Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/19/2024 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION   November 19, 2024 Tuesday 2:00 PM Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas. Council Work Room 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com 7:00 pm Formal Meeting Room 315 (See separate agenda) Welcome and public meeting rules 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. The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork. Generated: 09:40:08 Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items   1.Informational: Winter Shelter Plans Update ~ 2:00 p.m.  15 min. The Council will receive an update from the Administration on the state homeless winter shelter plans. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   2.Ordinance: Jordan River Fairpark District Zoning Map & Text Amendment Follow-up ~ 2:15 p.m.  30 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about a proposal that would amend the City's zoning ordinance by creating a new zoning district known as the Jordan River Fairpark (JRF) District at approximately 1500 West North Temple and bounded by the Jordan River, Redwood Road, North Temple, and Interstate 15. The proposal would rezone approximately 93 acres across 32 parcels into a single zone to support the area's redevelopment. The project is located within Council District 2. Petitioner: Snell & Wilmer, representing Larry H. Miller Development. 1.Zoning Map & Text Amendment: The JRF district would allow buildings up to 400 feet tall. No minimum lot size, setbacks, or open space requirements are proposed, and developments would be exempt from meeting the City's general plans. 2.Development Agreement: The proposed Development Agreement addresses access to the Jordan River, open space, roads, and infrastructure improvements and establishes review processes for development applications. Under new state law, an agreement must be reached by December 31, 2024, for expedited land use reviews related to a qualified stadium and related uses. If no agreement is made, the JRF District will not be subject to the City's zoning regulations. For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/JRFDistrict. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 12, 2024 and Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 12, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, December 3, 2024   3.Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at 333 West 700 South ~ 2:45 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning map for a portion of the property at approximately 333 West 700 South. The property is currently “split-zoned” with one portion zoned CG (General Commercial) and the other zoned D-2 (Downtown Support). The request is to rezone the CG portion to D-2, so the entire parcel is within one zoning designation. The project is within Council District 4. Petitioner: TAG SLC, representing the property owner, Bestway Investors, LLC. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, December 3, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD   4.Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at 238 South Concord Street and 1255 West Pierpont Avenue ~ 3:05 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of the properties at approximately 238 South Concord Street and 1255 West Pierpont Avenue from R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential District) to RMF-30 (Low-Density Multi- Family Residential District). The stated intent of the proposed amendment is to build five to seven family-sized units on the property. The combined properties contain 0.25 acres with one single-family home. The project is within Council District 2. Petitioner: Anthony Wright, the property owner. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, December 3, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD   5.Ordinance: Economic Development Loan Fund - GK Folks Foundation ~ 3:25 p.m.  5 min The Council will receive a briefing about an ordinance that would approve a $250,000 loan for GK Folks Foundation at 1506 South Redwood Road from the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF). GK Folks Foundation is a non-profit organization for African immigrants and refugees that focuses on mental health awareness and educational and entrepreneurial resources. This loan will be used to create a community events center for the African immigrant and refugee community and assist in the creation of two new jobs in the next year and the retention of one current job. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024   6.Ordinance: Economic Development Loan Fund - HK Brewing Collective, LLC.~ 3:30 p.m.  5 min The Council will receive a briefing about an ordinance that would approve a $250,000 loan for HK Brewing Collective, LLC. at 307 Aspen Avenue from the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF). HK Brewing Collective, LLC. offers non-alcoholic kombucha, Han’s kombucha, and a taproom and bar experience. This loan will assist in the creation of ten new jobs in the next year and the retention of twenty current jobs. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024   7.Tentative Break ~ 3:35 p.m.  20 min. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Set Public Hearing Date - Hold hearing to accept public comment - TENTATIVE Council Action -   8.Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2024-25 ~ 3:55 p.m.  45 min. The Council will receive a briefing about Budget Amendment No. 2 for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposed amendment includes creating a new fund dedicated to the Capital City Downtown Revitalization Zone sales tax, 12 new police officers partially funded by a Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS program grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, a donation from the University of Utah related to the construction of a baseball stadium at Sunnyside Park, and funding for the City’s vehicle fleet, among other projects. The Council will also receive a presentation about the State Transit Transportation Investment Fund or TTIF and four capital projects receiving TTIF grants, including a multi-use trail on 400 South to better connect Poplar Grove and Downtown, among other projects. For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, December 10, 2024   9.Informational: Review of 2025 Annual Meeting Calendar ~ 4:40 p.m.  15 min. The Council will review the draft 2025 Annual Meeting calendar for the City Council, Redevelopment Agency, and Board of Canvassers. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   Standing Items   10.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair -  - Report of Chair and Vice Chair.    11.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director -  - Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items.    12.Tentative Closed Session -  - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.    CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 14, 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@slc.gov, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. Item B3 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet Policy Analyst DATE:October 19, 2024 RE: MOTION SHEET – Jordan River Fairpark District Rezone & Text Amendment and Development Agreement Petition No PLNPCM2024-00982 MOTION 1 I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future council meeting. MOTION 2 I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future council meeting COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst DATE: November 19, 2024 RE:Jordan River Fairpark District Rezone & Text Amendment and Development Agreement Petition No PLNPCM2024-00982 PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing 1: Nov 12, 2024 Briefing 2: Nov 19, 2024 Set Date: Nov 12, 2024 Public Hearing: Nov 19, 2024 Potential Action: TBD WORK SESSION SUMMARY During the work session the Council discussed the proposed zoning amendment with Planning staff and the applicant. The Council discussed including the following items in the development agreement that would accompany the zoning amendments: Housing minimums include workforce housing and family sized housing. o Make amenities available to all residents in the project area Workforce development / internships Guaranteeing public access to the Jordan River / access in and out of the river Confirm what parts of the riparian corridor applicable to the project area Free expression & inclusivity in public plaza areas Property swap for city owned parcel on east side of the river and the easement on the westside Focus on local contractors participating in the development and construction of the project area The Council directed staff to work with the applicant on the development agreement. Those discussions are still ongoing. Staff anticipates holding a follow-up briefing on the development agreement at the December 3 work session briefing. For the follow-up briefing on November 19, staff is seeking direction from the Council on the following zoning related items. Page | 2 Open Space Requirements Recommendation: A minimum percentage of the project must be designated as open space and accessible to the public. Update: The applicant added that 10% of the district must be “active or passive open space,” but the DA states no open space is required. The applicant has indicated they intend to provide up to 18%, but details are not yet provided. Unclear if this will be accessible to the public. o Does the Council wish to designate a minimum amount of open space in the JRF zoning district and that it be publicly accessible? Design Standards Recommendation: Design standards apply to all buildings facing public streets and the Jordan River. These should include specifications for lighting, entry features, parking garages, and limits on building façade lengths. Update: There has been discussion with the applicant from the start about applying these standards. The stadium can be exempt from these design standards, but they should be applicable to all public streets. Assuming that private streets will be dedicated at a future time, the standards should apply to those public streets after they are dedicated. o Does the Council wish to require design standards for only the publicly facing streets and the Jordan River, or also include them for all the streets in the project area. o With the understanding that the stadium will front the Jordan River, does Council support requiring design standards for buildings that front the river? o Does the Council support exempting stadium uses from the design standards? Building Height The most current JRF draft revised staff’s addition to clarify the FAA regulations to any building over 60’ in height. Staff is concerned with a potential conflict between the FAA regulations and the JRF code and would like the prior draft language added back in. The language includes the following: No building over ’60’ is permitted unless the FAA issues a “determination of no hazard to air navigation” for said building. o Does the Council support the addition of this language to the JRF ordinance? Setback Requirement Recommendation: A maximum setback of 15 feet is required from all streets and publicly accessible open spaces. Update: This condition has not been addressed. Again, this max setback wouldn’t need to apply to the stadium. It is intended for the everyday structure to make sure buildings address the street and site development follows best urban design practices and would reduce the likelihood of street facing surface parking lots o Does the Council wish to establish a maximum setback from all streets and publicly accessible open spaces? If yes, does the Council support exempting stadium uses from this requirement? Page | 3 Building Height and Walkways Midblock Walkways: The PC added a condition that any midblock walkways associated with additional building height shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide. Update: The applicant updated the code to include this as an option for additional building height. In Downtown zones, the walkway width must increase to at least 20 feet for additional height so 15 feet is the bare minimum and doesn’t necessarily reflect the context of the site. Open Space Option: As an alternative to wider walkways, the proposed code allows for building heights above 200 feet, but no specific square footage has been provided. For Downtown, a 500 SF minimum is required, but due to the context of the site, a larger space would be appropriate. Downtown development is all infill so 500 SF is reasonable. o Does the Council wish to establish a minimum midblock walkway width for buildings that go over 200’ in height? If, so, does the Council support 15’ or 20’ in width? o Does the Council support establishing a minimum open space requirement as an option for the applicant to designate in order to go over 200’ in height. If so, does the Council support 500 sf or would the Council like to ask for additional recommendations from Planning staff? Land Uses Light manufacturing, vehicle rental and warehouses don’t meet the stated intent of the district and open up the land to development patterns that do not support mixed-use walkable communities. The applicant has requested a “flex space”, which is not defined in code at this time. Staff is coordinating with the applicant on a potential definition that would work for them and the City. At the time this memo was submitted, that language was not finalized. Staff will have the draft ready in time for the briefing on November 19. o Does the Council support including the proposed “flex-space” definition and use in the zoning ordinance? The public hearing is set for Tuesday, November 19 at 7:00pm. The following information was provided for the November 12 work session ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the City's zoning ordinance by creating a new zoning