HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/21/2024 - Meeting Materials
Board of Directors of the
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
SALT LAKE CITY
AGENDA
May 21, 2024 Tuesday 1:00 PM
Council Work Room
451 South State Street, Room 326
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
SLCRDA.com
BOARD MEMBERS:
Alejandro Puy, Chair Darin Mano, Vice Chair
Victoria Petro Chris Wharton Eva Lopez Chavez
Dan Dugan Sarah Young
In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically. After 5:00
p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance.
This is a discussion among RDA Board Directors and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen,
unless otherwise specified as a public comment period. Items scheduled may be moved and / or discussed
during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. Item start
times and durations are approximate and are subject to change at the Chair’s discretion.
Generated: 15:05:03
Comments:A.
NONE.
B.Public Hearing - individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing
topic for two minutes, however written comments are always accepted:
NONE.
C.Redevelopment Agency Business - The RDA Board of Directors will receive
information and/or hold discussions and/or take action on:
1.Straw Poll – Releasing 9-Line Strategic Intervention Funds for
Property Acquisition
~ 1:00
p.m.
5 min.
The Board will consider a straw poll to release 9-Line Intervention Funds for property
acquisition.
2.Overview of the Redevelopment Agency Budget for Fiscal Year
2024-25 ~ 1:05 p.m.
60 min.
The Board will receive a general overview of the proposed budget for the Redevelopment
Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2024-25. The Board will continue to discuss the
Mayor’s Recommended Budget over the next several weeks and will have public hearings
on Tuesday May 21, 2024 and Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 7 p.m. The Board expects to
adopt the budget in mid-June.
For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25.
3.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Executive Director, including a review of information items,
announcements, and scheduling items. The Board of Directors may give feedback or
policy input.
4.Report and Announcements from RDA Staff TENTATIVE
5 min.
The Board may review Board information and announcements. The Board may give
feedback on any item related to City business, including but not limited to scheduling
items.
5.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Chair and Vice Chair.
Adjournment
D.Written Briefings – the following briefings are informational in nature and
require no action of the Board. Additional information can be provided to the
Board upon request:
NONE.
E.Consent – the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be
discussed individually upon request. A motion to approve the consent agenda is
approving all of the following items:
NONE.
F.Tentative Closed Session
The Board 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:
1.discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of
an individual;
2.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
3.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property:
(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;
4.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
5.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and
6.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.
G.
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 4:00 p.m. on Friday, May 17, 2024, 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.
Page | 1
RDA BUDGET
STAFF REPORT
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:RDA Board Members
FROM: Jennifer Bruno, Ben Luedtke and Allison Rowland
DATE:May 21, 2024
RE: Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Budget – FY 2025
BUDGET BOOK PAGES: Key Changes pages 81-90, Department Overview 119-121 and 241-244, Staffing doc: 313
The Redevelopment Agency is a tool of the City, as enabled by State law, that allows for the capture of property
tax increment in defined areas to reinvest back in those same communities. The stated mission of the City’s RDA
is “to revitalize neighborhoods and business districts to improve livability, spark economic growth, and foster
authentic communities, serving as a catalyst for strategic development projects that enhance the City’s housing
opportunities, commercial vitality, public spaces, and environmental sustainability.” Note that the RDA is in the
process of being renamed the Community Reinvestment Agency or CRA to align with state law which is expected
to be completed by the start of the new fiscal year on July 1, 2025.
The Mayor’s FY 2025 Redevelopment Agency Recommended Budget includes tax increment spending in all
project areas for projects, loan funds, as well as department administration. See page 241 of the Mayor’s
Recommended Budget book for an overview of the Department including the full mission statement and core
values. Staff has also included Attachment 1 showing the RDA’s updated guiding framework adopted by the
Board in December 2021, which comprises the mission statement, core values and livability benchmarks. The
total proposed FY 25 budget is $84.7 million which is $3.9 million more (5%) than FY24. RDA
revenue includes property tax increment, loan proceeds, parking garage and commercial space rental revenues,
interest income, an annual transfer from Funding Our Future for affordable housing, and private donations for
the Eccles Theater. The largest non-donation source of revenue by far is tax increment, which will generate
$55.4 million in FY 25 from twelve active project areas (up 18.4% from $46.8 million in FY 24).
The Administration provided the following policy goals for the proposed FY 25 budget:
•“Affordable Housing - In accordance with the FY25 Affordable Housing Funding Priorities, this goal
prioritizes the deployment of the Agency’s housing funds for the development of affordable housing
units targeted for families and the deeply affordable as well as the facilitation of wealth building
opportunities and home ownership.
•Commercial Opportunities – The Agency has been collaborating with City staff in Economic
Development and Housing Stability to inform the Board on existing commercial funding programs prior
to presenting proposed/amended programs to the Board in the coming months. The proposed budget
includes allocations for Commercial Assistance Programs that will be made available as the Agency’s
programs are updated and approved.
Project Timeline:
1st Briefing: May 21, 2024
2nd Briefing: TBD
Budget Hearing: May 21, and June 4, 2024
Potential Action: June 11 or 13 (TBD)
Page | 2
•Infrastructure – The proposed budget includes the allocation of funds for the continued development of
public infrastructure projects such as Folsom Corridor and Japantown, as well as potential
improvements and capital repairs to the Gallivan Center.
•Public Art – The proposed budget also includes allocations of funds across multiple project areas for the
installation of public art. In the 9-Line area, additional funds are requested for the installation of a
second westside public art installation within the project area. Funding allocations have also been
requested for the re-installation of the “Gulls of Salt Lake City” sculpture as well as a public art project
within the CBD area.”
State law requires that tax increment be used within the project area where it was generated unless it is used for
housing affordable at 80% area median income (AMI) or below, or the Board makes a determination that
spending funds outside the project area directly benefits that project area (such as was recently done for
investment in properties around the Smith’s Ballpark). Other agency revenue sources are more flexible and may
be spent outside of project areas for housing and economic development purposes, again within state law
limitations. (These are listed in the Additional Information section below). Some RDA divisions are funded
through pass-through allocations from project areas or other revenue sources (see chart below), which increases
flexibility of those funds but reduces available budget in project areas where they originate.
The proposed budget for the RDA adds one financial analyst FTE for coordinating RDA activities across multiple
project area budgets and funds. This brings the total RDA employee count to 22, and 13 FTEs for Gallivan-
related maintenance and programming. Note: the budget for Gallivan-related maintenance and programming
is now handled in a donation account, which is unique for a public space). Gallivan funding and FTEs were
transferred to the RDA from the Public Services Department in the FY21 annual budget.
The following chart outlines the operating budget for each division of the RDA, and separates those that are
funded through tax increment, and those that are funded through pass-through revenue from project areas:
Page | 3
2024-25
Proposed Dollars %
Centra l Business District $ 24,644,694 $ 29,893,016 $ 5,248,322 21%
Block 7 0 (Eccles Thea ter Block) $ 11,053,759 $ 11,065,164 $ 11,405 0%
Depot District $ 7,227 ,908 $ 7,095,401 $ (132,507)-2%
Granary District $ 1,394,593 $ 1,748,249 $ 353,656 25%
North Temple $ 1,351,992 $ 1,952,466 $ 600,47 4 44%
North Temple Viaduct $ 2 ,7 74,419 $ 3,155,765 $ 381,346 14%
Northwest Quad CRA (North of I-80) $ 1,398,548 $ 2 ,603,998 $ 1 ,205,450 86%
Westside Community Initiative
(I nland Port Legislation set aside for
h ousing )
$ 1,835,469 $ 1,835,469 $ - 0%
Stadler Rail $ 141,2 97 $ 168,744 $ 27,447 19%
State S treet - new in FY 23 $ 5,788,520 $ 6,517,836 $ 729,31 6 13%
9 Line - new in FY 2 3 $ 3,455,989 $ 3,307,218 $ (148,771 )-4%
Block 67 North - new in FY 25 - West
Quarter Block $ 365,771 $ 365,771
West Capitol Hill (no lo nge r c o lle c ting) $ 384,332
Administration $ 4,428,662 $ 5,167,581 $ 738,91 9 17%
Housing Develoment Fund** $ 10,236,967 $ 2 ,902,000 $ (7 ,334,967)-72%
Primary Housing Fund $ 2,394,582 $ 3,602,241 $ 1,207,659 50%
Secondary Housing Fund $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ - 0%
Progra m Income Fund $ 1,449,692 $ 1,559,233 $ 109,541 8%
Revolving Loan Fund* $ 2 2 6,7 50 $ 332,400 $ 105,650 47 %
TOTALS $80,803,8 41 $84,656,884 $ 3,853,043 5%
Project Areas - Funded primarily with Tax I ncrement:
Accounts funded internally (with transfers from General Fund or other project areas)
Other
*RDA Staff indicates the "Commercial Assistance Program" line item in many of the project areas
may b e administered through the Revolving Loan Fund although it would be tracked in each project
area.
**The Housing Development Fund was much higher in FY 24 due to one-time infusion of money
from dormant HUD Funds.
Expenditu res by Project Area/Accou n t
Difference2023-24
Adopted
Page | 4
The FY 25 budget continues the process
of bringing budgeting for RDA dollars
into context with other City department
budgets, and it is included in the
Mayor’s Recommended Budget book.
The Department budget is shown in
summary form on page 241, and staffing
document on page 313. Key changes are
listed on pages 80-90.
The RDA budget can have follow-up
discussions through May and June as
needed. It will also have public hearings
on May 21 and June 4, with tentative
adoption scheduled for June 11 or 13.
Central Business
District,
29,893,016
Depot District, 7,095,401
Granary District, 1,748,249
North Temple, 1,952,466
Block 70 , 11,065,164
State Street, 6,517,836
9 Line, 3,307,218
North Temple Viaduct , 3,155,765
Northwest Quadrant CRA,
2,603,998
Stadler Rail, 168,744
Block 67, 365,771
Westside Community
Initiative (Housing $ from
Inland Port), 1,835,469
FY 25 Project Areas
funded through Tax Increment
FY 25 Multi-use Funds - funded
through other sources including
transfers from project areas
Revolving Loan Fund, 332,400
Program
Income
Fund,
1,559,233
Secondary Housing Fund,
1,000,000
Primary Housing
Fund, 3,602,241
Housing
Development
Trust Fund,
2,902,000
Page | 5
KEY ELEMENTS OF THE MAYOR’S FY 2025 RDA BUDGET PROPOSAL
Staff has highlighted key areas of the Mayor’s Recommended FY 2025 RDA Budget:
1.One additional Financial Analyst FTE – The proposed FY 25 budget proposes to add an additional
FTE to assist with financial analysis and tracking within the RDA. The fully loaded (salary and benefits)
annual cost for this FTE is$137,653. The Administration reports the position is planned to be funded for
10 months to recognize the time from job posting to hiring at a cost of $112,211. The Council may wish to
request how this FTE may assist in further coordinating RDA financing with overall City financing plans
for bonding and investment in the City.
2.RDA funding for affordable housing – The Mayor’s Recommended FY 2025 budget reflects a
continuation 0f the policy approach started in FY 20, to streamline affordable housing development
under the RDA and affordable housing programming under the Housing Stability Division of the
Community and Neighborhoods Department. Still, some recent efforts to develop permanent supportive
housing and community land trust activities have been managed in Housing Stability. One of the initial
goals was to create a “one-stop shop” for housing developers seeking financial assistance to deliver
affordable housing, recognizing that the RDA can make affordable housing investments Citywide.
The total housing investment proposed in the FY 25 RDA budget is $9.3 million, a decrease from FY 24
levels (although the FY 24 budget was an anomaly due to the one-time transfer of dormant HUD funds).
It should be noted that the Board could choose to allocate additional funds for housing programs
from any of the project areas (subject to project area regulations), or program income fund. For
example, there are several strategic intervention fund holding accounts that are intentionally flexible
for a variety of potential investment including affordable housing which the Board could instead
dedicate to housing programs. See chart below for more details on distribution of funds:
Annually, the RDA proposes a variety of strategies to implement various housing goals of the City with
its funding sources. The Board adopted the FY 25 strategy in April. See Attachments 2 & 3 for the final
guiding document and strategy. The focus areas for this year are:
a. Wealth Building Opportunity – Facilitate the ability for low-moderate income households
to build wealth through different pathways such as homeownership, supplemental income
opportunities, stipends for renters, cooperative housing, and other wealth building models.
b. Affordable Family Housing w/ Amenities for Children – Provide opportunities for
families to enjoy the many benefits of urban living by encouraging the development of housing
that is more conducive to larger household sizes with at least three or more bedrooms.
