONTAINS 56 SQFT MORE OR LESS.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:SHARED USE DRIVEWAY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
23
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 200 EAST STREET,
SAID POINT BEING NORTH 0 0 01 '02 "WEST 179.88 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF BLOCK 37,PLAT "A",SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY;THENCE NORTH
0 0 01 '02"WEST 29.30 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 37;THENCE
NORTH 89°58'48"EAST 279.01 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF A CONCRETE
RETAINING WALL;THENCE SOUTH 29.30 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF A
CONCRETE WALL OF THE LEONARDO CENTER;THENCE SOUTH 89°58'48"WEST
279.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID CONCRETE WALL EXTENDING TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING,CONTAINS 8179 SQFT (0.188 ACRES)
24
15.27'1-.II~_-L_..£.9£..Jl~1::;1L__24.00'tn~~toB.g~.$1-g'o.....,"cl~.U>(l)U>~"~"l~"~~~'"o~rU97II "I~III;;1~ILEONARDOBUILDINGSB9'58'4S':"W378.95'R/lI~I-~_E'~--~lI5J:oe"S":TI\1)''''~:POB.iLcORNffi---II1~i~•~III~8.oo1ll::•.m;;;r,0$~~~POOEXCEPllNGP&'f-~!~pP8z~';'~n~';'"'~0/~II.~I~~I~~~rnC~~1~~209.18tov.T:\Su.....ey_dW911\SUI'V'/I)IIndlllc\Gulla\Jobll\DESlGN\2009\03libraryLeonardoComei\LEONARDO.d\llll
EXHIBIT C
(Construction Budget)
See attached.
February September
Hybrid New Scope 12 May 09 recap comments
**Limited to Scope
BUilding Cost Summary Items lIsted*'"
$
L1 02 Siteworks &Demolition 384,989
$
L2 03 Concrete 39,196
$
L3 04 Masonry 39,000
$
L4 05 Metals 72,200
$
L5 06 Woods &Plastics 48,120
07 Thermal &Moisture $
L6 Protection 296,213
$
L7 08 Doors &Windows 146,282
$
L8 09 Finishes 300,552
$
L9 10 Specialties 72,766
L10 11 Equipment nic
$
L11 12 Furnishings 6,257
$
L12 13 Special Construclion 1,850,000
$
L13 14 Conveying Syslem 168,000
$
L14 15 Mechanical 2,663,681
$
L15 16 Electrical 1,520,684
$
L16 Sub Total 7,607,939
L17
General Condilions (9%&$
L18 6%)456,476
$
L19 Overhead &Profit (4%)304,318
Design Contingency &Bid $
L20 Package Incr (10%)380,397
Total
R
e
m
o
d
e
l
Construclion $
L21 Cost 8,749,130
$Includes $100k for
L22 LEED 135,000 documentation
$
L23 SHPO Allowance 150,000
$
L24 Subtotal Conslruction Cosl 9,034,130
$
L25 Inflation (10 Feb 'Og)304,258
26
L26
$
L27 Total Construction Cost 9,338,388
L28 Soft Cosls
Project Programming $additional study
L29 Expenses Ihru 07/07 350,000 costs Incurred
$
L30 Demolition Permit 2,300
$
L31 Plan Check Fees 31,023
$
L32 Building Permit 47,728
$
L33 1%State Permit Fee 477
$
L34 Impact Fees 30,000
$
L35 Geotechnical/Soil Study 30,000 Seismic
Environmental $
L36 Studies/Remediation 10,000
City Engineering Mgt Fee $
L37 (1.5%)140,076
$
L38 Project Delivery System 130,000 ESCO Coordination
Architectural Design Fees $
L39 7%653,687
$
L40 Architectural Reimbursables 40,000
$
L41 Enhanced Commissioning 75,000
Accelerate Hazmat and $
L42 Demo
Owner's Construction $
L43 Contingency 933,839
Special Inspection and $
L44 Testing 25,000
Art (1 %&included in $
L45 exhibits)93,384
$
L46 Total Soft Costs 2,592,514
L47
$
L48 Total Base Project Costs 11,930,902
L49
L50 City Alternates
L51
Blue Sky Solar Panels w/Included in Electrical $SeeL38 for funds,
L52 Partial RMP Grant Div.16 item L199 200,000 220 KW?