district known as the JRF District at approximately 1500 West North Temple and bounded by the Jordan River, Redwood Road, North Temple, and Interstate 15. The proposal would rezone approximately 93 acres across 32 parcels into a single zone to support the area's redevelopment. Zoning Map & Text Amendment: The JRF district would allow buildings up to 400 feet tall, with Design Review required for structures over 200 feet. There would be no minimum lot size, width, or setbacks, and at least 10% of the gross development area would be dedicated to open space. Developments would be exempt from meeting the City's general plans. Page | 4 Development Agreement: The proposed Development Agreement addresses access to the Jordan River, open space, roads, and infrastructure improvements and establishes review processes for development applications. Under new state law, an agreement must be reached by December 31, 2024, for expedited land use reviews related to a qualified stadium and related uses. If no agreement is made, the JRF District will not be subject to the City's zoning regulations. The Planning Commission voted 7 to 1 to forward a recommendation of approval with a list of conditions for the Council to consider. See those in the policy questions section below. Council Staff is proposing the Council review the zoning and draft development agreement concepts during the November 12 briefing and hold a follow-up briefing on November 19, the same day as the public hearing. In addition to these zoning regulations, the State statute requires the city complete the following by the end of this year: Amend the North Temple Redevelopment project area boundaries by removing the properties in the Utah Fairpark Area Investment and Restoration District. o That was completed on October 15. Finalize a municipal services contract with the UFAIR board. o The administration is currently working with the UFAIR board on this contract. Vicinity Map From Exhibit A of the Planning Commission Staff Report Policy Questions / Direction Page | 5 Planning Commission Proposed Conditions for Consideration The Council may wish to review the following list of potential conditions forwarded by the Planning Commission and provide policy direction to staff for which items to include in the final documents, whether the zoning amendments or the development agreement. Planning staff will be in attendance and can provide a response to questions the Council may raise during the briefing. 1. The applicant shall continue to work with Public Utilities on the applicability of the Riparian Corridor Overlay. Unless otherwise approved by Public Utilities, the overlay shall remain applicable. 2. Public Utilities Master Plans and Transportation Master Plans remain applicable to the JRF District. 3. The applicant shall follow mitigation measures as dictated in the Airspace Impact Study. 4. A minimum percentage of the entire project must be dedicated as open space and accessible to the public. 5. The Commission recommends that a minimum of 10% of the total housing development be available for rent or sale at a maximum of 80% AMI. 6. Design Standards shall apply to all buildings facing public streets and the Jordan River. The standards shall be updated to include lighting, entry features, parking garage specifications, and limits on building façade lengths. 7. Midblock walkways associated with additional building height shall be a minimum of 15’ wide. 8. A maximum setback of 15 feet shall be provided from all streets and publicly accessible open spaces. 9. The approved site plan created for the JRF District shall be incorporated into the North Temple Boulevard Plan. 10. Concerns raised by the Planning Commission during the October 9, 2024, briefing shall be addressed prior to the City Council adopting the Term Sheet associated with the Development Agreement. This includes: a. Automatically applying the proposed zoning district to lands that the applicant may purchase in the future instead of going through the normal zoning amendment process and the legality of such a provision. b. Vacating an existing city easement as part of the agreement without a guarantee that the easement would be replaced in kind. c. Exempting the property from all provisions of the Riparian Corridor Overlay instead of defining specific provisions of the Riparian Corridor Overlay that could be modified in the agreement. d. Exempting the proposal from all utility improvement plans that apply to the property, which are necessary to locate, increase capacity, and fund needed future upgrades. e. The lack of specific public benefits that would be included in the future development, including affordable housing or contribution to affordable housing funds that could be used in the area, no guarantee of publicly accessible open space. Development Agreement The Term Sheet, which is included in the transmittal letter (pages 21-24) is the basis for the development agreement discussions. The key points are outlined below In addition to the conditions proposed by the Planning Commission, Council staff has summarized a list of items that Council Members have asked if they could be discussed as part of the development agreement. The Council may wish to discuss these items with the applicant during the work session briefing. Page | 6 Include workforce and family sized housing in the project area A minimum amount of open space in the project area o A minimum amount should be green space Public access to the river and river frontage Easement in/out of river in plaza area Free expression in public areas Proposed Term Sheet Development of Property LHM may develop the Property consistent with the MDA and the JRF District, and LHM shall have the full power and exclusive control over the Property. Nothing in the MDA obligates LHM to develop the Property or develop the Property in a particular order or phase. LHM may develop the Property for all uses allowed in the JRF District. Jordan River Access The City is the grantee of that certain Public Recreation Easement Agreement, recorded July 17, 2015, as Entry No. 12094108 with the Salt Lake City Recorder that provides public a trail and access for recreational uses. This easement will be terminated in the MDA and the parties will enter into a memorandum of understanding for replacement access in connection with the MDA. Design Requirements The City shall not impose or enforce any design requirements on buildings, improvements, and structures located within the Property except as described in the JRF District. Open Space Developer intends to build an open space network as depicted in the conceptual Master Plan, which may be revised or relocated through subdivision plats. Except as set forth in the JRF District, the City shall not require Developer to dedicate open space as a condition of development application approval. Roads LHM shall install roadways consistent with a roadway master plan and cross-sections of roadways depicted in the roadway master plan to be attached to the MDA. Current conceptual roadway plans are attached hereto as Exhibit B. The City shall not require LHM to oversize any roadways without providing mutually acceptable reimbursement agreement(s) for any system improvements to the roadways as defined by the impact fees act. The Project may include private roads that will be specified on subdivision plats. Page | 7 Culinary and Sewer Improvements LHM shall install the requisite service and water distribution lines and similar improvements within the Property necessary for the City to provide culinary water and sewer service to a particular phase of development. The City shall not require LHM to install offsite improvements or install infrastructure that provides capacity outside of the Property without providing mutually acceptable reimbursement agreement(s) for any system improvements, as defined by the impact fees act. Stormwater Improvements The City shall account for impervious surface already in existence on private lands as particularly detailed in the Hydrology and Hydraulics Memo, dated July 29, 2024, prepared by CRS Engineers. LHM shall install stormwater improvements consistent with a stormwater improvement plan. The City shall not require LHM to install any stormwater improvements to store or transmit any offsite stormwater without providing mutually acceptable reimbursement agreement(s) for any system improvements, as defined by the impact fees act. Improvement Connections The City shall allow LHM to connect the roadways, culinary, sewer, and stormwater improvements to the City’s existing infrastructure in the areas identified on the applicable utility plans, which will be attached to the MDA. Installation of Improvements LHM may utilize public infrastructure districts, or similar districts, to construct the roads, water, sewer, and stormwater improvements contemplated by the MDA. LHM shall construct all improvements in compliance with the City’s laws in effect on the MDA’s effective date. Development Applications Pursuant to Utah Code § 11-70-206(3)(b)(ii)(A), the City shall provide an expedited process for the review and approval of development applications. All development applications for subdivisions or site plan approval shall be approved by the City’s staff. The City shall process all subdivision applications (even non- residential applications) consistent with the timing requirements described in Utah Code §§ 10-9a-604.1 and 10-9a-604.2. The City shall expedite the approval of all site plan application and take action thereon within 10 business days of receiving a complete application, and within 5 business days of Page | 8 receiving revisions thereto after an initial determination is made at no additional fee. LHM may request that the City outsource the review of any development application. LHM will pay the actual hourly review cost incurred by the City for such outsourced services. Conditional Uses The City shall promptly process conditional use permits in accordance with State law and the City’s laws in effect on the MDA’s effective date. No conditional use permit application shall be subject to more than one public hearing without the express written consent of LHM. Disputes If a dispute arises with respect to any development applications, LHM and the City shall meet and confer on the issue within 15 days a denial. LHM and the City can also mutually agree to mediate the issue. Annexations If LHM, or its affiliated entities, acquires property that is located within or annexed into the UFAIR District, the LHM may annex said acquired property into the MDA and have the JRF District applied to such annexed land. Assignment and Transfer LHM may assign, transfer, or convey the entire Property or portions thereof to a subsequent owner and may transfer any of the rights and obligations under the MDA in connection with such transfer. If such transfer occurs and LHM intends to convey its rights under the MDA with such transfer, then LHM shall execute and deliver a transfer acknowledgment to the City. LHM may reserve any right to receive reimbursement under the MDA, or separate reimbursement agreement(s) from the City regardless of whether LHM transfers its remaining rights under the MDA. Additional Information The transmittal letter outlines the following key points of the proposed zoning ordinance. The transmittal letter outlines the following key points of the proposed. zoning ordinance. Page | 9 Minimum Lot Area, Width, Yard Standards o No minimum lot areas, lot widths, or setbacks required in the JRF District. Open Space o The proposed code language states an open space plan will be created and will include at least 10% of the gross development area. Building Height o Maximum height is 400 feet. Anything over 200 feet is required to go through the Design Review process. o Buildings in the D-1 and D4 zoning districts must also go through the Design Review process for heights above 200 feet. FAA Regulations & Airspace Impact Study o No building over 200 feet is permitted unless the developer consults with the FAA regarding compliance with 14 CFR Part 77.9 o Buildings over 60 feet in height must be designed to avoid electrical interference, lighting and glare, impairing pilot visibility, and landing or maneuvering conflicts. Land Uses o Planning staff is still working with the applicant to update the land use table to remove uses that are not compatible with the proposed zoning’s goals and vision. The applicant has not submitted an update since the Planning Commission hearing on October 23, 2024. Design Standards o The proposed JRF District includes two sets of Design Standards: Internal buildings and street frontages. Structures along Redwood Road and North Temple. o The applicant is seeking substantial design flexibility due to the site's unique characteristics. o Currently, the only requirements for buildings along privately owned streets are limited to screening mechanical equipment and providing street trees, which are already mandated by code and do not speak to site or street facing building design in any way. o Buildings with frontage along Redwood Road and North Temple call for additional design standards, such as ground floor activation, durable materials, and minimum glass percentages. o Both Planning staff and the Planning Commission recommend adding more design standards that address street facing building façade length, lighting, entry features, and parking garage specifications. Signage o The same standards as the D-1 Central Business District and D-4 Secondary Central Business District would apply to the district. o Includes an increased allowance within 1000 linear feet of the arena to allow the same sign types as the new Sports Arena and Convention Center Sign Overlay. o Include additional private directional and wayfinding signs to communicate the district’s unique identity. o Includes one “public assembly facility sign” as allowed by U.C.A. 72-7-504.5 and signage not visible or directed to public rights of way will not be regulated. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE:November 19, 2024 RE: Zoning Map Amendment at 333 West 700 South PLNPCM2023-00923 The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for a portion of the approximately half acre parcel at 333 West 700 South in Council District Four. The property is currently “split-zoned” with approximately 0.37 acres zoned CG (General Commercial) and the remaining 0.14 acres zoned D-2 (Downtown Support). The request is to rezone the CG portion to D-2, so the entire parcel is within one zoning designation, indicated in the following image. Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division No development plans have been submitted to date, but potential future development will be simplified with one zoning designation for the property. An art studio, and a business that designs and fabricates museum exhibits currently occupy the site’s existing building. As shown in the map below, area zoning is primarily D-2 fronting the west side of 300 West, Kilby Court, and portions of 700 South. CG zoning is found on 700 South west of the subject property. FB-UN2 (Form Item Schedule: Briefing: November 19, 2024 Set Date: December 3, 2024 Public Hearing: January 7, 2025 Potential Action: TBD Page | 3 Based Urban Neighborhood) is to the south and east of the property. The Fleet Block is located on the block to the south. Area zoning map with subject parcel highlighted in blue. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at its February 14, 2024 meeting and held a public hearing at which no one spoke. Planning staff recommended and the Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the Council. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to ask the applicant if housing is planned for the site. If so, would they be willing to include any affordable housing in potential future projects on the subject site and enter into a development agreement pertaining to affordable housing units? 2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration how the Affordable Housing Incentives may impact this petition or development potential on the property. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property. No formal site plan has been submitted to the City nor is it within the scope of the Council’s authority to review the plans. Because zoning of a property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should be considered on the merits of Page | 4 changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified three key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 3-6 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1 – Compliance with City Goals, Policies, and General Plans Planning staff found that the proposed zoning map amendment supports several initiatives in Plan Salt Lake (2015) including Growth, Housing, Transportation & Mobility, Air Quality, and Beautiful City. In addition, the (2016) Downtown Plan calls for more residential development in this portion of the Granary District, though as noted above, no development plans have been submitted to date. Consideration 2 – CG vs. D-2 Zoning District Comparison As previously mentioned, and shown in the zoning map above, area zoning is primarily CG and D-2. Both allow for mid-rise development consistent with the Downtown Plan. Attachment D (pages 18-21) of the Planning Commission staff report includes a table comparing the zoning districts. A portion of the table is included below. For additional information please see the staff report. CG (Current)D-2 (Proposed) Maximum Building Height 75 feet (up to 105 feet with design review and outdoor usable space) 65 feet (up to 120 feet with design review) Minimum Lot Size 10,000 square feet None Minimum Lot Width 60 feet None Minimum Front Yard 5 feet None Minimum Rear Yard 10 feet None Landscape Yard 5 feet 10 feet (for areas not occupied by a structure) Design Standards Durable Building Materials: ground floor 70%80% Durable Building Materials: upper floors -50% Glass: upper floors 25%50% Reflective Glass: upper floors 40%50% Lighting: exterior -X Page | 5 Screening of Mechanical Equipment -X Parking garages or structures -X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent buildings -X Horizontal articulation -X Parking Minimum and maximum off-street parking General Context Urban Center Context Parking location and setbacks Parking prohibited between lot line and building. Parking prohibited between lot line and building. Surface parking must be located behind the principal structure. Consideration 3 – Neighborhood Analysis Planning staff reviewed the property and proposed zoning map amendment by considering proximity to current and planned amenities, infrastructure, and the historic district. The property is close to the downtown central business district and area amenities such as Pioneer Park, TRAX station, main library, Gateway, and Delta Center. Nearby potential future amenities include the Green Loop project, Fleet Block, and possible TRAX line extensions. It is not anticipated that future development at the site would result in significant additional demand for infrastructure, though proposals will be reviewed to determine if upgrades are needed. The property owners and developers would be required to upgrade offsite utilities if needed to ensure capacity is sufficient to meet needs. The property is within the Salt Lake City Warehouse National Historic District which does not require preserving the building as a local historic district might. The National Register of Historic Places classified the building as non-contributing, meaning it does not add to the historic significance of the district. Analysis of Standards Attachment E (pages 22-24) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. Factor Finding Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of Complies Page | 5 the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties Complies Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Complies The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including, but not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and refuse collection. Some City public facilities and services may need to be upgraded and improved if the density changes or if land use changes to a more intense use. City Department Review During City review of the petitions, no responding departments or divisions expressed concerns with the proposal but stated additional review and permits would be required if the property is developed. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • November 21, 2023-Petition for zoning map amendment received by Planning Division. • November 29, 2023-Petition assigned to Andy Hulka, Principal Planner. • July 3, 2023- o Notice sent to Granary District Alliance, Ballpark Community Council, and Downtown Community Council. o Early notification sent to residents and property owners within 300 feet of the project site. • November 2023-January 2024-Online open house hosted to solicit public comments on the proposal. • February 2, 2024- o Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing posted on the property and mailed to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject properties. o Notice of public hearing posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning Division listserv. • February 14, 2024- Planning Commission public hearing. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning map amendment. • February 29, 2024-Ordinance requested from City Attorney’s Office. Page | 6 • March 11, 2024-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • March 26, 2024-Transmittal received in City Council Office. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE:November 19, 2024 RE: 238 South Concord Street and 1255 West Pierpont Avenue Zoning Map Amendment PLNPCM2024-00389 The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for abutting properties at 238 South Concord Street and 1255 West Pierpont Avenue in City Council District Two from their current R-1/5,000 (single-family residential) zoning to RMF-30 (low-density multi-family residential). Combined, the properties total approximately 0.25 acres. A single-family home is on the Concord Street parcel which the owners stated they would like to retain. However, the home’s foundation was damaged in the 2020 earthquake and repairs may be cost prohibitive. In that case, the home would be removed as part of the site redevelopment. The Pierpont Avenue parcel is vacant. This proposed zoning map amendment was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its August 14, 2024 meeting and a public hearing was held at which no one spoke. Planning staff recommended and the Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. As shown in the map below, area zoning is R-1/5,000 and predominantly single-family homes, though there are several legal, non-conforming multi-family uses in the vicinity with R-1/5,000 zoning. Item Schedule: Briefing: November 19, 2024 Set Date: December 3, 2024 Public Hearing: January 7, 2025 Potential Action: TBD Page | 2 Area zoning map with the subject parcels outlined in blue. Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTION 1. The Council may wish to ask the applicant what the anticipated selling price of proposed units at this site would be, depending on dwelling type. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Amending the zoning map as requested would increase development potential of the properties. Under current R-1/5,000 zoning, a single-family home and a detached accessory dwelling unit could be built on Page | 3 each of the subject parcels. The applicant’s stated objective is to construct five to seven family-sized for sale units on the property. Smaller minimum lot sizes allowed under the proposed RMF-30 zoning would accommodate a modest density increase and provide options for additional housing types such as attached single-family, cottage, and tiny homes. The subject zoning map amendment petition was deemed complete before the City Council adopted the community benefit policy on March 5, 2024, so the petition is not subject to the new ordinance. The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property. No formal site plan has been submitted to the City nor is it within the scope of the Council’s authority to review the plans. Because zoning of a property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should be considered on the merits of changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified three key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 3-7 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1 – How the Proposal Helps Implement City Goals & Policies Identified in Adopted Plans Planning staff reviewed how the proposal aligns with Plan Salt Lake and the Westside Master Plan. They found that the proposed zoning map amendment supports initiatives in the plans that call for promoting infill and redevelopment of underutilized land, increasing the number of medium-density housing types and options, and enabling moderate density increases within existing neighborhoods, among others. Consideration 2 – Neighborhood Context When Interstate-80 was constructed, it divided neighborhoods, including Poplar Grove. Pierpont Avenue was built parallel to the interstate, but no homes front on the street, and it appears to be a frontage road. The applicant provided photographs showing broken vehicle windows, drug paraphernalia, and arson on the land between the freeway and Pierpont Avenue. Their intent is to create a development that increases activity on the street, and hopefully reduces unwanted activity. Smaller lot sizes noted above would allow more housing units to front Pierpont Avenue than could be built under the current zone. The nearby neighborhood node at 400 South and Concord Street provides access to grocery stores, a restaurant, auto repair, and a laundromat that serve the surrounding community. In addition, the subject properties are within walking distance of Sherwood Park, the Jordan River trail, Franklin Elementary School, and the Lied Boys and Girls Club. Planning staff stated, “The small-scale nature of the RMF-30 district would allow a development that fits within the existing fabric of the community while providing more diverse housing options for families.” Consideration 3 – Development Potential Comparison R-1/5,000 vs RMF-30 As noted above, the main difference between the current and proposed zones is allowed use. With smaller minimum lot sizes, a variety of housing types including tiny homes, twin homes, single-family attached, and multi-family dwellings are permitted within RMF-30. As mentioned above, R-1/5,000 zoning would allow a single-family home with a detached accessory dwelling unit on each parcel for a total of four units. Design standards in the RMF-30 zoning district help ensure that new development is a similar scale and compatible with existing the current low-density development pattern in the neighborhood. Attachment D (pages 47-49) of the Planning Commission staff report includes a table comparing the Page | 5 zoning districts. It is replicated below for convenience. R-1/5,000 (Current)RMF-30 (Proposed) Maximum Building Height 28 feet 16 feet for tiny houses. 30 feet for all other structures. Minimum Lot Size 5,000 square feet 1,500 square feet per unit for cottages and tiny houses. 