Affordable family housing is generally defined as units with three or more bedrooms affordable
to those earning 80% of the area median income (AMI) or below.
c. Deeply Affordable Housing – Expand the availability of units for extremely low-income
households, thereby providing more housing options for individuals or families that are
homeless or at risk of homelessness. Deeply affordable housing is generally defined as housing
affordable to those earning 40% of the area median income (AMI) or below.
d. Neighborhood Commercial and Services - Promote an array of commercial spaces that
support the neighborhoods, such as daycares, restaurants, and retail spaces. This priority
ensures that as housing continues to be built throughout the City, residents and neighbors
continue to have access to neighborhood services and amenities.
e. Expand Opportunity - Provide affordable housing within areas that have access to resources
that may improve a person’s chances of upward economic mobility as identified on RDA’s High
Opportunity Area Map. In previous years, the RDA Board dedicated funding towards areas of
high opportunity. With the majority of that funding expended, including this priority maintains
that the Board wants to see affordable housing expanded to Salt Lake City’s eastside
neighborhoods.
The following chart summarizes the sources and proposed uses in the various accounts:
Page | 6
FY 2024
Adopted
FY 2025
Proposed Change
9 Lin e Project Area ADU fu nds
(capital account continued from FY 24)1,455,680 0
Secon da ry Hou sin g & Develop men t Fu n d (formerly Project Area Hou sin g Fu n d)
Sources
Transfer from Depot District 1,000,000 0 (1,000,000)
Transfer from State Street 0 1,000,000 1,000,000
Uses
Housing Development Loan Program 0 1,000,000 1,000,000
Sunday-Anderson Senior Center 1,000,000 0 (1,000,000)
Total Secon d a ry Hou sin g Fu n d 1,000,000 1,000,000 0
Prima ry Hou sin g & Develop men t Fu n d (formerly Citywid e Hou sin g Fu n d )
Sources
Transfer from Depot 1,084,487 1,238,620 154,133
Transfer from State street 442,381 586,886 144,505
Transfer from 9 Line 265,378 303,072 37,694
Transfer from Granary 220,662 276,886 56,224
Transfer from North Temple 201,743 308,749 107,006
Transfer from NWQ 139,855 250,011 110,156
Transfer from Block 67 North 0 36,577
Loan Repayments 23,567 77,820 54,253
Transfer from Stadler Rail 14,130 16,115 1,985
Transition Holding Account 2,379 507,505 505,126
0 0
Uses 0
Housing Development Loans 1,000,000 2,684,859 1,684,859
Salt Lake School District Housing 380,762 417,382 36,620
Sunday Anderson Senior Center 1,013,820 0 (1,01 3,820)
West Capitol Hill/Arctic Court Infill Housing 0 500,000 500,000
Total Primary Hou sin g & Developmen t Fu n d 2,394,582 3,602,241 794,702
Westsid e Commu n ity I n itia tive (NWQ Hou sin g)
Sources
Increment set-aside from Utah Inland Port Authority 1,401,589 1,835,469 433,880
Transition Holding Account 433,880 0 (433,880)
Uses
Strategic Intervention Holding Account 0 1,000,000 1,000,000
Wealth Building Housing Opportunity (Holding Account)1,135,469 835,469 (300,000)
Wealth Building Housing Opportunity (Neighborworks)700,000 0 (700,000)
Total Westside Commu n ity I n itiative 1,835,469 1,835,469 0
Hou sin g Developmen t Fu n d
Sources
Funding Our Future Housing Transfer 1,840,000 2,590,000 750,000
Loan Repayments 220,953 312,000 91,047
Reallocaiton of excess North Temple Viaduct Increment 1,700,000 0 (1,700,000)
Transfer from Dormant HUD Funds (one-time)6,476,014 0 (6,476,014)
Uses
Competitve Housing Development Loans 7,836,967 902,000 (6,934,967)
ADU Program Incentives (Citywide)1,000,000 0 (1,000,000)
Wealth Building Housing Opportunities 0 2,000,000 2,000,000
Neighborworks Shared Equity Housing Project 1,400,000 0 (1,400,000)
Total Hou sin g Develop men t Fu n d 10,236,967 2,902,000 (719,047)
Total All Hou sing Fu nding 16,922,698 9,339,710 (7,582,988)
RDA Hou sin g Fu n din g
Page | 7
f. Family and Workforce Housing Holding Account – The Administration is proposing a
line item specific to family and workforce housing in the Primary Housing Fund, and has
provided the following additional information:
“This is a separate appropriation that recently started to meet the requirement within
the Interlocal Agreements with the School District for the State Street and 9-Line
project areas. There is not a proposed use for them at this time. They could be
appropriated via Board approval to a HDLP NOFA recommended project that meets the
requirements (similar to how the High Opportunity Funds were utilized). Or they could
be appropriated to a property acquisition or project that is developed intentionally to
meet the requirements.”
The Board may wish to discuss this allocation further with the Administration.
g. Westside Community Initiative – This initiative is funded from the 10% set aside from tax
increment in the Inland Port jurisdictional boundary, as mandated by the State’s Inland Port
enabling legislation. It started receiving revenue in FY 22. The Administration provided the
following information about the “Wealth Building Opportunities” line item within this fund:
“It would be a competitive NOFA for projects that “Facilitate the ability for low-
moderate income households to build wealth through different pathways such as
homeownership, supplemental income opportunities, stipends for renters, cooperative
housing, and other wealth building models.”
3.Administrative Budget – The FY 2025 proposed Administrative budget for the RDA represents an
11% increase ($435,007) over the FY 24 budget. It includes transfers of tax increment revenues from
various project areas to cover the approximately $5.2 million in administrative costs, which includes 1
additional FTE to the central RDA staff and raising the total to 35 FTEs (which includes 13 FTEs relating
to the Gallivan Center). The 13 FTEs related to the Gallivan Center are budgeted in the donation
account, although they are considered under the purview of the RDA, as reflected in the staffing
document. The following charts delineate the sources of funding for the Administrative budget, as well
as the specific uses:
Page | 8
FY 2 02 4
Adopted
FY 2025
Proposed $ Change
%
Change
Central Business District 2 ,464,469$ 2,72 6,570$ 262,101$ 11%
Depot District 813,365$ 928,965$ 115,600$ 14%
Granary District 165,496$ 207,666$ 42,170$ 2 5%
North Temple 100,87 2$ 2 31,561$ 13 0,689$ 130%
North Temple Viaduct
(lim ited to 1 .5% of increm ent)41,616$ 46,796$ 5,180$ 12%
Stadler Rail 7 ,065$ 8,058$ 993$ 14%
Northwest Quadrant CRA
(7.5% of total increm ent set by
agreem ent)139,855$ 250,011$ 110,156$ 79%
State Street 442,381$ 485,760$ 43 ,379$ 10%
9 Line 253,543$ 263,906$ 10,363$ 4%
Block 67 18,288$ 18,288$ n/a
Block 70
(does not allow for
Adm inistrative collection)-$ -$ -$ n/a
NWQ Housing Fund
(10% from I nland Port Area -
not intended for Adm in)-$ -$ -$ n/a
Revolving Loan Fund -$ -$ -$
Program Income Fund -$ -$ -$
Primary Housing Fund -$ -$ -$
Tota l 4,428,662$5,167,581$ 435,007$ 11%
RDA Ad min istra tive Bu d get - Sou rces
Central Business District
53%
Depot District
18%
Granary District
4%
North Temple
5%
North Temple Viaduct
(limited to 1.5% of increment)
1%
Stadler Rail
0%
Northwest Quadrant CRA
(7.5% of total increment
set by agreement)
5%State Street
9%
9 Line
5%
Block 67
0%
Page | 9
a. No official policy guides how much each district contributes to the administrative budget,
although to some extent it is related to available increment. The Central Business District is
typically the largest contributor, although the percentage has varied. In FY 25 it is proposed to
provide 53% of the administrative budget compared to 56% in FY 24 (the CBD project area expires
in 2042). Several recent project areas either cap or prohibit spending project area funds on
Administrative costs (usually as a result of negotiations with various taxing entities). The Board
may wish to ask the Administration to evaluate the overall strategy for funding
the administrative budget in future years, particularly as the Depot District and
Granary District project areas expire in the next couple years which provide 22%
of the total Administrative Budget funding. The Administration has indicated draft
recommendations will be developed for the Board to review. Staff note: there is no
statutory prohibition against using General Fund dollars to fund Redevelopment Agency
employees, since they are City employees. The City’s elected officials could elect to reimburse
RDA for a portion of the housing duties that they perform.
b.Because RDA revenues are estimated and can come in either higher or lower than
projected, the Board may wish to discuss policy guidance on how the RDA should
handle unexpected shortfalls in tax increment revenues, particularly as it relates
to the administrative budget, which is generally a fixed and ongoing cost (salary and
benefits). Staff is inquiring about the level of fund balance remaining after this budget. Board
Members previously expressed interest in aligning project area fund balances with fixed costs and
contractual obligations to ensure sufficient funding is available to cover those expenses if tax
increment significantly decreases in a future year.
RDA Administrative Budget - Uses
FY 2024
Adopted
FY 2025
Proposed Change %
Personal Services - RDA 2,756,779$ 3,170,296$ 413,51 7$ 15%
Operating and Maintenance 375 ,000$ 450,000$ 7 5,000$ 21%
Charges and Services 296,883$ 450,000$ 7 8,323$ 39%
Administrative Fees 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ -$ 0%
Allocation to fu nd balance -$ 97,285$ -$ 0%
Total RDA Bu dget 4,428,662$ 5,167,581$ 430,007$ 11%
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
4.Redevelopment Agency Capital Project and Holding Account Proposals – The FY2025 RDA budget includes funding for 35 capital
projects and/or capital reserve accounts. Overall funding for RDA capital projects is $29,153,507 across all project areas and funds which is
$4,551,689 more than the adopted annual budget last year. The table below provides a summary of the FY2025 proposed projects, provides a brief
description, the dates that funding was approved by the Board in earlier budget openings, and potential policy questions for the Board to consider.
Holding accounts are sometimes created when the RDA staff recognizes that multiple years of funding are needed to facilitate a major project
(such as the Rio Grande District infrastructure project), or when a proposal is still in the development process (such as the Commercial Assistance
Loan Program).
FY2025 Review of All RDA Account Balances with New Workday Financial System – The Board adopted a FY2023 legislative intent to review all
RDA accounts with positive balances to ensure the projects and programs still align with current Board policy priorities. The City is shifting to a
new financial system called Workday which went live on July 1, 2023, to coincide with the start of FY2024. The Board may wish to ask the
Administration when this review could begin in FY2025.
Advisory Board Review of RDA Capital Project Proposals – The Board may wish to consider whether it would add value to encourage the
Administration, in future years, to have RDA capital project requests go through the same public process/resident advisory board vetting and
recommendations that General Fund CIP applications do. The Board has previously discussed that opportunities to leverage RDA funds with other
City and private resources are enhanced when the information is processed in concert. An alternative approach could be to ask the Redevelopment
Agency Committee or RAC to review and provide funding recommendations to the Board.
Capital Project Accounts Do Not Lapse at End of Fiscal Year – If approved by the Board, then these would be considered capital accounts and
funds would not lapse to the project area’s fund balance if unspent by the end of the fiscal year.
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Strategic
Intervention Fund
Holding Account
$ 2,540,597
Labeled "Downtown for All" funding for projects
that support families such as daycares,
opportunities for play, and family-sized housing
as well as amenities for every generation of
individuals, families, residents, and visitors.
The Board may wish to ask if there is a
specific project in mind that accomplishes
this goal, and discuss whether these funds
should be kept flexible for a variety of
possible uses. The Board could provide more
specific prioritization of the funds.
Central
Business
District
(subtotal
$3,940,597)Gallivan Center
Playground $ 500,000
A playground for children of all ages. The
project will focus on creating safe, accessible
play structures to enhance the community’s
recreational facilities.
