The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/14/2026 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION April 14, 2026 Tuesday 4:00 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 4:00 PM Work Session Or immediately following the 2:00 PM Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting No Formal Meeting Please note: A general public comment period will not be held this day. This is the Council's monthly scheduled briefing meeting. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Alejandro Puy, Chair District 2 Erika Carlsen, Vice Chair District 5 Victoria Petro District 1 Chris Wharton District 3 Eva Lopez Chavez District 4 Dan Dugan District 6 Sarah Young District 7 The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session 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: 09:16:11 Welcome and public meeting rules 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.Ordinance: Community Clean Energy Program ~ 4:00 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would enact Title 9, Chapter 50 to the Salt Lake City Code, establishing participation in the Community Clean Energy program, formally known as Utah Renewable Communities. The proposal would provide a new opportunity for nearly all homes and businesses within the City to choose clean energy through their Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) bill. Customers will be automatically enrolled in the program, with the option to opt out. If customers choose to stay enrolled in the program, a new fee will appear on their RMP bill. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 14, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 7, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 5, 2026 2.Ordinance: Camping and Obstructing Public Property and Park Rules Text Amendment ~ 4:20 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend various sections of the Salt Lake City Code relating to camping on public grounds, streets, parks, and playgrounds, park hours, disposing of unclaimed property, and obstructing sidewalks. The proposal would introduce an updated definition of what constitutes camping and consolidate and clarify the use and obstruction of public spaces and rights of way to reduce confusion and ensure proper enforcement. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 14, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 5, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 3.Ordinance: Master Plan and Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately 346, 350, 354, and 370 South 800 East, and 775 East 400 South ~ 4:50 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of the properties at approximately 346, 350, 354 South 800 East from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family) to MU-5 (Mixed Use 5). The proposal would also amend the Central Community Plan Future Land Use Map of the properties at approximately 346, 350, 354, 370 South 800 East and 775 East 400 South from Medium Density Residential (15-30 dwelling units/acre) and Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) to High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre). The proposed amendments would allow the construction of a mixed-use building encompassing 109 total residential units and ground-floor commercial space, which includes 2-,3- and 4- bedroom units. The properties currently contain three existing residential buildings, including seven apartment units. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. The Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to amend the Zoning Map, and recommended that the Council deny the amendment to the Central City Community Future Land Use Map. In addition to the requested amendments, the applicant is seeking design review approval to exceed the maximum building façade length of 200 feet, which the Planning Commission will reconsider after the Council takes action on this proposal. The project is within Council District 4. Petitioner: Sean Thompson, representing the property owner Hardage Hospitality. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 14, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 5, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4.Fiscal Year 2026-27 Proposed Budget: Salt Lake City Public Library System ~ 5:10 p.m. 30 min. The Council will be briefed about the Library Board’s recommended Operations and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27. For more information visit https://link.slc.gov/slcfy27. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 7, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 5.Informational: Salt Lake County Council Presentation ~ 5:40 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a briefing from the Salt Lake County Council on the County budget, services and key priorities. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 14, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 6.Fiscal Year 2026-27 Funding Allocations for Federal Housing and Community Development Grants and City Funding Our Future Housing Programs Follow-Up ~ 6:00 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing on recommendations for allocating grant funding provided through four Federal Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) programs and the City's Funding Our Future (FOF) housing programs. The funding is allocated by the Council on a competitive basis to organizations which are mostly local non-profits that specialize in providing services to the City’s most economically vulnerable residents. For Fiscal Year 2026-27, approximately $11.3 million dollars is expected to flow through the Division of Housing Stability to the organizations eligible to receive grant funding. The HUD programs that provide this funding and oversee activities of grant recipients are: Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), the HOME Investment Partnership Program, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). City housing programs are funded from the local sales tax increment known as Funding Our Future. For more information visit www.tinyurl.com/annualhudgrants. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026, Tuesday, April 7, 2026, and Tuesday, April 14, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, March 10, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 7.Dinner Break ~ 6:20 p.m. 30 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 - Standing Items 8.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair - - Report of the Chair and Vice Chair 9.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. 10.Tentative Closed Meeting - - The Council will consider a motion to enter into closed meeting. A closed meeting described under Utah Code Annotated (UCA) Section §52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to discussing: 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. g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on _____________________, the undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest. 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. 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: Michael Sanders Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:April 14, 2026 RE:ORDINANCE – COMMUNITY CLEAN ENERGY PROGRAM New information obtained since the 12/09/2025 briefing has been added in blue. The Council is being asked to consider an ordinance to formally enroll Salt Lake City as a participating community in the Community Clean Energy Program. This step isrequired under state law and the recently released Public Service Commission (PSC) approval order when the Community Clean Energy Program was approved. The March 4, 2026 approval started a 90-day clock for communities to adopt program participation ordinances. Salt Lake City must decide by June 2, 2026 whether to adopt an ordinance to participate in the Community Clean Energy program, informally known as Utah Renewable Communities. This would automatically enroll most residents and businesses in a new renewable energy program on an opt-out basis, costing about $4/month for residential customers. If the Council does not take action, the City would be removed from the program and it would not be available locally. (Due to the size of the City, it would also negatively affect the program in other cities.) A Public Hearing for this item has been scheduled for 04/21/2026 prior to the Council’s vote to enroll. Once the sixteen cities take action on whether to enroll, several system changes will be initiated by Rocky Mountain Power. Additionally, the program requires budget support in two ways: Reimbursable upfront “startup costs” (estimated at approximately $820,000, plus contingency) are required to enable Rocky Mountain Power’s billing and customer systems. Rocky Mountain Power will initially fund these costs but requires at least one participating community to backstop the expenses through a contractual agreement in the event that program revenues do not fully reimburse the utility after launch. o The City proposes to allocate funds to the Department of Sustainability to serve as this backstop, allowing the program to move forward for the benefit of all participating Schedule: st Briefing: 12/09/2025 nd Briefing: 04/14/2026 Page | 2 communities. These funds would be held and only used if necessary. Based on participation estimates, Sustainability anticipates that startup costs will be fully recovered through ratepayer revenues within the first few months of operation (early 2027) and this City holding account will not be needed. If those estimates and Rocky Mountain Power’s costs are recovered, the City’s contractual obligation would end and the funds would no longer be needed. Mailing expenses of about $156,000 that would be paid to Rocky Mountain Power. This would not be reimbursed. (These funds have already been budgeted throughout the years by Sustainability.) POLICY QUESTIONS ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION What the Ordinance Does The ordinance outlines the main rules and structure of the program, including: Salt Lake City officially joining the program as a participating community. Allowing most electricity customers within current and future city boundaries to participate. Defining when the program starts, including the “Implementation Date” when customer notices are first sent. Explaining that customers will be automatically enrolled unless they opt out by the deadline in the notices. Allowing customers who are not enrolled to opt in later if they choose. Setting rules for termination fees if customers leave the program after the initial no-fee period, and identifying cases where fees would not apply. Describing how new clean energy resources will be selected and approved. Confirming that the PSC sets and adjusts program rates, and that Rocky Mountain Power is responsible for billing customers and notifying them of any changes. Continuing to work with other communities on decisions about clean energy projects and program operations. Following through on the Utility Agreement with Rocky Mountain Power, which is required to operate the program. Reimbursing Rocky Mountain Power for the cost of sending required customer notices. Page | 3 o This is estimated to cost $156,000. Sustainability has budgeted for this expense over several years and it will be included in their FY27 budget Recognizing that the City along with all other participating communities have already contributed funding to reimburse state agencies for third-party expertise to help develop the program. o SLC appropriated funds totaling $385,966.47 in Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023 to the Agency’s budget. Onetime SLC budget impact Before the program can begin, Rocky Mountain Power must complete several required “startup” activities. These include upgrading billing systems so the new program charge can appear on customer bills, setting up customer service support (such as a call line), and creating systems that allow customers to opt out and apply any required fees. These steps are necessary to launch the program, but they must be completed before any program revenue can be collected. The total estimated cost for these startup activities is about $820,000, plus a 10% contingency. Because the program cannot collect revenue until it is fully set up, these costs must be covered upfront. Rocky Mountain Power will pay for these upfront, but requires at least one community to backstop the expenses by signing a contract in the case that RMP is not fully reimbursed through program revenues after the program begins. The City is proposing to act as this backstop so the program can move forward and meet required timelines. Program revenues are expected to begin in early 2027 and are expected to generate significant monthly revenue. Based on current estimates, the full startup cost could be recovered by RMP within the first month or shortly after the program begins collecting revenue. The City is currently in discussions with other participating communities about sharing in these costs if needed. Overall, while the City would take on short-term financial responsibility to launch the program, the long-term financial risk is expected to be low, and funds may only need to be held temporarily rather than be paid to RMP in the case the startup cost contract is triggered. How will this impact residents The Community Clean Energy Program is set up as an opt-out program, which means most customers will be automatically enrolled until they choose to leave. After customers are notified, there will be a period when they can opt out for free. After that period ends, a fee will apply if they decide to leave the program. Based on current participation assumptions, the program is expected to cost approximately $4 per month for most residential customers. Income-qualified residents will not pay this cost, as they will receive a credit that fully offsets the monthly charge. The program is expected to begin sending customer notices in late 2026, with billing starting in early 2027 once implementation is complete. Current planning assumes that about 40% of eligible Rocky Mountain Power customers will participate. If participation is lower than projected, the program is designed to adjust by building out resources more gradually or by starting with a lower-cost renewable project, rather than by increasing customer rates. These conservative assumptions are already reflected in the program’s initial procurement approach. If participation exceeds projections, the program will be able to build more resources and do so more quickly. Noticing and timeline Customers will be notified about the program before it begins. The first notice is expected to be sent in November or December 2026. This notice will be mailed and will inform customers that the program is being implemented and that they will be enrolled unless they choose to opt out. A second notice will be sent about 15 days after the first notice. This follow-up notice may be mailed or sent digitally, depending on the customer’s pre-existing communication preferences. These notices are meant to give customers clear information about the program and time to decide whether they want to participate. Page | 4 The City is required to cover the cost of sending these notices. The Sustainability Department has budgeted about $156,000 to reimburse Rocky Mountain Power for this work. Page | 4 An estimated timeline is below. Page | 5 The following information was provided for the December 9, 2025 briefing. Utah Renewable Communities (URC) is a partnership of 19 Utah cities and counties working together to offer residents and businesses access to net-100% clean electricity by 2030. Formed under the state’s Community Clean Energy Act, URC collaborates with Rocky Mountain Power to design and implement a voluntary clean- energy program that matches participants’ annual electricity use with an equivalent amount of renewable energy. The clean power used for the program will come from a mix of existing renewable resources on the PacifiCorp grid and new projects built specifically for URC customers. Participating customers will remain Rocky Mountain Power customers, and the utility will continue to provide reliable service regardless of whether a customer joins the program. The City has been supportive of this program since 2019 through the passing of various resolutions and contributing financially to the URC budget for program development and implementation costs. The next step for program implementation is for the Public Services Commission (PSC) to review the Program Application at a hearing. This hearing is scheduled for December 16, 2025, after which a decision is anticipated as early as January 2026. If approved, eligible communities will have 90 days after the PSC’s approval to adopt the participation program ordinance. Currently, if timelines continue to unfold as expected, URC could begin collecting ratepayer revenue as soon as November of 2026. If Salt Lake City adopts a participation program ordinance, customers will be automatically enrolled, with the option to opt out at no cost during an initial cancellation period. If a customer opts out at a later period, a termination fee would apply. The URC’s goal is to limit the average household bill increase to no more than $3– $4 per month. To protect low-income customers, the program offers a monthly bill credit of up to $7 and will waive termination fees for those enrolled in Rocky Mountain Power’s Schedule 3 HELP program, with the credit funded by a charge up to $0.70 per month on other participating customers. Goal of the briefing: This briefing is informational only. Following the PSC hearing, if the PSC adopts the Program Application, the Administration will prepare a transmittal for the Council to consider a participation program ordinance. 6. The Council may wish to discuss how they may want to customize the Program Ordinance recitals to reflect Salt Lake City’s energy commitments and policy direction. 7. The Council may wish to ask the administration how many participants are needed to maintain the projected average bill increase of $3–$4 per month for participating households. o What would happen to rates if there are not enough participants? o Should the City advocate for additional mitigation measures if actual costs exceed projections? 8. If a resident currently participates in the BlueSky program, is it anticipated they would leave that to participate in the URC program? 9. The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what engagement and education efforts they might be planning to ensure Salt Lake City residents have as much notice as possible before a potential RMP fee increase, including the reasoning for that increase, and the timeline. Below is an annotated history of legislative actions taken by the City Council regarding URC: The Council adopted a joint resolution adopting two renewable energy goals.: 1. 50% renewable energy for municipal operations by 2020 2. 100% renewable energy for both municipal operations and the community by 2032 Page | 6 2019 The Council adopted a joint resolution advancing its community goal to 100% net renewable electricity by 2030 which qualified the City to participate in URC. The Council approved a total of $550,000 over FY22 and FY23 to cover the City's share of program developments costs as required by state statute. The actual expense over FY22 and FY23 was approximately $386,000. The Council approved a resolution endorsing the continued participation in the development of the URC program and authorized the Mayor to sign the Utility Agreement with other participating communities. Once the program launches, all Rocky Mountain Power customers located in jurisdictions that adopt Program Ordinances will be automatically enrolled, consistent with provisions in state law allowing customers to opt out at any time. The Agency’s target is to limit the average household bill increase to no more than $3–$4 per month. Customers may opt out at no cost during an initial 100-day cancellation period, which begins when the URC charges first appear on their bills. After that window closes, a termination fee will apply for those who choose to leave the program. The cancelation fee is currently proposed to be $30 for residential customers. To protect households with limited financial resources, the program includes the below low-income customer provisions: Proactive outreach and engagement, Monthly bill credit of up to $7, and Waived termination fees for those who decide to opt out after the initial cancellation period. These protections apply to customers enrolled in Rocky Mountain Power’s Schedule 3 Home Electric Lifeline Plan (HELP). To qualify for the HELP program, customers must be at or below the 150% of Federal Poverty Levels. The low-income bill credit is funded by customers participating in the clean energy program who are not enrolled in Schedule 3. These non-HELP customers will contribute up to $0.70 per month to support income- qualified households. The program ordinance may be modified to tailor certain components to better reflect local priorities and align with City Code. We are prohibited from modifying the overarching parameters of the statewide Program Ordinance without coordination with other URC communities and PSC review/approval. The draft Program Ordinance filed with the PSC consists of two parts: (1) a recitals section and (2) the ordinance itself. Of these, the recitals section provides the greatest flexibility for customization. The recitals can be expanded to incorporate additional “whereas” statements that highlight Salt Lake City’s climate and energy commitments, articulate the City’s rationale for participating in the URC program, and reinforce the City’s long-standing pursuit of clean energy goals. Although state law no longer requires participating communities to adopt a resolution stating a goal of achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2030, the Administration has noted that continuing to include such language would emphasize the City’s enduring commitment to renewable energy. Page | 7 Modifications to the ordinance section itself should be limited to changes necessary to conform with Salt Lake City’s code conventions, such as numbering and formatting. The Administration is evaluating potential adjustments to Sections 7.3 - 7.5 of the draft ordinance to clarify that the City is responsible for paying noticing costs for all customers within Salt Lake City, while removing references to fund appropriations since appropriations are handled through the City’s budget process. Council Participation in the PSC Hearing Next Steps Outline 1 During this time period, they may opt out at no cost. After this period concludes, customers may still opt-out of the program but would be subject to a termination fee currently proposed at $30 for residential accounts. ATTACHMENTS 1 In its testimony in the Program Application docket, URC proposed an even longer no-fee cancelation window of 6 months to the PSC to help ensure that participants have ample time to consider opting out after program-related bill impacts begin. The PSC will ultimately decide the actual duration of the cancelation period as per R746-314-101(3) and subject to statutory requirements. Page | 8 ATTACHMENT 1 Estimated 2026 URC Timeline Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance 9.50: Community Clean Energy Program April 14, 2026 -Sophia Nicholas and Glade Sowards, Department of Sustainability The 19 communities involved in this effort adopted “Utah Renewable Communities” (URC) as an informal name for this work. It should be noted that the formal name of the program is the Community Clean Energy Program. We are moving toward using “URC” for the agency and not the program. •The Community Clean Energy Program is a brand new program giving Rocky Mountain Power customers in eligible communities the ability to choose clean, reliable, affordable energy •The Community Clean Energy Program has been thoughtfully designed since 2019 through a partnership between RMP and the URC --of which Salt Lake City is a member •The program was approved by the Utah Public Service Commission (PSC) on March 4, 2026 •If we adopt the program by enacting the ordinance, all eligible RMP customers in SLC will have a new option for choosing clean energy through their power bill and will be automatically enrolled in 2027 with the choice to exit at any time. About the program Why develop this new clean energy option? •Solutions: By investing in clean energy, the program will help meet Utah’s growing energy needs while keeping power reliable and the air cleaner •Scale:we have a unique opportunity to drive investment in new clean energy at scale since URC communities represent about 25% of RMP's electricity sales in Utah •Choice:the program offers homes and businesses in our communities a new option for where their electricity comes from through RMP •Investment:clean energy investment supports jobs and economies, often in rural areas •Health and environment:clean energy helps to avoid pollution from other energy sources What will the proposed program look like for customers? •Program customers remain RMP customers receiving reliable power •Program customers will receive notices in late 2026 and will be automatically enrolled in the program in early 2027 with the choice to opt out •There will be no cost to opt out initially, after that, there will be a fee to terminate participation •New clean energy line item (“Schedule 100”) on bills Cost to participate & credit if low- income Information about the program ELECTRIC BILL •On March 4th, the PSC issued an order approving the Community Clean Energy Program •The order addressed key details like the initial program rate and customer opt out details, while leaving other items for a follow-up ruling •What does this mean? •The order allows the Community Clean Energy Program to move forward! •The 90-day clock for communities to consider the ordinance has begun (until June 2) •While the program is readied for launch, the URC board and support staff and RMP will continue collaborating with the other Parties* in the docket to propose solutions to remaining items •At the same time, URC and RMP will conduct negotiations with clean energy developers towards executing a contract for the first URC program resource(s) PSC order *Other Parties: Division of Public Utilities, Office of Consumer Services, Sierra Club, and Western Resource Advocates Eligible residential customers: $4 per month $3.88 monthly program participation fee + $0.12 monthly surcharge for low-income program = $4.00 per month Initial program rate: residential flat fee Qualifying low-income residential customers: $0 per month $3.88 monthly program participation fee - $3.88 monthly enhanced bill credit = $0.00 per month Eligibility All residential customers in participating communities are eligible to participate except those on Schedule 135. Residential customers in participating communities with rooftop solar on Schedule 136 or 137 are eligible to participate. What are the low-income offerings? Qualifying low-income customer provisions: •Ongoing outreach and engagement •Participate for free (Monthly bill credit to cover cost of participation) •Like all customers, can always choose to opt-out at any time. •Waived termination fee (if they decide to opt -out later in the program) How do customers qualify for the low- income offerings? Initial program rate: non -residential volumetric rate Non-residential customers: $0.00609 per kWh used per month + $0.12 monthly surcharge for low-income program per month. The total monthly cost depends on the amount of electricity used. Eligibility All non -residential customers in participating communities are eligible to participate except those with rooftop solar on Schedule 135 . Non-residential customers in participating communities with rooftop solar on Schedule 136 or 137 are eligible to participate. Example scenario: a medium office building used 6,880 kWh in May Without the program, their total RMP bill is $847.39 for the month With the program, the bill is an additional $42.02 for a total of $889.41, a ~5% increase •Like all utility rates, the rates for the Community Clean Energy Program will be periodically adjusted and communicated accordingly •Adjustments will occur no more than annually per the statute •The PSC order says the following: Program rates: long term "While future Program rates may diverge from those under RMP’s proposal contingent on later determinations regarding Resource Valuation and changes to other underlying variables,no evidence in the record suggests that Program rates are likely to meaningfully increase from the initial rates approved in this order.Instead,under RMP’s proposal,they would decrease rather significantly after the first two years.At the Program’s inception,customers will be deciding whether to opt-out with reference to rates that are likely to be higher than rates charged later,after the reserve balances are sufficiently established." Customer opt-out ●Customers can opt out at any time ○If during the 6-month "Cancellation Period" there is no fee to exit ○After the Cancellation Period, a $30 termination fee for residential customers ○The termination fee varies depending on rate Schedule for non -residential customers ●Customers moving into or annexed into a participating community will also be provided with a noticing and cancellation period and can exit the program any time RMP preps billing system (5 months following adoption window) Noticing period (60 days following implementation) No fee opt -out period (~ 4 months following commencement) PSC program approval: (March 4, 2026) Ordinance adoption (within 90 days of PSC approval: ends June 2,2026) "Implementation Date" Noticing begins (~November 2, 2026) "Commencement Date" Revenue collection begins (~January 1, 2027) Fee-Free Cancellation Period of 6 months Comparison to other renewable programs ●Blue Sky allows participants to voluntarily contribute $1.95 per 100 kWh “block” or 1.95 cents per kWh to support renewable energy by: ○Supporting grants to help organizations offset the cost of rooftop solar and ○Fund the purchase of renewable energy certificates (RECs) nationwide ●Subscriber Solar offers shares in an existing 20 MW solar farm in Southern Utah. Participation is capped and RMP has not indicated they plan to build more projects for this program ●Customers with the resources that own their home or business can install rooftop solar. Doing so supports renewable energy growth and can directly lower monthly bills by producing at least a portion of the electricity used by the home or business By supporting the development of large-scale, new, and regionally based clean energy projects, the Community Clean Energy Program can create impact that is unique to other clean energy options. •Per Community Clean Energy Act and Utah Code §54-17-903(3) governing the program: “an eligible community identified in the application must pass an ordinance…in order to become a participating community” and “the local ordinance…shall be adopted by the municipality or county within 90 days after the date of the commission order approving the community clean energy program” •Therefore, Salt Lake City and the other 18 URC members have until June 2 to adopt the ordinance if we want to enact the approved program within our boundaries Ordinance requirement Startup Cost Agreement There is a lot of conservativism built into the overall program and renewable energy acquisition. All program costs will be paid for by participants, including ongoing administrative costs. However, one outstanding issue: Administrative startup costs necessary to collect program revenue . . . incurred by RMP before program begins collecting revenue. Will be reimbursed through program revenues in 1 -2 months, but a contractual backstop is required. The Sustainability Department is making a budget request in Budget Amendment 5 to “hold” these funds of ~$900,000 to enable SLC to sign a Startup Cost Agreement with RMP which is necessary for the program to launch. Other URC communities are also being asked to consider signing separate agreements with Salt Lake City to assist in covering Startup Costs if sufficient revenue isn't collected. Very low risk if a reasonable number of communities adopt program ordinance Program revenues should be large, and Startup Cost reimbursement is first in order of payment •As part of RMP’s service territory, Salt Lake City’s options for supporting clean energy through the utility are limited. The Community Clean Energy Program has been designed to provide a new choice for all homes and businesses to choose clean energy through RMP by supporting clean energy development at scale. •Working to support clean energy aligns with Salt Lake City’s mission of promoting the health, safety, and welfare of the community at large. •Ordinance 9.50 is available for the Salt Lake City Council to discuss and consider adopting •If the City adopts the ordinance, we will officially bring the Community Clean Energy Program to our community, and we will continue to be part of the URC board, collaborating with RMP to launch and operate the program •If we do not adopt the ordinance, the Community Clean Energy Program will not be an option for our community, and we will no longer be part of the URC board Summary Net-100% Resolution Adopted 23 communities adopted Established clean energy goal for initial Program eligibility. No longer required Governance Agreement Signed 19 communities signed Adopted interlocal agreement to join the Community Renewable Energy Agency (aka URC board) Utility Agreement Signed All communities signed & RMP to sign Outlines roles and responsibilities to take effect upon program approval and launch Program Application Submitted Filed by RMP with significant URC involvement Included testimony and hearings to detail how URC program will work and projected rates Program Approved! Utah PSC reviewed and released order Resource valuation method and first power purchase agreement (PPA) approval pending Participation Ordinance Communities decide whether to adopt Within 90 days of PSC approval, decide whether to enact URC program Utah legislature and PSC Established requirements & defined pathway to develop program Enabling Legislation and Rules Adopted 2019 Mar-Dec 2019 2021 –2024 2024 Nov 2024; Jan and Jun 2025 March 4, 2026 By June 2, 2026 Program development process 6 SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 03/31/2026 Date Sent to Council: 03/31/2026 From: Department * Sustainability Employee Name: O'Malley, Monica E-mail monica.omalley@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 03/31/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 03/31/2026 Subject: Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance New transmittal or Revision New transmittal Revision Revision Updates: Adding the proposed ordinance for consideration (Attachment D). All other information is the same. Additional Staff Contact:Presenters/Staff Table Glade Sowards, Sr. Energy and Climate Program Manager, Glade.Sowards@slc.gov Sophia Nicholas, Deputy Director, Sophia.Nicholas@slc.gov Document Type Ordinance Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: Adopt the participation ordinance for the Community Clean Energy Program no later than June 2, 2026. Background/Discussion See ﬁrst attachment for Background/Discussion Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing Neither the Act nor the Rules require a public hearing for adoption of this ordinance. The Department is supportive of scheduling this item for public comment as timing permits and adopting the ordinance according to the City Council’s established protocol. Public Process This page has intentionally been left blank 1 Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance Background/Discussion Summary of Key Points • With the adoption of Salt Lake City’s net-100% renewable electricity goal in 2016 1, we began working with Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) and other communities to pass legislation in 2019 to facilitate that goal. The passage of HB 411 permitted communities to negotiate a proposed clean energy program with RMP to develop renewable energy resources to serve customers within the communities’ boundaries. • Salt Lake City has been involved in a joint cooperative eﬀort with 18 other communities, informally called the Utah Renewable Communities (URC), to develop a Community Clean Energy Program (Program) pursuant to the 2019 legislation. • The Program was submitted to the Public Service Commission of Utah (PSC) and was approved, with minor modiﬁcations, on March 4, 2026. Following the recent PSC approval, all 19 communities involved have to determine whether to enact the Program within our respective boundaries by adopting the program ordinance. • The ordinance adoption process runs 90 days from the PSC order, meaning the ordinance must be adopted no later than June 2, 2026, for Salt Lake City to participate. • The Community Clean Energy Program, should Salt Lake City choose to enact it, will provide a new opportunity for nearly all homes and businesses within Salt Lake City to choose clean energy through their RMP bill. A new line item will be added to customer RMP bills to support the investment in clean energy, with the option for customers to exit at any time. • The Program is still several months from kicking oﬀ. We expect customers to see notices by the end of 2026 and the new URC clean energy line item on their bill in early 2027 (at the earliest). • The initial residential rate set by the PSC is $4 per month. • Income-eligible customers can receive a bill credit, enabling them to participate for free. • The Program directly supports the addition of new, utility-scale clean energy to the PaciﬁCorp grid, and is distinct from other clean energy oﬀerings. • The Community Clean Energy Program ordinance is forthcoming for the Salt Lake City Council to discuss and consider adopting. o If Salt Lake City adopts the ordinance, it will oﬃcially bring the Community Clean Energy Program to our community and Salt Lake City will continue to be part of the URC Agency, collaborating with RMP to launch and operate the program. o If Salt Lake City does not adopt the ordinance, the Community Clean Energy Program will not be an option for our community and we will no longer be part of the URC Agency. 1 Joint Resolution 33 of 2016. 2 Legislative Background During the 2019 General Session, the Utah State Legislature passed and the Governor signed HB 411, the Community Renewable Energy Act (Act)2, Utah Code Ann. §§ 54-17-901 to 909 3. The Act created a pathway for communities to work together to establish a community clean energy program in partnership with Rocky Mountain Power (RMP), a subsidiary of PaciﬁCorp, for residents and businesses in participating communities. The Rules Governing the Community Renewable Energy Program (Rules), Utah Administrative Code R746-314 4, were also adopted in 2019 by the Utah Public Service Commission (PSC) to implement the Act. The Act and associated Rules outline a process whereby interested communities could work with RMP to develop a Program Application that the utility could ﬁle with the PSC on behalf of those communities. This eﬀort and program is more frequently called the Utah Renewable Communities (URC). State Code was amended in 2024 5, changing the name to “Community Clean Energy Act”, among other changes. During the 2026 session, additional amendments to this section of code were adopted by the State legislature under HB 238 6, which is pending the Governor’s signature. HB 238 adds speciﬁc noticing and opt-out features. These changes are not anticipated to have signiﬁcant impact on the Program. Communities’ Involvement To pursue this opportunity, and as contemplated by the Act, 23 Utah communities established clean energy goals, taking the ﬁrst step towards participating in the eﬀort to jointly design a proposed program in partnership with RMP. Eighteen of the original 23 interested communities continued participating by entering into the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Among Public Entities Regarding the Community Renewable Energy Program (ILA), creating a cooperative of communities called the Community Renewable Energy Agency (Agency, known informally as URC), to jointly make decisions and negotiate with RMP to create the proposed program. Midvale City joined the Agency in 2024, bringing the total number of eligible communities to 19, following a change to the enabling legislation which removed the requirement that a community adopt a clean energy goal before December 31, 2019, in order to be eligible to participate. Each community appoints a primary and alternate board member to the Agency, one of whom should be an elected oﬃcial. Council Member Dan Dugan represents Salt Lake City on the Agency board and serves as the chair. Three subcommittees were formed by the URC in 2021 to advance program development: the Program Design, Low-Income Plan, and Communications subcommittees. Board members and support staﬀ from URC communities have worked diligently and thoughtfully since 2021 to design the proposed program for submission to the PSC, working closely with the Agency’s legal and technical consultants to negotiate 2 [1] See https://le.utah.gov/~2019/bills/static/HB0411.html 3 State Code §54-17-901 to §54-17-901: https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title54/Chapter17/54-17-S901.html?v=C54-17- S901_2024050120240501 4 Utah Administrative Code R746-314: https://adminrules.utah.gov/public/rule/R746-314/Current%20Rules 5 See https://le.utah.gov/~2024/bills/static/HB0241.html 6 See https://le.utah.gov/~2026/bills/static/HB0238.html 3 with RMP. Salt Lake City staﬀ have played key roles on all three subcommittees, including leading the Program Design work over the years. What is the Goal of the Program? The goal of the Program is to drive the development of clean, renewable energy resources like solar and wind energy on our grid that would not have been developed otherwise, while keeping the Program aﬀordable and accessible to customers. Ultimately, the target is to develop enough renewable resources to match the amount of electricity used annually by Program participants. While a community is no longer required by state law to have a net-100% renewable electricity goal to have joined the Agency, the Board still aims to push for making net-100% renewable electricity available to homes and businesses in participating communities by 2030; however, this target may be adjusted over time. PaciﬁCorp is RMP's parent company whose grid serves six states7, including Utah. The clean energy counting towards the Program is proposed to come from both existing clean energy on the grid plus new clean energy projects the Program brings to the grid. These resources are and will be part of the PaciﬁCorp grid. The Program has been developed and will be implemented in collaboration with RMP, and all URC participants will remain RMP customers. RMP will continue to be required to provide reliable power to all customers, regardless of a customer’s URC participation status. Program Approval by the Utah Public Service Commission As described by step 5 in Attachment A, the Act and Rules required that the proposed program be filed by RMP with the PSC. Following years of careful work and negotiations between the URC and RMP, on January 24, 2025, and June 4, 2025, RMP submitted parts I and II, respectively, of a two-part Application to Implement Community Clean Energy Program Authorized by the Community Clean Energy Act (Docket 25-035-06 8). As required by the Act, the Program Application included, among other items, information about the customers within the boundaries of the participating communities, projected rates under the proposed program, a Utility Agreement between each participating community and RMP, low-income plans for each community, a draft ordinance that establishes an eligible community’s participation in the proposed program, and more. Rounds of direct, rebuttal, and surrebuttal testimony followed. The process concluded with a technical hearing and public witness hearing in front of the Utah Public Service Commission on December 16 and 17, 2025. The Parties to the docket are: RMP, URC, the Division of Public Utilities (DPU), the Oﬃce of Consumer Services (OCS), Western Resource Advocates, and the Sierra Club. Each party participated in the rounds of testimony and the hearing. 7 In February 2025, PaciﬁCorp announced their plans to exit Washington, which will reduce the number of states they operate in to ﬁve in the coming years: https://www.paciﬁcorp.com/about/newsroom/news- releases/paciﬁcorp-to-sell-washington-service-area-to-pge.html 8 Docket No: 25-034-06 on the PSC website: https://psc.utah.gov/2025/01/25/docket-no-25-035-06/ 4 On March 4, 2026, a signiﬁcant milestone was achieved when the Utah Public Service Commission issued an Order9 in Docket 25-035-06 (“Order”) approving the proposed program with modiﬁcations. The PSC ruling was generally favorable toward the proposed program and the URC communities’ interests and provides clarity on how the Program will work, the initial cost to participate, and more. However, the PSC did not resolve every dispute URC and RMP raised in the docket. For unresolved items, the Order provided guidance and clear action items for the communities and RMP to move forward. The main issues that still need to be addressed are the resource valuation methodology that considers the ﬁnancial beneﬁt the new resources bring to non-URC customers, as well as the ﬁrst resource(s) contract which is called a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). These are discussed in more detail below, in the section “Additional URC Agency Processes.” Ordinance Timeline The PSC approval of the Program on March 4, 2026, set oﬀ the 90-day ordinance adoption window, as required by the Act. Each URC community has until June 2, 2026, to pass the required ordinance to formally adopt the Program. Given the Salt Lake City Council’s schedule of public hearings and current workload, we recommend targeting the May 19 formal meeting to adopt the ordinance. In October 2022, the Department submitted an informational transmittal to City Council seeking feedback on the draft model ordinance. The version submitted as part of the Program Application was shared with the Council in October 2025. The ordinance has changed moderately from the last version shared. After the Order, the Agency’s legal counsel updated parts of the ordinance to fully comply with the Order and these redlines were shared with the communities’ legal counsels. It is important that the ordinance remain largely unchanged; particularly the “therefore” clauses and Exhibit A. This is because the ordinance draft submitted to the PSC as part of the Program Application was meant to be indicative of the ordinances to be adopted, pursuant to the Act. Furthermore, the ordinances should remain consistent between the participating communities. The Sustainability Department has updated key “whereas” sections to reﬂect Salt Lake City’s climate and sustainability goals. Program Details Customer participation and opt-out The Program was established under the Act as an “opt-out” program, meaning that every eligible RMP customer in a community participating in the Program will be automatically enrolled with the option to exit at any time. Customers in these communities will see a new Community Clean Energy Program line item (“Schedule 100”) on their RMP bills as early as the ﬁrst quarter of 2027 (See Attachment C). The new line item will only appear after certain additional processes by the Agency and RMP are completed and approved by the PSC. This means that if Salt Lake City adopts the ordinance, nearly all RMP customers in our community will be automatically enrolled when the Program commences, likely not until early 2027, with the choice to 9 March 4, 2026 Order: https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/25docs/2503506/3441662503506oapwm3-4-2026.pdf 5 opt out. Customers will be able to exit the Program at any time. There will be an initial “cancellation period” whereby customers exiting the Program can do so without incurring a termination fee. After the “cancellation period,” customers can still exit at any time but will be subject to a termination fee. The termination fees are outlined in Attachment B. Initial Program rates One of the most signiﬁcant outcomes of the Order is the establishment of the initial Program rate. The Order established an initial residential ﬂat rate totaling $4 per month ($3.88 per month plus a $0.12 low-income program surcharge). This amount is in line with the Agency’s targeted dollar amount to keep the Program aﬀordable and accessible to customers. The low-income proposal from the Agency was also approved by the PSC. Income-qualiﬁed residents who are on Schedule 3 (RMP’s Home Electric Lifeline Program, or HELP) will see a monthly rate of $3.88 which would be matched by a $3.88 credit on their bill, making the Program free for these customers. For all other (non-residential) customer classes, the PSC approved a volumetric rate of $0.00609 per kWh and a low-income surcharge of $0.12 per month. Bill impacts for these commercial customers will depend on how much electricity they use each month. Program rates over time Rates will be adjusted periodically (not more than annually) to account for actual customer participation, annual administrative cost true-ups, and the Program valuation and resource costs. Regular rate adjustments happen with all other utility ratemaking and are not unique to the Program. It is not expected that future URC rates will increase signiﬁcantly from the initial Program rate. Importantly, the PSC in its Order recognized that future rates may even decline as the required administrative and resource reserve funds are established. Page 24 of the PSC order states: While future Program rates may diverge from those under RMP’s proposal contingent on later determinations regarding Resource Valuation and changes to other underlying variables, no evidence in the record suggests that Program rates are likely to meaningfully increase from the initial rates approved in this order. Instead, under RMP’s proposal, they would decrease rather signiﬁcantly after the ﬁrst two years. At the Program’s inception, customers will be deciding whether to opt-out with reference to rates that are likely to be higher than rates charged later, after the reserve balances are suﬃciently established. While this is not guaranteed and will be inﬂuenced by multiple factors including additional future resource procurements, the PSC found it within the public interest to allow the Program to begin with an initial ﬁxed rate of $4 per month. Customer Noticing and Estimated Timelines There are two distinct but important milestones when customers will hear about the Program, deﬁned in the order and State law: 6 • “Program Implementation” happens when the ﬁrst customer notices are mailed by RMP. • “Program Commencement” is when RMP initiates collection of Program rates. The following is the anticipated timeline for Program milestones: June 2, 2026 Deadline for Communities to Adopt the ordinance (Hard) June - Nov/Dec 2026 RMP upgrades customer service and billing systems (estimated) Nov/Dec 2026 “Program Implementation” – First customer notices (estimated) Nov/Dec 2026 Second customer notices – 15 days after ﬁrst notices (estimated) Jan/Feb 2027 “Program Commencement” – Program revenue collection begins (estimated) May/June 2027 Free cancellation period ends, termination fees apply (estimated) 2028-2030 Resources begin to come online. Exact timing will depend on resource selection and the terms of its PPA (estimated) Once the ordinance deadline of June 2 passes and RMP concludes its customer service upgrades (i.e. the “Startup Activities”) which are estimated to take approximately ﬁve months, RMP customers in a participating community will receive their ﬁrst oﬃcial notices about the Program. The ﬁrst noticing date is deﬁned as the beginning of “Program Implementation.” All RMP customers in communities that adopt the ordinance will receive two notices that are separate from their bills. This includes at least one mailed notice. The second notice will be mailed or digital, depending on customer communication preferences (i.e. if the customer has signed up for online billing.) Large commercial customers on Schedules 8 or 9 that have an electric load of one megawatt or greater will instead receive a noticing meeting, which may be conducted in-person or via video conference. The Agency expects the ﬁrst customer notices will be mailed in late 2026. As required in the Act and the Utility Agreement, any community that enacts the Program (by passing the ordinance) is responsible for reimbursing RMP for the cost of providing the two required notices to all RMP customers within the community’s boundaries. The Sustainability Department has budgeted accordingly for this expected expense of $156,000. After the ﬁrst notices go out, there will be two billing cycles, or approximately 60 days, until the ﬁrst URC clean energy line item appears on RMP customer bills. This period of initial program rate collection is deﬁned as “Program Commencement.” The Agency is estimating that Program Commencement will occur in early 2027. Utah HB 238 from 2026 passed and is currently awaiting the Governor’s signature. This bill adds additional requirements for the customer notices that are not expected to add additional burden to the already planned noticing process. Customers Wishing to Opt Out of the Program Once the Program begins, all customers can always exit it at any time. However, there may be termination fees after a certain time period for certain customers. 7 After “Program Implementation” when the ﬁrst notices are sent out, customers will have a six-month period during which they can exit the Program for free (this is known as the “Cancellation Period.”) After six months, there will be a $30 termination fee for residential customers. There will be approximately four months during the Cancellation Period when customers will be paying the regular Program rates, but will not incur a termination fee if they choose to exit the Program. Income-qualiﬁed customers enrolled in HELP are never subject to a termination fee. Commercial customers will pay a termination fee speciﬁc to their particular rate schedule after the Cancellation Period ends. Termination fees are outlined in Attachment B. In addition to the Cancellation Period, the Program includes other circumstances during which the termination fee will not apply, including customers moving out of a participating community, ceasing to be a customer of RMP, or seeking protection through bankruptcy proceedings. New customers moving into a participating community, or annexed into it, will receive their own notice and no-fee cancellation period of 60 days from their ﬁrst notice about the Program. Additional URC Agency Processes and Resource Solicitation While communities consider adopting the Program ordinance, the URC Agency will be working on several related processes that need to conclude before the Program launches. These include helping RMP upgrade their billing system and set up new customer service support for the Program (these are described in the order as “Startup Activities”.) The funding to backstop these required Startup Activities is the subject of an item in Budget Amendment 5 of FY2026 and is further discussed below. The Agency is also in the middle of a resource solicitation process to determine the ﬁrst new clean energy resource(s) that will serve the Program. This process has played out separately and ahead of the Program Application. On November 19, 2024, RMP ﬁled an Application for Approval of Solicitation Process 10 with the PSC describing the proposed process to solicit bids from clean energy developers (Docket 24-035-5511). The PSC granted the application12, clearing the way for URC to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) on May 22, 2025 13. Fifteen bids were initially received by the July 10, 2025, RFP deadline, one of which was later withdrawn 14. These bids were evaluated and scored by URC technical consultants, and an “initial short list” of six projects was selected by URC for further evaluation by RMP. URC received the results of this analysis in December 2025 and used this information to create a “ﬁnal 10 See https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/24docs/2403555/336616Application11-19-2024.pdf 11 Docket No. 24-035-55 on the PSC website: https://psc.utah.gov/2024/11/19/docket-no-24-035-55/ 12 See https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/24docs/2403555/3397642403555ogrmpaam5-13-2025.pdf 13 URC RFP website: https://www.urc2024rfp.com/ 14 URC blog post regarding responses to the RFP: https://www.utahrenewablecommunities.org/post/urc-closes- the-call-for-clean-energy-resources-the-response-was-outstanding 8 short list”. In February 2026, the URC board approved Resolution 2026-0215 selecting all four ﬁnal short list projects for power purchase agreement (PPA) negotiations. PPA negotiations are currently underway and the process to execute an agreement with one or more projects will eventually coincide with the valuation process, described below, and preparations towards implementing the URC Program. Finally, the Agency is also working with RMP and state agencies to determine how those resources will be valued. A program resource valuation methodology was not determined by the PSC in the Order and will be considered in a future regulatory proceeding. This will be based, in part, upon determinations that RMP and the PSC will make in the utility’s long-range planning eﬀort across its multi-state service territory. This process is called the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). The IRP lays out the utility’s forecast load growth over a 20-year timeline and what resources it plans to utilize to serve electricity demand. The IRP process– which culminates in plans that are released every two years and less robust “updates” that are released in intervening, oﬀ-cycle years— inﬂuences how the utility values new renewable energy brought to the grid. Once the latest version of the IRP is ﬁnalized, it will allow the URC and RMP to settle on a valuation methodology for URC clean energy resources going forward, pending PSC approval. What this means for individual customers is not likely to be noticeable, but will mean that the rates will change to a small degree in the future (as do all rates). Program Ordinance Ordinance details There are more details included in the ordinance than may be typical of many Salt Lake City ordinances, including many one-time deadlines and dates that will quickly stale in the code. While a bit awkward, it was decided deliberately by the URC communities to spell out the full details of the Program in the ordinance to oﬀer transparency and clarity in one central location, without requiring community members to track down additional information in the Act, Rules, and Order. While atypical, the Salt Lake City Attorney’s Oﬃce did not identify any issues with this approach. The ordinance must do two key things: ● Enact the approved program by the eligible community adopting the ordinance; and, ● Make it clear that the PSC has the ﬁnal say on how the program will work. There are three sections in the ordinance that cover the following: • Preamble: describes the history and context for development of the Program. • Program adoption: while short in length, this is the “action” of the ordinance - that the community’s governing body votes to adopt the Community Clean Energy Program. • Exhibit A describes key elements of the Program that will occur if Salt Lake City adopts the ordinance. This includes: • Establishing Salt Lake City’s participation in the approved Community Clean Energy Program. 15 URC Resolution 2026-02 Resolution of the Board Selecting Projects for Contract Negotiation: https://www.utah.gov/pmn/ﬁles/1387795.pdf 9 • Enabling all retail electricity customers in current and future boundaries of Salt Lake City to participate in the Program. This does not include rooftop solar customers on Schedule 135, the older net metering schedule, in accordance with the Act.16 Rooftop solar customers on Schedules 136 and 137 are eligible to participate. • Deﬁning the Program’s “Implementation Date” as the date when RMP sends out its ﬁrst notices to customers of their forthcoming enrollment in the Program and describing RMP’s noticing requirements. • Explaining that eligible customers will be enrolled in the Program if they decline to opt-out by the date used in the RMP notices. • Describing that any customer in a participating community who is not enrolled in the Program may opt-in at any time. • Imposing termination fees for customers who opt out after the cancellation period as well as situations when termination fees will not occur. • Describing the process and approvals needed for clean energy resource acquisition under the Program. • Acknowledging that the PSC determines the Program rate and can approve adjustments to the rates periodically. • Acknowledging that RMP is responsible for billing customers and notifying them of changes to the Program rate. Section 7 of Exhibit A sets forth Salt Lake City’s role and responsibilities. This includes: • Salt Lake City will continue to participate in future decisions regarding clean energy resource solicitation, acquisition, and other issues. • Salt Lake City’s obligation to enter into an agreement with RMP to eﬀectuate the Program. This “Utility Agreement” was negotiated between RMP and the communities between 2022-23, with the core participation of Salt Lake City staﬀ and attorneys. It was shared with the City Council in October 2023. It was signed by Council Member Dugan, serving as the URC Agency Board Chair, on August 22, 2024, and by Mayor Mendenhall for Salt Lake City on November 26, 2024. The Utility Agreement is consistent for all communities and RMP, as required by the Act. • Per the Utility Agreement, Salt Lake City will reimburse RMP for their costs to provide the two required notices to all eligible customers within our boundary. Funds were ﬁrst appropriated for this in the Department’s FY24 budget, which has been carried forward as a base budget item each year into the Department’s proposed FY27 base budget. • Salt Lake City has already appropriated and paid additional funds (when we joined the Agency) which, in part, were used to reimburse the OCS and DPU for their costs of contracting third-party expertise to evaluate the Program. Why Create a New Clean Energy Option? Participating Communities, as deﬁned under the Act, are served by RMP – i.e., they do not have their own municipal utilities – and their options for procuring clean energy resources are, therefore, limited. 16 54-17-905(5) states that "a residential customer that is participating in the net metering program under Title 54, Chapter 15, Net Metering of Electricity, may not be a participating customer under this part." 10 The Program oﬀers homes and businesses in our community a new option for supporting clean energy. Furthermore, the Program creates a unique opportunity to drive investment in new clean energy at scale, since, collectively, URC represents about 25% of RMP's electricity sales in Utah 17, which in turn represents 80% of total electricity sales in the State. Beneﬁts of the URC Program Utah is facing a worrisome energy shortage, as our energy supply is projected to decrease while demand continues to rise, according to Governor Cox’s Operation Gigawatt18. Thankfully, URC is part of the solution: the Program will add hundreds of megawatts of new clean energy to the grid in the 2020s, with the aim of adding even more in the next decade to support our communities’ clean energy goals and growing energy needs. By adding new clean energy to our electricity mix, URC is part of the solution by creating a more reliable energy supply for Utah. Health and Environment The electricity used to power our homes and businesses comes from a collection of power plants connected to our grid. This includes electricity generated by natural gas, coal, wind, solar, hydropower, and more. Throughout the day, power plants are dispatched to generate enough electricity to meet demand. Wind and solar power plants have no fuel costs, so they are often dispatched before coal and gas plants which do have fuel costs. When coal and natural gas plants generate electricity, greenhouse gases and air pollutants are emitted into the atmosphere as byproducts. Renewable electricity generation does not come with harmful fossil fuel emissions. By adding more renewable energy to the grid, the URC program may reduce how often fossil fuel plants need to run. This reduces pollution, improving our air quality, water quality, and climate on a local and regional scale. In particular, there are several natural gas plants along the Wasatch Front, owned by RMP or other entities. Due to our state’s increasing electricity demands, these pollution-emitting gas plants will likely need to run more often, which is a particular concern for the Gadsby power plant, given its age and location in the Fairpark neighborhood of Salt Lake City, as well as others that impact our airshed. Adding new, clean energy to the grid helps alleviate overall electricity demand which can result in less air pollution from local fossil fuel power plants. This beneﬁts the neighborhoods immediately next to power plants and those living throughout our inversion-prone valley. Similarly, the Hunter and Huntington coal plants in central Utah are large fossil fuel plants that contribute to air pollution in other parts of the state and reduce visibility in our national parks. The URC program aims to bring more clean energy to reduce pollution throughout the state. The Program ultimately aims to bring online about 500 MW of clean energy over the coming years, based on current participating customer projections. This amount of clean energy, which would occur 17 This estimate is based on the 19 currently participating communities. It is possible that not all 19 communities enact the ﬁnal program by passing the ordinance 18 Information on Operation Gigawatt: https://energy.utah.gov/homepage/about-us/operation-gigawatt/ 11 over several diﬀerent resource procurements, would result in an estimated reduction of 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide pollution annually, and 1,000 pounds of criteria pollution annually.19 Economic Growth The Program supports economic growth by bringing new energy development to areas of the state that are hotspots for solar, wind, or other clean energy development. (Note that Salt Lake County is not a prime location for utility-scale solar and wind.) New projects create construction and operational jobs; provide resources to public schools via the Trust Lands Administration if projects are sited on certain state land; support private landowners if sited privately; and add to local counties’ tax base. These beneﬁts were captured in a recent study by The Western Way20. Supporting a healthy environment is also core to many economic drivers in Utah– whether that’s the local ski and snow sports industry, national park visitation in gateway communities, or the upcoming 2034 Olympic & Paralympic Games. In fact, the Program is a cornerstone of the sustainability goals of Utah’s bid to the International Olympic Committee.21 Program comparison Homes and businesses have a few diﬀerent ways to access clean energy. The Program is distinct from existing clean energy oﬀerings: • The Blue Sky program has been available for nearly 26 years and allows participants to voluntarily contribute at $1.95 per 100 kWh “block” or 1.95 cents per kWh. Blue Sky is an important program that supports grants to help organizations oﬀset the cost of rooftop solar (Salt Lake City has beneﬁtted from a Blue Sky grant which helped cover the cost of solar on the Sorenson Center). Blue Sky participants also fund the purchase of Renewable Energy Certiﬁcates (RECs) nationwide which, while helpful to the industry, do not signiﬁcantly catalyze the growth of new utility-scale renewable energy. Blue Sky is also more expensive on a per kilowatt-hour basis than the initial residential Program rate of $4 per month per residential customer approved by the PSC (0.609 cents per kWh for the average residential consumption of 637 kWh per month, plus a 12 cent per month surcharge charged to participants to assist low-income customers). This is, in part, due to key diﬀerences between the programs, including Blue Sky’s ability to claim RECs, while URC is aiming to use its rate revenue to develop new clean energy to match participant demand. • The Subscriber Solar Program is also one that Salt Lake City Corporation participates in. It oﬀers RMP customers shares in an existing 20 MW solar farm in Southern Utah. While allowing customers to directly purchase a share of clean energy is an important beneﬁt compared with Blue Sky, Subscriber Solar has a capped participation opportunity and RMP has not indicated they plan to build more projects to make available to additional subscribers. 