2,000 square feet per unit for other residential uses. 5,000 square feet per unit for non-residential uses. Maximum Lot Size 7,500 square feet No maximum Lot Width Minimum 50 feet No minimum Lot Width Maximum No maximum 110 feet Minimum Front Yard Average of block face or 20 feet. Average of block face or 20 feet. Minimum Corner Side Yard 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Interior Side Yard Four feet on one side, and 10 feet on the other. Single and two-family: four feet on one side, and 10 feet on the other. Row houses: four feet. Sideways row houses: six feet on one side, and 10 feet on the other. Cottages and tiny homes: four feet. Multi-family structures: 10 feet. Minimum Rear Yard 25% of lot depth or 20 feet.20% of lot depth, not to exceed 25 feet. Maximum Dwelling Units Per Form -Eight multi-family units. Eight cottage units (per development) Page | 5 Six row homes. Landscape Yard -Front and corner side yards. Landscape Buffers -10 feet for multi-family, row house, and non-residential uses. Design Standards Building Materials: Ground Floor -50% Building Materials: Upper Floors -50% Glass: Ground Floor -20% Glass: Upper Floors -15% Building Entrances -X Blank Wall: Maximum Length -15 feet Screening of Mechanical Equipment -X Screening of Service Areas -X Entry Features -X Analysis of Standards Attachment E (pages 50-52) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. Factor Finding Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Complies Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties Complies Page | 6 Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Complies The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including, but not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and refuse collection. Complies City Department Review During City review of the petitions, no responding departments or divisions expressed concerns with the proposal but stated additional review, permits, and utility upgrades would be required if the property is developed. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • April 3, 2024 – Application for zoning map amendment received by Planning Division. • April 18, 2024 – Petition assigned to Olivia Cvetko, Principal Planner. • April 23, 2024 – o 45-day notice sent to recognized community organizations. o Early notification announcement sent to residents and property owners within 300 feet of the project site. • April 24, 2024 – Applicant presented the proposal to the Poplar Grove Community Council. No comments or concerns were voiced by attendees. The community council is supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment. • April 29, 2024 – The proposal was posted for an online open house. • June 18, 2024 – Public hearing notice posted on property. • July 31, 2024 – o Public hearing notice mailed and posted on City and State websites, and Planning Division listserv. o Public hearing notice mailed. • August 14, 2024 – The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and held a public hearing. The Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation of approval as proposed. • August 27, 2024 – Ordinance requested from City Attorney’s Office. • September 11, 2024 – Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • October 31, 2024 – Transmittal received in City Council Office. Item F3 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Austin Kimmel Public Policy Analyst DATE:November 19, 2024 RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO GK FOLKS FOUNDATION, AT 1506 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE I move that the Council adopt the ordinance approving a $250,000 loan for GK Folks Foundation from the Economic Development Loan Fund. MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT I move that the Council not adopt the ordinance, and proceed to the next agenda item. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Austin Kimmel Public Policy Analyst DATE:November 19, 2024 RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO GK FOLKS FOUNDATION, AT 1506 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will consider approving a loan from the City’s Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) to a non- profit organization called GK Folks Foundation, which provides mental health, educational, and entrepreneurial resources for African immigrants and refugees, at 1506 South Redwood Road. The City’s Economic Development Loan Committee recommends the Council approve a $250,000 loan at a 9.50% fixed interest rate over seven years. This loan will assist in the creation of two jobs in the next year and the retention of one existing job. Additionally, funds will pay for renovation, working capital, equipment, furniture and fixtures, and will help fund the creation of a community events center for the African immigrant and refugee community. The interest rate reflects the 8.50% prime rate at the time of the application (March 1, 2024) plus the standard EDLF four percentage points. The project did qualify for a three percentage-point reduction based on location within a priority area (West of I-15), being owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual, and sustainability (see section B below). Council staff reminder: EDLF loans are now scheduled for a vote on the same day as the briefing, so this is scheduled for action on the November 19 formal meeting agenda. Goal of the briefing: Consider a potential $250,000 loan from the Economic Development Loan Fund to a non-profit organization called GK Folks Foundation. ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Item Schedule: Briefing: November 19, 2024 Public Hearing: N/A Potential Action: November 19, 2024 Page | 3 A.Interest Rates. For context, the nationwide median rates for urban small business commercial and industrial loans in the second quarter of 2024 (the most recent data available) were 7.77% for fixed-rate loans at and 8.88% for variable rate loans, according to the most recent U.S. Federal Reserve Small Business Lending Survey.i In the second quarter of 2022, these rates were 4.50% and 5.55% respectively. Interest rates for EDLF loans consider an assessment of the risk level of different applicants, among other factors, and include potential interest rate reductions. Interest rates have ranged from 7.25% for nearly all 2022 EDLF loans to an average of 9.55% in 2023 and 2024. B.Interest Rate Reductions. The bases for potential reductions are as follows: 1.Location within a priority area: RDA Project Area; Opportunity Zone; West of I-15; or Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP, previously known as Façade Improvement) target area. 2.Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individuals (SEDI)-Owned Businesses: 51% of the business is owned by at least one SEDI individual. 3.Low Income Business Owner: Income does not exceed 80% of Salt Lake County average median income (AMI) as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 4.Sustainability: Either, a) Membership in SLC Green’s E2 Business Program; or b) Loan proceeds will be used for the purchase of electric vehicles, electric vehicle charging stations and infrastructure, renewable energy including but not limited to wind and solar, heat pumps, high efficiency equipment, and/or energy efficiency. The interest rate reductions applied to this application are detailed below: GK Folks Foundation 8.50% prime rate + 4% ELDF charge – 1% for location within a priority area – 1% for owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual – 1% for sustainability ___________________________ 9.50% final interest rate C.Program. The EDLF is administered by the Department of Economic Development, which is charged with maintaining the corpus of the EDLF in a manner sufficient to perpetuate the program's goals. Each loan application is pre-screened, and an underwriting analysis and economic impact statement are completed before an application may be recommended for Loan Committee (see below) review. Information on successful applications is transmitted to the Council to consider for final approval. D.Available balance and amount of outstanding loans. The Department reported that the Fund’s available balance was approximately $8,200,000 on September 30, 2024, and outstanding loans totaled $3,932,437 on October 1. E.EDLF Committee Membership. The Department of Economic Development lists nine members of the EDLF Committee as follows: City Employees Community Volunteers 1. Finance Director, Community and Neighborhoods Department 2. Salt Lake City Business Advisory Board (BAB) member Page | 4 3. Representative of the Mayor’s Office 4. Banker 5. Salt Lake City employee at large 6. Community lender 7. Representative of the Division of Housing Stability 8. Business mentor 9. Director, Department of Economic Development 10. i POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to have a policy discussion with the Administration about interest rates charged by the City from this and other loan funds and whether it makes sense to reevaluate how interest rates are determined for lenders, especially since the City typically offers loans as a lender-of-last-resort. 2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether the EDLF Committee considered any other unique information about this business that would help Council Members evaluate how this application compares to others. For example, are risk factors evaluated for each company, like outstanding loans, years in business, etc.? 3.What outreach does the Department do to ensure a diverse pool of businesses successfully applies to the EDLF? Are applications from diverse owners, particularly those whose businesses are located on the Westside, offered additional support through the application process? Does EDLF staff have ideas for improving access that would benefit from program changes or additional funding? 4. The Council may wish to request a more general update on EDLF use and processes. This could include the number of applications, review criteria used, loan program goals, etc. i Source: Small Business Lending Survey, New Small Business Lending Declines as Credit Standards Continue to Tighten. Consulted on October 29, 2024, at https://www.kansascityfed.org/surveys/small-business-lending- survey/new-small-business-lending-declines-as-credit-standards-continue-to-tighten/. Item F2 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Austin Kimmel Public Policy Analyst DATE:November 19, 2024 RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO HK BREWING COLLECTIVE, LLC, AT 370 WEST ASPEN AVENUE MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE I move that the Council adopt the ordinance approving a $250,000 loan for HK Brewing Collective, LLC from the Economic Development Loan Fund. MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT I move that the Council not adopt the ordinance, and proceed to the next agenda item. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Austin Kimmel Public Policy Analyst DATE:November 19, 2024 RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO HK BREWING COLLECTIVE, LLC, AT 370 WEST ASPEN AVENUE ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will consider approving a loan from the City’s Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) to a business called HK Brewing Collective, LLC, at 370 West Aspen Avenue. HK Brewing Collective, LLC is a business which offers non-alcoholic kombucha, through its brand Han’s Kombucha, and a bar and taproom. The business recently signed a contract with United Natural Foods (UNFI), a national wholesale distributor of health and specialty foods. The City’s Economic Development Loan Committee recommends the Council approve a $250,000 loan at an 8.50% fixed interest rate over seven years. This loan will assist in the creation of 10 new jobs in the next year and the retention of 20 existing jobs. Funds will pay for equipment purchases, hiring staff, and working capital. The interest rate reflects the 8.50% prime rate at the time of the application (February 20, 2024) plus the standard EDLF four percentage points. The project did qualify for a four percentage-point reduction based on location within a priority area (State Street RDA Project Area), being owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual, with low income, and sustainability (see section B below). Council staff reminder: EDLF loans are now scheduled for a vote on the same day as the briefing, so this is scheduled for action on the November 19 formal meeting agenda. Goal of the briefing: Consider a potential $250,000 loan from the Economic Development Loan Fund to a business called HK Brewing Collective, LLC. Item Schedule: Briefing: November 19, 2024 Public Hearing: N/A Potential Action: November 19, 2024 Page | 3 ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION A.Interest Rates. For context, the nationwide median rates for urban small business commercial and industrial loans in the second quarter of 2024 (the most recent data available) were 7.77% for fixed-rate loans at and 8.88% for variable rate loans, according to the most recent U.S. Federal Reserve Small Business Lending Survey.i In the second quarter of 2022, these rates were 4.50% and 5.55% respectively. Interest rates for EDLF loans consider an assessment of the risk level of different applicants, among other factors, and include potential interest rate reductions. Interest rates have ranged from 7.25% for nearly all 2022 EDLF loans to an average of 9.55% in 2023 and 2024. B.Interest Rate Reductions. The bases for potential reductions are as follows: 1.Location within a priority area: RDA Project Area; Opportunity Zone; West of I-15; or Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP, previously known as Façade Improvement) target area. 2.Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individuals (SEDI)-Owned Businesses: 51% of the business is owned by at least one SEDI individual. 