The Board may wish to ask how a playground
was selected as a top priority for Gallivan
Center from the list of nearly 40 projects in
the 20-year Plaza Plan prioritization list?
Page | 11
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Maintenance and
Repairs of
Gallivan Center
$ 250,000
For capital maintenance of the Gallivan Center
potentially of the structure, parking garage, or
larger amenities. Note there is also $238,733 in
the Program Income Fund for a total of
$488,733 to maintain RDA-owned property at
Gallivan Center.
The Board may wish to ask which capital
maintenance needs are greatest at the
Gallivan Center. In recent years, the Board
has approved multiple appropriations for the
parking garage and staircase.
Japantown Art $ 300,000
Installation of a public art piece with
Japantown. Note there is also $36,577 for this
project in the proposed Block 67 budget.
The Board may wish to ask would these
funds be used for a single large artwork or
spread across multiple smaller projects, and
does the Board want to prioritize either
approach?
CBD Public Art $ 250,000
New public art in the CBD The Board may wish to discuss whether these
funds should be combined with the
$300,000 for Japantown Art, or where else
in the downtown to prioritize new public
artworks.
Japantown
Construction
Documents
$ 100,000
Drafting of construction documents to
implement the Japantown Design Strategy. The
funding will be used to create detailed
construction plans that are crucial for guiding
redevelopment efforts and revitalizing the
neighborhood while honoring its historical
significance.
The Board may wish to continue the
discussion of a potential bond to fund
construction of Japantown improvements.
The total estimated cost was $7,447,172 in
the April 2021 report. However, inflation and
supply chain impacts since then could have
doubled the total cost for all the
improvements.
West Capitol
Hill
(expired
project area;
no longer
collects tax
increment)
Arctic Court Infill
Home
Construction
$ 384,332
Prior year budget amendments redirected funds
from the new infill construction at 524 North
Arctic Court to Marmalade Plaza due to rising
construction costs. Note there is another
$500,000 for the project in the Primary
Housing Development Fund for a total project
cost of $884,332.
Some Board Members previously discussed a
desire to construct an entry-level home,
affordable family-sized home, adding the
property to the City's Community Land
Trust, and why the total project cost exceeds
the median home price in the City by over
$250k.
Page | 12
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Rio Grande
District
Infrastructure
Improvements
Holding Account
$ 3,705,316
Additional funding for public infrastructure
improvements to the two block Rio Grande
District between 200 South and 400 South and
500 West and 600 West. Improvements include
creation of new street segments to create
smaller block sizes, utility upgrades to allow
greater building densities, and a Festival Street
(300 South) amenities.
The Board approved $3,680,056 for this project
in the FY2024 annual budget.
The Board may wish to ask how the project
would move forward if there isn't enough
property tax increment to cover the total
project cost. 2024 is the final year for the
Depot District to collect property tax.
Commercial
Assistance
Program
Holding Account
$ 500,000
This is one of multiple proposed holding
accounts for commercial assistance pilot
programs in different project areas. The
Administration is developing draft policies for
the pilot program that would come to the Board
for review and adoption. Some prior year
appropriations were repurposed for uses while
the programs are still in development.
The Board may wish to ask whether these
funds may be needed to close the funding gap
for the Rio Grande District infrastructure
improvements (see item above). The Board
may also wish to ask why a new program is
proposed to be created in the final year of the
Depot District's property tax increment
collection, and what could be accomplished.
Depot
District
(Last year of
property tax
increment
collection;
subtotal
$4,705,316)
Home Inn Rio
Grande
Maintenance
$ 500,000
Adds to a reserve account to cover obligated
maintenance and repairs at the Home Inn
property in the Depot District owned by the
RDA. The building provides 50 units of
transitional housing.
The Board may wish to ask if the funding
level would fully meet the estimated cost for
maintenance needs.
Granary
District
(Second to last
year of
property tax
increment
collection)
Commercial
Assistance
Program
Holding Account
$ 1,263,697
This is one of multiple proposed holding
accounts for commercial assistance pilot
programs in different project areas. The
Administration is developing draft policies for
the pilot program that would come to the Board
for review and adoption. The Board approved
$1,003,435 in the FY2024 annual budget for the
same program.
The Board may also wish to ask why a new
program is proposed to be created in the last
two years of the Granary District's property
tax increment collection, and what could be
accomplished.
North
Temple
(subtotal
$1,312,156)
10% School Fund
Holding Account
$ 100,344
Based on an Interlocal Agreement with the SLC
School District, the Agency is obligated to set
aside 10% of the tax increment generated for
improvements that benefit schools served by the
project area.
Page | 13
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Strategic
Intervention Fund
Holding Account
$ 861,812
A holding account for multiple potential uses
depending on opportunities that arise in the
project area such as property acquisition, public
infrastructure improvements, site development,
etc.
The Board may wish to discuss whether these
funds should be kept flexible for the variety
of possible uses or the Board could provide
more specific prioritization of the funds.
Property Reuse
Planning $ 300,000
Site costs and evaluation of development
options for Agency-owned parcels along the
Folsom Corridor.
City Creek
Daylighting $ 50,000
Concept and feasibility designs for resurfacing
or "daylighting" a portion of City Creek from I-
15 to 1000 West. This project would be adjacent
to the separate Folsom Trail project. Project
goals include increasing access to nature,
improving water quality and mitigating surface
flooding.
The Board may wish to discuss with the
Administration how the project would move
forward if property tax increment is
insufficient to fully fund the total estimated
cost which could be millions of dollars.
Regent Street
Parking Structure
Capital Reserves
Holding Account
$ 100,000
Additional funding to a reserve account to meet
potential obligations in the future that are
required under the contract with PRI which
provides parking for the Eccles Theater. Under
the agreement, the Agency is required to
contribute towards the maintenance and long
term capital repairs of the parking structure.
The Board approved over $365,907 for this
holding account in the last three fiscal years.
The Board may wish to ask when a structural
assessment could be done to determine the
age, remaining useful life, and costs for
major repairs and replacement.
Eccles Theater
Ancillary Spaces
Operating Reserve
$ 475,000
The Board may wish to ask for examples of
when these reserve funds would be used and
whether the amount is sufficient to cover
expenses in the event of an economic
downturn.
Block 70
(subtotal
$780,323)
Eccles Theater
Fundraising
Fulfillment
Reserve
$ 125,000
Project set up to manage various gift
agreements related to the Eccles Theater and
Regent Street.
Page | 14
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Reinstallation of
"The Gulls"
Sculpture
$ 55,323
Reinstallation of the sculpture, formerly
installed in the façade of the Prudential Federal
Savings building, which is now the Eccles
Theater. The 100 bronze and nickel sculptures
were originally installed in the 1960s.
The Board may wish to ask whether the
funds include fabricating replacements for
the sculptures that disappeared or were
damaged over the years.
Regent Street
Event
Programming
Reserve
$ 25,000
Activation and programming of McCarthy Plaza
and Regent Street. The intent is to leverage
funds with other sources and coordinate efforts
with County operations and theater staff.
Northwest
Quadrant
(subtotal
$353,900)
Shared Costs
Holding Account
$ 353,900
Additional funding to a reserve account for a
portion of the tax increment as approved within
the project area budget. The funds are first
prioritized for redevelopment activities that
benefit the entire NWQ Project Area, are system
wide, or that benefit multiple property owners
or parcels.
If this funding is approved, then the holding
account would have a balance of over $1 million.
State Street
Strategic
Intervention Fund
Holding Account
$ 4,003,894
A holding account for multiple potential uses
depending on opportunities that arise in the
project area such as property acquisition, public
infrastructure improvements, site development,
etc.
The Board may wish to discuss whether these
funds should be kept flexible for the variety
of possible uses or the Board could provide
more specific prioritization of the funds.
9-Line
(subtotal
$2,297,272)
9-Line Public Art $ 300,000
The Board may wish to ask whether these
funds would be combined with the $300,000
for iconic Westside art approved in the
FY2024 budget or would be for separate
projects?
Page | 15
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Strategic
Intervention
Holding Account
$ 1,994,272
A holding account for multiple potential uses
depending on opportunities that arise in the
project area such as property acquisition, public
infrastructure improvements, site development,
etc.
The Board may wish to discuss whether these
funds should be kept flexible for the variety
of possible uses or the Board could provide
more specific prioritization of the funds.
Some Board Members have expressed a
desire to prioritize additional funding for the
9-Line ADU pilot program which is a
requirement of the interlocal agreement with
Salt Lake County to unlock additional
property tax increment for the project area.
Block 67 Japantown Art $ 36,577
Installation of a public art piece with
Japantown. Note there is also $300,000 for this
project in the proposed Central Business
District budget.
The Board may wish to ask would these
funds be used for a single large artwork or
spread across multiple smaller projects, and
does the Board want to prioritize either
approach?
Demolition of
former Deseret
Industries Site in
Sugar House
$ 500,000
The address is 2234 South Highland Drive. The
Board approved $550,000 for this demolition in
the FY2024 annual budget.
The Board may wish to ask whether the
adjacent old Fire Station #3 would also be
demolished, and whether additional funding
is anticipated to be needed. In the FY2024
annual budget the $550,000 was estimated
to fully fund the project but costs have
doubled.
Program
Income Fund
(subtotal
$738,733)Maintenance and
Repairs of
Gallivan Center
$ 238,733
For capital maintenance of the Gallivan Center
potentially of the structure, parking garage, or
larger amenities. Note there is also $250,000 in
the Central Business District budget for a total
of $488,733 to maintain RDA-owned property
at Gallivan Center.
The Board may wish to ask which capital
maintenance needs are greatest at the
Gallivan Center. In recent years, the Board
has approved multiple appropriations for the
parking garage and staircase.
Primary
Housing
Fund
(subtotal
$3,602,241)
Arctic Court Infill
Home
Construction
$ 500,000
Prior year budget amendments redirected funds
from the new infill construction at 524 North
Arctic Court to Marmalade Plaza due to rising
construction costs. Note there is another
$384,332 for the project in the West Capitol Hill
budget for a total project cost of $884,332.
Some Board Members previously discussed a
desire to construct an entry-level home,
affordable family-sized home, adding the
property to the City's Community Land
Trust, and why the total project cost exceeds
the median home price in the City by over
$250k.
Page | 16
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Housing
Development
Loans
Holding Account
$ 2,684,859
For inclusion in an upcoming Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
Salt Lake City
School District
Family Sized
Housing
Holding Account
$ 417,382
This set aside for family sized housing is a
requirement of some interlocal agreements
between the RDA and Salt Lake City School
District. These funds could be included in an
upcoming Notice of Funding Availability
(NOFA)
Secondary
Housing
Fund
Housing
Development
Loan Program
Competitive NOFA
Holding Account
$ 1,000,000
Note there are also housing development line
items in other funds. Keeping the accounts
separate is largely to help with tracking and
reporting for compliance. The funds would be
combined and/or added to a competitive Notice
of Funding Availability (NOFA). Note there is
also $902,000 in the Housing Development
Fund for this same NOFA.
Strategic
Intervention
Holding Account
$ 1,000,000
A holding account for multiple potential uses
depending on opportunities that arise in the
project area such as property acquisition, public
infrastructure improvements, site development,
etc.
The Board may wish to discuss whether these
funds should be kept flexible for the variety
of possible uses or the Board could provide
more specific prioritization of the funds. Westside
Community
Initiative
(subtotal
$1,835,469)
Wealth Building
Housing
Opportunities
Holding Account
$ 835,469
The Board approved $1,135,469 for this
program in the FY2024 annual budget. Note
there is also $2 million in the Housing
Development Fund for the same program.
The Board may wish to ask the
Administration for a status update and
timeline of next steps for the program's
implementation, and whether any additional
resources are needed.
Page | 17
Project Area Project Name FY2025
Proposed Description Policy Questions
Housing
Development
Loan Program
Competitive NOFA
Holding Account
$ 902,000
For inclusion in an upcoming competitive
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). Note
there is also $1 million in the Secondary
Housing Fund for this same NOFA.
