Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/13/2025 - Meeting Materials Board of Directors of the SALT LAKE CITY COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AGENCY AGENDA May 13, 2025 Tuesday 1:45 PM Council Work Room 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 CRA.SLC.GOV 1:45 PM Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting immediately following the 1:00 PM Work Session item A1. The Work Session will reconvene at 3:30 or immediately following the CRA Board Meeting. BOARD MEMBERS: Darin Mano, Chair Dan Dugan, Vice Chair Victoria Petro Alejandro Puy Chris Wharton Eva Lopez Chavez Sarah Young In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically. After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance. This is a discussion among CRA Board Directors and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen, unless otherwise specified as a public comment period. Items scheduled may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change at the Chair’s discretion. Generated: 15:10:03 A. Comments: 1. General Comments to the Board ~ 1:45 p.m. 5 min. The CRA Board of Directors will receive public comments regarding Community Reinvestment Agency business in the following formats: Written comments submitted to the CRA Board offices: 451 South State Street, Suite 304, P.O. Box 145476, Salt Lake City, UT. 84114-5476. Comments to the CRA Board of Directors. (Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing, as well as on any other CRA Business. Comments are limited to two minutes.) B. Public Hearing - individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing topic for two minutes, however written comments are always accepted: NONE. C. Community Reinvestment Agency Business - The CRA Board of Directors will receive information and/or hold discussions and/or take action on: 1. Approval of Minutes ~ 1:50 p.m. 5 min. The Board will approve the meeting minutes of January 21, 2025; March 18, 2025; and March 25, 2025. 2. Resolution: CRA Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2024- 25 ~ 1:55 p.m. 30 min. The Board will receive a briefing about a resolution that would amend the final budget of the Community Reinvestment Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments in the Community Reinvestment Agency’s budget, including proposed project additions and modifications, and staffing changes. The amendment includes adjustments to budgets based on property tax increment received to satisfy obligations under state law, interlocal agreements with other taxing entities, reimbursement agreements with private property owners, and additional funding for agency operations. The budget amendment also addresses an additional $4.8 million in interest revenue and a $1.8 million accounting error. 3. Straw Polls: 9 Line Community Reinvestment Area ~ 2:25 p.m. 15 min. The Board will consider two straw polls to approve the use of funding from the 9-Line Fund-Strategic Intervention Program for two property acquisitions in the 9-Line Community Reinvestment Area. 4. Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE 5 min. Report of the Executive Director, including a review of information items, announcements, and scheduling items. The Board of Directors may give feedback or policy input. 5. Report of the Chair and Vice Chair TENTATIVE 5 min. Report of the Chair and Vice Chair. 6. Report and Announcements from CRA Staff TENTATIVE 5 min. The Board may review Board information and announcements. The Board may give feedback on any item related to City business, including but not limited to: Project Updates; Staff Updates; and Scheduling Items. D. Written Briefings – the following briefings are informational in nature and require no action of the Board. Additional information can be provided to the Board upon request: 1. Informational: Community Reinvestment Agency Semi- Annual Property Report Written Briefing - The Board will receive a written briefing of all Tier 1 and Tier 2 properties owned by the CRA, as per the Land Disposition Policy. The May 2025 report includes the description, address, parcel ID, size, zoning and tier category of each property. In addition, the report details approximate acquisition date, current category of disposition, interim use and proposed permanent use for each property. E. Consent – the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be discussed individually upon request. A motion to approve the consent agenda is approving all of the following items: 1. Set Date – Resolution: CRA Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2024- 25 - - The Board will set the date of Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 1 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting a resolution that would amend the final budget of the Community Reinvestment Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments in the Community Reinvestment Agency’s budget, including proposed project additions and modifications, and staffing changes. The amendment includes adjustments to budgets based on property tax increment received to satisfy obligations under state law, interlocal agreements with other taxing entities, reimbursement agreements with private property owners, and additional funding for agency operations. The budget amendment also addresses an additional $4.8 million in interest revenue and a $1.8 million accounting error. F. Tentative Closed Session The Board will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: 1. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; 2. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; 3. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; 4. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and< (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale 5. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and 6. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. G. Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 4:00 p.m. on Friday, May 9, 2025, 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. KEITH REYNOLDS 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. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING I, ____________________, acted as the presiding member of the Community Reinvestment Agency of Salt Lake City, which met on ________________________ in an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Proclamation. Appropriate notice was given of the Community Reinvestment Agency 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 an individual; §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 and Public Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: _____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Community Reinvestment Agency 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 tape recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by tape 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. Community Reinvestment Agency Presiding Member Date of Signature Darin Mano May 13, 2025 Darin Mano (May 16, 2025 11:36 MDT)05/16/2025 Sworn Statement - WS March 25, 2025 Final Audit Report 2025-05-16 Created:2025-05-14 By:STEPHANIE ELLIOTT (STEPHANIE.ELLIOTT@slc.gov) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAsR-vXiDleuUtjcABeWf6QvIWG1lThsi9 "Sworn Statement - WS March 25, 2025" History Document created by STEPHANIE ELLIOTT (STEPHANIE.ELLIOTT@slc.gov) 2025-05-14 - 5:53:16 PM GMT Document emailed to darin.mano@slc.gov for signature 2025-05-14 - 5:54:15 PM GMT Email viewed by darin.mano@slc.gov 2025-05-14 - 7:13:44 PM GMT Signer darin.mano@slc.gov entered name at signing as Darin Mano 2025-05-16 - 5:36:38 PM GMT Document e-signed by Darin Mano (darin.mano@slc.gov) Signature Date: 2025-05-16 - 5:36:40 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2025-05-16 - 5:36:40 PM GMT Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/7/2025 6:34 Anonymous Constituent 3 Salt Lake City flags proposed Dear Salt Lake City Council, I am writing to express my profound disappointment and disapproval of the proposed flag designs—Juneteenth, Pride, and Trans—currently under consideration by the Salt Lake City Council. I strongly believe that state or city flags should not be used to promote specific social movements or personal identities, particularly those related to sexual orientation or gender identity. These designs, which emphasize individual expressions of identity, do not reflect the broad, unifying values and shared history of Salt Lake City. Flags representing a city should embody collective pride, heritage, and inclusivity for all residents, not highlight specific groups or lifestyles that may be divisive. Moreover, the selection process for these designs appears to have sidelined meaningful community input, which is critical for a symbol meant to represent our entire city. I urge the council to reconsider these proposals and prioritize a transparent, community-driven process to create a flag that unites all residents under a shared civic identity. 5/7/2025 11:30 Jannette Ashby Petition for Mixed Use Zoning I am a resident in District 2 (Poplar Grove). As you consider the changes to Zoning please look into the "Urban Canyon" effect that is created by increasing building heights and having too much high density housing in a confined area. Please reconsider a lower building height of a maximum of three stories in the city and especially in our area. There are many cities in America that have height restrictions. We can no longer see our beautiful mountains from many areas in the city due to all the new tall buildings. Also, the impact of having buildings constructed right up to the sidewalk without any or little set back. Our community is concerned about the approval of buildings that do not lend any visual improvement or enhance our neighborhood in any way. Not to mention one in particular that is made of unpainted corrugated aluminum that reflects the sun during the early morning and evening which causes drivers difficulty because of that glare. It is not only a driving hazard but the building is unsightly--perhaps you could ask the owner to paint the structure so there would not be glare. (8th and 8th Apartment Building--located on 800 South and 840 West --on the South side ) It is built almost right up to the sidewalk without a set back and looks like a barn. In