Braced frame additional $
L53 cost 594,519
$
L54 #3 Auditorium Renovation 646,178
L55 ADD LEO Prioritized alternates here I
$
L56 Total Alternates 1,440,698
L57
Total Project Cost with $
L58 Alternates 13,371,600
L59
02 SITEWORK &
L60 DEMOLITION
27
L61 Demolition
L62 Remove Existing stairs nic
$
L63 Wall sawculting 8"1,572
$
L64 Wall sawcutting 12"593
L65 Remove existing lockers nic
L66 Demolish escalator nic
L67 Demo millwork nic
Remove existing
L68 dumbwaiter nic
L69 Demo escalators ceiling nic
Demo exterior glazing at $
L70 shealWalls 9,243
L71 Demo pianter wall nic
Demo planter at parkin9
L72 garage nic
$
L73 Asbestos abatement 135,000
$
L74 Demo plumbing fixtures 1,560
L75 Demo stepped slab nic
$shorten coves at
L76 Demo ceiling coves 22,911 seismic braces
Remove escalators framing
L77 members nic
L78 Demo soffit glazing nic
Demo N &S vestibules $
L79 (tempered glass)1,134
Demo concrete waH at
L80 stailWell perimeter nic
Sawcut concrete wall at
L81 stairwell perimeter nic
$
L82 Remove Existing roof 29,859
$
L83 Electrical demolilion 82,914 full electrical scope
$
L84 Mechanical demolition 41,457
L85 Demo interior wall nic
$
L86 Painting protection 5,000
$
L87 Miscellaneous sawcutting 10,000
$
L88 Subtotal demolition 341,243
L89
L90 Earthwork
L91 Site repair nic
$
L92 New Sanitary Sewer 10,000
$
L93 Subtotal earthwork 10,000
L94
L95 Site concrete
$
L96 Repair concrete steps 10,611
$
L97 Cut in pedestrian access at site wall 10,000
L98 Curb cut at vehicle access $
28
11,875
Pedestrian walk at vehicle $
L99 access 1,260
$
L100 Subtotal Site concrete 33,746
L101
TOTAL SITEWORK &$
L102 DEMOLITION 384,989
L103
L104 03 CONCRETE
Miscellaneous concrete $
L105 repair 30,000
$
L106 Floor patch 9,196
L107 Floor infill nic
$
L108 TOTAL CONCRETE 39,196
L109
L110 04 MASONRY
$
L111 eMU Infills 39,000
$
L112 TOTAL MASONRY 39,000
L113
L114 05 METALS
L 115 New stairs nic
L116 Landing at stairs nic
Free standing railing at
L117 interior locations nk
$
L118 Modify existing railin9s 22,200
L119 Wall mounted railing nic
$
L120 Existing fire stair rail to code 10,000
$
L121 Miscellaneous steel 40,000
$
L122 TOTAL METALS 72,200
L123
L124 06 WOOD &PLASTICS
L125 Carpentry
$
L126 Wood plates &blocking 12,880
$
L127 Fire-rated plywood backing 30,240
$
L128 subtotal carpentry 43,120
L 129
L130 Millwork
L131 Ticket counter nic use existing
L 132 Coat room shelving nic use existing
$re attaching WQod
L133 Miscellaneous millwork 5,000 paneling
$
L134 Subtotal for millwork 5,000
L 135
TOTAL WOOD &$
L136 PLASTICS 48,120
L137
29
L138 07 THERMAL &MOISTURE PROTECTION
$
L139 R-30 Ri9id insuiation 68,805
R-19 sprayed in at 3d fioor $
L140 pienum 68,635
Exterior wall at 2nd floor,
L141 stud.Gyp.Insulation nic
$
L142 Sound Batt 3,840
$
L143 Singly ply roof membrane 68,805
Tray garden waterproofing
L144 repair nic see division 13
$
L145 Metal wail cap (Kynar)17,853
$
L146 Metai flashings 23,275
Cap at precast panels &$
L147 misc.repair 25,000
$
L148 Caulking &sealants 20,000