This funding includes $1.7 million from the
North Temple Viaduct transfer to the Debt
Service Fund above the annual bond
payment. The Board recently expressed a
preference that these funds be reinvested
along the North Temple Corridor. The
current proposal is to make the funds
available citywide. The Board may wish to
discuss whether to designate the funds for
housing development along the North
Temple Corridor or use citywide.
Housing
Development
Fund
(subtotal
$2,902,000)
Wealth Building
Housing
Opportunities
Holding Account
$ 2,000,000
The Board approved $1,135,469 for this
program in the FY2024 Westside Communities
Initiative annual budget. Note that WCI
proposed budget also has $835,469 for the same
program.
The Board may wish to ask the
Administration for a status update and
timeline of next steps for the program's
implementation, and whether any additional
resources are needed.
TOTAL $ 29,153,507
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
5.Other policy areas of the FY 2025 RDA budget
a. Program Income Fund – The primary source of funds for this account are revenues
generated from the Gallivan parking structure (approximately $1.2 million per year). The
budget also includes rents for RDA commercial spaces. It is the most flexible funding in the
RDA portfolio, as State law does not place limitations or expectations for how and where funds
are spent. In recent years this account has been used to fill funding gaps for infrastructure
projects in the Central 9th area and Rio Grande District, provided funding to assist with strategic
acquisition along North Temple, as well as provide seed funds for new project areas (9-Line and
State Street). When the Depot District and Granary District expire in the next couple years,
Program Income Fund might be increasingly relied upon to fill the funding gap for the RDA’s
Administrative Budget. This year the Administration is proposing to use these funds as follows:
b. “Strategic Intervention” Holding Accounts – Over the last few budget cycles the Board
has approved several allocations for “Strategic Intervention” in several project areas. RDA Staff
provided the following policy information about goals for these funds. These funds have been
used for timely investments in property purchases (several recent purchases have nearly or fully
depleted existing strategic intervention accounts), along with other uses. The Board must
approve releasing the funds from a holding account for specific uses. The Board may wish to
discuss these line items with more specificity such as prioritizing policy goals for each area,
given the quantity of funds that could build up. The Board could also discuss with the
Administration using some of these funds for affordable housing development.
•The Administration provided this information for general context on this approach:
“The overarching goal of the Strategic Intervention line items within the various funds is to
provide an appropriation into a program that may or may not have a specific project identified
Program Income Fund
Sources
FY 2024
Adop ted
FY 2025
Proposed Change
Parking Structure Income 1,242,336$ 1,290,184$ 47,848$
Rents 161,264$ 229,449$ 68,185$
Loan Repayments 38,640$ 33,600$ (5,040)$
Interest on Loans 7,452$ 6,000$ (1,452)$ -$ Proposed Uses -$
Capital Project - Sugarhouse DI Demo 550,000$ 500,000$ (50,000)$
Gallivan Maintenance & Repairs 214,692$ 238,733$ 24,041$
Charges and Services 355,000$ 457,500$ 102,500$
Operating and Maintenance 330,000$ 363,000$ 33 ,000$
Total Program Income Fu nd 1,449,692$ 1,559,233$ 109,541$
FY 2025 Prop osed
Central Business District
(Identified separately as "Downtown for
Every one" project)
$ 2 ,540,597
Westside Community Initiative $ 1,000,000
North Temple $ 861,812
State Street $ 4,003,894
9 Line $ 1,994,27 2
Tota l $ 10,400,575
Strategic Interven tion Fu n ds
Page | 19
yet. This program’s approved uses include property acquisition, site development costs and
community benefits. If there is an approved project, or projects, within a program
appropriation, those are identified as such. Otherwise, it is anticipated that staff will return to
the Board for approval to appropriate funds to specific projects. “
•The Administration has provided the following additional information about the $2.5
Million “Downtown for All” project in the CBD:
“This Strategic Intervention program appropriation is identified for a “Downtown for All” project
to implement the Mayor’s goal of creating a thriving and equitable downtown. This would
provide funding for projects that support families such as daycares, opportunities for play, and
family-sized housing as well as amenities for every generation of individuals, families, residents,
and visitors.”
c. Commercial Assistance Programs – The RDA Board has allocated money in various
project areas (most of the funding is since the FY 23 budget) for “Commercial Assistance” in a
variety of ways. Because these funds were budgeted in capital accounts they do not lapse to fund
balance. The Board has been meeting with RDA staff to discuss plans for moving forward with
these programs and coordinating the policies with the Economic Development Loan Fund and
Housing Stability Division’s CDBG economic development plans.
d. Transition Holding Accounts and Midyear Budget Amendments – It should be noted
that the Board sometimes approves millions in additional funding for projects and programs in
Commercial Assistance Funding
Ap p rop ria tion Title/District Fisca l Yea r Rema in in g
Amou n t
Commercia l Ad a p tive Reu se Loa n s
Granary District 2023 882,176
Commercia l Assista n ce Reserves
9 Line 2024 500,000
Depot District 2024 500,000
Granary District 2024 1,003,435
North Temple 2024 217 ,318
Program Income Fund 2023 0
State Street 2024 1,239,049
Commercia l Assista n ce Reserves
Tota l 3,459,802
Commercia l Revolvin g Loa n s
Central Business District 2023 568,354
North Temple 2023 18,675
Program Income Fund 2023 811,857
Revolving Loan Fund 2023 2,994,965
Revolving Loan Fund 2024 22 6,750
State Street 2023 500,000
Commercia l Revolvin g Loa n s Tota l 5,120,600
Commu n ity & Cu ltu ra l I n itia tive
Central Business District 2023 338,717
Granary District 2023 67 3,930
Commu n ity & Cu ltu ra l I n itia tive
Tota l 1,012,647
Total Commercial Assistan ce
Fu nding 10,475,225
Page | 20
budget amendments throughout the fiscal year, particularly when the City receives actual tax
increment revenue information from the County in April. Based on feedback from previous
budget years, the Mayor’s Recommended Budget continues an approach called “transition
holding accounts” that carry forward actual property tax increment received (after meeting legal
obligations) to be considered in the next annual budget. This approach is meant to streamline
budgeting by avoiding multiple funding requests for the same projects in the final budget
amendment of the year and in the annual budget. The Council asked for this to be included in
the context of the overall budget discussion so all funding requests and ideas could be
considered in context. The Board may wish to discuss how they would like to
allocate these funds and note that the Mayor’s Recommended Budget proposes
fully using the $3 million available across project areas and funds. The only
limitation on these funds is that they need to be used in accordance with the project area
guidelines.
e. Japantown Investment –
➢The FY 25 budget allocates $100,000 from the Central Business District to facilitate
construction documents for the Japantown Streetscape improvements. The Board has
expressed a desire to see these street improvements happen in the near term, as
discussions are ongoing regarding the investment in the Sports, Entertainment,
Cultural and Convention district. See policy question regarding bonding (via
the City or RDA) for these costs.
➢The FY 25 budget also adds $336,577 between the Central Business District
($300,000) and Block 67 ($36,577) for “Japantown Art”. When combined with
previous years allocation the total available for this purpose is $436,577 (not
including transition holding account funds from FY 24).
f. Property Management and Maintenance Budget. This is a line item that appears in
various project areas and is not covered by the centralized RDA Administrative budget. It
covers things like maintenance, security, and insurance for properties owned or managed by the
RDA. Actual expenditures vary year to year, and any unspent funds lapse to that project area’s
fund balance.
Central Bu siness District 786,303$
Depot 421,999$
Granary 165,086$
North Temple 249,892$
State Street 648,977$
9 Line 276,503$
Primary Hou sing Development Fund 507,505$
Total 3,056,265$
Transition Holdin g Accou nts
FY 2024
Adop ted
FY 2025
Prop osed Change % Change
Central Business District $ 1,000,000 $ 1,127,250 $ 1 27,250 1 3%
Depot District $ 150,000 $ 172,500 $ 22,500 1 5%
Granary District $ 5,000 $ - $ (5,000)-1 00%
North Temple $ - $ 50,000 $ 50,000 n/a
State Street $ - $ 50,000 $ 50,000 n/a
9 Line $ - $ 50,000
Tota l $ 1,155,000 $ 1,449,7 50 $ 294,750 26%
Property Management and Maintenance
Page | 21
•Due to the unique nature of some RDA properties, the RDA obtains insurance
separately from the City’s “self-insured” approach for City properties. The Board
may wish to ask the Administration to evaluate if there are any
opportunities for savings or streamlining in this area for certain RDA
properties.
g. Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) – The FY 2025 budget proposes $345,000 in additional
revenue to lend. The source of funding for the RLF is primarily repayments on loans and
interest earnings. Combined with previous years of funding the Administration indicates that
there is $3.6 million available to lend. The outstanding balance of existing loans being repaid
over the coming decades is over $26 million from 15 loans.
h. Regent Street Maintenance – The Block 70 (Eccles Theater) project area budget includes an
$80,000 ongoing allocation to the City General Fund to cover costs for maintenance of Regent
Street, given the enhanced features of the street are beyond typical City standards, and cost
more than a typical city street to maintain. The Attorney’s Office indicates that tax increment
funds can be used to maintain public infrastructure. The Board may wish to ask the
Administration if this transfer is the long-term plan for maintenance on Regent
Street when the Block 70 CRA ends in 2040, and what the City’s policy may be in
other enhanced-infrastructure areas (e.g., Central Ninth streetscape
improvements, Rio Grande Area festival street the Depot District, daylighting
City Creek near North Temple).
i. Gallivan Employees and Maintenance - The proposed budget continues the management
of the 13 Gallivan employees and maintenance under the RDA (accounting is separated from the
General Fund).
➢The Board may wish to ask the Administration for a review of how this
approach is working compared to the previous approach of managing
those employees in the General Fund (Public Services Department),
particularly as it relates to service level and programming.
➢The Board may wish to use this discussion to inform future policy
discussions, as the Administration has indicated they are exploring
alternative models for programming and maintenance of “enhanced”
public spaces coming to downtown such as Pioneer Park, Main Street
pedestrianization, the Sports, Entertainment, Cultural and Convention
district, and potentially the Green Loop.
j. Trend in Increment Received - During the FY 19 budget cycle the Administration noted
that actual increment received in a number of districts was unexpectedly lower than in previous
years, which did not track with the overall increase in total property valuation in the City and
construction of new buildings in some RDA project areas. Since that time the Administration
worked with County staff and a consultant who have determined that it was an “anomaly,” and
actual revenue received since then tracks more consistently with valuations. For FY 25 the RDA
has continued the practice of projecting tax revenues at roughly 80% of what was actually
received in the previous year, to help account for these potential fluctuations. The below charts
illustrate the fluctuations in tax increment revenue received in selected project areas for Board
context (Central Business District is shown on an independent chart due to the relatively larger
dollar amount differences). This trend information is available for all project areas if the board
is interested.
Page | 22
k. North Temple Viaduct Debt service – The RDA created the North Temple Viaduct project
area specifically to help offset the debt service costs on a City-issued bond to rebuild and shorten
the North Temple Viaduct in 2012, allowing the current TRAX alignment, and to facilitate
development that has now materialized in the adjacent area. All increment except a small
percentage for administration is transferred to the general fund to offset this annual payment.
The chart below provides a summary of tax increment received, annual debt service payment
made by the City and the tax increment as a percentage of those debt payments. In the early
years of this arrangement, the tax increment generated was not sufficient to cover the full debt
service payment, so the general fund covered the remainder. However, starting in FY19, actual
tax increment received exceeded debt service payments. In FY 21, the Board re-purposed this
surplus to re-invest on North Temple in the soon-to-open State Fair Park International Public
Market. In FY 23, the Board approved using the excess $1 million of this available overage to
invest in the Housing Development Fund, to increase the number of affordable units in the City.
In FY 24 this source was used to increase the Housing Development Fund by $1.7 million. With
the calendar year 2024 audit, the Administration will determine if, based on Taxing Entity
Agreements, any of this overage should be paid back to taxing entities.