addition, there are haphazard "third-world" type structures with old boards, tarp, metal or whatever miscellaneous materials are on hand that are built next to fences with no oversight by Zoning due to changes that allow secondary structures in backyards. This impacts the neighborhood as well as property values and the livability of the area. This neighborhood already is severely lacking in beautification and some of these new apartment constructions are lacking in architectural appeal. Perhaps another consideration is the billboard on 900 W. and 900 South on the corner. Could you change Zoning to eliminate that eye sore? Even better, it would be so beneficial to SAFETY and Beautification if our state adopted a ban on billboards. What a difference it would make for drivers to pay attention to their driving and not the billboards or their cell phones.. There are at least four states that ban all billboards. Here in Utah we have seen trucks or vans with extremely bright flashing digital billboards. It is difficult enough to have digital flashing stationary billboards along with intense LED (blue light) headlights on newer vehicles that are visually unsafe for drivers (There is research in this area of LED lighting on vehicles as well as street lighting--alternative warmer spectrum lighting ). No one seems to address these problems so I hope you are able to have discussions in this regard. Thank you for your time in reviewing these matters. Sincerely, Jan Hayes Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/7/2025 11:38 Amy Stocks Mixed Use Zoning Consolidation Comments Council Chair and Members of the Salt Lake City Council, Thank you for the opportunity to speak today regarding the proposed Mixed use zoning consolidation. My name is Amy Stocks, and I am the owner of the property at REDACTED. I’m speaking not only as a homeowner, but as someone deeply invested in the future of Salt Lake City’s neighborhoods and in the issue of housing stability. The proposed zone change from TSA to MU 5 will directly impact the lot immediately south of my 1898 single-story home on its humble 25’ wide lot. I understand the city's interest in simplifying zoning and easing the administrative burden—but doing so at the expense of long-term residents and the character of our neighborhoods is not responsible governance. It prioritizes developer convenience over community wellbeing. That tradeoff is not just unacceptable—it’s short-sighted. This zoning change would allow buildings up to 55-65 feet tall with drastically reduced setbacks—shrinking the buffer between my property and a potential six-story structure from over 60 feet under current zoning to just 20 feet. That would overwhelm my home, eliminate privacy, block sunlight, and prevent me from growing a garden, installing solar panels, or enjoying my backyard—fundamentally changing how I live in my own home.- I am just one example of the effects of this consolidation. This is not how we create thriving, livable communities. It is a one-size-fits-all approach that disregards context, ignores history, and weakens the social and architectural fabric of Salt Lake’s diverse neighborhoods. Fairpark is not Ballpark, and Fleet Block is not Maven State. Yet this rezone treats every area as interchangeable. Worse, the developers pushing this change have not earned the community's trust. In Fairpark, they have misrepresented property sales, allowed purchased homes to fall into disrepair, and contributed to visible blight—vacant houses, overgrown lots, and increased trash. They offer long-time residents below-market prices and then rent them with no upkeep while waiting for this rezone to pass. This is speculative development at its most predatory. And while the city justifies this rezone in part on the need for affordable housing, what’s being proposed doesn’t meet that need. Studio apartments at 60% AMI are not truly affordable for families or many individuals in Fairpark and surrounding neighborhoods. Let me be clear: I support smart, inclusive growth. But growth must be done with intention. Each neighborhood has different needs, different histories, and different capacities for change. This blanket rezone flattens those differences and gives developers a free pass to build quickly, cheaply, and without accountability to the people who already live here. Salt Lake City has a chance to do better. We can create policies that encourage density and creativity, affordability and livability. That starts by revising this zoning amendment—especially its regulations on height, setbacks, active frontage, and parking—to reflect the values of our communities and the reality on the ground. We don’t need another corridor of cookie-cutter buildings. We need neighborhoods we can be proud of—places where history, culture, and community aren't sacrificed for short-term profit. Salt Lake City is better than this. And I believe you are too. Thank you. Amy Stocks 5/7/2025 11:41 Steve Boyer Thank you!!Thank you council members, and thank you Mayor Mendenhall for the new city flags. Thank you for taking a stand for humanity, decency, and inclusion. Keep up the good work! Steve Salt Lake City Sent from Yahoo Mail. Get the app 5/7/2025 13:34 Anonymous Constituent Fetish Why is the mayor and city council have such a fetish over rainbow and pastel flags? I suppose this is better than the collective incompetence you have managing the city. From homeless, high density low income slums, ruined roads and saturation of cannabis stores and illicit drugs. It's amazing how a group can become an echo chamber of idiocy and still give themselves an A grade. I do know that in your inner circle you despise the city residents. I guess your inner circle isn't as obedient as you think. Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/7/2025 16:15 Adam Goff 1/2 Inequitable Exceptions to Design Standards in Proposed MU Consolidation Ladies and Gentlemen of the City Council, We represent Madbrook Donut Company (“Madbrook”). Madbrook operates its bakery and main offices in a large building located at 375 West Hope Avenue in Salt Lake City. Currently Madbrook is zoned as CG. However, as part of the Planning Commission’s proposed zoning changes (the “Proposal”), Madbrook’s building will find itself in the MU-11 district. This is concerning because although a commercial bakery will continue to be an approved use, the building would potentially become a noncomplying structure under the proposed changes to Section 21A.37.050 of the Municipal Code. As this Proposal has proceeded, Madbrook has become increasingly concerned by the high burden that the new design standards will impose on many of the established buildings along the I-15 corridor. Further, it appears that there is very little, if any, exception or carve out for retailers, manufacturers, and other complying uses, but noncomplying structures unless the local business isn’t really a local business, such as Walmart, Costco, and other bigger box retailers. Madbrook therefore remains concerned that the increased standards and minimal exceptions disproportionately affect smaller businesses like Madbrook. Specifically, when developing some of the newer Proposals, the Planning Commission Staff acknowledged “the reality that [certain] grocery stores generally do not meet the regulations and will not unless completely redeveloped,” and therefore made sure that “the MU-3 specifically includes a waiver of the Design Review threshold and Design Standards compliance to allow for some by-right additions to such large commercial noncomplying structures.” September 25, 2024 Staff Report at 9. The Staff thus proposed “additions allowance[s]” whereby a grocery store with over 10,000 square feet be allowed expansions of a maximum footprint of 7,500 square feet (a 75% expansion) without the requirement of undergoing Design Review or complying with the Design Standards. Although the numbers have changed slightly, the accommodation persists for businesses lucky enough to find themselves in the MU-3 zone, but not those who land in the MU-11 zone. As a result, if the Proposal is passed as currently submitted, Madbrook and many other businesses along the I-15 corridor will not enjoy the same sort of additions allowance despite also inhabiting a reality where their buildings “do not meet the regulations and will not unless completely redeveloped” – just like those in the MU-3 zone. Instead, these businesses are left wondering how much of an addition or change to their structures would trigger the necessity of remodeling the entire building to fit the Design Standards. Madbrook asks that if the City Council and Planning Commission are considering the undue burden on already established buildings in the MU-3 zone, it do so uniformly and codify the same type of exceptions in the MU-11 zone. The Proposal also discusses the creation of a Transitional Overlay over the zone in which Madbrook’s building is located. See id. § 21A.34.030. Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/7/2025 16:15 Adam Goff 2/2 CONTINUED!! Inequitable Exceptions to Design Standards in Proposed MU Consolidation Buildings in this Overlay may access relaxed design standards if either (1) they implement a series of several landscaping measures or (2) they are a pre-existing “large” retailer with more than 100,000 square feet of floor space. This limited exception that ignores buildings in the I-15 corridor means that businesses that have approved and conforming uses might incur significant demolition and remodeling even under the relaxed standards. However, the largest retailers, such as Walmart – which is across the street from Madbrook and within spitting distance, The Home Depot, and Costco all receive immediate access the relaxed standards just by virtue of their size. In essence, the City would be prioritizing protecting the largest retailers (and not local businesses) from the new requirements – even though those retailers arguably have more resources and capital to do so. This may mean that smaller businesses will have no choice but to move or go out of business, just allowing more lucrative and bigger boxes to fill the void. This is simply unfair. The Proposal’s effort to create addition allowances and relaxed standards for some of the businesses that are most affected by the changes is admirable, but in its current state, it creates inequity by hand-selecting only a few favored businesses, in certain parts of the new zones, to benefit from the changes while ignoring similarly-situated businesses that even have approved uses. While there are many walkable areas in Salt Lake City that may benefit from these design standards, applying them to the I-15 corridor that has historically contained industrial and manufacturing uses now, without making exceptions, is unfair and robs these owners of their expected return on their investments – both in their real estate and their businesses. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the City Council deny the Proposal in its current state with directions to the Planning Commission to create more equitable exceptions that allow for the same addition allowances and/or the same relative relaxation of standards via the Transitional Overlay for all businesses with an approved use, but potentially a nonconforming structure. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, ADAM D. GOFF BENNETT TUELLER JOHNSON & DEERE Millrock Park West Building Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/7/2025 16:17 William Watts Mu zoning consolidation zoning text and map amendment Please read. While high-density housing developments are frequently touted as solutions to urban sprawl and housing shortages, they also present substantial social, environmental, and infrastructural challenges that warrant meticulous reevaluation. Infrastructure and Service Strain High-density housing concentrates large populations into confined geographical areas, exerting immense strain on existing infrastructure such as roads, sewage systems, public transportation, and utilities. Many cities lack the requisite resources or foresight to upgrade these systems at the requisite pace. Consequently, residents may encounter increased traffic congestion, overburdened public transportation, water shortages, and degraded public services—all of which diminish the quality of life. Community and Livability Erosion Dense housing developments, particularly large apartment complexes and high-rise buildings, can undermine community cohesion. Detached single-family neighborhoods often foster stronger social bonds, as individuals have more space to congregate, interact, and engage with their neighbors. Conversely, high-density living can engender anonymity, social isolation, and diminished civic engagement. Furthermore, overcrowding can exacerbate noise pollution, restrict access to green spaces, and diminish personal privacy. Environmental Concerns While proponents contend that high-density housing diminishes urban sprawl and car dependency, the environmental advantages are not always unequivocal. Tall buildings necessitate substantial energy for construction and maintenance (particularly heating, cooling, and vertical transportation). Additionally, higher population densities can lead to localized air pollution hotspots, diminished biodiversity, and heat island effects, which adversely impact urban microclimates. Public Health Risks High-density living environments have been demonstrated to facilitate the rapid spread of infectious diseases, as evidenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Close proximity, shared ventilation systems, and common spaces hinder the effective control of outbreaks. Mental health can also be adversely affected, as studies have associated crowded living conditions with elevated rates of anxiety, depression, and stress. Aesthetic and Cultural Impact Dense housing developments frequently conflict with the architectural heritage and character of established neighborhoods. Large, uniform apartment complexes can diminish cultural identity, diminish historical value, and create monotonous urban landscapes that many individuals find unappealing. These developments pose a risk of replacing vibrant and diverse neighborhoods with bland and impersonal environments. Bill 5/7/2025 16:17 Mary McConaughy Zoning changes I am strongly opposed to anything in Sugarhouse being higher than 105 feet. My only exception would be an infill buidling in the area of the Barnes and Noble block when that area is bought up and even then I would want the building to be 30 feet from the road. The Sugarhouse area is not a downtown SLC area. We need to keep the flavor of Sugarhouse. This new proposal allowing 186 feet has not been discussed in any meetings and has not been transparent. Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/7/2025 16:19 Keiko Jones Ordinance: Mixed-Use (MU) Zoning Consolidation Zoning Text and Map Amendment | public comment tonight Hello, I’d like to submit my comment by email because I won’t be able to make it to the meeting tonight. Thank you so much. Keiko Hi, My name is Keiko Jones, and I live in the Guadalupe Neighborhood in Fairpark Community. I was happy when I heard the city was taking away TSA zone because the excessively relaxed requirements of TSA zone have been a heaven for developers but a hell for the residents nearby. Sad to say, my happiness was short lived. You are just changing the name to “Mixed Use.” And labels such as “general,” “urban,” “transit,” and so on still exist. It’s not that new buildings will be required to have more off-street parking. The idea of “Mixed Use” sounds nice. I grew up in Japan where you can just walk to different shops in the neighborhood. You take your dog on a walk and pick up pastries, coffee, fruit, lightbulbs, dry cleaning, whatever, along the way. But we need a safe community to be able to do so. Do we have a safe community? Not around North Temple. Criminals and drug dealers/users are hurting the businesses. Honestly, I don’t care what you call the zoning if it’s the same parking requirement as TSA zone in my neighborhood. TSA zone turned the residential streets into a parking lot. I’d invite all of you to come to the Guadalupe Neighborhood in the evening, especially when there is an event at the Union. But please remember to take the public transportation since you won’t be able to park anywhere. Thank you. Keiko Jones 5/7/2025 16:21 Lenny Fitzgerald Homelessness focus Hi, I look forward to sending you an email in the near future, more specifically addressing what I briefly noted to you on the evening of Tuesday the 6th, sorry I got nervous & missed the mark on the topic a bit, thank you all for your dedication & time, ~Lenny Fitzgerald 5/7/2025 16:22 Nathan PETERS Water, Waste, and Recycling Fee Increases Hi All, I am writing to voice concerns over the various fee increases proposed for water, waste, and recycling services. This slew of increases, coupled with the recent increase in city sales tax rates, seem to nickel and dime residents beyond what's reasonable. Citizens are being asked to pad the pockets of a billionaire to develop his newly acquired arena area by way of sales tax increase on everyday things we need to live. Couple that with these proposed fee increases and it is simply too much. Rather than increase the fees for residential water use, why doesn't the city and state develop plans to reduce the 68% water volume usage by alfalfa farmers and other farmers that contribute negligibly to our state's GDP? Or ensure that city cemeteries are watering in a smarter way. For reference, the Avenues cemetery was running its sprinkler system every day this past week even though it was pouring rain. If you're proposing to increase the fees for waste and recycling, then agree on a way to help the consumer in some other area, such as eliminating sales tax on groceries. Regards, Nathan 5/7/2025 16:24 Joey G Comments I talked at the meeting last night and back in 2022 about the development on Cleveland Avenue. Someone made remarks about my comments with regards to people living in the house and setting fires. The house got torn down and the lot is a mess. 5/7/2025 16:27 Anonymous Constituent Water rates I don't think you should be raising the water and the sewer and the storm and the street lights and whatever else you're charging for. One more cent, I think you should be taking some of it off. I'm retired. I have a little duplex in the city. I'm paying $211 a month for water, and one of the apartments is empty. And there's no water use outside because I've turned it into a rock garden because of the water bill. The water is ridiculous. You're charging me $70 a month for sewer. Are you trying to make it so people can't survive? Look to your people that voted you in and be kind. Stop raising prices, please. 5/8/2025 9:53 Charles Parsons Fairmont park Has there been a change in city policy regarding camping in the parks. I walk in Fairmont Park every day and I’ve noticed there more camps scattered throughout the park every day - I counted 7 this morning and now there’s starting to be open drug use. There weren’t any camps for months. What’s changed? 5/9/2025 16:11 Larry Weidick Congratulations Congratulations on adopting the gay flag. It makes planning vacations easier knowing what cities to avoid. Purple hair, nose rings and clowns aren't my thing. Larry Weidick Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/9/2025 16:13 Emina Alibegovic SLC budget Hello, I am emailing to express my deep concern for the proposed city budget. I am particularly unhappy with such a huge imbalance between policing and social services. 135 million for the police vs 5 million for deeply affordable housing is such a giant discrepancy. As the city that is talking for years about solving our unhoused neighbors problems we are certainly seeming to go about it in a backwards way. I am not interested in spending more and more money on policing people who are unable to find housing and jobs. I am far more interested in the city providing housing, mental health, healthcare and job search assistance to these people. I have already contacted my city council representative regarding policing and sadly never heard back. To summarize, I oppose the budget as it is presented. With best regards, Emina Alibegovic 5/9/2025 16:15 Anonymous Constituent City Flags Good afternoon. To the members of the city council. May I just say how very disappointed I am and you right now? K. As someone that used to live the alternate lifestyle but no longer does, I find it very disturbing that you put up flags