TOTAL THERMAL &$
L149 MOISTURE 296,213
L150
L 151 08 DOORS &WINDOWS
New interior single wood $
L152 doors 3,270
L153 Sound door single nic
New double aluminum $
L154 doors 6x7 7,700
NIS entrance mod 8x10 See Line L55 for
L155 aluminum doors See Leonardo add alter
NIS entrance new $
L156 storefront -tempered 21,718
New hardware at existing $
L157 door 10,000
Modification at existing $
L158 entry doors 5,600
Replace stairweil doors wi $
L159 rated doors 26,100
Interior glazing 3d floor $
L160 enclosure 28,614
L161 Repair existing glazing Done prior Done prior completed in Feb 09
Re-instail glazing at $necessary for
L162 concrete shearwail 43,280 braced frame
TOTAL DOORS &$
L163 WINDOWS 146,282
L164
L165
L166
L167 09 FINISHES
6"Metal stud interior $
L168 partition 22,800
6"Metal stud furring at
L169 exterior waH nic
Shaftwall at mechanical $shaftwall repair due
L170 shaft 6,000 to construction
L171 Minimum cafe fit out nic
5/8"abuse resistant $
L172 gypsum 25,600
30
$
L173 Tie in new walls at existing 2,000
Patch and repair existing $
L174 walls 5,500
Suspended gyp board $
L175 ceiling 3,825
Gypsum soffits -2nd fi.
L176 sphere humanity nic
L177 Acoustical spray waffle siab nic
$
L178 Skim patch existing ceiiing 1,419
$
L179 Texture existing beams 92,536 Register Surrounds
New ceiiing cove wiih metal
L180 at escalator nic
L181 6x6 Unistrut frame nic
L182 Acoustic ceiling nlc
Ceramic fioor tiie at $
L 183 restroom 10,350
$
L184 Ceramic tile base 2,280
Ceramic wall tiie at $
L185 restrooms 20,264
$
L186 Carpet 10,500
$
L187 Resilient flooring 36,300
$
L188 Rubber base 1,450
$
L189 PainVstain doors &frames 3,510
PainVstain existing doors &$
L190 frames 2,850
$
L191 Paint interior masonry 1,771
$
L192 Paint interior gyp 8,000
$
L193 Paint ceiling 495
L194 Paint existing ceiling beams nic
L195 Paint exposed ceiiing nic
Architectural repair at $
L196 shearwails 30,000 Drag Strut repair
Mechanical area clean,$
L197 paint 10,000
$
L198 Seal interior concrete 3,102 House keeping
$
L199 TOTAL FINISHES 300,552
L200
L201 10 SPECIALTIES
$
L202 Fire extinguisher 2,346
$
L203 Chain link @ storage area 2,590
$
L204 Toiiet partition ADA 5,100
$
L205 Toilet partition standard 11,250
Toiiet partition doors at 2nd $
L206 &3d floor 7,000
31
$
L207 Urinal screens 1,800
$
L208 Grab bars 1,170
$
L209 Restroom mirrors 152
$
L210 Toilet tissue dispensers 1,950
$
L211 Electric hand dryers 11,200
$
L212 Locker bench 1,308
$
L213 Relocate existing iockers 1,900
L214 Double tiered metal lockers na
$
L215 Identifying devices 25,000
$
L216 TOTAL SPECIALTtES 72,766
L217
L218 11 EQUIPMENT
L219 Kitchen exhaust nic
L220 TOTAL EQUIPMENT nk
L221
L222 12 FURNtSHINGS
L223 Roller shades 1st floor nic
$
L224 Entrance Mat 5,634
$
L225 Shower curtains 623
$
L226 TOTAL FURNISHINGS 6,257
L227
13 SPECIAL
L228 CONSTRUCTIONS
$
L229 Tray garden repair 50,000 replacement
Waler fealure at tray garden
L230 (donor)nic
$
L231 Seismic Upgrade 1,800,000
L232 Pile cap inc!