$-
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 2 0 2 5
C E N T R A L B U S I N E S S D I S T R I C T TA X I N C R E M E N T R E V E N U E
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 2 0 2 5
TA X I N C R E M E N T R E V E N U E
Depot District State Street North Temple Viaduct Northwest Quadrant CRA State Street 9 Line Block 70 (Eccles)Granary District North Temple
Page | 23
l. Eccles Theater Site Operations & Regent Street Activation – Per the terms of the
operating agreement with Salt Lake County, the City/RDA are responsible for any operating
costs (net of revenues) that the County experiences in operating the ancillary sites around the
Eccles Theater (Black Box, Regent Street Plaza, and Winter Garden). The FY 25 budget
proposes $475,000 for this purpose, which is flat from FY 24. The FY 25 budget also includes
continuing the allocation started in FY 24 for an additional $25,000 to program the McCarthy
Plaza and Regent Street, which the RDA reports to be a very successful endeavor. Consistent
with the Council’s initial goals for the construction of the Eccles Theater, the UPACA Board
continues to ask County staff to find innovative ways to increase programming in the spaces,
with a primary goal of activation rather than purely revenue generation.
m. Block 70/Eccles Theater Debt Reserve – In previous budget years the RDA has funded a
certain reserve to cover debt service for the Eccles Theater, to cover years when tax increment
for the block is insufficient to cover payments (originally projected to be a span of 5-8 years,
depending on projections). As of FY 25, the Finance Department believes the combination of
increment from Block 70 and the current level of debt service reserve is sufficient to cover debt
on the Eccles Theater
GENERAL POLICY QUESTIONS
1.Bonding for catalytic or specific projects – The Board may wish to ask the Administration
whether they have a recommendation for bond-eligible projects in any project area, especially new
project areas like the State Street or 9-Line project areas, given tax increment flow has started. Based on
previous discussions, the Board and Administration agreed that bonding early in project areas, as was
done for Block 70 and Regent Street/Eccles Theater, makes financial sense, since bonding capacity is
maximized early in a project area.
0.0%
50.0%
100.0%
150.0%
200.0%
250.0%
300.0%
350.0%
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
North Temple Viaduct Annual Bond Payments by Year and RDA Tax
Increment Contribution
RDA Tax Increment Transfer to General Fund for Debt Service
Total Annual Debt Service Payment for Series 2012A Bond
Tax Increment as Percent of Debt Payment
Page | 24
a. Bonding may also make sense for a project that is of particular immediate interest or
importance to the Board, such as Japantown Street improvements. Given the City’s
favorable interest rates, the Council may wish to initiate this conversation with
the City finance department to conduct an analysis.
b. The City has the ability to issue bonds for projects supported or offset by RDA tax increment
(the North Temple Viaduct rebuild project was financed this way), or it can issue bonds as an
agency (A portion of Eccles theater debt and Regent Street Improvements were financed this
way via Block 70 increment).
2.Project Area/Workload Prioritization – The Board may wish to continue the discussion of project
area and/or staff workload prioritization. Staff is continuing to work on Housing and Transit
Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs), the recent discussions about a Sports, Entertainment, Cultural and
Convention District, and is in continued discussions about new project areas to facilitate developments
around the Granary District, which is soon to expire. The RDA is also continuing property disposition
work in three expired project areas that no longer collect tax increment to offset these costs (Sugar
House, West Capitol Hill, and West Temple Gateway). RDA staff also is critical to the City’s efforts
during State legislative discussions about changes to the City’s development tools, which is an increasing
workload compared to previous years. Affordable housing development in the City is also an overarching
workload handled by RDA staff, as is work on some of the programs approved by the Board in recent
years, such as the ADU program. In January 2020 the Board approved two resolutions establishing
survey boundaries for potential Community Reinvestment Areas at the University of Utah Research
Park, and discussions are ongoing. The two new FTEs added in FY2023 and the new financial analyst
FTE proposed in FY2025 may help with this increased workload, but the Board may wish to have
additional discussions.
3.Public/Private Partnership Models and proposals with alternate governance models - As
the City and RDA consider the public-private partnership ideas that are periodically raised, the
Board/Council have shared feedback that they prefer to keep elected officials in the appropriate policy-
making and budgetary role. The Board/Council may wish to formalize this feedback in a policy
document to guide future administrative conversations about alternate governance and management.
Prior to adopting a policy, the Board could request a comprehensive review of these different models to
identify pros and cons and establish role clarity, transparency expectations, and staff accountability
upfront.
4.Consistency between RDA and City Policies – Currently the Board adopts policies to guide RDA
investment that typically mirror City policies, although in some cases they are different and/or more
targeted to RDA activities. The Board could adopt a blanket policy indicating that if the RDA does not
have a policy for a given area, City policy applies.
5.Fund Balances for Project Areas with Ongoing Funding Obligations – The Board may wish to
review with the Administration the levels of fund balances (“savings accounts” or “cash reserves”) for
project areas with ongoing obligations such as the Central Business District which has bond debt service
payments and agreements (such as Eccles, Regent Street, and Gallivan) and significantly contributes to
the RDA’s annual administration costs. Finance is working with the RDA staff to provide cash balance
amounts for each project area.
6.Pooled Resources vs. Project Area Resources – Some initiatives and projects previously funded
with RDA tax increment have been funded by transferring funds out of one project area, into a pooled
account, such as the Primary Housing Fund or Revolving Loan Fund (via appropriation from Fund
Balance). Because these accounts are flexible in terms of serving all project areas, this allows for a
project area with limited tax increment to complete projects it might otherwise not be able to afford.
Page | 25
There are not clear guiding policies that would help determine when it is appropriate to use this
approach for a given project or initiative, but in the past it has enabled the RDA to respond to unique
opportunities and projects.
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.Gallivan Utah Center Owners Association (GUCOA) - GUCOA is the managing agency for the
entire block through Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CCRs) and is responsible for maintenance
and programming. The RDA is the majority owner (over 51%). The CCRs originally contemplated a
contractor to provide maintenance and programming which has been provided by the Public Services
Department after an RFP process. An assessment is levied on the first floor of adjacent commercial
properties to contribute funding to administration, programming, and events. The programming
contract has requirements for a set number of events that must be open to the public annually. Gallivan
also provides many free events to activate the space consistent with the Council/Board’s public policy
goals for downtown.
2.Project Area Expiration Dates -Project areas have a designated expiration (aka sunset) date. State
law allows RDAs to continue spending tax increment already collected in expired project areas such as
Sugar House. Sometimes project areas can be extended/renewed for a longer length which happened to
the Central Business District. The table below summarizes project area timeframes from creation to
expiration.
Project Area Initial Collection
Year
Last Collection
Year
Central Business District*†1983 2042
West Capitol Hill**1998 2022
Depot District†1999 2024
Granary District†2000 2025
North Temple†2012 2039
North Temple Viaduct CDA 2012 2037
Northwest Quadrant 2019 2038
Block 70 CDA 2016 2040
Stadler Rail 2019 2038
Block 67 2021 2040
9-Line 2021 2040
State Street 2021 2040
NOTE: Only project areas that generate tax increment are listed in the table
*The RDA Board extended the CBD from the original expiration year of 2007
** The RDA Board extended the original expiration year to focus on 300 West streetscape
improvements
†In October 2021 the Board approved two-year extensions for these project areas. State law
was changed to allow extensions for projects areas negatively impacted by the COVID-19
pandemic
3.Statutory Definition of Project Area Development (Utah Code 17C-1-102(48)) - The section
of Utah Code below is a key list of allowable uses of RDA funds. The Utah Legislature updated this
statute in the 2016 General Session.
(47)"Project area development" means activity within a project area that, as determined by the board,
encourages, promotes, or provides development or redevelopment for the purpose of implementing
a project area plan, including:
(a)promoting, creating, or retaining public or private jobs within the state or a community;
(b)providing office, manufacturing, warehousing, distribution, parking, or other facilities or
improvements;
Page | 26
(c)planning, designing, demolishing, clearing, constructing, rehabilitating, or remediating
environmental issues;
(d)providing residential, commercial, industrial, public, or other structures or spaces, including
recreational and other facilities incidental or appurtenant to the structures or spaces;
(e)altering, improving, modernizing, demolishing, reconstructing, or rehabilitating existing
structures;
(f)providing open space, including streets or other public grounds or space around buildings;
(g)providing public or private buildings, infrastructure, structures, or improvements;
(h)relocating a business;
(i)improving public or private recreation areas or other public grounds;
(j)eliminating blight or the causes of blight;
(k)redevelopment as defined under the law in effect before May 1, 2006; or
(l)any activity described in Subsections (48)(a) through (k) outside of a project area that the board
determines to be a benefit to the project area.
Note: in the 2022 legislative session some changes were made to limit a taxing entity’s ability to invest in
certain retail uses in HB 151 – in summary it it prohibits a city or its RDA from making or entering into an
agreement to make certain incentive payments for retail facilities. While retail incentives are limited, there
some exceptions, including:
-census tract areas with the median income below 70% AMI (to ease food and service deserts, etc),
-mixed use developments with a certain amount of housing units, or 10% of the units being affordable,
-retail facilities under 20,000 sqft, retail for small businesses, etc.
- Incentives can still be used for public infrastructure, structured parking, main street or historic
programs, and environmental mitigation.
-If incentives for retail developments are used, a report must be issued to GOEO.
-If a taxing entity violates any of the incentives restrictions or doesn't submit a report, GOEO can send
a notice to the state auditor. There is still the ability to cure the problem or appeal the determination
of GOEO.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Attachment 1 - RDA Guiding Framework Transmittal December 2021 (Mission, Core Values and
Livability Benchmarks)
2.Attachment 2 – Presentation on Housing Funding Priorities for FY 25
3.Attachment 3 – Transmittal: Housing Funding Priorities for FY 25
Exhi bi t A t o t he Re s ol ut i on
Guiding Fra me work
This Guiding Framework is a strategic operational document outlining the methodology for evaluating and prioritizing projects requesting RDA financial assistance. The RDA’s
Mis s ion and Values form the foundation of the Guiding Framework, declaring the RDA’s purpose and the intended economic, s ocia l, and physical outcomes expected of RDA
projects and partnerships.
MIS S ION:The Redevelopment Agency of Salt La ke City strengthens neighborhoods and business districts to improve livability, create economic opportunity and
fos ter authentic, equitable communities, s e rving as a catalyst for strategic development projects that enhance the City’s housing opportunities,
comme rcial vita lity, public spaces, and environmental s us tainability.
VALUES :Economic Opportunity-Equity & Inclus ion-Neighborhood Vibrancy-
We inves t in the long-term prosperity and growth We prioritize people-focused projects and We cultivate distinct and livable places that are
contextually sensitive, durable, connected, and
sustainable.
of our local economy.programs that encourage everyone to
participate in and be ne fit from development
decisions that shape their communities.
PROJ ECT EVALUATION PROCESS: The RDA prioritize s projects that demonstrate a commitment to the Mis s ion and Values, evaluating projects via three steps, which answer the
following questions: 1.) Doe s the project meet the minimumTHRESHOLDS required for RDA pa rticipa tion? 2.) To wha t degree does the project be ne fit the public by achieving
de fine d LIVABILITY BENCHMARKS, thereby warranting RDA assistance? 3.) Doe s the project meet the CRITERIAoutlined in e xis ting RDA progra ms and policie s , such as the
RDA Loan Program or Tax Increment Reimbursement Program?
Alignme nt with adopted City policies &plans
Alignme nt with RDAProject Area Work Plans*
Financial viability with a demonstrated and reasonable need for public assistance
Step 1:
THRESHOLDS
Economic Opportunity Equity & Inclus ion
Tra ns it Opportunities
Mixe d-Income Neighborhoods
Neighborhood Safety
Community Engagement &Support
Hous ing for Everyone
Dis place me nt Mitiga tion
Neighborhood Vibrancy
Public Space
Public Art
Architecture &Urba n Des ign
Sustainability
Wa lka bility
Building Preservation, rehabilitation, or
adaptive reuse
Le ve ra ging
Time line s s
Return of Investment
Permanent Job Creation &Retention
Afforda ble Commercial Spaces
Owne rs hip
Step 2:
LIVABILITY
BENCHMARKS
Afforda ble Hous ing Preservation
Mis s ing Middle &Unique Building Type s
Step 3:
PROGRAM
CRITERIA
Evaluation of project according to respective RDA policies , programs and procedures
*Spanning a 1-3 year time frame, Project Are a Work Plans identifyredevelopment objectives and strategic redevelopment projects for each project area, along with a corresponding schedule &budget for each project. The Project Are a Work Plans
will be based on relevant City policies and plans and the Project Are a Plans that we re adopted when the project area was created and will provide direction for the annual RDA budget process.