3.Low Income Business Owner: Income does not exceed 80% of Salt Lake County average median income (AMI) as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 4.Sustainability: Either, a. Membership in SLC Green’s E2 Business Program; or b. Loan proceeds will be used for the purchase of electric vehicles, electric vehicle charging stations and infrastructure, renewable energy including but not limited to wind and solar, heat pumps, high efficiency equipment, and/or energy efficiency. The interest rate reductions applied to this application are detailed below: HK Brewing Collective, LLC 8.50% prime rate + 4% ELDF charge – 1% for location within a priority area – 1% for owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual – 1% for low income – 1% for sustainability ___________________________ 8.50% final interest rate C.Program. The EDLF is administered by the Department of Economic Development, which is charged with maintaining the corpus of the EDLF in a manner sufficient to perpetuate the program's goals. Each loan application is pre-screened, and an underwriting analysis and economic impact statement are completed before an application may be recommended for Loan Committee (see below) review. Information on successful applications is transmitted to the Council to consider for final approval. D.Available balance and amount of outstanding loans. The Department reported that the Fund’s available balance was approximately $8,200,000 on September 30, 2024, and outstanding loans totaled $3,932,437 on October 1. E.EDLF Committee Membership. The Department of Economic Development lists nine members of the EDLF Committee as follows: City Employees Community Volunteers Page | 4 1. Finance Director, Community and Neighborhoods Department 2. Salt Lake City Business Advisory Board (BAB) member 3. Representative of the Mayor’s Office 4. Banker 5. Salt Lake City employee at large 6. Community lender 7. Representative of the Division of Housing Stability 8. Business mentor 9. Director, Department of Economic Development 10. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to have a policy discussion with the Administration about interest rates charged by the City from this and other loan funds and whether it makes sense to reevaluate how interest rates are determined for lenders, especially since the City typically offers loans as a lender-of-last-resort. 2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether the EDLF Committee considered any other unique information about this business that would help Council Members evaluate how this application compares to others. For example, are risk factors evaluated for each company, like outstanding loans, years in business, etc.? 3.What outreach does the Department do to ensure a diverse pool of businesses successfully applies to the EDLF? Are applications from diverse owners, particularly those whose businesses are located on the Westside, offered additional support through the application process? Does EDLF staff have ideas for improving access that would benefit from program changes or additional funding? 4. The Council may wish to request a more general update on EDLF use and processes. This could include the number of applications, review criteria used, loan program goals, etc. i i Source: Small Business Lending Survey, New Small Business Lending Declines as Credit Standards Continue to Tighten. Consulted on October 29, 2024, at https://www.kansascityfed.org/surveys/small-business-lending- survey/new-small-business-lending-declines-as-credit-standards-continue-to-tighten/. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY25 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards Budget and Policy Analysts DATE: November 19, 2024 RE: Budget Amendment Number 2 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget Amendment Number Two includes 31 proposed amendments with $54,211,296 in revenues and $73,124,104 in expenditures of which $3,477,524 is from General Fund Balance. The amendments are across seven funds with twelve proposed general fund positions for new police officers and one position (City Prosecutor) being removed that was previously added in Budget Amendment #1. Most expenses in this budget amendment are housekeeping items found in section D. One of these funds will be a new fund associated with the Downtown Capital City Revitalization Zone 0.5% sales tax. The amendments also include six new initiatives in section A and additional housekeeping and grant related items, and one donation related item. There are also four Council-added items. Fund Balance If all the items are adopted as proposed, including all the Council-added items, then the General Fund Balance would be projected at 13.9% which is $4,627,100 above the 13% minimum target. Tracking New Ongoing General Fund Costs for the Next Annual Budget The table of potential new ongoing General Fund costs for the FY2026 annual budget is available as Attachment 1 at the end of this document. If all the items in Budget Amendment #2 are adopted as proposed by the Administration, then the FY2026 annual budget could have $1,704,055 of new ongoing costs. The total new ongoing costs from Budget Amendments 1 through 2 would be $6,207,570. Note that of the total cost, $4.1 million would be needed if the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation grant is not available for FY2026. Straw Poll Requests The Administration is requesting straw polls for three items: Item A-3: FY 24-25 COPS Hiring Program Grant to allow early job advertising to help ensure recruits can participate in the January training academy and for the Fleet Division to begin paperwork to meet the ordering window for purchasing vehicles. There is no closing date, however, the manufacturer will stop accepting orders once available builds are filled which is unpredictable. Item A-4: FY 24-25 Vehicles, Equipment, and Related Police Officer Costs Not Covered by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant, a straw poll is being requested for this item to help meet the ordering window for purchasing vehicles. There is no closing date, however, the manufacturer will stop accepting orders once available builds are filled which is unpredictable. Item I-2: Request to Reappropriate Funds for Reconnecting Communities Federal Grant for Local Match ($1.24 Million – Misc. Grants Fund). These funds were previously appropriated but lapsed to Fund Balance because the contract wasn’t ready to encumber the funds. A straw poll would ensure the contract can be finalized prior to the end of the calendar year. Project Timeline: 1st Briefing: November 19, 2024 2nd Briefing & Public Hearing: Dec. 3, 2024 Potential Adoption Vote: December 10, 2024 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: No adjustments to the revenue budget are anticipated at this time. Fund Balance Chart The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. Fund balance has been updated to include proposed changes for BA#1. Note that some Council-added items are proposed to use more from Fund Balance that shown in the table below. FUND BALANCE CHART Based on those projections adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 14.29%. The additional Council-added items would result in a Fund Balance projected to be at 13.9%. The proposal includes nineteen initiatives for Council review. A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council. The budget opening is separated in eight different categories: A.New Budget Items B.Grants for Existing Staff Resources C.Grants for New Staff Resources D.Housekeeping Items E.Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources F.Donations G.Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards I.Council Added Items PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing Vacancy Report (193 Vacant Positions) The Finance Department provided a vacancy report dated October 25, 2024 which is summarized in the table to the right. This is a snapshot in time of current full-time positions that are unfilled by department. The report found 193 vacant positions in the City. This report excludes several types of positions if they are grant funded, seasonal or part-time, and some FTEs in the 911, Fire, and Police Departments that are authorized but unfunded to help with turnover (such as hiring entry level positions shortly before expected retirements / terminations). This report only reflects the current fiscal year so covering the period of July 1 – October 25. It does not reflect positions that have been vacant across multiple fiscal years. During the annual budget the Council requested that the Administration include vacancy analyses as part of the hybrid zero-based budgeting / program-based budgeting effort. Impact Fee Unallocated “Available to Spend” Balances and Refund Tracking Updated balances of impact fees are anticipated to be available later this month. There is one item (D-5) in this budget amendment that would rescope transportation impact fees from one project to another. There are no proposed new appropriations of impact fees at the time of publishing this staff report. Section A: New Items Note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the transmittal for some of these items. A-1: Purchase Additional City Fleet Vehicles ($3.9 Million one-time from the Fund Balance) The Administration is requesting $3.9 million of one-time previously appropriated but unspent Fleet funding for the purchase of vehicles as follows: Department Current Acquire & Capital Cost Number Of Assets CED $147,980.46 4 Fire $1,900,000.00 1 Police $464,625.75 5 Streets $1,381,834.61 5 Grand Total $3,894,440.82 15 If this item is approved by the Council, the Administration estimates the amount remaining in the Fleet Fund will be $1.5 million, which is historically much lower than previous years. In response to the question as to whether Fleet has a new policy not to maintain a fund balance, Fleet Administration indicated the following: “ Fleet's budget is divided into two funds, Maintenance and Replacement. Internal service funds, in this case Fleet's Maintenance Fund, should never carry a large fund balance as it is an internal operation for departments in the City. The Fleet "new vehicle fund" (aka replacement fund) should carry a minimal fund balance.” A-2: Enhanced Security Improvements at the Justice Court ($200,000 from General Fund Balance then ongoing) In August of 2024, the Justice Court Administration received a Vulnerability Assessment Report which evaluated the Court’s security both inside and outside the Court building. The Administration is requesting $200,000 in ongoing funding for security improvements at the Justice Court. The Court may need to make future funding requests to implement other recommendations but may also satisfy those needs through the Department of Public Service Safety and Security via a CIP application. This budget amendment request addresses the primary need of the Court at this time, according to the report. Policy Question: Potential Efficiencies by Combining Security between City Facilities – Council Members may wish to ask the Administration whether efficiencies could be gained by combining Justice Court security efforts with City & County Building and Library Plaza security. A-3: Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS Hiring Grant from the U.S. Department of Justice for Two New Sergeants and 10 New Police Officers ($1 Million from Nondepartmental Holding Account and $617,673 from General Fund Balance of which $689,953 is ongoing) This item is related to item E-6 later in the staff report which is the budget step to accept the $1.5 million grant from the DOJ. A-3 is the required local match from the City’s General Fund. The City was awarded $1.5 million from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS hiring grant. It partially funds 12 new police officer FTEs that will form two squads dedicated to the Jordan River Trail and surrounding neighborhoods. The grant requires the City to maintain employment of the new police officers for at least 12 months after the 36 months that the grant helps pay for. Historically, the City has successfully applied for and received COPS hiring grants multiple times and has retained the officers beyond the required four-years. Over the four-year term, the grant provides $1.5 million and the General Fund will need to budget $5,480,115. The table below breakout these estimated costs by fiscal year. When the grant term ends, $2,071,325 is the fully loaded estimated annual cost for the General Fund to continue employing the 12 new police officer FTEs. In the annual budget, the Council created a $1 million holding account in Nondepartmental for TBD Jordan River trail service level improvements. The funds were intentionally left flexible to respond to different needs along the river and adjacent trail. The Administration is proposing to use the full $1 million to help meet the required $1,617,673 local matching funds for the COPS hiring grant. The remaining $617,673 would come from General Fund Balance. This item would approve ongoing costs that would be covered by the General Fund this fiscal year for: $383,228 for the local match of salaries and benefits, $306,725 for equipment and supplies, and $45,720 for 12 body cameras and associated software licenses One-time costs covered by the General Fund include: $787,800 transfer to the Fleet Fund for new vehicles, and $94,200 transfer to the IMS Fund for computers, software, mobile data terminals, and radios Timing of New Jordan River Police Squads and Police Department Staffing Update The Department reports an academy class is scheduled to begin in January. New recruits typically take 10 months to complete the academy and field training. When the 12 new recruits complete training they will be placed in patrol positions and a corresponding 12 experienced patrol officers will be transferred into the new Jordan River police squads. The public could start seeing the newly created squads in October or November next year. The Department is recommending this approach to avoid creating a shortfall in patrol staffing levels. If this item is approved, then the total staffing of police officers would increase to 630 FTEs (not counting 20 authorized but unfunded positions to help reduce turnover fluctuations). This includes 598 police officers paid by the General Fund, and 32 partially or