for gay rights and flags for transgender and flags for minority. Just hilly podge, oh oh, let's go look at us virtue signal. On the gay rights, what happens when you have the Christians in your community that feel offended like that? So they're no longer allowed to be part of your community. What happens to the white people that feel, they're hunting us down in the streets and they're murdering us, which a lot of them are feeling that way. So are they no longer out of the part of your community? What about the parents that do not want their children to be exposed to transgenderism? You've alienated them, so they're no longer part of your community. Are you putting those flags up? There's no difference in what you did as if you would have put up the flag flag for the Ku Klux Klan saying, oh, oh, oh, oh, and everybody doesn't agree with what we are. You're an outcast. There would have been no difference if you put it would have put up a flags saying, oh, oh, oh, oh, if everyone doesn't agree with that, Any races, you're an outcast. They would have put up the flag of Islam. Oh, oh, everyone disagrees with us, You're an outcast. Or or some flag of right wing open nationalist district. Oh oh, disagree with us. You're an outcast. What you should have done is put up a flag that says we are all together. We are all citizens of this great city. We all matter. I don't know. Oh, no. You have the virtue signal. Okay. You're no different than the Ku Klux Klan. You're no different than the Nazis. You're no different than the communist. You're no different than any racist I've ever met or any bigot. Okay. The only ones you wanna include is your little section. Okay. You see me, like I said, I used to be bisexual. I'm not anymore. K? I've got blacks in my family. I've got Hispanics in my family, and I've got Asians in my family. I don't really care. I don't say this is my black daughter-in-law. Okay? I don't say this is my Hispanic brother-in-law. I say this is my daughter and this is my brother. But you guys wanna put everyone in a separate little parts. K. What happens when Salt Lake has an has an emergency and you guys need the outer communities? You need them to come in to save you from something. And these outer communities are gonna say, you know, somebody see that well, they hate us because we're Mormon. They hate us because we're white. They hate us because we don't want our our kids exposed to sexual confusion when they're young. Salt Lake City. Oh, they just hate us. They hate us. They hate us. They hate us. They hate us on the outside. Like I said, you're so bigoted and you're so arrogant that you don't even realize you're bigoted. If you would have put up a flag that says we're all Utahns, we're all in together, and we we all live in the greatest state or whatever, you know, that showed every aspect of Utah, I would have loved it. And if on the very first time you flew that, you woulda had a transgender out there and a pink moo moo with one side of their head hair head being pink and the other side being fluorescent blue. I still would've supported it because you would've included everybody no matter what. But you had the virtue signal and you had to put some you had to let everyone know that some are above the others. I wanna know what happens when a a gay kid murders a straight kid in your in your city. Are you gonna let the gay are you gonna let the gay kid go? You know, because he's oppressed? Are you gonna treat him harder because everyone thinks everyone thinks he is privileged? Same with a black kid or a transgender kid. When you open this stuff up, you opened up a can of worms. No one's gonna trust anybody that you've singled out with your special flags for either not being victims or having privilege. You opened up a can of worms that cannot be closed. I am so very disappointed in you. And needless to say, my family, we will not be helping you anymore in the future. As of this moment, your persona non grata, you're on your own. Don't contact us for fundraisers. Don't contact us the next time you have you have someone who needs help building a project. Don't contact us the next time there's an emergency. We don't work with bigots. Look in the mirror and think of the problem you created. Have a nice day. 5/9/2025 16:26 Anonymous Constituent City Budget A proposal is to put forth an idea for discussion. You have already got the date effective and the rates all worked out on increased fees for garbage recycling, etcetera. That is not a proposal. That is a done deal. A done deal is not a proposal. Salt Lake City's got all kinds of money. You can create flags at the drop of a hat. How much did you pay for that? Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/12/2025 15:43 Pam Logsdon Flags To Council Member Mano, I am writing to you and the other council members regarding the flags recently approved by the Salt Lake City council and mayor. If you are not aware, the actions of the city council members and mayor of the capital city of Utah reflect upon the rest of the cities of Utah. Your recent decision to adopt three new flags does not represent the rest of the state. That was quite a chicken and immature trick the mayor and Salt Lake City council played in adopting those flags. You think you’re above the law and God’s law by thumbing your nose and coming up with a way to bypass a law. Your actions are disrespectful and immoral. Just because you’ve stuck a sego lily flower on the flags doesn’t make it right to have those flags on government buildings. You have made a mockery of the state flower and what the people of Utah represent. The sego lily means resilience, sacredness, and pioneer spirit. None of these flags represent this. They only represent your agenda for homosexuality and transgenderism and to push children and people into believing that this is normal and acceptable. God created his children as male and female only. We came to earth as either male or female and that is indisputable! Government buildings and school buildings must and should remain neutral. Why make life complicated? Fly the flag of the United States of America and the State of Utah ONLY on our government and school buildings. PERIOD. Where are these flags?! When the Olympics and the world come to Utah they won’t see the uniqueness and high morals and values of the people who worked hard to settle Utah. They will only see that we have followed and bowed to the whims and wickedness of the world. Please reconsider your decision. Thank you for your consideration. Pam Logsdon Sandy, Utah 5/12/2025 16:33 Bruce Shadley adoption of three new flags nothing speaks "Identity Politics" louder than putting one particular community over another!!! two flags: the Stars and Stripes, which ALREADY represents ALL legal citizens in this country and the State flag. anything other than that is PANDERING!!! you cheapen the value if this country when you pull STOOPID shit like you just pulled w/ your flag vote!!! you are a disgrace to your city, county, state and country!!! 5/13/2025 13:45 Michael Margetts salt Lake City Budget - Input Ladies and Gentlemen: I have lived in and paid taxes in SLC for nearly 80 years. Never have I observed such disrepair of our roadways as I have the last couple of years. Examples: 2300 East between 1700 south and 2100 South, 1700 South between 1100 East and 1900 East, 1900 East between 1300 South and 1700 South, 9th East between 1700 South and 2100 South. My home is surrounded by the streets. My 5-year-old grandson recently commented, " You sure have bumpy streets by you grandpa". Interesting but true comment from a child. I appreciate the challenges associated with balancing the needs of our great city with available funds. But in my opinion some projects appear to be prioritized ahead of the street repairs and maintenance. Examples of street issues: Huge projects on 200 South between State Street and 700 East, 900 South between Main Street and 700 East, 300 West between 1300 South and 2100 South, Sunnyside Ave between 1300 East and Foothill. These all seem to be geared toward cyclists. With the exception of Sunnyside, I seldom see bikers using the improvements. I'm not sure how much time and expense went in the purchase of "inclusive flags" to adorn the city and county building, in defiance of the bill passed by the legislature. Let's take care of our existing infrastructure needs before we seek ways to satisfy the desires of selected groups such as cyclists and special interest groups. Thank you Mike Margetts Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description 5/13/2025 15:52 Ted Dumont Thank you for attending the most recent RPCC Meeting Dear Chief Redd, On behalf of the Rose Park community, thank you for attending our most recent Community Council meeting. We sincerely appreciate you taking the time to hear from residents directly and to engage in meaningful conversation about the safety and well-being of our neighborhood. We are especially grateful for the efforts you and the Salt Lake City Police Department are making to improve public safety and community trust on the west side. Your presence at our meeting and your continued attention to the unique needs of Rose Park show a commitment to making our community a safer and more livable place for all. Thank you again for your leadership and dedication. We look forward to continuing this important partnership in service to our neighborhood. With appreciation, Ted Dumont Kevin Reeves Rose Park Residents since 1998 5/13/2025 17:09 Matt Sadauckas Zoning Consolidation For the sake of our city's future, we need to simplify, streamline, and liberalize our zoning. Most of the issues our city faces are downstream of the decades-long failure to build housing. Yes, we've been building a lot of new apartment buildings, but the complex zoning and approval processes means that these are the only sort of buildings that can be put up profitably. Streamlining zoning will enable both a larger volume of housing to be built, but a larger variety, too. There are many empty and abandoned properties across the city that could have housing built on it. More housing of all types is essential, and we must allow people to build more housing if they see people sit on their own properties, too. Please simplify the city's zoning and approval process.