11.24.21
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
DATE: March 29, 2024
PREPARED BY: Lauren Parisi & Tracy Tran, RDA Senior Project Managers
RE: FY 2024-25 Annual Housing Funding Priorities
REQUESTED ACTION: Consider adoption of a resolution to establish the FY 2024-25 Housing
Funding Priorities
POLICY ITEM: Affordable Housing
BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City’s (“RDA”) Housing
Development Loan Program (“HDLP”) policy requires that the RDA Board of Directors (“Board”)
approves housing funding priorities (“Funding Priorities”) on an annual basis. These Funding Priorities
guide the upcoming fiscal year’s housing activities including the requirements of the HDLP's competitive
affordable housing notice of funding availability (NOFA).
At their March 2024 meeting, the Board reviewed and discussed potential Funding Priorities for the
upcoming fiscal year 2024-2025 (“FY 25”). More detail regarding the information presented at this meeting
can be found within the March RDA Board Memo. The Board seemed to come to a consensus regarding
the approval of four priorities including:
• Wealth Building Opportunity
• Affordable Family Housing with Amenities for Children
• Deeply Affordable Housing
• Neighborhood Commercial and Services
In March 2024, the Board expended nearly all of the remaining high opportunity area funds, which are
focused on incentivizing affordable housing in high opportunity areas (east side of Salt Lake City). Since
these funds are no longer available, RDA Staff wanted to check if the Board would be interested in adding
an Expand Opportunity priority to the list above that could further incentivize affordable housing in high
opportunity areas. A map of the high opportunity areas has been included under Attachment A.
This memo outlines the intent of each of the four Funding Priorities and a potential fifth priority if the
Board would like to include. Two resolution options are included under Attachment B for the Board’s
consideration to approve the FY 25 Funding Priorities.
1
ANALYSIS:
FY 25 Annual Housing Funding Priorities. The intent of each priority that will be used to guide housing
decisions throughout the upcoming fiscal year are described below.
1. Wealth Building Opportunity – Facilitate the ability for low-moderate income households to build
wealth through different pathways such as homeownership, supplemental income opportunities,
stipends for renters, cooperative housing, and other wealth building models.
2. Affordable Family Housing – Provide opportunities for families to enjoy the many benefits of
urban living by encouraging the development of housing that is more conducive to larger household
sizes that have at least three or more bedrooms and includes family-oriented amenities.
3. Deeply Affordable Housing – Expand the availability of units for extremely low-income
households, thereby providing housing options for individuals or families that are homeless or at
risk of homelessness. Deeply affordable housing is generally defined as housing affordable to those
earning 40% of the area median income (AMI) or below.
4. Neighborhood Commercial and Services – Promote an array of commercial spaces that support the
neighborhoods, such as daycares, restaurants, and retail spaces. This priority ensures that as
housing continues to be built throughout the City, residents and neighbors continue to have access
to neighborhood services and amenities.
5. Potential Priority: Expand Opportunity – Provide affordable housing within areas that have access
to resources that may improve a person’s chances of upward economic mobility as identified on
RDA’s High Opportunity Area Map. In previous years, the RDA Board dedicated funding towards
areas of high opportunity. With the majority of that funding expended, including this priority
maintains that the Board wants to see affordable housing expanded to Salt Lake City’s eastside
neighborhoods.
Housing Development Loan Program – Competitive NOFA. To utilize the competitive HDLP notice of
funding availability (NOFA) to promote the Funding Priorities, RDA staff recommends making affordable
family housing with amenities for children and/or deeply affordable housing into thresholds requirements
in order for a project to be eligible for funding. To meet the family housing threshold, at least 10% of a
project’s units must have three or more bedrooms and be affordable to households earning 60% of the area
median income as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). To
meet the deeply affordable housing threshold, at least 10% of a project’s units must be affordable to those
earning 40% AMI or below as established by HUD. Similar to previous years, the priorities the Board
approves for the upcoming fiscal year will be weighted more in scoring than other benchmarks. Projects
will also be eligible for interest rate reductions for meeting other RDA benchmarks as outlined in the
HDLP guidelines.
FY 25 Housing Fund Projections. RDA staff will share the housing fund projections for the upcoming
fiscal year when it becomes available.
2
NEXT STEPS:
• Pursuant to the Housing Development Loan Program Policy, the Board may wish to consider the
adoption of the attached resolution to approve the Funding Priorities for FY 25.
• RDA staff will present proposed funding allocations to housing activities as a part of the FY 25
budget discussion.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - High Opportunity Area Map and Table
Attachment B – Resolution Options: FY 25 Affordable Housing Funding Priorities Resolution
3
ATTACHMENT A – HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA MAP
High opportunity areas are geographical locations within the city that provide conditions that expand a person’s
likelihood for social mobility. These areas have been identified through an analysis of a variety of economic,
housing, health, and community metrics. With these multiple indicators, a single composite, or standardized score
is calculated for each census tract. Scores may range from 0 to 10, with 1 indicating low opportunity and 10
indicating high opportunity.
A Census Tract with an Opportunity Index score of 7 or higher shall be designated as an Area of High Opportunity.
HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA MAP
4
HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA TABLE
SCORING NOTES
The High Opportunity Index uses an eleven-point rating scale to evaluate metrics associated with high economic
opportunity by census tract. Scores 0-2 indicate very low opportunity, 3-4 indicates low opportunity, 5-6 indicate
moderate opportunity, 7-8 indicate high opportunity, and 9-10 indicate very high opportunity.
For the methodology, scoring for the Opportunity Index was done by evaluating each tract on the variables in
Attachment A as compared to other census tracts in the city. A normalization formula is used to establish the
thresholds for scoring in 11 equal scoring ranges (0-10). Each tract’s normalized scores for all variables were then
multiplied by their determined weight and aggregated. The aggregate scores are then put through the same
normalization formula to determine the overall Opportunity Index score.
Tract Opportunity
Index Score Tract Opportunity
Index Score
1001 3 1028.01 2
1002 5 1028.02 4
1003.06 3 1029 2
1003.07 2 1030 6
1003.08 1 1031 8
1005 1 1032 6
1006 0 1033 7
1007 5 1034 8
1008 5 1035 7
1010 8 1036 10
1011.01 6 1037 8
1011.02 9 1038 7
1012 8 1039 7
1014.01 3 1040 9
1014.02 4 1041 8
1015 8 1042 9
1016 6 1043 6
1017 8 1044 7
1018 4 1047 8
1019 7 1048 5
1020 6 1049 5
1021 7 1118.02 6
1023 5 1140 6
1025.01 4 1141 7
1025.02 6 1145 1
1026 3 1147 3
1027.01 3 1148 8
1027.02 1
5
ATTACHMENT B – RESOLUTIONS: FY 25 AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDING
PRIORITIES RESOLUTION
6
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
FY 2024-25 Affordable Housing Funding Priorities
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF SALT LAKE CITY ADOPTING HOUSING FUNDING PRIORITIES FOR FISCAL YEAR
2024-25
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
(Board) adopted the Housing Funds Allocation Policy and the Housing Development Loan
Program Policy, which provide that the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (RDA) will
present to the Board an overall funding strategy and specific funding priorities (Funding
Priorities) for how housing monies should be allocated to the housing funds and housing loan
program for the upcoming fiscal year.
WHEREAS, the Housing Development Loan Program Policy provides that the specific
Funding Priorities shall be subject to approval by the Board.
WHEREAS, the Board desires to adopt the Funding Priorities identified in this
resolution to direct resources for the development of affordable housing for fiscal year 2024-25.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City hereby adopt following Funding Priorities for fiscal year
2024-25:
Funding Priority Objective
Deeply Affordable Housing
Threshold requirement for Housing
Development Loan Program applications
Expand the availability of units for extremely
low-income households, thereby providing
housing options for individuals or families that
are homeless or at risk of homelessness.
Affordable Family Housing with
Amenities for Children
Threshold requirement for Housing
Development Loan Program applications
Provide opportunities for families to enjoy the
many benefits of urban living by encouraging
the development of housing that is more
conducive to larger household sizes that have
at least three or more bedrooms and includes
family-oriented amenities.
Wealth Building Opportunity Facilitate the ability for low-moderate income
households to build wealth through different
pathways such as homeownership,
supplemental income opportunities, stipends
for renters, cooperative housing, and other
wealth building models.
Resolution - Option A
7
Neighborhood Commercial and
Services
Promote an array of commercial spaces that
support the neighborhoods, such as daycares,
restaurants, and retail spaces.
Passed by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, this
_______ day of ________________, 2024.
________________________________
Alejandro Puy, Chair
Approved as to form: __________________________________
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Allison Parks
The Executive Director:
____ does not request reconsideration
____ requests reconsideration at the next regular Agency meeting.
________________________________
Erin Mendenhall, Executive Director
Attest:
________________________
City Recorder
8
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
FY 2024-25 Affordable Housing Funding Priorities
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF SALT LAKE CITY ADOPTING HOUSING FUNDING PRIORITIES FOR FISCAL YEAR
2024-25
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
(Board) adopted the Housing Funds Allocation Policy and the Housing Development Loan
Program Policy, which provide that the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (RDA) will
present to the Board an overall funding strategy and specific funding priorities (Funding
Priorities) for how housing monies should be allocated to the housing funds and housing loan
program for the upcoming fiscal year.
WHEREAS, the Housing Development Loan Program Policy provides that the specific
Funding Priorities shall be subject to approval by the Board.
WHEREAS, the Board desires to adopt the Funding Priorities identified in this
resolution to direct resources for the development of affordable housing for fiscal year 2024-25.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City hereby adopt following Funding Priorities for fiscal year
2024-25:
Funding Priority Objective
Deeply Affordable Housing
Threshold requirement for Housing
Development Loan Program applications
Expand the availability of units for extremely
low-income households, thereby providing
housing options for individuals or families that
are homeless or at risk of homelessness.
Affordable Family Housing with
Amenities for Children
Threshold requirement for Housing
Development Loan Program applications
Provide opportunities for families to enjoy the
many benefits of urban living by encouraging
the development of housing that is more
conducive to larger household sizes that have
at least three or more bedrooms and includes
family-oriented amenities.
Wealth Building Opportunity Facilitate the ability for low-moderate income
households to build wealth through different
pathways such as homeownership,
supplemental income opportunities, stipends
for renters, cooperative housing, and other
wealth building models.
Resolution - Option B
9
Neighborhood Commercial and
Services
Promote an array of commercial spaces that
support the neighborhoods, such as daycares,
restaurants, and retail spaces.
Expand Opportunity Provide affordable housing within areas that
have access to resources that may improve a
person’s chances of upward economic mobility
as identified on RDA’s High Opportunity Area
map.
Passed by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, this
_______ day of ________________, 2024.
________________________________
Alejandro Puy, Chair
Approved as to form: __________________________________
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Allison Parks
The Executive Director:
____ does not request reconsideration
____ requests reconsideration at the next regular Agency meeting.
________________________________
Erin Mendenhall, Executive Director
Attest:
________________________
City Recorder
10
Annual
HOUSING
FUNDING
PRIORITIES
Fy 2024-25
APRIL 16, 2024
HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
FUND
WESTSIDE
COMMUNITY
INITIATIVE
FUND
SECONDARY
HOUSING
FUND
ADOPTED Q1 2021 YEARLY BOD APPROVAL
PRIMARY
HOUSING
FUND
HOUSING ALLOCATION
FUNDS POLICY
HOUSING
FUND
ALLOCATIONS
ANNUAL
HOUSING
PRIORITIES
HOUSING
ACTIVITIES
ANNUAL HOUSING
FUNDING STRATEGY
This policy
established guidelines
for allocating/directing
resources for housing
by funding source.
Also requires "Annual
Housing Funding
Strategy" (right) be
brought in front of
Board every year.