L233 Mlcropiles at new footings inc!
Core drilling at existing
L234 footing/slab incl
18"conc.shear wall full
L235 height.5,000 PSI inc!
Reinforce pre-cast panels -
L236 angle@ 2 fl.s inc!
Epoxy dowel at existing
L237 beams incl
Epoxy dowel connection at
L238 foundation wall incl
Epoxy dowel connection at
L239 columns incl
L240 Core drilling at floor beam incl
L241 Miscellaneous sawGutting inc!
TOTAL SPECIAL $
L242 CONSTRUCTIONS 1,850,000
L243
32
L244 14 CONVEYING SYSTEMS
Return 2 elevators to $
L245 normal operations 108,000
Escalator renovation 2-3d $
L246 lloor 60,000
TOTAL CONVEYING $
L247 SYSTEMS 168,000
L248
L249 15 MECHANICAL
L250 HVAC
$
L251 Air handler -120,000 CFM 474,000
$
L252 Air Handler -40,000 CFM 158,000
$
L253 Cooling tower on rool wlcoll 60,000
$
L254 Repair exisitng ductwork 92,127
$
L255 New pumps 45,000
New reheats at shaftwall $
L256 penetration 270,000
$
L257 Heat exchanger 65,000
$
L258 Connect to plant piping 20,000
$
L259 Hydronlc piping 244,137
$
L260 Valves 13,650
General cleanup 01 motors,
L261 belts,valves incl
Add lire smoke dampers at
L262 shalt penetrations inc!
Smoke evac system -$
L263 Smoke detect.In Div.16 250,000
L264 Smoke control system incl
$
L265 New ductwork 275,000
$
L266 Ductliner 51,475
$
L267 Temperature controls 244,137 Br4SC?
L268 Control modilications na
$
L269 Exhaust lans medium 21,900
Fire dampers at 3d lioor $
L270 penetration 50,000
$
L271 New registers and grilles 15,500
$
L272 Utility metering 20,000
$
L273 Outdoor air monitoring 23,500
$
L274 Test and balance 16,350
$
L275 TOTAL HVAC 2,409,776
L276
Fire Sprinklers $
L277 Modifications Only 88,673
33
L278
L279 Plumbin9
$
L280 Toilets ADA 2,880
$
L281 Toilets Standards 6,800
$
L282 Waterless urinals 16,500
$
L283 Showers-Bikers 3,800
$
L284 Lavs 2,650
$
L285 New faucets at eXisting lavs 1,590
$
L286 3d fioor handicap toilets 16,000
One compartment sink at $
L287 exhibits 2,320
$
L288 Restroom repair allowance 50,000
$
L289 Wali mounted lavs 1,995
$
L290 Thermostatic mixing valves 7,800
L291 Sink rough-in nlc
$
L292 Floor drains 500
$
L293 Mop sink 680
$
L294 Water lines 23,160
$
L295 WasteNent lines 23,557
$
L296 Clean &fiush lines 5,000
$
L297 TOTAL PLUMBING 165,232
L298
$
L299 TOTAL MECHANtCAL 2,663,681
L300
L301 16 ELECTRICAL (EC for hybrid,Spectrum for new scope)
$
L302 New fire alarm system 225,000
L303 New main electrical service in L306
Lighting relamp &baliast exisitng
L304 fixtures in L308
L305 Lighting controls in L308
$
L306 Service and distribution 391,540
$
L307 Power 244,137
Lighting (track heads in $
L308 exhibit bUdget)489,572
L309 Telecommunication nic
$
L310 PA system 64,489
Security -card access &$
L311 CACTI 105,946
L312 PV system aliowance See L52
34
L313 TOTAL ELECTRICAL
$
1,520,684
HB _A TTY -#86 J l-v3-Leonardo_Jease_agreemenU-20-09.DOC
35
Salt Lake City Corporation
Contract Activation
Contract Nbr:03 1 09 3992 Status:A City Wide:N
--,--"~._~
Title:Tl:iE~1!3.~RY~<.:lt,J~f{~E F()~U~IJA TI()~~L_~~~~(~~S~t\I~
Vendor 3?~~~g~~()N:"_f{lJ()~L!E3~~~~<.:l FOUt\l~[)~11()t\I:11-1~~~
Dept Contact:LINDA BENTON
"'__'>~fr"c-"~~_.,..~~"~~,-...o..._~""_~~"__,,,"m_"_._"..o."'_'~~'"~'_"_"'__~Ym_
Starts:6/23/2009 Ends:
.."_,"_,~~~__~,~...~~~,·,,·__m"~.,,_,_
Term:20 Units:YR
Limit:$0.00
Contract Activation was successful.