fully covered by grants: 1 for the DEA Metro Narcotics Task Force, 12 from this new COPS hiring grant, and 19 by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant. The Departments reports 12 police officers are currently unavailable due to being on leave and 46 are in training. STRAW POLL REQUEST: The Administration is requesting a straw poll on the $787,800 for new police vehicles so the Fleet Division may initiate paperwork to place the order while the manufacturer is still accepting new orders. The purchase order could not be finalized until the Council formally votes to adopt this budget item. Vehicle manufacturer ordering windows have become less predictable in recent years. Some Council Members have also proposed including early job advertising of the 12 new positions to help ensure the recruits can be included in the January academy instead of waiting for the next scheduled academy in May. Policy Question: Short-term Resource Needs until New Squads are Deployed – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what additional resources could help address public safety concerns along the Jordan River trail until the new squads are deployed in October / November next year? A-4: Vehicles, Equipment, and Related Police Officer Costs Not Covered by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant ($877,832 one-time from General Fund Balance of which $498,692 is ongoing) This is a follow up item from the annual budget that would shift ongoing costs from the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation to the General Fund and provide one-time funding for police officers’ vehicles, equipment, and related costs. The Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant award this year is $2,945,958 which is (- $161,243) less than last year. Four new police officers were added this year bringing the total to 19 police officers funded by the grant. The police officers are dedicated to the geographic area around the Geraldine E. King and Gail Miller homeless resource centers. The grant also funds four civilian FTEs and a subaward to the Volunteers of America or VOA. The grant would need to be approximately $4.1 million next year to fully cover the 23 FTEs, equipment, supplies, and subaward to the VOA. The grant is subject to annual appropriations by the Legislature and changes to the number of eligible municipalities. Non-personnel costs related to the 19 police officers funded by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant are proposed to shift to the General Fund. This shift better aligns eligible costs with reimbursement deadlines under the grant. For example, the City was unable to receive all reimbursable expenses under the grant in recent years because of difficulty aligning vehicle and equipment expenditures with the grant deadline. The smaller grant award is also insufficient to cover the cost of FTEs and all the vehicles and equipment needed by those FTEs. The reduced grant award created a budget shortfall for ongoing costs would be covered by the General Fund: $273,236 for ongoing supplies and equipment, and $225,456 for ongoing police officer salaries One-time costs covered by the General Fund include: $262,600 transfer to the Fleet Fund for vehicles $72,390 for 19 body cameras and associated software licenses $44,150 transfer to the IMS Fund for computers, software, mobile data terminals, and radios FY 24-25 State Homeless Mitigation Grant Officer Costs ($877,832 STRAW POLL REQUEST: The Administration is requesting a straw poll on the $262,600 for new police vehicles so the Fleet Division may initiate paperwork to place the order while the manufacturer is still accepting new orders. The purchase order could not be finalized until the Council formally votes to adopt this budget item. Vehicle manufacturer ordering windows have become less predictable in recent years. A-5: Downtown Capital City Revitalization Zone 0.5% Sales Tax Budget $25,982,860 ongoing in a new dedicated fund) Following the action by City Council to adopt the participation agreement and project area with the City and Smith Entertainment Group, this item is to address the anticipated 0.5% sales and use tax revenue and expense (budget) for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2025. It is anticipated that this action will result in approximately $25,982,860 in revenues for the remainder of the fiscal year, resulting in expenses of $25,982,860. The annual budget estimate is approximately $56,484,479. As the agreement and notice period become finalized, a new Fund will be established and Finance staff will ensure adequate accounting measures to track, report and monitor the Downtown Revitalization Zone Sales Tax. The Council voted to endorse the proposed participation agreement and project area on July 9, 2024, and submitted notice of the Council’s endorsement to the Revitalization Zone Committee on August 30, 2024. The Revitalization Zone Committee approved the endorsed project area and participation agreement on September 17, 2024. The City Council adopted a resolution on October 1, 2024. Per the Participation Agreement, the Administration plans to bring to the Council in a budget opening later this fiscal year a proposal to create the Public Benefit Account for ticket fee revenue and the 1% of sales tax revenues to cover the City's administrative expenses. A-6: 3200 West Complete Street Additions ($100,000 one-time from the Quarter-cent Sales Tax for Transportation Fund Balance) This request would fund a new opportunity to add sidewalks and bike lanes to bridge a gap in the active transportation network, connecting to West Valley City. 3200 West is a city arterial street which crosses under the 201 Freeway. UDOT is replacing the 201 Freeway bridge over 3200 West, which presents an opportunity for changes under the bridge -- a tricky spot for walking and bicycling due to a lack of bike lanes and disjointed sidewalks. This project would improve sidewalks and crosswalks, as well as add bike lanes under the bridge and through the interchange. UDOT's project is scheduled for 2025 construction. UDOT only recently extended the opportunity for these active transportation improvements to be added to the bridge project and has asked the local municipalities (Salt Lake City and West Valley City) to contribute toward adding these safety improvements. Transportation would like to consider using the County 1/4 cent Transportation fund for this request versus using General Fund balance. In the annual budget, the Council appropriated $2 million one-time for the Livable Streets Traffic Calming Program from the Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation Fund Balance (separate from General Fund Balance). The Council expressed an interest to continue annual funding for that program to reach all high need neighborhood zones. It's estimated that there's $1 million remaining unappropriated in the Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation Fund Balance but this is pending confirmation by the annual financial audit in December / January. Alternatively, there is existing complete streets funding from CIP that is eligible to be used for this project. Section D: Housekeeping Items D-1: City Hall Earthquake Repair Insurance Funds Rescope ($3,488,282 rescope in the CIP Fund) In Fiscal Year 2023 $7,252,300 was accepted by FM Global to pre-load funds for earthquake repairs to City Hall. Of this amount, $3,764,018.74 (pending final invoicing) was spent and $3,488,281.26 is remaining. The project is now being closed out and under warranty. The remaining balance has been approved by the insurer to complete multiple repairs to other facilities that have been deferred thus far. Since the earthquake damage was considered a one ‘loss event,’ all the FM Global funding is coming from one so-called ‘bucket.’ Since the City-County Building repairs are complete, this request is to place remaining funds in a holding account for FM Global-approved earthquake repair expenditures. This amount could change as projects are further along. When all repair projects are closed out, the remaining funds will be returned to FM Global. These funds are all insurance proceeds and will not impact the General Fund. The Administration provided the below list of City buildings with eligible expenses from damage caused by the March 2020 earthquake. The damage to these facilities was less critical than to City Hall. Site/Location Anticipated Completion Date Fire Station #8 March 2025 Fire Station #14 December 2025 Pioneer Police Precinct April 2025 Public Lands Administration Building May 2025 Fleet Shop Building April 2025 Police Training Facility June 2025 Jordan Park Maintenance Bldg June 2025 Rose Park Golf Maintenance Shed June 2025 RAC Athletic Complex North Building June 2025 Compliance Building                         212 E 600 S June 2025 234 E 600 S June 2025 Central Business District               240 E 600 S June 2025 Facilities                                               248 E 600 S June 2025 Justice Court Building                          333 S 200 E June 2025 D-2: Fleet Encumbrance Reappropriation ($10,580,117 from Fleet Fund) This is the Fleet encumbrance rollover for vehicles that were committed to with the funds appropriated in Fiscal Year 2024 or earlier, but that have not been received or completed and put into service. A summary of rollover amounts is included below. An additional small amount of prior-year funding was encumbered for software upgrades, a purchase that was also not fully expended by year-end. Fiscal Year 2023 Orders: $2,863,947.37 Fiscal Year 2024 Orders: $6,502,52616 Upfit costs for all listed vehicles: $1,213,643.47 Total Rollover Request: $10,580,117.00. D-3: WITHDRAWN D-4: Landfill Projects ($7 Million one-time in the CIP Fund) The landfill CIP account was funded with $1.5M for various landfill projects that have been ongoing. The funds placed in the account are applied to individual projects and then reimbursed by the County back to the General Fund – which are considered as equal expense and revenue. With the Council approved Environmental Engineer position, projects have been moving along at a much quicker timeline. The now-current project module is for the "South Header and methane collection wells" - for capture of methane gas emitting from the landfill which is then used for energy production. The construction start date has now moved up to Spring '25. This $7M project will need funding secured before going out to bid this winter. D-5: Additional Funding for Kensington Neighborhood Byway (103,182 of CIP funds and $42,833 of transportation impact fees both from a cancelled project) This request is to rescope funds from the existing Appropriation for 1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestrian) and the project for the- 1300 S Bicycle Bypass to construct a different bypass route than was originally envisioned at the time of the original CIP application in fiscal year 2015. The original east-west bypass route was to parallel 1300 South to the north; the east-west Kensington Neighborhood Byway parallels 1300 South to the south. The original northern route became unfeasible after a lengthy design process as UDOT declined to permit a new bicycle/pedestrian crossing of State Street at Edith Avenue (1195 S) or Kelsey Avenue (1180 S) due to close proximity to the 1300 South signalized intersection. A portion of the original appropriation was used to make safety improvements to the TRAX rail crossing at Paxton Avenue, which then connects to existing bikeways on Main St. This leaves two funding sources as outlined below, both dedicated to the 1300 South Bicycle Bypass. The East-West Kensington Neighborhood Bypass runs parallel to 1300 South at approximately 1500 South and will serve as a preferred bicycle route and alternative for those traveling East-West in the Ballpark neighborhood. The other funding source, a federal grant from the Wasatch Front Regional Council, has already been rescoped to fund the Kensington Neighborhood Byway. This request seeks to add the City's portion of the 1300 S Bicycle Bypass to resolve a budget gap in the Kensington project, as UDOT has given its blessing for more significant improvements at State Street and 700 East compared to the budget developed for the original Kensington funding applications. There is also an associated impact fee cost center tied to the original appropriation for 1300 S Bicycle Bypass found in the 1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestrian) for $42,832.69. In consulting with the CIP Finance team, these funds will either need to be used on a project or returned to the Street/Transportation impact fee Fund. The Kensington Neighborhood Byway project has a current budget of $2,472,823. The additional funding proposed in this item would increase the budget to $2,618,838. If this item is approved, then the project’s expanded scope is expected to be fully funded. D-6: Racial Equity in Policing Commission Recommended Trainings for the Police Department ($240,950 one-time from the Nondepartmental Public Safety Reform Holding Account) At the time of publishing this staff report additional information was forthcoming on this item. D-7: Prosecutor’s Office Changes since Budget Amendment #1 ($280,269 back to General Fund Balance; removing City Prosecutor FTE; and Rescope $50,000 in the CIP Fund for Fifth Floor of City Hall feasibility and structural study) This item is in response to a previous item noted on Budget Amendment 1. In Budget Amendment 1 (Item A-1), it was noted that the District Attorney's Office provided the City Attorney's Office notice of intent to termination the interlocal agreement between the city and County. This item was to bring the function and various staff under the City, resulting in termination of the contract effective December 31, 2024. Following ongoing discussions, it was determined that the agreement will