19 Source: EPA’s AVERT model. https://www.epa.gov/avert 20 The Economic Beneﬁts of Utah’s Rural Renewable Energy Industry: https://www.thewesternway.org/ut-eco-devo 21 "SALT LAKE CITY—UTAH COMMITTEE FOR THE GAMES Future Host Questionnaire Response" https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/Olympic-Games/Future-Host/SLC-UT-2034-Future-Host- Questionnaire-Response.pdf : Pages 24, 46, 57 12 • Customers can individually install rooftop solar on their homes or businesses. This is an important option to support renewable energy growth and energy security. However, it is expensive and only available to some types of customers with the funding and property types that allow for it. For these reasons, Salt Lake City and the other participating communities that are part of URC have worked diligently to develop the Community Clean Energy Program with RMP over the last several years. The Program oﬀers participating communities the opportunity to drive renewable energy development at utility scale and oﬀers their residents and businesses the choice to participate. If the ordinance is not adopted, that choice is removed for them. History of Salt Lake City’s support Salt Lake City joint resolution Number 33 of 2016, adopted November 1, 2016 (“2016 Resolution”) established two renewable energy goals – one for Salt Lake City’s government operations and another for the wider Salt Lake City community. For government operations, the 2016 resolution established a goal to achieve at least 50% municipal renewable energy by 2020. It also established 2032 as the year to achieve 100% renewable energy for both government operations and the community. The community goal was advanced to 2030 in Joint Resolution 23 of 2019, which established “a community goal of achieving an amount equivalent to 100% of the annual electric energy supply for participating customers from renewable energy resources by 2030.” By adopting this latter resolution, Salt Lake City qualiﬁed under the Act to join the URC and develop the Program in partnership with RMP. Subsequently, Salt Lake City made ﬁnancial contributions totaling $385,966.47 in Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023 to the Agency’s budget, which were proportional to our community’s population and electricity load. The Rules require participating communities to pay for program development and implementation costs incurred by the utility and regulators to avoid shifting costs to non-participating customers. On August 3, 2023, the Salt Lake City Council adopted Resolution 22 of 2023 endorsing the City’s ongoing participation in the development of the Program, and following that, Mayor Mendenhall signed the Utility Agreement along with the other participating communities. RMP is expected to sign the Utility Agreement soon now that the PSC has issued the Order. Transmittals shared with Council In addition to actions taken above, we are sharing the most recent transmittals on this program over the last few years, as reference: • In October 2022, the Department submitted an informational transmittal to City Council seeking feedback on the draft model ordinance and approaches to low-income assistance. • In October 2023, the Department submitted an informational transmittal to City Council providing a copy of the Utility Agreement. • In December 2024, the Department submitted an informational transmittal giving an update on Program milestones. • In October 2025, the Department provided a transmittal updating the City Council on the Program Application and Solicitation processes and expected next steps, should the PSC approve the Program. 13 Budgetary Updates The Agency will begin to receive Program rate revenue after RMP begins revenue collection, anticipated in early 2027 according to the timeline above and in Attachment C. To date, Program costs have been paid for from member communities contributions. URC has also been successful in receiving one grant and a ﬁnancial donation to support its eﬀorts over the last year. Because the Agency unexpectedly had to run its own resource solicitation process, it charged bid fees from developer applicants to pay for consultants to run the solicitation and other legal and technical costs. The Agency has remaining budget to fund expected activities through 2026, and URC support staﬀ continues to seek philanthropic opportunities to continue funding URC work to bridge any gaps until revenue collection begins. If additional funds are requested of member communities, which the Sustainability Department cannot cover with existing budget for Salt Lake City’s share, the Sustainability Department will prepare a budget amendment. As noted in the transmittal sent to the City Council in December 2024 and in the section below, there is a separate outstanding issue of unexpected administrative “Startup Costs.” Sustainability has included a funding request in FY26 Budget Amendment 5 to backstop the cost of these activities. Once revenue collection begins, all other costs associated with administering the program and for program resources will be covered by participating RMP customers and there is no further community obligation. Startup Costs There are certain customer service activities, with associated costs, that need to occur in order for RMP to send out bills with the Program line item, thus allowing the Program to commence. These activities can be paid for by ratepayer revenues, but those cannot be collected before such activities occur. Accordingly, these activities are called “Startup Activities” and their associated costs, “Startup Costs”. The most signiﬁcant Startup Cost is an upgrade to RMP’s information systems to automate statutory aspects of the Program, namely, to: • allow Program-eligible customers to opt-out one or more of their electric accounts; • generate ongoing opt-out notices for new Program-eligible customers; and • assess any applicable termination fees. Other costs include setting up a 1-800 number for customer support, customer service training, and other miscellaneous costs. The total Startup Cost estimate provided to the PSC as part of the Program approval docket was $820,169. Unfortunately, RMP did not initially identify these Startup Costs as an expense that the URC would need to cover. For that reason, the URC’s initial $700,000 budget—fully funded through contributions by its 19 member communities—was not designed to cover it. Additionally, the Rules adopted by the PSC say that costs related to operation of the Program should be recovered through the Program rate paid by participating customers – not the participating communities. Further, neither the Act nor Rules allow Program-related costs like this to be shifted to non-participating customers. If these Program-related costs are included in the established rate, RMP has expressed 14 concern that the liability for the Startup Costs could be shifted to all customers if a majority of URC customers opt out of the Program. This is an extremely low likelihood event, but RMP has required that URC’s member communities sign an agreement, in advance, to cover the Startup Costs if those costs have not been recovered through Program rates after an agreed timeframe. The nature and estimated amounts of the Startup Costs were discussed in the Program Approval docket, with cost estimates and challenges made before the PSC. Ultimately, the PSC, in approving the program, acknowledged that the Startup Costs could be paid for up-front by RMP, but would need to be reimbursed, either by ratepayer revenues, or a URC community, so as not to shift costs to other RMP customers. Recognizing that Salt Lake City is the community with the largest population and electricity load of all 19 URC communities and could thus most beneﬁt from the Program’s impact, the Sustainability Department agreed to request budget allocation that could be obligated, allowing Salt Lake City to sign such a contract with Rocky Mountain Power. As conﬁrmed in recent conversations with RMP staﬀ, the Startup Costs will remain approximately the same whether solely Salt Lake City participates in the program, or all 19 communities. The Startup Cost estimate we are using for Budget Amendment 5 is the one RMP provided to the PSC of $820,169, plus an additional 10% contingency. While this number is an estimate and actual costs would vary, we believe it is on the higher end of what would be required, allowing us to move forward contractually. Furthermore, it is very unlikely that Salt Lake City would end up needing to pay this money to RMP. Rather, it is being identiﬁed and held as a backstop in order to sign the Startup Cost agreement. That is because it is estimated the Program could generate around $18 million in revenues each year at the PSC-approved initial rate of $4 per month for residential customers and $0.00609 per kWh for non- residential customers. At these rates, it is likely that the Startup Cost estimate of $820,169 will be more than recovered from a single month of Program revenue. Given RMP’s requirement that a contract be in place and the high likelihood that the full cost will be recovered through one month of Program revenues, it is very likely that this Startup Cost budget can be de-obligated shortly after Program revenue collection begins. These details have been worked into the contractual language that is currently being negotiated with RMP. Salt Lake City is separately talking with other communities that are part of the Agency on their potential contributions to reimburse the City, in the case that the Startup Costs are collected. Conclusion After nearly a decade of thoughtful, intentional, and complex work to plan, design, negotiate, and apply for approval, the Community Clean Energy Program has been approved by the PSC. This milestone starts a 90-day clock for each of the 19 communities involved in URC to consider enacting the approved Program by adopting the program ordinance by June 2, 2026. If adopted, the ﬁrst customer notices are 15 expected to go out in late 2026, and the new clean energy line item will appear in early 2027 on customers’ RMP bills. This page has intentionally been left blank ATTACHMENT A This page has intentionally been left blank ATTACHMENT B Information on termination fees included in the Program Application This page has intentionally been left blank Estimated 2026-27 URC Timeline PROGRAM: v PSC program approval: (March 4, 2026) 1 v Ordinance adoption (within 90 days of PSC approval: ends June 2,2026) 2 v RMP preps billing system (5 months following adoption window) 3 Noticing period (60 days following implementation) 4 No fee opt-out period (~ 4 months following commencement) 5 Fee-Free Cancellation Period of 6 months "Implementation Date" Noticing begins (~November 2, 2026) "Commencement Date" Revenue collection begins (~January 1, 2027) “Implementation” = when customer noticing begins. Currently estimated in late 2026 “Commencement” = when rate collection begins. Currently estimated in early 2027 This page has intentionally been left blank 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ____ of 2026 (Enacting Title 9, Chapter 50 to the Salt Lake City Code, Community Clean Energy Program) WHEREAS, in 2019, the Utah State Legislature enacted House Bill 411, codified at Utah Code Ann. §§ 54-17-901 to -909 (“Act”), titled the “Community Renewable Energy Act”; and WHEREAS, in 2024, the Utah State Legislature enacted House Bill 241 and Senate Bill 214 which, collectively, renamed the Act the “Community Clean Energy Act” and amended certain provisions of the Act; and WHEREAS, the Act authorizes the Utah Public Service Commission (“Commission”) to approve a program (“Program”) negotiated by towns, municipalities, and counties with qualified utilities to provide electric energy from clean energy resources for participating customers; and WHEREAS, the Act further authorizes the Commission to adopt administrative rules to implement the Act and the Commission has adopted such rules as set forth in Utah Administrative Code R746-314-101 through -402 (“Rules”); and WHEREAS, the Rules require that, in addition to the requirements of the Act, the Community which may be served by the Program also adopts an agreement (“Governance Agreement”) with other eligible Communities to establish a cooperative decision-making process for Program design, resource solicitation, resource acquisition, and other Program issues and provides a means of ensuring that eligible Communities and those that become participating Communities will be able to reach a single joint decision on any necessary Program issues; and WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of the Rules, Salt Lake City entered into an agreement with other eligible Communities entitled the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Among Public Entities Regarding the Community Renewable Energy Program (“Governance Agreement”), thereby becoming a member of the Community Renewable Energy Agency (“Agency”), which endeavors to make certain joint decisions about the proposed Program on behalf of all Communities; and WHEREAS, the Act and Rules further specifies a requirement that the Community must enter into an agreement with a qualified utility (“Utility Agreement”) whereby the Community stipulates to pay certain costs associated with establishing the Program, determines the obligation of payment for termination charges that are not paid through participating customers, and identifies any initially proposed replaced assets; and WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of the Act, Salt Lake City executed a Utility Agreement with Rocky Mountain Power, a qualified utility under the Act, on November 26, 2024, which addresses the issues required by the Act; and WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of the Act, on January 24, 2025, and June 4, 2 2025, Rocky Mountain Power filed an application with the Commission seeking approval of the Program and the Commission opened Docket No. 25-035-06 to consider the application; and WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of the Act, on March 4, 2026, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. 25-035-06 (“Commission Order”) approving the Program; and WHEREAS, the Act further provides that a Community must, within ninety (90) days after the date of the Commission’s order approving the Program, adopt a local ordinance (“Program Ordinance”) that establishes the Community’s participation in the Program and is consistent with the Utility Agreement, if the Community desires that the Program be available to customers of the qualified utility residing or operating within its boundaries; and WHEREAS, following the approval of the Commission Order on March 4, 2026, Salt Lake City must adopt a Program Ordinance no later than June 2, 2026, if it desires to adopt the Program for electric customers within Salt Lake City boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council desires to take actions which it has determined promotes the health, safety and welfare of Salt Lake City’s residents; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds that energy sources utilized by and within Salt Lake City can impact public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council has determined that adoption of this ordinance will help address public health and welfare concerns related to poor air quality and other environmental concerns arising in part from the use of fossil fuels; and WHEREAS, recent advances in energy technology have made certain clean energy resources more economically viable than in the past and, in some cases, more cost-effective than traditional energy sources; and WHEREAS, proximity to outdoor recreation, which is critical to public welfare and is a key economic contributor to Salt Lake City, relies on preservation of the environment and protection of natural resources; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council has determined that adoption of this ordinance will enhance the economic well-being of Salt Lake City and its residents through prudent management of Salt Lake City’s financial resources; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City and its residents have shown an interest in environmental stewardship through various initiatives and activities surrounding growth and development; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Joint Resolution No. 33 of 2016, adopted November 1, 2016, established two renewable energy goals: (1) to achieve at least 50% municipal renewable energy by 2020, and (2) to achieve 100% renewable energy for both municipal operations and the community by 2032; and 3 WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Joint Resolution No. 23 of 2019, adopted August 27, 2019, advanced the previously established community energy goal, striving to achieve an amount equivalent to 100% of the annual electric energy supply for participating customers from renewable energy resources by 2030, thereby qualifying Salt Lake City under the Act to participate in the Program; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Resolution No. 22 of 2023, adopted July 18, 2023, endorsed the City’s ongoing participation in the development of the Program; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council believes that determining and undertaking further actions designed to reduce fossil fuel dependence while appropriately balancing financial stewardship and promoting economic growth is an important component of safeguarding public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council met in regular session on ______________, 2026, to, among other things, consider adopting the Program on behalf of Salt Lake City’s electric customers; and WHEREAS, as contemplated in the Act, the Salt Lake City Council desires to adopt the attached Program Ordinance that satisfies the requirements of the Act and adopts the Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption. Salt Lake City Code, Title 9, Chapter 50, Community Clean Energy Program, which is published as a code in book form, is adopted in accordance with Exhibit A herein, copies of which have been filed for use and examination in the Office of the City Recorder (the “Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance”). Section 2. Savings Clause. In the event one or more of the provisions of this Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance shall, for any reason, be held to be unenforceable or invalid in any respect under applicable laws, such unenforceability or invalidity shall not affect any other provision; and in such an event, this Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance shall be construed as if such unenforceable or invalid provision had never been contained herein. Section 3. Effective Date. This Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. 4 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _____ day of ______________, 2026. ATTEST: _________________________ __________________________________ Keith Reynolds, City Recorder CHAIRPERSON Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________ Keith Reynolds, City Recorder Bill No. _______ of 2026. Published: __________________ Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office 5 EXHIBIT A TITLE 9 CHAPTER 50 COMMUNITY CLEAN ENERGY PROGRAM 9.50.010: SALT LAKE CITY’S PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY CLEAN ENERGY PROGRAM: A. Salt Lake City hereby establishes its participation in the Community Clean Energy Program (“Program”) as approved by the Public Service Commission of Utah (“Commission”). B. The Commission has adopted such rules as set forth in Utah Administrative Code R746-314-101 through -402 (“Rules”). On March 4, 2026, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. 25-035-06 (“Commission Order”) approving the Program. The Commission Order is on file with the Commission. The Program’s rates and requirements are governed by the Commission Order, and may be modified from time to time by subsequent Rules and orders adopted by the Commission. To the extent that the Commission Order or any subsequent Rule or order adopted by the Commission contradicts any portion of this Title, the Commission order or Rule or order adopted by the Commission shall govern. C. ELIGIBLE CUSTOMERS. Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 54-17-905(5), residential customers participating in the net metering program under Utah Code Title 54, Chapter 15, Net Metering of Electricity, Rocky Mountain Power Schedule 135, are not eligible to participate in the Program. All other retail electric customers of Rocky Mountain Power (“RMP”) within the current and future boundaries of Salt Lake City, including all residential, commercial, and industrial customers, are eligible to participate in the Program (“Eligible Customer”). Eligible Customers include rooftop solar customers on Rocky Mountain Power Schedules 136 and 137, which are compensated through an export credit rather than a net metering schedule. D. IMPLEMENTATION DATE. The Program shall be implemented on the date that RMP sends out the first Notices identified in section 9.50.020 (“Program Implementation Date”). Eligible Customers shall be enrolled in the Program if they receive the Notices and decline to opt out of participation in the Program by the date set forth in the Notices. Consistent with the Act and the Rules, the Notices shall be sent to each Eligible Customer before the commencement date that applies to each such customer (“Customer Commencement Date”), as set forth in the Rules. 9.50.020: CUSTOMER PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY CLEAN ENERGY PROGRAM: A. Each Eligible Customer shall be automatically enrolled in the Program unless the customer opts out of the Program prior to the Customer Commencement Date. B. NOTICES. As set forth in the Act and the Rules before any Eligible Customer becomes a participant in the Program, RMP first shall deliver to each Eligible Customer certain 6 notices (collectively, the “Notices”) containing content and in the form, manner, and delivery method as required by the Act and Rules and other orders and Rules. C. OPT-OUT. Each Eligible Customer may elect not to participate in the Program and instead to pay applicable existing electric rates by giving notice to RMP in the manner and within the time period set forth in the Notices. 1. FIRST OPT-OUT NOTICE. RMP shall provide a First Opt-Out Notice, separate from standard monthly bills, to each Eligible Customer within Salt Lake City, no earlier than sixty (60) days and no later than thirty (30) days before the Customer Commencement Date applicable to each customer. The First Opt-Out Notice shall, in all material respects, use the form and content of the First Opt-Out Notice as approved by the Commission. 2. SECOND OPT-OUT NOTICE. RMP shall provide a Second Opt-Out Notice, separate from standard monthly bills, to each Eligible Customer within Salt Lake City, at least fifteen (15) days after the First Opt-Out Notice was provided and at least seven (7) days before the Customer Commencement Date applicable to such customer. The Second Opt-Out Notice shall, in all material respects, use the form and content of the Second Opt-Out Notice as approved by the Commission. 3. Each Eligible Customer that receives the First Opt-Out Notice and the Second Opt-Out Notice as described herein and declines to opt out of the Program by the customer’s Customer Commencement Date will be enrolled in the Program. D. CUSTOMER OPTION TO OPT IN TO PROGRAM. An Eligible Customer located within Salt Lake City that is not enrolled in the Program may at any time elect to participate in the Program by providing notice to RMP in the form and content approved by the Commission. Following such notice to opt in to the Program, the customer will be enrolled in the Program starting with the billing period following the notice in which it is reasonably practicable for RMP to enroll such customer. The reasonably practicable billing period shall be based on when the notice was received from the customer and the customer’s billing cycle. Following enrollment in the Program, the customer shall be subject to all Program requirements E. CUSTOMER OPTION TO EXIT PROGRAM. Customers enrolled in the Program may exit the Program by giving notice to RMP. 9.50.030: TERMINATION FEES: A. If a customer declines to opt out of the Program prior to the applicable Customer Commencement Date, but subsequently exits the Program, the exiting customer may be required to pay a termination fee, as set forth in this section and further specified by the Rules and the Commission Order. B. When applicable, the amount of the termination fee shall be based on the rate schedule of the exiting customer as approved by the Commission and may be modified from time to time by subsequent orders of the Commission. 7 C. CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH TERMINATION FEE SHALL NOT APPLY: A termination fee shall not apply in the following circumstances: 1. any customer that opts out of the Program within the “Cancellation Period” applicable to that customer, as defined in the Rules. 2. any customer that ceases to be an electric customer of RMP; 3. any customer that moves to a new location that is not within the boundaries of a community that participates in the Program; 4. any customer that seeks protection through bankruptcy proceedings; or 5. any customer enrolled in Rocky Mountain Schedule 3 bill assistance (“Low- Income Lifeline Program”). 9.50.040: ACQUISITION OF CLEAN ENERGY RESOURCES: A. For purposes of this section, “clean energy resource” shall have the definition set forth in the Act. B. RMP may adopt or procure one or more clean energy resources to serve the needs and goals of the Program. The acquisition of any such clean energy resource must follow solicitation application and evaluation criteria approved by the Commission. C. Any clean energy resource adopted or procured by RMP to serve the needs and goals of the Program must be approved by the Commission based on a finding the same is reasonable and in the public interest. D. The Commission shall determine the method of cost recovery for any clean energy resource acquired to meet Program needs and goals, and the Commission’s determination regarding cost recovery may affect Program rates. 9.50.050: PROGRAM RATES AND RATE ADJUSTMENT FILINGS: A. Program rates will be determined by the Commission. B. The initial Program rates were determined by the Commission in the Commission Order. C. Program rates may be adjusted by the Commission from time to time, consistent with the procedures approved by the Commission for adjusting Program rates. 9.50.060: UTILITY BILLING FOR PARTICIPATING CUSTOMERS: A. RMP shall bill each Participating Customer on a monthly basis and shall: 1. include information in its monthly bills to participating customers 8 identifying the Program cost; and 2. provide notice to participating customers of any change in rates for participation in the Program. 9.50.070: SALT LAKE CITY PARTICIPATION IN PROGRAM: A. Through its membership in the Community Renewable Energy Agency, Salt Lake City participated in the design and approval of the Program and shall participate in future decisions regarding clean energy resource solicitation, clean energy resource acquisition, and certain other Program issues. B. Consistent with Utah Code Ann. § 54-17-903(2)(a), Salt Lake City entered into an agreement with RMP regarding the facilitation of the Program (“Utility Agreement”). Pursuant to the Utility Agreement: 1. Salt Lake City shall pay for the costs of third-party expertise contracted for in connection with the Program’s development and initial approval by the Commission; 2. Salt Lake City shall pay its proportional costs associated with RMP providing the Notices to the Salt Lake City customers as discussed in section 9.50.020; 3. termination fees not paid by a participating customer shall be included in participating customer rates and shall not be paid by Salt Lake City; 4. there shall be no initially proposed “Replaced Asset” as that term is defined by Utah Code Ann. § 54-17-902(15). C. Salt Lake City has already approved the appropriation of funds and has already paid those funds to the Agency for the Agency to make payments for the costs of third-party expertise contracted for in connection with the Program’s development and initial approval by the Commission pursuant to the Governance Agreement. D. Salt Lake City has approved the appropriation of funds to pay its proportional costs associated with RMP providing the Notices to Salt Lake City customers as discussed in section 9.50.020. E. Salt Lake City shall not be obligated to pay any costs of the Program other than those costs set forth herein and any costs that Salt Lake City may bear as a utility customer that participates in the Program, if applicable. This page has intentionally been left blank SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 03/27/2026 Date Sent to Council: 03/27/2026 From: Department * Sustainability Employee Name: O'Malley, Monica E-mail monica.omalley@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 03/27/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 03/27/2026 Subject: Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance Additional Staff Contact:Presenters/Staff Table Glade Sowards, Sr. Energy and Climate Program Manager, Glade.Sowards@slc.gov Sophia Nicholas, Deputy Director, Sophia.Nicholas@slc.gov Document Type Ordinance Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: Adopt the participation ordinance for the Community Clean Energy Program no later than June 2, 2026. Background/Discussion See ﬁrst attachment for Background/Discussion Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing Neither the Act nor the Rules require a public hearing for adoption of this ordinance. The Department is supportive of scheduling this item for public comment as timing permits and adopting the ordinance according to the City Council’s established protocol. Public Process This page has intentionally been left blank 1 Community Clean Energy Program Ordinance Background/Discussion Summary of Key Points • With the adoption of Salt Lake City’s net-100% renewable electricity goal in 2016 1, we began working with Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) and other communities to pass legislation in 2019 to facilitate that goal. The passage of HB 411 permitted communities to negotiate a proposed clean energy program with RMP to develop renewable energy resources to serve customers within the communities’ boundaries. • Salt Lake City has been involved in a joint cooperative eﬀort with 18 other communities, informally called the Utah Renewable Communities (URC), to develop a Community Clean Energy Program (Program) pursuant to the 2019 legislation. • The Program was submitted to the Public Service Commission of Utah (PSC) and was approved, with minor modiﬁcations, on March 4, 2026. Following the recent PSC approval, all 19 communities involved have to determine whether to enact the Program within our respective boundaries by adopting the program ordinance. • The ordinance adoption process runs 90 days from the PSC order, meaning the ordinance must be adopted no later than June 2, 2026, for Salt Lake City to participate. • The Community Clean Energy Program, should Salt Lake City choose to enact it, will provide a new opportunity for nearly all homes and businesses within Salt Lake City to choose clean energy through their RMP bill. A new line item will be added to customer RMP bills to support the investment in clean energy, with the option for customers to exit at any time. • The Program is still several months from kicking oﬀ. We expect customers to see notices by the end of 2026 and the new URC clean energy line item on their bill in early 2027 (at the earliest). • The initial residential rate set by the PSC is $4 per month. • Income-eligible customers can receive a bill credit, enabling them to participate for free. • The Program directly supports the addition of new, utility-scale clean energy to the PaciﬁCorp grid, and is distinct from other clean energy oﬀerings. • The Community Clean Energy Program ordinance is forthcoming for the Salt Lake City Council to discuss and consider adopting. o If Salt Lake City adopts the ordinance, it will oﬃcially bring the Community Clean Energy Program to our community and Salt Lake City will continue to be part of the URC Agency, collaborating with RMP to launch and operate the program. o If Salt Lake City does not adopt the ordinance, the Community Clean Energy Program will not be an option for our community and we will no longer be part of the URC Agency. 1 Joint Resolution 33 of 2016. 2 Legislative Background During the 2019 General Session, the Utah State Legislature passed and the Governor signed HB 411, the Community Renewable Energy Act (Act)2, Utah Code Ann. §§ 54-17-901 to 909 3. The Act created a pathway for communities to work together to establish a community clean energy program in partnership with Rocky Mountain Power (RMP), a subsidiary of PaciﬁCorp, for residents and businesses in participating communities. The Rules Governing the Community Renewable Energy Program (Rules), Utah Administrative Code R746-314 4, were also adopted in 2019 by the Utah Public Service Commission (PSC) to implement the Act. The Act and associated Rules outline a process whereby interested communities could work with RMP to develop a Program Application that the utility could ﬁle with the PSC on behalf of those communities. This eﬀort and program is more frequently called the Utah Renewable Communities (URC). State Code was amended in 2024 5, changing the name to “Community Clean Energy Act”, among other changes. During the 2026 session, additional amendments to this section of code were adopted by the State legislature under HB 238 6, which is pending the Governor’s signature. HB 238 adds speciﬁc noticing and opt-out features. These changes are not anticipated to have signiﬁcant impact on the Program. Communities’ Involvement To pursue this opportunity, and as contemplated by the Act, 23 Utah communities established clean energy goals, taking the ﬁrst step towards participating in the eﬀort to jointly design a proposed program in partnership with RMP. Eighteen of the original 23 interested communities continued participating by entering into the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Among Public Entities Regarding the Community Renewable Energy Program (ILA), creating a cooperative of communities called the Community Renewable Energy Agency (Agency, known informally as URC), to jointly make decisions and negotiate with RMP to create the proposed program. Midvale City joined the Agency in 2024, bringing the total number of eligible communities to 19, following a change to the enabling legislation which removed the requirement that a community adopt a clean energy goal before December 31, 2019, in order to be eligible to participate. Each community appoints a primary and alternate board member to the Agency, one of whom should be an elected oﬃcial. Council Member Dan Dugan represents Salt Lake City on the Agency board and serves as the chair. Three subcommittees were formed by the URC in 2021 to advance program development: the Program Design, Low-Income Plan, and Communications subcommittees. Board members and support staﬀ from URC communities have worked diligently and thoughtfully since 2021 to design the proposed program for submission to the PSC, working closely with the Agency’s legal and technical consultants to negotiate 2 [1] See https://le.utah.gov/~2019/bills/static/HB0411.html 3 State Code §54-17-901 to §54-17-901: https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title54/Chapter17/54-17-S901.html?v=C54-17- S901_2024050120240501 4 Utah Administrative Code R746-314: https://adminrules.utah.gov/public/rule/R746-314/Current%20Rules 5 See https://le.utah.gov/~2024/bills/static/HB0241.html 6 See https://le.utah.gov/~2026/bills/static/HB0238.html 3 with RMP. Salt Lake City staﬀ have played key roles on all three subcommittees, including leading the Program Design work over the years. What is the Goal of the Program? The goal of the Program is to drive the development of clean, renewable energy resources like solar and wind energy on our grid that would not have been developed otherwise, while keeping the Program aﬀordable and accessible to customers. Ultimately, the target is to develop enough renewable resources to match the amount of electricity used annually by Program participants. While a community is no longer required by state law to have a net-100% renewable electricity goal to have joined the Agency, the Board still aims to push for making net-100% renewable electricity available to homes and businesses in participating communities by 2030; however, this target may be adjusted over time. PaciﬁCorp is RMP's parent company whose grid serves six states7, including Utah. The clean energy counting towards the Program is proposed to come from both existing clean energy on the grid plus new clean energy projects the Program brings to the grid. These resources are and will be part of the PaciﬁCorp grid. The Program has been developed and will be implemented in collaboration with RMP, and all URC participants will remain RMP customers. RMP will continue to be required to provide reliable power to all customers, regardless of a customer’s URC participation status. Program Approval by the Utah Public Service Commission As described by step 5 in Attachment A, the Act and Rules required that the proposed program be filed by RMP with the PSC. Following years of careful work and negotiations between the URC and RMP, on January 24, 2025, and June 4, 2025, RMP submitted parts I and II, respectively, of a two-part Application to Implement Community Clean Energy Program Authorized by the Community Clean Energy Act (Docket 25-035-06 8). As required by the Act, the Program Application included, among other items, information about the customers within the boundaries of the participating communities, projected rates under the proposed program, a Utility Agreement between each participating community and RMP, low-income plans for each community, a draft ordinance that establishes an eligible community’s participation in the proposed program, and more. Rounds of direct, rebuttal, and surrebuttal testimony followed. The process concluded with a technical hearing and public witness hearing in front of the Utah Public Service Commission on December 16 and 17, 2025. The Parties to the docket are: RMP, URC, the Division of Public Utilities (DPU), the Oﬃce of Consumer Services (OCS), Western Resource Advocates, and the Sierra Club. Each party participated in the rounds of testimony and the hearing. 7 In February 2025, PaciﬁCorp announced their plans to exit Washington, which will reduce the number of states they operate in to ﬁve in the coming years: https://www.paciﬁcorp.com/about/newsroom/news- releases/paciﬁcorp-to-sell-washington-service-area-to-pge.html 8 Docket No: 25-034-06 on the PSC website: https://psc.utah.gov/2025/01/25/docket-no-25-035-06/ 4 On March 4, 2026, a signiﬁcant milestone was achieved when the Utah Public Service Commission issued an Order9 in Docket 25-035-06 (“Order”) approving the proposed program with modiﬁcations. The PSC ruling was generally favorable toward the proposed program and the URC communities’ interests and provides clarity on how the Program will work, the initial cost to participate, and more. However, the PSC did not resolve every dispute URC and RMP raised in the docket. For unresolved items, the Order provided guidance and clear action items for the communities and RMP to move forward. The main issues that still need to be addressed are the resource valuation methodology that considers the ﬁnancial beneﬁt the new resources bring to non-URC customers, as well as the ﬁrst resource(s) contract which is called a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). These are discussed in more detail below, in the section “Additional URC Agency Processes.” Ordinance Timeline The PSC approval of the Program on March 4, 2026, set oﬀ the 90-day ordinance adoption window, as required by the Act. Each URC community has until June 2, 2026, to pass the required ordinance to formally adopt the Program. Given the Salt Lake City Council’s schedule of public hearings and current workload, we recommend targeting the May 19 formal meeting to adopt the ordinance. In October 2022, the Department submitted an informational transmittal to City Council seeking feedback on the draft model ordinance. The version submitted as part of the Program Application was shared with the Council in October 2025. The ordinance has changed moderately from the last version shared. After the Order, the Agency’s legal counsel updated parts of the ordinance to fully comply with the Order and these redlines were shared with the communities’ legal counsels. It is important that the ordinance remain largely unchanged; particularly the “therefore” clauses and Exhibit A. This is because the ordinance draft submitted to the PSC as part of the Program Application was meant to be indicative of the ordinances to be adopted, pursuant to the Act. Furthermore, the ordinances should remain consistent between the participating communities. The Sustainability Department has updated key “whereas” sections to reﬂect Salt Lake City’s climate and sustainability goals. Program Details Customer participation and opt-out The Program was established under the Act as an “opt-out” program, meaning that every eligible RMP customer in a community participating in the Program will be automatically enrolled with the option to exit at any time. Customers in these communities will see a new Community Clean Energy Program line item (“Schedule 100”) on their RMP bills as early as the ﬁrst quarter of 2027 (See Attachment C). The new line item will only appear after certain additional processes by the Agency and RMP are completed and approved by the PSC. This means that if Salt Lake City adopts the ordinance, nearly all RMP customers in our community will be automatically enrolled when the Program commences, likely not until early 2027, with the choice to 9 March 4, 2026 Order: https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/25docs/2503506/3441662503506oapwm3-4-2026.pdf 5 opt out. Customers will be able to exit the Program at any time. There will be an initial “cancellation period” whereby customers exiting the Program can do so without incurring a termination fee. After the “cancellation period,” customers can still exit at any time but will be subject to a termination fee. The termination fees are outlined in Attachment B. Initial Program rates One of the most signiﬁcant outcomes of the Order is the establishment of the initial Program rate. The Order established an initial residential ﬂat rate totaling $4 per month ($3.88 per month plus a $0.12 low-income program surcharge). This amount is in line with the Agency’s targeted dollar amount to keep the Program aﬀordable and accessible to customers. The low-income proposal from the Agency was also approved by the PSC. Income-qualiﬁed residents who are on Schedule 3 (RMP’s Home Electric Lifeline Program, or HELP) will see a monthly rate of $3.88 which would be matched by a $3.88 credit on their bill, making the Program free for these customers. For all other (non-residential) customer classes, the PSC approved a volumetric rate of $0.00609 per kWh and a low-income surcharge of $0.12 per month. Bill impacts for these commercial customers will depend on how much electricity they use each month. Program rates over time Rates will be adjusted periodically (not more than annually) to account for actual customer participation, annual administrative cost true-ups, and the Program valuation and resource costs. Regular rate adjustments happen with all other utility ratemaking and are not unique to the Program. It is not expected that future URC rates will increase signiﬁcantly from the initial Program rate. Importantly, the PSC in its Order recognized that future rates may even decline as the required administrative and resource reserve funds are established. Page 24 of the PSC order states: While future Program rates may diverge from those under RMP’s proposal contingent on later determinations regarding Resource Valuation and changes to other underlying variables, no evidence in the record suggests that Program rates are likely to meaningfully increase from the initial rates approved in this order. Instead, under RMP’s proposal, they would decrease rather signiﬁcantly after the ﬁrst two years. At the Program’s inception, customers will be deciding whether to opt-out with reference to rates that are likely to be higher than rates charged later, after the reserve balances are suﬃciently established. While this is not guaranteed and will be inﬂuenced by multiple factors including additional future resource procurements, the PSC found it within the public interest to allow the Program to begin with an initial ﬁxed rate of $4 per month. Customer Noticing and Estimated Timelines There are two distinct but important milestones when customers will hear about the Program, deﬁned in the order and State law: 6 • “Program Implementation” happens when the ﬁrst customer notices are mailed by RMP. • “Program Commencement” is when RMP initiates collection of Program rates. The following is the anticipated timeline for Program milestones: June 2, 2026 Deadline for Communities to Adopt the ordinance (Hard) June - Nov/Dec 2026 RMP upgrades customer service and billing systems (estimated) Nov/Dec 2026 “Program Implementation” – First customer notices (estimated) Nov/Dec 2026 Second customer notices – 15 days after ﬁrst notices (estimated) Jan/Feb 2027 “Program Commencement” – Program revenue collection begins (estimated) May/June 2027 Free cancellation period ends, termination fees apply (estimated) 2028-2030 Resources begin to come online. Exact timing will depend on resource selection and the terms of its PPA (estimated) Once the ordinance deadline of June 2 passes and RMP concludes its customer service upgrades (i.e. the “Startup Activities”) which are estimated to take approximately ﬁve months, RMP customers in a participating community will receive their ﬁrst oﬃcial notices about the Program. The ﬁrst noticing date is deﬁned as the beginning of “Program Implementation.” All RMP customers in communities that adopt the ordinance will receive two notices that are separate from their bills. This includes at least one mailed notice. The second notice will be mailed or digital, depending on customer communication preferences (i.e. if the customer has signed up for online billing.) Large commercial customers on Schedules 8 or 9 that have an electric load of one megawatt or greater will instead receive a noticing meeting, which may be conducted in-person or via video conference. The Agency expects the ﬁrst customer notices will be mailed in late 2026. As required in the Act and the Utility Agreement, any community that enacts the Program (by passing the ordinance) is responsible for reimbursing RMP for the cost of providing the two required notices to all RMP customers within the community’s boundaries. The Sustainability Department has budgeted accordingly for this expected expense of $156,000. After the ﬁrst notices go out, there will be two billing cycles, or approximately 60 days, until the ﬁrst URC clean energy line item appears on RMP customer bills. This period of initial program rate collection is deﬁned as “Program Commencement.” The Agency is estimating that Program Commencement will occur in early 2027. Utah HB 238 from 2026 passed and is currently awaiting the Governor’s signature. This bill adds additional requirements for the customer notices that are not expected to add additional burden to the already planned noticing process. Customers Wishing to Opt Out of the Program Once the Program begins, all customers can always exit it at any time. However, there may be termination fees after a certain time period for certain customers. 7 After “Program Implementation” when the ﬁrst notices are sent out, customers will have a six-month period during which they can exit the Program for free (this is known as the “Cancellation Period.”) After six months, there will be a $30 termination fee for residential customers. There will be approximately four months during the Cancellation Period when customers will be paying the regular Program rates, but will not incur a termination fee if they choose to exit the Program. Income-qualiﬁed customers enrolled in HELP are never subject to a termination fee. Commercial customers will pay a termination fee speciﬁc to their particular rate schedule after the Cancellation Period ends. Termination fees are outlined in Attachment B. In addition to the Cancellation Period, the Program includes other circumstances during which the termination fee will not apply, including customers moving out of a participating community, ceasing to be a customer of RMP, or seeking protection through bankruptcy proceedings. New customers moving into a participating community, or annexed into it, will receive their own notice and no-fee cancellation period of 60 days from their ﬁrst notice about the Program. Additional URC Agency Processes and Resource Solicitation While communities consider adopting the Program ordinance, the URC Agency will be working on several related processes that need to conclude before the Program launches. These include helping RMP upgrade their billing system and set up new customer service support for the Program (these are described in the order as “Startup Activities”.) The funding to backstop these required Startup Activities is the subject of an item in Budget Amendment 5 of FY2026 and is further discussed below. The Agency is also in the middle of a resource solicitation process to determine the ﬁrst new clean energy resource(s) that will serve the Program. This process has played out separately and ahead of the Program Application. On November 19, 2024, RMP ﬁled an Application for Approval of Solicitation Process 10 with the PSC describing the proposed process to solicit bids from clean energy developers (Docket 24-035-5511). The PSC granted the application12, clearing the way for URC to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) on May 22, 2025 13. Fifteen bids were initially received by the July 10, 2025, RFP deadline, one of which was later withdrawn 14. These bids were evaluated and scored by URC technical consultants, and an “initial short list” of six projects was selected by URC for further evaluation by RMP. URC received the results of this analysis in December 2025 and used this information to create a “ﬁnal 10 See https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/24docs/2403555/336616Application11-19-2024.pdf 11 Docket No. 24-035-55 on the PSC website: https://psc.utah.gov/2024/11/19/docket-no-24-035-55/ 12 See https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/24docs/2403555/3397642403555ogrmpaam5-13-2025.pdf 13 URC RFP website: https://www.urc2024rfp.com/ 14 URC blog post regarding responses to the RFP: https://www.utahrenewablecommunities.org/post/urc-closes- the-call-for-clean-energy-resources-the-response-was-outstanding 8 short list”. In February 2026, the URC board approved Resolution 2026-0215 selecting all four ﬁnal short list projects for power purchase agreement (PPA) negotiations. PPA negotiations are currently underway and the process to execute an agreement with one or more projects will eventually coincide with the valuation process, described below, and preparations towards implementing the URC Program. Finally, the Agency is also working with RMP and state agencies to determine how those resources will be valued. A program resource valuation methodology was not determined by the PSC in the Order and will be considered in a future regulatory proceeding. This will be based, in part, upon determinations that RMP and the PSC will make in the utility’s long-range planning eﬀort across its multi-state service territory. This process is called the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). The IRP lays out the utility’s forecast load growth over a 20-year timeline and what resources it plans to utilize to serve electricity demand. The IRP process– which culminates in plans that are released every two years and less robust “updates” that are released in intervening, oﬀ-cycle years— inﬂuences how the utility values new renewable energy brought to the grid. Once the latest version of the IRP is ﬁnalized, it will allow the URC and RMP to settle on a valuation methodology for URC clean energy resources going forward, pending PSC approval. What this means for individual customers is not likely to be noticeable, but will mean that the rates will change to a small degree in the future (as do all rates). Program Ordinance Ordinance details There are more details included in the ordinance than may be typical of many Salt Lake City ordinances, including many one-time deadlines and dates that will quickly stale in the code. While a bit awkward, it was decided deliberately by the URC communities to spell out the full details of the Program in the ordinance to oﬀer transparency and clarity in one central location, without requiring community members to track down additional information in the Act, Rules, and Order. While atypical, the Salt Lake City Attorney’s Oﬃce did not identify any issues with this approach. The ordinance must do two key things: ● Enact the approved program by the eligible community adopting the ordinance; and, ● Make it clear that the PSC has the ﬁnal say on how the program will work. There are three sections in the ordinance that cover the following: • Preamble: describes the history and context for development of the Program. • Program adoption: while short in length, this is the “action” of the ordinance - that the community’s governing body votes to adopt the Community Clean Energy Program. • Exhibit A describes key elements of the Program that will occur if Salt Lake City adopts the ordinance. This includes: • Establishing Salt Lake City’s participation in the approved Community Clean Energy Program. 15 URC Resolution 2026-02 Resolution of the Board Selecting Projects for Contract Negotiation: https://www.utah.gov/pmn/ﬁles/1387795.pdf 9 • Enabling all retail electricity customers in current and future boundaries of Salt Lake City to participate in the Program. This does not include rooftop solar customers on Schedule 135, the older net metering schedule, in accordance with the Act.16 Rooftop solar customers on Schedules 136 and 137 are eligible to participate. • Deﬁning the Program’s “Implementation Date” as the date when RMP sends out its ﬁrst notices to customers of their forthcoming enrollment in the Program and describing RMP’s noticing requirements. • Explaining that eligible customers will be enrolled in the Program if they decline to opt-out by the date used in the RMP notices. • Describing that any customer in a participating community who is not enrolled in the Program may opt-in at any time. • Imposing termination fees for customers who opt out after the cancellation period as well as situations when termination fees will not occur. • Describing the process and approvals needed for clean energy resource acquisition under the Program. • Acknowledging that the PSC determines the Program rate and can approve adjustments to the rates periodically. • Acknowledging that RMP is responsible for billing customers and notifying them of changes to the Program rate. Section 7 of Exhibit A sets forth Salt Lake City’s role and responsibilities. This includes: • Salt Lake City will continue to participate in future decisions regarding clean energy resource solicitation, acquisition, and other issues. • Salt Lake City’s obligation to enter into an agreement with RMP to eﬀectuate the Program. This “Utility Agreement” was negotiated between RMP and the communities between 2022-23, with the core participation of Salt Lake City staﬀ and attorneys. It was shared with the City Council in October 2023. It was signed by Council Member Dugan, serving as the URC Agency Board Chair, on August 22, 2024, and by Mayor Mendenhall for Salt Lake City on November 26, 2024. The Utility Agreement is consistent for all communities and RMP, as required by the Act. • Per the Utility Agreement, Salt Lake City will reimburse RMP for their costs to provide the two required notices to all eligible customers within our boundary. Funds were ﬁrst appropriated for this in the Department’s FY24 budget, which has been carried forward as a base budget item each year into the Department’s proposed FY27 base budget. • Salt Lake City has already appropriated and paid additional funds (when we joined the Agency) which, in part, were used to reimburse the OCS and DPU for their costs of contracting third-party expertise to evaluate the Program. Why Create a New Clean Energy Option? Participating Communities, as deﬁned under the Act, are served by RMP – i.e., they do not have their own municipal utilities – and their options for procuring clean energy resources are, therefore, limited. 16 54-17-905(5) states that "a residential customer that is participating in the net metering program under Title 54, Chapter 15, Net Metering of Electricity, may not be a participating customer under this part." 10 The Program oﬀers homes and businesses in our community a new option for supporting clean energy. Furthermore, the Program creates a unique opportunity to drive investment in new clean energy at scale, since, collectively, URC represents about 25% of RMP's electricity sales in Utah 17, which in turn represents 80% of total electricity sales in the State. Beneﬁts of the URC Program Utah is facing a worrisome energy shortage, as our energy supply is projected to decrease while demand continues to rise, according to Governor Cox’s Operation Gigawatt18. Thankfully, URC is part of the solution: the Program will add hundreds of megawatts of new clean energy to the grid in the 2020s, with the aim of adding even more in the next decade to support our communities’ clean energy goals and growing energy needs. By adding new clean energy to our electricity mix, URC is part of the solution by creating a more reliable energy supply for Utah. Health and Environment The electricity used to power our homes and businesses comes from a collection of power plants connected to our grid. This includes electricity generated by natural gas, coal, wind, solar, hydropower, and more. Throughout the day, power plants are dispatched to generate enough electricity to meet demand. Wind and solar power plants have no fuel costs, so they are often dispatched before coal and gas plants which do have fuel costs. When coal and natural gas plants generate electricity, greenhouse gases and air pollutants are emitted into the atmosphere as byproducts. Renewable electricity generation does not come with harmful fossil fuel emissions. By adding more renewable energy to the grid, the URC program may reduce how often fossil fuel plants need to run. This reduces pollution, improving our air quality, water quality, and climate on a local and regional scale. In particular, there are several natural gas plants along the Wasatch Front, owned by RMP or other entities. Due to our state’s increasing electricity demands, these pollution-emitting gas plants will likely need to run more often, which is a particular concern for the Gadsby power plant, given its age and location in the Fairpark neighborhood of Salt Lake City, as well as others that impact our airshed. Adding new, clean energy to the grid helps alleviate overall electricity demand which can result in less air pollution from local fossil fuel power plants. This beneﬁts the neighborhoods immediately next to power plants and those living throughout our inversion-prone valley. Similarly, the Hunter and Huntington coal plants in central Utah are large fossil fuel plants that contribute to air pollution in other parts of the state and reduce visibility in our national parks. The URC program aims to bring more clean energy to reduce pollution throughout the state. The Program ultimately aims to bring online about 500 MW of clean energy over the coming years, based on current participating customer projections. This amount of clean energy, which would occur 17 This estimate is based on the 19 currently participating communities. It is possible that not all 19 communities enact the ﬁnal program by passing the ordinance 18 Information on Operation Gigawatt: https://energy.utah.gov/homepage/about-us/operation-gigawatt/ 11 over several diﬀerent resource procurements, would result in an estimated reduction of 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide pollution annually, and 1,000 pounds of criteria pollution annually.19 Economic Growth The Program supports economic growth by bringing new energy development to areas of the state that are hotspots for solar, wind, or other clean energy development. (Note that Salt Lake County is not a prime location for utility-scale solar and wind.) New projects create construction and operational jobs; provide resources to public schools via the Trust Lands Administration if projects are sited on certain state land; support private landowners if sited privately; and add to local counties’ tax base. These beneﬁts were captured in a recent study by The Western Way20. Supporting a healthy environment is also core to many economic drivers in Utah– whether that’s the local ski and snow sports industry, national park visitation in gateway communities, or the upcoming 2034 Olympic & Paralympic Games. In fact, the Program is a cornerstone of the sustainability goals of Utah’s bid to the International Olympic Committee.21 Program comparison Homes and businesses have a few diﬀerent ways to access clean energy. The Program is distinct from existing clean energy oﬀerings: • The Blue Sky program has been available for nearly 26 years and allows participants to voluntarily contribute at $1.95 per 100 kWh “block” or 1.95 cents per kWh. Blue Sky is an important program that supports grants to help organizations oﬀset the cost of rooftop solar (Salt Lake City has beneﬁtted from a Blue Sky grant which helped cover the cost of solar on the Sorenson Center). Blue Sky participants also fund the purchase of Renewable Energy Certiﬁcates (RECs) nationwide which, while helpful to the industry, do not signiﬁcantly catalyze the growth of new utility-scale renewable energy. Blue Sky is also more expensive on a per kilowatt-hour basis than the initial residential Program rate of $4 per month per residential customer approved by the PSC (0.609 cents per kWh for the average residential consumption of 637 kWh per month, plus a 12 cent per month surcharge charged to participants to assist low-income customers). This is, in part, due to key diﬀerences between the programs, including Blue Sky’s ability to claim RECs, while URC is aiming to use its rate revenue to develop new clean energy to match participant demand. • The Subscriber Solar Program is also one that Salt Lake City Corporation participates in. It oﬀers RMP customers shares in an existing 20 MW solar farm in Southern Utah. While allowing customers to directly purchase a share of clean energy is an important beneﬁt compared with Blue Sky, Subscriber Solar has a capped participation opportunity and RMP has not indicated they plan to build more projects to make available to additional subscribers. 19 Source: EPA’s AVERT model. https://www.epa.gov/avert 20 The Economic Beneﬁts of Utah’s Rural Renewable Energy Industry: https://www.thewesternway.org/ut-eco-devo 21 "SALT LAKE CITY—UTAH COMMITTEE FOR THE GAMES Future Host Questionnaire Response" https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/Olympic-Games/Future-Host/SLC-UT-2034-Future-Host- Questionnaire-Response.pdf : Pages 24, 46, 57 12 • Customers can individually install rooftop solar on their homes or businesses. This is an important option to support renewable energy growth and energy security. However, it is expensive and only available to some types of customers with the funding and property types that allow for it. For these reasons, Salt Lake City and the other participating communities that are part of URC have worked diligently to develop the Community Clean Energy Program with RMP over the last several years. The Program oﬀers participating communities the opportunity to drive renewable energy development at utility scale and oﬀers their residents and businesses the choice to participate. If the ordinance is not adopted, that choice is removed for them. History of Salt Lake City’s support Salt Lake City joint resolution Number 33 of 2016, adopted November 1, 2016 (“2016 Resolution”) established two renewable energy goals – one for Salt Lake City’s government operations and another for the wider Salt Lake City community. For government operations, the 2016 resolution established a goal to achieve at least 50% municipal renewable energy by 2020. It also established 2032 as the year to achieve 100% renewable energy for both government operations and the community. The community goal was advanced to 2030 in Joint Resolution 23 of 2019, which established “a community goal of achieving an amount equivalent to 100% of the annual electric energy supply for participating customers from renewable energy resources by 2030.” By adopting this latter resolution, Salt Lake City qualiﬁed under the Act to join the URC and develop the Program in partnership with RMP. Subsequently, Salt Lake City made ﬁnancial contributions totaling $385,966.47 in Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023 to the Agency’s budget, which were proportional to our community’s population and electricity load. The Rules require participating communities to pay for program development and implementation costs incurred by the utility and regulators to avoid shifting costs to non-participating customers. On August 3, 2023, the Salt Lake City Council adopted Resolution 22 of 2023 endorsing the City’s ongoing participation in the development of the Program, and following that, Mayor Mendenhall signed the Utility Agreement along with the other participating communities. RMP is expected to sign the Utility Agreement soon now that the PSC has issued the Order. Transmittals shared with Council In addition to actions taken above, we are sharing the most recent transmittals on this program over the last few years, as reference: • In October 2022, the Department submitted an informational transmittal to City Council seeking feedback on the draft model ordinance and approaches to low-income assistance. • In October 2023, the Department submitted an informational transmittal to City Council providing a copy of the Utility Agreement. • In December 2024, the Department submitted an informational transmittal giving an update on Program milestones. • In October 2025, the Department provided a transmittal updating the City Council on the Program Application and Solicitation processes and expected next steps, should the PSC approve the Program. 