To be included
in RDA budget
For your approval
today
To be included
in RDA budget
WEALTH
BUILDING
OPPORTUNITY
recommended annual housing priorities
Priorities to focus on this FY; Seeking Board feedback today
AFFORDABLE
FAMILY
HOUSING w/
AMENITIES for
CHILDREN
DEEPLY
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
AND SERVICES
HOUSING
FUND
ALLOCATIONS
ANNUAL
HOUSING
PRIORITIES
HOUSING
ACTIVITIES
ANNUAL HOUSING
FUNDING STRATEGY
EXPAND
OPPORTUNITY
UPDATED HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA MAP
2
3
4
5
6
Source: Census Bureau's 2017-2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates (1,2, 3, 4)
Salt Lake County Assessor (5)
CoStar Group (6)
HIGHER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS MAKING $75K OR MORE HAVE INCREASED WITHIN
SALT LAKE CITY THROUGH THE YEARS, LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLD MAKING LESS
THAN $50K HAVE DECREASED.
NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL PARCELS HAVE DECREASED WITHIN SALT LAKE CITY
COMMERCIAL GROWTH RATE IS SLOWING, WHILE OCCUPANCY AND LEASE RATES
HAVE INCREASED
PERCENTAGE OF FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS HAVE BEEN DECREASING SINCE 2018
AT LEAST 8,431 RENTING HOUSEHOLDS FALL IN THE "EXTREMELY LOW INCOME” LIMIT
SET BY HUD FOR FY23.
1 HOMEOWNERSHIP RATE IS GROWING AT A SLOWER PACE THAN RENTAL RATE
Data - other metrics
Data - current and future slc deed-restricted affordable housing developments map
LAND
ACQUISITION/
DISPOSITION
HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
LOAN
PROGRAM
EQUITY
BUILDING
NOFA
recommended housing ACTIVItIES
Tools/programs by which to achieve Priorities; Seeking Board feedback today
HOUSING
FUND
ALLOCATIONS
ANNUAL
HOUSING
PRIORITIES
HOUSING
ACTIVITIES
ANNUAL HOUSING
FUNDING STRATEGY
housing ACTIVItIES
Housing Development Loan Program
Competitive NOFA
Require affordable family housing and/or deeply
affordable housing as threshold
Utilize interest rate reduction benchmarks for
competitive NOFA (Alignment with RDA's Guiding
Framework); annual priorities will have greater
ranking weight
)064I/(
'6/%
"--0$"5I0/4
"//6"-
)064I/(
13I03I5I&4
HOUSING
ACTIVITIES
ANNUAL HOUSING
FUNDING STRATEGY
HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
FUND
SECONDARYPRIMARY
WESTSIDE
COMMUNITY
INITIATIVE
FUND
housing fund
allocations
FY25 ANNUAL HOUSING FUNDING STRATEGY
ANNUAL HOUSING
PRIORITIES
HOUSING
ACTIVITIES
NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
AND SERVICES
DEEPLY
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
WEALTH
BUILDING
OPPORTUNITY
AFFORDABLE
FAMILY
HOUSING
HOUSING
DEV. LOAN
PROGRAM
LAND
ACQUISITION/
DISPOSITION
EQUITY
BUILDING
NOFA
EXPAND
OPPORTUNITY
next steps
The RDA Board may wish to consider the adoption of the FY 25
Annual Housing Priorities
RDA staff will present proposed funding allocations to housing
activities as a part of the FY 25 budget discussion
HOUSING
FUND
ALLOCATIONS
ANNUAL
HOUSING
PRIORITIES
HOUSING
ACTIVITIES
ANNUAL HOUSING
FUNDING STRATEGY
Redevelopment Agency FY24-25 Budget
Presented by Danny Walz
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Redevelopment Agency Funds
2
Project Area Funds
Must be used within the boundaries of the project area, except for
revenues transferred to Primary Housing (legally required),
Secondary Housing (supplemental), Agency Operations (defined
by interlocal agreements), or other legal reasons.
•Central Business District (CBD)
•Block 70 (B70)
•Depot District (DD)
•Granary District (GD)
•North Temple (NT)
•North Temple Viaduct (NTV)
•Stadler Rail (SR)
•Northwest Quadrant (NWQ)
•State Street (SS)
•9 Line (9L)
•Block 67 North (B67N)
•West Capitol Hill (WCH)
Housing Funds
May be used anywhere in the City, unless otherwise directed by the
Board, except for the WCI, which must be used west of I-15.
•Primary Housing (1H)
•Secondary Housing (2H)
•Housing Development Fund (HDF)
•West Side Community Initiative (WCI)
Multi-Use Funds
Can be used across project areas (and potentially city-wide),
unless otherwise directed by the Board.
•Program Income Fund (PIF)
•Revolving Loan Fund (RLF)
Agency Operations Fund (OPS)
•Receives transfers in from other funds to fund the Agency’s
operational expenses.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Agency Budget Process
=-
•Tax Increment Revenue
•Loan Payments
•Rent Payments
•Parking Structure Income
•Interest from Investments
•Internal Fund Transfers
•External Fund Transfers
•Transition Holding
Account
•Tax Increment
Reimbursements
•Taxing Entity Payments
•Primary Housing
Contributions
•Debt Service
•Contractual Obligations
•Property Management &
Maintenance
•Administrative and
Operating Expenses
•Proposed Programs and
Projects
Revenue Sources Obligated Expenses Discretionary Expenses
3
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Overview of Expense Changes by Fund
4
FY24 Proposed
Changes
FY25
Recommended
FTE: 21 FTE: +1 FTE: 22
Fund Type Fund Name
FY 2024 Adopted
Budget Change
FY 2025
Recommended
Budget
Project Area Central Business District 24,644,694 5,248,322 29,893,016
Block 70 11,053,759 11,405 11,065,164
Depot District 7,227,908 (132,507)7,095,401
Granary District 1,394,593 353,656 1,748,249
North Temple 1,351,992 600,474 1,952,466
North Temple Viaduct 2,774,419 381,346 3,155,765
Stadler Rail 141,297 27,447 168,744
9-Line 3,455,989 (148,771)3,307,218
State Street 5,788,520 729,316 6,517,836
Northwest Quadrant 1,398,548 1,205,450 2,603,998
Block 67 North 0 365,771 365,771
West Capitol Hill 0 384,332 384,332
Housing Primary Housing 2,394,582 1,207,659 3,602,241
Secondary Housing 1,000,000 0 1,000,000
Housing Development Fund 10,236,967 (7,334,967)2,902,000
Westside Community Initiative 1,835,469 0 1,835,469
Multi-Use Program Income Fund 1,449,692 109,541 1,559,233
Revolving Loan Fund 226,750 105,650 332,400
Operations Redevelopment Agency Operations 4,428,662 641,634 5,070,296
Total 80,803,841 3,755,758 84,559,599
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Organizational Chart
5
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DIRECTOR
GALLIVAN
STAFF
(12 POSITIONS)
GALLIVAN
DIRECTOR
OFFICE
FACILITATOR
OFFICE
MANAGER
RDA DEPUTY
DIRECTOR
COMM/
OUTREACH
COORDINATOR
COMM/
OUTREACH
MANAGER
SR. PROJECT
MANAGER
SR. PROJECT
MANAGER
SR. PROJECT
MANAGER
PROJECT
MANAGER
PROJECT
MANAGER
PROJECT
COORDINATOR
SR. PROJECT
MANAGER
SR. PROJECT
MANAGER
PROPERTY
MANAGER
PROJECT
MANAGER
PROJECT
MANAGER
PROJECT
COORDINATOR
FINANCIAL
ANALYST
DATA
MANAGER
SPECIAL
PROJECTS
FINANCIAL
ANALYST
REVENUE PROJECTIONS
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Project Area Tax Increment Revenue
7
Fund 2020-A 2021-A 2022-A 2023-A 2024-B 2024-A 2025-B %
Central Business District 32,241,850 31,160,698 29,210,363 25,941,783 24,644,694 27,265,707 27,265,707 0%
Depot District 5,331,207 5,375,538 5,165,393 5,316,113 5,422,435 6,071,665 6,193,098 2%
Granary District 737,929 926,661 975,276 1,081,675 1,103,309 1,357,286 1,384,433 2%
Block 70 2,151,501 2,145,823 2,156,531 1,925,503 1,829,228 2,133,992 2,133,992 0%
North Temple 526,266 633,123 674,845 988,936 1,008,715 1,513,475 1,543,745 2%
North Temple Viaduct 1,550,077 2,100,528 2,573,995 2,720,019 2,774,419 3,058,618 3,119,790 2%
West Capitol Hill (113,393) 526,903 - - - - -
Northwest Quadrant 197 1,684,441 1,035,350 1,371,125 1,398,548 2,451,087 2,500,109 2%
Stadler Rail 69,903 101,927 108,334 138,526 141,298 157,991 161,151 2%
9-Line - - 1,871,603 2,601,746 2,653,781 2,971,289 3,030,715 2%
State Street - - 3,289,619 4,337,070 4,423,811 5,753,783 5,868,859 2%
Block 67 North - - - - - 358,599 365,771 2%
Total 42,495,537 44,655,642 47,061,309 46,422,496 45,400,237 53,093,492 53,567,370 1%
A = Actual | B = Budget | F = Forecast
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
200,220
229,449
561,600
1,290,184
1,835,469
2,590,000
3,056,265
3,210,658
53,567,370
Loan Payments - Interest
Rents
Loan Payments - Principal
Parking Structure Income
Inland Port Housing
Funding Our Future
Transition Holding Account
Interest from Investments
Tax Increment
Revenue & Other Sources
Estimated Revenue*
66,541,215
*Excluding internal transfers
8
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Housing Fund Revenue & Other Sources
9
$1MM– Supplemental Transfer from SS to 2H
507,505
2,590,000
113,820
276,000
1,835,469
16,115
36,577
250,011
276,886
303,072
308,749
1,238,620
1,586,886
Transition Holding Account
Funding Our Future
Loan Payments - Interest
Loan Payments - Principal
Inland Port Housing
Stadler Rail
Block 67 North
Northwest Quadrant
Granary District
9-Line
North Temple
Depot District
State Street
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
Estimated Revenue*
9,339,710
*Including internal transfers
EXPENSE PROJECTIONS
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
417,382
2,599,534
5,167,581
8,477,030
180,000
250,000
363,000
385,447
417,382
454,244
591,807
636,577
1,849,750
3,108,969
3,468,976
9,644,668
12,441,752
School District Required Family & Workforce Housing
Primary Housing Fund
Administration (Agency Operations) Fund
Internal Transfers - Debt Service
Eccles - Maintenance & Repairs
Gallivan - Programming
Operating & Maintenance
Gallivan - Administration Assessment
School District Required Family & Workforce Housing
Infrastructure Improvements
Gallivan - Management & Maintenance Assessment
RDA Arts & Culture Program
Property Management and Maintenance
Salt Lake City Debt Service
TI Reimbursements
Eccles Debt Service
Taxing Entity Payments
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
Obligated Expenses
11
Estimated Obligations*
50,454,099
*Including internal transfers &
excluding the Agency Operations Fund.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Discretionary Expenses
Project Area Funds
12
Program > Project CBD B70 DD GD NT 9L SS WCH Total
Charges & Services 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000
Commercial Assistance Reserves 500,000 1,263,697 1,763,697
Commercial Studies and Planning 300,000 300,000
New Project: North Temple Property Reuse Planning 300,000 300,000
Gallivan - Maintenance & Repairs 250,000 250,000
PRJ-000057 Gallivan Repairs 250,000 250,000
Infrastructure Improvements 600,000 3,705,316 50,000 4,355,316
Available for Project Assignment 3,705,316 3,705,316
New Project: Japantown Construction Documents 100,000 100,000
New Project: Gallivan Playground 500,000 500,000
PRJ-000022 RDA - City Creek Daylighting Design Plan Budget 50,000 50,000
Internal Transfers - Secondary Housing Fund 1,000,000 1,000,000
Property Management and Maintenance 50,000 50,000 100,000
RDA Arts & Culture Program 450,000 80,323 300,000 830,323
New Project: Japantown Art 300,000 300,000
New Project: CBD Public Art Project 150,000 150,000
PRJ-000081 Regent Street Event Programming 25,000 25,000
New Project: Reinstallation of "The Gulls"55,323 55,323
New Project: 9-Line Public Art Project 300,000 300,000
Strategic Intervention 2,540,597 861,812 1,994,272 4,003,894 9,400,575
Available for Project Assignment 861,812 1,994,272 4,003,894 6,859,978
New Project: Downtown for All 2,540,597 2,540,597
Housing Construction & Rehabilitation 384,332 384,332
PRJ-000015 RDA - Arctic Court Infill Home Construction 384,332 384,332
Total 3,840,597 80,323 4,255,316 1,263,697 1,261,812 2,394,272 5,103,894 384,332 18,584,243
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Discretionary Expenses
Housing & Multi-Use Funds
13
Housing Funds
Housing Funds
Total
Multi-Use
Funds
Multi-Use
Funds Total
Program > Project 1H 2H WCI HDF RLF PIF
Charges & Services 457,500 457,500
Commercial Revolving Loans 332,400 332,400
Gallivan - Maintenance & Repairs 238,733 238,733
PRJ-000057 Gallivan Repairs 238,733 238,733
HDLP - Competitive 2,684,859 1,000,000 902,000 4,586,859
Infrastructure Improvements 500,000 500,000
PRJ-000078 Sugar House DI Demolition 500,000 500,000
Operating & Maintenance 363,000 363,000
School District Required Family & Workforce Housing*417,382 417,382
Strategic Intervention 1,000,000 1,000,000
Housing Construction & Rehabilitation 500,000 500,000