City Council Announcements
Tuesday, December 7, 2021
Information Needed by Council Staff
A. Review and Approval of 2022 Annual Calendar (attached)
The 2022 annual meeting calendar is attached. Each year, an annual calendar of
the Council meeting dates must be posted for the public on the State’s website. The
annual calendar is posted ahead of time, however times or meetings may change
throughout the year as unexpected needs arise.
Does the Council approve of the 2022 Annual Meeting Calendar?
Adjustments:
• January
o Per RDA request the RDA meeting will be on January 18 and January
11 will be a work session only.
• March
o NLC conference will be held March 14-16 currently we have a work
session and formal scheduled on the 15th. Should we move those
meetings to the 22nd?
• May
o Thursday, May 24th & 31 are reserved as tentative Work Sessions to
allow additional time for budget briefings. During the budget season,
the Council will determine if those briefing times are needed.
• June
o Typically, the Council will take action on the budget at the second
Tuesday in June (June 14), but staff has listed a tentative formal
meeting on June 21st in case budget adoption is needed later.
• July
o Typically, the Council avoids scheduling a meeting near summer
holidays. The July meetings have been changed to July 12th and July
19th.
• August
To accommodate Night Out Against Crime community events the August
meetings have been changed to August 9th and August 16th.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
January 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesda
Thursday Friday Saturday
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
New Year’s
Eve
New Year’s
Day
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Oath of
Office
Ceremony
Work
Session,
Formal
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Work
Session only
16 17 18
19 20 21 22
Martin
Luther King
Jr. Day
RDA, Work
Session,
Formal
(tentative:
Mayor’s
Address)
*Legislative
session
23 24 26 26 27 28 29
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• *Legislative session begins Tuesday, January 18th. *This could change
due to Utah Constitutional Amendment F and subsequent bills.
• Tentative: Mayor’s State of the City Address during January 18th
formal meeting.
• RDA meeting on the 18th was requested by RDA staff
School dates at the end of this doc
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
Work
Session,
Formal
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
RDA, Work
Session
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Work
Session,
Formal
20 21
22 23 24 25 26
President’s
Day
27 28 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• Council retreat generally held this month – Council prefers a Tuesday
since those days are blocked off already. Deferring date choice to
2022 Chair and Vice Chair.
February 2022
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
March 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
27 28 1 2 3 4 5
Work
Session,
Formal
*Legislative
session
ends
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
RDA, Work
Session
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
NLC
Work
Session,
Formal
NLC NLC
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
NAHRO
NAHRO
NAHRO
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are indicated in
gray.
• National League of Cities Congressional City Conference March 14-16, 2022
• *Legislative session ends Friday, March 4th.
• National Association of Housing & Redevelopment Officials Washington
Conference (NAHRO): originally scheduled for March 28-30 in D.C.
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
April 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Work
Session,
Formal
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
RDA, Work
Session
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Work
Session,
Formal
ULCT ULCT ULCT
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
APA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• Utah Leagues of Cities and Towns (ULCT) Midyear Conference – April
20-22
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
May 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesda
Thursday Friday Saturday
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
APA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
APA APA
Work
Session,
Formal
APA
Work Session
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
RDA, Work
Session
Work Session
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Work
Session,
Formal
Work Session
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Work
Session
Only
Work Session
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
Memorial
Day
Work
Session
only
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• American Planning Association (APA) originally scheduled for April 30-
May 3
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
June 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
Work Session
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Work Session,
Formal
Work Session
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
RDA, Work
Session &
Formal
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Formal
(tentative - as
needed for
budget)
26 27 28 29 30 1 2
.