13 Budgetary Updates The Agency will begin to receive Program rate revenue after RMP begins revenue collection, anticipated in early 2027 according to the timeline above and in Attachment C. To date, Program costs have been paid for from member communities contributions. URC has also been successful in receiving one grant and a ﬁnancial donation to support its eﬀorts over the last year. Because the Agency unexpectedly had to run its own resource solicitation process, it charged bid fees from developer applicants to pay for consultants to run the solicitation and other legal and technical costs. The Agency has remaining budget to fund expected activities through 2026, and URC support staﬀ continues to seek philanthropic opportunities to continue funding URC work to bridge any gaps until revenue collection begins. If additional funds are requested of member communities, which the Sustainability Department cannot cover with existing budget for Salt Lake City’s share, the Sustainability Department will prepare a budget amendment. As noted in the transmittal sent to the City Council in December 2024 and in the section below, there is a separate outstanding issue of unexpected administrative “Startup Costs.” Sustainability has included a funding request in FY26 Budget Amendment 5 to backstop the cost of these activities. Once revenue collection begins, all other costs associated with administering the program and for program resources will be covered by participating RMP customers and there is no further community obligation. Startup Costs There are certain customer service activities, with associated costs, that need to occur in order for RMP to send out bills with the Program line item, thus allowing the Program to commence. These activities can be paid for by ratepayer revenues, but those cannot be collected before such activities occur. Accordingly, these activities are called “Startup Activities” and their associated costs, “Startup Costs”. The most signiﬁcant Startup Cost is an upgrade to RMP’s information systems to automate statutory aspects of the Program, namely, to: • allow Program-eligible customers to opt-out one or more of their electric accounts; • generate ongoing opt-out notices for new Program-eligible customers; and • assess any applicable termination fees. Other costs include setting up a 1-800 number for customer support, customer service training, and other miscellaneous costs. The total Startup Cost estimate provided to the PSC as part of the Program approval docket was $820,169. Unfortunately, RMP did not initially identify these Startup Costs as an expense that the URC would need to cover. For that reason, the URC’s initial $700,000 budget—fully funded through contributions by its 19 member communities—was not designed to cover it. Additionally, the Rules adopted by the PSC say that costs related to operation of the Program should be recovered through the Program rate paid by participating customers – not the participating communities. Further, neither the Act nor Rules allow Program-related costs like this to be shifted to non-participating customers. If these Program-related costs are included in the established rate, RMP has expressed 14 concern that the liability for the Startup Costs could be shifted to all customers if a majority of URC customers opt out of the Program. This is an extremely low likelihood event, but RMP has required that URC’s member communities sign an agreement, in advance, to cover the Startup Costs if those costs have not been recovered through Program rates after an agreed timeframe. The nature and estimated amounts of the Startup Costs were discussed in the Program Approval docket, with cost estimates and challenges made before the PSC. Ultimately, the PSC, in approving the program, acknowledged that the Startup Costs could be paid for up-front by RMP, but would need to be reimbursed, either by ratepayer revenues, or a URC community, so as not to shift costs to other RMP customers. Recognizing that Salt Lake City is the community with the largest population and electricity load of all 19 URC communities and could thus most beneﬁt from the Program’s impact, the Sustainability Department agreed to request budget allocation that could be obligated, allowing Salt Lake City to sign such a contract with Rocky Mountain Power. As conﬁrmed in recent conversations with RMP staﬀ, the Startup Costs will remain approximately the same whether solely Salt Lake City participates in the program, or all 19 communities. The Startup Cost estimate we are using for Budget Amendment 5 is the one RMP provided to the PSC of $820,169, plus an additional 10% contingency. While this number is an estimate and actual costs would vary, we believe it is on the higher end of what would be required, allowing us to move forward contractually. Furthermore, it is very unlikely that Salt Lake City would end up needing to pay this money to RMP. Rather, it is being identiﬁed and held as a backstop in order to sign the Startup Cost agreement. That is because it is estimated the Program could generate around $18 million in revenues each year at the PSC-approved initial rate of $4 per month for residential customers and $0.00609 per kWh for non- residential customers. At these rates, it is likely that the Startup Cost estimate of $820,169 will be more than recovered from a single month of Program revenue. Given RMP’s requirement that a contract be in place and the high likelihood that the full cost will be recovered through one month of Program revenues, it is very likely that this Startup Cost budget can be de-obligated shortly after Program revenue collection begins. These details have been worked into the contractual language that is currently being negotiated with RMP. Salt Lake City is separately talking with other communities that are part of the Agency on their potential contributions to reimburse the City, in the case that the Startup Costs are collected. Conclusion After nearly a decade of thoughtful, intentional, and complex work to plan, design, negotiate, and apply for approval, the Community Clean Energy Program has been approved by the PSC. This milestone starts a 90-day clock for each of the 19 communities involved in URC to consider enacting the approved Program by adopting the program ordinance by June 2, 2026. If adopted, the ﬁrst customer notices are 15 expected to go out in late 2026, and the new clean energy line item will appear in early 2027 on customers’ RMP bills. This page has intentionally been left blank ATTACHMENT A This page has intentionally been left blank ATTACHMENT B Information on termination fees included in the Program Application This page has intentionally been left blank Estimated 2026-27 URC Timeline PROGRAM: v PSC program approval: (March 4, 2026) 1 v Ordinance adoption (within 90 days of PSC approval: ends June 2,2026) 2 v RMP preps billing system (5 months following adoption window) 3 Noticing period (60 days following implementation) 4 No fee opt-out period (~ 4 months following commencement) 5 Fee-Free Cancellation Period of 6 months "Implementation Date" Noticing begins (~November 2, 2026) "Commencement Date" Revenue collection begins (~January 1, 2027) “Implementation” = when customer noticing begins. Currently estimated in late 2026 “Commencement” = when rate collection begins. Currently estimated in early 2027 This page has intentionally been left blank 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: Michael Sanders Budget & Policy Analyst DATE: April 14, 2026 RE:UPDATES TO THE NO CAMPING ORDINANCE ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will be briefed on a proposal to update the current camping ordinance to address growing challenges arising from the increased use of public spaces (parks, sidewalks, park strips, etc.) as living spaces for use such as sleeping, storing property or preparing meals. The proposal updates the definition of camping and consolidates existing rules to be clearer and focused on behaviors that cause problems, while aiming for humane and compassionate enforcement. This proposal will accomplish one of the actions outlined in the Public Safety Plan Below is a summary of the key changes to the camping definition. Camping now includes more than tents—covers broader “living accommodation” behaviors. Applies to all public property (not just parks), including sidewalks. New definition includes: o Sleeping outdoors or in vehicles on public property during closed hours (11 PM–5 AM) o Leaving personal property unattended on public property closed to the public o Using public space or vehicles as a residence or dwelling for living accommodation purposes “Living accommodation purposes” (2+ indicators like sleeping, storing items, cooking, hygiene, or setting up structures) Goal of the briefing: Provide feedback to the Administration and prepare to consider the ordinance at a future formal meeting A Public Hearing for this item is scheduled for May 5th. Schedule: Page | 2 POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Does Council support the current list of indicators of “living accommodation purposes used to establish unlawful camping when public property (and vehicles on public property) is being used as a residence/dwelling? a. Should the “two or more indicators” approach be adjusted (e.g., add/remove indicators)? 2. Does Council support the proposal’s prohibition of sleeping outdoors and addition of a prohibition of sleeping in vehicles tied to public property closure and/or nighttime hours (11:00 PM–5:00 AM)? a. Are there specific areas or circumstances where Council wants extended exceptions or expanded prohibitions)? b. The Council may wish to ask how enforcing on vehicle camping provides law enforcement with clearer more enforceable standards. 3. Does Council support the proposed two-minute “no obstruction” rule for entrances/egress and public thoroughfares (sidewalks, streets, park strips, trails), including an ADA clear-passage standard? a. If Council wants a different threshold, what is the preferred standard (e.g., longer time, warning-first structure, or “reasonable opportunity to comply” language), and how should it balance practical enforceability for staff, public accessibility/safety, and reasonable notice expectations 4. The Council may wish to ask the Administration what training the Police Department will receive on the updated camping/living-accommodation provisions, and how will the Administration ensure consistent application across staff and shifts? 5. To have a clear understanding of the changes, the Council may wish to ask the Administration to provide a walk-through of a typical enforcement scenario from first contact to resolution. 6. The Council may wish to ask the Administration what the various diversified response teams roles would be during enforcement (e.g., outreach, service connection, de-escalation, follow-up). New definition of camping The proposal updates and clarifies the existing camping prohibitions. Currently, the ordinance addresses traditional camping—such as erecting tents or using other camping equipment on “public grounds,” streets, and in parks and playgrounds. The proposed revisions consolidate these property location terms and applies the prohibition to “public property” and seeks to clarify and modernize the definition of “camping” to address more recent concerns arising from the increased use of public property for living accommodations. This includes not only parks but also sidewalks and other public property and could apply even in situations where no camping equipment is used but the activity nonetheless constitutes camping. The new definition of camping includes: Sleeping outdoors on public property that is closed, or between 11:00 PM–5:00 AM; Sleeping in vehicles during those same closed hours/conditions; Leaving personal property unattended on public property closed to the public; Using a vehicle or public property as a residence/dwelling for living accommodation purposes. Using or occupying public property for “living accommodation purposes” o Living accommodation purposes is demonstrated through two or more of the following indicia: Sleeping Storing personal property Preparing or consuming meals using camp stoves or otherwise making fires in an unauthorized area Establishing or occupying sleeping quarters or otherwise laying down bedding for sleeping purposes Erecting or occupying temporary structures, including but not limited to tents, tarps, tarpaulins, huts, lean-tos, awnings, or shacks Engaging in personal hygiene activities, toileting or bathing outside designated facilities Page | 3 When camping is prohibited/allowed The general rule is that camping (as defined in the proposal) on public property is not allowed unless one of the listed exceptions applies: Authorization of a property owner; Along a permitted parade route in the 24 hours prior to and through the parade; After the Mayor declares a local emergency and camping is necessary Even if camping would otherwise be permitted under an applicable exception, camping in the following locations or manner is prohibited: Where there’s an immediate threat/unreasonable risk to persons, public health/safety, or vital government services; Within 1000 feet of certain facilities (overnight shelters, permanent supportive housing, designated warming/cooling centers, hospitals, urgent care, walk-in clinics for physical or mental health); Within 500 feet of daycares, senior centers, and primary/secondary schools; Within 10 feet of driveways or building entrances/exits; Within an RCO riparian corridor overlay area Additionally, vehicle camping is also subject to the parking regulations found in City Code Chapter 12.56. If an encampment is discovered, this proposal outlines the process for removal of an encampment/personal property by City employees/authorized agents if one of several conditions exists, including: After reasonable notice, an individual refuses refusal to remove their personal property (reasonable notice may include signage) Encampment appears to be abandoned personal property Probable cause of other illegal activity Immediate danger to life/health/safety (including contamination by unsanitary/hazardous waste) The proposal indicated a provision that non-abandoned encampments may not be removed during a “code blue” event. This provision is included in order to be consistent with state code on code blue alerts, 35A-16-703(6). When an encampment is being removed: Property that comes into possession of law enforcement is handled under Utah Code Title 77 and other existing City provisions/policies. Abandoned personal property and waste/unsanitary items may be immediately discarded. Currently, Section 11.12.080 requires individuals violating the camping prohibitions to remove camping equipment within five minutes after being requested to do so by a police officer. Additionally, Section 14.20.100 currently prohibits individuals from standing, lying, or sitting on any sidewalk in a manner that obstructs the free passage of pedestrians for longer than two minutes, or from willfully remaining in such a manner for more than one minute after being requested to move by a police officer. The proposal consolidates these time requirements and updates the definition of “sidewalk” and adds a provision making it unlawful to obstruct building entrances or exits, as well as various public thoroughfares— including streets, sidewalks, park strips, medians, driveways, and trails by: Sitting, lying, or sleeping, or by storing, using, maintaining, or placing personal property for longer than two (2) minutes, or in a manner that obstructs ADA-compliant passage. Page | 4 Park hours The proposal clarifies that parks (including Library Square and Public Safety Building plaza) and “public squares” are closed 11:00 PM–5:00 AM, including the park strips adjacent to such parks and public squares. Below are some special exceptions to the general park hours. Lee Charles Miller Bird Refuge and Nature Park: 9:00 PM–5:00 AM; Donner Trail Park and East Bench Preserve: 10:00 PM–5:00 AM; “All parks… five (5) acres or less” generally closed 10:00 PM–5:00 AM, with City Creek Park at 11:00 PM–5:00 AM. Memorial House o The Memorial House shall close to public use at 12:00 a.m. (midnight). o Outdoor activities on the leased south lawn shall end by 11:30 p.m. o The Memorial House must be locked and vacant no later than 2:00 a.m. o Between 12:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m., use of the building is limited to employees cleaning the premises following an event. The ordinance establishes a two-part compliance framework based on the location of the violation. First, for encampments located on public property that is not part of a right-of-way (such as hillsides, riverbanks, or open fields), enforcement requires that individuals be provided with notice and an opportunity to comply. This may occur through direct notification from an officer or through posted signage. In these situations, individuals are often present for longer periods and may have accumulated personal belongings, making immediate removal impractical. Accordingly, a “reasonable notice” standard is applied to allow sufficient time for compliance. Second, for encampments or materials located within a right-of-way or other areas where they obstruct passage—such as sidewalks, park strips, roadways, medians, or access points like doorways and driveways—the ordinance allows for more immediate enforcement. In these cases, individuals are subject to a two-minute compliance window. This time standard is consistent with the City’s existing loitering provisions and reflects the need to maintain clear and safe thoroughfares. Due to public safety considerations, it is not feasible to delay enforcement for extended periods in these high-traffic or access-critical areas. SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 01/21/2026 Date Sent to Council: 01/22/2026 From: Department * Mayor Employee Name: Johnston, Andrew E-mail Andrew.johnston@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 01/22/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 01/22/2026 Subject: No Camping Ordinance Additional Staff Contact: Rachel OttoSara Montoya Presenters/Staff Table Rachel.Otto@slc.govSara.Montoya@slc.gov Document Type Ordinance Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: Adopt the ordinance. Background/Discussion The intent of this transmittal is to update Salt Lake City ’s municipal code to address challenges arising from the use of public spaces as living accommodations, which exceeds the intended purpose of those areas. The comprehensive revisions are intended to promote eﬃciency in government, foster community harmony, preserve public spaces for their intended use, and address public health, safety and welfare concerns, all while doing so in a humane and compassionate manner that focuses enforcement on conduct causing negative impacts to the community. It is the city ’s goal to ensure these public spaces are equally accessible to all residents and visitors of the city. The city ’s current ordinance prohibits camping or erecting tents and other camping equipment in any city park. This narrow prohibition does not address more recent issues arising from the increased use of public spaces (including parks but also encompassing sidewalks and other public property) as residential spaces while not using any camping equipment at all, but which nonetheless poses risks to public health and safety. The proposed ordinance changes seek to better deﬁne these prohibited activities and better equip the city with enforcement mechanisms to preserve these public spaces for equal enjoyment by all. The current camping provision and other regulations on the use of public spaces such as parks, park strips, sidewalks, streets, and other public property, are dispersed throughout various chapters of the municipal code, which can be confusing to citizens and city staﬀ. Consolidating these regulations under Chapter 11.12, Oﬀenses Against Public Order, and deﬁning key terms brings the city ’s camping regulations and related ordinances into a uniﬁed, clearer framework that enhances readability, improves understanding, and promotes more eﬃcient and consistent government oversight. It is important to note that any prohibition on camping within the city is but one tool available to the city to address the adverse impacts on public health, safety, and access to public spaces that have accompanied the increase of people living in spaces not meant for human habitation; it is not intended as a punitive enforcement tool to be used against unhoused individuals. Similarly, the proposed changes are not meant to address the underlying causes of homelessness—those must be addressed through proactive policies meant to address housing, shelter and other services. The new proposal would: •Continue to broadly prohibit camping in parks, as well as extend this prohibition to other public property. This prohibition is subject to a few notable exceptions, including permission by the government property owner, designated routes prior to and during permitted parades, and pursuant to a Mayoral declaration of emergency and any accompanying orders. o Notwithstanding the allowable exceptions, under no circumstance may camping activities be permitted if they pose an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of harm to any person or to the public health or safety, or if they pose a disruption to vital government services. o Additionally, even under the allowable exceptions, camping activities are never permitted within 1000 feet from an overnight shelter, permanent supportive housing, designated warming/cooling center, hospital, urgent care facility, or walk-in health clinic; within 500 feet from any daycare, senior center, primary or secondary school; within 10 feet from a driveway or building entrance/exit; or within an RCO riparian corridor. •Consolidate camping prohibitions from two diﬀerent chapters of code (11.12, Oﬀenses Against Public Order and 15.08, Park Rules) into one section within Chapter 11.12, Oﬀenses Against Public Order.•Deﬁne “camp” or “camping” and other key terms. The deﬁnitions seek to provide a modern deﬁnition reﬂective of the current challenges arising from the use of public property as residential spaces or other forms of living accommodation. The deﬁned term “camp” or “camping” includes:o Sleeping outdoors in or on public property closed to the public, or between the hours of 11:00PM and 5:00AM.o Sleeping in a vehicle in or on public property closed to the public, or between the hours of 11:00PM and 5:00AM.o Leaving personal property unattended in or on public property closed to the public.o Using a vehicle in or on public property for living accommodation purposes.o Using or occupying public property as a residence or dwelling for living accommodation purposes. •Provide clarity on what constitutes “using or occupying public property for living accommodation purposes” by providing that evidence or observations of two or more of the following constitutes indica that public property is being used for living accommodation purposes: sleeping, storing of personal property, preparing or consuming meals, using camp stoves or otherwise making ﬁres in an unauthorized area, establishing or occupying sleeping quarters or otherwise laying down of bedding for sleeping purposes, erecting or occupying temporary structures, including but not limited to tents, tarps, tarpaulins, huts, lean-tos, awnings, or shacks, or engaging in personal hygiene activities, toileting or bathing outside designated facilities. •Consolidate and clarify regulations related to vehicular and pedestrian thoroughfares and points of building ingress and egress while continuing to prohibit individuals from obstructing these spaces for more than 2 minutes to help ensure safe and unobstructed access to the public for their intended purpose. The administration understands that some may feel that this time frame is not suﬃcient time for compliance, and is open to other reasonable proposals, provided they do not unduly burden city staﬀ charged with enforcement. •Continue to regulate the use of city parks and public squares through designated park hours and provide more clarity that adjacent park strips are subject to the same closures as their neighboring park or public square. The hours of closure have been updated to better reﬂect the current uses of city parks and public squares, ensuring they remain accessible, well-managed, and responsive to community needs. We understand that this proposed ordinance will not address all current and future nuisance issues occurring in parks and other public spaces. Some of those should be handled elsewhere in city code. We also want to be clear that the intent of the new ordinance is to protect all people’s right to access and use public parks and other spaces for the purposes for which they are intended, and to do so in ways that do not compromise general public health and safety or inhibit the accessibility of all people to those spaces. To these ends, we have proposed language in a “Purpose” section within the draft ordinance that is intended to supplement the ordinance’s reading and guide enforcement policies developed by police and other city departments to fulﬁll its intent. Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing Propose ordinance would have an impact on many city departments and will have an interest from the general public. Public Process City council public hearing. This page has intentionally been left blank 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ______ of 2026 (Camping on or Obstructing Public Property and Park Rules) An ordinance amending various sections of the Salt Lake City Code relating to camping on public grounds, streets, parks, and playgrounds, park hours, disposing of unclaimed property, and obstructing sidewalks WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (the “City”) considers one of its foremost responsibilities to set standards for the preservation and protection of human life, health and safety of all City residents; WHEREAS, the City has seen an increase in the use of public spaces a living accommodations, for example, for uses such as sleeping, storing personal property, preparing or cooking meals, and toileting or personal hygiene, which uses exceed the intended purpose of public spaces and compromise public health, safety, and welfare; WHEREAS, the City currently prohibits camping, lodging, cooking, making a fire, pitching a tent, fly, lean to, tarpaulin, or any other type of camping equipment in public spaces; WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the current prohibition on camping to more broadly encompass all living accommodation activity that more accurately describes the conduct being observed in public spaces throughout the City, as well as to extend this prohibition to apply to the use of vehicles as living accommodations; WHEREAS, it is also the purpose of the City to establish a process for the removal of encampments and personal property found on public property to promote the health safety, and welfare of City residents and users of public property. WHEREAS the City additionally wishes to consolidate and clarify various ordinances in City code that regulate the use and obstruction of public spaces and rights of way, to reduce confusion among City staff and citizens and ensure proper enforcement; 2 WHEREAS, the City is committed to protecting the rights of individuals related to their personal property and to treating individuals and their property with respect and consideration in the enforcement of these ordinances; and WHEREAS, for these purposes, and with the balance of these critical interests in mind, the City finds it necessary to make certain amendments to the Salt Lake City Code as provided herein. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Chapter 11.12 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to camping on public grounds, streets, parks, and playgrounds, is hereby amended as follows: Chapter 11.12 Offenses Against Public Order 11.12.080: CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY: A. PURPOSE. The City has a vital government interest in promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of all inhabitants in the City by ensuring that the streets, sidewalks, parks, and other public property are maintained in a clean, sanitary, and accessible condition and kept safe and orderly for any persons using or passing upon such public property. These interests are nonetheless intended to be balanced by the essential human dignity and civil rights of all City inhabitants, and in enacting this ordinance, it is not the City’s intent to criminalize homelessness or violate any person’s constitutional rights. Enforcement of this ordinance shall be undertaken to avoid such results and enforcement efforts shall be focused on mitigating adverse impacts to public health, safety, and welfare that may arise from camping. B. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this section the following terms, phrases, words, and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein: “Abandoned personal property” means personal property that has been discarded, or the owner is not present or is unable to be identified. 3 “Camp” or “Camping” means: 1. Sleeping outdoors in or on public property closed to the public, or between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) PM and five o’clock (5:00) AM; 2. Sleeping in a vehicle, including but not limited to, a recreational vehicle, travel trailer, motor coach, or motor home in or on public property closed to the public, or between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) PM and five o’clock (5:00) AM; 3. Leaving personal property unattended in or on public property closed to the public; 4. Using a vehicle, including but not limited to, a recreational vehicle, travel trailer, motor coach, or motor home in or on public property as a residence or dwelling, whether temporary or permanent, for living accommodation purposes; or 5. Using or occupying public property as a residence or dwelling, whether temporary or permanent, for living accommodation purposes. Observations and/or evidence of any combination of at least two of the following are indicia that public property is being used for living accommodation purposes: sleeping, storing of personal property, preparing or consuming meals, using camp stoves or otherwise making fires in an unauthorized area, establishing or occupying sleeping quarters or otherwise laying down of bedding for sleeping purposes, erecting or occupying temporary structures, including but not limited to tents, tarps, tarpaulins, huts, lean-tos, awnings, or shacks, or engaging in personal hygiene activities, toileting or bathing outside designated facilities. “Encampment” means personal property, including but not limited to vehicles, including recreational vehicles, travel trailers, motor coaches, tents, tarpaulins, chairs, cots, beds, bedding materials, huts, awnings, lean-tos, shacks, items used to cook or prepare food, household furniture items used to engage in personal hygiene activities, and other items used to facilitate camping. “Overnight shelter” means a public or private facility whether permanent, temporary, or emergency in nature, with all necessary governmental occupancy approvals, open to an individual or a family experiencing homelessness to house the individual or family at no charge. 4 “Park strip” means the portion of the right-of-way between a curb, or a place where a curb would be located if improvements were installed, and where a sidewalk is located or would be installed. “Personal property” means any tangible item reasonably recognizable as belonging to a person. Personal property does not include litter, trash, junk, discarded items, and other types of waste, or property owned by the United States of America and its agencies, or the state of Utah or any of its political subdivisions, including Salt Lake City Corporation or any department thereof. “Public property” means any real property, building, or structure owned, used, or leased by the United States of America and its agencies, or the state of Utah or any of its political subdivisions, including Salt Lake City Corporation or any department thereof, regardless of whether such public property is vacant or occupied and actively used for any public purpose. Public property includes any street, highway, sidewalk, park strip, alley, traffic island or median, park, public square, open space, trail, path, bench, equipment, and other similar property. “Reasonable notice” means notice reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise a person that camping is prohibited at a particular location and, where personal property is deposited, affording the person time to gather their personal property and depart. “Store,” “Stored,” “Storing,” or “Storage” means to put aside or accumulate for use when needed, to put for safekeeping, and/or place or leave personal property on public property. Moving personal property to another location on public property or returning personal property to the same area on a daily or regular basis shall be considered storing and shall not be considered to be removing the personal property from public property. This definition does not include personal property left on public property pursuant to the express written permission of the City, or as otherwise authorized by law. C. CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION PROHIBITED 1. No person may camp or maintain an encampment in or upon any public property unless: 5 a. The person has the authorization of the property owner to camp at that location; b. The public property is along a permitted parade route, and the person is camping in the 24 hours prior to and through the duration of such parade; or c. Camping is necessary after the Mayor declares a local emergency in accordance with chapter 22.03 of this code. 2. At all times, regardless of whether camping would otherwise be permitted under subsection 1 herein, it is unlawful for any person to camp or to maintain an encampment: a. Where such activity poses an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of harm to any person; b. Where such activity poses an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of harm to public health or safety; c. Where such activity poses a disruption to vital government services. d. Within 1000 feet from the property boundary of an overnight shelter, permanent supportive housing, designated warming or cooling center, hospital, urgent care facility, or walk in clinic for physical or mental health. e. Within 500 feet from the property boundary of any daycare, senior center, and primary or secondary schools. f. Within 10 feet of a driveway or a building’s entrance and exit. g. Within an RCO riparian corridor overlay as defined in Section 21A.13.34 of this code. 6 3. Camping in a vehicle is also subject to the parking regulations set forth in Chapter 12.56 of this code. D. REMOVAL OF UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENT 1. Upon discovery of activities in violation of this section, removal of an encampment by City employees and its authorized agents may occur if: a. After reasonable notice, the individual refuses to remove their personal property from the public property; in areas where camping frequently occurs, reasonable notice may be provided by signage. b. Encampment appears to be abandoned personal property. c. There is probable cause for law enforcement officials to believe that illegal activities other than camping are occurring at the encampment. d. There is immediate danger to human life, health, or safety, including possible contamination of public or private property by unsanitary and/or hazardous waste or materials. e. Removal of the encampment does not conflict with any provision of an applicable state or federal law. 2. An encampment that has not been abandoned may not be removed during a code blue event pursuant to Utah Code, Section 35A-16-701, et seq., or its successor. E. REMOVAL, DISPOSITION, AND RELEASE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY 1. Personal Property that comes into the possession of a Salt Lake City employee in their capacity of a peace officer or a Salt Lake City law enforcement agency shall be gathered, retained, and released, in accordance with Utah Code Title 77, Chapters 11a through 11d, section 2.10, Article IV of this Code, and any applicable Salt Lake City Corporation ordinances, regulations, and policies. 7 2. Upon removal of an encampment by City employees and its authorized agents, all abandoned personal property, litter, trash, junk, other types of waste, and items in an unsanitary condition may be immediately discarded. F. ENFORCEMENT AND MITIGATION Upon conviction for a violation of this ordinance, in addition to any other factors deemed appropriate by the Court, the Court shall consider in mitigation whether or not the person immediately removed all personal property and litter, including, but not limited to, bottles, cans, and garbage from the encampment after being informed it was in violation of the law. G. APPLICATION TO CITY PROPERTY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS This Chapter applies to public property owned by Salt Lake City Corporation that is located outside the City’s municipal limits. H. CONFLICT OF LAW If any provision of this section conflicts with a provision of an applicable state or federal law or regulation, such law or regulation shall supersede the conflicting provision of this chapter. 11.12.130: OBSTRUCTING THOROUGHFARES: A. DEFINITIONS. For purpose of this section the following terms, phrases, words, and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein: “Park strip” means the portion of the right-of-way between a curb, or a place where a curb would be located if improvements were installed, and where a sidewalk is located or would be installed. “Street” means the roadway portion of the right-of-way between the curbs, or places where a curb would be located if improvements were installed, and is used primarily for vehicular and bicycle travel. 8 “Sidewalk” means the paved portion of the right-of-way, outside of the curb, or a place where a curb would be located if improvements were installed, and the adjacent property lines, and is used primarily for pedestrian travel. B. It is unlawful for any person to obstruct any building entrance or exit, street, sidewalk, park strip, traffic island or median, driveway, trail, or other public place used as a thoroughfare for vehicular or pedestrian travel by sitting, lying, or sleeping, or by storing, using, maintaining, or placing personal property for a period longer than two (2) minutes, or in a manner that obstructs passage as provided by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, PL 101-336, 42 USC section 12101 et seq, as amended from time to time. SECTION 2. That Section 15.08.020 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to park hours, is hereby amended as follows: 15.08.020: PARK HOURS; DESIGNATED: A. All parks as defined in section 15.08.010 of this code, which includes Library Square and the Public Safety Building plaza, and public squares as defined in section 15.12.020 of this code, as well as the park strips adjacent to such parks and public squares shall be closed to the public between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) P.M. and five o’clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning, with the exception of: 1. Lee Charles Miller Bird Refuge and Nature Park, which shall be closed to the public between the hours of nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning; 2. Donner Trail Park and East Bench Preserve, between the hours of ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning; 3. All parks of the City which are five (5) acres or less in size, whether or not specifically named or described in this title, which shall be closed to the public between the hours of ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning, except for 9 City Creek Park, which is closed between the hours of eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning; and 4. The Memorial House in Memory Grove shall be closed to public use at twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight; outdoor activities on the leased south lawn shall be closed at eleven thirty o'clock (11:30) P.M.; and the Memorial House shall be locked and vacant no later than two o'clock (2:00) A.M. Between twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight and two o'clock (2:00) A.M., use of the Memorial House shall be limited to employees cleaning the premises after an activity. B. No person or persons shall be permitted in said parks, either on foot or on or in any type of vehicle while the park or public square is closed. SECTION 3. That Section 15.08.080 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to camping on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Lands, is hereby amended as follows: 15.08.080: RESERVED. SECTION 4. That Sections 2.10.100, 2.10.110, and 2.10.120 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to disposition of unclaimed property, are hereby amended as follows: 2.10.100: DEFINITIONS: LOST OR MISLAID PROPERTY: A. Any property that comes into the possession of a Salt Lake City employee in their capacity of a peace officer or a Salt Lake City law enforcement agency: 1. That is not claimed by anyone who is identified as the owner of the property; or 2. For which no owner or interest holder can be found after a reasonable and diligent search; B. Includes any property received by Salt Lake City employees in their capacity as a peace officer or law enforcement agency from a person claiming to have found the property; and 10 C. Does not include property seized by Salt Lake City employees in their capacity as a peace officer or law enforcement agency pursuant to title 24, forfeiture and disposition of property act, Utah state code. PROPERTY HELD AS EVIDENCE: Any property received in evidence by a court submitted by a city agency. PUBLIC INTEREST USE: Use by a governmental agency as approved by the city council as provided in section 2.10.150 of this chapter; or use by a bona fide charity registered with the state of Utah as approved by the city council. UNCLAIMED PROPERTY: Tangible and intangible property that comes into possession of a Salt Lake City employee in their capacity as a peace officer or a Salt Lake City law enforcement agency, through circumstances not involving criminal procedures in which the owner is either unknown or unavailable to take possession of said property. 2.10.110: DISPOSITION OF LOST OR MISLAID PROPERTY: Lost or mislaid property shall be disposed of in accordance with Utah code chapter 77-11d as amended, or its successor statute. 2.10.120: DISPOSITION OF FOUND UNCLAIMED PROPERTY TO FINDER: Unclaimed property shall be disposed of in accordance with Utah code chapter 77-11d as amended, or its successor statute. SECTION 5. That Section 14.20.100 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to loitering on a sidewalk, is hereby amended as follows: 14.20.100: RESERVED: SECTION 6. That Section 12.76.090 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to obstruction of sidewalks, is hereby amended as follows: 12.76.090: RESERVED: 11 SECTION 7. Effective Date. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. 12 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _____ day of ______________, 2026. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ________________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR _______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2026. Published: ___________________. Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Sara Montoya, Senior City Attorney This page has intentionally been left blank LEGISLATIVE DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 1 No. ______ of 2026 2 (Camping on or Obstructing Public Property and Park Rules) 3 An ordinance amending various sections of the Salt Lake City Code relating to camping 4 on public grounds, streets, parks, and playgrounds, park hours, disposing of unclaimed property, 5 and obstructing sidewalks 6 WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (the “City”) considers one of its foremost 7 responsibilities to set standards for the preservation and protection of human life, health and 8 safety of all City residents; 9 WHEREAS, the City has seen an increase in the use of public spaces a living 10 accommodations, for example, for uses such as sleeping, storing personal property, preparing or 11 cooking meals, and toileting or personal hygiene, which uses exceed the intended purpose of 12 public spaces and compromise public health, safety, and welfare; 13 WHEREAS, the City currently prohibits camping, lodging, cooking, making a fire, 14 pitching a tent, fly, lean to, tarpaulin, or any other type of camping equipment in public spaces; 15 WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the current prohibition on camping to more broadly 16 encompass all living accommodation activity that more accurately describes the conduct being 17 observed in public spaces throughout the City, as well as to extend this prohibition to apply to 18 the use of vehicles as living accommodations; 19 WHEREAS, it is also the purpose of the City to establish a process for the removal of 20 encampments and personal property found on public property to promote the health safety, and 21 welfare of City residents and users of public property. 22 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT WHEREAS the City additionally wishes to consolidate and clarify various ordinances in 23 City code that regulate the use and obstruction of public spaces and rights of way, to reduce 24 confusion among City staff and citizens and ensure proper enforcement; 25 WHEREAS, the City is committed to protecting the rights of individuals related to their 26 personal property and to treating individuals and their property with respect and consideration in 27 the enforcement of these ordinances; and 28 WHEREAS, for these purposes, and with the balance of these critical interests in mind, 29 the City finds it necessary to make certain amendments to the Salt Lake City Code as provided 30 herein. 31 Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 32 SECTION 1. That Chapter 11.12 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to camping on 33 public grounds, streets, parks, and playgrounds, is hereby amended as follows: 34 Chapter 11.12 35 Offenses Against Public Order 36 11.12.080: CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY GROUNDS, STREETS, PARKS, AND 37 PLAYGROUNDS: 38 A. It is unlawful for any person to camp, lodge, cook, make a fire or pitch a tent, fly, lean to, 39 tarpaulin, or any other type of camping equipment on any "public grounds", as defined in 40 subsection B of this section, upon any portion of a "street", as defined in section 1.04.010 of this 41 code, or in any park or playground, unless allowed by section 15.08.080 of this code. It is 42 unlawful for any person using or benefiting from the use of any of the foregoing items of 43 camping equipment to fail to remove the same for more than five (5) minutes after being 44 requested to do so by any police office. PURPOSE. The City has a vital government interest in 45 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of all inhabitants in the City by ensuring that 46 the streets, sidewalks, parks, and other public property are maintained in a clean, sanitary, and 47 accessible condition and kept safe and orderly for any persons using or passing upon such public 48 property. These interests are nonetheless intended to be balanced by the essential human dignity 49 and civil rights of all City inhabitants, and in enacting this ordinance, it is not the City’s intent to 50 criminalize homelessness or violate any person’s constitutional rights. Enforcement of this 51 ordinance shall be undertaken to avoid such results and enforcement efforts shall be focused on 52 mitigating adverse impacts to public health, safety, and welfare that may arise from camping. 53 B. For the purpose of this section, the term "public grounds" means any real property owned 54 in whole or in part by the United States Of America and its agencies, or the state of Utah or any 55 of its political subdivisions, including Salt Lake City Corporation, upon which no camping has 56 been authorized by the owner. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this section the following terms, 57 phrases, words, and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein: 58 “Abandoned personal property” means personal property that has been discarded, or the 59 owner is not present or is unable to be identified. 60 “Camp” or “Camping” means: 61 1. Sleeping outdoors in or on public property closed to the public, or between the hours 62 of eleven o’clock (11:00) PM and five o’clock (5:00) AM; 63 2. Sleeping in a vehicle, including but not limited to, a recreational vehicle, travel 64 trailer, motor coach, or motor home in or on public property closed to the public, or 65 between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) PM and five o’clock (5:00) AM; 66 3. Leaving personal property unattended in or on public property closed to the public; 67 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 4. Using a vehicle, including but not limited to, a recreational vehicle, travel trailer, 68 motor coach, or motor home in or on public property as a residence or dwelling, 69 whether temporary or permanent, for living accommodation purposes; or 70 5. Using or occupying public property as a residence or dwelling, whether temporary or 71 permanent, for living accommodation purposes. 72 Observations and/or evidence of any combination of at least two of the following are indica that 73 public property is being used for living accommodation purposes: sleeping, storing of personal 74 property, preparing or consuming meals using camp stoves or otherwise making fires in an 75 unauthorized area, establishing or occupying sleeping quarters or otherwise laying down of 76 bedding for sleeping purposes, erecting or occupying temporary structures, including but not 77 limited to tents, tarps, tarpaulins, huts, lean-tos awnings, or shacks, or engaging in personal 78 hygiene activities, toileting or bathing outside designated facilities. 79 “Encampment” means personal property, including but not limited to vehicles, including 80 recreational vehicles, travel trailers, motor coaches, tents tarpaulins, chairs cots, beds, bedding 81 materials, huts, awnings, lean-tos, shacks, items used to cook or prepare food, household 82 furniture items, items used to engage in personal hygiene activities, and other items or equipment 83 used to facilitate camping. 84 “Overnight shelter” means a public or private facility whether permanent, temporary, or 85 emergency in nature, with all necessary governmental occupancy approvals, open to an 86 individual or a family experiencing homelessness to house the individual or family at no charge. 87 “Park strip” means the portion of the right-of-way between a curb, or a place where a curb 88 would be located if improvements were installed, and where a sidewalk is located or would be 89 installed. 90 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT “Personal property” means any tangible item reasonably recognizable as belonging to a person. 91 Personal property does not include litter, trash, junk, discarded items, and other types of waste, 92 or property owned by the United States of America and its agencies, or the state of Utah or any 93 of its political subdivisions, including Salt Lake City Corporation or any department thereof. 94 “Public property” means any real property, building, or structure owned, used, or leased by the 95 United States of America and its agencies, or the state of Utah or any of its political subdivisions, 96 including Salt Lake City Corporation or any department thereof, regardless of whether such 97 public property is vacant or occupied and actively used for any public purpose. Public property 98 includes any street, highway, sidewalk, park strip, alley, traffic island or median, park, public 99 square, open space, trail, path, bench, equipment, and other similar property. 100 “Reasonable notice” means notice reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise 101 a person that camping is prohibited at a particular location and, where personal property is 102 deposited, affording the person time to gather their personal property and depart. 103 “Store,” “Stored,” “Storing,” or “Storage” means to put aside or accumulate for use when 104 needed, to put for safekeeping, and/or place or leave personal property on public property. 105 Moving personal property to another location on public property or returning personal property 106 to the same area on a daily or regular basis shall be considered storing and shall not be 107 considered to be removing the personal property from public property. This definition does not 108 include personal property left on public property pursuant to the express written permission of 109 the City, or as otherwise authorized by law. 110 C. CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION PROHIBITED 111 1. No person may camp or maintain an encampment in or upon any public property 112 unless: 113 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT a. The person has the authorization of the property owner to camp at that 114 location; 115 b. The public property is along a permitted parade route, and the person is 116 camping in the 24 hours prior to and through the duration of such parade; 117 or 118 c. Camping is necessary after the Mayor declares a local emergency in 119 accordance with chapter 22.03 of this code. 120 2. At all times, regardless of whether camping would otherwise be permitted under 121 subsection 1 herein, it is unlawful for any person to camp or to maintain an 122 encampment: 123 a. Where such activity poses an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of 124 harm to any person; 125 b. Where such activity poses an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of 126 harm to public health or safety; 127 c. Where such activity poses a disruption to vital government services. 128 d. Within 1000 feet from the property boundary of an overnight shelter, 129 permanent supportive housing, designated warming or cooling center, 130 hospital, urgent care facility, or walk in clinic for physical or mental 131 health. 132 e. Within 500 feet from the property boundary of any daycare, senior center, 133 and primary or secondary schools. 134 f. Within 10 feet of a driveway or a building’s entrance and exit. 135 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT g. Within an RCO riparian corridor overlay as defined in Section 21A.13.34 136 of this code. 137 3. Camping in a vehicle is also subject to the parking regulations set forth in Chapter 138 12.56 of this code. 139 D. REMOVAL OF UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENT 140 1. Upon discovery of activities in violation of this section, removal of an 141 encampment or other personal property by City employees and its authorized 142 agents may occur if: 143 a. After reasonable notice, the individual refuses to remove their personal 144 property from the public property; in areas where camping frequently 145 occurs, reasonable notice may be provided by signage. 146 b. Encampment appears to be abandoned personal property. 147 c. There is probable cause for law enforcement officials to believe that 148 illegal activities other than camping are occurring at the encampment. 149 d. There is immediate danger to human life, health, or safety, including 150 possible contamination of public or private property by unsanitary and/or 151 hazardous waste or materials. 152 e. Removal of the encampment does not conflict with any provision of an 153 applicable state or federal law . 154 2. An encampment that has not been abandoned may not be removed during a code 155 blue event pursuant to Utah Code, Section 35A-16-701, et seq., or its successor. 156 E. REMOVAL, DISPOSITION, AND RELEASE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY 157 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1. Personal Property that comes into the possession of a Salt Lake City employee in 158 their capacity of a peace officer or a Salt Lake City law enforcement agency shall be gathered, 159 retained, and released, in accordance with Utah Code Title 77, Chapters 11a through 11d, section 160 2.10, Article IV of this Code, and any applicable Salt Lake City Corporation ordinances, 161 regulations, and policies. 162 2. Upon removal of an encampment by City employees and its authorized agents, all 163 abandoned personal property, litter, trash, junk, other types of waste, and items in an unsanitary 164 condition may be immediately discarded. 165 F. ENFORCEMENT AND MITIGATION 166 Upon conviction for a violation of this ordinance, in addition to any other factors deemed 167 appropriate by the Court, the Court shall consider in mitigation whether or not the person 168 immediately removed all personal property and litter, including, but not limited to, bottles, cans, 169 and garbage from the encampment after being informed it was in violation of the law. 170 G. APPLICATION TO CITY PROPERTY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS 171 This Chapter applies to public property owned by Salt Lake City Corporation that is located 172 outside the City’s municipal limits. 173 H. CONFLICT OF LAW 174 If any provision of this section conflicts with a provision of an applicable state or federal law or 175 regulation, such law or regulation shall supersede the conflicting provision of this chapter. 176 11.12.090: OBSTRUCTING THOROUGHFARES: 177 A. DEFINITIONS. For purpose of this section the following terms, phrases, words, and their 178 derivations shall have the meaning given herein: 179 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT “Park strip” means the portion of the right-of-way between a curb, or a place where a curb 180 would be located if improvements were installed, and where a sidewalk is located or would be 181 installed. 182 “Street” means the roadway portion of the right-of-way between the curbs, or places where a 183 curb would be located if improvements were installed, and is used primarily for vehicular and 184 bicycle travel. 185 “Sidewalk” means the paved portion of the right-of-way, outside of the curb, or a place where a 186 curb would be located if improvements were installed, and the adjacent property lines, and is 187 used primarily for pedestrian travel. 188 B. It is unlawful for any person to obstruct any building entrance or exit, street, sidewalk, 189 park strip, traffic island or median, driveway, trail, or other public place used as a thoroughfare 190 for vehicular or pedestrian travel by sitting, lying, or sleeping, or by storing, using, maintaining, 191 or placing personal property for a period longer than two (2) minutes, or in a manner that 192 obstructs passage as provided by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, PL 101-336, 42 193 USC section 12101 et seq, as amended from time to time. 194 SECTION 2. That Section15.08.020 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to park hours, 195 is hereby amended as follows: 196 15.08.020: PARK HOURS; DESIGNATED: 197 A. All parks, shall be closed to the public between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) P.M. 198 and five o’clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning as defined in section 15.08.010 of this code, 199 which includes Library Square and the Public Safety Building plaza, and public squares as 200 defined in section 15.12.020 of this code, as well as the park strips adjacent to such parks and 201 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT public squares shall be closed to the public between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) P.M. and 202 five o’clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning, with the exception of: 203 1. Lee Charles Miller Bird Refuge and Nature Park, which shall be closed to the 204 public between the hours of nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following 205 morning; 206 2. Pioneer Park, which shall be closed to the public: a) from May 1 through 207 September 30, between the hours of eleven o’clock (11:00) P.M. and five o’clock (5:00) A.M. 208 the following morning; and b) from October 1 through April 30, between one-half (1/2) hour 209 after sunset to seven o’clock (7:00) A.M. the following morning, except that in connection with 210 events or activities at Pioneer Park for which a permit has been issued under title 3, chapter 3.50 211 of this Code, the Director of Public Services, or his or her designee, shall, at the request of the 212 sponsor of such event or activity, allow Pioneer Park to remain open until eleven o’clock (11:00) 213 P.M. for not to exceed three (3) consecutive days during which the event or activity is occurring 214 Donner Trail Park and East Bench Preserve, between the hours of ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. and 215 five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning; and 216 3. Donner Trail Park and East Bench Preserve, each of which shall be closed to the 217 public between the hours of ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following 218 morning; and All parks of the City which are five (5) acres or less in size, whether or not 219 specifically named or described in this title, which shall be closed to the public between the 220 hours of ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning, except for 221 City Creek Park, which is closed between the hours of eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. and five 222 o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning. 223 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 4. With the exception of City Creek Park, which shall be closed to the public 224 between the hours of eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following 225 morning, all parks of the City five (5) acres or less in size, whether or not specifically named or 226 described in this title, which shall be closed to the public between the hours of ten o'clock 227 (10:00) P.M. and five o'clock (5:00) A.M. the following morning The Memorial House in 228 Memory Grove shall be closed to public use at twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight; outdoor 229 activities on the leased south lawn shall be closed at eleven thirty o'clock (11:30) P.M.; and the 230 Memorial House shall be locked and vacant no later than two o'clock (2:00) A.M. Between 231 twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight and two o'clock (2:00) A.M., use of the Memorial House shall 232 be limited to employees cleaning the premises after an activity. 233 B. The Memorial House in Memory Grove shall be closed to public use at twelve o'clock 234 (12:00) midnight; outdoor activities on the leased south lawn shall be closed at eleven thirty 235 o'clock (11:30) P.M.; and the Memorial House shall be locked and vacant no later than two 236 o'clock (2:00) A.M. Between twelve o'clock (12:00) midnight and two o'clock (2:00) A.M., use 237 of the Memorial House shall be limited to employees cleaning the premises after an activity. No 238 person or persons shall be permitted in said parks, either on foot or on or in any type of vehicle 239 while the park or public square is closed. 240 C. No person or persons shall be permitted in said parks, either on foot or on or in any type 241 of vehicle, during such hours unless for the express purpose of traveling directly through the park 242 on a public street that passes through the park. 243 SECTION 3. That Section 15.08.080 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to camping on 244 lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Lands, is hereby amended as follows: 245 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 15.08.080: RESERVED. CAMPING 246 A. No person shall camp, lodge, make a fire or pitch a tent, fly, lean to, tarpaulin, or any 247 other type of camping equipment in any park except: 248 1. In cases of local emergency as declared by the Mayor of the City. 249 2. By permit issued to youth groups the majority of whose members’ ages are at 250 least eight (8) years of age, but no more than seventeen (17) years of age, under the following 251 conditions: 252 a. The youth are accompanied by adult leaders in the ratio of two (2) adults for 253 every ten (10) youth at all times while the youth are camping. 254 b. The youth group provides adequate police and fire security to ensure the safety 255 of the campers and garbage removal and cleanup. The sponsor shall submit a plan along with an 256 application for a special events permit to the City that shall be reviewed and approved by the 257 Public Services Department Director, the Fire and Police Chiefs, or their designees, who will 258 forward a recommendation to the Mayor as to whether or not the request for camping should be 259 granted. Application for the special events permit shall be made directly to the Special Events 260 Coordinator who shall forward all accompanying information to the appropriate departments. 261 c. The youth group files a bond in the amount of ten thousand dollars 262 ($10,000.00) to compensate the City for any damage to the park caused by the youth group 263 during its camping activities. 264 d. The youth group files a certificate of insurance in the aggregate amount of one 265 million dollars ($1,000,000.00), which names the City as an additional insured. 266 e. No camping is allowed in any one park for more than forty eight (48) 267 continuous hours in any thirty (30) day period. 268 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f. The youth group shall comply with all applicable ordinances and park 269 regulations. 270 g. No more than sixty (60) people shall be allowed to camp at one time. 271 B. The Public Services Department Director shall issue rules and regulations for the use of 272 parks and parking lot areas for camping and parking of vehicles. Said rules shall specify in which 273 parks camping will be allowed by permit only, wherein the location camping may be allowed 274 and restrict activities of campers with regard to noise, fires, attaching structures to the ground, 275 and specifying qualifications for security personnel. 276 SECTION 4. That Sections 2.10.100, 2.10.110, and 2.10.120 of the Salt Lake City Code, 277 relating to disposition of unclaimed property, are hereby amended as follows: 278 2.10.100: DEFINITIONS: 279 LOST OR MISLAID PROPERTY: 280 A. Any property that comes into the possession of a Salt Lake City employee in their capacity of 281 as a peace officer or a Salt Lake City law enforcement agency: 282 1. That is not claimed by anyone who is identified as the owner of the property; or 283 2. For which no owner or interest holder can be found after a reasonable and diligent 284 search; 285 B. Includes any property received by Salt Lake City employees in their capacity as a peace 286 officer or law enforcement agency from a person claiming to have found the property; and 287 C. Does not include property seized by Salt Lake City employees in their capacity as a peace 288 officer or law enforcement agency pursuant to title 24, forfeiture and disposition of property act, 289 Utah state code. 290 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT PROPERTY HELD AS EVIDENCE: Any property received in evidence by a court submitted by 291 a city agency. 292 PUBLIC INTEREST USE: Use by a governmental agency as approved by the city council as 293 provided in section 2.10.150 of this chapter; or use by a bona fide charity registered with the 294 state of Utah as approved by the city council. 295 UNCLAIMED PROPERTY: Tangible and intangible property that comes into possession of a 296 Salt Lake City employees employee in their capacity as a peace officer or a Salt Lake City law 297 enforcement agency, through circumstances not involving criminal procedures in which the 298 owner is either unknown or unavailable to take possession of said property. 299 2.10.110: DISPOSITION OF LOST OR MISLAID PROPERTY: 300 Lost or mislaid property shall be disposed of in accordance with Utah code chapter 77-24a 77-301 11d as amended, or its successor statute. 302 2.10.120: DISPOSITION OF FOUND UNCLAIMED PROPERTY TO FINDER: 303 Unclaimed property, which has been surrendered to the city by one who found the property and 304 for which no owner has been identified, shall be released to the finder on the following 305 conditions: 306 A. There has expired not less than thirty (30) calendar days from date of surrender to the city; 307 B. The finder signs a statement containing: 308 1. An explanation as to how the property came into the finder's possession, including the 309 time, date and place, 310 2. A statement that the finder does not know who owns the property, 311 3. A statement that, to the finder's knowledge, the property was not stolen, 312 4. A statement that the finder's possession of the property is lawful, 313 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 5. Such other information known to the finder that may lead to an identification of the 314 owner, and 315 6. Other information the department receiving the property may request that will reasonably 316 lead to discovering the true owner; 317 C. The true owner has not been determined from information provided by the finder or known 318 to the city from other sources, after reasonable efforts by the city; 319 D. The intent to dispose of property has been advertised by the procedure set forth in 320 section 2.10.130 of this chapter, the finder has paid a proportional share of the costs of 321 advertising and storage, and eight (8) days have elapsed from the date of publication and posting 322 of the notice. 323 No city employee may claim or receive unclaimed property as a finder. 324 Unclaimed property shall be disposed of in accordance with Utah code chapter 77-11d as 325 amended, or its successor statute. 