PRJ-000015 RDA - Arctic Court Infill Home Construction 500,000 500,000
Wealth Building Housing Opportunities 835,469 2,000,000 2,835,469
Total 3,602,241 1,000,000 1,835,469 2,902,000 9,339,710 332,400 1,559,233 1,891,633
*School District Required Family & Workforce Housing is an obligated expense, but the utilization of the program is discretionary provided it meets the requirements of the interlocal agreement.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Fund Name Revenue or Expense Appropriation Type Program
FY 2024 Adopted
Budget Change
FY 2025
Recommended
Budget
Redevelopment Agency Operations
Revenue 4,428,662 738,919 5,167,581
Expense Operations Program RDA Personnel 2,756,779 413,517 3,170,296
Administrative Fees 1,000,000 0 1,000,000
Charges & Services 296,883 153,117 450,000
Operating & Maintenance 375,000 75,000 450,000
Expense Total 4,428,662 641,634 5,070,296
Total 0 97,285 97,285
Agency Operations Fund
14
Note: FY23 Amended Budget | C&S - $419,281 | O&M - $660,000
STAFFING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
22
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Redevelopment Agency Grade FY 2022 FY2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Comments
Director 41 1 1 1 1
Deputy Director 37 1 1 1 1
Senior Project Manager 35 2 2 4 5 1 New position(s)
Financial Analyst III 29 1 1 0 1 1 New position(s)
Financial Analyst IV 32 0 0 1 1
Project Manager 33 7 7 4 5 1 New position(s)
Communications Manager 32 1 1 1 1
Communications Coordinator 25 0 0 1 1
Property Administrator 26 1 1 0 0
Property Manager 30 0 0 1 1
Project Coordinator 28 1 1 4 2 2 Position(s) eliminated
Office Manager 21 1 2 1 1
Special Projects Assistant 21 1 1 1 1
Office Facilitator II Non-Union 20 2 1 1 1
Redevelopment Agency Total 19 19 21 22
Redevelopment Agency Staffing
16
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
Gallivan Staffing
13
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY24-25 BUDGET PROPOSAL
Presented by Danny Walz, Department Director
17
Gallivan Plaza Grade FY 2022 FY2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Comments
Plaza & Comm Events Div Director 32 1 1 1 1
Operations Manager 31 1 1 1 1
Facilities Maintenance Supervisor 25 0 0 0 0
Gallivan Event Adv/Mktg Manager 25 2 2 2 2
Plaza Marketing/Activities Supr 23 1 1 0 0
Event Coordinator II 23 0 0 1 1
Office Facilitator II Non-Union 22 1 1 1 1
General Maintenance Worker I 16 5 5 2 1
General Maintenance Worker II 18 0 0 1 1
General Maintenance Worker III 21 0 0 2 3
Office Technician I 19 1 1 1 1
Custodian II 11 1 1 1 1
Gallivan Total 13 13 13 13
With support from:
Erin Cunningham, Financial Analyst
THANK YOU
Presented Danny Walz, Department Director
APPENDIX: PROGRAM & PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Housing Programs > Projects
20
Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) – Competitive - $4,586,859
•A permanent and annually renewable loan program that consolidates and centralizes resources for the development and preservation of affordable housing.
Funds are awarded through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) on a competitive basis. {Capital Reserves Program}
Wealth Building Housing Opportunities - $2,835,469
•Affordable Housing through Wealth Building opportunities such as homeownership or shared equity models. {Capital Reserves Program}
School District Required Family & Workforce Housing - $417,382
•Housing solutions for families and the workforce, mandated by interlocal agreements with the Salt Lake City School District. Funds may be combined with other
housing programs provided the project meets the requirements of the agreement. {Capital Reserves Program}
Housing Construction & Rehabilitation - $884,332
•Support for new housing development and renovation of existing structures. {Capital Reserves Program}
•> Project: PRJ-000015 RDA -Arctic Court Infill Home Construction -$884,332
•Prior year budget amendments redirected funds from the new infill construction at 524 North Arctic Court to Marmalade Plaza due to rising construction
costs. Staff committed to requesting re-funding from the Board in future budget proposals. {Capital Reserves Project}
Commercial Programs > Projects
21
Commercial Assistance Reserves - $1,763,697
•Reserve funds to ensure resources are available for commercial programs currently being revised by the Agency. {Capital Reserves Program}
Commercial Revolving Loans - $332,400
•Offers loans to support local businesses, part of the broader Commercial Assistance Program. {Capital Reserves Program}
Studies & Planning Programs > Projects
Commercial Studies and Planning - $300,000
•Research and planning for commercial development strategies.
•>New Project: New Project: North Temple Property Reuse Planning -$300,000
•Appropriation of funds to support site costs and evaluation of development options for Agency-owned parcels along the Folsom Corridor.
Infrastructure Programs > Projects
22
Infrastructure Improvements - $5,309,560
•Diverse infrastructure improvements are funded, including utilities, streets, public transportation, lighting, and the creation of curbs, sidewalks, and open
spaces. These efforts aim to enhance safety, connectivity, walkability, accessibility, and enjoyment in neighborhoods and business districts.
•> Available for future projects -$3,705,316
•Staff will return with proposed projects for infrastructure improvements.
•>New Project: Gallivan Playground -$500,000
•Funding for the Gallivan Center Playground project aims to develop an inclusive and engaging playground for children of all ages. The project will focus on
creating safe, accessible play structures to enhance the community’s recreational facilities.
•> New Project: Japantown Construction Documents -$100,000
•Appropriation of $100,000 to fund the drafting of construction documents to implement the Japantown Design Strategy. The funding will be used to create
detailed construction plans that are crucial for guiding redevelopment efforts and revitalizing the neighborhood while honoring its historical significance.
•>Project: PRJ-000022 RDA -City Creek Daylighting Design Plan Budget -$50,000
•Appropriation of funds to support a design plan to daylight (bring to the surface) a portion of City Creek that runs north of the Folsom Trail from 800 West to
1000 West. Project goals include increasing access to nature, improving water quality and mitigating surface flooding.
•> Project: PRJ-000078 Sugar House DI Demolition -$500,000
•Site and demolition costs in anticipation of offering property for affordable housing development.
•>Project: PRJ-000086 North Temple School Construction Reserves -$100,344
•A project has been established as a reserve fund per an interlocal agreement with the School District, mandating the Agency to earmark portions of tax
increment for the construction of a potential new school, improvements to existing schools, or infrastructure improvements for the benefit and safety of
students.
•>Project: PRJ-000087 NWQ Shared Costs Reserve -$353,900
•A project has been established as a reserve fund per the interlocal agreement with the City to cover shared costs. This project will utilize tax increment
financing for redevelopment activities that benefit the entire project area, are system-wide, or that advantage multiple property owners or parcels.
RDA Arts & Culture Program > Projects
23
RDA Art Program - $1,466,900
•Dedicated to enriching the community by supporting local artists and promoting cultural diversity through exhibitions, performances, and educational
initiatives.
•>New Project: 9-Line Public Art Project -$300,000
•Installation of a public art piece within the 9-Line Project Area.
•>New Project: CBD Public Art Project -$150,000
•Installation of a public art piece within the Central Business District.
•>New Project: Japantown Art -$336,577
•Installation of a public art piece with Japantown.
•>New Project: Reinstallation of "The Gulls of Salt Lake City“ -$55,323
•Reinstallation of the sculpture, formerly installed in the façade of the Prudential Federal Savings building, which is now the Eccles Theater.
•>PRJ-000081 Regent Street Event Programming -$25,000
•Funds for additional activation and programming of McCarthy Plaza and Regent Street. The intent is to leverage funds with other sources and coordinate
efforts with County operations and theater staff, whenever possible.
•>PRJ-000082 Eccles Fundraising Fulfillment -$125,000
•Project set up to manage various gift agreements related to the Eccles Theater and Regent Street.
•>PRJ-000083 Eccles Theater-Operating Reserve for Ancillary Spaces -$475,000
•Project created to track an operating reserve set aside for operating expenses related to the Eccles Theater
Strategic Intervention Programs > Projects
24
Strategic Intervention - $10,400,575
•Uses include property acquisition, site development, and community benefits, e.g., when allocation between housing or commercial use is has not been
determined.
•>Available for future projects -$7,859,978
•Staff will return with proposed projects for infrastructure improvements. Note: Funds received from Salt Lake County in the State Street project area have
restricted uses defined in the interlocal agreement.
•>New Project: Downtown for All -$2,540,597
•Appropriation of funds to support Mayor’s goal of creating a thriving and equitable downtown. This would provide funding for projects that support families
such as daycares, opportunities for play, and family-sized housing as well as amenities for every generation of individuals, families, residents, and visitors.
Debt Service > Projects
Eccles Debt Service - $9,644,668
•Debt service for the Eccles Theater.
Salt Lake City Debt Service - $3,108,969
•Repayment of debts incurred by Salt Lake City in redevelopment projects.
Eccles & Gallivan Programs > Projects
25
Eccles - Maintenance & Repairs - $180,000
•Upkeep and repair of Eccles Theater funded facilities and projects.
•>PRJ-000084 Regent Street Parking Structure Reserves -$100,000
•Project created to reserve funds for repairs related to the Regent Street parking structure.
•>PRJ-000085 Regent Street Maintenance -$80,000
•Project created for maintenance required for Regent Street.
Gallivan - Maintenance & Repairs – $488,733
•Maintenance and repair at the Gallivan Center.
•>PRJ-000057 Gallivan Repairs -$488,733
•Project created for repairs associated with the Gallivan Center property owned by the Agency.
Gallivan - Administration Assessment - $385,447
•Fees related to the Block 57 Owners Group, formerly Gallivan Utah Center Owners Association.
Gallivan - Management & Maintenance Assessment - 591,807
•Fees related to the Block 57 Owners Group, formerly Gallivan Utah Center Owners Association.
Gallivan – Programming - $250,000
•Development and management of programs and events at the Gallivan Center.
Tax Increment Programs > Projects
26
Taxing Entity Payments - $12,441,752
•Payments to taxing entities as part of interlocal agreements.
TI Reimbursements - $3,468,976
•Reimbursements related to tax increment reimbursement agreements.
RDA Operations Programs > Projects
27
PRG92030 RDA Charges & Services - $1,107,500
•Expenses for services such as consulting, legal advice, accounting, marketing, audits, travel, software, or other service-related expenses.
PRG92059 Operating & Maintenance - $813,000
•Expenses for utilities, facility maintenance, equipment, supplies, and other costs related to Agency operations.
PRG92061 Property Management and Maintenance - $1,949,750
•Management and maintenance of properties under the agency’s control, typically within a project area.
•>PRJ-000064 RDA -Home Inn Rio Grande Maintenance -$500,000
•This project reserves funds for these obligated for maintenance and repairs related to maintaining the Home Inn property in the Depot District owned by the
Agency.
PRG92023 Administrative Fees - $1,000,000
•Fees from the City to distribute the costs of shared resources.
PRG92063 RDA Personnel - $3,170,296
•Agency employee compensation including salaries, wages, benefits, and other forms of remuneration.