remain in place as is for the foreseeable future. As a result, this item is to reverse the budgetary impacts and actions outlined in Budget Amendment 1. It is important to note, however, that two (2) of the positions outlined in BA1 are proposed to remain as new, ongoing FTEs. The two (2) new FTEs are outlined below: (1) Senior City Attorney – Class 39. The anticipated cost for 8 months is $157,635.74 in FY25, or $236,452 annually and; (1) Deputy Director of Administration - City Attorney’s Office – Class 40 (New position). The anticipated cost for 9 months is $186,547 in FY25, or $248,729 annually. Additionally, in BA1, the administration proposed $280,000 be rescoped and transferred to the CIP Fund to lease office space, utilities, tenant improvements, furniture, fixtures, and equipment. Following council discussion, the amount was increased to $472,298. This action is also being reversed, however, $50,000 is to remain in the CIP Fund to conduct a feasibility and structural study for the current City Attorney’s (department) office space. D-8: 911 Department Reclassifying Two Positions (Budget Neutral) The 911 Department is proposing to reclassify an existing appointed executive assistant at pay grade 26 to a merit Business System Analyst at pay grade 28. The change is intended to increase the technical expertise within the Department and improve collaboration with IMS. The second reclassification is an existing appointed deputy director at pay grade 32 to a merit assistant director at pay grade 31. There are currently four merit assistant directors in the 911 Director which would increase to five under this proposal. The assistant directors have been described as like division directors which are typically appointed. There would no longer be a deputy director position in the 911 Department. A job description for the assistant director position is available as Attachment 3. Both reclassifications would change appointed positions to merit positions. The Administration included an update to the Appointed Pay Plan in the transmittal that would require Council approval. The net impact of the pay grade changes is estimated to be budget neutral so no additional funding would be needed. Policy Question: No Deputy Director in the 911 Department – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration how the 911 Department would function without a deputy director, especially in stances when the director is unavailable. Over the years, some departments have proposed removing deputy directors and the Council approved it but later the departments returned requesting to restore the deputy director positions. This most recently occurred with the HR department. D-9: University of Utah Donation for Sunnyside Park Improvements ($4,200,000 one-time) The City received a donation from the University of Utah for $4,200,000 for improvements at Sunnyside park (See Initiative F-2). This funding has been received through the Donation fund and will be transferred to the CIP fund to facilitate the improvements planned for Sunnyside park. D-10: Expense Budget Transfer from Non-departmental to the Police Department and Fire Department for Wages ($2,131,513 from Non-departmental; $1,047,521 to the Fire Department and $1,083,992 to the Police Department) As part of the Fiscal Year 2025 Adopted Budget, budget was captured in Non-departmental to account for the additional budget necessary to support increased Police and Fire wages because of updated MOUs. This item is to transfer those funds from Non-departmental to the Police and Fire Department budgets, as follows: General Fund: $1,854,416 Funding Our Future: $277,097 Fire Department: $1,047,521 Police Department: $1,083,992 Staff note: Items E-1 through E-4 are capital projects receiving grants from the State Transit Transportation Investment Fund or TTIF. The City Transportation Division provided a presentation about these four projects which is available as Attachment 2. Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources E-1: TTIF 200 South Transit Corridor Project ($1,800,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,800,000 for the purpose of completing the 200 South Transit Corridor project. Project Description: The 200 South Transit Corridor Technology Upgrades will evaluate bus transit operations on 200 South between roughly 600 west and University Street and identify strategies for improvement. The focus of the project will be on improving bus operations through upgrades to intersection controls, which will likely include a combination of transit signal priority (TSP), detection systems, cabinet/controller hardware, fiber optic communication, and connected vehicle (V2X) systems. Salt Lake City has already made significant investments to rebuild the street to establish a Business Access and Transit (BAT) lane and boarding islands; this project follows the initial roadway construction with focus on transit operations and technology upgrades to further enhance the transit capacity and safety of the 200 South Transit Corridor. E-2: TTIF 400 South Multi-Use Trail ($6,356,000,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $6,356,000 for the purpose of completing the 400 South multi-use trail. UDOT and SLC are partnering to create a multi-use trail on the south side of 400 South from 900 West to 200 West, including the viaduct bridge over the railroad tracks. The corridor is an important east/west connector and the project aims to maintain current vehicular capacity while establishing a safe dedicated corridor for people walking, biking and rolling. The trail will feature art to enhance the character of the surrounding area and make traveling along the trail an enjoyable experience. E-3: TTIF West Temple Bike Transit Connections ($1,326,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,326,000 for the purpose of completing the West Temple Bike Transit Connections. West Temple Bike Transit Connections-the project will add buffered bike lanes in both directions of West Temple from Market Street to North Temple, improve pedestrian crossings by adding medians and/or bulb outs and HAWK signals at the Market Street, Pierpont Street, and 150 South crosswalks, and improve bus stops including bus boarding islands at a new protected intersection at 300 South. E-4: TTIF Westpointe/Jordan Meadows Neighborhood Byway ($900,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $900,00 for the purpose of completing the Westpointe/Jordan Neighborhood Byway. The Westpointe/Jordan Meadows Neighborhood Byway will integrate active transportation infrastructure into the local street network to create a north- south route through the Westpointe and Jordan Meadows neighborhoods that runs west of and parallel to Redwood Road. This project will improve bicycling and walking along this route and increase neighborhood access to the Green Line TRAX and planned SLC Westside Transit Hub. This route will provide access to transit at several points; notably to TRAX on the south end, along the route itself and on 700 North. Also, it will enhance connectivity to the Northwest middle School, Westpointe Park, Escalante Elementary School and Utah State Office complex at 1950 West North Temple. E-5: FY24 COPS Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act ($98,786 from Misc. Grants Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability through a grant award in the amount of $98,786 for the purpose of providing wellness and mental health resources to the police department. Project Description: Salt Lake City will receive a grant under the DOJ through the COPS Office. Salt Lake City will use FY24 LEMHWA funding to support training for the Wellness team, peer mentoring training for Peer support team including a mobile wellness app for employees and their families and accompanying training; and overtime for Peer Support Team to expand services in the department. E-6: FY 24 COPS Hiring Program ($1,500,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) Staff note: This item is related to item A-3 earlier in the staff report which is the budget step to authorize 12 new police officer FTEs on the staffing document and provide $1.6 million from the City's General Fund as the required local match to the $1.5 million COPS hiring grant. This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability through a grant award in the amount of $1,500,000 for the purpose of hiring 12 new officers. Project Description: The Police Department will hire 12 new police officers to facilitate deployment of 12 current officers who will be assigned to newly created squads. The squads will focus on crime reduction, community safety, and expansion of services in areas to include the City’s portion of the Jordan River Trail, as well as City parks and other recreational areas and residential and business areas. Section F: Donations F-1: WITHDRAWN F-2: University of Utah Sunnyside Donation ($4,200,000 from Donations Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City receiving a donation from the University of Utah for $4,200,000 for improvements at Sunnyside park. Per the donation agreement with the University, the University will provide $1.0 million within 30 days of the effective date of the agreement. The remaining balance will be deposited into a third-party escrow account within 30 days of receipt of the City’s notice that it has completed its public engagement process to determine the improvements. Quarterly progress payments will be released to the City from the escrow based on a construction schedule mutually agreed upon by the City and the University. Per the agreement, these funds must be used for the project determined by the public engagement process. The City may not use these funds for deferred maintenance or repairs except as required to accomplish new, renovated, or upgraded amenities and infrastructure. Per the agreement, the City may also use these funds toward mitigating the loss of the softball fields currently in Sunnyside park to other City parks. The funds from this donation will be deposited in the City’s Donations special revenue fund and transferred to a CIP fund to be used for the Project (see Initiative D-10 for CIP Funding). Section G: Grant Consent Agenda No. 4 G-1: Mental Health Services to First Responders ($47,556 from Misc. Grants Fund) Funding to support a year of a comprehensive and data-driven mental health and wellness platform to enhance the mental well-being of its first responders. A platform of this type will provide essential wellness tools for early detection and intervention, including web-accessible peer support and a wellness resource toolkit accessible through iOS and Android-driven applications offering clinically validated wellness sessions and learning modules specifically tailored for first responders, their families, and retirees. This resource will provide first responders with the tools to build resilience and maintain mental wellness. Additionally, this will cover the cost of two mental health trainings for SLC 911 (Help is on the way for Dispatch Training and an Emotion Intelligence training for SLC 911 managers.).This grant is provided by the Utah State Department of Public Safety. The Public Hearing was held June 11 ,2024. G-2: Utah State Board of Education Snack Grant ($6,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) The Division of Youth and Family Services submitted a renewal application for reimbursement to provide nutritious snacks to Youth City participants during summer of 2024. The Public Hearing was held on July 9, 2024. G-3: State of Utah, Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services (BEMS) ($9,642 from Misc. Grants Fund) This is Salt Lake City's annual BEMS grant from the state. Under Utah Code Ann. 53-2d-207, BEMS is allowed to award annual grants to emergency medical services providers from the EMS Per Capita grant funds to assist in providing emergency medical services. The Public Hearing was held March 5,2024. G-4: Emergency Management Performance Grant ($18,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) This is Salt Lake City's annual BEMS grant from the state. Under Utah Code Ann. 53-2d-207, BEMS is allowed to award annual grants to emergency medical services providers from the EMS Per Capita grant funds to assist in providing emergency medical services. The Public Hearing was held June 11, 2024. Section I: Council-Added Items I-1: City Hall Physical Security Improvements Holding Account Release ( On June 26, 2024 the Administration sent a transmittal requesting the Council release $123,133 for two projects described below. In Budget Amendment #5 of FY2023, the Council put $1 million into a CIP Fund holding account for one-time to be determined physical security improvements to City Hall. If the Council approved releasing these funds, then the holding account would have a remaining balance of $586,867. The Council previously approved releasing some funds in January this year:$ $83,733 for Camera System Upgrades (hardware and software): The current camera system in use throughout the City and City Hall, manufactured by Pelco, is outdated and its software license is set to expire at the end of 2024. Due to the outdated technology and expiring license, the cameras and servers they operate on require replacement. The City will be migrating to Milestone's system for use in City Hall. Milestone has already been successfully implemented by the SLC Police Department in the Public Safety Building. Transitioning to Milestone will ensure enhanced security and uniformity across the City infrastructure. $39,400 is needed for Emergency Notification System Upgrades (hardware in three buildings). Emergency Management will be transitioning from the current RAVE emergency notification platform to Titan HST. The Emergency Management Division will cover the subscription cost; however, there is a hardware component associated with this change that needs