326 SECTION 5. That Section 14.20.100 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to loitering on 327 a sidewalk, is hereby amended as follows: 328 14.20.100: RESERVED. LOITERING ON SIDEWALK 329 It is unlawful for any person to remain standing, lying or sitting on any sidewalk for a longer 330 period than two (2) minutes, in such manner as to obstruct the free passage of pedestrians 331 thereon, or wilfully to remain standing, lying or sitting thereon in said manner for more than one 332 minute after being requested to move by any police officer, or wilfully to remain on any 333 sidewalk in such manner as to obstruct the free passage of any person or vehicle into or out of 334 any property abutting upon said sidewalk or any property having access to such sidewalk. 335 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT SECTION 6. That Section 12.76.090 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to obstruction 336 of sidewalks, is hereby amended as follows: 337 12.76.090: RESERVED. PEDESTRIANS OBSTRUCTING SIDEWALKS PROHIBITED 338 Pedestrians shall not obstruct or prevent the free use of sidewalks or crosswalks by other 339 pedestrians. 340 SECTION 7. Effective Date. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the 341 date of its first publication. 342 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _____ day of ______________, 343 2026. 344 ______________________________ 345 CHAIRPERSON 346 ATTEST: 347 348 ________________________________ 349 CITY RECORDER 350 351 Transmitted to Mayor on 352 _______________________. 353 354 Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 355 356 ______________________________ 357 MAYOR 358 Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Sara Montoya, Senior City Attorney LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 359 _______________________________ 360 CITY RECORDER 361 362 363 (SEAL) 364 365 366 367 Bill No. _________ of 2026. 368 Published: ___________________. 369 This page has intentionally been left blank CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLC.GOV/COUNCIL TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Kate Werrett Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:April 14, 2026 RE:GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT AT APPROXIMATELY 346, 350, 354, 370 SOUTH 800 EAST, AND 775 EAST 400 SOUTH PLNPCM2025-00660 and PLNPCM2025-00641 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will be briefed on a proposal to amend the zoning of the properties at approximately 346, 350, and 354 South 800 East from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family) to MU-5 (Mixed Use 5). The proposal would also amend the Central Community Plan Future Land Use Map of the properties at approximately 346, 350, 354, 370 South 800 East and 775 East 400 South from Medium Density Residential (15-30 dwelling units/acre) and Medium Density Transit-Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) to High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre). The proposed amendments would allow the construction of a mixed-use building encompassing 109 total residential units and ground-floor commercial space, which includes 2-,3- and 4- bedroom units. The properties currently contain three existing residential buildings, including seven apartment units. In addition to the requested amendments, the applicant is seeking design review approval to exceed the maximum building façade length of 200’, which the Planning Commission will reconsider after the Council takes action on this proposal. The project is within Council District 4. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments during its November 12, 2025 meeting and held a public hearing at which eight people spoke, sharing concerns about solar blockage to neighboring lots, the bulk and height of the proposed building, and incentivizing neglect. Planning staff recommended approval of the proposed amendments. For the zoning plan amendment, the Planning Commission voted 4:3 to recommend City Council approval. Those opposed to a positive recommendation for the zoning plan amendment were concerned the proposed zone was not suitable for the location, building length concerns, Linden Street width, and shading caused by the building height on Linden Schedule: Page | 2 Street homes. The Planning Commission voted 6:1 to recommend denial of the general plan amendment because evidence was not provided demonstrating the proposal complies with Consideration 3: Applicant’s Community Benefit, Unit Replacement, and Tenant Displacement Proposals. Zoning map with proposed amendments Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division Page | 3 General Plan Amendment Map Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed general plan and zoning map amendments, and determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss whether they want the Central Community Plan to reflect medium density residential and medium density transit oriented development or high density transit oriented development residential development in this area. 2. Is the Council supportive of the proposed zoning map and general plan amendments? 3. Is the Council interested in formalizing any tenant displacement and relocation requirements in the a development agreement? ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Council is being asked to consider rezoning the subject properties and amending the future land use map within the Central Community Plan. The applicant submitted a Design Review application, PLNPCM2025- 00856, which the Planning Commission will take action on after the City Council determination on the rezone and general plan amendment. The following table summarizes the proposed amendments for each of the subject parcels. Page | 4 Current Zoning Proposed Zoning Current General Plan Designation Proposed General Plan Designation 346 S 800 E RMF-35 MU-5 Medium Density Residential (15-30 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre)* 350 S 800 E RMF-35 MU-5 Medium Density Residential (15-30 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development 354 S 800 E RMF-35 MU-5 Medium Density Residential (15-30 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development 370 S 800 E MU-5 MU-5 Split- Medium Density Residential & Medium Density Transit Oriented Development High Density Transit Oriented Development 775 E 400 S MU-5 MU-5 Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development * The 400 South Livable Communities Plan supports higher densities along 400 South and permits 137 units/acre proposed by the applicant. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified four key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 12-23 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 reviewed how the proposed zoning and plan amendments align with the Central Community Plan, Plan Salt Lake, 400 South Livable Communities Project, and Housing SLC. Planning staff believes goals and objectives from several plans show the applicant's compliance with Salt Lake’s vision for the 400 South corridor. Central Community Plan: The Planning Commission staff report includes the Central Community Plan objective to have “the highest residential densities and most intense land uses” in the area of these applications. Planning staff also commented on the vicinity of the project parcels to transit, and this Transit Oriented Development direction within the community plan: “Transit Oriented Development can target specific properties, such as those along the 400 South corridor, for redevelopment that do not affect the historic character of the neighborhood. New development should occur on vacant or noncontributing sites and should be compatible with the historic district. The goal is to allow higher density structures where commercial zoning exists to meet the desired population density in TOD area while eliminating demolition pressures on contributing historic structures.” Plan Salt Lake: Planning found that the Plan Salt Lake notes goals for neighborhoods, growth, housing, transportation & mobility, and air quality, which these applications support. 400 South Livable Communities Project: Planning staff shared that this plan encourages mixed-use development within ½ mile of transit stops. The project parcels are designed to be mixed-use and are less than ¼ mile from a heavily used transit stop. Additionally, planning staff shared that the proposed development could be considered a “transition” from the Central Business urban core to the adjacent Page | 5 urban neighborhoods. The 400 South Livable Communities Project calls for density in the application area. Housing SLC: Planning staff found the general plan and zoning map amendments are consistent with Housing SLC’s goal of increasing the city’s housing stock, as it provides units with varying unit sizes near transit. Consideration 2: RMF-35 vs. MU-5 Zoning District Comparison Two of the five subject properties are currently zoned MU-5 and the applicant hopes to rezone the three northern parcels from RMF-35 to MU-5 with this application. The remainder of the block is zoned MU-5. Prior to the October 2025 zoning consolidation, several parcels on this block were TSA-UN-T. The three parcels that the applicant applied to rezone are proposed to have multi-family residential units only. Zoning Building Envelope Building Comparison Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division Planning staff provided the following table in Attachment D (pages 121-124) of the Planning Commission staff report. It is replicated here for convenience. Zoning Standards RMF-35 (existing for 346, 350, 354) MU-5 (proposed for 346, 350, 354, in place for 370 & 775) Maximum Building Height 35’55’ maximum Front/Corner/Side/ Rear Yard Setback 20’/10’ 10’ interior 25’ rear 10’ minimum, 20’ maximum 0’ side minimum 10’ minimum Buffer Yard Buffer required when abutting single or two-family district. Buffer required when abutting single or two-family district. Minimum Lot Area 26,000 Sw. Ft. for more than 12 units n/a Landscaping & Buffering (21A.48) Front, Corner side and interior.All areas not occupied by buildings, plazas, terraces, patios, parking areas, or other similar feature shall be landscaped. Design Standards RMF-35 MU-5 Ground Floor Use Not required 75% Building Materials Not required 70% ground floor 70% upper floor Page | 6 Ground Floor Glass Not required 40% Upper Floor Glass Not required 15% Building Entrances Not required Every 40 feet Maximum Length of Blank Wall Not required 200’ Upper Floor Step Back Not required Lower-level interior Lighting Exterior Not required Required Screening of mechanical equipment Not required Required Parking Garages or Structures Not required Required Public Improvements Not required Required Land Uses Use RMF-35 MU-5 Bar Establishment Not Permitted Permitted Use Brewpub Not Permitted Permitted Use Distillery Not Permitted Permitted Use Tavern (more than 2,500 square feet in floor area)Not Permitted Permitted Use Winery Not Permitted Permitted Use Antenna, Communication Tower Not Permitted Permitted Use Bed and Breakfast Not Permitted Permitted Use Office Not Permitted Permitted Use Restaurant Not Permitted Permitted Use Retail, Services or Goods Not Permitted Permitted Use Dwelling, Single-family detached Permitted Use Permitted Use Self Storage Not Permitted Permitted Use Parking, Off site Not Permitted Permitted Use Parking RMF-35 MU-5 within ¼ mile of fixed rail transit Minimum Parking (Multi-family) Studio & 1 Bedroom: 1 space per DU 2+ bedrooms: 1.25 spaces per DU *Could request a reduction at this location due to its proximity to a transit stop No Minimum Maximum Parking (Multi-family) All Contexts: Studio & 1 Bedroom: 2 spaces per DU 2+ bedrooms: 3 spaces per DU Minimum Bicycle Parking 1 per 4 units 1 per 3 units Page | 7 As outlined in the Planning Commission staff report, the Planning staff concluded that the design review standards reduce the impacts of increased development. Consideration 3: Applicant’s Community Benefit, Unit Replacement, and Tenant Displacement Proposals Community Benefit Tenant Displacement Unit Replacement Consideration 4: Façade Length Requirements Page | 8 As determined by Planning staff, design review is required under Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.37.060 and Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.59.050 due to the project’s noncompliance with the maximum façade length standard. Specifically, the proposed building exceeds the 200-foot limit for a street-facing façade, measuring approximately 273 feet along 800 East. This standard ensures building massing remains consistent with the city’s historic development patterns. Façade Length Mitigation Analysis of Factors Attachment E (pages 125-136) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines master plan and zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. It is Planning staff’s opinion that the proposed master plan amendment changing the future land use map from Medium Density residential and Medium Density Transit-Oriented Development to High Density Transit Oriented Development fulfills the intended outcomes of policies within the Central Community Master Plan. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. The table below summarizes Planning Consideration Factors, additional information is available in the Planning Commission attachment. 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 Whether the proposed development requires a shift that calls for either a new plan or a revision of the current adopted plan. Complies The Central Community Plan was adopted in 2005. Whether the goals, policies, or implementation actions of the plan to be amended have been achieved, are no longer relevant to or capable of Complies Page | 9 addressing the current issues or needs of the neighborhood or the city, or are no longer aligned with policies in citywide plans. For petitions submitted by a property owner, the extent, effectiveness, and proportionality of the public benefit proposed by the petitioner to the increase in development potential if the proposal were to be adopted by the city council. Complies The potential for displacement of people who reside in any housing that is within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. Complies The potential for displacement of any business that is located within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. N/A The potential impacts on properties in the immediate vicinity of the proposal. Complies The potential impacts on the city to provide safe drinking water, storm water, and sewer to the property based on the additional development potential of future development. Complies Public Utilities reviewed the application & have no specific infrastructure concerns. The potential impacts to public safety resources created by the increase in development potential that may result from the proposed amendment. Complies Police & Fire reviewed the application; any issues will be addressed during building permit review The potential impacts to any other city service, infrastructure, or resource that may be impacted by the increase in development potential that may result from the proposed amendment. Complies Zoning Map Amendments Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with and helps implement 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 applicable purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent and nearby properties due to the change in development potential and allowed uses that do not currently apply to the property. 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. Complies Transportation reviewed the zoning amendment and raised no roadway capacity concerns, noting only the reduction in minimum parking requirements. The status of existing transportation facilities, any planned changes to the transportation facilities, and the impact that the proposed amendment may have on the city's ability, need, and timing of future transportation improvements. Complies The proximity of necessary amenities such as parks, open space, schools, fresh food, entertainment, cultural facilities, and the ability of current and future residents to access these amenities without having to rely on a personal vehicle. Complies Page | 10 The potential impacts to public safety resources created by the increase in development potential that may result from the proposed amendment. Complies Police reviewed the application and found no significant safety impact. The potential for displacement of people who reside in any housing that is within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. Complies The potential for displacement of any business that is located within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. Complies The community benefits that would result from the proposed map amendment, as identified in Section 21A.50.050.C. Complies Community Benefit Standards (see 21A.50.050.C) Types of Community Benefit The proposed community benefit(s) shall be within any of the following categories: a. Providing housing that aligns with the current or future needs of the community as determined by the general plan. Needs could include the level of affordability in excess of the number of dwellings that exist on the site, size in terms of number of bedrooms, or availability of housing for purchase; b. Providing commercial space for local businesses or charitable organizations; c. Providing a dedication of public open space; d. Providing a dedication or other legal form of protection from future development of land that is adjacent to a river, creek, wetland, floodplain, wildlife habitat, or natural lands; e. Preserving historic structures not otherwise protected; f. Expanding public infrastructure that expands capacity for future development. Complies The application includes Community Benefit A. Community Benefit Standards (21A.50.050.C.2) For proposals that are intended to increase the housing supply, the level of affordability of the additional density that may be allowed if the proposal were to be adopted. Complies The percentage of space allocated to commercial use compared to the total ground floor area that could be developed on the site. Complies The size of the public open space compared to the total developable area of the lot, exclusive of setbacks, required landscaped yards, and any open space requirement of the proposed zoning district. N/A The relative size and environmental value of any land that is to be dedicated. N/A The historic significance of the structures proposed to be preserved.Complies The amount of development that could be accommodated due to the increase in public infrastructure capacity compared to the general need for the area. N/A The input received related to the community benefit during the 45-day engagement period. Complies Policies in the general plan that support the proposed community benefit. Complies City Department Review During the City's review of the petitions, no responding departments or divisions expressed objections to Page | 11 the proposal, but stated additional comments would be provided during building permit review if the property is developed. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY July 2, 2025 – Application for a Zoning Map Amendment, General Plan Amendment July 16, 2025 – Application for a Zoning Map Amendment was accepted. July 16, 2025 – Petitions PLNPCM2025-00641 and PLNPCM2025-00660 assigned to Grant Amann. July 17, 2025 – o A petition notice was sent to the East Bench Community Council Recognized Community Organization (RCO). o Property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the alley were provided early notice of the proposal. o An early notice was sent to property owners and residents within 300 ft of the applicant parcels. An online open house was posted and remains available. o The applicant posted an Early Notification sign on the properties. August 14, 2025 – Applicant proposal presentation at a East Central City Community Council meeting August 28, 2025 – Accepted Design Review Application. September 18, 2025 – Petition PLNPCM2025-00856 was assigned to Grant Amann. October 8, 2025 – MU zoning consolidation went into effect. This changed the subject property's existing zoning from TSA-UN-T to MU-5, and the applicant’s request from TSA-UN-T to MU-5. October 29, 2025 – Public hearing notices were posted on the City and State websites, and posted on the Planning Division listserv. November 1, 2025 – Public hearing notice signs were posted on the property. November 6, 2025 – Planning Commission Staff Report was posted. November 12, 2025 – Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed map amendment and deny the general plan amendment. November 21, 2025 – Ordinance requested from Attorney’s Office February 2, 2026 – Ordinance received from Attorney’s Office. February 25, 2026 – Transmittal received in City Council Office. ATTACHMENTS 1. Transmittal: General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately 346, 350, 354, 370 South 800 East, and 775 East 400 South 2.Planning Commission Staff Report 3.Planning Commission Agenda – November 12, 2025 4.Planning Commission Approved Minutes – November 12, 2025 5.November 12, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting Recording (1:43) 6.Salt Lake City Zoning Map 7.Plan Salt Lake 8.Central Community Plan 9.400 South Livable Communities Project (Transit-Oriented Development) 10.Housing SLC 11.Off Street Parking Ordinance (Chapter 21A.44) Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning City Council –April 14th, 2026 PLNPCM2025-00641 & PLNPCM2025-00660 GENERAL PLAN & ZONING MAP AMENDMENT// APPROX. 346 S. 800 E. Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning EXISTING SITE 400 S --- 900 E Trax Station (Red Line) Salt Lake City // Planning Division •General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment at approximately 346 S. 800 E to enable a 109 residential development. •Blue outline: General Plan •Black outline: Rezone (Design Review is currently tabled at Planning Commission) REQUEST Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Existing: Subject properties are currently Medium Density Residential and Medium Density Transit Oriented Development 7 units over 0.787 acres, or 8 units per acre. Proposed: High Density Transit Oriented Development 109 units over 0.787 acres, or 138 units per acre Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Central Community General Plan states: •“Higher intensive uses may be located near light rail stations. These areas are in centers of high population where pedestrians are more concentrated.” – High Density TOD Existing: Medium Density Residential and Medium Density Transit Oriented Development Proposed: High Density Transit Oriented Development Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Current Zoning Designation •RMF-35 Proposed Zoning Designation •MU-5 •The subject property is currently in the RMF-35 zone, requesting MU-5. Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning ZONING MAP COMPARISON Current Zoning Designation •RMF-35 Proposed Zoning Designation •MU-5 (Prior to the mixed-use consolidation it was zoned TSA-UN-T) Salt Lake City // Planning Division Community Benefit: •Diverse unit mix that meet’s city’s goals for housing variety including 24% 2, 3, and 4 bedroom units. •Publicly accessible commercial space and publicly accessible business space including TRAX bike storage. •Sustainable Development COMMUNITY BENEFIT Salt Lake City // Planning Division Unit Replacement: •All 7 units, bedroom for bedroom will be replaced in the development. Tenant Displacement: •Only 4 of the units are occupied. •Upon approval, the applicant has agreed to all requirements of 21a.50.050, including moving expenses, application fees, and monthly rental assistance. Community Benefit, Unit Replacement, and Tenant Displacement all deemed sufficiently compliant with 21A.50.050 UNIT REPLACEMENT, & TENANT DISPLACEMENT Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning COMPLIANCE WITH ADOPTED POLICIES “Encourage the development of mixed-use projects near light rail stations to create a livable, walkable urban environment” – TOD-2.0 (Central Community Plan) •Plan Salt Lake Consistent with two guiding principles and initiatives in three chapters – growth, housing, and transportation & mobility •Central Community Plan Consistent with initiatives relating to livable communities and neighborhoods, vital and sustainable commerce, unique and active places, and pedestrian mobility and accessibility Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation of the General Plan Amendment and a positive recommendation of the Zoning Map Amendment to City Council, with details stipulated in a Development Agreement. PLANNING COMMISSION RESULTS Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Grant Amann // Principal Planner Grant.Amann@slcgov.com Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning PROPOSAL Planning Commission •Requires Design Review for buildings over 200’ in length. The Planning Commission tabled the Design Review portion of the project. Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning PROPOSAL Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning PROJECT OVERVIEW •Property Size: .54 Acres •Max Height: approx. 39’ 7” •Unit Type: 2 and 3- bedroom •Exterior Materials: Brick, Stucco EIFS •Parking: 2 stalls per unit SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 02/23/2026 Date Sent to Council: 02/25/2026 From: Department * Community and Neighborhood Employee Name: Amann, Grant E-mail grant.amann@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 02/23/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 02/25/2026 Subject: General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment - Approx. 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E., 354 S. 800 E., 370 S. 800 E., and 775 E. 400 S. Additional Staff Contact:Presenters/Staff Table Grant Amann Document Type Ordinance Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: At its November 12, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of transmitting a recommendation of approval that the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) amend the Zoning Map, and recommended that the City Council deny the application to amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map. Background/Discussion See ﬁrst attachment for Background/Discussion Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing Required Public Process The Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will hold a work session and a public hearing and make the ﬁnal decision on the petition. I have attached a Public Hearing Notice sheet which will need to be sent out prior to the public hearing. This page has intentionally been left blank ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Tammy Hunsaker Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL RECOMMENDATION: PLNPCM2025-00660 – Deny the Central Community master plan as recommended by Planning Commission. PLNPCM2025-00641 – Approve the zoning map amendment request for the properties located at 346 S. 800 E, 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E. from RMF-35 to MU-5 as recommended by Planning Commission. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Sean Thompson, representing the property owner, Hardage Hospitality, is requesting approval from Salt Lake City to amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map designations and zoning map for the following properties: 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E., 354 S. 800 E., 370 S 800 E, and 775 E. 400 S. The second request only impacts 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E. The applicant is seeking the amendments to enable the construction of a mixed-use building encompassing 109 total residential units and ground floor commercial space. The building will also offer multi-bedroom units, including 2-, 3-, and 4-bedroom units, if approved. The request must adhere to the Community Benefit standards outlined in 21A.50.050. Both requests went to Planning Commission on November 11, 2025. The Planning Commission recommended denial for the Central Community Plan Future Land Use Map amendment and approval for the Zoning Map amendment. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES: The proposed changes includes 2 petitions. REQUEST 1: Central Community Future Land Use Map The subject properties are currently identified as “Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre)” and “Medium Density Residential (15-30 dwelling units/acre)”. The plan amendment seeks to change the General Plan Future Land Use Map designation of all the properties to High Density Transit Oriented Development. The existing uses are 1 single-story commercial building and 3 residential buildings. The subject properties are located in the boundaries of the Central Community Plan area where a variety of medium density housing types and a mix of neighborhood serving uses are appropriate. The subject properties are located in the Bryant neighborhood, which is characterized by diverse architectural styles and a wide variety of land uses, with a strong commercial presence along 400 South. This request would maintain consistency between the Future Land Use Map and the desired units per acre. The case number for request 1 is PLNPCM2025-00660. REQUEST 2: Zoning Map Amendment The second proposal is to rezone 3 of the 5 properties from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi- Family) to MU-5 (Mixed-Use 5) District. The MU-5 district allows for greater density, height and a wider range of uses than permitted in the RMF-35 zoning district. If the zoning map amendment is approved, the applicant intends to apply for a lot consolidation to combine the subject properties and construct a mixed- use multi-family and storefront development consisting of approximately 109 residential units and approximately 2,590 square feet of publicly accessible retail space. The applicant is proposing to meet the requirements of the Community Benefit, Tenant Displacement, and Unit Replacement standards located in Section 21A.50.050 of the Zoning Ordinance. The case number for request 2 is PLNPCM2025-00641. Existing Zoning Map Existing Future Land Use Map COUNCIL CONSIDERATIONS: The proposed amendments must meet the consideration factors outlined in Chapters 19 and 21A of the Salt Lake City Code. Included in these factors are compliance with citywide policies, goals, and applicable plans. The applicant must indicate the project’s compliance with efforts by the city to mitigate tenant displacement and unit demolition, along with the proportionality of the community benefit proposed by the petitioner and the increase in the development potential of the site. Section 19.06 of the City Code outlines the process for general plans and amendments. Section 19.06.070 lists the factors to consider for amendments to the general plan, and a complete analysis of those standards is found in Attachment E of the Staff Report. A decision to amend a plan is ultimately up to the discretion of the City Council. The proposed community benefit is intended to provide housing that aligns with the community needs and the applicable general plan by increasing the number of units on the land from 5 units to 109 units. Of these 109 units, 24% are two-, three-, and four-bedroom units. The development also exceeds the city’s commercial frontage requirements, providing 2,590 square feet of active ground -floor commercial space along 400 South, designed to serve both residents and the broader community. Details regarding the community benefit requirements, tenant relocation assistance and unit replacement will need to be finalized as part of the development agreement, but have been deemed sufficient to advance to a public hearing. PUBLIC PROCESS: • Early Notification – On May 10th, 2025, notice of the proposal was mailed to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the property. The East Bench Community Council a was sent the 45- day required notice for recognized community organizations. Staff and the applicant attended the August 14, 2025, community council meeting. An online open house has been posted on the Planning Division’s website since July 2025. • Planning Commission Meeting – The petition was heard by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on November 12, 2025. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of approval for the request, with the following conditions of approval: 1) Council review the components of Thriving in Place to ensure they are all represented in the potential rezone. 2) The following provisions be incorporated into a development agreement for the zoning map amendment: a. Each demolished residential dwelling unit shall be replaced in accordance with 21A.50.050.E. b. The developer shall provide tenant relocation assistance to tenants displaced by the demolition of the residential dwelling units on the subject properties as specified in subsection 21A.50.050.D. The full public meeting can be viewed using this link. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of November 12, 2025 b) PC Minutes of November 12, 2025 c) PC Staff Report of November 12, 2025 EXHIBITS: 1. Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3. Original Petition 4. Mailing List 5. Ordinance This page has intentionally been left blank ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Tammy Hunsaker Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petitions: PLNPCM2025-00641 – Zoning Map Amendment PLNPCM2025-00660 – General Plan Amendment PLNPCM2025-00856 – Design Review ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- July 2, 2025 Application for a Zoning Map Amendment, General Plan Amendment reviewed for pre-screen. July 16, 2025 Application for a Zoning Map Amendment was accepted. July 16, 2025 Petitions PLNPCM2025-00641 and PLNPCM2025-00660 were assigned to Grant Amann, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing. July 17, 2025 Notice was sent to the East Bench Community Council Recognized Community Organization (RCO) informing them of the petition. Early notification of the project was also sent to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the proposal. The proposal was posted for an online open house. The proposal can still be viewed online. July 17, 2025 An Early Notification sign was posted on the properties by the applicant. August 14, 2025 The applicant presented their proposal at the East Central City Community Council meeting. August 28, 2025 Application for a Design Review was accepted. September 18, 2025 Petition PLNPCM2025-00856 was assigned to Grant Amann, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing. October 8, 2025 The MU zoning consolidation went into effect. The changed the existing zoning of the subject property, and the applicant’s request from TSA- UN-T to MU-5. October 29, 2025 Planning Staff posted notices on City and State websites and sent notices via the Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting. Public hearing notices were mailed. October 29, 2025 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended. November 1, 2025 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property by the applicant. November 1, 2025 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended. November 6, 2025 Planning Commission Staff Report was posted. November 12, 2025 Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed map amendment. November 21, 2025 Requested Final Draft of Ordinance from Attorney’s Office February 2, 2026 Final Draft of Ordinance received from Attorney’s Office This page has intentionally been left blank SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petitions PLNPCM2025-00660, PLNPCM2025-00641, and PLNPCM2025-00856. Sean Thompson, representing the property owner Hardage Hospitality, is requesting approval from the City to amend the zoning map and the Central Community Future Land Use Map designations of the following properties: 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E., 354 S. 800 E., 370 S 800 E, and 775 E. 400 S. In addition to the requested amendments, the applicant is seeking Design Review approval to exceed the maximum building façade length of 200’. The subject properties contain existing 3 existing residential buildings, including 7 apartment units. The proposed rezone is intended to allow for a portion of a 109-unit residential multi-family apartment development, which includes 2- ,3-, and 4- bedroom units. As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held: DATE: PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means while also providing an in-person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at 801.535.7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Grant Amann at 801-535-6171 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or by e-mail at grant.amann@slc.gov. The application details can be accessed at https://www.slc.gov/planning/2025/07/08/openhouse2025-00558/ . 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. This page has intentionally been left blank 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 East Properties Rezone Zoning Amendment CONTENT • Purpose and Justification • Future Development • Current Zoning Map • Community Benefit • Data Collection • Tenant Displacement • Demolish Unit Replacement November 12, 2025 Page 28 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 370 S 800 E Purpose and Justification November 12, 2025 Page 29 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Purpose for the Amendment The primary purpose of this zoning amendment is to facilitate significant housing production in direct response to Salt Lake City's acute housing crisis. As outlined in Housing SLC, the city must entitle 10,000 new housing units between 2023-2027 to address both projected population growth and existing housing deficits. This project transforms 7 existing substandard units into 109 modern, code-compliant residential units—representing a 15-fold increase in housing capacity on underutilized urban land. This requests a zoning map amendment for parcels 16-05-303-015, 16-05-303-016, and 16-05-303-017 from RMF-35 (Residential Multi-Family, 35' Maximum Height) to MU-5 (Mixed Use, 5 stories). This amendment will enable the redevelopment of underutilized properties containing deteriorated residential structures and a vacant, fire-damaged commercial building into a vibrant mixed-use development that directly advances Salt Lake City's housing and economic development objectives. AREA OF REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE FIG. 1 - CURRENT ZONING MAP AND AREA OF REQUESTED CHANGE RMF-35 to MU-5 TSA-UN-T to MU-5 November 12, 2025 Page 30 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Purpose for the Amendment Addressing Critical Housing Shortage The primary purpose of this zoning amendment is to facilitate significant housing production in direct response to Salt Lake City's acute housing crisis. As outlined in Housing SLC, the city must entitle 10,000 new housing units between 2023-2027 to address both projected population growth and existing housing deficits. This project transforms 7 existing substandard units into 109 modern, code-compliant residential units—representing a 15-fold increase in housing capacity on underutilized urban land. Creating Mixed-Use Urban Environment The MU-5 zoning designation will enable a true mixed-use development featuring approximately 3,460 square feet of ground- floor commercial space alongside diverse residential options. This mixed-use approach eliminates the current vacant commercial eyesore while creating space for multiple local businesses, charitable organizations, and community services that enhance neighborhood walkability and economic vitality. Maximizing Transit-Adjacent Development Located just 600 feet from two TRAX stops with exceptional walkability scores (80s-90s), this site represents an ideal opportunity for transit-oriented development. The MU-5 zoning supports appropriate density and mixed-use character that reduces car dependency, supports public transit investment, and promotes sustainable urban growth patterns. FIG. 2 - SALT LAKE CITY / PLANNING DIVISION, IMAGE CORTESY OF WWW.SLC.GOV/PLANNING November 12, 2025 Page 31 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Justification for the Amendment 1. Alignment with City Planning Objectives Housing SLC Implementation: In June of 2023, the Salt Lake City Council voted to adopt Housing SLC, a five-year plan that is to “serve as a guiding document for the City over the next five years, providing a framework for action across City Departments and Divisions” (Housing SLC, page 58). Goal 1 of this plan is to entitle 10,000 new housing units between 2023 and 2027. The population of Salt Lake City is projected to increase by 6,000 during the five-year period of the Plan, which will require an additional 3,000 new housing units on top of the existing deficit (Housing SLC, page 9). The problem is that there is very limited buildable land on which these additional units can be placed within the City. Many parts of the city are unable to be developed due to the presence of wetlands and foothills. Areas in proximity to the Salt Lake City International Airport cannot be built on due to Federal Aviation Administration regulations. Most of the developable land has already been built on. We are out of land to continue growing outward. The solution is greater density - providing more housing on the existing developable land. New developments in Salt Lake City are required to select at least five Moderate Income Housing Plan (MIHP) strategies that will be incorporated into the project. Projects must utilize at least six strategies in order to be eligible for state funding. Four of the strategies have to do with rezoning or amending regulations in order to allow for higher density and more multifamily residential dwellings (Strategies A, F, G, and W; Housing SLC, pages 28-29). The Housing SLC plan states that “The crisis we are currently facing has been decades in the making and extends beyond the municipal boundaries of the city, reaching across the county, the state, and the nation. It will take collaboration across governmental, non-profit, community, and private partners to work through this housing crisis.” That includes us. That includes you. The proposed rezoning and subsequent project helps meet these City goals. Currently, these lots host 7 units (4 one-bed, 1 two-bed, 1 three-bed, and 1 four-bed) while the proposed project would host 109 units (22 studio, 61 one-bed, 22 two-bed, 3 three-bed, and 1 four-bed). Mixed-Use Development Support: The project exemplifies the mixed-use, walkable development promoted throughout Salt Lake City's planning documents, creating an integrated live-work-shop environment that reduces transportation demand and supports local economic activity. FIG. 3 - GRAPH OF POPULATION AND PROJECTED POPULATION, HOUSING SLC (LEFT), GRAPH OF EXISTING VS PROPOSED UNITS ON PROJECT AREA LOTS (RIGHT) 15x Increase in Housing 8x Increase in Family Units November 12, 2025 Page 32 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone Justification for the Amendment 2. Zoning Consistency and Logical Planning: The block in question is already predominantly zoned TSA- UN-T (~93%). Rezoning the remaining RMF-35 parcels to MU-5 will establish a consistent zoning pattern, reduce regulatory complexity, and support coherent urban planning. The initial request was for TSA-UN-T; however, during the application review, the zoning designation was changed to MU-5. The current request aligns with that designation and seeks to formally rezone the parcels to MU-5. 3. Optimal Land Use and Site Conditions: Underutilized Property Transformation: The current site contains deteriorated structures that cannot economically be renovated to meet current building codes and livability standards. The existing 4-plex, duplex, and single-family home are in poor condition, while the commercial space has been vacant and fire-damaged. Redevelopment represents the highest and best use of this prime urban location. Infrastructure Readiness: The development team is actively coordinating with Salt Lake City Public Utilities Department and utility consultants to evaluate infrastructure capacity needed to support the proposed project. Ongoing discussions indicate that the necessary systems can be planned to accommodate the development. In addition, a Traffic Impact Study has been prepared and is currently under review. Preliminary coordination with UDOT suggests that transportation impacts can be addressed, particularly given the site’s strong transit access and walkability. FIG. 4 - PORTION OF ZONING MAP, IMAGE COURTESY OF SLC FIG. 5 - PROPERTY VIEW FROM TRAX, IMAGE COURTESY OF GOOGLE MAPS November 12, 2025 Page 33 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone Justification for the Amendment 4. Enhanced Public Safety and Emergency Access Fire Department Coordination: The project design has been developed in consultation with Salt Lake City Fire Department to ensure optimal emergency access. Current site constraints, including narrow streets and overhead power lines, limit emergency vehicle access under existing zoning. The MU-5 development enables unified site planning that significantly improves fire and emergency access compared to the fragmented current configuration. Modern Safety Standards: New construction will meet all current building and fire safety codes, replacing aged structures with modern safety systems and accessibility features. Zoning Setback Buildable Area AERIAL FIRE ACCESS WIDTH REQUIREMENT THE MINIMUM UNOBSTRUCTED WIDTH IS 26’, 800 E IS 24’ WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH FIRE CODE REQUIREMENT. A AERIAL FIRE ACCESS OBSTRUCTION OVERHEAD UTILITY AND POWER LINES SHALL NOT BE LOCATED OVER AERIAL FIRE ACCESS ROAD OR BUILDING. CAERIAL FIRE ACCESS PROXIMITY TO BLDG. REQUIRED TO BE NOT LESS THAN 15’ AND NOT GREATER THAN 30’ FROM BUILDING. B 400 S 80 0 E LINDEN AVE 24' - 0" 11% of Building Perimeter 26 ' . M i n . Buildable Area 32' 15% of Building Perimeter Construction with Proposed Rezoning Rezone allows for SLCFD preferred approach, reduces asphalt and maximizes housing potential A B C Max.Allowable height 35’ Maximum allowable height 50’ Construction with Added Fire Lane Fire lane between zones results in additional asphalt and reduced housing A B C Max.Allowable height 35’ Maximum allowable height 50’ A B C Construction with Current Zoning SLCFD will not allow roofs at multiple heights FIG. 6 - 400 S AND LINDEN AVE. FIRE AERIAL ACCESS ANALYSIS November 12, 2025 Page 34 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone Justification for the Amendment Due to physical site constraints, aerial fire access from 800 East is not feasible. The road width, which cannot be increased, and presence of high voltage power lines prevent compliance with Salt Lake City Fire Department standards for aerial operations. Per Salt Lake City Code, the Fire Department requires a minimum of 25% of the building perimeter to be aerial apparatus accessible in order to ensure life safety and fire protection. Given the limitations along 800 East, the only viable way to meet this requirement is to provide aerial access along Linden Avenue and 400 South, which offer sufficient clearance, appropriate setbacks, and operational space for fire equipment. The requested zone change to MU-5 supports this layout by enabling a development form that can meet fire access requirements while also contributing to the city’s goals for higher-density, transit-oriented design. 5. Economic and Community Development Substantial Private Investment: The project represents significant private investment in neighborhood infrastructure and housing stock, generating construction employment and ongoing economic activity. Local Business Support: The 3,460 square feet of commercial space will accommodate multiple local businesses, professional services, and potentially charitable organizations, creating local employment and serving daily needs of residents and the surrounding community. Community-Endorsed Development: Local community area representatives have provided positive feedback on the project's approach to addressing vacant properties and increasing family housing options. 6. Family Housing Production Critical Family Unit Shortage: The project increases family-sized units (2-4 bedrooms) from 3 existing to 26 proposed— an eight-fold increase that directly addresses the shortage of family housing in Salt Lake City's urban core. The unit mix specifically responds to diverse household needs identified in the General Plan: • 22 studio units for workforce housing • 61 one-bedroom units for diverse household types • 22 two-bedroom units for small families • 3 three-bedroom units for larger families • 1 four-bedroom unit for larger families November 12, 2025 Page 35 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone Justification for the Amendment 7. Environmental and Transportation Benefits Urban Infill Development: The project represents responsible urban infill that maximizes existing infrastructure rather than encouraging sprawling greenfield development. Reduced Transportation Demand: The combination of transit access, high walkability, and integrated commercial space minimizes vehicle trips per unit, supporting the city's sustainability and transportation efficiency goals. FIG. 8 - TRAX STOP NEAR PROPERTY, IMAGE COURTESY OF SLC 8. Compatibility with Surrounding Neighborhood Character Because the adjacent properties to the South and West are already zoned MU-5, the proposed amendment will not introduce incompatible land uses or disrupt the existing development pattern. Instead, it will promote continuity in building scale, architectural design, and streetscape character, thereby enhancing neighborhood cohesion. To ensure a sensitive and gradual transition from the MU-5 zone to the adjacent RMF-35 zone north of Linden Avenue, the proposed development will comply with the angular plane requirements outlined in Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.37.050. Specifically, a 45-degree angular plane measured from the shared property lines provides a clear framework for scaling down from higher-density, high-rise forms to lower-scale residential development. This design approach mitigates potential impacts on neighboring properties and supports a compatible urban form that respects the established residential context. FIG. 7 - PROPOSED HEIGHT TRANSITION 45.00° Pr o p e r t y L i n e Pr o p e r t y L i n e Pr o p e r t y L i n e Setback 10'107' Stepback Building157' Setback 10' Angular Plane from (E) Property Building Context and Facade Length Diagram Elevation 0 8'32'16' FIG. 9 - 800 EAST FACADE TSA-UN-T November 12, 2025 Page 36 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Justification for the Amendment 9. Solar Shading Study: The comprehensive solar shading study demonstrates that the proposed 4-story mixed-use building at 370 S 800 E will not create adverse solar access impacts on neighboring properties. Key findings include: Contained Shadow Patterns: Shadows fall predominantly within the development site boundaries and on public street areas, Seasonal Stability: Both equinox and winter solstice conditions show consistent pattern of contained shadow impact, Time-of-Day Analysis: Morning and afternoon peak periods demonstrate minimal extension of shadows onto neighboring private properties. Responsible Building Design: Appropriate Scale: 4-story height balances density objectives with neighborhood compatibility, Strategic Orientation: Building placement and design minimize shadow extension during critical daylight hours, Transition Elements: Angular plane compliance and height stepping provide appropriate transitions to adjacent properties. Regulatory and Community Compatibility: Standards Compliance: Project meets all MU-5 zoning requirements for height, setbacks, and building relationships. Urban Context: Shadow patterns appropriate for established urban mixed-use area with existing infrastructure and development. Net Community Benefit: Minimal shadow impact is significantly outweighed by housing production, commercial activation, and neighborhood improvement benefits. The solar study confirms that this well-designed mixed-use development will integrate successfully into the neighborhood fabric while preserving appropriate solar access for surrounding properties. The building's scale, orientation, and positioning demonstrate careful consideration of neighboring properties' solar access needs while achieving important community housing and economic development objectives. FIG. 10 - EQUINOX - 9AM FIG. 12 - WINTER SOLSTICE - 9AM FIG. 11 - EQUINOX - 3PM FIG. 13 - WINTER SOLSTICE - 3PM November 12, 2025 Page 37 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Future Development November 12, 2025 Page 38 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties FIG. 14 - ALLOWABLE VOLUME Future Development 1. Proposed Use of the Property: Upon approval of the requested Zoning Map Amendment, the affected property is intended for development as a five-story structure designed and constructed in accordance with MU-5 zoning requirements. The development will feature active ground-floor uses, including commercial space, and amenity and support spaces to engage the street scape and contribute to a vibrant pedestrian environment. Parking will be incorporated internally within the structure to minimize its visual impact and support transit-oriented goals. Residential units will occupy floors one through five, providing a mix of housing types from studio to three bedroom units, consistent with the City’s goals for increased density and walkability in transit station areas. (Refer to Floor Plans) 2. Proposed Density of the Property: The current zoning designation, RMF-35 (Residential Multi-Family), permits a building height of up to 55 feet. The proposed MU-5 (Mixed Use, 5 stories) zoning allows for increased residential density and a maximum building height of up to 50 feet, subject to compliance with design and compatibility standards outlined in the Salt Lake City Code. Approval of this zone change would allow for the addition of approximately 24 residential units (studios, 1bed, 2bed, 3bed and 4bed) beyond what is currently permitted under RMF-35. This increase in density supports a more efficient use of the land in a transit-adjacent location and enables the development of a four-story, mixed-use building. The proposed density and height are compatible with the surrounding context and further the City’s goals for walkable, transit-oriented, and higher-intensity urban neighborhoods. MU-5 ALLOWABLE VOLUME TSA-UN-T ALLOWABLE VOLUME RMF-35 ALLOWABLE VOLUME November 12, 2025 Page 39 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Future Development 3. Scale of the Development: The proposed development will consist of a five-story, mixed-use building that reflects the scale and character encouraged in the MU-5 zoning district. The structure will reach a height of approximately 55 feet to the roof, consistent with the maximum height allowed under the MU-5 zone and in keeping with surrounding buildings within the block, the majority of which are already recently zoned MU-5. Along Linden Avenue, the building will incorporate a 45-degree angular plane from the shared property lines, as required by Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.37.050, to provide a visually appropriate step-down in height and massing. This approach minimizes visual impact and supports a cohesive streetscape. In terms of footprint and form, the building will occupy the northern portion of the block, with internalized parking and active ground-floor uses that contribute to the pedestrian environment. The overall scale is compatible with the area’s evolving urban context and aligns with the City’s goals for higher-density, transit-oriented development. 4. Timing of the Development: The project will proceed to planning immediately upon approval of the requested Zoning Map Amendment. 5. Impact to Existing land uses and Occupants: At a prominent corner of the block is a vacant commercial building, most recently a Pizza Hut that was damaged by a transient-set fire. The subject property also features a mix of older, non- historical structures: a single-family home, a duplex, and a four-plex. These existing uses represent a fragmented and underutilized condition that does not align with the area’s evolving urban character or its potential for transit-oriented, mixed-use redevelopment. The buildings on-site are not historically significant, and offer limited contribution to the surrounding urban fabric or pedestrian experience. The vacancy and visible decline of the site diminish the vitality of the neighborhood, which is predominantly recently zoned MU-5 and currently experiencing significant reinvestment and redevelopment activity. Rents received on said properties do not support renovation of said buildings. The requested zone change would result in a financially viable project to redevelop all of the parcels, which will facilitate a cohesive, higher-density redevelopment that supports Salt Lake City’s vision for Transit Station Areas. The proposed mixed-use project will introduce active commercial uses, live/work spaces, and new housing options that enhance walkability, support transit ridership, and contribute to the long-term vibrancy and resilience of the neighborhood. FIG. 14 - CURRENT VACANT COMMERCIAL BUILDING November 12, 2025 Page 40 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties ¼ Mi.½ Mi. Retail Medical Businesses Site Grocery Restaurants Transit Vicinity Map This graphic illustrates businesses within walking distance of the 800 E Properties. Redevelopment of the site and the addition of units will increase pedestrain traffic in the area. November 12, 2025 Page 41 of 160 Site Plan 0 8'32'16' N 11’ - 5 ¾” 12’ - 4 ¼”103’ - 9 ¾”157’ - 0 ¼” 18’-1 ¾“ 17’ - 11 ¼” 10’ - 0”27’ - 5” Aerial Access Road WidthSet Back 22’ 2 ½” Existing Road WidthProximity 5’ 2 ½” 316’ - 8 ¼” 10 7 ’ - 2 ¾ ” Le s s t h a n 1 4 % o f B u i l d i n g P e r i m e t e r 54’ - 11 ¾” 293’ - 3 ¾ ” M a x D i a g o n a l D i m e n s i o n (Dista n c e b e t w e e n A c c e s s R o a d s M i n . 1 4 6 ’ ½ ” ) Less than 2% of Perimeter Less than 7% of Perimeter 71 ’ - 1 0 ” 32 ’ - 8 ½ ” 24 ’ - 0 ” Le s s t h a n 9 % o f B u i l d i n g P e r i m e t e r Building Perimeter is 798’ 7 ¼” 5 Stories (over 30’, less than 60’) 110 Residential Units Required Fire Sprinkler System NFPA-13 AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD □ Access to one entire side of the building - D105.3 □ Road width is over 26’ - D105.2 □ The road curb is 18’ - 1 ¾” from the building - D105.3 40 0 S Li n d e n A v e n u e 800 E AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD □ Access to one entire side of the building - D105.3 □ Road width is over 26’ - D105.2 □ The road curb is 23’ - 1 ¾” from the building - D105.3 150’ Hose Pull Length 150’ Hose Pull Length 150’ Hose Pull Length 150’ Hose Pull Length Existing Primary Feed Overhead Power Line Distance Between Access Roads is Over 139’ Proximity Exceeds Maximum Distance from Building Road Width Does Not Meet Fire Apparatus Access Road Requirements Existing Overhead Utility To be Buried or Relocated Fi r e L i n e , N O P A R K I N G 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 42 of 160 UP DN UP 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 205 21222425 26272829 23 3132 30333435 363738 40 41 42 43 44 53 54 55 5657 58 60 6159 62 63 64 65 66 67 6850 51 5247 48 4945 46 39 8 14 1414 3 3 2 2 12 Lobby Plan Key 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Stair Elevators Bike Storage Tenant Amenity Trash/Recycling Chutes Dumpsters Parking Garage Clubhouse Leasing/Management Mail & Package Room Mechanical/Electrical Roof Deck Tenant Storage Transformer Legend Studio...........................497 SF 1 Bedroom Junior........689 SF 1 Bedroom...................764 SF 2 Bedroom..................1025 SF Live/Work Loft Commercial 3 Bedroom..................1469 SF Circulation Indoor Amenity Parking Vertical Circulation Storage Service/Mechanical Building Plans - Below Grade 0 5'20'10' N 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 43 of 160 DN UP DN UP Ramp Down Parking Garage Entry Drive Fi r e L a n e Parking Garage Entry Drive 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 95 10 11 12 15 14 1318 17 1621 20 19 11 1 10 4 3 3 1 7 12 12 2 2 8 15 12 12 Lease Space Gym Space Lobby Plan Key 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Stair Elevators Bike Storage Tenant Amenity Trash/Recycling Chutes Dumpsters Parking Garage Clubhouse Leasing/Management Mail & Package Room Mechanical/Electrical Roof Deck Tenant Storage Transformer Legend Studio...........................497 SF 1 Bedroom Junior........689 SF 1 Bedroom...................764 SF 2 Bedroom..................1025 SF 4 Bedroom..................1760 SF Commercial 3 Bedroom..................1469 SF Circulation Indoor Amenity Parking Vertical Circulation Storage Service/Mechanical Building Plans - Level 1 0 5'20'10' N 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 44 of 160 DN UP UP DN 9 3 3 2 5 5 2 13 6 12 12 Lobby Plan Key 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Stair Elevators Bike Storage Tenant Amenity Trash/Recycling Chutes Dumpsters Parking Garage Clubhouse Leasing/Management Mail & Package Room Mechanical/Electrical Roof Deck Tenant Storage Transformer Legend Studio...........................497 SF 1 Bedroom Junior........689 SF 1 Bedroom...................764 SF 2 Bedroom..................1025 SF Live/Work Loft Commercial 3 Bedroom..................1469 SF Circulation Indoor Amenity Parking Vertical Circulation Storage Service/Mechanical Building Plans - Level 2 0 5'20'10' N 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 45 of 160 DN DN UP 3 3 2 5 52 6 12 12 Lobby Plan Key 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Stair Elevators Bike Storage Tenant Amenity Trash/Recycling Chutes Dumpsters Parking Garage Clubhouse Leasing/Management Mail & Package Room Mechanical/Electrical Roof Deck Tenant Storage Transformer Legend Studio...........................497 SF 1 Bedroom Junior........689 SF 1 Bedroom...................764 SF 2 Bedroom..................1025 SF Live/Work Loft Commercial 3 Bedroom..................1469 SF Circulation Indoor Amenity Parking Vertical Circulation Storage Service/Mechanical Building Plans - Levels 3 - 5 0 5'20'10' N 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 46 of 160 Roof Plan 0 5'20'10' N 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 47 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 North Elevation 2 5 10 9 6 7 9 10 4 6 5 0 5'20'10' 1 8 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 48 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 East Elevation 1 2 6 3 7 97 9 6 8 7 9 2 5 5 1 10 10109 7 10 0 5'20'10' 1 7 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 49 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 South Elevation 1 2 5 10 10 9 78 5 9 10 9 5 6 0 5'20'10' 74 8 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 50 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 West Elevation 4 6 6 6 7 9 7 7 9 2 5 5 9 1 10 8 1 9 5 10 4 0 5'20'10' 2 5 8 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 51 of 160 South View from Across 8th East 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 52 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Current Zoning Map November 12, 2025 Page 53 of 160 1 21 - 0 9 5 20 2 2 - 0 8 - 3 1 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties RECORD OF SURVEY FOR THE PARCELS IN QUESTION. Purpose for the Amendment The purpose of this requested zoning map amendment is to establish a consistent zoning designation across the block, which is currently 94% zoned MU-5. This change will enhance fire and emergency access and support higher-density development of family-friendly housing on the northern portion of the properties owned by Hardage Hospitality. Specifically, this request seeks to rezone the following parcels: 16-05-303-015, 16-05-303-016 & 16-05-303-017. From RMF-35 (Residential Multi-Family, 35 units/acre) to MU-5 (Mixed Use, 5 stories). November 12, 2025 Page 54 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit November 12, 2025 Page 55 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit The development at 800 East Properties provides substantial community benefits as required by Section 21A.50.050.C, delivering housing that aligns with community needs and commercial space for local businesses that would not otherwise be provided without the zoning amendment. Section 21A.50.050.C.1.a - Housing Aligned with Community Needs Providing housing that aligns with the current or future needs of the community as determined by the general plan. Needs could include the level of affordability in excess of the number of dwellings that exist on the site, size in terms of number of bedrooms, or availability of housing for purchase. Dramatic Increase in Housing Supply The proposal transforms underutilized residential structures and vacant commercial space into 109 residential units - a significant increase from the existing 4-5 dwelling units currently on site. This represents over a 2,000% increase in housing density, directly addressing Salt Lake City's documented housing shortage. Family-Sized Housing Mix Addressing Community Needs The project's unit distribution specifically addresses the "size in terms of number of bedrooms" criterion identified in Section 21A.50.050.C.1.a: • Studios (22 units, 20%): 445-536 SF - Entry-level housing for young professionals and students • Junior One-Bedrooms (17 units, 16%): 630-651 SF - Transitional housing for couples and small households • One-Bedrooms (44 units, 40%): 704-726 SF - Core market housing for diverse household types • Two-Bedrooms (22 units, 20%): 951-1,114 SF - Family housing accommodating children and home offices • Three-Bedrooms (3 units, 3%): 1,384 SF - True family-sized units retaining families in the urban core • Four-Bedrooms (1 unit, 1%): 1,678 SF - True family-sized unit retaining families in the urban core This diverse mix directly responds to Salt Lake City's General Plan goals for housing diversity and the documented need for family-appropriate housing along transit corridors. The inclusion of larger 2-, 3-, and 4-bedroom units (24% of total) specifically addresses the shortage of family housing in urban mixed-use developments. Alignment with General Plan Objectives The housing mix supports Plan Salt Lake's objectives for: Transit-Oriented Development: 109 units directly on the 400 South/800 East corridor Housing Diversity: Units ranging from 445 SF to 1,384 SF serve multiple income levels and family types Urban Density: Efficient use of existing infrastructure while maintaining neighborhood character STUDIO UNIT (22) ONE BED UNIT (61)TWO BED UNIT (22)THREE BED UNIT (3)FOUR BED UNIT (1) 497 SF 689-764 SF 1,025 SF 1,469 SF 1,678 SF November 12, 2025 Page 56 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit Section 21A.50.050.C.1.b - Commercial Space for Local Businesses, Providing commercial space for local businesses or charitable organizations. Community-Serving Commercial Programming The project provides 2,590 SF of active commercial space specifically designed to support local businesses and address documented community needs: Public Gymnasium (1,978 SF) • Addresses overcrowding at existing area fitness facilities • Serves both residents and the broader community • Creates employment for fitness professionals and support staff • Provides accessible health infrastructure along the transit corridor Local Business Commercial Space (612 SF) • Dog Wash Station: Serves pet owners in the dense residential corridor who currently lack convenient pet care facilities • TRAX Bike Storage & Repair: Supports cyclists using public transit, encouraging multimodal transportation • Flexible space designed to accommodate other neighborhood-serving businesses Local Business Benefits These commercial uses specifically benefit local entrepreneurs by: • Providing turn-key facilities for service businesses addressing unmet community needs • Creating visible, accessible storefronts with extensive glazing and sidewalk orientation • Offering affordable commercial space in a prime transit-accessible location • Supporting business sustainability through built-in customer base (109 residential units) and transit accessibility FIG. 16 - UTA BIKE LOCKER WEBSITEFIG. 