Budget
adoption
deadline
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• Legal deadline to adopt the annual budget is June 30.
• Downtown Alliance Urban Exploration – dates not posted yet
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
July 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesd
Thursday Friday Saturday
26 27 28 29 30 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Independence
Day
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
RDA, Work
Session,
Formal
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Work
Session,
Formal
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Pioneer Day
Pioneer Day
Observed
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• Pioneer Day Observed is July 25th as Pioneer Day is July 24th.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
August 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesd
Thursday Friday Saturday
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
Night Out
Against
Crime events
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
RDA, Work
Session,
Formal
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Work
Session,
Formal,
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are indicated
in gray.
• Night Out Against Crime events.
• Legal Deadline: Truth in Taxation hearing, if needed, by September 1.
• Legal Deadline: CIP needs to be adopted by September 1.
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
September 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
28 29 30 31 1 2 3
CIP
adoption
+ Truth
in Tax
Hearing
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Labor Day
Work
Session,
Formal
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
RDA, Work
Session
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Work
Session,
Formal
25 26 27 28 29 30 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• **Legal Deadline: Truth in Tax public hearing, if need, must be held by
September 1.
• **Legal Deadline: CIP must be adopted by September 1.
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
October 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
25 26 27 28 29 30 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Work
Session,
Formal
ULCT ULCT ULCT
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
RDA, Work
Session
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Work
Session,
Formal
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
Rail~Volution
Rail~Volution
Rail~Volution
Rail~Volution
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• ULCT Annual Convention – Oct 5-7
• Rail~Volution: October 30-November 2 in Florida
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
November 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
Rail~Volution Rail~Volution
Rail~Volution Rail~Volution
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
RDA, Work
Session,
Formal
Veteran’s
Day
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Work
Session,
Formal
NLC NLC NLC NLC
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Thanks-
giving Day
Day after
Thanks-
giving
27 28 29 30 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are indicated
in gray. Our Office is also closed the Friday following Thanksgiving.
• Board of Canvassers meeting needed two weeks following the election.
• NLC City Summit - November 16-19
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
December 2022
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
27 28 29 30 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Work
Session,
Formal
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
RDA, Work
Session,
Formal
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Christmas
Eve
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Christma
s Day
Christmas
Day
Observed
New Year’s
Eve
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Notes:
• Our office is closed on Federal & State Holidays. These closures are
indicated in gray.
• School dates at the end of this doc.
INTERNAL – COUNCIL OFFICE ANNUAL MEETING CALENDAR
As of 12.02.21
School Dates:
• SLC school district
o 2021-22 School Year Winter Recess December 20 – January 2
o Spring Recess March 28-April 1
o Classes end June 3
o 2022-23 School Year Classes begin Aug. 30
o Fall Recess Oct. 13-14
o Winter Recess begins Dec. 26 – Jan. 6
• U of U
o 2021-22 School Year Winter break Dec. 18–Jan. 9
o Classes begin Jan. 10
o Spring break scheduled for March 6-13
o Classes end Aug. 3
o 2022-23 School Year Classes begin Aug. 22
o Fall break Oct. 9-16
o Winter break Dec. 17- Jan. 8
• Westminster
o 2021-22 School Year Winter break Dec. 24- Jan. 3
o Classes begin Jan. 10
o Spring break March 7-11
o Classes end Aug. 1
o 2022-23 School Year Classes begin Aug. 24
o Fall Break Oct. 17-21
o Winter break Dec. 26-30
• SLCC
o 2021-22 School Year Classes begin Jan. 10
o Spring break March 7-11
o Classes end Aug. 3
o 2022-23 School Year Classes begin Aug. 24
o Fall break Oct. 14-16
o Classes end Dec. 9
2022 MEETING SCHEDULE FOR SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL,
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (RDA), & LOCAL BUILDING AUTHORITY (LBA)
12/02/21
1
Until further notice, all City Council meetings will be electronic meetings pursuant to the
determination of the City Council and Redevelopment Chair. The listed City Council,
Redevelopment Agency (RDA), and Board of Canvassers meetings will not have a physical
location at the City and County Building. However, all attendees will connect remotely via
Webex or by phone. Members of the public are encouraged to participate in meetings.