funding. The necessary hardware will be initially installed at City Hall, Plaza 349, and the Public Safety Building to support this new system. This first phase will inform future deployments of hardware at other buildings. I-2: Request to Reappropriate Funds for Reconnecting Communities Federal Grant for Local Match ($1.24 Million – Funding Our Future’s Fund Balance) This is a reappropriation as the local matching funds for a federal reconnecting communities grant the City was awarded to study and recommend solutions to the east-west transportation divide created by several railroad tracks and Interstate 15. The study has a total budget of $3.74 million. UDOT is acting as the financial administrator for the City. The Federal Highway Administration preferred this arrangement in part because UDOT already has the systems to regularly manage federal transportation funds and meet the compliance requirements. The funding sources are: -$1.97 million from the federal reconnecting communities planning grant -$1.24 million from the General Fund -$500,000 from UTA -$25,000 from the RDA -$5,000 from Public Utilities Staff has communicated to the Administration Council Member interest in submitting federal grant applications for implementation construction funding. Those applications may need to be submitted before the study is finalized which could be in two years. There are limited federal funding opportunities to implement the results of the study but the largest federal grants are scheduled to only be available for two or three more years. Most of these construction grants are authorized by the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Congressional authorization would be needed to extend most of these grants beyond the next two or three years. STRAW POLL: The Council could consider straw polling this item to help ensure the contract can be finalized prior to the end of the calendar year. Policy Question: Request Local Matching Funds in Annual Budget for Construction Grant Applications – The Council may wish to request that the Administration include local matching funds in the next annual budget in anticipation of the City applying for implementation construction grants from the Federal Government. The U.S. Department of Transportation has previously provided guidance that grant applications are more competitive when there are local matching funds and a coalition of supporting organizations. I-3: Ivory University House Student Housing Project ($350,000 from FOF for Year One / FOF Housing Allocation to CAN for Years Two through Five) Council Member Petro has requested the Council’s consideration on this item. The Ivory Foundation has approached the City about contributing towards the Ivory University House, a student housing project they are building adjacent to the University of Utah campus on land owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The City does not currently have a financing tool to facilitate the development of affordable student housing in the manner that the City has financing tools to facilitate general affordable housing, which is why this is coming through a budget amendment request. Additionally, while tax credit programs like LIHTC are available for income-qualified persons on an Area- Median-Income (AMI) basis, no such tool exists to help facilitate affordable student housing. The following are general aspects of the proposal: -25% of the student housing would be set aside for graduates of Salt Lake City school district high schools who qualify for the highest amount of financial aid as determined through the student’s Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). This would guarantee that the family of the student is need based and not just the student. Those families would also likely qualify for many of the other affordable housing developments that the City invests in. -This would serve approximately 150 students per year. -The City would allocate $350,000 per year for 5 years to the project, through the City’s Funding our Future housing allocation for a total of $1.75 million. The initial year would come from Funding our Future fund balance. -The term of the deed restriction on the affordable spaces is proposed to be 30 years in exchange for the City’s investment. -The City would require annual reports including the number of students served. The Administration is still working on details that could be included in a potential contract, should the Council approve this funding. Because it would be a contractual obligation for 5 years, it would be included in Funding our Future budget appropriations for the next 4 budget cycles and would be removed from the budget once the term of the contract is complete. Policy Questions: Long-term City Strategy for Affordable Student Housing – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if it would like to consider a longer-term strategy for the City to use its housing dollars to facilitate affordable student housing for all of the universities and community colleges in Salt Lake City. Council Approval of Final Terms – The Council may wish to make the funding contingent on approval of final terms of the agreement. I-4: PLACEHOLDER - Public Utilities Stabilization Fee Waiver for Instances of Non-use At the time of publishing this staff report additional information was forthcoming on this item. ATTACHMENTS 1. Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing Costs to the General Fund 2. Transit Transportation Investment Fund or TTIF presentation from the City’s Transportation Division on four capital projects receiving TTIF funding 3. 911 Division Assistant Director Job Description ACRONYMS BEMS – Bureau of Emergency Medical Services CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CDBG – Community Development Block Grant CREP – Commission on Racial Equity in Policing CIP – Capital Improvement Program COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services DOJ – Department of Justice FOF – Funding Our Future FTE – Full time Employee / Equivalent FY – Fiscal Year GF – General Fund iOS – I-phone Operating Software IMS – Information Management Services RAVE Alert – Mobile Emergency Notification System UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation ATTACHMENT 1 Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing Costs to the General Fund Council staff has provided the following list of potential new ongoing costs to the General Fund. Many of these are new FTE’s approved during this fiscal year’s budget amendments, noting that each new FTE increases the City’s annual budget costs if positions are added to the staffing document. Note that some items in the table below are partially or fully funded by grants. If a grant continues to be awarded to the City in future years, then there may not be a cost to the General Fund but grant funding is not guaranteed year-over-year. Budget Amendment Item Potential Cost to FY2026 Annual Budget Full Time Employee (FTEs)Notes #1 Item A-1 Attorney’s Office Organizational Structure Change $722,888 3 FTEs: 1 City Prosecutor 1 Senior City Attorney 1 Deputy Director of Administration City Prosecutor $178,278 for 9 months/$237,704 annually Senior City Attorney Class 39 - $157,635.74 for 8 months/$236,454 annually Deputy Director of Administration Class 40 - $186,547 for 9 months or $248,730 annually. At the time of publishing this staff report, the cost to lease office space is unknown. The cost could be more or less than the current budget under the soon to be terminated interlocal agreement with the District Attorney’s Office. #1 Item D-8 $171,910 1 FTE: Capital Asset Planning Financial Analyst IV position Inadvertently left out of the Mayor’s Recommended FY2025 Budget. Position would be dedicated to impact fees compliance tracking and reporting for new state requirements. Impact fees fully reimburse the General Fund for the position’s cost. $2,945,957 grant funding* 4 FTEs: 3 Officer positions 1 Sergeant position *Amount of grant funding needed in order to fully cover the ongoing costs including the new FTEs. #1 Item E-1 Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant FY25 Costs currently paid for by the Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant in FY2024 that might be shifting to the General Fund in FY2025 $662,760 For ongoing costs related to 15 existing FTEs; the grant funds a total of 23 FTEs $662,760 is needed for ongoing equipment for all 15 officers. The Administration is checking whether existing budgets could absorb some of these costs. #2 Item A-2 Enhanced Security at Justice Court $200,000 A security report identified an issue needing to be addressed immediately. Budget Amendment Item Potential Cost to FY2026 Annual Budget Full Time Employee (FTEs)Notes #2 Item A-3 Community Oriented Policing Svcs or COPS Hiring Grant from U.S. Dept. of Justice for 2 new Sergeants & 10 new Officers FY 24-25 $1,285,642 in FY2026 For ongoing costs related to hiring 2 new Sergeant FTEs and 10 new Officers in the Police Dept. Ongoing costs include grant salary match plus vehicles, supplies & equipment. After the 48 month grant period ends, the estimated annual cost to retain the 12 police officers is $2,071,325. #2 Item A-4 Vehicles, Equip- ment & Related Police Officer costs not covered by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant FY24-25 $498,692 is ongoing For ongoing costs related to the hiring of new officers Ongoing costs include ongoing salary increases, supplies, body cameras, vehicles, and computers. #1 & #2 D-7 Prosecutor’s Office Changes since Budget Amendment #1 (-$280,279) back to General Fund Balance 1 FTE Removed City Prosecutor FTE removed Reverses a portion of budgetary impacts & actions outlined in BAM#1, Item A-1. TOTAL $6,207,570 38 total FTEs of which 15 are New FTEs Note that of the total cost, $4.1 million would be needed if the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation grant is not available for FY2026 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING §52 -4-205(1)(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l)(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205(l)(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; §52-4-205(l)(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if 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; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A Closed Meeting may also be held for Attorney-Client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open andPublic Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: _____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b)the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b)the names of members Present and Absent; and (c)the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6), a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by electronic recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by electronic recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: : Electronic recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Presiding Member Date of Signature I, Victoria Petro, acted as the presiding member of the Salt Lake Council, which met on November 19, 2024 in a hybrid meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Proclamation. Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of anindividual; X X X Victoria Petro (Jan 21, 2025 14:17 MST)Jan 21, 2025 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING §52 -4-205(1)(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l)(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205(l)(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; §52-4-205(l)(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if 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; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A Closed Meeting may also be held for Attorney-Client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open andPublic Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: _____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b)the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b)the names of members Present and Absent; and (c)the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6), a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by electronic recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by electronic recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: : Electronic recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Presiding Member Date of Signature I, Victoria Petro, acted as the presiding member of the Salt Lake Council, which met on November 19, 2024 in a hybrid meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Proclamation. Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of anindividual; X X X X Victoria Petro (Jan 21, 2025 14:17 MST)Jan 21, 2025 November 19, 2024 Closed Meeting Sworn Statements (A & B) Final Audit Report 2025-01-21 Created:2024-12-30 By:DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slc.gov) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAYp2F5Do6f-67hKfTDCgttJ7dvzuihCLl "November 19, 2024 Closed Meeting Sworn Statements (A & B)" History Document created by DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slc.gov) 2024-12-30 - 5:43:08 PM GMT Document emailed to victoria.petro@slc.gov for signature 2024-12-30 - 5:44:32 PM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slc.gov 2025-01-01 - 0:31:53 AM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slc.gov 2025-01-09 - 5:48:52 PM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slc.gov 2025-01-18 - 5:04:49 AM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slc.gov 2025-01-21 - 9:17:14 PM GMT Signer victoria.petro@slc.gov entered name at signing as Victoria Petro 2025-01-21 - 9:17:42 PM GMT Document e-signed by Victoria Petro (victoria.petro@slc.gov) Signature Date: 2025-01-21 - 9:17:44 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2025-01-21 - 9:17:44 PM GMT