15 - ICLEAN DOG WASH FIG. 17 - LOCAL GYM November 12, 2025 Page 57 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit Section 21A.50.050.C.2.h - General Plan Policy Support The proposed community benefits align with multiple General Plan policies: • Grow Plan: Increasing density along transit corridors • Live Plan: Providing diverse housing options for different life stages • Connect Plan: Supporting multimodal transportation through bike facilities • Play Plan: Enhancing community health through fitness facilities Conclusion The 800E Properties development provides exceptional community benefits under Section 21A.50.050.C that would not be possible without the zoning amendment. The project transforms underutilized property into 110 units of diverse, family-appropriate housing while creating commercial space specifically designed to support local businesses and address documented community needs. These benefits - a 2,000%+ increase in housing supply with family-sized units and community-serving commercial space - clearly justify the requested zoning amendment and provide lasting value to the 400 South transit corridor neighborhood. November 12, 2025 Page 58 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Data Collection November 12, 2025 Page 59 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties 4 Plex - 346-348 S 800 E SLC, UT 84102 Unit Count: 4 Square Footage per Floor Unit Summary *Note: Unit B (main level) includes shared entrance, hall, and staircase to Unit A. Duplex - 350 S 800 E SLC, UT 84102 Unit Count: 2 Unit Summary Unit Est. Sq Ft Bedrooms Current Residents Bonus Rooms Rent Now Rent 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 A 500 1 1 $995 $995 $995 $675 B 800 1 1 2 finished basement bonus rooms $1,095 $1,095 $1,095 $895 C 1,600 2 1 Small office $1,495 $1,495 $1,195 $1,195 D 500 1 1 $895 $895 $895 $995 Sum 3,400 5 4 $4,480 $4,480 $4,180 $3,760 Floor Sq Ft per Floor Notes Floor 1 1,444 Floor 2 1,444 Basement ~1,444 Approx. 60-70% Finished Living Space + Utility Room Sum ~4,332 Unit Est. Sq Ft Bedrooms Current Residents Notes Rent Now Rent 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 352 560 1 1 $895 $995 $995 $945 354 1,380 3 3 $1,545 $1,295 $1,295 $1,295 Unfinished Basement 1,120 0 0 No residents have access to this space Sum 3,060 4 4 $2,440 $2,290 $2,290 $2,240 Data Collection November 12, 2025 Page 60 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties House - 354 S 800 E SLC, UT 84102 Unit Count: 1 Bedrooms: 4 Total People Living in Property: 5 Square Footage per Floor Rent Vacant Commercial Space - 775 E 400 S SLC, UT 84102 Current Use: Vacant Prior Occupant: Pizza Hut Square Footage: ~1,600 Sq Ft Cost to Lease Now 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 Rent $1,895 $1,895 $1,895 $1,895 Floor Sq Ft Floor 1 1,630 Floor 2 1,630 Unfinished Basement 1,090 Sum 2,720 Data Collection Now 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 Rent $0 $0 $$ November 12, 2025 Page 61 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement November 12, 2025 Page 62 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement If the petition is successful, the owner will coordinate with the planning department to ensure compliance with City Ordnance 21A.50.050.D.4. and 21A.50.050.E, Tenant Displacement Obligations and Demolished Unit Replacement. Section 19.06.070.D.4 Tenant Relocation Assistance - Applicant Proposal There are seven (7) existing units, four (4) are occupied and three (3) are vacant. All units will be demolished as part of this proposed project. The existing four (4) leases are month-to-month short-term leases. Upon project approval the applicant will provide (60) written notice to existing tenants that their leases will be terminated and notice that the applicant will provide the relocation assistance identified herein to the remaining affected tenants. The applicant will provide each tenant the following assistance as provided under Section 19.06.070.D.4.a-d subject to the following terms: a. Moving expenses based on a reasonable estimate provided by the tenant, up to a maximum of $1,500. a. To qualify for moving expenses, the tenants will be required to provide applicant estimates/quotes (10) business days prior to expenses being incurred for reimbursement. b. The applicant will reimburse moving expenses based upon the estimate provided by tenant within (10) business days of receipt of estimates. b. Application fees for the replacement housing. a. The applicant will reimburse tenant for reasonable application fees up to maximum of (20) separate applications. b. The tenants must provide applicant copies of application fees and receipts of fees paid. c. The applicants will reimburse tenant application fees (10) business days after receipt of invoices. c. A reasonable deposit that the displaced tenant would have to pay to secure replacement housing. a. The applicant will reimburse deposits up to max amount equal to current monthly rent rate of tenant. b. The tenant will provide applicant invoices and receipts of required deposits for replacement housing within (10) business days of invoices. c. The applicant will reimburse invoices within (10) business days of receipt. d. Monthly Rental Assistance payment. The rental assistance payment is based upon the difference, if any, between the cost of the currently monthly rent of the existing housing and a reasonably comparable unit. The rental payment total amount paid shall not be more than $7,200. a. The applicant will provide rental assistance payment to tenants for the difference between current rent and rent for reasonably comparable replacement housing for up to (12) months total and/or a maximum of $7,200, whichever amount is less. b. The tenant seeking rental assistance will only qualify in for reimbursement if the tenant has found a reasonably comparable unit. Comparable is defined as equal in size, number of bedrooms, baths, level of finishes, amenities available, and age of property (within 20 years). Tenants will be required to submit comparable properties applications to application to confirm they are comparable properties. c. The tenant will provide applicant with a copy of the new lease and different rent calculation to applicant within (10) business days of commencement of lease for reimbursement. d. The applicant will reimburse tenant within (10) business of receipt of new lease and rent assistance calculation. November 12, 2025 Page 63 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement Section 19.060.070.E Demolished Unit Replacement There are (7) existing units that will be demolished as part of this proposed project. The future development will be replacing the existing housing units with units having the same number of bedrooms. Additionally, the applicant will provide the following option as permitted by Section 19.06.070.E.2. 2. As allowed under the City Code, the applicant will make a payment to the city in lieu of rental restrictions on the new unit to go toward the city’s housing fund to offset the loss of naturally affordable housing. The payment will be equal to the monthly rent of the units prior to demolition times outlined in the data tables on page 32 and 33 multiplied by the number of months between the time the unit is vacated prior to demolition until a temporary certificate of occupancy for applicant’s new development is issued. November 12, 2025 Page 64 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 East Properties Design Review CONTENT • Compliance with Section 21A.59.050 • Site Plan • Existing Conditions • Project Description • Proposed Development November 12, 2025 Page 65 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Compliance with Section 21A.59.050 November 12, 2025 Page 66 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Compliance with Section 21A.59.030 A. Consistency with MU-5 Zone, Urban Design Element, and Master Plans The MU-5 (Mixed Use District 5) zone is intended to promote higher-density, mixed-use, transit-oriented development. This project advances those goals by: • Delivering 109 residential units in a mix of studios, junior one-bedrooms, one-bedrooms, two-bedrooms, three- bedrooms, and four-bedrooms (Pages 16-18). • Incorporating active, publicly accessible ground floor uses, including a gym (1,978 sf), commercial space (612 sf) clubhouse, leasing office, and lobby (Page 16). • Locating all parking within the builing (Page 15 -16), eliminating surface parking and reinforcing the pedestrian realm. • Supporting master plan and Urban Design Element goals for the 400 South/Transit Corridor by enhancing walkability, providing higher-intensity housing near transit, and activating the street frontage with retail-like functions. B. Orientation to Sidewalk • Primary Entrances: The lobby, lease spaces, and gym entries face 400 South and 800 East, directly addressing the sidewalk (Page 16). • Building Siting: The building maintains a 10’ setback, reinforcing the urban street wall (Page 7). • Parking: All parking is internalized and screened. Garage access is limited to driveways on secondary frontages, minimizing pedestrian conflicts (Pages 15-16). The two access points is a 60 % reduction of driveways compared to current state. C. Active Ground Floor & Transparency • Active Uses: The ground level includes a gym, and leasing functions, ensuring continuous activation along sidewalks (Page 16). • Transparency: Clear, non-reflective storefront glazing is used extensively along 400 South and 800 East (Pages 19- 22). • Storefront Articulation: Sign bands, transom glazing, and articulated transitions reinterpret traditional storefront design. • Outdoor Visual Connections: Amenity and landscaped open spaces at ground level provide direct visual connections to the street (Pages 23-26). D. Human-Scale Massing • Contextual Scale: The 5 story structure (59’ max height) fits the anticipated scale of MU-5 and adjacent mixed-use development. • Modulation: Stepbacks, recesses, and alternating façade planes break down massing (Pages-19-22). • Secondary Elements: Balconies, bays, horizontal courses, and window reveals enhance articulation. • Window Rhythm: Fenestration establishes a solid-to-void ratio that reflects desired urban patterns (Pages-19-22). November 12, 2025 Page 67 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties E. Large Building Masses (>200’) • Vertical Breaks: Façade modulation occurs through inset balconies and material shifts (Pages-19-22). • Material Changes: The exterior employs architectural metal, EIFS, brick veneer, and wood accents materials in a manner to suggest different buildings if not in fact separate masses (Pages-19-22). • Massing Changes: The east and west wings create differentiated volumes. • Active Uses at Grade: More than 80% of ground floor frontage includes active, publicly accessible uses (Page 16). • Stepbacks: Upper levels step back 10’ from the streetwall, creating a defined pedestrian-scaled base (Pages-19-22). F. Privately-Owned Public Spaces The project provides outdoor gathering spaces along 400 South and 800 East (Page 7), including: • Seating areas for residents and visitors. • Street trees and landscaping offering shade, visual interest and a softening of the hardscape. • Public art opportunities integrated into plazas. • Outdoor connection to amenity patios and community spaces. G. Building Height & Human Scale • Stepbacks: Stepbacks are used above the base to maintain human scale. • Minimizing Impacts: Building modulation and orientation reduce shadow and wind impacts; taller portions are set back from property edges. • Roofline & Cornice: Rooflines are articulated with parapets, material changes, and mechanical screening (Pages-19- 22) • Roof Deck: A roof amenity deck provides outdoor living space and supports sustainability (Page 14). H. Parking & Circulation • All parking is internal and screened from pedestrian view(Pages 15-16). • Driveway entries are minimized to protect sidewalks. • Direct pedestrian connections link entries to sidewalks and transit stops (Page 7). I. Screening of Service Areas Trash, recycling, transformers and mechanical rooms are located within the building and accessed via service drives (Z- 006). All equipment is screened with materials consistent with the façade (Pages-19-22). November 12, 2025 Page 68 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties J. Signage • Signage zones will be integrated into storefront bands (Page 19). • Blade signage opportunities are provided at primary corners. • Signage locations are coordinated with lighting and landscaping. K. Lighting • Pedestrian-scale lighting will be installed per the Salt Lake City Lighting Master Plan. • Building and plaza lighting is designed for comfort, safety, and dark sky compliance. • Accent lighting highlights building entries and key design features. L. Streetscape Improvements Street Trees: New trees will be planted along both 400 South and 800 East at approx. 30’ intervals, per city forestry guidelines (Page 7). Hardscape: • Durable, ADA-accessible materials differentiate public vs. private spaces. • High-SRI paving minimizes heat island effects. • Landscape-integrated seating supports universal accessibility. Conclusion The Viv – MU-5 has been designed to fully comply with the intent and requirements of Salt Lake City Code §21A.59.050. The project delivers a transit-oriented, pedestrian-scaled, mixed-use development that strengthens the urban edge of 400 South and 800 East, enhances public realm conditions, and provides high-quality housing supported by active ground floor uses. November 12, 2025 Page 69 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Site Plan November 12, 2025 Page 70 of 160 Fi r e L a n e S00o14'08"W 170.29' Line of Building Above Raised Planters -Native Plants -Drip Irrigation Building Line of Building Above 33' - 3 3/4"22' - 4 1/4"102' - 3 1/2" Drive Width 24' - 0"91' - 1 1/4" Dr i v e W i d t h 27 ' - 0 " Transforme 13' - 9" 13 ' - 1 " Sidewalk Parking Strip 800 East Si d e w a l k 40 0 Se t b a c k 3' - 6 " Se t b a c k 6' - 7 1 / 2 " Setback 6' - 8 3/4" Setback 10' - 1 1/4" Se t b a c k 12 ' - 1 1 / 4 " Setback 11' - 5" Se t b a c k 1' - 8 1 / 2 " Setback 10' - 0 3/4" 275' - 4 3/4" 11 0 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 12 0 ' - 8 " Ne a r e s t D w e l l i n g Nearest Dwelling Pool Deck, Level 2 Unit Deck 48 SF, Typ. Unit Deck 48 SF, Typ. Unit Deck Railing, 42" Typ. Li n d e n A v e n u e Clear Sight Triangle Clear Sight Triangle Pool Deck Raised Planters -Native Plants -Drip Irrigation Clear Sight Triangle Clear Sight Triangle Retaining Wall, 18" Retaining Wall, 18" Commercial Entry Terrace, 490 SF Commercial Entry Terrace, 105 SF Raised Planters -Native Plants -Drip Irrigation Exterior Wall Sconce Lights Building Sign, 11' x 6'-11" 17 ' - 6 " 6' - 0 " 8' - 0" Lot Area: 34,299 SF N00o14'08"E 82.59' N8 9 o47 ' 0 2 " W 1 6 . 5 0 ' S89 o47 ' 0 2 " E 4 9 . 5 0 ' S89 o47 ' 0 2 " E 1 1 5 . 5 0 ' S00o14'08"W 41.25' S8 9 o47 ' 0 2 " E 8 2 . 5 0 ' N00o14'08"E 297.12' 7' - 9 3 / 4 " 38 ' - 7 1 / 4 " Site Plan 0 5'20'10' N November 12, 2025 Page 71 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Existing Conditions November 12, 2025 Page 72 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Existing Conditions The existing residential structures on the site are aged, substandard, not historically significant, and are not up to current building codes. Their replacement with new, code-compliant housing will improve living conditions and contribute to a healthier and safer neighborhood. The corner parcel currently contains a vacant commercial space, most recently a Pizza Hut. There is also a vacant lot between this corner lot and the three lots for which rezoning has been requested. Redevelopment will eliminate these eyesores, replacing them with an attractive, well-maintained building that enhances the character and visual appeal of the block. 1 21 - 0 9 5 20 2 2 - 0 8 - 3 1 RECORD OF SURVEY FOR THE PARCELS IN QUESTION. EXISTING DRIVEWAYS 1 1 21 - 0 9 5 20 2 2 - 0 8 - 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 423 4 1 November 12, 2025 Page 73 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Project Description November 12, 2025 Page 74 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Project Description The Building The proposed building is a five-story, mixed-use residential building designed to reinforce the 400 South/800 East transit corridor with an active ground floor and urban residential density above. The project introduces 110 residential units, a structured parking facility, and active community-serving spaces along the sidewalk, meeting the intent of the MU-5 district. Building Length Exception The proposed structure exceeds the 200-foot maximum contiguous building length standard in §21A.59.050(E). To mitigate bulk and support a pedestrian-friendly scale, the design incorporates: • Vertical and horizontal modulation including stepbacks, recessed balconies, and breaks in the façade plane (see Z-009). • Distinct material shifts (brick veneer, EIFS, architectural metal, wood accents) that visually separate masses. • Strong ground floor activation with gym, leasing, and community amenities occupying more than 80% of the 400 South and 800 East frontages (see Z-006). • Stepbacks above the second story (minimum 10’) that create a defined pedestrian-scaled base and reduce shadow/wind impacts (see Z-020). These strategies ensure the building reads as a series of smaller volumes rather than a single elongated block, meeting the intent of the code while allowing an exception for additional building length. Construction Type • Below Grade: Reinforced concrete structured parking. • First Level / Podium: Reinforced concrete structure housing active ground floor uses and structured parking. • Upper Levels (2–5): Anticipated wood frame construction over the podium; a steel frame alternative may be considered for efficiency and durability. Unit Count & Mix The project provides a balanced residential mix sized to attract diverse households: Unit Type Count % Of Total Range (SF) Studios 22 20% 445 - 536 sf Junior One-Bedroom 17 16% 630 - 651 sf One-Bedroom 44 40% 704 - 726 sf Two Bedroom 22 20% 951 - 1114 sf Three Bedroom 3 3% 1384 Four Bedroom 1 1% 1678 TOTAL 109 100%— November 12, 2025 Page 75 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Parking & Bicycle Facilities • Vehicle Parking: 89 structured stalls (internal and screened from the street) (Z-005, Z-006). • Bicycle Parking: 34 indoor bike spaces provided at ground level, near building entries, to encourage multimodal use. • Parking ratios comply with MU-5 standards and prioritize transit-oriented development. Exterior Materials The building is designed with a durable and varied material palette that breaks down the massing and enhances architectural quality (Z-011–Z-014, Z-018–Z-019): • Brick Veneer: Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer, Platinum 60% Matte / 40% Ruff Mix – grounding the base and emphasizing permanence. (or equal approved) • Metal Panels: PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate (Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4), PAC-CLAD Bone White flush panels, and PAC-CLAD Onyx composite panels — accentuating upper levels and balconies. (or equal approved) • EIFS: Medium warm gray with reveals and bone white accents, adding variation and texture. • Wood Accents: ChamClad Sunbleached Oak shadowline panel and brushed silver panels used at balconies and inset details, introducing warmth and residential character. (or equal approved) • Glazing: Clear anodized aluminum storefront and silver vinyl windows, with black powder-coated railings at balconies. This material strategy emphasizes a base–middle–top composition: • A concrete and brick base that grounds the structure. • A varied middle zone articulated with balconies, window bays, and material shifts. • A lightened upper portion with stepbacks and accent cladding, visually reducing the overall mass. Summary The proposed building is a concrete podium, wood/steel frame mixed-use building with 110 units, 89 parking stalls, 34 bicycle spaces, and a carefully curated material palette. While the building length exceeds 200 feet, the proposal meets the intent of the ordinance through modulation, stepbacks, material diversity, and strong ground-level activation, ensuring a pedestrian-scaled, context-sensitive, and transit-supportive development. November 12, 2025 Page 76 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Propose Development November 12, 2025 Page 77 of 160 Exterior Renderings November 12, 2025 Page 78 of 160 Exterior Renderings November 12, 2025 Page 79 of 160 Exterior Renderings November 12, 2025 Page 80 of 160 Exterior Renderings November 12, 2025 Page 81 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties General Plan Amendment CONTENT • Purpose and Justification • Proposed Modification to General Plan Map • Future Development • Community Benefit • Data Collection • Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement November 12, 2025 Page 82 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Purpose and Justification November 12, 2025 Page 83 of 160 AREA OF REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Purpose for the Amendment The primary purpose of this zoning amendment is to facilitate significant housing production in direct response to Salt Lake City's acute housing crisis. As outlined in Housing SLC, the city must entitle 10,000 new housing units between 2023-2027 to address both projected population growth and existing housing deficits. This project transforms 7 existing substandard units into 109 modern, code-compliant residential units—representing a 15-fold increase in housing capacity on underutilized urban land. This requests a zoning map amendment for parcels 16-05-303-015, 16-05-303-016, and 16-05-303-017 from RMF-35 (Residential Multi-Family, 35' Maximum Height) to MU-5 (Mixed Use, 5 stories). This amendment will enable the redevelopment of underutilized properties containing deteriorated residential structures and a vacant, fire-damaged commercial building into a vibrant mixed-use development that directly advances Salt Lake City's housing and economic development objectives. FIG. 1 - CURRENT ZONING MAP AND AREA OF REQUESTED CHANGE RMF-35 to MU-5 TSA-UN-T to MU-5 November 12, 2025 Page 84 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties FIG. 2 - GRAPH OF POPULATION AND PROJECTED POPULATION, HOUSING SLC (LEFT), GRAPH OF EXISTING VS PROPOSED UNITS ON PROJECT AREA LOTS (RIGHT) 15x Increase in Housing 8x Increase in Family Units Justification for the Amendment 1. Alignment with City Planning Objectives Housing SLC Implementation: In June of 2023, the Salt Lake City Council voted to adopt Housing SLC, a five-year plan that is to “serve as a guiding document for the City over the next five years, providing a framework for action across City Departments and Divisions” (Housing SLC, page 58). Goal 1 of this plan is to entitle 10,000 new housing units between 2023 and 2027. The population of Salt Lake City is projected to increase by 6,000 during the five-year period of the Plan, which will require an additional 3,000 new housing units on top of the existing deficit (Housing SLC, page 9). The problem is that there is very limited buildable land on which these additional units can be placed within the City. Many parts of the city are unable to be developed due to the presence of wetlands and foothills. Areas in proximity to the Salt Lake City International Airport cannot be built on due to Federal Aviation Administration regulations. Most of the developable land has already been built on. We are out of land to continue growing outward. The solution is greater density - providing more housing on the existing developable land. New developments in Salt Lake City are required to select at least five Moderate Income Housing Plan (MIHP) strategies that will be incorporated into the project. Projects must utilize at least six strategies in order to be eligible for state funding. Four of the strategies have to do with rezoning or amending regulations in order to allow for higher density and more multifamily residential dwellings (Strategies A, F, G, and W; Housing SLC, pages 28-29). The Housing SLC plan states that “The crisis we are currently facing has been decades in the making and extends beyond the municipal boundaries of the city, reaching across the county, the state, and the nation. It will take collaboration across governmental, non-profit, community, and private partners to work through this housing crisis.” That includes us. That includes you. The proposed rezoning and subsequent project helps meet these City goals. Currently, these lots host 7 units (4 one-bed, 1 two-bed, 1 three-bed, and 1 four-bed) while the proposed project would host 109 units (22 studio, 61 one-bed, 22 two-bed, 3 three-bed, and 1 four-bed). Mixed-Use Development Support: The project exemplifies the mixed-use, walkable development promoted throughout Salt Lake City's planning documents, creating an integrated live-work-shop environment that reduces transportation demand and supports local economic activity. November 12, 2025 Page 85 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone FIG. 3 - PORTION OF ZONING MAP, IMAGE COURTESY OF SLC Justification for the Amendment 2. Zoning Consistency and Logical Planning: The block in question is already predominantly zoned TSA- UN-T (~93%). Rezoning the remaining RMF-35 parcels to MU-5 will establish a consistent zoning pattern, reduce regulatory complexity, and support coherent urban planning. The initial request was for TSA-UN-T; however, during the application review, the zoning designation was changed to MU-5. The current request aligns with that designation and seeks to formally rezone the parcels to MU-5. 3. Optimal Land Use and Site Conditions: Underutilized Property Transformation: The current site contains deteriorated structures that cannot economically be renovated to meet current building codes and livability standards. The existing 4-plex, duplex, and single-family home are in poor condition, while the commercial space has been vacant and fire-damaged. Redevelopment represents the highest and best use of this prime urban location. Infrastructure Readiness: The development team is actively coordinating with Salt Lake City Public Utilities Department and utility consultants to evaluate infrastructure capacity needed to support the proposed project. Ongoing discussions indicate that the necessary systems can be planned to accommodate the development. In addition, a Traffic Impact Study has been prepared and is currently under review. Preliminary coordination with UDOT suggests that transportation impacts can be addressed, particularly given the site’s strong transit access and walkability. FIG. 4 - PROPERTY VIEW FROM TRAX, IMAGE COURTESY OF GOOGLE MAPS November 12, 2025 Page 86 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone Zoning Setback Buildable Area AERIAL FIRE ACCESS WIDTH REQUIREMENT THE MINIMUM UNOBSTRUCTED WIDTH IS 26’, 800 E IS 24’ WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH FIRE CODE REQUIREMENT. A AERIAL FIRE ACCESS OBSTRUCTION OVERHEAD UTILITY AND POWER LINES SHALL NOT BE LOCATED OVER AERIAL FIRE ACCESS ROAD OR BUILDING. CAERIAL FIRE ACCESS PROXIMITY TO BLDG. REQUIRED TO BE NOT LESS THAN 15’ AND NOT GREATER THAN 30’ FROM BUILDING. B 400 S 80 0 E LINDEN AVE 24' - 0" 11% of Building Perimeter 26 ' . M i n . Buildable Area 32' 15% of Building Perimeter Construction with Proposed Rezoning Rezone allows for SLCFD preferred approach, reduces asphalt and maximizes housing potential A B C Max.Allowable height 35’ Maximum allowable height 50’ Construction with Added Fire Lane Fire lane between zones results in additional asphalt and reduced housing A B C Max.Allowable height 35’ Maximum allowable height 50’ A B C Construction with Current Zoning SLCFD will not allow roofs at multiple heights FIG. 5 - 400 S AND LINDEN AVE. FIRE AERIAL ACCESS ANALYSIS Justification for the Amendment 4. Enhanced Public Safety and Emergency Access Fire Department Coordination: The project design has been developed in consultation with Salt Lake City Fire Department to ensure optimal emergency access. Current site constraints, including narrow streets and overhead power lines, limit emergency vehicle access under existing zoning. The MU-5 development enables unified site planning that significantly improves fire and emergency access compared to the fragmented current configuration. Modern Safety Standards: New construction will meet all current building and fire safety codes, replacing aged structures with modern safety systems and accessibility features. November 12, 2025 Page 87 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Rezone FIG. 6 - RENDERING OF PROPOSED BUILDING Justification for the Amendment Due to physical site constraints, aerial fire access from 800 East is not feasible. The road width, which cannot be increased, and presence of high voltage power lines prevent compliance with Salt Lake City Fire Department standards for aerial operations. Per Salt Lake City Code, the Fire Department requires a minimum of 25% of the building perimeter to be aerial apparatus accessible in order to ensure life safety and fire protection. Given the limitations along 800 East, the only viable way to meet this requirement is to provide aerial access along Linden Avenue and 400 South, which offer sufficient clearance, appropriate setbacks, and operational space for fire equipment. The requested zone change to MU-5 supports this layout by enabling a development form that can meet fire access requirements while also contributing to the city’s goals for higher-density, transit-oriented design. 5. Economic and Community Development Substantial Private Investment: The project represents significant private investment in neighborhood infrastructure and housing stock, generating construction employment and ongoing economic activity. Local Business Support: The 3,460 square feet of commercial space will accommodate multiple local businesses, professional services, and potentially charitable organizations, creating local employment and serving daily needs of residents and the surrounding community. Community-Endorsed Development: Local community area representatives have provided positive feedback on the project's approach to addressing vacant properties and increasing family housing options. 6. Family Housing Production Critical Family Unit Shortage: The project increases family-sized units (2-4 bedrooms) from 3 existing to 26 proposed— an eight-fold increase that directly addresses the shortage of family housing in Salt Lake City's urban core. The unit mix specifically responds to diverse household needs identified in the General Plan: • 22 studio units for workforce housing • 61 one-bedroom units for diverse household types • 22 two-bedroom units for small families • 3 three-bedroom units for larger families • 1 four-bedroom unit for larger families November 12, 2025 Page 88 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Justification for the Amendment 7. Environmental and Transportation Benefits Urban Infill Development: The project represents responsible urban infill that maximizes existing infrastructure rather than encouraging sprawling greenfield development. Reduced Transportation Demand: The combination of transit access, high walkability, and integrated commercial space minimizes vehicle trips per unit, supporting the city's sustainability and transportation efficiency goals. FIG. 7 - TRAX STOP NEAR PROPERTY, IMAGE COURTESY OF SLC FIG. 7 - PROPOSED HEIGHT TRANSITION 45.00° Pr o p e r t y L i n e Pr o p e r t y L i n e Pr o p e r t y L i n e Setback 10'107' Stepback Building157' Setback 10' Angular Plane from (E) Property Building Context and Facade Length Diagram Elevation 0 8'32'16' FIG. 8 - PROPOSED HEIGHT TRANSITION 8. Compatibility with Surrounding Neighborhood Character Because the adjacent properties to the South and West are already zoned MU-5, the proposed amendment will not introduce incompatible land uses or disrupt the existing development pattern. Instead, it will promote continuity in building scale, architectural design, and streetscape character, thereby enhancing neighborhood cohesion. To ensure a sensitive and gradual transition from the MU-5 zone to the adjacent RMF-35 zone north of Linden Avenue, the proposed development will comply with the angular plane requirements outlined in Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.37.050. Specifically, a 45-degree angular plane measured from the shared property lines provides a clear framework for scaling down from higher-density, high-rise forms to lower-scale residential development. This design approach mitigates potential impacts on neighboring properties and supports a compatible urban form that respects the established residential context. November 12, 2025 Page 89 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Justification for the Amendment 9. Solar Shading Study: The comprehensive solar shading study demonstrates that the proposed 4-story mixed-use building at 370 S 800 E will not create adverse solar access impacts on neighboring properties. Key findings include: Contained Shadow Patterns: Shadows fall predominantly within the development site boundaries and on public street areas, Seasonal Stability: Both equinox and winter solstice conditions show consistent pattern of contained shadow impact, Time-of-Day Analysis: Morning and afternoon peak periods demonstrate minimal extension of shadows onto neighboring private properties. Responsible Building Design: Appropriate Scale: 4-story height balances density objectives with neighborhood compatibility, Strategic Orientation: Building placement and design minimize shadow extension during critical daylight hours, Transition Elements: Angular plane compliance and height stepping provide appropriate transitions to adjacent properties. Regulatory and Community Compatibility: Standards Compliance: Project meets all MU-5 zoning requirements for height, setbacks, and building relationships. Urban Context: Shadow patterns appropriate for established urban mixed-use area with existing infrastructure and development. Net Community Benefit: Minimal shadow impact is significantly outweighed by housing production, commercial activation, and neighborhood improvement benefits. The solar study confirms that this well-designed mixed-use development will integrate successfully into the neighborhood fabric while preserving appropriate solar access for surrounding properties. The building's scale, orientation, and positioning demonstrate careful consideration of neighboring properties' solar access needs while achieving important community housing and economic development objectives. FIG. 9 - EQUINOX - 9AM FIG. 11 - WINTER SOLSTICE - 9AM FIG. 10 - EQUINOX - 3PM FIG. 12 - WINTER SOLSTICE - 3PM November 12, 2025 Page 90 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Proposed Modification to General Plan Map November 12, 2025 Page 91 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties RMF-35 to MU-5 TSA-UN-T to MU-5 FIG. 14 - CURRENT ZONING MAP AND AREA OF REQUESTED CHANGE FIG. 13 - PORTION OF ZONING MAP Proposed Modification to General Plan Map The purpose of this requested General Plan amendment is to facilitate significant housing production in direct response to Salt Lake City's acute housing crisis. As outlined in Housing SLC, the city must entitle 10,000 new housing units between 2023-2027 to address both projected population growth and existing housing deficits. This project transforms 7 existing substandard units into 109 modern, code-compliant residential units—representing a 15-fold increase in housing capacity on underutilized urban land. Specifically, this request seeks to rezone the following parcels: 16-05-303-015, 16-05-303-016 & 16-05-303-017. From RMF-35 (Residential Multi-Family, 35 units/acre) to MU-5 (Mixed Use, 5 stories). November 12, 2025 Page 92 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Future Development November 12, 2025 Page 93 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Future Development 1. Proposed Use of the Property: Upon approval of the requested General Plan Amendment, the affected property is intended for development as a four-story structure designed and constructed in accordance with MU-5 zoning requirements. The development will feature active ground-floor uses, including commercial space, live/work units, and amenity and support spaces to engage the streetscape and contribute to a vibrant pedestrian environment. Parking will be incorporated internally within the structure to minimize its visual impact and support transit-oriented goals. Residential units will occupy floors one through four, providing a mix of housing types from studio to three bedroom units, consistent with the City’s goals for increased density and walkability in transit station areas. (Refer to Floor Plans) 2. Proposed Density of the Property: The current zoning designation, RMF-35 (Residential Multi-Family), permits a building height of up to 35 feet. The proposed MU-5 (Mixed Use, 5 stories) zoning allows for increased residential density and a maximum building height of up to 50 feet, subject to compliance with design and compatibility standards outlined in the Salt Lake City Code. Approval of this zone change would allow for the addition of approximately 24 residential units (studios, 1bed, 2bed, 3bed and 4bed) beyond what is currently permitted under RMF-35. This increase in density supports a more efficient use of the land in a transit-adjacent location and enables the development of a four-story, mixed-use building. The proposed density and height are compatible with the surrounding context and further the City’s goals for walkable, transit-oriented, and higher-intensity urban neighborhoods. FIG. 15 - ALLOWABLE VOLUME MU-5 ALLOWABLE VOLUME TSA-UN-T ALLOWABLE VOLUME RMF-35 ALLOWABLE VOLUME November 12, 2025 Page 94 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Future Development 3. Scale of the Development: The proposed development will consist of a five-story, mixed-use building that reflects the scale and character encouraged in the MU-5 zoning district. The structure will reach a height of approximately 55 feet, consistent with the maximum height allowed under the MU-5 zone and in keeping with surrounding buildings within the block, the majority of which are already recently zoned MU-5. Along Linden Avenue, the building will incorporate a 45-degree angular plane from the shared property lines, as required by Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.37.050, to provide a visually appropriate step-down in height and massing. This approach minimizes visual impact and supports a cohesive streetscape. In terms of footprint and form, the building will occupy the northern portion of the block, with internalized parking and active ground-floor uses that contribute to the pedestrian environment. The overall scale is compatible with the area’s evolving urban context and aligns with the City’s goals for higher-density, transit-oriented development. 4. Timing of the Development: The project will proceed to planning immediately upon approval of the requested Zoning Map Amendment. 5. Impact to Existing land uses and Occupants: At a prominent corner of the block is a vacant commercial building, most recently a Pizza Hut that was damaged by a transient-set fire. The subject property also features a mix of older, non- historical structures: a single-family home, a duplex, and a four-plex. These existing uses represent a fragmented and underutilized condition that does not align with the area’s evolving urban character or its potential for transit-oriented, mixed-use redevelopment. The buildings on-site are not historically significant, and offer limited contribution to the surrounding urban fabric or pedestrian experience. The vacancy and visible decline of the site diminish the vitality of the neighborhood, which is predominantly zoned MU-5 and currently experiencing significant reinvestment and redevelopment activity. Rents received on said properties do not support renovation of said buildings. The requested zone change would result in a financially viable project to redevelop all of the parcels, which will facilitate a cohesive, higher-density redevelopment that supports Salt Lake City’s vision for Transit Station Areas. The proposed mixed-use project will introduce active commercial uses, live/work spaces, and new housing options that enhance walkability, support transit ridership, and contribute to the long-term vibrancy and resilience of the neighborhood. FIG. 16 - CURRENT VACANT COMMERCIAL BUILDING November 12, 2025 Page 95 of 160 Site Plan 0 8'32'16' N 11’ - 5 ¾” 12’ - 4 ¼”103’ - 9 ¾”157’ - 0 ¼” 18’-1 ¾“ 17’ - 11 ¼” 10’ - 0”27’ - 5” Aerial Access Road WidthSet Back 22’ 2 ½” Existing Road WidthProximity 5’ 2 ½” 316’ - 8 ¼” 10 7 ’ - 2 ¾ ” Le s s t h a n 1 4 % o f B u i l d i n g P e r i m e t e r 54’ - 11 ¾” 293’ - 3 ¾ ” M a x D i a g o n a l D i m e n s i o n (Distanc e b e t w e e n A c c e s s R o a d s M i n . 1 4 6 ’ ½ ” ) Less than 2% of Perimeter Less than 7% of Perimeter 71 ’ - 1 0 ” 32 ’ - 8 ½ ” 24 ’ - 0 ” Le s s t h a n 9 % o f B u i l d i n g P e r i m e t e r Building Perimeter is 798’ 7 ¼” 5 Stories (over 30’, less than 60’) 110 Residential Units Required Fire Sprinkler System NFPA-13 AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD □ Access to one entire side of the building - D105.3 □ Road width is over 26’ - D105.2 □ The road curb is 18’ - 1 ¾” from the building - D105.3 40 0 S Li n d e n A v e n u e 800 E AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD □ Access to one entire side of the building - D105.3 □ Road width is over 26’ - D105.2 □ The road curb is 23’ - 1 ¾” from the building - D105.3 150’ Hose Pull Length 150’ Hose Pull Length 150’ Hose Pull Length 150’ Hose Pull Length Existing Primary Feed Overhead Power Line Distance Between Access Roads is Over 139’ Proximity Exceeds Maximum Distance from Building Road Width Does Not Meet Fire Apparatus Access Road Requirements Existing Overhead Utility To be Buried or Relocated Fi r e L i n e , N O P A R K I N G 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 96 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 North Elevation 2 5 10 9 6 7 9 10 4 6 5 0 5'20'10' 1 8 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 97 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 East Elevation 1 2 6 3 7 97 9 6 8 7 9 2 5 5 1 10 10109 7 10 0 5'20'10' 1 7 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 98 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 South Elevation 1 2 5 10 10 9 78 5 9 10 9 5 6 0 5'20'10' 74 8 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 99 of 160 PAC-CLAD Burnished Slate Alternating Box Rib 2 & 4 Medium Warm Gray EFIS w/ Reveals PAC-CLAD Bone White Flush Wall Panel Black Powder Coated Railings Black Aluminum Storefront and Black Vinyl Windows Interstate Brick Thin Brick Veneer - Platinum 60% Matte 40% Ruff Mix - Modular 2 1/4" x 8" ChamClad Sunbleached Oak 6" Shadowline Panel -3" Reveal Bone White EFIS w/ Reveals ChamClad Black Sand 12" Flush Panel Cladding Type -1 (North and South Masses) Cladding Type -2 (On West Side) (10% of East Facade) (Elevator and Stair Penthouse) Cladding Type -3 (East Center Mass) (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -4 (West Center Mass) Cladding Type -5 (Base and Two Corner Balcony Insets (including ceilings at balconies on top floor) and Accent Cladding Window System Surround Cladding (On Balconies Surrounding Sliders) (Recesses on East and West Sides) (Between Storefront and Vinyl Windows) Open Rails Windows and Window Systems PAC CLAD -Onyx - PAC4000 Composite Panel System Flat Profile Metal Panel (Solid Rails and Balcony and Canopy Fascias) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 West Elevation 4 6 6 6 7 9 7 7 9 2 5 5 9 1 10 8 1 9 5 10 4 0 5'20'10' 2 5 8 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 100 of 160 South View from Across 8th East 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 101 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit November 12, 2025 Page 102 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit The development at 800 East Properties provides substantial community benefits as required by Section 21A.50.050.C, delivering housing that aligns with community needs and commercial space for local businesses that would not otherwise be provided without the zoning amendment. Section 21A.50.050.C.1.a - Housing Aligned with Community Needs Providing housing that aligns with the current or future needs of the community as determined by the general plan. Needs could include the level of affordability in excess of the number of dwellings that exist on the site, size in terms of number of bedrooms, or availability of housing for purchase. Dramatic Increase in Housing Supply The proposal transforms underutilized residential structures and vacant commercial space into 109 residential units - a significant increase from the existing 4-5 dwelling units currently on site. This represents over a 2,000% increase in housing density, directly addressing Salt Lake City's documented housing shortage. Family-Sized Housing Mix Addressing Community Needs The project's unit distribution specifically addresses the "size in terms of number of bedrooms" criterion identified in Section 21A.50.050.C.1.a: • Studios (22 units, 20%): 445-536 SF - Entry-level housing for young professionals and students • Junior One-Bedrooms (17 units, 16%): 630-651 SF - Transitional housing for couples and small households • One-Bedrooms (44 units, 40%): 704-726 SF - Core market housing for diverse household types • Two-Bedrooms (22 units, 20%): 951-1,114 SF - Family housing accommodating children and home offices • Three-Bedrooms (3 units, 3%): 1,384 SF - True family-sized units retaining families in the urban core • Four-Bedrooms (1 unit, 1%): 1,678 SF - True family-sized unit retaining families in the urban core This diverse mix directly responds to Salt Lake City's General Plan goals for housing diversity and the documented need for family-appropriate housing along transit corridors. The inclusion of larger 2-, 3-, and 4-bedroom units (24% of total) specifically addresses the shortage of family housing in urban mixed-use developments. Alignment with General Plan Objectives The housing mix supports Plan Salt Lake's objectives for: Transit-Oriented Development: 109 units directly on the 400 South/800 East corridor Housing Diversity: Units ranging from 445 SF to 1,384 SF serve multiple income levels and family types Urban Density: Efficient use of existing infrastructure while maintaining neighborhood character STUDIO UNIT (22) ONE BED UNIT (61)TWO BED UNIT (22)THREE BED UNIT (3)FOUR BED UNIT (1) 497 SF 689-764 SF 1,025 SF 1,469 SF 1,678 SF November 12, 2025 Page 103 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit Section 21A.50.050.C.1.b - Commercial Space for Local Businesses, Providing commercial space for local businesses or charitable organizations. Community-Serving Commercial Programming The project provides 2,590 SF of active commercial space specifically designed to support local businesses and address documented community needs: Public Gymnasium (1,978 SF) • Addresses overcrowding at existing area fitness facilities • Serves both residents and the broader community • Creates employment for fitness professionals and support staff • Provides accessible health infrastructure along the transit corridor Local Business Commercial Space (612 SF) • Dog Wash Station: Serves pet owners in the dense residential corridor who currently lack convenient pet care facilities • TRAX Bike Storage & Repair: Supports cyclists using public transit, encouraging multimodal transportation • Flexible space designed to accommodate other neighborhood-serving businesses Local Business Benefits These commercial uses specifically benefit local entrepreneurs by: • Providing turn-key facilities for service businesses addressing unmet community needs • Creating visible, accessible storefronts with extensive glazing and sidewalk orientation • Offering affordable commercial space in a prime transit-accessible location • Supporting business sustainability through built-in customer base (109 residential units) and transit accessibility FIG. 18 - UTA BIKE LOCKER WEBSITEFIG. 17 - ICLEAN DOG WASH FIG. 19 - LOCAL GYM November 12, 2025 Page 104 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Community Benefit Section 21A.50.050.C.2.h - General Plan Policy Support The proposed community benefits align with multiple General Plan policies: • Grow Plan: Increasing density along transit corridors • Live Plan: Providing diverse housing options for different life stages • Connect Plan: Supporting multimodal transportation through bike facilities • Play Plan: Enhancing community health through fitness facilities Conclusion The 800E Properties development provides exceptional community benefits under Section 21A.50.050.C that would not be possible without the zoning amendment. The project transforms underutilized property into 110 units of diverse, family-appropriate housing while creating commercial space specifically designed to support local businesses and address documented community needs. These benefits - a 2,000%+ increase in housing supply with family-sized units and community-serving commercial space - clearly justify the requested zoning amendment and provide lasting value to the 400 South transit corridor neighborhood. November 12, 2025 Page 105 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Data Collection November 12, 2025 Page 106 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties 4 Plex - 346-348 S 800 E SLC, UT 84102 Unit Count: 4 Square Footage per Floor Unit Summary *Note: Unit B (main level) includes shared entrance, hall, and staircase to Unit A. Duplex - 350 S 800 E SLC, UT 84102 Unit Count: 2 Unit Summary Unit Est. Sq Ft Bedrooms Current Residents Bonus Rooms Rent Now Rent 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 A 500 1 1 $995 $995 $995 $675 B 800 1 1 2 finished basement bonus rooms $1,095 $1,095 $1,095 $895 C 1,600 2 1 Small office $1,495 $1,495 $1,195 $1,195 D 500 1 1 $895 $895 $895 $995 Sum 3,400 5 4 $4,480 $4,480 $4,180 $3,760 Floor Sq Ft per Floor Notes Floor 1 1,444 Floor 2 1,444 Basement ~1,444 Approx. 60-70% Finished Living Space + Utility Room Sum ~4,332 Unit Est. Sq Ft Bedrooms Current Residents Notes Rent Now Rent 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 352 560 1 1 $895 $995 $995 $945 354 1,380 3 3 $1,545 $1,295 $1,295 $1,295 Unfinished Basement 1,120 0 0 No residents have access to this space Sum 3,060 4 4 $2,440 $2,290 $2,290 $2,240 Data Collection November 12, 2025 Page 107 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties House - 354 S 800 E SLC, UT 84102 Unit Count: 1 Bedrooms: 4 Total People Living in Property: 5 Square Footage per Floor Rent Vacant Commercial Space - 775 E 400 S SLC, UT 84102 Current Use: Vacant Prior Occupant: Pizza Hut Square Footage: ~1,600 Sq Ft Cost to Lease Now 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 Rent $1,895 $1,895 $1,895 $1,895 Floor Sq Ft Floor 1 1,630 Floor 2 1,630 Unfinished Basement 1,090 Sum 2,720 Data Collection Now 2024 Rent 2023 Rent 2022 Rent $0 $0 $$ November 12, 2025 Page 108 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement November 12, 2025 Page 109 of 160 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement If the petition is successful, the owner will coordinate with the planning department to ensure compliance with City Ordnance 21A.50.050.D.4. and 21A.50.050.E, Tenant Displacement Obligations and Demolished Unit Replacement. Section 19.06.070.D.4 Tenant Relocation Assistance - Applicant Proposal There are seven (7) existing units, four (4) are occupied and three (3) are vacant. All units will be demolished as part of this proposed project. The existing four (4) leases are month-to-month short-term leases. Upon project approval the applicant will provide (60) written notice to existing tenants that their leases will be terminated and notice that the applicant will provide the relocation assistance identified herein to the remaining affected tenants. The applicant will provide each tenant the following assistance as provided under Section 19.06.070.D.4.a-d subject to the following terms: a. Moving expenses based on a reasonable estimate provided by the tenant, up to a maximum of $1,500. a. To qualify for moving expenses, the tenants will be required to provide applicant estimates/quotes (10) business days prior to expenses being incurred for reimbursement. b. The applicant will reimburse moving expenses based upon the estimate provided by tenant within (10) business days of receipt of estimates. b. Application fees for the replacement housing. a. The applicant will reimburse tenant for reasonable application fees up to maximum of (20) separate applications. b. The tenants must provide applicant copies of application fees and receipts of fees paid. c. The applicants will reimburse tenant application fees (10) business days after receipt of invoices. c. A reasonable deposit that the displaced tenant would have to pay to secure replacement housing. a. The applicant will reimburse deposits up to max amount equal to current monthly rent rate of tenant. b. The tenant will provide applicant invoices and receipts of required deposits for replacement housing within (10) business days of invoices. c. The applicant will reimburse invoices within (10) business days of receipt. d. Monthly Rental Assistance payment. The rental assistance payment is based upon the difference, if any, between the cost of the currently monthly rent of the existing housing and a reasonably comparable unit. The rental payment total amount paid shall not be more than $7,200. a. The applicant will provide rental assistance payment to tenants for the difference between current rent and rent for reasonably comparable replacement housing for up to (12) months total and/or a maximum of $7,200, whichever amount is less. b. The tenant seeking rental assistance will only qualify in for reimbursement if the tenant has found a reasonably comparable unit. Comparable is defined as equal in size, number of bedrooms, baths, level of finishes, amenities available, and age of property (within 20 years). Tenants will be required to submit comparable properties applications to application to confirm they are comparable properties. c. The tenant will provide applicant with a copy of the new lease and different rent calculation to applicant within (10) business days of commencement of lease for reimbursement. d. The applicant will reimburse tenant within (10) business of receipt of new lease and rent assistance calculation. November 12, 2025 Page 110 of 160 Tenant Displacement & Demolished Unit Replacement Section 19.060.070.E Demolished Unit Replacement There are (7) existing units that will be demolished as part of this proposed project. The future development will be replacing the existing housing units with units having the same number of bedrooms. Additionally, the applicant will provide the following option as permitted by Section 19.06.070.E.2. 2. As allowed under the City Code, the applicant will make a payment to the city in lieu of rental restrictions on the new unit to go toward the city’s housing fund to offset the loss of naturally affordable housing. The payment will be equal to the monthly rent of the units prior to demolition times outlined in the data tables on page 32 and 33 multiplied by the number of months between the time the unit is vacated prior to demolition until a temporary certificate of occupancy for applicant’s new development is issued. 1441 UTE BOULEVARD, SUITE 100, PARK CITY, UT 84098 | 435.649.0092 | ELLIOTTWORKGROUP.COM 800 E Properties November 12, 2025 Page 111 of 160 Fi r e L a n e S00o14'08"W 170.29' Building Footprint Transformer Sidewalk Parking Strip 800 East Si d e w a l k 40 0 S o u t h Li n d e n A v e n u e N00o14'08"E 82.59' N8 9 o47 ' 0 2 " W 1 6 . 5 0 ' S8 9 o47 ' 0 2 " E 4 9 . 5 0 ' S8 9 o47 ' 0 2 " E 1 1 5 . 5 0 ' S00o14'08"W 41.25' S8 9 o47 ' 0 2 " E 8 2 . 5 0 ' N00o14'08"E 297.12' Pool Deck (Level 2) Roof Deck (Roof Level) Building Footprint.............22,293.9 SF (65%) Driveway...............................1,316.9 SF (3.8%) Open Space.........................5,028 SF (14.7 %) Roof Decks..........................5,666 SF (16.5 %) Property.............................34,299.5 SF (100%) LEGEND Open Space Calculation November 12, 2025 Page 112 of 160 Durable Materials............14,592 SF (90%) Street Facing Facade......16,132 SF (100%) LEGEND Durable Materials............6,851 SF (100%) Street Facing Facade......6,851 SF (100%) LEGEND Durable Materials............4,106 SF (100%) Street Facing Facade......4,106 SF (100%) LEGEND Durable Building Materials Calculation SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" 800 East Facade SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" 400 South Facade SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" Linden Avenue Facade November 12, 2025 Page 113 of 160 First Floor Glass Facade 1079 SF (40%) First Floor Street Facing Facade 2,731 SF (100%) LEGEND Upper Floors Glass Facade 2,600 SF (20%) Upper Floors Street Facing Facade 12,781 SF (100%) First Floor Glass Facade 555 SF (41%) First Floor Street Facing Facade 1,333 SF (100%) LEGEND Upper Floors Glass Facade 1,040 SF (20%) Upper Floors Street Facing Facade 5,290 SF (100%) First Floor Glass Facade 200 SF (40%) First Floor Street Facing Facade 496 SF (100%) LEGEND Upper Floors Glass Facade 572 SF (16%) Upper Floors Street Facing Facade 3,537 SF (100%) Glazing Calculation SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" 800 East Facade SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" 400 South Facade SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" Linden Avenue Facade November 12, 2025 Page 114 of 160 GRASSES PERENNIALS - Divide up plants equally, 24" O.C. Triangular Spacing Bouteloua gracilis 'Blonde Ambition' Blue Grama Grass 1 Gal. 32 Calamagrostis acutiflora 'Overadam' Feather Reed Grass 1 Gal. 24 Panicum virgatum 'Prarie Sky'Switch Grass 1 Gal. 38 Panicum virgatum 'Shenandoah'Switch Grass 1 Gal. 26 Schizachyrium scoparium 'Ha Ha Tonka' Little Blue Stem 1 Gal. 32 Schizachyrium scoparium 'Smoke Signal' Little Blue Stem 1 Gal. 36 Schizachyrium scoparium 'Twilight Zone' Little Blue Stem 1 Gal. 16 Sporobolus heterolepis Prairie Dropseed 1 Gal. 36 1 Gal. Achillea millefolium 'Summerwine'Yarrow Agastache cana 'Sinning Sonoran' Wild Hyssop Campanula portenshlagiana Dalmatian Bellflower Echinacea Big Sky Yellow Coneflower Gaillardia aristata 'Arizona Sun'Blanket Flower Guara lindheimeri Whirling Butterflies Guara Heuchera 'Firefly'Coral Bells Oenothera missouriensis Missouri Evening Primrose Penstemon eatonii Eaton's Beardedtongue Phlox subulata Creeping Phlox Salvia nemorosa 'May Night'Salvia Notes: 1. All Planter Beds Shall be Covered in 4" Min. of Bark or Rock Mulch Depending on Location. 2. Placement of Trees to be Approved by Landscape Architect. 3. See Civil Drawings for Existing and Proposed Utility Locations and Proposed Grading and Drainage. 4. Areas Impacted During the Construction Process Outside the Limit of Disturbance to be Restored. Ramp Down Parking Garage Entry Drive Fi r e L a n e Parking Garage Entry Drive Lease Space Gym Space DN UP UP DN 800 East Un i v e r s i t y B l v d . SHRUBS TREES SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE QTY. Acer tataricum 'GarAnn' Hot Wings Tartarian Maple 2" Cal. 2 Amelanchier alnifolia 'Oblelisk'Columnar Serviceberry 8-10" Tall 3 Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud 15 Gal. 7 Koelreuteria paniculata 'Fastigiata' Columnar Goldenrain Tree 8-10' Tall 6 Zelkova serrata 'City Sprite'Zelkova 2" Cal. 7 Forsythia 'Nimbus'Dwarf Forsythia 5 Gal. 16 Physocarpus opulifolius Little Angel Dwarf Ninebark 5 Gal. 18 Rhus aromatica 'Gro-Low'Fragrant Sumac 5 Gal. 25 Pinus mugo 'Slowmound'Mugo Pine 5 Gal. 15 Salix repens argentea Silver Creeping Willow 5 Gal. 19 PLANTING SCHEDULE Roof Top Deck 2nd Level Landscape Plan 0 10'40'20' N Proposed Building November 12, 2025 Page 115 of 160 Parking Garage Entry Drive Fi r e L a n e Parking Garage Entry Drive 800 East Un i v e r s i t y B l v d . TREES SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE QTY. GRASSES Amelanchier alnifolia 'Oblelisk'Columnar Serviceberry 8-10" Tall 5 Bouteloua gracilis 'Blonde Ambition' Blue Grama Grass 1 Gal. 14 Schizachyrium scoparium 'Ha Ha Tonka' Little Blue Stem 1 Gal. 13 Schizachyrium scoparium 'Twilight Zone' Little Blue Stem 1 Gal. 21 Notes: 1. All Planter Beds Shall be Covered in 4" Min. of Rock Mulch. 2. Placement of Trees to be Approved by Landscape Architect. 3. See Civil Drawings for Existing and Proposed Utility Locations and Proposed Grading and Drainage. 4. Areas Impacted During the Construction Process Outside the Limit of Disturbance to be Restored. PLANTING SCHEDULE Landscape Plan - Roof Top 0 10'40'20' N Proposed Building Roof Top Deck November 12, 2025 Page 116 of 160 NOTES: 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND VERIFY THE EXISTENCE OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO STARTING WORK. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY ALL PLANT MATERIALS IN QUANTITIES SUFFICIENT TO COMPLETE THE PLANTINGS SHOWN ON ALL DRAWINGS. 3. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM TO THE GUIDELINES ESTABLISHED BY THE CURRENT AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN OR EQUIVALENT. 4. NO PLANT SHALL BE PUT INTO THE GROUND BEFORE ROUGH GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUAL. 5. ALL PLANTS SHALL BEAR THE SAME RELATIONSHIP TO FINISHED GRADE AS THE PLANT'S ORIGINAL GRADE IN THE CONTAINER, B&B, OR IF TRANSPLANTED. 6. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE BALLED AND WRAPPED OR CONTAINER GROWN. NO CONTAINER GROWN STOCK WILL BE ACCEPTED IF IT IS ROOT BOUND. ALL ROOT WRAPPING MATERIAL MADE OF SYNTHETICS OR PLASTICS SHALL BE REMOVED AT TIME OF PLANTING. 7. WITH CONTAINER GROWN STOCK, THE CONTAINER SHALL BE REMOVED AND THE CONTAINER BALL SHALL BE CUT THROUGH THE SURFACE IN TWO VERTICAL LOCATIONS. 8. THE DAY PRIOR TO PLANTING, THE LOCATION OF ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE STAKED FOR APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUAL. 9. AT PLANTING TIME, ALL PLANTS SHALL BE THINNED BY REMOVING A BALANCED ONE-THIRD OF THE VEGETATIVE MATERIAL. DO NOT CUT LEADERS. 10. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH AN ANTI-DESSICANT WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER PLANTING. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH AN ANTI-DESSICANT AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR FIRST WINTER. 11. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE WATERED THOROUGHLY TWICE DURING THE FIRST 24-HOUR PERIOD AFTER PLANTING. ALL PLANTS SHALL THEN BE WATERED AS NEEDED AND SUGGESTED BY LOCAL CONDITIONS DURING THE FIRST GROWING SEASON. 12. AREAS TO BE SEEDED SHALL BE RAKED OF STONES AND DEBRIS. DEBRIS AND STONES OVER 1" IN DIAMETER SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE. 13. MAINTENANCE SHALL BEGIN AFTER EACH PLANT HAS BEEN INSTALLED AND SHALL CONTINUE UNTIL FINAL ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR OWNER REPRESENTATIVE. MAINTENANCE INCLUDES WATERING, PRUNING, WEEDING, MULCHING, REPLACEMENT OF SICK OR DEAD PLANT MATERIAL, AND ANY OTHER CARE NECESSARY FOR THE PROPER GROWTH OF THE PLANT MATERIAL. 14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW ARCHITECTURAL/ENGINEERING PLANS TO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH GRADING AND SURFACE UTILITIES. 15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSURE THAT HIS WORK DOES NOT INTERRUPT ESTABLISHED OR PROJECTED DRAINAGE PATTERNS. 16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH LIGHTING AND IRRIGATION CONTRACTORS REGARDING TIMING OF INSTALLATION OF PLANT MATERIAL. 17. EVERY POSSIBLE SAFEGUARD SHALL BE TAKEN TO PROTECT BUILDING SURFACES, EQUIPMENT AND FURNISHINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE OR INJURY TO PERSON OR PROPERTY WHICH MAY OCCUR AS A RESULT OF NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE CONTRACTOR IN THE EXECUTION OF THE WORK. 18. ALL PROPOSED PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE INSTALLED EITHER ENTIRELY IN OR ENTIRELY OUT OF PLANTING BEDS. PLANTING BED LINES ARE NOT TO BE OBSTRUCTED. 19. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE WHOLLY RESPONSIBLE FOR STABILITY AND PLUMB CONDITIONS OF ALL TREES AND SHRUBS, AND SHALL BE LEGALLY LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE CAUSED BY INSTABILITY OF ANY PLANT MATERIALS. STAKING OF TREES OR SHRUBS, IF DESIRED OR REQUESTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, SHALL BE DONE UTILIZING A METHOD AGREED UPON BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, AS INDICATED ON THE DOCUMENTS. 20. UPON COMPLETION OF ALL LANDSCAPING, AN INSPECTION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK SHALL BE HELD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR OWNER FOR SCHEDULING THE INSPECTION AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE ANTICIPATED INSPECTION DATE. 21. ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND PERENNIALS SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR 12 MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE. REPLACEMENT PLANTS USED SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 90 DAYS. 22. IN THE EVENT OF VARIATION BETWEEN QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANT SCHEDULE AND THE PLANS, THE PLANT SCHEDULE SHALL CONTROL. IMPROPER PLANT COUNT MADE BY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE NO CAUSE FOR ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. SOD QUANTITY TAKE-OFFS ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. ALL DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION PRIOR TO BIDDING. 23. ALL LAWN AREAS TO BE SEEDED BY HYDROSEEDER USING A MULCH CONTAINING TAKIFIER 24. PERENNIALS TO BE PLANTED @ 24" O.C. IN CLUSTERS OF 3-10 PER SPECIES AS SPECIFIED ON PLAN. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL VERIFY SITE PLACEMENT OF PLANTS BEFORE PLANTING BEGINS. 25. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES. 26. ALL PERENNIAL BEDS TO BE MULCHED WITH A MINIMUM OF 4" PINE BARK. 27. LANDSCAPE AREA WILL BE COVERED 100% BY EITHER DRIP OR SPRAY IRRIGATIONS. AN IRRIGATION PLAN WILL BE INCLUDED AS A DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT AND WILL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY COUNTY PRIOR TO IRRIGATION AND PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION. 28. ALL MAINTAINED LANDSCAPE AREAS WILL BE COVERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. 1. PLACE BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL 2. REMOVE ALL SYNTHETIC SOIL WRAPPING MATERIALS (TREATED BURLAP, NYLON TWINE, WIRE BASKETS, ETC.) AND DISCARD UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE EXCAVATE HOLE TO DIAMETER 2X WIDER THAN ROOTBALL. BACKFILL WITH PLANTING SOIL MIX. BERM TO FORM DEPRESSED WATERING BASIN. (TO BE REMOVED PRIOR TO END OF MAINTENANCE PERIOD.) ROOT FLARE SHALL BE EXPOSED, MULCH SHOULD BE WITHIN 4" OF SHRUB TRUNK SET CROWN 2" HIGHER THAN FINISH GRADE TO ALLOW FOR SETTLING NOTES: SCALE: SHRUB2NTS SECTION 5 6 2 1 1/2 SIZE ROOTBALL 1/2 SIZE 3 PLACE BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL 7 6 1 2 3 4 7 4" DEEP BARK MULCH4 5 5 1. INSTALL TREE PLUMB 2. REMOVE ALL SYNTHETIC SOIL WRAPPING MATERIALS AND WIRE BASKET PLACE BALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL. UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE EXCAVATE HOLE TO DIAMETER 2X WIDER THAN ROOTBALL. BACKFILL WITH PLANTING SOIL MIX. BERM TO FORM DEPRESSED WATERING BASIN. (TO BE REMOVED PRIOR TO END OF MAINTENANCE PERIOD.) 