Interested members of the public may access the meetings by phone or online. Please visit
www.slccouncil.com for information on how to watch and participate in virtual meetings.
Public Notice is hereby given that the 2022 Annual Meeting Schedule of the City Council,
Redevelopment Agency (RDA) & Local Building Authority
(LBA) of Salt Lake City, Utah, shall be as follows:
The Board of Directors will hold regular meetings from time to time as the Board deems necessary.
When held, regular meetings will be on the same dates and at the same times and places as regular
meetings of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah.
Council Meetings generally include a 2 p.m. WORK SESSION and a 7 p.m. FORMAL SESSION
All meetings of the City Council are open to the public unless closed pursuant to Sections 52-4-204,
52-4-205 and 78B-1-137, Utah Code Annotated. Notice of each meeting is given at least 24 hours in
advance of the meeting as required by State law. An agenda of each meeting is posted at:
• Salt Lake City Council website www.slccouncil.com
• State of Utah Public Notice website www.utah.gov/pmn/index.html
Meetings in addition to those listed below may be held or canceled as circumstances may require,
subject to applicable public notice requirements.
Notice:
• Applicable when in-person meetings resume due to COVID-19 safety precautions:
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may
include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids, and services. Please make
requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City
Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.
• In accordance with State statute, City ordinance, and Council policy, one or more Council
Members may be connected via speakerphone.
2022 MEETING SCHEDULE FOR SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL,
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (RDA), & LOCAL BUILDING AUTHORITY (LBA)
12/02/21
2
January Meetings
• Monday, January 3
Oath of Office Ceremony
• Tuesday, January 4 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, January 11 Council Work Session Only
• Tuesday, January 18 RDA Meeting, Council Work Session & Formal Meeting (RDA Requested)
February Meetings
• Tuesday, February 1 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, February 8 RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
• Tuesday, February 15 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
March Meetings
• Tuesday, March 1 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, March 8 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, March 15
RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
April Meetings
• Tuesday, April 5 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, April 12 RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
• Tuesday, April 19
Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
May Meetings
• Tuesday, May 3
Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• TENTATIVE - Thursday, May 5
Council Work Session Only (as needed for
budget)
• Tuesday, May 10
RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
• TENTATIVE - Thursday, May 12
Council Work Session Only (as needed for
budget)
• Tuesday, May 17
Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• TENTATIVE - Thursday, May 19
Council Work Session Only (as needed for
budget)
• Tuesday, May 24
Council Work Session Only
• TENTATIVE - Thursday, May 26
Council Work Session Only (as needed for
budget)
• Tuesday, May 31
Council Work Session only
June Meetings
• TENTATIVE - Thursday, June 2
Council Work Session Only (as needed for
budget)
• Tuesday, June 7
Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• TENTATIVE - Thursday, June 9
Council Work Session Only (as needed for
budget)
• Tuesday, June 14
RDA Meeting, Council Work Session &
Formal Meeting
2022 MEETING SCHEDULE FOR SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL,
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (RDA), & LOCAL BUILDING AUTHORITY (LBA)
12/02/21
3
June Meetings Cont.
• TENTATIVE - Tuesday, June 21
Formal (as needed for budget)
July Meetings
• Tuesday, July 12
RDA Meeting, Council Work Session &
Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, July 19
Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
August Meetings
• Tuesday, August 9
RDA Meeting, Council Work Session &
Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, August 16 Council Work Session, Formal Meeting,
September Meetings
• Tuesday, September 6 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, September 13 RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
• Tuesday, September 20 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
October Meetings
• Tuesday, October 4 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, October 11 RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
• Tuesday, October 18
Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
November Meetings
• Tuesday, November 8
RDA Meeting, Council Work Session &
Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, November 15
Council Work Session, Formal Meeting,
December Meetings
• Tuesday, December 6 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
• Tuesday, December 13
RDA Meeting, Council Work Session &
Formal Meeting