4" DEEP BARK MULCH ROOT FLARE SHALL BE EXPOSED; MULCH SHOULD NOT BE WITHIN 4" OF TREE TRUNK TOP OF ROOTBALL SHALL BE 1-2" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE NOTES: SCALE: DECIDUOUS TREE1NTS SECTION 3 4 5 6 7 2 1 1/2 SIZE ROOTBALL 1/2 SIZE 31 2 4 5 5 6 7 12" DEEP PLANTING MIX 4" DEEP BARK MULCH GRASSES (SEE PLANTING PLAN) SEE PLAN FOR EDGE CONDITION SEE PLANT SCHEDULE FOR SPACING SCALE: GRASSES3NTS SECTION/PLAN 3 4 5 2 1 PLAN SECTION VA R I E S 1 2 3 4 6 12" DEEP PLANTING SOIL MIX 4" DEEP BARK MULCH GROUNDCOVER/PERENNIALS SEE PLAN FOR EDGE CONDITION SEE PLANT SCHEDULE FOR SPACING SCALE: GROUNDCOVER/PERENNIALS4NTS SECTION/PLAN 3 4 5 2 1 PLAN SECTION VA R I E S 1 2 3 4 5 Landscape Details November 12, 2025 Page 117 of 160 This page has intentionally been left blank OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR own_unit WILLIAMSEN VC, LLC SEN VC, LLC 154 E MYRTLE AVE VINCENT COURT LLC T COURT LLC 154 E MYRTLE AVE # 303 HP COUNCIL CREST LLC L CREST LLC 2855 WASHINGTON BLVD SUSAN N JOHNSON N N JOHNSON 752 S 900 E SPENCER STEWART APARTMENTS LLC RTMENTS LLC PO BOX 1521 MARK R REX; MAHA A BARRANI (JT) ARRANI (JT)744 E 300 S JAMES R GARDNER; LYNN F GARDNER (JT) ARDNER (JT)626 E SIXTH AVE GREGORY P. REHERMANN; EDWINA REHERMANN (JT) ERMANN (JT)PO BOX 1259 MELISSA KELLY FRYER KELLY FRYER 319 S 800 E 1 BIN GUO BIN GUO 3468 S SCOTT PARK LN COLLETTE A HOLMES TE A HOLMES 319 S 800 E 3 ELIZABETH A DAYTON TH A DAYTON 3240 SHADOWBROOK DR MADDOX FAMILY TRUST MARRIED A B ALTERNATE B REVOCABLE LIVING TRUS6385 PASEO ASPADA HUANHE LI; QIYUAN WU (JT) UAN WU (JT)319 S 800 E 6 CITY HAVEN CONDOMINIUMS PH 1 OWNERS ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION262 E 3900 S # 200 MICHAEL NUNEZ CHAEL NUNEZ 662 E WILSON AVE PAUL HOFFMAN AUL HOFFMAN 3702 CHANNEL PLACE JONATHAN ACCARRINO N ACCARRINO 2905 CLAREMONT RD SARA BRINGHURST BRINGHURST 320 S 800 E # 14 CLAUDIA BATEY SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST 07/02/2019 07/02/2019 3275 BUTTERFLY LN MIN YANG MIN YANG 1180 S FOOTHILL DR # 712 MADISON KATE MUNGER; JONAS SETH MUNGER (JT) MUNGER (JT)310 S 800 E 17 COLLARD TRUST 11/06/2012 11/06/2012 13387 VIA RANCHERO DR WILLIAM CHARLES SISKA; ELIZABETH SIMONA CONLEY (JT) CONLEY (JT)3604 S ASTRO CIR JIE SHI CHUN IE SHI CHUN 320 S 800 E # 20 MCKENNZIE GENETTI LIVING TRUST 06/14/2018 06/14/2018 310 S 800 E 21 CARRIE SNOW CARRIE SNOW 320 S 800 E # 22 LYNETTE M EICHERS; FRANKIE MCCANDLESS (JT) NDLESS (JT)2849 E 2850 S IREVA G PETTY; BPB TRUST ; BPB TRUST 2001 S WINDSOR ST WILLIAMSEN SOUTH JORDAN INC JORDAN INC 154 E MYRTLE AVE # 303 JALEH AFSHAR ALEH AFSHAR 777 HAMILTON AVE ABDELAZIZ ABOELSEUD Z ABOELSEUD 721 E LINDEN AVE PAK TRUST PAK TRUST 727 E LINDEN AVE TRAVIS COE; KRISTIE GILES (JT) GILES (JT)116 W LAYTON AVE LEON SHERIDAN CHODOS; GISELA JOHANNA CHODOS (JT) CHODOS (JT)928 S LAKE ST JACEK A KOWALCZYK; ALINA J KOWALCZYK (JT) ALCZYK (JT)739 E LINDEN AVE KIMBERLY GOODSON; JARED WILKINSON (JT) KINSON (JT)743 E LINDEN AVE DARIN D ARNELL IN D ARNELL 4503 W 3285 S SALT CITY URBAN PROPERTIES LLC PERTIES LLC PO BOX 521402 TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED IDENTIFIED 12 BAYO VISTA WAY KHRIS JENSEN HRIS JENSEN 325 S LAKER CT KADRI O BARRANI I O BARRANI PO BOX 581432 WU-LANG KAO WU-LANG KAO 1710 S WESTTEMPLE ST # 21 NICOLE N DAVIS OLE N DAVIS 156 E 900 S ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK TIONAL BANK PO BOX 54288 SLC 400 S LLC C 400 S LLC 12555 HIGH BLUFF DR #330 VIDOVICH-765 LOFTS LP 65 LOFTS LP 960 N SANT ANTONIO RD ABBY CONDON; RACHEL CONDON; DARC, LLC (JT) C, LLC (JT)323 S 800 E NIKOLE J PAULOS LE J PAULOS 596 EL SUENO RD DEBORA J WRATHALL; JAMES BIRCHLER (JT) RCHLER (JT)331 S 800 E JEFF TAYLOR JEFF TAYLOR 1160 E 200 S JADE PROPERTIES, LLC ERTIES, LLC 647 S 350 E ERIC NESS ERIC NESS 1345 S 1200 W ADELE CORPORATION CORPORATION 815 E 400 S TRMC RETAIL LLC RETAIL LLC PO BOX 711 WDG SEVENTH EAST, LLC H EAST, LLC 1178 LEGACY CROSSING BLVD DON C HALE INVESTMENT COMPANY ENT COMPANY PO BOX 902020 CORP OF PB OF CH JC OF LDS H JC OF LDS 50 E NORTHTEMPLE ST #2225 LP SPIRIT REALTY IRIT REALTY 744 E 400 S LIBERTY BLVD ASSOCIATES LLC OCIATES LLC 6440 S WASATCH BLVD VALLEY HEIGHTS INVESTMENTS LLC STMENTS LLC 496 W WINDMILL GATE CV DANIEL THOMAS LAMBERT MAS LAMBERT 327 S 700 E 2 LUCAS PARELIUS AS PARELIUS 327 S 700 E 3 BENJAMIN KARTCHNER; MELISSA KARTCHNER (JT) TCHNER (JT)7126 E OSBORN RD #3012 WHITNEY ESPINEL NEY ESPINEL 327 S 700 E 5 JAMES MAXWELL THOMAS WELL THOMAS 327 S 700 E 6 MABEL OWNERS ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION 610 N 800 W MANA DEVELOPMENT LLC LOPMENT LLC 790 N NORTHSHORE ST CHRISTOPHER DEMURI; MEREDITH DEMURI (JT) DEMURI (JT)1420 E CIRCLE WY OILWELL PROPERTIES LC OPERTIES LC 7430 S CREEK RD # 200 JOHN BOLTON JOHN BOLTON 820 E 400 S Occupant PARCEL_ADDR NEW_UNIT Current Occupant 302 S 700 E Current Occupant 314 S 700 E REAR Current Occupant 314 S 700 E Current Occupant 660 E 300 S Current Occupant 706 E 300 S Current Occupant 315 S 700 E Current Occupant 710 E 300 S Current Occupant 718 E 300 S Current Occupant 726 E 300 S Current Occupant 730 E 300 S Current Occupant 740 E 300 S Current Occupant 752 E 300 S Current Occupant 754 E 300 S Current Occupant 766 E 300 S Current Occupant 804 E 300 S Current Occupant 319 S 800 E 2 Current Occupant 319 S 800 E 4 Current Occupant 319 S 800 E 5 Current Occupant 319 S 800 E Current Occupant 310 S 800 E 11 Current Occupant 320 S 800 E 12 Current Occupant 310 S 800 E 13 Current Occupant 320 S 800 E 14 Current Occupant 310 S 800 E 15 Current Occupant 320 S 800 E 16 Current Occupant 320 S 800 E 18 Current Occupant 310 S 800 E 19 Current Occupant 320 S 800 E 20 Current Occupant 320 S 800 E 22 Current Occupant 310 S 800 E Current Occupant 328 S 700 E Current Occupant 330 S 700 E Current Occupant 677 E 400 S Current Occupant 320 S 700 E Current Occupant 655 E 400 S Current Occupant 335 S 700 E Current Occupant 729 E LINDEN AVE Current Occupant 733 E LINDEN AVE Current Occupant 320 S REEVES TER Current Occupant 749 E LINDEN AVE Current Occupant 757 E LINDEN AVE Current Occupant 327 S REEVES TER Current Occupant 324 S 800 E Current Occupant 328 S 800 E Current Occupant 336 S 800 E Current Occupant 747 E LINDEN AVE NFF Current Occupant 761 E LINDEN AVE Current Occupant 747 E LINDEN AVE NFF2 Current Occupant 753 E LINDEN AVE Current Occupant 323 S REEVES TER NFF Current Occupant 321 S REEVES TER Current Occupant 365 S 700 E Current Occupant 346 S 800 E Current Occupant 350 S 800 E Current Occupant 354 S 800 E Current Occupant 373 S 700 E Current Occupant 701 E 400 S Current Occupant 775 E 400 S Current Occupant 765 E 400 S Current Occupant 370 S 800 E Current Occupant 327 S 800 E Current Occupant 339 S 800 E Current Occupant 343 S 800 E Current Occupant 347 S 800 E Current Occupant 353 S 800 E Current Occupant 809 E 400 S Current Occupant 365 S 800 E Current Occupant 674 E 400 S Current Occupant 680 E 400 S Current Occupant 416 S 700 E Current Occupant 424 S 700 E Current Occupant 716 E 400 S Current Occupant 762 E 400 S Current Occupant 420 S 800 E Current Occupant 424 S 800 E Current Occupant 712 E 400 S Current Occupant 714 E 400 S Current Occupant 710 E 400 S Current Occupant 425 S 700 E Current Occupant 455 S 700 E Current Occupant 327 S 700 E 1 Current Occupant 327 S 700 E 4 Current Occupant 327 S 700 E Current Occupant 348 S LAKER CT Current Occupant 821 E 400 S Current Occupant 411 S 800 E Current Occupant 804 E 400 S OWN_CITY OWN_STATEOWN_ZIP MURRAY UT 84107 MURRAY UT 84107 OGDEN UT 84401 OREM UT 84097 PARK CITY UT 84060 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84103 KAMAS UT 84036 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84106 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 PROVO UT 84604 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 MURRAY UT 84107 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84105 NEWPORT BEACHCA 92663 RALEIGH NC 27608 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 MORGAN HILLCA 95037 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84108 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SARATOGACA 95070 MILLCREEKUT 84109 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 MILLCREEKUT 84109 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84105 MURRAY UT 84107 MENLO PARKCA 94025 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84115 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84105 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 WEST VALLEYUT 84120 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84152 SAN RAFAELCA 94901 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84158 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84115 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84111 LEXINGTONKY 40555 SAN DIEGOCA 92130 LOS ALTOS CA 94022 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SANTA BARBARACA 93110 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 FARMINGTONUT 84025 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84104 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 DALLAS TX 75221 CENTERVILLEUT 84014 SANDY UT 84090 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84150 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 HOLLADAY UT 84121 DRAPER UT 84020 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SCOTTSDALEAZ 85251 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 CENTERVILLEUT 84014 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84103 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84103 SANDY UT 84093 SALT LAKE CITYUT 84102 CITY ZIPCODE STATE SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT SALT LAKE CITY84102 UT This page has intentionally been left blank 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2025 (Amending the zoning map pertaining to properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E. and amending the Central Community Plan Future Land use Map pertaining to properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E., 354 S. 800 E., 370 S. 800 E., and 775 E. 400 S.) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family) to MU-5 (Mixed Use 5) District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2025-00641; and amending the Central Community Future Land Use Map pertaining to properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E., 354 S. 800 E., 370 S. 800 E., and 775 E. 400 S. from Medium Density Residential (15- 30 dwelling units/acre) and Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) to High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre) pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2025-00640. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on November 12, 2025 to consider a petition by Elliott Work Group, representing the property owners, Hardage Hospitality, to rezone the parcels located at 346 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-015-0000), 350 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-016-0000) and 354 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-017-0000) from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family) to MU-5 (Mixed Use 5) pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2025-00641; and to amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map future land use designations pertaining to properties located at 346 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-015-0000), 350 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05- 303-016-0000), 354 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-017-0000), 370 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16- 05-303-034-0000), and 775 E. 400 S. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-028-0000 from (15-30 dwelling units/acre) and Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) to 2 High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre) pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2025-00640. WHEREAS, at its November 12, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) to amend the Zoning Map on Petition No. PLNPCM2025-00641, and recommended that the City Council deny the application to amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map on Petition No. PLNPCM2025-00640. WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E., identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, shall be and hereby is rezoned from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family) to MU-5 (Mixed Use 5). SECTION 2. Amending the Central Community Future Land Use Map. The Salt Lake City Central Community Future Land Use Map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the future land use of properties, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E., 354 S. 800 E., 370 S. 800 E., and 775 E. 400 S., identified on Exhibit “B” attached hereto, shall be and hereby are amended to change the future land use designations from Medium Density Residential (15-30 dwelling units/acre) and Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) to High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre). 3 SECTION 3. Conditions. The proposed amendments are conditioned upon the Applicant entering into a development agreement with Salt Lake City that will mitigate the demolition of the existing residential units and displacement of tenants and specify the details and terms of the Community Benefit required by the Zoning Ordinance, section 21A.50.050. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. The Salt Lake City Recorder is instructed to not publish this ordinance until the conditions set forth in Section 3 are satisfied as certified by the Salt Lake City Planning Director or his designee. SECTION 5. Time. If the conditions set forth in Section 3 above have not been met within one year after adoption, then this ordinance shall become null and void. Prior to such one year period, the City Council may, for good cause shown, by resolution, extend the time period for satisfying the conditions identified above. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 2026. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 4 ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2026. Published: ______________. Ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to properties located at 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E and rezoning 346 S. 800 E., 350 S. 800 E. and 354 S. 800 E. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__2/19/26___________________________ By: ___________________________________ Courtney Lords, Senior City Attorney 5 EXHIBIT “A” Legal Descriptions of Properties to be Rezoned: 346 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-015-0000) 818,BEG 2 RDS S FR NE COR LOT 8, BLK 40, PLAT B, SLC SUR; S 2.5 ,RDS; W 5 RDS; N 2.5 RDS; E 5 RDS TO BEG 4672-0490 7573-827 ,8639-2371 9148-9411 9161-3070 TO 3073 9161- 3087 9271-8073 ,9271-8074 9316-9587 10353-4159 350 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-016-0000) 818,BEG 4 1/2 RDS S FR NE COR LOT 8, BLK 40, PLAT B, SLC SUR; S ,2 1/2 RDS; W 8 RDS; N 2 1/2 RDS; E 8 RDS TO BEG. 4158-245 ,4158-0244 3673-318, 4002-43 7176-0873 8639-6488 9317-0208 ,10353-4159 354 S. 800 E (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-017-0000) 818,COM 5.25 FT N FR SE COR LOT 8 BLK 40 PLAT B SLC SUR N 44.25 ,FT W 8 RDS S 2.5 RDS E 1 RD S 3 FT E 7 RDS TO BEG 7435-1119 ,9305-1553 10353-4159 6 EXHIBIT “B” Legal Descriptions of Properties to be Amended on the Central Community Future Land Use Map: 346 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-015-0000) 818,BEG 2 RDS S FR NE COR LOT 8, BLK 40, PLAT B, SLC SUR; S 2.5 ,RDS; W 5 RDS; N 2.5 RDS; E 5 RDS TO BEG 4672-0490 7573-827 ,8639-2371 9148-9411 9161-3070 TO 3073 9161- 3087 9271-8073 ,9271-8074 9316-9587 10353-4159 350 S. 800 E. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-016-0000) 818,BEG 4 1/2 RDS S FR NE COR LOT 8, BLK 40, PLAT B, SLC SUR; S ,2 1/2 RDS; W 8 RDS; N 2 1/2 RDS; E 8 RDS TO BEG. 4158-245 ,4158-0244 3673-318, 4002-43 7176-0873 8639-6488 9317-0208 ,10353-4159 354 S. 800 E (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-017-0000) 818,COM 5.25 FT N FR SE COR LOT 8 BLK 40 PLAT B SLC SUR N 44.25 ,FT W 8 RDS S 2.5 RDS E 1 RD S 3 FT E 7 RDS TO BEG 7435-1119 ,9305-1553 10353-4159 370 S 800 E (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-034-0000) 922,BEG N 00?01'02 W 99 FT FR SE COR OF LOT 1, BLK 40, PL B, ,SLC SUR; S 89?57'57" W 115.50 FT; N 00?01'02" W 71.33 FT; N ,89?58'01" E 115.50 FT; S 00?01'02" E 71.33 FT TO BEG. 0.19 ,AC M OR L. 4824-0588 5582-2351 5598-1278 6869-0086 6870-0330,8405-0319 775 E. 400 S. (Tax ID No. 16-05-303-028-0000) 818,COM AT SE COR LOT 1, BLK 40, PLAT B, SLC SUR; W 74 1/4 FT; N,6 RDS; E 74 1/4 FT; S 6 RDS TO BEG, ALSO BEG 4 1/2 RDS W OF ,SE COR SD LOT 1; W 2 1/2 RDS; N 6 RDS; E 2 1/2 RDS; S 6 RDS ,TO BEG 4516-1034 6226-512 6226-0518 9129-0956 9237-0227 ,9278-796 This page has intentionally been left blank 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 DATE:April 14, 2026 RE: Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 Library Annual Budget ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE $53,193,189. This is an increase of nearly $10 million or 23.1% compared to the Library’s FY26 adopted budget. The increase is driven primarily by a higher budgeted amount for required pass-through property taxes to other entities, an increased Capital Projects budget, and cost-of-living wage increases following approval of the collective bargaining agreement for Salt Lake City Public Library employees in February 2026. Item Schedule: Page | 2 Goal of the briefing: To review the Fiscal Year 2027 proposed Salt Lake City Public Library budget and consider the Mayor’s recommendation to approve the Library Board’s proposed budget for consideration by June 30, 2026. POLICY QUESTIONS 1.Proposed Bond: The Council may wish to ask the Library for an update on its proposed bond effort. This could include the expected tax impact on residents, results from the ongoing community polling, and the timeline for bringing a formal proposal to the Council before a vote to put a GO bond measure on the November ballot. The Council could also ask the Library to expand on how it plans to move forward if the bond does not pass, since the FY27 budget includes funding for design and construction documents if the bond is approved. The Council could add a funding contingency to these allocations so they would be subject to bond approval. 2.Capital Projects: The Anderson-Foothill Branch continues to have foundation problems. The Council could ask for an update on the building's condition and whether there is a risk that conditions could worsen and require spending before a bond is approved. (See page 5, Additional & Background Information below) 3.Collective Bargaining Agreement: The Council may wish to ask the Library for an update on how it is handling ongoing personnel cost obligations of the CBA, particularly as it looks ahead to a potential property tax increase in FY28, as the Library’s long-term financial plan. 4.Staffing: The proposed budget does not add any new positions. The Council could ask the Library to explain how it has reclassified jobs to make sure there is enough coverage throughout the system without lowering service quality. 5.Staff Innovation: The budget now includes a $400,000 line item for Staff Innovation, which was not in the FY26 budget. The Council could ask how these funds are intended to be used and how the results will be measured. 6.New Growth Revenue: The FY27 budget estimates total tax revenue of $42,634,618, including about $639,000 in new growth. The City does not receive final new growth figures until June 8, so the Council may wish to ask the Library what budget adjustments it would make if the estimated new growth revenue is not realized. LIBRARY BUDGET PRIORITIES Library leadership outlined the following priorities for its Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget: Competitive Staff Compensation: The Library has continued this priority from the FY26 budget to ensure staff compensation remains fair and competitive. It aligns with the Library’s 2025 third-party compensation study and the recent collective bargaining agreement with the Library Employees Union. Prioritized Capital Projects: The proposed budget includes capital improvements across the Library system and its nine locations. Priority projects include power and networking improvements at older branches, lighting and landscaping improvements, and a site assessment at the Anderson-Foothill Branch. This priority was also included in the FY26 budget and is informed by the Library’s Master Facilities Plan. Programmatic Enhancement Investments: The proposed budget includes investments to extend the Library’s programmatic offerings in child and youth literacy, technology literacy, workforce development, Page | 3 civic engagement, and English language learning resources. This priority aligns with the Library’s strategic plan. REVENUES Property taxes are the Library's primary source of revenue. The FY27 budget does not propose a tax rate increase. In FY25, the Council approved a property tax rate increase for the Library, which is currently 0.000630. This rate represents 63% of the cap established by Utah State statute. The estimated total tax revenue is $42,634,618, and the estimated new growth is $639,00. The budget and the table below assume that property values stay the same as the prior year. The average annual impact on residents is about $34.65 per $100,000 of residential property value. The Council may wish to ask the Library what the budget plan would be if new growth revenue is not realized (see Policy Question #6 above). Figure 1 - copied from page 8 of the FY27 Library Proposed Budget The budget includes a required $5.5 million pass-through of property taxes to the Utah Inland Port Authority, Convention Center Hotel, and the Community Reinvestment Agency. This is an increase of $1.4 million from last fiscal year's budget and reflects anticipated growth in these areas. The higher allocation in the proposed FY27 budget aims to more accurately reflect the actual amounts received for this pass-through. The Library's Fund Balance is projected to end FY26 at $11,520,482. The Library has a minimum target of keeping the balance at or above 16.67%, consistent with the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommendation and is approximately two months of operating expenses. Other revenue sources: Intergovernmental Revenues, $875,000 (decrease of $23,000 due to the likelihood of federal grant funding received in prior years discontinuing) Charges for Services Revenues, $181,000 (unchanged from FY26) Charges for Lost/Damaged Items, $20,000 (unchanged from FY26) Miscellaneous Revenues (interest earnings, rental revenue, etc.), $216,000 (unchanged from FY26) Contributions & Transfers, $9,266,571 ($6,367,211 increase from FY26, due to a proposed transfer of General Fund dollars to address deferred maintenance and other capital projects sooner than initially anticipated to take advantage of current pricing) GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES A. Staffing & Compensation The FY27 proposed personnel budget is $24,603,561, an increase of $1,342,474 (5.8%) from FY26. Page | 4 Library personnel expenditures account for about 70% of the Library’s overall operating budget, consistent with previous fiscal years. The FY27 budget proposes a 5.5% salary increase for all Library staff, which includes a 3% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) and a 2.5% longevity adjustment. The personnel increases are informed by a 2025 compensation study conducted by a third-party consultant group and the outcome of the Library’s collective bargaining agreement reached with the Library Employees Union earlier this year. For more information about the Library Employees Unionization efforts, please refer to the ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND information section below. No additional full-time equivalents (FTEs) are proposed for FY27. Some positions have been reclassified to better align with needs, keeping the total number of FTEs at 249.675, the same as in FY25 and FY26. A complete staffing profile, including reclassified positions, is on pages 6 and 7 of the Library’s FY27 Proposed Budget. Like Salt Lake City departments, the City Library offers a high-deductible health plan with contributions to each employee’s health savings account (HSA). Employees receive $1,000 for individual coverage and $2,000 for employee plus dependent coverage. The proposed budget includes a 10% increase in premiums. B. Capital Projects & Debt Service Capital improvements across the Library’s system are a main priority in the Library’s FY27 budget. The Capital Projects Fund is proposed at $11,670,000, an increase of $2,048,928 (21.3%) from the $9,621,072 FY26 budget. A key factor in the increase is a higher transfer from the General Fund to the Capital Projects Fund to cover costs for architectural design documents for Anderson-Foothill and Day-Riverside rebuilds or renovations, associated with the Library’s proposed Bond (more information in the ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION section). The Library requested up to $2.5 million in congressional project appropriations through U.S. Representative Celeste Maloy to help fund this project. Procurement of design and construction documents will not proceed unless the bond is approved by the Council and, if necessary, by voters in the November 2026 election. The Library proposes transferring $990,000 (decrease of $2,000 from FY26) from its General Fund to the Debt Service Fund to cover bond payments for the Glendale and Marmalade Branches. This amount covers the annual debt payments for the Local Building Authority lease revenue bonds for both branches. Other capital projects include: Sunlight mitigation, exterior glazing, replacement of relief and exhaust fans, fire suppression and HVAC system maintenance, and events equipment at the Main Library Flooring, ADA-accessible doors, roof drains and stucco replacement at the Chapman Branch Replacement of the patio deck flooring and door hardware at the Marmalade Branch Replace brickwork and electrical paneling at the Sweet Branch Furniture replacement across the Library system Technology replacement across the Library system C. Other Changes by Expense Category Materials & Supplies: $ 1,185,021 (1% increase from FY26) Buildings, Grounds & Equipment: $2,477,458 (14.1% increase from FY26 to address increased utility costs and equipment and furniture maintenance needs) Services: $2,546,199 (22% increase from FY26, largely to update the Library’s Integrated Library System, or ILS) Page | 5 Collections & Other Capital Outlays: $ 3,130,000 (6.8% increase from FY26) Transfers, Grants & Donations: $ 18,213,250 (an increase of about $7.5 million from FY26, mainly consisting of the $11,670,000 million transfer to Capital Projects as detailed above, along with a budgeted $5.5 million for property tax pass-through to other entities) Other Charges: $1,037,700 (11% increase from FY26, related to the implementation of the Library’s strategic plan in this category) ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Library Employee Unionization Effort In February 2026, the City Council approved a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the Salt Lake City Public Library and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local #1004, representing eligible Library employees. Some provisions of the agreement became effective upon execution, while many of the compensation provisions go into effect July 1, 2026. The agreement runs through June 30, 2029. The CBA between the Salt Lake City Library and AFSCME Local #1004 established the formal framework for labor relations and detailed wage schedules, dispute resolution, employee benefits like insurance and leave accrual, union membership eligibility, and other provisions. At the time of Council consideration, the Library confirmed that the CBA provisions, including wage increases and other benefits, could be implemented without a property tax increase, as reflected in its proposed FY27 budget. B. Proposed Bond The Library is developing a proposal for either a Local Building Authority (LBA) bond or a General Obligation bond to be issued by Salt Lake City, leveraging the City’s strong bond rating. The bond would be informed by the Library’s 2021 master facilities plan and is expected to fund three main capital projects: rebuilding or renovating the Anderson-Foothill and Day-Riverside branches, and constructing a new full-size branch in the Ballpark neighborhood. According to the Library, the anticipated bond total for an LBA bond is expected to be around $40 million, supplemented by a $5 million fundraising campaign through the Library Foundation. A GO bond is expected to have a larger scope and higher total. The Library argues that delaying these projects risks higher long-term costs to taxpayers and that addressing them sooner with a bond is more fiscally prudent. The Library is currently in its Community Engagement & Concept Design phase. The tax impact for voters has not yet been finalized, but according to Library staff, is anticipated to be similar to the Library’s previous property tax increase in Fy25. If the Council votes to place a GO Bond measure on the ballot late summer 2026, voters would decide on the matter at the November 2026 election. C. Library Taxing Status Update In June 2025, Salt Lake County and the Utah State Tax Commission combined the Salt Lake City Public Library's tax status with Salt Lake City, citing an ambiguous state law provision. The Library had historically been categorized as a separate taxing entity from Salt Lake City until this decision. The reclassification has affected the timing of the Library's revenue, as tax proceeds now flow through the City before reaching the Library. However, the Library reports a strong working relationship with the City’s Finance Department as the two entities navigate this decision, and the Library does not anticipate near-term issues. Page | 6 During the 2026 Utah General Legislative Session, HB565 was passed directing the County to list the Library’s tax portion as a separate line item on property tax notices. While the legislation does not fully resolve the tax status issue, it provides transparency for taxpayers to understand where their property taxes go. ATTACHMENTS 1.Proposed FY2027 Library Budget 2.Library Master Facilities Plan 2022-2032 ACRONYMS AFSCME — American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees CBA — Collective Bargaining Agreement COLA — Cost-of-Living Adjustment FTE — Full-Time Equivalent FY — Fiscal Year GO — General Obligation (as in GO Bond) HSA — Health Savings Account HVAC — Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning ILS — Integrated Library System LBA — Local Building Authority Noah Baskett - Chief Executive Officer/Library Director Tyler Bahr - Chief Financial Officer PR O P O S E D B U D G E T FY2026-27 1 2 SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY TRIVIA 3 1. Approximately how many visits did the Salt Lake City Public Library receive in 2025? a.550,000 b.800,000 c.1,000,000 d.1,3000,000 4 2. What is the oldest branch location in the Library system? a. Sprague b. Chapman c. Anderson-Foothill d. Sweet 5 3. According to the Annie E. Casey Foundation, literacy at the end of what grade-level is key to future educational success? a. Kindergarten b. 2 gradend c. 3 graderd d. 6 gradeth 6 4. What was the most circulated item at the Library in 2025? a. James b. A Court of Thorns and Roses c. The Official Taylor Swift - The Eras Tour Book d. The Let Them Theory by Percival Everett (eAudio book) by Sarah J. Maas (print edition) (print edition) by Mel Robbins (eBook) 7 5. Which Library location circulated the most picture books in 2025? a. Sprague b. Main c. Anderson-Foothill d. Day-Riverside 8 6. What percentage of residents surveyed in 2025 support additional funding for the Salt Lake City Public Library? a. 51% b. 68% c. 87% d. 98% Competitive Staff Compensation Wage increases focused on entry-level Labor union agreement Prioritized Capital Projects Reopened roof-top plaza Crescent Wall renovation is on budget & on schedule to wrap up by June Philanthropy & Fundraising Launched the SLC Library Foundation Launched “Our Next Chapter” capital campaign Increased annual giving by nearly 300% Secured 8 new grants from local foundations Strategic Planning Consultation Extensive community engagement informed strategic plan being finalized by June RETURN ON INVESTMENT F Y 2 0 2 6 9 10 Would you support or oppose additional funding for the SLC Public Library, even if it resulted in a property tax increase for residents? 73% 2023 “Definitely or Probably Support” SUPPORT FOR THE CITY LIBRARY Foot traffic 1,295,369, up 20.4% Circulation count 3,077,933, up 8.3% Unique patrons checking out items 75,855, up 9.1% New sign-ups 21,703, up 11.5% 2025 Statistics 11 Would you support or oppose additional funding for the SLC Public Library, even if it resulted in a property tax increase for residents? 73% 2023 87% 2025 “Definitely or Probably Support” SUPPORT FOR THE CITY LIBRARY Foot traffic 1,295,369, up 20.4% Circulation count 3,077,933, up 8.3% Unique patrons checking out items 75,855, up 9.1% New sign-ups 21,703, up 11.5% 2025 Statistics Minimum Fund Balance Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 12 Minimum Fund Balance PY Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 13 Minimum Fund Balance PY Projection Current Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 14 $13.2M $5.6M STAYING THE COURSE, WORKING THE PLAN Current Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 OPPORTUNITY 15 $13.2M $5.6M STAYING THE COURSE, WORKING THE PLAN Property taxes Projected 2% increase over FY26 budget from new growth, including expiration of Granary District increment No property tax increase Property tax pass-throughs FY25 Actual FY26 Budget FY27 Proposed $5.0M $4.1M $5.5M PROPOSED REVENUE F Y 2 0 2 7 16 STAFFING Employee Union agreement 5.5% COLA & longevity/step No headcount increase Reduced travel by 10% PROGRAMMATIC ENHANCEMENT Aligned with Mayor’s priorities C hild, youth & technology literacy, workforce development, civic engagement, & English learning Strategic plan implementation F Y 2 0 2 7 17 $1.9M - Building Improvements Sunlight mitigation Relief & exhaust fans Fire suppression & HVAC Flooring Stucco & brickwork at branches $90k - Furnishings $400k - IT Projects $3.3M - Reserve (Contingency) Projects $6.0M Architectural Designs CAPITAL PROJECTS F Y 2 0 2 7 18 Current Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 OPPORTUNITY 19 $13.2M $5.6M STAYING THE COURSE, WORKING THE PLAN We are h e r e 20 I N V E S T M E N T I N & P R O G R E S S T O W A R D S F Y 2 7 B O N D Anderson-Foothill settling continues Community engagement Design consultation - $400k $6M in FY27 proposed budget for architectural designs Foundation & capital campaign Community Project Funding (CPF) submission to Rep. Maloy GFOA Award for Excellence in Government Finance 21Day - Riverside Anderson - Foothill G E N E R A L O B L I G A T I O N ( G O ) B O N D 22 L O C A L B U I L D I N G A U T H O R I T Y ( L B A ) B O N D G E N E R A L O B L I G A T I O N ( G O ) B O N D Larger scope - included Ballpark Fixed timeline - Council must approve placement on ballot by August, residents vote in November Library directed to work towards GO bond vote in November 2026 (FY27)23 L O C A L B U I L D I N G A U T H O R I T Y ( L B A ) B O N D G E N E R A L O B L I G A T I O N ( G O ) B O N D Larger scope - included Ballpark Fixed timeline - Council must approve placement on ballot by August, residents vote in November Library directed to work towards GO bond vote in November 2026 (FY27)24 L O C A L B U I L D I N G A U T H O R I T Y ( L B A ) B O N D Smaller scope - Ballpark branch to be considered later with Ballpark Next development Flexible timeline - avoid potential confusion with City’s truth-in- taxation Discussion with City Finance: Consider smaller, LBA bond T H E A S K LBA bond - winter FY27 Existing Library revenue sufficient to make first $3M bond payment in FY28 $6M increase in FY28 Next increase not until FY2034 25Day - Riverside Anderson - Foothill L B A B O N D $40M 20-year term Rebuild of Anderson- Foothill Renovation of Day- Riverside Future consideration for Ballpark 26Day - Riverside Anderson - Foothill B U D G E T P R O C E S S March Board vote on proposed budget March - May Engagement with Mayor, City Council, & City partners April - May Staff presentations June City Council vote on proposed budget July & beyond Strategic plan implementation 27 Presentation Design THANK YOU slcpl.org SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 04/07/2026 Date Sent to Council: 04/07/2026 From: Department * Library Employee Name: Bahr, Tyler E-mail tbahr@slcpl.org Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 04/07/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 04/07/2026 Subject: Library Budget Brieﬁng FY26-27 Additional Staff Contact: Noah Baskett - nbaskett@slcpl.org Presenters/Staff Table Noah Baskett - nbaskett@slcpl.org Document Type Information Item Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: The administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the proposed budget for the Department as part of the FY2026-27 adopted budget. Background/Discussion See ﬁrst attachment for Background/Discussion Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing To provide transparency to the public about how the library plans to use its funds to provide the best possible services to the community. Public Process Budget Presentation - City Library This page has intentionally been left blank Noah Baskett - Chief Executive Officer/Library Director Tyler Bahr - Chief Financial Officer PR O P O S E D B U D G E T FY2026-27 1 2 SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY TRIVIA 3 1. Approximately how many visits did the Salt Lake City Public Library receive in 2025? a.550,000 b.800,000 c.1,000,000 d.1,3000,000 4 2. What is the oldest branch location in the Library system? a. Sprague b. Chapman c. Anderson-Foothill d. Sweet 5 3. According to the Annie E. Casey Foundation, literacy at the end of what grade-level is key to future educational success? a. Kindergarten b. 2 gradend c. 3 graderd d. 6 gradeth 6 4. What was the most circulated item at the Library in 2025? a. James b. A Court of Thorns and Roses c. The Official Taylor Swift - The Eras Tour Book d. The Let Them Theory by Percival Everett (eAudio book) by Sarah J. Maas (print edition) (print edition) by Mel Robbins (eBook) 7 5. Which Library location circulated the most picture books in 2025? a. Sprague b. Main c. Anderson-Foothill d. Day-Riverside 8 6. What percentage of residents surveyed in 2025 support additional funding for the Salt Lake City Public Library? a. 51% b. 68% c. 87% d. 98% Competitive Staff Compensation Wage increases focused on entry-level Labor union agreement Prioritized Capital Projects Reopened roof-top plaza Crescent Wall renovation is on budget & on schedule to wrap up by June Philanthropy & Fundraising Launched the SLC Library Foundation Launched “Our Next Chapter” capital campaign Increased annual giving by nearly 300% Secured 8 new grants from local foundations Strategic Planning Consultation Extensive community engagement informed strategic plan being finalized by June RETURN ON INVESTMENT F Y 2 0 2 6 9 10 Would you support or oppose additional funding for the SLC Public Library, even if it resulted in a property tax increase for residents? 73% 2023 “Definitely or Probably Support” SUPPORT FOR THE CITY LIBRARY Foot traffic 1,295,369, up 20.4% Circulation count 3,077,933, up 8.3% Unique patrons checking out items 75,855, up 9.1% New sign-ups 21,703, up 11.5% 2025 Statistics 11 Would you support or oppose additional funding for the SLC Public Library, even if it resulted in a property tax increase for residents? 73% 2023 87% 2025 “Definitely or Probably Support” SUPPORT FOR THE CITY LIBRARY Foot traffic 1,295,369, up 20.4% Circulation count 3,077,933, up 8.3% Unique patrons checking out items 75,855, up 9.1% New sign-ups 21,703, up 11.5% 2025 Statistics Minimum Fund Balance Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 12 Minimum Fund Balance PY Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 13 Minimum Fund Balance PY Projection Current Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 14 $13.2M $5.6M STAYING THE COURSE, WORKING THE PLAN Current Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 OPPORTUNITY 15 $13.2M $5.6M STAYING THE COURSE, WORKING THE PLAN Property taxes Projected 2% increase over FY26 budget from new growth, including expiration of Granary District increment No property tax increase Property tax pass-throughs FY25 Actual FY26 Budget FY27 Proposed $5.0M $4.1M $5.5M PROPOSED REVENUE F Y 2 0 2 7 16 STAFFING Employee Union agreement 5.5% COLA & longevity/step No headcount increase Reduced travel by 10% PROGRAMMATIC ENHANCEMENT Aligned with Mayor’s priorities C hild, youth & technology literacy, workforce development, civic engagement, & English learning Strategic plan implementation F Y 2 0 2 7 17 $1.9M - Building Improvements Sunlight mitigation Relief & exhaust fans Fire suppression & HVAC Flooring Stucco & brickwork at branches $90k - Furnishings $400k - IT Projects $3.3M - Reserve (Contingency) Projects $6.0M Architectural Designs CAPITAL PROJECTS F Y 2 0 2 7 18 Current Projection Fu n d B a l a n c e (m i l l i o n s ) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 OPPORTUNITY 19 $13.2M $5.6M STAYING THE COURSE, WORKING THE PLAN We are h e r e 20 I N V E S T M E N T I N & P R O G R E S S T O W A R D S F Y 2 7 B O N D Anderson-Foothill settling continues Community engagement Design consultation - $400k $6M in FY27 proposed budget for architectural designs Foundation & capital campaign Community Project Funding (CPF) submission to Rep. Maloy GFOA Award for Excellence in Government Finance 21Day - Riverside Anderson - Foothill G E N E R A L O B L I G A T I O N ( G O ) B O N D 22 L O C A L B U I L D I N G A U T H O R I T Y ( L B A ) B O N D G E N E R A L O B L I G A T I O N ( G O ) B O N D Larger scope - included Ballpark Fixed timeline - Council must approve placement on ballot by August, residents vote in November Library directed to work towards GO bond vote in November 2026 (FY27)23 L O C A L B U I L D I N G A U T H O R I T Y ( L B A ) B O N D G E N E R A L O B L I G A T I O N ( G O ) B O N D Larger scope - included Ballpark Fixed timeline - Council must approve placement on ballot by August, residents vote in November Library directed to work towards GO bond vote in November 2026 (FY27)24 L O C A L B U I L D I N G A U T H O R I T Y ( L B A ) B O N D Smaller scope - Ballpark branch to be considered later with Ballpark Next development Flexible timeline - avoid potential confusion with City’s truth-in- taxation Discussion with City Finance: Consider smaller, LBA bond T H E A S K LBA bond - winter FY27 Existing Library revenue sufficient to make first $3M bond payment in FY28 $6M increase in FY28 Next increase not until FY2034 25Day - Riverside Anderson - Foothill L B A B O N D $40M 20-year term Rebuild of Anderson- Foothill Renovation of Day- Riverside Future consideration for Ballpark 26Day - Riverside Anderson - Foothill B U D G E T P R O C E S S March Board vote on proposed budget March - May Engagement with Mayor, City Council, & City partners April - May Staff presentations June City Council vote on proposed budget July & beyond Strategic plan implementation 27 Presentation Design THANK YOU slcpl.org This page has intentionally been left blank The City Library Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2027 2 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Contents In 2025, SLCPL welcomed 21,703 new library card holders Budget Overview • General Fund Proposed Budget - $53,193,189 • Increase of $10.0M or 23.1% due to Capital Projects, cost-of- living wage increases & Property Taxes – Pass Through • Debt Service Fund Proposed Budget - $990,000 • Capital Project Fund Proposed Budget - $11,670,000 Contents and Budget Overview............................... 2 A Letter from the CEO ............................................ 3 Staffing Profile..................................................... 6-7 General Fund Revenue ....................................... 8-9 General Fund Expenditures............................. 10-12 Debt Service Fund ............................................... 13 Capital Project Fund............................................. 14 The City Library Locations .................................... 15 3 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 A Letter from the CEO February 2026 Mayor Mendenhall, City Council Members, and Residents of Salt Lake City, I present to you this proposed budget for the Salt Lake City Public Library for fiscal year 2027, recognizing the great resource that our public library system is toward the flourishing of our city and its residents. As you know, the City Library is one of the most trusted institutions in our city today. We take that position seriously, recognizing that it is trust that serves as the connective glue that knits our richly diverse neighborhoods and communities together. As we launch the next chapter of this 128-year-old institution with our newly adopted strategic plan, this budget recognizes our responsibility to maintain that historic trust while also preparing us to respond effectively to the newest needs that the Library is positioned to address. These responsible and responsive investments include: • Competitive Staff Compensation – In alignment with the Library’s 2025 third-party compensation study, as well as the outcome of its collective bargaining agreement reached with the Library Employees Union, this budget ensures Library staff compensation is fair, competitive, and congruent with our high expectations – and appreciation – for their consistent commitment and care. • Prioritized Capital Projects – In alignment with the Library’s Master Facilities Plan, this budget includes expenditures for capital improvements across the Library system’s nine locations. Priority projects include power and networking improvements within older buildings, external lighting improvements, landscaping improvements, and a site assessment at the Anderson-Foothill Branch, given the ongoing issues with the building’s foundation. Additionally, this budget includes funding for design and construction documents for two high-priority capital projects the Library has been planning for several years: rebuilding the Anderson-Foothill Branch and rebuilding and/ or significantly remodeling the Day-Riverside Branch. This initial investment allows the Library to take the necessary early steps toward these projects and ensures we are responsibly advancing plans to meet the evolving needs of these communities. • Programmatic Enhancement Investments – In alignment with the Library’s newly adopted strategic plan, the FY 26- 27 budget includes deeper investments to extend our programmatic offerings in child and youth literacy, technology literacy, workforce development, civic engagement, and English Language Learning resources. As we look to the future, we envision a time when the City Library becomes an even richer and more valuable resource to Salt Lake City residents, where all are welcome and invited to create, learn, and connect with one another. In gratitude and service, Noah Baskett Chief Executive Officer & Library Director 4 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Library Staff demonstrate homemade tea bags at the Spring Seed Swap Launch party for the anthology Beyond the Glittering World at the Marmalade Branch, featuring the book’s editors Children play at the Ballpark Library Lab. Creativity toys like these spark imagination and help little ones learn to share and cooperate 5 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Rooftop Yoga at the Main Library, one of Salt Lake’s most unique activities Volunteers from the Friends of The City Library after another successful used book sale 6 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Staff Position FY26 FY27 FY27 − FY26 Difference Accountant/Payroll Coordinator 1 1 — Accounting Specialist 1.45 1.45 — Administrative Assistant 1 3 2 Assistant Manager 10 9 -1 Associate Librarian 24.35 23.8 -0.55 Audio Visual Specialist 1 1 — Cataloger 1 2 1 Chief Development Officer 1 1 — Chief Executive Officer - Executive Director Library 1 1 — Chief Financial Officer 1 1 — Chief Operation Officer 1 1 — Chief People Officer 1 1 — Chief Services & Impact Officer 1 1 — Circulation Supervisor 2 — -2 Community Garden Associate 0.45 0.45 — Copy Editor & Public Relations 1 1 — Creative Director 1 1 — Custodial Supervisor 2 2 — Custodian 11.25 11.25 — Data Analyst 1 2 1 Delivery Driver 1 — -1 Delivery Driver/Maintenance Technician — 1 1 Director of Community Engagement 1 1 — Director of Employee Relations — 1 1 Director of Facilities — 1 1 Director of Marketing & Communications 1 1 — Director of Organizational Learning — 1 1 Director of Public Safety 1 — -1 Director of Social Services & Safety — 1 1 Director of Public Services 1 2 1 Employee Benefits Associate — 1 1 Employee Experience Manager — 1 1 Equity Coordinator 1 — -1 Event Associate 1.45 1.45 — Executive Administrative Assistant 1 1 — Facility Manager 1 — -1 Finance Manager 1 1 — Graphic Designer 1 1 — Help Desk Tech 1 1 — Human Resource Associate 3 — -3 Staffing Profile Finding toys at the Ballpark Library Lab. Playing teaches children how to think, imagine, problem solve, and practice putting thoughts into words Opening at the Marmalade Branch in March 2025, Lucky Ones Coffee employs individuals with disabilities and offers coffee drinks and brunch fare During FY26, the Library focused on negotiating a Collective Bargaining Agreement with Salt Lake City Public Library Workers United (AFSCME Local 1004) including wage increases that will go into effect in FY27. 7 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Staff Position FY26 FY27 FY27 − FY26 Difference Human Resource Director 1 — -1 Human Resource Project Manager 1 — -1 Librarian 41 42 1 Library Aide 19.4 19.4 — Library Assistant 40.475 40.025 -0.45 Literacy Initiatives Project Manager 1 1 — Logistics Coordinator 1 1 — Maintenance Technician - Painter 1 1 — Maintenance Technician 5 5 — Maintenance Supervisor 1 1 — Manager 16 17 1 Marketing & Communication Assistant 0.475 0.475 — Marketing & Comm Project Manager 1 1 — Network & Systems Engineer 1 1 — Network Administrator I 1 — -1 Network Engineer — 1 1 Organizational Development Coordinator 1 — -1 Passport Agent 1.8 1.8 — Passport Supervisor 1 1 — People & Culture Coordinator — 1 1 People & Culture Project Manager — 1 1 Procurement & Contracts Manager 1 1 — Project Manager - Facilities 1 1 — Safety Associate 9.9 9.9 — Safety Manager — 1 1 Safety Supervisor 3 2 -1 Senior Graphic Designer 1 1 — Senior Network Support Technician 1 1 — Service Coordinator 3 3 — Social Media Manager & Photographer 1 1 — Social Services Coordinator 1 1 — Social Worker 1 1 — Staff Development Coordinator 1 — -1 Systems Administrator 1 1 — Technical Services Specialist 2 2 — Technology Assistant 2.25 2.25 — Technology Associate 1.425 1.425 — Technology Librarian 2 2 — Trainer 1 — -1 Web Developer 1 1 — Total 249.675 249.675 0 Sta ffing Profile Continued Staffing Profile Smiles all around as Library Staff and patrons celebrate the Rooftop Terrace reopening in May 2025 A local creator displays their zines and handmade art at Alt Press Fest 8 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Charges for Services Revenues Printer Revenues 30,971 20,000 20,000 0 0% Passport Services 284,158 145,000 145,000 0 0% Non-Resident Fees 26,494 16,000 16,000 0 0% Subtotal 341,623 181,000 181,000 0 0% Intergovernmental Revenues Reimbursements - E Rate 27,194 20,000 0 -20,000 -100.0% Grants - State 22,926 28,000 25,000 -3,000 -10.7% RDA Rebate 871,588 850,000 850,000 0 0% Subtotal 921,708 898,000 875,000 -23,000 -2.60% Tax Revenues FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Current Property Taxes 29,653,420 29,179,206 29,829,855 650,649 2.2% Personal Property Taxes 3,598,567 2,766,498 2,754,763 -11,735 -0.4% Property Taxes - Pass Through 4,952,084 4,100,000 5,500,000 1,400,000 34.1% Delinquent Property Taxes 449,170 450,000 450,000 0 0% Motor Vehicle Taxes 1,095,404 800,000 800,000 0 0% Judgment Levy 4,415 0 0 0 0% Property Taxes (Contingency) 0 1,703,090 3,300,000 1,596,910 93.8% Subtotal 39,753,060 38,998,794 42,634,618 3,635,824 9.30% Tax Year 2021 Tax Year 2022 Tax Year 2023 Tax Year 2024 Tax Year 2025 Tax Year 2026 est. Certified Tax Rate 0.000649 .000615 .000580 .000646 .000630 .000630 Residential Property $35.70 $33.83 $31.90 $35.53 $34.65 $34.65 Commercial Property $649.00 $615.00 $580.00 $646.00 $630.00 $630.00 This chart reflects the estimated property tax amount for each $100,000 of residential property value and each $1,000,000 of commercial property value. Tax Year 2026 amounts are based on FY27 budgeted real and personal property tax revenue less estimated new growth and no increase in 2026 property values. Tax Revenues The Library’s primary source of funding is property taxes. Current Year Property Tax revenue has been budgeted at the amount generated by the 2025 certified tax rate plus an estimated 2.0 percent for new growth, approximately $639,000. The Library’s current property tax rate is 0.000630, which is 63.0 percent of the ceiling established by the Utah State statute. If the proposed tax rate increase is adopted, the 2026 estimated tax rate would be 0.000630. The Library is also required to budget for property tax revenues collected by Salt Lake County that are paid directly to other government entities without coming directly to the Library. An offsetting transfer from the Library equal to this revenue is reflected in the Transfers from the Library. The amount of this transfer for FY27 is estimated at $5,500,000. General Fund Revenue General Fund Revenue Overview Revenue categories have been budgeted based on historical trends, current year projections, and economic considerations. The following explanations compare the FY26 and FY27 budgets. 9 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Total Revenues FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Subtotal 41,947,626 43,213,154 53,193,189 9,980,035 23.1% Contributions & Transfers Donations 69,835 2,500 152,500 150,000 6000.0% Fund Balance - Appropriated 0 2,896,860 9,114,071 6,217,211 214.6% Subtotal 69,835 2,899,360 9,266,571 6,367,211 219.6% Miscellaneous Revenues Interest Earnings 782,422 150,000 150,000 0 0% Rents - Facilities 18,967 26,000 26,000 0 0% Rents - Commercial Space 32,009 30,000 30,000 0 0% Sundry Revenues 12,157 10,000 10,000 0 0% Subtotal 845,554 216,000 216,000 0 0% Charges for Lost/Damaged Items FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Charges for Lost/Damaged Items 15,845 20,000 20,000 0 0% Subtotal 15,845 20,000 20,000 0 0% Intergovernmental Revenues The FY27 budget for Intergovernmental Revenues is slightly lower because of federal grant funding received in prior years that may be discontinued. Charges for Services Revenues Revenue from Charges for Services is anticipated to remain at levels budgeted in FY26. Charges for Lost/Damaged Items Revenue from Charges for Lost/Damaged Items is anticipated to remain at levels consistent with FY26. Miscellaneous Revenues Miscellaneous Revenue is budgeted to remain at levels consistent with FY26. Contributions & Transfers The FY27 budget proposes using General Fund balance to address deferred maintenance and other capital projects. Implementing these projects sooner will allow the Library to take advantage of current pricing. Transfers from the General Fund include $11,670,000 for capital projects and $990,000 to make payments on bonds for the Marmalade and Glendale Branches. Seen here, the Sweet Family gave a generous $25,000 gift to The Salt Lake City Library Foundation, in support of the Branch’s collections. Tony and his sister, Virginia, made the gift in memory of their late brother, Jonathan, and in honor of their parents who are the Branch's namesake: Corinne and Jack Sweet. 10 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 General Fund Expenditures Materials & Supplies Subscriptions & Memberships 44,918 59,073 60,849 1,776 3.0% Publicity 241,144 290,400 357,500 67,100 23.1% Travel & Training 222,971 271,708 240,000 -31,708 -11.7% Office Supplies & Expense 11,436 91,000 91,000 0 0% Postage 27,200 28,500 28,500 0 0% Special Department Supplies 380,317 432,398 407,172 -25,226 -5.8% Printer Copier Paper 9,831 0 0 0 0% Printer Copier Toner 38,541 0 0 0 0% Subtotal 976,358 1,173,079 1,185,021 11,942 1.0% Personnel FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Salaries & Wages - Regular 13,254,000 16,714,449 17,634,769 920,320 5.5% Overtime - Regular 42,949 15,000 15,000 0 0% Salaries & Wages - Flex 246,311 168,135 519,135 351,000 208.8% Social Security - Regular 989,573 1,268,538 1,342,939 74,401 5.9% Social Security - Flex 18,843 10,530 11,030 500 4.7% Employee Insurance 1,987,454 2,617,144 2,606,857 -10,287 -0.4% Retiree Insurance 19,200 60,020 60,020 0 0% State Retirement 1,800,629 2,236,222 2,248,484 12,262 0.5% Workers Compensation 40,523 48,084 49,202 1,118 2.3% Unemployment Insurance 849 3,000 3,000 0 0% Other Employee Benefits 82,365 101,685 99,065 -2,620 -2.6% Employee Appreciation 10,583 18,280 14,060 -4,220 -23.1% Subtotal 18,493,279 23,261,087 24,603,561 1,342,474 5.8% The FY27 budget reflects a projected 10 percent increase in premiums. The Library covers 100 percent of employee coverage and 90 percent of employee plus dependent premiums. The Library’s contributions to health savings accounts are as follows: $1,000 for single coverage and $2,000 for employee plus dependent coverage. For details on the Library’s staffing, refer to the Staffing Profile on pages 6-7. Personnel Overview Personnel expenditures account for approximately 70 percent of the Library’s overall operating budget (General Fund less Transfers to the Capital and Debt Service Funds and Payments to Other Governments), which is consistent with recent fiscal years. The FY27 budget proposes a 5.5 percent salary increase for all Library staff which consists of a 3.0 percent cost of living adjustment and a 2.5 percent longevity adjustment. The City Library will continue to offer a high-deductible health plan and a contribution to each employee’s health savings account. General Fund Expenditures Overview The color-coded explanations compare the FY26 and FY27 expenditures. 11 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Services Professional & Technical 281,289 353,511 344,605 -8,906 -2.5% Security Contracts 71,544 75,000 69,000 -6,000 -8.0% Technology Contracts 608,614 919,399 1,239,162 319,763 34.8% City Administrative Charges 0 30,500 30,500 0 0% Cataloging Charges 115,161 117,000 123,000 6,000 5.1% Staff Training & Development 87,736 274,082 415,182 141,100 51.5% Programming 286,479 306,645 314,100 7,455 2.4% Board Development 4,283 10,000 10,000 0 0% Interlibrary Loans 575 650 650 0 0% Subtotal 1,455,680 2,086,787 2,546,199 459,412 22.0% Buildings, Grounds & Equipment FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Fuel 5,140 10,000 10,000 0 0% Maintenance - Equipment & Furniture 338,612 371,704 437,908 66,204 17.8% Maintenance - Vehicles 8,788 11,000 12,500 1,500 13.6% Maintenance - Buildings & Grounds 755,313 774,495 734,695 -39,800 -5.1% Utilities - Boiler Operations 61,040 115,000 90,000 -25,000 -21.7% Utilities - Electricity 459,239 445,000 487,000 42,000 9.4% Utilities - Natural Gas 73,284 136,600 114,600 -22,000 -16.1% Utilities - City Services 150,908 133,500 415,500 282,000 211.2% Utilities - Garbage 42,981 46,900 47,050 150 0.3% Utilities - Telecommunications 107,380 127,339 128,205 866 0.7% Subtotal 2,002,685 2,171,538 2,477,458 305,920 14.1% Materials & Supplies Overview Funding for publicity, travel and training, and printing supplies are proposed to increase by approximately 1 percent to increase visibility and awareness of library facilities and services. Buildings, Grounds & Equipment Overview This budget category is proposed to increase by 14 percent to address increased utility costs, as well as equipment and furniture maintenance needs. Services Overview Services are budgeted to increase by approximately 22 percent primarily to update the Library’s Integrated Library System (ILS) and improve patrons’ overall experience. Other Charges Overview Increases related to implementation of the Library’s strategic plan are being proposed in this category. Other Charges Insurance 452,691 571,200 568,800 -2,400 -0.4% Sundry Expense 24,989 31,260 18,900 -12,360 -39.5% Executive Discretion 35,104 332,402 50,000 -282,402 -85.0% Staff Innovation 0 0 400,000 400,000 0% Subtotal 512,783 934,862 1,037,700 102,838 11.0% 12 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Transfers, Grants & Donations Transfer to Capital Project Fund 3,890,000 5,516,800 11,670,000 6,153,200 111.5% Transfer to Debt Service Fund 986,000 992,000 990,000 -2,000 -0.2% Payments to Other Governments 4,952,084 4,100,000 5,500,000 1,400,000 34.1% Grants - State 44,418 47,000 47,000 0 0% Donations 0 0 6,250 6,250 0% Subtotal 9,872,502 10,655,800 18,213,250 7,557,450 70.9% Collections & Capital Outlays FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Print Materials 772,394 885,000 900,000 15,000 1.7% Audio Materials 85,105 95,000 125,000 30,000 31.6% Visual Materials 144,676 300,000 150,000 -150,000 -50.0% Databases 241,809 250,000 260,000 10,000 4.0% eBooks and Audio 1,640,553 1,300,000 1,585,000 285,000 21.9% Newspapers and Magazines 99,536 100,000 110,000 10,000 10.0% Subtotal 2,984,073 2,930,000 3,130,000 200,000 6.8% Ge neral Fund Exp nditures Continued Total Expenditures FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Subtotal 36,297,361 43,213,153 53,193,189 9,980,036 23.1% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 5,650,265 1 0 -1 -100.0% Collections & Other Capital Outlays Overview The collections budget is proposed to increase by $200,000 compared to the prior fiscal year. In addition to other collection items and consistent with recent trends, particular focus is on the Library’s ability to provide access to popular electronic materials and reduce wait times. Transfers, Grants & Donations Overview The transfer to the Capital Projects fund consists of $11,670,000 for facilities, technology, and other capital projects. A patron retrieves a book from the Ballpark Library Lab’s outdoor Holds Locker General Fund Expenditures 13 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Expenditures Interest Payments 176,496 177,000 160,000 -17,000 -9.6% Principal Payments 805,000 810,000 825,000 15,000 1.9% Administrative Fees 1,500 5,000 5,000 0 0% Subtotal 982,996 992,000 990,000 -2,000 -0.2% Miscellaneous Revenues FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Interest Earnings 479 0 0 0 0.0% Subtotal 479 0 0 0 0.0 Debt Service Fund Budget Debt Service Overview Funds necessary to meet the lease payments on the Glendale and Marmalade Branches are derived from a portion of the Library’s certified tax rate designated for such. The designated revenues are deposited in the General Fund. The amount needed to meet the lease payment is then transferred to the Debt Service Fund. The Library is funding the lease payment one year ahead of schedule — the FY26 transfer will cover the payment for FY27. Children’s Librarians host an activity at the Main Library’s roof reopening celebration, May 2025 Contributions & Transfers Transfers 986,000 992,000 990,000 -2,000 -0.2% Subtotal 986,000 992,000 990,000 -2,000 -0.2% Total Revenues FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Subtotal 986,479 992,000 990,000 -2,000 -0.2% Total Expenditures FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Subtotal 982,996 992,000 990,000 -2,000 -0.2% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 3,483 0 0 0 0% 14 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 Capital Project Fund Budget Expenditures Cap Outlay - Buildings 5,130,131 6,101,020 7,840,000 1,738,980 28.5% Cap Outlay - Improvements 19,853 178,112 40,000 -138,112 -77.5% Cap Outlay - Equipment 85 2,678 0 -2,678 -100.0% Cap Outlay - Furnishings 112,299 382,907 90,000 -292,907 -76.5% Cap Outlay - Technology 728,872 1,425,854 400,000 -1,025,854 -71.9% Cap Outlay - Contingency Projects 0 1,530,500 3,300,000 1,769,500 115.6% Subtotal 5,991,239 9,621,072 11,670,000 2,048,928 21.3% Revenues & Other Inflows FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Interest Earnings 300,060 0 0 0 0% Transfer From General Fund 3,890,000 5,516,800 11,670,000 6,153,200 111.5% Fund Balance - Appropriated 0 4,104,272 0 -4,104,272 -100.00% Subtotal 4,190,060 9,621,072 11,670,000 2,048,928 21.3% • Replace brickwork and electrical paneling at the Sweet Branch • Furniture replacement across the Library system • Technology replacement across the Library system • Architectural design for reconstruction of the Anderson-Foothill Branch and renovation of the Day-Riverside Branch • Sunlight mitigation, exterior glazing, replacement of relief and exhaust fans, fire suppression and HVAC system maintenance, and events equipment at the Main Library • Flooring, ADA-accessible doors, roof drains and stucco replacement at the Chapman Branch • Replacement of the patio deck flooring and door hardware at the Marmalade Branch Revenues Overview Funding for capital projects accounted for in the Capital Projects Fund comes from three sources: a transfer from the General Fund, interest earnings on the cash balance in the fund, and the Capital Projects Fund. The fund balance is a result of unspent money accumulated from prior years. Expenditures Overview Budgeted capital projects are unique from year to year based on needs and requests. The following is a list of some of the proposed capital projects for FY27: Transfers & Other Uses Fund Balance - Unappropriated 0 0 0 0 0% Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0% Total Revenues FY24 Actual FY25 Revised Budget FY26 Adopted Budget FY26 − FY25 Difference Percentage Change Subtotal 4,190,060 9,621,072 11,670,000 2,048,928 21.3% Total Expenditures FY24 − 25 Actual FY25 − 26 Budget FY26 − 27 Proposed Budget Difference Percentage Change Subtotal 5,991,239 9,621,072 11,670,000 2,048,928 21.3% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures -1,801,179 0 0 0 0% 15 Salt Lake City Public Library Proposed Budget, Fiscal Year 2027 400 S 20 0 E 13 0 0 E 2100 S 70 0 E 30 0 w 500 S California Ave. Co n c o r d S t . 90 0 w 500 N F S t . 9th Ave. 1300 S 600 N 500 S Foo t h i l l D r . 1000 N S W T e m p l e Sprague Branch Foothill Branch Glendale Branch Chapman Branch Main Library Sweet Branch Marmalade Branch Day-Riverside Branch Ballpark Library Lab Pages 8-9 Revenue Pages 10-12 Expenditures Page 13 Debt Service Fund Page 14 Capital Projects Fund Main Library 210 East 400 South 801-524-8200 Chapman Branch 577 South 900 West 801-594-8623 Marmalade Branch 280 West 500 North 801-594-8680 Anderson-Foothill Branch 1135 South 2100 East 801-594-8611 Day-Riverside Branch 1575 West 1000 North 801-594-8632 Sprague Branch 2131 South 1100 East 801-594-8640 Ballpark Library Lab 1406 South West Temple 801-594-8694 Glendale Branch 1375 South Concord 801-594-8660 Sweet Branch 455 F Street 801-594-8651 The City Library Locations This page has intentionally been left blank SALT LAKE COUNTY GOVERNMENT Understanding the purpose, structure, and funding for county programs and services. •Salt Lake City (1850) •Sandy (1893) •Murray (1902) •Midvale (1909) •South Jordan (1935) •South Salt Lake (1938) •West Jordan (1941) •Riverton (1948) •Town of Alta (1970) •Draper (1978) •Bluffdale (1978) •West Valley City (1980) HISTORY OF SALT LAKE COUNTY •Taylorsville (1996) •Herriman (1999) •Holladay (1999) •Cottonwood Heights (2005) •Town of Brighton (2020) 1990's WAVE OF INCORPORATIONS Wanted input on planning, zoning & services ESTABLISHED CITIES Evolved many times since 1850 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION PROJECT Resulted in 23 incorporated cities •Millcreek (2016) •Kearns (May 2024) •Magna (May 2024) •White City (May 2024) •Emigration Canyon (May 2024) •Town of Copperton (May 2024) ** H.B. 330 (2024) now requires all “islands” to annex or incorporate by July 2027 WILL WALL -TO -WALL CITIES REDUCE THE NEED FOR THE COUNTY? Consolidation into cities reduces duplication and allows counties to maximize efficiency across jurisdictions. Counties are political subdivisions of the state per Utah Constitution Article XI, Section 1. Counties deliver state-mandated services. State law differentiates the roles of cities and counties. Cities handle municipal services—counties focus on regional functions. 3 EXAMPLES OF SERVICES THE COUNTY PROVIDES CRIMINAL JUSTICE / PUBLIC SAFETY Jail and other criminal justice services, prosecution and indigent defense. ELECTIONS Runs the general election by statute. Contracts with municipalities for municipal elections. HEALTH DEPARTMENT Provides immunizations, saftey protocols for restaurants and businesses, clean up homeless camps and other unsafe environments. AGING & ADULT SERVICES Provides Meals on Wheels and runs senior centers. BEHAVIORAL HEALTH Manages mental health/substance abuse services. Partners with providers. Designated by the state to be mental health & substance abuse authority. CULTURE & THE ARTS Administers grants and manages cultural facilities: Abravanel Hall, Capitol Theater, Eccles Theater, etc. CONVENTIONS & TOURISM County -owned convention centers bring in out -of -state conventions that generate sales tax. REGIONAL PARKS & RECREATION Maintains regional parks, trails, and open spaces. Operates recreation centers and sports complexes. LIBRARY SERVICES Salt Lake County Library system serves most of the county, with access to Salt Lake City and Murray libraries. PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION Collects property tax for all entities, most of which are not part of Salt Lake County, and distributes funds. Multiple jails? Multiple health departments? Multiple clerk’s offices? Salt Lake County delivers regional services on a scale best served by county government. Duplicating these services would be expensive, inefficient, and create confusion across city boundaries. CITIES CAN’T DO WHAT THE COUNTY DOES MAYOR Clear separation of powers, administration and oversight. MAYOR -COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT ASSESSOR Chris Stavros Establ i shes t he fair market val ue of real and personal property ensuring assessments are accurate, fair, and compliant with Utah law. AUDITOR Chris Harding Financial integrity through audits, annual financial report, certifying property tax rates, and ensuring compliance with budgeting and fiscal policies. CLERK Lannie Chapman Oversees elections, marriage licenses, passports, and maintains official records for the County Council. DISTR I C T A TTORNEY Sim Gill Responsible for legal work, including prosecution of all felony criminal matters in Salt Lake County as well as civil government litigation. RECORDE R Rashelle Hobbs Maintains public land records, relating to real estate, liens, mining, and subdivision plats, to ensure transparency in real estate transactions. SHERIF F Rosie Rivera Runs the jail operations, manages search and rescue teams, and law enforcement for the unincorporated areas including the canyons. SURVEYOR Bradley Park Provides qual ity surveying and mapping serv i ces to p rotect , preserve, and per petuate property boundary right s . T REASURE R Sheila Srivastava Collects, safeguards, and disburses county funds, including property tax payments, and manages the county’s investments. Justice Court Judge Shauna Graves Robertson The Salt Lake County Justice Co urt handles small claims, misdemeanors, and traffic cases **This will dissolve June 2027. INDEPENDENT ELECTED OFFICIALS Operate independently within their constitutional and statutory authority but in coordination with the Mayor and Council. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED 2025 SALT LAKE COUNTY BUDGET? TOTAL BUDGET NET COUNTY BUDGET While this reflects the total amount adopted, only a portion of it falls under the County Council’s discretion --some are “pass through” taxes. $2 Billion (Approx.) The net budget represents total revenues minus “pass through” taxes. This is the portion that falls under the County Council’s discretion. $1.5 Billion (Approx.) June 3, 2025 Budget Presentation RDA Property Tax Property Tax-RDA- Pass Thru State & General-Tax Administration Multi County Pass Thru Revenue 33,616,073 3,099,840 2025 Mayor’s Proposed June Budget PASS THROUGH TAXES Transportation sales tax Mass Transit Pass Thru to UTA, cities & state New Sales Tax for Public Safety & Public Transportation (aka 5th 5th) 0.15% beginning July 1, 2025 ~$29M Visitor Promotion Sandy Soccer Stadium Transient Room Tax Grand Total $498,306,001 455,735,500 5,854,588 WHAT ARE PASS THROUGH TAXES? •Appear in the budget for transparency, but don’t impact county operations. •County is middleman. Receives funds and forwards to other agencies. •Not truly county funds. •Examples: Cities, service providers, federal or state grants, UTA. •Council has NO DISCRETION over how these funds are used. •Source: Primarily property taxes, sales tax, etc. •Core government services—public safety, elections, public heath, and administration. •Most flexible. •Only fund the council has full discretion. GENERAL FUNDSPECIAL REVENUE •Source: County controlled funds from taxes or fees. •Libraries, TRCC, Behavioral Health, etc. •HIGHLY RESTRICTED USE •Council has some discretion over use but can only fund certain things within certain funds. ENTERPRISE FUNDS •Source: Fees charged to users through paid services—not taxes. •These funds operate like businesses. •Golf Courses, Landfill, Public Works •Council has limited discretion over how this is used. PUBLIC SAFETY WHAT IS THE COUNTY’S LARGEST RESPONSIBILITY? Public Safety accounts for the largest portion of the budget. More than 74% of the county’s general fund is allocated to public safety including law enforcement, corrections, and prosecution. Criminal Justice Breakdown 1/24/2025 HOW PROPERTY TAXES WORK IN UTAH Purchasing Power Erosion Due to Inflation State law limits property tax revenue increases to only “new growth” (e.g., new construction or additions). Inflation in property values does not increase revenue—rates are adjusted downward to keep revenue flat. Population growth increases demand for county services. This creates a budget gap, averaging about 1% or $5M per year. DECLINING TREND IN PROPERTY TAX RATES '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 '26* Excluding Bond Debt Service and Judgment Levies Countywide and Assessing & Collecting * Projected rate based on projected taxable value with new growth. Advertised rate for 2026 is .001519. What portion of property taxes goes to the county? When my property values go up, does my property tax automatically go up? No - it does not. Utah’s system is designed so that rising property values alone do not automatically raise your property tax bill. Each year, the County Auditor calculates a certified tax rate for every taxing entity (county, city, school district, etc.). That rate is adjusted downward so the entity collects the same total revenue as the prior year—plus new-growth revenue from new construction. As part of its commitment to fiscal responsibility, the Council has regular stress testing in each agency to identify financial needs and manage spending. HOW HAS THE COUNTY RESPONDED? The Council has consistently exercised fiscal discipline, cut spending while preserving Salt Lake County’s top tier AAA bond rating—the highest available. PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS •Not a single new bed has been built since 2001, even as the county’s population has grown by nearly 300,000 and is expected to grow to 1.4 million by 2040. •Approximately one-fifth of the jail’s beds are in Oxbow, a failing facility that urgently needs to be replaced. •At the same time, homelessness and mental illness have increased, and our jail has become the state’s default mental health provider. •Over the past ten years, the average person booked into the jail has been booked seven times prior, driving up costs while leaving underlying needs unmet. OVERVIEW PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS Although beds have increased after opening Oxbow’s third pod, the jail continues to operate at or near capacity every day. JAIL REMAINS AT CAPACITY Reopening the third pod at Oxbow added 184 individuals, placing additional pressure on aging infrastructure and maintenance systems. Increased enforcement due to SLC Public Safety Plan has meant an increase in bookings and individuals with multiple charges is placing greater demands on judicial processing. PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS Rebuild capacity from Oxbow Jail (552 beds) at main facility Add new beds to meet growth and safety demands Expand mental health treatment from 88 → 160 beds Create a stepdown unit (100 beds) for re-entry support Look at a lower-security facility to save on costs to provide mental health, substance use, job training and wraparound services for low-level offenders in order to reduce recidivism. GOALS: COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Allison Rowland, Senior Policy Analyst DATE:April 14, 2026 RE: FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FOR FEDERAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANTS AND CITY FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING PROGRAMS April 7 Briefing Summary Responses from Housing Stability to Council Member Questions during the April 7 Work Session can be found in Attachment C7. In the April 7 Work Session, the Council discussed several potential funding shifts and seemed to have come to a tentative agreement on several: CBDG Public Services, #17 South Valley Services, Case Management. Shift recommended $60,000 funding to: o #14 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. (DBA Fourth Street Clinic), Health and Housing Transition Team ($10,000), and o #33 Salt Lake American, Refugee Services for Survival $50,000. This would leave #17 South Valley Services with $0 in this funding category. Other potential shifts discussed, for which there did not appear to be consensus include: CBDG Public Services, #16 THRIVE Center for Survivors of Torture, Integrated Services for Torture Survivors. Shift recommended $50,000 funding to #27 Wasatch Community Gardens, leaving #16 THRIVE Center for Survivors of Torture, with $0. ESG Part 1, #5 Ruff Haven, Street Outreach. Shift Ruff Haven application to Funding Our Future and add $50,000 recommended from another application, to be decided. FOF, #1 The INN Between, Medical Supportive Housing for the Homeless. Shift $50,000 to another application, to be decided. Other potential FOF shifts to or from the recommended amounts that were mentioned: o #2 Utah Community Action. o #5 Utah Community Action. o #6 The Road Home. o #7 The Road Home. o #9 The Road Home. Schedule: o #12 South Valley Services. o #18 Women of the World. o #21 First Step House. March 24 Briefing Summary Responses from Housing Stability to Council Member Questions during the March 24 Work Session, as well as corrections to a few errors on the Funding Log, can be found in Attachment C5, below. A new Housing Stability spreadsheet, which shows unspent funds from previous years, can be found in Attachment C6, below. Note that these unspent allocations are included in the Reallocated Funding line of each of the HUD programs. For Funding Our Future, unspent allocations are returned to the City’s general fund balance. Policy Question: Would the Council like to discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of redirecting unspent Funding Our Future allocations for redistribution in the next year’s cycle? _______________________ ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE Each year the Council is responsible for allocating millions of dollars in grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) among local organizations that serve Salt Lake City residents. The organizations are primarily non-profits that specialize in providing services to the most economically vulnerable City residents. For Fiscal Year 2026-27 (FY27), just over $8.9 million dollars is expected to flow from four main HUD programs—Community Development Block Grants (CDBG); Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG); the HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME); and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)—through the Division of Housing Stability to community service providers selected by the Council. In addition, beginning this year, the City’s annual Funding Our Future (FOF) housing program will also form part of this annual allocation process. As part of the FY2025-26 budget, the Council approved nearly $2.4 million in FOF housing funding, which will be available to local non-profit service providers for housing activities. During the budget process, the Council opted to provide the bulk of these housing funds for Tenant- based Housing Assistance as well as Equity and Homeownership Assistance. Details on the proposed funding that make up the totals listed below can be found in Attachment C1. Estimated FY27 Housing Funds Source Grant Total Community Development Block Grants $5,118,278 Emergency Solutions Grants $299,065 HOME Investment Partnership Program $2,542,913 Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS $972,032 Federal Funds Subtotal $8,932,288 Equity and Homeownership Assistance $350,000 Tenant-based Housing Assistance $2,020,500City Funds Subtotal $2,370,500 Grand Total $11,302,788 Goal of the briefing: Discuss the Council’s federal and local housing funding priorities, ask questions about applications, and ultimately, award funding to eligible programs and projects. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Does the Council have any questions about the funding recommendations from the Advisory Board and the Mayor? As a reminder, some categories have percentage caps on the total amount awarded, so additional funds cannot be shifted to them. Instead, funds can only be shifted among uses within that category (Public Services and Administrative categories). ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Funding Recommendation Process. The Council bases its selection of final HUD and FOF awards on information from the Division of Housing Stability (which is part of CAN, the Department of Communities and Neighborhoods), combined with the reviews and recommendations of the Community Development and Capital Improvement Program (CDCIP) resident advisory board, and the Mayor. These recommendations are presented in Attachment C1. An additional source of information is the public hearing held during a Formal Meeting early in the deliberation process. Recommendations for the Council. In preparation for the Council’s decisions on award amounts to specific organizations, each application receives a score and a funding recommendation from the CDCIP Advisory Board. These scores and recommendations are provided to the Mayor, who adds funding recommendations of her own. Attachment C2 shows each FY27 application ranked by score within each program category. These scores are calculated by combining the advisory board’s raw score with City staff’s administrative and risk assessment scores. Competitive Process. Typically, the combined amount of total funding requested by applicants significantly exceeds available funds. For FY27, requests total 154% of available funding with $12.3 million requested, and an estimated $8.9 million available (see table below). These funding amounts combine entitlement (new) funding, recaptured funds, and anticipated program income. HUD has not yet confirmed the City’s final award amounts, so at this stage the City works with estimates of available funding that are based on the previous year’s amounts. Estimated FY27 Available Funding versus Requests Program Available Funds* Total Requests Requests as Share of Available Funds CDBG $5,118,278 $7,814,006 153% HOME $2,542,913 $2,636,507 104% HOPWA $972,032 $1,025,479 105% ESG $299,065 $780,142 261% FOF $2,370,500 $5,198,897 219% Total $11,302,788 $17,455,031 154% 3.Minimum Funding Threshold. The minimum funding threshold for HUD Grant applicants is $50,000 annually, in conformance with best practices. This floor was changed for FY26 for the new five-year Consolidated Plan and future Annual Action Plans. Overview of FY27 Funding Recommendations. 1.Mayoral versus Board Recommendations. As in most other years, the Advisory Board and the Mayor agree on the great majority of their recommendations for FY27. The only difference between them is for the two items listed below. See Attachment C2 for the FY 2026-27 Recommendations by score. CDBG #14 and #20. The Board recommends fully funding the $207,412 requested for CDBG #14 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. (DBA Fourth Street Clinic), while the Mayor recommends using $50,000 of that amount for CDBG #20 Fit to Recover. 2.Disqualified Applications. No applications were determined to be ineligible this year. 3.Returning Project Applications Not Recommended for FY27 Funding. There are five returning applications that received grant awards last year but did not receive a funding recommendation this year. CDBG#22. International Rescue Committee, ESL & Financial Readiness. Requested $60,000. CDBG#27. Wasatch Community Gardens, Green Team Job Training. Requested $50,000. ESG#10. The Road Home, Rapid Re-housing. Requested $100,000 FOF#3. SL Neighborhood Housing, Down Payment Assistance. Requested $262,500. FOF#21. First Step House, Housing Case Management. Requested $679,513. FOF#22. The Road Home, Landlord Assurance. Requested $185,246. 4.New Applications. This year there are ten funding applications which are recommended which did not request funding from the same category last year. Note that some of these applications are for new programs that would be offered by returning organizations. CDBG#17. South Valley Services, Case Management. Recommended for $60,000. CDBG#18. Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah, Site-based Mentoring. Recommended for $50,000. ESG#8. YWCA of Utah, Housing Stability Through Survivor-Centered Case Management. Recommended for $60,000. HOME#4. Community Development Corporation of Utah, Emeril Avenue Apartments. Recommended for $200,000. HOME#5. Community Development Corporation of Utah, Community Development Land Trust. Recommended for $400,000. HOPWA#2. Housing Connect, Housing Assistance. Recommended for $737,508. HOPWA#3. Utah Community Action, FY26 SLC HOPWA. Recommended for $205,363. FOF#11. Family Support Center, Transitional Housing, Child & Family Support at LifeStart Village. Recommended for $76,200. (Recommended for less than requested this year.) FOF#13. Wasatch Community Gardens, Green Team Case Management. Recommended for $52,600. (Recommended for less than requested this year.) 5.Projects Recommended for More Funding than was Requested. One application, for Funding Our Future funds, received recommendations from both the Board and the Mayor for more funding than they had requested. Housing Stability Division staff confirmed with the organization that they can make use of the additional funding amount. FOF#1. Community Development Corporation of Utah, Homebuyer Cohort and Matched Savings. Requested $100,000; recommended for $150,000. 6.Organizations with Multiple Applications. Some organizations submit a single application for a program for which they seek funding from multiple funding sources. Others submit multiple applications for different programs which are narrowly tailored to each funding source. Organizations with multiple applications are listed alphabetically in Attachment C3, with total funding requested and the recommended award amounts. Sources of Annual Funds. Grants offered through HUD provide substantial funding amounts to local organizations that serve people with low- and moderate-income levels; people experiencing or on the verge of homelessness; potential homeowners; and people with AIDS/HIV who qualify for affordable housing. Most of the funds are “passed through” the City to specific recipients or programs, including several programs that are administered by the City through an annual competitive grant process. FOF Housing funds, which are allocated during the annual budget process, come from the City’s ½-cent local sales tax increment. This source also provides some of the funding for Transit, Streets, Public Lands Maintenance and Public Safety. Adding Funding Our Future dollars to the allocation process does increase the City’s flexibility in responding to applications, since Federal guidelines do not apply to FOF dollars. Still, this practice may increase challenges in the future if the City decides to divert FOF dollars to other uses (as allowed) and organizations have come to rely on them. For FY27, the Division of Housing Stability estimates that the total amount available in HUD funding for use in housing and related activities is $8.9 million. These grants are considered “entitlement” funds—that is, Federal money provided on a recurring basis, with amounts linked to formulas that consider population and other demographic variables. In addition, the amount available to the City also varies each year because it draws not only from annual funding, but also recaptured funds, and program income. The total estimate here is the sum of the grants all three funding sources (see below). 1.New Funding (FY27 HUD Award). Because the precise amount of new grants is typically not determined before the Council discussion and allocation process, the Division of Housing Stability provides estimates based on awards from the previous funding year. The funding amounts are updated by the Division once final notification is received from HUD, and these are adjusted for each grantee based on contingencies approved by the Council as part of the allocation process (see below). Approximately $5,333,355 in new funds is estimated to be available through the four HUD programs for FY27. Estimated FY27 HUD Awards (New Funding) Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)$3,250,831 Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)$972,032 HOME Investment Partnership Program $817,318 Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$293,174 Total $5,333,355 2.Recaptured Funds. At the close of each HUD program year, once agreements expire or projects are completed, funds available for “recapture” are identified. This occurs when, for example, a project is completed under budget, contracts expire before funds are used, or a project or program is somehow unsuccessful. The City can use these funds in the next round of allocations, subject to federal requirements, eligibility criteria, and limitations of the original federal funding source. They are not allowed to be used for City administration and planning activities, or for CDBG Public Services programs. For FY27, recaptured funds total $1,848,933, significantly more than the $772,000 recaptured in FY26. Details of specific programs, activities and funding amounts can be found on page 5 of the transmittal. Estimated FY27 Recaptured Funding Available HOME Investment Partnership Program $925,595 Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)$917,447 Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)$0 Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$5,891 Total $1,848,933 In response to a staff question, Housing Stability explained the unusually high level of recaptured funds for FY27 as follows: “A major factor in the increase was the implementation of new federal regulations, particularly the Build America, Buy America Act, which requires projects receiving federal funding above certain thresholds to purchase American-made construction materials. This requirement has increased some project costs. As a result, several programs from the 2024–2025 program year, including ICAST and Alliance House, later chose not to use their awarded funds. We consistently encourage awardees to spend their funds fully and as quickly as possible. To support this, we have begun working with a University of Utah program to develop a comprehensive dataset of American manufacturers, prioritizing those in Utah and the Mountain region. This resource will help programs more easily identify compliant suppliers. Additionally, Housing Stability intends to incorporate more detailed explanations of these new federal requirements in our future grant application trainings, so that potential applicants will be fully aware of the potential setbacks and costs associated with certain projects.” 3.Program Income. Several income-generating programs are funded by CDBG and HOME, including downpayment assistance, first-time homebuyer mortgages, and certain home rehabilitation programs. The amount collected fluctuates from year to year. All program income generated by HUD funding must be spent before any entitlement (annual) funds are drawn down, so the City typically allocates anticipated program income at the same time as annual entitlement funding. Contingencies are built in for differences between the estimates and actual revenue, since the amount of program income allocated is based on estimates of revenue not yet received. For FY27, the estimated amount of Program Income available for allocation is $1,750,000. The Division of Housing Stability attributes the 9% increase from FY26 primarily to loan repayments for over $9 million in HUD funding which was loaned to affordable housing developers in recent years, which is now beginning to be repaid. For this reason, the increases in program income are likely to continue for some years. The Division also notes that, as was the case in FY26, “Due to changes at the federal level, evolving program requirements, and increased administrative workload, we are requesting to utilize the full 20% [of program income] allowable for administration to ensure the City has sufficient resources to manage these programs effectively.” Because administrative costs for Funding Our Future are budgeted separately, as part of the annual City budget process, and include funding for one FTE position, FOF funds are used only for client services and community funding, and not for administrative expenses. Estimated FY27 Program Income Available Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)$950,000 HOME Investment Partnership Program $800,000 Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)$0 Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$0 Total $1,750,000 4.Funding Our Future (FOF) Housing Funds. The amount of FOF funding designated for housing is set each year by the Council during the previous year’s budget discussions, so estimates are not needed. As mentioned earlier, the FOF funds are the product of the City’s ½- cent local sales tax increment which also includes funding for Transit, Streets, Public Lands Maintenance and Public Safety. Additional FOF Housing funds are transferred to the Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) for their annual notice of funding availability, which the Council reviews and approves in their capacity as CRA Board Members. FY26 FOF Housing Funds Allocated Equity and Homeownership Assistance $350,000 Tenant-based Housing Assistance $2,020,500 Total $2,370,500 Estimated FY27 Funding by Program Category and Source. The City allocates all available funds (new, recaptured, program income, and FOF) through an open and competitive process. Applications are evaluated based on HUD and City requirements and how well they align with the City’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan goals (see below), as well as the City’s Housing SLC Plan goals. The Council considers all public comments received, along with the recommendations from the Mayor and the CDCIP advisory board before making funding decisions. All HUD funding decisions made by the Council are subject to HUD approval. Trends in program funding for Salt Lake City over recent years can be found below. Estimated FY27 Funding Program Estimated Total CDBG $5,118,278 HOME $2,542,913 HOPWA $972,032 ESG $299,065 FOF $2,370,500 Total $11,302,788 1.Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). This program provides annual grants to states, cities, and counties to create safe and affordable housing opportunities, expand neighborhood transportation and economic opportunities, invest in social service programs, and more. As noted in the chart above, in FY27 approximately $5,118,278 is available for allocation to CDBG programs. CDBG grants focus on community development with an emphasis on physical improvements. CDBG funds are allocated to organizations in three categories, listed below. City administration fees are limited to 20% of the annual grant award and program income received during the program year. Housing. Neighborhood Improvements: This category funds transportation and economic development infrastructure within the designated target area (see Attachment C4 for map). Public Services: This category focuses on services for individuals in need, and not necessarily on physical improvements, in contrast to other CDBG categories, and it is typically the most competitive category. Its total amount is limited to 15% of the annual CDBG award, and the recommendations for funding requests from the CDCIP Board and Mayor add up to this maximum. This means that if the Council would like to allocate money to any application beyond the Mayor’s recommended funding in this category, those funds must be shifted from another Public Services application. 2.HOME Investment Partnership (HOME). This is the only grant program entirely focused on expanding the supply of quality, affordable housing for low-to-moderate-income residents. It allows states and municipalities to fund a wide range of activities, such as building, buying, or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership. It also may provide direct rental assistance to renters. As noted in the chart above, approximately $2,542,913 is available for FY27 allocation to CDBG programs. HOME funds are allocated to organizations providing services in two categories (below). City administration fees are limited to 10% of the annual grant award and program income received during the program year. Standard HOME Funds. Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO). This program reserves 15% of the annual HOME grant award for certified projects which create or develop affordable rental or homebuyer housing. Rental assistance, homeowner rehabilitation, and down payment assistance are not eligible expenses. For this reason, the Housing Stability Division works with the Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) to include these funds in the CRA’s annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process for funding affordable housing development. The Community Development Corporation of Utah is seeking certification as a CHDO in Salt Lake City, but the Housing Stability Division reports that expanding the number of CHDOs remains challenging, and that other areas of the country have similarly struggled to meet the certification criteria. 3.Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). The HOPWA Program is the only Federal program dedicated to the housing needs of people living with HIV/AIDS. It provides funding for projects that address the needs of individuals living with HIV/AIDS and their families. As noted in the chart above, approximately $972,032 is available in FY27 for allocation to CDBG programs. City administration fees are limited to 3% of the annual grant award. 4.Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG). The ESG program focuses on preventing homelessness and providing services to individuals who are experiencing homelessness. Examples are street outreach, emergency shelter, prevention efforts, and rapid re-housing assistance. As noted in the chart above, in FY27 approximately $299,065 is available for allocation to ESG programs. These funds are allocated to organizations providing services in two categories (below). City administration fees are limited to 7.5% of the annual grant award. ESG Part 1: Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter (limited to 60% of the total annual grant award). ESG Part 2: Homelessness Prevention, Rapid Re-Housing, and Homeless Management Information Systems. 5.Funding Our Future (FOF) Housing Funds. As alluded to earlier, in each annual budget process the Council sets the amount of FOF housing funding and also chooses general categories for its use. For FY26, the Council opted to provide these housing funds for two categories: Tenant-based Housing Assistance, and Equity and Homeownership Assistance. Funding Contingencies. Annual HUD program funding is allocated by the Council on the basis of estimates of funding that has not yet been received. For this reason, contingencies are needed to compensate for differences between estimates and actual grant amounts received. Each year the advisory board recommends specific contingencies, which are summarized in the table below. The Council may wish to review the contingencies listed below and identify any changes they wish to make in case HUD’s confirmation of final funding amounts is not available by the scheduled vote on April 21. FY27 Council Funding Contingencies If MORE funding is available If LESS funding is available CDBG Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and estimated 2026- 27 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to and in excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and estimated 2026-27 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. ESG Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exceed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to or in excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest- scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000. HOME Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set- Aside. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to or in excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. HOPWA Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. FOF Add additional funding to the highest- scoring applications up to the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $100 or $1,000. Because the FOF funding amount is appropriated in the previous year’s City budget, contingencies only arise when an applicant declines or withdraws from an award. This inevitably makes more funding available to be redistributed to other applicants, rather than less. FY27 HUD Entitlement Allocations and the FY25-29 Consolidated Plan. HUD requires that the City’s longer-run funding goals and strategies for using Federal funds be guided by a five-year Consolidated Plan. The updated Plan, which was drafted by the Division of Housing Stability for the period FY2025 to 2029, was adopted by the Council in 2025. The plan spells out the goals and strategies that determine eligibility for HUD grant funding and identifies geographic target areas for the CDBG neighborhood improvement category funding. A city which does not fund applications that advance the five-year plan could be considered as “underperforming,” which could lead to reductions in future grant awards and audits of the program. The target area delineates the geographic boundaries for spending CDBG funding on economic development and public infrastructure improvements (Attachment C4). Focusing federal grants in specific target areas is intended to maximize community impact and stimulate investments from other entities in these neighborhoods. These applications are included in the CDBG Neighborhood Improvements category on the funding log. Examples of these project types include small business façade improvement grants, public transit improvements, and creation of ADA ramps. FOF funding is not subject to HUD geographic restrictions and may be used anywhere in the City. Trends in City Housing Funding. As seen in the chart below, HUD Grant funding remained relatively stable through recent years. However, from FY25 to FY27, the total amount of funding available for CDBG grants grew by 56% and HOME grants more than doubled. There are two main sources for these changes: A sharp increase over FY26 in the amount of recaptured funds in CBDG and HOME funding categories. (See section on recaptured funds above.) The City’s policy change which includes the past year’s program income in the current year’s CBDG and HOME funding for allocation. ATTACHMENTS Attachment C1. Recommended Uses of FY2026-27 Federal Funding and FY2025-26 FOF Housing Funding. Attachment C2. FY2026-27 Program Recommendations by Score. Attachment C3. Organizations with Multiple Applications. Attachment C4. Target Area Map for CDBG Neighborhood Improvements (2025-2029 Consolidated Plan). Attachment C5. Housing Stability Responses to Council Member Questions, March 24 Work Session. Attachment C6. Organizations with Unspent Allocations from Past Years. Attachment C7. Responses to Council Member Questions, April 7 Work Session. $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27* CDBG ESG HOME HOPWA Trends in Final Allocations from HUD Programs All data provided by the Housing Stability Division. *Allocation for FY27 is an estimate based on previous years' funding. YEAR FY25-26 Request 650,166.20$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 650,166.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 650,166.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 215,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 215,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 215,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 720,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 720,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 720,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 400,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 400,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 400,000.00$ TOTAL City Council SALT LAKE CITY 2026-2027 HUD & 2025-2026 FOF RECOMMENDATIONS Funding Log Supplement COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT # AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN ALIGNMENTAMOUNT City Adminsitration 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by: - Attorney's Office - Finance Department - Housing Stability Division $830,116 Yes $667,155 Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office $679,552 $2,176,823 Neighborhood, Housing and Infrastructure 2 YWCA Utah While many housing programs are designed for families or general populations, single survivors, particularly those without children, are frequently excluded from family-focused transitional housing models. This project fills that gap by creating 24 self-contained studio apartments that provide autonomy and stability while connecting residents to trauma- informed support. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $155,127.96 (41% of awarded funds) Did not apply Yes $221,000 Transitional Housing Conversion Did not apply $221,000 3 NIS Team This program provides façade improvements to businesses in the West Side Target Area. This includes any work on the outside of the building that promotes community engagement or a welcoming atmosphere. Priority points are given to projects that are increasing their ADA accessibility or adding a mural to their façade. Salt Lake City provides a grant of up to $50,000 to do façade work. The business owner can contribute 25% to the project to earn a priority point. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $633,737.41 (22% of awarded funds) $600,000 Yes $708,000 Neighborhood Business Improvement Program $925,000 $2,233,000 4 Habitat for Humanity The Habitat Critical Home Repair Program (CHiRP) tackles urgent housing needs by delivering essential repairs that enhance safety, accessibility, and energy efficiency. Projects may include structural repairs that strengthen a home’s integrity—such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical work—as well as accessibility upgrades like wheelchair ramps, widened doorways, and bathroom modifications for seniors or individuals with disabilities. In addition, energy-saving improvements like weatherization, energy-efficient windows, and HVAC replacements help lower utility costs and extend the life of the home. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A $450,000 Yes Did not apply Critical Home Repair Program Did not apply $450,000 FY25-26 Request 402,500.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 402,500.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 402,500.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 315,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 315,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 315,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 900,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 900,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 900,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 300,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 300,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 300,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 460,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 460,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 460,000.00$ TOTAL City Council 5 Salt Lake City Neighborhood Housing Services (DBA NeighborWorks) The primary goal of this project is to help current homeowners stay in their homes and preserve their equity, addressing the community's critical need for housing stability. They plan to accomplish this by offering financial assistance for home repairs, empowering homeowners to maintain and improve their properties, and allowing them to continue living in their homes safely and comfortably. These funds will support essential repairs that might otherwise be unaffordable, preventing issues such as deterioration, safety hazards, and potential foreclosure. FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $231,437.75 (20% of awarded funding) $200,000 Yes $358,000 Home Ownership Promotion Services $406,267 $964,267 6 Odyssey House This funding will be used to address facility improvements to Odyssey House's Adolescent residential facility. The improvements are all geared towards the comfort of the clients and lowering utility expenses through a new roof, a makeup air unit, and by installing air handler unit that will efficiently distribute air throughout the facility. FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $266.75 (<1% of awarded funding) $250,000 Yes $80,000 Adolescent Residential Facility Upgrades $0 $330,000 7 Assist Inc. ASSIST's program serves households at or below 80% area median income, and specifically focuses on persons with physical and cognitive disabilities and aging/senior households. They provide critical home repairs and strategic design interventions at no cost to income-qualifying households. Activities include: roof repair/replacement; repair/replacement of malfunctioning electrical, HVAC, and plumbing systems; environmental remediation (radon, extermination); minor structural repairs; and accessibility retrofits. FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $122,744.54 (5% of awarded funding) $650,000 Yes $747,547 Emergency Home Repair, Accessibility, & Community Design $926,766 $2,324,313 8 First Step House These funds will be used to make the following improvements to the treatment facility at 411 N Grant Street: replace all flooring; repaint building interior; replace 20 inoperable/water damaged window;, replace original interior door frames on the north side of the building; repair or replace trim, molding, and wainscotting; replace landscape sprinkler system and remove some turf. FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $473,577.34 (21% of awarded funding) $280,000 Yes $290,000 Building Improvements $379,703 $949,703 9 NIS Team FTB helps preserve affordable housing and upkeep the current housing stock in SLC by remediating unreinforced masonry (URM) homes. There are over 30,000 URM buildings in SLC. A URM is a brick home that was built before 1970 and poses a significant seismic risk since the roof is not connected to the walls. FTB connects the roof to the walls with helical pins and metal strapping as well as chimney bracing. This provides additional time for the individuals who may be in the home to escape during an earthquake. Although this improvement is not meant to save the structure, it was found that during the large earthquake in 2020 the majority of the homes that had this work done did not collapse. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $633,737.41 (22% of awarded funds) $728,040 Yes $220,000 Fix the Bricks (FTB) Did not apply $948,040 FY25-26 Request 750,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 125,488.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 125,488.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 240,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 80,500.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 80,500.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 80,500.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 207,412.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 207,412.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 157,412.00$ TOTAL City Council 10 Community Development Corporation of Utah CDCU’s Making Homeownership a Reality program creates a cohort-based pathway to sustainable ownership for LMI households. Participants engage in six months of HUD-certified workshops and one-on-one counseling on budgeting, debt reduction, credit improvement, and mortgage readiness. Peer support and accountability ensure stronger outcomes, with each graduate leaving “mortgage-ready” and equipped with a personalized plan. Graduates gain access to down payment assistance (DPA) loans, shared equity programs, and community land trust homes. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $173,209.29 (39% of awarded funds) Did not apply Yes Did not apply Homebuyer Education and Downpayment Assistance Did not apply $0 11 Upwards Care, Inc. The Boost Program serves low- and very low-income microenterprise owners who run licensed, home-based childcare businesses. These providers are primarily women and minority entrepreneurs, many of whom are the sole or primary income earners in their households. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A $0 Yes $0 Boost Program $0 $0 Public Services 12 Salt Lake Donated Dental Services This project targets the homeless and those experiencing extreme poverty, providing them with access to dental services. They create a Dental Home for the underserved in our community. Considerable time is spent educating each patient on the importance of a healthy smile and how to maintain good oral health. Program services are free to the homeless and those living in poverty. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame) $55,000 Yes $55,000 Community Dental Project $49,692 $159,692 13 YWCA Utah This project will support the continued expansion of housing-focused services at the Salt Lake Area Family Justice Center. Funding will allow YWCA Utah to maintain and deepen its survivor- centered, housing-first response to domestic violence. They anticipate an even greater increase in the coming year as Case Managers gain more experience and as additional housing funds become available. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $155,127.96 (41% of awarded funds) $30,000 Yes $30,000 Housing and Stability Access $56,249 $116,249 14 Wasatch Homeless Healthcare Inc. (DBA Fourth Street Clinic) The HHoT program addresses social determinants of health, including access to healthcare and housing stability. The team works with residents of Magnolia and Palmer Court apartments housed within the last twelve months, as well as tenants at risk of eviction, focusing particularly on those with behavioral health needs. Program staff conduct individualized assessments to determine health, behavioral health, and housing support needs and develop shared care plans using a multi-team, multidisciplinary approach. The team provides follow-up and ongoing support to ensure residents maintain housing stability and improve overall well-being FY22-25 Unspent funds: $2.00 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $112,000 Yes $33,000 Health and Housing Transition Team (HHoT) $40,456 $185,456 FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 100,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 72,212.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 72,212.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$ TOTAL City Council 15 The Road Home Housing Navigators focus on guiding clients through the housing search process, assisting with rental applications, communicating with landlords and property managers, coordinating unit viewings, and supporting move-in logistics. Meanwhile, Case Managers work alongside clients to secure the vital documents, resources, and transportation necessary to support the housing process. CMs also help reduce barriers by connecting clients to benefits, employment opportunities, and other services that promote long-term stability. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $4,211.04 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $30,000 Yes $66,000 Housing Staffing $105,450 $201,450 16 THRIVE Center for Survivors of Torture THRIVE is the only organization that provides services to refugees who have been in the U.S. for longer than 5 years, and the only low-barrier, culturally appropriate provider in Utah. Many of their clients are under- or uninsured, making mainstream mental health services inaccessible. Organization wide they will serve at least 320 individuals, and 30 specifically with CDBG funds. They will expand the services provided with CDBG funds to include mental health services, case management, medical advocacy, and psychiatry services. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A $30,000 Yes Did not apply Integrated Services for Torture Survivors Did not apply $30,000 17 South Valley Services The requested funds would be used to support the Shelter Director and the Community Resource Center Director. Both Positions will undertake the following CDBG-funded activities: Housing Services Case Management (includes time spent safety planning with victims, assisting them with system navigation, supporting life skills development, and securing long-term, safe, stable housing) and Community Service Delivery (includes time spent providing one-on-one supportive service delivery designed to increase survivors' access to essentials such as food, healthcare, and affordable childcare) FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $19,254.60 (3% of awarded funds) $0 Yes $30,000 Case Management $30,489 $60,489 18 Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah In this curriculum-based mentoring program, BBBSU staff facilitate programming for all mentoring matches at a school or business office where they can meet their mentors and learn about potential careers. The curriculum includes non-cognitive skills such as mental health, gratitude, healthy relationships, skills to cope with bullying as well as specialized skills such as financial literacy, nutrition, and internet safety. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A $0 Yes Did not apply Site-based Mentoring Did not apply $0 19 The Road Home The Road Home will utilize funds to support direct service staff at the Gail Miller Resource Center. Funds will support frontline and facilities staff, including Housing Advocates and Case Managers, who work to connect participants with housing and other community resources while rapidly ending their housing crisis. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $4,211.04 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $30,000 Yes$66,000 Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC)$105,450 $201,450 20 Fit to Recover Funds from this grant will go towards transportation to and from the youth and homeless resource centers, staff salaries for fitness, nutrition, and creative arts instructors facilitating the youth and homeless programming, and equipment and supplies for these programs. Funds from this grant will also be used to purchase food for community cooking classes attended by the temporary residents of the Gail Miller Resource Center and Youth VOA. FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A Did not apply Yes Did not apply Free Meals, Scholarships, & Recovery Resources for Unhoused Adults and At-risk Youth Did not apply $0 FY25-26 Request 72,486.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 55,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 240,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council 21 First Step House This program will address the lack of wraparound supportive services people often face when exiting homelessness and substance use treatment. Case managers use assessments, one-on- one counseling, and community connections to help clients transition to stable housing. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $473,577.34 (21% of awarded funds) $0 Yes $113,000 Housing Case Management $60,000 $173,000 22 International Rescue Committee The program will enroll adult students in VESL programming which combines targeted vocational English lessons with specialized training in workforce readiness, financial literacy, and digital literacy, each delivered by the respective program area. VESL instruction will target foundational English language skills and will be provided by TESOL-certified ESL teachers who are already part of the IRC UT staff. Workforce Development staff will lead vocational skills and job coaching, FinCap staff will deliver financial literacy and coaching, and both teams will collaborate to integrate digital literacy into classroom practice. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $30,489.00 (43% of awarded funds) $40,000 Yes $0 ESL & Financial Readiness $30,489 $70,489 23 Catholic Community Services The CCS Housing Locator will work with 200 clients who are prepared to move into their own housing. Each client typically requires several meetings to go through the entire housing location process, which can take several days to several weeks depending on unit availability, how fast they hear back from landlords, and whether any last-minute obstacles crop up for clients. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $0.03 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $0 Yes $60,000 Housing Locator $91,090 $151,090 24 Catholic Community Services The Employment & Client Specialist provides different types of services to cater to the unique circumstances and specific needs of each client with the goal of helping clients obtain living- wage jobs. These services include helping students at the Kitchen Academy find externships and providing ongoing employment support for up to one year after graduation from the academy. They likewise work one-on-one with clients not enrolled in the Kitchen Academy and hold job fairs twice a month. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0.03 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $0 Yes $60,000 Employment & Client Specialist $91,090 $151,090 25 Disability Law Center This program helps level the playing field by ensuring that Utahns with disabilities, particularly those from economically vulnerable backgrounds, have access to free legal advocacy and representation. These services empower clients to challenge unfair treatment, request necessary accommodations, and retain employment that supports their independence and well-being. With continued funding, DLC will work to close the justice gap for low- and moderate-income individuals and advance workplace equity across Utah. FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A Did not apply Yes Did not apply Jobs for All Did not apply $0 26 Utah Community Action This program will provide high-quality early childhood education to support academic, physical, social, emotional, and all other aspects of development in a research-based model. We also engage parents and caregivers in their child’s development, providing resources to learn how to actively support their child’s education as well as participating in the case management process to improve their overall stability and self-reliance. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $24,682.66 (2% of awarded funds) $0 Yes Did not apply Early Childhood Services Did not apply $0 FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 60,321.58$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 150,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 215,842.84$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 75,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council 27 Wasatch Community Gardens The Job Training Green Team program directly addresses barriers to housing and employment services by providing transitional employment, job training, housing support, and access to healthy food. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame) $33,366 Yes $30,000 Green Team $30,489 $93,855 28 English Skills Learning Center This project seeks to improve economic stability by expanding career exploration and Workplace English instruction at various partner sites within the service area. Companies contract ESLC to provide general workplace English courses or ask for a focus on specific outcomes, such as increasing safety performance in a warehouse or learning the English needed to answer questions during an audit. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame) $0 Yes Did not apply Workplace English and Career Pathways for Limited English Speakers Did not apply $0 29 Odyssey House This program provides free bus passes for low- to extremely low-income clients. By giving clients access to the public transit system, they support increased transportation accessibility as well as helping clients attain life skills that will help them find long-term success and self- sufficiency. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $266.75 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $0 Yes $155,173 Bus Passes $30,000 $185,173 30 Women of the World Women of the World supports women and their families in overcoming the steep barriers to safe, stable housing. Case managers walk clients step-by-step through lease applications, landlord mediation, and tenant rights education—critical for women unfamiliar with U.S. rental systems. They also help families secure rental and utility assistance to prevent eviction and displacement. Flexible financial aid covers urgent costs such as housing application fees, deposits, and first month’s rent—often the only barrier between a mother and her children moving from homelessness into stable housing FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A Did not apply Yes Did not apply Self-sufficiency Services Did not apply $0 31 Asian Association of Utah The SOAR program will provide targeted housing stability services and case management for survivors of human trafficking in Salt Lake City who are at risk of homelessness or already experiencing housing instability. Specifically, the grant will support services such as rent payments to prevent eviction, utility payments to prevent service cutoff, rent arrears, utilities, application fees, late fees, deposit fees, administrative fees, eviction fees, and lease initiation fees. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $5,499.33 (17% of awarded funds) $0 Yes Did not apply Stability, Opportunity, Assistance, & Resilience for Survivors of Trafficking (SOAR) $32,318 $32,318 32 A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande A Reentry Case Manager creates an Individual Participant Plan (IPP) with each participant that includes all evidence-based screening tools and assessments. The IPP is a modified biopsychosocial (BPS) document that provides comprehensive plans for housing, education, employment, medical, and food assistance priorities. FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A Did not apply Yes Did not apply Reentry Services Program Did not apply $0 FY25-26 Request 30,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 219,777.21$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 75,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 150,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 100,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council 33 Salt Lake American The community-based Social Service Facilitator is available to on call 24/7 and to walk-ins to the office to current of former Somali refugees who face language and cultural barriers in conducting vital daily task or face emergency situations. This service consists of language interpretation and/or translation and guidance through the process that is being dealt with in the relevant situation. FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame) $0 Yes $30,000 Refugee Services for Survival $30,000 $60,000 34 Spy Hop Productions Spy Hop will implement Phase 2 Productions’ Advanced Apprenticeship for young adults ages 19 to 25, providing structured, hands-on technical training in camera operation, lighting, and sound. Apprentices will earn Utah Film Commission-endorsed certifications while contributing to professional client projects, primarily serving small businesses and local nonprofits. Activities include pre-production planning, production shoots, and post-production editing, alongside mentorship from alumni professionals employed at Phase 2. FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A Did not apply Yes Did not apply Advanced Apprenticeship $0 $0 35 Asian Association of Utah The Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and Immigrant Populations project will provide targeted housing support exclusively to eligible households within municipal Salt Lake City boundaries. The program will serve approximately 60 very low-income households (180 individuals), including homeless persons, refugees, immigrants, asylees, and illiterate adults. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $5,499.33 (17% of awarded funds) $0 Yes Did not apply Refugee Rental Assistance & Housing Stability $32,318 $32,318 36 A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande The Employment Initiative creates an Employment Action Plan using evidence-based screening tools and assessments which determines priorities and intervention level. Participants will complete the 90-day Employment Initiative and this includes Orientation, Education, Application, and then Employment Placement. FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A Did not apply Yes Did not apply Employment Initiative Program Did not apply $0 37 Odyssey House This program provides stable housing for clients as they transition from residential treatment to transitional housing. The transitional housing program allows clients to procure stable housing while re-integrating into the community by teaching them life skills that will sustain them beyond the program. Objectives in the program include: teaching life skills, rental assistance, community partnerships, house meetings, recreational activities, budgeting, and case-management support. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $266.75 (less than 1% of awarded funds) $0 Yes $155,173 Transitional Housing $30,000 $185,173 38 Advantage Services Advantage Services will provide Supportive Employment opportunities up to $1500 in wages, On the Job training, Job Coaching/Mentoring, Assistance in eliminating barriers to outside employment, referrals to community partners, and Job development/placement to outside employes. FY22-25 Unspent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame) $0 Yes $63,164 Homeless Employment Program Did not apply $63,164 YEAR FY25-26 Request 21,988.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 21,988.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 21,988.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 62,200.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 57,076.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 57,076.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 74,750.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 52,488.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG) # AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN ALIGNMENTAMOUNT City Administration 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by: - Attorney's Office - Finance Department - Housing Stability Division 21,988.00$ Yes 22,396.00$ Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office 22,732.00$ $45,128 ESG PART 1 2 Volunteers of America The VOA’s Youth Resource Center (YRC) provides unaccompanied youth ages 15 - 22 experiencing or at risk of homelessness with emergency shelter, diversion, and housing- focused case management. It provides immediate access to safe shelter, meals, and basic necessities, while working closely with each client to develop a personalized path toward stable housing through comprehensive housing case management. Support services include mental health and medical care, legal assistance, employment services, and training & education services. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.82% ($27,949.39 of awarded funds) 50,000.00$ Yes 49,739.00$ Youth Resource Center 30,408.00$ $80,147 3 First Step House FSH’s Resource Center Program improves treatment access for shelter guests and unsheltered people with substance use disorders (SUDs) and co-occurring health conditions. By embedding a behavioral health team within the Gail Miller Resource Center, RCP helps bridge this gap to homeless services and remove barriers such as benefits eligibility, record transfers, and reluctance to engage in care. This approach ensures that people with co-occurring behavioral health conditions, who are often overlooked by traditional systems, can access the services necessary to achieve stability and reduces the reliance on emergency systems while interrupting the cycle of recurring homelessness, and improving long-term housing and health outcomes. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 17% ($339,888.32 of awarded funds) 30,000.00$ Yes 39,437.00$ Resource Center Program 40,636.00$ $80,073 4 Volunteers of America The VOA’s Women’s Resource Center provides immediate access to shelter, support for long- term housing stability, and individualized services to an at-risk population of women 18 and older who face co-occurring challenges, including behavioral health conditions, domestic violence, and chronic homelessness. Comprehensive services such as individualized case management, access to health services, and connections to community resources ensure that women are empowered to exit homelessness and achieve lasting self-reliance. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.82% ($27,949.39 of awarded funds) 34,141.00$ Yes 30,000.00$ Geraldine E. King Women's Resouce Center 30,408.00$ $60,408 5 Ruff Haven Ruff Haven’s Street Outreach services are a vital component of insuring that unhoused individuals are able to access existing services within the community. Access to shelter services for companion animals allows individuals and families the ability to more quickly leave abusive and unsafe living conditions and allows them increased access to safe and permanent housing solutions. The program’s unique approach of assisting unhoused individuals and caring for their companion animals allows Ruff Haven to educate unhoused individuals on how they can access care for themselves without losing the emotional support of their pets. FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A 30,000.00$ Yes -$ Ruff Haven Street Outreach -$ $30,000 FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 80,500.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 158,256.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 100,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 120,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$ FY23-24 Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council 6 Family Promise As a shelter program designed specifically for families, FPSL provides a continuum of care through its Emergency Shelter Program, Transitional Housing Program, and Graduate Services Program. These services are tailored to help families not only exit homelessness but also maintain long-term housing stability. By focusing on families—particularly those with young children—FPSL fills a critical gap in Salt Lake City's homeless response system, particularly the community needs for safe, family-appropriate shelter options, transitional support to bridge the gap to permanent housing, and ongoing case management and wraparound services to prevent recurrence. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.74% ($6,930.39 of awrded funds) -$ Yes 30,000.00$ Fmaily Promise Direct Family Services 50,000.00$ $0 ESG PART 2 8 YWCA of Utah YWCA’s program offers a comprehensive response to domestic violence-related homelessness by integrating housing navigation, safety planning, financial assistance, and systems advocacy. The program embeds case management within emergency shelter and transitional housing. Case Managers provide the intensive, survivor-centered support required to overcome challenges and expand pathways for survivors of domestic violence to access long-term permanent housing solutions. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 41% ($155,127.96 of awarded funds) -$ Yes-$ Housing Stability Through Survivor-Cenered Case Management -$ $0 9 Utah Community Action UCA’s Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) program focuses on providing clients experiencing homelessness with re-housing assistance and addresses the gap of assisting a population that is shelter resistant. It has been operating for 10 years out of the Weigand Center, assisting populations at risk of eviction or experiencing homelessness who have experienced a recent crisis. This funding will support the efforts outlined in Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy, including protecting clients from displacement, and strengthening partnerships and collaborations to impact this program. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 1.9% ($24,682.66 of awarded funds) $67,045 Yes $34,368 UCA FY 26 SLC ESG $31,853 $133,266 10 The Road Home TRH’s Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) program provides short-term rental assistance and intensive case management to very low-income households who have experienced homelessness and helps participants secure and maintain safe, affordable housing while receiving support to stabilize and work toward long-term self-sufficiency. The program covers participant’s upfront housing costs such as security deposits and application fees, along with ongoing rental and utility assistance. These supports are designed to help families quickly stabilize in permanent housing and reduce the likelihood of returning to homelessness. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 0.33% ($4,211.04 of awarded funds) $30,000 Yes $32,687 Rapid Re-Housing $34,337 $97,024 11 Asian Association AAU’s Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention & Rapid Re-Housing Program directly addresses challenges to housing for immigrants and refugees by providing rapid re-housing, rental and utility assistance, case management, and tailored supportive services. By removing barriers to stable housing, the program prevents eviction, promotes timely placement, and strengthens long-term stability, self-sufficiency, and well-being. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 17% ($5,499.33 of awarded funds) -$ Yes-$ Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention & Rapid Re-Housing Program 32,318.00$ $0 YEAR FY25-26 Request 139,182.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 139,182.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 139,182.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 350,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 350,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 350,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 176,194.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 176,194.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 176,194.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 200,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 200,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 200,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 400,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 400,000.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 400,000.00$ TOTAL City Council HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) # AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN ALIGNMENTAMOUNT City Administration 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by: - Attorney's Office - Finance Department - Housing Stability Division 152,325.80$ Yes 82,356.00$ Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office 102,366.00$ $184,722 ALL APPLICATIONS 2 The Road Home UCA will provide holistic case management services to income-eligible households seeking emergency rental assistance. Their programs operate on a case management model, aiming to prevent instances of homelessness and promote long-term housing stability. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 0.33% ($4,211.041 of awarded funds) 336,432.00$ Yes 350,000.00$ TBRA 349,839.00$ 1,036,271.00$ 3 Volunteers of America The Youth Resource Center reaches unaccompanied youth aged 18-24 through a comprehensive outreach strategy focused on connecting youth to the Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.82% ($174,867 of awarded funds) 174,867.00$ Yes 350,000.00$ Youth Resource Center TBRA 99,372.00$ 624,239.00$ 4 Community Development Crop of Utah This project provides 140 new apartments for households between 30% and 70% Area Median Income, which addresses the gap in the number of apartments that are affordable to incomes at or below 80% AMI. 20% of the units will be dedicated to serving households at or under 50% AMI. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 39% ($173,209.29 of awarded funds) -$ Yes -$ Emeril Avenue Apartments -$ -$ 5 Community Development Crop of Utah This project will create 8 new, owner-occupied single-family homes (2 Three-bedroom homes, 6 two-bedroom homes) that will be sold to households at or below 80% of the area median income. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 39% ($173,209.29 of awarded funds) -$ Yes -$ Community Development Land Trust -$ -$ FY25-26 Request 326,055.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 326,055.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 326,055.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 294,075.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 294,075.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 294,075.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 276,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 183,722.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 183,722.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 475,000.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 473,684.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 473,684.00$ TOTAL City Council YEAR FY25-26 Request 28,356.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 28,356.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 28,356.00$ TOTAL City Council 6 First Step House TBRA provides short-term rental and deposit assistance, enabling clients to transition directly into stable housing. This is a pivotal step toward long-term recovery and self-sufficiency. FY22-25 Unspent Funds: 17% ($339,888.32 of awarded funds 283,119.00$ Yes -$ TBRA -$ 283,119.00$ 7 Utah Community Action Utah Community Action provides short-term rental assistance and case management to households experiencing a temporary crisis. FY22-25 Unspent funds 1.91% ($24,682.66 of awarded funds 287,141.00$ Yes233,142.00$ TBRA 208,757.00$ 729,040.00$ 8 Neighborworks NeighborWorks’ Homeownership Promotion Services (HOPS) Down Payment Assistance promotes homeownership and prevents displacement of long-term residents. By providing financial support to low- and moderate-income households, HOPS reduces the barriers to homeownership that many families face in today's competitive housing market. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 20% ($231,437.75 of awarded funds -$ Yes-$ Homeonwership Promotion Services -$ -$ CHDO APPLICANTS 9 Community Development Corp of Utah Capacity Building funding will be used for any eligible use, such as hiring or training staff for development, financial management, or compliance, obtaining technical assistance or consulting related to housing development, board training, strategic planning, or systems development to improve housing delivery. The funding for Emeril Ave will be used for a portion of the construction costs of this project, which includes the foundations, framing, HVAC, electrical, plumbing, and other multifamily construction items. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 39% ($173,209.29 of awarded funds) 473,684.00$ Yes-$ CHDO Capicty Building and Emeril Ave New Construction -$ $473,684 HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS (HOPWA) # AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN ALIGNMENTAMOUNT City Administration 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by: - Attorney's Office - Finance Department - Housing Stability Division 28,356.00$ Yes 28,356.00$ Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office 27,985.00$ 56,341.00$ FY25-26 Request 737,508.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 737,508.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 737,508.00$ TOTAL City Council FY25-26 Request 258,810.00$ FY24-25 CDCIP Board 205,363.00$ FY23-24 Mayor 205,363.00$ TOTAL City Council YEAR FY24-25 Request 100,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 150,000.00$ Mayor 150,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 200,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 200,000.00$ Mayor 200,000.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 262,500.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 185,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 165,700.00$ Mayor 165,700.00$ TOTAL City Council ALL APPLICATIONS 2 Housing Connect HC’s HOPWA program provides TBRA and PHP services that make housing affordable for people living with HIV/AIDS who are either currently homeless or housing insecure. When HOPWA funding is used to provide TBRA assistance, households are responsible to pay 30% of their monthly income toward rent. The remainder of the rent is paid by Housing Connect. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5% ($89,363.21 of awarded funds)Yes 199,714.00$ Housing Assistance 172,835.00$ 372,549.00$ 3 Utah Community Action Utah Community Action’s (UCA) HOPWA program provides STRMU (short term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance), PHP (permanent housing placement) and holistic case management for households with at least one member with an HIV/AIDS diagnosis. UCA has administered HOPWA funds for the past 12 years, and the program provides housing assistance to eligible households at risk of housing instability in order to support stable housing in an effort to prevent homelessness. FY22-25 Unspent funds: 1.91% ($24,682.66 of awarded funds) Yes 534,211.00$ FY26 SLC HOPWA 629,102.00$ 1,163,313.00$ FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES (FOF) # AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION HOUSING SLC ALIGNMENTAMOUNT Equity and Home Ownership Assistance 1 Community Development Corporation of Utah CDCU will use this program to fund match savings for approximately 6-to-10 first-time buyers earning up to 120% of AMI in Salt Lake City. Participants will also participate in counseling and homebuyer education staffed and funded by this award. The project will prioritize working households, veterans, refugees and immigrants, individuals with disabilities, and communities of color. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent 652,100.00$ Yes522,000.00$ Homebuyer Cohort & Matched Savings $1,174,100 2 Community Development Corporation of Utah CDCU provides financial assistance and housing counseling to help first-time homebuyers achieve sustainable homeownership in Salt Lake City. Assistance will be for up to $39,000 per household, pairing assistance with innovative products such as silent second mortgages and shared equity models. The project will serve approximately 7 low- to moderate-income households. This includes working households, veterans, refugees and immigrants, individuals with disabilities, and communities of color. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent 652,100.00$ Yes522,000.00$ Down Payment Assistance $1,174,100 3 SL Neighborhood Housing (NeighborWorks)SL Neighborhood Housing will provide down payments, closing costs, and home improvement assistance as forgivable loan/grants. Funding will also cover client participation in financial education and financial counseling. The program will serve 7 West Side, vulnerable and low- income clients. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent 150,000.00$ No 100,000.00$ Down Payment Assistance & Home Improvements $250,000 Tenant-based Housing Assistance 4 The INN Between The INN Between provides medical supportive housing and services to homeless/unsheltered adults in need of end-of-life care and/or medical respite care in Salt Lake City. The program serves approximately 80 low-income individuals at a time who are experiencing homelessness, including individuals with serious medical conditions, disabilities, and those in need of end-of- life or medical respite care. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent 80,000.00$ No*-$ Medical Supportive Housing for the Homeless $80,000 FY24-25 Request 449,408.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 355,200.00$ Mayor 355,200.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 171,811.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 135,800.00$ Mayor 135,800.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 269,100.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 210,200.00$ Mayor 210,200.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 198,079.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 154,700.00$ Mayor 154,700.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 200,626.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 154,800.00$ Mayor 154,800.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 150,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 114,300.00$ Mayor 114,300.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 100,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 76,200.00$ Mayor 76,200.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 280,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 213,400.00$ Mayor 213,400.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 69,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 52,600.00$ Mayor 52,600.00$ TOTAL City Council 5 Utah Community Action UCA assists low-income tenants at risk of eviction due to disputes or non-payment, providing Tenant Education classes and mediation training statewide, and offers rental assistance for up to 4 months. The project will serve approximately 83 households experiencing homelessness, living with disabilities, elderly adults, single parents, large households with three or more children, or individuals fleeing domestic violence. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 5% of funds unspent ($77,848.26) 207,900.00$ Yes250,000.00$ Landlord Tenant Mediation $457,900 6 The Road Home TRH Shared Housing program provides immediate housing interventions for low-income single adults, enabling individuals who may not ordinarily qualify as homeless to find housing and to choose suitable roommates. The program estimates service of 45 individuals. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50) 315,000.00$ Yes 435,000.00$ Shared Housing $750,000 7 The Road Home This program provides supportive housing, including individualized, high-touch case management and wraparound services, for chronically homeless low-income individuals in Salt Lake City. TRH provides this housing at several of their own properties. The project will serve approximately 75 individuals. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50) 315,000.00$ Yes 435,000.00$ Supportive Housing Case Management $750,000 8 Odyssey House The Odyssey House funds provides rental assistance and staff support for clients in transitioning from residential treatment to transitional housing. This program serves 50 low- income vulnerable individuals struggling with substance use and mental health issues, often court-referred or facing chronic homelessness. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA -$ Yes -$ Transitional Housing $0 9 The Road Home TRH House 20 program provides 20 participants with direct housing assistance and ongoing, intensive case management as they pursue other housing opportunities. The project will serve low-income individuals who are unhoused, service-averse, and the most frequent users of emergency services such as fire, police, and medical response. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50) 315,000.00$ Yes 435,000.00$ House 20 $750,000 10 International Rescue Committee The IRC provides financial assistance, culturally and linguistically accessible case management, and evidence-based housing navigation. IRC will serve 150 low-income New American refugees and immigrants from a variety of countries, with a particular focus on single parents, large families with limited wage earners, and households with disabilities or significant medical needs. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 1% of funds unspent ($1,975.74) 100,000.00$ Yes-$ New American Rental Assistance $100,000 11 Family Support Center The FSC-managed LifeStart Village program houses single-parent families recovering from homelessness, domestic violence, substance abuse, and other challenging circumstances. This program funding will serve 170 low-income residents who are recovering from homelessness, domestic violence, or substance abuse. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA -$ No* -$ Child & Family Support at LifeStart Village $0 12 South Valley Services SVS provides trauma-informed, one-on-one, wraparound homelessness case management services to about 175 city residents, and direct rental assistance to about 20 households. SVS will serve survivors of domestic violence at or below 80% AMI, many who are living with a disability or identify as a racial minority. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 1% of funds unspent ($2,117.40) 189,000.00$ Yes 172,100.00$ Wraparound Case Management $361,100 13 Wasatch Community Gardens With this project, WCG will provide rental assistance and one-on one continuum of care case management to connect their Green Team Job Training participants to available resources. The project will serve only the participants in this program: low-income female adults experiencing homelessness in Salt Lake City, particularly those with complex behavioral health challenges. The project will serve 36 women. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA -$ Yes -$ Green Team Case Management $0 FY24-25 Request 250,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$ Mayor 96,900.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 229,032.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$ Mayor 96,900.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 248,029.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$ Mayor 96,900.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 239,253.45$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$ Mayor 96,900.00$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 150,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 347,300.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council 14 Community Development Corporation of Utah CDCU will cover rental payments for at-risk households and staff costs for community navigation and counseling. These costs are associated with the Salt Lake City-partnered Tenant Resource Center. The program will serve approximately 600 low-income tenants through community navigation, provide rental assistance to 30 households and deliver counseling to 50 participants, helping families remain housed and move toward financial self-sufficiency. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent 652,100.00$ Yes 522,000.00$ Community Navigation & Rental Assistance $1,174,100 15 Asian Association of Utah AAU will provide comprehensive rental assistance and supportive services to trafficking survivor residents within Salt Lake City. The project will serve approximately 35 very low- income survivors of sex or labor trafficking who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. This also includes minor trafficking victims and their non-offending family members. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 22% of funds unspent ($212,974.43) 299,600.00$ Yes 166,300.00$ Rental Assistance for Human Trafficking Survivors $465,900 16 Volunteers of America With the House 20 program, VOA provides intensive, client-centered case management and housing navigation services, and financial assistance to individuals experiencing chronic homelessness. The program will serve low-income female adults experiencing homelessness in Salt Lake City, particularly those with complex behavioral health challenges. The project will serve 20 individuals identified as high utilizers of emergency shelter services. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent 150,000.00$ Yes -$ House 20 $150,000 17 Asian Association of Utah AAU will provide financial assistance, case management, and financial/employment assistance for refugees, immigrants, and asyless at risk of homelessness. This program attempts to prevent eviction and stabilize households. Approximately 80 households will be served by this program. This is separate and distinct from their programming for human trafficking survivors. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 22% of funds unspent ($212,974.43) 299,600.00$ No* 166,300.00$ Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and Immigrant Populations $465,900 18 Women of the World WOW will provide housing navigation, landlord mediation, tenant rights education, benefits enrollment, financial assistance, and on-site childcare. This project will serve low-income refugee, immigrant, and asylum-seeking women in Salt Lake City. The project will serve 120 women who are primarily single mothers, survivors of violence, and seniors facing isolation and health challenges. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA -$ Yes -$ Assistance for Refugee, Immigrant, and Asylum- Seeking Women $0 19 YWCA Utah YWCA will serve the public with the following four programs: the Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot project will provide secure housing and case management focused on employment, education, and financial planning. This project will serve low-income residents. The Survivor- Driven Housing project will provide flexible financial assistance for rental deposits and intensive housing coordination for very-low income households. The KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance project provides rent support and case management for 36 low-income families. All projects are managed at YWCA properties, and serve those at risk of homelessness, including survivors of abuse, former foster youth, veterans, and other vulnerable community members FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 5% of funds unspent ($15,523.81) -$ Yes 315,000.00$ Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot, Survivor Driven Housing, and KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance $315,000 FY24-25 Request 185,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 679,513.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 185,246.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council FY24-25 Request 50,000.00$ FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$ Mayor -$ TOTAL City Council *Did not directly cite Housing SLC plan, but appears to align with plan goals 20 Catholic Community Services of Utah CCS provides direct emergency rental assistance to low-income refugee individuals and families who find their housing at risk due to a temporary financial crisis. The project will serve approximately 100 refugee individuals and families previously resettled by CCS. Due to changes in federal policies, only those previously resettled by CCS can be served. This includes those with cooccurring factors, such as PTSD and past trauma associated with their emigration. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA -$ Yes -$ Refugee Resettlement Assistance $0 21 First Step House The FSH Housing Case Management program provides housing and ongoing support for low- income individuals at risk of homelessness, including direct rent/utility assistance. FSH will serve 750 low-income clients with case management services and 130 low-income clients with financial assistance. Clients are all at risk of homelessness, including veterans, seniors, and people with disabling mental illness. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: ~0% of funds unspent ($6,329.03) 498,300.00$ Yes 543,500.00$ Housing Case Management $1,041,800 22 The Road Home TRH Landlord Assurance program provides targeted financial assistance to low-income tenants and landlords to prevent returns to homelessness by addressing financial barriers and incentivizing landlord participation. Landlord incentivies includes covering costs of "high risk" tenants and encouraging participation in the Good Landlord program. The program estimates service for 50 households. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50) 315,000.00$ Yes 435,000.00$ Landlord Assurance $750,000 23 Utah Housing Coalition This UHC program will expand renter/tenant education, deliver landlord education, and release updated housing counseling resources in English and Spanish. The primary impact group will be very-low income renters, and the potential scope will impact up to 5000 households. FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA -$ Yes-$ Renter, Tenant, and Landlord Education $0 $3,250,831 $950,000 $917,447 $5,118,278 ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL APPLICANTS n/a n/a 10 $630,124.65 15% 27 $650,166.20 20% 1 38 If funding is GREATER than estimated: If funding is LESS than estimated: SALT LAKE CITY 2026-2027 HUD & 2025-2026 FOF RECOMMENDATIONS Simplified Funding Log COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME TBD FUNDING CATEGORIES CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED (CONTINGENCY) Neighborhoods, Housing and Infrastructure $4,702,500 TBD REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100% TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE) TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL) TBD TOTAL $7,814,005.83 TBD COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and estimated CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to and in excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and estimated CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest 1,000 or 10,000. Public Services $2,461,340 TBD Administration $650,166.20 TBD CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office n/a 650,166.20$ 650,166.20$ 650,166.00$ 650,166.20$ 650,166.20$ 650,166.00$ 2 YWCA Utah Transitional Housing Conversion 79% 215,000.00$ 215,000.00$ 215,000.00$ 3 NIS Team Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP)74% 720,000.00$ 720,000.00$ 720,000.00$ 4 Habitat for Humanity Critical Home Repair Program 74% 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 5 Salt Lake Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. (DBA NeighborWorks)Homeownership Promotion Services 71% 402,500.00$ 402,500.00$ 402,500.00$ 6 Odyssey House Adolescent Residential Facility Upgrades 71% 315,000.00$ 315,000.00$ 315,000.00$ 7 Assist, Inc. Emergency Home Repair, Accessibility, and Community Design 71% 900,000.00$ 900,000.00$ 900,000.00$ 8 First Step House Building Improvements 71% 300,000.00$ 300,000.00$ 300,000.00$ 9 NIS Team Fix the Bricks 68% 460,000.00$ 460,000.00$ 460,000.00$ 10 Community Development Corporation of Utah Homebuyer Education and DPA 63% 750,000.00$ 125,488.00$ 125,488.00$ 11 Upwards Care, Inc. Boost Program 58% 240,000.00$ -$ -$ 4,702,500.00$ 3,837,988.00$ 3,837,988.00$ 12 Salt Lake Donated Dental Services Community Dental Project 84% $ 60,000.00 60,000.00$ 60,000.00$ 13 YWCA Utah Housing and Stability Access 79% $ 80,500.00 80,500.00$ 80,500.00$ 14 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. (DBA Fourth Street Clinic)Health and Housing Transition Team (HHoT) 79% $ 207,412.00 207,412.00$ 157,412.00$ 15 The Road Home Housing Staffing 79% $ 50,000.00 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 16 THRIVE Center for Survivors of Torture Integrated Services for Torture Survivors 79% $ 50,000.00 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 17 South Valley Services Case Management 76% $ 60,000.00 60,000.00$ 60,000.00$ 18 Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah Site-Based Mentoring 76% $ 50,000.00 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 19 The Road Home Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC) 76% $ 100,000.00 72,212.00$ 72,212.00$ 20 Fit to Recover Free Meals, Scholarships, & Recovery Resources for Unhoused Adults and At-risk Youth 74% $ 50,000.00 -$ 50,000.00$ 21 First Step House Housing Case Management 74% $ 72,486.00 -$ -$ APPLICATIONS # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS City Administration TOTAL Neighborhoods, Housing and Infrastructure TOTAL Public Services CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 22 International Rescue Committee ESL & Financial Readiness 74% 60,000.00$ -$ -$ 23 Catholic Community Services Housing Locator 74% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 24 Catholic Community Services Employment & Client Specialist 74% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 25 Disability Law Center Jobs for All 71% 55,000.00$ -$ -$ 26 Utah Community Action Early Childhood Services 71% 240,000.00$ -$ -$ 27 Wasatch Community Gardens Green Team 71% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 28 English Skills Learning Center Workplace English and Career Pathways for Limited English Speakers 71% 60,321.58$ -$ -$ 29 Odyssey House Bus Passes 71% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 30 Women of the World Self-Sufficiency Services 68% 150,000.00$ -$ -$ 31 Asian Association of Utah Stability, Opportunity, Assistance, & Resilience for Survivors of Trafficking (SOAR)68% 215,842.84$ -$ -$ 32 A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande Reentry Services Program 68% 75,000.00$ -$ -$ 33 Salt Lake American Refugee Services for Survival 68% 30,000.00$ -$ -$ 34 Spy Hop Productions Advanced Apprenticeship 66% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 35 Asian Association of Utah Refugee Rental Assistance & Housing Stability 66% 219,777.21$ -$ -$ 36 A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande Employment Initiative Program 66% 75,000.00$ -$ -$ 37 Odyssey House Transitional Housing 63% 150,000.00$ -$ -$ 38 Advantage Services Homeless Employment Program 63% 100,000.00$ -$ -$ 2,461,339.63$ 630,124.00$ 630,124.00$ 7,814,005.83$ 5,118,278.20$ 5,118,278.00$ $293,174.00 $0.00 $5,890.00 $299,064.00 ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL APPLICANTS $179,438.40 60% 5 n/a n/a 4 $21,988.00 7.5% 1 10 # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME $0 RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS TOTAL GRAND TOTAL EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG) FUNDING CATEGORIES CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED (CONTINGENCY) ESG Part 1 $299,398.00 REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100% TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE) TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL) TBD TOTAL $780,142.00 ESG Part 2 $458,756.00 Administration $21,988.00 If funding is GREATER than estimated: If funding is LESS than estimated: CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office n/a 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 2 Volunteers of America Youth Resource Center 82% 62,200.00$ 60,000.00$ 60,000.00$ 3 First Step House Resource Center Program 79% 60,000.00$ 57,076.00$ 57,076.00$ 4 Volunteers of America Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center 79% 74,750.00$ 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 5 Ruff Haven Ruff Haven Street Outreach 66% 52,448.00$ -$ -$ 6 Family Promise Family Promise Direct Family Services 63% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 299,398.00$ 167,076.00$ 167,076.00$ 7 YWCA of Utah YWCA Utah: Housing Stability Through Survivor- Centered Case Management 79% 80,500$ 60,000$ 60,000$ 8 Utah Community Action UCA FY26 SLC ESG 74% 158,256$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 9 The Road Home TRH - ESG RRH - FY27 (Rapid Re-housing) 74% 100,000$ -$ -$ 10 Asian Association Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention & Rapid Re-Housing Program 71% 120,000$ -$ -$ 458,756.00$ 110,000.00$ 110,000.00$ 780,142.00$ 299,064.00$ 299,064.00$ COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exceed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to or in excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest- scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000. APPLICATIONS # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE* REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS City Administration TOTAL # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE* REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS ESG Part 1 TOTAL ESG Part 2 TOTAL GRAND TOTAL $817,318.00 $800,000.00 $574,508.00 $351,086.00 $2,542,912.00 ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL APPLICANTS n/a n/a 7 $473,680.00 15% + Reallocated CHDO 1 $139,182.60 10% 1 9 If funding is GREATER than estimated: If funding is LESS than estimated: CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office n/a 139,182.65$ 139,182.00$ 139,182.00$ 139,182.65$ 139,182.00$ 139,182.00$ 2 The Road Home TRH - HOME - Tenant-Based Rental Assistance - FY27 82% 350,000.00$ 350,000.00$ 350,000.00$ 3 Volunteers of America Youth Resource Center’s Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program 82% 176,194.00$ 176,194.00$ 176,194.00$ 4 Community Development Corp of Utah Emeril Avenue Apartments 76% 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ 5 Community Development Corp of Utah Community Development Land Trust (CDLT) 74% 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 6 First Step House TBRA 74% 326,055.00$ 326,055.00$ 326,055.00$ 7 Utah Community Action UCA FY26 SLC TBRA 71% 294,075.00$ 294,075.00$ 294,075.00$ 8 Neighborworks Homeownership Promotion Services 63% 276,000.00$ 183,722.00$ 183,722.00$ 2,022,324.00$ 1,930,046.00$ 1,930,046.00$ HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME $700,000.00 FUNDING CATEGORIES CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED (CONTINGENCY) HOME Projects $2,022,324.00 REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100% REALLOACTED CHDO TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE) TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL) TBD TOTAL $2,636,506.65 COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set- Aside. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to or in excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. HOME CHDO $475,000.00 Administration $139,182.65 City Administration TOTAL HOME Projects TOTAL APPLICATIONS # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 9 Community Development Corp of Utah CHDO Capacity Building and Emeril Ave New Construction 63% 475,000.00$ 473,684.00$ 473,684.00$ 475,000.00$ 473,684.00$ 473,684.00$ 2,636,506.65$ 2,542,912.00$ 2,542,912.00$ $972,032.00 $0 $0 $972,032.00 ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL APPLICANTS n/a n/a 2 $29,160.96 3% 1 3 If funding is GREATER than estimated: If funding is LESS than estimated: CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office n/a 29,160.96$ 29,160.00$ 29,160.00$ 29,160.96$ 29,160.00$ 29,160.00$ 2 Housing Connect Salt Lake City HOPWA – Housing Connect 79% 737,508.00$ 737,508.00$ 737,508.00$ 3 Utah Community UCA FY26 SLC HOPWA 74% 258,810.00$ 205,363.00$ 205,363.00$ 996,318.00$ 942,871.00$ 942,871.00$ 1,025,478.96$ 972,031.00$ 972,031.00$ # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CHDO Projects TOTAL REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100% TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE) TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL) TBD GRAND TOTAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS (HOPWA) ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME $0 City Administration $29,160.96 TOTAL $1,025,478.96 FUNDING CATEGORIES CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED (CONTINGENCY) HOPWA Projects $996,318 COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. APPLICATIONS # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST TOTAL GRAND TOTAL RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS City Administration TOTAL HOPWA Projects $2,370,500.00 n/a n/a $2,370,500.00 ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL APPLICANTS $350,000.00 n/a 3 $2,020,500.00 n/a 20 23 If available funding is INCREASED: CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 1 Community Development Corporation of Utah Homebuyer Cohort & Matched Savings 69% 100,000.00$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$ 2 Community Development Corporation of Utah Down Payment Assistance 67% 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ 3 SL Neighborhood Housing (NeighborWorks Down Payment Assistance & Home Improvements 62% 262,500.00$ -$ -$ 562,500.00$ 350,000.00$ 350,000.00$ 4 The INN Between Medical Supportive Housing for the Homeless 90% 185,000.00$ 165,700.00$ 165,700.00$ 5 Utah Community Action Landlord Tenant Mediation 79% 449,408.00$ 355,200.00$ 355,200.00$ 6 The Road Home Shared Housing 79% 171,811.00$ 135,800.00$ 135,800.00$ 7 The Road Home Supportive Housing Case Management 78% 269,100.00$ 210,200.00$ 210,200.00$ 8 Odyssey House Transitional Housing 78% 198,079.00$ 154,700.00$ 154,700.00$ 9 The Road Home House 20 77% 200,626.00$ 154,800.00$ 154,800.00$ 10 International Rescue Committee New American Rental Assistance 76% 150,000.00$ 114,300.00$ 114,300.00$ 11 Family Support Center Child & Family Support at LifeStart Village 76% 100,000.00$ 76,200.00$ 76,200.00$ 12 South Valley Services Wraparound Case Management 76% 280,000.00$ 213,400.00$ 213,400.00$ 13 Wasatch Community Gardens Green Team Case Management 76% 69,000.00$ 52,600.00$ 52,600.00$ FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES (FOF 2025-2026) APPROPRIATED FUNDING TOTAL APPROPRIATED FUNDING TOTAL $2,370,500.00 TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL)$2,370,500.00 FUNDING CATEGORIES CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED (CONTINGENCY) ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME n/a REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100% TOTAL $5,198,897.45 COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $100 or $1,000. Equity and Home Ownership Assistance $562,500.00 Tenant-based Housing Assistance $4,636,397.45 Equity and Home Ownership Assistance TOTAL Tenant-based Housing Assistance APPLICATIONS # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CDCIP BOARD MAYOR 14 Community Development Corporation of Utah Community Navigation & Rental Assistance 75% 250,000.00$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$ 15 Asian Association of Utah Rental Assistance for Human Trafficking Survivors 75% 229,032.00$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$ 16 Volunteers of America House 20 75% 248,029.00$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$ 17 Asian Association of Utah Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and Immigrant Populations 75% 239,253.45$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$ 18 Women of the World Assistance for Refugee, Immigrant, and Asylum- Seeking Women 74% 150,000.00$ -$ -$ 19 YWCA Utah Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot, Survivor Driven Housing, and KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance 73% 347,300.00$ -$ -$ 20 Catholic Community Services of Utah Refugee Resettlement Assistance 73% 185,000.00$ -$ -$ 21 First Step House Housing Case Management 71% 679,513.00$ -$ -$ 22 The Road Home Landlord Assurance 70% 185,246.00$ -$ -$ 23 Utah Housing Coalition Renter, Tenant, and Landlord Education 69% 50,000.00$ -$ -$ 4,636,397.45$ 2,020,500.00$ 2,020,500.00$ 5,198,897.45$ 2,370,500.00$ 2,370,500.00$ # APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CONTINGENCY FUNDING ALLOCATIONS TOTAL GRAND TOTAL Attachment C3. Organizations with Multiple Applications. Where funding recommendations are the same for the Board and the Mayor, a single dollar figure appears. Exceptions are noted. Application Funding Requested Recommended for funding? CDBG #33 Reentry Services Program $75,000 $ - A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande CDBG #37 Employment Initiative Program $75,000 $ - ESG #10 Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention & Rapid Re-Housing Program $120,000 $ - CDBG #31 Stability, Opportunity, Assistance, & Resilience for Survivors of Trafficking (SOAR) $215,843 $ - CDBG #35 Refugee Rental Assistance & Housing Stability $219,777 $ - FOF #15 Rental Assistance for Human Trafficking Survivors $229,032 $96,900 Asian Association of Utah FOF #17 Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and Immigrant Populations $239,253 $96,900 CDBG #23 Housing Locator $50,000 $ - CDBG #24 Employment & Client Specialist $50,000 $ - Catholic Community Services of Utah FOF #20 Refugee Resettlement Assistance $185,000 $ - HOME #4 Emeril Avenue Apartments $200,000 $200,000 HOME #5 Community Development Land Trust $400,000 $400,000 HOME #9 CHDO Capacity Building and Emeril Ave New Construction $475,000 $473,684 CDBG #10 Homebuyer Education and DPA $750,000 $125,488 CDBG #1 Homebuyer Cohort & Matched Savings $100,000 $150,000 FOF #2 Down Payment Assistance $200,000 $200,000 Community Development Corporation of Utah FOF #14 Community Navigation & Rental Assistance $250,000 $96,900 continued on next page Application Funding Requested Recommended for funding? CDBG #8 Building Improvements $300,000 $300,000 CDBG #22 Housing Case Management $72,486 $ - ESG #3 Resource Center Program $60,000 $57,076 HOME #6 Tenant Based Rental Assistance $326,055 $326,055 First Step House FOF #21 Housing Case Management $679,513 $ - CDBG #23 ESL & Financial Readiness $60,000 $ - International Rescue Committee FOF #10 New American Rental Assistance $150,000 $114,300 CDBG #3 Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP) $720,000 $720,000 NIS Team CDBG #9 Fix the Bricks $460,000 $460,000 CDBG #6 Adolescent Residential Facility Upgrades $315,000 $315,000 CDBG #29 Bus Passes $50,000 $ - CDBG #37 Transitional Housing $150,000 $ - Odyssey House FOF #8 Transitional Housing $198,079 $154,700 HOME #8 Homeownership Promotion Services $276,000 $183,722 CDBG #5 Homeownership Promotion Services $402,500 $402,500 Salt Lake Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. (DBA NeighborWorks) FOF #3 Down Payment Assistance & Home Improvements $262,500 $ - CDBG #18 Case Management $60,000 $60,000 South Valley Services FOF #12 Wraparound Case Management $280,000 $213,400 continued on next page Application Funding Requested Recommended for funding? CDBG #16 Housing Staffing $50,000 $50,000 CDBG #20 Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC) $100,000 $72,212 ESG #9 TRH - ESG RRH - FY27 (Rapid Re-housing) $100,000 $ - HOME #2 TRH - HOME - Tenant-Based Rental Assistance - FY27 $350,000 $350,000 FOF #6 Shared Housing $171,811 $135,800 FOF #7 Supportive Housing Case Management $269,100 $210,200 FOF #9 House 20 $200,626 $154,800 The Road Home FOF #22 Landlord Assurance $185,246 $ - HOPWA #3 UCA FY26 SLC HOPWA $258,810 $205,363 CDBG #27 Early Childhood Services $240,000 $ - ESG #8 UCA FY26 SLC ESG $158,256 $50,000 HOME #7 UCA FY26 SLC Tenant Based Rental Assistance $294,075 $294,075 Utah Community Action FOF #5 Landlord Tenant Mediation $449,408 $355,200 ESG #2 Youth Resource Center $62,200 $60,000 ESG #4 Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center $74,750 $50,000 HOME #3 Youth Resource Center’s Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program $176,194 $176,194 Volunteers of America FOF #16 House 20 $248,029 $96,900 CDBG #28 Green Team $50,000 $ - Wasatch Community Gardens FOF #13 Green Team Case Management $69,000 $52,600 CDBG #31 Self-Sufficiency Services $150,000 Women of the World FOF #18 Assistance for Refugee, Immigrant, and Asylum- Seeking Women $150,000 $ - continued on next page Application Funding Requested Recommended for funding? ESG #7 YWCA Utah: Housing Stability Through Survivor- Centered Case Management $80,500 $60,000 CDBG #2 Transitional Housing Conversion $215,000 $215,000 CBDG #13 Housing and Stability Access $80,500 $80,500 YWCA of Utah FOF #19 Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot, Survivor Driven Housing, and KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance $347,300 $ - HUD LMI 2016-2020 Eligible Block Groups and Consolidated Plan Target Area, Salt Lake City, UT "' ~ ~ L ~;_w,.;;, q,,. 1"" 1 ~;Q~b~J!W,,t,~~~~~~~~;C;:~~I r-llifllilii...._liiiiii~lil::!-~~"'m~~,--------,w.-2.1/00 s, ______ ...,~...._.b....J=!~;:: (/) W 2 3 20 S Eligible Block Groups c::::J Proposed Target Area c::::J Current Plan Target Area :s: 0 0 0) (/) :s: 0 0 co (/) W 2700 S So E County of Sal Garmin , SafeGra J.b---1oFF~k, • o L--• w USF '3 g -w O r--,r---'!,,-..!.....-L.I...L..l.. ~ (/) 0 0 t--- C O "' (/) (/) (/) D ata Source : HUD Exchange, ACS 5-Year 20 16-2020 Low-and Mo derate-Income Summary Data, 2024 Erik Fro nberg, Salt Lake City Hou sing Stability Division 9/25/2024 Attachment C5. Housing Stability Responses to Council Member Questions, March 24 Work Session. Some of these responses were edited by Council staff for clarity. 1. CDBG #9, NIS Team, Fix the Bricks. How many homes have they finished in recent years? NIS Team: “Since January 2024, we have completed 139 Fix the Bricks projects, 6 of which were funded fully through CDBG, for households under 80% AMI. We have also utilized the City General Fund match for 47 FEMA-funded projects for households under 100% AMI.” 2. CDBG #17, South Valley Services, Case Management. How many Salt Lakers receive the benefit of this funding? South Valley Services, CDBG: “[…] SVS anticipates the Shelter Director and Community Resource Center Director will support case management service delivery to over 450 Salt Lake City residents in FY27.” 3. Same question on FOF#12, South Valley Services. South Valley Services will serve 175 Salt Lake City residents if awarded funding. They have historically only served Salt Lake City residents with awarded FOF funding. Housing Stability also provided information for the Big Brothers Big Sisters CDBG application: “60 children and youth in Salt Lake City will be matched one-to-one with an adult mentor outside their immediate family. Children and youth in our programs will be provided with resources that go beyond academics to support their whole development.” 4. In general, for grants which have not yet spent more than 5% of recent years’ awards, what are reasons that funds haven’t yet been spent? The “unspent funds” shown in the Funding Log are presented as the collective total remaining balance of funds for each organization, broken out by funding source (HUD or Funding Our Future), rather than per application, program, or award. These figures reflect unspent funds over the past three completed program years for each agency, under each of the respective funding sources. Housing Stability has created a new spreadsheet (see Attachment C6) that more clearly identifies the specific programs and awards for each agency with unspent funds, and their responses to the unspent funds in question. Housing Stability recognizes this may have caused confusion, and moving forward, we will present this information to the CDCIP board and subsequently to Council in a cleaner, more detailed way. Additionally, after further review, to ensure we provide the most up-to-date and accurate information, we need to note two corrections to the original “unspent funds” listed. For CDCU, there was a transposition error on our original Funding Log. Their unspent HUD funds from FY22-25 should have stated $5,386.41, which is below 1% of their awarded HUD funds. As explained above, this includes CDBG #10, HOME #4, HOME #5, and HOME #9. These numbers were calculated in the fall ahead of the CDCIP Board’s review process; since then, the NIS team has spent a significant amount of additional funding. Their unspent funds went from $633,737.41 to $132,284.01, which is less than 5% of the HUD funds awarded. 5. Correction of typo on HOME #2. The correct description of the application should be listed as follows: “The Road Home will provide rental assistance and supportive services to 40 households participating in its Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) program. Financial assistance may include security and utility deposits, utility assistance, rental payments, and the removal of housing barriers, where eligible and necessary. In addition to housing assistance, households will receive comprehensive supportive services designed to promote long-term stability. These services will include individualized case management, assistance with applying for and securing public benefits, support in increasing income, job readiness, and access to employment opportunities. Case Managers will also provide referrals to specialized service providers, including healthcare, mental health services, and other community-based resources, to ensure holistic support tailored to each household’s unique needs.” 6. FOF #21 First Step House, Housing Case Management. What’s their success rate over the past few years? First Step House served 413 clients with FOF case managers in the last two years. 206 clients exited to stable housing, and 351 clients avoided an exit to homelessness or jail. These percentages (50% and 85% respectively) are 10-15% higher compared to all clients served. First Step House also provided some other outcome metrics. 46% of clients completed their full treatment plan, compared to 32% of all clients. 78% were abstinent from drugs and alcohol at discharge, compared to 54% of all clients. Attachment C6. Organizations with Unspent Allocations from Past Years. Organization Grant Award Award amount Unspent Amount %Reasoning Asian Association of Utah FOF Mortgage Assistance Program $50,000 $17,959 36% In 2021 AAU was awarded mortgage assistance funding. They later extended the term period on this award. Feeling confident in a community need, despite not having completed their previous spending, they applied for three additional mortgage assistance and homeownership programs in 2022 and 2023. Each year they were one of only two or three applicants. After several years of outreach and marketing, they were unable to find enough eligible clients to spend their funding. Prioritization of earlier funding meant even less funding awarded later was spent. Finally, the long-time Executive Director and several housing program managers departed during this time period. This added instability may have contributed to low spenddown, either directly or by impacting the other factors. In 2024 AAU decided to return all of their homeowner funding. They have not applied for this category in subsequent years.Asian Association of Utah FOF Mortgage Assistance Program $50,000 $37,408 75%See explanation aboveAsian Association of Utah FOF Home Ownership Program $187,500 $79,114 42%See explanation aboveAsian Association of Utah FOF Mortgage Assistance Program $50,000 $50,000 100%See explanation above Asian Association of Utah FOF Rental Assistance Program $125,000 $6,723 5% In 2022 AAU was awarded a rental assistance funding. They later extended the term period on this award, and applied for funding again the following two years. Because of this, AAU did not fully spend down their rental assistance award before they began spending their award for the next year. Additionally, the long-time Executive Director and several housing program managers departed during this time period. This added instability may have contributed to low spenddown, either directly or by impacting the other factor.Asian Association of Utah FOF Rental Assistance Program $220,000 $18,496 8%See explanation above Asian Association of Utah ESG Homeless Prevention and Support for BIPOC Communities $32,318 $5,499 17% The main contributing factors for us underspending those awards are: 1. Significant internal staff and program transition; and 2. Challenges in accurately projecting the needs with the boundary and qualification restrictions of the program. 1. In the fall of 2022 our Executive Director, Shu Cheng, announced his retirement. The AAU Board of Directors started the recruiting process which led to the hire of Scott Cougill in early 2023. As our executive leadership changed, the leadership of the Housing Program at that time, also changed. The program director overseeing the housing program along with the two housing case managers resigned from their positions. The spring of 2023 through to the fall of 2023 allowed AAU to restructure it’s programming while also rehiring for the vacant positions. I was appointed as the Director of Refugee Services in late 2023. During the restructuring, our Housing program fell under my direction. My first step was to rehire for the vacant Housing Coordinator position which led to the hiring of our current Housing Coordinator, Abdi Sheikh. From there, Abdi and I were able to rebuild the foundations of personnel for the Housing Team and begin to effectively meet the program needs. This restructuring took place from the Fall of 2023 to the Spring of 2024. 2. Within housing supportive services we face many challenges to effectively support clients in their journey toward stable housing and self- sufficiency. One of these challenges is to forecast the needs of the community with the programming and support we offer. Each year we do our best to review the previous year’s data along with the community’s request for services to project the level of support we are able to offer to community. Those factors, along with the variables in eligibility for the assistance, typically produce some graps in what we project compared to our actual program delivery. This data is consistently analyzed to improve year after year. Overall, our approach to approving financial rental assistance support leans more toward being conservative and methodical about the use of community funds compared to approving and providing support for all who apply. We seek to utilize the funding responsibility and in alignment with the city and grant goals. Our efforts moving forward will continue to focus on careful and responsible execution to help the city’s most vulnerable while being as fiscally responsible as possible. Specifically for our ESG Homeless Prevention and Support for BIPOC Communities grant, the issue was connected to the timing of utilizing the direct client rental assistance funds compared to the utilization of the staffing/admin costs. We were able to utilizing the direct client rental assistance funding within a 6 month period which left staffing and admin costs we were not able to bill because the goals and staff time within the project were complete." Assist INC CDBG Emergency Repair Program $747,547 $122,745 16%There were some regulatory questions with environmental reviews not condutced on certain types of projects, which caused a remining balance of funds. This issue has since been fixed. First Step House CDBG Recovery Residence Rehabilitation $322,000 $114,044 35%Bids for Construction came in under what was expected, so the project came in under budget. First Step House HOME Housing Rehabilitation Project $500,000 $225,885 45%Rehabilitation of the building took longer than expected and the contract expired prior to final reimbursement of project was completed. International Rescue Committee CDBG Upward Mobility for Refugees and New Americans via Digital Tools and Skill Training $30,489 $30,489 100%Did not ask for reimbursement during the program year. HSD has reached out to the agency and will share their response as soon as we hear from them. Neighborworks Utah CDBG Home Rehabiltaion and Improvement $196,837 $119,587 61% For 22-23 CDBG and HOME, the main hurdle was the late start--we didn't receive those contracts until mid-October. I noticed our Q3 report was optimistic about spending the balance, but the final "NA" was clearly an administrative oversight during that staff transition. It didn't accurately reflect our progress, which is why we’ve since overhauled our tracking to ensure our reporting stays consistent through the very end. We now use an improved CRM platform called Compass2 provided by NeighborWorks America that helps us track projects and better set our clients up for long-term success. Additionally, since Katee took on her role during the 24-25 CDBG funding period, her team has been focused on optimizing our management guidelines and reporting. Neighborworks Utah CDBG Home Rehabiltaion and Improvement $358,000 $25,826 7% Regarding the 24-25 CDBG funds, the remaining balance wasn't spent due to a client’s unfortunate health complications. These health issues delayed the bidding process, and since construction would not have been finished by the contract deadline--and our window for an extension was closed--we moved them to the next program year’s waitlist to stay in compliance. I do want to note that since implementing a new sealed bid process with deadlines, our service delivery process is much more efficient. That client is currently prioritized on our waitlist and we are prepared to begin their project immediately upon the finalization of the 25-26 contract. We’re in a much stronger spot now with these new systems, and we’re seeing a lot more consistency in how we hit our milestones thanks to Katee and her team's hard work setting up a much more accurate reporting baseline. Neighborworks Utah HOME Home Buyer Program $208,661 $66,691 32% For 22-23 CDBG and HOME, the main hurdle was the late start--we didn't receive those contracts until mid-October. I noticed our Q3 report was optimistic about spending the balance, but the final "NA" was clearly an administrative oversight during that staff transition. It didn't accurately reflect our progress, which is why we’ve since overhauled our tracking to ensure our reporting stays consistent through the very end. We now use an improved CRM platform called Compass2 provided by NeighborWorks America that helps us track projects and better set our clients up for long-term success. Additionally, since Katee took on her role during the 24-25 CDBG funding period, her team has been focused on optimizing our management guidelines and reporting. NIS Team CDBG Small Repair Program $30,000 $11,150 37% For the Small Repair Programs in FY 23 & 24 we returned the amounts below to focus on fully spending out the awarded funds for the following year. As you can see, we spent down more in FY24 than we did in FY23 and since FY25 we have fully spent down or returned less than 2% of our award for our Minor Repair and Home Repair programs. We have focused on additional outreach to ensure that we have enough applicants to spend down the Minor Repair budget. NIS Team CDBG Small Repair Program $41,142 $7,792 19%See explanation above NIS Team CDBG Shared Equity Program $406,253 $68,873 17%We used the Shared Equity program to purchase two homes and add them to the CLT. The amount returned was due to the fact that we did not have any additional CLT expenses and the remaining amount was not enough to purchase another home. The Road Home FOF Shared Housing $100,000 $28,014 28% In 2022 TRH was awarded House 20 and Shared Housing program funding. Staff turnover made them request extensions for their programs. They later applied for additional funding for both programs the following two years. Prioritization of earlier funding meant less funding awarded the following year was spent. The number of clients for both specialized programs are limited, so layered funding or staff turnover slowed spending. The Road Home FOF House 20 $250,000 $38,162 15%See explanation above The Road Home FOF House 20 $250,000 $62,380 25% The program manager for FOF awards at the Road Home vacated their position during the course of this award. It took several months before TRH was able to find a replacement. Additionally, the number of clients for both specialized programs are limited, so this staff turnover slowed spending. Utah Community Action FOF McKinney-Vento Program $187,079 $77,848 42% In 2021 UCA was given a FOF award to assist school-age homeless children and their families. They then received a much larger federal award that served the same clients. In consultation with HSD staff, they prioritized their federal funding for their relatively small client base. Despite their extensions, this left a large portion of their FOF funding unspent. Their funding expired in 2024, and they have not applied for this programming again. This is the only FOF award that UCA has not fully spent. Volunteers of America HOME TBRA - Youth Resource Center $174,867 $27,949 16% During this fiscal year, we experienced staff turnover, including a transition in leadership, which impacted spending across certain contract categories. When we have a vacancy, we're not able to charge the contract or draw down the funds. Despite these challenges, we were grateful to exceed our service goals. Our original application projected serving 25 youth; however, we ultimately served 31 unduplicated youth during the fiscal year. Of those served, 16 youth successfully exited the program within the same fiscal year. In response to these circumstances, we anticipated the need to amend our contract and submitted a request at the end of February to reallocate funds from administrative costs to direct client assistance. The amendment was approved by the City at the end of May, which left a limited window to fully expend funds within the amended budget categories prior to the close of the fiscal year. Regarding the specific unspent funds, the remaining $27,949 is comprised of the following: $26,993.07 in rental assistance $950 in IT-related expenses $6.32 in cell phone expenses With respect to the IT allocation, no computer purchase was ultimately made. The minimal balance in cell phone expenses was not utilized due to staff turnover and the delayed start of the grant. YWCA Utah FOF Huntsman Transitional Housing $113,500 $10,848 10%The original terms and restrictions YWCA wrote into their program contract ended up being too restrictive for adequately finding and serving client needs. Subsidy caps limited their ability to bridge the gap between extremely low-income households payment needs and fair market rent levels. Amendments late in the contract period helped, but did not occur early enough to allow spenddown of the full award. Other factors involving lower client enrollment impacted programming, and these factors have been addressed with new process improvements. YWCA Utah CDBG Roof Replacement $221,000 $123,657 56%Bids for Construction came in under what was expected, so the project came in under budget. Attachment C7. Responses to Council Questions in April 7 Work Session. Housing Stability staff collected these responses from multiple sources and have edited some service provider’s responses to provide greater clarity. Italicized text is a direct quote. The Wasatch Community Gardens (WCG) Job Training Program’s Green Team provides paid transitional employment, work readiness training, job placement support, continuing education assistance, housing support, and mentoring and advocacy for women facing or experiencing homelessness. These women work primarily at our farm based in Glendale, growing produce that is then donated to feed over a thousand low- income community members in Salt Lake City each year. Each application was made to support different aspects of the Green Team: Case Management and Programming. o FOF (#12) - Case Management: According to WCG, the current recommendation of $52,600 would support the salary of a Case Manager, who provides a one-on-one continuum of care to connect current Green Team participants as well as program graduates to housing resources and other benefits for which they qualify. Many of the women begin the program living in temporary shelters; the Case Manager’s role is essential in providing stability and support for participants as they navigate obstacles to improve their housing situation. o CDBG (#27) - Programming: According to WCG, the $50,000 requested would support the salary of the Job Training Program Director, who oversees recruitment, job and life skills training, and job placement for Green Team participants. She also maintains connections and relationships with a dozen community partners in Salt Lake City, ensuring fresh produce from the farm reaches over a thousand low-income community members annually. The Job Training Program provides a public service by equipping low-income community members with practical skills, workforce experience, and support needed to secure employment and increase their economic mobility. Each of the above requests covers very distinct support functions for the Green Team. Both are critical to program operations and positive outcomes, hence the separate requests across two categories. This is related to a parcel on 700 E Hollywood/Redondo Ave. Upon inquiry, WCG provided the following response. WCG is in the early stages of working with Salt Lake City Public Lands to take over management of a neglected parcel on 700 E. This is an emerging project and is very separate from our Funding Our Future and CDBG applications. We do, however, anticipate that Green Team Program participants will intermittently help with maintenance of the site, expanding their farming and research skills while furthering the project. We plan to utilize this site to conduct community science research in drought-resistant crop varieties that will perform well in Salt Lake County. Our Education team has found that there is very little information locally available to support local gardeners and farmers in adapting their gardening practices to drought conditions, and questions about adaptation methods are increasing. This project aims to fill this critical gap in understanding and enhance our community's climate resiliency. We feel this partnership is timely as we as a city are navigating population growth in tandem with limited water resources, and we hope that this research will result in a greater variety of locally available, water-wise crops that are adapted to Salt Lake’s climate to support growers in our community. This project supports many of the goals outlined in SLC Public Utilities' Water Conservation Plan and SLC's Urban Forest Action Plan. This project is an example of the many ways in which the City relies on WCG to directly meet increasing community demand for services. In addition to the above programs, the City also relies on WCG to provide healthy food access and preservation of urban green space through our longstanding Green City Growers partnership, consisting of 9 WCG-managed community gardens on City land, with regular requests from both the City and community to manage additional gardens. 3. Is there a potential overlap in funding requested for the South Valley Services Case Management Services (in CDBG #17 and FOF #12)? Clients do not receive rental assistance from both sources; therefore, those served with HUD funding are distinct from those supported by FOF. As you have probably picked up on, part of the reason we are so grateful for FoF is that it was designed to give more flexibility to the organization, which means that we are better able to protect our community members from domestic violence and sexual assault, and to set our clients on the path to a future where they thrive. Thanks again for the opportunity to receive these funds, and please let me know if you have any other questions. 4. NeighborWorks (HOME #8 & FOF #3) is the amount for down payment assistance enough? 5. Can HOME down payment assistance be used on townhomes and condos? 6. What is the difference between The Road Home’s (FOF #9) and Volunteers of America (FOF #16) House 20 programs? House 20 began as a partnership and funding earmark between the City and The Road Home. The Road Home (#9) intends to serve the 20 highest utilizers of emergency services in the city. They keep track of these utilizers through SLCPD and local EMS. Their goal is to serve 20 new clients during the program year, which may include new clients or returning clients who were previously offboarded. Volunteers of America House 20 program (#16) serves the 20 highest utilizers of their shelter beds and services. Their goal is to serve 20 new clients during the program year, which may include new clients or returning clients who were previously offboarded. CDCU (#1) will provide DPA to approximately seven homebuyers earning up to 120% of AMI in Salt Lake City, with assistance of up to $39,000 per household, as well as additional education. They will pair assistance with silent second mortgages and shared equity models. NeighborWorks (#3) will provide DPA to approximately seven homebuyers earning up to 80% AMI in Salt Lake City, with assistance up to $30,000 for down payment and closing costs, and/or forgivable loans/grants up to $25,000 for home improvements, and additional education. Yes. Although funding for the two categories was approved as part of the FY26 budget process, the funds are all within the same Cost Center and Fund. As a result, no budget amendment would be required to reallocate funding between the two categories. Council has the flexibility to shift between these categories or adjust their intended use as they determine is appropriate. Last year, UCA’s request was $330,000, and they were awarded $207,000. The only other source of funding for this program came from federal CARES funding, which ended in September. The larger request this year reflects a need for greater dependence on this funding, the rising costs of rent, and a corresponding greater number of projected clients served (41 last year vs. 83 this year). The program offers neutral facilitation that aims to assist individuals experiencing a housing conflict or housing instability. Their focus is to prevent people from losing their housing and includes both education and facilitation. They anticipate assisting 83 people in the program year, if awarded their full request. 10. FOF, are there overlapping services between the multiple projects recommended for single providers? Specifically, TRH (FOF #6, #7, #9, #22), potentially also AAU (FOF #15, #17), and CDCU (FOF #1, #2, #14). 11.Is ESG #5 Ruff Haven eligible for FOF funding?